Originally Posted by Ohio

The constant abuse and lack of civility all comes from the top. Supposedly this aspect of TLR came from a sister M. Barber, who "perfected" Nee by rebuking him. Remember the old saying, that "it" of the "sh" kind always rolls down hill. By the time I left, there was a line ringing in my head, "this program turns beloved brothers into bullies." It was all too evident on every level. Bullies just reproduce themselves. It also partly explains so many family breakups.

Can someone please show me just one scripture for this "recovered" method of perfecting brothers?

I talked to my son about his time in the LC. He relayed a story about going on an overnight church camp. While they were playing basketball, one of the kids was moody and went to his dad complaining. Dad came back, never asked a single question of any of the other boys, and went to my son and grabbed him around the neck. But Dad was a "burning" brother who went door-knocking with the elder, so he was never held accountable. How can a chaperone behave like this?

Originally Posted by awareness

In the past it's been easy to maintain ignorance. Not so easy today, with so much information at our fingertips.

Ignorance was easier to maintain before the internet. . ..

Originally Posted by aron

Jesus healed. He forgave. But when they tried to make him king, he refused. When they asked him to command others, he balked: "Who put me in authority over you?" Luke 12:14

Beware of wolves who dress like sheep. They create 'ekklesia' based on some abstract ideal, say, "oneness". And you become convinced this is the way. And one day you wake up and you are far from the reality of the kingdom. The ideal was merely a leverage point over your mind.

You will see that these people do not heal, nor forgive. But they want to tell you what to do. What to say, what to read, what to think.

Originally Posted by Freedom

One side must "take the cross" which always ends up being the person who is not in an authority role..

Originally Posted by Freedom

I had an interesting situation where the wife of an elder was making a point to say things publicly towards me that were demeaning, all because she didn't like my personality. There wasn't anything I could do about her behavior, being that she was the wife of an elder. And indeed, when people had previously tried to confront her about the same type of behavior, she had become livid. The elders all knew very well that she was a problem, but the felt that people affected by her behavior should just not worry about it.

Originally Posted by Freedom

The LC view of authority is based on some kind of notion that for a leader to make a compromise or admission of any sorts would undermine his authority. LC elders and leadership thus adopt a “take it or leave” it attitude. The ‘lesser’ party must be the one to make the compromise.

In the LC, I observed quite a few problems occur that the elders should have addressed and they failed to anything. It seemed to be that they didn’t want to have to make a difficult decision. Rather than use their position as a leader to present a solution, they instead used their position to reinforce their level of authority, to make sure that both sides knew that they didn’t have to take any action if they didn’t want to.

Originally Posted by Terry

That's usually how it works. The one in authority role almost never seeks reconciliation for their actions or their speaking. You or I as the non-authority ones would be expected to "take the cross". When you say taking the cross, it is usually intended to be "not making an issue".
I think the brothers could care less if the cross is taken or not. That's a matter between the individual and the Lord.
What the brothers really care about is "not making an issue". If there's an unresolved matter and a brother is exercised to use the prayer meeting or prophesying meeting as an opportunity to "tell it to the church", that's not the type of conflict resolution the brothers are willing to entertain.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I talked to my son about his time in the LC. He relayed a story about going on an overnight church camp. While they were playing basketball, one of the kids was moody and went to his dad complaining. Dad came back, never asked a single question of any of the other boys, and went to my son and grabbed him around the neck. But Dad was a "burning" brother who went door-knocking with the elder, so he was never held accountable. How can a chaperone behave like this?

Originally Posted by Freedom

In the back of my mind, I could always tell that there was something not quite right about how LCers interacted with each other with respect to conflicts and conflict resolution. In fact, most of the conflicts that I observed were manifested as angry outbursts instead of being just a simple disagreement. Such outbursts occur because the LCM does not feel that the 'lesser' party should stand their ground, and "agreeing to disagree" is not viewed as an appropriate resolution. One side must "take the cross" which always ends up being the person who is not in an authority role.

Originally Posted by Freedom

In the back of my mind, I could always tell that there was something not quite right about how LCers interacted with each other with respect to conflicts and conflict resolution. In fact, most of the conflicts that I observed were manifested as angry outbursts instead of being just a simple disagreement. Such outbursts occur because the LCM does not feel that the 'lesser' party should stand their ground, and "agreeing to disagree" is not viewed as an appropriate resolution. One side must "take the cross" which always ends up being the person who is not in an authority role.

Originally Posted by Ohio

You're so right. The program is set up by abusive men, and enables hot-tempered personalities. Once when I decided to stop taking the blame, and calmly refused to back down from his aggressions, the elder went ballistic on me, and I was nearly hospitalized. Later I was lectured about forgiving him, and "protecting" the eldership.

Originally Posted by Freedom

One lesson that I learned the hard way was when I came to realize that people in the LC will take advantage of those who are readily willing to forgive others, or those who are non-aggressive. If you happen to stand your ground, then all the sudden, you get labeled as “having an offense” with someone.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

Ok, I'm being sarcastic here... but really- that kind of passive aggressive dumbing down power move is EXACTLY what happens. And it's too much- gotta call it out when I see it now. Hopefully, people reading will RECOGNIZE when it's being done to them.

You're using someone's relationship with the Lord and their place in the body of Christ AGAINST them- dismissing and subliminally shaming them, in order to get a certain desired behavior. It's called spiritual abuse. It's manipulative and a sin in the body of Christ. I saw it and see it all the time.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

The fact that WN or WL claims to KNOW the truth about all the debated doctrines of the Bible is a huge red flag for me.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I was disappointed when I noticed that the elders made no attempt to equip us to address people’s concerns about the LC. I then became more interested in finding out for myself what was out there on the internet. The information didn’t change my mind overnight, but what eventually did change my mind was when I realized how much that is out there that has gone unaddressed by the LC and its leaders. It could be said the facts were what ‘poisoned’ me. I had lived in fear of information. The same information that the LC was incapable of addressing. Once I realized that the LC had no interest in addressing the concerns and information that really mattered, it made such information all the more meaningful.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Fear goes hand-in-hand with control. It's interesting to note that when the LC makes reference to groups, individuals, or material that is not pro-LC, they will use generic terminology such as negative ones, negative speaking, etc. They won’t qualify what is ‘negative’ about it. Even in the instances where they do get more specific (such as literature produced by the DCP), the defense of LC positions or teachings always comes from an ‘official’ source, rather than it being represented as something that any member could defend.

Originally Posted by aron

J: “I was reading the biography of Watchman Nee by Witness Lee. In it, Lee shows how Nee was helped by Madame Guyon, on the inner life, and how Nee's “Spiritual Man” was heavily indebted to Jessie Penn-Lewis’ “War on the Saints”, and how Mary McDonough’s “Three Parts of Man” influenced his thinking (and later, Lee’s). Plus Nee credited Emily Fishbacher on the charismatic experience. Not to mention ME Barber teaching him all those years! (And Dora Yu, Peace Wang, Ruth Lee &c). Now, I'm wondering: if the ministries of all these women were obviously so instrumental in Nee’s spiritual development, why does the 'recovery' church he founded not allow women to teach? It seems that he was either illegitimately instructed by women, or his 'recovery' group is illegitimately suppressing valid and valuable women's ministries today. I don't see how one can simultaneously have it both ways here. What do you think?”

Originally Posted by kumbaya

Fear is a good control tactic. I've said it before but it wasn't until years after I stopped meeting with the church that I looked anything up online.

What was I so afraid of? I was afraid subconsciously of being confronted with information that would "ruin" my outlook and make me uncomfortable. It's so much easier to just go with the flow.

I really feel like people in the LC think the boogeyman is going to jump out of the computer and poison their minds if they dared to look anything up for themselves. I wouldn't admit it to myself then, but I was too scared I would read something that would "change" me. What happened to being able to defend your beliefs?? I mean, what was I thinking?? It's so interesting to think back on my mindset then. This is why I truly believe thought reform is strongly in play. I would like to say that my whole life, I could defend my beliefs and faith to some extent to someone either outside the LC or an unbeliever. But I can't say that bc I never read or knew anything about the group I met with, other than what was told to me by the elders.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

This is hitting home. I was talking to someone today (former family in LC) about this. They really are afraid to be exposed to any other idea. I believe they 100% believe they're right, but the FEAR of being "poisoned" is real.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

In REALITY, when you care and love someone- you're not "suppressive" or "poison" to tell them about something that concerns you that they're doing. As long as its done with love, its NORMAL to do that..

Originally Posted by aron

Absolutely. In the thought-world of the LSM-affiliated lc, they get only one perspective. They are afraid to be exposed to any other as it might shatter the veils. What kind of sick-bed faith is that? Where is the fresh air? Where is the light? The transparency?

Originally Posted by Freedom

I have a number of LC members as friends on Facebook and I noticed a pattern with those who have attended the training. Upon starting, they will add a "canned" post on their page explaining that they will be unavailable to communicate on Facebook or by phone for a duration of a few months. It really makes you wonder just what they are being told to do. It is definitely not normal to convince people that they need to drop virtually all communication with the outside world.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

I feel like if people can just learn about thought reform and spiritual abuse practices- that's ALL it takes. Just awareness about what is and isn't right in relationships will give you the perspective where God can lead you.

Originally Posted by kumbaya

Well, administrators of the FTT- you've been asked to look at your techniques in teaching these "trainees" for some time now. At what point is using these "thought reform" techniques just willful ignorance or an intentional practice? Neither of them are ok....

I recieve emails from someone in the training right now that I don't even know, it's kind of funny. I guess I got on his email "update" list somehow. It's exactly the same tone and wording I got from the updates when my family member was in- very strange.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Like so many others, I experienced the pressure first-hand to attend the FTT. Thankfully I never attended, but the fact that they attempt to pressure people into attending is disturbing to say the least. I don't know that the FTT was conceived with ill motives, but what they are trying to accomplish, and the means by which they go about it is as you say - disgusting.

I have known quite a few who attended the FTT. The difference before and after is remarkable, and not in a good way. Personalities change, people become cold and distant, it is sad.

Also, the usage of the FTT to arrange and orchestrate relationships and marriages is one of the things that I find to be the most concerning and questionable. If those in charge have that much control over young and impressionable trainees, then they essentially have the ability to control them in any way they want.

Originally Posted by JJ

Kumbaya, you are spot on with this critique of FTT and discussion about marriage conformance pressure.

Simply said it’s disgusting.

One of the best things we can do is warn people about it on this forum.

Thanks for contributing your firsthand view of these things.

Originally Posted by JJ

Kumbaya, you are spot on with this critique of FTT and discussion about marriage conformance pressure.

Simply said it’s disgusting.

One of the best things we can do is warn people about it on this forum.

Thanks for contributing your firsthand view of these things.

Originally Posted by Terry

Problem is FTTA creates an environment where young people don't want to stick around if FTTA isn't a goal.

Originally Posted by aron

WL's hermeneutics were exercises in logic, yet supposedly we weren't mature enough or pure enough to exercise our own...

Originally Posted by HERn

You know Igzy, I let a lot of crap slide by when I thought that the LC was doing the "God-ordained way", you know all prophesying, etc.. Now that I've thrown Witness Lee along with his blendeds out on their ears I'm not gonna let that crap slide by. Where in the bible is the word or concept of the body of Christ being an "organism" found? It's true that the body of Christ is more than an organization, it's the body of Christ, but who has the right to coin a new word "organism"? I guess none of the writers of the NT had the vision to see the reality that WL and his blindeds saw.

Originally Posted by Igzy

fungus, mold, spores, toadstools...

Note, too, again, "the organism of the Triune God" is an attempt to remove personality and thought from the equation. It's just "life." Spontaneous, automatic... blah, blah. Yes, we should all spontaneously and automatically submit to the MOTA, without thinking. Get out of your mind and be a spontaneous fungus. De-evolution.

Originally Posted by Terry

After you've prayed about and the light you receive isn't according to the "fellowship given", go back and pray some more until you finally receive the light.

Originally Posted by Igzy

fungus, mold, spores, toadstools...

Note, too, again, "the organism of the Triune God" is an attempt to remove personality and thought from the equation. It's just "life." Spontaneous, automatic... blah, blah. Yes, we should all spontaneously and automatically submit to the MOTA, without thinking. Get out of your mind and be a spontaneous fungus. De-evolution.

Originally Posted by Igzy

fungus, mold, spores, toadstools...

Originally Posted by OBW

When I think "organisms" I think of parasites and bacteria. Nothing good.

Originally Posted by Ohio

. . . we were organisms . . .

Originally Posted by Terry

You mean to tell me none of the local churches have any affiliations with Living Stream Ministry, which in my opinion is a biased affiliation.

Originally Posted by aron

So Thyatira was a genuine and legitimate lampstand, apostasy and all. But it signified the apostate church which wasn't genuine or legitimate, and thus didn't get a lampstand.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I remember this teaching years ago by Lee which defined a "true" local church, i.e. one that was a legitimate "lampstand." The were a half-dozen points, one of which was "no affiliations" with outside agencies or organizations.

Originally Posted by aron

As they would say in the LC, "Just pray about it." Ask the Lord to open your eyes. Right.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I remember this teaching years ago by Lee which defined a "true" local church, i.e. one that was a legitimate "lampstand." The were a half-dozen points, one of which was "no affiliations" with outside agencies or organizations. Even at the time I wondered how in the world I could accept that in all good conscience. So I basically stuck that in my "to be addressed later" file, and continued marching on with every one else. We would accept nonsense like that, without discussion of its merits, because TC would have shut them down.

Originally Posted by aron

But they all have lampstands????

Originally Posted by Ohio

They kept their lampstand because they were still a proper local church, standing on the local ground of oneness, i.e. one church one city.

Originally Posted by Witness Lee

“The seven churches…symbolize the seven kinds of churches in church history…The initial church had its continuation in the suffering church; the suffering church became the worldly church; and the worldly church became the apostate church. Hence, the first four churches issued eventually in one kind of church…the Roman Catholic Church. Then the reformed church…came into existence as another kind of church, a church not fully recovered. Hence, after this, the recovered church was raised up as a full recovery of the proper church life. This…[is] the third kind of church. Through the degradation of the recovered church, the degraded recovered church came into being. This can be counted as the fourth kind of church. These four kinds of churches will all remain until the Lord comes back. Undoubtedly, only the recovered church can fulfill God's eternal purpose…” [Rev. 3:22, RcV., note 1].

Originally Posted by aron

Here is an interesting thought: if LC nomenclature of "lampstand" accepts the scriptural presentation of each church having a lampstand, as in the seven churches in Asia, then how is it that LC assemblies only are designated as lampstands in the world today? How does the thought of each LSM-affiliated assembly having the unique lampstand square with the scriptures showing that each fellowship, no matter how degraded or what the situation (Balaam, Jezebel, Nicolaitans, etc) had a lampstand?

Did WL dance around this disparity, I wonder? Or did he just ignore it?

Originally Posted by OBW

... it is clear that the LRC claims the right to cloak their assemblies with the nomenclature of "lampstand" and to exclude all others from it. If they aren't there, then there is no lampstand. If they are there, then there is a lampstand. And if they move away, the lampstand goes with them.

But it is not so in the NT, especially in the one place the term is used — Revelation. The lampstand is there in the city that was declared to have lost its first love. It was there where that woman, Jezebel, taught despicable things. It was there where everyone was lukewarm.

The lampstand is everywhere that there are people shining as the image of God in their lives among the darkness that is the world. The LRC's interest is not its testimony to the world. Only to the principalities and powers. And they don't even know how little that testimony means when their lack of shining to the living humans demonstrates that they are not having any impact on the world. At least not as a single group.

Originally Posted by Terry

It wouldn't be the first time numbers or statistics would be inflated or manipulated.

Originally Posted by Terry

It wouldn't be the first time numbers or statistics would be inflated or manipulated. The following is from John So's 1990 Testimony in Manila on page 6

I wasn’t opposing or anything fermenting within me. I’m sorry to say, dear saints, I think there is a plot, a conspiracy, there, not on our part, but on somebody else’s part to bring the churches in Europe and myself under a certain leading—under the, sorry to say, the hidden function of the office. That I must confess I do not, I just cannot fully agree. But that doesn’t mean that if I don’t agree, I oppose. I went to Taipei. I went to Taipei. I joined the door knocking. Okay, I enjoyed it. You might not believe me, but I really enjoyed it. In fact, I fully submitted to the group. You can ask my group leaders, I baptized a few people, really. And I am quite fond of that whole group. But when I was there, listen, one major leading brother in Taipei every time he saw me, he told me that the statistics were manipulated. That’s the word I think he used. I said, “Are you sure brother?” He said, “Yes.”

I believe one of Nigel's writings addressed the issue of statistics also.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am pretty sure the numbers in Europe are inflated. A group of LCer's came visiting our church (we didn't know who\what they were at the time) and as I was reading on the internet about Witness Lee, I ran across an update on Europe where they were claiming all the members of our church for the "recovery". We didn't even realize we were being counted as a part of the Lord's Recovery Just from that experience, I am pretty sure that they are not honest with their updates and numbers. They came to us as wolves in sheep's clothing and I trust nothing that comes out of that organization.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am pretty sure the numbers in Europe are inflated. A group of LCer's came visiting our church (we didn't know who\what they were at the time) and as I was reading on the internet about Witness Lee, I ran across an update on Europe where they were claiming all the members of our church for the "recovery". We didn't even realize we were being counted as a part of the Lord's Recovery Just from that experience, I am pretty sure that they are not honest with their updates and numbers. They came to us as wolves in sheep's clothing and I trust nothing that comes out of that organization.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I am pretty sure the numbers in Europe are inflated. A group of LCer's came visiting our church (we didn't know who\what they were at the time) and as I was reading on the internet about Witness Lee, I ran across an update on Europe where they were claiming all the members of our church for the "recovery". We didn't even realize we were being counted as a part of the Lord's Recovery Just from that experience, I am pretty sure that they are not honest with their updates and numbers. They came to us as wolves in sheep's clothing and I trust nothing that comes out of that organization.

Originally Posted by OBW

I have already pointed out that the article by Nigel does not really say much since there is insufficient information and true comparability, coupled with uncertain causation to make any real assertions. But among the possible results, a decline in interest in the LRC could be a cause. And having 3X more people in Europe does not stand in the way of that result (or any result) because the numerical insignificance of the group makes analysis nearly meaningless.

Originally Posted by YP0534

Still at it, eh?

Grace to you all, but this morning I was reminded that the Lord still speaks in my speaking. I don't know why I was led here after that but I'm definitely not settling in to rejoin the rehashing. I just don't even have time. The Lord has led me many light years away from this place and, I guess, given me this word:

No human effort will yield improved sight.
He is the unique eyesalve.

Originally Posted by Freedom

To me, this all explains why LC numbers are so small. I think that the BB's and LC elders honestly believe that they can gain loads of people, and that is why there putting forth the effort to do so. The reality of the situation, however, is that WL had a very different attitude to getting the increase he wanted. He spoke publicly about it, but then when it didn't work out, he would shell up and claim how he needed only a few people who were loyal to him.

Originally Posted by Freedom

To me, this all explains why LC numbers are so small. I think that the BB's and LC elders honestly believe that they can gain loads of people, and that is why there putting forth the effort to do so. The reality of the situation, however, is that WL had a very different attitude to getting the increase he wanted. He spoke publicly about it, but then when it didn't work out, he would shell up and claim how he needed only a few people who were loyal to him.

So what if all the saints who were out doing BFA activities or working on campuses, knew what WL said: "I only care for ten to twenty faithful ones meeting together to practice the truth." Statements like that pretty much negate the value of any gospel work people in the LC are doing.

Originally Posted by Freedom

So what if all the saints who were out doing BFA activities or working on campuses, knew what WL said: "I only care for ten to twenty faithful ones meeting together to practice the truth." Statements like that pretty much negate the value of any gospel work people in the LC are doing.

Originally Posted by Freedom

To me, this all explains why LC numbers are so small. I think that the BB's and LC elders honestly believe that they can gain loads of people, and that is why there putting forth the effort to do so. The reality of the situation, however, is that WL had a very different attitude to getting the increase he wanted. He spoke publicly about it, but then when it didn't work out, he would shell up and claim how he needed only a few people who were loyal to him.

So what if all the saints who were out doing BFA activities or working on campuses, knew what WL said: "I only care for ten to twenty faithful ones meeting together to practice the truth." Statements like that pretty much negate the value of any gospel work people in the LC are doing.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Well there you have it, folks. God's mouthpiece who recovers God's truth, and is satisfied even with only ten or twenty faithfully meeting together to practice this truth, which he has recovered. While some six billion others on this planet...what are they doing? What truth are they practicing?

Is this man some kind of god himself, that he would make such a declaration? Who is this man?

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Well there you have it, folks. God's mouthpiece who recovers God's truth, and is satisfied even with only ten or twenty faithfully meeting together to practice this truth, which he has recovered. While some six billion others on this planet...what are they doing? What truth are they practicing?

Is this man some kind of god himself, that he would make such a declaration? Who is this man?

Originally Posted by Freedom

That is very true. WL said himself:

This is why I find the whole subject so ironic. On the one hand, the LC is all for "the increase", then when it doesn't happen, WL turns around and says things like the quote posted above.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Interesting, I've never really heard any statistics regarding what Europe was like before. It sounds to me like the 750 number was essentially gaining back what they lost. 3000 is a considerable increase by LC standards, but I'm not that impressed.

I constantly hear the brothers say how Europe is "closed" to the gospel if as that is an excuse for the ineffectiveness of their work. Now, I don't know how "closed" Europe really is, but I think it's fair to say that there are other factors being involved than Europe simply being "closed off".

Originally Posted by Cassidy

750 is a small number... and so is 3000 compared to the larger context. The discussion is about growth rate not percentage against the whole.

Originally Posted by Friedel

When the churches in Western Europe and the UK under the distinct leadership of the brothers in Stuttgart, particularly John So, dissociated themselves from Witness Lee/ his Office/Living Stream Ministry in 1988, there were about 400 meeting in Stuttgart.

The other large locality was Blackpool in England but not nowhere near the numbers of Stuttgart.

My educated guess is that there were probably around 800 in all of Western Europe and the UK; possibly less. (Eastern Europe came after the demise of the Berlin Wall.)

Only one locality in all of Western Europe and the UK, allied with Stuttgart, did not break away and remained loyal to Anaheim: Friedrichshafen on the Bodensee in northern West Germany. There were about eighteen meeting there in total.

However, Philip Lee had by then already commissioned one Chris Lee (no relation) in London to start a new office. That step effectively killed whatever had been raised up in Blackpool and the rest of the UK over several years.

So the "Office" started on a clean slate. The Local Church started over.

There were Local Churches in England, Ireland, France, Switzerland, West Germany, Spain, (I think) Portugal, Sweden (mainly through migration), possibly Denmark … and that is about it. (I am speaking from memory from very long ago.) Some localities were very small, perhaps less than 10.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

My impression is that they're probably OK w/going back and forth from extremely tiny, to just tiny, and then back to extremely tiny, et cetera, et cetera, for decades. Wasn't the remnant that returned to Israel in the Old Testament one-third of the people? Well, they're content to be a remnant which is not even one-third of one percent, and often not even one-tenth of one percent.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

My impression is that they're probably OK w/going back and forth from extremely tiny, to just tiny, and then back to extremely tiny, et cetera, et cetera, for decades. Wasn't the remnant that returned to Israel in the Old Testament one-third of the people? Well, they're content to be a remnant which is not even one-third of one percent, and often not even one-tenth of one percent.

Originally Posted by Friedel

Dong Yu Lan was the King Pin for South America and elsewhere and after the death of the main King Pin he became a serious contender for the Throne of Pin. So, they cut him off at the knees but that did not stop him. Dong's Pin Empire today is all over. Perhaps he is now THE King Pin of the “Recovery” in the world today.

Originally Posted by Friedel

Originally Posted by Friedel

So the "Office" started on a clean slate. The Local Church started over.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Those numbers do represent an increase in LC membership, however, some questions come to mind (none of which I have a good answer for):

1) What about the massive disassociation of LC's in Europe from LSM in the late 80's? How many members were there in Europe before that happened, how many after?

2) How do these numbers compare to LC membership in America during that same time period?

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why did they disassociate? Did they just part ways? Were they just doing their own thing? Were there so-called ambitious leaders?

Originally Posted by Igzy

You are making a storm in a teacup to miss the larger point. Four times nothing is still nothing.

Sorry, Nee and Lee had their time. There is not going to be a significant resurgence of interest in them to validate the "Recovery" as anything but a tiny niche group. Their time has passed. They had their chance. Ain't going to happen. That's the fact you need to deal with. And that's the fact that dwindling Internet interest demonstrates. Which is the point.

I'm not the least bit interested in Tomes' popularity on the internet and I doubt he is. But you should be interested in Lee's. And it's relatively nothing. Do you expect it to grow? Why would you? Deus ex machina?

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy>Well, you have a point. But that doesn't help LSM's problem of declining interest in Lee at all, does it?

What decline? Post 28 from Unregistered shows a 4X increase over a 14 year period in membership in Europe. Even if those direct stats are ignored (there is no reason to ignore it but some people will anyway) it does not change my challenge to Tome's use of an internet search engine to draw his conclusion about interest/disinterest or membership in the local churches..... Google Trend is a single data point.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Those numbers do represent an increase in LC membership, however, some questions come to mind (none of which I have a good answer for):

1) What about the massive disassociation of LC's in Europe from LSM in the late 80's? How many members were there in Europe before that happened, how many after?[/B]

.

Originally Posted by OBW

Lord's recovery. ...The Lord's recovery is a designator for the sect of people who follow the ideologies of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee, declare that the only true church is the one that stands "on the ground of locality," accept that they are becoming God in life and nature, but not Godhead, and believe that the trinity, though true, and therefore three, is irrelevant because they are "simply" one. And if they do not agree to excommunicate Titus Chu and others who did not follow the unscriptural decrees, such as the Phoenix Accord, they are themselves cut off.

And then the legal team goes to work to "recover" the name (that they don't have) from the excommunicated group so that they can declare another lampstand in that city and call themselves by the "proper" no-name name. Oh, and try to sue for the property of the local assembly (the assembly that was at least once local in administration) by claiming more than local administration.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy>Well, you have a point. But that doesn't help LSM's problem of declining interest in Lee at all, does it?

What decline? Post 28 from Unregistered shows a 4X increase over a 14 year period in membership in Europe. Even if those direct stats are ignored (there is no reason to ignore it but some people will anyway) it does not change my challenge to Tome's use of an internet search engine to draw his conclusion about interest/disinterest or membership in the local churches..... Google Trend is a single data point.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

A BRIEF REPORT CONCERNING THE LORD’S MOVE IN EUROPE, DECEMBER, 2014

Increase in Europe

In the past fifteen years, the Lord has gained a significant increase throughout Europe:
In 2000, there were 32 lampstands in 12 countries. There were approximately 750 saints in
the Lord’s recovery throughout Europe. Now in 2014, there are 85 lampstands in 23 countries. There are now approximately 3,000 saints in the Lord’s recovery throughout Europe.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy>Well, you have a point. But that doesn't help LSM's problem of declining interest in Lee at all, does it?

What decline? Post 28 from Unregistered shows a 4X increase over a 14 year period in membership in Europe. Even if those direct stats are ignored (there is no reason to ignore it but some people will anyway) it does not change my challenge to Tome's use of an internet search engine to draw his conclusion about interest/disinterest or membership in the local churches..... Google Trend is a single data point.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

A BRIEF REPORT CONCERNING THE LORD’S MOVE IN EUROPE, DECEMBER, 2014

Increase in Europe

In the past fifteen years, the Lord has gained a significant increase throughout Europe:
In 2000, there were 32 lampstands in 12 countries. There were approximately 750 saints in
the Lord’s recovery throughout Europe. Now in 2014, there are 85 lampstands in 23 countries. There are now approximately 3,000 saints in the Lord’s recovery throughout Europe.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy>So the decline in Tomes is actually reflective of the decline in Lee. Which makes Tomes' point.

Hi Igzy,

Good to see you.

If Tomes had a decline trend, a flat trend, or a rising trend for that same period we could debate the correlation. In Tomes' case there is no trend to debate.... only a blank. Using Tome's methodology with his own Google Trend stats one could argue that there is not a decline in interest in Tome's material but no interest at all... were we to adopt the same credence and logic that Tomes uses against Witness Lee.

Originally Posted by Terry

From the late 90's I felt the FTTA creates a caste system among the young people. If you're one with a view in mind to attend FTTA, you will receive much care and shepherding. If you don't have an ambition for FTTA, you don't feel wanted, needed, or cared for. By the time you're 19-21, if you go to a Sunday meeting it's out of tradition.
Problem is FTTA creates an environment where young people don't want to stick around if FTTA isn't a goal.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Hi Ray,

Thanks, good to see you. There was some levity built in. If Nigel ever comes by I hope he takes it that way.

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger

This coming from someone who believes that brother Lee is the only person who has been speaking as God's oracle since 1945. Nothing very dangerous about that! Let's give Nigel Tomes some room, after all he was under this kind of myth for many years and he is just trying to work his way through all the Local Church myths. Give him a break, he's the only regional leader/elder who has had the intestinal fortitude to come on the internet and post what God has been revealing to him since leaving "the recovery". Don't worry, eventually he'll get there. In the meantime he is probably busting a cut watching people like this guy come out and try to defend the defenseless.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

I think that is problem.. a very big and dangerous one actually.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Igzy>So the decline in Tomes is actually reflective of the decline in Lee. Which makes Tomes' point.

Hi Igzy,

Good to see you.

If Tomes had a decline trend, a flat trend, or a rising trend for that same period we could debate the correlation. In Tomes' case there is no trend to debate.... only a blank. Using Tome's methodology with his own Google Trend stats one could argue that there is not a decline in interest in Tome's material but no interest at all... were we to adopt the same credence and logic that Tomes uses against Witness Lee.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Freedom> I don't think that Nigel or anyone else assume that they can conclusively interpret Google Trends results,

I find little disagreement with the logic of your argument with the exception of the above. In fact, Dr. Tomes' whole presentation pivots on the results of Google Trends.... and there are so many ridiculous fallacies in his presentation and conclusions that I do not know where to start other than where I did.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Observations: I guess Google Trend is not Nigel Tomes friend either... after all those dissertations and online postings attacking Witness Lee we can't even see a spike as is seen with Titus Chu in 2006. Nothing, nada, nunca, nyet,.... no contra-trend showing a rise in interest... not even a flat line... not a whimper.... not a blip.. nor a sliver....not even a speck..... a total non-starter (using and comparing with Dr. Tomes own methodology of course).

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger

The Local Church has spent years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to promote the so call ministry of the age and they hardly make a blip on the radar. When you google Witness Lee most of the sites that pop up are PAID ADVERTISING from The Local Church/Living Stream Ministry or one of their front organizations which are no more than some website run from the computer of some Local Churcher sitting behind a desk over at the mother ship on La Palma in Anaheim!

I doubt Tomes gives a rip about anybody googling his name, and even if he does so what? He's not claiming to be the only person speaking as God's oracle on earth, is he?

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Observations: I guess Google Trend is not Nigel Tomes friend either... after all those dissertations and online postings attacking Witness Lee we can't even see a spike as is seen with Titus Chu in 2006. Nothing, nada, nunca, nyet,.... no contra-trend showing a rise in interest... not even a flat line... not a whimper.... not a blip.. nor a sliver....not even a speck..... a total non-starter (using and comparing with Dr. Tomes own methodology of course).

Originally Posted by rayliotta

I remember a study session on Ball Rd, during a biannual training, with a few hundred young people present. One of the training brothers (Dan Towle, perhaps? -- I'm not sure) addressing the full-time training graduates in the room. He was asking questions like, why would you not go full-time (as a serving one) if you graduated from the FTTA?

He also talked about those who had met their husband or wife at the FTTA, as if they owed something. He said something along the lines of, Haven't we found you the best spouse? Can't recall just how he said it. But it seemed pretty brazen, even at the time. And he was going on about it with such an air of significance...

Originally Posted by Freedom

I get this impression as well. I know they have said that they want more "average Americans". Obviously this isn't happening, and I think Nigel's writing shows that this won't be happening.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I always felt that the FTTA is the "glue" that holds the LC together. If it weren't for the FTTA, I think there would be a serious lack of younger saints. I think what the FTTA accomplishes is that it makes the graduates feel they owe a debt to the LC, and thus they have to stay and participate in the LC. Most who I've seen attend the FTTA recently were pushed to go, they weren't too keen on going. I think the real situation is clear, it is just something LC leadership needs to come to terms with.

Originally Posted by Friedel

I have ambivalent feelings about the interesting and wide-ranging statistics provided by Nigel Tomes, not that I question them; in fact, I would like to see it compared to other criteria, as well. I am just not convinced that they necessarily prove a decline in membership or interest in Nee, Lee and/or the Local Church. Fact is, current membership only consume and digest the sanitized fare of Nee/Lee, nothing else. Why would they then have a need to do internet searches?

Originally Posted by Friedel

("Sanitized fare" means Paul Kerr's famous questions have been deleted as well as possibly the names and contributions of other "rebels". This is LSM's "spiritual" version of the paleo diet.)

For instance, I left fifteen years ago so I have no frame of reference to the turmoil of 2004–2006; I know very little about that but I assume that was the cutting off of Dong Yu Lan and Titus Chu.

I just believe you cannot confidently compare searches for Watchman Nee or Witness Lee with those of modern-day preachers who use the internet extensively to further their ministries and come to a conclusion whether the membership of the Local Church is shrinking or not; LSM does not use the internet extensively to promote the Local Churches. Sure, they maintain an internet presence but that is mainly as a library reference.

Originally Posted by Friedel

And the Local Church has changed: it has become more structured than fifteen or twenty years ago. It now has several permanent full-time training centers globally so the lecturers travel from Anaheim or wherever to the different training centers. They spend two weeks completing their own curriculum before leaving again. They do this every semester. I suppose many of the trainees have never even been to La Palma in Anaheim or Taipei but they would possibly be more familiar with London, Hamilton or Pretoria.

We could actually describe it as a decentralization of staff and assets. This could possibly be classified as effective measures, yet not reflect in statistics.

Originally Posted by Friedel

What would really interest me is numbers. How many are members of the Local Church in the US, in Europe, in Africa, in Australasia as well as countries in the Far East. How does today's statistics compare with that of 1985?

Perhaps Nigel can provide some input on that.

Originally Posted by Freedom

I always felt that the FTTA is the "glue" that holds the LC together. If it weren't for the FTTA, I think there would be a serious lack of younger saints.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Friedel

What would really interest me is numbers. How many are members of the Local Church in the US, in Europe, in Africa, in Australasia as well as countries in the Far East. How does today's statistics compare with that of 1985?

Originally Posted by rayliotta

I suppose the fringe rebels eventually become an Empire of their own...

Originally Posted by Friedel

What would really interest me is numbers. How many are members of the Local Church in the US, in Europe, in Africa, in Australasia as well as countries in the Far East. How does today's statistics compare with that of 1985?

Perhaps Nigel can provide some input on that.

Originally Posted by bearbear

From my personal contact with other Christians, virtually no one has heard of Witness Lee, except for those who attended Christian clubs in university. A friend of mine who attended Intervarsity said that everyone goes through an orientation on campus explaining the dangers of Witness Lee, however, the impression given was that most of Watchman Nee's stuff was still okay.

Regarding my own LC experience, I did get a sense of stagnation in my LC before I left. Virtually every new person who came into our church life was a church kid, or was already in the LCs and only came because they moved into the area. There were barely any new ones, and the few that were attained eventually left. I found it not surprising because I once brought two of my close friends from college to a meeting where Ron Kangas was speaking, they headed for the exits after five minutes and said the atmosphere was extremely creepy and I was quite embarrassed.

There was always a sense of desperation in the LCs to increase their numbers. Before I left, they were really pushing the system of "vital groups" and the "God Ordained Way" as the solution to all their problems. Ironically, it's what made me really want to head for the exit as it was through that movement where I was exposed to more of the extreme teachings by Witness Lee which outrightly contradict the bible.

I remember my LC elder once saying "if you total those who left our LC and compare it to the ones here now, we would be a tiny minority". The number of ex-LCers probably dwarfs those still in the LCs by a wide margin. You get sometimes get a sense on this forum that the ex-LCers are like the smaller rebel alliance in star wars and the LCs are the empire, but we're probably the overwhelming majority and it's reflected in the active posters here.

Maybe virtually every current LC-er is destined to be an ex-LCer, interesting if you think about it, and perhaps a reason why we should still love and never give up on those in the LCs...

Regarding the comparisons, I like the references to Tim Keller and Francis Chan. They are some of my favorite pastors as well, and I found them to be of a great help after leaving because they destroyed my previous indoctrination that good Christian teaching was only found in Witness Lee's ministry.

Tim Keller's apologetic sermons were pivotal for one of my friends coming to Christ who was previously a strong atheist and humanist. Francis Chan is good for a wake up call everyone now and then. One of my favorite sermons from him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=havd_RVXOEM

Originally Posted by UntoHim