How Can This Forum Improve?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Truth

If it weren't for the internet, many of us would never have known the truth. Perhaps, we still don't know the whole truth about what happened in the history of the LC. But we are much closer to it now than ever before. Thanks to the internet. Much of my confirmation of what has been written here in this forum is due to the fact that no one has come forward to refute the information. One the one hand it surprises me, on the other it just confirms that much of it is true.

Good points. For me, searching for the truth of our history, the internet is like a courtroom with both sides stating their case. I am just one of the jurors, hashing it out with 11 others, trying to get to the bottom of things. According to the system of law, jurors should be "peers," and having been a member of the LC's for many years, I consider myself a qualified "peer." For years I heard only WL's side of events. I never got to hear the other side of the story. Real courts allow both sides to present their cases, with pointed cross-examinations.

Approximately 20 years ago the "prosecutors" at LSM presented their case. They had open meetings, brought forth numerous witnesses with the accused tried in absentia. Their public proceedings were recorded and distributed throughout the Recovery. Here in the Great Lakes area, we were informed that Titus Chu had "examined the evidence," and agreed with Witness Lee that all the accused (especially John Ingalls, the apparent ringleader) were guilty of conspiracy and rebellion against God's deputy authority. The "Letter of Eight" signed by Titus Chu, which severely reprimanded John Ingalls, was also circulated to all the churches.

Then in late 2005 / early 2006 I finally came across various writings of some of the "accused," namely John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, Albert Zehr, John So, Godfred, Al Knoch, etc. The defense of the accused was finally made known to this "juror." I had to weigh all the evidence based on my limited knowledge of each of the accused. I examined all the evidence I could find. I was also able to watch the "prosecutors" in action once again (except for WL) as they held their "kangaroo court" in Whistler, BC and prompted further lawsuits in Toronto, Mansfield, and Columbus.

Sorry to say, but I held John Ingalls and company in contempt for 15 years. I judged these brothers in my heart as "lepers" based solely on the reputations of Witness Lee and Titus Chu. Once I heard the whole story, my respect for these two ministers shrunk. It is just shameful what they did to John Ingalls and the other brothers.

If the Lord Jesus Himself exposed all the lies that were told to us 20 years ago, the Recovery would collapse like a house of cards, LSM would totally dissolve, and all those Blended brothers would hide their faces in shame.

[Truth]

I love the LCs individually, meaning I love meeting with the saints in the LCs and even WN and WL's ministry very much. That is why I am still a member. I would not want the LCs to collapse

I have so many friends who are genuine lovers of Christ in the LC, but they have no idea about its history. I would never bring up what is on this forum to them unless they were desirous to know. It would just spark a bad feeling in our relationship. They are enjoying and going on with the Lord in an innocent and pure way. I would not want to be the one to put stumbling block in their path by making known to them what they don't need to know. But if they are being abused by the leaders or are seeking a way out because of issues they are facing, then it would be a different story.

However, as much as I love the LCs individually, I hate the lies that is hiding behind the organization as a whole. And I don't agree that LSM has a lot of *hidden* control among the churches. And I don't like the way WL was elevated, and now the BB somewhat too.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Truth

However, as much as I love the LCs individually, I hate the lies that is hiding behind the organization as a whole. And I don't agree that LSM has a lot of *hidden* control among the churches. And I don't like the way WL was elevated, and now the BB somewhat too.

I understand your love for the LC's and the many precious saints in them. I agree with you that knowing our history is not every member's urgent need.

As for LSM's "hidden" control of the LC's, however, it is intricately intertwined with that history. In other words, what has happened in the past has set the stage for today's "puppet show." It appears like all the actors are moving of their own volition, when actually their movements have all been choreographed by past "training." For example, every single leader in the Recovery today has witnessed first hand what has happened to the likes of the John Ingalls' and Titus Chu's in the Recovery. No one would forget that. The boundaries of their teachings and leadership directions are thus clearly defined. There are enough "spies" in the Recovery to keep each and every "adventurous" new leader in line. Mandatory attendance at the "Feasts" ensures that.

Just as Israel killed all the prophets the Lord sent to them, there is no way for the Recovery to receive "course correction." Every single brother in the past who attempted reform, speaking his heart as a prophet for the Lord, was branded a rebel and banished.

Let me use a bad example to explain. Years ago I worked side-by-side with a Russian engineer, nominally Jewish, who was able to leave that communistic country during the Carter administration. He took advantage of a political opportunity to "volunteer" to emigrate, knowing that if it backfired, his life was basically over. He chose Columbus, Ohio because he read that Christopher Columbus discovered America. We spent much time discussing life in Russia. He relayed to me a very happy home life -- but, of course, he and his wife knew all the "rules." They never discussed problems in Russia, rather took advantage of "opportunities" to bad-mouth capitalism. They would never speak in front of their children a whole host of subjects, since, of course, the children were regularly "questioned" by their teachers at the state schools.

Such is a picture of life in a little "society" which requires fear to keep their members in line. A snapshot of every home appears blissful indeed, as long as the members behave. Watch what happens, however, when someone begins to talk about those "forbidden" subjects. One of those "forbidden" topics is why do we have to use the HWFMR on a regular basis.

[Truth]

I don't have a problem if LSM wanted to control the churches and bring them all under the "same" ministry. The Roman Catholic Church exercises such control, so does the Mormons, and so do many other religious groups (Christian and non-christian). But what bothers me is the hypocrisy. One the one hand they say that the LCs are autonomous, but on the other hand there is an undercurrent (very subtle) that forces the church to use LSM materials. This is where the control really is: it is through their ministry. The leaders are right when they say LSM does not control the churches (in a sense). This is true in 'paper' but not at heart. Sure, LSM is not one of the board of directors in "The Church in Portland" (I'm just using a really random locality for example). But LSM expects that "The Church in Portland" will use its material.

Don't get me wrong. I love what LSM publishes, because I love WN/WL's ministry. But I don't agree with forcing it on others. And I think if we are going to force it on the churches, then we should call ourselves LSM churches. This would be more truthful than saying we are just non-denominational local churches. I have no problem being called a LSM church, or a "Church that focuses on Lee's and Nee's teaching". I would feel more comfortable with that than hiding. I love WN/WL's ministry, so I belong to a group that pursues this ministry. What's wrong with that? Some of you would say that is not biblical...we should not follow a man. Let me tell you: I am not following a man. I will whole heartedly follow any man's ministry (in part or whole) if that man's ministry is part of the NT ministry as revealed in the Bible. However, I don't believe WL's ministry is the entire NT ministry or "The ministry". It is only a part of the NT ministry. And there is nothing wrong with meeting with a group that follows this ministry, which is part of the NT ministry. Why do we need to claim to be "The Local Church"? We just just a local church. One of many local churches in Los Angeles. Together with all the other Christians we are part of the church in Los Angeles. We are a no better church than any other churches in Los Angeles. We have our weaknesses and our strengths, as do all the other churches in the same city that may follow another ministry...a different ministry but still part of the same NT ministry.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Truth

I don't have a problem if LSM wanted to control the churches and bring them all under the "same" ministry.
...

Don't get me wrong. I love what LSM publishes, because I love WN/WL's ministry.
...

I love WN/WL's ministry, so I belong to a group that pursues this ministry. What's wrong with that?

Truth, if every LCer thought like you the movement would be on it's way to true recovery.

I do have one caveat. I don't think any church should focus on one ministry. Of course, the ministries of the leaders of that church are going to naturally have emphasis. But I think a healthy church would be open to many ministries, past and present. Otherwise, it's hard to see the errors in a ministry.

I do think it's better to be an autonomous local church with no official affilations with any ministries, at least non-local ones. Better, that is, than being an LSM church or a Rick Warren church or whatever. But I agree with your point that the first thing is to at least be non-hypocritical about what your church really is. Otherwise, change is nigh impossible if you can't be honest about what you are.

Also, you say you love Lee's ministry. But do you realize that he taught strongly that we should not recognize any other churches others than his? He didn't put it in those terms, but effectively that's what he meant. I've never seen once in the history of the Recovery that any non-LSM-affiliated church was ever recognized as a true church. The exclusivity of the LC churches comes straight from Lee. So obviously some of his ministry is quite unhealthy.

[Truth]

Igzy: I love much of what WN/WL's minstry teaches. However, I never said I agreed with everything in their ministry. It would take months if we were to discuss which items I agreed with and with items I disagreed with.

Yes, ideally a church should be non-denominational and embrace all ministries that are part of the NT ministry, not just one ministry. But this is hard to do in practice. When it comes to administration on which materials to use in a church, I'm sure not everyone will agree. So that is why I think it is ok if you enjoy a particular ministry and would like to pursue with those who enjoy the same ministry. I'm also ok if you would like to be part of a church that pursues multiple ministries. There is no hard rule in the bible which ministry you need to pursue. As long as the ministry helps you to love the Lord and love other Christians. And we really shouldn't divide over ministry. I don't considering meeting with a group that emphasizing on a particular ministry is divisive.

I'm not for division. But sometimes in the name of trying too hard to be one, we end up dividing, as you see in the example of LC. Being broad and tolerant of one another is the key. Don't we all believe in the same Christ?

[Truth]

Originally Posted by Truth

...

I don't considering meeting with a group that emphasizing on a particular ministry is divisive.

I'm not for division. But sometimes in the name of trying too hard to be one, we end up dividing, as you see in the example of LC. Being broad and tolerant of one another is the key. Don't we all believe in the same Christ?

Just clarifying one of my sentences I wrote earlier:

I don't consider it divisive to meet with a group that pursues a particular ministry.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Truth

Igzy: I love much of what WN/WL's minstry teaches. However, I never said I agreed with everything in their ministry. It would take months if we were to discuss which items I agreed with and with items I disagreed with.

Yes, ideally a church should be non-denominational and embrace all ministries that are part of the NT ministry, not just one ministry. But this is hard to do in practice. When it comes to administration on which materials to use in a church, I'm sure not everyone will agree. So that is why I think it is ok if you enjoy a particular ministry and would like to pursue with those who enjoy the same ministry. I'm also ok if you would like to be part of a church that pursues multiple ministries. There is no hard rule in the bible which ministry you need to pursue. As long as the ministry helps you to love the Lord and love other Christians. And we really shouldn't divide over ministry. I don't considering meeting with a group that emphasizing on a particular ministry is divisive.

I'm not for division. But sometimes in the name of trying too hard to be one, we end up dividing, as you see in the example of LC. Being broad and tolerant of one another is the key. Don't we all believe in the same Christ?

I go along with your thoughts here. Obviously, evangelical churches are going to emphasize evangelical ministries, and so forth.

The problem comes in when you start to think that you don't need any other ministries. Now, here's fact--Benson Phillips is on record declaring that there is nothing in "Christianity" teaching (that wasn't also in Recovery teaching) that is worthwhile. In others words, he believes other churches and teachers have nothing to offer the LCs. I heard him say this kind of thing first hand.

Do you believe this? How does it make you feel that one of the main leaders of the movement you are in has such a mindset? Do you "love" it when this kind of speaking comes out of LSM?

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by Truth

But what bothers me is the hypocrisy. One the one hand they say that the LCs are autonomous, but on the other hand there is an undercurrent (very subtle) that forces the church to use LSM materials. This is where the control really is: it is through their ministry.

Don't get me wrong. I love what LSM publishes, because I love WN/WL's ministry. But I don't agree with forcing it on others. And I think if we are going to force it on the churches, then we should call ourselves LSM churches. This would be more truthful than saying we are just non-denominational local churches.

This is exactly right. They control through the imposition of their curriculum on the churches i.e. they control the content of the churches to the exclusion of all other ministries. BUT IMHO it is not so subtle. One of the reasons they excommunicated Titus Chu was he was publishing his own materials without coming under their umbrella and getting it approved by LSM.

Like you suggest if they were honest they would call themselves the LSM churches. Another alternative would be the Witness Lee churches. These designations more accurately describe what they really are about without pretense.

What they are asking all Christians in Portland to do (to use your example) is:

1. Meet with them in order to be a legitimate church
2. Acknowledge and come under the authority of the elders appointed by Witness Lee or the Anaheim Politburo.
3. Accept that the sole ministry allowed in "The Church in Portland" will be that of the LSM.

A real "The Church in Portland" would never look anything like the above. And I don't know many Christians who will swallow this sort of arrangement and especially those from a Protestant background. It is the antithesis of their tradition.