Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
I, of course, still believe that they all are genuine Christians, at least all the leaders I knew back in the 70's, 80's, and 90's. Reading the NT carefully one can see that many Christian leaders will fail us, falling into sin, immorality, or financial corruption.
Regularly I was reminded by LC and LSM leaders, and WL himself, that the Recovery was altogether holy, pure, godly, and absolutely free from any sort of financial, sinful, or moral corruption as we saw played out on the media.
Fast forward to the Midwest Quarantines, which really started behind the scenes after WL passed, and gained momentum after Y2K. Now we all had the internet, the old Bereans forum began, and even Plymouth Brethren writings were now available. The written accounts of a number of well-respected former members, like John Ingalls of Anaheim, were digitized and posted for internet availability. The number of honest and believable testimonies that became available during the quarantine was overwhelming.
It was a light shining in a dark place, the rotten spirit hidden in LSM past.
On several occasions WL told us all from the podium concerning John Ingalls that "People Change." Yes, they do. But it was not John Ingalls who changed. He was faithful unto death. It was WL who changed.
|
Christian leaders falling into sin will happen in "Christianity", but certainly not in the Recovery? To some degree it was just covered up better in the Recovery. You know the saying "cover the brothers"? It could be utilized to say cover the sinning brother. Not just in the local churches, but I have been in non-local churches where a "good brother" may be the receive covering or looking the other way. It takes the sisters to say, "No! This is unacceptable!" Then the leadership listens. Not in the local churches. It is too patriarchal. Voices of sisters is not truly regarded as members of the Body. Yes brothers will say sisters are members of the Body, but it is only lip service. Actions and words from the podium says otherwise.
It is also said what other Christian leaders would do, Witness Lee would not do. Was Witness Lee any different? From a business perspective, certainly not. For a time Witness Lee was able to cover it better. It could very well be the John Ingalls, Albert Knochs, and Bill Mallons of the recovery had no knowledge. Whereas the Titus Chus, Benson Phillips, Ray Gravers, Minoru Chens, and James Lees of the recovery did have some inkling and choose to look the other way. By the internet age it became much more difficult to continually cover Witness Lee. The curtain had been pulled back for all to see how corrupt the the recovery movement really was. Villains receive covering whereas victims are scorned. At best the recovery movement is a sect and at worst, it is a cult. Because I was taught Witness Lee was the modern day apostle Paul, how could you not call the recovery a cult?