[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps TC said it best when he testified, "I always viewed WL as a man, while the BB's viewed WL as god."....Maybe idolatry was in the undiscussed root of those disagreements.

In what little I have heard from Titus, I think his view of Witness Lee falls somewhere between the two (as does the BB's I think). Furthermore, the root of the disagreements between Chu and BB have little to nothing to do with their over-all view of Lee. The BBs simply want Chu to "do Lee" their way and present Lee their way....Titus has always chosen to do Lee and present Lee in his own way. I don't believe that they disagree on the end, just the means to that end. In some respects all I see from Titus Chu is a "re-packaging" of Lee's ministry with a little bit of personal spin to make it his own. This apparently infuriates the BBs and other non GLAers...why I don't know because Chu is one of the most close imitators of Witness Lee I have ever seen...and I have seen a lot.

After all, we did get quarantined over what many thought was nonsense.

And aren't you thankful for that now?

I would also add that Ron Kangas doesn't necessarily speak for all the current members of the LC's.

I never said that he did...but many of his public proclamations are certainly reflective of the general attitude that most members have held towards the person and work of Witness Lee. You say things are different in the Midwest...fine, but I must say that during my tenure in the Local Church I observed no such difference. I had occasional contact with a number of those from the Midwest (at trainings and conferences, including 10 day hospitality stints) and I don't recall any real noticeable difference...I guess things have changed over the past decade or so!

Let's differentiate between BB speakers and LC members.

Well, you can if you want to, no problem. I will differentiate between the two at times, but at other times I may not. The BBs are the official leaders of the Local Church movement. Those LC members who chose to stay in the group are under their leadership and under their "ministry". In most places in the Free World this is a choice. Nobody is holding a gun to their head. They can get up and walk away, and I suggest that they do just that ASAP.

I know many LC folks who never make it to the feasts, and rarely hear a LSM message.

Huh? Then what do they do at the meetings? Do they sing contemporary worship songs and read outlines by John MacArthur? Really, I'm curious, because what makes them "LC folks" if they are not hearing "LSM messages"?

They are there for various reasons, but no one would say they have idolized a man. The program just is not as homogenized as sometimes it is portrayed here.

Ok, now you got me, I'm lost. What "program" are they in then?

It would serve our discussion well if we substituted the BB'S for the LC's.

No, I don't think this would serve our discussion well at all. In fact it would have a tendency to confuse our discussions. I think by now we all know who is who and where they stand, and there is no need to substitute anybody for anybody else. If somebody's position or standing has been misrepresented, they can say so and then give a word of clarification. This is what discussion forums are all about!

If the BB's promote some form of idolatry, let's identify that, rather than including lots of people we may know nothing about.

I think the BBs have been promoting the same form of idolatry that has existed and been promoted by Witness Lee and the Local Churches for decades. It seems that it has not been promoted to the same degree in different regions. We don't need to know anything about the individual members to make an assessment of a movement that has existed for many years. If any individual or any individual church chooses to remain associated with the LC movement and/or the LSM, then they stand the chance of falling under the umbrella of that assessment. This is not guilt by association, but rather a person or a group of people choosing to remain associated with a certain group that teaches and practices in a certain manner.