Poor, poor Christianity...

[awareness]

In post #185 I described my positive though incomplete experience in Pentecostalism. Here I will provide what I consider the poor poor Christianity aspects of Pentecostslism. One is a basic teaching and the other are practices.
Brother Drake, God is a loving God. So much so that He provides churches for bipolar believers. And that's the Pentecostal and the Apostolic churches ; where bipolar's can go in and out of salvation.

I've seen it. I've had friends that are bipolar, and for awhile they're on fire for Jesus, and the Bible, then something happens, like lust for a woman, and their on fire for sex and partying. Then, after awhile of that, they run back to Jesus ... and are on fire for Jesus again. Only to repeat it again and again ; falling in and out of salvation. They can't help it. They're bipolar.

So God needs churches for these bipolar's. Don't knock it.

[Ohio]

I cannot nor will I deny the positive life changing experiences I had in a Pentecostal Church. However, the environment lends itself to superstition and manufactured exhibitions. I will recount two that I consider to be firmly in the poor poor category.

First, because glossia is so important to the group as evidence of the Holy Spirit it was often manufactured... by that I mean speaking in tongues was brought by repeating “coca-cola ten times real fast”. One dear older sister used to reach out and kinda yank the lower lip of someone trying to break through as if to jump start the glossia.

Second, during revivals there was frequent supernatural manifestations. “I was praying here today and Jesus appeared standing right there at the end of this altar. And He told me,..”.

I should add that a popular interpretation of tongues started with “ If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves...l “ etc. I was pretty sure He had more to say but it was just part of that culture as it were.

These are examples but they reflect what is poor about Pentecostalism in my experience.

Drake
There's no one here to defend your attacks on nameless people, but obviously there is a boomerang effect here to expose your beloved and indefensible LSM.

Tongues can be manufactured, but so can your shouting episodes. Never in history has a sect been tagged "Shouters," as your Chinese branch has been labeled. Does any one really think God is honored when the whole room full of bored and sleepy stiffs stand and yell "OhhhhLoooooorGeeeeeeshuuuuush" 5 times. That's an abomination. I watched that in LSM's Kangaroo Court at the Whistler Resort and Ski Lodge.

What a sham. Excommunicate and slander another minister for supposedly wanting clean sheets in Thailand and damnable "heresies" like writing his own books? Seriously? And then you pay off Hank Hankygraft to write a favorable story to give you some much needed PR, and all your people jump up and down.

Looking at your people in action, speaking in tongues looks pretty spiritual and honorable.

[ZNPaaneah]

I have not juxtaposed anything but i understand why you automatically go there.

What Brother Lee described as “poor poor Christianity “ stands or falls on its own merits. That is the purpose of this thread. You may offer your own examples of poor poor Christianity wherever you think they exist.

Drake

Then the "rich, rich ministry" also stands or falls on its own merits. You judge a tree by its fruit. All you have proved so far is that there are childish, immature and fleshly Christians.

[Ohio]

Then the "rich, rich ministry" also stands or falls on its own merits. You judge a tree by its fruit. All you have proved so far is that there are childish, immature and fleshly Christians.

To what height does LSM's level of hypocrisy rise to when WL appoints his childish, immature and fleshly son Phillip to run his empire in the USA while he moved to Taiwan?

[ZNPaaneah]

To what height does LSM's level of hypocrisy rise to when WL appoints his childish, immature and fleshly son Phillip to run his empire in the USA while he moved to Taiwan?

Hey, with what judgement you judge you shall be judged.

[Jo S]

I cannot nor will I deny the positive life changing experiences I had in a Pentecostal Church. However, the environment lends itself to superstition and manufactured exhibitions. I will recount two that I consider to be firmly in the poor poor category.

I'd say that out of all the mainline protestant demoninations, Pentecostalism gets the most flack. Did you find that to be the case when you were involved?

[awareness]

Hey, with what judgement you judge you shall be judged.
And it also true for the judger of the judgers.

[leastofthese]

Ok. Perhaps this will clarify the purpose of this thread since you keep bringing it up.

If your pastor, prominent leader of “the LofT Church” (I don’t know the real name and don’t care to know it), believed strongly in community activities with other churches and held strong vocal convictions against Beyonce worship, soulish dance performances under the guise of worship, the 10 Articles of Anglicanism, and the teachings and practices of the Episcopalian Church that got them ostracized by the Anglican Church.... and a forum like this were opened with exmembers criticizing his teachings and convictions and lambasting his coworkers and mocked his practices of meeting with other churches for community projects and his stand against Beyonce worship and those other ungodly things...wouldn’t you be inclined to step up and offer a defense? Or would that be too much of a Pharisee for your taste?

If you can imagine that scenario then you will understand the purpose of this thread in this forum. Yet, I thought the base note was clear needing no further explanation as to purpose. We are now examining a particular belief of “my pastor”, to put it in terms more familiar to you, and I am arguing that he was on solid ground to characterize the situation in the Church as poor poor Christianity.

Hope that clarifies.

Drake

Lots of "ifs" there Drake - none of which are reality. As the Lord knows, I've been known to be a Pharisee time and again.

You are arguing "that he was on solid ground to characterize the situation in the Church as poor poor Christianity". But you still miss the entire point, it is so very simple. I'm moving along Drake.

[ZNPaaneah]

And it also true for the judger of the judgers.

Yes, and that is probably the point that Drake wants to make. But I dare not speak for him.

[Drake]

I'd say that out of all the mainline protestant demoninations, Pentecostalism gets the most flack. Did you find that to be the case when you were involved?

I did. Probably toughened me up for later in life. ;)

[Drake]

You "never heard it before"? Perhaps you don't have "ears to hear" [v.7]. :rolleyes: The "epistle" is addressed, not unto men but "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus." That's not my interpretation, that's my quotation, as Witness Lee liked to say.

hey zeek,

Give it another go. Please explain the whole letter to the church in Ephesus if it was only addressed to an angel.

Thanks,
Drake

[Drake]

Then the "rich, rich ministry" also stands or falls on its own merits. You judge a tree by its fruit. All you have proved so far is that there are childish, immature and fleshly Christians.

To be accurate ZNP. I have not proved that because I do not know what everyone in the audience might be thinking. Maybe they are sitting there wanting to leave. Or after the Youtube they stood up and condemned the practice. I don't know, none of us do.

What I have proven is that these identified works, beliefs, and practices are idolatrous, sensual, not according to the Bible, and ... poor. Well, poor poor really.

Drake

[Drake]

Lots of "ifs" there Drake - none of which are reality. As the Lord knows, I've been known to be a Pharisee time and again.

You are arguing "that he was on solid ground to characterize the situation in the Church as poor poor Christianity". But you still miss the entire point, it is so very simple. I'm moving along Drake.

Ok. Thanks for stopping by.

Drake

[Drake]

Yes, and that is probably the point that Drake wants to make. But I dare not speak for him.

Not really, ZNP. I've stated that concern in the past in other threads but it is thoroughly ironic that those who protest against critiquing works, practices, beliefs as we have done in this thread are often the most vigorous at doing the very same thing and sometimes stepping well over that line into attacking people. Yet, I know the Lord will judge all things.... me, you, every forum member and all their posts, every motive, every thought and intent... and all these groups we mentioned and their practices, good and bad, including everything and everybody related to the local churches.

That is why I try to write as if the Lord were reading each post outloud at His Bema because I think He very well might. Yet, I am at peace before the Lord. I really care about people in general and particularly in this forum. Must be because I am not inclined to seek out such beatings on a daily basis. :eek:

thanks,
Drake

[Jo S]

I did. Probably toughened me up for later in life. ;)

I believe you.

What kind of accusations did you personally encounder while there?

[Drake]

I believe you.

What kind of accusations did you personally encounder while there?

My family was "dyed-in-the-wool" Baptist. Ordained ministers in the family. So going Pentecostal caused quite a stir. Different world.

Drake

[Jo S]

My family was "dyed-in-the-wool" Baptist. Ordained ministers in the family. So going Pentecostal caused quite a stir. Different world.

Drake

Oh, so you faced family persecution more than anything else?

[Drake]

Oh, so you faced family persecution more than anything else?

Mostly yes. Some family members told to steer clear.

Drake

[Jo S]

Mostly yes. Some family members told to steer clear.

Drake

I'm curious to what their reasoning was. Do you mind sharing?

[ZNPaaneah]

Not really, ZNP. I've stated that concern in the past in other threads but it is thoroughly ironic that those who protest against critiquing works, practices, beliefs as we have done in this thread are often the most vigorous at doing the very same thing and sometimes stepping well over that line into attacking people. Yet, I know the Lord will judge all things.... me, you, every forum member and all their posts, every motive, every thought and intent... and all these groups we mentioned and their practices, good and bad, including everything and everybody related to the local churches.

That is why I try to write as if the Lord were reading each post outloud at His Bema because I think He very well might. Yet, I am at peace before the Lord. I really care about people in general and particularly in this forum. Must be because I am not inclined to seek out such beatings on a daily basis. :eek:

thanks,
Drake

This was covered years ago by 77150 -- two verses in Proverbs about this.

See the thread “Does Proverbs 26:4 contradict verse 5?"

[Drake]

I'm curious to what their reasoning was. Do you mind sharing?

Oh, the typical fears and concerns.... speaking gibberish, falling on the ground moaning and twitching, leg lengthening, rolling on the floor... my experience was fairly mild (Assembly of God) compared to what some branches of Pentecostalism grew into after I left.

https://youtu.be/_P5B5Brz_lc

Not sure if that was a passing phase or still an active version. Anyway, my experience was a milder version of that. Still, it spooked some of my family.

Drake

[awareness]

I really care about people in general and particularly in this forum. Must be because I am not inclined to seek out such beatings on a daily basis. :eek:

thanks,
Drake
You're a sweet brother Drake. And you sure can take a beating with smiles. If you represent the local church you make them look good.

But you still didn't answer my question about if I can be in the local church without liking Nee and Lee.

[Drake]

You're a sweet brother Drake. And you sure can take a beating with smiles. If you represent the local church you make them look good.

But you still didn't answer my question about if I can be in the local church without liking Nee and Lee.

Hi awareness,

I replied in #233.

Thanks
Drake

[awareness]

Hi awareness,

I replied in #233.

Thanks
Drake
Like Evangelical, I know many like this in the Lords Recovery. Those would not be conditions for meeting.
I'm sorry, I did catch that. That means the local church has changed, since the days that I got the boot for not accepting that Lee was the MOTA.

I wonder if I tried to meet in Anaheim, while denying Lee was the MOTA, and not going along with the "MOTA killing doctrine" of the Blended Brothers.

Can you and Evangelical speak for Anaheim?

[Jo S]

Oh, the typical fears and concerns.... speaking gibberish, falling on the ground moaning and twitching, leg lengthening, rolling on the floor... my experience was fairly mild (Assembly of God) compared to what some branches of Pentecostalism grew into after I left.

https://youtu.be/_P5B5Brz_lc

Not sure if that was a passing phase or still an active version. Anyway, my experience was a milder version of that. Still, it spooked some of my family.

Drake

Have you had any spiritual experiences yourself in the Pentecostal church?

Having been a part of that church, would you say those things in that video are real or acted out?

[Drake]

I'm sorry, I did catch that. That means the local church has changed, since the days that I got the boot for not accepting that Lee was the MOTA.

I wonder if I tried to meet in Anaheim, while denying Lee was the MOTA, and not going along with the "MOTA killing doctrine" of the Blended Brothers.

Can you and Evangelical speak for Anaheim?

Hi awareness,

I can’t speak for Anaheim.

In my experience there has been no change for forty years on this matter. The difference between you and I are the places we each lived. I believe you said a brother recognized your situation and hoped to facilitate your move out of there. As for me, I was never pressured to accept Brother Lee or Nee. I was already sold on Nee before I ever met with a local church for the first time. After I met with the local church I had not heard of Brother Lee for the better part of a year. That is why I say there was no pressure.

I have said it before, and say it here again, had I been in your shoes under those circumstances I do not know how it would have turned out for me.

Drake

[Drake]

Have you had any spiritual experiences yourself in the Pentecostal church?

Having been a part of that church, would you say those things in that video are real or acted out?

Jo S,

As to my experience, yes. See #185 and #248.

I’d like to believe they were acting out in that video but the truth is more disturbing. That is, i think it was real but not of God. However, I’m not a mind reader, they may be good actors. They look pretty taken up with it though. In either case, it is a clear example of poor poor Christianity. Well maybe poor poor pathetic!

Drake

[Jo S]

Jo S,

As to my experience, yes. See #185 and #248.

I’d like to believe they were acting out in that video but the truth is more disturbing. That is, i think it was real but not of God. However, I’m not a mind reader, they may be good actors. They look pretty taken up with it though. In either case, it is a clear example of poor poor Christianity. Well maybe poor poor pathetic!

Drake

I did catch those posts however I was actually asking about any specific spiritual experiences you may have had (for instance glossia) and not just a general overall experience. That is if you feel comfortable sharing.

[Drake]

I did catch those posts however I was actually asking about any specific spiritual experiences you may have had (for instance glossia) and not just a general overall experience. That is if you feel comfortable sharing.

Yes, I did experience an outward pouring of the Spirit with glossia.

[Jo S]

Yes, I did experience an outward pouring of the Spirit with glossia.

Interesting, I've only ever spoke to one other person that speaks in tongues so I'm alway curious to hear about other's experiences.

Did you speak in another known language?

[Drake]

Interesting, I've only ever spoke to one other person that speaks in tongues so I'm alway curious to hear about other's experiences.

Did you speak in another known language?

No. Not that I know. But I did not speak glossia on a daily basis.

Drake

[awareness]

I believe you said a brother recognized your situation and hoped to facilitate your move out of there.
That brother was Ron Kangas. He felt so strongly about it that he cried on the phone.

I recently saw a video of him speaking and noticed that he's picked up some Lee affectations. So I doubt very much if he'd accept me if I disliked Nee and Lee.

Back to you brother. I was wondering about the locality you're in. That makes a difference. Some localities are poor, poor, and some not.

I came in in the Santa Cruz Cal. locality. That was a wonderful locality. Then Kangas and the other elders talked me into coming to the c. in Detroit, where bro zeek came in. Except for Kangas, that turned out to be a nightmare. I really liked Ron.

Then Lee ordered a migration of 5 localities to Ft. Lauderdale, Florida (to get the Spring Breakers, that was the hot spot back then) and it was down hill from there.

Actually, in the end, it was the best thing ever, as it ended with me no longer being in the LC. Thanks Mel Porter. You done me a solid. I had no choice. I wasn't ever going to be able to take your personality as my own.

The c. in Ft. Lauderdale was an example of poor, poor, Christianity. And so was the c. in Detroit -- now's there 2 of them, one an LSM c. in Detroit, and the other is the leftover of the Kangas locality. Which one is poor? As usual, LSM decides.

And the c. in Santa Cruz? Like the c. in Ft. Lauderdale, it's no longer there. It was started by a brother that was at odds with Lee, so it had to be poor, poor, too ... as is all localities not loyal to Lee and Co.

Thanks bro Drake ...
Harold

[Ohio]

Thanks awareness.

All of our testimonies confirm the blatant hypocrisy constantly flowing out of LSM for decades. Too bad it never hit Drake in the head. One would think that LSM's own checkered history would humble them a little. At least enough to stop with the wholesale categorical prejudice aimed at all of poor, poor Christianity.

P.S. I don't blame Drake. Back in 2003 I got hit by my elder in the head badly, and I still stayed on. Later on he accused me of starving little children, and I still stayed on. A bunch of stiff-necked hardheads Drake and I are. Be thankful that you got the message years ago after Porter got in your face about taking his personality.

[zeek]

hey zeek,

Give it another go. Please explain the whole letter to the church in Ephesus if it was only addressed to an angel.

Thanks,
Drake

I don't know what you think needs an explanation. It's interesting that Ephesus, the first church to whom the one like the son of man speaks, was only about 70 miles from the island of Patmos where John says he received his vision.

It's interesting too that while it is the one like the son of man that speaking beginning in chapter 1:11, in chapter 2:7 it says that the spirit is speaking. While the son of man/spirit commends the church in many regards, he criticizes them for leaving their first love.

In Matthew 22, Mark 12 and Luke 10 Jesus teaches that the first commandment, the greatest commandment, was " Hear O Israel the Lord Our God the Lord is one and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." Since Jesus considered that the first commandment, to fall from it would be a serious fall for those who claim to be followers of Jesus.

[Trapped]

I recently saw a video of him speaking and noticed that he's picked up some Lee affectations. So I doubt very much if he'd accept me if I disliked Nee and Lee.


Minoru Chen also has that affectation!!

[UntoHim]

Well at least Minoru is Chinese so one could expect that....it's when it's coming out of an American white dude that it gets just plain weird:eek:
-

[Drake]

I don't know what you think needs an explanation. It's interesting that Ephesus, the first church to whom the one like the son of man speaks, was only about 70 miles from the island of Patmos where John says he received his vision.

It's interesting too that while it is the one like the son of man that speaking beginning in chapter 1:11, in chapter 2:7 it says that the spirit is speaking. While the son of man/spirit commends the church in many regards, he criticizes them for leaving their first love.

In Matthew 22, Mark 12 and Luke 10 Jesus teaches that the first commandment, the greatest commandment, was " Hear O Israel the Lord Our God the Lord is one and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." Since Jesus considered that the first commandment, to fall from it would be a serious fall for those who claim to be followers of Jesus.

Zeek,

When you first brought up angels as the recipient of the letter you seemed to be suggesting that the entire letter was FOR the angel. So, for instance, the condemnation and the commendation and the call to overcome ...you made it appear as if the letter was written to the angel and not the church or to the overcomers. With this understandings I said it was a new teaching. Therefore, I asked you to explain the first letter (Ephesians) in that context.

If you did not mean that the entire letter was ONLY applicable in every aspect to the angel, then I do not know why you brought it up.

What did you mean by bringing up the angel?

Drake

[zeek]

Zeek,

When you first brought up angels as the recipient of the letter you seemed to be suggesting that the entire letter was FOR the angel. So, for instance, the condemnation and the commendation and the call to overcome ...you made it appear as if the letter was written to the angel and not the church or to the overcomers. With this understandings I said it was a new teaching. Therefore, I asked you to explain the first letter (Ephesians) in that context.

If you did not mean that the entire letter was ONLY applicable in every aspect to the angel, then I do not know why you brought it up.

What did you mean by bringing up the angel?

Drake

I was pointing out that those messages were given by the one like unto the son of man to the angels for seven specific churches in first century Asia Minor. They were not addressed to you or me.

[Drake]

I was pointing out that those messages were given by the one like unto the son of man to the angels for seven specific churches in first century Asia Minor. They were not addressed to you or me.

Ah okay. So then Paul wrote to the church in Corinth, the church in Thessaloniki, the saints scattered throughout the province of Galatia, the church in Ephesus, etc etc.

By that logic they are not for us either.

Drake

[zeek]

Ah okay. So then Paul wrote to the church in Corinth, the church in Thessaloniki, the saints scattered throughout the province of Galatia, the church in Ephesus, etc etc.

By that logic they are not for us either.

Drake

They were most certainly not written to us.

[Drake]

They were most certainly not written to us.

Zeek,

Do you believe that the letters whether from a Paul or Jesus to the churches in Revelation are applicable to us today?

Drake

[Ohio]

Ah okay. So then Paul wrote to the church in Corinth, the church in Thessaloniki, the saints scattered throughout the province of Galatia, the church in Ephesus, etc etc.

By that logic they are not for us either.

Drake
I have heard this "logic" from Jewish Christians who say, "Why are you reading someone else's mail?" :rollingeyesfrown:

[zeek]

Zeek,

Do you believe that the letters whether from a Paul or Jesus to the churches in Revelation are applicable to us today?

Drake
We need a spirit of wisdom to discern what is applicable and what isn't. Look at the passage in question. Just because the church in Ephesus had tried the false apostles and found them to be liars doesn't mean that you have. Nor does the fact that they left their first love doesn't mean that you did. We must let the spirit of truth guide us into all truth. The letter kills but the spirit gives life.

[Drake]

We need a spirit of wisdom to discern what is applicable and what isn't. Look at the passage in question. Just because the church in Ephesus had tried the false apostles and found them to be liars doesn't mean that you have. Nor does the fact that they left their first love doesn't mean that you did. We must let the spirit of truth guide us into all truth. The letter kills but the spirit gives life.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up.

The stuff you select is following the spirit of truth. Following the whole revelation in the Bible is following the letter.

Got it.

Drake

[Trapped]

Well at least Minoru is Chinese so one could expect that....it's when it's coming out of an American white dude that it gets just plain weird:eek:
-

True! Although one part of it is the stretching out of a word accompanied by a shake of the voice that comes with old age that marked Lee's later speaking. Minoru is still way too young to have that shake! And in regular conversation it disappears!

[zeek]

Ok, thanks for clearing that up.

The stuff you select is following the spirit of truth. Following the whole revelation in the Bible is following the letter.

Got it.

Drake

Ha ha. No I don't think you did "get it", bro. Love the sarcasm though. ;)

[awareness]

Bro's Drake and zeek. NO disrespect, but y'all are so silly.

The whole book of Revelation wasn't intended for us, 2000 yrs up the road. Just read the very first verse. "Shortly come to pass," meant back then, not 2018.

[zeek]

Bro's Drake and zeek. NO disrespect, but y'all are so silly.

The whole book of Revelation wasn't intended for us, 2000 yrs up the road. Just read the very first verse. "Shortly come to pass," meant back then, not 2018.

"Shortly" is a relative term. If the universe is 13.8 billion years old as astronomers tell us, 2000 years is indeed a short period of time.

Call me silly, but I think Drake is trying to use the the Book of Revelation to negate the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels much as Witness Lee did. I think that's an egregious mistake.

But, I think it's a mistake to reject the Book of Revelation too. Yes, there are strange images in it that are difficult to understand. Yes, there have been many wild and even harmful interpretations of the book. But, the Spirit of Truth still speaks to me through the book as I showed in the passage from chapter 2. So I'm arguing for it.

[ZNPaaneah]

"Shortly" is a relative term. If the universe is 13.8 billion years old as astronomers tell us, 2000 years is indeed a short period of time.

Call me silly, but I think Drake is trying to use the the Book of Revelation to negate the teachings of Jesus in the Gospels much as Witness Lee did. I think that's an egregious mistake.

But, I think it's a mistake to reject the Book of Revelation too. Yes, there are strange images in it that are difficult to understand. Yes, there have been many wild and even harmful interpretations of the book. But, the Spirit of Truth still speaks to me through the book as I showed in the passage from chapter 2. So I'm arguing for it.

What teaching does it negate? Jesus tells us "judge not lest you be judged" therefore He said we would be judged. Jesus talks about wise and foolish servants. Talks about casting certain ones out into outer darkness. Talks about how it is better to have a millstone around your neck and be cast into the middle of the sea than to commit certain sins. I think you are being willfully ignorant of what the Jesus in the gospels taught.

[zeek]

What teaching does it negate? Jesus tells us "judge not lest you be judged" therefore He said we would be judged. Jesus talks about wise and foolish servants. Talks about casting certain ones out into outer darkness. Talks about how it is better to have a millstone around your neck and be cast into the middle of the sea than to commit certain sins. I think you are being willfully ignorant of what the Jesus in the gospels taught.

I didn't say the Book of Revelation negates Jesus teaching in the gospels. I said that Drake seems to want to use it for that purpose. What am I being willfully ignorant of?

[ZNPaaneah]

I didn't say the Book of Revelation negates Jesus teaching in the gospels. I said that Drake seems to want to use it for that purpose. What am I being willfully ignorant of?

Maybe I am the ignorant one. Can you point me to the post from Drake that gave you this clue?

[zeek]

Maybe I am the ignorant one. Can you point me to the post from Drake that gave you this clue?

I can't find Drake's original post. Maybe UntoHim deleted it. But I quoted it and responded to it in post number 217.

[UntoHim]

That Jesus, the one in Revelation, is judging, condemning, and hates some things and commends His followers who hate the same things. He condemns things in the churches. Is His condemning and hatred incompatible with love one another? incompatible with judge not? No, it is not. Does He intimate any concept close to "live and let live"? No, He does not. Does He condemn the worship of Beyonce under the banner of Christian worship? I'm certain He does. Appealing to the Jesus in the gospels while evaluating the matters He judges as the High Priest, matters that He explicitly states we are to heed, is missing the whole point of Revelation 2 & 3.
With Drake's permission, I'd like to steer us back to address what is quoted above. Witness Lee's "Poor, poor Christianity" was a lamentation of sorts on the general condition of the Christian protestant church, at least as he saw it during his life and ministry. I think it's safe to say he was specifically, or even especially, referring to Christianity in America. Of course Lee's modern day followers would have to be referring to the current state of affairs in contemporary Christianity.

While I do agree that the passages in Rev 3 are applicable to the matter at hand, I would vehemently disagree that Witness Lee was in any way qualified to make these same kind of judgments and condemnations of Christianity.
-

[zeek]

The problem I have with Witness Lee is not that he criticized Christianity but that he placed himself outside of it and above it.
-

[awareness]

The problem I have with Witness Lee is not that he criticized Christianity but that he placed himself outside of it and above it.
Yes, I'm poor, and a member of poor, poor, Christianity. And was a member of poor, poor, poor, Witness Lee's Christian movement.

Made up of poor poor members, Christianity can't help being poor.

But Lee managed to left his Christian movement above all the rest ; with the sleight of mind trick -- perchance like the Jedi mind trick -- of saying his movement was a new creation. And his poor, poor, followers easily fell for it.

Brother Drake, and most everyone else out here, love to base current Christianity on Revelation (interpolated, of course).

But methinks they fail to see it also applies to Lee's LSM churches :

Rev_3:17* Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

[ZNPaaneah]

I can't find Drake's original post. Maybe UntoHim deleted it. But I quoted it and responded to it in post number 217.

Drake: Now here is what I have noticed. As concerns the local churches and His assessments, judgements, commendation, condemnation, and call to individuals to overcome the shortcomings in those local churches many posters here appeal, as a counter to the Lords clear demands in the letters in Revelation, to the sayings of, as aron sums up, "a guy named Jesus" in the gospels. So "judge not lest you be judged" in the gospels is not a direct match to ""But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." revealed in Revelation. That is because the Jesus revealed in the gospels is not complete. It is part of the story. It is only when we come to Revelation that we see our High Priest, Jesus, caring for the churches in His glorified position in the heavenly tabernacle. There we see not a lowly man on Earth.

I saw this post and I don't think Drake has negated the Jesus we see in the gospels, only the interpretation "judge not lest you be judged" is somehow a condemnation of judging things like the practices of the Nicolaitans.

Even if you look at the portion of the gospels where Jesus says "judge not lest you be judged" he also says "give not that which is holy to the dogs" and "cast not your pearls before swine". Now you can interpret that literally which doesn't make any sense, otherwise you have to interpret that he is telling us to make certain judgements about "dogs" and "pigs".

Therefore I have always concluded that Jesus does not tell us not to judge, that is a very clear misunderstanding. He only tells us not to judge others. Instead He charges us to judge ourselves repeatedly, not only in the gospels but also in Revelation.

[Evangelical]

Drake: Now here is what I have noticed. As concerns the local churches and His assessments, judgements, commendation, condemnation, and call to individuals to overcome the shortcomings in those local churches many posters here appeal, as a counter to the Lords clear demands in the letters in Revelation, to the sayings of, as aron sums up, "a guy named Jesus" in the gospels. So "judge not lest you be judged" in the gospels is not a direct match to ""But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate." revealed in Revelation. That is because the Jesus revealed in the gospels is not complete. It is part of the story. It is only when we come to Revelation that we see our High Priest, Jesus, caring for the churches in His glorified position in the heavenly tabernacle. There we see not a lowly man on Earth.

I saw this post and I don't think Drake has negated the Jesus we see in the gospels, only the interpretation "judge not lest you be judged" is somehow a condemnation of judging things like the practices of the Nicolaitans.

Even if you look at the portion of the gospels where Jesus says "judge not lest you be judged" he also says "give not that which is holy to the dogs" and "cast not your pearls before swine". Now you can interpret that literally which doesn't make any sense, otherwise you have to interpret that he is telling us to make certain judgements about "dogs" and "pigs".

Therefore I have always concluded that Jesus does not tell us not to judge, that is a very clear misunderstanding. He only tells us not to judge others. Instead He charges us to judge ourselves repeatedly, not only in the gospels but also in Revelation.

Many people do not understand what Jesus was teaching because they have combined the Bible with worldly culture which is afraid to offend and afraid to be offended. Particularly, Jesus was speaking about hypocritical and self-righteous judgement as seen in Luke 6:42.

Jesus said:

How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye?

and then said

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

Many people misinterpret these verses to mean:

"Do not judge your brother because you have a plank in your eye if you judge your brother who has a speck".

It does not say that at all. It says that after addressing the hypocrisy, once you can "see clearly", then you can proceed to remove the speck from your brother's eye. This would be considered righteous judgement.

The state of society as a whole would be worse if no body could judge anybody. No parent could correct their child, no government could charge a criminal, and no one would be answerable to anybody except themselves.

Based on the Bible it seems that church should be the place where people are judged the most. It describes the church bringing people into judgement:

1 Cor 14:24 But if an unbeliever or an inquirer comes in while everyone is prophesying, they are convicted of sin and are brought under judgment by all,

1 Cor 14:25 as the secrets of their hearts are laid bare. So they will fall down and worship God, exclaiming, "God is really among you!"

Paul also said:

1 Cor 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more the things that pertain to this life?

We simply cannot reconcile a view of not judging others with these verses.

[Kevin]

What does the Bible mean that we are not to judge others?

Jesus’ command not to judge others could be the most widely quoted of His sayings, even though it is almost invariably quoted in complete disregard of its context. Here is Jesus’ statement: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” (Matthew 7:1). Many people use this verse in an attempt to silence their critics, interpreting Jesus’ meaning as “You don’t have the right to tell me I’m wrong.” Taken in isolation, Jesus’ command “Do not judge” does indeed seem to preclude all negative assessments. However, there is much more to the passage than those three words.

The Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean we cannot show discernment. Immediately after Jesus says, “Do not judge,” He says, “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs” (Matthew 7:6). A little later in the same sermon, He says, “Watch out for false prophets. . . . By their fruit you will recognize them” (verses 15–16). How are we to discern who are the “dogs” and “pigs” and “false prophets” unless we have the ability to make a judgment call on doctrines and deeds? Jesus is giving us permission to tell right from wrong.

Also, the Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean all actions are equally moral or that truth is relative. The Bible clearly teaches that truth is objective, eternal, and inseparable from God’s character. Anything that contradicts the truth is a lie—but, of course, to call something a “lie” is to pass judgment. To call adultery or murder a sin is likewise to pass judgment—but it’s also to agree with God. When Jesus said not to judge others, He did not mean that no one can identify sin for what it is, based on God’s definition of sin.

And the Bible’s command that we not judge others does not mean there should be no mechanism for dealing with sin. The Bible has a whole book entitled Judges. The judges in the Old Testament were raised up by God Himself (Judges 2:18). The modern judicial system, including its judges, is a necessary part of society. In saying, “Do not judge,” Jesus was not saying, “Anything goes.”

Elsewhere, Jesus gives a direct command to judge: “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly” (John 7:24). Here we have a clue as to the right type of judgment versus the wrong type. Taking this verse and some others, we can put together a description of the sinful type of judgment:

Superficial judgment is wrong. Passing judgment on someone based solely on appearances is sinful (John 7:24). It is foolish to jump to conclusions before investigating the facts (Proverbs 18:13). Simon the Pharisee passed judgment on a woman based on her appearance and reputation, but he could not see that the woman had been forgiven; Simon thus drew Jesus’ rebuke for his unrighteous judgment (Luke 7:36–50).

Hypocritical judgment is wrong. Jesus’ command not to judge others in Matthew 7:1 is preceded by comparisons to hypocrites (Matthew 6:2, 5, 16) and followed by a warning against hypocrisy (Matthew 7:3–5). When we point out the sin of others while we ourselves commit the same sin, we condemn ourselves (Romans 2:1).

Harsh, unforgiving judgment is wrong. We are “always to be gentle toward everyone” (Titus 3:2). It is the merciful who will be shown mercy (Matthew 5:7), and, as Jesus warned, “In the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you” (Matthew 7:2).

Self-righteous judgment is wrong. We are called to humility, and “God opposes the proud” (James 4:6). The Pharisee in Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector was confident in his own righteousness and from that proud position judged the publican; however, God sees the heart and refused to forgive the Pharisee’s sin (Luke 18:9–14).

Untrue judgment is wrong. The Bible clearly forbids bearing false witness (Proverbs 19:5). “Slander no one” (Titus 3:2).

Christians are often accused of “judging” or intolerance when they speak out against sin. But opposing sin is not wrong. Holding aloft the standard of righteousness naturally defines unrighteousness and draws the slings and arrows of those who choose sin over godliness. John the Baptist incurred the ire of Herodias when he spoke out against her adultery with Herod (Mark 6:18–19). She eventually silenced John, but she could not silence the truth (Isaiah 40:8).

Believers are warned against judging others unfairly or unrighteously, but Jesus commends “right judgment” (John 7:24, ESV). We are to be discerning (Colossians 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). We are to preach the whole counsel of God, including the Bible’s teaching on sin (Acts 20:27; 2 Timothy 4:2). We are to gently confront erring brothers or sisters in Christ (Galatians 6:1). We are to practice church discipline (Matthew 18:15–17). We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15).

Source:https://www.gotquestions.org/do-not-judge.html

[UntoHim]

The problem I have with Witness Lee is not that he criticized Christianity but that he placed himself outside of it and above it.
-
Tada! This really hits the nail on the head. Thanks zeek!
-

[leastofthese]

Tada! This really hits the nail on the head. Thanks zeek!
-

Agreed, very succinct zeek! Lee tried to point out specks in eyes,while denying the lumber in his.

[ZNPaaneah]

The problem I have with Witness Lee is not that he criticized Christianity but that he placed himself outside of it and above it.
-

This is a major contradiction with Revelation 2-3 where Jesus is the one walking in the midst of the Lampstands.

Jesus was one with the churches He rebuked. As He told the Laodiceans:

19 As many as I love, I reprove and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

[awareness]

This is a major contradiction with Revelation 2-3

19 As many as I love, I reprove and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
Except for that pesky repent thing.

[ZNPaaneah]

Except for that pesky repent thing.

Witness Lee criticizing Christianity was contrary to the Book of revelation 2-3 which Drake is using to justify the condemnation. Why? Did Witness Lee walk in the midst of Christianity or did he claim that it was Babylon and he had left it?

Did Witness Lee love the churches he was castigating as "poor, poor, Christianity". No doubt there are quotes where he says "he loves the saints but hates the system" but the reality is the Lord didn't say any of that in Rev 2-3.

This is what I meant that WL's condemnation was direct contradiction to Rev 2-3

[awareness]

Witness Lee criticizing Christianity was contrary to the Book of revelation 2-3 which Drake is using to justify the condemnation. Why? Did Witness Lee walk in the midst of Christianity or did he claim that it was Babylon and he had left it?

Did Witness Lee love the churches he was castigating as "poor, poor, Christianity". No doubt there are quotes where he says "he loves the saints but hates the system" but the reality is the Lord didn't say any of that in Rev 2-3.

This is what I meant that WL's condemnation was direct contradiction to Rev 2-3
Got it. Misread it. Thanks for explaining ...

[zeek]

Witness Lee criticizing Christianity was contrary to the Book of revelation 2-3 which Drake is using to justify the condemnation. Why? Did Witness Lee walk in the midst of Christianity or did he claim that it was Babylon and he had left it?

Did Witness Lee love the churches he was castigating as "poor, poor, Christianity". No doubt there are quotes where he says "he loves the saints but hates the system" but the reality is the Lord didn't say any of that in Rev 2-3.

This is what I meant that WL's condemnation was direct contradiction to Rev 2-3

Witness Lee identified Christianity with the religious aspect of the great Babylon in Revelation 14 - 18.

Based on God's attitude, we should have two attitudes toward Christianity. First, if we receive mercy from the Lord, we should not participate in the confused, deformed situation in Christianity. Although God does not eliminate or forbid such an improper condition, He does say, “Come out of her, My people” (Rev. 18:4). Simply stated, one who lives before God, cares for God's heart's desire, has inner light, and is willing to pay the price cannot remain in organized Christianity. I am not exhorting people to leave the denominations; this is not a matter of whether a person is in a denomination. Rather, it is a matter of avoiding mixture with the world.

Second, we are foolish if we think that we can alter the condition of today's Christianity. Such thinking assumes that we are greater and more capable than God. Some people say, “The churches are divided; let us make them one.” Twenty-five years ago I also felt this way; however, I now feel that to say such a thing would indicate that I do not know myself and that to try to do such a thing would be to try to do what God Himself will not do. To hope to correct Christianity and eliminate its mistakes is to be foolish and proud. Who can reform Christianity? We cannot do it because God is not doing it. Of course, if God wanted to do it, He would have a way. However, God's Word shows that He is not reforming Christianity. Since He is not doing it, why should we try? (Three Aspects of the Church: Book 2, The Course of the Church, Chapter 19, Section 1)

[ZNPaaneah]

Witness Lee identified Christianity with the religious aspect of the great Babylon in Revelation 14 - 18.

And the call to come out of her my people also corresponds with Rev 2-3.

1. In Laodicea Jesus is outside knocking calling on those who are in to come out and He will sup with them.
2. In Philadelphia Jesus tells the overcomers that they will "go out no more" indicating that they had gone out previously. This cannot be negative (backsliding) since they are all overcomers and it appears to be a prerequisite to being in Philadelphia.
3. This split appears in Ephesus -- some have left their first love and the consequence of not repenting for this will be that you will lose your lamp stand. Once Jesus leaves the building (Laodicea) then you have lost your lamp stand since He is the light.
4. Every church after that indicates this split becoming deeper and wider. Balaam, Jezebel, martyrs, and most of those in Sardis are not walking white.

We can see this with the Catholic church. In the Catholic church we have individual monks living in remote regions of the world in a way that expresses Jesus Christ (movie "The Mission" comes to mind). At the same time there are those Bishops conflicted by the political aspect of the Catholic church trying to please various worldly powers like Portugal, Spain, etc (again portrayed in "The Mission") and then of course you have the Vatican city which by all accounts had become a very corrupt idolatrous place.

It is possible to portray the Catholic Church as Pergamum, Thyatira, or Sardis depending on what you are looking at. You cannot describe it as Philadelphia since the idea that "they have a little strength" is absurd, nor could you characterize them as being composed of those who "have gone out" from one of the other churches. But after the rapture of the first fruits in Rev 14 it is clear that all of them will become Laodicea.

[awareness]

Witness Lee identified Christianity with the religious aspect of the great Babylon in Revelation 14 - 18.
Using symbolism in Revelation to support religious bigotry is repugnant ... and is poor, poor, poor.

In Revelation we don't believe what we see, we see what we believe.

[Ohio]

Witness Lee identified Christianity with the religious aspect of the great Babylon in Revelation 14 - 18.
That was mostly for the RCC and the denominations -- supposedly the "daughters" of the harlot.

For all the rest of the Christians out there, whether in free groups, home meetings, workplace bible studies, any old "2 or 3 gathered in My name," they were all categorically slammed as the incestuous children of a drunken Lot, born in caves near Sodom and Gomorrah.

How can any Bible-believing, Evangelical Christian with a sound mind even listen to Lee???

Did Hank Hankygraft of CRI ever read Lee's teaching on Lot and unaffiliated Christians before he flip-flopped?

[zeek]

And the call to come out of her my people also corresponds with Rev 2-3.

1. In Laodicea Jesus is outside knocking calling on those who are in to come out and He will sup with them.

That's wrong. The "one like the son of man/spirit" doesn't tell the Laodiceans to come out. He tells them to "open the door" and he "will enter".


2. In Philadelphia Jesus tells the overcomers that they will "go out no more" indicating that they had gone out previously. This cannot be negative (backsliding) since they are all overcomers and it appears to be a prerequisite to being in Philadelphia.

In context "go out no more" refers to the temple of God in which the overcomer is said to be "a pillar." There's no reference to a previous "coming out".

You said "Witness Lee criticizing Christianity was contrary to the Book of revelation 2-3" Now you seem to be saying that he Rev 2-3 support his teaching about coming out of Christianity. And your argument is not supported by the text.




3. This split appears in Ephesus -- some have left their first love and the consequence of not repenting for this will be that you will lose your lamp stand. Once Jesus leaves the building (Laodicea) then you have lost your lamp stand since He is the light.

4. Every church after that indicates this split becoming deeper and wider. Balaam, Jezebel, martyrs, and most of those in Sardis are not walking white.

We can see this with the Catholic church. In the Catholic church we have individual monks living in remote regions of the world in a way that expresses Jesus Christ (movie "The Mission" comes to mind). At the same time there are those Bishops conflicted by the political aspect of the Catholic church trying to please various worldly powers like Portugal, Spain, etc (again portrayed in "The Mission") and then of course you have the Vatican city which by all accounts had become a very corrupt idolatrous place.

It is possible to portray the Catholic Church as Pergamum, Thyatira, or Sardis depending on what you are looking at. You cannot describe it as Philadelphia since the idea that "they have a little strength" is absurd, nor could you characterize them as being composed of those who "have gone out" from one of the other churches. But after the rapture of the first fruits in Rev 14 it is clear that all of them will become Laodicea.

Nevertheless, the one like the son of man/spirit doesn't call any of those in the seven churches to "come out." Your claim that "the call to come out of her my people also corresponds with Rev 2-3" is unsupported.

[ZNPaaneah]

That's wrong. The "one like the son of man/spirit doesn't tell the Laodiceans to come out. He tells them to "open the door" and he "will enter".

"If any man" does not refer to the church in Laodicea. It refers to any individual in the church. It is fair to say that it is my interpretation of these verses, but it is not fair to say flatly that "it is wrong".

If you want you can claim that Jesus standing at the door and knocking is not referring to being outside of the church in Laodicea. But when we get to the Great Babylon the call is clearly "to come out of her my people". So if you don't think it refers to Christendom then why are the Lord's people there and why is He making the call for them to come out? You can also interpret that all 7, including Laodicea are lamp stands and it is not until chapter 14 that they have lost their lamp stand.

I really don't care where you draw the line, however, I think that Rev 2-3 provides a progression of the church becoming more and more corrupt and then more and more dead.

In context "go out no more" refers to the temple of God in which the overcomer is said to be "a pillar." There's no reference to a previous "coming out".

That interpretation creates more questions than it answers. Everyone in Philadelphia has gone out of the temple of God before but will not need to any longer. What does that mean? How are they still overcomers if they left the temple of God? Ephesians makes it clear that the church is the Temple of God, so why is the church the temple of God but this reference is not referring to the church?

You said "Witness Lee criticizing Christianity was contrary to the Book of revelation 2-3" Now you seem to be saying that he Rev 2-3 support his teaching about coming out of Christianity. And your argument is not supported by the text.

Witness Lee is not walking in the midst of the lamp stands, instead he claims to be outside of them. That is contrary to the Lord who walks in the midst. Witness Lee may have spoken the truth, but it wasn't in love. Jesus makes it clear that those He loves he rebukes. These are the two ways I pointed to indicate that he is acting contrary to Rev 2-3 and should not use these chapters to support his condemnation of Christianity.

On the other hand I agree with the interpretation that Rev 2-3 depicts a battle over the church between evil worldly forces depicted by Balaam and Jezebel. We see a progression that begins with leaving your first love and ends up with Jesus outside knocking for someone to open the door.

As for your point that my interpretation is not supported by the text, I respectfully disagree. I think that your interpretation is muddled, confused, and ignores many other relevant verses, nor do I think anything you have said annuls any part of my interpretation.

Nevertheless, the one like the son of man/spirit doesn't call any of those in the seven churches to "come out." Your claim that "the call to come out of her my people also corresponds with Rev 2-3" is unsupported.

That is an extremely narrow interpretation that obviously ignores Hebrews. I believe my interpretation is far better aligned with the entire NT revelation and I think it is extremely poor practice to base an interpretation on one verse which is what you appear to do. Peter said no verse is of its own interpretation. How much worse to do that in Revelation which is a book of figures which can be interpreted in a variety of ways and needs to be tied down with the black and white word of the NT.

[zeek]

The word church is a translation of the Greek word εκκλησια which according to Strong's Concordance is formed from the word ek, "out from and to" and kaléō, "to call" – "properly, people called out from the world and to God." Thus, the churches already consist of those who have been called out. You seem to be suggesting that the Bible teaches that God calls people out of the "called out". That would mean that God calls people out of the church or at least a church or some churches. I haven't seen that. Do you have any evidence for that claim other than what you cited below because, like I said, that seemed to be mistaken.

[ZNPaaneah]

The word church is a translation of the Greek word εκκλησια which according to Strong's Concordance is formed from the word ek, "out from and to" and kaléō, "to call" – "properly, people called out from the world and to God." Thus, the churches already consist of those who have been called out. You seem to be suggesting that the Bible teaches that God calls people out of the "called out". That would mean that God calls people out of the church or at least a church or some churches. I haven't seen that. Do you have any evidence for that claim other than what you cited below because, like I said, that seemed to be mistaken.

By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

The path of faith is to be called out. We should not assume that it is a one stop. Every single one of us in the church has been "called out". Perhaps you were born into the LRC, but I was not. I had no problem believing I had been called out of the Episcopalian church to meet with the saints. Now that I have left the LRC why is it hard to believe I got called out of that situation as well. Being called out is who we are. If you are following the Lord then He called you out, that is my testimony. If you are not following the Lord that is a different issue.

For God called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification.

It would be nice if we could "overcome" the uncleanness in the LRC. We couldn't. That may be our failure or it might be God's plan. But I was called out, not for uncleanness, but in sanctification". Therefore I have no issue with realizing I had been called out of the Episcopalian church and also out of the LRC.

13Let us therefore go forth unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach.

Not my interpretation, the black and white word. No doubt at the time of Peter meeting with the early Christians involved going forth without the camp. But today it is clear that established Christianity is the camp.

But now they desire a better country

This is the characteristic of all who are men of faith. No reason to deny it or be ashamed of it.

to the twelve tribes which are of the Dispersion

to the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion

Our Jewish brothers were called out, after having been in "God's move on Earth". Why do we think that does not apply to us?

And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church which was in Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judaea and Samaria, except the apostles.

OK, of course it does apply to us.

Both the crossing the Red Sea and Noah’s ark are types of baptism. In both cases we were called out.

It applies to everyone baptized into Christ. But when we get to the church in Philadelphia we will "go out no more"

However, if you do not understand this verse in Philadelphia this way then you have to explain what it means for overcomers to have 'gone out of the temple of God', you haven't. If it is referring to the spiritual church then why aren't they backsliders, not overcomers? Everyone seeking a better country, being called out and not knowing where they are going, the ones crossing the red sea or riding in Noah's ark, they were not backsliders but to arrive at that better city they had to go out.

[Evangelical]

I can understand this interpretation, but it means little without a solid definition of the church.

A genuine church is a local church (church in Ephesus, church in Corinth etc). Geography is the only thing that should separate believers.
Each genuine local church in Revelation symbolizes a particular condition of the genuine church. So one church in one city may be Sardis, and another may be Ephesus, it depends on their condition.
Jesus never told anyone to come out of these churches, but to overcome - "to him who overcomes". If we stand as a local church, then our job is to overcome the degradation in our church. It is not possible to leave a local church unless we change our geographical location.
But if we stand as a denomination, then the call is to come out of her. The old Reformers saw the Roman Catholic church as Babylon. Later, these reformed churches became Babylon when they became worldly and denominationalized. Babylon is the false church, or worldly church system.

Simply, it reduces to this:
If we are in a local church (a local church is one which has the locality as its identity), we overcome.
If we are in Babylon (a church which does not have locality as its identity), we leave.

Notice that I have defined Babylon not by its condition but by its identity. That is, suppose the Episcopalian church did not incorporate Beyonce into the church services, suppose they were 100% biblical to the letter. They are still Babylon because they are defined by Episcoplainism or the English Monarchy (historically), which is a worldly mixture.

In the time when Revelation was written, maybe there was a sect in Sardis for example which was more perfect than the church in Sardis. This sect called itself "Sardiscopalian", and their head was the Roman Emperor because the Roman Emperor thought he was the God-appointed head of the church in his country (just as the English monarchs thought the same and established the Church of England).
But they are not a genuine church because they are not local and do not have a lampstand. So they are Babylon.

[awareness]

A genuine church is a local church (church in Ephesus, church in Corinth etc). Geography is the only thing that should separate believers.
Brother EvanG I guess it's safe to say that you a one church one city kinda guy.

But surely you have to admit that it's not a dogma developed anywhere in the New Testament.

I guess there's no harm in zealotry for it, but it is a zealotry not found anywhere in the scriptures, or it would have been expounded clearly and precisely.

Nee and Lee made more of it than scripture does. They turned it into an extra-Biblical dogma. It's a way of saying, "We're the true church, and every other is not." It's not unifying, as I first envisioned it, but is divisive.

[ZNPaaneah]

Jesus never told anyone to come out of these churches, but to overcome - "to him who overcomes".

I never said that Jesus did tell them to come out of these churches, that was Zeek. What I said was that the verse in Philadelphia indicates that everyone in that church has had to come out previously and that this coming out did not hinder their status as overcomers.

Here is what Rev 2-3 actually does say:

Ephesus:
5Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place,

So what happens if the lamp stand is removed? You just stay there? Or do you come out?

Pergamum
even in the days of Antipas my witness, my faithful one, who was killed among you

So what happens if like John Ingalls you are forced to leave?

Thyatira
except they repent of her works

Granted there are those in Thyatira that do not know the deep things of Satan. But what do you do once you do know? You are required to "repent of her works". You seriously think that this means you stay in Thyatira?

Sardis
If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come as a thief

And what exactly is He stealing? WL's exposition of the Bible, the entire bound set?:hysterical: Come on, He is taking the precious saints. So where do they go once they have been taken?

Laodicea
Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Jesus is standing at the door of Laodicea knocking, asking for someone to open the door to Him. That tells me He is outside of the church. Just like Hebrews says, "Let us therefore go forth outside the camp unto Him".

He told them "thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked" they are blind -- He says "behold", if they weren't blind they would see that Jesus is no longer in the church but outside. They think they are rich but Jesus Christ is our riches and He is no longer there, they have been robbed and are poor. They were warned that they would lose their lamp stand and it has been fulfilled, they have lost their light.

You seem clueless to how many questions remained unanswered with your simplistic view.

Like Abraham we have been called to go out to a place where we are to receive our inheritance. If it isn't Ephesus then we keep going. If it isn't Thyatira we keep going. If it isn't Sardis we keep going. We keep going until we get to Philadelphia, only then do we hear the words that we no longer need to go out anymore.

[UntoHim]

Ok ZNP, you've taken the "called out" deal as far as it can be taken...and then some. Your last number of posts have started to stray from the general theme of the thread I believe. (so have zeek's but you egged him on, and Mr. z, God bless him, is never going to back down from a good argument) So as much as I love all this esoteric rhetoric....we have a rare opportunity here. A thread actually started by our friend Drake! Accordingly, I really want him to take the lead on this thread, even if he doesn't want to.

That Jesus, the one in Revelation, is judging, condemning, and hates some things and commends His followers who hate the same things. He condemns things in the churches. Is His condemning and hatred incompatible with love one another? incompatible with judge not? No, it is not. Does He intimate any concept close to "live and let live"? No, He does not. Does He condemn the worship of Beyonce under the banner of Christian worship? I'm certain He does. Appealing to the Jesus in the gospels while evaluating the matters He judges as the High Priest, matters that He explicitly states we are to heed, is missing the whole point of Revelation 2 & 3.

I still think this quote by Drake strikes at the heart of the matter. Also, I still would say Witness Lee was not qualified in position or person to be the judge of the entire of Christianity (whatever that term "Christianity" may mean to whomever). That being said I strongly feel that God can and does raise up faithful ones who would speak forth a strong and sharp work of correction for his people. He did it through Moses and Aaron, he did it through Joshua, he did it though so many of the major and minor prophets. Of course he certainly did it through our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ the Righteous. But this same Lord and Savior clearly passed along this baton to the original apostles and disciples - and now the baton has been passed to us - his latter day disciples.

And among the ragtag band of his latter day disciples, somebody has to stand up and speak forth the true condition of God's people. The problem is that it takes a true man of God who is without offence towards God or man. A man with clean hands in respect to God and man. One who can draw the line in the sand and not be worried about who may or may not step over it. Tall order, I understand.
-

[Evangelical]

Brother EvanG I guess it's safe to say that you a one church one city kinda guy.
But surely you have to admit that it's not a dogma developed anywhere in the New Testament.
I guess there's no harm in zealotry for it, but it is a zealotry not found anywhere in the scriptures, or it would have been expounded clearly and precisely.
Nee and Lee made more of it than scripture does. They turned it into an extra-Biblical dogma. It's a way of saying, "We're the true church, and every other is not." It's not unifying, as I first envisioned it, but is divisive.

You are confusing dividing with leaving. For example, if I get out of my car, I am leaving my car, I am not dividing from my car. And after getting out of my car, if I see another car, me leaving my car did not cause the other car to appear nor was another car created. I did not cause "another car" just because I left my car and am now looking at it. Similarly, once you leave division you are no longer in division or divisive, you have left. And you have not caused "another division" by leaving a division.

Denominations are divisions because the word denominate has the same root word as denominator in fractions which means to divide.

This is very simple to understand I don't know why so many struggle with it.

[Evangelical]

I never said that Jesus did tell them to come out of these churches, that was Zeek. What I said was that the verse in Philadelphia indicates that everyone in that church has had to come out previously and that this coming out did not hinder their status as overcomers.
.

Following your ideas, the overcomers must be the ones watching TV church on a Sunday from their lounge room .
"I don't like this denomination over here, so I'll go to this other, I am such an overcomer". Especially if you think a church is a gathering of two or three, it's so much easier to leave one small group and join another small gathering of two or three.

[byHismercy]

You are confusing dividing with leaving. For example, if I get out of my car, I am leaving my car, I am not dividing from my car. And after getting out of my car, if I see another car, me leaving my car did not cause the other car to appear nor was another car created. I did not cause "another car" just because I left my car and am now looking at it. Similarly, once you leave division you are no longer in division or divisive, you have left. And you have not caused "another division" by leaving a division.

Denominations are divisions because the word denominate has the same root word as denominator in fractions which means to divide.

This is very simple to understand I don't know why so many struggle with it.

Evangelical....you pretend the sordid practice of dividing from christians is not the modus operandi of the Lee church. I was divided from the saints in my locality by them. I would never have voluntarily shunned, cold-shouldered, or divided from them of my own accord...they were friends and I loved them. We belong together in the fellowship of Christ...this division was against my ill and choosing for the body of Christ, of Whom we were all members. The sisters I loved followed the Witness Lee program and will not see me, nor speak to me, nor my children, who loved these ones also. Th LC is the one maintaining their belief in and adherance to this practice by perpetrating division on unsuspecting believers. They actively carry this division out....the local church denominated my family...if you like that term. You cannot deny they are dividing the body of our Lord...in a purposeful and destructive way. The Lord knows all they are doing....

[Ohio]

Evangelical....you pretend the sordid practice of dividing from christians is not the modus operandi of the Lee church. I was divided from the saints in my locality by them. I would never have voluntarily shunned, cold-shouldered, or divided from them of my own accord...they were friends and I loved them. We belong together in the fellowship of Christ...this division was against my ill and choosing for the body of Christ, of Whom we were all members. The sisters I loved followed the Witness Lee program and will not see me, nor speak to me, nor my children, who loved these ones also. Th LC is the one maintaining their belief in and adherance to this practice by perpetrating division on unsuspecting believers. They actively carry this division out....the local church denominated my family...if you like that term. You cannot deny they are dividing the body of our Lord...in a purposeful and destructive way. The Lord knows all they are doing....

Using Evangelical's "car" analogy, these LC sisters drove you and your children to a lonely deserted country road, and then kicked you and your children out of the car. Then they quickly sped away all excited about meeting together in the name of Witness Lee.

In their twisted minds, they were not "dividing" from you, rather there was just not room for you in their car, because they had a "vision" for where this "car" should be going.

[ZNPaaneah]

Following your ideas, the overcomers must be the ones watching TV church on a Sunday from their lounge room .
"I don't like this denomination over here, so I'll go to this other, I am such an overcomer". Especially if you think a church is a gathering of two or three, it's so much easier to leave one small group and join another small gathering of two or three.

So the overcomers in the LRC were called out of Christianity, but if you are called to come out from the midst of the LRC then you are in a lounge chair watching church on TV?

[awareness]

So the overcomers in the LRC were called out of Christianity, but if you are called to come out from the midst of the LRC then you are in a lounge chair watching church on TV?
Where's bro Drake. Untohim charged him with this thread.

Someone tell him that I said that I'd take poor, poor, Christianity, and even the lounge chair TV church, over Lee's cult, and all the machinations that support it.

And bro EvanG, what's wrong with 2 or 3 gathering together, if the Lord is there?

[Evangelical]

So the overcomers in the LRC were called out of Christianity, but if you are called to come out from the midst of the LRC then you are in a lounge chair watching church on TV?

If you think overcoming means leaving the group then aren't those watching church TV the overcomers in the city?

[Evangelical]

Where's bro Drake. Untohim charged him with this thread.

Someone tell him that I said that I'd take poor, poor, Christianity, and even the lounge chair TV church, over Lee's cult, and all the machinations that support it.

And bro EvanG, what's wrong with 2 or 3 gathering together, if the Lord is there?

I didnt realize overcoming was so easy. If you dont like a church of 2 or 3 over there you can just leave and find another church of 2 or 3. Or you can even stay at home and overcome by doing that and join the TV church which is full of overcomers. And if there is 3000 Christians in a city I guess that means 1000 churches of 3 to choose from so overcoming must be easy.

[ZNPaaneah]

If you think overcoming means leaving the group then aren't those watching church TV the overcomers in the city?

I think overcoming is being a faithful brother, like Antipas.

[ZNPaaneah]

I didnt realize overcoming was so easy. If you dont like a church of 2 or 3 over there you can just leave and find another church of 2 or 3. Or you can even stay at home and overcome by doing that and join the TV church which is full of overcomers. And if there is 3000 Christians in a city I guess that means 1000 churches of 3 to choose from so overcoming must be easy.

What are you talking about, it is taught all the time in the LRC. "Come out of her my people" Babylon refers to Christianity. You sing songs about how sad you were in Babylon and how happy you are now that you have come out from there.

[Evangelical]

What are you talking about, it is taught all the time in the LRC. "Come out of her my people" Babylon refers to Christianity. You sing songs about how sad you were in Babylon and how happy you are now that you have come out from there.

So we are the overcomers then I guess. Or is it the people watching TV from home? Where are the overcomers?

[awareness]

I didnt realize overcoming was so easy. If you dont like a church of 2 or 3 over there you can just leave and find another church of 2 or 3. Or you can even stay at home and overcome by doing that and join the TV church which is full of overcomers. And if there is 3000 Christians in a city I guess that means 1000 churches of 3 to choose from so overcoming must be easy.
I'm just happy the Lord is there. What? You want more?

[awareness]

Babylon refers to Christianity.
Where does scripture say that?

[awareness]

Where are the overcomers?
Only the Lord knows.

[ZNPaaneah]

Where does scripture say that?

It is a type that begins with Babel, a tower built up to God with an idol on every brick.

Later, God's people are taken captive into Babylon.

The description in Revelation describes a religious aspect and a material aspect.

It is a very important type and is certainly open to interpretation, but it is not open to being ignored.

[ZNPaaneah]

"The Lord had been traded for the lawyer." (John Meyer, A Future and a Hope) -- Isn't that equivalent to "you have left your first love"?

[ZNPaaneah]

So we are the overcomers then I guess. Or is it the people watching TV from home? Where are the overcomers?

I don't understand your confusion. While in the LRC I sang songs, hymns and psalms about wandering in Babylon and then how happy I was to get the call to come out. I heard many testimonies from saints in the LRC about leaving Babylon and "come out of her my people". So why would you have an issue with overcomers "coming out" and being led by the Lord. Or do you have a double standard that this only applies to everyone else and not to us?

With what judgement you judge you shall be judged.

[awareness]

It is a very important type and is certainly open to interpretation,
But not to hyper-interpretation. Rev. 18 does not liken it to a religion, it calls it a mighty city.

[awareness]

"The Lord had been traded for the lawyer." (John Meyer, A Future and a Hope) -- Isn't that equivalent to "you have left your first love"?
Still??????? You're like a bull dog. We're not stupid. We get it. Come out, come out, come out! Harp, harp, harp. Just quote Rev. 18:4 and be done with.

[Ohio]

"The Lord had been traded for the lawyer." (John Meyer, A Future and a Hope) -- Isn't that equivalent to "you have left your first love"?

Or have become shipwrecked regarding the faith for not holding faith and a good conscience.

[ZNPaaneah]

Still??????? You're like a bull dog. We're not stupid. We get it. Come out, come out, come out! Harp, harp, harp. Just quote Rev. 18:4 and be done with.

Let me quote John Meyer first.

What will God do for people whose lives have become an exercise of tolerating one new low after another—when they are wedged in neutral, knowing the flock has become a rank religious camp, yet never finding the motivation to leave it?

…Yes, in an effort to control, slander, and conceal, they meant evil, but in an effort to lead us out of a ministry fold, “God meant it for good."

…When it was time to get out, He showed you the door. (John Meyer, A Future and a Hope)

[awareness]

Let me quote John Meyer first.

What will God do for people whose lives have become an exercise of tolerating one new low after another—when they are wedged in neutral, knowing the flock has become a rank religious camp, yet never finding the motivation to leave it?

…Yes, in an effort to control, slander, and conceal, they meant evil, but in an effort to lead us out of a ministry fold, “God meant it for good."

…When it was time to get out, He showed you the door. (John Meyer, A Future and a Hope)
I rest my case. Now quote Rev. 18:4.

[ZNPaaneah]

I rest my case. Now quote Rev. 18:4.

I can't do it, the post would be too long. Why don't you ask Drake?

[Drake]

Where's bro Drake. Untohim charged him with this thread.

Medical.


To UntoHims last post #326, I did not originally anticipate the matter of judging, judgment would be a part of this conversation but I’m glad it came up for I believe it exposes an erroneous concept about the Lord and a root cause issue. Kevin’s post #308, on judgement, I thought, was pretty compelling. Paul did say something to the effect of our needing to judge matters in this life else how can we judge in the age to come.

I believe Brother Lee’s term “poor, poor Christianity “ was an example of judgement on degradation that should be pointed out.

I believe Evangelical says it rightly that we are to overcome the degradation not come out of the local churches.

Nevertheless, I appreciate all the sober and thoughtful responses.

Drake

[A little brother]

I believe Brother Lee’s term “poor, poor Christianity “ was an example of judgement on degradation that should be pointed out.

I believe Evangelical says it rightly that we are to overcome the degradation not come out of the local churches.
Drake

Drake, do you believe then,

Some, if not all, of the posts in this forum are examples of judgement on degradation in the LC/LSM that should be pointed out
We are to overcome the degradation not come out of Christianity

?

[Drake]

Drake, do you believe then,

Some, if not all, of the posts in this forum are examples of judgement on degradation in the LC/LSM that should be pointed out
We are to overcome the degradation not come out of Christianity

?

Some, not all.

[A little brother]

Some, not all.
Praise the Lord!

[ZNPaaneah]

Still??????? You're like a bull dog. We're not stupid. We get it. Come out, come out, come out! Harp, harp, harp. Just quote Rev. 18:4 and be done with.

9 I wrote somewhat unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth and casteth them out of the church.

My point is not that you should come out, but in many instances you may be cast out, and that was of the Lord. I think it is clear that those in Philadelphia had been very grieved at having to go out previously, hence the promise that they wouldn't have to again.

[Drake]

9 I wrote somewhat unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth and casteth them out of the church.

My point is not that you should come out, but in many instances you may be cast out, and that was of the Lord. I think it is clear that those in Philadelphia had been very grieved at having to go out previously, hence the promise that they wouldn't have to again.

ZNP,

Please elaborate on the bold sentence above.

Thanks
Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

ZNP,

Please elaborate on the bold sentence above.

Thanks
Drake

12 He that overcometh, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go out thence no more:

I read this as saying that they have gone out previously and this promise suggests that not going out again is comforting, hence my conclusion that the previous experience of going out was grievous.

[awareness]

Medical.
Sorry for your medical problems. Prayers that you are okay.


I believe Brother Lee’s term “poor, poor Christianity “ was an example of judgement on degradation that should be pointed out.
As I've stated, in so many words, if humans are involved expect "degradation." Still, I understand. Christianity today earns it.

But don't you agree that Lee painted with such a wide brush that he was very, very, likely, condemning true members of the body of Christ? Not all Christianity is degraded. And that's true for Lee's, and Nee's, local church movement too.

Maybe, brother, you're not boned up on LC history, including the hidden history. Then you'd see the degradation that's been in their movement.

Shouldn't that be pointed out too? Believe me Lee knew -- and was prolly projecting -- about the degradation in his movement. Some of it he branded as "rebellions." Some of it he quarantined. And some of it he covered up. So he had no high road to be judging Christianity from. Judge not comes to mind. No one is perfect. Paul advised love.

Hope you're recovering well ... blessings brother. Thanks for responding. We/I missed you.

Harold

[awareness]

9 I wrote somewhat unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10 Therefore, if I come, I will bring to remembrance his works which he doeth, prating against us with wicked words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and them that would he forbiddeth and casteth them out of the church.

My point is not that you should come out, but in many instances you may be cast out, and that was of the Lord. I think it is clear that those in Philadelphia had been very grieved at having to go out previously, hence the promise that they wouldn't have to again.
I thought you were trying to revive the 'come-outer' movement :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come-outer

[ZNPaaneah]

I thought you were trying to revive the 'come-outer' movement :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come-outer

Well, I guess I have developed a strange doctrine that Philadelphia is composed of the "cast outers".

[awareness]

Well, I guess I have developed a strange doctrine that Philadelphia is composed of the "cast outers".
I'll say it's strange. There's no mention of casting out in the text to the church in Philadelphia.

[Ohio]

Well, I guess I have developed a strange doctrine that Philadelphia is composed of the "cast outers".
If the prophetical-historical view of the 7 churches is truly valid, then we should never consider Philadelphia to represent the Plymouth Brethren. Their checkered history of frivolous excommunications definitely disqualifies them.

Far more representative of Philadelohia would be the Moravians under Zinzendorf. They came from all over the continent as real "cast outers" fleeing untold persecutions. Once together, they definitely and actively sought to eliminate all minor points of difference that the love of God could abound in their midst. They began a 100 year prayer meeting thru which the Lord abundantly blessed with evangelists, spreading the good news over the earth.

[Drake]

If the prophetical-historical view of the 7 churches is truly valid, then we should never consider Philadelphia to represent the Plymouth Brethren. Their checkered history of frivolous excommunications definitely disqualifies them.

Far more representative of Philadelohia would be the Moravians under Zinzendorf. They came from all over the continent as real "cast outers" fleeing untold persecutions. Once together, they definitely and actively sought to eliminate all minor points of difference that the love of God could abound in their midst. They began a 100 year prayer meeting thru which the Lord abundantly blessed with evangelists, spreading the good news over the earth.
The Moravian brethren certainly fit the description of Philadelphia yet in some ways and at some point in time so do the Brethren churches. God opened up the scriptures through them to the benefit of all Christians. So perhaps the church is Philadelphia is a genre rather than only one or the other. Just thinking out loud.

Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

Interesting, so you would agree that both Laodicea and Philadelphia can be seen in the Brethren churches. Would you place the LRC as part of the Brethren movement?

[Drake]

I'll say it's strange. There's no mention of casting out in the text to the church in Philadelphia.

Awareness,

True, it is an inference. But, in the context of the whole letter ZNPs cast-outers thought has merit. For it is in Philadelphia that the Lord says it is possible to be built in as a pillar in the temple. The idea of a pillar also expresses the same idea of being built in to such an extent that leaving is no longer possible as it would cause structural damage to God’s building. The benefit of a pillar is to both God and man.

It does not mean that Philadelphia is composed of only those who have been cast out. But I think there is sufficient imagery to give hope to those who had been cast out that they have found a home in God where they can be permanently established.

Drake

[awareness]

The Moravian brethren certainly fit the description of Philadelphia yet in some ways and at some point in time so do the Brethren churches. God opened up the scriptures through them to the benefit of all Christians. So perhaps the church is Philadelphia is a genre rather than only one or the other. Just thinking out loud.

Drake
Y'all are ignoring the Quakers.

[Drake]

To UntoHims last post #326, I did not originally anticipate the matter of judging, judgment would be a part of this conversation but I’m glad it came up for I believe it exposes an erroneous concept about the Lord and a root cause issue. Kevin’s post #308, on judgement, I thought, was pretty compelling. Paul did say something to the effect of our needing to judge matters in this life else how can we judge in the age to come.

I believe Brother Lee’s term “poor, poor Christianity “ was an example of judgement on degradation that should be pointed out.

I believe Evangelical says it rightly that we are to overcome the degradation not come out of the local churches.

Nevertheless, I appreciate all the sober and thoughtful responses.

Drake

Judging requires discerning and examining. In Revelation, the Lord Jesus has eyes as flames of fire. His feet are polished brass indicating judging. As the High Priest He trims the wicks of the lamps to keep them brightly shining. He examines and He trims. No one and no church escapes His discerning judgement and His trimming.

And for those who prefer Jesus as presented in the gospels He is also the One who overturned the tables of the money changers to cleanse His Fathers house. So He is consistent both on earth and in heaven.

I have provided examples of “poor poor Christianity” that validates the term. Some have said that Brother Lee excluded the local churches from that characterization. I believe he did it in apposition but not strictly between poor poor Christianity and the local churches but between poor poor Christianity and the aspiration to be a Philadelphia, to avoid the mistakes of Protestantism division, the mistakes of the Brethren, that the local churches would aspire be all that pleases the Lord, His commendations, and avoid all His condemnations. In short, to cooperate to make ready to bring a Him back or if you prefer to be ready at His appearing.

Therefore, the greater part of Brother Lees ministry was directed inward. It would be inaccurate to give the impression that his focus was on poor poor Christianity. His ministry focus was on the local churches, to establish them and build them up. Even at that his ministry was mostly “life-studies” focused on the experience of the life of Christ but there was a fair amount of critique toward our own shortcomings, warnings, and sometimes action. This is not say that Brother Lee or his ministry did not have mistakes, shortcomings, and issues of their own. He and it did. However, I would not toss out the baby with the bath water.

Drake

[Drake]

Y'all are ignoring the Quakers.

Had some this morning for breakfast with raisins, cinnamon, and brown sugar. Yummy. ;)

I don’t know enough about them but if Philadelphia is a genre, a model, then maybe. Don’t know.

[awareness]

Had some this morning for breakfast with raisins, cinnamon, and brown sugar. Yummy. ;)

I don’t know enough about them but if Philadelphia is a genre, a model, then maybe. Don’t know.
My experience with the Quakers (Meetinghouse, not Steeple-house) is that they are by far and away the most loving Christians I've ever known.

They're opposite from the Shouters. They meet in silence - seeking The Teacher Within - Christ. Judge a tree by its fruits - it works.

That's why I relate them to the c. in Philadelphia.

Glad to see you're up to getting back at it brother.

Harold

[Drake]

Glad to see you're up to getting back at it brother.

Harold

Thank you, Harold.

I have a greater appreciation of the relief Lazarus must have felt to be back from his adventure. Though I was nowhere near death ... It felt like I was well on the way.

Drake

[leastofthese]

Therefore, the greater part of Brother Lees ministry was directed inward. It would be inaccurate to give the impression that his focus was on poor poor Christianity. His ministry focus was on the local churches, to establish them and build them up. Even at that his ministry was mostly “life-studies” focused on the experience of the life of Christ but there was a fair amount of critique toward our own shortcomings, warnings, and sometimes action. This is not say that Brother Lee or his ministry did not have mistakes, shortcomings, and issues of their own. He and it did. However, I would not toss out the baby with the bath water.

Glad you're better Drake.

To anyone worried about a family member in the LSM churches or anyone seeking information because their college student has been meeting with a group that is more about Lee than Jesus. My two cents:

This would appear to be a very rational, thought out, and appropriate comment (if I'm reading as someone who hadn't been deeply involved with the LSM churches). The problem is that this doesn't match the reality of Lee's ministry. Dozens and dozens of people on this forum, both regulars and those who stop by for a visit, have brought forth testimony that would reject the statement quoted above. As a Christ follower I desire nothing more than for others to know His Truth, experience His Grace, be filled with His Spirit, and live their life glorifying their Lord and Savior. Personally, I would do anything (move, quit my job, turn over my assets, etc.) to keep my children away from the LSM and their churches. I won't fully understand the deception and deadness of the LSM churches until I'm with the Lord, but the appropriate response is exactly the opposite of what Drake thinks - DO "throw the baby out with the bath water".

The Lord is greater than the teachings of Witness Lee - His Spirit, His Word, and His Truth does not need Witness Lee's flawed ministry.

[Ohio]

The Moravian brethren certainly fit the description of Philadelphia yet in some ways and at some point in time so do the Brethren churches. God opened up the scriptures through them to the benefit of all Christians. So perhaps the church is Philadelphia is a genre rather than only one or the other. Just thinking out loud.

Drake
Perhaps. For an adherent of Lee and Nee, however, your comment would not be accepted in certain LC circles.

Secondly, the key feature of Philadelphia was not a preponderance of teachings, but brotherly love and open doors.

[Ohio]

Therefore, the greater part of Brother Lees ministry was directed inward. It would be inaccurate to give the impression that his focus was on poor poor Christianity. His ministry focus was on the local churches, to establish them and build them up. Even at that his ministry was mostly “life-studies” focused on the experience of the life of Christ but there was a fair amount of critique toward our own shortcomings, warnings, and sometimes action. This is not say that Brother Lee or his ministry did not have mistakes, shortcomings, and issues of their own. He and it did. However, I would not toss out the baby with the bath water.

Drake
Your longsuffering and forbearance towards W. Lee and LSM is commendable. Paul says it should be made known to all.

Unfortunately none of that exists towards any Christians outside of the LCM. Even if all of Christianity was your enemy, as Lee often made it seem that way, the Lord instructs us to love these "enemies." The Blendeds took Lee's bad habits even further, (which is always the case) by making Titus Chu and the Midwest brothers your enemies.

[awareness]

Awareness,

True, it is an inference. But, in the context of the whole letter ZNPs cast-outers thought has merit. For it is in Philadelphia that the Lord says it is possible to be built in as a pillar in the temple. The idea of a pillar also expresses the same idea of being built in to such an extent that leaving is no longer possible as it would cause structural damage to God’s building. The benefit of a pillar is to both God and man.

It does not mean that Philadelphia is composed of only those who have been cast out. But I think there is sufficient imagery to give hope to those who had been cast out that they have found a home in God where they can be permanently established.

Drake
Cool imagery. Plus, I'm a casted-outer.

[awareness]

Thank you, Harold.

I have a greater appreciation of the relief Lazarus must have felt to be back from his adventure. Though I was nowhere near death ... It felt like I was well on the way.

Drake
Amen!!! Lazarus is back!!! :hurray:

Harold

[ZNPaaneah]

My experience with the Quakers (Meetinghouse, not Steeple-house) is that they are by far and away the most loving Christians I've ever known.

They're opposite from the Shouters. They meet in silence - seeking The Teacher Within - Christ. Judge a tree by its fruits - it works.

That's why I relate them to the c. in Philadelphia.

Glad to see you're up to getting back at it brother.

Harold

Perhaps Richard Nixon is the most famous Quaker.

[ZNPaaneah]

Your longsuffering anf forbearamce towards W. Lee and LSM is commendable. Paul says it should be made known to all.

Unfortunately none of that exists towards any Christians outside of the LCM. Even if all of Christianity was your enemy, as Lee often made it seem that way, the Lord instructs us to love these "enemies." The Blendeds took Lee's bad habits even further, (which is always the case) by making Titus Chu and the Midwest brothers your enemies.

Reading John Meyers book brings home the truth that the Ohio churches were treated outrageously bad by LSM.

[Drake]

Glad you're better Drake.

To anyone worried about a family member in the LSM churches or anyone seeking information because their college student has been meeting with a group that is more about Lee than Jesus. My two cents:

This would appear to be a very rational, thought out, and appropriate comment (if I'm reading as someone who hadn't been deeply involved with the LSM churches). The problem is that this doesn't match the reality of Lee's ministry. Dozens and dozens of people on this forum, both regulars and those who stop by for a visit, have brought forth testimony that would reject the statement quoted above. As a Christ follower I desire nothing more than for others to know His Truth, experience His Grace, be filled with His Spirit, and live their life glorifying their Lord and Savior. Personally, I would do anything (move, quit my job, turn over my assets, etc.) to keep my children away from the LSM and their churches. I won't fully understand the deception and deadness of the LSM churches until I'm with the Lord, but the appropriate response is exactly the opposite of what Drake thinks - DO "throw the baby out with the bath water".

The Lord is greater than the teachings of Witness Lee - His Spirit, His Word, and His Truth does not need Witness Lee's flawed ministry.

Thanks for the well wishes LofT.

Here is the problem with the rest of your post.

There is no substance. It just a “he’s wrong, listen to me because I’m right and the majority in this forum agree with me”.

I’d like to hear your reasoned argument if you have one.

Thanks
Drake

[Drake]

Your longsuffering and forbearance towards W. Lee and LSM is commendable. Paul says it should be made known to all.

Unfortunately none of that exists towards any Christians outside of the LCM. Even if all of Christianity was your enemy, as Lee often made it seem that way, the Lord instructs us to love these "enemies." The Blendeds took Lee's bad habits even further, (which is always the case) by making Titus Chu and the Midwest brothers your enemies.

Christianity, and all its branches, including the many evil things we have seen already, like Beyoncé worship, mainstream sensual dance ministries like Osteen’s church promotes, 10 Articles of the Anglican Church and the Episcopalian practices that got them ostracized by the former, tele- evangelists schemes. Etc. qualifies as a legitimate enemy. Christianity is not the Church though the genuine regenerated believers in it are. Christians are not the enemy but the religion called Christianity is.

The Lord does not instruct us to love those enemies. No sir. Not one itsy little bit. There is no scriptural basis for those things and no call to love them.

Drake

[Ohio]

Christianity, and all its branches, including the many evil things we have seen already, like Beyoncé worship, mainstream sensual dance ministries like Osteen’s church promotes, 10 Articles of the Anglican Church and the Episcopalian practices that got them ostracized by the former, tele- evangelists schemes. Etc. qualifies as a legitimate enemy. Christianity is not the Church though the genuine regenerated believers in it are. Christians are not the enemy but the religion called Christianity is.

The Lord does not instruct us to love those enemies. No sir. Not one itsy little bit. There is no scriptural basis for those things and no call to love them.

Drake


What you have written is not Christ, not Christian, and not scriptural.

And btw most of us feel the same way about your LCM. Your corrupt system led by LSM is an enemy.

But the Lord has instructed us to still love you.

[Drake]

What you have written is not Christ, not Christian, and not scriptural.

And btw most of us feel the same way about your LCM. Your corrupt system led by LSM is an enemy.

But the Lord has instructed us to still love you.

Well Ohio,

You have just demonstrated your version of hating a thing (“Local Church Movement or Living Stream Ministry”) and loving a Christian (Drake).

Although, because of the way you said it I would still bring a food tester if invited to a barbecue at your place. ;)

But seriously , You nor anyone else cannot defend those things or the organization that allows those things to flourish. Has nothing to do with God or Christ except in name only.

Drake

[awareness]

Perhaps Richard Nixon is the most famous Quaker.
And believe me, the Quakers were shamed ; the ones I know. He must have been a Steeple-house Quaker ... if a true one at all.

But point taken. Even Quakers are primates.

[awareness]

There is no substance. It just a “he’s wrong, listen to me because I’m right and the majority in this forum agree with me”.
Take out the word 'forum,' and replace it with 'local church' and that's exactly what I saw while in the local church ; except add "agree with Lee with pumping fists."

Lee would have been nothing without devoted followers. We made Lee. You bro Drake prove Lee. Without you, and we, and there would be no Lee. He would have just been another man from China, selling goods.

[awareness]

Christianity, and all its branches, including the many evil things we have seen already, like Beyoncé worship, mainstream sensual dance ministries like Osteen’s church promotes, 10 Articles of the Anglican Church and the Episcopalian practices that got them ostracized by the former, tele- evangelists schemes. Etc. qualifies as a legitimate enemy. Christianity is not the Church though the genuine regenerated believers in it are. Christians are not the enemy but the religion called Christianity is.

The Lord does not instruct us to love those enemies. No sir. Not one itsy little bit. There is no scriptural basis for those things and no call to love them.

Drake
Goodness bro Drake. You must not be feeling very good right now. Those were harsh words.

But I agree with you about the Lord, and not loving enemies. But then we have to take the Lord in the book of Revelation, not the one in the gospels.

I think the odds are better on the one in the gospels. Revelation is to obscure to trust that it represents the Lord ; specially since it contradicts the Lord in the gospels.

[UntoHim]

specially since it contradicts the Lord in the gospels.
My good friend awareness has a nasty habit of thinking that if he repeats a demonstrable falsehood enough, he can turn a lie into the truth. To say that the Lord Jesus in Revelation contradicts the Lord Jesus in the Gospels shows gross ignorance at best, and at worst is having one foot on a banana peal and the other on the edge of blasphemy. Simply stated, awareness is confusing the age of grace with the judgement that is to come. Grace came through the Lord Jesus, and judgement shall be meted out by the Lord Jesus. The Word is very clear on this, and it is also clear that this is all done under the administration and good pleasure of God the Father, in accordance with his will and in his chosen timing.

Here's some applicable examples of the Lord Jesus in the Gospels:
Then he will say to those on his left, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels"...Then he will answer them, saying, "Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me." And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matthew 25:41,45-46

The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
John 12:48

Not much time for me this morning to give some of the other myriad of Gospel passages, but trust me there are many more.

I'll leave you with this:
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.
Hebrews 13:8
-

[Drake]

Goodness bro Drake. You must not be feeling very good right now. Those were harsh words.

But I agree with you about the Lord, and not loving enemies. But then we have to take the Lord in the book of Revelation, not the one in the gospels.

I think the odds are better on the one in the gospels. Revelation is to obscure to trust that it represents the Lord ; specially since it contradicts the Lord in the gospels.


Bro awareness,

I feel terrific. Feeling my Quaker Oats. Thanks.

Harsh words? No, because ...

The Lord presents the Church to Himself glorious, not Christianity. Those are not synonymous though some here frame their argument as if they were. It’s the “ity” that is the enemy. I provided some examples of the insulting things that Christianity teaches and practices... “poor poor Christianity” is an accurate description for those things. They are a distraction to the work that the Lord is doing to present the Church to Himself without blemish.

It is the same Lord Jesus in both the gospels and the Revelation. His purpose is the same and He will accomplish what He has begun.

Drake

[Ohio]

The Lord presents the Church to Himself glorious, not Christianity. Those are not synonymous though some here frame their argument as if they were. It’s the “ity” that is the enemy.
Amen!

But it goes both ways my friend ...

No more LSMity, Leeity, DCPity, MOTAity, FTTity, Blendedity, etc. and all their lies, unrighteousness, lawsuits, and slanders. Your “ity” is the enemy.

[awareness]

Well Ohio,

You have just demonstrated your version of hating a thing (“Local Church Movement or Living Stream Ministry”) and loving a Christian (Drake).

Although, because of the way you said it I would still bring a food tester if invited to a barbecue at your place. ;)

But seriously , You nor anyone else cannot defend those things or the organization that allows those things to flourish. Has nothing to do with God or Christ except in name only.

Drake
True. There's lots of CINO's out there. But just because you go around shouting "Oh Lord Jesus" or "Jesus is Lord" does not mean you are not one.

And Beyoncé worship is no worse than Lee worship. We shouldn't worship any human primate, male or female, or inbetween, or both in one.

[Ohio]

True. There's lots of CINO's out there. But just because you go around shouting "Oh Lord Jesus" or "Jesus is Lord" does not mean you are not one.

And Beyoncé worship is no worse than Lee worship. We shouldn't worship any human primate, male or female, or inbetween, or both in one.
When Apostle Paul was faced with the Corinthians lining up behind various ministers, including himself, he clearly concluded that "No flesh should boast before God," and if anyone must boast, "Let him boast in the Lord." (I Corinthians 1.29, 31)

Those in the LCM never got this message from Paul. Firstly, when it came to Christian ministers, W. Lee was one of the greatest boasters of all time. Secondly, his blended followers learned from his bad habits and have been boasting in W. Lee for decades, both before, during, and after his death.

[awareness]

his blended followers learned from his bad habits and have been boasting in W. Lee for decades, both before, during, and after his death.
Isn't that the qualifications to be a blended brother?

[leastofthese]

Take out the word 'forum,' and replace it with 'local church' and that's exactly what I saw while in the local church ; except add "agree with Lee with pumping fists."

Lee would have been nothing without devoted followers. We made Lee. You bro Drake prove Lee. Without you, and we, and there would be no Lee. He would have just been another man from China, selling goods.

But I’m not a guy trying to start “the” church, so change the entire context too.

I’m just a regular dude. I’m not here to reason or change Drake’s mind - we’ve all seen where that ends. Witness Lee > Everything else. It’s a sad reality, in light of the truth offered by the grace of Jesus, a tragic reality. People need to know.

[Drake]

But I’m not a guy trying to start “the” church, so change the entire context too.

I’m just a regular dude. I’m not here to reason or change Drake’s mind - we’ve all seen where that ends. Witness Lee > Everything else. It’s a sad reality, in light of the truth offered by the grace of Jesus, a tragic reality. People need to know.

LofT,

Please provide evidence of your unfounded assertion above as pertains to me. Else, don’t make those false assertions.

Drake

[Ohio]

LofT,

Please provide evidence of your unfounded assertion above as pertains to me. Else, don’t make those false assertions.

Drake

Drake, what was his false assertion? That he couldn't change your mind?

[Drake]

Drake, what was his false assertion? That he couldn't change your mind?

That I (inbold) elevate Witness Lee greater than everything else.

[awareness]

That I (inbold) elevate Witness Lee greater than everything else.
Well it's apparent that you read other material other than just Lee and Nee.

You might be like me, or like I was. Maybe you get chided for reading other material. That got brothers making a cross with their fingers at me.

Cuz the other material - books - weren't in the current flow coming down from Lee.

I've been out much longer, so I don't know, but Lee has been dead for over 20 years ... so I guess there are no more new flows.

Is the only flow now just Lee, Lee, Lee? But considering your reading habits, not for you.

[Ohio]

That I (inbold) elevate Witness Lee greater than everything else.

Are you claiming to be different than the stated policies of your church?

Then you should be quarantined with the rest of us.

[Drake]

Are you claiming to be different than the stated policies of your church?

Then you should be quarantined with the rest of us.

LofT accused Drake.

He can substantiate it. Else he can cease from making false allegations.

[ZNPaaneah]

Are you claiming to be different than the stated policies of your church?

Then you should be quarantined with the rest of us.
I am not aware of any stated policies since I left in 1998, but prior to that I was not required to elevate "Witness Lee above everything else" and I knew many saints, myself included, that refused to pray read his books because they saw that as a way to put him on par with the Bible. We were never quarantined.

I think it is safe to say that in the LRC you are expected to show respect to Witness Lee as a servant of God. More than that was never required of me, though I suppose you could say it was required of the elders who signed the loyalty pledge.

I get it that in Ohio LSM acted brutishly, and perhaps in Orange county Ca, but that should not be assumed to be the same as the rest of the LRC.

I was also aware of saints who had extensive libraries of Christian books that were not "ministry books". They were discreet about it, but when you helped them move it was impossible to hide.

[Drake]

I am not aware of any stated policies since I left in 1998, but prior to that I was not required to elevate "Witness Lee above everything else" and I knew many saints, myself included, that refused to pray read his books because they saw that as a way to put him on par with the Bible. We were never quarantined.

I think it is safe to say that in the LRC you are expected to show respect to Witness Lee as a servant of God. More than that was never required of me, though I suppose you could say it was required of the elders who signed the loyalty pledge.

I get it that in Ohio LSM acted brutishly, and perhaps in Orange county Ca, but that should not be assumed to be the same as the rest of the LRC.

I was also aware of saints who had extensive libraries of Christian books that were not "ministry books". They were discreet about it, but when you helped them move it was impossible to hide.

Well said.

[Drake]

Well it's apparent that you read other material other than just Lee and Nee.

You might be like me, or like I was. Maybe you get chided for reading other material. That got brothers making a cross with their fingers at me.

Cuz the other material - books - weren't in the current flow coming down from Lee.

I've been out much longer, so I don't know, but Lee has been dead for over 20 years ... so I guess there are no more new flows.

Is the only flow now just Lee, Lee, Lee? But considering your reading habits, not for you.

If we do not read other material how would we fulfill this exhortation?

"You must learn Brethren theology, you must learn the inner life teachings, and you must know where Calvinism and Reformed theology stand. Likewise, you must know where the school of Arminianism stands. Between Calvinism and Arminianism there is the kingdom teaching concerning the reward to the faithful ones and the punishment or discipline for the unfaithful ones. After you pick up these five things, you will become qualified and very much equipped to understand the Bible. I assure you that you could never go astray. This vision will govern your interpretation of every verse of the Bible. All the notes I wrote on the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were written under the governing of these five things. Although my teachings could be wrong in some small points, they are quite safe." Elders' Training, Book 05: Fellowship Concerning the Lord's Up-to-Date Move. Witness Lee

Drake

[Ohio]

I am not aware of any stated policies since I left in 1998, but prior to that I was not required to elevate "Witness Lee above everything else" and I knew many saints, myself included, that refused to pray read his books because they saw that as a way to put him on par with the Bible. We were never quarantined.

I think it is safe to say that in the LRC you are expected to show respect to Witness Lee as a servant of God. More than that was never required of me, though I suppose you could say it was required of the elders who signed the loyalty pledge.

I get it that in Ohio LSM acted brutishly, and perhaps in Orange county Ca, but that should not be assumed to be the same as the rest of the LRC.

I was also aware of saints who had extensive libraries of Christian books that were not "ministry books". They were discreet about it, but when you helped them move it was impossible to hide.
LSM determines stated policy for the LCM, regardless of individual saints or LC's.

Individuals can have personal libraries with any books they want, but they are only permitted to promote Lee's books.

I remember one time your friend Ed Marks publicly condemned from the podium (at late 90's post-Lee Training in Anaheim) all so-called Christian "self-help" books such as from Focus on the Family as being "Chicken Soup for the Soul."

Strong message from LSM!

Quick sisters, hide your Joyce Meyer's books!!!

[Drake]

-1

Ohio,

All this talk of policy and permissions. Overstated.

Where may I read for myself this “stated policy”?

#399 is good material for a policy and it is even stated and referenced. How about that one?

Drake

[awareness]

If we do not read other material how would we fulfill this exhortation?

"You must learn Brethren theology, you must learn the inner life teachings, and you must know where Calvinism and Reformed theology stand. Likewise, you must know where the school of Arminianism stands. Between Calvinism and Arminianism there is the kingdom teaching concerning the reward to the faithful ones and the punishment or discipline for the unfaithful ones. After you pick up these five things, you will become qualified and very much equipped to understand the Bible. I assure you that you could never go astray. This vision will govern your interpretation of every verse of the Bible. All the notes I wrote on the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were written under the governing of these five things. Although my teachings could be wrong in some small points, they are quite safe." Elders' Training, Book 05: Fellowship Concerning the Lord's Up-to-Date Move. Witness Lee

Drake
So even in your reading habits you follow Lee? Doesn't that prove leastofthese right? Geez, I was defending you.

[Ohio]

-1

Ohio,

All this talk of policy and permissions. Overstated.

Where may I read for myself this “stated policy”?

#399 is good material for a policy and it is even stated with references. How about that one?

Drake
Did you miss that message by Ed Marks on Chicken Soup for the Soul?

Why don't we start there?

I've read some Brethren History, they have as many excommunications as you do -- fruit of all that excellent theology that Lee was promoting.

Read about what their Park Avenue "Blendeds" did to old beloved Doctor Cronin while Darby was on his death bed. It was almost as bad as what Lee did to John Ingalls.

[Drake]

Did you miss that message by Ed Marks on Chicken Soup for the Soul?

Why don't we start there?

I've read some Brethren History, they have as many excommunications as you do -- fruit of all that excellent theology that Lee was promoting.

Read about what their Park Avenue "Blendeds" did to old beloved Doctor Cronin while Darby was on his death bed. It was almost as bad as what Lee did to John Ingalls.

Brother Ed probably said it more than once. So what?

Brother Lee exhorted us to study Brethren theology. Not what happened on Darby deathbed.

Drake

[Ohio]

Brother Ed probably said it more than once. So what?

Brother Lee exhorted us to study Brethren theology. Not what happened on Darby deathbed.

Drake
Apparently you have become quite naive as to how the rank and file members perceive Ed Marks' public directives. Either they secretly read beneficial outside books or they obey and suffer loss. Kind of like certain errant sects refuse to see doctors.

Should we not also know the fruit of Brethren theology? What good are high peak teachings which cause us to judge all our brothers over petty nothings?

Have you read what the Park Avenue "Blendeds" did to old beloved Doctor Cronin while Darby was on his death bed? Pretty pathetic application of your foundational teaching on The Ground of Oneness.

[Kevin]

If we do not read other material how would we fulfill this exhortation?

"You must learn Brethren theology, you must learn the inner life teachings, and you must know where Calvinism and Reformed theology stand. Likewise, you must know where the school of Arminianism stands. Between Calvinism and Arminianism there is the kingdom teaching concerning the reward to the faithful ones and the punishment or discipline for the unfaithful ones. After you pick up these five things, you will become qualified and very much equipped to understand the Bible. I assure you that you could never go astray. This vision will govern your interpretation of every verse of the Bible. All the notes I wrote on the twenty-seven books of the New Testament were written under the governing of these five things. Although my teachings could be wrong in some small points, they are quite safe." Elders' Training, Book 05: Fellowship Concerning the Lord's Up-to-Date Move. Witness Lee

Drake

Calvinism and Reformed theology huh? I have debated with LCers on their misrepresentations and misconceptions on Calvinism, especially good works and rewards. ;)

Everytime they want to catch my attention on Facebook about Calvinism.

Me: Do you wanna build a strawman?🎼🎵🎶🎤

[ZNPaaneah]

Calvinism and Reformed theology huh? I have debated with LCers on their misrepresentations and misconceptions on Calvinism, especially good works and rewards. ;)

Everytime they want to catch my attention on Facebook about Calvinism.

Me: Do you wanna build a strawman?��������

I think it is very difficult to have a theology that accurately conveys all the various verses that apply to man's fall and God's plan of redemption. I agree with you that the common response of most Christians, not simply in the LRC is an oversimplification and/or misrepresentation of all the various doctrines including their own.

For example: "all have sinned" does that equate to "total depravity", if so then you have the problem of evil. Also, what happens when an infant dies?

Also, how do you speak to an unbeliever that does not believe in talking snakes? According to Paul you are to "become all things to all people" -- how would you do that?

Once saved always saved or can you lose your salvation? Why is it that before the Great White Throne judgement where men are sent to the Lake of Fire there are already two men in the Lake of Fire? What does it mean in Revelation that the Lord "will not blot your name out from the book of Life"? If it is possible to blot your name out then doesn't that mean you can lose your salvation?

So the LRC doctrine is certainly acceptable in the spectrum of Calvinism and Weslayanism, but in my opinion is still inadequate.

[Drake]

Apparently you have become quite naive as to how the rank and file members perceive Ed Marks' public directives. Either they secretly read beneficial outside books or they obey and suffer loss. Kind of like certain errant sects refuse to see doctors.

Should we not also know the fruit of Brethren theology? What good are high peak teachings which cause us to judge all our brothers over petty nothings?

Have you read what the Park Avenue "Blendeds" did to old beloved Doctor Cronin while Darby was on his death bed? Pretty pathetic application of your foundational teaching on The Ground of Oneness.

I am “rank and file” as you call it and apparently you have no grasp what we actually think or believe.

If you find nourishment in the feathers and the bones then chow down and munch away. I prefer the fine succulent meat.

Now, just to keep this near to topic.... Brother Lee exhorted us to read other writings, I would fellowship with brothers about those discoveries, and no one had a “policy” to shun or discourage me or others from doing that. However, he did not to advise us to read just anything and he would have been irresponsible not to advise us to steer clear of certain things, teachings, practices as would Brother Ed. That is not the same as a read mandate as you seem to be suggesting.

Drake

[UntoHim]

Where may I read for myself this “stated policy”?The Official, published stated policy of the Official leaders of the Local Church of Witness Lee.
http://www.lsm.org/onepublication/

#399 is good material for a policy and it is even stated and referenced. How about that one?
Since when do you, or any other rank and file member of the Local Church decide what is or what is not good material for a policy? You are not allowed to make any such decision for yourself or for others. The Blended Brothers have made this perfectly clear. LEE. LEE. LEE. (some of Nee where it confirms LEE) Witness Lee made all sorts of bogus declarations throughout his life and ministry. What you have quoted is just one of many. This quote does not begin to mitigate what the man taught and practiced on a day-in and day-out basis - That HE, and HE ALONE was the only person ON EARTH speaking as God's oracle since 1945.
-

[Drake]

The Official, published stated policy of the Official leaders of the Local Church of Witness Lee.
http://www.lsm.org/onepublication/


Since when do you, or any other rank and file member of the Local Church decide what is or what is not good material for a policy? You are not allowed to make any such decision for yourself or for others. The Blended Brothers have made this perfectly clear. LEE. LEE. LEE. (some of Nee where it confirms LEE) Witness Lee made all sorts of bogus declarations throughout his life and ministry. What you have quoted is just one of many. This quote does not begin to mitigate what the man taught and practiced on a day-in and day-out basis - That HE, and HE ALONE was the only person ON EARTH speaking as God's oracle since 1945.
-

That is the one publication policy....

.... not the one read policy.

I’ve provided what may be as succinct a read “policy” as may be found. The suggestion was that we are restricted in what we read. Frankly, LSM has every right and obligation to use their limited resources to publish whatever they believe is proper before the Lord..... and encourage us to consume it.

As far as reading, Brother Lee exhorted us to read other material as per my quote from him in 399.

What I read, I decide. Never a question that it is my decision and never a problem.

Drake

[Ohio]

That is the one publication policy ....

.... not the one read policy.


Talk about political "spin." Spoken as a true LSM wordsmith. You help me to relate to scripture where Jesus was confronting the "scribes."

Unfortunately the facts here indicate some level of deceit on your part, especially when you just endorsed Blended Ed Marks bully pulpit directives about Christian bookstores only carrying "Chicken Soup for the Soul," and the recent quarantine of Midwest brothers.

[UntoHim]

That is the one publication policy....
.... not the one read policy.

Your claim is a distinction without a difference. Show me where the Blended Brothers have clearly delineated the difference between the two. They have not delineated between the two because Witness Lee never delineated between the two. "I will publish EVERYTHING you need to read!" You shall read what I publish!" was the mantra in so many words. The One Publication declaration indicates an official continuation of this dynamic. Your claim to be an eclectic reader is commendable. Too bad that is not the official policy, much less encouraged by the leadership in the LC movement.
-

[ZNPaaneah]

Talk about political "spin." Spoken as a true LSM wordsmith. You help me to relate to scripture where Jesus was confronting the "scribes."

Unfortunately the facts here indicate some level of deceit on your part, especially when you just endorsed Blended Ed Marks bully pulpit directives about Christian bookstores only carrying "Chicken Soup for the Soul," and the recent quarantine of Midwest brothers.

The quarantines prove they will enforce the one publication policy in a way that is clearly not scriptural and abusive. Which is why I describe it as "brutish".

The disparaging remarks by Ed Marks and others shows that there are a multitude of insulting remarks spoken against all other ministries without any specific praise. They may say generic terms like "we love everyone" but in reality there isn't a single current ministry that they would lift up as a godly example other than LSM.

I experienced tremendous oversight in what was said or printed for public consumption that was associated with the Local church (we printed in the school paper).

But there is little or nothing they can do to control what you read, or what forums you visit online. Corporate living can be somewhat invasive, but other than that I don't see them having any ability to dictate terms.

However, since these other books and sources are not ever shared in the meetings (can you imagine a testimony or message that quoted other ministries in anything other than disparaging terms?) and since the other meetings can completely dominate your non work day they can control the time and influence what you speak.

[awareness]

Brother Lee exhorted us to study Brethren theology.
So the oracle has spoken?

[Ohio]

However, since these other books and sources are not ever shared in the meetings (can you imagine a testimony or message that quoted other ministries in anything other than disparaging terms?) and since the other meetings can completely dominate your non work day they can control the time and influence what you speak.
I have an old friend from my Cleveland days who was living in Denver, CO a few years back. He decided that he would only share from the scripture what the Lord anointed him to speak in the meetings. Apparently he got away with it a couple times until one sister happened to say something like, "it was so refreshing what Brother Edward shared last week."

He knew that he was now in trouble. He definitely was not sharing from other ministries, only the Bible.

Sure enough, all the elders called him into the office and asked him not to come back.

True story.


So brother Drake, please be advised that you better not share in the meetings anything you read unless it comes from Lee. You are only allowed to read your outside books in private.

[awareness]

It's ironic. When I was in because Lee mention Darby I bought the whole set of Darby's Synopsis Of The Books Of The Bible.

I WAS reading them in private. But when I mentioned it at a lunch table all the brothers condemned me for it, and were literally crossing their fingers in the shape of a cross like they were demonic.

I was flummoxed. After all, Lee spoke highly of the Brethren & Darby.

But that wasn't the worst thing that happen because of my reading habits. I was reading Lee.

And when "The Flow of Oneness" came down from Anaheim, that Lee was the apostle, oracle, and authority of God on the earth, I was using Lee's books to counter that claim.

Then the lead elder, Mel Porter, accused me of "using Lee's works to destroy Lee's works."

This didn't make any sense to me at all. To be honest, it completely blew my mind. From that point on the local church didn't make any sense to me.

Darby was bad, William Law - The Spirit of Love - was bad (another story), and even Lee was bad.

Clearly, the LC had become Laodicea. And that was before the blended brothers.

[Drake]

Your claim is a distinction without a difference. Show me where the Blended Brothers have clearly delineated the difference between the two. They have not delineated between the two because Witness Lee never delineated between the two. "I will publish EVERYTHING you need to read!" You shall read what I publish!" was the mantra in so many words. The One Publication declaration indicates an official continuation of this dynamic. Your claim to be an eclectic reader is commendable. Too bad that is not the official policy, much less encouraged by the leadership in the LC movement.
-

There is a very big massive mega difference between what a ministry chooses to publish and what the "rank and file" members of the local churches read. Both are free and independent choices. They don't need to delineate the two because the two are not the same thing.

Consider this.

If a ministry publisher does not believe they have a unique value proposition then they do not need to publish even a single pamphlet. If Brother Ed were to say something like "Yeah, go ahead and just go down to your local christian bookstore or Amazon and read whatever you fancy", then I, and I imagine a lot of folks, would have to wonder just what does he stand for then? That is what we left.

But still, your argument is flawed because it ignores what Brother Lee actually said. It only works if you selectively include the one publication, ignore what Brother Lee actually said, and then conflate publishing with reading. For I have a provided a direct exhortation, a quote, from Brother Lee that cannot be completed unless one reads a lot of other material. Furthermore, that material is not published by LSM so there is no choice but to go purchase those studies if you want to read them as he exhorted.

There is no official policy about what I read.. or for any "rank and file" member (I acknowledge exceptions) in the local churches. Even if they made such a declaration about what to read and if they were so inclined (which they are not) there is no way to enforce it. The local churches are not set up to force their members to do anything against their will. This "control, force," narrative promoted in this forum misses the real dynamic going on there.

Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

Then the lead elder, Mel Porter, accused me of "using Lee's works to destroy Lee's works."

This didn't make any sense to me at all.

yep. Enough said.

[Drake]

Talk about political "spin." Spoken as a true LSM wordsmith. You help me to relate to scripture where Jesus was confronting the "scribes."

Unfortunately the facts here indicate some level of deceit on your part, especially when you just endorsed Blended Ed Marks bully pulpit directives about Christian bookstores only carrying "Chicken Soup for the Soul," and the recent quarantine of Midwest brothers.

Oh yes Ohio, here you go again.

I'm a Pharisaical scribe and you are a scholar.

I practice deceit and you are the purveyor of truth.

I support bullies who issue directives about what to read and you are a champion of distressed souls who are being forced to read stuff they don't want to.

:rolleyes:

Ad hominem attacks.... your default argument when facts don’t support your contention.

Drake

[Drake]

But there is little or nothing they can do to control what you read, or what forums you visit online. Corporate living can be somewhat invasive, but other than that I don't see them having any ability to dictate terms

This is accurate.

Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

There is a very big massive mega difference between what a ministry publisher chooses to publish and what the "rank and file" members of the local churches read. Both are free and independent choices.

Sounds reasonable.

I do have one question though, if people are free to read other ministries using their independent choice, then at some point wouldn't you hear references to this in their testimonies?

In my recollection I could hear 10 or 20 references to WL's ministry in any meeting, yet I don't ever recall someone saying they enjoyed reading something from any other ministry in those meetings, ever.

[Kevin]

LSM’s Bridges to "Babylon" (http://www.blendedbody.com/AAA-PersonalEvaluation/The%20Lord%92s%20recovery%20is%20not%20a%20part%20 of%20Christianity.htm)

"The books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology, not to mention error in many cases. We are not part of organized Christianity." (The Ministry, March 2005)

[UntoHim]

There is a very big massive mega difference between what a ministry chooses to publish and what the "rank and file" members of the local churches read.

Mr Drake, I'm not sure what Local Church you are referring to here, but it ain't the one that is the subject of this forum...not even close. There must be some "Parallel Local Church" (cf: Parallel Universe) that you're a part of. There is absolutely NO SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE between what comes off of the LSM printing presses and what is disseminated to LC members for their daily reading, which is in turn is the subject matter covered in the Sunday morning meetings. I really shouldn't have to make such an obvious point...but for the sake of some lurkers out there with little to no experience with the Local Church, I just couldn't let your statement above stand as it.

But still, your argument is flawed because it ignores what Brother Lee actually said.
Right. Sure thing. And Witness Lee actually said "There is no official or permanent leadership in the Local Churches":hysterical::xx:. And Witness Lee SWORE UNDER OATH that "He did not consider himself to be an apostle and encouraged others not to consider him or call him an apostle" (close paraphrase) Witness Lee also told anyone who would listen "I do not control the churches! What churches to I control?" Witness Lee taught and said a lot of things. He also was infamous for contradicting himself. There is almost no significant teaching/doctrine/practice that he established without contradicting himself in a major way. As a matter of fact, he was also infamous for teaching something, then when the members practiced what he taught, and it turned out produce bad/harmful fruit, he would do an about-face and scold everyone with "why do you speak such things! Why do you practice such things!" As soon as the "flow" which he himself initiated went south, he would never take responsibility. It's just how the man rolled.
There is no official policy about what I read.. or for any "rank and file" member (I acknowledge exceptions) in the local churches.
You must be reading too many of awareness' posts. Do you actually believe that if you say something (that is patently false) enough times it will magically turn into the truth? What you need to acknowledge, my friend, is that YOU are apparently the exception to the rule, not the other way around as you claim.
-

[Drake]

-1

UntoHim,

You don’t need to take my word for it. The most credible witness against your prosecution is the very same witness you called to support your claim.

Reading the One Publication “policy” it is apparent that Brother Lee had no desire or intention to control the local churches and not a shred of evidence that he controlled what “rank and file” will be forced to read. None. Nunca. Nyet. Nada. However, he was acting responsibly in the publication of the ministry the Lord charged him with as he should be.

Your interpretation of the One Publication is an example of reading into the text things that are not there. If you disagree, then please show from the text itself. I welcome it. It is the primary witness of your choosing and it doesn’t say what you claim it does.

Everyone who cares to understand the facts in this matter should read that article. Show me where I am wrong.

Drake

[Drake]

LSM’s Bridges to "Babylon" (http://www.blendedbody.com/AAA-PersonalEvaluation/The%20Lord%92s%20recovery%20is%20not%20a%20part%20 of%20Christianity.htm)

"The books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology, not to mention error in many cases. We are not part of organized Christianity." (The Ministry, March 2005)

They are not full of superstition, superficiality, lukewarm theology, and error in many cases?

I’ve provided several examples. How many more would you like?

[Kevin]

"The books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology, not to mention error in many cases. We are not part of organized Christianity." (The Ministry, March 2005)

They are not full of superstition, superficiality, lukewarm theology, and error in many cases?

I’ve provided several examples. How many more would you like?

Any normal reader would take this as a plain statement that the books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology. I have received many rebukings not to read any other materials except LSM publications. Only blendeds or LC apologists can read but for any lay LC members are discouraged to pursue those books.

[Evangelical]

Any normal reader would take this as a plain statement that the books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology. I have received many rebukings not to read any other materials except LSM publications.

Only need to go into the medicine/nutrition of a Christian bookstore to know that.

For example, the biblical diet:

"Jesus ate fish and Daniel at vegetables, so you should just eat vegetables and fish and you'll be healed".

There is always some sort of superstitious meaning attached to the fact that it is biblical.

[awareness]

You must be reading too many of awareness' posts
-
Now, now. Even Drake admits we love the Christians but hate their systems. It's the same for him and his system.

[Drake]

Any normal reader would take this as a plain statement that the books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology. I have received many rebukings not to read any other materials except LSM publications. Only blendeds or LC apologists can read but for any lay LC members are discouraged to pursue those books.

Kevin,

Those telling you to only read LSM material are not basing that on LSM material.

Read the part of the One Pubication to them where Brother Lee emphatically says his ministry is not a basis for fellowship.

Drake

[Kevin]

Kevin,

Those telling you to only read LSM material are not basing that on LSM material.

Read the part of the One Pubication to them where Brother Lee emphatically says his ministry is not a basis for fellowship.

Drake

Nah, I already did twice, but so much for kicking me out.

four favourite books authored by John Piper:
1. Desiring God
2. When I don't desire God
3. The Pleasures of God
4. God is the Gospel

[Drake]

Now, now. Even Drake admits we love the Christians but hate their systems. It's the same for him and his system.

Awareness, forgive me using you as example below.

UntoHim,

You exercise oversight of aberrant teachings in this forum by directing them to Alternate Views. Of course that is a responsible thing to do. In One Publication Brother Lee asked the elders to use discernment and accuracy according to scriptural truth as publications produced locally can, with modern technology, be made available to all the churches. That too is responsible oversight. I’m sure you love awareness as a Christian brother, provocateur that he may be, but you don’t just allow his aberrant teachings to remain unchecked.

In other words, you don’t tell awareness what he can read but you do exercise management over what he will publish where.

Drake

[Drake]

Nah, I already did twice, but so much for kicking me out.

four favourite books authored by John Piper:
1. Desiring God
2. When I don't desire God
3. The Pleasures of God
4. God is the Gospel

Kevin,

So you are testifying that the local church where you were kicked you out because you did not want to read ministry material and the elders said doing so was necessary as a basis for fellowship. Is that what you are saying?

If so, that is totally opposite to what Brother Lee charged the elders in One Publication.

Drake

[Ohio]

Oh yes Ohio, here you go again.

I'm a Pharisaical scribe and you are a scholar.

Not a scholar, just a lifelong grunt, who gave my best years to the program, only to later learn that LSM leaders had little if any integrity.

[Kevin]

Kevin,

So you are testifying that the local church where you were kicked you out because you did not want to read ministry material and the elders said doing so was necessary as a basis for fellowship. Is that what you are saying?

Drake

My interest in reading was not to be limited by Lee's books.

[Ohio]

Any normal reader would take this as a plain statement that the books in Christianity are full of superstition, superficiality, and lukewarm theology. I have received many rebukings not to read any other materials except LSM publications. Only blendeds or LC apologists can read but for any lay LC members are discouraged to pursue those books.
Brother Drake, do you read these posts?

For you to maintain blind faith in your delusion, you must dismiss every witness like Kevin. And this is what you always do -- dismiss every account which contradicts your own narrative.
Kevin, Those telling you to only read LSM material are not basing that on LSM material.

Because LSM materials are not based on actual messages by LSM leaders. LSM materials are highly edited and sanitized lies.

[Drake]

]My interest in reading was not to be limited by Lee's books.

So, Kevin, let me get this straight.

You were reading Witness Lee's books and you wanted to supplement your learning with additional Christian material and because of that the elders kicked you out of the local church telling you that the reason was that Witness Lee's books are the basis for fellowship in the local church. You pointed out to them that the One Publication document states clearly that the ministry cannot be a basis for fellowship in the local churches but they kicked you out anyway. So they were countermanding Brother Lees direct word in the One Publication document. Is that your testimony?

Drake

[Kevin]

So, Kevin, let me get this straight.

You were reading Witness Lee's books and you wanted to supplement your learning with additional Christian material and because of that the elders kicked you out of the local church telling you that the reason was that Witness Lee's books are the basis for fellowship in the local church. You pointed out to them that the One Publication document states clearly that the ministry cannot be a basis for fellowship in the local churches but they kicked you out snyway. So they were countermanding Brother Lees direct word in the One Publication document. Is that your testimony?

Drake
It is as you say. But that's only half of the story. One black American came to our city and I opened up an extend of fellowship together with the saints in his home. The elders found out that he was not a brother in the Recovery. Really I was got into trouble afterwards.

[Ohio]

So, Kevin, let me get this straight.

You were reading Witness Lee's books and you wanted to supplement your learning with additional Christian material and because of that the elders kicked you out of the local church telling you that the reason was that Witness Lee's books are the basis for fellowship in the local church. You pointed out to them that the One Publication document states clearly that the ministry cannot be a basis for fellowship in the local churches but they kicked you out snyway. So they were countermanding Brother Lees direct word in the One Publication document. Is that your testimony?

Drake
Hi Drake, I noticed you refused to comment on my old friend's experience getting quarantined in Denver, CO for only testifying from the Bible.

I'm sure you can find a bunch of W. Lee quotes that "testifying from the Bible" is good for building up.

Why would my friend (former elder who migrated to startup numerous LC's) be then quarantined for doing what Lee had long instructed us to do?

[Drake]

Because LSM materials are not based on actual messages by LSM leaders. LSM materials are highly edited and sanitized lies.

No one here has ever provided a single substantive difference between audio and printed except as would be normal grammatical correction or removing of personal identity.

It is not even a rational argument, The power is in the enduring print, the record, not in the " nod nod wink wink we all know whar he really said. "

By saying Brother Lee said one thing but printed another allows you to make any claim you want about what he said.

Drake

[Kevin]

Hi Drake, I noticed you refused to comment on my old friend's experience getting quarantined in Denver, CO for only testifying from the Bible.

I'm sure you can find a bunch of W. Lee quotes that "testifying from the Bible" is good for building up.

Why would my friend (former elder who migrated to startup numerous LC's) be then quarantined for doing what Lee had long instructed us to do?

Maybe it's a made-up story.

[awareness]

Those telling you to only read LSM material are not basing that on LSM material.
So is that where you get your material? Cuz it sounds to me like you don't really have a cue about the goings-on at headquarters in Anaheim, or the real actual things Lee did and claimed while alive. The LSM materials omits that.

[Drake]

Hi Drake, I noticed you refused to comment on my old friend's experience getting quarantined in Denver, CO for only testifying from the Bible.

I'm sure you can find a bunch of W. Lee quotes that "testifying from the Bible" is good for building up.

Why would my friend (former elder who migrated to startup numerous LC's) be then quarantined for doing what Lee had long instructed us to do?

Ohio,

Think about this.

Just a few posts back you accuse me of deceit, being a Pharisee scribe, endorsing bully behavior. .. and then you want to know what I think of your friend's story?

You don't get to define me and I don't have to legitimize your insulting behavior. You want to engage in a discussion with me then stop the personal assaults else we can just agree to put each other on ignore.

Okay?

[Ohio]

Ohio,

Think about this.

Just a few posts back you accuse me of deceit, being a Pharisee scribe, endorsing bully behavior. .. and then you want to know what I think of your friend's story?

You don't get to define me and I don't have to legitimize your insulting behavior. You want to engage in a discussion with me then stop the personal assaults else we can just agree to put each other on ignore.

Okay?
You may not like my posts, but I have the right to challenge your statements when they are not honest and contradict the truth.

No personal assaults here. I was only reminded of how the Lord must have felt talking to the Jewish scribes and lawyers. For a guy who has made a career of critiquing Christianity, you sure are easily offended.

[Drake]

You may not like my posts, but I have the right to challenge your statements when they are not honest and contradict the truth.


No personal assaults here. I was only reminded of how the Lord must have felt talking to the Jewish scribes and lawyers. For a guy who has made a career of critiquing Christianity, you sure are easily offended.

I'm not offended. But whether I am or not is neither here nor there. What is important here is that you stop launching personal attacks and insults.

And yes, saying I am practicing deceit, equating me to a Pharisee, etc. is the quintessential examples of personal assault toward a Christian.

Drake

[Evangelical]

You may not like my posts, but I have the right to challenge your statements when they are not honest and contradict the truth.

No personal assaults here. I was only reminded of how the Lord must have felt talking to the Jewish scribes and lawyers. For a guy who has made a career of critiquing Christianity, you sure are easily offended.

Remember that when you call anyone a Pharisee, you call yourself Jesus. And I don't think you mean that in the sense of being a God-man.

[Jo S]

Remember that when you call anyone a Pharisee, you call yourself Jesus. And I don't think you mean that in the sense of being a God-man.

Perhaps then Stephen was reprimanded by Christ after his martyrdom for calling the assembly of the Sanhedrin "stiff-necked people". Whether this was a righteous judgment or an unwarranted personal attack, it got him killed.

[Ohio]

Remember that when you call anyone a Pharisee, you call yourself Jesus. And I don't think you mean that in the sense of being a God-man.

It was from W. Lee that I learned that some folks are modern day Pharisees.

So that made him Jesus?

[Ohio]

I'm not offended. But whether I am or not is neither here nor there. What is important here is that you stop launching personal attacks and insults.

And yes, saying I am practicing deceit, equating me to a Pharisee, etc. is the quintessential examples of personal assault toward a Christian.

Drake

And Mr. Drake are you not practicing a far worse deceit by characterizing all Christians as Beyonce worshippers?

Talk about the "quintessential example of personal assaults" toward all your Christian brothers!

Is this not why you even started this thread? To launch ad hominens toward your brothers and sisters?

Lee made his ministerial career of this, yet you now feign moral outrage at our little push back on this forum.

[ZNPaaneah]

Not sure what the argument is about.

Everyone agrees that Beyonce worship can be characterized as "poor".

Everyone agrees that Christians should be free to read from any ministry and extensive libraries are not a negative thing.

Everyone agrees that church leaders do need to control what is said in a meeting (or in this case a forum).

Everyone agrees that excommunicating a brother because he has non ministry books is wrong.

No one is disputing testimonies of wrong doing by various Local Churches.

So then since as far as I can tell everyone agrees about all of the main points why the bitter argument? Witness Lee said one thing in the published ministry but church leaders did something else.

We all agree that casting someone out of the church because you want the preeminence is condemned in the NT. Therefore these testimonies of this action are also examples of "poor, poor Christianity".

[Ohio]

Not sure what the argument is about.

Everyone agrees that Beyonce worship can be characterized as "poor".

Everyone agrees that Christians should be free to read from any ministry and extensive libraries are not a negative thing.

Everyone agrees that church leaders do need to control what is said in a meeting (or in this case a forum).

Everyone agrees that excommunicating a brother because he has non ministry books is wrong.

No one is disputing testimonies of wrong doing by various Local Churches.

So then since as far as I can tell everyone agrees about all of the main points why the bitter argument? Witness Lee said one thing in the published ministry but church leaders did something else.

We all agree that casting someone out of the church because you want the preeminence is condemned in the NT. Therefore these testimonies of this action are also examples of "poor, poor Christianity".
I may agree, but not "everyone" does.

[awareness]

I may agree, but not "everyone" does.
Bro Ohio, I'm sure you remember the good times in the LC. I remember them.

I discovered the LC was a cult back in the late 70s early 80s. I'm shocked that since then people have joined up, but I'm rather certain it has something to do with that enjoyment we remember.

So of course, those enjoying all that, are going to disagree with us exLCers.

I think if we just look at them like we look at those in the denominations we can love them.

I have to do that at family gatherings. Except for my local church days, it comes natural to me.

[Ohio]

Bro Ohio, I'm sure you remember the good times in the LC. I remember them.

I discovered the LC was a cult back in the late 70s early 80s. I'm shocked that since then people have joined up, but I'm rather certain it has something to do with that enjoyment we remember.

I am only convinced that Mel Porter in Miami was cultic.

[UntoHim]

ZNP if you're not sure what the argument's all about then you haven't been following this thread very well.

The thread starter, Drake, gave us a proposition that Witness Lee was correct in his assessment of "poor, poor Christianity". Drake's contention that Lee's criticisms were not meant for all of Christianity falls flat in the face of the facts.

The rest of your "everyone agrees" are just your personal opinions. Maybe you and Drake agree about those things, but I doubt there are many others here that would agree with everything you posted.

Beyonce worship? Really? As much as I find the kind of "service" that was held at that so-called church appalling, it wasn't about worshiping Beyonce. Anyone who took a couple of minutes to read that article would know this.
Everyone agrees that Christians should be free to read from any ministry and extensive libraries are not a negative thing.
Sure. But this forum is about the teachings, practices and history of the Local Church of Witness Lee, and the Christians in the LC are not free to read from any ministry, and very few have extensive libraries (unless you want to consider all those green Life-Study books an extensive library!)
Everyone agrees that church leaders do need to control what is said in a meeting
Sure. But the rub comes in with just HOW the church leaders control what is said. To proclaim that "all the members can function" and then require them to regurgitate by rote or reading is not "functioning", it is being a "Witness Lee tape recorder".
Everyone agrees that excommunicating a brother because he has non ministry books is wrong.Where do you come up with this stuff? No one has said any such thing ever happened. If you are aware of such a case please give specifics.
Witness Lee said one thing in the published ministry but church leaders did something else.
Actually Witness Lee said one thing and then did something else. In fact, this was pretty much his modus operandi throughout his entire ministry. As far as "church leaders" are concerned, the Blended Brothers are running the show almost exactly as Witness Lee did. They have truly fulfilled their mission of being "brother Lee's continuation". What have they taught that Witness Lee did not teach? What have they practiced that Witness Lee did not practice? I have made this challenge for anyone to show any significant difference between Lee and the Blendeds. Nobody has taken me up. And nobody can because there is no significant difference.

-

[Jo S]

Has anyone else found it ironic that the song sung in that church service was Destiny's Child "Survivor" which is quite literally a song about overcoming?

Perhaps the LC has more in common with Beyonce then they realize.:lurk5:

[ZNPaaneah]

ZNP if you're not sure what the argument's all about then you haven't been following this thread very well.

The thread starter, Drake, gave us a proposition that Witness Lee was correct in his assessment of "poor, poor Christianity". Drake's contention that Lee's criticisms were not meant for all of Christianity falls flat in the face of the facts.

I realize that is a point worthy of debate, but not the acrimony of the recent posts.

The rest of your "everyone agrees" are just your personal opinions. Maybe you and Drake agree about those things, but I doubt there are many others here that would agree with everything you posted.

Beyonce worship? Really? As much as I find the kind of "service" that was held at that so-called church appalling, it wasn't about worshiping Beyonce. Anyone who took a couple of minutes to read that article would know this.

I didn't say everyone agreed it was "Beyonce worship" only that everyone agrees that Beyonce worship is reasonably called "poor". Again, this is a point of debate if you wish. But certainly not a reason for the acrimony.

Sure. But this forum is about the teachings, practices and history of the Local Church of Witness Lee, and the Christians in the LC are not free to read from any ministry, and very few have extensive libraries (unless you want to consider all those green Life-Study books an extensive library!)

So then the debate is not over whether or not you are free to own and read the books, since everyone agrees you are, but rather whether or not this is the actual practice in the LRC. Instead of the acrimony Drake's posts prove that the practice in the LRC is judged and condemned by the written ministry in the LRC.

Actually Witness Lee said one thing and then did something else. In fact, this was pretty much his modus operandi throughout his entire ministry. As far as "church leaders" are concerned, the Blended Brothers are running the show almost exactly as Witness Lee did. They have truly fulfilled their mission of being "brother Lee's continuation". What have they taught that Witness Lee did not teach? What have they practiced that Witness Lee did not practice? I have made this challenge for anyone to show any significant difference between Lee and the Blendeds. Nobody has taken me up. And nobody can because there is no significant difference.

-

So then Drake's quotes prove that "with what judgement you judge you shall be judged". The practice in the LRC violates what they say in print. With their own words the Lord will judge them and the judgement will probably be "poor, poor Christianity".

[ZNPaaneah]

Where do you come up with this stuff? No one has said any such thing ever happened. If you are aware of such a case please give specifics.
-

Post #426 -- later Kevin said that this post was half the story and that his fellowship with a non member of the LRC was the other half, taken together it was the basis for him to be disciplined.

Drake also read this as Kevin being kicked out for reading non ministry books post #436.

[ZNPaaneah]

No one here has ever provided a single substantive difference between audio and printed except as would be normal grammatical correction or removing of personal identity.

It is not even a rational argument, The power is in the enduring print, the record, not in the " nod nod wink wink we all know whar he really said. "

By saying Brother Lee said one thing but printed another allows you to make any claim you want about what he said.

Drake

Sorry that I am not able to provide a substantive difference between audio and print since I don't have any audio tapes and have no interest in listening to them.

However, I was involved in the editorial process and would say that it was much more extensive than normal grammatical correction.

There was a three step process to it that I was aware of. First level involved college graduate volunteers like myself whose job was to read through and find obvious spelling and grammatical errors. The second step went to those that were English teachers or to fully polish the English. However they were instructed not to change the meaning.

Then the third step went to brothers like Ben M (before he was forced out) and others. These brothers were there to remove things that were not for public consumption. This was after the lawsuits began so there was a legal component to this.

I suppose you could characterize this as the kind of editing a legal department does to avoid litigation, so in that sense it was no different from much of the world. But to my perception it allowed Witness Lee to say some of his most outrageous quotes from the podium without fear that they would show up in print.

[Ohio]

Hi Drake, I noticed you refused to comment on my old friend's experience getting quarantined in Denver, CO for only testifying from the Bible.

I'm sure you can find a bunch of W. Lee quotes that "testifying from the Bible" is good for building up.

Why would my friend (former elder who migrated to startup numerous LC's) be then quarantined for doing what Lee had long instructed us to do?

Maybe it's a made-up story.


This story is totally legit. Happened at LC in Denver, CO about ten years ago.

[Ohio]

No one here has ever provided a single substantive difference between audio and printed except as would be normal grammatical correction or removing of personal identity.

It is not even a rational argument, The power is in the enduring print, the record, not in the " nod nod wink wink we all know whar he really said. "

By saying Brother Lee said one thing but printed another allows you to make any claim you want about what he said.

Drake
Hogwash.

Nell recently posted a story about this.

Nigel Tomes even wrote a paper about how LSM sanitized their radio broadcasts. (http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=537)

[awareness]

I am only convinced that Mel Porter in Miami was cultic.
Believe me, Mel Porter wasn't that smart. He brought it from Anaheim, at an elders meeting. The message was that Lee, in so many words, was the MOTA. It wasn't just a local matter, as all of us out here know very well, including you. It was setting Lee up as the local church personality cult leader.

So the LC cult was not just in Miami.

[ZNPaaneah]

This story is totally legit. Happened at LC in Denver, CO about ten years ago.

To go back to your question, I think this is clearly a case of the elders wanting preeminence in the church. As long as they were the stewards of all things WL, then they had it.

This is an example of something the NT condemns and no one is defending it.

The basic premise of this thread is that this one example with Beyonce is enough to justify WL's claim of "poor, poor, Christianity". Based on that logic this one example is enough to condemn the LRC.

[Drake]

Hogwash.

Nell recently posted a story about this.

Nigel Tomes even wrote a paper about how LSM sanitized their radio broadcasts. (http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vBulletin/showthread.php?t=537)

Thank you for calling my attention to that Tomes article. How did I miss it? Glad to weigh in on it over there.

[Drake]

These brothers were there to remove things that were not for public consumption. This was after the lawsuits began so there was a legal component to this.

I suppose you could characterize this as the kind of editing a legal department does to avoid litigation, so in that sense it was no different from much of the world. But to my perception it allowed Witness Lee to say some of his most outrageous quotes from the podium without fear that they would show up in print.

Sure, ZNP.

There was the legal, grammatical, removal of personal references. Etc. also, Brother Lee’s delivery style was, as you know, interactive and anecdotal relating borrowing examples and experiences both present and past. Much of that does not transfer well to print. Yet, there was nothing substantive lost between what was spoken and what was printed. I know because having attended the Life studies live twice a year for the better part of twenty years, followed by listening to the cassette tapes WHILE following along with the printed pamphlet I never noticed even one difference of theological import.

So, in spite of claims in this forums that it occurred not one shred of evidence had ever been produced. It never will because it did not happen. The purpose of those false claims are clear... they simply want to put their own words in Brother Lee’s mouth.

Drake

[Ohio]

Perhaps C.S. Lewis said it best to summarize this thread ...

I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.

[aron]

So, in spite of claims in this forums that it occurred not one shred of evidence had ever been produced. It never will because it did not happen. The purpose of those false claims are clear... they simply want to put their own words in Brother Lee’s mouth.

Did you ever hear Lee say that there were 15 to 20 million shouters affiliated with the LSM on mainland China? I did. And I remember the noise from the crowd when we heard it: it was designed for effect. You coudn't say the man didn't know how to work a room.

Did it ever get printed? I doubt it. Then deniability was still there and Chris Wilde could say 10 years later, "No connection whatever" with the mainland shouters. Poof - 15 million people vanished.

Or Kangas saying, "Sometimes I think the only thing worse than a rebellious brother is a spiritual sister." There's headline material. Take that, Dora Yu! But it got buried.

Or "don't waste your time" with the windows & orphans. That was the FTTA trainer speaking to us. Not sure if that made it into the HWMR.

And we already know - This wasn't your experience. But it was ours.

[leastofthese]

So, in spite of claims in this forums that it occurred not one shred of evidence had ever been produced. It never will because it did not happen. The purpose of those false claims are clear... they simply want to put their own words in Brother Lee’s mouth.

This is an interesting argument. I've read conversations along these lines for over a year on this forum. Person after person has posted their experiences as evidence. I have listened to Witness Lee first hand on a recording speaking about the ministry's finances with Sal (I also asked Drake and others to please let me know if that recording was doctored or a fake). I am a completely impartial party - nothing to gain or lose from these claims being true or false - but from what I've read here, why wouldn't I believe them to be true?

[Drake]

This is an interesting argument. I've read conversations along these lines for over a year on this forum. Person after person has posted their experiences as evidence. I have listened to Witness Lee first hand on a recording speaking about the ministry's finances with Sal (I also asked Drake and others to please let me know if that recording was doctored or a fake). I am a completely impartial party - nothing to gain or lose from these claims being true or false - but from what I've read here, why wouldn't I believe them to be true?

You would. Always. You have already declared that.

Your example has zero to do with my argument.

Drake

[leastofthese]

You would. Always. You have already declared that.
Your example has zero to do with my argument.

Drake you are loved by God.

[Drake]

Drake you are loved by God.

Yes, I am.

Greatly loved by Him....... and.... did I mention...

.... your example has zero to do with my argument?

Drake

[leastofthese]

Yes, I am.

Greatly loved by Him....... and.... did I mention...

.... your example has zero to do with my argument?

Drake

Brother Drake,

You act like this is a game or contest, but this is real stuff man. Is this your forum persona or the real Drake?

[aron]

Did you ever hear Lee say that there were 15 to 20 million shouters affiliated with the LSM on mainland China? I did. And I remember the noise from the crowd when we heard it: it was designed for effect.When Lee told us from the podium of the millions of shouters in China, it was after a recitation of the numbers of LC saints worldwide. China was presented last, and it was exponentially above any other (maybe Taiwan had several tens of thousands). There was a genuine stir from the assembly - it had the intended effect. Very dramatic.

But Lee the showman was also an accountant who knew to keep two sets of books, and only one got published. (btw this wasn't restricted to Lee alone - it had a cultural element. Lee disciple Dong Yu Lan followed the LC programme to a 't' and ran "Estancia Arvore Da Vida" as his own family business. When of the fund-raising 'co-workers' asked to see the books thy were told it was a "black box" and got tongue-lashed).

Did it ever get printed? I doubt it. Then deniability was still an option and Chris Wilde could say 10 years later, "No connection whatever" with the mainland shouters.If you control what is written then you control the narrative. Then you can be as provocative as you want, and appear to be the model of rectitude and sobriety in the 'official' version. Lee loved to get a rise out of the crowd. But he also loved to appear the sober, balanced Bible teacher. So he kept two sets of books.

Or Kangas saying, "Sometimes I think the only thing worse than a rebellious brother is a spiritual sister." There's headline material. Take that, Dora Yu! But it got buried.
Not only Dora Yu - what happens to Elizabeth Fischbacher? Or Margaret Barber? Or Mary McDonald? Or Jessie Penn-Lewis? Or Madame Guyon? Or Ruth Lee? Or Peace Wang? What would happen if the word spoken by RK from the dias got published? The whole edifice might crumble!

No; better to keep two sets of books. Much less trouble that way.

[aron]

Brother Drake,

You act like this is a game or contest, but this is real stuff man. Is this your forum persona or the real Drake?

Drake's 'argument' is to present an a priori conclusion - no variance with the LSM between the spoken word from the podium and what was eventually published. Any evidences to the contrary are dismissed out of hand.

This m.o. is not limited to the LC; it's unfortunately rather widespread in primitivist, 'revelatory' fundamentalist religion. The 'oracle' got a revelation and any and all to the contrary, scripture included, be damned. Whatever happened to "test all things - prove the good"?

For example, Witness Lee the supposed oracle of God is held to be "closely following the teachings of the apostles" until someone points out that Paul was eager to help the poor, e.g., Galatians 2:10 (cf Romans 15 & 2 Cor 8). You know what Evangelical said? That was Paul's thing, not Lee's. Everyone has their own gig, see.

As I said at the beginning of this thread: "Christianity" (if, as I take it, one means the mass in toto of confessing believers in Christ) is indeed arguably "poor" (if one wants to find lacks, failures, ignorance, hypocrisy etc). But by the exact same measure you measure others, you are also measured. And by this same measure the Living Stream Ministry of Witness Lee is impoverished to the extreme. A desert, a ruin. A wasteland, of owls and cormorants. Like Ninevah, Ashkelon, Moab, Ammon before.

[Evangelical]

Drake's 'argument' is to present an a priori conclusion - no variance with the LSM between the spoken word from the podium and what was eventually published. Any evidences to the contrary are dismissed out of hand.

This m.o. is not limited to the LC; it's unfortunately rather widespread in primitivist, 'revelatory' fundamentalist religion. The 'oracle' got a revelation and any and all to the contrary, scripture included, be damned. Whatever happened to "test all things - prove the good"?

For example, Witness Lee the supposed oracle of God is held to be "closely following the teachings of the apostles" until someone points out that Paul was eager to help the poor, e.g., Galatians 2:10 (cf Romans 15 & 2 Cor 8). You know what Evangelical said? That was Paul's thing, not Lee's. Everyone has their own gig, see.

As I said at the beginning of this thread: "Christianity" (if, as I take it, one means the mass in toto of confessing believers in Christ) is indeed arguably "poor" (if one wants to find lacks, failures, ignorance, hypocrisy etc). But by the exact same measure you measure others, you are also measured. And by this same measure the Living Stream Ministry of Witness Lee is impoverished to the extreme. A desert, a ruin. A wasteland, of owls and cormorants. Like Ninevah, Ashkelon, Moab, Ammon before.

The Lord will judge you with the same measure you judge Lee. So I hope your home is full of widows and orphans that you are taking care of. I would wager that any persons good deeds in the recovery are just as much or more than anyone else. I know some giving up to 90 percent of their disposable income. But spiritual condition is more important and the recovery is about the more important matters.

[Drake]

Drake's 'argument' is to present an a priori conclusion - no variance with the LSM between the spoken word from the podium and what was eventually published. Any evidences to the contrary are dismissed out of hand.

Well, .... ummm... how about because no evidence has been produced?

Look, it was my practice for several decades and the end of the last century (oh my but I feel old now) to read the printed Life studies WHILE listening to the cassettes of the original speaking. I followed along with both eyes and ears simultaneously. Other than grammatical construct, removing the names of people mentioned, etc. there was never any substantive difference between what I read and what I heard.

My challenge still stands. Produce evidence showing substantive differences in teaching with what he spoke in ministry and what was published from that speaking.

Besides, Brother Lees opposers oppose him because of the things he said and published.

Drake

[Drake]

Brother Drake,

You act like this is a game or contest, but this is real stuff man. Is this your forum persona or the real Drake?

Could not be more serious LofT.

However, we must also recognize that this form of communication is deficient as it lacks both voice intonation and facial expressions.... two important signals to understand what a person is trying to convey. So, thanks for that question.

Drake

[awareness]

Could not be more serious LofT.

However, we must also recognize that this form of communication is deficient as it lacks both voice intonation and facial expressions.... two important signals to understand what a person is trying to convey. So, thanks for that question.

Drake
Even tho I don't always agree with you I've always thought of you as authentic. It's one thing I like about you. I also like that you are on this forum, and willing to take the inevitable beating.

[aron]

The Lord will judge you with the same measure you judge Lee.
I suppose if I'd claimed the ministry of the age, your comment might have some merit. As it is, Lee got the biggest tombstone in the cemetery. The Lord put it so well, "Truly I say to you, he got his reward."

[Ohio]

I suppose if I'd claimed the ministry of the age, your comment might have some merit. As it is, Lee got the biggest tombstone in the cemetery. The Lord put it so well, "Truly I say to you, he got his reward."
That was until they made a new cemetery for him at Grace Terrace Memorial Assoc. (http://www.graceterrace.com/about-us/) Cost the saints $Millions.

As soon as Lee passed, folks at LSM got "the vision" of another money-making scheme to bilk the faithful. Read this:
In 1997, a group of Christians filled with commission and burden came together for discussion, preparing to build a solemn cemetery for Christians, in order to develop saints’ eternal knowledge of the biblical truths. Before long, a scenic terrace with the area of 2.5 acres was chosen. This terrace was hidden in the rolling mountainside in Rose Hills Memorial Park (undeveloped at that time), Southern California. Immediately the organizers established a permanent institution—Grace Terrace Memorial Association. They also entrusted a cemetery designing group, which was the most talented and renowned one in the United States, to plan out a unique design, in which the exalted principle of Christian faith was the content. As a result, a Christian cemetery, that is beautiful, fabulous, and rich in spiritual heritage, was established.These are the kinds of teachings that really dupe the saints:
Genesis 23 is a window through which we can see the New Jerusalem. The New Jerusalem is not found in this chapter, but it can be seen through it. This chapter is like a telescope: through it we can see the eternal tabernacle that is far off in the future.

Verse 6 speaks of the “choice” sepulcher, referring to the best sepulcher. When the Lord Jesus was on earth, He did not have a good dwelling place. But after He died, He was put into a very good burying place. He lived in a poor home, but He was buried in a rich tomb. In the Bible, this is a principle. We should not live in a good home, but we should prepare the best tomb. Abraham paid more attention to the sepulcher than to the tent.Can we ever spend too much on a grave site? What if it's near W. Lee?

What if it's also next to the "Fo Guang Shan Buddhist Memorial?"

[Unregistered]

I wanted to post this quote here, because it illustrates clearly what the LR teaching it’s members, or probably what it doesn’t speaks even louder.


The Pentecostal movement is a reaction to the dead doctrines and worship in traditional Christianity. Most of the sermons that people listen to in Christianity are simple to understand, such as, loving one's neighbor as oneself, being humble and patient, honoring one's parents, wives obeying their husbands, husbands loving their wives, and raising children.


This quote although is referring to Pentecostal movement, is an attitude and beliefs system that is promoted and practiced by the LR. What these people call dead, is what almost every book of the Bible calls believers to live by. WL was above that, or so he thought. No wonder none of those things are present in the movement that’s solely based on his blind and self serving lies.

[UntoHim]

Thanks for the quote and your counter. Could you please take a second and give the reference information? Thanks!
-

[Unregistered]

Thanks for the quote and your counter. Could you please take a second and give the reference information? Thanks!
-

This is from:
CWWL, 1970, Vol 3.
“The Church Life in Spirit and Truthfulness” Ch 11.

[ACuriousFellow]

Witness Lee has certainly said many interesting things regarding "The Lord's Recovery" and "Christianity/Christendom."

Here's a list of fascinating quotes I've compiled from the "ministry" of The Lord's Recovery. (https://thecuriousfellows.wordpress.com/2023/11/15/select-quotes-from-witness-lee-regarding-the-lords-recovery-christendom-christianity-and-the-overcomers/) I hope this provides some more sufficient background information and points of reference for those who happen upon this thread. It is by no means exhaustive, but I believe it will prove useful to curious minds.

[PriestlyScribe]

Here's a list of fascinating quotes I've compiled from the "ministry" of The Lord's Recovery.

Thanks ACF for providing that list of quotes.
This one (below) stood out to me like a sore thumb:
https://blendedbody.com/WitnessLee/EarlyVsLateWL/GoldenCupOfTLR.png

I would propose that TLR's so-called "Fully Interpreted Word Of God" meets the all the characteristics of that Golden Cup which Lee complained about!

P.S.

[Ohio]

I would propose that TLR's so-called "Fully Interpreted Word Of God" meets the all the characteristics of that Golden Cup which Lee complained about!

P.S.
Hi P.S.

Living in the "Great Lakes Region" most of us NEVER elevated the "Interpreted Word" above the Word of God, but obviously we were the outliers. When do you think this happened to the rest of TLR?

[Ohio]

Witness Lee has certainly said many interesting things regarding "The Lord's Recovery" and "Christianity/Christendom."

Here's a list of fascinating quotes I've compiled from the "ministry" of The Lord's Recovery. (https://thecuriousfellows.wordpress.com/2023/11/15/select-quotes-from-witness-lee-regarding-the-lords-recovery-christendom-christianity-and-the-overcomers/) I hope this provides some more sufficient background information and points of reference for those who happen upon this thread. It is by no means exhaustive, but I believe it will prove useful to curious minds.
WL had a way of negatively characterizing the whole of Protestant Christianity based on a few bad actors. Then he would positively characterize the whole of the Recovery based on a few exciting tests/testimonies of young people. Classic spin characteristic of Politicians.

I definitely would distinguish Protestant "Christianity" from Roman Catholic "Christendom." Remember Paul's word, "In a great house are both gold and silver vessels unto honor and wooden and earthen vessels unto dishonor." (2 Tm 2.20)

We should not mince words, however, since John's Apocalypse definitely characterizes Roman Catholicism as "BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." (Rev 17.5)