[Freedom]

Unregistered, when I read your post, I immediately noticed some misconceptions about “us” and what we are doing here. You also say that you knew Brother Lee. If so, I am curious as to what your impression of him as a person was. Some people like me never met him and never saw him speak, so we may very well have a completely different impression of him. There is nothing wrong with that, because Lee was and still is highly regarded, so everyone in the LC has to have some impression of him whether good or bad. Obviously, those on this forum don’t have such a great impression of Lee, or at least serious concerns as to how he might have erred. The only way to keep people from having strong opinions about Lee would be to minimize his importance within the LC and that’s not going to happen.

It seems that those higher up in the LCM have this notion that those who are on the internet are there for the sole purpose of finding any way that they can criticize Lee. Ron coined the term “the lawless users of the internet” to describe those who discuss the LC on the internet. Such a mindset only serves to minimize the real issue, and I guess it helps the BB’s to not feel bothered about the real reasons that people are here on the internet. Do you really think that such a hasty generalization describes what people are doing here? Do you not see any possibility that people are here because they have been hurt by LC teachings and practices?

Here is a quick example of one of the many ways I’ve been severely affected by the LC. For over 20 years, while growing up, I was not able to attend a single Christmas celebration because my family took Lee’s anti-Christmas statements quite seriously. This highlights a big issue with Lee, and is also relevant to Nigel’s “Witness Lee Sanitized” paper. Lee made lots of absolute statements. Of course, everyone in the LC has great respect for his ministry so they will be inclined to do whatever he said. Many people in the LC will argue that Lee’s statements shouldn’t be taken too literally or “out of context”, but then that brings up the question of how to clarify what Lee said. Lee never clarified many of his statements, so that is his fault.

Here is an example of one of Lee’s “absolute” statements:

“Christmas is a blasphemy to Christ, and no Christian with a pure conscience should have anything to do with it.” Life-Study of Revelation Message 51.

If Lee really knew what he was taking about, he wouldn’t make an absolute statement and then talk about the conscience in the same sentence. That defeats the whole purpose of the conscience. Maybe Lee’s position on Christmas had some truth to it, but that doesn’t give him the right to impose his personal convictions on individual LC members. Why not let them follow their consciences, rather than make absolute statements like a dictator would? Nigel has documented many more of these statements that Lee made. Such statements that Lee made are absolutely deserving of criticism and critique. Do you not realize how dangerous it is to follow Lee without question? I’m sorry, but I can’t see how Lee is in any way “safe” to follow blindly. LC members need to hear the other side of the story, and those who have come in contact with the LC also need the ability to make informed decisions as to what the LC is really about.