Sacrifice and Sail On - Book by Philip Lin

[TLFisher]

Deleted for now.

[TLFisher]

http://www.amazon.com/Sacrifice-Sail...rds=philip+lin

A book brought to my attention.
Those with Kindle Unlimited can read for free. I paid $20. Was the $20 worth it?

I will just say those in the local churches who think the late 70's and 80's turmoil's is ancient history, think again. Brother Lin, has brought it back to the surface through his perspective.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

http://www.amazon.com/Sacrifice-Sail...rds=philip+lin

A book brought to my attention.
Those with Kindle Unlimited can read for free. I paid $20. Was the $20 worth it?

I will just say those in the local churches who think the late 70's and 80's turmoil's is ancient history, think again. Brother Lin, has brought it back to the surface through his perspective.

Thank you for sharing the link to this book. What comes to mind is Philip Lin's statement:

I know in my conscience you brothers are right according to the truth, but in my culture I must be loyal to Brother Lee.

With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could be expected to place any trust in what Lin writes.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Thank you for sharing the link to this book. What comes to mind is Philip Lin's statement:


With that in mind, I wonder how anyone could be expected to place any trust in what Lin writes.

Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying?

[Dave]

Originally Posted by awareness

Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying?

At least in the title Lin states "My View of Witness Lee" although in the Preface Lin states, "Under the anointment and guidance of the Holy Spirit I have completed the writing of this book." I do know that because of some of WLs failed businesses and harsh church practices in Taiwan he was not loved by everyone. It would be interesting to obtain an overall fair biography of WLs ministry etc in Taiwan but it doesn't look we will with this book. I for one will not drink the kool-aid.

It doesn't appeal to me at all because I agree with Awareness, there appears to be a considerable amount of propaganda. I can only go by my own observations and my experience when I was in the LC and it wasn't favorable as I became closer to those trained by WL in Anaheim.

If you want the book free you could probably sign up for "Kindle Unlimited" 30 day trial, obtain the book and then if you don't want to continue with Kindle Unlimited cancel the trial before the 30 days are over. I presume you still keep the book.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Dave

If you want the book free you could probably sign up for "Kindle Unlimited" 30 day trial, obtain the book and then if you don't want to continue with Kindle Unlimited cancel the trial before the 30 days are over. I presume you still keep the book.

Unless someone gives me a reason otherwise I won't waste signing up for Kindle Unlimited on this book. Besides the table of contents, all I had to read to kill it for me is: "Witness Lee, a bondslave of Christ Jesus."

And why $20 dollars? Who published this book? It doesn't say. Maybe Lin expects to tap the LC Lee zealots. They're use to being fleeced. A fool and his money kinda thing.

[aron]

I have looked at the back cover. It uses the word "love" nine times, describing "an intimate life of love with the Lord", and so forth. Now, I don't know, maybe Lee loved the Lord Jesus Christ tremendously. I won't argue with that.

But maybe "his heart was darkened by greed", also? How are we to measure such things of the heart? Whether someones heart is "dark" or "full of love for the Lord" are subjective measures, and in Lee's local churches we habitually received subjective measures as if they were objective reality. So if a printed encomium by one of his disciples says that Lee's heart was full of love for the Lord, all we can do is take it at face value. How can we argue with such words? We cannot.

What we can do, however, is look at deeds. Look at actions. The Greatest Commandment is to love the Lord God with all our heart and soul and strength, and love our neighbor as ourselves. The first part is not easy to assess (unless you are writing for LSM, of course), but the second is easier to see. Lee's actions showed that he loved other things; when Lee's neighbor interfered with these other things (the ministry, his teachings, his organization, his distribution of publications, his control of the local churches) then the neighbor got thrown under the bus. John Ingalls was called his closest co-worker, until JI wasn't convenient to the cause, then everything changed. I don't see love demonstrated there. Nor with many others whom he raised up and quickly threw down. The records are there. The turmoils, the rebellions, the storms, the lawsuits. Discord after discord.

So "love" as used in local church parlance can get dried up pretty quickly if you don't do exactly as they say. They love your participation and support, but they don't love you.

Secondly, who is this Jesus Christ that Witness Lee loved so much? The one in the Bible, or the one he constructed from his imagination? Was this the real Jesus revealed to us in the Word of God, or a construction convenient to Witness Lee's ministry? I am tending toward the latter, the more I examine Lee's Bible study messages.

Regarding the OT text, Jesus said, "These things were written concerning Me" (Luke 24:44; cf Rom 15:4). Lee said, "No they were not. They were often merely the vain imaginations and fallen concepts of sinners".

The Bible says, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." (Matt 4:4) Lee said, "Not by every word but by some; some are profitable, and some are not". Naturally the words which Lee lined up with his hermeneutics were "revelatory of Christ", and the words which couldn't fit into his theology got abandoned. And it wasn't just one or two verses, it was chapter after chapter. Look in the OT for chapters of footnote-less scriptures. No cross-references either; merely a few disparaging remarks: "Natural", etc.

The writer of Hebrews held up the OT and said, "We see Jesus". (2:9) Lee said, "No we don't. We see a fallen man writing according to his natural concepts."

Peter, standing on Pentecost, said that David being a prophet foreknew and spoke of the Messiah who was to come after him. (Acts 2:30,31) Lee said, "No, David was a sinner. He fornicated with Bathsheba, numbered Israel in his pride, murdered Uriah, etc." So when David wrote, "God rescued me" (Psa 34:4), Lee panned that and said "No, David rescued himself". Lee ignored the coming Messiah.

Paul said that the Psalms are the "word of Christ" (Cor 3:16); Lee said, "No, they are often merely words of a fallen man." Jesus said that David was speaking of Him in Spirit (Mark 12:36; Matt 22:43); Lee said David was merely speaking from and of himself, his fallen soul.

Who is fallen, here? Who is natural? You can keep your love if it's manifested this way; I don't want it. Not if you do this to the Bible. I don't know what kind of Christ is being promoted, but my job is to reject it. I really don't want to know. "Truly I tell you, I don't know you". Matt 25:12

[Freedom]

This is from the preface:

When I wrote this book, I was very cautious and faithful. The Holy Spirit strictly controlled me not to mold Witness Lee into a so-called “perfect person.” Of course, I also did not hesitate to describe in detail his admirable traits , which merit recommending. I hope that everything I wrote about Witness Lee in this book will be beneficial to future generations. This was the governing principle in my writing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 211-214). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I wonder if this statement is an attempt to solicit trust from the reader? This also begs the question of why would Lin have any idea in the first place of describing a "perfect" Lee. That is, unless, perhaps the LC has the tendency to view Lee as such a person.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

I have looked at the back cover. It uses the word "love" nine times, describing "an intimate life of love with the Lord", and so forth. Now, I don't know, maybe Lee loved the Lord Jesus Christ tremendously. I won't argue with that.

But maybe "his heart was darkened by greed", also? How are we to measure such things of the heart? Whether someones heart is "dark" or "full of love for the Lord" are subjective measures, and in Lee's local churches we habitually received subjective measures as if they were objective reality. So if a printed encomium by one of his disciples says that Lee's heart was full of love for the Lord, all we can do is take it at face value. How can we argue with such words? We cannot.

In the introduction Lin says: "This is a book about Witness Lee’s personal Christian walk."

I have to ask the question, what does he know about Lee's Christian walk? He may have been around Lee all the time, but that doesn't mean he knows how much Lee loved the Lord or what his heart was like. I think those in the LC have always had the tendency to make subjective statements about other people, like "so and so really loves the Lord", "so and so is lukewarm", etc.

That being said, I think you can know a little about someone's heart through their actions, so it would make sense to take into account all of Lee's actions, not just those that put him in a positive light.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

What we can do, however, is look at deeds. Look at actions. The Greatest Commandment is to love the Lord God with all our heart and soul and strength, and love our neighbor as ourselves. The first part is not easy to assess (unless you are writing for LSM, of course), but the second is easier to see. Lee's actions showed that he loved other things; when Lee's neighbor interfered with these other things (the ministry, his teachings, his organization, his distribution of publications, his control of the local churches) then the neighbor got thrown under the bus. John Ingalls was called his closest co-worker, until JI wasn't convenient to the cause, then everything changed. I don't see love demonstrated there. Nor with many others whom he raised up and quickly threw down. The records are there. The turmoils, the rebellions, the storms, the lawsuits. Discord after discord.

So "love" as used in local church parlance can get dried up pretty quickly if you don't do exactly as they say. They love your participation and support, but they don't love you.

The love you see demonstrated in regard to a Max Rapaort, a John Ingalls, a John So, etc is a type of conditional love as seen in Luke 6:32:

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them.

You don't see a love typified by 1 Corinthians 13:4-7

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by awareness

Just taking a look at the table of contents reveals to me a mass of propaganda.

Terry, am I lying?

When I'm in jury duty next Wednesday, I will have most of the day to decipher through the propaganda and spin.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

I will just say those in the local churches who think the late 70's and 80's turmoil's is ancient history, think again. Brother Lin, has brought it back to the surface through his perspective.

Do you think Lin would dare publish this without "fellowship" from the Blendeds? But why would they possibly extend their "right hand of fellowship" to this biographical project from one of the rank-and-file? Why risk stirring up the hornets' nest? My thoughts:

1. Now when prospective members being recruited hear of failed business deals and angry "investors" demanding their money back, hear of whispered "turmoils" and "rebellions" in days gone by, they can just tell them, "Read bro Lin's book. He addresses all this. Old news."

2. There is benefit to them from distancing themselves from it. Then if it blows up they can say, "That was brother Phillip Lin." They can say that it wasn't the official line.

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

[awareness]

Okay his book is published by Sail On Publishing, with one employee and owner: Philip Lin.
http://www.nonprofitfacts.com/CA/Sai...ublishers.html

http://nonprofitlocator.org/organiza...-on-publishers

http://www.manta.com/c/mb5pkcm/sail-....google.com%2F

[aron]

Originally Posted by awareness

His book is published by Sail On Publishing, with one employee and owner: Philip Lin.

What?!? And it doesn't say "affiliated with the ministries of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee"?!? This is dangerous precedence, of unaffiliated ministry! What ground, pray tell, does he minister from?

[Dave]

Originally Posted by awareness

Okay his book is published by Sail On Publishing, with one employee and owner: Philip Lin.
http://www.nonprofitfacts.com/CA/Sai...ublishers.html

http://nonprofitlocator.org/organiza...-on-publishers

http://www.manta.com/c/mb5pkcm/sail-....google.com%2F

It's interesting that Sail On Publishing has 501(c)(3) status or non-profit status. He is not indicating that all proceeds will go to the feeding of the poor or to his church or? He is acting like Lee! Apparently trying to make a profit off of WL's name.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by aron

Do you think Lin would dare publish this without "fellowship" from the Blendeds? But why would they possibly extend their "right hand of fellowship" to this biographical project from one of the rank-and-file? Why risk stirring up the hornets' nest? My thoughts:

1. Now when prospective members being recruited hear of failed business deals and angry "investors" demanding their money back, hear of whispered "turmoils" and "rebellions" in days gone by, they can just tell them, "Read bro Lin's book. He addresses all this. Old news."

2. There is benefit to them from distancing themselves from it. Then if it blows up they can say, "That was brother Phillip Lin." They can say that it wasn't the official line.

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

You make good points, aron. I'll add one more: If the Blended Brothers and LSM leaders did, in fact, put their stamp of approval on this book, it could allow them to say, "See, we do make room for other publishers!"

Originally Posted by Philip Lin's book

The name Sail On Publishers comes from this theme and is intended to encourage readers to follow suit and to "Sail On"! Sail On Publishers is a nonprofit publisher, which has been registered in California in order to be the first publisher of this book.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ. Sail On Publishers. Preface.

As an aside, don't individuals still have to pay tax on earnings paid to them by a nonprofit?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

3. And if it goes over relatively well with the reading public, they have the veneer of objectivity, like this was an independent source of information about Lee. What would it look like for a publishing house to print a biography of the owner and sole author of the publishing house's output? How truthful and objective would you expect that to be? So now they can pretend Lin's biography is independent, to outsiders, while everybody in the local church system knows that independence is the road to rebellion. And I doubt sincerely that Mr. Lin is being rebellious here. This is not Steve Isitt. This is not "fair and balanced". This is hagiography. The cover makes that clear.

(Hagiography: a book or report about someone's life that makes it seem better than it actually was)

Reminds me of the concession the Blendeds made to Chicago leader Jim Reetzke in order to secure his endorsement for the quarantine of Titus Chu. Reetzke initially rejected the "One Publication" edict claiming that "Christians have been martyred for their right to publish." In order to win his crucial approval, the Blendeds allowed him to continue to write and print his books, with blended oversight, of course.

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Reminds me of the concession the Blendeds made to Chicago leader Jim Reetzke in order to secure his endorsement for the quarantine of Titus Chu. Reetzke initially rejected the "One Publication" edict claiming that "Christians have been martyred for their right to publish." In order to win his crucial approval, the Blendeds allowed him to continue to write and print his books, with blended oversight, of course.

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

Anaheim voted against the Chicago Book Room -- before they voted for it.

[Ohio]

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Locations 1262). Sail On Publishers.

Because there were many business affairs in conducting the Life-Study of the Bible, Brother Lee needed one full-time serving one to take charge of it, but he could not find a willing and suitable brother to bear this responsibility. After everything, he asked his son Brother Lee Menzer (Philip Lee) to help. At that time, Brother Philip Lee had a small business in hand, and Brother Lee asked him to put down his business to take this post. Brother Philip willingly accepted this job in order to support his father’s ministry work. So he gave up his small business and wholeheartedly took and dived into his father’s literary ministry work.

That ought to be enough to make to make the readers puke.

[Ohio]

This successful evidence had gained Brother Lee’s recognition and trust with regard to Philip Lee’s faithfulness and his ability to execute. This was one unique reason that Brother Lee continued hiring him to take charge of the LSM Leviticus services. Because the work kept him up late in the night— working on the video/ audio systems and the arrangement of the interior rooms— and he felt mounting excessive pressures upon him, Philip Lee’s physical and mental conditions were affected enormously, and his physiological condition changed abruptly. As a result, he became easily irritable, and inadvertently offended people easily. Thus, he offended a few people who did not know anything about him except that he was Brother Lee’s son, and they initially resented Brother Lee’s LSM station. Eventually it turned into opposition to Brother Lee and his ministry in the wiles of God’s enemy Satan. It was a great pity!

Now we can all understand why Phillip was "hitting" on all the female staff. The growing "pressures" within were just more than he could handle.

"A great pity!" Talk about spin! Talk about bearing false witness! Talk about deception! Tell me again what the definition of "is" is?

[Friedel]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By allowing Lin to publish his hagiographic account of Lee, LSM gets it cake and gets to eat it. They secure a much needed "independent" biography, yet bear no responsibility for its veracity.

I only had a sample from Amazon because I refuse to pay $25 for some more of Witness Lee under another name. I got to see the photos with at least two typos (i.e. Austin Spark instead of Austin-Sparks). And why does he go on and on about "Sail On Publishers". Is he afraid some will suspect LSM actually did this for him?

Did he write the introduction? To me it was pure Witness Lee-talk. That means Phillip Lin got fully constituted with the ministry of Witness Lee; he is now a god-man. He surely is now ready to be blended with the deeply spiritual ones.

Maybe that is what he wanted to achieve. A full-blooded parrot and Yes-man.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Friedel

Maybe that is what he wanted to achieve. A full-blooded parrot and Yes-man.

As a kid I heard many times that I should be a "Witness Lee tape recorder." The full-time trainings are often referred to as "Witness Lee duplication centers."

[Lisbon]

Did you ever hear of a bond slave bilking his master and friends out of millions of dollars? Or did you ever hear of a bond slave excommunicating his masters leading employees from two thousand miles away. Don't talk about love. Don't talk about caring.

You know the Catholics do elect their pope. The lc only has a form of apostolic accession where no members have any input. They are all so humble and meek.

Lisbon

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Lisbon

Did you ever hear of a bond slave bilking his master and friends out of millions of dollars? Or did you ever hear of a bond slave excommunicating his masters leading employees from two thousand miles away. Don't talk about love. Don't talk about caring.

You know the Catholics do elect their pope. The lc only has a form of apostolic accession where no members have any input. They are all so humble and meek.

Lisbon

Lisbon, great point. You need that sign which says "the spin stops here."

Reminds me of that "brilliant" MIT professor named Booger who informed us that we all were too "stupid" to understand the decisions our leaders were making "on our behalf."

It has for many years seemed so strange that every thing we know about Lee came directly from Lee. How convenient, how misleading, how evil, how deceptive, and you could go on. I would like to know and hear more of Herald Shu.
Lisbon