Originally Posted by Indiana

Coming Clean

I think it is amazing that government officials in Washington D.C. lie about their criminal acts and wrongdoings and dig in when they are caught; instead of confessing. But they have a team of people who are in coordination to cover them and to cover-up for them, if needed.

We wouldn’t allow such a government in the church life, right? But we do have a system of church government that tells us not to care for right and wrong; but to look away from the mistakes of a leader (deputy authority) and respect “God’s government” instead. In so doing, a system of authority and submission began, which can be traced back to the resumption of Watchman Nee’s ministry in 1948 that followed his 6-year suspension.

Actually, these two systems work similarly to cover the backs of leaders and to cover-up for them, unrighteously, when needed.

Originally Posted by aron

Steve Isitt attempted to eliminate the double bind. One day in a meeting, Witness Lee said, "We need to reconcile with those who have left. We need to find out what happened, to heal their wounds, to restore fellowship." So Steve tried to do this, and yet to remain "one" with LSM-affiliated church leadership. Eventually he found out that these were incompatible goals.

Originally Posted by Indiana

"These rumors are in the nature of myths (1 Tim. 1:4; 4:7; 2 Tim. 4:4), that is, narrative stories without factual basis. Some of these rumors were long ago disproven but still circulate today.”

http://www.lordsrecovery.us/Shepherd...troduction.pdf

Originally Posted by aron

So Steve tried to do this, and yet to remain "one" with LSM-affiliated church leadership. Eventually he found out that these were incompatible goals.

Originally Posted by Gubei

I have met some leading brothers in S.Korea, and realized they now knew something wrong, but they just want to keep silent or keep distance away from the leadership position rather than speaking out what they have felt... partially understandable, but uncomfortable to me. May the Lord have his way in this country. Amen.

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

but I suppose if WL had spent more time, publicly repenting and exposing details, then Resurrection Life could have had a way to really come forth. But alas, that's not the way it went . . .

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I don't think it was easy for bro Lee to make that confession and it has been mentioned many times on here. I think that as far as the LC should be concerned, it should be the main focus of their attention.That is, the one they promote so very strenuously had something critically important to say at the end of his life. But it seems they largely ignore that speaking and have chosen to go on as if WL had never said what he said. To acknowledge it would take a real dying to self and humbling before the Lord, which appears is not present.

We can only conjecture, but I suppose if WL had spent more time, publicly repenting and exposing details, then Resurrection Life could have had a way to really come forth. But alas, that's not the way it went . . .

Originally Posted by Indiana

After being driven to the point of questioning seriously the legitimacy of the “Lord’s New Move,” planned and orchestrated in the “local churches” by Witness Lee, I began to research his claims about the causes of turmoil and division, and also compared his new move to the blueprint he had brought to the United States. At the end of his ministry in 1997, he admitted that he had made "mistakes" concerning staying on the right path of receiving believers; both those "among us" and those outside the local churches. He said he had repented before the Lord and was "sorry to the whole Body of Christ," yet he wasn’t specific about who or what he was referring to but did convey that those "mistakes" were very important and should be researched. He had really under-stated the matter, as history shows. It would have been at a high price for him to tell the truth regarding his "mistakes" and the major causes of division and the persons, places, and details involved. He left this heavy burden first to the leaders, and also to all the saints - that we might learn!

I became pressed in my church life experience to know our history, learning it from men of conscience who paid the price of offering transparent fellowship in the church; but a price was paid also by those who did not become men of conscience, and are suffering the consequences today, as are the churches!

https://lordsrecovery.us/MiscAccusationsCH1.pdf

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/...Stronghold.pdf

To have fellowship with brothers in Christ in the Spirit and in brotherly love is a priceless heritage of ours.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Recent LSM Speaking

“Here I need to point out a real heavy concern I have. And this supported again by the word of Brother Lee’s ministry. So many saints stop here with the conscience. And how they end up is not being God-men, just being good people caring for right and wrong according to the conscience, dealing with the conscience.

"John Ingalls could tell us, he told us openly in his last meeting in Anaheim, when he was resigning and also attacking Brother Lee in 18 or 19 ways. He said, ‘I’m at peace with myself, I’m at peace with God, I’m at peace with all of you.’

“But he was obsessed. That’s a false peace, I remember him giving a message with a certain kind of gesture, “I was deeealling [deep voice] with my conscience. Dealing, straining gnats. He was straining gnats to "swallow a camel.” RK Dec 2018

Ron is saying that john, in his 18 points' fellowship was just "straining gnats," small things, to "swallow a camel, Brother Lee.

None of the points were small, but vitally important as the church had marched far off the track and away from the vision that John, Brother Lee, Samuel Chang and others began with and stood for when they "took the ground" in Los Angeles.

John was not attacking, but giving transparent fellowship about the real situation in Anaheim and according to the original vision, for the sake of the church he helped spawn in the beginning.

Originally Posted by Indiana

https://www.amazon.com/Time-Turmoil-.../dp/150564013X


AMAZON:




Dear Admin,

I wonder if we could block this for now and see if fellowship opens up with Ron and LSM.

I have free links to the book that I will be setting up. No need to buy.

Steve Isitt

Originally Posted by Igzy

What is troubling about Ron Kangas' attitude is how dismissive he is of John's conscience. If there is one thing the Bible teaches us it is to be careful of and respectful of others' consciences. But Kangas' dismissive attitude shows no respect whatsoever for John.

Kangas is upset because John rocked Kangas' little LR world. Kangas was offended that John would ever suggest publicly that the LR was not all Kangas thought it was. Well, guess what, Ron? God gave John the right to exercise his conscience and make life decisions about the LR, and it is not your place to call him "obsessed" just because you can't deal with that.

Again we encounter the LR problem. They cannot bear to admit they are just another Christian group, which people can choose in good conscience to join or leave. No! They have to be IT. And anyone who acts otherwise will get kicked on the way out, kicked years after they leave, and even kicked years after they have passed from this earth.

Kangas is not qualified to park cars, let alone lead or minister. And I know. I've parked cars.

Originally Posted by Ohio

John Ingall's was reigning in life when he spoke those 16 Points to the church in Anaheim, and his conscience supported him.

Originally Posted by Ohio

John Ingall's was reigning in life when he spoke those 16 Points to the church in Anaheim, and his conscience supported him.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Ron Kangas:

1:17.48 In God’s complete salvation, there is the issue of reigning in life. Reigning in life. And the reality of the Kingdom is a matter of reigning in life, according to Romans 5:17 and 21. THIS IS TO BE BROUGHT UNDER THE DIRECT RULE OF GOD, so that you are living in His presence, shining, this is His shining. Your intuition and your fellowship are very keen and your conscience supports you.1:18.32

Originally Posted by Igzy

The irony of that is the only thing that can save these guys and the ones they are misleading is an encounter with their conscience.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Originally Posted by Igzy

Logic asks, What is the fail-safe of such a belief system? Can you just excuse anything your movement does and say you were acting as "God-men?" Seriously?

Kangas is scary crazy.

This is one more example why this movement is dangerous and needs to be exposed, and why this board is here.

"Hate what is evil; hold tightly to what is good!" Romans 12:9

"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea." Mark 9:42

"Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees!" Isaiah 10:1

“Woe to you, blind guides!" Matthew 23:16

Originally Posted by Indiana

“Here I need to point out a real heavy concern I have. And this supported again by the word of Brother Lee’s ministry. So many saints stop here with the conscience. And how they end up is not being God-men, just being good people caring for right and wrong according to the conscience, dealing with the conscience.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Can you believe that Ron Kangas is actually denigrating a good conscience as supposedly a hindrance to becoming something called a "god-man?" How low can LSM go?

Originally Posted by Indiana

Originally Posted by Indiana

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...46&postcount=1

All were on board in this thread as Brother Lee received a full review from many and varied sources.

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://www.Lordsrecovery.us/Obeisanc...toDivision.pdf


The governing vision of two of the five elders in Anaheim 1987-1989

When Witness Lee had begun the “Lord's new move” in the local churches, you, Minoru, were to come under a severe test as an elder in Anaheim. Would you stand one with the elders in your locality according to the vision that governed the church from the beginning; or would you capitulate to a new and broadened view introduced to the churches under the leadership of Witness Lee?

Originally Posted by OhLordJesus

Is there anything wrong that descendants of Witness Lee are entitled to receive royalty payments from LSM? He founded LSM and all published materials are his Intellectual Property including the methodology of FTT. He reserved the rights to distribute the income earned from all the sale proceeding to his next generations.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I would think that Tim Graver is Ray Graver's son?
-

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://www.Lordsrecovery.us/Obeisanc...toDivision.pdf


When Witness Lee had begun the “Lord's new move” in the local churches, you, Minoru, were to come under a severe test as an elder in Anaheim. Would you stand one with the elders in your locality according to the vision that governed the church from the beginning; or would you capitulate to a new and broadened view introduced to the churches under the leadership of Witness Lee?

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

Exactly!

The whole death v. life thing is another handy tool of deception used by Witness Lee and now LSM employees to divert attention away from their own behavior and history. "Pay attention to life not right and wrong" etc are catch-all phrases designed to stop those with legit concerns in their tracks. It gives those doing wrong or covering up wrong a license to do whatever they want without recourse.

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://www.Lordsrecovery.us/Obeisanc...toDivision.pdf


The governing vision of two of the five elders in Anaheim 1987-1989

When Witness Lee had begun the “Lord's new move” in the local churches, Minoru was to come under a severe test as an elder in Anaheim. Would you stand one with the elders in your locality according to the vision that governed the church from the beginning; or would you capitulate to a new and broadened view introduced to the churches under the leadership of Witness Lee?

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://www.Lordsrecovery.us/Obeisanc...toDivision.pdf


The governing vision of two of the five elders in Anaheim 1987-1989

When Witness Lee had begun the “Lord's new move” in the local churches, you, Minoru, were to come under a severe test as an elder in Anaheim. Would you stand one with the elders in your locality according to the vision that governed the church from the beginning; or would you capitulate to a new and broadened view introduced to the churches under the leadership of Witness Lee?

Originally Posted by Ohio

I heard (~AD 2004) that, after Lee passed, some of the Blendeds in Anaheim felt GG was "too legalistic," and asked him to leave, at which point many were "happy" when he was gone.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hi, is it appropriate here to ask concerning what happened to Gene Gruhler, why he left Anaheim? And what happened to Dan Towle, that he left Fullerton and is apparently not meeting?

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/...dsrecovery.pdf

Today is August 2nd 2018, and on August 2nd 2000 I began to write about concerns that I had in the local churches. I did not know that from writing down my concerns I was going to be set apart from the fellowship of the church when my writing came to fruition.

But I wrote from my heart and to this day 18 years later I still prefer to address the truth and oppose works of darkness. There is still the Earth to possess and man has yet to possess it in the Name of Christ and for the fulfilling of God's eternal purpose. In other words, His kingdom has not yet come in with His righteous rule and reign over every people, tribe, city, and nation.

"The local churches" purport to represent God's move in His administration over all the Earth, yet they still believe they can do so without ever exposing their works of darkness and the devastating effects of their deviation from Christ and the church.

It is good for leaders like Ron Kangas to examine themselves, as W. Lee did in the end and reported so to them, opaquely. There has "never" been a thorough public repentance by the leadership in "the local churches" since the Shanghai Christian Assembly in 1957 did so, with regional support. As a reminder, Ron Kangas has "never" repented for one thing that he has spoken or done, and neither did brother Lee specifically repent for anything, publicly, that had meaningful impact in the Body. In other words the things that caused much strife, heartache, and division are still covered up.

"Democracy dies in darkness" said David Nunes of the U. S.government And, so does the church. There is no transparency among the leaders of "the local churches". And there is also “no” rule and reign.

A glimmer of transparency appeared with Minoru Chen, who toward the end of the late eighties turmoil confessed that the promotions and divisive activities of LSM and Philip Lee were wrong and he repented for his part in the heavy promotions of a man, his ministry, and ministry office. In doing this before the church in Anaheim, he was agreeing with his fellow elders (who just gave 16 points of concern over the direction of the churches) We have a very superficial leadership today that captains the same movement that caused a huge cloud of darkness and division in the late 80s.
The books of darkness came out and the lies of both commission and omission by clouded leaders ruled the night.

Witness Lee: "The book, The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion includes my spoken messages, but its content was edited afterward by me personally. I have carefully checked all the facts and have tried my best to be accurate, to be without any mistakes. In addition to an account of the beginning and development of the whole period of the rebellion, the content of that book includes personal testimonies from over thirty brothers. Therefore, concerning this storm, I have spoken the clarifying and concluding word that I needed to speak. I have absolutely no more interest in talking about this matter. This matter now stops here. I hope that you brothers who have come to attend this conference will not mention it anymore. It does not deserve any more mentioning." (Message given 4/18/90 from The Mysteries of God's New Testament Economy page 11).


Like I said, books of darkness ruled the night. (Contributing also to such works were authors Ron Kangas and Andrew Yu in their books.)


DEVIATING FROM THE PATH IN THE LORD'S RECOVERY.

http://makingstraightthewayofthelord...dsRecovery.pdf

Bill Mallon and his wife visited me in 2005 and over lunch he suggested that I write a narrative about my experience in the local churches. I suggested instead that I write about the other side of the story to The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, and to do so point by point. He agreed that this idea also would be good. And I began that day to uncover the works of darkness over a two year period, Jan 2005 to Jan 2007, with deep interest in "repentance, restoration, and revival among the leaders and the saints in the local churches." OR whatever would work toward the truth and God's glory and gain. A long-time current local church brother edited this writing 5 times before it went onto the forum.

This is a book of transparency and none of the blending brothers refute it publicly.

Originally Posted by Indiana

"Watchman Nee writes, "We must take notice of one condition that prevailed after the Roman Catholic Church came into being. We know how the Roman Church was filled with heresy, idols, filthiness, and sins. Why did no brothers or sisters in the church stand up to deal with the situation for eleven hundred years? Could it be that no brothers or sisters had seen the heresies? Could it be that they had not seen the idols? Could it be that they had not seen the filthy sins?

In the eleven hundred years following the fourth century, there were definitely some who saw the heresies, idols, and filthy sins, but not one dared to deal with them! They feared that once they dealt with these things, they would immediately break the “unity.” “The church is one,” they said. “If we begin to deal with the idols, the church will be divided.” They felt that the sin of worshipping idols was great, but the sin of ruining the unity was even greater. Therefore, even though they rejected the worship of idols themselves, they did not speak out. They feared that speaking out might ruin the unity. They knew of the heresies and they knew of the idols; moreover, they hated the heresies and they hated the idols. But even more, they hated to destroy the unity. Therefore, they simply avoided the heresies and idols; they dared not evoke any word, message, or action that might ruin the unity. For a period of one thousand one hundred years no one made any move; they continued to keep the unity of the church." (Further Talks on the Church Life, ch 4, online, Ministrybooks.org)


In the Wake of the New Way

http://lordsrecovery.us/uploads/3/4/...ayabridged.pdf

Originally Posted by Trapped

. . .there are a lot of indoctrinated saints with eyes of policemen out there. It is very easy to figure out who owns a site, where that saint lives, who the elders are in that locality, and to contact them about the "rogue" content (content that is otherwise fully acceptable to any non-Nee/Lee Christian). And abracadabra!! The site is then pulled down!

Originally Posted by Truth

By the way, what happened to the one publication edict? I've noticed that everyone is blogging these days. News songs are being written and posted on the internet. I doubt all of them are LSM approved. Not sure if the one publication can really be carried out. It was possible before the internet era. But now with thousands of members blogging, writing on forums, posting music, messages, etc..., it is impossible to police the situation. I don't think this one publication thing is going to last for very long. What do you guys think?

Originally Posted by I Was Also There

Steve, I think you should start with the beginning.

Please tell all about your book, "In the Wake of the New Way", which is really why your were shunned and banned. They still have not forgiven you for exposing a terrible trend they had allowed to grow.

Originally Posted by aron

One thing I appreciate about Steve's writing is it insistently places the focus on real human beings and the consequences of our behaviours on our relations with others. Instead of getting lost in disembodied abstractions like "the ground" or "the ministry" or "the church", he keeps coming back to what actual people have done and continue to do. I think it's important to keep that focus as he has. Nothing wrong with abstractions per se, but they must be continually rooted in a commonly agreed-upon physical reality of people, places, actions.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Originally Posted by Indiana

Galatians 2

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he stood condemned. 12 For before some came from James, he continually ate with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to shrink back and separate himself, fearing those of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was carried away in their hypocrisy.14 But when I saw that they were not walking in a straightforward way in relation to the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all,....


http://www.twoturmoils.com/SeeingDig...yintheBody.pdf

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us

My letter to the leaders that began this thread has never been answered by them. Now that letter is on a website called leadersofthelordsrecovery.us and includes reports of their history through a transparent lense.

Originally Posted by Terry

I disagree Ohio. The blendeds have no problem in receiving.....conditionally that is. Certain brothers need to know in order to be received, they need to submit.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Are you serious?

These Blendeds have never "examined themselves" regarding receiving believers.

On the contrary, they have rejected all of Brazil and all of the Great Lakes Area.

It's obvious why they expelled Titus Chu. He would have gone to Anaheim and "drained the swamp."

Originally Posted by Indiana

Brother Lee soberly encouraged a blending core of brothers, in the last year of his life, to examine themselves, and their history of receiving believers. Has it been according to Christ alone?

Originally Posted by Indiana

"Although there are legitimate reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010

Originally Posted by aron

In my years of 24/7 total immersion in LC, I never once heard "Daystar" mentioned. Nor, sons Philip and Timothy Lee. Yet the shortcomings and failures of "Christianity" were ever before us, constantly reminding us of our utter dependence on the "ministry".

Thus we became both suspicious of anything outside the LC, and unable to critically examine our own thoughts and teachings. Myopic, introspective, subjective, and unbalanced; we wondered why others shied away from our zeal, and were constantly trying to massage the "gospel" (our proseletyzing efforts) to make it palatable to prospective members.

Originally Posted by aron

In my years of 24/7 total immersion in LC, I never once heard "Daystar" mentioned.

Originally Posted by Nigel Tomes

Shortly after his passing some visiting Great Lakes brothers were given a guided tour of Brother Lee’s home on Ball Road, Anaheim, CA. They were led into his private bedroom where dresser drawers were opened to display Brother Lee’s orderliness. This produced a lasting impression. It caused some to ask—Is Brother Lee’s home being turned into a shrine? Has the veneration process begun? In some quarters it seems so. Some suggest God blessed Brother Lee’s every action.

Originally Posted by Nigel Tomes

Some suggest God blessed Brother Lee’s every action.

Originally Posted by Indiana

We would not have wonderful ministry churches, as now prevail, rather than love that should prevail, according to WL's own word (below). When love PREVAILS all the members are included and built up that life could prevail also and a way be opened up into the hearts of new ones.

Our brother Witness Lee knew the great lack that "knowing all the mysteries" cannot replace. Darby came to realize this also - both of them at least as they approached the last lap in their ministry. Chapman, however, lived this way all through his Christian life, according to all accounts, including Darby's. He was known as the apostle of love among the Brethren and elsewhere.


Quotes from A Word of Love 1996

"From the beginning of brother Lee's ministry in the United States clear to the end of it, although we heard marvelous things, we heard comparatively little about love. Near the end of his ministry, however, he did speak more concerning the need for love among us. He said, "In the last few years, we have appreciated the Lord's showing us the high peak of the divine revelation. My concern is that although we may talk about the truths of the high peak, love is absent among us. If this is the case, we are puffed up, not built up. The Body builds up itself in love".

"He actually began to speak in this way starting in 1988 and, intermittently, to the end of his ministry, addressing the elders on a number of occasions more definitely about this need. He said, "according to my observance throughout the years, most of the co-workers have a human spirit of "power" but not love. We need a spirit of love to conquer the degradation of today's church…this is what the recovery needs." He also stated, "only love prevails" and that "love is the most excellent way". He said it is the way to be an elder or a co-worker, and that it is the way to handle the saints. He proclaimed that it is the way to do everything and to be anything in the church life."

"Many of you are good speakers, knowing the higher truths. The truths we hold are much higher than those in Christianity. However, we do not have fruit because we are lacking in the Father's loving and forgiving heart and the Son's shepherding and seeking spirit. We condemn and regulate others rather than shepherd and seek them. We are short of love and shepherding. These are the vital factors for us to bear fruit, that is, to gain people. I am very concerned for our full-time training. Do we train the young ones to gain people or to regulate people? We have to reconsider our ways, as Haggai said (1:5). Our way is not right; something is wrong." (Used in In the Wake of the New Way, 2002)

I like the truth; and truth should prevail, as well as love, wherever believers assemble, for the building up and the oneness in the Body of Christ. Praise the Lord!

Originally Posted by JJ

You are correct about why I cited that verse, Indiana. Asking brothers to review their actions or teachings in light of scripture is certainly not rendering evil.

Neither was I suggesting any course of action regarding your web sites or participation on this forum (your writings have helped many!) ... just a verse that helped me emotionally give the situation up to the Lord .

Originally Posted by Indiana

Hi JJ, I want to be clear about what you mean by paying back evil for evil. Do you possibly mean that is what I have done over the years in addressing the words and conduct of certain brothers? Do you think that is what Jane and John were doing in their book? John Meyer did in his? Nigel in his writing, John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, John So? I would say that in all these examples they were simply giving testimony before God and man of their experience and observation in their Local Church life. Without malice in their heart.

I think you agree, but that you came to a point, where I may be now, to turn things over to the Lord of all who knows our concerns, and theirs...

And, "If possible, so far as it depends on [us], be at peace with all men."

Originally Posted by JJ

I used to get really frustrated that TLR leading brothers didn't want to talk about anything they had done that I took issue with, even when I tried to have open, honest, mutual fellowship with them (they shut me down in the same way).

Then a fellow believer pointed out that I had tried to do everything within my power to follow scriptural reconciliation practice, and reminded me of the following verses:

Romans 12:17-19 (New American Standard Bible):

Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. Respect what is right in the sight of all men. If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord.

This really helped me to finally let go and move on with life in fellowship with Christians outside of TLR. I had done as much as depended upon me to be at peace, and they weren't open to it. Now it is up to the Lord to judge.

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf

"Although there are proper reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf

"Although there are good reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010

Originally Posted by Ohio

Can you reference the source of these quotes?

Originally Posted by Terry

"But one year later all of a sudden ___ received a phone call from Lee and Lee want him to go to the training center and withdraw a large sum of money and give the money to his son. But when ___ looked at the books at the training center there was only about 600,000 yankee dollars left at the training center. That was far short of the 2 million dollars demanded by Lee." Page 15 Taipei History

How do brothers explain that? As I have said before, it's as if Living Stream Ministry was Witness Lee's family business where as owner he could make draws as needed.

On the surface this office was the responsibility of Ingalls and Chang but in reality he sent 2 of his sons to manage the financials and office. One of his daughter in law handles all the books. The entire operation of this deac off was thoroughly in the dark. No one knew exactly what was going on. Looking at this personnel arrangement it was easy to see what was on Lee’s mind. But all the church members were very much simple minded. They did not suspect there was anything evil going on. Page 21

To answer my question, brothers were too trusting, too naïve, and too simple minded as Larry Chi said. They naturally thought money they give is for the Lord's work and not for someone's financial empire. After all could a brother whose speaking is so gifted be so corrupt? Is it no surprise there has never been transparency regarding LSM finances?

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

For years now I have researched the history of Witness Lee's personal living and quite honestly I see him repeating the same mistakes decade after decade, with increasing consequences. Where was the "dispensing" in his own life? Where is the dispensing in the lives of his disciples? They are the same year after year. They just look older and harder and tell others how to live - like the Pharisees. They equate dispensing (if there is such a thing) with more knowledge. There is no early Lee or latter Lee - he was the same Lee his whole life, only older and more desperate

Originally Posted by Freedom

As far as I'm concerned, the LC has always had a leadership problem, and at the most basic level the problem is that there are lots of ineffective leaders. As it turns out, that is not just coincidence. It is one of the side effects of WL's elder-appointing game. I'm not out to judge anyone for their inexperience or unsuitability as leaders, but at the same time, every single LC leader is someone who has made the decision to function as a leader. When the opportunity presented itself, they were the ones who stepped up to the plate. So there is thus an assumed individual responsibility for their either successful or failed leadership.

I can say somewhat confidently that one of the things that was particularly frustrating about the LC was having to follow ineffective leaders. As it turns out, ineffectiveness is merely the surface of the issue, and at worse, an 'unassuming' style of leadership has been a front for behind the scenes manipulation and control. I have encountered LC leaders who are overtly authoritarian (these types are less common). The other type would hardly be identifiable as elders, but they have the ability to rule with an iron fist behind the scenes. What is problematic is you can't tell what's actually going on unless you are really familiar with who these leaders are.

Originally Posted by OBW

I understand both the "early Lee — Later Lee" thought and the "nothing changes" thought. And from a purely analytical analysis of any particular time in the history of the LCM, including its predecessors in Taiwan and China, things are seen as being both good and bad. Sometimes more of one and sometimes more of the other.

But from the other perspective, there is an undercurrent that seemed to have affected Nee before he was the leader of anything. And over time it came to a place that he became the MOTA, just not using those terms, and never insisting on it directly. And by that time Lee had become #2 because he had brought Nee back to the forefront.

Then Lee went to Taiwan and we see the first visible evidence of his desire for personal profit even at the expense of his flock. At the same time we see his desire to cast aside anyone who might appear to be a contemporary with sound teaching (thinking of TAS here). He financially raped the church in Taipei and had to leave, then came here where he talked in such humble terms as DR has reflected in the post repeated earlier.

And the LCM began as more of an independent group following a (the?) successor to Nee (who was a known factor). But Lee kept his distance for a while. He did go back and retake his place in Taiwan, but we didn't see that.

Then came Daystar. And the poor saints "lost their virginity" (to the sounds of his laughter). Then the thrusting of Max all over the U.S. followed by his ouster and the sudden need for Lee to be our leader. It only got worse from there.

I accept that on the surface there was an early Lee and a later Lee. But in hindsight it seems too likely that it was just surface. The makeup of a mime.

And I accept that there was a wonderful time of camaraderie among the members in the early days that affected everything from meetings to any other kind of fellowship. And that that special sense of things dwindled over time. And I accept that much of that was because God was in and among us.

But I do not believe that it was because God was among a (then) "right" version of the church that then lost something. It was not about the teachings of the LCM or Nee or Lee. It was about the breakout of a bunch of people from different forms that had become stifling to them. (Notice I did not say that those forms had simply become stifling. I do not believe that the forms, in themselves, are an issue. But for some any particular form may be a problem. And for others they are fully able to move forward with Christ in them.)

It is true that Eli had bad sons. And he ignored them until it was too late. And David had bad sons that almost took the kingdom from him and even tried to kill him. But that does not mean that there is no problem with Lee because he does not look much different that them. He does look different that them. David did not spend his pre-king time trying to figure out how to be king now. He did not gather forces with the goal of getting enough following to simply take over. He did defend his own life. But when someone (incorrectly) bragged that they had killed Saul, he ran them through because that was not to happen.

Paul and Barnabas had a falling out but both went on in ministry. (I ignore Lee's claim that Barnabas was wrong and simply disappeared.) But if Paul had been Lee, we would have been hearing about how we should never trust or listen to Barnabas again for ever and ever. That was pre-U.S. (for Lee) and therefore I have a problem with more than the surface of any kind of "early Lee."

Unless you think that maybe he started out back in the 1920s as a decent Christian with a heart to serve God. That would be the early Lee. The one who reconstituted the Shanghai church eldership to get Nee back in was already a form of later Lee (on the inside).

Do I think that he never had any kind of repentance along the way? It is possible. I would not say he did not. But he did seem to be wandering around trying to capture people with his "coworker of Nee" shtick from the time he hit the U.S. shores. Took more than a few weeks to take hold. But he was working on it. I think that a leader that needs to repent needs more than a change of scenery where no one knows your faults to simply start back in.

I'm not sure it ever happened.

Originally Posted by Freedom

It is particularly problematic for rank and file members because when they are adversely affected by leaders, because there is little means for recourse or defense.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Igzy

So they not only tried to control the impact members had on their group, they tried to control the very lives of those people as well, to the point of filling them with a fear of leaving the group. This was and is completely inexcusable.

That is the central sin of the LCM. It is the sin of Witness Lee, Benson Phillips and every other leader, or for that matter run-of-the-mill member, who ever pushed it.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Hope

I had listed this post under regional concerns, down south but felt it should be on its own thread.

Hello to those currently participating on the “forum.”

Due to many personal issues and my feelings about some who were posting here, I have been away. Recently I felt that perhaps the Lord desired that I begin to read the current series of posts. The most recent series seems to me to be of much more potential value than those 4-6 months ago.

I felt to stop my ongoing history on the forum as the format of an incomplete work being target practice for certain malcontents did not seem profitable for what I believed the Lord desired.

My hope was that my experience could be an aid for others seeking to know the Lord’s will in their lives regarding participation in the LSM etc and could serve as help to any who had been discouraged by their experience there. In addition, I thought that the posters were predominately seekers of truth and that perhaps we all could come to a more accurate understanding of the Way of God, Acts 18:26.

One glaring fallacy among the posters is to assume the worst possible motives and conduct among those who had some leadership and the best motives regarding former members. I personally know or know of the most vitriolic posters. In the early years, we endured quite a collection of saints. Unless you were there and participating in seeking to help the many problem people, you cannot understand the endurance, mercy, and compassion needed to shepherd some among us and also some among the would be leaders. I believe it will help this discussion to focus a little on the problems which came with the territory in the early days.

Some came into the church and were attracted by the attention they could demand. Giving “testimonies” was an excellent opportunity to talk about ME, ME, ME. Some could go on for weeks, months and years constantly drawing attention to themselves depending on how much they could couch the self-glorifying in spiritual terms and church lingo. Eventually, when out of exhaustion on the part of an elder or elders or compulsion of the Spirit or stacked up complaints from the saints or all of the above, the dear one was confronted about their self- obsession. It almost never went well. THEY WERE HURT! THEY HAD BEEN WOUNDED! Then we all suffered a time of retribution, complaints and getting even. Some on the forum are still suffering from me-itus.

Because of the apparent loose oversight and low key roll many of the elders took, wandering stars would appear. These were folks who saw themselves as spiritually gifted but in need of an audience or group to shepherd where they could practice their wonderful gifts. When they were not given the leading role they saw for themselves, it was surely those controlling elders who stood in their way. They only wanted to help the saints but were shunt aside by the awful elders.

Similar to the above was a group of men I have labeled “disappointed office seekers.” After a period of time, they assumed they would be recognized by WL or BP or some local elders and invited to share in the leadership. (President Garfield was assassinated by a disappointed office seeker. After that event, the civil service examine process was instituted.) This person is so easy to recognize because his remarks always, always, always center on belittling any local church elder or leader.

Then we had the confrontational fault finder. Some elders fell into this category. (Mike, one was in Dallas.) They always had an issue with someone or some church. Usually the other elders would try to ignore them hoping they would get better. Eventually they would get frustrated and withdraw from the church or from the leadership or move somewhere else.

A final group I will mention was the “we are free”, “we can do whatever we want,” “we are not religious,” “we are not under any law.” These folks disrupted many a meeting and offended many of the saints. Eventually when the saints and the leadership could stand no more they were adjusted. My, my, often they howled like a stuck pig. Some on this forum are still howling.

To take the testimony of some of the problem folks and overlay their accusations on WL, BP, RG, MR etc is so unfair. Many of the errors and mistakes made by the local churches were due to the challenge brought on by the “come one come all” approach with very little organization and deliberately weak leadership.

WL had been too authoritarian in the Far East. He told me so directly to my face and I heard him mention it many times. One of his hopes for the trip of 141 in 1967 to Taiwan was to demonstrate to the churches there the lack of control and freedom of the Spirit. Actually pray-reading and calling on the Lord, were originally stumbled on as a way to level the playing field. Anyone could pray read and anyone could call on the Name of the Lord.

The change that occurred in 1974 was not just due to the ambition of WL and MR. (Yes they were ambitious.) But they were searching for a way to provide direction for what often seemed to be some poorly managed congregations often without a clear rudder. The above mentioned problem people were too many. MR was especially running out of patience and ready to institute tighter controls.

BP, RG who I knew intimately, served, and served and served. They both had a weakness of being a little like Popeye the sailor man. Popeye would endure Brutus and endure and endure until finally he declared “I have stood all I can stand, I can’t stands no more.” Then after a little spinach, the house is destroyed as he explodes and deals with Brutus. This happened a few times in Texas. They could have handled some of the problem folks in a better way. But would you say that poor ole Brutus was just an innocent victim? Please note dear reader, you never hear the other side of the story from some of the vitriolic posters.

WL had two bad children. So did Aaron. So did Eli. David had more than two. Solomon’s son caused the kingdom to be divided. Do bad children mean your service was false? The Bible does tell us the details of these families but to illustrate that there is no such thing as Spiritual succession. There is no such thing as apostolic succession. This would be for another discussion of God’s Administration.

Unfortunately there was a very real change over time and the change was not for the better. Unfortunately there were some serious flaws in the practice and attitudes. There was some wrong understanding of the truth and practice unveiled in the New Testament. And there were some problem people who hurt others then and continue to damage and distract those seeking to press on the know the Lord.

In Christ Jesus,

Hope

Originally Posted by THE BELIEFS AND PRACTICES OF THE LOCAL CHURCHES

2. Who is your leader?
Our unique leader is Christ. We have no official, permanent, organized human leadership. Furthermore, there is no hierarchy of any kind and no worldwide leader. We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly. On the contrary, we follow only those whose teaching and practice is in accordance with the truth of God's Word. Those who take the lead do not lord it over the saints, but rather shepherd them in love. Likewise, those who serve the Lord do not control the churches, but rather serve them as bondslaves of Christ in the ministry of the living Word.

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Brother Indiana, those "kind" LC brothers felt the need (four of them) to escort you out! They will not even let you sit there!

Originally Posted by aron

When Stephen died it didn't look like there was much potential, or opportunity there, in Saul of Tarsus, who was standing by and holding the cloaks of the executioners. Hardened he was, as Yoda would put it. And it got worse before it got better - "But Saul began destroying the church", per Acts 8:3. Etc.

"But when it pleased God . . " (Gal 1:15)

Originally Posted by Indiana

Lisbon, You cant believe that in the ten minutes I was in the Table meeting, I got more refreshed than in any meeting I have been in elsewhere. The song was one of the many I appreciated greatly and began singing the moment I entered. (A hymn by WL)

Originally Posted by OBW

And I don't think Lisbon was talking about Indiana.

But I think you knew that.

Originally Posted by HERn

Looks like Nee and Lee might have got it wrong about the tree of life.

The same words are used in Proverbs 3:18 to represent wisdom.
18 She is a tree of life to them that lay hold upon her, and happy is every one that holdest her fast.

It's used in Proverbs 11:30 as a fruit of the righteous.
30 The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that is wise winneth souls.

And in Proverbs 13:12 as like having desire fulfilled.
12 Hope deferred maketh the heart sick; but desire fulfilled is a tree of life.

And Proverbs 15:4 as how good or helpful is good speech.
A soothing tongue is a tree of life; but perverseness therein is a wound to the spirit.

I'll get to the NT next, but it does not look like the tree of life is a principle or command to behave/function by intuition or whatever it is that the blendeds say you touch in your spirit. The word life without a qualifying adjective...like Christ's life, God's life, my dog's life, etc. can be misleading and possibly used by satan (or any other nefarious being/person) to indicate any intuitive feeling that one receives from any source. I wonder if this is a safe practice for Christians? Do the church fathers have any comments on this topic?

Originally Posted by aron

I don't get any bitterness coming from Indiana.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Here is the thing, Lisbon, and others who have wondered about me, I see the potential for revival .... the opportunity is there.

Originally Posted by Indiana

......but the fountain of living waters was down the street and the saints have aged, and they were fewer in number, but they have been trained and raised up to know their spirit and get to that fountain that never runs dry.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Lisbon, You cant believe that in the ten minutes I was in the Table meeting, I got more refreshed than in any meeting I have been in elsewhere. The song was one of the many I appreciated greatly and began singing the moment I entered.

As I told the 4 brothers who escorted me out ...

Originally Posted by Lisbon

As of today I'm picking Indiana up on my prayer list. After reading post 516 it would relieve me greatly to know you had after many years had the grace from our Lord to leave that wicked place be. It is no different whatsoever from the RCC and if the Lord has chosen to leave the RCC alone for 1700 years He can do the same for the LC and I think likely will.

I notice we came into the LC just one year apart, you in 71 and I in 72. My wife died in 07 and I started keeping a diary of sorts. I just recently noticed an entry in 09 mentioning th at my experience of the LC was quite unreal. Not a good comment. It took me 4 more years before I walked out. I still have two children and 5 grand children in the thing. I have no power over them except to pray. I don't think a christian sect of 50 plus years can be touched by man. I never heard of one being touched.

My opinion is worth little but, James I think it was said that a fountain can not issue both bitter and sweet water. I don't believe you agree but the bitterness coming out of WL and later the Blendeds makes it look impossible for there to be any sweetness. You're around 69, I around 86, we need to forget LC forever and ipray for our loved ones.
Lisbon

Originally Posted by Lisbon

As of today I'm picking Indiana up on my prayer list. After reading post 516 it would relieve me greatly to know you had after many years had the grace from our Lord to leave that wicked place be. It is no different whatsoever from the RCC and if the Lord has chosen to leave the RCC alone for 1700 years He can do the same for the LC and I think likely will.

I notice we came into the LC just one year apart, you in 71 and I in 72. My wife died in 07 and I started keeping a diary of sorts. I just recently noticed an entry in 09 mentioning th at my experience of the LC was quite unreal. Not a good comment. It took me 4 more years before I walked out. I still have two children and 5 grand children in the thing. I have no power over them except to pray. I don't think a christian sect of 50 plus years can be touched by man. I never heard of one being touched.

My opinion is worth little but, James I think it was said that a fountain can not issue both bitter and sweet water. I don't believe you agree but the bitterness coming out of WL and later the Blendeds makes it look impossible for there to be any sweetness. You're around 69, I around 86, we need to forget LC forever and ipray for our loved ones.
Lisbon

Originally Posted by Lisbon

James said that a fountain can not issue both bitter and sweet water.

Originally Posted by HERn

How was the RK lawsuit resolved?

Originally Posted by aron

Maybe I didn't word it clearly. What I meant was, "Instead of compounding his sin with Bathsheba and Uriah by murdering the accusing Nathan, David did not; instead he saw the light and repented." But my terse wording may have opened the door to understanding the opposite.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did David murder Nathan?

Originally Posted by aron

David saw the light before he murdered Nathan, and made things worse. But like Saul, WL and his Blendeds piled mistake upon mistake. The reason for this is that WL built a system predicated upon infallibility, and to admit mistake might cut the underpinnings of the whole enterprise. Admitting one lapse in judgement would lead to questioning other decisions, and then the whole thing might have no validity whatsoever! Terrible! Unthinkable!

Originally Posted by Freedom

A lot of what Lee did could have been 'fixed' a long time ago by a simple admission on his part that he had made a mistake or had a large lapse in judgement.

Originally Posted by SteVee

It makes me think of the difference between Saul and David.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Our brother Lin claims to have written his book under the anointing, guidance and constraint of the Holy Spirit. Our brother Lee also claims to have been before the Lord before writing his slanderous book; Fermentation Of The Present Rebellion. I personally would be under great trembling and fear of ever dragging the Spirit Of TRUTH into an endless pit of self-serving LIES. They may speak about High Truth, but they do not practice the Truth

Originally Posted by Freedom

A lot of what Lee did could have been 'fixed' a long time ago by a simple admission on his part that he had made a mistake or had a large lapse in judgement. Did he do that? Nope. He instead proceeded to put a spin on so many things.

Originally Posted by Terry

Think about the 2011 lawsuit Indiana had against RK and SR. It's sure okay to sue Harvest House and in the last decade GLA localities, but when one of their own blendeds has his name mentioned in a defamation lawsuit, oh the brothers can't have that.
The hypocrisy is reeking in Puget Sound region LC's The brothers would rather remain silent than to be truthful.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Think about those recent lawsuits in Ohio and Toronto, ON. Would those brothers and sisters, left to themselves and their loving Head, dream about suing each other over meeting halls, furniture, bank accounts, and their nameless "name?" No, of course not, but with LSM's special "trainings" held nearby, these saints now "feel life and peace" while suing their brothers and sisters.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Our brother Lin claims to have written his book under the anointing, guidance and constraint of the Holy Spirit. Our brother Lee also claims to have been before the Lord before writing his slanderous book; Fermentation Of The Present Rebellion. I personally would be under great tembling and fear of ever dragging the Spirit Of TRUTH into an endless pit of self-serving LIES. They may speak about High Truth, but they do not practice the Truth

Originally Posted by Freedom

I used to find it hard to believe that any of the blendeds would have looked up to Philip Lee. I assumed that if anything, he was tolerated for the sake of WL, a past issue that they would be glad to sweep under the rug.

Quite to the contrary, an Anaheim elder, Philip Lin, expressed a great appreciation for Philip Lee. It makes me want to gag:

Originally Posted by OBW

The sad part about it is that this is exactly what the rank and file are taught to think about things that make them feel bad or uneasy inside. It is supposed to make them reject the source that makes them feel that way rather than the thing (the error) that is the actual problem.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Tree of Life?! These people could use a little knowledge of good and evil!

Originally Posted by HERn

The word life without a qualifying adjective...like Christ's life, God's life, my dog's life, etc. can be misleading and possibly used by satan (or any other nefarious being/person) to indicate any intuitive feeling that one receives from any source. I wonder if this is a safe practice for Christians? Do the church fathers have any comments on this topic?

Originally Posted by Igzy

If Witness Lee is right even when he's wrong, that implies that whatever you do to further Witness Lee is right even if it's wrong. This explains Philip Lee, the Blendeds and the whole shameful history of lies, deceptions, double-talk, cover-ups, lawsuits, quarantines, property grabs and character assassinations, not to mention the general buffoonery.

Tree of Life?! These people could used a little knowledge of good and evil!

Lord, how long?

Originally Posted by Igzy

Tree of Life?! These people could used a little knowledge of good and evil!

Originally Posted by Ohio

The whole distortion by Witness Lee and the Blendeds was "the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error," and it makes me sick to my stomach. Here's Phillip Lee, the hot-tempered, licentious bully, who was not even identified by name by his father, portrayed as a faithful Levitical serving one in the LSM office and who needs to be apologized to. What a projection of guilt and shame!

Let's all gag together.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I used to find it hard to believe that any of the blendeds would have looked up to Philip Lee. I assumed that if anything, he was tolerated for the sake of WL, a past issue that they would be glad to sweep under the rug.

Quite to the contrary, an Anaheim elder, Philip Lin, expressed a great appreciation for Philip Lee. It makes me want to gag:

Originally Posted by Igzy

The above implies that being a "faithful saint" means giving one's "whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee," even if the motivation is selfish and sullied.

The Blended have learned well from Philip Lee.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Apparently, Ron and other Blendeds were heavily influenced by Phillip Lee. Instead of looking away unto Jesus they looked away unto Phillip Lee. It does not surprise me that they resemble Phillip more than they resemble Christ.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Here's Mr. Ronald Kangas taking out time from his busy schedule to explain himself ...

Originally Posted by Freedom

When Ron publicly defamed Steve, he did so using vague terminology and accusations. And by that I mean language that is elusive to outsiders. His intended message, however, is crystal clear to those within the LC. As Igzy pointed out, it is significant that Ron was not willing to convey a definitive position that he could subsequently stand behind. He didn’t even initiate a public ‘quarantine’ letter like has been done for others.

Originally Posted by OBW

Denominations are primarily bound by details of belief, not names. Each one may or may not be particularly "sectarian." I think that the problem lies in the way the terms are used. If we think of denominations as, by definition, exclusive, we think they are harshly divisive even if they are not. And we tend to use the term "sectarian" to denote those that are (as I called it) harshly divided. Those that think they are the church and others are damaged. The LRC/LCM is a good example. The Church of Christ is (or has been) at least somewhat in this group.

Surely there is a level of "we are right and you are not" in virtually every group. And sometimes the rank-and-file members have a different idea of how harsh that separation is than the leadership does. (Not much difference in the LRC. They pretty much all hold a hard line.) I must say that I prefer to meet with people who believe in those side issues closer to what I believe. It keeps there from being as much controversy in the meetings. I am mostly happy to allow the leaders, theologians, etc., dig deep into the things that divide. For the most part, I think that they view it as important to the church as a whole, but they also have a more realistic view of the totality, and even unity of the church than most of us do. Two different churches on opposite corners is often not as divisive as we were made to believe. They are not at war. Each not declaring the other to be deficient in a serous way.

Until some group like Nee's'/Lee's comes along. Find a novel approach to defining the church such that you are it and others simply are not. Declare the people as automatically members of your group and declare the groups they meet with as harlots.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Freedom

In the local churches, there is a disturbing pattern of excusing bad behavior and purging those with solid character, who are unwilling to compromise their integrity. I don't think Lee intended the LC to turn out this way, but character and integrity had to be sacrificed in order for WL to pursue the larger than life status that he craved. He eliminated all the checks and balances that should have stopped him from going off the deep end. He purged anyone who criticized him in any way.

Those who are part of this system don't realize what they are giving themselves to or who they are following. They think that following Lee absolutely is essential to being a Christian. And it's not that following a leader as an example is wrong, per se, however, the leader that is being followed is a man who insisted on being #1. He insisted submission to his totalitarian regime. He excused sin when he knew that it could harm his ministry. This is the man who so many LC members are following.

Originally Posted by Indiana

“The Lord's recovery is really among us, and, although the scale is quite small, the standard of the character is higher than Christianity. In the Lord's recovery the high standard of the character must be kept and maintained. Some have checked with me asking, Do you mean that all the other Christians are rotten and that only the local church people are not rotten? I don't mean that. If any people have become rotten, they are no more in the reality of the Lord's recovery. Whatever and whoever is rotten is not in the recovery. The local churches are people who have been recovered out of their rottenness back to the pure church life. The local church is not a kind of organization or religious group. The local church is the pure church life as a pure testimony of Jesus. If we become rotten, we are no longer in the reality of the Lord's recovery. (Concerning the Lord's Recovery chapter 1 section 4, 1983)

http://www.twoturmoils.com/Recoverin...onyofJesus.pdf

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Brother Lee often stated that he followed brother Nee. Perhaps his priority should have been to follow the Lord. We are encouraged to imitate those believers that persue Christ, but we must always have the eyes of our heart fixed on the Lord. As we know all to well, and as WL has stated himself: "people can change". Now we see the blendeds following a man - making the same mistakes.

I find it interesting and extremely pervasive throughout brother Lee's writings that it is we who must see the vision as presented by a minister and his vision, being himself of course; Implying that God does not reveal His heart to all His devout servants but has this unique minister of the age with a unique vision.
Now if this unique minister should make a mistake and perhaps deviate from this unique vision, then God would have a real problem since he has only one unique minister for each unique age having its own unique vision.

Does this sound strange? Of course it does. But even worse it is extra-biblical and the fruit of this kind of thinking has resulted in a great deal of unrepented sin and division. The history posted by our brother speaks for itself.

The Father loves the Son exceedingly and has given Him all things: All things are through Him and for Him and to Him; He has the first place in all things and He is the fullness that fills all and in all! He is the head of His Body, the Church. The result of the vision is to sum up all things in Christ both in the heavens and on the earth. This vision has been around for a long time and many have seen it. And because of this God gives us Apostle(s), Prophet(s), Teacher(s) and various ministrie(s) for the perfecting of the saints until we all arrive at a full-grown man in Christ. There is no mention of any unique minister with a unique vision which all must follow or they "are not in it". All this is imaginary conjecture based upon the Old Testament with disasterous results.

Today God speaks to us in His son through His many devoted servants who deny themselves and take up their cross. Those that follow the Lamb - Not a man. The definition of an overcomer is: They overcame him by the Blood of the Lamb, the word of their testimony and they loved not their soul life unto the death.

Come back to the pure Word - be an overcomer!

Originally Posted by Renee

I remember listening to a talk by RK when he was talking about a friend of his, a non-believer, who was saved shortly before he died. RK said it was nice and all that he was saved, but it was too late, it was too late to help build the body of Christ.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Originally Posted by Renee

LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Of course brother Lee was a different person than Phillip Lee...HE WAS HIS FATHER AND HIS EMPLOYER...Which made him DOUBLY responsible before God AND man, especially when it became very clear that Phillip was a raging alcoholic and sexual predator. Instead of being behind the lead desk of a Christian ministry and publishing company, he should of been behind bars. Every time Phillip Lee's improprieties and criminal behavior were exposed, Witness Lee blamed, attacked and defamed the whistle blowers. In the case of the sisters he abused, instead dealing with his criminal son, he had the victim and her family relocated to another state. Despicable, and something one might expect from a godless, immoral businessman, and not a so call "God-man".

And Local Churchers wonder why people call them a personality cult. Most other legitimate Christian leaders would have been publicly exposed, sued by the victims and removed from public ministry for an extended period of time. But of course this would of required the leadership of the Local Church to be transparent and accountable, like what is clearly taught in the New Testament. Instead everyone, from top to bottom, was/is only accountable to the person and work of Witness Lee.

-

Originally Posted by Hope

Right after the meeting James informed John So and I that WL was very upset. Francis had tipped off James. WL did not want to have a quiet private talk but chose to dress the two of us down in the meeting hall for all to see. As soon as the meeting was over, we two were marched to the front. Chairs were rearranged. John and I set by ourselves facing WL and about 50 brothers including James Barber who set behind WL in support of him. Scores of those in attendance milled around the little court room and became an audience. WL never asked us to open our concerns but immediately launched into a tirade against us and issued a general warning that if we continued to question what the office and the ministry was doing we would cause a lot of damage to the saints and we would damage ourselves.

I can never forget the glare of despising we got from Ron Kangas as WL continued for about 10 minutes with the rebuke. Then he dismissed the meeting and we all went home. Was I ever in shock!!! So was John So. I was taking hospitality with Ned. On the ride home he laughed and laughed. He said this regularly happened to the elders in Orange County California.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Of course brother Lee was a different person than Phillip Lee...HE WAS HIS FATHER AND HIS EMPLOYER...Which made him DOUBLY responsible before God AND man, especially when it became very clear that Phillip was a raging alcoholic and sexual predator. Instead of being behind the lead desk of a Christian ministry and publishing company, he should of been behind bars. Every time Phillip Lee's improprieties and criminal behavior were exposed, Witness Lee blamed, attacked and defamed the whistle blowers. In the case of the sisters he abused, instead dealing with his criminal son, he had the victim and her family relocated to another state. Despicable, and something one might expect from a godless, immoral businessman, and not a so call "God-man".

And Local Churchers wonder why people call them a personality cult. Most other legitimate Christian leaders would have been publicly exposed, sued by the victims and removed from public ministry for an extended period of time. But of course this would of required the leadership of the Local Church to be transparent and accountable, like what is clearly taught in the New Testament. Instead everyone, from top to bottom, was/is only accountable to the person and work of Witness Lee.

-

Originally Posted by Ohio

Witness Lee, however, was found to be a liar during the entire scandalous affair which resulted in his slanderous account, The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, LSM 1990.

Originally Posted by Terry

This prior Bellevue elder was so sure of himself. So sure of Witness Lee and so sure of the Blended brothers. The problem is when one believes you cannot be wrong, you may very well be deceived. The deception is due in part having lost all humility.

Over the years so much faith is put into Witness Lee that the brother said in absoluteness "Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. " Because faith in man leads others astray. That's how I feel has happened to the brother who wrote the email to Indiana.

Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no salvation.
Psalms 146:3

Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he? Isaiah 2:22

It is better to take refuge in the Lord than to trust in man. Psalms 118:8

Originally Posted by Indiana

THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery.......... But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

Originally Posted by Freedom

These were my thoughts exactly. The letter implies that Steve is too sure of himself. But that's exactly what this Bellevue elder is guilty of, not Steve. With respect to how LCers view Lee, there is only one view that they hold, that being "even when he's wrong, he's right."

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf
Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:
Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do.

Originally Posted by Terry

This prior Bellevue elder was so sure of himself. So sure of Witness Lee and so sure of the Blended brothers. The problem is when one believes you cannot be wrong, you may very well be deceived. The deception is due in part having lost all humility.

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:

In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

2001 Letter on past page- p3

Originally Posted by Renee

Oh my, what a dreadful letter! LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:

Originally Posted by Renee

This was a wonderful read, thanks! It's too bad the church lost Don Rutledge. Maybe he decided there was nothing positive he could say after the first 2 chapters? He had a lot of good things to say about Benson Phillips. Whatever happened to him?

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:

In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

2001 Letter on past page- p3

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf

A former elder in Dallas wrote about local church history and finished two chapters before being visited by three brothers he knew from their early days in Texas together, and who were now in accord with the blending brothers.

The three brothers felt welcomed to visit, due to the warmth in Don's sharing on matters and people they all knew in the church life; and they were also compelled to visit based on major concerns they had about his transparency regarding the seeds of development in the churches to follow the lead of a man and a ministry.

Don indicated that they had a cordial time together and he was able to share with them about why he left the church life. He spent several hours with them, and heard also what their concerns were about him and his writings on a public internet forum.

We don't know whether or not that visitation effected his course, but, he did not write another chapter - and he did have more that he had planned, and desired, to add. But the two chapters he did provide are insightful to those who seek to understand true local church history.

www.twoturmoils.com/DonRutledgeHistory.pdf

Originally Posted by Renee

What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?

Originally Posted by Renee

What is the difference between Denominationalism and Sectarian oneness? It would seem that if the LC shifted to the wrong ground, then it must have been on the proper ground at an earlier time. Apparently this same shift also occurred much earlier in Taiwan. This suggests that this shifting might have been deliberately planned?

Originally Posted by Indiana

“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)

Originally Posted by Renee

Thanks for responding with the links. Those should answer my questions hopefully.

Originally Posted by Indiana

“If we introduce these manmade distinctions into the church, the relationship among the brothers and sisters will be shifted to the wrong ground.” (W. Nee, New Believers Series)

www.twoturmoils.com/ShiftingtotheWrongGround.pdf

Originally Posted by HERn

I would like to state that I was not kind in making this statement. I realize that Indiana is seeking reconciliation within the body of Christ, just as Christ would want. His patience and love of the brothers far exceeds mine. I need to learn to be less hostile and more loving. Please forgive my anger and rudeness.

Originally Posted by HERn

I would like to state that I was not kind in making this statement. I realize that Indiana is seeking reconciliation within the body of Christ, just as Christ would want. His patience and love of the brothers far exceeds mine. I need to learn to be less hostile and more loving. Please forgive my anger and rudeness.

HERn

Originally Posted by HERn

Indiana confuses me. If the blinded brothers would accept his argument and throw their arms around his neck it seems he would kiss and make up. I don't think he believes that WL is a false teacher.

Originally Posted by Renee

This reminds me of the words of Jesus: “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” In Matthew 10:15, Jesus clarifies His meaning: “Truly I tell you, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town”

I'm not sure why anyone would continue to beg for fellowship from those who are not interested and furthermore have told lies about them?

Originally Posted by Indiana

Tony, we ought to know our church history! and become accountable.

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf

Originally Posted by Freedom

From an objective standpoint, it seems like the common denominator in all of this is the notion of recovery. While I believe the notion of recovery to be highly erroneous, that’s a different discussion. The point I want to make here is that because all LC members believe that they are part of a recovery, and because this recovery is believed to be ongoing and characterized exclusively by teachings from Nee/Lee, LC members have been inadvertently placed in the position where they feel obligated to receive “the ministry.”

The fact that WL was exclusively speaking everything that was deemed to have been "recovered," created an inherent conflict of interest, and there was no such thing as objectivity. Things got to the point where any of Lee’s actions could and would be rationalized by members. The dependency on Lee as the one who was "fueling" the supposed recovery is what produced “ministry churches” over time. Unless people were severely disillusioned with Lee, there was really no way to escape that. The reason that I say that, is because if a member were to question basic things like the promotion of LSM material or control over the churches, it would quickly become apparent that to draw the line with LSM is not enough. A disillusionment should really lead to other questions, especially the more difficult ones.

Originally Posted by Terry

As critical as I am of Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama, my criticism for the blended brothers (collectively) surpasses. It isn't about doctrines or orthodoxy, but normal Christian behavior.
1. They are brothers in Christ
2. How could they be supportive of an unrighteous, unethical, and immoral man like Philip Lee AND
3. Smear brothers who are under the headship of Christ?
4. Their speaking and their subsequent actions are very subversive. Creating and causing problems when there is no need for it.

Originally Posted by Freedom

As long as there is this kind of mindset in the LC, it can never amount to anything. When the LC started, all kinds of people came in. Members then took initiative to invite friends and tell people about the LC. If someone were to do the same thing today, it's as Terry says, they might be labeled as being independent, seeking a following, or I have even heard implications that people who are successful in the gospel can become too "proud".

Originally Posted by Terry

Problem here is initiative is likened to ambition. As soon as someone exercises the initiative to preach the gospel or go door knocking, he/she may be labeled as "ambitious to have a following". It becomes church culture to bury your extra talents and be one-talented members just like everyone else. Don't exercise initiative and certain don't share from the Bible apart from the ministry.

Originally Posted by Freedom

As I started to become concerned about the LC, there was an interesting phenomena that I noticed. The elders would regularly criticize the rank and file for failing to take initiative in an activity, to attend a conference/training or even something like preach the gospel. They usually call this being "lukewarm". At the same time, the minute anyone took any amount of initiative, they quickly got "corrected". It's no wonder that so many of the rank and file choose to live in the shadows, waiting until they are called upon to do anything at all. The elders know this and are frustrated by this, but at the same time they also know that they can't encourage anyone to take initiative. It's just one of those things that I'm sure drives members crazy and they probably can't ever put their finger on what the real problem is.

Originally Posted by aron

In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders". There should be covering of the inadequacy and frailty of human psyche and flesh; nonetheless there isn't and shouldn't be covering for evil. Darkness should be uprooted, exposed and expelled. The light shines and the darkness cannot overcome it. The church and its citizens should be holy, just as our God is holy.

Obviously the system set up by Nee and Lee has no checks and balances, no accountability. The Leaders of the Lord's Recovery demand unquestioning submission, and absolute silence from the proletariat... Indiana's crime was his unwillingness to silence and hide what wasn't convenient to LSM's 'official' narrative.

Originally Posted by aron

But I used it in the way the OT uses it, pejoratively. The giants (Gk: grigori) were the unholy offspring of disobedient "sons of God" and the daughters of men. "There were giants on the earth in those days..." Gen 6:4.

Originally Posted by Terry

“Also the one who had received the two talents came up and said, ‘Master, you entrusted two talents to me. See, I have gained two more talents.’ His master said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. You were faithful with a few things, I will put you in charge of many things; enter into the joy of your master.’
“And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you scattered no seed. And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground. See, you have what is yours.’ Matthew 25:22-25

Originally Posted by OBW

I honestly believe that there are spiritual giants. But that is not about great teaching. Or great skills at preaching. Or even evangelism. It is about great commitment to Christ and his people.

They are our servants, not our leaders in the way of the Pharisees..

Originally Posted by Freedom

What this all leads to is that anyone who has ventured outside the standard LC repertoire of material and cookie cutter fake spirituality is going to stand out noticeably. In an environment that desperately needs "normal Christians", such people could actually be a benefit to LCers. Thus, these people are threats to LC leaders. I personally have seen people come through the LC who would put most LC elders to shame in terms of what they know about the Bible. In the LC they can't have anyone interrupting the authority structure and it is conveniently to label such people as argumentative, independent, "not clear about God's economy", or whatever else is convenient. It's really all the same. Calling someone a spiritual giant is just another LC method to discredit someone, and the LC has many, many methods for doing so.

Originally Posted by Freedom

From what I've seen in the LC, any amount of individual spirituality expressed could be potential characterized as seeking to be a "spiritual giant". It's just their way of discrediting those who don't fit the LC mold, namely their notion that all manifestations of spirituality must be "corporate".

Originally Posted by Witness Lee

"The practice of today’s Christianity is absolutely different in principle. Wherever there is a gifted person, a spiritual “giant” with a certain gift, that person will begin a work. He will build up a certain Christian organization or ministry, and possibly call it some worthy name. We are not opposing anyone, but we are against the wrong principles which damage the Body life."

Originally Posted by aron

When Witness Lee passed, the brothers loyal to him said, "The age of spiritual giants is over." Thus they declared that Lee was, indeed, one of these giants that damage the Body life. By their own words they indicted themselves, that they had created a monstrous "giant".

Originally Posted by Jane Anderson

When I got into trouble in the Local Church, I was accused of trying to be a spiritual giant and of seeking my own individual spirituality. I was told that the age of spiritual giants was over and that this was the age of the church, the "corporate Christ." But the truth is that there is no such thing as a spiritual giant. p.310

Originally Posted by Indiana

Thus, the churches were in their hand and they were fixed on their apostle and his leading, dependent on him for their direction to a large extent.

Originally Posted by Witness Lee

"The practice of today’s Christianity is absolutely different in principle. Wherever there is a gifted person, a spiritual “giant” with a certain gift, that person will begin a work. He will build up a certain Christian organization or ministry, and possibly call it some worthy name. We are not opposing anyone, but we are against the wrong principles which damage the Body life."

Originally Posted by aron

The USA political system was set up with "checks and balances", because it was known that men, even leaders, were fallible creatures. The Judicial System watches the Legislators, the Legislators appoint the Judiciary, the people vote for the Legislators etc.

Originally Posted by aron

Yes, I referenced the 2008 financial scandal of Wall Street deliberately.

The question for me, which can be arguably traced back to Genesis Chapter 6 is, "Who watches the Watchers?" Or, who judges the judge, when that person judges wrongly?

The USA political system was set up with "checks and balances", because it was known that men, even leaders, were fallible creatures. The Judicial System watches the Legislators, the Legislators appoint the Judiciary, the people vote for the Legislators etc.

In spiritual, Christian affairs, Jesus allowed for checks and balances: i.e. "tell it to the church"; as did Paul's "receiving accusations against elders". There should be covering of the inadequacy and frailty of human psyche and flesh; nonetheless there isn't and shouldn't be covering for evil. Darkness should be uprooted, exposed and expelled. The light shines and the darkness cannot overcome it. The church and its citizens should be holy, just as our God is holy.

The Leaders of the Lord's Recovery demand unquestioning submission, and absolute silence from the proletariat... Indiana's crime was his unwillingness to silence and hide what wasn't convenient to LSM's 'official' narrative. There was nepostism, favoritism, bias, cover-ups, financial impropriety, whitewashing (lies), political maneuverings, and more. So, his final recourse was to tell it to the church.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sounds no different than the politicians on Wall Street.

Originally Posted by Acts 19:18

Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed what they had done.

Originally Posted by Ohio

So there is more to this book?

Originally Posted by Ohio

Any info on who this Larry Chi was?

Originally Posted by Indiana

http://www.twww.twoturmoils.com/TaipeiHistory.pdf

Larry Chi wrote a book that included the history of the church in Taipei and some other churches in Taiwan, after he left the recovery in 1985, (approximately). The book included a word about the young Titus Chu who had come onto the scene and became involved in giving training sessions, and became a concern to others, including Witness Lee. He is still a concern, whether or not it should be so great as "advertised".

The word about him is not included in the link above; but some very interesting historical accounts are given, including what is referred to as the 1965 massacre, which should relate to the 1966 so-called rebellion.

I can't confirm Larry Chi's accuracy, but he was certainly burdened to give his viewpoints, based on his experience and observation. He was in his 80s when I contacted him last in CA, both by phone and email, 5 years ago. He was referred to me by another dear Chinese brother in his 80s, from Sydney, who has since passed away. Both brothers were very much concerned for the developments that took place before them in the recovery under the leadership of Witness Lee.

Originally Posted by Indiana

I received two copies of the book from Larry Chi, written in Chinese. This might have been in 2003. Just part of it was on the history and I had that part alone translated by a Chinese professional. The rest of the book was on teachings, which I was not interested in at the time, and it would have been far to expensive to translate. The book is not online anywhere.

The two copies of the book are in the hands of two Chinese brothers, one of them being a brother who runs the concerned brothers site. He could confirm the word spoken about Titus, which for some reason is missing from the document I posted. I must have removed that speaking for some reason at one time, but haven't been able to retrieve the information.

The book had been circulated among Chinese to some degree, but no one had it translated into another language, particularly English. I wondered how this could be that the book was written in the eighties and I come along in the 2000s and have it translated. The price was high ($680) and the Chinese could have done it themselves for the sake of English readers, but for some reason no one did. I was told it was a cultural matter just as there was no warning from the Chinese about Daystar at its inception. Don Hardy had mentioned this that the Chinese saints, including Samuel Chang, could have given the history of WL's failed business ventures in the Far East and warned at least the elders in Southern CA who were cooperating with the hype for Daystar. Don said not a word of warning was given and that the brothers would have stopped him had they known.

What Ohio said about Titus likening WL to a father and giving him a pass at every turn is the heighth of cultural interference with God's moving and working in the Body in genuine display of spiritual authority and activity. In this matter I do not appreciate Titus Chu and the passivity of those under his influence in the GLA, as they do make strange bedfellows with those on LaPalma avenue in preserving the lies that prevail in the churches, and in keeping their Idol shiny, clean, and APPROVED - instead of smashing it into a thousand pieces.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Too bad the Internet wasn't around back in the 1960s/70s for this Larry Chi to inform us gullible Americans about the things Witness Lee had already pulled back in the Far East.

I would love to get a hold of the entire book that he supposedly wrote.
-

Originally Posted by aron

And the real rub is that the ones who knew what Lee did, back in Taipei, sat by quietly when he drummed up the USA saints for $$ for Daystar. They knew exactly what was going on and they said nothing. What a shame.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sounds no different than the politicians on Wall Street.

Originally Posted by aron

Nice gig if you can get it. If you win, you win, and if you lose, Bailout Central steps in and covers the loss. So why not gamble? That was the bait dangling in front of Witness Lee and he took it.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Witness Lee Business Failures Disrupt the Church

Around 1959 Mr. Lee had some investment failures and he lost a great deal of money. This brought the first financial crisis to the church.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Two of my posts on Larry Chi book - 2009

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...21&postcount=3

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...25&postcount=7

Originally Posted by aron

Nothing initially about the church or the ministry. "We're just simple lovers of Jesus, who choose to meet on the ground of oneness."

Originally Posted by OBW

And just maybe that is the reason that there is the Christians on Campus group. They keep the new ones at a distance from he mother ship until they think they are able to just take the nonsense and go along quietly.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

The LSM dictionary defines anyone who disagrees with them an opposer. Synonyms include: negative, death, self... These young ones are conditioned to believe this and unfortunately, over time, loose the ability to discern for themselves. I think we can all testify to this. When we left and sadly even until now, many former members are leary to speak the truth concerning the LSM organization because these old tapes keep playing. It becomes difficult to tell the counterfeit from the reality.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

From watching some of the videos today, I do not see this. Young members are quickly subdued and indoctrinated. ... I have yet to see any positive fruit and genuine growth in Life produced by this method. It always looks so scripted.

Originally Posted by aron

The Christ that is the "centrality and universality" of this church-fixated world is not the Jesus of Nazareth of Whom Moses and the prophets wrote, and to Whom Peter and Paul and James and John were discipled. It's not the Christ Whom the Father sent, but rather the Christ whom the self-obsessed church manufactures to justify herself.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

But that is what puzzles me. These are new recruits. They are not familiar with their new environment and therefore not yet sold on the LSM bill of goods. If someone told me not to go on the internet because it is "negative", that would immediately raise red flags. Why should any group be afraid of the Internet unless they are hiding something. I would like to think that young college students have at least a little common sense.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

But that is what puzzles me. These are new recruits. They are not familiar with their new environment and therefore not yet sold on the LSM bill of goods. If someone told me not to go on the internet because it is "negative", that would immediately raise red flags. Why should any group be afraid of the Internet unless they are hiding something. I would like to think that young college students have at least a little common sense.

Originally Posted by aron

There's a hymn that says, "The Bride eyes not her garments/but her dear Bridegroom's face." Church leaders unfortunately specialize in eyeing our garments, and comparing them to those of everyone else. Unbalanced subjectivity, myopathy, bias (self-selection), judgmentalism, and self-justification then become the garments with which we drape ourselves.

I don't know how many times I heard young females blurt out emotionally in meeting that we should "love the church". Christ loved the church; so should we, right? Wrong. Christ loved the church and the church should love Christ.

Instead the church gets seduced, and distracted: instead of loving Christ, the church loves the church and it all goes south in a hurry. The Bridegroom is left waiting at the altar, and the church is hurried off by an interloper, waving a fun-house mirror before her, telling her to eye herself and her garments. "How beautiful you are, my queen!" (See e.g. Rev 18:7's "I sit a queen!")

And what is the Christ that comes out of this? A Christ that doesn't care about one's neighbor, or the poor, or the sick or weak or imprisoned, but wants to scour universities for "good building material". A Christ who is selective with scripture; it's no longer "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God" but only those words which prop up a hermeneutic or teaching. A Christ that elevates fallen men. A Christ that judges everyone else as deficient. A Christ that doesn't care about "right and wrong", i.e. righteousness. I could go on, obviously.

The Christ that is the "centrality and universality" of this church-fixated world is not the Jesus of Nazareth of Whom Moses and the prophets wrote, and to Whom Peter and Paul and James and John were discipled. It's not the Christ Whom the Father sent, but rather the Christ whom the self-obsessed church manufactures to justify herself.

Originally Posted by HERn

How about "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on ANYTHING ELSE we become a cult".

THE MINISTRY
THE MOTA
GOD's ORACLE
THE HIGH PEAK TRUTHS

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

And that is what baffles me. Since the major part of their recruitment is focused on smart, young, college students; it should be highly probable that these individuals would Google "Witness Lee", "Local Church", "Christians on Campus"... and do some research. I know that would be the first thing I would do.

Originally Posted by Terry

By all indications, the transition from The Stream Publishers to Living Stream Ministry more or less coincided with the Daystar collapse.

Originally Posted by Ricky,P

Thanks to open forums like this one local church members are far less uniformed and the truth is far less suppressed. It's probably the younger more techy members that have made their way to this forum and that's a good thing because the older ones are probably far too brainwashed by Lee and the blended bros to see what's going on out here in the real world.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Can someone tell me about the history of LSM? If possible I would like to know when the original Stream Publishers became LSM.

Thanks

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf

"Although there are proper reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010

Originally Posted by aron

One leader who I respect today is George Washington. Washington was surrounded by brilliant and able men: Hamilton, Madison, Jefferson, etc. but he wasn't threatened by them. He was secure, not in his position but in his person. He never cared about position, either his or others'. As a result, men like Hamilton were able to flourish, and use their powers of rhetoric and persuasion, because they didn't have to constantly look over their shoulders at the Commander in Chief.

But WL was abetted by a system. The man is gone but the system remains. It would be good to expose it for what it is. You know, fallen human culture and fallen spirits are not that far apart - they're arguably quite related. One is motivated by the other, and the other takes refuge in the one, and is manifested through it.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

I was listening to this weeks message on the CTM website. The brother who was speaking said something that startled me; "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on the Church we become a cult". I use quotes but this is essentially what he stated.

Originally Posted by HERn

This is why I don't believe all cultures are equal. They may be equally fallen, but I don't think they are all equal..

Originally Posted by HERn

The fact that none of the strong-willed American brothers like MR could take down WL tells me he was incredibly intelligent, strong-willed, and possibly under the influence of evil spirits.

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

I was listening to this weeks message on the CTM website. The brother who was speaking said something that startled me; "When we take our eyes off of Christ and put them only on the Church we become a cult". I use quotes but this is essentially what he stated. My dear blendeds you would do well to give heed to our simple brother's statement. He is a chosen vessel!

Originally Posted by Indiana

“Brother Nee stressed two things: Christ as life to produce the church and the church as the Body of Christ to express Christ.” (W.L.) That is, until the resumption of his ministry in Shanghai and he began to use terms like “the minister of the age” for the first time.

http://www.twoturmoils.com/BobDanker...onoftheAge.pdf

Originally Posted by Terry

Let's take the blendeds for example. My feeling is if you remove them from the system; the garlic room they're in they become normal, respectable, and loving Christian brothers. In the garlic room, they're captives of the system. One that demands preservation of the ministry above all else.

Originally Posted by Indiana

Two of my posts on Larry Chi book - 2009

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...21&postcount=3

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...25&postcount=7

Originally Posted by aron

I think it's pretty clear that this culture avoids airing dirty laundry at all costs. Even when the cost includes violating scripture: i.e. "tell it to the church". Anyone who hung around the LC for a while saw culture repeatedly trump scripture.

Originally Posted by HERn

This is why I don't believe all cultures are equal. They may be equally fallen, but I don't think they are all equal. The fact that none of the strong-willed American brothers like MR could take down WL tells me he was incredibly intelligent, strong-willed, and possibly under the influence of evil spirits.

Originally Posted by aron

Notice that this is a big meeting, many "responsible" and "mature" ones have come in from afar, many of the LC members are suffering, and confused, the appearance of unrighteousness or impropriety or malfeasance rears up, and no one says a thing! They couldn't, because their culture had paralyzed them. To question WL in a public setting would make him lose face, and that wasn't an option. Righteousness was optional, but making the leader publicly lose face was simply not possible.

Once you see the cultural element in the Leadership structure of the LC, it is hard not to see it. Because it's so obvious.

Originally Posted by Indiana

The (Larry Chi) book had been circulated among Chinese to some degree, but no one had it translated into another language, particularly English. I wondered how this could be that the book was written in the eighties and I come along in the 2000s and have it translated. The price was high ($680) and the Chinese could have done it themselves for the sake of English readers, but for some reason no one did. I was told it was a cultural matter just as there was no warning from the Chinese about Daystar at its inception.

Originally Posted by Terry

This thread parallels that somewhat of the Asian Mind and the Western Mind. Those in LSM leadership embrace the characteristic of the Asian culture where authority is absolute and submission is unconditional. As a result those in leadership don't need to be accountable nor responsible to anyone.

Originally Posted by Don Hardy

It was a LARGE Mtng (bros. had flown in), and WL was sitting up-front in “the captain’s chair”. John Smith of San Diego, asked him something like this: “WHAT happened with Daystar, WL? Soooo many saints are still suffering. Somehow we have to pay them $$ back”

WL’s answer: something like this (I’ll “never” forget): “They have lost their virginity”.

Dick Taylor was very perplexed, and asked: ”Why, WL, what on earth do you mean?!!”

“Well bros. when the saints first came into Elden Hall, in the “early days” they were all somewhat pure virgins, WHOLLY for the LORD, seeking the Lord, wanting only the Lord. But over Daystar, so many LOST their virginity, they lost their first love. (They got mixed).

Dick (or someone else) said, HOW did that happen WL?

WL said, they were (all) SEDUCED, they lost their virginity!”

And there were MANY brothers there, but NOT one asked, “WHO did the seducing, WL?” I did not ask publicly, but I asked (and was answered) within me! "Why, the "little precious man" sitting right in front of us, IS THE MAN who seduced us all!!"

Originally Posted by JJ

I'm sure you all know this, but for the record "tell it to the church" is the last step in confronting a sinning brother (not keep your mouth shut). Thus the function of this forum is to tell it to the church in hopes of gaining repentance from our brothers.

Mat 18:15-17 (New American Standard Version):

"Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.
And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."

Originally Posted by aron

An interesting thing about the LC experience is that it began as a reaction to Western imperialism, which came to Asia alongside the gospel imperative. Eventually, WN and the indigenous Chinese church threw off the yoke of the running dogs of the West, i.e. the denominations.

One hundred years later, WL returned the favor. We were willing to accept their Eastern imperialism, and the Asian-flavored kingdom of God, if it gave us a leg up on the gospel. Turns out, that it didn't. The "virgin soil" of China wasn't that virginous, after all.

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.leadersofthelordsrecovery.us/LRLeaders.pdf

"Although there are proper reasons for open, honest, mutual fellowship with church leaders, the opportunity to meet with them is closed to me and to others. The concept in the leadership is that no one in the churches should make an issue of anything or care for right and wrong, which has worked well to keep church members uninformed and the truth suppressed. Thus, discussion of serious concerns keep going to an open forum." -2010

Originally Posted by aron

I must repeat that Chinese culture isn't inferior to that of USA or Germany etc; all are fallen. But in assuming that no trace of worldly human culture tainted his ministry... their blindness remained (cf John chap 9).

Originally Posted by Lisbon

This all became the garlick room WL talked about so much. We were numbed, befuddled, just like Lee said we were. We were moo cows and we laughed as we were taken down the road of captivity.

Originally Posted by aron

In Chinese culture, screaming and yelling and jumping up and down entails "loss of face", no? No wonder they were unwilling. If Lee shows up, and says you are outdated, and you need to jump up and down and scream "O Lord Jesus" then essentially your doing so is not a surrender to God, but to WL.

Also makes it very interesting that the WL disciples in Mainland were called "Yellers" and "Screamers" and "Shouters". He noted their numbers approvingly, and called them by this name, before they were revealed to be under cultic influence...

Originally Posted by Ohio

Here is a post from another thread which is just one example why I say that Lee changed ...


This is why nearly all the LC saints I know would not agree with this site. UntoHim pukes every time I mention this, but they will not visit this site because some posters here refuse to acknowledge that Lee was once an anointed minister of the word.

OK, I'm already ducking.

Originally Posted by OBW

When we speak of Early Lee and Late Lee, it reminds me that way back (maybe 2005) when posting on the old Berean site, I was struck with the sameness of the new v the old ...

Originally Posted by JJ

This inversion of things "ministry above the word" astounds me, because I recall Witness Lee asking the saints not to do this at the 1981 Winter Training on Corinthians. "Don't say Witness Lee says this", say "the Bible says this". I always understood that the ministry was an aid to help us get into the Word, and if the Lord Spirit and the clear Word didn't support what was in the ministry to drop that part.