Recovery Version

[djohnson(XLCmember)]

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

[UntoHim]

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

I don't suppose that you really expect me to visit all the GLA LC's and report back to you, do you? Some of the churches are using projectors for songs and scripture, so even if I happened to visit some place, I might not know what version they are using. Does it matter?

[cityonahill]

Ya, I asked a similar question on the other board about the distinctions between LSM and GLA regarding teaching sources and practices...I got no reply either!

reece

[Overflow]

I think it does matter. I keep checking back...wish someone would answer.

[kisstheson]

Dear ones,

I am not from the GLA, so I have no "definitive" answer to give. Lately, however, I have been listening to a lot of the spoken messages from past GLA conferences and trainings. These messages can be found at keepitintune.net and ministrymessages.org/.

There are also web sites for particular GLA assemblies which contain audio, and sometimes video, for messages spoken in that assembly. For example, video messages spoken in the GLA assembly in Toronto can be found at churchintoronto.org/Video.htm. Audio messages spoken in the GLA assembly in Columbus, OH, can be found at thechurchincolumbus.org/churchincolumbusenglish/html/bible/.

When you listen through many of these messages, you can catch some hints about the use of the Recovery Version in the GLA; however, there are certainly no definitive, all-embracing declarations to be found. This appears to be a matter of conscience for each believer to decide for themselves before the Lord.

Here is a short portion from a message spoken by dear brother John Meyer almost one year ago at the GLA Conference in Goshen, IN:

"Please turn to Revelation chapter 2. Revelation chapter 2 verse 2. And now, this is Jesus talking, the ascended Lord Jesus who’s looking at the church in Ephesus, and He has something to say. I’m using the New King James Version, if you don’t mind."

So there you have it. At least one ministering brother in the GLA reads from the New King James Version!

I am sorry, but that is pretty much all the information I have related to this topic. Hopefully this information moves the conversation forward a little bit.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by djohnson

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

Originally Posted by UntoHim

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

Ok kiddies, let's take a step or two back to the beginning, shall we?

djohnson's original question is legitimate and relevant to our discussions I believe. At first I took it that he was referring to the text of the Recovery Version (silly me). Of course this thread has broadened out to the much, much wider issue of the acceptance, use and promotion of Witness Lee's teachings among those dear brothers and sisters who have "disassociated" (to one degree or another) from the Living Stream Ministry. Again, this is legitimate and relevant to our discussions.... but is there any possible way we can continue these discussions without kicking each other in the shins or handing out black eyes?

Originally Posted by cityonahill

At the end of the day, how can people continue to use resources and teaching material that they criticize so much?

Ah, on it's face, this seems like such a reasonable question.... but then again it is coming from somebody who has never been a Local Churcher. It's very easy to tell somebody to throw out the baby and the bathwater when they have had no personal, close connection to either. Sorry, Reece, I'm not trying to pick on you, but somebody has mentioned more then once that "it is one thing to take the Local Churcher out of the Local Church, and yet quite another to take the Local Church out of the Local Churcher".

Hey, if I could snap my fingers I would would make every Christian (or person for that matter) on earth see what I see and think what I think... but that would pretty much make me God anyway...right? In the meantime, while we're all waiting for everyone to see what we see and think what we think, could we all remember that we are not God or even becoming God (not even in life and nature)?

[cityonahill]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ah, on it's face, this seems like such a reasonable question.... but then again it is coming from somebody who has never been a Local Churcher.

Exactly. I've grown up in a denomination and have believed many dogmatic and unbiblical things in the process.(as every believer does at some point) The most important questions which have helped to change my mindset on certain things have come from other christians outside of my little bubble. Perhaps those in the LC could use an outside opinion every once in a while too...Those in the GLA/LSM LC don't have to agree with everything I say or stand for of course, but I do believe my question was a valid one(even as an "outsider"). Why would some critique LSM so harshly but still sit under its ministry by using their teaching material and resources? I guess it does not matter if you like me or not, that's a question that should be addressed.

[Norm]

Let me ask a very reasonable question. Which leaders in which assemblies are still propagating the Recovery Version in the GLA?

Here is what I know.

Detroit is not.

Toronto is not.

Cleveland is not.

Pittsburgh is not.

Columbus is not.

Mansfield is not.

Ann Arbor is not.

I use many different Bibles and hundreds of reference books. Most have doctrinal problems to my view and quite a few may have portions tending toward/ or are plagiarism. They are tools and I use them with discretion and inform those around me as to what I see as short-comings.

Now, concerning the assembly here in Detroit, we are very small, very beat up and beginning to enjoy a very fresh visitation from the Lord.

At least half of who are meeting have 35-40 years experience with the LC/LSM system, we will never be devoid of it but we can look to the Lord to not continue the abusive aspects. Many things we practice are found in the NT and we will not drop those. There are also 10-12 who are very new in our midst. They have no idea who or what is WL, LSM, the local church, etc., and we do not intend to take them into that mess. As the Holy Spirit leads we are growing in grace.

I personally have not met with any of the "leaders", as some would say, in the GLA are for almost a year now. I have been to only one conference meeting (less than 2 hours) in that same year also. What tight-knit fellowship and leadership are you talking about?

I have heard that some of the newer congregations in the GLA are calling their elders pastors.

Let's face it, the topic of leaders propagating the RcV and LSM publications is legit but why try to pin it on the GLA when we have paid a huge price for not going along with LSM.

One result of the trial is also a huge aversion by most here for anything that begins to smell remotely like what we have left.

What we were like 20 years ago and who we are today is becoming light years apart. Please get an up-to-date photo of who we are.

These are random thoughts but that is all the time I felt to give them.

Enjoy your discussion but please do not paint me according to your imagined image.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Norm

At least half of who are meeting have 35-40 years experience with the LC/LSM system, we will never be devoid of it but we can look to the Lord to not continue the abusive aspects. Many things we practice are found in the NT and we will not drop those. There are also 10-12 who are very new in our midst. They have no idea who or what is WL, LSM, the local church, etc., and we do not intend to take them into that mess. As the Holy Spirit leads we are growing in grace.

For what it's worth Norm, I view our time in the LSM/LC fellowship as an aspect of our Christian experience. As the assembly you meet with continues, as does the Christian experience for all who meet there.

Terry

[Cal]

I don't think Tomes point was ever that LSM's materials are so tainted as to be unusable. I think his point has always been to knock LSM off its self-righteous, we're-the-unique-continutation-of-God's-Recovery, all-must-prostrate-at-our-judgment high horse. If he succeeds in that he's done a good thing, whether he continues to use their materials or not.

But as Norm has expertly testified, many GLA churches have abandoned the RcV. Hopefully that will satisfy dj and he can cut out the terrier imitation.

[djohnson(XLCmember)]

Igzy for me the issue is not the "tainted" materials of the LSM. The LSM are a known quality and nothing I hear about them surprises me anymore. My question has been about the condoning of plagiarism by knowingly using materials publicly that contain it. I suspect the reason Tomes looked into it was because he was first accused of it by the LSM. It's merely tit for tat. And that is sort of unfortunate because the issue is beyond that in my view.

In an academic setting the plagiarizer would typically be fired. Those knowingly using the plagiarized materials would at minimum be required to discontinue the use and be given a warning. I suspect because Lee was never in a formal academic setting he learned to be fast and loose with the rules when it suited his purposes. The scholarship standards of the LSM are absolutely deplorable. To put it more clearly they are committing theft.

Norm that is very good news and my intent was not to "pin" anything on the GLA. It just so happens that the GLA is the latest region that has left the LSM enmasse and so they serve as a convenient example in the discussion.

[djohnson(XLCmember)]

So far the silence is deafening.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by djohnson

So far the silence is deafening.

They may not be on line..or maybe haven't even seen your question.

I don't know who all is in non-LSM/GLA.

[Suannehill]

Originally Posted by djohnson

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

I've visited several, and have seen most versions that you can name used.

It's not an issue.

Making it an issue is very divisive to the Body of Christ.

Sue