View Single Post
Old 06-21-2019, 12:02 PM   #58
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Renton, Washington
Posts: 3,347
Default Re: Open Letter - Dear Saints in the Lord's Recovery

Originally Posted by aron View Post

From The Spokesman-Review Dec 17 1978

Witness Lee refused to act on Max Rapoport's demand. Why? Because he didn't want to, that's why. He's Witness Lee, the voice of God. That's the sum total of reality in the LC: if the oracle wants to do something he does, and if he doesn't want to, then he refuses. And by extension, "Philip Lee doesn't like to answer such charges" - I mean, who would? Certainly Philip didn't want to face the music. But that's apparently sufficient in the LC -- the oracle's son doesn't want to answer such charges. End of conversation. Kind of like Dad was with Sal Benoît.

"So subjective is my Christ in me..." Yes indeed, so subjective.... Christ is whatever you want Christ to be - how very convenient. And ten years later, someone else found the oracle's son in the same office doing the same "immoral act". Surprised?
A side point at that time in Anaheim (I was there 1976-1979), it's not only the parents who remained open to Max that suffered, but THEIR CHILDREN TOO. Friendships were squashed among churchkids by the parents. Very sad.

Anyways, I emphasized a portion of Aron's post. This is the M.O. of elders, co-workers etc when confronted with questions, criticisms, etc. Whether it be Harvest House, Steve Isitt, or direct personal interactions. No response. This is what I have termed as bunker mentality. Brothers have no problems levying their opinions (founded or unfounded). Yet when others do the same which invariably questions the ministry, it's by default labeled as an attack when that's hardly the intention of the individual or individuals.
"Even a neutral has a right to take account of facts, even a neutral cannot be asked to close his mind or close his conscience."- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Terry is offline   Reply With Quote