|
| 07-13-2019 02:03 PM | ||
| Indiana |
Re: Claim that the Dissenting Brothers Were Rebellious Angel of light ministers claimed and still claim,after much warning to them, that John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So were leaders of a rebellion. Since they still do not listen, and sin willfully, they graduate to the distinction of being called angel of light ministers. A lawsuit was actually filed against two angel of light ministers, Sherman Robertson and Ron Kangas, which was brought to the attention of all elders attending an international meeting Dec 2010. The lawsuit went on for four months, with neither one of these so-called leaders capitulating to the truth and fellowship with me, and others, over my writings that they condemn but no angel of light minister has yet refuted with intelligence or fact. The Claim that the Dissenting Brothers Were Rebellious (p. 74-75, FPR) John Ingalls – The following word from John Ingalls is taken from the conclusion of his book. We are also widely and vociferously accused of being rebellious and of fermenting and fomenting rebellion. This also is an extremely serious charge, and one which I feel obliged to respond to and deny. Against whom, I would ask, are we rebelling. And what was our act of rebellion? For my part I have always sought to have a good conscience before God and man. To remain silent in a situation of departure and degradation, or to withdraw into “judicious obscurity”, as some have done, would have been for me unconscionable. Not to speak out or to refrain from warranted action would have been for me a form of rebellion against the Lord’s inner speaking and urging. My object was to follow the Lord, obey His Word, and practice the truth, fearing only Him. Perhaps I fell short in some particulars. Apart from that, however, “I am conscious of nothing against myself,yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord” (I Cor. 4:4). I therefore consider the charge of rebellion to be totally inappropriate and unfounded. Is it rebellious to voice one’s concerns, care for one’s conscience, obey the Lord’s Word, and follow the inner anointing? This is what I did and sought to do, as this account testifies. Was I ambitious for position or did I seek to raise a following for myself, as some say? The Lord knows that this is far from the truth. I can only consider the charges of rebellion and conspiracy to be a form of character assassination, and a means to cover one’s own track. John So – John So describes the relationship that he was expected to have with LSM that he could not go along with. The course he then took was perceived as rebellion: In my last page, I told Brother Lee, “Please do not think that I’m against you or am opposing you because of my writing you this letter. I do not have the slightest intention to oppose your work or your ministry”. At that time, I really meant what I said according to my understanding of the function of the ministry office; and I fully agreed with Witness Lee that if the LSM is only operating on the business side to print books and to distribute tapes, then we brothers should accept this, and cooperate with them. Well, the question is this: I was accused here in Fermentation of pretending to be one with LSM, but that really I was against them [rebelling__ED]. Tonight let me say a word. I don’t want to vindicate, but I just like to share at least the way we look at it. Everything has two sides. I’m sorry to say, it is not that I am pretending. It is because the LSM office really has a double standard. There is a public declaration that the office is only for the business side to print books, to duplicate tapes, and to send them out to serve the churches. But to my realization, there is another aspect expected of us. During the visit of these five brothers to Stuttgart, two of them stayed with me in my home—two of them. And these brothers began to fellowship with me concerning the office, that it is really brother Philip Lee and that brother Philip Lee is the closest and most intimate co-worker of Witness Lee. And that I need to get into the fellowship with him, and that our brother, Witness Lee, needs his son. And after almost every meeting in Stuttgart, they made a long-distance call to the office to report everything that is happening. To the office! The report went to the office. I was, in short, expected to do the same. I told the brothers in a very good way—we were not fighting—I said, “Brothers, I’m sorry, in short, I just cannot do that. You have the grace to do it, that’s fine, but I just cannot do that.” I told the brothers maybe some other German brothers, like Jorn Urlenbac could do it. I was told, No, no, no, you are the right person to do it. I said, Thank you, but I can’t do it. This is what I realized later was the cause of many problems that we in Stuttgart began to experience with the LSM. Report had gone back to Philip Lee that I refused to do what the brothers were doing. Looking back, this is what caused a serious problem with him. In my view, however, what they were doing in reporting everything to the office had nothing to do with Witness Lee’s public declaration of what the office is. I didn’t feel there was a need for me to report to the office what we were doing. But these brothers who came to Stuttgart were telling me that Witness Lee’s son is his closest and most intimate co-worker. I have to say I had never heard such a thing before. But these two brothers who stayed with me assured me that this was true though Brother Lee doesn’t say this publicly. Well, I say, if I haven’t heard of this, I just haven’t heard of it. Anyway, a report went back to Anaheim, and somebody wasn’t happy with me. I was happy with everybody, but somebody wasn’t happy with me. I didn’t realize it at first, but as time went by I could see that we had problems with “the office” because we lacked cooperation with the manager of the office. It is not right, therefore, to say that on one hand I declare that I am for the ministry office, but on the other hand, I don’t cooperate with it. I want to let you know that something more was expected of us at LSM that we could not cooperate with. And, someone was not happy with us about that. Witness Lee should know about our fluctuation. Why? My goodness, if he knows about the consideration of the whole earth, this is a little matter. He should know why there was a fluctuation. The fluctuation was due to the new expectation “the office” had for us, which we could not cooperate with. Of course this made it difficult for us to work together in one accord with LSM. Bill Mallon – In the Southeast, Bill Mallon endeavored to be one with Brother Lee, the co-workers, and the new way, but ran into serious problems with LSM representatives, who avoided fellowship with him, and other elders, in order to establish LSM influence in the Southeast churches. His reaction to their usurpations and control of the churches was perceived as rebellion by brothers and sisters in the churches who didn’t know his circumstances.…. Indiana is online now Report Post |
|
| 07-12-2019 06:57 PM | ||
| awareness |
Re: Testimony of Our Conscience Quote:
|
|
| 07-12-2019 04:47 PM | ||
| Indiana |
Re: Testimony of Our Conscience The apostle Paul actually had a testimony of his conscience that he could not be blamed in anything. Contrariwise, a former elder posits that he didn't know how some of the current elders could sleep at night for what they know. In Ron's recent speaking he asserts that John Ingalls had never repented in 29 years, but John wrote a book that Ron and the blending brothers should have read, (and have had plenty of opportunity to do so), and offer their own much-needed repentances in he Body.. Ron Kangas' special meeting with FTT graduates https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WNR...eh-q81816/view "For our boasting is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in singleness and sincerity of heart, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and more abundantly toward you." (2 Cor. 1:12) BROTHERS WERE INVOLVED IN A CONSPIRACY? John Ingalls – “It is not our desire, nor has it ever been, to overthrow anyone’s work or ministry, neither have we desired to put anyone’s ministry aside, but rather to bring everything to the light and put everything in the proper context. A report has been circulated that we would not be satisfied until we brought a certain person down; this report was erroneously applied to us. We never had any such intention, nor have we ever conspired against anyone – the Lord knows this and can testify for us. The accusation of conspiracy made against us is an utter falsehood – our testimony as recorded in this account bears this out. Rather we have grieved over those in leadership who have swerved from the path they once proclaimed and espoused. We desperately hoped there would be some change to resolve the serious problems that had emerged, and we fellowshipped earnestly with Brother Lee to this end. We have lamented the damage inflicted and suffered by many saints through practices and attitudes that we too in some measure participated in… For my part, I humbly repent of this”. (Speaking the Truth In Love conclusion, 1990) Al Knoch – “Anyone who knows John Ingalls knows that he is not ambitious; he is not that way. Who would want that responsibility [of taking over the recovery]. There was no conspiracy” (from an interview with Al, Nov 2000). John So – In his Manila presentation, John So expressed surprise at the conspiracy charge: I would like to just go through Brother Lee’s outline concerning the rebellion. It says the rebellion began to ferment from Stuttgart in 1986. What I would like to do is just give you the chronological events of what took place. I will only deal briefly with things that I personally know quite well, concerning myself, Stuttgart, and Europe. I don’t know and I am not thoroughly familiar with what went on in Hong Kong. I really do not know and I cannot say anything in details. So, I cannot speak for brother Joseph Fung. And I didn’t know exactly what happened in Anaheim in the very beginning. So I cannot speak for brother John Ingalls. I really cannot. And when things happened in Rosemead, I really had no idea what was going on there until I read the literature that they had put out. I did not even know that we had ever formed together an “international conspiracy ring” until Witness Lee said so. I am quite surprised. None of the places I’ve mentioned involved me. Okay, Witness Lee claims that rebellion and conspiracy started to ferment in Stuttgart in 1986. I’m going to start at this point….(1990, John So’s testimony given in Manila by their invitation) John Ingalls – John Ingalls speaks of having the same “heart’s burden” as others. "Brother Lee mentioned then that Bill Mallon, John So, and myself all used the same term – central control. He deduced that we must have consulted or “conspired” together. The fact was that we all had the same realization because of separate similar experiences without any consultation and certainly without any “conspiring“ with each other. John So began to be concerned in 1986, Bill Mallon in the spring of 1987, and myself in the fall of 1987. Eventually, as we had done for years, we had telephone contact with each other, and our heart’s burden came out. John Ingalls – John shares the following refutation of the conspiracy charge: At this point we felt that it would be useful for the brothers we had contacted to come together to fellowship and pray in preparation for going to see Brother Lee, so that we would be clear concerning the issues we would present to him. Moreover, we believed it would be best not to create any stir among the saints or other elders by doing this openly; so we sought some place where we could all meet privately. This was by no means a conspiracy, as we are being charged. At no time did we ever meet with the purpose of plotting to overthrow Brother Lee and his ministry. That is utterly ridiculous. We never had such a thought – the Lord can testify for us. A private meeting or a secret meeting does not constitute a conspiracy. A conspiracy takes form from the content of the meeting. Is it a conspiracy to pray and fellowship together in preparation for visiting Brother Lee and opening our hearts in frank fellowship? Of course not. We were very concerned for the saints and sought for an extended period to cover the grave matters from them lest they be distraught and we suffer worse consequences. One of the brothers I sought to contact and confer with was Ray Graver, an elder in the church in Irving, Texas, and the manager of the LSM branch office there. I called him in Texas and proposed that I come to see him in Irving. It was thought, however, for us to meet in Irving would attract too much attention; so we settled on meeting midway in El Paso, Texas. This decision is being censured now as a plan for a secret meeting, as if that in itself is evil and a conspiracy. But I fail to see anything wrong with this. It was with a pure motive and desire and certainly was not a plot to draw him into a conspiracy to overthrow anyone’s ministry. Ray was quite willing to do this until Benson Phillips, another co-worker and elder in Irving, Texas, who was then in Taiwan, advised him against it. Had Benson been in Irving, I would have sought to speak with him also. I enjoyed a very good and close relationship with both Ray and Benson for many years. John So - John So speaks straightforwardly to Brother Lee: Originally, I did plan to go to Anaheim to have some personal fellowship with you [Witness Lee] as you requested by phone early December. (I must say at this time I was not too polite anymore. If you would consider that as maybe a rebellion, that’s fine with me. Consider it as a rebellion. Conspiracy, that is also fine with me.) In my last page, I told him, please do not think that I’m against you or am opposing you because of my writing you this letter. I do not have the slightest intention to oppose your work or your ministry. Neither do I have any desire to convince any brother. By the Lord’s grace, I like to be straightforward and follow my conscience, not to hide anything and not play politics, not to please anyone, or to offend anyone. May the Lord have mercy on all His churches. (I ended the letter that way.) Bill Mallon - Bill Mallon was very concerned over serious developments in the Southeast churches and of course he opened to other brothers about his concerns, but he spurns the idea that there was ever a conspiracy to overthrow someone. He said this “would be funny if it were not so tragic” to be charged in this way. The brothers simply came together to discuss their serious concerns and desired to bring those concerns into fellowship with other brothers, including Brother Lee. John Ingalls approached Brother Lee sixteen times on behalf of the feeling of many brothers and the burden that many of them had at that time. Ken Unger went to Brother Lee twenty times. After a considerable amount of time had passed with little progress being made, certain brothers began to speak out according to their convictions, based on the Word of God, prior church ministry, and their conscience. This, however, was interpreted by some as speaking differently, and negatively, and being against the new way in the churches. |
|
| 07-12-2019 02:57 PM | ||
| awareness |
Re: Resurrecting the Shanghai Elders testimony Quote:
And the LC was born carrying the idea that we get our spiritual being from obviously fallen men. It all makes sense now. |
|
| 07-12-2019 01:14 PM | ||
| Indiana |
Re: Angel of Light Ministers I listened to Ron’s message three times. He is so locked into the system that he didn’t realize he was dealing with Deborah, not Miriam. “In the 'Song', Deborah describes a total breakdown of order in Israel.” Ron once again manifests what he is not, a true leader who can hear the voice of a prophet, a sister, Joanna. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WNR...eh-q81816/view Angel of Light Ministers What a stark difference between the apostle Paul and the super-apostles he addressed in 2 Corinthians! (11:5) He was very much disturbed by their falsehood and drew the contrast between him and them. He was a genuine apostle; they were not. Concerning taking care of the ministry, he said, "we have renounced the hidden things of shame and did not walk in craftiness or adulterate the word of God, but by manifestation of the truth, commended themselves to every conscience of men before God." (5:11) The super-apostles could not do this. Although Paul never campaigned for leadership in the churches, his apostleship was manifest to God, and he and those with him behaved in such a way that others would not be offended or stumbled by them. So Paul could say to the Corinthians, "for I am jealous over you with a jealousy of God, for I betrothed to one husband to present you as a pure virgin to Christ.” (11:2) Paul could do this because he was pure (of God); and they were not. The Falsehood of the Blending Brothers Those today who feign purity in their roles of global authorities over the federation of churches they manage have problems today matching Paul in character and purpose. In outward appearance they seem to match; but they do not have the same heart. (5:12) When Paul says, “We gave no occasion of stumbling in anything that the ministry may not be faulted, he said this in purity; he was not covering up unrighteous matters to protect the ministry. Paul could say with a pure conscience, “in everything we commend ourselves as ministers of God in much endurance…” (3:4); “make room for us, we have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have taken advantage of no one. (7:2) Our mouth is opened to you Corinthians, our heart is enlarged…you also be enlarged (6:11)…be reconciled to God" (5:20). He had the ground to speak like this, with much entreaty to the Corinthians. The blending brothers’ record of impurities are well-documented by several brothers and sisters. And the blending brothers' appeal for cooperation with them falls on many deaf ears as a result. These men, in essence, are false brothers, daring to mix the impure things with the New Testament ministry and expect there will be a pure result, as Paul, betrothing the saints as a pure virgin to Christ. 2012 |
|
| 07-10-2019 06:07 PM | ||
| Indiana |
Resurrecting the Shanghai Elders testimony Although the Shanghai elders and regional leaders had made a Decision after Nee’s sentencing, Witness Lee was not of the same spirit. He would follow his own narrative and favor Nee and Noah and lethal concepts like those he had introduced in Shanghai, extolling as a virtue blind submission to a spiritual father. http://www.makingstraighttheWayofthe...sTestimony.pdf |
|
