Heresies in LC?

[Robert]

Hi, everybody!
Is there any of You, who can name at least three heresies in LC? I mean mainstream teaching/ winds of teaching?
Thanks!

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Robert

Hi, everybody!
Is there any of You, who can name at least three heresies in LC? I mean mainstream teaching/ winds of teaching?
Thanks!

When you say "heresy", what do you mean by heresy?

Trapped

[Robert]

Dominionism, that we have ability to bring Christ back. Last Years they put more accent on this. This is hidden, but after Years it is obvious that they want to produce army earthly Christians ( my opinion). That was one example.
By heresy I mean soemthing really contrary to Word of God. It can be hidden thought. If You say that tribulation will be after rapture, it will be not heresy. I mean not something so important which can lead Christians away fro Christ. You can believe in both theories and be healthy brother. But telling saints that Your growth is important to bring Christ back is saying other words, indirectly, that we ave power, ability to force or influence on Gods acting which is directly heresy.

[Trapped]

If you are just talking about contrary to the Word, there's a fair amount. I wouldn't label all these heresies, but the implications of many of them are very serious.

-Minister of the Age/Vision of the Age/Ministry of the Age
-the concept of deputy authority in general
-submitting to deputy authority regardless of right or wrong, and the covering of a sinning deputy authority
-get out of your mind
-tree of knowledge of good and evil being the source of death
-God not caring about good/evil or right/wrong, only life
-blending being to lose individual distinctions
-God's economy
-their teaching regarding "denominations taking a name"
-the one publication edict
-their being the "pure" church; the set apart Body of Christ
-any talk of Ron Kangas regarding someone who is leprous or rebellious or poisonous
-the thought of "touching death" -- total misuse of OT verses
-a sisters' role being primarily to submit and pray, and if the church doesn't do well it's because the sisters do not pray enough
-their teaching and actions related to lawsuits
-the way to handle offenses in the church
-the ground of oneness
-over-legalism with young people regarding non-sinful human activities
-Satan dwelling in our flesh
-overcomers
-"becoming God"

There's a lot more, but that's a start.

Trapped

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

-Minister of the Age/Vision of the Age/Ministry of the Age
-the concept of deputy authority in general
-submitting to deputy authority regardless of right or wrong, and the covering of a sinning deputy authority.

Heresies

I'd agree with quote above, on the Minister of the Age/Vision of the Age/Ministry of the Age teaching, which led us directly away from the revealed gospel. It's contrary to the idea of being subject to one another. Now with MOTA, everyone's subject to one person, aka Deputy God, Today's Moses, Today's Paul etc. It's a Christ-like position of untouchability which only the sinless Christ holds. In the NT you see repeated demonstrations and indications of mutuality. Paul was the apostle to the gentiles, and Peter to the Jews. Nobody had primacy, ever.

It's probably connected with 'Robert' note on Dominionism, as the New Apostolic Reformation shows. In the NAR, as long as you're 'under' the self-claimed Apostle, aka the LC 'covering', then you're 'over' the earth. This is hijacking the gospel for selfish ends, those of the MOTA and lackeys. The sins of the MOTA get covered, and those if his/her children and close associates and supporters, and the Chief Cheerleaders expose everyone else. I've seen it at conferences, and it's not pretty. It's rather a kind of public humiliation: who gets to shame who in the pecking order.

-The Son is the Father. That, to me, is clearly heresy. The NT shows the Son on earth praying to "our Father" in heaven. The NT says that the Father loved us and sent His Son.

The "when you see me, you see the Father" of John 14:9 is explained by the idea of agency, of the Sent One, who as agent (or steward) expresses fully (completely and unequivocally) the Giving or Sending One. The Ambassador to France will say, "When you see me, you see the Prime Minister" The Ambassador is functionally one with the Sender. When s/he speaks, acts, thinks, does and refrains from doing, s/he's completely expressing them. Jesus claimed this relationship for himself the Father, which scandalized the religious Jews. Then He told his disciples, "Just as I obey the Father, you should obey me"[!] (John 15:9-12)

We're his 'sent ones' and express him, but that doesn't make us ontologically The Christ anymore than the Ambassador is now the Prime Minister, or The Sent Christ is perforce The Sending Father.

Doubtful Teachings and Questionable Speculations

-Why did some psalms of imprecation in the NT supposedly show Christ defeating Satan, while other similar antagonistic statements are said to be merely the fallen writer's natural human sentiments? You know, we are supposed to bless and not curse? Turn the other cheek?

So why didn't Samuel turn the other cheek with Agag? Why didn't David turn the other cheek with Goliath? Oh, because they were portraying the victorious Christ? So in some RecV footnotes we're given one interpretation, in others the opposite. No explanation offered.

-If women can't teach, then why does LSM website sell books by Mary McDonough, the "God's Plan of Redemption" alongside books by WN and WL? And, why did WN copy slavishly the works of J P-L if women can't teach?

-The RecV footnote says that the 'ethnon' of Revelation 22:2 get to live forever, but it's not eternal life? Don't 'forever' and 'eternal' mean the same thing? But one's a quality, other is a quantity, is what we're told. Where does the Bible make such distinctions? It sounds like a make-shift theology of convenience. I heard that reputable scholars teach this 'live forever' idea, and read Robert Govett, who said these verses show us perpetual mortals. Again, this is a stark contradiction in terms. Mortals by definition can't be perpetual.

-For that matter, why does giving a cup of cold water to one of Jesus' disciples during the Great Tribulation earn one perpetual mortality (whatever that is), and living forever (but not eternal life), yet when you give a cup of water to one of Jesus' disciples in any other time, you're still sent to eternal torment, because we all know that such works are vain? But during a 3.5-year span, suddenly good works gain eternal bliss? Where does the Bible clearly show the juxtaposition of such contrasting themes? Or, are these hopeful interpretations, cobbled together?

Rock Solid Truth

-God loved us and sent His Son.
-Christ died for us, and rose again on the third day, raised to eternal glory and rule.
-Christ now wants us to love one another, not merely in word but in deed. The command is, "Feed my sheep." Then what's Peter et al doing in early chapters of Acts? Feeding the widows. Then Paul repeatedly writing to the gentile churches to collect for the poor of Jerusalem. Coincidence? I doubt it.

I wish that we'd spend 90% to 95% of our time rehearsing the Rock Solid Truth of the gospel, agreed-upon by all Christians, and 5% or 10% of our time and attention on the aspects that allow views and interpretations. But even those questions, gently held, should quickly bring us back to the Truth. Sometimes, "I don't know" is the best operationalized truth. (and I speculate a lot. But beyond the Rock Solid Truth, I won't insist)

And stay far away from groups who hold and teach clear deviations, the first category. Such collective promotions will only bring misery. And there's a lot of it out there, not just the LC! Persistent attempts at critical thinking usually expose such efforts as deviation, which is why the LC wants us to shout repetitively and get into an unbalanced and suggestive state. But if you're being coerced by those who want to use the truth of the gospel as a springboard for their unbalanced speculations, our Father can protect you and keep you from such harm.

[Recovering]

Originally Posted by Trapped

-tree of knowledge of good and evil being the source of death
-God not caring about good/evil or right/wrong, only life

The message on "Job and the Two Trees" in the 2020 Crystallization Study of Job was the moment I woke up and realized something was very wrong in LSM-land. In trying to make a point about not being distracted by good works from loving God (a point I can understand in its proper context: "I'm coming back to the heart of worship. I'm sorry Lord for the thing I've made it, when it's all about You, Jesus." ), the brother went way off the edge of the cliff into something I would call heresy when he said "Actually, it's deceptive to call it the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil", and then later, "Good is somewhat worse than evil because it's deceptive." I'm pretty sure he meant something like "It's easier to realize you're distracted by something bad than by something good." but to state it that way, with those words from the podium is inexcusable. That's what took me to the elders to have a conversation about stepping back from leadership, to start reevaluating the things I'd read and accepted for decades, and eventually to leave.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Recovering

The message on "Job and the Two Trees" in the 2020 Crystallization Study of Job was the moment I woke up and realized something was very wrong in LSM-land. In trying to make a point about not being distracted by good works from loving God (a point I can understand in its proper context: "I'm coming back to the heart of worship. I'm sorry Lord for the thing I've made it, when it's all about You, Jesus." ), the brother went way off the edge of the cliff into something I would call heresy when he said "Actually, it's deceptive to call it the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil", and then later, "Good is somewhat worse than evil because it's deceptive." I'm pretty sure he meant something like "It's easier to realize you're distracted by something bad than by something good." but to state it that way, with those words from the podium is inexcusable. That's what took me to the elders to have a conversation about stepping back from leadership, to start reevaluating the things I'd read and accepted for decades, and eventually to leave.

This is a wonderful story!

Just in case you want some bolstering that you indeed heard them say what they say, here is Witness Lee himself:

The nature and result of the tree of life are both life because it is a tree of life. But the nature and result of the tree of knowledge of good and evil are both death because knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death. Anything that is not life is of death and results in death. Actually, the tree of knowledge of good and evil is the tree of death; yet it is not called the tree of death, but the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Death is not only behind evil; it is also behind knowledge and good. The title of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is subtle because Satan always likes to conceal himself. Satan has the power of death (Heb. 2:14). Since the tree of knowledge of good and evil is actually the tree of death, it signifies Satan.
-Life-Study of Genesis

There's no way around it. He flat-out says "good is of death". No nuance. "Death is behind good". No qualifying.

I genuinely do not think the speaking brothers intend to say something different. They repeat this teaching over and over (particularly, mind you, when there is some discontent to squash......).

And yes, the very tree that GOD CALLED "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", the very tree that GOD SAID THE NAME OF to Adam and Eve.....Witness Lee says that name -- that God Himself used -- was deceptive.

Does anyone still think this guy is the God-appointed "minister of the age"?

There are so many falsehoods and bad claims in this one portion alone it's really unbelievable. To think someone can be this bumbling and yet still trick people into being his followers and make millions and millions of dollars off of this nonsense is crazy to me.

[Robert]

To TRapped:
So what about Christ Jesus saying in Math. 7:22? Was it not "good"?

[Robert]

I do not catch the point, Trapped. There was a tree of "good and evil". yes? So good and evill was on one tree. Yes? There was anoter tree of Life. Yes? So this is clear, that tree of knowledge was opposite the tree of life. I do not have to study WL ministry to see this. May be my English is not perfect, but I do not catch Your point here...
For me, good coming from my intention is anyway evil in God's Eye. Is not?

[UntoHim]

Actually Robert, God does not consider the knowledge of good and evil as opposite or antithetical to life, at least if you take in consideration the following 1,186 chapters of the Bible. Nee and Lee taught their followers that we are to pay more attention to "life" than we are to knowing and differentiating between good and evil. This notion, maybe above all else, has caused a lot of damage in the Local Church of Witness Lee. God does not consider knowledge as death. God wants his children to know the truth, speak the truth and walk in the truth. The apostle John, as an old man, implored the believers to walk in truth. He didn't implore them to "walk in life" - "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children are walking in the truth". (3 John 1:4)

Unfortunately, Lee and his followers have majored in "life" at the expense of truth, and this has cost them dearly. They have a name that they are living but they are dead. They are not dead because of knowledge and truth, they are dead and they are starving for a lack of knowledge and truth. And this lack of knowledge and truth has made the dear saints in the Local Churches numb and susceptible to imbibing all manner of false teachings and heresies. May the Lord have mercy.
-

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Robert

I do not catch the point, Trapped. There was a tree of "good and evil". yes? So good and evill was on one tree. Yes? There was anoter tree of Life. Yes? So this is clear, that tree of knowledge was opposite the tree of life. I do not have to study WL ministry to see this. May be my English is not perfect, but I do not catch Your point here...
For me, good coming from my intention is anyway evil in God's Eye. Is not?

Hi Robert,

Hopefully I can explain my point; let me know if anything is still unclear afterwards.

The tree was not "the tree of good and evil", but "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil." So it wasn't "good and evil being on the same tree". It was the tree of the knowledge of something -- the knowledge of good and evil.

Not just "the tree of good and evil". But the knowing of it.

The Bible confirms this after Adam and Eve eat of it, and God says in Genesis 3:22, "the man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil."

Yes, the Bible mentions another tree in the center of the garden, the tree of life. But the tree of life is not said to be "opposite" from any tree. If you read Genesis, God does not even mention the tree of life to Adam and Eve. He doesn't tell them to eat it. He doesn't point to it. He doesn't say anything about it. All God tells them is that they can eat "of any tree EXCEPT the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

What God does tell them is that if they eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (the tree He commanded them not to eat), they would die. At this point, Witness Lee would teach that Adam and Eve die because the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is really "the tree of death", and that some poisonous element got into man from the tree. But there is a big problem with this teaching.

1. The Bible never, ever calls it a tree of death.
2. The Bible describes the tree positively. It is called a) good for food, b) pleasant to the sight, and c) makes you like God. None of those can be "death" or "poison". No one calls something poisonous "good for food".
3. The tree was forbidden to eat, but this does not necessary make it a bad tree. Like I said in #2 above, it is described positively but is just forbidden.
4. Witness Lee says the name of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was deceptive because it's really the tree of death. But God called it "the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", and God is most certainly not deceptive! Witness Lee was wrong.
5. The tree's names are not deceptive at all. If you eat the tree of life, you live forever (Genesis 3:22), and if you eat the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you......know good and evil (also Genesis 3:22)!!! The names of the tree are exactly what they got from it. No deception.
6. Additionally, God said it in plain words to Adam and Eve - if you eat the tree you will die. There's no deception involved.

So Adam and Eve ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and God made good on His promise that they would die. And where do we see the proof of Adam and Eve dying? Genesis 3:22-23 again:

...He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden...

God prevented Adam and Eve from eating the tree of life so they would not live forever. In other words......so they would die.

Death did not come from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, like Witness Lee taught. It came because God punished Adam and Eve by preventing them from eating the tree of life, which prevented them from living forever.

This is why the Bible tells us "the wages of sin is death". Death did not come from the tree. Death is our punishment from God for sin, for disobedience.

I'll write another post tomorrow to explain why getting this story right matters and to answer the rest of your question.

Trapped

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

There's no way around it. WL flat-out says "good is of death". No nuance. "Death is behind good". No qualifying.

Peter's speaking to Cornelius and his household refutes this idea of equating "good" with "death". Peter spent 3+ years with Jesus, basically 24/7, and summed up his ministry and living with these words: 1) God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power; 2) how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil; 3) because God was with him. ~Acts 10:38, NIV

The good works that Jesus did were not a substitute or replacement for a living relationship with the Father, but demonstrated the continual (abiding) living relationship. The gospels show this: "If you don't believe me, believe the [good] works that I do." ~John 14:11; 10:38. Then, Jesus told his disciples to obey him and abide with him just as he'd done with the Father. How can we say, "We're not interested in good works"? It's both his example, and his command. It's the demonstration of our life hidden with Christ, the love that comes out toward others, who can't repay us. It's not, "Get good material to build up the church".

[aron]

Although not at the level of heresy, WL's teaching of 'God's economy' was baseless speculation, and flourished under the ministry-of-the-age concept. Paul didn't write, "Stay in Ephesus and teach things that result in God's economy, which is to eat the processed Triune God and become God in life and nature." No, the whole thing was put together out of disparate and unrelated bits.

And, why would anyone think that Paul asked Timothy to teach things including 'intensification' if Paul's writings never mention it? Even in post-Paul texts like Revelation 1:4, 3:1, 4:5 where are seen the Seven Spirits of God, how can one call this the sevenfold intensified Spirit to overcome the degraded church, if Moses saw seven flames burning before the throne in Exodus 25? Was the church degraded in the book of Exodus? God said, "See that you build everything according to the pattern that you saw on the holy mountain", and then Moses built a gold lampstand with seven beaten lamps of fire. Now John's writing of seeing seven lampstands with seven - not 49 - lamps of fire, before the throne.

Yet nobody questioned this in the LSM assemblies. You don't question the Big Boss... sorry, I mean God's humble bond slave who bears the mantle before God.

Here's an example of the homespun logic holding together the presentation:

Originally Posted by Tom Smith Blog

These seven Spirits are for intensified shining, like a seven-way lamp.

When there is plenty of light, you may hardly need any lamps. The darker the situation gets, the more light we need.

Depending on the light we need, we may use a three-way bulb, with three gradients of brightness. A three-way lamp may be sufficient for our home but not for God’s move in this dark age.

To overcome today’s spiritual darkness we need sevenfold intensification, that is, the function of the sevenfold intensified Spirit of God.

https://holdingtotruth.com/2017/05/1...in-revelation/

No mention of the fact that seven flames of fire have been burning in the temple for centuries. No, suddenly it seems that the church got degraded and God needs seven lamps of fire to burn before his throne. The amount of scripture that's ignored to make the LSM narrative hold up is astonishing. It's remarkable that Witness Lee pulled it off.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Robert

I do not catch the point, Trapped. There was a tree of "good and evil". yes? So good and evill was on one tree. Yes? There was anoter tree of Life. Yes? So this is clear, that tree of knowledge was opposite the tree of life. I do not have to study WL ministry to see this. May be my English is not perfect, but I do not catch Your point here...
For me, good coming from my intention is anyway evil in God's Eye. Is not?

continued from my previous post about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil......

So Witness Lee said, "The nature and result of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil are both death because knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death." (LS of Genesis)

First of all, look at what Lee says here. He does not say "Because the result of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was death, we can see that knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death." At least that would be logically plausible (if you ignore parts of Scripture). At least with that statement, Lee would be STARTING with Scripture and drawing a conclusion, however wrong.

But instead, Lee's base claim here is simply "because knowledge, good, and evil are all of death and bring in death" and his conclusion is, "THEREFORE, the nature/result of the TOTKOGE is death."

!!!

Do you see that? Lee made a completely unsupported, unfounded, unbiblical claim (that knowledge/good/evil are of death) and used THAT as the explanation for why the TOTKOGAE resulted in Adam and Eve's dying.

It's shocking what he got away with.

But the Bible shows that it was not the tree that brought in death, but the disobedience that God punished with death. Death was God's punishment for disobedience. Death actually came from God! Not from the tree.

This is why we die! Because God punishes sin with death! (“the wages of sin is death”) This is why Jesus had to DIE in our place!

So once we see where death ACTUALLY comes from, we can see immediately that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is not "the tree of death" NOR the source of death.

This means that it is a FALSE conclusion to use the name of the tree and the punishment for disobedience to say that "knowledge is of death" or that "good is of death".

(It is also logically false to use the name of the tree to say "evil is of death", but we can easily prove that evil is evil in many other ways, so we’re safe there.)

So knowledge is not of death. And good is not of death.

The truth is, Robert, that good is good. The Bible only speaks highly of good.

3 John 1:11
Dear friend, do not imitate what is evil but what is good. Anyone who does what is good is from God. Anyone who does what is evil has not seen God.

1 Timothy 6:17-19
17 Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment.
18 Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.
19 In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.

Acts 10:37-38
37 You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached--
38 how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.

1 Peter 3:11-12
11 They must turn from evil and do good; they must seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and his ears are attentive to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”

1 Thessalonians 5:15
15 See that no one repays anyone evil for evil, but always seek to do good to one another and to everyone.
20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt
21 but test them all; hold on to what is good,
22 reject every kind of evil.

The only time when we see God or His Son angry at people doing good are when they are hypocrites doing good publicly to puff themselves up. But it’s the hypocrisy and the double-heartedness that’s the problem, NOT the doing good. But the co-workers never teach it that way.

One of the most important points, I think, can be found in this verse:

Isaiah 5:16, 20
16 But the LORD Almighty will be exalted by his justice, and the holy God will be proved holy by his righteous acts.
20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.

When Witness Lee/the coworkers/the local church teaches that “good and evil are on the same tree” and that “God doesn’t care for good and evil” and that “good and evil are both of death”……and when they speak over the saints that “good is somewhat worse than evil because it’s deceptive” what are they actually doing?

They are switching them around. Grouping them together. Equating them with each other. Lumping them both together.

They are calling evil good and good evil. And the Bible clearly says “WOE TO THOSE” who do exactly what the co-workers are doing.

Isaiah 5:16 here says that the holy God will be proved holy by his righteous acts. God is so holy we can’t even comprehend it. But the co-workers in the Lord’s recovery teach that God doesn’t even CARE about good and evil, right and wrong.

This holy God doesn’t care about right and wrong?

This is a teaching straight from Satan, who wants to deceive us about who God is.

In Hebrews 5 we know that being able to discern between good and evil is what mature believers in Christ should be able to do:

Hebrews 5:11-14
11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to make it clear to you because you no longer try to understand.
12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food!
13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness.
14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

So yes, God cares very much about good and evil, right and wrong. That’s why He sent His Son to die for our wrongs and our evils.

And distinguishing good from evil is what we as hopefully maturing believers are SUPPOSED to do. There is simply no teaching in Scripture that warns us about good or doing good. It is true that our own goodness cannot save us, but that is not ever what the co-workers mean by this teaching.

Even if the local church had every other teaching right, this one alone would probably be enough for me to leave without looking back. It’s evil, cloaked with words of light to deceive the listeners.

I’m not sure if any of this helped to explain what I mean, Robert. Let me know if any of this made sense?

Trapped

[Bible-believer]

Originally Posted by aron

Although not at the level of heresy, WL's teaching of 'God's economy' was baseless speculation, and flourished under the ministry-of-the-age concept. Paul didn't write, "Stay in Ephesus and teach things that result in God's economy, which is to eat the processed Triune God and become God in life and nature." No, the whole thing was put together out of disparate and unrelated bits.

And, why would anyone think that Paul asked Timothy to teach things including 'intensification' if Paul's writings never mention it? Even in post-Paul texts like Revelation 1:4, 3:1, 4:5 where are seen the Seven Spirits of God, how can one call this the sevenfold intensified Spirit to overcome the degraded church, if Moses saw seven flames burning before the throne in Exodus 25? Was the church degraded in the book of Exodus? God said, "See that you build everything according to the pattern that you saw on the holy mountain", and then Moses built a gold lampstand with seven beaten lamps of fire. Now John's writing of seeing seven lampstands with seven - not 49 - lamps of fire, before the throne.

Yet nobody questioned this in the LSM assemblies. You don't question the Big Boss... sorry, I mean God's humble bond slave who bears the mantle before God.

I did but didn't get any response. The first false teaching I noticed is the sevenfold intensified Spirit. Afterward, I look up the Bible for every teaching of Lee to see if it checks out.
The Holy Spirit Himself guides me to read the Scripture, and I praise the Lord for that.
My relatives and friends spent much fortune on the Collected Works of Witness Lee, yet they lost the words of God without realizing it.