Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History

Indiana · 04-18-2018, 01:13 PM

http://lordsrecovery.us/LeeKaungLinesinAmerica.pdf

Having spent 30 years in the local churches under the ministry of Witness Lee and the last three years in fellowship with Stephen Kaung-associated assemblies, I have found the fellowship in both groups to be so similar and their hearts much the same for carrying out God’s eternal purpose in building up the one Body of Christ.

Where I live, there is a group that calls themselves the church in Seattle, (where I used to meet); and another group here which calls themselves Seattle Christian Assembly, (where I now meet). They have no difference in their basic statement of the faith regarding what is essential to believers in “the fellowship”. And, their basic understanding, doctrinally, of the church and of keeping the oneness of the Body of Christ is essentially the same. Yet, they cannot be one for a testimony in Seattle.

It is the same in New York where Stephen Kaung was asked to address New York’s past and his relationship with Witness Lee. He noted that there was one point about the church ground that he could not conscientiously accept and that Witness Lee had become adamant about. That separating factor managed to survive till today.

Note: Corrections welcome. I hope this can be a vitriol-free thread. I do like my basic positioning and perspective for writing and bringing attention to the relevant history covered.

Freedom · 04-19-2018, 11:32 AM

Lee's legacy is tainted by two factors which have become increasingly apparent. 1) He overstated his relationship with Nee and 2) he used the ground of locality doctrine to distance himself from his peers.

By every indication, during the beginning of the LCM in the U.S., Lee was regarded as a mentor because he had worked with Nee. There were others who had worked with Nee, and I suppose they could have filled the same role. Lee just happened to be in the right place at the right time. Somewhere along the way, Lee managed to discredit Nee's other coworkers as not having had as close of a relationship with Nee as he did. Perhaps no one will ever know what was the case, but suffice to say, after Nee's imprisonment, Lee could have made any claims he wanted to about his relationship with Nee.

It had always been my assumption that the practice of "local churches" in China is exactly what was emulated in the U.S. when it began here. It now seems very certain that wasn't the case. The disagreements that Lee had with those like Kaung and others highlight that point. If they had indeed been practicing Lee's view of local churches in China, it wouldn't make sense that all of Nee's other coworkers would disagree with what Lee was pushing. This is why it seems like Lee at least particular formulated his version of the ground of locality teaching as a means to separate himself from his peers.

Drake · 04-19-2018, 02:58 PM

If the only point of disagreement was the church ground then we only need to examine Brother Nee's messages on the topic to understand who represented Bro Nee more closely.

I think that is very clear.

UntoHim · 04-19-2018, 04:08 PM

Good point Drake! It is crystal clear who represented Nee more closely.

Of Kaung and Lee, which one has caused the most division, confusion and dissension in the body of Christ? Which one has has gotten the attention of many Christian apologists and cult awareness ministries? It's not even a close call, now is it?

This very forum is filled with dozens (hundreds?) of quotes of Nee which show the man had no intention of the Little Flock/Local Churches developing into the religious, man-made institution known as The Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream Ministry.

If Watchman Nee came back today he would have absolutely nothing to do with the sect/movement/denomination based over there on La Palma in Anaheim. I think he would be repulsed to the uttermost to see what Witness Lee and his followers have done to his beloved, home grown native Christian movement.

What would he think of Kaung et al, and their little fellowship? I don't know.
-

Drake · 04-19-2018, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Good point Drake! It is crystal clear who represented Nee more closely.

Of Kaung and Lee, which one has caused the most division, confusion and dissension in the body of Christ? Which one has has gotten the attention of many Christian apologists and cult awareness ministries? It's not even a close call, now is it?

This very forum is filled with dozens (hundreds?) of quotes of Nee which show the man had no intention of the Little Flock/Local Churches developing into the religious, man-made institution known as The Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream Ministry.

If Watchman Nee came back today he would have absolutely nothing to do with the sect/movement/denomination based over there on La Palma in Anaheim. I think he would be repulsed to the uttermost to see what Witness Lee and his followers have done to his beloved, home grown native Christian movement.

What would he think of Kaung et al, and their little fellowship? I don't know.
-

UntoHim,

Yours is a different point.. yet concerning the ground of the church there is no daylight between Bros Nee and Lee. They taught exactly the same thing.

Drake

Ohio · 04-19-2018, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drake

UntoHim,

Yours is a different point.. yet concerning the ground of the church there is no daylight between Bros Nee and Lee. They taught exactly the same thing.

Drake

15 years ago we re-read Nee's TNCCL and compared it to the practice at LSM under Lee, his son, and those Blendeds, and we found contractions on every page.

W. Nee would never allow a LC to receive only one ministry.

Drake · 05-05-2018, 08:00 PM

Ohio,

After falsely accusing me of defending Philip Lee, defaming my character by saying my protests to your fabrications were ”craftily devised strategies to deceive”, a clear innuendo that my defense is a work of Satan himself, chasing my posts with snarky comments about me personally and then wrapping yourself in scripture to justify your derogatory statements toward moi.... you have the audacity to object to a comparison of your bullying antics with someone who uses a similar technique?

You recently justified your behavior with this: “What makes this forum so valuable is that it gets to the heart of the matter. It strikes the axe at the root”

Aren’t we getting to the heart of the matter? We are. Are we striking the axe to the root? We are. Is it only valuable when you wield the axe?

As I said, I’m not trying to wound you, but neither will I allow you to redefine what I say. I offered to have conversations with you but I will push back on your mischaracterizing of me and my beliefs.

Drake

04-18-2018, 01:13 PM	#1
Indiana Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 713	Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History http://lordsrecovery.us/LeeKaungLinesinAmerica.pdf Having spent 30 years in the local churches under the ministry of Witness Lee and the last three years in fellowship with Stephen Kaung-associated assemblies, I have found the fellowship in both groups to be so similar and their hearts much the same for carrying out God’s eternal purpose in building up the one Body of Christ. Where I live, there is a group that calls themselves the church in Seattle, (where I used to meet); and another group here which calls themselves Seattle Christian Assembly, (where I now meet). They have no difference in their basic statement of the faith regarding what is essential to believers in “the fellowship”. And, their basic understanding, doctrinally, of the church and of keeping the oneness of the Body of Christ is essentially the same. Yet, they cannot be one for a testimony in Seattle. It is the same in New York where Stephen Kaung was asked to address New York’s past and his relationship with Witness Lee. He noted that there was one point about the church ground that he could not conscientiously accept and that Witness Lee had become adamant about. That separating factor managed to survive till today. Note: Corrections welcome. I hope this can be a vitriol-free thread. I do like my basic positioning and perspective for writing and bringing attention to the relevant history covered.

04-19-2018, 11:32 AM	#2
Freedom Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Posts: 1,636	Re: Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History Lee's legacy is tainted by two factors which have become increasingly apparent. 1) He overstated his relationship with Nee and 2) he used the ground of locality doctrine to distance himself from his peers. By every indication, during the beginning of the LCM in the U.S., Lee was regarded as a mentor because he had worked with Nee. There were others who had worked with Nee, and I suppose they could have filled the same role. Lee just happened to be in the right place at the right time. Somewhere along the way, Lee managed to discredit Nee's other coworkers as not having had as close of a relationship with Nee as he did. Perhaps no one will ever know what was the case, but suffice to say, after Nee's imprisonment, Lee could have made any claims he wanted to about his relationship with Nee. It had always been my assumption that the practice of "local churches" in China is exactly what was emulated in the U.S. when it began here. It now seems very certain that wasn't the case. The disagreements that Lee had with those like Kaung and others highlight that point. If they had indeed been practicing Lee's view of local churches in China, it wouldn't make sense that all of Nee's other coworkers would disagree with what Lee was pushing. This is why it seems like Lee at least particular formulated his version of the ground of locality teaching as a means to separate himself from his peers. __________________ Isaiah 43:10 “You are my witnesses,” declares the Lord, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

04-19-2018, 02:58 PM	#3
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History If the only point of disagreement was the church ground then we only need to examine Brother Nee's messages on the topic to understand who represented Bro Nee more closely. I think that is very clear.

04-19-2018, 04:08 PM	#4
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	Re: Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History Good point Drake! It is crystal clear who represented Nee more closely. Of Kaung and Lee, which one has caused the most division, confusion and dissension in the body of Christ? Which one has has gotten the attention of many Christian apologists and cult awareness ministries? It's not even a close call, now is it? This very forum is filled with dozens (hundreds?) of quotes of Nee which show the man had no intention of the Little Flock/Local Churches developing into the religious, man-made institution known as The Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream Ministry. If Watchman Nee came back today he would have absolutely nothing to do with the sect/movement/denomination based over there on La Palma in Anaheim. I think he would be repulsed to the uttermost to see what Witness Lee and his followers have done to his beloved, home grown native Christian movement. What would he think of Kaung et al, and their little fellowship? I don't know. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11

05-05-2018, 08:00 PM	#7
Drake Member Join Date: Nov 2016 Posts: 2,075	Re: Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History Ohio, After falsely accusing me of defending Philip Lee, defaming my character by saying my protests to your fabrications were ”craftily devised strategies to deceive”, a clear innuendo that my defense is a work of Satan himself, chasing my posts with snarky comments about me personally and then wrapping yourself in scripture to justify your derogatory statements toward moi.... you have the audacity to object to a comparison of your bullying antics with someone who uses a similar technique? You recently justified your behavior with this: “What makes this forum so valuable is that it gets to the heart of the matter. It strikes the axe at the root” Aren’t we getting to the heart of the matter? We are. Are we striking the axe to the root? We are. Is it only valuable when you wield the axe? As I said, I’m not trying to wound you, but neither will I allow you to redefine what I say. I offered to have conversations with you but I will push back on your mischaracterizing of me and my beliefs. Drake