It's a Sham

Sham. That's a word I never thought I'd use to characterize Witness Lee, his ministry, and to some extent the Local Church itself.

This past week has been a real education on the history and character of WL, his ministry, and his successors. (I'm the guy from the "Some thoughts on this site" thread.)

A week ago if you would've told me "the Lord's Recovery is a group of Christians with an exclusivist attitude and weird, insular culture" I would've said "Yep, I've known that for a long time." But it wasn't until I was informed of this site and spent a lot of time reading the documents and comments, along with even more time reflecting, reminiscing, and writing about it myself that I can now conclude "it's a sham." That's a significant difference from merely calling it puffed up and peculiar.

A big thank-you to the core community here for hosting this site and providing this information. The real shame would be if these important historical records were lost.

p.s. I have some ideas how to better organize and communicate the information on this site. Let me know if you're interested.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

The real shame would be if these important historical records were lost.

Before this forum started up there was another one that had 40 pages of personal testimonies, along with a forum like this one. Many of the the stories were heart-wrenching. You could see the human cost, the real human experience behind the spiritual veneer. Then the hosting site got a new software, archived the material & its now gone. So your concern isn't unfounded.

Originally Posted by Unreg

I have some ideas how to better organize and communicate the information on this site. Let me know if you're interested.

Admin on this site is looking for some help. As for myself, I write because I like to. I don't see it as either cause or burden. So function as you see fit.

Secondly if we do have a cause its to hold forth Christ. My contribution has been an attempt to hold forth the Christ seen in scripture with the one of LC teaching and practice. The contrast could hardly be more glaring.

And sham is a great word - succinct and accurate and absent undue religious colourings.

[newcreation]

If you have the URL you may be able to find the content in the internet archives:

https://archive.org/web/

Let us know!

[Drake]

Originally Posted by newcreation

If you have the URL you may be able to find the content in the internet archives:

https://archive.org/web/

Let us know!

What mean "us"?

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Sham. That's a word I never thought I'd use to characterize Witness Lee, his ministry, and to some extent the Local Church itself.

This past week has been a real education on the history and character of WL, his ministry, and his successors. (I'm the guy from the "Some thoughts on this site" thread.)

A week ago if you would've told me "the Lord's Recovery is a group of Christians with an exclusivist attitude and weird, insular culture" I would've said "Yep, I've known that for a long time." But it wasn't until I was informed of this site and spent a lot of time reading the documents and comments, along with even more time reflecting, reminiscing, and writing about it myself that I can now conclude "it's a sham." That's a significant difference from merely calling it puffed up and peculiar.

.

"A Sham" hmmm. God used saints from the "the local church" in my city and Witness Lee's ministry to bring the word of Christ and His unsearchable riches to me. My spirit was enlivened with The Holy Spirit of God. I was baptized into the body of Christ, and His Holy Spirit, taught to read the Bible and pray to God, follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, use my gifts to build the church.... to name some of the biblical things. Unfortunately non-biblical teachings and practices were also there, so God also helped me see through those and leave.
How can I say it was a Sham now? No way. Messed up? Yes.

[askseek]

Originally Posted by JJ

How can I say it was a Sham now? No way. Messed up? Yes.

Ministry of the Age, God-ordained way, High peak of the divine revelation -- these claims of WL and his ministry are either true or not. Legit or sham. There's really no in-between. (I must credit aron for making this point in my other thread.)

And note that my OP said "to some extent the Local Church itself." Like you, I do not consider my entire LC experience a total sham. Actual life experience is far too complex to be glibly assessed.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by askseek

Misitry of the Age, God-ordained way, High peak of the divine revelation -- these claims of WL and his ministry are either true or not. Legit or sham. There's really no in-between. (I must credit aron for making this point in my other thread.)

I've come to the conclusion that WL was delusional. He actually believed these things. I suppose that makes it a "sham," but I think people balk at the suggestion that the delusion is intentional (not sure if that's implied in the word "sham" or not).

[askseek]

Yes, I agree that he was delusional. I also believe he was deceitful to some extent. (You're correct in pointing out that the word "sham" does typically connote deceit.)

The John Ingalls account, for instance, tells of WL's "noticeably pained expression" when John delivered his resignation letter for his position on the LSM board of directors. Then a few months letter, in what would be their final conversation, WL pleads with him over the phone to reconsider resigning from the RcV translation work, saying "I have prayed, Preserve my brother's usefullness in your hands."

How much of this particular episode is delusion and deception? Impossible for us to say for sure, but to me it's some of both.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

I've come to the conclusion that WL was delusional. He actually believed this things. I suppose that makes it a "sham," but I think people balk at the suggestion that the delusion is intentional (not sure if that's implied in the word "sham" or not).

For me it's almost impossible to make simple conclusions about WL. Surely he did much work for the Lord. I know hundreds of brothers and sisters in the Lord who would readily step forward to assert this.

Unfortunately WL was also abusive and demeaning to others, both within and without his movement. His sons Timothy and Philip exaggerated this fleshly tendency, taking it new new depths, apparently without any semblance of Christian charity. Unbelievably, WL was fine with their roles, knowing full well the shortage of character in his own sons, even when innocent children of God were being damaged. Only when his own ministry was tainted did he take action, but not the action one might expect from a servant of God. How can any fair-minded Christian not be outraged at the corrupt nepotism WL exhibited?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

For me it's almost impossible to make simple conclusions about WL. Surely he did much work for the Lord. I know hundreds of brothers and sisters in the Lord who would readily step forward to assert this.

Unfortunately WL was also abusive and demeaning to others, both within and without his movement. His sons Timothy and Philip exaggerated this fleshly tendency, taking it new new depths, apparently without any semblance of Christian charity. Unbelievably, WL was fine with their roles, knowing full well the shortage of character in his own sons, even when innocent children of God were being damaged. Only when his own ministry was tainted did he take action, but not the action one might expect from a servant of God. How can any fair-minded Christian not be outraged at the corrupt nepotism WL exhibited?

I have a more extreme view. Based on the definition of a false prophet or false teacher I would define WL as a false teacher. Remember, Balaam was the OT archetype of a false prophet and he faithfully spoke the Lord's word. When you get into the details of this topic it is truly stunning and very scary. Judas is the NT example of a false prophet and for 3 years he was one of the 12 disciples doing miracles and following the Lord. Surely, when Revelation refers to "The false prophet" we can understand that to mean and/or include Judas depending on your interpretation. Yet Revelation says the false prophet is in the Lake of fire before the Great White Throne Judgment when Jesus judges the unbelievers. How do you explain that? If the Lake of fire is only for unbelievers, and they don't get judged until the Great White Throne, why is the false prophet already in the Lake of fire before that judgement? I think this is because the false prophet feels he should be judged at the judgement seat of Christ with the believers, the Lord acquiesces, and that is where he is judged for the Lake of fire.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JJ

"A Sham" hmmm. God used saints from the "the local church" in my city and Witness Lee's ministry to bring the word of Christ and His unsearchable riches to me. My spirit was enlivened with The Holy Spirit of God. I was baptized into the body of Christ, and His Holy Spirit, taught to read the Bible and pray to God, follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, use my gifts to build the church.... to name some of the biblical things. Unfortunately non-biblical teachings and practices were also there, so God also helped me see through those and leave.
How can I say it was a Sham now? No way. Messed up? Yes.

Good points. Any characterization must include both the good and the bad. I also think that we should always distinguish between LSM and the LC's. To impugn one man's sins upon the whole is never fair.

This is why I prefer to use the Lord's own words here, notably "leaven." Jesus warned us to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and likewise we should warn others of the leaven of Lee and the Blendeds. This leaven includes errant teachings and unrighteous behaviors.

The LC's are filled with kind and caring saints, loving both God and man, and mostly unawares of corruption at headquarters in Anaheim.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by JJ

My spirit was enlivened with The Holy Spirit of God. I was baptized into the body of Christ, and His Holy Spirit, taught to read the Bible and pray to God, follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, use my gifts to build the church.... to name some of the biblical things. Unfortunately non-biblical teachings and practices were also there, so God also helped me see through those and leave.
How can I say it was a Sham now? No way. Messed up? Yes.

I would tend to agree with JJ with an emphasis on teaching/practices that result in division.

[JJ]

I should have added that the positive things I mentioned all happened in the late 1970's and early 1980's, and thus are "ancient history"... not a good commentary for today,

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by JJ

I should have added that the positive things I mentioned all happened in the late 1970's and early 1980's, and thus are "ancient history"... not a good commentary for today,

I would agree. In the 70's I wouldn't trade the childhood I had being raised in the local church environment. As a young Christian in the mid-80's I was helped by personal testimonies of one's daily walk through the week. Not relevant for the present local church environment which I'd characterize as "ministry churches".

[aron]

Lee said that there could only be one apostle per age, and he was the current MOTA. Either the statement was true or he was a fraud.

For the first part -- 'one ministry/apostle per age' -- I see no biblical support. If Paul was MOTA, then what was John doing? Where do you see John or Peter confessing subservience to Paul, and/or Paul demanding (or implying) its necessity? And why was the 'Apocalypse' written, post-Paul, by John and not by Timothy or Titus? And what, for example, of Wesley vis-a-vis Edwards? Which one of them was MOTA? And why is it that neither of them seemed to care, yet God moved mightily?

But suppose we accept the first part and try to go on, to find that, "Witness Lee has God's current (and sole) oracle."

There are enough data points to strongly suggest that if there were in fact a true and clear MOTA, then WL wasn't it, but defrauded the flock with false claims.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Daystar showed avarice, opacity (money-laundering) and tight operational control, and if we look around we find there already was a behavioral pattern: tennis rackets, chairs, suits, "Let's go Linko!" &c. Rainbow booklets and gold bars. Merchandize and move on; leave the wreckage behind and 'sail on'.

Second, the Philip Lee affair(s): there are multiple, re-enforcing accounts from various ones involved. Per Paul's epistolary directives, WL wasn't even qualified to be church elder much less MOTA.

Third, look at treatment of scripture, a la Psalms, Job, 1 Peter, Jude, James &c. WL clearly and repeatedly departed from NT and subsequent church reception of scripture. According to his so-called revelation of 'God's economy', a not inconsiderable amount of scriptural text was merely 'fallen concepts' and 'natural thinking', not indicative of Christ (but WL claimed to be free from any such conceits.)

Folks, if someone comes to you claiming to be an apostle, much less 'the' apostle, and says to follow his so-called revelations, rather than scripture and the clear pattern of apostolic and church reception of scripture, run away. Run away fast.

[askseek]

(quotiong myself with my new account)

Originally Posted by Unregistered

This past week has been a real education on the history and character of WL, his ministry, and his successors. ...I was informed of this site and spent a lot of time reading the documents and comments, along with even more time reflecting, reminiscing, and writing about it myself that I can now conclude "it's a sham."

The past two days have been a winding-down process after the conclusion was reached. There's still fresh insights and more to learn and experience, but my soul has been able to quiet down.

I want to comment on the reflecting and reminiscing process. It's remarkable just how many memories welled up during the immersive week. Dozens and dozens of people, places, incidents, etc. over the course of 20+ years. Most were of the "snapshot" variety, a still-image impression. Others a brief "video clip", sometimes with "audio". Some funny, some not-so-funny, some momentous, some plain ordinary.

An important theme emerged over the course of the week: many of these memories captured evidence of dissonance I experienced over the years. Several were vivid recollections of the countenance or demeanor of saints either betraying their inner discord or doing hypocritical behavior. A few of these people I honestly cannot recall the name of and may never have even talked to! But the situations were such that the disparity between expectation/belief and reality were glaring enough for it to register a lasting impression. This included a number of LC leaders, probably because of relatively-heightened expectations for them contrasted with the actual experience.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Sham. That's a word I never thought I'd use to characterize Witness Lee, his ministry, and to some extent the Local Church itself.

This past week has been a real education on the history and character of WL, his ministry, and his successors. (I'm the guy from the "Some thoughts on this site" thread.)

A week ago if you would've told me "the Lord's Recovery is a group of Christians with an exclusivist attitude and weird, insular culture" I would've said "Yep, I've known that for a long time." But it wasn't until I was informed of this site and spent a lot of time reading the documents and comments, along with even more time reflecting, reminiscing, and writing about it myself that I can now conclude "it's a sham." That's a significant difference from merely calling it puffed up and peculiar.

A big thank-you to the core community here for hosting this site and providing this information. The real shame would be if these important historical records were lost.

p.s. I have some ideas how to better organize and communicate the information on this site. Let me know if you're interested.

Perhaps we should have had the definition of "sham" :https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sham and a description of what TLR "purports to be at the beginning of this discussion.