New Book by Henry Hon

[Freedom]

Henry Hon: Most Christians are concerned mainly with what God can do for them, their own interest. As long as they are saved to go to heaven and God blesses them, then they are quite satisfied. God’s eternal purpose is concerning what God is after, His interest, and what is on His heart. Therefore, most Christians are not interested in such a topic if they don’t think it can affect them or benefit them directly.

On the other hand, there is a longing within every Christian, a desire to know what their purpose is. They want to know what God has in store for them. Therefore, “The Purpose Driven Life” by Rick Warren sold over 30 million copies. In his book, Mr. Warren did not unveil the highest revelations concerning God’s eternal purpose as books such as “From Eternity to Here” by Frank Viola. So, the reader of the Purpose Driven Life didn’t really receive the real understanding concerning God’s eternal purpose other than what most have already understood, but presented in a more concise manner. There was not the kind of fresh and in-depth revelation as in Mr. Viola’s book.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/frankviola/eternalpurpose/

Certain talk, such as what is seen in the above quote makes me cringe. By that I mean generalizations such as "most Christians are mainly concerned with what God can do for them." Or where it is stated that Rick Warren’s book doesn't "unveil the highest revelation" but Frank Violas books do. That right there is enough to keep me from reading Mr. Hon's book.

I'm not out to criticize, but it seems that with some who have left or been purged from the LC, there is a notion that all is really needed is a reboot of the same old themes. In the links provided, I see certain language present such as "body life", "oneness", etc. It leaves me wonder whether the LC connotation of those words/phrases is intended or not.

Also, I’m not against the house church movement or what they’re seeking to accomplish, however, I tend to question the stated importance home gatherings of vs. what is found in mainstream Christianity. Where I’m from, the LC leaders were nothing short of obsessed with WL’s “new way” ministry, specifically his talk about the home gatherings. From my own experience in that kind of setting, the presentation of home gatherings as being some sort of secret formula to accomplishing God’s goal, always seemed too good to be true (and it was).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I'm not out to criticize, but it seems that with some who have left or been purged from the LC, there is a notion that all is really needed is a reboot of the same old themes. In the links provided, I see certain language present such as "body life", "oneness", etc. It leaves me wonder whether the LC connotation of those words/phrases is intended or not.

Why is it when Christians become so obsessed with oneness, they can no longer fellowship with those they are with, and must separate ("divide?") themselves off to "fulfill God's eternal purpose" for the "one" body of Christ? Nee and the Exclusives had to part ways for the oneness. Lee left all of Christianity for the oneness. The Blendeds dumped Brazil Dong and Midwest Chu for the oneness. And here Henry Hon must leave his Blended brothers for the oneness. It's always for the oneness. And God's eternal purpose.

In his interview with Viola, Henry Hon said this of his LC experience ...

Additionally, though I had received the vision of the oneness of believers, I was frustrated in its actual practice: it wasn’t happening. While church groups that grew out of the Jesus Movement were typically contrary to the traditions and divisiveness of mainline denominations, they also competed amongst themselves. Being in such a group, we expected Christians to leave their churches and groups to join us if they, too, saw the vision of God’s purpose. Needless to say, that didn’t work well; rather, it produced even more divisions.

Obviously Hon tries to hide his association with Lee and the Blendeds, but here we see it described ...

While I was actively enjoying the body life from house to house, I was still involved in an organized church group. This church was founded on the basis of practicing the oneness of the body; therefore, I was attracted because they lifted up Christ and were receiving all believers as the one body. But their teaching also included accusation and condemnation of institutional churches. As this church evolved, their teaching of unity in the body became one of having a unique leadership structure, an exclusive ministry led by specific teachers, and a singular way to practice the oneness. My assembling from house to house in the complete freedom of the Spirit became conflicting with their way to practice oneness. Due to my unwillingness to submit to their direction, I was told that I was no longer part of building up the body. They directed and influenced believers that we were fellowshipping with to stop coming to our home gatherings. This experience caused me to reexamine the Scripture to improve my understanding of the oneness of the body, including the practices and manifestation of this oneness.

Sounds to me like our favorite Blendeds at LSM went and quarantined brother Hon.

.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why is it when Christians become so obsessed with oneness, they can no longer fellowship with those they are with, and must separate ("divide?") themselves off to "fulfill God's eternal purpose" for the "one" body of Christ? .

Good point Ohio. I don't know Hon in the least. Reading his website I agree he's seems to be riding on the "God's Eternal Purpose," and "oneness" schtick. But he doesn't seem to be capitalizing on his ministry on his website. Maybe he's taking a loss leader while ramping up, but his book sells for less than $4.00. And it's not covered up with marketing like Hank Hanegraaff's site.

[Evangelical]

Why isn't this the case of a man thinking he can do the same sort of thing Lee did but do it better himself? why is it not an example of a work within a work? reinventing the wheel?

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Why isn't this the case of a man thinking he can do the same sort of thing Lee did but do it better himself? why is it not an example of a work within a work? reinventing the wheel?

Sorry, but--who cares?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Sorry, but--who cares?

I was wondering the same thing given no one seems to know who he is.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I was wondering the same thing given no one seems to know who he is.

Most people have never heard of Witness Lee either. Who knows--maybe Hon is the current Minister of the Age.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I was wondering the same thing given no one seems to know who he is.

Back in the days of the New Way, his brother Paul Hon was a rising star. Is he an official Blended brother yet?

Since Henry worked a job to support himself, his influence could never spread beyond his locality. Only LSM approved speakers can speak outside their LC.

Obviously Henry never wanted to compromise his faith nor be brought under the subjection his brother was.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Certain talk, such as what is seen in the above quote makes me cringe. By that I mean generalizations such as "most Christians are mainly concerned with what God can do for them." Or where it is stated that Rick Warren’s book doesn't "unveil the highest revelation" but Frank Violas books do. That right there is enough to keep me from reading Mr. Hon's book.

I'm not out to criticize, but it seems that with some who have left or been purged from the LC, there is a notion that all is really needed is a reboot of the same old themes. In the links provided, I see certain language present such as "body life", "oneness", etc. It leaves me wonder whether the LC connotation of those words/phrases is intended or not.

Also, I’m not against the house church movement or what they’re seeking to accomplish, however, I tend to question the stated importance home gatherings of vs. what is found in mainstream Christianity. Where I’m from, the LC leaders were nothing short of obsessed with WL’s “new way” ministry, specifically his talk about the home gatherings. From my own experience in that kind of setting, the presentation of home gatherings as being some sort of secret formula to accomplishing God’s goal, always seemed too good to be true (and it was).

I more or less agree with you and had the same impression. But we should also give him some credit. Think of how disruptive it must have been for him--a prominent elder in a prominent LC--to break ties and start to feel his own way. He's on the journey.

I can only imagine how he is being characterized and slandered now. Ambitious, charismatic, always doing his own thing, a work within the work, attracting people to follow after himself, nothing new, everything from the ministry etc., etc.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

I more or less agree with you and had the same impression. But we should also give him some credit. Think of how disruptive it must have been for him--a prominent elder in a prominent LC--to break ties and start to feel his own way. He's on the journey.

I can only imagine how he is being characterized and slandered now. Ambitious, charismatic, always doing his own thing, a work within the work, attracting people to follow after himself, nothing new, everything from the ministry etc., etc.

I don't know anything about him besides what I read in this thread. Was he well-known in the LC outside of where he is from?

The thing that I find interesting about all of this is that a practice of home meetings is something Lee taught and emphasized. So for someone to get 'quarantined' over organizing relatively small gatherings in homes, it makes the inevitable LC accusation of him being 'ambitious' all the more absurd.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I don't know anything about him besides what I read in this thread. Was he well-known in the LC outside of where he is from?

The thing that I find interesting about all of this is that a practice of home meetings is something Lee taught and emphasized. So for someone to get 'quarantined' over organizing relatively small gatherings in homes, it makes the inevitable LC accusation of him being 'ambitious' all the more absurd.

Berkeley is a fairly large LC with a well-known campus work. Henry Hon was the "lead elder" there for many years. Very involved in the student work, home meetings, perfecting trainings, etc.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

I more or less agree with you and had the same impression. But we should also give him some credit. Think of how disruptive it must have been for him--a prominent elder in a prominent LC--to break ties and start to feel his own way. He's on the journey.

I can only imagine how he is being characterized and slandered now. Ambitious, charismatic, always doing his own thing, a work within the work, attracting people to follow after himself, nothing new, everything from the ministry etc., etc.

One more descriptive word that would be characterized of such brothers is individualistic. Of course I tend to see it more as an unwillingness to sacrifice principles for the group.
I agree Koinonia, he is on a journey. As we have heard many times...."the vision". Appears there was a conflict in vision that caused one door to close and another to open.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

I more or less agree with you and had the same impression. But we should also give him some credit. Think of how disruptive it must have been for him--a prominent elder in a prominent LC--to break ties and start to feel his own way. He's on the journey.

I can only imagine how he is being characterized and slandered now. Ambitious, charismatic, always doing his own thing, a work within the work, attracting people to follow after himself, nothing new, everything from the ministry etc., etc.

Originally Posted by Terry

One more descriptive word that would be characterized of such brothers is individualistic. Of course I tend to see it more as an unwillingness to sacrifice principles for the group.

Notice how none of these demeaning characteristics of ministers, apparently so treacherous in the LC's, is ever critiqued in the Bible. Sounds a whole lot like all the Apostles! I bet the Judaizers perfected all of these accusations and many more with Apostle Paul.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

One more descriptive word that would be characterized of such brothers is individualistic. Of course I tend to see it more as an unwillingness to sacrifice principles for the group.
I agree Koinonia, he is on a journey. As we have heard many times...."the vision". Appears there was a conflict in vision that caused one door to close and another to open.

One reason the situation with Mr. Hon caught my attention is because WL made a big deal about trying to get people to start and organize home gatherings. In certain parts of WL's ministry, it seems that he actually encouraged people to take initiative (in regards to getting an increase), even individual initiative if others weren't doing anything. Of course, WL contradicted himself on this. However, it seems that when Hon was in the LC, he must have taken to heart something that WL taught about home meetings. As I mentioned previously, in the area that I'm from, the leaders were really big on WL's "new way." The interesting part of it all is all the too good to be true promises that WL made. He spoke of exponential increase, “the final revival,” etc, etc.

As would be expected, the results of such things were never as promised, and this was always my observation in the area I’m from. However, in the case with Hon, you have someone who has their own little spin on what WL taught and because it happened to be successful, headquarters got jealous and came in to take over. It's ironic, because in order to practice what WL taught and avoid any kind of interference, it seems like it is dependent on having something mediocre, something that doesn't attract much attention. If a work ends up being successful, then everyone can rest assured that it’s only a matter of time before headquarters comes in to take over.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Freedom

One reason the situation with Mr. Hon caught my attention is because WL made a big deal about trying to get people to start and organize home gatherings. In certain parts of WL's ministry, it seems that he actually encouraged people to take initiative (in regards to getting an increase), even individual initiative if others weren't doing anything. Of course, WL contradicted himself on this. However, it seems that when Hon was in the LC, he must have taken to heart something that WL taught about home meetings. As I mentioned previously, in the area that I'm from, the leaders were really big on WL's "new way." The interesting part of it all is all the too good to be true promises that WL made. He spoke of exponential increase, “the final revival,” etc, etc.

As would be expected, the results of such things were never as promised, and this was always my observation in the area I’m from. However, in the case with Hon, you have someone who has their own little spin on what WL taught and because it happened to be successful, headquarters got jealous and came in to take over. It's ironic, because in order to practice what WL taught and avoid any kind of interference, it seems like it is dependent on having something mediocre, something that doesn't attract much attention. If a work ends up being successful, then everyone can rest assured that it’s only a matter of time before headquarters comes in to take over.

Bro Freedom, did you ever consider the possibility that Witness Lee was delusional?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by awareness

Bro Freedom, did you ever consider the possibility that Witness Lee was delusional?

Yes, there is certainly that possibility if he was completely serious about some of the stuff he said. But I tend to view Lee as manipulative more than anything else.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

If a work ends up being successful, then everyone can rest assured that it’s only a matter of time before headquarters comes in to take over.

Correct. That's what happened to Austin, Tx.

Not only so, but the leader must also get all the credit, all the glory, for the successes. In this regard, Cleveland was the same as Anaheim. The success of any subordinate is always viewed with suspicion. A fruitful subordinate is always viewed as a potential rival. This is systemic to the program.

Hence, the ultimate irony. Lee was "successful" in the US until he took over. Ask anyone from Elden Hall why the Lord blessed them, and they will tell you that Lee was not responsible for their blessing. Yet hagiography demanded it. So, by the time Lee did take over the Recovery, every one of his numerous "winds and waves of teaching" was a failure, despite the manufactured results.

Hence, a twofold response to failure was always mandated. First, blame all failures on subordinates. Second, steal all the glory from those who happened to bear fruit.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hence, the ultimate irony. Lee was "successful" in the US until he took over. Ask anyone from Elden Hall why the Lord blessed them, and they will tell you that Lee was not responsible for their blessing. Yet hagiography demanded it. So, by the time Lee did take over the Recovery, every one of his numerous "winds and waves of teaching" was a failure, despite the manufactured results.

This could very well lead posts in a different direction, the increase Elden Hall had in the early seventies could be tied to the Jesus People movement that carried over from the late 60's. Then the growth just stagnated. Why was that?
Was it fallout from Daystar?
Was it an obvious change from Christ and the Church to a man and a ministry that began in 1974?
Elders have raised the question before "why has the increase stagnated", but they don't want a sincere answer.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Correct. That's what happened to Austin, Tx.

Not only so, but the leader must also get all the credit, all the glory, for the successes. In this regard, Cleveland was the same as Anaheim. The success of any subordinate is always viewed with suspicion. A fruitful subordinate is always viewed as a potential rival. This is systemic to the program.

Hence, the ultimate irony. Lee was "successful" in the US until he took over. Ask anyone from Elden Hall why the Lord blessed them, and they will tell you that Lee was not responsible for their blessing. Yet hagiography demanded it. So, by the time Lee did take over the Recovery, every one of his numerous "winds and waves of teaching" was a failure, despite the manufactured results.

Hence, a twofold response to failure was always mandated. First, blame all failures on subordinates. Second, steal all the glory from those who happened to bear fruit.

Wow! bro Ohio! Why don't you knock it outta de park? Great and penetrating post.

You know, I have a friend from early on in the c. in Ft. Laud (1974-75). He's Hosepipe out here, but we don't hear much from him. Cuz we don't want to. I'll just say he don't mince words concerning "Witless Lee" as he likes to call him.

He was at the infamous Elden Hall when at its peak ... when the Holy Spirit took over the meetings, I'm told, by him. Infamous might not be the right word. It implies something bad. Maybe it's infamous cuz it's when Witless Lee killed the Holy Spirit.

Anyway bro Ohio, when you brought up hagiography it got me thinking. Then I wondered if Elden Hall, and the hyper-grand stories of supernatural goings-on, with the telling of unbelievable stories, of powerful moving's of the Holy Spirit, isn't riddled with hagiography.

I can tell you tho, it changed Hosepipe from that point on. Cuz he knew when the Holy Spirit was present or not. I remember he'd get up and walk out of the meeting. Later when I asked him why he said, "cuz the Holy Spirit wasn't there."

And he was right. The Holy Spirit wasn't needed. The lead elder. Mel Porter, took over. He had a group of 14 brothers in his trust, that he was using to "seed" the meetings, the way the elder wanted it to go, and to make it look like the Holy Spirit was guiding the meetings. It's a real sleight of hand (or in this case 'mind') trick. Hosepipe quit coming to meetings, because the Spirit wasn't there, he said, before he knew about the elder seeding the meetings.

But I digress. Back to hagiography and Elden stories. One story Hosepipe told me about what happened at Elden was that, in the meetings they would all in unison make up brand new songs, singing them together on the fly, with no one missing a single word, or note, or messing up out of confusion. And that proved to Hosepipe that the Holy Spirit was mightily moving at Elden. Is it fantastical? Well yes. It might just be hagiography of Elden speaking.

Hey. How far back does Hon go? Does he know about Elden? Can he add to the wonders of the hagiographying of Elden?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by awareness

The lead elder. Mel Porter, took over. He had a group of 14 brothers in his trust, that he was using to "seed" the meetings, the way the elder wanted it to go, and to make it look like the Holy Spirit was guiding the meetings. It's a real sleight of hand (or in this case 'mind') trick. Hosepipe quit coming to meetings, because the Spirit wasn't there, he said, before he knew about the elder seeding the meetings.

That's not a stretch to say awareness. I witnessed similar speaking by an elder in the NW when there was fellowship in taking Life Lessons in lieu of HWFMR. Instead of "seed", the term used was "plant". Brothers would be planted to steer the meeting. Of course it would appear as being spontaneous when really it wasn't.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Correct. That's what happened to Austin, Tx.

What's the story in Austin? Maybe you can point me to a different thread?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

What's the story in Austin? Maybe you can point me to a different thread?

Don't know about another thread. Perhaps those from Texas (Nell, Igzy, OBW, Nell, etc.) can say more.

Under Don Looper the church in Austin had a fruitful work for many years on the U. of Texas main campus leading students to the Lord. LSM took it over. Instead of Christ our Savior, we now introduce students to "the ministry" and a full-time training.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hence, the ultimate irony. Lee was "successful" in the US until he took over. Ask anyone from Elden Hall why the Lord blessed them, and they will tell you that Lee was not responsible for their blessing. . . . So, by the time Lee did take over the Recovery . . .

where was Eldon Hall? Why wasn't it ready to be the central place for the building of the so-called recovery?

Because it was already in decline due to the beginnings of Lee's takeover. He had to go some place new that had not been spoiled. And that place was Anaheim.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

where was Eldon Hall? Why wasn't it ready to be the central place for the building of the so-called recovery?

Because it was already in decline due to the beginnings of Lee's takeover. He had to go some place new that had not been spoiled. And that place was Anaheim.

Elden Hall was an old Brethren meeting place in LA obtained by the newly formed LC. Don Rutledge, in his account, said that WL told him privately that Elden had become stale and his ministry needed a new start, and thus the move to Anaheim and the new name, from Stream Publisher to Living Stream Ministry. Numerous other posters (Elden1971, HosePipe, etc.) who were part of Elden have stated that Lee was not responsible for the blessing there, but his rise as the preeminent speaker expedited the end of the blessing.

The story oft-repeated in the GLA was that crime forced them out of LA. Titus Chu was always protective of WL, and covered up any and all unrighteousness at LSM including that of Philip amd Tomothy Lee, when the police should have been called. TC would allow any brother to be thrown under the bus in order to protect WL, his so-called "spiritual father," and his family. John Ingalls account STTIL made that clear. TC felt he owed everything to WL, including his own life. Most of us would conclude that we owed everything including our life to the Lord Jesus.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

One reason the situation with Mr. Hon caught my attention is because WL made a big deal about trying to get people to start and organize home gatherings. In certain parts of WL's ministry, it seems that he actually encouraged people to take initiative (in regards to getting an increase), even individual initiative if others weren't doing anything. Of course, WL contradicted himself on this. However, it seems that when Hon was in the LC, he must have taken to heart something that WL taught about home meetings.

Initiative is the key word. Indicates sidestepping fellowship protocol and taking individual decision making. Brothers and sisters alike are paralyzed from not making individual decisions when there's fellowship protocol that's expected.
I didn't have a problem with brother Hon's burden on home meetings. My question is what's the purpose of the home meeting? For many non-LC churches, home meetings is the best format for participation that wouldn't be possible on a Sunday morning service.
In Local Church home meetings the safe choice is to make the home meeting a miniature prophesying meeting. Just take turns reading sentences from HWFMR. It's pretentious. There's no real risk of having to bear one's soul.
For one to take the initiative and suggest, "let's set aside the ministry and present our individual burdens and trials before the group to pray over", how do you think that would go over? If it didn't come from elders, such a suggestion would be marginalized as being individualistic. Or as trying to seek a following.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

In the links provided, I see certain language present such as "body life", "oneness", etc. It leaves me wonder whether the LC connotation of those words/phrases is intended or not.

Speaking strictly for myself and perhaps others have this feeling too, having been jaded in the LC in the inferences of certain phrases:

• Building up of the Body
• Oneness
• speaking the same thing

I'm sure there are more, but with any ordinary believer we might know from relations, friends, or work, the phrases in itself are harmless and quite positive. The LC inference is it could only be found through their brand of fellowship.
In my opinion if there is truly a care for oneness among believers, we don't care where they meet but themselves as a member of the Body as seen in 1 Corinthians 12.
How many times has fellowship been extinguished because of where a person meets or doesn't meet?

[Evangelical]

As highlighted by Freedom and others, it seems Mr Hon still holds onto the vision he has received from the Recovery about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose. He distinguishes between what Lee calls the low gospel which is about what God can do for man, and the high gospel about what God wants man to do for Him.

Also, him pointing out the shortcoming of Rick Warren's book is an observation I have also made.

Hon also mentions God's consummate goal which is language that is very Lee-like. However where Lee would say God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, which is biblical,
Hon says it is Oneness.


Sentences by Hon such as this one:

"People the world over, though diverse, have the same yearning: to live in peace and come together as one. "

sound a little like the Utopian dream of the New Age movement - world peace and oneness.

The bible however makes clear that God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, the Kingdom of God, the New Jerusalem. Before that happens there won't be oneness but warfare and division.

God's consummate goal can be found in the last book of the bible, Revelation, and it is not the Oneness that Hon claims although Oneness will be there.

What distinguishes Hon's group from a typical house church movement is the holding into Recovery-like ideas such as oneness, God's consummate goal and the deficiencies in Christiandom.

So I think describing his group as a "local church sect" is an okay description. The word sect means a cut, so it seems to be a cut away of the local church.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

As highlighted by Freedom and others, it seems Mr Hon still holds onto the vision he has received from the Recovery about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose. He distinguishes between the low gospel which is about what God can do for man, and the high gospel about what God wants man to do for Him.

Every church I have ever attended spoke, "about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose." Are you serious, EvanG?

And, btw, the so-called "high calling purpose" in the Recovery has nothing to do with God's needs, but has everything to do with LSM's needs.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Every church I have ever attended spoke, "about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose." Are you serious, EvanG?

And, btw, the so-called "high calling purpose" in the Recovery has nothing to do with God's needs, but has everything to do with LSM's needs.

You got that from Rick Warren I suppose. Was this higher purpose oneness like the Recovery and Hon believes? I don't think many churches know that God's purpose is oneness. They typically think God's purpose is some sort of ministry or activity.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You got that from Rick Warren I suppose. Was this higher purpose oneness like the Recovery and Hon believes? I don't think many churches know that God's purpose is oneness. They typically think God's purpose is some sort of ministry or activity.

Is God's purpose really oneness?

Christians have been obsessing over "oneness" for two millennia, and it has never turned out well for us. The Catholic "oneness" church obsessed over oneness, and look where it led them. Same with the Exclusive Brethren and the so-called Recovery. Why is it every time church leaders obsess over oneness, their followers end up obsessing over their leader? Think Popes, Oracles, and MOTAs.

This is why I often say, based on church history, that distorted oneness has done more damage to the church of God than any other heresy, and that's exactly what obsessing over distorted oneness is, a horrible heresy in the church. The Catholics held endless inquisitions (and tortures) over perceived violations of their distorted oneness, and the Exclusives and Lee/Blendeds have held endless quarantines (and lawsuits) over perceived violations of their own distorted oneness.

The Lord Jesus commanded us to love God and to love our neighbors. In this regard, love is to be much more desired than oneness. It's also much more difficult to fake love than oneness, since oneness can be so easily disguised as uniformity, manufactured by an unholy allegiance to an earthly headquarters.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Is God's purpose really oneness?

Christians have been obsessing over "oneness" for two millennia, and it has never turned out well for us. The Catholic "oneness" church obsessed over oneness, and look where it led them. Same with the Exclusive Brethren and the so-called Recovery. Why is it every time church leaders obsess over oneness, their followers end up obsessing over their leader? Think Popes, Oracles, and MOTAs.

This is why I often say, based on church history, that distorted oneness has done more damage to the church of God than any other heresy, and that's exactly what obsessing over distorted oneness is, a horrible heresy in the church. The Catholics held endless inquisitions (and tortures) over perceived violations of their distorted oneness, and the Exclusives and Lee/Blendeds have held endless quarantines (and lawsuits) over perceived violations of their own distorted oneness.

The Lord Jesus commanded us to love God and to love our neighbors. In this regard, love is to be much more desired than oneness. It's also much more difficult to fake love than oneness, since oneness can be so easily disguised as uniformity, manufactured by an unholy allegiance to an earthly headquarters.

Good point Ohio. Ephesians 1 and 3 plainly state God's eternal plan or purpose is to sum up (Recovery version alone says head up) all things in Christ, and that it has already been accomplished (3:11). Through the mysterious stewardship of God the Apostle Paul was given grace to participate in and reveal, we gentile believers along with Jewish believers in the assembly are given sonship, an inheritance, and peace through Christ, and are the first to hope in Christ. And, his working in us is to be to the praise of the glory of God's grace, and be a display to the heavenly rulers and authorities.

Evangelical is right that Revelation is a good place to see God's plan manifested.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Lord Jesus commanded us to love God and to love our neighbors. In this regard, love is to be much more desired than oneness. It's also much more difficult to fake love than oneness, since oneness can be so easily disguised as uniformity, manufactured by an unholy allegiance to an earthly headquarters.

I thought this needed to be repeated. Jesus commanded us to love one another. With oneness He prayed that we would all be one, but it was not the law of liberty. In fact there are many instances in the NT where you would be required to "not be one" with someone.

Uniformity comes to us an angel of light, as "oneness". Unholy allegiance comes to us as an angel of light, as "oneness". Hatred, back biting, insults, and self justification comes to us as an angel of light, by condemning all others for not "caring of the oneness". In this way they ignore the Lord's command to love one another.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I thought this needed to be repeated. Jesus commanded us to love one another. With oneness He prayed that we would all be one, but it was not the law of liberty. In fact there are many instances in the NT where you would be required to "not be one" with someone.

Uniformity comes to us an angel of light, as "oneness". Unholy allegiance comes to us as an angel of light, as "oneness". Hatred, back biting, insults, and self justification comes to us as an angel of light, by condemning all others for not "caring of the oneness". In this way they ignore the Lord's command to love one another.

Great points.

And wouldn't he who claimed to be the Minister of the Age qualify also for what Paul called a "Super Apostle?"

[awareness]

Did Hon and his little sect declare the ground somewhere?

Originally Posted by Evangelical

As highlighted by Freedom and others, it seems Mr Hon still holds onto the vision he has received from the Recovery about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose. He distinguishes between what Lee calls the low gospel which is about what God can do for man, and the high gospel about what God wants man to do for Him.

Also, him pointing out the shortcoming of Rick Warren's book is an observation I have also made.

Hon also mentions God's consummate goal which is language that is very Lee-like. However where Lee would say God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, which is biblical,
Hon says it is Oneness.


Sentences by Hon such as this one:

"People the world over, though diverse, have the same yearning: to live in peace and come together as one. "

sound a little like the Utopian dream of the New Age movement - world peace and oneness.

The bible however makes clear that God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, the Kingdom of God, the New Jerusalem. Before that happens there won't be oneness but warfare and division.

God's consummate goal can be found in the last book of the bible, Revelation, and it is not the Oneness that Hon claims although Oneness will be there.

What distinguishes Hon's group from a typical house church movement is the holding into Recovery-like ideas such as oneness, God's consummate goal and the deficiencies in Christiandom.

So I think describing his group as a "local church sect" is an okay description. The word sect means a cut, so it seems to be a cut away of the local church.

[countmeworthy]

Why won't people just let the Holy Spirit be our TEACHER AND LEAD??

Jesus told us He would send Him to us.
“But the Helper, (the Comforter) the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.

I also know the LORD GOD also raises people to teach..
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ;

(I think Ephesians 4:10-12 gave the enemy the license to entice religious people with these offices. So now we have "apostle so and so" 'bishop so and so", "Evangelist so and so" "Pastor so and so"... and of course the MOTA.)

and yet Hebrews 8:11 says
they shall not teach everyone his fellow citizen, And everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ For all will know Me, From the least to the greatest of them.

Originally Posted by awareness

Did Hon and his little sect declare the ground somewhere?

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

As highlighted by Freedom and others, it seems Mr Hon still holds onto the vision he has received from the Recovery about God not just wanting to save people but having a higher purpose. He distinguishes between what Lee calls the low gospel which is about what God can do for man, and the high gospel about what God wants man to do for Him.

Also, him pointing out the shortcoming of Rick Warren's book is an observation I have also made.

Hon also mentions God's consummate goal which is language that is very Lee-like. However where Lee would say God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, which is biblical,
Hon says it is Oneness.


Sentences by Hon such as this one:

"People the world over, though diverse, have the same yearning: to live in peace and come together as one. "

sound a little like the Utopian dream of the New Age movement - world peace and oneness.

The bible however makes clear that God's goal is to head up all things in Christ, the Kingdom of God, the New Jerusalem. Before that happens there won't be oneness but warfare and division.

God's consummate goal can be found in the last book of the bible, Revelation, and it is not the Oneness that Hon claims although Oneness will be there.

What distinguishes Hon's group from a typical house church movement is the holding into Recovery-like ideas such as oneness, God's consummate goal and the deficiencies in Christiandom.

So I think describing his group as a "local church sect" is an okay description. The word sect means a cut, so it seems to be a cut away of the local church.

Evangelical, spiritual truths--if they are truths--are not owned by Witness Lee or "the Recovery." That you seem to think so would demonstrate how narrow you are.