Quote:
Originally Posted by Truthseeker
I have received a warning that many Watchman Nee's works from LSM publications were falsely translated by Witness Lee. Lee might keep the original Chinese version with himself and tried to distort and embellish Nee's works by his unauthentic translation in order to have Nee supporting Lee. This is true? Should I seek Nee's works in another publication apart from LSM?
|
After I first contacted the LC in Cleveland, I bought Kinnear's biography of Nee. A Chinese elder JY told me to "
throw it away, since it has more than 200 major errors." How would he know, since he was never there in China? Simple. Lee said so. But Kinnear was the SIL of TASparks, so he did provide great perspective to thwart Lee's rampant hagiography. I never did read that book.
Before the Midwest quarantines became official, TC had all the elders read thru Nee's book
TNCCL. This was supposedly the all-time classic commentary on the church-life, and the guiding principles (published architectural "blueprint" for the Recovery) by which Lee operated. That was a shocking read. Now whether that book actually matched the N.T. is open for debate, but one thing was definitely certain, nothing in that book matched the practices of either Lee, TC, or the Blendeds.
It is my personal belief that reading that book did TC more harm than good. TC was obviously hoping that the book would expose only the errant leadership practices of the Blendeds. The pending LC crisis between Cleveland and Anaheim caused many of us to realize how far off everything was in the recovery.
Help! Look how lost we are! How did we get here?
One time brothers went to Lee about these discrepancies between Nee's book and his leadership controls. Lee abruptly responded, "You are questioning me?
I was there!" I know a brother who went to TC with the same questions, he got a similar cold shoulder.
It is obvious that LSM writes a self-serving history for their people. Recently I learned that brother Dan Towle has left, and they must remove his name from all publications. They did the same thing to John Ingalls et. al. a quarter century ago. Who knows what else they are rewriting.
As a publisher LSM has proved that it is just not trustworthy. They only publish Nee and Lee, so any flaws in their history would damage their revenue stream. The Bible was never this way. Peter never got to go back to the Gospels or the book of Galations to scrub out his failures. Neither did any of the O.T. men of God. I would now trust other publications of Nee before I would trust LSM's.