[OBW]

Don,

I would commend the early followers for their purity in intent. I further do not condemn all of the LC for where the doctrine that slowly surfaced took those early practices. It was a subtle thing.

But with some of the history going back to Taiwan that we now have available, I believe that the practice and belief of the 60s was not the whole of Lee’s teaching. He introduced his doctrine in stages. Remember the discussion of that first meeting in Dallas in your living room? I recall from an earlier thread (probably on the BARM or possibly in your book) that while you did not understand the rush, someone thought you and George should hurry up and have that first meeting. It is now clear that someone felt that oneness was not enough. It took Lee’s version of oneness and not one of the others that that were about to do the same.

If they practiced in such a manner that the LC as you knew it then could not meet simultaneously with their group, then that speaks loudly of one or two other groups that technically followed the same one church in a city doctrine. And Lee knew that he could not set up his own group there without violating his own doctrine. But if you have to beat the others there, then there is something more than just the “ground” that is important to your meeting. It must not be acceptable to be in their group rather than in your own group.

In effect, there were sects that grew out of Nee’s teachings. The LC was but one. You did not know this. George probably did not either. But Lee and possibly some others did. There was already sectarianism buried underneath the “ground of oneness” that was taught. It would only truly surface over time.

It eventually drove you away. We can thank God for that.