Sacrifice and Sail On - Book by Philip Lin [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : Sacrifice and Sail On - Book by Philip Lin

Pages : [1] 2

TLFisher

11-04-2014, 12:48 PM

Deleted for now.

TLFisher

11-20-2014, 09:16 PM

Freedom

11-20-2014, 09:43 PM

http://www.amazon.com/Sacrifice-Sail-Witness-Slave-Christ-ebook/dp/B00LI69K3S/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1416543074&sr=8-1&keywords=philip+lin

A book brought to my attention.
Those with Kindle Unlimited can read for free. I paid $20. Was the $20 worth it?

I will just say those in the local churches who think the late 70's and 80's turmoil's is ancient history, think again. Brother Lin, has brought it back to the surface through his perspective.

Thank you for sharing the link to this book. What comes to mind is Philip Lin's statement:
I know in my conscience you brothers are right according to the truth, but in my culture I must be loyal to Brother Lee.

With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could be expected to place any trust in what Lin writes.

awareness

11-20-2014, 10:01 PM

Thank you for sharing the link to this book. What comes to mind is Philip Lin's statement:

With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could be expected to place any trust in what Lin writes.
Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying?

Dave

11-21-2014, 05:37 AM

Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying? At least in the title Lin states "My View of Witness Lee" although in the Preface Lin states, "Under the anointment and guidance of the Holy Spirit I have completed the writing of this book." I do know that because of some of WLs failed businesses and harsh church practices in Taiwan he was not loved by everyone. It would be interesting to obtain an overall fair biography of WLs ministry etc in Taiwan but it doesn't look we will with this book. I for one will not drink the kool-aid.

It doesn't appeal to me at all because I agree with Awareness, there appears to be a considerable amount of propaganda. I can only go by my own observations and my experience when I was in the LC and it wasn't favorable as I became closer to those trained by WL in Anaheim.

If you want the book free you could probably sign up for "Kindle Unlimited" 30 day trial, obtain the book and then if you don't want to continue with Kindle Unlimited cancel the trial before the 30 days are over. I presume you still keep the book.

aron

11-21-2014, 05:54 AM

I have looked at the back cover. It uses the word "love" nine times, describing "an intimate life of love with the Lord", and so forth. Now, I don't know, maybe Lee loved the Lord Jesus Christ tremendously. I won't argue with that.

But maybe "his heart was darkened by greed", also? How are we to measure such things of the heart? Whether someones heart is "dark" or "full of love for the Lord" are subjective measures, and in Lee's local churches we habitually received subjective measures as if they were objective reality. So if a printed encomium by one of his disciples says that Lee's heart was full of love for the Lord, all we can do is take it at face value. How can we argue with such words? We cannot.

What we can do, however, is look at deeds. Look at actions. The Greatest Commandment is to love the Lord God with all our heart and soul and strength, and love our neighbor as ourselves. The first part is not easy to assess (unless you are writing for LSM, of course), but the second is easier to see. Lee's actions showed that he loved other things; when Lee's neighbor interfered with these other things (the ministry, his teachings, his organization, his distribution of publications, his control of the local churches) then the neighbor got thrown under the bus. John Ingalls was called his closest co-worker, until JI wasn't convenient to the cause, then everything changed. I don't see love demonstrated there. Nor with many others whom he raised up and quickly threw down. The records are there. The turmoils, the rebellions, the storms, the lawsuits. Discord after discord.

So "love" as used in local church parlance can get dried up pretty quickly if you don't do exactly as they say. They love your participation and support, but they don't love you.

Secondly, who is this Jesus Christ that Witness Lee loved so much? The one in the Bible, or the one he constructed from his imagination? Was this the real Jesus revealed to us in the Word of God, or a construction convenient to Witness Lee's ministry? I am tending toward the latter, the more I examine Lee's Bible study messages.

Regarding the OT text, Jesus said, "These things were written concerning Me" (Luke 24:44; cf Rom 15:4). Lee said, "No they were not. They were often merely the vain imaginations and fallen concepts of sinners".

The Bible says, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." (Matt 4:4) Lee said, "Not by every word but by some; some are profitable, and some are not". Naturally the words which Lee lined up with his hermeneutics were "revelatory of Christ", and the words which couldn't fit into his theology got abandoned. And it wasn't just one or two verses, it was chapter after chapter. Look in the OT for chapters of footnote-less scriptures. No cross-references either; merely a few disparaging remarks: "Natural", etc.

The writer of Hebrews held up the OT and said, "We see Jesus". (2:9) Lee said, "No we don't. We see a fallen man writing according to his natural concepts."

Peter, standing on Pentecost, said that David being a prophet foreknew and spoke of the Messiah who was to come after him. (Acts 2:30,31) Lee said, "No, David was a sinner. He fornicated with Bathsheba, numbered Israel in his pride, murdered Uriah, etc." So when David wrote, "God rescued me" (Psa 34:4), Lee panned that and said "No, David rescued himself". Lee ignored the coming Messiah.

Paul said that the Psalms are the "word of Christ" (Cor 3:16); Lee said, "No, they are often merely words of a fallen man." Jesus said that David was speaking of Him in Spirit (Mark 12:36; Matt 22:43); Lee said David was merely speaking from and of himself, his fallen soul.

Who is fallen, here? Who is natural? You can keep your love if it's manifested this way; I don't want it. Not if you do this to the Bible. I don't know what kind of Christ is being promoted, but my job is to reject it. I really don't want to know. "Truly I tell you, I don't know you". Matt 25:12

Freedom

11-21-2014, 07:26 AM

This is from the preface:
When I wrote this book, I was very cautious and faithful. The Holy Spirit strictly controlled me not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called “perfect person.” Of course, I also did not hesitate to describe in detail his admirable traits , which merit recommending. I hope that everything I wrote about Witness Lee in this book will be beneficial to future generations. This was the governing principle in my writing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 211-214). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I wonder if this statement is an attempt to solicit trust from the reader? This also begs the question of why would Lin have any idea in the first place of describing a "perfect" Lee. That is, unless, perhaps the LC has the tendency to view Lee as such a person.

awareness

11-21-2014, 07:28 AM

If you want the book free you could probably sign up for "Kindle Unlimited" 30 day trial, obtain the book and then if you don't want to continue with Kindle Unlimited cancel the trial before the 30 days are over. I presume you still keep the book.
Unless someone gives me a reason otherwise I won't waste signing up for Kindle Unlimited on this book. Besides the table of contents, all I had to read to kill it for me is: "Witness Lee, a bondslave of Christ Jesus."

And why $20 dollars? Who published this book? It doesn't say. Maybe Lin expects to tap the LC Lee zealots. They're use to being fleeced. A fool and his money kinda thing.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 07:35 AM

aron

11-21-2014, 07:35 AM

... all I had to read to kill it for me is: "Witness Lee, a bondslave of Christ Jesus."

Yes, he was supposedly 'today's Paul'. Didn't you know that? And if you'd prayerfully receive this recommendation you'll get much profit. Otherwise, your heart is probably dark and hard, and you won't be able understand the revelation of God's current oracle.

Blah, blah, blah. Empty words sold for money; words full of carefully contrived appearance, but devoid of substantiation.

aron

11-21-2014, 07:39 AM

In the introduction Lin says: "This is a book about Witness Lee’s personal Christian walk."

...I think you can know a little about someone's heart through their actions, so it would make sense to take into account all of Lee's actions, not just those that put him in a positive light.

Also consider the writer: consider Lin's own personal Christian walk. If Phillip Lin has been elsewhere quoted, saying that he put his loyalty to his and Lee's shared Asian culture and heritage, above the righteousness and truth of the Bible, and above his conscience, and above his love for the brothers, how much can you trust Lin's recommendation of Witness Lee, however scrupulously presented? Where do his loyalties lie here, to God or to man?

awareness

11-21-2014, 07:57 AM

Empty words sold for money
$20. I guess hoping to tap all the Lee fanatics. Is there a minimum order requirement for all the localities?

Ohio

11-21-2014, 08:00 AM

$20. I guess hoping to tap all the Lee fanatics. Is there a minimum order requirement for all the localities?
With a retail price of $57.08 plus S&H, $20 is supposed to be a "bargain."

Those with a Kindle reader can get it for free. How good is that!

Btw, "sacrifice" was supposedly Lee's last official words. It was a frameable quote you could buy at the training.

"Sail on" was a reference to Christopher Columbus' exhortation in the face of mutiny. Lee saw any and all feedback to his ministry, which was not exuberant cheerleading, as persecution from God's enemy.

aron

11-21-2014, 08:37 AM

"Sail on" was a reference to Christopher Columbus' exhortation in the face of mutiny. Lee saw any and all feedback to his ministry, which was not exuberant cheerleading, as persecution from God's enemy.

Yes if you express any kind of personal opinion in the local churches this is mutiny. "Rebellion" they call it. Yet the Maximum Brother is somehow exempt from this peril. Somehow the MB is so transformed, either positionally as God's Deputy (shades of 'ex cathedra') or dispositionally as God's premierly transformed, loving and humble bondslave, that every expressed word is "God's oracle". No opinion from the MB, just manna from heaven.

So if you can swallow this fully fleshed out and formally declared organizational despotism, then by all means, sail on. The good news is that you never need to think again. Just do whatever MB tells you, and sail on. If your conscience protests, ignore it. If the Bible can't square up, ignore it. If 2,000 years of Christian activity, both professed and acted upon, are overturned, ignore that. Sail on.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 08:39 AM

I am reading the free Kindle version. I should point out that while this book is pro-Lee, it brings up the matters of both Phillip Lee and Daystar. Both these issues are put in a positive light by Lin. It is interesting that the LC is willing to let these matter be brought up, considering that they have not addressed Steve's writings on these same issues.

Maybe they wanted to put something in writing that could be considered the "final word" on these issues. That is my best guess.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 09:49 AM

Cal

11-21-2014, 09:49 AM

Who published this book? It doesn't say.

Self-published probably. You can actually write and sell a book on Kindle with $0 invested. You can also have conventional books printed and only pay for the copies you sell with CreateSpace. Anyone can be an author these days.

Just Google CreateSpace and Kindle to learn how. I read this book about it: http://amzn.to/1v33uCi (http://amzn.to/1v33uCi)

I'm waiting for Steve Isitt to jump on this.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 10:07 AM

How in the world do you portray Daystar and Phillip Lee in a "positive light?"

Well for someone who claims that due to his culture he must be loyal to Lee, I suppose anything can be twisted.

Lin quotes Sister Lee as saying that the Lee father/son duo was somethig "admirable" and "the Lord's doing". I can post some quotes later along with what is said regarding Daystar.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 10:11 AM

Well for someone who claims that due to his culture he must be loyal to Lee, I suppose anything can be twisted.

Lin quotes Sister Lee as saying that the Lee father/son duo was somethig "admirable" and "the Lord's doing". I can post some quotes later along with what is said regarding Daystar.

Please do quote what you can.

Did you know that "sister" Lee was not Phillip's bio mother? Never did learn what happened to her. Perhaps the book reveals this.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 10:13 AM

Daystar is portrayed as a business venture meant to help the saints for migration. Lin claims that Lee decided to shut the business down when they realized that motorhomes weren't selling. The reader might get the impression that it was an honest effort by Lee, and he had everything under control.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 10:16 AM

Please do quote what you can.

Did you know that "sister" Lee was not Phillip's bio mother? Never did learn what happened to her. Perhaps the book reveals this.

I didn't know that. I have only read maybe 1/3 of the book so far. There is a lot of nonsense to sift through. Kindle doesn't let me generate quotes from my phone, so I have to use the desktop version to do that.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 10:26 AM

aron

11-21-2014, 11:21 AM

I will just say those in the local churches who think the late 70's and 80's turmoil's is ancient history, think again. Brother Lin, has brought it back to the surface through his perspective.

Do you think Lin would dare publish this without "fellowship" from the Blendeds? But why would they possibly extend their "right hand of fellowship" to this biographical project from one of the rank-and-file? Why risk stirring up the hornets' nest? My thoughts:

1. Now when prospective members being recruited hear of failed business deals and angry "investors" demanding their money back, hear of whispered "turmoils" and "rebellions" in days gone by, they can just tell them, "Read bro Lin's book. He addresses all this. Old news."

2. There is benefit to them from distancing themselves from it. Then if it blows up they can say, "That was brother Phillip Lin." They can say that it wasn't the official line.

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

awareness

11-21-2014, 12:21 PM

aron

11-21-2014, 12:45 PM

His book is published by Sail On Publishing, with one employee and owner: Philip Lin.

What?!? And it doesn't say "affiliated with the ministries of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee"?!? This is dangerous precedence, of unaffiliated ministry! What ground, pray tell, does he minister from?

Dave

11-21-2014, 12:57 PM

Self-published probably. You can actually write and sell a book on Kindle with $0 invested. You can also have conventional books printed and only pay for the copies you sell with CreateSpace. Anyone can be an author these days.

Just Google CreateSpace and Kindle to learn how. I read this book about it: http://amzn.to/1v33uCi (http://amzn.to/1v33uCi)

I'm waiting for Steve Isitt to jump on this. I am sure Steve won't take that step. He doesn't want to get into a legal tassle with LSM. LSM has their lawyers ready to pounce.

aron

11-21-2014, 12:59 PM

I am sure Steve won't take that step. He doesn't want to get into a legal tassle with LSM. LSM has their lawyers ready to pounce.

Further reason to speculate that the Blendeds are somewhere in the background behind Phillip Lin, silently smiling and nodding their heads.

Dave

11-21-2014, 01:02 PM

Okay his book is published by Sail On Publishing, with one employee and owner: Philip Lin.
http://www.nonprofitfacts.com/CA/Sail-On-Publishers.html

http://nonprofitlocator.org/organizations/ca/mission-viejo/462055511-sail-on-publishers

http://www.manta.com/c/mb5pkcm/sail-on-publishers?ftoggle-frontend-prod-on=abTests.revenue.test_10312014_backfillNoad&utm_expid=82789632-25.oHnsZFf0S6aL6ZTTV65kcg.3&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F It's interesting that Sail On Publishing has 501(c)(3) status or non-profit status. He is not indicating that all proceeds will go to the feeding of the poor or to his church or? He is acting like Lee! Apparently trying to make a profit off of WL's name.

TLFisher

11-21-2014, 01:17 PM

What we can do, however, is look at deeds. Look at actions. The Greatest Commandment is to love the Lord God with all our heart and soul and strength, and love our neighbor as ourselves. The first part is not easy to assess (unless you are writing for LSM, of course), but the second is easier to see. Lee's actions showed that he loved other things; when Lee's neighbor interfered with these other things (the ministry, his teachings, his organization, his distribution of publications, his control of the local churches) then the neighbor got thrown under the bus. John Ingalls was called his closest co-worker, until JI wasn't convenient to the cause, then everything changed. I don't see love demonstrated there. Nor with many others whom he raised up and quickly threw down. The records are there. The turmoils, the rebellions, the storms, the lawsuits. Discord after discord.

So "love" as used in local church parlance can get dried up pretty quickly if you don't do exactly as they say. They love your participation and support, but they don't love you.

The love you see demonstrated in regard to a Max Rapaort, a John Ingalls, a John So, etc is a type of conditional love as seen in Luke 6:32:

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.

You don't see a love typified by 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

TLFisher

11-21-2014, 01:30 PM

Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying?

When I'm in jury duty next Wednesday, I will have most of the day to decipher through the propaganda and spin.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 01:30 PM

A quote on the beginning of Phillip Lee's LSM involvement:

Because there were many business affairs in conducting the Life-Study of the Bible, Brother Lee needed one full-time serving one to take charge of it, but he could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility. After everything, he asked his son Brother Lee Menzer (Philip Lee) to help. At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip willingly accepted this job in order to support his father’s ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father’s literary ministry work.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1262). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 01:35 PM

Lin on the legacy of Phillip Lee:

Recalling the beginnings of the Anaheim LSM Station in 1974, I think about how everything was ragged and rough, without financial support and with a shortage of manpower. It was a very tough start. However, after years of labor, it became a rather big and well-organized publisher. It was the Lord’s blessing. It was also the hard work of Brother Philip Lee and many faithful saints who gave their whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee. It is appropriate to describe the beginning of LSM by quoting Brother Lee’s wife, Sister Lee, as she told me: “this was the result of the father with his son, two men beginning work like a “swap-meet.” It is admirable. It is also the Lord’s doing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Location 1292). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

aron

11-21-2014, 01:39 PM

A quote on the beginning of Phillip Lee's LSM involvement:

I would like to see, in Lin's book, the quote by Witness Lee where he acknowledged his son's rather "unspiritual" condition, and defended his putting him in charge, by saying that it was a "business decision". I would like to see if Phillip Lin has the brass to print that statement by God's supposed humble little bondslave. I doubt it but I am willing to be surprised.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 01:43 PM

Dave

11-21-2014, 03:29 PM

There are a number of contradictions in this book, even by Lee himself. How is that possible?!:hysterical:

Lisbon

11-21-2014, 05:31 PM

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 06:49 PM

Do you think Lin would dare publish this without "fellowship" from the Blendeds? But why would they possibly extend their "right hand of fellowship" to this biographical project from one of the rank-and-file? Why risk stirring up the hornets' nest? My thoughts:

1. Now when prospective members being recruited hear of failed business deals and angry "investors" demanding their money back, hear of whispered "turmoils" and "rebellions" in days gone by, they can just tell them, "Read bro Lin's book. He addresses all this. Old news."

2. There is benefit to them from distancing themselves from it. Then if it blows up they can say, "That was brother Phillip Lin." They can say that it wasn't the official line.

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

You make good points, aron. I'll add one more: If the Blended Brothers and LSM leaders did, in fact, put their stamp of approval on this book, it could allow them to say, "See, we do make room for other publishers!"

The name Sail On Publishers comes from this theme and is intended to encourage readers to follow suit and to "Sail On"! Sail On Publishers is a nonprofit publisher, which has been registered in California in order to be the first publisher of this book.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ. Sail On Publishers. Preface.

As an aside, don't individuals still have to pay tax on earnings paid to them by a nonprofit?

TLFisher

11-21-2014, 06:53 PM

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 06:57 PM

I do know in the last few months of his life while Philip was slowly dying from cancer, former elders reached out to Philip Lee only for their letters to be returned to sender.

Terry, I wasn't familiar with this. Is this posted about elsewhere?

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 07:05 PM

A quote on the beginning of Philip Lee's LSM involvement:...At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip willingly accepted this job in order to support his father’s ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father’s literary ministry work.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1262). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

You got that right!

I would like to see, in Lin's book, the quote by Witness Lee where he acknowledged his son's rather "unspiritual" condition, and defended his putting him in charge, by saying that it was a "business decision". I would like to see if Phillip Lin has the brass to print that statement by God's supposed humble little bondslave. I doubt it but I am willing to be surprised.

In the above quoted passage, is Philip Lin implying that Philip Lee may have been more involved in ministry affairs than what his father claimed? Perhaps?

Freedom

11-21-2014, 07:09 PM

I would like to see, in Lin's book, the quote by Witness Lee where he acknowledged his son's rather "unspiritual" condition, and defended his putting him in charge, by saying that it was a "business decision". I would like to see if Phillip Lin has the brass to print that statement by God's supposed humble little bondslave. I doubt it but I am willing to be surprised.

The following quote is the closest Lin gets to admitting there were any issues with Phillip Lee, and by the end of the quote it is clear that Lin's attitude is the problem was those who took issue with Phillip Lee:

With the new hall ready for use, it needed many supplementary facilities, such as a sound system, an audio system, a video system, and so forth. All of these systems were carried out by Brother Lee’s son, Brother Lee Men-tze (Philip Lee), with the assistance of two or three electrician brothers. They worked day and night every day with very minimal sleep in the night... This successful evidence had gained Brother Lee’s recognition and trust with regard to Philip Lee’s faithfulness and his ability to execute. This was one unique reason that Brother Lee continued hiring him to take charge of the LSM Leviticus services. Because the work kept him up late in the night— working on the video/ audio systems and the arrangement of the interior rooms— and he felt mounting excessive pressures upon him, Philip Lee’s physical and mental conditions were affected enormously, and his physiological condition changed abruptly. As a result, he became easily irritable, and inadvertently offended people easily. Thus, he offended a few people who did not know anything about him except that he was Brother Lee’s son, and they initially resented Brother Lee’s LSM station. Eventually it turned into opposition to Brother Lee and his ministry in the wiles of God’s enemy Satan. It was a great pity!

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 3851-3862). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 07:14 PM

Lin on the legacy of Phillip Lee:Recalling the beginnings of the Anaheim LSM Station in 1974, I think about how everything was ragged and rough, without financial support and with a shortage of manpower. It was a very tough start. However, after years of labor, it became a rather big and well-organized publisher. It was the Lord’s blessing. It was also the hard work of Brother Philip Lee and many faithful saints who gave their whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee. It is appropriate to describe the beginning of LSM by quoting Brother Lee’s wife, Sister Lee, as she told me: “this was the result of the father with his son, two men beginning work like a “swap-meet.” It is admirable. It is also the Lord’s doing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Location 1292). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

You got that right!

Faithful human beings giving "their whole being to the ministry of" another human being. As someone who has spent most of his life under the ministry of Witness Lee, this sounds pretty accurate to me!

Freedom

11-21-2014, 07:19 PM

How is that possible?!:hysterical:

Here a good one for you. Lin relates a conversation he had with Phillip Lee. Pay attention to the part in bold:
Brother Philip told me that at the moment when his father accepted him to be the manager of the Living Stream Ministry office, his father was very happy, but his face was also very serious and cautious , as he told him: “Son, you were for the Lord, for the expansion of the work of His, and for the commission of His ministry of life entrusted to your father in taking up this responsibility of the Levites’ services. I believe the Lord will remember you and bless you. But I want you to understand in advance that if American Christians will not accept my Life-Study of the Bible... if they do not accept my Life-Study of the Bible, I will shut the whole Life-Study down!”

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1268-1274). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition. Later on the following quote is attributed to WL:
In the United States, those who opposed me were very curious that this old China man could speak throughout the year, four times a week without stop, delivering messages and publishing them for the general public; those who opposed me also read them because they wanted to find fault with me...
The more they opposed me, the more I spoke; they needed nonstop research in order to oppose me.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1298-1305). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.
Have Lee's Life Study been accepted by Christians outside the LC? I don't think so. So Lee contradicted himself here. He said he would shut it down if it was rejected, but then we catch him saying "the more they opposed me, the more I spoke".

Ohio

11-21-2014, 07:25 PM

Did you ever hear of a bond slave bilking his master and friends out of millions of dollars? Or did you ever hear of a bond slave excommunicating his masters leading employees from two thousand miles away. Don't talk about love. Don't talk about caring.

You know the Catholics do elect their pope. The lc only has a form of apostolic accession where no members have any input. They are all so humble and meek.

Lisbon
Lisbon, great point. You need that sign which says "the spin stops here."

Reminds me of that "brilliant" MIT professor named Booger who informed us that we all were too "stupid" to understand the decisions our leaders were making "on our behalf."

aron

11-21-2014, 07:27 PM

Regarding his sons Philip and Timothy, it seems that through them Lee would have been disqualified to be a local church elder, much less the apostle possessing the ministry of the age. Paul made this clear in Titus 1:6. That fact alone disqualified Lee from authority in the church, irrespective of the details of the shenanigans they were involved in, or not as the case may even possibly be.

But it was people like Philip Lin who obeyed their Asian culture rather than their conscience, and the clear dictates of God's Word, who covered Lee's sins and preserved his status. And Westerners like myself were so enamored of the apparent "good order in the church" that we cast a blind eye from whence it was derived, and how it was maintained.

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 07:34 PM

The following quote is the closest Lin gets to admitting there were any issues with Phillip Lee, and by the end of the quote it is clear that Lin's attitude is the problem was those who took issue with Phillip Lee:With the new hall ready for use, it needed many supplementary facilities, such as a sound system, an audio system, a video system, and so forth. All of these systems were carried out by Brother Lee’s son, Brother Lee Men-tze (Philip Lee), with the assistance of two or three electrician brothers. They worked day and night every day with very minimal sleep in the night... This successful evidence had gained Brother Lee’s recognition and trust with regard to Philip Lee’s faithfulness and his ability to execute. This was one unique reason that Brother Lee continued hiring him to take charge of the LSM Leviticus services. Because the work kept him up late in the night— working on the video/audio systems and the arrangement of the interior rooms— and he felt mounting excessive pressures upon him, Philip Lee’s physical and mental conditions were affected enormously, and his physiological condition changed abruptly. As a result, he became easily irritable, and inadvertently offended people easily. Thus, he offended a few people who did not know anything about him except that he was Brother Lee’s son, and they initially resented Brother Lee’s LSM station. Eventually it turned into opposition to Brother Lee and his ministry in the wiles of God’s enemy Satan. It was a great pity!

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 3851-3862). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I find this interesting, because I know that in the past, when the full-time trainees set up the Ball Rd or LaPalma Ave facilities for the summer/winter training, they would frequently be asked to pull all-nighters. I don't know exactly, but I believe they assign teams to specific tasks and assign one or two all-nighters for each team. You'd think they might have learned that that's not so healthy?

As an aside, does this mean that Philip Lee set up the 5x5 (or 6x6?) TV rigs they've had for years? Those TV's have occasionally been the tools of mischief, methinks...

Ohio

11-21-2014, 07:38 PM

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

Reminds me of the concession the Blendeds made to Chicago leader Jim Reetzke in order to secure his endorsement for the quarantine of Titus Chu. Reetzke initially rejected the "One Publication" edict claiming that "Christians have been martyred for their right to publish." In order to win his crucial approval, the Blendeds allowed him to continue to write and print his books, with blended oversight, of course.

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

rayliotta

11-21-2014, 07:44 PM

Reminds me of the concession the Blendeds made to Chicago leader Jim Reetzke in order to secure his endorsement for the quarantine of Titus Chu. Reetzke initially rejected the "One Publication" edict claiming that "Christians have been martyred for their right to publish." In order to win his crucial approval, the Blendeds allowed him to continue to write and print his books, with blended oversight, of course.

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

Anaheim voted against the Chicago Book Room -- before they voted for it.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 07:44 PM

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1262). Sail On Publishers.

Because there were many business affairs in conducting the Life-Study of the Bible, Brother Lee needed one full-time serving one to take charge of it, but he could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility. After everything, he asked his son Brother Lee Menzer (Philip Lee) to help. At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip willingly accepted this job in order to support his father’s ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father’s literary ministry work.

That ought to be enough to make to make the readers puke. :gag:

Ohio

11-21-2014, 07:59 PM

This successful evidence had gained Brother Lee’s recognition and trust with regard to Philip Lee’s faithfulness and his ability to execute. This was one unique reason that Brother Lee continued hiring him to take charge of the LSM Leviticus services. Because the work kept him up late in the night— working on the video/ audio systems and the arrangement of the interior rooms— and he felt mounting excessive pressures upon him, Philip Lee’s physical and mental conditions were affected enormously, and his physiological condition changed abruptly. As a result, he became easily irritable, and inadvertently offended people easily. Thus, he offended a few people who did not know anything about him except that he was Brother Lee’s son, and they initially resented Brother Lee’s LSM station. Eventually it turned into opposition to Brother Lee and his ministry in the wiles of God’s enemy Satan. It was a great pity!Now we can all understand why Phillip was "hitting" on all the female staff. The growing "pressures" within were just more than he could handle.

"A great pity!" Talk about spin! Talk about bearing false witness! Talk about deception! Tell me again what the definition of "is" is?

Ohio

11-21-2014, 08:05 PM

Phillip Lin refers to Phillip Lee as Brother Phillip Lee. Whether Phillip Lee was ever regenerated, I don't know. All signs in his character and behavior does not indicate so.
I do know in the last few months of his life while Phillip was slowly dying from cancer, former elders reached out to Phillip Lee only for their letters to be returned to sender.

Lin is the first one to call Phillip Lee a "brother."

That's like the Catholic Church canonizing one of their murderous popes.

Freedom

11-21-2014, 08:07 PM

Now we can all understand why Phillip was "hitting" on all the female staff. The growing "pressures" within were just more than he could handle.

"A great pity!" Talk about spin! Talk about bearing false witness! Talk about deception! Tell me again what the definition of "is" is?

If the situation was really as simple as Phillip Lee being overworked and it was obvious to those such as Lin that his mental condition was deteriorating, then why didn't WL step in and do anything about it?

It makes absolutely no sense at all that WL would risk tarnishing his ministry over someone being under "excessive pressures". As we already know there is much more to the story than is being told.

TLFisher

11-21-2014, 08:17 PM

"A great pity!" Talk about spin! Talk about bearing false witness! Talk about deception! Tell me again what the definition of "is" is?
So there's a spin trying to explain away Phillip's behavior of offending people easily. Maybe there's a slight oversight how Phillip Lee was offended easily which could result in a locality having their shipments held up for an apology. Flagstaff, Eugene, and Vancouver, B.C. to name a few. Who knows how many other localities there were that had their publication orders suspended?

Freedom

11-21-2014, 08:29 PM

Here is the quote everyone has been waiting for.:lurk5: The following is Lin's explanation of Daystar. Most of it sounds similar to what I have heard, minus any admission to the damage that it caused. He also explains his involvement in Daystar:

 In this context, what was in Brother Lee’s mind was how to steal the wealth of Pharaoh from Egypt to finance this rapid expansion of the Lord’s recovery. Meanwhile, in the United States, during the 1970s, middle-class American retirees liked to move around and live in different places, and automobile homes or motor homes have become one of the lifestyles. And coincidentally, in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, a factory was ready to welcome Brother Lee to operate it; he fellowshipped with elders of the church in Los Angeles about it, and eventually a decision was made to invest in this factory. Brother Lee hired four professionals from the United States and sent them to Taiwan in March 1973 for the construction of motor homes in the factory in Kaohsiung. I was one of the four. Brother Lee also went and lived in Kaohsiung for a little over three months. Because I was born in a city near Kaohsiung and speak the Taiwanese dialect, and I was counted as trustworthy to him, he had a high expectation of my help in his operation of this factory. We stayed in the same house and had many private discussions about factory business; sometimes he would exhort me by whispering to assure me that he was doing this business for the Lord, and wanted me to be faithful and do my best for it. After five to six months of hard work, we finally got the first motor home “model” produced in August. In a pleasant and joyful atmosphere, Brother Lee held a press conference to introduce the first motor home manufactured in Taiwan. Taiwan’s Minister of Economic Affairs and other senior government officials all came to congratulate him. Unfortunately (Note: Rather, I would say that it must be of the Lord’s doing), because of the energy crisis in the United States, those large size automobiles like the motor home, which consume a huge amount of gasoline, were hard to sell. Seeing the adverse situation in the motor home business due to the energy crisis, Brother Lee immediately decided to stop manufacturing and close the factory.
By the end of the year, Brother Lee had cleared all debts. (Note: Because I was one of the small investors, of course, I was one of the debt holders; Brother Lee sent accounting people to my home to clear the debt owed me.)

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 3962-3964). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 08:43 PM

So there's a spin trying to explain away Phillip's behavior of offending people easily. Maybe there's a slight oversight how Phillip Lee was offended easily which could result in a locality having their shipments held up for an apology. Flagstaff, Eugene, and Vancouver, B.C. to name a few. Who knows how many other localities there were that had their publication orders suspended?

That was probably a blessing in disguise!

All the churches I was familiar with had the opposite problem: How to shut off the steady stream of books coming every month, and how to finance the massive debt accumulating on the shelves of every LC book room.

Ohio

11-21-2014, 08:50 PM

It's prolly time to provide a picture of one of these 70's gas guzzlers ...

http://i60.tinypic.com/2nizes9.jpg

TLFisher

11-21-2014, 09:06 PM

Here is the quote everyone has been waiting for.:lurk5: The following is Lin's explanation of Daystar. Most of it sounds similar to what I have heard, minus any admission to the damage that it caused. He also explains his involvement in Daystar:

Phillip Lin indicated he was in Taiwan. He wasn't present in the U.S. How many brothers and sisters were stumbled over their life savings lost to Daystar and being asked to "forgive" Witness Lee of their investment?

Freedom

11-21-2014, 09:26 PM

Phillip Lin indicated he was in Taiwan. He wasn't present in the U.S. How many brothers and sisters were stumbled over their life savings lost to Daystar and being asked to "forgive" Witness Lee of their investment?

Philip Lin really put a spin on things here. He says that Lee "cleared" all the Daystar debts. It make it sound like everything worked out just fine. He forgot to mention that saints were asked to "forgive" debt owed by Lee. I wonder how many saints did so out of pressure?

Friedel

11-22-2014, 12:57 AM

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

I only had a sample from Amazon because I refuse to pay $25 for some more of Witness Lee under another name. I got to see the photos with at least two typos (i.e. Austin Spark instead of Austin-Sparks). And why does he go on and on about "Sail On Publishers". Is he afraid some will suspect LSM actually did this for him?

Did he write the introduction? To me it was pure Witness Lee-talk. That means Phillip Lin got fully constituted with the ministry of Witness Lee; he is now a god-man. He surely is now ready to be blended with the deeply spiritual ones.

Maybe that is what he wanted to achieve. A full-blooded parrot and Yes-man.

rayliotta

11-22-2014, 01:12 AM

We stayed in the same house and had many private discussions about factory business; sometimes he would exhort me by whispering to assure me that he was doing this business for the Lord, and wanted me to be faithful and do my best for it. After five to six months of hard work, we finally got the first motor home “model” produced in August. In a pleasant and joyful atmosphere, Brother Lee held a press conference to introduce the first motor home manufactured in Taiwan. Taiwan’s Minister of Economic Affairs and other senior government officials all came to congratulate him.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 3962-3964). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

This pretty much says it all, eh?

Isn't it encouraging to know that when Witness Lee held a press conference with the Taiwanese Minister of Economic Affairs, that there was a pleasant and joyful atmosphere? As opposed to, you know, all those other business press conferences, which have unpleasant atmospheres, lacking in joy.

"God, I thank You that I am not like the rest of men -- extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector" (Luke 18:11).

rayliotta

11-22-2014, 01:20 AM

Maybe that is what he wanted to achieve. A full-blooded parrot and Yes-man.

As a kid I heard many times that I should be a "Witness Lee tape recorder." The full-time trainings are often referred to as "Witness Lee duplication centers."

aron

11-22-2014, 06:03 AM

Isn't it encouraging to know that when Witness Lee held a press conference with the Taiwanese Minister of Economic Affairs, that there was a pleasant and joyful atmosphere?

Well it's common for local church activities to have a joyful atmosphere. Similar to North Korea, where events are always pleasant and festive, unless you're one of the unfortunates getting executed for not clapping loudly enough.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/12/13/250711321/was-north-koreas-no-2-killed-for-not-clapping-hard-enough

awareness

11-22-2014, 07:43 AM

aron

11-22-2014, 08:34 AM

It's prolly time to provide a picture of one of these 70's gas guzzlers ...

Interesting thing for me was that when I came in to the "local church life" there was a big speech that impressed me. WL was talking about how the function of the church was to be the fullness of the One who fills all in all, how we were the organic Body of the Triune God, how we were supposed to manifest God's glory to the whole earth, blah blah.

Well, one of the things WL contrasted this "proper and normal" church to, was the degraded Denominations who got involved in all sorts of non-church activities, like hospitals, schools, and other secular affairs. No - we were pure, we were heavenly, we were unsullied by the sordid affairs of the world. No "money changers in the temple" for us. No - we looked heavenward.

So what is Daystar? What is the skyscraper(s) being built in Taiwan to "fund the gospel outreach"? What was "Let's go Linko!"?

It is the usual: condemn others and then turn around and do the same thing yourself, or worse, only with rebranding, with a new name and a shiny coat of new paint. And the brain-dead sheep bleat their condemnation of "Christianity" only to do the same thing and even worse. Trust that there will be enough gullible people who refuse to connect the dots. No, they're "too positive for the church life". They'll ignore the obvious disconnect.

All of which is fine and good in the world turns; politics uses this. Sports teams traffic in it. Companies need it. It is called among other things, "Brand loyalty". Or "Faithfulness". Or "Enduring in hope". It is wonderful and necessary to social order. But loyalty to what? Zeal for what? What are we building here, with our motor home factory, and with our skyscrapers? What are we placing our hope in?

Dave

11-22-2014, 09:29 AM

Interesting thing for me was that when I came in to the "local church life" there was a big speech that impressed me. WL was talking about how the function of the church was to be the fullness of the One who fills all in all, how we were the organic Body of the Triune God, how we were supposed to manifest God's glory to the whole earth, blah blah.

Well, one of the things WL contrasted this "proper and normal" church to, was the degraded Denominations who got involved in all sorts of non-church activities, like hospitals, schools, and other secular affairs. No - we were pure, we were heavenly, we were unsullied by the sordid affairs of the world. No "money changers in the temple" for us. No - we looked heavenward.

So what is Daystar? What is the skyscraper(s) being built in Taiwan to "fund the gospel outreach"? What was "Let's go Linko!"?

It is the usual: condemn others and then turn around and do the same thing yourself, or worse, only with rebranding, with a new name and a shiny coat of new paint. And the brain-dead sheep bleat their condemnation of "Christianity" only to do the same thing and even worse. Trust that there will be enough gullible people who refuse to connect the dots. No, they're "too positive for the church life". They'll ignore the obvious disconnect.

All of which is fine and good in the world turns; politics uses this. Sports teams traffic in it. Companies need it. It is called among other things, "Brand loyalty". Or "Faithfulness". Or "Enduring in hope". It is wonderful and necessary to social order. But loyalty to what? Zeal for what? What are we building here, with our motor home factory, and with our skyscrapers? What are we placing our hope in?
The problem with the LC and WL was that they failed the test---time after time: They should have been above reproach in all their dealings with the saints and with the world. Additionally, with their lawsuits etc they have shown no humility. They are arrogant (I don't say this lightly) and believe that whatever they do is God directed so they can do almost anything to reach their objectives. I don't see this behavior in the NT. They don't care what means they use as long as they reach their ends.

TLFisher

11-22-2014, 10:23 AM

Stunning to read the problem Lee had with Theodore Austin Sparks in Taiwan, was because he was teaching different things.

More I read, the more inaccuracies, misinformation, and omissions I see in this book.

Cal

11-22-2014, 03:37 PM

"But I want you to understand in advance that if American Christians will not accept my Life-Study of the Bible... if they do not accept my Life-Study of the Bible, I will shut the whole Life-Study down!”

Promises, promises... :zzz:

aron

11-23-2014, 04:18 AM

awareness

11-23-2014, 08:58 AM

Here is a link to an article by a Westerner living in China, on the custom of not being truthful. Effectively he is saying that:

1. The Chinese are pragmatic and they will say whatever they need to say to get their desired results.

2. The Chinese have a feudalistic notion of loyalty. So they have different sets of rules depending where you are in the clan or not. They may lie to an outsider, to protect an insider. Thus Philip Lin's statement that "Okay I recognize the truth as you (a Westerner) present it, but my loyalty still lies with Witness Lee. To me there's a greater truth than "who did what to whom and when", and that's my affiliation with Witness Lee."

So their truth may be to spin and spin to protect the Mothership, which is reality (i.e. "truth" itself). Their goal is to save the Hive at all costs; that is the "greater truth". Thus, the production of Philip Lin's book, to uphold the public standing of Witness Lee. Truth as we Westerners understand it, (i.e. the "facts", or "what really happened") is optional, or relative to the goal at hand.

http://chinahopelive.net/2011/11/09/lying-lying-and-mainland-china

Here's a quote, in red, below:

“Lying” isn’t just a cross-cultural communication pot-hole between Chinese and Euro-Americans, it’s a crater. Conflicting communication styles result in Westerners sometimes thinking their Chinese counterparts are lying even when they actually have no intention of deceiving anyone. The Americans get the (long-standing) impression that the Chinese are devious and deceptive, while the Chinese, who weren’t intending to deceive anyone and were merely being polite and gracious, are annoyed to no end at the simplistic and judgmental Americans.

But there’s another side to Mainland Chinese society, where ethics are simply a non-factor in decision making. Mainland Chinese lie and deceive reflexively in many aspects of their daily lives and relationships; it’s routine, accepted, expected and generally considered unavoidable. If you’re straight, honest and genuine, people will think you’re simple, naive and stupid. Corruption is endemic in every layer of society, and it is common for it to taint thesis papers, resumes and job applications, personal ads, and communication between spouses, parents and children, employees and employers, clients and suppliers, etc.

To someone like Bill Mallon or John Ingalls or Max Rappoport, trying to get at the "truth" about Witness Lee's internal affairs is going to run into some very strongly ingrained cultural resistance. To many of his Asian adherents, the greater truth is loyalty to Witness Lee, at all costs. Including our Judeo-Christian notion of truth: to survive, we non-Asians would stand in the meeting and declare that we were proud to be ostriches with our heads in the sand. The only truth remaining for us was loyalty to the clan. We needed to incorporate Asian values to survive in the local churches of Lee. All of this I tried to address in the thread "The Asian mind and the Western mind."
Yes you did. And I remember it. Am keeping an eye open to spot it. But never on that thread, that I remember seeing, did you hit the nail on the head so squarely as in this post.

Ya know, I married a Cantonese Chinese girl, full-blooded but 3rd generation Americanized. The one thing that stood out, and stands out about her in my mind today was, she was naturally submissive. She came by it without trying, and certainly not because the Bible, or sisters, told her to. Truly I tell you I've never seen anything like it.

When I was having problems in the church she never did anything wrong. I shielded her from my problems with the church. She was innocent. Yet, because she was with me Mel Porter branded her a serpent too. So we were both out. What amazed me is how she never had to shift her ways, or ingrained Chinese instincts, if you will, she just continued to be naturally submissive.

There were other characteristics that were particularly Chinese to me also. But one thing is for sure, based just upon this one close up example, the Chinese are different, and that's for sure. The devil is in the details, perchance, as they say.

I remember back in Santa Cruz -- shortly after just about a dozen of us "Southgate Sickies" (from Southgate Michigan) came into the LC -- we befriended brother and sister Lee, an elderly Chinese couple in the LC there. She was gung-ho for the LC and he wasn't. He was a retired professor of physics, and played the Sitar, Chinese flute, and various other Chinese instruments. I had to spend time with him. I couldn't help myself. And I liked that he was so close to a movement that came out of China yet didn't want to be a part of it. He was different. He was profound and deep to me.

But his wife on the other hand taught me a lesson early on in the LC. She was doing everything she could to get her husband to go to meetings. She was slipping behind his back and engaging other brothers and sisters to get their help. It was devious, and deceptive, and she knew it, acting cute, like it was all for the Lord. When she saw I was close to him she tried to enlist me in her efforts. I just hugged her and told her to leave it in the Lord's hands. She was, after all, just a lovable old lady, Chinese or otherwise.

So I can easily buy into what you present in red in your post. And thanks, by the way, for posting it. It's a keeper.

Sorry for the length of this post.

zeek

11-23-2014, 09:03 AM

aron

11-23-2014, 11:27 AM

If they are all lying to each other, how have they managed to trust and cooperate with each other enough to create a productive society?

Harmonious functioning is based on shared expectations and values. If a blunt American causes someone to lose face, that is perceived as a threat to order. So the American's goal may be "truth at any cost", and the Asian goal may be "preserve social order at any cost." It is not that one system's values are superior to another, but if the different groups don't understand what is important to the other, conflict will ensue.

Notice that the quote used words like "instinctive" and "reflexive"; they may not enumerate it consciously but the expectation is always there. Don't make the other lose face. Social cohesion depends on it. If the truth needs to be managed carefully to that end, then so be it.

awareness

11-23-2014, 11:40 AM

The crux of the question is: Is Philip Lin acting Chinese in his tome in support of Witness Lee?

TLFisher

11-23-2014, 12:54 PM

Reading through the book, several verses from Levitius comes to mind concerning the history of the so-called recovery:

‘Now if a person sins after he hears a public adjuration to testify when he is a witness, whether he has seen or otherwise known, if he does not tell it, then he will bear his guilt.
Or if he touches human uncleanness, of whatever sort his uncleanness may be with which he becomes unclean, and it is hidden from him, and then he comes to know it, he will be guilty. Or if a person swears thoughtlessly with his lips to do evil or to do good, in whatever matter a man may speak thoughtlessly with an oath, and it is hidden from him, and then he comes to know it, he will be guilty in one of these.
Leviticus 5: 1, 3-4

zeek

11-23-2014, 01:19 PM

Harmonious functioning is based on shared expectations and values. If a blunt American causes someone to lose face, that is perceived as a threat to order. So the American's goal may be "truth at any cost", and the Asian goal may be "preserve social order at any cost." It is not that one system's values are superior to another, but if the different groups don't understand what is important to the other, conflict will ensue.

Notice that the quote used words like "instinctive" and "reflexive"; they may not enumerate it consciously but the expectation is always there. Don't make the other lose face. Social cohesion depends on it. If the truth needs to be managed carefully to that end, then so be it.

What I particularly notice is how you avoided my first question. Perhaps there is no difference? Are all Americans blunt? Ah, may. We all may say something, anything perhaps if we preface it with may. You mean to say that truth telling is not superior to lying? By what ethical standard? Or have we like Witness Lee transcended the ethical altogether by Life? That's a defense of a mystical tyrant. Ask Rayliotta about the ethics of the Godfather. The Family lies against the sucker. Fukyama "divides societies into two classes: high trust and low trust. High-trust societies form volunteer and meritocratic organizations that expand in scope and efficiency to reach optimum economies of scale. These commercial and non-profit organizations (which are not dependent on family ties) create a network of efficiencies that benefit commerce, media communication and social change. Low-trust societies, in contrast, rely on the extended family to build commercial, social and political networks. The trouble with the extended-family approach to economic development is that all families will soon run out of blood-line managerial, scientific, literary or artistic talent. The Latin Catholic and Chinese cultures are described as low-trust societies. http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Human-Nature-Reconstitution-Social-ebook/dp/B003719FUU/ref=sr_1_sc_3?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1416773343&sr=1-3-spell&keywords=fukayama

TLFisher

11-23-2014, 01:19 PM

Including our Judeo-Christian notion of truth: to survive, we non-Asians would stand in the meeting and declare that we were proud to be ostriches with our heads in the sand.
That is a type of playing politics; to stick your head in the sand as an ostrich and acting oblivious through the pretense of innocence.

aron

11-23-2014, 03:58 PM

The crux of the question is: Is Philip Lin acting Chinese in his tome in support of Witness Lee?

Well he's already on record that in his culture he has to support him. And this was over his conscience, over God's revealed truth and righteousness, etc.

Remember that poster Eph on here a couple of months ago? He said, "You don't give up 5,000 years of culture that easily."

aron

11-23-2014, 04:09 PM

What I particularly notice is how you avoided my first question. Perhaps there is no difference? Are all Americans blunt? Ah, may. We all may say something, anything perhaps if we preface it with may. You mean to say that truth telling is not superior to lying? By what ethical standard? ]

I didn't answer your first question because there is this thing called "culture". Culture means that even though not every single person in a society may exibit trait A, you can still make a generalization about the population, as compared to others. Culture. Pretty self-evident. So your question was... not worth addressing. But if you insist that is my answer.

Regarding truth telling versus lying. Suppose a young child on the subway says, "Mommy, why is that man fat?" He is telling the truth, but mommy says, "Shush child". Sometimes its better to be quiet. Sometimes there is a higher truth. It's called keeping your mouth shut, and exhibiting self control (even when the other party may not be). Perhaps this value is prized higher in Asian cultures than in Western cultures. Just sayin'.

If you read the link I provided, all this seems to be addressed better than I can do so here. In fact I think that's why he wrote it. Because it isn't simply "society X is full of cheats and liars", but there are issues in society X that maybe society Y doesn't have, and misunderstandings might be avoided if we at least become partly aware of them.

When you see the issue of "face" for example, you can better understand Titus Chu v/v the Blendeds, and also Dong Yu Lan. Those 2 ministers would defer to Lee (in fact I witnessed TC being publicly shamed by WL) but not to the Blendeds, not because they suddenly became uppity or arrogant after Lee passed, but because their culture demanded the first and deterred (they might even say forbade) the second. Culture is a very powerful force in human behavior. If we don't examine it critically we miss a lot. Because WN & WL sold their schtick as if it were apart from human culture, they avoided scrutiny. And this led to great loss for many.

aron

11-23-2014, 04:20 PM

For an example of the effect of culture on behavior: look at Steve Isitt vs Witness Lee. Lee says, "We should approach the drop-outs. Find out what happened." Sounds good, right?

Unfortunately the Westerner Steve Isitt took him at face value, and went out, and got all the info from people who got steamrolled by the local church system. Suddenly SI is running afoul of WL's desire for good order in the church. WL did want honesty, and openness, and reconciliation, to a degree. But here is the rub -- not at any cost. Not at the cost of instability and opening wounds. Protecting the Mothership was greater in value than finding out what happened.

So WL talked about it, and if there were a low-cost way, he'd have been open to reconciliation and healing. But SI's method had a cost too high. But the differerence with SI is that his cultural disposition is to pay the cost. SI thinks, "Honesty at any price." WL's cultural disposition is that the cost is too high. WL thinks, better to pay lip service and move on.

I think that in those from Asian culture, for people to ask too many questions is to "attack" Witness Lee and the standing order. When they use the word "attack" they really mean it. They don't go, "Oh, people are being open and honest here." They go, "We are under attack." So they interpret what is happening quite differently from someone from a Western background.

SI just wanted the truth, i.e. "what happened". WL wanted to talk about the truth to a limited degree, but the higher truth, to WL, was just to "sail on".

zeek

11-23-2014, 04:26 PM

I didn't answer your first question because there is this thing called "culture". Culture means that even though not every single person in a society may exibit trait A, you can still make a generalization about the population, as compared to others. Culture. Pretty self-evident. So your question was... not worth addressing. But if you insist that is my answer.

Sometimes, stupid people like me must importune an answer on issues that are self-evident to wise people like yourself. We look around and see one culture calling another liars and the next thing you know they are killing them. Is a generalization like that the same as a stereotype?

aron

11-23-2014, 04:30 PM

We look around and see one culture calling another liars

Well its not an easy subject to deal well. I unfortunately am ill-equipped. But I sense there is an issue there and avoiding it (pretending it doesn't exist) comes with a cost of its own. Certainly name-calling isn't the answer either. I don't think I was doing that, nor was the blog I linked to.

Different cultures have different values. Overlooking that, as if somehow we were too spiritual, is to make a generalization as well. "The Local Churches are not tainted by fallen human culture". Um...

zeek

11-23-2014, 04:40 PM

Well its not an easy subject to deal well. I unfortunately am ill-equipped. But I sense there is an issue there and avoiding it (pretending it doesn't exist) comes with a cost of its own. Certainly name-calling isn't the answer either. I don't think I was doing that, nor was the blog I linked to.

Different cultures have different values. Overlooking that, as if somehow we were too spiritual, is to make a generalization as well. "The Local Churches are not tainted by fallen human culture". Um...

Seems to be an issue between a rock and a hard place, or maybe a slippery matter of more or less? Trait psychology leads to labeling. Labeling leads to prejudice. Prejudice leads to walls. When I see walls I look for a door. Jesus said he was a door. Is there a door in this issue? Or do the walls win?

awareness

11-23-2014, 05:22 PM

Freedom

11-23-2014, 05:50 PM

This is Philip Lin's idea on how the late 80's rebellion started:

For this, in 1986, he started a training called “Full-Time Truth Training in Taiwan,” referred to as FTTT . In order to carry out this task, Brother Lee used a bilingual young brother, A. Yu, instead of a more mature brother, J. Ingalls, or others, to help him with the training. This caused more than a little murmuring and dissenting in the church in Anaheim.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 2314-2316). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition. I have been previously aware that saints were questioning WL's motives for selecting AY, however, no where have I seen any indication that JI was ambitious to be a FTTT trainer. To the contrary, JI and others spoke out against the training.

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 05:57 PM

But never on that thread, that I remember seeing, did you hit the nail on the head so squarely as in this post.

Ditto that.

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 06:00 PM

Seems to be an issue between a rock and a hard place, or maybe a slippery matter of more or less? Trait psychology leads to labeling. Labeling leads to prejudice. Prejudice leads to walls. When I see walls I look for a door. Jesus said he was a door. Is there a door in this issue? Or do the walls win?

Witness Lee preached against spiritual deadness, lack of intrinsic spiritual reality, etc. He condemned other religious groups for exalting their leaders and building monuments to them. When Witness Lee passed away in 1997, his closest disciples commissioned a large monument to him at his gravesite. As I remember it, the monument is literally a white wall.

I was in high school at the time, but even at that age I was surprised and bothered by the fact that "we" seemed to be doing the same thing we so often criticized "the denominations" for doing. I'll pose a question here: If I were Chinese -- by birth, by background, and by culture -- would this have surprised me (a "white American") as much as it did? Or would I have been more attuned, as a matter of cultural expectation and convention, to view this kind of monument-building as being normal, even predictable?

To be in a ministry where we are convinced that we are free from cultural constraints, and all the while the ministry which we have "sold ourselves out" for is, in reality, steeped in a particular culture -- this is denial. And when the culture of the organization is a culture that is largely unknown to us, I think there can be some value in seeking to understand just how much of what we believed to be "spiritual" or "from the Lord," was actually -- quite literally -- the manifestation of a particular human culture.

TLFisher

11-23-2014, 06:16 PM

"Phillip Lee's physical and mental conditions were affected enormously, and his physiological condition changed abruptly. As a result, he became easily irritable, and inadvertently offended people easily." From Chapter 7

Focus is on the word inadvertent. Meaning "not resulting from or achieved through deliberate planning".

"Godfred had been an elder in the church in Irvine, California, for close to ten years, and had recently been appointed as an elder in Anaheim by Brother Witness Lee. Thus we had been put into a position of more intimate fellowship and coordination. I had known Godfred since 1972 and over the years had numerous occasions of fellowship with him. I respected him for his genuineness, wisdom, and devotion to the Lord. Hence, upon returning from Atlanta on Sept. 22, 1987, I made an appointment for dinner with Godfred on September 25, Friday evening.
We sat together in the restaurant, and after some general conversation, I said to him in a serious tone, “Godfred, I would like to ask you a question. Would you please tell me who Philip Lee is? It seems that he is being promoted and is going altogether too far in his involvement in the spiritual side of the work, greatly overstepping his position as a business manager. Have you noticed this? I myself could never agree with this.”
It seemed that my question took him by surprise. We had never discussed these matters before. He hesitated a few moments. Then, in a very grave tone, he replied, “John, the situation is very serious.” If he was surprised by my question, I was somewhat taken aback by his answer. Godfred continued, “I have seen and heard many things in the Living Stream Office in recent months. I cannot go into detail, but I can tell you there is much that is very serious and very wrong.” Then I began to be more alarmed and concerned. Godfred fully agreed that Philip Lee’s involvement in the work was way out of line, but he indicated that there were more serious things than that.
Two days later, on Sept. 27, the Lord’s Day, as we met in the Elders’ Room before the morning meeting on Ball Road, Godfred had a few moments alone with me, and he said, “John, it is very timely that you opened up to me the other night. Let me tell you that the whole situation is sick and corrupt. I have seen and heard too much.” Then I knew that we were really in trouble, though he did not mention any details or any names.
On the following Tuesday, Sept. 29th, Godfred left for a business trip to Europe. On the next day, Wednesday, Sept. 30th, I received a telephone call from a sister who had a prominent position in the Living Stream Ministry Office, asking if she could see me that night. I consented. That evening she sat in my living room and with tears opened her heart to me. She had served sacrificially and faithfully for many years in the LSM office, and now she said she could not tolerate anymore the gross misconduct that was being perpetrated upon some and especially upon her. I had been acquainted with this sister for many years and knew her to be faithful, upright, and trustworthy; therefore, I took her word very seriously. I was amazed that she could put up with such conduct for so long. She stated that she tolerated it only for the sake of Brother Lee and his ministry. She said that she had no other recourse but to resign. I confirmed her intention.
That conversation utterly shocked me. I deeply felt that something must be done to acquaint Brother Lee with the situation and to let him know that we would not tolerate it. I obtained Godfred’s telephone number in Europe and called him a soon as the difference in time zones permitted, telling him the things that had come to my ears. Godfred listened and said that he already knew it. I was amazed. That night I considered what could be done. That we had to go to Brother Lee I was certain."
Speaking the Truth in Love pages 9-10

Now, is gross misconduct something that is inadvertent? As a husband, father, and son, I would not be offended by someone perpetrating gross misconduct on my wife, mother, or daughter?
The question I raised before is not that Phillip Lee "inadvertently" offended people easily. Rather, Phillip Lee was one who was offended easily. If an elder offended Phillip Lee, guess what? The locality who the elder served, had their publication shipments suspended for a personal apology. Flagstaff, Eugene, and Vancouver, B.C. to name a few.

aron

11-23-2014, 06:16 PM

To be in a ministry where we are convinced that we are free from cultural constraints, and all the while the ministry which we have "sold ourselves out" for is, in reality, steeped in a particular culture -- this is denial. And when the culture of the organization is a culture that is largely unknown to us, I think there can be some value in seeking to understand just how much of what we believed to be "spiritual" or "from the Lord," was actually -- quite literally -- the manifestation of a particular human culture.

The wall is fear. We are afraid to question, afraid to think, afraid to raise our hand and say, "Excuse me but there seems to be an issue here."

TLFisher

11-23-2014, 06:32 PM

"In this Anaheim situation, he dared not to put his hands in to deal with the situation, but waited quietly on the Lord to work it out. Eventually it was the Lord who won the victory, and the church in Anaheim was purified and moved strongly forward!" Chapter Six Location 2305

This "situation" Phillip Lin is writing about is in part to Phillip Lee and the alleged altercation Phillip had with then elder Max Rapoport in 1978.

John Ingalls spoke regarding gross misconduct being brought to him in 1987, "Ten years previously there had been reports of similar incidents in the LSM office confirmed by several eye-witnesses. "

Speaking the Truth in Love pages 10-11

Of course Witness Lee did not want to put his hands in to deal with the situation. To deal with the situation, meant to deal with his son Phillip.

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 06:40 PM

"In this Anaheim situation, he dared not to put his hands in to deal with the situation, but waited quietly on the Lord to work it out. Eventually it was the Lord who won the victory, and the church in Anaheim was purified and moved strongly forward!" Chapter Six Location 2305

This "situation" Phillip Lin is writing about is in part to Phillip Lee and the alleged altercation Phillip had with then elder Max Rapoport.

"Ten years previously there had been reports of similar incidents in the LSM office confirmed by several eye-witnesses. "

Speaking the Truth in Love pages 10-11

"But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary" (Isa 40:31).

It seems that in this case, those who waited ten years got to see people being abused and damaged for...another ten years.

zeek

11-23-2014, 07:07 PM

Trait=labeling=prejudice=walls. None as disturbing as nuclear warheads aimed at each other. Did it all start with trait psychology? Which came first?

More likely trait psychology is just one more car on a very long train.

Freedom

11-23-2014, 07:13 PM

"But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary" (Isa 40:31).

It seems that in this case, those who waited ten years got to see people being abused and damaged for...another ten years.

I don't know if anyone will ever be able to definitely say why WL didn't "involve" himself in these situations intially, however, I think from what we know now, we can make reasonable guesses. I think it needs to be pointed out that while WL never seemed to be involved much during these "turmoils" while they were in progress, WL seemed to have a habit of getting involved in the aftermath of "turmoils" and using the opportunity to make defamatory statements about brothers whom he once worked with.

Philip Lin's book clearly demonstrates just that. While Lin may think his book serves the purpose of clearing up "misconceptions" about past event, his words contradict many facts that we now know. During the late 70's "turmoil" Lin attributes the problem to brothers who wanted to gain a big increase. He quotes WL as saying the following:

Because of this atmosphere, a door opened for three or four enthusiastic and ambitious evangelists to creep in. Their desires were just to get more people. Up to 1973, everyone’s focus had turned to the work of expanding the church and how to get people, so they had the opportunity to stand up and sound out their ideas. They felt that the number of saints in the Lord’s recovery was too small— only seven to eight thousand— and that we should bring in more people . Such an atmosphere had filled in our midst to a point that we forgot the growth in life, and we paid no attention to the matter of growth in life. From 1973 to 1976, those ambitious ones became rebellious and they worked underground among themselves, planning to take over the Lord’s recovery into their hands. They did not care for the church, neither for the growth in life; they only cared for expansion and getting more people; and in order to reach that goal they did not care about the way to get it. They even said: “You could use filthy hands to get the fish.” That means as long as they were able to get people, it didn’t matter whether or not the approach was legitimate and spiritual.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 156). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

What Lin fails to mentions is that WL was the one who gave Max R a position. Yes, Max later admitted that he was ambitious, but without WL giving him some type of position, nothing would have ever materialized. I think that in respect to both Max and Daystar, WL initiated everything, when things when awry, he just sat back until he found someone to blame.

The same thing goes for what happened in the late 80's. I already posted Lin's statement on what he thought the problem was. Did Lee ever deal with the real problem? In a way he did, but by then (after he fired Phillip Lee), many brothers had come to realize the problems were far greater than Phillip Lee. What is ironic is that Lin can't even admit that Phillip Lee was much of a problem. That is taking into consideration that WL himself fired him eventually.

Lin obviously would rather defend WL than take a minute to think about what really happened and why. Lin was there in Anaheim, he saw everything that happened. It's really too bad for him that he decided to write this book. Now that he has brought up all these things, I think they are fair game for anyone in the LC to discuss.

zeek

11-23-2014, 07:22 PM

Witness Lee preached against spiritual deadness, lack of intrinsic spiritual reality, etc. He condemned other religious groups for exalting their leaders and buildling monuments to them. When Witness Lee passed away in 1997, his closest disciples commissioned a large monument to him at his gravesite. As I remember it, the monument is literally a white wall.

I was in high school at the time, but even at that age I was surprised and bothered by the fact that "we" seemed to be doing the same thing we so often criticized "the denominations" for doing. I'll pose a question here: If I were Chinese -- by birth, by background, and by culture -- would this have surprised me (a "white American") as much as it did? Or would I have been more attuned, as a matter of cultural expectation and convention, to view this kind of monumemt-building as being normal, even predictable?

To be in a ministry where we are convinced that we are free from cultural constraints, and all the while the ministry which we have "sold ourselves out" for is, in reality, steeped in a particular culture -- this is denial. And when the culture of the organization is a culture that is largely unknown to us, I think there can be some value in seeking to understand just how much of what we believed to be "spiritual" or "from the Lord," was actually -- quite literally -- the manifestation of a particular human culture.

It took me 13 years to figure that out, and then another 28 to recover from the Recovery. I recommend re-thinking everything from the inside out, rinse and repeat. But, don't despair. Or maybe drag a certain amount of despair into the process too, but keep the spin cycle going as long as necessary.

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 07:24 PM

It took me 13 years to figure that out, and then another 28 to recover from the Recovery. I recommend re-thinking everything from the inside out, rinse and repeat. But, don't despair. Or maybe drag a certain amount of despair into the process too, but keep the spin cycle going as long as necessary.

And isn't that what aron is doing when he broaches the subject of Asian culture?

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 07:42 PM

Philip Lin's book clearly demonstrates just that. While Lin may think his book serves the purpose of clearing up "misconceptions" about past event, his words contradict many facts that we now know. During the late 70's "turmoil" Lin attributes the problem to brothers who wanted to gain a big increase...

...What Lin fails to mentions is that WL was the one who gave Max R a position. Yes, Max later admitted that he was ambitious, but without WL giving him some type of position, nothing would have ever materialized. I think that in respect to both Max and Daystar, WL initiated everything, when things when awry, he just sat back until he found someone to blame...

...Lin obviously would rather defend WL than take a minute to think about what really happened and why. Lin was there in Anaheim, he saw everything that happened. It's really too bad for him that he decided to write this book. Now that he has brought up all these things, I think they are fair game for anyone in the LC to discuss.

Freedom, the points you raise remind me of Witness Lee's own biography of Watchman Nee. Similar flavor. Lin gives simple, even simplistic, explanations of events we all know are far more complicated.

Sometimes "it's all in the packaging," as they say in marketing. It would be difficult for me to believe that Philip Lin doesn't know perfectly well that there's a lot more to the story. But as aron points out, Lin's conscience would probably be much more offended by sullying the good name of Witness Lee, than it is by presenting a biased version of the facts.

Most children would not go around bad-mouthing their own parents. Some things more important than "facts." View Witness Lee as the spiritual father (which of course many do) and it starts to make sense.

Add in the idea of fool me twice, shame on you, and ... it all starts to coalesce.

zeek

11-23-2014, 08:02 PM

And isn't that what aron is doing when he broaches the subject of Asian culture?

I think so. Today's observation becomes tomorrow's prejudice. And I'm referring to myself not aron. I have found, if I am honest with myself, which I am once in a while, my prejudices are dis-confirmed. Individuals are more complex and defy cultural stereo-types. Not only that, the social science show the limits of stereotypes on a statistical scale. It's a matter of more or less not black and white. But, do I believe that I or Brother Lee transcended our cultures of origin? The preponderance of evidence says otherwise. My response to aron was an attempt to find the limit of his proposition not to refute it. Where is the boundary between observing a cultural trait and racism?

TLFisher

11-23-2014, 08:07 PM

Lin was there in Anaheim, he saw everything that happened. It's really too bad for him that he decided to write this book. Now that he has brought up all these things, I think they are fair game for anyone in the LC to discuss.

Until this book came out, it would be easy for a local church elder to dismiss the late 80's turmoil as ancient history. Now, that Phillip Lin has brought it back to the surface, it is fair game :yep:

Freedom

11-23-2014, 08:09 PM

Freedom, the points you raise remind me of Witness Lee's own biography of Watchman Nee. Similar flavor. Lin gives simple, even simplistic, explanations of events we all know are far more complicated.

Sometimes "it's all in the packaging," as they say in marketing. It would be difficult for me to believe that Philip Lin doesn't know perfectly well that there's a lot more to the story. But as aron points out, Lin's conscience would probably be much more offended by sullying the good name of Witness Lee, than it is by presenting a biased version of the facts.

Most children would not go around bad-mouthing their own parents. Some things more important than "facts." View Witness Lee as the spiritual father (which of course many do) and it starts to make sense.

Add in the idea of fool me twice, shame on you, and ... it all starts to coalesce.

It seems that it's always easier in life to "be political" rather than to stand up for what's right. On thing that I never really thought about before is that John Ingalls was supported by the church in Anaheim. Lin makes reference to that in his book, and I will provide a quote regarding that at the end of this post. For JI to stand up to WL meant that he not only risked being in good standing with WL, but they very livelihood of him and his family. Regardless whether brother John did everything right, would Minoru or Philip Lin have done the same thing in order to stand up for their principles? Me thinks not.

A fact is worth noting in order to clear many rumors that circulated about how the Anaheim church had cut out financial support for Brother Ingalls. The church in Anaheim did not cut off financial support for Brother Ingalls; the Anaheim church had continuously given Brother Ingalls financial support, including for his phone bill, until he requested to stop.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 160). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 08:12 PM

I think so. Today's observation becomes tomorrow's prejudice. And I'm referring to myself not aron. I have found, if I am honest with myself, which I am once in a while, my prejudices are dis-confirmed. Individuals are more complex and defy cultural stereo-types. Not only that, the social science show the limits of stereotypes on a statistical scale. It's a matter of more or less not black and white. But, do I believe that I or Brother Lee transcended our cultures of origin? The preponderance of evidence says otherwise. My response to aron was an attempt to find the limit of his proposition not to refute it. Where is the boundary between observing a cultural trait and racism?

Where is the boundary between Witness Lee "losing" the virginity of bleating Caucasian sheep and racism?

Freedom

11-23-2014, 08:13 PM

Until this book came out, it would be easy for a local church elder to dismiss the late 80's turmoil as ancient history. Now, that Phillip Lin has brought it back to the surface, it is fair game :yep:

I also have to wonder if Lin is excluded from the "One Publication" edict. He must be, since his publication company is not LSM. Does that mean that it's fair game for me to start my own publication? :hysterical:

Ohio

11-23-2014, 08:40 PM

It took me 13 years to figure that out, and then another 28 to recover from the Recovery. I recommend re-thinking everything from the inside out, rinse and repeat. But, don't despair. Or maybe drag a certain amount of despair into the process too, but keep the spin cycle going as long as necessary.

Sounds like a guy who does his own laundry! :rolleyes:

rayliotta

11-23-2014, 08:42 PM

I also have to wonder if Lin is excluded from the "One Publication" edict. He must be, since his publication company is not LSM. Does that mean that it's fair game for me to start my own publication? :hysterical:

One time a full-timer corrected me when I said that our book room only has books by two authors (Watchman Nee and Witness Lee). It turned out I was incorrect because the book room also sells two books called the Bible and the Hymnal. And both of those books have dozens, maybe even hundreds, of authors!

Ohio

11-23-2014, 08:47 PM

Ohio

11-23-2014, 08:52 PM

bearbear

11-23-2014, 10:29 PM

bearbear

11-23-2014, 11:47 PM

To someone like Bill Mallon or John Ingalls or Max Rappoport, trying to get at the "truth" about Witness Lee's internal affairs is going to run into some very strongly ingrained cultural resistance. To many of his Asian adherents, the greater truth is loyalty to Witness Lee, at all costs. Including our Judeo-Christian notion of truth: to survive, we non-Asians would stand in the meeting and declare that we were proud to be ostriches with our heads in the sand. The only truth remaining for us was loyalty to the clan. We needed to incorporate Asian values to survive in the local churches of Lee. All of this I tried to address in the thread "The Asian mind and the Western mind."

Perhaps they could also use the story of Rahab and the spies to justify their overlooking the truth. Rahab lied but was blessed by God because she did it for the greater good and her heart was in the right place. One could argue her actions doesn't fall under the commandment for bearing false witness against another, but Leviticus 19:11 does prohibit lying:

'Do not steal. "'Do not lie. "'Do not deceive one another.

Yet had she not lied, she would arguably have broken her oath and committed murder, an even worse sin.

Anything good for the "Lord's Recovery" could be viewed as the greater good, even to the point of violating biblical commands to sue fellow Christians as the LCs are known for. Perhaps Philip Lin thinks he is "hiding Witness Lee" from his captors in the same way Rahab did.

Matthew 11:12
From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent take it by force.

aron

11-24-2014, 06:29 AM

Perhaps they could also use the story of Rahab and the spies to justify their overlooking the truth. Rahab lied but was blessed by God because she did it for the greater good and her heart was in the right place...

I had a similar story told to me when I came into the local churches. I was discussing my job situation with an elder brother and he told me that it was good to "plunder the gold out of Egypt", and since the fleeing Jews robbed the Egyptians of gold which they later made the ark and serving vessels of, while in the desert, we could do the same thing with our jobs. He wasn't condoning theft, of course, but he was giving a spiritual cover to avarice, and greed, and covetousness. He wasn't encouraging anything, but giving me an excuse if I wanted it.

Today I suspect "stealing the gold from Egypt" does have some spiritual connotations, but to give it material connotations of any kind is probably going too far.

aron

11-24-2014, 06:41 AM

The title of this book just sounds spooky to me. I know of many congregations that dearly love their pastor, but I think most of them would never go so far as to label them a "bondslave of Jesus Christ". I think most dedicated Christians would agree such labels should be left up to God to decide, since only God knows the hearts of men. If Philip Lin ever intended this book for outsiders, he's not doing a good job because it's just sending out creepy vibes by just the title..
Witness Lee was a bondslave of Christ, like the apostle Paul before him. Okay. But what about Billy Graham? What about Pastor Bob down the street? What about you and I, for that matter?

Why are we giving special titles to special brothers? Are we not making distinctions among ourselves, expressly forbidden by the apostle James, and based clearly upon the repeated teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ? If you want to be great, be the least. The more you trumpet your supposedly special position, the less special you become.

And if you build monuments to your specialness, what are you building? Should not God be doing such, at the Judgment Seat, and not we beforehand? If we try to anticipate God's exaltation, here below, I am afraid we will suffer loss.

I think I'm also afraid for Philip Lin. If he comes to the judgment seat of Christ, perhaps God will ask him why the only book he wrote was to defend Witness Lee's legacy and not Jesus Christ his Saviour, perhaps revealing the object of his worship. (From a cursory search, it appears Mr. Lin has not published any other works). I think we need to pray for Philip Lin to redirect his heart to Jesus and away from religious idols.
...

I will stick to John Ingall's STIL which is free of charge. Or better yet just wait until the end of this age for God to be the judge and to reveal all things.

I wonder if Philip Lin would be willing to present "the rest of the story", as Paul Harvey's radio show was called.

In his defense, Lin here is arguably doing what he thinks is right. But I bet he is doing it reflexively, and instinctively. His upbringing and culture demand such a monument to Lee. His ability to absorb spiritual things is conditioned by his human culture, as was Nee and Lee before him.

As are you and I, of course, which is why we have "discussions". Have you posters noticed how different everyone is? I seem to be unique here, in many ways. Does that mean that I alone am right? That everyone on this forum should agree with me in totality in every point, that we may all be "one" before the Father? Or does it mean, rather, that I have my own dispositions, as does everyone else?

So why were Nee and Lee somehow exempt from this? How could the Little Flock movement be so pure, and free from any taint of fallen human interpretation? That thesis, presented by Lee and swallowed whole by all us gullible rubes here in the USA, was preposterous. We wanted it to be true, probably because it would eliminate a lot of hard work for us all. Don't think, just do what the apostle tells you. Then you are "covered". Don't do anthing without "fellowship". Philip Lin, in his defense, is just functioning within this system.

aron

11-24-2014, 07:21 AM

I want to address the issue of bias. Here in Calgary we love our Flames. And my friend Joe lives in Edmonton and he loves the Oilers. Whenever we watch them play, and we discuss what we see in front of us, it is remarkable how different our interpretation is.

I will watch a play and exclaim how "my guy" got mugged by the opponent, and the ref didn't call a penalty! Terrible! Joe laughs, and says, "He barely touched him. Your guy just lost his balance and fell down." Joe's team is composed of thugs, miscreants, and so forth. My team is composed of tough, smart, hard-nosed hockey players.

When my team loses to Joes team it is because the refs didn't call the plays right, and the other team cheated, and played dirty, and the hockey gods weren't smiling and the puck bounced funny. But when my team wins it's because we work hard, play well, and are a good team.

It's called bias. We all do this to some extent. In sports fandom it is pretty obvious. In many phases of life it is less obvious. But Jesus said that to God it is obvious, that we can see the splinter elsewhere and miss the beam in our own situation.

How can we be so sure that the Little Flock raised up by Watchman Nee was so pure? Christianity was deformed, and a pure move of God recovered His original intention for the church, so we were told. And we bought it. Nee's "one-church-per-city" held an unassailable logic, so we thought, and even now we blame the problems on those horrible Blendeds, or Titus Chu who rebelled, or Witness Lee who sullied Watchman Nee's "pure move of God".

But why are we so quick to think there was no bias in the creation and organization of the Little Flock? It goes against every human experience heretofore. Somehow Nee was exempt. ???? And I am putting this idea on this thread because the author of this book Phillip Lin is biased. Witness Lee was biased. So are we all. Welcome to planet earth. If you think everyone is biased but you, then you are arguably the most blind of all.

zeek

11-24-2014, 07:39 AM

Where is the boundary between Witness Lee "losing" the virginity of bleating Caucasian sheep and racism?

The short answer is: "I don't know." But, if he fleeced Caucasian sheep, surely he fleeced Chinese sheep as well.

aron

11-24-2014, 08:50 AM

... if WL fleeced Caucasian sheep, surely he fleeced Chinese sheep as well.

Interesting if we could know what percentage of American investors of Daystar loudly demanded to know what happened, where was the money? What percentage of Americans wanted financial redress, compared to what percentage that quietly took a bath "for the greater good."

Then compare that to the Asians. I believe the percentages would be skewed, judging by what anecdotal evidence I've heard.

bearbear

11-24-2014, 08:55 AM

It's called bias. We all do this to some extent. In sports fandom it is pretty obvious. In many phases of life it is less obvious. But Jesus said that to God it is obvious, that we can see the splinter elsewhere and miss the beam in our own situation.

My elder in church who was also ex-LC told me he noticed LCers, including ex-LC have trouble shaking off a spirit of criticism. He said this because he noticed it in me also so that I could be free of it.

The truth hurts sometimes, but if you think about it, it's true. Most of the Christians I meet today seem to have a much better time at seeing the good in people. People from LC backgrounds on the other hand, myself included will easily see the bad and struggle to see the good. We were trained for many years to criticize Christianity while overlooking our own hypocrisy. After leaving the LCs, we in turn took this subconsciously tuned mindset and turned it against Witness Lee and Watchman Nee.

Think about it, some of us have been out of the LCs for decades, yet we are still be struggling to be free. Many of us may not have even settled into a new church because we see irreconcilable problems with all other congregations. I know it was hard for me as well and it took forever to find a church both my wife and I were comfortable with. Maybe the only way to move on is to be free from this spirit of criticism inherited from the LCs.

Perhaps to get the worst of the LC fully out of our system we should learn to be merciful to others and try to see the good in them. I know I've failed many times in this regard, but perhaps once you realize the beam is in your eye, you can finally make an effort to take it out.

Cal

11-24-2014, 09:09 AM

Think about it, some of us have been out of the LCs for decades, yet we are still be struggling to be free. Maybe the only way to move on is to be free from this spirit of criticism inherited from the LCs.

Perhaps to get the worst of the LC fully out of our system we should learn to be merciful to others and try to see the good in them. I know I've failed many times in this regard, but perhaps once you realize the beam is in your eye, you can finally make an effort to take it out.

There is a lot to be said for this bearbear. Forgiveness is not only for the person you forgive, it's for you. It should set you free from a lot of negative feelings.

Someone once said that holding a grudge is like drinking poison in order to kill the other person. At some point you just have to let it go and move on. You may not have all your questions answered, but you have to move on.

I hope nobody goes to their grave still majoring in figuring out and setting everything right about the LC.

Freedom

11-24-2014, 10:11 AM

There is a lot to be said for this bearbear. Forgiveness is not only for the person you forgive, it's for you. It should set you free from a lot of negative feelings.

Someone once said that holding a grudge is like drinking poison in order to kill the other person. At some point you just have to let it go and move on. You may not have all your questions answered, but you have to move on.

I hope nobody goes to their grave still majoring in figuring out and setting everything right about the LC.

I agree that there is a lot to be said here. The spirit of criticism I have received due to being in the LC is strong and deeply ingrained in me.

I am used to having critical thoughts about everyone besides me, and I am used to being a target of all kinds of criticism. I can't say that I know how to "shake off" this part of me. That is part of wht I am here. I think we are all in this together, trying to release ourselves from this bondage. The spirit of criticism in the LC started all the way at the top with WL, the COTA (Criticizer of the Age).

aron

11-24-2014, 11:05 AM

I agree that there is a lot to be said here. The spirit of criticism I have received due to being in the LC is strong and deeply ingrained in me.

I think a way out of this self-inflicted damage (criticism, & bitterness toward others) is the objectivity we may gain by seeing ourselves in others. The same spirit that we see in others (the splinter) may also operate in us (as the beam). So looking back and asking "what went wrong" may indeed show us the way forward. It was not bad old Nee or bad old Lee or bad Blendeds We, but all of us fallen humanity which succumbs to the siren charms of Gods adversary.

So today I was thinking about 2 events. One was WL publicly shaming TC in a training. The other was one of the blendeds doing the same, from the podium, to one of the rank-and-file "brothers" during a conference at my old church. I was thinking, Would this behavior, of public shaming, be acceptable in my Congregational church? Absolutely not! Then why was it accepted, even expected, in the local church? I argue because the social culture required it. To know who was behind whom you have to see who shames whom in public. All this is necessary for a well-ordered, functioning society, in certain cultures. But other cultures don't figure out who is behind whom that way. They have other less public means.

So it dawned on me that what I was watching here was fallen human culture, masquerading as spiritual organization. And how much do my behaviors also reflect my culture? The website I linked had two key words for me: "instinctive" and "reflexive". We don't examine it, we just do it. Nee and Lee were not exempt. Nobody is. So our discussions today can help us find those hidden forces operating in us all, and free us.

And I would argue that this process of being free is the best thing we can do for others. "Physician, heal thyself": when others see us being enlightened, and freed, then maybe they will be emboldened to examine the chains that bind them. Certainly one chain is culture.

TLFisher

11-24-2014, 12:52 PM

But why are we so quick to think there was no bias in the creation and organization of the Little Flock? It goes against every human experience heretofore. Somehow Nee was exempt. ???? And I am putting this idea on this thread because the author of this book Phillip Lin is biased. Witness Lee was biased. So are we all. Welcome to planet earth. If you think everyone is biased but you, then you are arguably the most blind of all.

So true aron. It's a struggle not to be biased. Especially when it comes to delivery of messages. Whether you're in the local churches or in non-LC churches, there is a propensity to prefer one brother's speaking over another.
Perhaps that's why apostle James spoke the word in James chapter 2 on the Sin of Partiality. Being partial is part of our flesh. Which is why this book Sacrifice and Sail On is a product of flesh.

zeek

11-24-2014, 01:20 PM

Interesting if we could know what percentage of American investors of Daystar loudly demanded to know what happened, where was the money? What percentage of Americans wanted financial redress, compared to what percentage that quietly took a bath "for the greater good."

Then compare that to the Asians. I believe the percentages would be skewed, judging by what anecdotal evidence I've heard.

In the locality where I attended, I don't recall anyone loudly demanding anything. They were loudly saying "Amen" to whatever Witness Lee and the elder saying. I don't have any data on the questions you raise but I do appreciate that you recognize that we are talking about behavior which are not all or none in any ethnic group but rather ones that are more or less in every group.

awareness

11-24-2014, 01:43 PM

So true aron. It's a struggle not to be biased. Especially when it comes to delivery of messages. Whether you're in the local churches or in non-LC churches, there is a propensity to prefer one brother's speaking over another.
Perhaps that's why apostle James spoke the word in James chapter 2 on the Sin of Partiality. Being partial is part of our flesh. Which is why this book Sacrifice and Sail On is a product of flesh.
The need for a man in the flesh, like bro Lee, is a carnal need.

rayliotta

11-24-2014, 04:05 PM

Interesting if we could know what percentage of American investors of Daystar loudly demanded to know what happened, where was the money? What percentage of Americans wanted financial redress, compared to what percentage that quietly took a bath "for the greater good."

Then compare that to the Asians. I believe the percentages would be skewed, judging by what anecdotal evidence I've heard.

aron, would this imply that Chinese and Korean Recovery members may have been more likely to quietly take a bath, or that they may have been wiser and more cautious before investing in Lee's business propositions in the first place?

Or perhaps, a little of both, eh?

rayliotta

11-24-2014, 04:07 PM

The short answer is: "I don't know." But, if he fleeced Caucasian sheep, surely he fleeced Chinese sheep as well.

He surely did. And some of the Chinese sheep watched in silence while Caucasian sleep were getting their own wool pulled over their eyes.

"LOL"

zeek

11-24-2014, 07:52 PM

He surely did. And some of the Chinese sheep watched in silence while Caucasian sleep were getting their own wool pulled over their eyes.

"LOL"

Comic/tragic. No wonder you like mob movies look what you witnessed as a kid. You're Brother Witness Liotta.

Freedom

11-24-2014, 10:08 PM

In the last chapter of his book, Lin addresses WL's financial dealings. This is also where he addresses Daystar. He says a number of inaccurate things that I wanted to point out along with some contradictions. Regarding the aftermath of Daystar Lin states:

Looking back, we can say that although Brother Lee was a competent business builder, but it seems that the Lord did not want him to do business to make money for Him, because he was not born for that! In this matter of making money for the Lord, Brother Lee seemed never to have any successes in his life. If we look at it from man’s view point, this case shows his weakness and failure just as he himself once admitted that as a fallen human being, he also have had his weakness and failure...

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 272). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.
So here Lin excuses the failure of Daystar as a matter of WL not being a business man. Notice the part in bold where Lin states that Lee never seemed to have success in making money for the Lord. Shortly after stating this, Lin include a copy of WL's will. Here is an excerpt of WL's will:
Following the Lord’s leading, I established the Gospel Bookroom and the Living Stream Ministry both to spread the messages of His recovery. The purpose of such establishment is not for building up an enterprise for myself or my children to secure any gain. In order to protect the copyright from confusion, I decided that the Gospel Bookroom and the Living Stream Ministry should pay me a royalty. Any excess that I received would be offered to the Lord for His use. Later, the royalty I received became more than before. In addition to offering to the Lord, I used the rest to support those of you children who are in need. At the beginning of 1994, while I was resting in the hospital, I felt that although what I received from my royalty payment was a result of my writing, the source of such writing is the word of the Lord. I vowed to the Lord that after I am taken away by the Lord, beginning from the year after that, I will offer all the royalty to the Lord.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 277). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.Notice how Lee's own words contradict what Lin just stated. LSM got to the point where it was bringing "excess". Yes, WL had "success" in generating money. This success was LSM. What particularly catches my attention is where WL says "Later, the royalty I received became more than before". What exactly does this mean? Does this mean he went from receiving just a little money to receiving a large amount of money. The way this is worded it implies that without stating it explicitly.

I'm not here to judge WL on his financial dealings, however, I don't like the thought that Lin wishes to portray the image of Lee being "pure" in his finances. For starters, if LSM had "excess" in later years, why did Lee not take the opportunity to repay some of those who lost money from Daystar who "forgave" him his debts? Well, I guess technically that would have to be done under the table.:yep:

Finally, I wanted to post a quote of what Lin has to say regarding brothers whom he labels as "rebellious":
Those rebellious ones say that Brother Witness Lee used LSM to preach the Word of God in order to make financial gains from the saints and to establish an enterprise to accumulate financial fortune for him and his children. In order to make known and to explore the senseless and false rumors, unfounded foulness, arrogant allegations and also to give, at the same time, an excellent example for those with a pure heart loving and serving the Lord to follow, I have included below a copy of the will of Brother Witness Lee to his children in English, which was handed to me from his son Brother Philip Lee.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 276). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.Apparently Lin feels that no one had any right to question WL's finances. That is hard to swallow given all we know about Lee's financial failures. I really feel that Lee had the inability to let himself be held accountable for his personal choices.

TLFisher

11-24-2014, 10:08 PM

Philip Lin really put a spin on things here. He says that Lee "cleared" all the Daystar debts. It make it sound like everything worked out just fine. He forgot to mention that saints were asked to "forgive" debt owed by Lee. I wonder how many saints did so out of pressure?

The other side of the coin from former LC elder Doug Krieger,

"The L.C. needed someone to sell its motor homes--the entire enterprise (in retrospect) was nothing more than a vain attempt by W.L. to build his financial empire here in America via cheap labor in Taiwan. My subjective knowledge of this "scheme" was that it was illegal, immoral and unethical to the core--it was a vast rip off of God's people--a shame to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ! Many saints lost their life savings in this bogus venture.

I was asked to help in this now defunct and exposed sham--although there were full-time sales people doing the job. Before W.L. and his ilk decided to excommunicate me, I was able to sell 5 of these wildebeests (the only guy that ever sold any to anyone aside from selling it to ourselves!) - For a time this "saved me from excommunication" (by the way there was the spurious charge that my excommunication or being asked to "leave Berkeley" (which Dave Mattison and Jim Miller requested of me and Doug Shearer to do) was based upon "divisiveness" (a most ambiguous charge in that I was immediately heralded in Anaheim as "the savior of the Recovery") - that ignoble title lasted one week or less. Then, when I asked for my promised commission for the sale and "cash in hand" of these vehicles, Max Rapaport smashed me by telling me that when I requested my financial commissions as promised that I would NOT receive anything and that "your opinions count as nothing."

W.L. - after I appealed to him (for I was the only one who had done all the sales out of my own resources and had received no compensation throughout the two-month effort--unlike virtually all sales and staff members) realized that what Max had done (although I understand now that W.L. had asked Max to "stick it to me" (i.e., no compensation)) was encouraged by W.L. in an attempt to secure more funds for his nefarious efforts--efforts now embracing sons Timothy and Phillip."

http://www.thebereans.net/forum2/showthread.php?t=39611

TLFisher

11-24-2014, 10:27 PM

Sacrifice and Sail On Chapter 6 Kindle Location 2305

"All of this culminated in a meeting in Anaheim August 28, 1988, in which Brother Ingalls gave 8 points on the so-called truth; in his view, he said the Lord's recovery had deviated and changed in nature. This was followed by Brother Godfred's speaking on the so-called "standing of the Church in Anaheim." After they finished speaking, Brother Al Knoch confirmed he agreed with what they said. Their speaking was absolutely a direct attack on Brother Lee and his ministry, and also an attempt to cut the church off from Brother Lee's ministry.
Brother Minoru Chen and I were in Anaheim as elders objecting to the things the other three elders did and to the unseemly things taking place in the meetings."

The following is John Ingalls testimony of the same event including a time with brother Lee several days before from Speaking the Truth in Love pages 39-40.

"On Thursday, August 25th, Brother Lee asked me to come to his home for further fellowship. He said then that he would ask Godfred and Al to come to his home the following day, Friday. It seemed strange to me that he would separate us, asking me to come on one day and them on another. But he said I could come too on Friday if I liked. On Thursday alone with me, Brother Lee asked me what changes I thought he should have. This greatly surprised me. Perhaps he was thinking of my fellowship with him on June 22nd, when I told him that if he did not have some change, it would be difficult for the churches to go on. I said, "Brother Lee, please give me a moment to collect my thoughts." I was concerned what I should say to him. Then I proceeded to mention a few of the concerns previously mentioned. Moreover, I tried to impress him that I never tried to use the term "autonomy" in all of my speaking. Throughout these months I had told him this several times. I stated that I was burdened to speak about local administration together with universal fellowship (as we have in our hymn, #824, authored by Brother Lee and translated from Chinese: Administration local, each answering to the Lord; Communion universal, upheld in one accord.) He responded, "that’s my teaching." I agreed that it was indeed his teaching. So what was wrong?
The next afternoon, Friday, August 26th, I joined Godfred and Al at Brother Lee’s home. Godfred spoke strongly, asking Brother Lee first if he had spoken anything against us recently. He replied that he had not. Then Godfred reasoned with him: How is it that you speak against autonomy, considering that a problem, but you will not deal with the problems that we brought to your attention. Godfred spoke earnestly and impressively. He said, "the center of the church should be Christ, but He has been replaced by you and your ministry." Brother Lee was touched by what Godfred said, and perhaps considering that what he had just alleged afforded some light for clearing up the problem, he said, "I like to hear that." I recall the scene vividly, and his words still echo in my ears. It seemed that this time Brother Lee appreciated the frank fellowship and was trying to warm up to us. But we could not seem to make any real progress. Brother Lee remarked that everything that had happened in Europe which had caused so great a problem between the churches and the Living Stream Ministry was just a misunderstanding. After the meeting Godfred told us that he wanted to leave the eldership and was fully disgusted with the whole situation.

SIXTEEN POINTS
August 28, 1988

As the day drew near for special fellowship with the church as we had announced, Godfred, Al and I came together for prayer and fellowship regarding the content of the coming gathering. We only knew that we needed to clear up some matters, and set a direction for the church, and we had been praying individually for guidance concerning the specific points that should be covered. I proposed to the brothers that we briefly expound a number of basic matters according to the Word of God that set forth the proper standing of the church, touching especially the aspects both of truth and practice that related to our current situation. The brothers consented. After some consideration we decided that I would cover eight points concerning the truth and Godfred would cover eight points regarding the practice; in conclusion Al would give a testimony of confirmation.
The appointed time arrived for the meeting. (Brother Lee meanwhile was in San Gabriel, meeting with the Chinese-speaking saints.) This time, we felt, was very crucial to our going on. There were over two hundred saints on hand, including some on the Chinese-speaking side who understood English (a good number considering our usual attendance). Brothers Minoru Chen and Philip Lin with the three of us sat together in the front. We launched into our burden and experienced much strengthening, release, and anointing. As contemplated, I covered the points concerning our standing related to the truth. This touched the following points (in a greatly abridged form):
1. Our standing in relation to the Word of God. It is our sole authority, our constitution, and we should check everything by it.
2. Our standing concerning the church. In this age the church is central and supreme; no other corporate body is recognized by the New Testament.
3. Concerning the genuine oneness. It is organic; it can never be organized or forced. Spiritual leaders should not divide us.
4. Concerning other Christians. We should never mock or belittle other Christians with an elitist attitude; rather, we should love, honor, and receive them all.
5. Concerning our vocation. It is to build up the Body of Christ, not any work or ministry.
6. Concerning our purpose or aim. It is to be the Lord’s testimony; we are not here for any work.
7. Concerning the ministry. It is the imparting of God into His people to produce the church. It is not the ministry of any one person; we all have a share in it.
8. Concerning the apostles. They are always plural, and there are a number of them on the earth today. We should not exalt any apostle or servant of God beyond what is written.
The full text of my points as well as Godfred’s plus Al’s testimony is included in the Appendix (see page 79, Appendix B).
I spoke honestly and frankly according to the solid principles revealed in the Word, which we had been taught and which we had believed and held for years, applying some of the points to our present situation. I was not aiming at Brother Lee. I was burdened to present the basic truths concerning our standing and correct some misconceptions held by the saints. The present need demanded that we touch specifically the matters which we addressed. I have heard Brother Lee repeat a number of times what he had been told by a brother. "These sixteen points are sixteen bullets aimed at you {Brother Lee}." That is not true. If anything hit him it is not because we were aiming at him.
Godfred followed and covered eight points regarding our practice:
1. In relation to church administration. It should be local, with no central control. The elders in each place should seek the Lord directly for his timely leading according to the need in their locality.
2. The Living Stream Ministry Office. It is a business office and has no authority over the church. As the church we disassociate ourselves from certain practices and conduct there that we find intolerable.
3. The Life Studies and Christian literature in general. We should never allow spiritual materials to become a crutch or replacement for the reading of the Bible. To insist upon reading only LSM material or to oppose the reading of LSM material is going to far.
4. The church book sales. We will continue this service, but we will no longer advertise or promote any books.
5. The semi-annual trainings. We will no longer interrupt our church life for the trainings. Anyone who wishes to attend the trainings should feel free to do so.
6. The other churches. We should respect and highly esteem all other churches, but we should not compel the church in our locality to practice like other churches.
7. Various practices. In all these matters we must practice generality. Any practice which is not sinful we should not oppose; neither should we impose it.
8. The gospel. There is no particular way to preach the gospel; any proper way is good.
Godfred spoke earnestly and to the point with a good spirit. He apologized to the church on our behalf for coming under the influence of external pressures in past years and not seeking the Lord’s leading directly according to the local need. He confessed to the saints on our behalf the promoting of an improper relationship with the LSM office, so that we declared our oneness with that office and thus associated ourselves with its conduct. The blame for that relationship, he said, must be borne by us elders, and not put on the doorstep of the office.
Godfred closed with this statement, which I want to quote in full: "Our reason for having this fellowship is not to vindicate anyone or to condemn anyone, or to do anything for ourselves. We are having this fellowship for the purpose of bringing us all back to the Lord Himself. He is our Head, He is our center; and He should be the entire unique content of the church life! We hope that the things we have briefly mentioned will clear up the past so that we all can go forward together positively as the church in our city." This was a fitting conclusion to the sixteen points.
Al Knoch then followed with an appropriate confirming testimony, saying that we were not there to oppose anything which the Lord had given us through the years. He cited questions being raised by saints in local churches in Europe, where he had recently visited with his family. They were asking, "Are we really the local church with a general standing, open to every Christian in our city? Or are we a sect?" These are legitimate and timely questions. Then he added, "They found out that gradually they were becoming a very special kind of ‘church’, not a local church…." Al also apologized for his part in all the promotions and for all that he had done and said.
When Al finished I spoke just a few words regarding our going on, how we needed much prayer and the Word. We did not have time to impress these matters upon the saints, so we just made a few announcements, expecting that the meeting would soon be brought to a close.
When I sat down a number of brothers, most of whom were in the home meetings Godfred and I visited a few weeks previously (see pages 37 and 38), were very burdened to speak and had come to the meeting well-prepared. They felt that what we had spoken had left the job only half done, and they desired to complete it. Therefore, they stood one by one crying out against various evils and especially remonstrating against sin being tolerated and sinful persons being put into a position of influence. One brother quoted Watchman Nee’s word that the judgment of sin is the basis of oneness. (Love One Another, pp. 148-149). The pent-up feelings of some of them burst out in strong protest against practices and abuses they could brook no longer. Although we sympathized with a number of their burdens, we felt the spirit of the meeting had changed, and there was considerable stridency and rancor. That left a bad taste. Accusations were made and some personal matters were raised that should have been handled in private, not in that forum. The meeting began to erupt in an exchange of words at the end, and Godfred arose and with God-given wisdom calmed the storm and turned the saints to pray. Thus concluding the meeting. We regretted that it should end in such a manner.
Toward the conclusion of the session as we were starting to pray, Minoru arose and made a couple of statements which I want to note for the record. He said that he agreed in principle with all the points that we had made, but he stated that he wanted to reserve himself regarding some matters; and concerning some of the points, particularly those made by Godfred, he stated that he would not say in a definite way that he agreed or disagreed. He also referred to Godfred’s apology for participating in certain promotions, which, he said, took place mainly in 1986. (He was alluding to the promotion of the LSM office and Philip Lee.) He said that he wanted to amen what Godfred had shared and declared that there was an excessive amount of this promotion, thereby bringing the saints into confusion and despondency, and the church into suffering. He also wanted to ask the forgiveness of the whole church for his part in this very matter."

zeek

11-24-2014, 10:39 PM

Apparently Lin feels that no one had any right to question WL's finances. That is hard to swallow given all we know about Lee's financial failures.

Lin is following the principle of "Spiritual Authority" by Watchman Nee wherein to question the delegated authority is rebellion.

rayliotta

11-24-2014, 11:58 PM

Lin is following the principle of "Spiritual Authority" by Watchman Nee wherein to question the delegated authority is rebellion.

That, and Witness Lee claimed that his ministry's financial dealings were his own personal business, since it was his "personal ministry."

For anyone who hasn't had the opportunity to hear Witness Lee's phone conversation with Boston elder Sal Benoit in 1978, I repost it again here. (Thanks to bearbear for linking to the transcript (http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=5082).)

A couple of nuggets from Witness Lee:

"All the donations
were donated
to the Living Stream ….
It all went to the Living Stream account.
That is legal.
Living Stream is a legal, tax deduction ...
Co-pation, corporation.
That’s it.
About Daystar, that is not your business.
No, I don’t answer you.
I have no responsibility to answer anyone about this" (p. 3 of transcript).

"Okay. The ministry is my personal ministry and
this is incorporated.
I’m not responsible to
anyone. I’m only responsible to the government" (p. 5 of transcript).

Audio: http://mustune.com/sal-benoit-witness-lee/ (http://mustune.com/sal-benoit-witness-lee/)

Transcript: http://www.laymansfellowship.com/public/Transcript-SalBenoitAndWitnessLee-PhoneCall.pdf (http://www.laymansfellowship.com/public/Transcript-SalBenoitAndWitnessLee-PhoneCall.pdf)

zeek

11-25-2014, 07:38 AM

That, and Witness Lee claimed that his ministry's financial dealings were his own personal business, since it was his "personal ministry."

For anyone who hasn't had the opportunity to hear Witness Lee's phone conversation with Boston elder Sal Benoit in 1978, I repost it again here. (Thanks to bearbear for linking to the transcript (http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=5082).)

A couple of nuggets from Witness Lee:

"All the donations
were donated
to the Living Stream ….
It all went to the Living Stream account.
That is legal.
Living Stream is a legal, tax deduction ...
Co-pation, corporation.
That’s it.
About Daystar, that is not your business.
No, I don’t answer you.
I have no responsibility to answer anyone about this" (p. 3 of transcript).

"Okay. The ministry is my personal ministry and
this is incorporated.
I’m not responsible to
anyone. I’m only responsible to the government" (p. 5 of transcript).

Audio: http://mustune.com/sal-benoit-witness-lee/ (http://mustune.com/sal-benoit-witness-lee/)

Transcript: http://www.laymansfellowship.com/public/Transcript-SalBenoitAndWitnessLee-PhoneCall.pdf (http://www.laymansfellowship.com/public/Transcript-SalBenoitAndWitnessLee-PhoneCall.pdf)

As the MOTA, Lee apparently saw himself as answerable to no one but God whereas, we were all answerable to him as our delegated authority.

Freedom

11-25-2014, 09:42 AM

As the MOTA, Lee apparently saw himself as answerable to no one but God whereas, we were all answerable to him as our delegated authority.

It's a shame that even though Lin readily admits that Lee wasn't perfect, he dismisses his failures as minor issues. Actually, I think if Lee wasn't viewed as the MOTA, then his failures wouldn't be such a big deal.

Because Lee felt he was accountable to no one, it changes everything. Because of Lee's status in the LC and the broad impact of his failures, there is good reason to question his financial dealings.

Ohio

11-25-2014, 09:46 AM

My elder in church who was also ex-LC told me he noticed LCers, including ex-LC have trouble shaking off a spirit of criticism. He said this because he noticed it in me also so that I could be free of it.

The truth hurts sometimes, but if you think about it, it's true. Most of the Christians I meet today seem to have a much better time at seeing the good in people. People from LC backgrounds on the other hand, myself included will easily see the bad and struggle to see the good. We were trained for many years to criticize Christianity while overlooking our own hypocrisy. After leaving the LCs, we in turn took this subconsciously tuned mindset and turned it against Witness Lee and Watchman Nee.

Think about it, some of us have been out of the LCs for decades, yet we are still be struggling to be free. Many of us may not have even settled into a new church because we see irreconcilable problems with all other congregations. I know it was hard for me as well and it took forever to find a church both my wife and I were comfortable with. Maybe the only way to move on is to be free from this spirit of criticism inherited from the LCs.

Perhaps to get the worst of the LC fully out of our system we should learn to be merciful to others and try to see the good in them. I know I've failed many times in this regard, but perhaps once you realize the beam is in your eye, you can finally make an effort to take it out.
bearbear, I think it is God's loving shepherding that an elder, a former ex-member, could discern this in you. Perhaps you could start a new thread with these points elaborated.

I have never met a member or former member of the LC's that was not inflicted to some extent with this spirit of criticism. Nee and Lee passed on this "spiritual disease" to all of us, and that's why they were so confident that we were "wrecked" for Christianity. Up until now, I have simply referred to this as the "ministry of condemnation." (2 Cor 3.9) It is thus far easier for ex-members to enter into the world than it is to enter into fellowship in another congregation.

This disease has made us all critical, even to the extent of giving us a spirit of criticism. It is so easy to perceive the bad, rather than noticing the good in others and in various circumstances. We have become skeptics and suspicious of everything. I see this in myself, my extended family, the saints I am close to, and in all those who have posted on these forums.

I don't believe there is any magic "cure" for this disease. Ours is an uphill struggle, constantly repudiating the old ingrained ways, and exercising our hearts to love, to be merciful, to be compassionate, to be complimentary, to believe all things. (I Cor 13.7)

Mark 7.22-23 has been helpful to me ...

Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.An "evil eye" is an eye that sees evil. We in the Recovery were trained to see evil, to see evil in everyone except Lee. That "evil" which we see in everyone else is dangerous because it can enter our heart and defile us. It enables us to judge all others and excuse ourselves. This evil eye then fuels our pride and blindness.

Freedom

11-25-2014, 10:22 AM

An "evil eye" is an eye that sees evil. We in the Recovery were trained to see evil, to see evil in everyone except Lee. That "evil" which we see in everyone else is dangerous because it can enter our heart and defile us. It enables us to judge all others and excuse ourselves. This evil eye then fuels our pride and blindness.

What I think makes matters worse is that in the LC we can't criticize things that are clearly wrong, even when it would be beneficial to do so. In my experience, I feel like I have held a lot inside, so my natural reaction is to want to speak what's on my mind.

I remeber not too long ago one of the elders in my LC criticized Rick Warren, Greg Laurie and Billy Graham as being those who preach the "low gospel". All I heard was "amen" when that was said. I really felt like standing up and tellling him off for making a statement like that.

I think my point is that there are plenty of situations where it might be okay to criticize or point out something wrong. There are also situations that we may be just as wrong as the person we think is wrong. I feel that the LC has really contributed to making this a confusing issue to deal with.

Ohio

11-25-2014, 11:11 AM

What I think makes matters worse is that in the LC we can't criticize things that are clearly wrong, even when it would be beneficial to do so. In my experience, I feel like I have held a lot inside, so my natural reaction is to want to speak what's on my mind.

I remember not too long ago one of the elders in my LC criticized Rick Warren, Greg Laurie and Billy Graham as being those who preach the "low gospel". All I heard was "amen" when that was said. I really felt like standing up and tellling him off for making a statement like that.

I think my point is that there are plenty of situations where it might be okay to criticize or point out something wrong. There are also situations that we may be just as wrong as the person we think is wrong. I feel that the LC has really contributed to making this a confusing issue to deal with.

What you say is very true. We were taught to speak when we should have been quiet, and taught to be quiet when we should have spoken up.

Ecclesiastes 3.7 says, "A time to tear apart and a time to sew together; A time to be silent and a time to speak."

It's too bad in the Recovery that we often did not know what time it was! We were on Lee's time, and not God's time. :xx:

And Freedom ... now is the time, and this is the place ... for you to speak up! ... And to Give Thanks to God!

Dave

11-25-2014, 12:08 PM

I have never met a member or former member of the LC's that was not inflicted to some extent with this spirit of criticism. Nee and Lee passed on this "spiritual disease" to all of us, and that's why they were so confident that we were "wrecked" for Christianity. Up until now, I have simply referred to this as the "ministry of condemnation." (2 Cor 3.9) It is thus far easier for ex-members to enter into the world than it is to enter into fellowship in another congregation. You may be correct in general but not for the reasons you are stating. Before I became involved in the LC I was a junior attending an AOG Bible College in Santa Cruz, Calif. and had previously been an active Christian for 5 years since I was 17 e.g. I preached on the streets every week to win souls to Christ. I left the LC in 1978 after having been in the LC for about 9 years and 2 migrations later. I had been very active in the LC in recruiting Christians and the unsaved on campuses but I left not because I was overly critical as much as realizing that this is not what I signed up for. After I left I started attending an AOG church and became involved with the congregation teaching adult Sunday school etc. However, after a year or so I realized that I just couldn’t continue. Again, it wasn’t that I was critical but it was just that I didn’t want to be a part of it anymore. I had received 9 years of hearing that these churches were the daughters of Babylon and that Christ was against religion. Also, we were taught that we had the inside revelation as to the workings of God on the earth with the apostle as the leader and other teachings seemed superficial comparatively. I tried to go back to other churches over the next few years but it just didn’t work for me for several reasons. As I have stated previously, I focused on my work and family over the next few years as a result.

In any case, from an Evangelical Christian/Biblical standpoint it is either you are in the world or living the devout Christian life. However, I don’t have that narrow perspective. For me, I am still a seeker and I read and have read extensively in several areas of interest as well as being very active in the Unitarian Church (President, Leader on several groups etc, as well as giving many talks to the congregation over the years). The last talk I gave a couple months ago or so ago was on James Luther Adams, the most prominent Unitarian theologian of the 21<sup>st</sup> Century where I shared that when he was in Germany in 1937 he saw firsthand how Christians succumbed to the Nazis. The bottom line: don’t stick your head in the sand in regards to the social/political issues surrounding your life. I read the Bible all the time, not from a theological standpoint but how it addresses many of the issues of today e.g. poverty, women, etc. It is the most important book of the last 2000 years influencing western civilization. One thing I like about the Unitarians--they aren't trying to cram some believe it or else doctrine down my throat but they are one of the most active socially groups in our area and work with other churches to feed and clothe the poor and the downtrodden etc.

In regards to the book we are talking about on this thread. Lin has his head in the sand and can't see what is in front of him or is unwilling to see and confront the issues and problems of Witness Lee. He should never have written such a book which is so full of misinformation. But he is being a "good" Christian and follower of the Apostle WL.

HERn

11-25-2014, 12:30 PM

bearbear, I think it is God's loving shepherding that an elder, a former ex-member, could discern this in you. Perhaps you could start a new thread with these points elaborated.

I have never met a member or former member of the LC's that was not inflicted to some extent with this spirit of criticism. Nee and Lee passed on this "spiritual disease" to all of us, and that's why they were so confident that we were "wrecked" for Christianity. Up until now, I have simply referred to this as the "ministry of condemnation." (2 Cor 3.9) It is thus far easier for ex-members to enter into the world than it is to enter into fellowship in another congregation.

This disease has made us all critical, even to the extent of giving us a spirit of criticism. It is so easy to perceive the bad, rather than noticing the good in others and in various circumstances. We have become skeptics and suspicious of everything. I see this in myself, my extended family, the saints I am close to, and in all those who have posted on these forums.

I don't believe there is any magic "cure" for this disease. Ours is an uphill struggle, constantly repudiating the old ingrained ways, and exercising our hearts to love, to be merciful, to be compassionate, to be complimentary, to believe all things. (I Cor 13.7)

Mark 7.22-23 has been helpful to me ...

An "evil eye" is an eye that sees evil. We in the Recovery were trained to see evil, to see evil in everyone except Lee. That "evil" which we see in everyone else is dangerous because it can enter our heart and defile us. It enables us to judge all others and excuse ourselves. This evil eye then fuels our pride and blindness.

Thanks for the discussion on being critical in this thread and also in the comments some have made in my "How Much to Throw Out" thread. I think this has caused my spouse and I to pray in the car when traveling to our new church meetings that We would saved from being judgmental, superior and critical. Soon we plan to meet with the pastor and maybe I'll ask him if he detects any judgmental- ism in us.

awareness

11-25-2014, 01:13 PM

Outstanding posts bro's Ohio and bearbear. And of course I resent .. er ah .. resemble those remarks.

I don't believe there is any magic "cure" for this disease. Ours is an uphill struggle, constantly repudiating the old ingrained ways, and exercising our hearts to love, to be merciful, to be compassionate, to be complimentary, to believe all things.
I don't know that it's a disease -- being critical -- or if so, that its in need of being cured. It's our defenses, of falling for anything like the LC again. Isn't that a good thing? Like a brother or sister telling you, "maybe the Lord is trying to teach or show you something." If you're not inclined to be critical, you'll prolly find yourself being manipulated, by those who wish to make you in their image. I guess some are okay with that. But not me. I'm critical.

An "evil eye" is an eye that sees evil.
Well the evil eye is another thing. What a concept! I agree we should be more concerned with the evil I, and not just see evil in others.

But rest assured. If evil is afoot, I hope I have an eye out for it.

TLFisher

11-25-2014, 01:27 PM

What I think makes matters worse is that in the LC we can't criticize things that are clearly wrong, even when it would be beneficial to do so. In my experience, I feel like I have held a lot inside, so my natural reaction is to want to speak what's on my mind.

That's how I am also. I have kept in so much for so long, because the Local Church culture/system does not want expression of thought. I no longer meet in this environment except when I visit my parents. Even when I do visit, there's confirmation I have made the proper decision to leave.

TLFisher

11-25-2014, 01:37 PM

Sacrifice and Sail On Chapter 6 Kindle Location 2305

" Their speaking was absolutely a direct attack on Brother Lee and his ministry, and also an attempt to cut the church off from Brother Lee's ministry."

The following is John Ingalls testimony of the same event including a time with brother Lee several days before from Speaking the Truth in Love pages 39-40.

1. Our standing in relation to the Word of God. It is our sole authority, our constitution, and we should check everything by it.

2. Our standing concerning the church. In this age the church is central and supreme; no other corporate body is recognized by the New Testament.

3. Concerning the genuine oneness. It is organic; it can never be organized or forced. Spiritual leaders should not divide us.

4. Concerning other Christians. We should never mock or belittle other Christians with an elitist attitude; rather, we should love, honor, and receive them all.

5. Concerning our vocation. It is to build up the Body of Christ, not any work or ministry.

6. Concerning our purpose or aim. It is to be the Lord’s testimony; we are not here for any work.

7. Concerning the ministry. It is the imparting of God into His people to produce the church. It is not the ministry of any one person; we all have a share in it.

8. Concerning the apostles. They are always plural, and there are a number of them on the earth today. We should not exalt any apostle or servant of God beyond what is written.

Godfred followed and covered eight points regarding our practice:

1. In relation to church administration. It should be local, with no central control. The elders in each place should seek the Lord directly for his timely leading according to the need in their locality.

2. The Living Stream Ministry Office. It is a business office and has no authority over the church. As the church we disassociate ourselves from certain practices and conduct there that we find intolerable.

3. The Life Studies and Christian literature in general. We should never allow spiritual materials to become a crutch or replacement for the reading of the Bible. To insist upon reading only LSM material or to oppose the reading of LSM material is going to far.

4. The church book sales. We will continue this service, but we will no longer advertise or promote any books.

5. The semi-annual trainings. We will no longer interrupt our church life for the trainings. Anyone who wishes to attend the trainings should feel free to do so.

6. The other churches. We should respect and highly esteem all other churches, but we should not compel the church in our locality to practice like other churches.

7. Various practices. In all these matters we must practice generality. Any practice which is not sinful we should not oppose; neither should we impose it.

8. The gospel. There is no particular way to preach the gospel; any proper way is good.

Godfred spoke earnestly and to the point with a good spirit. He apologized to the church on our behalf for coming under the influence of external pressures in past years and not seeking the Lord’s leading directly according to the local need. He confessed to the saints on our behalf the promoting of an improper relationship with the LSM office, so that we declared our oneness with that office and thus associated ourselves with its conduct. The blame for that relationship, he said, must be borne by us elders, and not put on the doorstep of the office.
Godfred closed with this statement, which I want to quote in full: "Our reason for having this fellowship is not to vindicate anyone or to condemn anyone, or to do anything for ourselves. We are having this fellowship for the purpose of bringing us all back to the Lord Himself. He is our Head, He is our center; and He should be the entire unique content of the church life! We hope that the things we have briefly mentioned will clear up the past so that we all can go forward together positively as the church in our city." This was a fitting conclusion to the sixteen points.

Toward the conclusion of the session as we were starting to pray, Minoru arose and made a couple of statements which I want to note for the record. He said that he agreed in principle with all the points that we had made, but he stated that he wanted to reserve himself regarding some matters; and concerning some of the points, particularly those made by Godfred, he stated that he would not say in a definite way that he agreed or disagreed. He also referred to Godfred’s apology for participating in certain promotions, which, he said, took place mainly in 1986. (He was alluding to the promotion of the LSM office and Philip Lee.) He said that he wanted to amen what Godfred had shared and declared that there was an excessive amount of this promotion, thereby bringing the saints into confusion and despondency, and the church into suffering. He also wanted to ask the forgiveness of the whole church for his part in this very matter.

Where is the attack Phillip Lin is referring to? Key words I underlined are apologized and confessed. As I read from John's account, Godfred and Minoru asked for forgiveness for their role in promoting the LSM office. Sacrifice and Sail On appears to have left this portion out.

Ohio

11-25-2014, 02:08 PM

I don't know that it's a disease -- being critical -- or if so, that its in need of being cured. It's our defenses, of falling for anything like the LC again. Isn't that a good thing?
Discernment comes with experience and the knowledge of the scriptures. Of course, it's a good thing. The Lord Himself and the apostles all have warned us in their writings.

A spirit of criticism takes this to an extreme. Consider those who cannot fellowship with any other Christians, cannot maintain meaningful friendships due to endless disagreements, cannot enjoy peaceful marital relations due to nit-picking, etc. all are indicators that things are not healthy with us. Check within whether, during times of conflict, we can find anything good in the situation. Can we still trust people? Are we skeptical of everything and everyone?

In the midst of conflict and tension, the apostle Paul said, "whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is righteous, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is honorable, if there is any virtue or praise, keep thinking about these things."

Ohio

11-25-2014, 02:14 PM

Where is the attack Phillip Lin is referring to? Key words I underlined are apologized and confessed. As I read from John's account, Godfred and Minoru asked for forgiveness for their role in promoting the LSM office. Sacrifice and Sail On appears to have left this portion out.
There was no attack by John Ingalls. Never was one. Nada. Zilch. Negatory.

When faced with the truth, when faced with prophets sent by God, what did Lee do? Did he have ears to hear? Did he repent? No, he did not.

Instead Lee did to John Ingalls what the Pharisees did to the Prophets.

The only difference was in the aftermath. The Pharisees erected monuments to the Prophets they killed. Lee and the Blendeds, however, just removed every trace of Ingalls from their history.

bearbear

11-25-2014, 03:21 PM

A spirit of criticism takes this to an extreme. Consider those who cannot fellowship with any other Christians, cannot maintain meaningful friendships due to endless disagreements, cannot enjoy peaceful marital relations due to nit-picking, etc. all are indicators that things are not healthy with us. Check within whether, during times of conflict, we can find anything good in the situation. Can we still trust people? Are we skeptical of everything and everyone?

Just today I came across a piece of scripture where it seems Jesus predicts the result of the LC -> ex-LC experience as you have just described it. The context is set in the last days, but the pattern seems to match so well it cannot be ignored.

Matthew 24:11-13
"11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved."

Not only did we inherit a spirit of criticism, but perhaps many even came to know a level of wickedness and hypocrisy we thought was not possible from who we believed were men of God. Since many of us looked up to Witness Lee and considered him our spiritual father, we felt betrayed and deceived (Matt 24:11) when we discovered the truth that he only viewed us as pawns, or as "saints who lost their virginity". From what I've seen with my Dad in regards to Titus Chu also, it seems that many felt used and as a result our trust towards others was broken.

The natural response to this according to Matthew 24:11-12 is for one's love to grow cold after being deceived by authority figures (v11) and experiencing wickedness (v12). The following verse 13 then suggests that letting our love grow cold actually implies a letting go of faith.

It seems like there is always a temptation to blame God when things like this happen, but Jesus never promised that we would not encounter such horrible experiences after following him, in fact it seems like he warns us to expect such things in Matthew 24:11-13 as well as many other places such as:

John 16:33
"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."

I think this is why Jesus gave us the parable of the sower, whereby he gives us the secret for enduring testing and tribulation until we bear fruit.

Luke 8:15
As for that in the good soil, they are those who, (1) hearing the word, hold it fast in an (2) honest and good heart, and (3)bear fruit with patience.

The good soil of Luke 8:15 contains three pointers for persevering until the end which I'm going to personally keep in mind.

1. hold fast to the word of God (don't let go, don't give up trying to understand God's word (Matt 13:19), trust in it and live it out)
2. maintain an honest and good heart (through fellowship with Jesus, ask God to clean our heart daily and rid any areas that are unpleasing to him, including a spirit of criticism/judgment, Psalm 51:10)
3. endure with patience (the rocky place believer previously believed but fell away when tested because he was not rooted deeply enough in Luke 8:13, the key to enduring may be to be deeply rooted in Jesus through relationship so that when trials and testing come we are not stumbled)

1 Peter 4:12-13
Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.

Acts 14:22
where they strengthened the believers. They encouraged them to continue in the faith, reminding them that we must suffer many hardships to enter the Kingdom of God.

Freedom

11-25-2014, 07:01 PM

Where is the attack Phillip Lin is referring to? Key words I underlined are apologized and confessed. As I read from John's account, Godfred and Minoru asked for forgiveness for their role in promoting the LSM office. Sacrifice and Sail On appears to have left this portion out.

Yes, it left that part out. Taking into consideration that Minoru asked for forgiveness for promoting the LSM office and that Philip Lin admits that these brothers were right according to the truth, it is quite twisted that Lin would turn everything around and accuse brothers of "attacking" WL and his ministry.

I remember back when I would attend trainings and hear brothers like Minoru speak. I always thought that maybe they were some kind of role model or a brother I should strive to be like. I have lost every ounce of repect for Philip Lin, Minoru and any other BB who perpetuates these lies. It saddens me to see so many in the LC who will take in anything that brothers like Minoru say.

zeek

11-25-2014, 07:15 PM

It's a shame that even though Lin readily admits that Lee wasn't perfect, he dismisses his failures as minor issues. Actually, I think if Lee wasn't viewed as the MOTA, then his failures wouldn't be such a big deal.

Because Lee felt he was accountable to no one, it changes everything. Because of Lee's status in the LC and the broad impact of his failures, there is good reason to question his financial dealings.

Indeed there appears to be a growing consensus on this website that, whatever we conclude about Lee's spiritual ministry, it was his use of the MOTA doctrine that resulted in an authoritarian structure that was and continues to be the deal breaker.

Freedom

11-25-2014, 07:20 PM

zeek

11-25-2014, 07:55 PM

Also, it wouldn't surprise me if it turns out that brothers like Philip Lin and Minoru chose the "political" route because they couldn't see any future for themselves in a group besides the LC. I know that brothers like JI when on to continue practicing their own version of the LC, however, for most who consider leaving the LC, the idea of going into some other type of church they spent their whole lives criticizing might not be that appealing.

I know many in the LC who are unhappy, but they know nothing else. It is probably safe to say that many have let the LC define who they are as a person, so what are they supposed to do?

With this whole subject that was brought up of how critical the LC makes us, it is understandable why so many either leave the LC and don't ever find somewhere else to go or stay in the LC and remain unhappy. I feel like many critical attitudes I have held in the past slowly became reinforced "facts" in my mind. I am now having to undo all this. It is not easy, and I haven't even left the LC yet.

Yes, I have seen that. It wasn't my experience because I had a positive experience in "Christianity" before coming to the church. I committed my life to Christ among the Pentecostals after growing up a Prebyterian and losing my way. I participated in many Christian groups on campus including Intervarsity, The Baptist Student Union and a group of Charismatic Christians. No group is above criticism. We were just suppressing what we saw in the local church because it was taboo to express it. I was attracted to the local church because the local ground was presented as a means of recovering Christian unity, but in practice it was false unity. It took me 13 years to figure that out.

awareness

11-25-2014, 08:29 PM

It took me 13 years to figure that out.
And Philip Lin may die before he figures it out.

Ohio

11-26-2014, 05:20 AM

I have lost every ounce of repect for Philip Lin, Minoru and any other BB who perpetuates these lies. It saddens me to see so many in the LC who will take in anything that brothers like Minoru say.

After they came to the GLA filing lawsuits and attempting to destroy churches, i too lost all respect for them, in fact, they have revealed their true nature as dogs and evil workers. Apostle Paul faced the likes of these and said "beware!"

Ohio

11-26-2014, 05:28 AM

Also, it wouldn't surprise me if it turns out that brothers like Philip Lin and Minoru chose the "political" route because they couldn't see any future for themselves in a group besides the LC. I know that brothers like JI when on to continue practicing their own version of the LC, however, for most who consider leaving the LC, the idea of going into some other type of church they spent their whole lives criticizing might not be that appealing.

I know many in the LC who are unhappy, but they know nothing else. It is probably safe to say that many have let the LC define who they are as a person, so what are they supposed to do?

With this whole subject that was brought up of how critical the LC makes us, it is understandable why so many either leave the LC and don't ever find somewhere else to go or stay in the LC and remain unhappy. I feel like many critical attitudes I have held in the past slowly became reinforced "facts" in my mind. I am now having to undo all this. It is not easy, and I haven't even left the LC yet.

In your heart you have already left.

Unless the Lord directs you to sever ties, there are reasons to stay in touch with LC folks depending on your situation. Let's face it, the older we are, the more we are shaped, and our circle of companions are fairly established.

Ohio

11-26-2014, 05:33 AM

I was attracted to the local church because the local ground was presented as a means of recovering Christian unity, but in practice it was false unity. It took me 13 years to figure that out.
It took me 30 years. I'm a little slow.

Since Titus Chu hid the Anaheim events from us, i never saw Anaheim's true colors until, ironically, TC got quarantined.

TLFisher

11-26-2014, 05:47 PM

Also, it wouldn't surprise me if it turns out that brothers like Philip Lin and Minoru chose the "political" route because they couldn't see any future for themselves in a group besides the LC. I know that brothers like JI when on to continue practicing their own version of the LC, however, for most who consider leaving the LC, the idea of going into some other type of church they spent their whole lives criticizing might not be that appealing.

I feel like many critical attitudes I have held in the past slowly became reinforced "facts" in my mind.

First John Ingalls and Minoru Chen. Until recent years, following his departure from the so-called recovery, John had traveled to speak at various in conferences in Oregon, Virginia, and Ghana just to name a few and not restricted just to the fellowship in Westminster. Some of which I have found on various websites. One in particular http://www.christiantapeministry.com/
On Minoru. I wish had known then what I knew now. I met Minoru at a conference in Eugene, Oregon 1996. At the time I had not known Al Knoch was living up the road in Salem, Oregon or about John Ingalls book. Had, I would have wanted to bring it up.

Speaking about your critical attitudes becoming reinforced facts. I think that could be a product of your spirit, but lacking any content to justify why you feel "inwardly disturbed". If you're like me, you just know your spirit is convicted about something and sometimes it becomes expressed as a critical observation.

TLFisher

11-26-2014, 06:08 PM

Indeed there appears to be a growing consensus on this website that, whatever we conclude about Lee's spiritual ministry, it was his use of the MOTA doctrine that resulted in an authoritarian structure that was and continues to be the deal breaker.
The doctrine of deputy authority and the doctrine of ground of locality are unpublished essential matters of faith in the LSM/LC culture.

rayliotta

11-26-2014, 10:34 PM

Indeed there appears to be a growing consensus on this website that, whatever we conclude about Lee's spiritual ministry, it was his use of the MOTA doctrine that resulted in an authoritarian structure that was and continues to be the deal breaker.

This is a good "top-down," "big picture" kind of explanation. What it leaves out is the myriad strange behaviors and manipulations that can (and often are) fostered in the kind of environment that zeek describes.

Friedel

11-27-2014, 03:01 AM

I wonder how this matches up with Philip Lin's drivel.

Article published in The Spokesman Review, Spokane, WA, 17 December 1978.

(I have retained the paragraph formatting, corrected the spelling of "Gruhler" and put in [ ] dates that were wrong. I highlighted one or two statements.)

Ex-official reveals fear, loathing in ‘Local Church’

By John Dart
Los Angeles Times

DENVER – The one-time heir-apparent to the leadership of a little known, intensely devout Christian sect called the “Local Church” has urged that parents get their offspring out of the California-based movement “any way they can.”

Max D. Rapoport, considered the No. 2 man in the Local Church until his resignation last September, broke a two-month silence to tell of what he called dangerous psychological fears and pressures applied to members.

The Local Church, which has 5,000 to 7,000 U.S. members and tens of thousands of followers in Taiwan and the Philippines, is run from Anaheim, Calif., where its prophet, Witness Lee, has lived for several years.

Lee, 74, reached by telephone for a rare and brief interview, declined to say anything about Rapoport but he denied there are psychological pressures on members or great demands on them to conform to his wishes.

“In our church everyone is so free. We are free in thinking,” Lee said.

But interviews with Rapoport and other former members here last week revealed a story of adulation of Lee as divinely inspired and members’ fears for what God may do to them if they stray or leave.

Sal Benoit, leader of the Boston branch of the church from the 1960s until he left about two months ago, observed in a telephone interview: “You don’t know how insidious it is until you come out. And then you are amazed you could have been in it and not seen through it.” He called the pressures of the church “excruciating.”

Evangelical cult-fighter, Jack Sparks of Berkeley, Calif., in a book describing seven religious groups, said, “The brainwashing, or mind bending, of the ‘Local Church’ is, I believe, the most powerful and lasting of any cult on the contemporary religious scene.”

Rapoport said he did not realize how much fear is a factor in member loyalty until him and his wife were criticized by members last August.

The 46-year-old ex-salesman resigned Sept. 29 as president of The Church in Anaheim (each congregation takes the name of its city) and as a board member of the Living Stream Ministry, the sect’s nonprofit corporation.

After moving to the Denver area and buying an alarm business in Boulder. Colo., Rapoport said he first hesitated to talk publicly about his experiences because of fear. The news from Guyana about the mass suicide of People’s Temple members changed his mind, he said.

Rapoport said the Local Church has no propensity to violence, but the fear of divine retribution is subtly and effectively conveyed.

Followers are warned, by examples cited, that ex-members sometimes die suddenly or become mentally ill because of God’s disfavor. “Practically, all the people I’ve seen who have left the movement live in morbid fear that something will happen to them.” He also claimed to know 13 persons in the church who suffered nervous breakdowns because of the pressures.

Joan Geiger of Denver said she left last March after a nervous breakdown, an attempted suicide and advice by a psychiatrist to get out of the movement. Her contacts with the sect began in 1964, while she was doing graduate work at Baylor University and continued later while she was assistant dean of women at Radford (Va.) College.

“Women in the Local Church have an especially hard time because of doctrines they have about submission to men,” Mrs. Geiger said. Divorced women like herself, or single women, are urged to take the church elders as their male authority, she said.

Rapoport said the church makes it plain that good members will isolate themselves from television, movies, newspapers and sports. They must give unquestioning loyalty to Lee, who is hailed by followers as “the oracle of God on earth today,” according to Rapoport.

A spokesman for the church, elder Eugene Gruhler of Anaheim, said Rapoport’s general characterizations of the movement and Lee’s role are “utterly false”.

Gruhler said he “personally never heard” stories told about accidents and tragedies befalling defectors.

Gruhler said it simply was “not true” that followers regard Lee as “infallible and divinely inspired.”

Lee himself said of Rapoport’s remarks to the Los Angeles Times, “I don’t say what he says. I preach the Bible. I teach people according to the Word of God.”

Asked whether he considers himself God’s special oracle or a modern-day prophet, Lee said merely, “God speaks through his servants.”

Lee is not the sect’s founder, but rather was an intimate associate of Nee Tuo Sheng, known as Watchman Nee, who started the movement in 1920 in China.

Not satisfied with Christianity as taught by Western missionaries in China, Nee determined that there should be only one Christian church in each city, based on his interpretation of the New Testament.

When the Communist Party swept into power in the late 1940s, Lee went to Taiwan but Nee remained behind. Imprisoned in 1952 on charges of being a U.S. spy (termed ‘‘false” by the Local Church), Nee died in a Shanghai jail the same year [wrong], shortly before his scheduled release.

The Local Churches in Taiwan today have an estimated 25,000 members.

Missionary work in America began in the early 1960s when a brother-in-law of Nee, Samuel Chang, migrated to Los Angeles. Lee visited Chang several times and then decided in 1963 to stay in this country.

After a church in one city was well-established a group of two or three dozen members would move to another city to start a Local Church there.
It has not attracted the public attention that other sects or cults have, partly because it generally shuns publicity. Its meeting halls have no identifying signs or crosses on the outside.

Members consider it the only true Christian church and they are advised not to associate with persons in other denominations.

Active members are expected to attend three or four meetings a week and rise early for “morning watch” prayer. A popular method of worship is “pray-reading” – reading Scripture verses prayerfully and enthusiastically in assemblies or small groups.

Samuel Chang once characterized this as “eating’’ the word of God.

Twice yearly, all members who can do so are urged to attend a 10-day training session in Anaheim. About 3,000 gather each time to hear Lee give three talks a day.

Rapoport said anyone who attends might be called upon the next day to repeat something that Lee said.

Rapoport said there is “tremendous pressure” on those attending to memorize as much as they can in case they are put to the test.

The fear of humiliation in meetings for failure is strong, according to Rapoport and other ex-members.

Periodic burnings of prized personal possessions occur. “All of us had to give up our individuality. We would have a ‘burning’ of a television set or pictures of your baby at birth or of your marriage,” Rapoport said. “I’ve attended many of them.”

Ex-member Mickey Bulce, who joined the church in Texas in 1967, said he once burned a Bible that he had used from earlier times.

Rapoport had been converted to charismatic-style Christianity in the late 1960s after getting into trouble as an LSD user. He and his wife helped drug-plagued youths at a Teen Challenge center In Garden Grove, Calif.

But in June 1979 [1969?], impressed by the teachings of Lee, Rapoport joined the church and by 1976 had moved into a prominent leadership position because of his abilities as a public speaker, businessman and organizer.

Although Gruhler denies the Local Church is making a concerted effort to discredit Rapoport, ex-members say Rapoport is being represented as a Judas and one who tried to achieve more authority.

Rapoport said his disenchantment with the movement began about 18 months ago when Lee refused to act on his demand that Lee’s son, Philip, be removed as head of the Living Stream Ministry after a church member accused Philip of an immoral act.

Attempts to reach Philip Lee for comment were unsuccessful. Witness Lee said his son does not like to answer to such charges.

Rapoport said his standing in the Local Church seemed to erode gradually after that incident. His eventual decision to leave, he said, also was helped by his opposition to charging members $50 each for twice-yearly training sessions and $25 for each videotape of Lee s talks. He estimated that the Living Stream Ministry takes about $400,000 a year from such religious material.

Rapoport emphasized in the interview that Lee himself lives frugally in an Anaheim duplex and has no vices. He also insisted there has been no intent to defraud by leaders and no links with any government agencies.

“All of the people I know in the Local Church are real, born-again Christians, including Witness Lee,” Rapoport said.

They “are the most zealous Christians I’ve ever met,” he said. But he indicated he started questioning some practices after he himself was perceived to be rocking the boat.

Thus, Rapoport said, he now feels that parents of members – the bulk of who are in their 20s and 30s – should pray that their offspring will leave.
Otherwise, he recommended even the controversial methods of “deprogramming” members be employed by parents, if necessary.

The resignations by Rapoport and Benoit reportedly have led to 80 defections out of 400 Boston members and 150 departures among Colorado members. Some disaffection has been reported also in Anaheim and Tempe, Ariz.

But Benoit said there was little likelihood the Local Church would suffer a major split in the ranks or dissolution in this country.

“It would be very hard to bring it down,” he said.

Freedom

11-28-2014, 11:44 AM

At one point in the book, Lin puts in the following quote by WL:
From 1945 to 1984, I found out that in both the English-speaking world and the Chinese-speaking world, there was not a weighty spiritual book published. There were numerous publications, but they were all just like the newspapers, a hodgepodge of a lot of things. I checked around, but no one could point a book out to me about expounding the Scriptures or about the supplying of life, or about the light of divine truth that had some amount of weight. No!

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (pp. 55-56). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Really? Not a single weighty spiritual book? I suppose WL wasn't talking about books by WN, because plenty of WN books were published in that time period. That is, unless WL doesn't consider WN books to be "weighty". :hysterical:

On a more serious note, there were plenty of books published during this time period, even ones that WL referenced. Does WL feel he gets to decide what constitutes a "weighty" book?

Ohio

11-28-2014, 01:05 PM

At one point in the book, Lin puts in the following quote by WL:

Really? Not a single weighty spiritual book? I suppose WL wasn't talking about books by WN, because plenty of WN books were published in that time period. That is, unless WL doesn't consider WN books to be "weighty".

On a more serious note, there were plenty of books published during this time period, even ones that WL referenced. Does WL feel he gets to decide what constitutes a "weighty" book?
I was in a meeting (early-mid 80's) where Lee was boasting in his own ministry, and then abruptly looks over at John Ingalls and queries him yo name one book of spiritual value since after WWII.

John had this look on his face like, "how in the world am I supposed to know?" Was now Ingalls responsible for reading every Christian book published over the past half century? I don't think John answered the question because it was not a question that was answerable. How indicative of Lee's manipulative ways! Put Ingalls on the spot publicly to confirm his absurd claim. What if John would have responded, "well I can name a few off the top of my head," Lee would then have immediately shut him down and shamed him for his "ignorant response."

zeek

11-28-2014, 03:27 PM

Could Witness Lee have possibly believed this?

“In our church everyone is so free. We are free in thinking,” Lee said.

Freedom

11-28-2014, 04:41 PM

Could Witness Lee have possibly believed this?

I was in a meeting (early-mid 80's) where Lee was boasting in his own ministry, and then abruptly looks over at John Ingalls and queries him yo name one book of spiritual value since after WWII.

John had this look on his face like, "how in the world am I supposed to know?" Was now Ingalls responsible for reading every Christian book published over the past half century? I don't think John answered the question because it was not a question that was answerable. How indicative of Lee's manipulative ways! Put Ingalls on the spot publicly to confirm his absurd claim. What if John would have responded, "well I can name a few off the top of my head," Lee would then have immediately shut him down and shamed him for his "ignorant response."

I never saw Lee speak in person, however, if this is how he really was, it's no surprise that everyone would be intimidated by him. In the same part of the book, actually in the same excerpt of WL, he claims he told saints to read other books to see what they could find:
While working, I had been observing and paid much attention to Christian publications. Although I had no time to read, I asked the brothers and sisters, and even urged them to read publications published by others. I always held the attitude that we cannot work behind closed doors.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (p. 55). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I wonder how many brothers and sisters actually read other books? I would bet that some did, especially in the early days. I'm sure they found books that were helpful. But wouldn't people have been too intimidated to tell Lee if they found a helpful book that wasn't from his ministry? Then again Lee should have known (being the MOTA and all) that you can't prove a negative.

rayliotta

11-28-2014, 07:23 PM

Article published in The Spokesman Review, Spokane, WA, 17 December 1978.

Thanks for posting, Friedel. Very interesting.

Here's a link to the article: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ofdLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Du4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6767%2C820767

bearbear

11-30-2014, 04:50 PM

TLFisher

11-30-2014, 06:30 PM

Kindle Location 205 of Sacrifice and Sail On

"In writing a person's testimony, the most important principle to follow is to avoid flattery, exaggeration, and exhortation, which might portray a "perfect person."

"When I wrote this book, I was very cautious and faithful. The Holy Spirit strictly controlled me not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called "perfect person."

Phillip Lin may say the Holy Spirit strictly controlled him not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called perfect person.

What would Phillip say the Holy Spirit strictly controlled him in respect to Theodore Austin Sparks?

Same question can even be asked in respect to the brothers who were quarantined.

TLFisher

12-01-2014, 09:32 PM

Freedom

12-01-2014, 09:57 PM

Kindle Location 1262 of Sacrifice & Sail On

"Because there were many business affairs in conducting the Life-Study of the Bible, Brother Lee needed one full-time serving one to take charge of it, but he could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility. After everything, he asked his son Brother Lee Menzer (Philip Lee) to help. At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip Lee willingly accepted this job in order to support his father's ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father's literary ministry work."

I take since the Life-Study trainings began around 1974, this is the time frame Philip Lin is referring to. Right after the failed Daystar venture. Well, not exactly a failure. Is there any truth to Timothy Lee benefiting $1 million or more from the failed venture? As I am reading through the book, I have seen no mention of Timothy Lee.
This might be a stretch to say Witness Lee wanted to take care of his children. Timothy benefited from Daystar. Philip may have been jealous and ask, "what about me father?"
As a result Witness names Philip as the one to manage his "office". I doubt it was a matter of Witness not being able to find any brother "willing and suitable".

This seems to be a pattern with WL. He couldn't find anyone to do X. Or like the quote I posted a few days ago:
From 1945 to 1984, I found out that in both the English-speaking world and the Chinese-speaking world, there was not a weighty spiritual book published.

Because he claims he couldn't find anyone to manage his office, he put Philip Lee in charge. Because he claims there weren't any "weighty" spiritual books published, that greatly elevates the status of his books. Is it just a coincedence that he couldn't find anyone to manage his office? I seriously doubt it. Could WL reasonably say that their wasn't a "weighty" spiritual book published without reading every single spiritual book that was published between 1945-1984? Unfortunately, I think most in the LC will take these statements at face value.

Ohio

12-02-2014, 01:57 AM

Because he claims he couldn't find anyone to manage his office, he put Philip Lee in charge. Because he claims there weren't any "weighty" spiritual books published, that greatly elevates the status of his books. Is it just a coincedence that he couldn't find anyone to manage his office? I seriously doubt it. Could WL reasonably say that their wasn't a "weighty" spiritual book published without reading every single spiritual book that was published between 1945-1984? Unfortunately, I think most in the LC will take these statements at face value.

Just mory hypocrisy. Lee also deflected the criticism for hiring his profligate son by saying, "don't i have the right to hire an unbelieving cook?"

As if Phillip's role at LSM was as benign as Chef Gordon Ramsey.

rayliotta

12-02-2014, 02:45 AM

Kindle Location 1262 of Sacrifice & Sail On

"Because there were many business affairs in conducting the Life-Study of the Bible, Brother Lee needed one full-time serving one to take charge of it, but he could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility. After everything, he asked his son Brother Lee Menzer (Philip Lee) to help. At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip Lee willingly accepted this job in order to support his father's ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father's literary ministry work."

"He could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility." Lin gives these cozy, vague, pat explanations. It reminds me of Lee's explanations about Nee's excommunications.

Nee was said to be "living with a woman" who was actually his mother, refused to say anything other than, "Yes" (because he was living with his mother), and everyone was too stupid, or too reckless, to figure it out.

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=3489

Nee was said to be excommunicated the second time, because he was running a business. Which not only doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but it also raises the question of whether he might (possibly) have been imprisoned by the Communist government for anything (anything) other than his Christian faith.

Either we should be simplistic and swallow Lin's simplistic explanations whole. Or, we should acknowledge that if it sounds like there was more going on, it's because there probably was.

Lin's account is to Lee what Lee's account is to Nee.

rayliotta

12-02-2014, 03:11 AM

In writing a person's testimony, the most important principle to follow is to avoid flattery, exaggeration, and exhortation, which might portray a "perfect person"...When I wrote this book, I was very cautious and faithful. The Holy Spirit strictly controlled me not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called "perfect person." Of course, I also did not hesitate to describe in detail his admirable traits, which merit recommending. I hope that everything I wrote about Witness Lee in this book will be beneficial to future generations. This was the governing principle in my writing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ. Mission Viejo, CA: Sail On Publishers. Preface.

Compare Lin's caution with Lee's caution:

After much consideration, my solution to all these points is this: Since I have been under Brother Nee's teaching, edifying, and perfecting, and since he was a brother I respected, observed, and weighed for a quarter of a century, the accuracy of my writing about him should be guaranteed. As to the motive, the heart-searching God is the Judge! As to the influence and issue, the merciful Lord is the blessing. Much endeavor has been exercised to avoid flattery, exaggerations, and the exaltation of men, and the Holy Spirit has been the Guide and Controller of this writing. Thus, I desire to see this writing accomplished unto the good pleasure of the Triune God for His rich blessing.

Lee, Witness (1991). Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age. Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry. P. 5.

Friedel

12-03-2014, 02:01 AM

Witness Lee's book on Watchman Nee
After much consideration, my solution to all these points is this: Since I have been under Brother Nee's teaching, edifying, and perfecting, and since he was a brother I respected, observed, and weighed for a quarter of a century, the accuracy of my writing about him should be guaranteed. As to the motive, the heart-searching God is the Judge! As to the influence and issue, the merciful Lord is the blessing. Much endeavor has been exercised to avoid flattery, exaggerations, and the exaltation of men, and the Holy Spirit has been the Guide and Controller of this writing. Thus, I desire to see this writing accomplished unto the good pleasure of the Triune God for His rich blessing.

Lee, Witness (1991). Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age. Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry. P. 5.

Concerning the trial and imprisonment of Watchman Nee the following paragraph from Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age is all that Witness Lee wrote about it:In the spring of 1952, he was arrested and imprisoned; and in the summer of 1956, after a long trial, he was sentenced to fifteen years' imprisonment. He was, however, never released.
Only one paragraph. Lily Hsu wrote a whole book on that.

My question is simple: did Witness Lee know the truth about Nee's imprisonment or was it an inconvenient truth he chose to ignore?

My next question is even more simple: how many inconvenient truths about Witness Lee did Philip Lin ignore? Or is his dissertation a determined attempt to obfuscate the truth about Witness Lee?

Do you all realize what role his book is going to play in the immediate and even distant future? It is going to become the de facto "official" biography of Witness Lee in the Local Church: written by a former elder in the Church in Anaheim, where Witness Lee resided. He would have known everything. All other books, those written by John Ingalls and who else, will become unimportant footnotes in Witness Lee's history.

Sacrifice and Sail On was designed to drown out all the voices of the "opposition".

Footnote: I have been considering for a while now posting something about the publisher, Spiritual Counterfeits Project (SCP) and the author of The God-Men, Neil T Duddy. I wasn't all that clear about the details so I looked it up. I came across a site maintained by someone calling himself Kevin “the NorthWest” (real name Kevin Paul), apparently a self-styled prophet. Since he states that Non-commercial use [is] permitted, I took the liberty to copy the following from one page:The book [The God-Men] was proved libelous in a court of law. During the court case Witness Lee did not even use a lawyer, considering his hold upon reality so sharp that the opposing party didn't have a chance. Not even Satan's smarter brain had a chance! Witness had too much of a renewed mind! As to the right or wrong of taking brothers to court, well that will be tried in the next age, but the courts awarded damages in the amount of 11.5 million dollars to Witness Lee and the local churches.

What happened to the author of that book? Well, since the folks he worked with at Spiritual Counterfeits Project went bankrupt as a result of this court case, he fled to Switzerland to have some wealth left. But it seems he did not escape the judgment of God. His kids shortly thereafter got on drugs and he went mountain climbing, fell off the mountain and died. As far as I know, his body has never been found to this very day. This should be a warning to us to not sow discord and division contrary to the truth. (My emphasis.)
On my first reading I thought he was being facetious but then it became clear he was deadly serious. I had heard on more than one occasion that the author of The God-Men, Neil Duddy's death in Nepal (?) was divine retribution for his criticism of Witness Lee and the Local Church.

Do they teach that at FTT, albeit privately?

If you want to check out the website of Kevin “the NorthWest”, here is the link:
http://www.lostkeysrevelation.com/chapter06.html

Cal

12-03-2014, 09:22 AM

Do you all realize what role his book is going to play in the immediate and even distant future? It is going to become the de facto "official" biography of Witness Lee in the Local Church: written by a former elder in the Church in Anaheim, where Witness Lee resided. He would have known everything. All other books, those written by John Ingalls and who else, will become unimportant footnotes in Witness Lee's history.

Sacrifice and Sail On was designed to drown out all the voices of the "opposition".

No offense meant at all, but who cares?

Any person with objective common sense will realize Philip Lin's book is the biased work of an undiscerning sycophant. Such books end up collecting dust on the back shelves of Half-Price Books, next to titles about HIV being the creation of the World Health Organization and instructions on how to board the Mother Ship when the Comet Hale-Bopp flies by. The only people who take them seriously are "homers" like Kevin "the Northwest."

I understand that this new book is "news." But it is basically just a self-published personal essay by one writer with no editor and probably no proof-reader. If turgid works like this and the "biography" of Nee by Witness Lee are the best official records the Recovery can produce, then there isn't much to worry about.

Needy and gullible youth, as we were, will always be vulnerable to this kind of thing. That's why parents need to educate their children. But intelligent, informed adults just throw this junk back on the stack, shake their heads and move on.

TLFisher

12-03-2014, 12:40 PM

Ohio

12-03-2014, 01:08 PM

No offense meant at all, but who cares?

Any person with objective common sense will realize Philip Lin's book is the biased work of an undiscerning sycophant. Such books end up collecting dust on the back shelves of Half-Price Books, next to titles about HIV being the creation of the World Health Organization and instructions on how to board the Mother Ship when the Comet Hale-Bopp flies by. The only people who take them seriously are "homers" like Kevin "the Northwest."

I beg your pardon! I care!

At least I used to. I swallowed Lee's bio of Nee completely, elevating him to perfect God-Man status. I waited 14 years for that book to come out, THE definitive word on the 20th century MOTA.

Guess I had little of that "objective common sense" you been talking about.

And you should take those comets more seriously! I spent a couple of my best years packaging the ion engine controls for NASA's rocket tracking Halle's comet. Good stuff them comets! :sFun_abduct:

Cal

12-03-2014, 03:12 PM

I beg your pardon! I care!

lol. I just meant the notion that Lin's book will define on how Lee is remembered is not worth the worry.

His book is clearly a puff piece that no one outside the LC is going to be fooled by. Except, that is, for comet hoppers!

:abducted:

LCers, on the other hand, are going to believe what they want to, that is, what they are told. That's why you swallowed Lee's myth about Nee. They need prayer, because reasoning and arguing with them is a waste of time.

Freedom

12-03-2014, 07:47 PM

lol. I just meant the notion that Lin's book will define on how Lee is remembered is not worth the worry.

His book is clearly a puff piece that no one outside the LC is going to be fooled by. Except, that is, for comet hoppers!

:abducted:

LCers, on the other hand, are going to believe what they want to, that is, what they are told. That's why you swallowed Lee's myth about Nee. They need prayer, because reasoning and arguing with them is a waste of time.

Given the $50 price tag on a hard copy of Lin's book, I doubt they will sell many, even among the LC, unless there is something going on that I don't know about. I guess the main issue is that for someone who wants to know about Lee, what do they go to? For biographies on Nee, there is Against the Tide, Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age, and now Dr. Hsu's book. Thus, there should be enough information for the reader to make up their own mind about Nee.

Since Nee is known in the Christian world outside the LC, I guess it makes sense that people would be curious about his life. I don't know how many people outside the LC know about Lee, but since BFA is distributing his bible (and now ministry books as well :rollingeyesfrown:), maybe people are getting curious about who WL was.

Lin stated at the beginning of his book, that one of the reasons for writing it was because he noticed a growing interest (of those in the LC) regarding the early days of the LC in America. This does make sense, because for the younger generation who may have never even seen Lee in person, so little is known about him other than everything that is read is taken from his ministry. From my experience growing up in the LC, I always got the impression that LC history was "off limits", so I never asked any questions. Now I don't know whether that is really the case everywhere or not, but I can state quite certainly that most of the younger generation know very little of who Lee was.

I knew very little of LC history or WL until I started exploring writings on the internet. To me, it always seemed a bit odd that so many would follow Lee's ministry completely, and give themselves 100% to the LC (such as attending the FTTA), without having at least a little concern for who Lee really was. The irony of it all is that because of the true LC history, it goes without saying that it is a subject that they would want to avoid altogether.

Perhaps Lin's book was an honest attempt at fulling the need of the average LC person who wants to know a little about the history of the LC and WL. Did he tell everyone the whole story? No, but they can't have anyone reading what is here on this site, can they? I suspect that by Lin addressing issues such as Daystar and Philip Lee, they hope to gain the trust of the reader by giving the impression that they addressed all the issues that have been brought up on the internet (that some in the LC may have read). Eventually the BB's have to come to terms with the fact that they can't filter what is on the internet, so maybe they are hoping by giving the illusion of "transparency" with writings such as Lin's book they can gain the trust of those who feel that the whole story isn't being told.

TLFisher

12-05-2014, 01:19 PM

From my experience growing up in the LC, I always got the impression that LC history was "off limits", so I never asked any questions.

Perhaps Lin's book was an honest attempt at fulling the need of the average LC person who wants to know a little about the history of the LC and WL. Did he tell everyone the whole story? No, but they can't have anyone reading what is here on this site, can they? I suspect that by Lin addressing issues such as Daystar and Philip Lee, they hope to gain the trust of the reader by giving the impression that they addressed all the issues that have been brought up on the internet (that some in the LC may have read). Eventually the BB's have to come to terms with the fact that they can't filter what is on the internet, so maybe they are hoping by giving the illusion of "transparency" with writings such as Lin's book they can gain the trust of those who feel that the whole story isn't being told.

"Read my lips", the Blended Brothers have been just as transparent as President Obama.

I too grew up in the local churches, but in a different generation. My experiences, brothers and sisters who were there in 1960's have a far different view of LC history than those that came in following decades. I will say also from my experience it is taboo to ask about Max Rapoport, Philip Lee, and the late 80's turmoil.

Freedom

12-05-2014, 10:18 PM

"Read my lips", the Blended Brothers have been just as transparent as President Obama.

I too grew up in the local churches, but in a different generation. My experiences, brothers and sisters who were there in 1960's have a far different view of LC history than those that came in following decades. I will say also from my experience it is taboo to ask about Max Rapoport, Philip Lee, and the late 80's turmoil.

I guess everyone has different experiences. I have been around saints from all across the board, even some who have been around since the 60's. I do feel that those from the current young generation have a completely different perspective of the LC than those who have been around for a while. I get the feeling that those from my generation don't really understand what the LC is really about other than they know all the fundamental LC doctrines. I think that most who grew up in the LC (including myself) really got it ingrained that we were better than other Christians.

Many of the older saints I know have a collection of non-LSM Christian books, multiple Bible versions, Bible commentaries, etc. How many of this generation (such as college students, FTTA attendees and graduates) have ever read a Christian book not published by LSM? How many have ever read a version of the Bible besides the Recovery Version? All of the older generation has done this. I know that some older saints appreciate other works besides LSM books, they just don't give them the same precedence. Things are completely different with the younger generation. Because no one talks much about non-LSM material or the "history" of the LC, the current generation assumes it's not important and doesn't even bother to talk about it.

So I think my point is that it seems peculiar that this generation of the LC doesn't seem much concerned with questioning things or knowing how we got here. Why do we only use the Recovery Version? Why do we read points out of the HWMR in meetings instead of having something more structured? Why is it so hard to get outsiders to "appreciate" the idea of one church in each city that we think is so special?

The older LC generation knows all the "whys". This generation accepts everything at face value. This generation is happy to do these practices because that's all they know, especially if they grew up in a LC environment.

Cal

12-05-2014, 10:37 PM

So I think my point is that it seems peculiar that this generation of the LC doesn't seem much concerned with questioning things or knowing how we got here. Why do we only use the Recovery Version? Why do we read points out of the HWMR in meetings instead of having something more structured? Why is it so hard to get outsiders to "appreciate" the idea of one church in each city that we think is so special?

The older LC generation knows all the "whys". This generation accepts everything at face value. This generation is happy to do these practices because that's all they know, especially if they grew up in a LC environment.

I think that is very sad. Because basically you are saying their parents raised them to be dopes. And as far as I'm concerned that's child abuse. Like raising your kids to hate black people, or raising fat kids and never teaching them they should control their weight. It's flat-out child abuse. It makes me damn mad to think about such things. I really hate the LC sometimes for what it does to people.

TLFisher

12-05-2014, 10:54 PM

Things are completely different with the younger generation. Because no one talks much about non-LSM material or the "history" of the LC, the current generation assumes it's not important and doesn't even bother to talk about it.
The older LC generation knows all the "whys". This generation accepts everything at face value. This generation is happy to do these practices because that's all they know, especially if they grew up in a LC environment.
I think the part about the history especially in Southern California, an entire generation of young people (those who graduated from high school 86-90) were lost. Maybe LSM wants to revise history to prevent it from happening again?
I've been in home meetings where older saints would talk about Daystar in whisper or about experiences from the 70's.
When it comes to the turmoil's, it's like a family embarrassment most relatives know, but don't want to talk about it.

As for the younger generations, it's just like any other denomination....it's all they know and don't have experience with other Christian assemblies.

Freedom

12-05-2014, 11:16 PM

I think that is very sad. Because basically you are saying their parents raised them to be dopes. And as far as I'm concerned that's child abuse. Like raising your kids to hate black people, or raising fat kids and never teaching them they should control their weight. It's flat-out child abuse. It makes me damn mad to think about such things. I really hate the LC sometimes for what it does to people.

Unfortunately it's all too often the case. I know that I never questioned anything for the longest time. I can't honestly say that while growing up it ever struck me as odd that we only read WL books. It wasn't until my college years did I start questioning things more.

I know that many people who I grew up with really struggled because of LC practices. I know that I did. Many dropped out along the way. Some are constantly in and out, and then somehow end up going to the FTTA.

I think what happens is that many "church kids" just assume that their struggles are their own fault and not so much a problem related to LC teachings or practices. I see some who struggle while growing up, only to come back and fully immerse themselves into the LC. Do they do that because they really like the LC, or because they still have it in the back of their mind that the LC is some sort of "solution" to all of life's problems?

I don't think that parents are intentionally out to raise their kids as "dopes", however, that is the end effect. What saddens me is to see so many go off to the training getting married, etc, having no idea what awaits for the in the future. No one can learn from LC history, because it's been hidden (at least the real history).

I often wonder how those who have dedicated 2 years to attend the FTTA will feel when the next LC split occurs and their whole paradigm of the LC is shattered. History will eventually repeat itself, and there is now a whole generation who doesn't even know what's coming.

TLFisher

12-06-2014, 12:48 AM

I think what happens is that many "church kids" just assume that their struggles are their own fault and not so much a problem related to LC teachings or practices.

One problem is honesty is not encouraged and when you try to be honest, you might be discarded as being negative.
Fact- life isn't always going to be positive and calling on the Lord three times isn't going to change it either. We all need to pray and to pray for one another.

Dave

12-06-2014, 07:52 AM

One problem is honesty is not encouraged and when you try to be honest, you might be discarded as being negative.
Fact- life isn't always going to be positive and calling on the Lord three times isn't going to change it either. We all need to pray and to pray for one another.  Unless there is an atmosphere where openness and honesty is encouraged it will never happen. The structure of the LC by its very nature does not permit this type of atmosphere. It starts with the BB to the elders in a locality. The atmosphere is designed to reduce friction so that there is not the free flow of information. With very little friction there may be the illusion of peace and harmony but it is merely an illusion. The structure is designed so as not to be democratic so it will never be open and any friction will appear as disharmony and negative.

I am sure this example has been used in the past but if you look at the Roman Catholic Church, it is a similar structure except the RCC have been at it so long they can tolerate very limited disharmony. When the Pope dies the Cardinals come together and elect a new Pope by voting. If you read Acts 1:24-26 that’s the way they did it at the beginning. The big difference is that the Apostles didn’t set up a Pope but just added an Apostle to make the number 12 so after Jesus returned to establish the Kingdom of God they could rule over the 12 tribes of Israel.

What’s the difference with the LC? When WL died they came together and decided upon the BB to replace WL (I don’t know the history as to whether WL set up the BB before he died or if they voted or someone appointed them etc). The LC operates more like the RCC as opposed to the early church with the LCs ruling class. As long as all opposition is oppressed and there are those willing to accept it, it will continue.

Ohio

12-06-2014, 08:49 AM

awareness

12-06-2014, 11:20 AM

TLFisher

12-06-2014, 11:58 AM

Unless there is an atmosphere where openness and honesty is encouraged it will never happen. The structure of the LC by its very nature does not permit this type of atmosphere. It starts with the BB to the elders in a locality. The atmosphere is designed to reduce friction so that there is not the free flow of information. With very little friction there may be the illusion of peace and harmony but it is merely an illusion. The structure is designed so as not to be democratic so it will never be open and any friction will appear as disharmony and negative.

Typically when a brother or sister speaks openly in honesty and truthfulness, but the content is not conducive to the ministry, expect to have the following verse quoted:

"Reject a factious man after a first and second warning," Titus 3:10

As if a brother's honesty to speak the truth in love is received as being divisive and speaking "differently".

To keep the illusion everything is positive, when a brother or sister is prophesying, it's okay to put down the church next door or your friends and relatives who are Christians as long as the ministry and the local churches are exalted.

Freedom

12-06-2014, 01:03 PM

Typically when a brother or sister speaks openly in honesty and truthfulness, but the content is not conducive to the ministry, expect to have the following verse quoted:

"Reject a factious man after a first and second warning," Titus 3:10

As if a brother's honesty to speak the truth in love is received as being divisive and speaking "differently".

To keep the illusion everything is positive, when a brother or sister is prophesying, it's okay to put down the church next door or your friends and relatives who are Christians as long as the ministry and the local churches are exalted.

I don't know many who would dare speak something that's not from the ministry. I think the BB's and elders have certainly done a good job at creating an environment that is insulated from any speaking that doesn't involve the ministry. It is nearly impossible to fight against it.

I remember back when the BB's were talking about all their "one publication" edict, they said something to the effect that both reading the pure Word (non-LSM interpreted) and saying that we don't need the interpreted Word is arrogant. Essentially what they did was to say that anyone who thinks they can receive light from the Word apart from the ministry is an arrogant person. Of course, no one wants to be labeled as being arrogant, so these subtle tactics employed by the BB's tend to work. For someone who doesn't know better, it's not too hard to take a statement like that to heart.

Actually, when I try to come to the pure Word, it is not all that easy to do. It goes without saying that the Bible is not an easy book to understand. I don't think for a second that I am anything special when it comes to understanding the Bible. Ironically, what has made me arrogant is being in the LC my whole life. It has caused me to think that I know what everything in the Bible is talking about. If someone talks about the book of James, I automatically start thinking about how it's a book that wasn't written according to "God's economy". I have memorized parts of outlines for some books of the Bible, and I know some footnotes almost by memory. All of these things really lessen dependency on the Word. While growing up, I even read Life Studies messages on books of the Bible where I had not read the actual book yet.:rollingeyesfrown:

awareness

12-06-2014, 01:04 PM

Dave

12-06-2014, 01:07 PM

Typically when a brother or sister speaks openly in honesty and truthfulness, but the content is not conducive to the ministry, expect to have the following verse quoted:

"Reject a factious man after a first and second warning," Titus 3:10

As if a brother's honesty to speak the truth in love is received as being divisive and speaking "differently".

To keep the illusion everything is positive, when a brother or sister is prophesying, it's okay to put down the church next door or your friends and relatives who are Christians as long as the ministry and the local churches are exalted.
You may or may not have heard of the Cambridge Platform of 1649 but it is the basis of congregational type of churches throughout the world or shall I say the basis for democracy in churches today. It is based on the Bible and a couple verses quoted among hundreds is Galatians 2:14-15, "...how can you compel the Gentiles to live like the Jews...we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith..." Acts 26:6-7, "...I stand here on trial on account of my hope....It is for this hope...that I am accused." The apostles asking for democracy. Acts 6:3 "Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, whom we may appoint to this task." After the apostles, appointments ended.

The real problem came in with Eusebius (265 AD-340 AD) who wrote a ten volume book, "The History of the Church" and was the first person to put the canon together. The problem is that he supported a letter, "First Clement" which was a letter from the bishop in Rome to the church in Corinth [sent from "...the church of God in Rome" to "the church of God in Corinth" (1:1)] telling them that they needed to change the elders in their church. This is the first trace of apostolic succession so as to change leadership in another church (Corinth) from Rome since the apostles died.

In any case, there is no hope without some openness and it isn't going to happen in the LC.

rayliotta

12-07-2014, 01:58 AM

I remember back when the BB's were talking about all their "one publication" edict, they said something to the effect that both reading the pure Word (non-LSM interpreted) and saying that we don't need the interpreted Word is arrogant. Essentially what they did was to say that anyone who thinks they can receive light from the Word apart from the ministry is an arrogant person. Of course, no one wants to be labeled as being arrogant, so these subtle tactics employed by the BB's tend to work. For someone who doesn't know better, it's not too hard to take a statement like that to heart.

Right. It's arrogant for us to read the text on our own. But for them to stand on a podium and declare that the one ministry, given by the God of the Universe, for "our age," is the ministry of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee...this could never be called "arrogant." And if "they" just happen to be registered as the legal and financial officers of the same publishing company that publishes the works of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee...this could never be called a "conflict of interest."

And if anyone -- such as me -- dares to use the terms "arrogant" or "conflict of interest," in this context -- then that one -- such as me -- is "factious."

It's all so simple if you just let it be simple. Where the simpleness is leading you, well, that's another matter.

rayliotta

12-07-2014, 02:17 AM

TLFisher

12-07-2014, 11:36 AM

Sacrifice and Sail On Chapter 4 Kindle Location 1402

The second testimony came in 1962 when he was clear that the Lord would keep in the United States to spread the Lord's recovery to the Western World. He said that in December of 1962 he began to serve in the church in Los Angeles. By then the number of saints in the church was very small. Concerning financial support, the church in Taipei and churches in the Far East did not give him any support, because they thought that he went to the golden land of America, so he did not need any financial support from them;

However a former Texas elder wrote on the same period as found on http://www.makingstraightthewayofthelord.com/DonBookch1.pdf

"In 1962, there was a World’s Fair in Seattle, Washington. (The Space Needle was built on this occasion.) Witness Lee and his son, Timothy, had an exhibit at the fair. They displayed and attempted to sell manufactured goods from Taiwan. They had raised funds from members of the local churches in Taiwan. The endeavor was a failure and the products stored in a warehouse. The problems created by this business failure made it difficult for Witness Lee to return to the churches in Taiwan in good graces. But I believe this human failure opened the
door for a blessing for many of the seeking Christians in the USA in those early years (since Witness Lee remained in this country as a result of the problem, and ministered.)
Watchman Nee had visited the USA in the late 1930s and had received a poor impression due to the extreme materialism. He told Witness Lee that the USA was Egypt and he had little hope that the Lord would do much there. On the other hand, Witness Lee had grown up under the care of American Southern Baptist missionaries from Texas. He had a great appreciation for the USA. He came for a visit in 1958. He visited Brother Nee’s brother-in-law and former business partner, Samuel Chang, in Southern California. He also visited a co-worker of Brother Nee named Stephen Kaung in New York City. He spoke to some Christian groups during these visits.

In Los Angeles, at Westmoreland Chapel, he met a young man named John Ingalls. John would become a pioneer in the local church movement, and a minister of the truth concerning the experience of the indwelling Christ and of the vision of a practical authentic New Testament Church Life. In the spring of 1962, Samuel Chang and John Ingalls were in fellowship one evening with Eugene Gruhler Sr., of New York City. Brother Gruhler encouraged them to go
ahead, as they were so clear in their desire to practice the church life as taught by Watchman Nee. That night while driving home, John Ingalls had a deep and clear impression from the Lord that they should begin. On May 27, 1962, John Ingalls began with about 20 others to gather in the Lord’s name to practice the church life as revealed in the book, The Normal Christian Church Life by Watchman Nee. John urged Witness Lee to join him and the few others who gathered. Witness Lee joined them on November 30, 1962."

Freedom

12-07-2014, 03:09 PM

Ohio

12-07-2014, 04:23 PM

I remember back when the BB's were talking about all their "one publication" edict, they said something to the effect that both reading the pure Word (non-LSM interpreted) and saying that we don't need the interpreted Word is arrogant.

I was told that "coming back to the pure word of God," was the strategy of the enemy, and that "ambitious ones" in the Recovery like Titus Chu always use this tactic to build up their own following.

Ohio

12-07-2014, 04:28 PM

awareness

12-07-2014, 05:12 PM

rayliotta

12-07-2014, 05:18 PM

However a former Texas elder wrote on the same period as found on http://www.makingstraightthewayofthelord.com/DonBookch1.pdf

Thanks for the link, Terry. Is this from Don Rutledge?

Ohio

12-07-2014, 05:49 PM

Christians have a long history of lying, going back to their earliest days. They can't be trusted any more than non-Christians. Especially the zealots, who are the worst. And that, of course, includes Lee and the leadership in the Recovery.

I have read many quality church histories and biographies. They are well received and critiqued by peers as accurate, unbiased and objective.

Cal

12-07-2014, 07:07 PM

rayliotta

12-07-2014, 07:46 PM

I have read many quality church histories and biographies. They are well received and critiqued by peers as accurate, unbiased and objective.

Some of you may remember the old "Overcomers" email listserve. Back in the 90's, there were some email forwards sent to the list, claiming that NASA scientists had discovered the "missing" day from the Bible (the day the earth stood still in Joshua). I seem to remember another about NASA scientists using the Bible to avert a terrible meteor collision w/Earth.

Eventually someone replied to the list that these were, of course, hoaxes. Whoever sent it out said they wondered why Christians felt the need to come up with these silly stories.

I wonder the same thing...

awareness

12-07-2014, 08:22 PM

Hmm, so is that the truth, Christian? :lol:
I'm lying right now ....:D

Friedel

12-08-2014, 12:01 AM

I was always put under the impression the Lee came here with the specific purpose of starting something in the US, and that everything was initiated by him.

He was already in the check-in line at the airport to fly back to Taiwan "when the Lord told him to stay" – that is how I heard it.

rayliotta

12-08-2014, 01:11 AM

He was already in the check-in line at the airport to fly back to Taiwan "when the Lord told him to stay" – that is how I heard it.

Was he wearing headphones?

rayliotta

12-08-2014, 01:11 AM

(just kidding)

TLFisher

12-08-2014, 12:48 PM

After being active in the Recovery for 30 years, and then studying them for 10 more, I have reached the sobering conclusion that no rendition of church history by LSM (whether in the near or distant past) has ever been honest, accurate, or objective, and that every single account of church history from LSM is biased, dishonest, and self-serving.

Acts 5:1-2
But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife’s full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet.

Local church history as presented by LSM/LSM-coworkers is a type of Acts 5:1-2. They hold back if not for personal gain, but to refrain from loss of respect. In order to keep the respect intact many in the local churches have for them, their is a need to reject transparency.

Freedom

12-08-2014, 09:36 PM

He was already in the check-in line at the airport to fly back to Taiwan "when the Lord told him to stay" – that is how I heard it.

Friedel, do you have any insight into what would have enabled Lee to later return to Taiwan in good standing at various points in time? Did he still have a core group of followers even after his business failures there?

Friedel

12-10-2014, 01:18 AM

Friedel, do you have any insight into what would have enabled Lee to later return to Taiwan in good standing at various points in time? Did he still have a core group of followers even after his business failures there?

I have no specific information about the situation but I can only hazard a guess after having read some about the trouble he had had. I believe his problems there might have stemmed from difficulties with elders over money lost or even with individuals.

When he returned for a conference around the 1970s, he took with him a large number of Americans. He then accused the Taiwanese of being "old"; he introduced a new "louder" version of the meeting life and received overwhelming support. Thereby he affirmed his authority, wiping away any form of opposition.

Perhaps someone can help me with some specific details.

Indiana

12-30-2014, 04:28 PM

awareness

12-30-2014, 04:58 PM

www.lordsrecovery.us/SailingOnOvertheTruthAgain.pdf
I got a 404 error ...

Freedom

12-30-2014, 07:18 PM

Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.
But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor
handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth,
commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God 2 (Cor. 4:1-2)

Dear brother Philip Lin,

........

I will be reading this with great interest. Now that Philip Lin has brought up matters that have been considered "closed" in the LC, the BB's need to be ready to address these issues honestly. Are they really naive enough to believe that current LC members such as myself are not going to read these things? LC members owe it to themselves to get a complete view of what the LC is, including the "hidden things of dishonesty".

awareness

12-30-2014, 08:46 PM

www.lordsrecovery.us/SailingOnOvertheTruthAgain.pdf

Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not.
But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor
handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth,
commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God 2 (Cor. 4:1-2)

Dear brother Philip Lin,

........
Bro Steve has written a masterful challenge to Philip Lin, to explain why he wrote a book fawning over Witness Lee, to the point of whitewashing the truth.

Kudos bro Steve. Job well done. Thanks.

bearbear

12-30-2014, 11:31 PM

Bro Steve has written a masterful challenge to Philip Lin, to explain why he wrote a book fawning over Witness Lee, to the point of whitewashing the truth.

Kudos bro Steve. Job well done. Thanks.

This is a really good dismantling of Fermentation of the Present Rebellion. Perhaps God allowed Philip Lin to write his book so that brother Steve could respond in kind. There seems to be a need to crystallize all the historical testimonies and content in this forum into a format that is easily accessible by others and it seems that Steve is doing this job. Not everyone has the time/energy to browse through thread after thread to get to the meat of things in LC history.

It's also too bad LSM dismantled FPR on ministrybooks.org. It's an undeniable testimony of how far off the rails Witness Lee went when you compare his record against the facts. It's clear as day that the same evil spirits that influenced Mao Tse Tung and Eli in the book of Samuel were also influencing Witness Lee. As Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes 1:9 "What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun."

Existing LC members would do well to read writings such as this so perhaps they could gather the wisdom to run away to other healthier fellowships, as the same strongholds and evil spirits that existed back then are probably still there wreaking havoc in the LCs today as it looks like they have never been dealt with.

OBW

12-31-2014, 07:57 AM

I have read about 1/3 of the most recently linked pdf (I remember that it is about 52 pages in standard pdf format). I think that the material is great.

I really wish that Steve took as much time formatting for clarity as he does gathering and arranging the material. The use of color and indentations continues to confuse as to what are quotes and what is his editorializing.

In large sections, he does well, fully left-justifying his own words, and indenting the quotes from others. And providing some differentiation in color or font between the actual quote and the source.

Then in another, his words, while still in his own font, are imbedded in the indented area. And the colors used on certain quotes (such as from something Lee spoke/wrote) are not used on another similar quote just a paragraph or two later.

I've been asked to purchase his book for someone else and I will do that. I just hope that he has a better time figuring out what is what. I appreciate Steve's comments and for the most part the way it is pieced together. I still disagree with some of his characterizations of whether what was before all of this was really so wonderful and worthy of the desire for return that he exibits, but at the same time, it makes his assessment stronger because he is not just someone (like me) who would be satisfied if the thing just folded and all those who live off of the LSM had to go get real jobs. And the dear ones who are bottled up in there were free to pursue God without the fog of Lee, the LSM and the LRC.

Ohio

12-31-2014, 08:17 AM

Existing LC members would do well to read writings such as this so perhaps they could gather the wisdom to run away to other healthier fellowships, as the same strongholds and evil spirits that existed back then are probably still there wreaking havoc in the LCs today as it looks like they have never been dealt with.

One reason we all love the Bible -- God's word -- is because it is an accurate and honest portrayal of history. The book of Acts, for example, was written by a close friend and traveling companion of Apostle Paul. The book of Acts accurately portrays Paul (Saul) as a murderer. It was Saul who instigated and authorized the stoning of Steven, the first martyr after Jesus ascended into heaven. The writers of the New Testament, especially Luke in the book of Acts, could have easily hidden this atrocious and unspeakable "act" from the Gentile world, but they did not, just as the Bible did not hide King David's acts behind the cloak of royalty.

We cannot say the same about any the accounts of Witness Lee by LSM. Of course, they admit superficial generalizations like, "nobody's perfect" and "we all make mistakes," but the Bible never did this with any of her most notable men in history, from Moses to Peter. Only Jesus was perfect. Let me repeat. Only Jesus was perfect! One more time. Only Jesus was perfect!

But not so for the common LC'er. I know I was there actively serving for almost 30 years. I was indoctrinated by LSM to believe that Nee and Lee were the closest thing ever to the "perfect suffering God-man" that ever existed in the church age. Every so-called "storm" in the annals of Nee and Lee historical revisionism was twisted and re-spun to the faithful as "persecution by ambitious men who only wanted to overthrow the Minister Of The Age."

How disgusting! How very deceptive!

Philip Lin, who clearly knows better, should be ashamed of himself.

Freedom

12-31-2014, 08:36 AM

We cannot say the same about any the accounts of Witness Lee by LSM. Of course, they admit superficial generalizations like, "nobody's perfect" and "we all make mistakes," but the Bible never did this with any of her most notable men in history, from Moses to Peter. Only Jesus was perfect. Let me repeat. Only Jesus was perfect! One more time. Only Jesus was perfect!

But not so for the common LC'er. I know I was there actively serving for almost 30 years. I was indoctrinated by LSM to believe that Nee and Lee were the closest thing ever to the "perfect suffering God-man" that ever existed in the church age. Every so-called "storm" in the annals of Nee and Lee historical revisionism was twisted and re-spun to the faithful as "persecution by ambitious men who only wanted to overthrow the Minister Of The Age."

How disgusting! How very deceptive!

Philip Lin, who clearly knows better, should be ashamed of himself.

This is a very good point. It is also the thing that disgusts me the most about Lin's book. It goes without saying that no one is perfect, so why must this be clarified with respect to Lee? The very fact that these types of statements are made implies that many view Lee as "perfect". What's worse is that they think that by simply admitting that Lee was imperfect magically erases his mistakes and all the damage he caused.

Ohio

12-31-2014, 08:42 AM

I still disagree with some of his characterizations of whether what was before all of this was really so wonderful and worthy of the desire for return that he exhibits ...
For many of us, the early church life was a wonderful time. It was to us a reenactment of the early NT church, both of which, however, were still filled with all sorts of problems. That time in America was a real move of the Holy Spirit, not just in the LC's, but among nearly all God's children.

Witness Lee gave structure to some in that movement, which on the one might have been beneficial, but eventually became a cause of degradation. Talking to some of his loyalists, however, one might think that the entire Jesus People movement was God's poured out blessing on Witness Lee for coming to the US. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Ohio

12-31-2014, 08:48 AM

aron

12-31-2014, 12:06 PM

This is a very good point. It is also the thing that disgusts me the most about Lin's book. It goes without saying that no one is perfect, so why must this be clarified with respect to Lee? The very fact that these types of statements are made implies that many view Lee as "perfect". What's worse is that they think that by simply admitting that Lee was imperfect magically erases his mistakes and all the damage he caused.

And the imperfections of "degraded Christianity" were brought up, again and again, usually based on Witness Lee's growing up Protestant in Mainland China in the 1920s and 1930s. As if he could pronounce judgment on all Christian fellowship based on that experience alone. And then, when the faults of the LC were mentioned, he and his followers would shrug and say, "nobody's perfect". It reminds me of the NT parable of the servant who beat his fellows and threw them into jail, but when his own creditors came he begged for mercy. The servant expected different treatment for himself than he'd given to others.

OBW

12-31-2014, 01:02 PM

For many of us, the early church life was a wonderful time. It was to us a reenactment of the early NT church, both of which, however, were still filled with all sorts of problems. That time in America was a real move of the Holy Spirit, not just in the LC's, but among nearly all God's children.

Witness Lee gave structure to some in that movement, which on the one might have been beneficial, but eventually became a cause of degradation. Talking to some of his loyalists, however, one might think that the entire Jesus People movement was God's poured out blessing on Witness Lee for coming to the US. Nothing could be further from the truth.I would agree that you had a wonderful time in the early LRC. But I would disagree that it was really about the LRC or Lee, but the freedom and the opportunity to view the Christian life an experience beyond the mold of the old-line denominations.

But Jesus people and the LRC weren't the only things happening back then. Just the more outwardly boisterous. And that is appealing. Not necessarily spiritually. There were many independent groups that were beginning at that time. And many of them were not so outwardly boisterous, so Lee had fun just calling them more of the same. But they were not.

In fact, the explosion of separate section 501(c)(3) filings is not because there are suddenly a whole lot of Christians that are so divided, but because the hold over those Christians by the old-line denominations was failing. Yet for the most part, despite the "name" appearance of division, they are more one with the others that the LRC is with any of them, and even within it own original ranks. Bible churches are mostly new. A few existed before 1960. In fact, of all the different groups of churches that arose, it is fair to say that few had the historical path of destruction that the LRC has had. And for the few that did, the result was usually because a wayward leader was tossed out, not because he forced everyone else out.

We were there reason that anything was wonderful. The LRC was not the cause. Lee did not provide structure, he provided less control than he wanted. Just to hook us. That cannot be spun as positive. He was never positive. Virtually everything he taught had worms hanging on it. The flour bin had too many rat hairs. And the smell of garlic was overwhelming.

No. The whole experience was not worms, rats, and garlic. But what Lee provided was infested with it. We provided the rest. Eventually our part could not keep Lee out and was overrun by his myths and endless genealogies.

Cliffhanger

12-31-2014, 02:08 PM

And the imperfections of "degraded Christianity" were brought up, again and again, usually based on Witness Lee's growing up Protestant in Mainland China in the 1920s and 1930s. As if he could pronounce judgment on all Christian fellowship based on that experience alone. And then, when the faults of the LC were mentioned, he and his followers would shrug and say, "nobody's perfect". It reminds me of the NT parable of the servant who beat his fellows and threw them into jail, but when his own creditors came he begged for mercy. The servant expected different treatment for himself than he'd given to others.

Very nice aron. I was speaking with a long time LCer just recently, when I asked him if he thought that brother Lee was infallible he said "absolutely not!". But I asked him to give me just one thing that he thought that Lee was wrong about and he could not come up with anything, not one thing. He just had a sheepish smirk and shrugged his shoulders. I asked him if maybe just maybe he was wrong about "poor poor christianity" and he said "absolutely not!". I told him God bless you and I rest my case.

Ohio

12-31-2014, 02:18 PM

rayliotta

12-31-2014, 03:15 PM

Very nice aron. I was speaking with a long time LCer just recently, when I asked him if he thought that brother Lee was infallible he said "absolutely not!". But I asked him to give me just one thing that he thought that Lee was wrong about and he could not come up with anything, not one thing. He just had a sheepish smirk and shrugged his shoulders. I asked him if maybe just maybe he was wrong about "poor poor christianity" and he said "absolutely not!". I told him God bless you and I rest my case.

I've sat there on LaPalma Ave with thousands of fellow local church'ers, listening to "blended brothers" talk about what they will say to Witness Lee when they "see him again." Didn't Witness Lee also, when he was alive, talk about Watchman Nee as if he would have to "answer" to him someday?

Why do they go so far out of their way to say, "Lee was just a man"? Could it be -- is it even possible -- that they're uncomfortable with their own attitudes toward him?

aron

12-31-2014, 04:30 PM

I've sat there on LaPalma Ave with thousands of fellow local church'ers, listening to "blended brothers" talk about what they will say to Witness Lee when they "see him again." Didn't Witness Lee also, when he was alive, talk about Watchman Nee as if he would have to "answer" to him someday?

Why do they go so far out of their way to say, "Lee was just a man"? Could it be -- is it even possible -- that they're uncomfortable with their own attitudes toward him?

My sense is that they try to have it both ways. Of the group they say, "We are special. We are the sole move of God on the earth today. If you are not with us, you are doing absolutely nothing to build up the Body of Christ on earth according to God's heart's desire." Then to others outside, they say, "We are just a group of Jesus-loving Christians. We are no different." So they can be either 'unique' or 'jest reg'lar folks' depending on the need at hand.

Likewise, Lee was either the unique 'wise master builder' raised up by God to be used to 'end the age', or he was 'just a man' like any other redeemed and regenerated Christian. Depending on how you needed to characterize him at the moment.

And they don't see any contradiction. Supposedly, it's all for the building up of the Body. And they take Paul's "all things to all men" to a new level, I think.

rayliotta

01-02-2015, 03:28 AM

And they don't see any contradiction. Supposedly, it's all for the building up of the Body. And they take Paul's "all things to all men" to a new level, I think.

I suppose the ends justify the rhetoric?

TLFisher

01-02-2015, 01:05 PM

What's worse is that they think that by simply admitting that Lee was imperfect magically erases his mistakes and all the damage he caused.
Or Lee's imperfection is meant to excuse any mistakes he made or damage he caused.
We may not know the quantity exactly, but many have been stumbled by the damage.....

Freedom

01-02-2015, 07:16 PM

Or Lee's imperfection is meant to excuse any mistakes he made or damage he caused.
We may not know the quantity exactly, but many have been stumbled by the damage.....

People's perspectives on Lee vary greatly, that is why it's so easy for the BB's and even Lee himself to put a spin on things. To some Lee could say that he never controlled anyone, and they would believe it. To others he could say "Going with God’s oracle, surely there is the deputy authority of God in this oracle. Whoever speaks for God, he surely has certain divine authority." So which is it? It seems like it all changes to fit the situation.

People like me who never met Lee or saw him speak in person have no idea of who he was other than various writings regarding him which can be here. It turns out that these writings show just how bad the damage that was cause by Lee's mistakes. All the BB's can do to address that is say that Lee made mistakes, just like everyone else. They are probably hoping that we will feel that maybe we shouldn't judge Lee for his mistakes. Well that might work if he was just like you and me, but because his mistakes were so great, they can't be simply ignored.

TLFisher

01-03-2015, 12:03 AM

All the BB's can do to address that is say that Lee made mistakes, just like everyone else. They are probably hoping that we will feel that maybe we shouldn't judge Lee for his mistakes. Well that might work if he was just like you and me, but because his mistakes were so great, they can't be simply ignored.

No question we all have sinned with the exception of one. In regards to Lee or any other Christian minister, how they conduct their lives affects many. So if there's a brother or sister who stop going on because mistakes weren't addressed, how do you quantify it?
Do you criticize the person who gave too far respect to the minister?
Or do you criticize the minister for the pride of life?

Ohio

01-03-2015, 05:36 AM

They are probably hoping that we will feel that maybe we shouldn't judge Lee for his mistakes. Well that might work if he was just like you and me, but because his mistakes were so great, they can't be simply ignored.

For me it all boils down to this -- did people get hurt by Lee's "mistakes."

I'm not talking about someone like brother Ohio getting disillusioned by various disappointing events, NO, not at all. I'm referring to those who lost their life's savings to Daystar, and then being told that it was your fault for "losing your virginity." I'm talking about devoted sisters who get molested by the LSM Office Manager while fulfilling some voluntary Levitical service for The Ministry. I'm recalling all those men of God who had given their lives to build up Lee's little kingdom, and then got their reputations squeezed through the wringer washer for simply obeying their conscience and speaking up for God and for the children of God.

Nobody but Lee's trained sycophants would dare to call these events "mistakes."

TLFisher

01-03-2015, 11:31 AM

NO, not at all. I'm referring to those who lost their life's savings to Daystar, and then being told that it was your fault for "losing your virginity." I'm talking about devoted sisters who get molested by the LSM Office Manager while fulfilling some voluntary Levitical service for The Ministry. I'm recalling all those men of God who had given their lives to build up Lee's little kingdom, and then got their reputations squeezed through the wringer washer for simply obeying their conscience and speaking up for God and for the children of God.

Nobody but Lee's trained sycophants would dare to call these events "mistakes."

What would blended brothers and co-workers say to that? Would there be compassion or would there be callousness?
To categorize these events as "mistakes" is deeply insensitive.

Ohio

01-03-2015, 06:23 PM

What would blended brothers and co-workers say to that?
Just deny, like they always have.

Freedom

01-03-2015, 07:52 PM

For me it all boils down to this -- did people get hurt by Lee's "mistakes."

I'm not talking about someone like brother Ohio getting disillusioned by various disappointing events, NO, not at all. I'm referring to those who lost their life's savings to Daystar, and then being told that it was your fault for "losing your virginity." I'm talking about devoted sisters who get molested by the LSM Office Manager while fulfilling some voluntary Levitical service for The Ministry. I'm recalling all those men of God who had given their lives to build up Lee's little kingdom, and then got their reputations squeezed through the wringer washer for simply obeying their conscience and speaking up for God and for the children of God.

Nobody but Lee's trained sycophants would dare to call these events "mistakes."

Exactly, very well put. There is just something sickening when you hear about so many well-intentioned saints who got back-stabbed. It's hard to believe that all this can just be called "mistakes". I wasn't even there, so I can't even imagine what it was like for all those who got manipulated in these situations.

bearbear

01-03-2015, 10:14 PM

No question we all have sinned with the exception of one. In regards to Lee or any other Christian minister, how they conduct their lives affects many. So if there's a brother or sister who stop going on because mistakes weren't addressed, how do you quantify it?
Do you criticize the person who gave too far respect to the minister?
Or do you criticize the minister for the pride of life?

The New Testament makes a distinction between 1) making mistakes / stumbling into sin versus 2) a lifestyle held in bondage by sin resulting in regular, continual practice of sinning which is wickedness or iniquity.

John says whoever says he does not sin is a liar (1 John 1:8). While we're still in the flesh we'll all make mistakes and stumble into sin. Yes no one is perfect until we receive our glorified bodies. One example is David who had a heart for God like no other, but fell into even the most serious sins such as adultery and murder but later repented.

But John also says whoever knows God cannot continue to sin in 1 John 3:6
"No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him."

The type of continual sinning John is referring to results from a wicked heart that is held in bondage to the lusts of the flesh (fame, love of money, power etc) [Gal 5:19-21].

This follows John 8:34-36 (ESV), where Jesus says:
"Very truly I tell you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin... So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."

Jesus also said whoever drinks of the water he gives will no longer thirst (John 4:14). It implies when we have truly found Jesus, he will fulfill all our needs, and we will no longer have a need to thirst/hunger after worldly lusts that once held us captive.

http://www.laymansfellowship.com/public/070206PeopleChange.pdf

"[Witness Lee] referred to the title he has used for the Holy Spirit – "the all-inclusive Spirit of Christ as the
consummation of the processed Triune God" – and asked who made such a title. Webster? he
asked. Then he answered his own question, "That Lee! Lee has to be famous! Lee! Lee! Lee must
have the credit! And if you listen to me, you do not listen to Lee, you listen to the very God in His
oracle spoken by me." A little later in his message he said, "Going with God’s oracle, surely there
is the deputy authority of God in this oracle. Whoever speaks for God, he surely has certain
divine authority. I’m claiming this for Lee!"

If the accounts of Witness Lee are true, it does seem that he was held under bondage of sin (love of money, fame, power for him and his sons) for much of his ministry, which would then be classified by scriptures as wickedness and not occasional mistakes. If Lee had repented and made amends and changed his ways then it would be evidence otherwise, but the publication of Fermentation of the Present Rebellion indicates that he cemented his position and also the book was never retracted.

2 Timothy 2:19
Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: "The Lord knows those who are his," and, "Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness."

Acts 8:13
for I can see that you are full of bitter jealousy and are held captive by sin."

Ohio

01-04-2015, 08:43 AM

If the accounts of Witness Lee are true, it does seem that he was held under bondage of sin (love of money, fame, power for him and his sons) for much of his ministry, which would then be classified by scriptures as wickedness and not occasional mistakes. I

Lee was gripped by a kind of spiritual megalomania, convincing himself and others that he was today's Moses, whose every fault and failure was covered by a judgmental God, bent on protecting Lee regardless. Nee suffered similarly. Hence, any corrective word, any exposure of failures, or any "negative" speaking was deemed the persecution of the enemy.

This kind of self-aggrandizement (pride?) seemed to be the root of everything else. I dont think it was the love of money per se with Lee. He also loved his legacy and reputation above everything to the point that he would "lynch" any and all who would even speak up concerning his profligate sons. Both he and his sons believed they were above any earthly law, and expected their followers to protect them from any and all consequences.

Freedom

01-04-2015, 04:05 PM

Lee was gripped by a kind of spiritual megalomania, convincing himself and others that he was today's Moses, whose every fault and failure was covered by a judgmental God, bent on protecting Lee regardless. Nee suffered similarly. Hence, any corrective word, any exposure of failures, or any "negative" speaking was deemed the persecution of the enemy.

This kind of self-aggrandizement (pride?) seemed to be the root of everything else. I dont think it was the love of money per se with Lee. He also loved his legacy and reputation above everything to the point that he would "lynch" any and all who would even speak up concerning his profligate sons. Both he and his sons believed they were above any earthly law, and expected their followers to protect them from any and all consequences.

Yes, I think he loved his position and reputation above all. How else could everything he did be explained?

I think his business failings began as honest attempts to meet financial certain needs the churches and his ministry. The problem came in when he attempted to cover up and distort the reality of these business failings. Because it is clear that Daystar involved illegal activities (which I'm sure Lee was eventually made aware of), in order to save his reputation he had no choice to cover everything up. How would things have looked if the "MOTA" ended up in jail for money laundering? I guess part of the problem is that Lee could not bring himself to admit that he was not cut out as a business man. At least Philip Lin is willing to admit this much.

Ohio

01-04-2015, 04:41 PM

Yes, I think he loved his position and reputation above all. How else could everything he did be explained?

I think his business failings began as honest attempts to meet financial certain needs the churches and his ministry. The problem came in when he attempted to cover up and distort the reality of these business failings. Because it is clear that Daystar involved illegal activities (which I'm sure Lee was eventually made aware of), in order to save his reputation he had no choice to cover everything up. How would things have looked if the "MOTA" ended up in jail for money laundering? I guess part of the problem is that Lee could not bring himself to admit that he was not cut out as a business man. At least Philip Lin is willing to admit this much.
Anyone can fail at business, and there is no shame in that. But Lee took it two steps further. Firstly he forced the churches to pay for all his losses, then he attacked the reputations of any brother who stood up to him.

This happened in the 50's in Taipei, where Lee forced the church to sell its property to pay his bad business debts. Lee told us repeatedly that the Lord sent him to the USA, when the real story was the church ran him out of the country. Did he ever fess up and learn his lesson? No, because the same thing happened with Daystar.

It's easy to say that WL was only attempting to care for the workers, but what does history tell us? When Daystar finally collapsed, President Timothy Lee walked away with $1 Million. LSM later spent $14 Million on the Harvest House lawsuit. Then LSM spent $30+ Million on the LaPalma campus. Where is all their "love and care" for needy people, for the workers, for the volunteers, and for the serving saints?

I was church treasurer for ten years, so I know these things from the inside out. We always had a "needy saints" fund, but never put a dollar into that fund because both Anaheim and Cleveland were constantly squeezing us for more. So "caring for the needy" was a big farce. I abruptly quit my service as church treasurer the day I was accused of starving the children of the full-timers for not sending enough money to Cleveland. I had been putting local needs first, like paying the mortgage and the utilities.

Freedom

01-04-2015, 05:11 PM

Anyone can fail at business, and there is no shame in that. But Lee took it two steps further. Firstly he forced the churches to pay for all his losses, then he attacked the reputations of any brother who stood up to him.

This happened in the 50's in Taipei, where Lee forced the church to sell its property to pay his bad business debts. Lee told us repeatedly that the Lord sent him to the USA, when the real story was the church ran him out of the country. Did he ever fess up and learn his lesson? No, because the same thing happened with Daystar.

It's easy to say that WL was only attempting to care for the workers, but what does history tell us? When Daystar finally collapsed, President Timothy Lee walked away with $1 Million. LSM later spent $14 Million on the Harvest House lawsuit. Then LSM spent $30+ Million on the LaPalma campus. Where is all their "love and care" for needy people, for the workers, for the volunteers, and for the serving saints?

I recently came across the following photo of WL standing next to a Daystar motorhome, so I though that I would post it :lol:. After all, a picture is worth a thousand words. The funny thing is, after seeing this picture, I can imagine the "business man" side of Lee.

It's hard to know for sure regarding Lee's intentions, but after the dust settled after these business ventures, the reality of it all is sad, that's for sure. Wouldn't LSM care more about making things right with the Daystar investors rather than suing other Christians or purchasing a campus?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6qTxTpbPOao/UFglK3YBV9I/AAAAAAAAAss/YfRDDaVC1GI/s1600/D10007+%E6%8B%B7%E8%B2%9D.jpg

Ohio

01-04-2015, 06:25 PM

I recently came across the following photo of WL standing next to a Daystar motorhome, so I though that I would post it :lol:. After all, a picture is worth a thousand words. The funny thing is, after seeing this picture, I can imagine the "business man" side of Lee.

I got a bunch of Daystar pics, but I never saw this one. Good Job!

The writing on the building in the background suggests it was taken in Taiwan; perhaps at the Phosphorus plant where the monstrosity was built.

Maybe Igzy or UntoHim can shrink it down to fit the screen.

I have heard that LSM used some pretty girls in bikinis to model the Daystar. Like to see a few pics of that!

awareness

01-04-2015, 08:55 PM

bearbear

01-05-2015, 03:35 AM

Isn't it a two way street, between a leader and followers?

As far as I know the local church has a power to entrap the minds of followers -- for sure, that's for real -- but other than that there's nothing holding anyone in the local church. All of them are free to walk away, any time. Many have.

It's the followers that empower the leader. Without them the leader is not a leader, and is nothing, just another passing person.

But the leader isn't innocent either. The leader, in this case Witness Lee, has to have something to offer. Witness Lee offered a unique fresh high sounding interpretation of the Word of God from the Bible. And offered a system whereby you could give your life to it: Originally advertised as Christ and the Church. But eventually became Lee and The Ministry.

Then all that's needed to establish a cult, from the leader is, a gift for deception. And Lee was adept at hiding immorality and larceny. He covered for Watchman Nee, and his sons, and his criminal business dealings.

And there you have it, a system of the willing deceiver and the willingly deceived. A system dynamic that requires both the leader and followers ; that empowers both ways, to establish and empower, in the end, the leader .... à la Witness Lee.

Everyone is responsible for making their own decisions, but scripture places more responsibilities on those in authority than followers:

James 3:1 says "Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly."

And Jesus has harsh words for those who lead others astray. Regarding these folks, it's the only occurrence in scriptures where the Good Shepherd recommends suicide:

Luke 17:1-2 (AMP)
"And [Jesus] said to His disciples, Temptations (snares, traps set to entice to sin) are sure to come, but woe to him by or through whom they come! It would be more profitable for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were hurled into the sea than that he should cause to sin or be a snare to one of these little ones [lowly in rank or influence]."

According to the amplified bible, Jesus isn't just referring to children, but those who are "Lowly in rank or influence".

Would it have been better for Lee to bust the emergency doors open and tie a millstone around his neck to jump into the Pacific Ocean during his flight from Taiwan to the US in 1962?

On the one hand, a lot of people did get their first contact with Jesus through Lee's ministry. But many lives were also destroyed, including existing Christians who came from other denominations. This group probably had the greatest disappointment. Many probably left their denominations due to disillusionment, only to get disillusioned again in Lee's ministry. It's God's grace if any of these folks still held on to their faith.

Yet all things work together for good (Romans 8:28).

bearbear

01-05-2015, 04:22 AM

Philip Mantoufa, now a church pastor in Indonesia shares a powerful testimony on CBN:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CXsdrxX9t4&feature=youtu.be

He was sexually molested by a church leader as a youth, the same person who he looked up to and got him interested in God. He subsequently lost his faith and wanted to have nothing to do with Jesus.

After leading a rebellious life in the occult, he had a powerful encounter with Jesus years later and returned back to his faith.

Mantoufa said he "banged on heaven's door" asking God why he allowed a trusted authority figure to abuse him during his youth.

He never received a detailed explanation, but the answer he got from God was "I am who I am, I am not like people and I love you".

That also reminds me of a leader in my church who was sexually molested by a church youth leader when he was young. For years he asked Jesus why he allowed what happened to him. One night he got a dream where he revisited the time and place where he was sexually abused. However instead of him being molested, he saw Jesus taking his place during the horrific ordeal. Later he felt the Lord was telling him that he was right there with him it occurred and he felt his pain as much as he did and that Jesus was taking the shame away from him onto himself.

Matthew 25:40
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

Ohio

01-05-2015, 06:16 AM

Mantoufa said he "banged on heaven's door" asking God why he allowed a trusted authority figure to abuse him during his youth.

He never received a detailed explanation, but the answer he got from God was "I am who I am, I am not like people and I love you".

That also reminds me of a leader in my church who was sexually molested by a church youth leader when he was young. For years he asked Jesus why he allowed what happened to him. One night he got a dream where he revisited the time and place where he was sexually abused. However instead of him being molested, he saw Jesus taking his place during the horrific ordeal. Later he felt the Lord was telling him that he was right there with him it occurred and he felt his pain as much as he did and that Jesus was taking the shame away from him onto himself.

Matthew 25:40
And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

It seems like everyone of us has some sort of testimony where we could blame God, "how could you let this happen to me?" This can go on for years as fiery darts are constantly shot at us from God's enemies. I believe the answer can only be found when we see Jesus hanging on the cross with outstretched arms. Look at what God allowed His perfect, holy, sinless Son to endure. Before His death, even Jesus uttered something similar, "Eli, Eli, how could you let this happen to me?"

aron

01-05-2015, 06:36 AM

I recently came across the following photo of WL standing next to a Daystar motorhome... The funny thing is, after seeing this picture, I can imagine the "business man" side of Lee.

It's hard to know for sure regarding Lee's intentions, but after the dust settled after these business ventures, the reality of it all is sad, that's for sure. Wouldn't LSM care more about making things right with the Daystar investors rather than suing other Christians or purchasing a campus?

To me the problem is not that Lee was a "business man" on the side, or even that he bilked people out of money. The problem is that he preached the opposite. Doesn't anyone remember the sermon (message) given by Lee that the Church was to be pure and unsullied by the world? Doesn't anyone remember Lee castigating the Baptists and Presbyterians for building hospitals and founding universities? This was not our calling, Lee firmly asserted.

Suddenly we find out he'd been asking the saints for "investments" in his business scheme, run by his son. What a hypocrite. How could anyone sit in meetings where Lee lambasted "Christianity" for failing its mission, when he was even moreso? How could they walk out of that meeting with their consciences still intact? At some point, the disconnect between message and action had to become too strong.

For me the main thing was the lack of love. No care for our neighbor. Just "good building material" sought to "consummate the New Jerusalem". I had a penchant for dragging in the dregs of society, and they couldn't assimilate well with Recovery culture. It wasn't forbidden, but it became clear that I was being independent, and the "move on the campuses" was where it was at. So I left. I was still pickled in "God's economy" brine, but at least I was free from LSM's "building the Body" ideas. News flash: if God had wanted "good building material" then He sent His Son to the wrong planet.

Secondly, we'd loved one another. We didn't give speeches about it, but we lived together, ate together, went to meetings together, set up chairs in the meeting halls together, preached the gospel together, and went to each other's families and presented the name of Jesus together. Then, the Anaheimians showed up, declared that Lee had pronounced us "dormant", and grouped us into geographic sectors and declared that we were "vital groups". I remember the passive, confused, and discouraged looks in the meeting. The World Sector Leaders had arrived, and love had scurried out the door with its tail between its legs. Fear was now the Boss.

OBW

01-05-2015, 06:45 AM

Not to say that this is the whole truth or the answer, but even where God attempts to shepherd us in certain directions, we are free to go where our eyes, ears, emotions, etc., take us. He does not deny us our choosing. And that does not mean that our choosing is always bad. But being in the LRC was, in my case, a function of a linkage to Watchman Nee (of whom we actually had limited, but appealing knowledge). If I knew then what I know now, I might not have been as interested in it. That goes for both Lee and the LRC as well as Nee. There were always worms in the meal. But they were only eggs waiting to hatch from our vantage point, therefore hidden.

Yet God allowed it. Just like he allowed the fall. We do not need to reform our past to have a glorious present and future. Just know where you are now and remain in it (if it is worthy of remaining in).

Ohio

01-05-2015, 06:58 AM

News flash: if God had wanted "good building material" then He sent His Son to the wrong planet.

Too funny! :hysterical:

awareness

01-05-2015, 08:37 AM

At some point, the disconnect between message and action had to become too strong.That's what cinched it for me. That Lee was not practicing what he preached.

News flesh: if God had wanted "good building material" then He sent His Son to the wrong planet.Misanthropic ... but seems to be true.

But he commanded us to love them; those on this planet. And that too seems impossible ... cuz we're of this wrong planet.

If God doesn't step in we have no hope in the Christian sense of hope. We can't reach up, so God has to reach down ... if we're ever gonna reach the Christian ideal; which, by the way, is the Christian ideal.

aron

01-05-2015, 10:21 AM

Misanthropic ... but seems to be true.

But he commanded us to love them; those on this planet. And that too seems impossible ... cuz we're of this wrong planet.

If God doesn't step in we have no hope in the Christian sense of hope. We can't reach up, so God has to reach down ... if we're ever gonna reach the Christian ideal; which, by the way, is the Christian ideal.

There is hope. There is one "good building material", and His name is Jesus Christ. Our faith is in Him, not ourselves. But I argue that Lee led us to look away from Jesus. There was the local church, then the Body of Christ, then the ministry, then God's deputy authority, then God's dispensing, then God's present move on the earth, then this, then that. All of it confusing and stumbling the saints.

I still have my old RecV. Yesterday I was reading in Revelations chapter 1. The footnotes are really something. One note said that unless you are in the local churches, you can't figure out the book of Revelation. Like the book was closed until the recovery of the local churches. What unchristian hubris, and what a distraction from the person of Jesus Christ. Like the tables have flipped, and now instead of Christ showing us the Father you have the local churches (of Lee) showing us Christ. Like He was inaccessible until Lee showed up with his teachings.

That kind of teaching I don't like. But I am willing to live with imperfect people, because I myself am imperfect. And Jesus taught again and again, if you have mercy on them, God will have mercy on you. So the poor building material all around me is an opportunity for me to find God's favor, and grace.

Freedom

01-05-2015, 11:17 AM

There is hope. There is one "good building material", and His name is Jesus Christ. Our faith is in Him, not ourselves. But I argue that Lee led us to look away from Jesus. There was the local church, then the Body of Christ, then the ministry, then God's deputy authority, then God's dispensing, then God's present move on the earth, then this, then that. All of it confusing and stumbling the saints.

I still have my old RecV. Yesterday I was reading in Revelations chapter 1. The footnotes are really something. One note said that unless you are in the local churches, you can't figure out the book of Revelation. Like the book was closed until the recovery of the local churches. What unchristian hubris, and what a distraction from the person of Jesus Christ. Like the tables have flipped, and now instead of Christ showing us the Father you have the local churches (of Lee) showing us Christ. Like He was inaccessible until Lee showed up with his teachings.

That kind of teaching I don't like. But I am willing to live with imperfect people, because I myself am imperfect. And Jesus taught again and again, if you have mercy on them, God will have mercy on you. So the poor building material all around me is an opportunity for me to find God's favor, and grace.

There are certain aspects of Lee's ministry that I look at now and wonder to myself how I fell for it all. The footnotes in Revelation are a prime example of that. Once I started questioning Lee's ministry, it didn't take me long to realize that I needed to drop my "elitist" attitude. It is rather addicting to think that you have a "unique" vision that no one else has, and in my experience, it is hard to let go of this. Even though I fully realize that the LC is not all that it's made out to be, I find myself still reverting to this mindset unintentionally.

When I set aside the elitism and ideas of Lee being the MOTA, I still find that it is hard to get past the notion that he at least had the ability to put "everything together", or interpret the meaning of everything the Bible talks about. There are certainly positive aspects of Lee's ministry, and I have to admit that there are things here and there that have helped me. In respect to all of this, one thing that was an eye-opener was when I read Nigel Tome's "LSM's Plagiarism" paper. It would have never occurred to me that perhaps Lee's putting "everything together" was his compiling of things that others had already seen. Of course, in the LC, I wasn't exposed to the writings of anyone but Lee, so for all I knew, everything that is contained in his ministry is what he saw. Sometimes I go and read Wikipedia articles on certain Biblical topics, and it amazes me how interpretations that I though were "unique" to the LC are actually commonly accepted interpretations. So with respect to some of the more fundamental things, it turns out Lee's ministry isn't so "unique" as we were led to think.

I got so accustomed to WL's straw man arguments with respect to other Christians, that I really believed that "other Christians" were as he described. It seems Lee had a bad habit of misattributing certain characteristics to Christians and then attacking this made up image of Christians. Since I was uniformed, I believed it all. It wasn't until I developed relationships with other non-LC Christians that I realized the LC has it all wrong.

Ohio

01-05-2015, 11:31 AM

It is rather addicting to think that you have a "unique" vision that no one else has, and in my experience, it is hard to let go of this. Even though I fully realize that the LC is not all that it's made out to be, I find myself still reverting to this mindset unintentionally.

That my friend is PRIDE. It has afflicted us all, and is hard to let go. I have a few friends, after leaving the LC, promptly hooked up with an even more exclusive group. It is just so hard not to think that we are better than any others.

Freedom

01-05-2015, 07:09 PM

That my friend is PRIDE. It has afflicted us all, and is hard to let go. I have a few friends, after leaving the LC, promptly hooked up with an even more exclusive group. It is just so hard not to think that we are better than any others.

Yes, pride is a big problem. It is hard to get over. And the LC is especially hypocritical with respect to pride. Pride is condemned, yet the elitist attitude is what creates it.

TLFisher

01-06-2015, 07:36 PM

For me the main thing was the lack of love.

I would add lack of grace. Phillip Lin's book, he could have given grace to the brothers he once served with in Anaheim. No grace was to be given.
How many brothers and sisters could have been ministered with grace and love?

Freedom

01-06-2015, 08:26 PM

I would add lack of grace. Phillip Lin's book, he could have given grace to the brothers he once served with in Anaheim. No grace was to be given.
How many brothers and sisters could have been ministered with grace and love?

Since Minoru was in Anaheim along with Philip Lin, I have to wonder how they could go on for so long knowing the truth and choosing to ignore it. I have heard Minoru speak many times, and I used to have some amount of respect for him. Once I discovered all the things that happened in Anaheim, I lost all respect for him. Since Philip Lin admitted his loyalty to Lee was something of his culture, I assume Minoru would admit the same. So there is something seriously wrong with the consciences of both of these brothers.

Because both of these brothers know the truth, and were there in Anaheim, neither of them could honestly say that they buy into Lee's imagined "global conspiracy theory" in the late 80's. So I think in both of their cases, their actions were based on wanting to remain loyal to Lee. I can understand that they chose loyalty to Lee over the truth. What is most concerning, however, is their total disregard of brotherly love and the lack of grace to receive brothers whom Lee labeled as "rebellious".

The same Savior who died for Minoru and Philip Lin, also died for all the brothers whom Lee slandered by labeling them as "rebellious". This is a basic aspect of the Christian faith. I'm not sure that Minoru and Philip Lin understand this.

1 John 4:20 - If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?

TLFisher

01-07-2015, 01:00 PM

Since Minoru was in Anaheim along with Philip Lin, I have to wonder how they could go on for so long knowing the truth and choosing to ignore it. I have heard Minoru speak many times, and I used to have some amount of respect for him. Once I discovered all the things that happened in Anaheim, I lost all respect for him. Since Philip Lin admitted his loyalty to Lee was something of his culture, I assume Minoru would admit the same. So there is something seriously wrong with the consciences of both of these brothers.

Because both of these brothers know the truth, and were there in Anaheim, neither of them could honestly say that they buy into Lee's imagined "global conspiracy theory" in the late 80's. So I think in both of their cases, their actions were based on wanting to remain loyal to Lee. I can understand that they chose loyalty to Lee over the truth. What is most concerning, however, is their total disregard of brotherly love and the lack of grace to receive brothers whom Lee labeled as "rebellious".

The same Savior who died for Minoru and Philip Lin, also died for all the brothers whom Lee slandered by labeling them as "rebellious". This is a basic aspect of the Christian faith. I'm not sure that Minoru and Philip Lin understand this.

I know from Ohio's post's, Titus Chu regards Witness Lee as a spiritual father. Likely many of these blended brothers do also. My point as you have also pointed out, it was Jesus who died for our sins.

Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? 1 Corinthians 1:13

The nature of grace I see practiced in the local churches can be characterized as Us and Them. If you're not for us, you're against us.

rayliotta

01-07-2015, 11:30 PM

Since Philip Lin admitted his loyalty to Lee was something of his culture, I assume Minoru would admit the same. So there is something seriously wrong with the consciences of both of these brothers.

Because both of these brothers know the truth, and were there in Anaheim, neither of them could honestly say that they buy into Lee's imagined "global conspiracy theory" in the late 80's. So I think in both of their cases, their actions were based on wanting to remain loyal to Lee. I can understand that they chose loyalty to Lee over the truth. What is most concerning, however, is their total disregard of brotherly love and the lack of grace to receive brothers whom Lee labeled as "rebellious".

It's all contextual for them. Everything applies within their group that they refer to as the "church life" and the "Body." Once someone is outside of that sphere, then all they want to know is whether you're "rebellious" or "negative" about "the ministry" (as HERn recently posted on another thread).

It just so happens that about 99.99% (literally) of Christians worldwide are not in the Lord's Recovery. So...what gives?

rayliotta

01-08-2015, 02:08 AM

Freedom

01-08-2015, 08:18 PM

It's all contextual for them. Everything applies within their group that they refer to as the "church life" and the "Body." Once someone is outside of that sphere, then all they want to know is whether you're "rebellious" or "negative" about "the ministry" (as HERn recently posted on another thread).

It just so happens that about 99.99% (literally) of Christians worldwide are not in the Lord's Recovery. So...what gives?

 The thing that bothers me is that Philip Lin, Minoru, and the rest of the BB’s claim to adhere to a ministry that has “recovered” every truth in the Bible, yet they willingly choose not to love and receive their fellow brothers who have left the LC (or were kicked out) . Furthermore this attitude is held towards Christians at large, which is evidenced by their numerous lawsuits and unwillingness to accept non-LSM ministries. The hypocrisy completely obvious, yet they continually misrepresent what the LC is and the teachings encompassed by the LC. I’m not sure what drives it all. Someone could say that it’s all loyalty to Lee, but I think there’s more to it than just that.

It seems that most of these brothers are convinced that the LC is truly something unique and set apart from everyone else. I think this attitude might create these ideas of not wanting to “waste time” with other Christians or other ministries. While growing up, I heard it said many times that the LC is the realization of the church in Philadelphia (the church of brotherly love). My experience seemed to attest to it being something special and full of love. For example, I could visit any LC with the expectation of receiving hospitality and a warm welcome. Those in my LC have always been happy to give hospitality. This paradigm all fell apart once I realized that the scope of loving and receiving others is limited to those who follow the ministry. My point is that it’s all too easy to get caught up in some of the more positive aspects of the LC and end up with a distorted view of what it is.

I think when someone thinks the LC is something that it’s not, then it becomes easy to justify their actions such as “quarantining” brothers, suing other Christians, etc. In Lin’s book he calls WL a “Bond Slave of Jesus Christ”. Lee’s trail of destruction is simply his “mistakes”. In Lin’s view, nothing that Lee did was even remotely of concern or worthy of critique. I’m sure the BB’s also feel the same way. I really feel that the BB’s are so caught up in what they think the LC is, that they are blind to what it has become.

TLFisher

01-09-2015, 10:06 PM

The thing that bothers me is that Philip Lin, Minoru, and the rest of the BB’s claim to adhere to a ministry that has “recovered” every truth in the Bible, yet they willingly choose not to love and receive their fellow brothers who have left the LC (or were kicked out) . Furthermore this attitude is held towards Christians at large, which is evidenced by their numerous lawsuits and unwillingness to accept non-LSM ministries. The hypocrisy completely obvious, yet they continually misrepresent what the LC is and the teachings encompassed by the LC. I’m not sure what drives it all. Someone could say that it’s all loyalty to Lee, but I think there’s more to it than just that.

What I have placed in bold as I quote Freedom can be simplified as Us versus Them.
Christians at large view all born again believers as comprising the Body of Christ past, present, and future. While in the local churches, the view is only those meeting with the LSM branded local churches as the Body of Christ exclusively.
There is more to it. I can say pride, but it's more than pride. Perhaps some are dependent on LSM maintaining revenue from Local churches for their living. If the other side of the coin was acknowledged, there's a fear local churches would separate in mass from dependence on LSM for their Christian publications.

Freedom

01-10-2015, 08:26 AM

There is more to it. I can say pride, but it's more than pride. Perhaps some are dependent on LSM maintaining revenue from Local churches for their living. If the other side of the coin was acknowledged, there's a fear local churches would separate in mass from dependence on LSM for their Christian publications.

I think that is definitely part of the issue. If saints in the LC started to think for themselves, that might mean they stop using the HWMR, other LSM books and not attend the semi-annual trainings. That would represent a significant revenue drop for the LSM. Since the BB's all seem to all play a part in the LSM some how, they have to push LSM publications on everyone.

awareness

01-10-2015, 09:43 AM

I think that is definitely part of the issue. If saints in the LC started to think for themselves, that might mean they stop using the HWMR, other LSM books and not attend the semi-annual trainings. That would represent a significant revenue drop for the LSM. Since the BB's all seem to all play a part in the LSM some how, they have to push LSM publications on everyone.Right. The Blended Brothers have a conflict of interest. And a vested interest in shaping the ministry to enhance "the bottom line" of Living Stream Ministry. Lee has become their commodity. Their loyalty is to that of every corporation: to the bottom line.