|
| 09-07-2018 11:56 AM | |||
| Trapped |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Hi Drake, Thanks for taking the time to respond in recognition that I did mean well in spirit. The illustrations I chose were never intended to be inflammatory, pointed, or even a part of the actual discussion in themselves. (In other words, I have no comment on how you would or wouldn't respond given a topic of sexual abuse or loss of a child, and don't have a desire to go down that route since that is a different path and point altogether, for which I have no input). I had to choose severe situations to get the point across since most of the situations discussed on this forum don't carry the same impact needed to deliver what I tried to communicate. Your response actually shows me that I did get the point across. You mention that those examples I gave are very personal and extreme, and you describe them as an awful experience, and because of that you would never respond in such a way. So, as you recognized, sexual abuse and loss of a child are very, very high on the spectrum of "personal and extreme", and as a result, care needs to be taken in how anyone responds to people who have experienced those things. Well....the situations that those in the LC describe usually fall lower on that scale, but my point is they are still on the same spectrum of "personal and extreme", which is why, when you respond the way you sometimes do, there is a visceral response from others, for the four reasons that I enumerated in my previous post. Care needs to be taken in the same way. The specific responses of yours that get labelled as "dismissive" do genuinely cause a pang in the person to whom you initially responded. That much is undeniable as I have experienced it myself. It is okay if I haven't made that very clear as I'm not sure it's even possible to communicate it successfully; I just felt to say this much and if I didn't succeed, I am not bothered. I really was trying to help one side feel they aren't intentionally being dismissed by you, while also trying to help you see why certain responses sometimes do come across that way. If I can come up with less extreme examples that I feel still carry a similar impact I will let you know, but for the time being I'll stick with what I said. Thanks for listening. Trapped |
||
| 09-07-2018 09:32 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Obviously, since he also says he has a wonderful church life, the storms are not his church life experience. Storms are just unavoidable events in life. However : Mat_7:18* A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. The storms were the immorality and unethicality of the leading family, the Lee family. A corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit. So even tho calling on the Lord, pray-reading, and reading HWFMW (sp) and Life Study's et. al. seems to make for a good church life experience, according to Jesus, it can't produce good fruit. And that's why I'm burdened for our dear brother Drake. We consider storms an "act of God." It's like our dear brother isn't listening to God. |
||
| 09-07-2018 07:24 AM | |||
| Nell |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee I have brought the Whistleblower thread to the top. If you look at Drakes comments on the Whistleblower thread, you can compare for yourself what Drake SAYS he would do below, and what he SAYS in responding to actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum. Then you can decide for yourself the veracity of Drake's comments above. Nell |
||
| 09-07-2018 06:05 AM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Dismissive is the word. It's always been that way. In contrast to Drake et.al. in the LC's, I have a believing Catholic friend, a family lawyer, whose response to recent allegations about the priests is that "God is purging." My friend neither excuses nor dismisses the behavior of priests. How refreshing. How honest! |
||
| 09-07-2018 01:49 AM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee -3 Trapped, In general you are describing a contrarian and indeed I may be just that in this forum. Not purposely, but rather my minority view will seem to be deliberately contrarian simply because it is a minority view. But I can acknowledge the characterizations in your post no further than that. Reason is because your examples are very personal and extreme. Were someone to describe such an awful experience happening to them I would not respond as you suggest. First, no one can argue with ones personal experience for it is theirs. That is why I don’t and only offer a comparison with my own. Yet, I would not be so callous as to draw a personal comparison to sexual assault or the death of a loved one in the way you describe..... unless I had such an experience myself and sharing said experience would be supportive. I know you meant well in hopes to offer me sound advice. I accept it in that spirit but you missed the mark in your chosen examples making further dialogue about it impossible for in so doing I would lend credibility to the extreme examples which I cannot. Drake |
||
| 09-06-2018 11:01 PM | |||
| Evangelical |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
And, Paul called himself a servant of Christ in Romans 1:1. Why did Paul not refer to Christ as his friend? I believe you have misunderstood what Christ is saying here. He called them friends, but they did not stop being servants of Christ. This is why you cannot use this verse to support worldly friendships in the church. |
||
| 09-06-2018 08:01 PM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee As brother zeek quoted Lee, that Lee admitted he no friends, explains a lot about Lee. That's why he could thrown loyal coworkers under the bus without issue. He had no friends to be loyal too. But his kids were a different story. He was loyal to them even when it compromised and contradicted the very ministry he was expecting us to give our all to. Why should we give our all to something he didn't give his all to? |
||
| 09-06-2018 07:48 PM | |||
| Trapped |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Thanks for your response to me about your experience in this area. I have a feeling to respond to you, not about your content but about the delivery. I am hesitant to do so, however, because I don't know you as a person and I don't know the best approach to convey this (as each of us receives communication differently). Please know that I do mean this respectfully and I'm sure there are shortcomings in what I've written below so I apologize for any and all of those. Based on your language and the words you used, I do not believe that you have any intention of being dismissive. I do believe that you are simply describing your experience, which is valuable since it, bafflingly, so often stands in stark contrast to what many others have experienced. However, I have noticed oftentimes posters respond with frustration to you, and I will be honest that I understand why they do. I'll use a serious situation to try to explain. Please note that this is just for example only. What I describe below did not happen to me; it is just for illustration purposes. Trapped: I was sexually abused in the church by a serving one for many years and as a result have trouble trusting anyone and am very isolated and fearful of anyone getting to close to me. I tried to get help from the elders but they dismissed my fears and told me to take the cross, which I did and suffered needlessly for many more years as a result before things got so bad I sought help elsewhere, even though for years I had heard all our problems can be solved in the church. Drake: Thanks for sharing, Trapped. I was never abused and never experienced any of that or saw evidence of it. None of my serving ones were inappropriate with me. I grew up happily and do not have trouble trusting anyone and am not afraid of being close to people. There is no problem seeking professional help outside the church for serious matters such as this. What both of us said in that illustration is true. Your experience in the illustration is true. The reason that type of response gets a rise out of people, however, I think is because of a few factors: 1. Your telling me you never experienced what I experienced lends itself to casting doubt on my experience, although I can tell that that is not your intention. 2. Your telling me that you never experienced what I experienced does not help at all. It is like throwing a boulder at an injured person's chest which then drops to the floor with a thud - what is an injured person supposed to do with that? 3. It makes someone who went through a difficult time feel even worse that not everyone went through that suffering and that they are the "lucky" one who are left to struggle. 4. Telling me something that is in opposition to everything I grew up with does nothing to help me after the fact. I was told (in the illustration) to take the cross and that all our problems can be solved in the church. Your telling me, long after the negative situation occurred, that it is okay to do the opposite of everything I was made to believe is another boulder to the chest. I can see that someone coming from your experience may think that telling me this would help me and “free me up” from the chains that bind, but the reality is there is actually no help rendered from that kind of statement. Another example, is as follows: Trapped: My son fought in the armed forces and died in combat. I have lived in the depths of despair since then and struggle to make it through each day. Drake: My son never died in combat and came home safe and sound. Both are true, but that type of response really ends up being a punch to the gut more than anything. If someone states they suffered, and someone else respond that they didn’t suffer, what is the suffering person supposed to do with that information? To someone who has endured a loss, at best it does not help and at worst it makes it worse. Essentially, hearing that someone else didn't have a bad experience has no positive personal impact to the person who had a bad experience, besides being glad that there are some who go through the LC's unscathed. I'm not sure how much anything I said is helpful, I'm just trying to bridge the disconnect that seems to occur when some posters feel you are being dismissive while you respond that you are simply posting your experience. I do see both sides, and am certainly not trying to squelch your right to post; I am just attempting to help if I can. Thanks, Trapped |
||
| 09-06-2018 05:05 PM | |||
| Nell |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Can you spell H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y? hy·poc·ri·sy /həˈpäkrəsē/noun the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense. synonyms: dissimulation, false virtue, cant, posturing, affectation, speciousness, empty talk, insincerity, falseness, deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, pretense, duplicity; More Rather than play the "shut up and forgive" card, perhaps those still meeting with the LC should ASK for forgiveness and REPENT for their sinful behavior toward those of us who can no longer tolerate the "negative events". Nell |
||
| 09-06-2018 05:02 PM | |||
| zeek |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
You can have your own peculiar interpretation, no problem as far as I'm concerned, but yours is not Witness Lee's view as he clearly stated it as I quoted below. When I was in the local church if you openly disagreed with Lee you were violating the Oneness and that was a problem. I guess you folks do things differently in New Zealand. Good for you. |
||
| 09-06-2018 04:33 PM | |||
| UntoHim |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Mr E. Do you actually read what you write before you hit that "submit reply" button? Quote:
NO LONGER DO I CALL YOU SERVANTS The friendship the Lord Jesus was describing was not a friendship based upon a servant-master relationship. It's the same kind of relationship the Lord was describing when he called his disciples "brothers". This are normal, organically human relationships. Friendship is a natural, vital component of being a human being. God has never discouraged much less abolished friendship among his people. In fact, as John 15:15 shows, he has encouraged friendship all the more for his latter day followers. - |
||
| 09-06-2018 04:13 PM | |||
| Evangelical |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee You are quoting verses and using the term friend without understanding the meaning. The verse you quoted about friendship is preceded by a verse where Christ declares his disciples to be servants. So this is a friendship between servant-master. More plainly, Christ said: John 15:14-15 You are my friends if you do what I command. So this friendship is conditional upon being a servant. This hardly characterizes "normal human relationships" as the world defines them. To show the difference more plainly, friendships in the world are more like: "You are my friends if you like the same sport as I". Unfortunately in the church, friendships of this kind are the norm whereas friendships of the biblical kind are not. |
||
| 09-06-2018 03:51 PM | |||
| UntoHim |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee The problem, Mr E, is that God's normal is radically different from Witness Lee's normal. God's normal is vividly described and displayed in his Word. It has also been displayed in and among his people in general for multiple thousands of years. God's normal includes human relationships of all kinds. One of them is friendship. In fact, this notion of friendship is so vital and intrinsic to human existence and our relationship to God that the Lord Jesus made this stunning declaration: "No longer do I call you servants, for the servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you." (John 15:15) Witness Lee's reasons and motivation for discouraging friendships among his followers has become painfully obvious to anyone who is not still immersed in the culture of the religion he invented. His reasons and motivations have been comprehensively exposed on this very thread. Lee could not afford to have one drop of natural affection be directed at any person or persons outside of his person and work. All affections and energy was to be expended upon "the one apostle with the one ministry for the age". This dynamic is still alive and well in the Local Church of Witness Lee. May God have mercy. - |
||
| 09-06-2018 02:52 PM | |||
| Evangelical |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-06-2018 11:31 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-06-2018 11:31 AM | |||
| zeek |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee I too wish to thank Trapped for his testimony about the detrimental effect of Witness Lee's teaching on his ability to form normal friendships. The effect of this teaching on my children was one reason I left the Local Church Movement. Here's a sample of Witness Lee's sick teaching on the matter: Question: You have sometimes said that we should avoid friendship. What is the difference between a friend and one we are built with? How do we know whom to open up to when we need to fellowship about a matter?This teaching runs counter to normal human well-being and healthy relationships particularly when applied to developing children. Psychological research overwhelmingly demonstrates the importance of friendships, and their positive impact on mental and physical health. |
||
| 09-06-2018 10:45 AM | |||
| byHismercy |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
It is ok if you personally hate to eat fish or have or be a friend.....just don't tell everyone it is Gods' preference when it is not. |
||
| 09-06-2018 09:42 AM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
The Midwest LC's did have some abusive leaders, but no LC could be characterized as a cult. There was just way too many genuine, spiritual, blood-washed, born again, loving and caring brothers and sisters to apply any other C-word to them but Church. The contradictions in your statement above confirm my views. We should address the egregious failings of LC leaders, especially those at LSM, which have damaged many a child of God, but ... and that's a big BUT ... please ... and that's a big PLEASE ... do not characterize the whole as you did. You have rightly mentioned some pathetic behaviors by MP in Florida, and to Drake's chagrin, I often mention the pathetic behaviors by LSM's past and present Managers, but they do not represent everyone. People should not be judged for what they don't even know about. But once they do know, like our friend Drake, then they become responsible. |
||
| 09-06-2018 07:33 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Even the elder I helped with his roof, a brother I knew all the way back to Kangas in Detroit, never apologized. I forgave the brother that apologized. I repaired his computer. He was always a good brother. He just got caught up in the Lee fever, but came to his senses. And even the elder I helped, that didn't apologize, just the fact that he got the boot for the same reasons as I was enough. We all now think we were in a cult. You know, if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, then it's a duck. That's not to say that the saints aren't good and precious brothers and sisters. That's not true at all. Just like there are good people in the Mormon church, and JW's, and Scientology, et al., there are good people in Lees' personality cult. Good people join cults. Some -- all born in them -- even grow up in them. Maybe we can blame grown up idiots for joining and staying in cults. But we certainly can't blame those that grow up in them. They're completely innocent ... well ... until they grow up and start mixing the Kool-Aid. |
||
| 09-05-2018 07:55 PM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Once again, Drake, you are twisting and distorting the facts. This forum addresses leaders at LSM and LC's. Ask awareness. He talks about specific brothers -- Kangas, Porter, etc.-- who acted unbecoming in their position in the body of Christ. |
||
| 09-05-2018 07:33 PM | |||
| Trapped |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee One passage from Nee on friends (from The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, Vol. 49, Messages for Building Up New Believers (2))I can't say I agree with it. --------------- IV. REPLACING FRIENDS WITH BROTHERS IN THE CHURCH A person must settle the matter of friendship during the first few weeks of his Christian life. He must change all his friends. You must tell all your friends what has happened to you. You may still maintain some friendship with them, but this friendship cannot be intimate in any way. You must change all your friends. You must learn to be a brother in the church and replace your former friends with brothers in the church. We do not want to go to the extreme. We do not hate our former friends, and we do not want to ignore them altogether. But now our contact with them must be on a different level. Learn to testify to them and bring the Lord to them. We should be with them for only five minutes, fifteen minutes, half an hour, or an hour. Do not continue to sit among them. Do not talk about worldly things with them. Learn to take your stand and try your best to bring them to the Lord and the church. Testify to them and preach the gospel to them. Try your best to make them brothers and sisters in the church. Do not make friends or have friendship outside the circle of brothers. I can assure you that a believer with too many unbelieving friends will surely be a defeated Christian. Even if he does not sin, he will become worldly. If a person loves the Lord, serves Him, and is faithful to Him and is exercised in himself, he cannot possibly have many worldly friends. If a person has many frivolous friends, it proves that he is sick. We should not have unclean lips, and we should not dwell among people of unclean lips. In the sight of God, it is wrong to have unclean lips. It is equally wrong and requires equal confession to dwell among people of unclean lips. It is wrong for us to sin, and it also is wrong to dwell among sinners. We need to ask God for grace so that we ourselves do not sin. We need His grace so that we do not cultivate intimate friendship with sinners. You would be angry at someone if he said that you were a thief. Neither would it be a compliment if he said that you were in the company of thieves or that you were a friend of thieves. The first question a person should ask before the Lord is about himself. The second question he should ask is about his friends. Next to the person himself, a person is represented by his acquaintances. If he wants to remain strong, he must not be careless about his acquaintances and friendships. The minute he becomes careless about his friends, he is defeated. Never be careless in this matter. You must leave all your former friends behind. Learn to make friends with those who fellowship in the church. Your communication with them should be something in the Lord. You should replace all of your former communication with communication that is in the Lord. |
||
| 09-05-2018 07:20 PM | |||
| JJ |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 05:13 PM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
I accept and acknowledge your experience and that of most others in this forum. I too lived through all the storms and knew people that went, and came and went, including most of the leading brothers both those who left and those who stayed...... my experience has been good, actually wonderful to be more accurate in spite of the problems. I had to deal with situations also. Not like yours but challenges just the same. My product matches my rhetoric.... I am not peddling anything that is not genuine to me. I recognize no man is without faults, sins, problems, weaknesses, including me, or maybe I should say especially me. I acknowledge the issues that are restated here again and again day in and day out...... but perhaps the difference between me and some others is that I am not obsessed with the failures of others and by the grace of God I was enabled to forgive and face the next chapter.... or the next storm, or whatever life brought me. Yet surely Harold, you are not so numb at this point that you do not see a problem with the steady stream of slander, berating, mocking, and judging of brothers and sisters in the local churches? If you prefer a standard of ethics then where is the ethics in that? Do you not recognize how the simplest explanations on a variety of topics are disregarded in favor allegations of sinister plots, criminal behavior, theft, immorality, etc.? At what point is it enough for you? Or are you all in when posters refer to servants of the Lord as "brain -dead"? You don't find it just a little usual that almost every topic ends up with rants about events that happened decades ago and where most of the players are dead? Or is it all justified in your view because of negative events that happened to you and others decades ago? If it was wrong then, then it is wrong now with the shoe on the other foot....so why sanction it, why play into it, and why flirt with becoming the thing you hate? Obsession seems to me to be a modest description of such patterned behavior. Still, I believe you are a brother with a conscience and I think in your heart of hearts that you know this path does not lead to the kingdom... because it is not living the kingdom life which is just the Lord living through us. There is a call for overcomers to all the churches in Revelation 2 & 3 so no matter where you are today the call is there. But if you do not accept that interpretation then how about the more straightforward command from the Lord in the gospels to forgive your brothers while you are in the way, before you or they die. Forgiving your brother 70 X 7 times... forgive others debts as the Lord forgave you of yours? Some brothers in this forum made that simple yet crucial observation recently..... ZNP and StG in other threads.. and yet they go unheeded... the status quo rolls on. Harold, I tell you the truth in love. If it were possible, I'd believe for you. If it were possible I would go back in time and be your companion in your time of trouble. But that is not possible so I can only be here for you in the present and so I will tell it to you like I see it, straight-up, whether you believe it or not. Drake |
||
| 09-05-2018 03:58 PM | |||
| Evangelical |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Some people in the recovery misunderstand the teaching about friendship. They claim that we should have no friends, inside or outside of the recovery. But I find this to be a distortion of Lee's teaching. On the other hand the world and Christianity in general places too much emphasis on friendship. In most churches, there will be groups of friends, but in spiritual reality, every believer is a brother or sister which is higher than friendship. To be called a brother or sister by another person in church is more complimentary than calling them a friend. Brotherly love is something the world does not understand, and most denominations do not understand the concept of brotherhood either, as the churches are mere social gatherings and forming of friendships. For example, it is very hard and almost unheard of for a Catholic to call a protestant a "brother" and same for protestant to call a Catholic "brother". Catholics think "brothers" are in the monastery. But in the recovery, ex-protestants and ex-Catholics call every believer a brother. |
||
| 09-05-2018 03:38 PM | |||
| byHismercy |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Which, at the time,and still now, doesn't make much sense to me. I mean, I loved and still love reading....fiction, autobiographies, reference, textbooks, horror, just all sorts of stuff. But that never impeded Jesus! His book is the one of value and the only one I trust to guide me in my ways, His gospel reached me when I was searching new age teachings for the truth about God, and His name was announced to me when I asked to know Gods' true name. All the things I was looking into, now I see that stuff as new age...doctrines of our enemy. But He used all of it, He was not impeded by my being under deception. No matter how immersed in the world, worldly friends, worldly pursuits, interests....greater is He who is in me, than he who is in the world!! |
||
| 09-05-2018 03:18 PM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 03:13 PM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Here is also a great collection of articles. Please note that there is a lot here. I read this stuff for a few years. Much of what I read is not on this list, and I did not read everything on the list. The writers here are mostly objective about Darby and the Exclusives, iow they expose both the failures and the merits of the movement. |
||
| 09-05-2018 02:47 PM | |||
| byHismercy |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
I don't know what is up with the quote button, but Trapped, I wanted to respond to your post. Your insight is so valuable... This might be a little off topic, but the Lord knows who to put into our lives. He is the perfect Father for all children.....a particular friend comes to my mind, my best friend growing up was a super smart, sweet chinese american girl who I spent the majority of junior high and high school hanging around with....she grew up to decide atheism was her system of belief, or non belief, and she was into so many things I wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole. Shoplifting, stripping, threesomes, the Magic Castle.....just so much....the Lord was faithful to call me towards Himself all those years, eventually bringing me out of my own 'chosen' sins, sinful activities. If anything, for me, he used my friendship to spotlight what I didn't want in my life. And my friend was no less dear to me, even though we stopped having much in common after a while. But I just wanted to thank you for sharing your experience....I am so glad I was not raised inside the LC, and I thank God He kept us so distant as my children are growing up....btw, my friend is an attorney today...much more accomplished in many respects than I! |
||
| 09-05-2018 02:29 PM | |||
| byHismercy |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee I have another one. A dear brother was giving a new believers message to us, a group of college age saints, mostly gained off the local college campus as I was. Part of the message focused on reading. Reading for pleasure was the target that day, and possibly any outside casual reading. I liked and trusted this brother. I came into the church life already a regenerated believer, albeit new. But this teaching offended me, as a bookworm, an enthusiastic college student, and a 'self-educator'. Where is the scripture to support this belief?? And how much easier to indoctrinate and control young members who swallow this as proper and healthy teaching....one coming from trusted older christians? To balance this teaching, an older sister told me sometime later that some of the saints actually do read books, or watch current movies....in order to be able to relate to people outside the church, and bring ones in. Actually, I witnessed this kind of 'reading' in my friend here in the pnw....she (a lady in her mid 40's) is an avid reader of juvenile fiction. In fact, she will take the list of books all awarded a particular literary award and go through it systematically. Getting to know childrens' books. To have a way in with children. At the time I assumed it was for the spread of the gospel of Christ. Now I find it to be extremely creepy....I mean, they are seperate from your average christian, by their own standards. Or Lees' standards, actually. So this practice is all toward the goal of gaining young people into the LC, exclusively. When, exactly was the one publication edict made? This message I received must have been about 92' or 93'. |
||
| 09-05-2018 01:34 PM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
And you and Kangas just went along with it all, even when it's obviously against all Christian standard of morality and ethics. That sheds a bad light on the both of you, and all others, that just turned a blind eye, and conscience. It hurts me to say this brother ... specially about brother Ron, whom I've known, but also about you, who I've come to like. |
||
| 09-05-2018 01:28 PM | |||
| byHismercy |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 11:50 AM | |||
| TLFisher |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Noah principle (aka cover the brothers) Deputy/Delegated Authority |
||
| 09-05-2018 11:01 AM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
I was and am. But I agree with your sentiment. Drake |
||
| 09-05-2018 10:54 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 10:06 AM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Drake |
||
| 09-05-2018 09:48 AM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
I understand this completely. I was taught to do this for decades in the LC. |
||
| 09-05-2018 09:41 AM | |||
| UntoHim |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
You have provided the explanation of this phenomenon/dynamic in the Local Church. Of course nearly all current Local Church members will poo poo and dismiss what you experienced first hand, and usually claim you are just "bitter" or "ambitious for a position" or "poisoned" and other such garbage. Thank God that you have made your way out of this system of error which has inflicted so much damage on untold numbers of American young people over the years. May He continue to enlighten the eyes of your heart and understanding! - |
||
| 09-05-2018 09:38 AM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 09:27 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 08:53 AM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
My local church experience has been East and West, North and South.... here and abroad over 40 years. For me, it has been the same wherever I went. Drake |
||
| 09-05-2018 08:13 AM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
|
||
| 09-05-2018 04:22 AM | |||
| Drake |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee -1 Thanks Trapped for sharing your sincere and heartfelt experience. My kids, and all the ones of the parents I know, had friends outside the church life. Of course, there were some bad influences from those friends that resulted in permanent damage, yet I don’t blame the friends but rather the ruler of the age. I figured I’d rather deal with the influence while they were still with me rather than have them deal with it after they left on their own. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn’t. In the end I decided a parent must make decisions in the best interest of their munchkins but how they fare later as an adult is mostly in their own hands. Friendship in the church life will happen spontaneously. It’s not a negative thing unless or until it interferes with the relationship between members in the Body of Christ which is fellowship. Fellowship means each member gives and receives the same care toward one another. When friendships have a higher priority in the church life than fellowship then there will be problems. In the Body, Christ is every member so there is no higher relationship between members than fellowship. Thx again, Drake |
||
| 09-04-2018 08:55 PM | |||
| Trapped |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee My response will come from the perspective of a church kid hearing this thought from a very young age. There are also two lines - friends outside the church and friends in the church. Friends outside the church As a church kid, I was taught incessantly that having friends is bad. This was contrasted with having companions in the church as good. The thought behind it was "being unequally yoked”. The fear-tactic used was that all non-LC friends your age are inevitably into drugs, sex, and alcohol, while all LC people your age are not. So if you had friends or any close relationships outside of the church, they would inexorably draw you away from the Lord into the realm of whatever those friends outside the church were doing. You would get pulled "out of the ark". The problem is the LC put a heavy blanket kibosh on ALL non-LC friends, which is like saying "some dogs bite so let’s stay away from all dogs ever for all time". Well, actually the truth is it’s the parents' job is to vet the friends and make sure they are people with a level head and who are not inclined to get into trouble. The concept that “friends = bad” is the wrong concept and the wrong teaching. This was realized and admitted years ago by the ones in the Southern California Young People's Work as a mini "we were wrong" moment (I heard a message on it passed around years later), where they realized if young people in the church don't have any friends outside the church, then the logical source for gospel contacts at that age is also eradicated. So they changed their tune, unfortunately not with the mental health of the young people in mind, but for the sake of the growth of the LCs. I think the message should have been more like “choose your friends wisely”. This goes along with the thought that “you are the average of the five people you spend the most time with”. Of course it is an important matter who our friends are, because, especially as young people, they can become big determiners of our actions and situations. So rather than “friends are bad” it really should be “choose the right friends.” What if your friends were 4.0+ GPA, A+ students, diligent members of the band, high achievers, involved in positive school activities? Are they “bad”? This creates the bizarre scenario which marked my childhood of positive high achieving kids reaching out to me to try to be my friend and me dancing around not able to explain why I couldn’t connect back. The “friends” I had (I use quotes not to denigrate them, but to represent the mental wall I could never breakthrough to really enjoy the friendships) were essentially the ones that any parent would pray that their children would have. And yet I never could shake the weight that the friends were snatching their claws at me to drag me into the pits of hell. When the reality was they were just nice kids from nice homes who liked me and wanted to hang out with me. To this day I see that they all still hang out together, but because I didn’t have the opportunity and clear mentality to build up normal human friendships, I do not have them as friends as an adult, when I really, really wish I did. I genuinely have to work hard in talking to normal people “out there” to kill the thought that they are “bad people”, and am in the process of trying to make connections with humans for the first time in my life. This teaching applied to children creates handicapped adults who cannot form relationships outside the local church. Friends in the local church I have less to say here, but the thought is that all our interactions have to go through the cross. “Nothing natural does the Body life allow”. I never really thought much about this side, but in considering why someone in Lee’s position would promulgate this thought, I can see that if there are no “natural friendships” then there are less likely to be honest conversations between saints where dissatisfaction or their true feelings are expressed. This way opinions, thoughts, ideas cannot be brought up because it is “soulish”. I really run out of steam to write much on this, but I just don’t see how anyone can have a normal life under this bizarre concept. How do you go on, for example, a hiking trip with another family unless they are your friends? At some point you are just a human being. |
||
| 09-04-2018 07:41 PM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
So I concluded that the only one I could safely trust was Witness Lee. At least that's what he had taught me for years. How sick is that? Today I don't trust a single thing Lee taught me -- unless it can be independently corroborated. But I can trust a lot of other people in my life. Thank the Lord. |
||
| 09-04-2018 07:25 PM | |||
| Ohio |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
The matter of Friendship. W. Lee called this "natural relationships." Lee's only justification against honey was a wild interpretation of honey spoiling the meal offering (Leviticus 2.11). Lee took this speculation from the Exclusive brethren. We should ask why in the world did the Brethren teach this? Simple. After their many excommunications for nonsensical reasons, the Brethren needed a way to hold onto their people. And I will tell you that some of their excommunications were both unbelievable and heartbreaking. Families and friends and churches were divided asunder by these mandates. If these "natural relationships" could be theologically undermined by false teachings, then their loyalties to the ministry could be maintained. To prevent additional heartbreak and pain with subsequent excommunications, a new system of teaching had to address these difficulties. Their source for this new system of errors often was found in Leviticus. Interpretations of O.T. types were fabricated out of this air in order to justify their divisive actions, their evil behaviors, and to find remedies for member conflicts. LSM's websites were also filled with this nonsense, claiming ex-members were "lepers" whose church houses must be torn down and "re-plastered." In II Timothy 3.1-5 (Apostle Paul's last writing), he addressed the situation among Christians, not the unsaved. Read this detailed description. It sounds exactly like the LC's I left. "Without natural affection" is just one of the many items included. Yet these same ones at LSM will jump up and down and proclaim their "oneness" and their "brotherly love." How can this be? They are blinded with pride. So sad. |
||
| 09-04-2018 07:09 PM | |||
| awareness |
Re: Self serving doctrine of Lee Quote:
Still, the very glue of their togetherness, is also behind friendships : That humans are social critters. So, those I met in the LC, and friends I came in with, and brought in, that I wasn't allowed to be friends with in the LC, some of them, are life long friends now today. I can't tell you where that crazy rule came from -- prolly China -- but I can tell you what it's all about. In theory, that which was behind it was the same thing behind the burning's : that our hearts wouldn't be attached to anything but Christ. And that was fine, until it became : attached to anything but Lee and his ministry. That became a real bone of contention between me and the Leeite's, which happened to be the elders, and their sycophants (who got to have friendships, or so it looked). The contention being just that : heart attached to only Christ ... OR ... heart attached to Lee. I argued Christ, but got the boot for it. And others today, some 3 and 4 years later also got the boot for taking a stand for Christ. Two of them, as I've mentioned, were elders when I was in the LC. So I remember years later going down from Ft. Lauderdale to Miami, to help one of them, after he got the boot, to help him (and other not friend friends) fix his roof after hurricane Andrew. On his roof I bumped into Bill Mallon. In talking to him a non-friend brother came up, that I use to lead service groups with. Long short of it, I got the brothers phone number and called him. Turned out he was in Maine, and fresh out of the LC. He was not only forced out of the LC, the elders also made his wife divorce him, and take his kids, all over Witness Lee. He was totally heart broken. So to get away he came to Ft. Lauderdale, and we became friends. So don't worry about that silly rule. We're social animals. It's in our makeup. We need it like we need food, water, and air. It's a biological imperative. And if we're fortunate, friendships will happen. Think of David and Jonathan. And even Jesus had friends. |
||
| 09-04-2018 04:05 PM | |||
| byHismercy |
Self serving doctrine of Lee Hi saints, I would like to open a discussion about doctrines we were given via WL which are questionable and what I now see as self serving. There is one in particular that I have in mind, but if anyone has others, please include those as well. To start, is their teaching against friendship. When I first heard this I was very young, very new christian, and my spirit REJECTED this teaching immediately. I did not understand at that time how much those around me believed into every word that proceeds from the 'mouth of the oracle'....I don't understand how or why they see friendship as a major negative, where this teaching comes from in scripture, if they have any scriptural basis for this at all, and I would love to hear other believers genuine opinion on this teaching. It seems like this doctrine comes out of thin air, and my question is, does anybody else suspect this is perpetuated to serve the function of cutting saints off from each other quickly and without feeling, if one is perceived as 'negative' towards Lee? Does it serve the divisions practiced by LCers....and could Lee really be that nefarious? Am I way off base, here? The scripture that comes to me is about the last days....the Lord said they would be without natural affection. This, to me, is a refutation of such a teaching.... Recently, a LC sister whom I had regarded as a very dear friend, one who had cut us off months ago, came back, claiming to be completely open to fellowship, with one caveat, that I not speak anything 'negative' about her beliefs, that I close my mouth and remain silent on all points regarding questionable doctrine. I was unable to submit to her conditions for fellowship. Actually, I'm pretty sure she didn't hear anything negative since she simply shouted my name in a threatening tone throughout the entire conversation....she was one who promptly cut me off after I disagreed with the Lee teaching contrary to friendship, and declared, that we were, in fact friends! Her disdain for this concept was abundantly clear in our recent conversation, if it could be called a conversation. Conversation implies two people speaking and hearing one another. That didn't happen. I am so blown away at the fact that I never saw this attitude until I had a disagreement with Lee....then the dam broke, so to speak. Why do they view friendship as natural, and do they really equate it with the flesh, which in turn is Satan? Anyone for it or against it...and scriptural support would be much appreciated! Thanks in advance... |
||
