Originally Posted by Terry

For the audio go to this web address.
http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audi...to-enero.2008/

and then select this file:

comunion.para.hnos.responsables.y.servidores.mp3

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Working link to what was said in Ecuador??
Thanks...

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't think pointing out problems with Christians is always a bad thing. What's a mistake here is the use of the word "the," as in "the problem today...." It implies that the problem being discussed is the main or primary problem, or the problem that causes all other problems. This is the way Lee talked and we all picked it up. Better just to say "one problem..." or "a problem."

THE problem, obviously, is sin.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Working link to what was said in Ecuador??
Thanks...

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I think that the "the problem among Christians today" (as if any one person is qualified to actually know this) is that too many Christians spend too much precious time talking about what is "the problem among Christians today", and not enough time preaching and teaching the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Generally, the problem among Christians today is a lack of balance; they go to extremes. Believers either place certain ones above reproach or they criticize endlessly without properly investigating. Should apostles, workers, or ministers out in the field be given honor? Yes, they should. And what of apostles/workers/ministers that are found to be in sin or cause division among the believers? Here we can take our cue from the Scriptures.

Further, this example goes hand-in-hand with with the words of exhortation given to Timothy by Paul in the treatment of elders in a church. First Timothy, chapter 5, verses 19 to 21 say, "Against an elder receive not an accusation unless where there are two or three witnesses. Those that sin convict before all, that the rest also may have fear. I testify before God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, that thou keep these things without prejudice, doing nothing by favour."

Note the manner in which an accusation against an elder is dealt with - without partiality and with the cooperation with other members of the church (two or three witnesses). There is much to learned here in these verses. Personally, what I see is that the church (all members) are its protectors. There is no one that is beyond reproach and consequently, every member is accountable to every other member, regardless their measure of operation and faith in the church.

A fellow member of the faith.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Ohio, you ask some very good questions to which I would like to make an attempt to reply.

Generally, the problem among Christians today is a lack of balance; they go to extremes. Believers either place certain ones above reproach or they criticize endlessly without properly investigating. Should apostles, workers, or ministers out in the field be given honor? Yes, they should. And what of apostles/workers/ministers that are found to be in sin or cause division among the believers?

Here we can take our cue from the Scriptures. First, in the church in Ephesus, the Lord commended the Ephesian believers of their ability to discern the false apostles (Rev. 2:2). It is interesting to note that this was done by the church and not by representative group within the church. This is made evidently clear as the letter was written to the assembly, and not a specific representative group.

A fellow member of the faith.

Originally Posted by Ohio

This post brings up the difficult question, "Is the character of the minister at all important, or should I ask, how important is it?" SavedByGrace's point of view is that the character of the minister is secondary, as long as he personally is helped to "enjoy the Lord" with the other saints.

Perhaps this speaks to the heart of the matter. How crucial is the moral character of our leaders/ministers? When do their personal failures become cause for alarm? How much "perfection" should the church demand from them? SavedByGrace is definitely not alone in his point of view. I'm still surprised to see certain televangelists back on TV after shameful failures.

In a recent post SavedByGrace noted the following:
These are pertinent examples. Solomon has great and wise proverbs on marriage to teach us all, yet none of us would recommend or condone 700 wives and 300 mistresses. Apostle Peter also had a few notable failures, yet none of us would recommend that his books be purged from scripture. Yet ... what do we do with all those scripture which stress the character of the Lord's servants, how they should be above reproach, so that they can be patterns to the Lord's children, and not bring shame to His name?


What saith thee?

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

Each answering to the Lord......

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Great point. LSM could buy wallpaper for the entire LC in bulk at a discount and then sell it to the individual LC's for a profit. Paul you are a genius.

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

Each answering to the Lord as to what color wallpaper to use in the ladies restroom.

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

Each answering to the Lord as to what color wallpaper to use in the ladies restroom.

Originally Posted by Terry

Administration local,
Each answ'ring to the Lord;

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I admit there is influence, But, from what I have seen, the leading brothers have to manage it.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Well, imagine if you were a young, single brother. You got married in the LRC, your family and your wife's family are in the LRC. Your kids are raised in the LRC. Your friends and the ones you have known for 20 years are also in the LRC, meeting in different churches. Now you get "quarantined". Well if this is for sin or acts of the flesh you should repent and confess your sins and deal with them. But what if it is because you objected to PL abusing sisters while running the LSM. Are you supposed to apologize for that like the spineless elders in Anaheim did? So the damage is that they don't just say "you can't buy books from LSM anymore" that would be funny. No, they take your family and friends away from you. That is the cost you take for following your conscience.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I am not avoiding any issue and I do not carry any guilt about some brothers in some locality. As I said earlier, each local church is locally administered.
And, I do not understand about 'severe damage'. The worst thing that certain local churches in certain localities have been said to have done is quarantine people. How does it damage people?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Well, imagine if you were a young, single brother. You got married in the LRC, your family and your wife's family are in the LRC. Your kids are raised in the LRC. Your friends and the ones you have known for 20 years are also in the LRC, meeting in different churches. Now you get "quarantined". Well if this is for sin or acts of the flesh you should repent and confess your sins and deal with them. But what if it is because you objected to PL abusing sisters while running the LSM. Are you supposed to apologize for that like the spineless elders in Anaheim did? So the damage is that they don't just say "you can't buy books from LSM anymore" that would be funny. No, they take your family and friends away from you. That is the cost you take for following your conscience.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I am not avoiding any issue and I do not carry any guilt about some brothers in some locality. As I said earlier, each local church is locally administered.

And, I do not understand about 'severe damage'. The worst thing that certain local churches in certain localities have been said to have done is quarantine people. How does it damage people?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I think there is merit to this view. However, I would point out that since most saints subscribe to this view it enables the LSM to bully churches.

However, let's discuss the example that Ohio has been giving of the quarantine of TC. The BBs sent out a letter explaining their basis for the quarantine and then expected all the churches and saints to stand with them. Therefore, unless your church "quarantines" those saints, there would be no quarantine. So I read the letter and I felt the letter was sin. The NT gives very clear guidelines as to what would constitute grounds for quarantine and the letter didn't present any evidence of any of these grounds. Instead I felt the letter did much to condemn the BBs who signed it.

Now you can no longer say that "this doesn't affect my locality". Either you stand with the quarantine or you don't.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I am not avoiding any issue and I do not carry any guilt about some brothers in some locality. As I said earlier, each local church is locally administered.

And, I do not understand about 'severe damage'. The worst thing that certain local churches in certain localities have been said to have done is quarantine people. How does it damage people?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

One issue we used to have with the book room is that saints felt pressured to buy their books there instead of other book stores. Now with the internet and ebooks I find this concern to be very overblown.

A second issue was that churches were pressured into having large standing orders for books that no one would buy, they would stack up in boxes, and then every year they would clear out the store room with a sale, book for 0.99, 0.25, etc. Once you do that once no one wants to pay full price anymore. The elders chose to go with the standing order lest the church lose standing among other churches. I feel this was the result of having spineless elders.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

If I was in a local church where a sin occurs and the elders are prevented from taking the right decision, I do not have a choice but to leave the local church.

And, to answer your example, I would have a low opinion about anyone who misuses his office. Practically speaking, I would stop listening to the person who misuses his office, irrespective of how wonderful his ministry is.

But, since I am in a different local church which is not affected by this incident, I would not be leaving my local church just based on this incident. I have been enjoying the fellowship with the brothers for some time and I enjoy it. As long as my local church is administered without any issues, I would like to continue there.

Originally Posted by Ohio

SavedByGrace, these ones were not just "brothers in another locality," they were WL and PL who ran the ministry which was beginning to invade every part of the local church life back in the 80's. Behind the scenes WL and TC were struggling as to "who had the rights" to our eldest brother, and shepherd in the Lord. I could go on for hours how damaging and disrupting LSM and ministry leaders have been to the local churches I have been a part of, but I'm not sure you would like to hear that.

Originally Posted by Ohio

You have been in the Recovery about 10 years. Several years ago LSM and its affiliate DCP sent operatives into Midwest churches to "train" them how to bring lawsuits against their elders in order to capture church properties and assets. LSM sponsored lawsuits occurred in Toronto, Mansfield, and Columbus. Other churches faced the risk of lawsuits. Many churches were torn in half with conflicts dividing families in half. Does this qualify as something that would upset you if it happened in your place?

Originally Posted by Ohio

This is unfortunate, ZNP. Though I realize your experience is unique.

I just do not understand why UntoHim takes offense at certain of your posts.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I did not condone any unrighteousness. If possible, quarantines should be avoided. But, in any organization, quarantines occur. Can you tell me of any church anywhere where you are sure there would be no quarantines?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I agree with you completely on this point. In fact I went through the math to describe WL's influence on my experience in the LC as being between 1-5% depending on which equation you wish to use. However, the moderator felt that could not possibly be true and deleted/moved that post.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

If I was in a local church where a sin occurs and the elders are prevented from taking the right decision, I do not have a choice but to leave the local church.

And, to answer your example, I would have a low opinion about anyone who misuses his office. Practically speaking, I would stop listening to the person who misuses his office, irrespective of how wonderful his ministry is.

But, since I am in a different local church which is not affected by this incident, I would not be leaving my local church just based on this incident. I have been enjoying the fellowship with the brothers for some time and I enjoy it. As long as my local church is administered without any issues, I would like to continue there.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

The Gospel Book Room was started by Br. Nee, though I understand it published books by various authors. But, the Gospel Book Room extablished by Br. Nee was supposed to be in sync with the local churches.
Anyways, the content is what should matter.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Dear SavedbyGrace, you keep trying to justify the use of quarantines by denominational leaders. The Bible, as in I Cor 5, spells out conditions for such action. But i am not talking about anything of the kind. Not one single person was quarantined for immoral or unrighteous activity (sin.) Each brother was quarantined by LSM leaders in order to silence them from exposing sin, immorality, and unrighteousness at LSM.

Is that too hard to understand? Why else would so many of us leave? I am not talking about minor matters here. I was in church responsibility for many years. I was involved in hundreds of sad cases of the believers failures. I am the last person to be disappointed by naive concepts of expected "perfection" in God's children. We are all a work in progress. But LSM operates under a horrible double standard.

Let me use a simple example here to make the situation "perfectly clear." What if I was a gifted, but abusive, leader whose son ran my ministry and got caught for molesting ministry employees. In order to protect my reputation and my ministry, I literally destroyed the reputations of all my assistants who threatened to go public with this information.
SavedbyGrace, what would you think of me or my ministry?

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I admit there is influence, But, from what I have seen, the leading brothers have to manage it.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I already said that my Leader is perfect.

Br. Lee is supposed to have shortcomings, given the fact that he died and was buried.

For me, Br. Lee is only a brother whose writings helped reveal many things in the Bible. My relation with the Lord is not dependent on Br. Lee or LSM or anyone else.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

each local church is administered locally, answering to the Lord.

Originally Posted by Terry

In the past, but not presently.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

God can use anyone to move on earth. He used Pharaoh to bring up Moses. In Acts 5:34, God used Gamaliel to protect the lives of his disciples.
In my opinion, as long as you receive Christ through someone's ministry, you should accept Christ.
But, practically, if I begin to dislike someone or my respect for a person reduces, I may not pay attention to what he is saying, however spiritual his words are.

This is just my opinion/understanding. You are free to disagree.

Originally Posted by Terry

If I'm reading your post correctly, your implication is the LSM local churches are an organization. I'm inclined to agree however many in it's leadership would disagree. They would say they are not an organization, but an organism.

Originally Posted by Terry

Some Christians object to pointing to a specific minister. However if you speak without pointing to a specific minister, the content is much better received.

Originally Posted by Igzy

As long as you read other sources, you can read Lee. The danger, as far as your leaders are concerned, is if you do read other sources you'll start seeing that Lee made some big errors, and they don't want you to see that.

I honestly wish there was a way to get the good stuff Lee shared without the chaff, because I think he has some good things to offer.

The problem is when he slipped into chaff, it was really nasty chaff. Stuff like his movement being the only true move of God, only city churches (and only his) being true churches, implying that separation from him and his movement was rebellion against God, and so forth. Basically stuff that attempted to imprison believers in his movement. And you never knew when you were going to stumble upon it. This stuff has done a lot of damage, I can testify personally. Who is responsible for this damage? Who is accountable?

Ask yourself, what authorizes a man to claim his work is the only legitimate work of God on earth?!

And it's flat inexcusable. It's not just unfortunate, it's something that needs to be refuted and repented from. LSM and the BBs have yet to separate themselves from these type teachings. If they did, then perhaps they could begin the process putting Lee's ministry in proper perspective

Christian theologians aren't stupid. Many have read Lee's writings. If they really struck a chord with them eventually they would be rediscovered. But it hasn't happened yet because, I think, of the really questionable stuff that is mixed in. Lee basically attempted to invalidate any work other than his own. He believed everything flowed through him. It's hard to take someone like that seriously unless he's all you know, which is why the BBs want you to just know him.

I don't know of any true theologians who have come around to Lee.

Originally Posted by Ohio

This post brings up the difficult question, "Is the character of the minister at all important, or should I ask, how important is it?" SavedByGrace's point of view is that the character of the minister is secondary, as long as he personally is helped to "enjoy the Lord" with the other saints.

Perhaps this speaks to the heart of the matter. How crucial is the moral character of our leaders/ministers? When do their personal failures become cause for alarm? How much "perfection" should the church demand from them? SavedByGrace is definitely not alone in his point of view. I'm still surprised to see certain televangelists back on TV after shameful failures.

In a recent post SavedByGrace noted the following:
These are pertinent examples. Solomon has great and wise proverbs on marriage to teach us all, yet none of us would recommend or condone 700 wives and 300 mistresses. Apostle Peter also had a few notable failures, yet none of us would recommend that his books be purged from scripture. Yet ... what do we do with all those scripture which stress the character of the Lord's servants, how they should be above reproach, so that they can be patterns to the Lord's children, and not bring shame to His name?


What saith thee?

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I did not condone any unrighteousness. If possible, quarantines should be avoided. But, in any organization, quarantines occur. Can you tell me of any church anywhere where you are sure there would be no quarantines?

As a practical activity, go to a church led by a pastor and preach daily that clergy laity is unbiblical. Else, go to a Brethren church and tell the members daily that unless the members speak in tongues, they do not have the spirit. I would be very surprised if a quarantine does not follow.

If you are expecting the local church to be the 'perfect' church, you will be disappointed. And, that is what seems to have happened.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

It's not about being "bad". It's about a network of hundreds of churches -- or is it thousands? -- around the world, each with its own tidy bookroom devoted entirely to the publications of one particular publishing company. Exclusive of any other publishing companies.

And, the publishing company runs a school, which uses exclusively its own publications for all courses. And actively seeks to establish new training centers around the world, to use solely their own materials.

I would like to know of any other Christian publishing company that is supported by an exclusive network of franchise churches. Seriously, can someone tell us of even one other?

There is one that comes to mind, the initials of the group are JW. And I'm pretty sure they ain't a member of the "Evangelical Christian Publishers Association"...

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

The problem I have with LSM books is that they slant your view of Christianity in such a way that you can't help but agree with what LSM wants you to agree with.

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

I think someone said that every loves everyone in the LRC because everyone thinks the same way. I've found that is very true. They love each other to death. But when I came in and revealed myself to be outside the LRC, I was treated somewhat less warmly than others, if you know what I mean. I wasn't flat out treated rudely, but I could tell the older members did not approve of me or were wary or whatnot. Not to discount the books you read entirely or anything like that, but that doesn't mean everything in them is all truth either.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

Below is some portion from Life Study of Mark Chapter 28.

We have pointed out that in 9:38 John told the Lord Jesus that they saw someone casting out demons in His name who did not follow them, and they forbade him, because he was not following them. It seems that John was saying, “This man was casting out demons in Your name, Lord. Yet, he would not follow us. He is divisive, sectarian. Because he causes trouble, we forbade him to cast out demons in Your name. I told him that either he should come along with us, or he should stop casting out demons in Your name.”

In this situation could John say that he was living Christ, that now it was no longer he, but Christ? Certainly not. Had John been terminated by Christ’s death, and had His resurrection been wrought into him? Not at all! In 9:38 John was still a natural son of thunder. He was still in himself, even in an enlarged self. When the Lord was speaking to the disciples concerning humility, John even went on in verse 38 to change the subject.

The Lord’s reply in verse 39 must have come as a great surprise to John: “Do not forbid him, for there is no one who shall do a work of power in My name and be able soon to speak evil of Me.” Here the Lord Jesus was saying to John, “You should not forbid him. He is not against Me; rather, he is for Me. All the believers are mine.”

Originally Posted by Igzy

Your generalized statements are covering up the extremity of the LRC's dealings in these matters.

Groups have the right to protect themselves. But the public also has the right to make assessments about a group based on how the group handles situations involving alleged problem members and dissenters.

I doubt there are many people who, being objectively informed about how the LRC has dealt with problems of dissent, would agree that the group has been reasonable in its dealings. I believe that most people would feel that the LRC's dealings have been extreme, arrogant, paranoid and abusive. I have little doubt of that.

Originally Posted by Ohio

When I devoted my life to "Christ and the church," in a sense, I did my homework! I was with these brothers day-in and day-out. I saw the godly manner of life of many brother and sister, including our leaders.

What was never really investigated was WL/LSM. We took the recommendations of local leaders, and kind of like a snowball rolling down the hill, each new brother in the church began to sing the praises of the ministry of WL, and attend trainings in Anaheim.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

If I understand correctly, you enjoyed fellowship with brothers in your locality, all of whom were faithful Christians and led lives above reproach. Then, you heard about certain incidents related to brothers in another locality, who you may or may not have met. So, you do your research about the brothers in the other locality and decide to leave the church in your locality.

I would not do this, esp. if I argue that each local church is administered locally, answering to the Lord. My being a part of the local church will not be dependent on incidents/elders/leading brothers in another locality. I am not saying that you are wrong. This is just my understanding.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm not buying your argument of "every body's doing it, so it's OK."

Your reasoning therefore condones all manner of unrighteousness. If I witness things like theft, corruption, manipulation, abuse, error, etc. and I am brave enough to call this to others' attention, and then I am publicly shamed and quarantined as a rebellious leper, that's apparently just fine with you.

Besides ... every denomination has an occasional quarantine or two.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

each local church is administered locally, each answering to the Lord.

Originally Posted by Igzy

You left out the part where your leaders claim that anyone who leaves your movement will not be able to go on with the Lord and will stop the process of sanctification and will likely miss the kingdom reward.

Why did you not address this point?

Originally Posted by Ohio

SavedbyGrace, in response to Paul Cox's post, you did not address his complaint at all. You quoted a section by WL about "considering ourselves to be great." That may be somewhat related, but it misses the mark. WL's commentary misses the mark also.

Paul Cox mentioned how LC leaders condemn outsiders and former members. It is this derogatory speech and recorded condemnations which he referred to, not the inner attitude of the leaders. In Mark 8.39, Jesus never addressed the attitude of the disciple, probably John, the son of thunder, but his actions in forbidding others who were not with "following us." Jesus then commented on his reasons for forbidding -- that they will not speak evil of the Lord, and thus are really "for us."

WL apparently skipped this matter and brought in his own agenda. Your post does the same.

I prefer not to assume what people think about themselves. I have no way to know. That is between them and the Lord. Jesus alone is the Knower of hearts and the judge of all. I prefer only to discuss what LC leaders do and say, and what they do and say to those outside their circle of fellowship is truly atrocious.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Nowhere does the Bible condemn systems per se. Everything is a system. LSM is a system, your local church is a system. Even the Body of Christ is a system. It's just the Lord's system. If I study the Bible systematically, that's a system. Since when is that a bad thing?

"System" is one of those bugaboo words that Lee set us against. The question is not whether something is a system, because everything is. The question is what kind of system is it and is it compatible with the Holy Spirit.

Being against "systems" allows you to condemn Christianity as a system, but exempt your own movement from being one, even though both are.

Like I said, the Bible doesn't condemn systems. Ephesians 4:14 condemns a "system of error," but that's "of error."

Condemning systems for being systems is just sloppy thinking.

Originally Posted by Igzy

The issue is the severe damage the movement has done to the lives of many through its heavy-handed wielding of self-assumed "spiritual authority."

This legacy is inexcusable and no amount of "rich enjoyment" on your part makes up for the pain it has caused. And it really is quite bizarre that you might think it would.

This, as far as I can tell, is something the members of the movement really don't discuss or take issue with. They hide from it, and pretend it's not there, like a wife turning a blind eye to a husband who abuses his kids.

Until you do something about it, until members take back the movement from the hands of the self-assumed few, you are going to carry in your consciences the guilt of being enablers of abuse. It's your dirty little secret that this forum is making not so secret.

That is the issue. Talking about your "rich enjoyment" is avoiding this issue.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Let me reiterate. The Christian life is all about how you treat God and how you treat people. That's it. There is nothing else. (Luke 10:27). LRCers lose sight of that, so caught up are they in all their high-sounding "rich" experiences. How they treat others is not that high on their radar. Case in point: lawsuits, quarantines, character assassinations, lies, callousness, treating people as means to an end, etc.

But with the Lord, the question comes down to, how do you treat other people, especially those who are different that you?

And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even sinners do that. Luke 6:33

Like I said, LRCers are great at doing good to each other. They certainly love their own. But show yourself a little different than them, become a little unlovable to them, and you become to them a persona non grata.

Even the sinners do that.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Like I said earlier, there are some flaws in the local churches. And, there certainly would be flaws or else we would be raptured. But, I have not seen any other church/denomination where I have seen a richer enjoyment of Christ.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Here's the problem I have with your testimony, SbG. It's all about you feeling good and warm and fuzzy. There's nothing in it about God changing you or anyone else.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Let me ask you something. How are you with people who are different than you? Can you spend time with them? Can you see them as people the Lord loves? Do you love them? How has the Lord changed your heart in regards to people?

Originally Posted by Igzy

From what I've seen of LRCers, they are quite happy with each other. Why? Because everyone thinks and believes the same thing. No one rocks the boat. There are few challenges to your reality. It's all in a bubble, and when someone threatens the bubble, you all just retreat further into it, and boot out "dissenters."

The Lord didn't approach things that way at all. He was able to mingle with just about everyone. He was out in the community. He didn't see us and them. Can you make the same claim?

I don't see how, when your whole claim to fame is that you are unlike anyone else. Except when you want to gloss over your failings. Then you are (aw shucks) just like everyone else.

Originally Posted by Igzy

I don't see how, when your whole claim to fame is that you are unlike anyone else. Except when you want to gloss over your failings. Then you are (aw shucks) just like everyone else.

Originally Posted by Ohio

When I devoted my life to "Christ and the church," in a sense, I did my homework! I was with these brothers day-in and day-out. I saw the godly manner of life of many brother and sister, including our leaders.

What was never really investigated was WL/LSM. We took the recommendations of local leaders, and kind of like a snowball rolling down the hill, each new brother in the church began to sing the praises of the ministry of WL, and attend trainings in Anaheim.

Originally Posted by Igzy

If LCers are expert at anything, it is at being content with being ignorant.

Originally Posted by Igzy

RE: My last post.

I did not mean to be insulting. I did mean to be terse, but I realize what I wrote can sound like an insult.

It wasn't. It's just my observation from watching every single pro-LSM poster on this board. That they are massively uninformed and seemingly content to be so.

Think about it. These people are devoting their lives, and severely restricting their lives, in service of a movement they haven't even done their homework on.

Does that make any sense?

Originally Posted by Ohio

For the most part, this is a survival skill for those under oppressive regimes.

Those who have lived in communist countries have learned that certain knowledge about their leaders is dangerous because what one knows might be accidentally spoken. Hence, for the most part, they choose to survive by living in a type of contented ignorance.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Having the internet at one's disposal, this today seems almost absurd, but ......

Originally Posted by Igzy

To me the internet has meant... ignorance is no longer ever an excuse on any subject.

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

Imo any church that treats people with different opinions the way the LRC does is more than not for everyone...it is really not for anyone. That kind of behavior is detrimental to the church and the body of Christ as a whole.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

1. By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way.

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

Imo any church that treats people with different opinions the way the LRC does is more than not for everyone...it is really not for anyone. That kind of behavior is detrimental to the church and the body of Christ as a whole. How can you preach oneness when you slam all of Christianity and "organized religion" as Babylon? I've been on the receiving end of this rejection, and let me tell you it's just baffling sometimes, and hurtful in others. There are churches that aren't for everyone because of their particular practices and whatnot, but the LRC is a step beyond that.

Originally Posted by Ohio

In principle, I agree with this statement by SavedbyGrace. It's true. The Recovery is not for everyone. For 30 years I operated this way too, telling others that we had a certain commitment, and our own particular ways of doing things, and, though we welcomed everyone, we realized that not everyone would (or could) take the same way.

Every collection of believers and churches could say the same thing about themselves. What changed it all was all those "hidden things" which leaders kept secret. I'm not talking about leaders who took vacations on the sly, but the multitude of unrighteousness by LC leaders which have damaged the children of God. We all have to tolerate a little hypocrisy at times, but not crimes against the people of God. That was the game changer for me and for many others.

Originally Posted by Terry

Igzy, this ties into what SavedByGrace spoke in post #48

"By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way."

Originally Posted by Terry

Igzy, this ties into what SavedByGrace spoke in post #48

"By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way."

In other words in order to keep the oneness (aka like-minded), you might need to bury your head in the sand, look the other way, etc even if the outcome is to sacrifice your "spiritual and moral condition".

So if you are not one willing to sacrifice what you believe in, your core values, your integrity, you've become a dissenter for your unwillingness to remain like-minded. As SavedByGrace said, "it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way." It's because of my love for the saints in the local churches, I cannot forget what I left behind. Practically there is the need to press on, but still loving the brothers and sisters we once fellowshipped with.

Originally Posted by Igzy

I realize this is easy to say, but the rock-hard truth is that no changes will take place in the LRCs until the saints demand them.

Unfortunately, the members have been indoctrinated to believe "oneness" is more important than anything, even their spiritual and moral condition.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

BC was not at the lunch I was referring to. I spoke during a public meeting with several hundred saints. I sat on the back row, this way when I stood up I could see the entire congregation. I likened WL and PL to Eli and the sons of Eli. By standing up from the last row it also sent a message that everyone in the church was aware of this behavior, though I did cover my testimony with a very small fig leaf in case there were new ones or others that didn't have to know everything.

Shortly after that BC gathered the other two elders together and told me I had to move out of Dunton House. A few months later I learned a trap was being set to create a scene that could be used to excommunicate me.

Originally Posted by Igzy

I realize this is easy to say, but the rock-hard truth is that no changes will take place in the LRCs until the saints demand them.

Unfortunately, the members have been indoctrinated to believe "oneness" is more important than anything, even their spiritual and moral condition.

That kind of mentality is hard to overcome. Nigh impossible, because it's self-reinforcing.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did you do that? Did BC agree to that? What happened?

Originally Posted by rayliotta

I understand that we try to separate the "leadership" from the "common members". What I think is interesting is just how hard it is for us to agree on what that means.

None of this is a "bad thing". It's just the reality. How do you, really, separate the "leadership" from the "members"? I don't think it's so simple.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I did learn of PL while in NY, I was eating with some elders and leading ones who were discussing a visit to the church by the LSM. They were all in disgust with PL and I felt I should be the one to speak openly about it to the LSM reps during the meeting. After all I had served in the LSM for many years.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Most messages on these forums are anti-local churches. For more than 10 years, I am a member of the local church in a non-US, non-Chinese country. And, my experience in the local church is certainly different from the negative, suspicious experiences mentioned here.

There is some truth to some of the allegations, esp. the control and the attempt to fit the church into a particular pattern. But, it is true for most denominations. Every denomination has its own ways and you are supposed to conform. Try preaching in a Pentecostal church and the pastor would try his best to get you to stop.

I was born in an conservative Pentecostal family. My parents came in touch with Br. Lee's writings moves to the local church. I followed my parents to the local church. But, once I reached the local church, I fell in love with it.

The teaching, the hymns, the atmosphere in the local churches were so much different from the Pentecostal churches. A simple example is that I began to appreciate the book Song of Songs after I came to the Lord's recovery. Till then, it was considered a book that had to be ignored. Similarly, I never heard about the Lord becoming the life-giving Spirit till I came to the local churches. Neither did I know that Rom 5:10 is so rich and talks about the complete salvation of God. And, so many more things.

I also appreciate how the local churches encourage all saints to prophesy. Even today, I attended a meeting where one of the elders gave a long boring message. But, the prophesying after the message was so rich. I wish all churches (non-local churches) would stop the one man speaking and let every member function.

Also, the HWMR explains the Bible so well. Recently, we have been pursuing Psalms and you realize that the riches in Psalms are so vast. Similar to the experience with earlier HWMR on Song of Songs or Isaiah or all the other books.

And, the Hymns are so wonderful. They are not only about salvation or going to heaven or working for the Lord or being comforted. Right now, I am listening to hymn # 509 - God is in Christ to be my supply....

Like I said earlier, there are some flaws in the local churches. And, there certainly would be flaws or else we would be raptured. But, I have not seen any other church/denomination where I have seen a richer enjoyment of Christ.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Ohio

My last fellowship with the leaders was to cry out for the situation of my LC, imploring the elders to be elders, and not merely employees of and instructed to apologize to the brothers who were also there.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Right, and the followers have been trained to not think for themselves.

I can hear some now, pulling out that Laodicea means "rule of the people."

Ooooh. Better shut up for the rest of your life because of that one word.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Because ... they are the leaders! ... and all the "abuse, intolerance and exclusivity" is spun in a different light.

This is why I have repeatedly differentiated the leaders from the common members.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Originally Posted by Igzy

So, again, the solution is to either free themselves from the BBs, or reform them. But in general it doesn't make sense to expect a movement of churches to submit to spiritual leadership that doesn't reflect their core beliefs. Believers ought to be able to walk away from that, but stay intact as churches.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Well, this correlates to one of my basic beliefs about this whole situation which I stated earlier.

The whole problem with the LRC movement is the common saints need to speak out and tell the leadership what they believe.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Well, this correlates to one of my basic beliefs about this whole situation which I stated earlier.

The whole problem with the LRC movement is the common saints need to speak out and tell the leadership what they believe.

If it is true what you say, that WL is just a footnote to most, then why are they letting a subgroup which believes he was the MOTA lead them around by the nose? Why are they allowing this subgroup to create this reputation for them of abuse, intolerance and exclusivity?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You said "silent majorities rarely get anything done". What do you want them to "get done"?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This was a response to your post on 1Cor 3 with the conclusion "therefore, no more boasting about leaders" in reference to "some saying they are of Paul and others of Apollos". So clearly the context is about what the "common members did".

I am not denying that your view is a valid view of the LRC, what I am saying is that your view is limited to a minority of saints. I would define "minority" as less than 50%. I would call the ones I am referring to as the "silent majority". No matter where I met (NY, Houston, Irving, West Texas, NH, or Taipei) I was always able to fellowship with them. Get them out of the meeting hall and WL is nothing more than a footnote.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

How could you possibly know this? Maybe you’re more travelled than I thought. As one taking hospitality in the Anaheim area for many years, including many brothers and sisters from all over America, including those from older, established churches, I never noticed a major difference in them. If anything, they were usually more zealous for “the ministry” than those of us there at the feet of Witness Lee on a weekly basis.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Short answer. Yes. They are a lot worse than most groups. You are the exception. And this really isn't about what some common members did. This is about what the designated leaders of the movement say and do.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is the LRC really worse than any other Christian group on this point?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

WL was a very minor part of my LRC experience.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This may also answer Ohio's question. Peter was not a cheerleader for himself, but turned us to Jesus. Likewise with Paul. Did they have failings? Yes. Does that mean we cannot benefit from their ministry? No.

Originally Posted by Igzy

It's interesting, too, Ray. I was reading 1 Cor 3 again yesterday, and I realized that Paul's warning that some works would be burned was in the context of cheerleading a particular man.

Paul give his whole warning of works being burned and then ends the chapter with, "So then, no more boasting about human leaders!" v. 21. (emphasis mine).

Surely this is indicating that one way to get your work burned is to do them in the context of elevating a particular leader!

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

1. By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way.

2. Quarantines happen in most organizations. I personally know someone (let us call him Mr. X) who was quarantined by a Christian organization. The members of the organization were sent a letter asking them not to entertain Mr. X.
After a few years gap, Mr. and Mrs. X, visited one of his old friends from the organization. Mr. X was allowed to enter but was informed that the friend's family was not comfortable entertaining Mr. X because they were afraid someone would squeal on them.
Ironically, Mr. X is not boycotted by the person who sent out the letter asking people to boycott Mr. X.

3. Are the saints who left the local churches welcoming everyone? Do ex-members of local churches allow everyone to speak whatever they think is the revelation that each of them have received? Doesn't anyone try to control the teachings in the churches where the ex-members of the local churches meet?

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Even if you had "the high peak of the divine revelation", why would you label it like that? Witness Lee's favorite apostle Paul -- where did he refer to his own letters as the "kernel" of Scripture? Can you imagine Paul's response if some cheerleaders, you know, like the ones in Corinth, started using vocabulary like that?

When Paul said, don't call yourselves "of Paul", maybe he was winkin' and noddin' the whole time. Good job, cheerleader squad in Irving...er...Corinth. Keep up the good work! I wonder if some folks in the Recovery really believe that...

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

From the post above, I felt that your concern was that brothers working in LSM are often like despotic dictators lording it over churches and her leaders.

Since I do not know the brothers working at LSM, I do not have an opinion about them. You have an opinion about the brothers in LSM because you interacted with them or know people who interacted with them.

But, I never read the books published by LSM because the brothers working in LSM were more spiritual than me. I read the books because the books helped me enjoy the Lord. And, I would continue to refer to the books as long as I benefit from it.
(Balaam's donkey spoke to Balaam. Balaam could either listen to the donkey or tell the donkey that the donkey had not been the bestest of donkeys all these years.)

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

From the post above, I felt that your concern was that brothers working in LSM are often like despotic dictators lording it over churches and her leaders.

Since I do not know the brothers working at LSM, I do not have an opinion about them. You have an opinion about the brothers in LSM because you interacted with them or know people who interacted with them.

But, I never read the books published by LSM because the brothers working in LSM were more spiritual than me. I read the books because the books helped me enjoy the Lord. And, I would continue to refer to the books as long as I benefit from it.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

How does having book rooms or training centres make a difference? There are so many Bible Colleges out there. Are they 'all' bad?

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

You are right. For the most part, their love is conditional, although there are some exceptions. When the Blended Brothers stand on a pulpit and spouts off all the "High Peek Truths," they are a clanging symbol.

P.C.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

But, I never read the books published by LSM because the brothers working in LSM were more spiritual than me. I read the books because the books helped me enjoy the Lord. And, I would continue to refer to the books as long as I benefit from it.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Ohio

SavedbyGrace, I do have major issues with both the behaviors of LSM leaders and their teachings. I actively served in the churches for close to 30 years, from the mid-70's to the mid 00's, then the quarantines of the Great Lakes Area caused me to research and evaluate, in the light of scripture and church history, both current and past activities of WL/LSM, especially related to the many so-called "storms" in the Recovery in which former leaders were publicly "quarantined" following a time of so-called "rebellion."

What I learned disgusted me. They could not be considered merely as "flaws."



This is part of the hypocrisy which is so disturbing. LSM claims to be only "little brothers" desiring only to be "faithful" to the Lord's charge to "serve" all the churches in the Lord's "body," when in truth they are often like despotic dictators lording it over churches and her leaders. Those who resist LSM's advances are shamed and bullied into submission, or publicly smeared and slandered into departure.

Since I knew many of the so-called "rebels," and then after many years, read their personal accounts of why they actually departed, I was able to discern for myself the true facts of history, and not just buy into LSM's distorted record of history. LSM has a seasoned team of wordsmiths at their disposal who have learned to spin all events according to their own self-serving interests, and not according to truth and righteousness.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

1. By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way.

2. Quarantines happen in most organizations. I personally know someone (let us call him Mr. X) who was quarantined by a Christian organization. The members of the organization were sent a letter asking them not to entertain Mr. X.
After a few years gap, Mr. and Mrs. X, visited one of his old friends from the organization. Mr. X was allowed to enter but was informed that the friend's family was not comfortable entertaining Mr. X because they were afraid someone would squeal on them.
Ironically, Mr. X is not boycotted by the person who sent out the letter asking people to boycott Mr. X.

3. Are the saints who left the local churches welcoming everyone? Do ex-members of local churches allow everyone to speak whatever they think is the revelation that each of them have received? Doesn't anyone try to control the teachings in the churches where the ex-members of the local churches meet?

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

1. By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way.

2. Quarantines happen in most organizations.

3. Are the saints who left the local churches welcoming everyone? Do ex-members of local churches allow everyone to speak whatever they think is the revelation that each of them have received? Doesn't anyone try to control the teachings in the churches where the ex-members of the local churches meet?

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

1. By definition, organizations are a group of like-minded people. When a person of a different views/opinions joins the organization, the peace is lost. So, it is better for the dissenter to go on his/her separate way.

2. Quarantines happen in most organizations. I personally know someone (let us call him Mr. X) who was quarantined by a Christian organization. The members of the organization were sent a letter asking them not to entertain Mr. X.
After a few years gap, Mr. and Mrs. X, visited one of his old friends from the organization. Mr. X was allowed to enter but was informed that the friend's family was not comfortable entertaining Mr. X because they were afraid someone would squeal on them.
Ironically, Mr. X is not boycotted by the person who sent out the letter asking people to boycott Mr. X.

3. Are the saints who left the local churches welcoming everyone? Do ex-members of local churches allow everyone to speak whatever they think is the revelation that each of them have received? Doesn't anyone try to control the teachings in the churches where the ex-members of the local churches meet?

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

And, regarding people who are not in the Lord's Recovery, I defer to Br. Lee's word in LIFE-STUDY OF MARK MESSAGE TWENTY-NINE.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

And, I oppose Christianity as a system too. It is the same as the Pharisees turning the commandments into a 'system'. If you want to argue even the Lord's Recovery has become a system, I would agree that it may be true in some local churches (but not everywhere). But, I also agree with Br. Lee that the 'system'/'religion' of Christianity is incorrect.

Originally Posted by Ohio

SavedbyGrace, I do have major issues with both the behaviors of LSM leaders and their teachings. I actively served in the churches for close to 30 years, from the mid-70's to the mid 00's, then the quarantines of the Great Lakes Area caused me to research and evaluate, in the light of scripture and church history, both current and past activities of WL/LSM, especially related to the many so-called "storms" in the Recovery in which former leaders were publicly "quarantined" following a time of so-called "rebellion."

What I learned disgusted me. They could not be considered merely as "flaws."



This is part of the hypocrisy which is so disturbing. LSM claims to be only "little brothers" desiring only to be "faithful" to the Lord's charge to "serve" all the churches in the Lord's "body," when in truth they are often like despotic dictators lording it over churches and her leaders. Those who resist LSM's advances are shamed and bullied into submission, or publicly smeared and slandered into departure.

Since I knew many of the so-called "rebels," and then after many years, read their personal accounts of why they actually departed, I was able to discern for myself the true facts of history, and not just buy into LSM's distorted record of history. LSM has a seasoned team of wordsmiths at their disposal who have learned to spin all events according to their own self-serving interests, and not according to truth and righteousness.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Absolutely. I would ask two questions about CFP. Are there any churches, anywhere in the world, with book stores, excuse me, book rooms, that only sell books published by CFP?

Is there any kind of two-year school, excuse me, training, where all course materials are published by CFP?

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

Nobody from CFP has ever declared that Stephen Kaung is the Minister of the Age, God's Oracle on the earth, or the Acting God.

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

None of the groups getting help from Stephen Kaung, neither individually, nor collectively have ever called themselves 'The Lord's Recovery,' or 'God's Move on the Earth,' ...

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

... while at the time taking every opportunity to demean and find fault with everything that is not them. No one person or group of people who stopped fellowshiping with the Assemblies were said to have left God's Best, and no one who ever dared to speak contrary to them has been called inspired by Satan, rebellious or any such thing.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

As much as we confused Chinese culture with "spirituality", you don't have to be Chinese to understand this --

Originally Posted by Ohio

For the most part, this is a survival skill for those under oppressive regimes.

Those who have lived in communist countries have learned that certain knowledge about their leaders is dangerous because what one knows might be accidentally spoken. Hence, for the most part, they choose to survive by living in a type of contented ignorance.

The more I studied my past in the Recovery, the more I noticed the evidences of Chinese culture in the form of "contented submission." We in the US confused this with being "spiritual," since they do look somewhat similar to Americans. For example, TC and other LC Chinese leaders lived by the saying that "my father's failures are none of my business." This principle was taken to the extreme, providing WL and his Blendeds unlimited license without accountability for their actions. Hence the saying, "even if Bro Lee is wrong, he is still right."

Case in point: When John Ingalls, John So, Bill Mallon, and numerous other godly men were slanderously and unrighteously quarantined, TC signed his name on the dotted line, and agreed with that condemnation, all the while he knew better. He and the entire GLA thus entered into a period of contented ignorance, only to be interrupted by his own quarantine.

Originally Posted by Igzy

It's just my observation from watching every single pro-LSM poster on this board. That they are massively uninformed and seemingly content to be so.
Think about it. These people are devoting their lives, and severely restricting their lives, in service of a movement they haven't even done their homework on.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Like I said earlier, there are some flaws in the local churches. And, there certainly would be flaws or else we would be raptured. But, I have not seen any other church/denomination where I have seen a richer enjoyment of Christ.

Originally Posted by Ohio

What was never really investigated was WL/LSM. We took the recommendations of local leaders,

Originally Posted by Igzy

RE: My last post.

I did not mean to be insulting. I did mean to be terse, but I realize what I wrote can sound like an insult.

It wasn't. It's just my observation from watching every single pro-LSM poster on this board. That they are massively uninformed and seemingly content to be so.

Think about it. These people are devoting their lives, and severely restricting their lives, in service of a movement they haven't even done their homework on.

Does that make any sense?

Originally Posted by Igzy

If LCers are expert at anything, it is at being content with being ignorant.

Originally Posted by Igzy

If LCers are expert at anything, it is at being content with being ignorant.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

LSM may have its flaws (though I would like to hear the major issues anyone has with it).

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

LSM may have its flaws (though I would like to hear the major issues anyone has with it).

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

But, LSM does a job too.

Originally Posted by Paul Cox

One big difference. Nobody from CFP has ever declared that Stephen Kaung is the Minister of the Age, God's Oracle on the earth, or the Acting God. None of the groups getting help from Stephen Kaung, neither individually, nor collectively have ever called themselves 'The Lord's Recovery,' or 'God's Move on the Earth,' while at the time taking every opportunity to demean and find fault with everything that is not them. No one person or group of people who stopped fellowshiping with the Assemblies were said to have left God's Best, and no one who ever dared to speak contrary to them has been called inspired by Satan, rebellious or any such thing.

P.C.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I'd much rather people call the local church an organisation than a cult. Most lay people do not have any idea what 'cult' means. They just know that it has bad connotations and refuse to give it a chance.

And, I do not subscribe to everything that Brother Lee says nor do I accept that he is 'the' minister of the age. I do not see the Bible having one minister. Paul worked along with Peter, John, James and other Apostles.

I agree with brother Lee that denominations are bad. But, it seems that it cannot be helped. The good thing, IMHO, is that the local churches have a rich word, though others in this forum may not agree.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Very true.

LSM has no basis for their very existence. LSM has no scriptural mandate to even exist, let alone lord it over the churches.

Originally Posted by Terry

Ohio, time has proved LSM doesn't serve the churches, it's the churches that serve LSM.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I believe being far from Anaheim helps.

At the same time, I also know of local churches in my country where leading brothers are more intolerant than the leading brothers in my local church.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I'd much rather people call the local church an organisation than a cult. Most lay people do not have any idea what 'cult' means. They just know that it has bad connotations and refuse to give it a chance.

And, I do not subscribe to everything that Brother Lee says nor do I accept that he is 'the' minister of the age. I do not see the Bible having one minister. Paul worked along with Peter, John, James and other Apostles.

I agree with brother Lee that denominations are bad. But, it seems that it cannot be helped. The good thing, IMHO, is that the local churches have a rich word, though others in this forum may not agree.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I agree with brother Lee that denominations are bad. But, it seems that it cannot be helped. The good thing, IMHO, is that the local churches have a rich word, though others in this forum may not agree.

Originally Posted by SavedbyGrace

I agree with brother Lee that denominations are bad. But, it seems that it cannot be helped. The good thing, IMHO, is that the local churches have a rich word, though others in this forum may not agree.

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Sir, thank you for your candor. However, do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about denominations? Do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about organisations?

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There are external influences but nothing that cannot be accepted and nothing that does not occur in other denominations. From my experiences, the local churches are similar to most denominations with an organisational set-up.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why is it that no brother and no church can amiably part ways with LSM?

LSM is an absolutely closed "society" which answers to no one. They have zero accountability to member churches. How can LSM supposedly "serve" the churches yet these same churches have no say?

Originally Posted by Terry

Amen! Yes UntoHim, key word is disagreement. The may be mistrust, but not hatred. To the contrary, it's because of love for the brothers and sisters we know in the local churches there is groaning for change. A change to local churches which is general in it's receiving. A change that is impartial to whoever walk throught the meeting hall doors. A change in forgiving one another. I would love to see localities such as Moses Lake, Rosemead, etc be received and acknowledged as a local church without fellowship with LSM being a prerequisite.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

However, maybe you are so far from Anaheim that the leading brothers in your local church have taken some liberties...if this is the case I think it is a very positive development. Without disclosing your location, please feel free to let us know about these "different practices" in your local church. I am genuinely interested to know.

Also, please take to heart what Paul Cox just posted. This forum is a place for dialogue and communication. We are not here to express hatred for the Local Church, Witness Lee or Watchman Nee. Disagreement does not equal hatred. However, if you see something posted that you believe expresses hatred than you can point that out to me and we can talk about it.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Each local church is unique with only the teachings being common. The practices will be different and based on the leading brothers' understanding of the word. So, unless you taste and see each local church, you cannot know whether it is good.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I made the last post because I could not find any positive thing about the local churches in this forum. Anyone who came to this forum would be influenced to avoid the local church, which I don't think is fair. Each local church is unique with only the teachings being common. The practices will be different and based on the leading brothers' understanding of the word. So, unless you taste and see each local church, you cannot know whether it is good.

As for the experiences some of you have had, it is unfortunate. But, since I am not part of the local churches you were in, I do not see any reason to hate local church in my locality. There are external influences but nothing that cannot be accepted and nothing that does not occur in other denominations. From my experiences, the local churches are similar to most denominations with an organisational set-up.

Originally Posted by Ohio

The down side of the prophecying meeting is the tasteless, doctrinal and uninspirational monotone that often accompanies it. There are lots of people who should not be given the microphone on a weekly basis.

The bigger question, in my mind, is -- what is the reason for promoting this method of meeting. Is it protection or is it control? We were told for years that prophecying will protect us from all the inherent dangers of the clergy-laity system. I bought into that reasoning, as did all of my colleagues. But who protects us from the inherent dangers of having only one man --WL -- teach? The Bible never promoted the ministry of just one man. Who protects us from the errors that WL introduced?

I have concluded that the real reasoning for WL/LSM's method of prophecying is control.

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

WL was essentially the head pastor and all the FTT graduates are the elders/pastors in today's LRC. What do they do? They guide everyone so that they conform to the ministry.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Most messages on these forums are anti-local churches. For more than 10 years, I am a member of the local church in a non-US, non-Chinese country. And, my experience in the local church is certainly different from the negative, suspicious experiences mentioned here.

There is some truth to some of the allegations, esp. the control and the attempt to fit the church into a particular pattern. But, it is true for most denominations. Every denomination has its own ways and you are supposed to conform. Try preaching in a Pentecostal church and the pastor would try his best to get you to stop.

Like I said earlier, there are some flaws in the local churches. And, there certainly would be flaws or else we would be raptured. But, I have not seen any other church/denomination where I have seen a richer enjoyment of Christ.