[OBW]

OK. I've made my point. And it is actually understood. I'm happy.

And when I refer to the LRC to others, I sometimes refer to it as a "cult, at some level." And that is the absolute truth. But that almost always needs some explanation.

O well.

To me, the worst thing about it is that the most public uses of the word are even somewhat erroneous in why they apply the word. Almost always, "modalism" is given as a reason. Now I consider the overall effect of the LRC's allegedly "balanced" view of the Trinity to be very unbalanced. But somehow I think that the idea that it is some kind of modalism is ridiculous. They are trying to make another misunderstood term apply to get the other term to apply.

And an elder in an assembly who does a bunch of crazy things does not a cult make. But when it is happening at a more global level, and being carried on by a regional or national leader, and then he boasts about it in a national conference setting, we are getting there. Or when you find it happening in the same way in a large number of assemblies, then you have something. And the fact that Mel was at least sort of set aside for a while suggests that the overall system of the LRC does not approve of the things he did.

Yet they have no desire to reach out to fix the wreckage he left behind. No desire to reconcile with awareness. The problem is that they want what Mel wanted. Just not handled the way he handled it. And what Mel wanted is an extreme personality cult. One with a hierarchy of personalities. Lee at the top, and Mel a little below that as local representative.

Fortunately, this is not the case in all places. But it is somewhat common. And a rotten teaching like "deputy authority," which actually came from Nee (and was bad enough then) but was enhanced in practice by Lee, causes these kinds of things to happen. Just not often with the kind of over-the-top behavior as was directed at awareness.

Then there is TC. And BP. Willing to drive off the best among both the flock and the leadership so that the worst can thrive.

It just seems that pointing out the facts of the errors and abuses should be enough. If we point back to Jane's account of Benson's public slander of her, followed by a private meeting of berating, then years later of a boast about having done it — if that doesn't set off enough sirens and red flags, I'm just not sure that labeling it will help. If we talk about TC's public shamings, and of the way he was slandered out of the system — not for his actual errors, but for the things he actually did right. "Follow the money" on the Daystar fiasco. Note how Lee sent Max out to create havoc so that there would be a reason to become the leader of the group. He may have said to call him on his errors if they were to happen, but ask John Ingalls how that works out. He claims that a "little sister" should stand up to him, then refuses when much greater than that does it.