Answer to Mr. MacDuff.

[MacDuff]

UntoHim

I attended Elden Hall, but was never part of the LC. At the time, I had no use for the doctrine of Lee who seemed to me to be consistent only in his inconsistencies. What little I learned of Witness Lee’s doctrine while at Elden Hall I’ve forgotten over time.

What I knew of the person of Lee comprises one introduction where he looked at me and ignored me. As if he had foreknowledge I would never become one of his minions. The very few times I saw him present in the meetings in Elden Hall (never once saw him in one of the spontaneous meetings that took place outside of the hall itself) where he didn’t practice the art of “prophesying in the meetings” as he himself advocated. Where he rarely said anything at all even as a teaching. It was as if he only attended as an observer. And the times I saw him on stage at the convention center. And the only reason I saw him then was because I got a ride with someone I considered a friend (that was still allowed back then) who encouraged me to go, and I didn’t have to pay for admission.

What I currently know of the teachings of Lee I’ve learned in the last two months from reading posts on the two forums and reading a few of his writings on the LC website. What I currently know of the person of Lee I’ve learned in the last two months on the two forums, which is second hand knowledge at best, and appears to me to be mostly biased by negative events in the lives of those who portray him. But the many negative events they portray leads me to have a poor opinion of Lee. That he was a bad tree with bad fruit.

When I attended the meetings of the LC a few months ago, for reasons I’m not even clear about myself, it seemed like a foreign land in contrast to what I remember of Elden Hall. They pray-read the writings of Witness Lee as if those writings are equal to or more than the Bible, instead of the Bible alone. The obviously leading ones (who were leading ones in the meetings in Elden Hall were not outwardly apparent) would encourage the rest to, “say ‘Oh Lord Jesus three times’ ”. As if calling three times is going to bring Jesus running faster than calling once with faith. Or change the faith of the ones calling, or help them to “touch their spirit”. The obviously leading ones spoke a lot more often then at Elden Hall with a lot more self importance and show of authoritative knowledge as they quoted Lee more often than the Bible. I had the impression that Jesus is hearing them no more than they are hearing him.

I really have two views. I was born Catholic. And as a Catholic I believe in the Catholic view. But I am also a Biblicist, in the sense of a view according to what I understand the Bible to be saying. Sometimes the views coincide. Sometimes they do not. The view I usually share when among Protestants is the Biblicist view. Which is the view I shared the most basic part of on this forum. And presented as part of that basic part a distinction between the ekklesia as portrayed in the New Testament and the Churches as they exist in Christianity. Igzy was correct when he said I repeated myself a lot. It was due to advocating a basic that seemed to me should be agreed with by anyone claiming to believe in the Bible alone, and thinking the reason they don’t is merely due to a misunderstanding of what I was advocating. I have since come to realize the disagreement is not due to misunderstanding.

I’ve never agreed that Christianity needs to be reformed, recovered, restored, renewed, or what have you. Updated from a Catholic view. From a Biblicist view those who are in Christ need to start distinguishing between what is truly of Christ and what is of Christianity, a man-made religion that is predominantly denominational in character and thinking, that has been overtly a man-made religion since the 4th century. The nature of which is ultimately expressed in Catholicism, the character of which is ultimately expressed in Protestantism. While exhibiting both the nature and character of Christianity.

I currently have nil interest in reading any more of the writings of Witness Lee or Watchman Nee. I have nil interest in the LC. My personal view of reality, whether from a Catholic or a Biblicist perspective, bears little resemblance to the view of Lee or the LC. And in the grand scheme of Christianity, the LC is a drop in the bucket percentage wise. Two billion versus a few thousand? I still wonder what the current statistics are on the LC. I’ve personally not found anything on the internet as yet. I have as much interest (nil) in the JW’s who have more adherents at a half mil than the LC ever had, near as I can tell.

I was never abused by the LC. I and many others didn’t make the move from Elden Hall to Anaheim, after which things apparently changed drastically in the LC. So I haven’t that kind of negative baggage from which to unpack an interest in Lee or the LC.

So, as far as my having anything in common relating to Lee or the LC with the former Recoveryites on this forum.... is mostly nil.

Regarding the Mission Statement and guidelines as presented by Igzy. Which I question whether he alone is the source. I personally consider them to have some potential to be the parameters they are intended to be. Nevertheless, as they stand are too unrealistic, inconsistent with some of Igzy’s own actions, and internally inconsistent to fulfill the purpose for which they are intended. And I’m not sufficiently interested to do as Igzy has suggested, which is to PM him concerning my personal thoughts that might improve the standard or the forum. Seeing as I do not foresee my presence here to be of long duration.

Neither my Catholic view nor my Biblicist view corresponds in any way to Evangelical Protestantism.

I am thankful for two things since coming on this forum. Concerning Al Knoch, I already mentioned in a post to Igzy on another thread. And to Aron for introducing me to another side of Erasmus, I didn’t know before. Having read his entire book that Aron quoted from, he appears to be midway between Catholicism as it existed in the 16th century and the Reformation of Martin Luther so called. I think Erasmus would fit in rather well with Catholicism as it exists today. Since Vatican II it has become much more like Protestantism in practice, and for some even in faith, though the faith hasn’t really changed from an official view. Erasmus doesn’t appear to me to be one who argues simply to argue.

Let me ask you, UntoHim. As one who appears to be more influential on this forum than the word member under his name implies. What is the reason you think I should hang around? If you are even still of that opinion. What have I got to gain from a community of Christians who already in two months time has influenced me to be more appreciative of my Catholic roots, rather than persuaded me toward the view of Evangelical Protestantism that igzy’s Mission statement says is the basis of this forum? And what have they to gain from me? Seeing as Ohio claimed my view of the New Testament is a fairy tale and Igzy claimed I am a phony, that neither has thought it necessary to retract, and not one here has thought it necessary to say either was wrong? Implying to me either agreement or that chiming in on my behalf would have negative repercussions. Either way....

MacDuff