The Mormon Church is "The Church"?

[byHismercy]

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/...most-uses.html

Hi saints, just wanted to share this news article with everybody. The LDS church has decided to go with its official name only, or be known as "The Church" for short....I found this to be ironically amusing and was thinking someone better inform the Local Church!?

[byHismercy]

By the way, isn't 'restored' an acronym for 'recovered'? Maybe we shouldn't tell the LC.....I hate to see tax payer wastin lawsuits run through our legal system...

[Evangelical]

I don't see the point of this considering that the Orthodox church and the Roman Catholic church have been referring to themselves as "The Church" for hundreds of years. Seems like another thread locked and loaded with irrelevant insinuation and innuendos. You should really stop baiting local church members to come onto your forum with posts like these.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I don't see the point of this considering that the Orthodox church and the Roman Catholic church have been referring to themselves as "The Church" for hundreds of years. Seems like another thread locked and loaded with irrelevant insinuation and innuendos. You should really stop baiting local church members to come onto your forum with posts like these.

Sorry, Evan. I didn't mean to bait LCers. I just have fresh eyes for groups who are under the assumption they are THE church of Christ...besides that, I have recently received my schooling regarding strawmen arguments...something I can thank you and Drake for, exclusively! Something that cannot be thought of as anything but 'baiting', 'manupilation', 'deception'....in my humble opinion, the wrong path to take in honest discussion....

So you don't like baiting? But straw-manning folks is ok?

[Nell]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Sorry, Evan. I didn't mean to bait LCers. I just have fresh eyes for groups who are under the assumption they are THE church of Christ...besides that, I have recently received my schooling regarding strawmen arguments...something I can thank you and Drake for, exclusively! Something that cannot be thought of as anything but 'baiting', 'manupilation', 'deception'....in my humble opinion, the wrong path to take in honest discussion....

So you don't like baiting? But straw-manning folks is ok?

This is the classic "pot calling the kettle black".

[byHismercy]

Hi Nell,

It seems like, too, the same groups that deviate from scripture, or have accepted some mans' doctrine over that of the doctrine of Christ, are also led down the path of confusion to a place where they, exclusively are Gods true church, or Gods 'overcoming' church. They seem to go hand in hand....only He can keep us from becoming arrogant or proud, even about our position or salvation. I am learning, just how dangerous it is to reconcile another doctrine in with Gods' word...we have to be so careful! I am not saying that I am safe from being proud or arrogant before Him, just that I also need His leading to guard me from that, just as much as any christian. I am so thankful for everything that has transpired for us, regarding the LC....I continue to be surprised at how much I never saw, and what I continue to learn...all praise to Jesus, sister.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

By the way, isn't 'restored' an acronym for 'recovered'? Maybe we shouldn't tell the LC.....I hate to see tax payer wastin lawsuits run through our legal system...

Correction...acronym?? to synonym

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Correction...acronym?? to synonym

They are different words that have different meanings. Yet I consider the word "reform" as in reformation of Catholicism or "the reformation" to be a worse term than recover or restore, and to me means lipstick on a pig.

[UntoHim]

Mr. E.
Witness Lee used these terms interchangeably. As a Local Church member you are not allowed to say which is better and which is worse. Even the Blended Brothers cannot do this. Watch your step.

So, what Martin Luther was doing was "putting lipstick on a pig"? Really? That's kind of far out there bro....even for you. No objective person could deny that Witness Lee considered his movement a "reformation" of "Poor, Poor, Christianity." In fact, Lee was always trying to bring about a reformation of "The Recovery". Sometimes it was called a new "flow". Sometimes it was called "the New Way". Lee was always in the business of tearing down, mostly so that he could claim to be the only one to build back up. This is why Lee is referred to as "The Master Builder".
-

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

They are different words that have different meanings. Yet I consider the word "reform" as in reformation of Catholicism or "the reformation" to be a worse term than recover or restore, and to me means lipstick on a pig.

I'm not impressed though.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Mr. E.
Witness Lee used these terms interchangeably. As a Local Church member you are not allowed to say which is better and which is worse. Even the Blended Brothers cannot do this. Watch your step.

So, what Martin Luther was doing was "putting lipstick on a pig"? Really? That's kind of far out there bro....even for you. No objective person could deny that Witness Lee considered his movement a "reformation" of "Poor, Poor, Christianity." In fact, Lee was always trying to bring about a reformation of "The Recovery". Sometimes it was called a new "flow". Sometimes it was called "the New Way". Lee was always in the business of tearing down, mostly so that he could claim to be the only one to build back up. This is why Lee is referred to as "The Master Builder".
-

I don’t think so, UntoHim

I never heard the notion of reformation in the Lord’s recovery.

Reformation and recovery are two very different concepts.

Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Reformation and recovery are two very different concepts.

Do tell more bro Drake .... please.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by awareness

Do tell more bro Drake .... please.

at the beginning of the sixteenth century, the Lord raised up Martin Luther. Before him some others had been raised up. (Actually, throughout the previous fourteen centuries, there were some faithful saints raised up by the Lord to recover the lost truths.) These paved the way for the Reformation. It was at this time that the Lord started His recovery and recovered the first item, justification by faith. Since that time many things have been recovered, such as sanctification by faith, holiness by faith, the living of a life by faith, victory by faith, and many other items.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Yet I consider the word "reform" as in reformation of Catholicism or "the reformation" to be a worse term than recover or restore, and to me means lipstick on a pig.

So Drake, do you agree with your comrade Mr. E? Were Luther, Zwingli, Calvin et al simply putting "lipstick on a pig"?

Yes or No.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So Drake, do you agree with your comrade Mr. E? Were Luther, Zwingli, Calvin et al simply putting "lipstick on a pig"?

Yes or No.
-

To deride the reformation as mere "lipstick on a pig" is to reject the work of the Spirit and the faith many died for.

I would only ask, "who at LSM is willing to suffer like them?" Many, many reformers gave up their lives for the Lord and His word. LSM, on the other hand, will sue you or quarantine their own people for the slightest of correction.


It seems that those who always like to warn us of our criticisms of LSM in light of the judgment seat of Christ, ought to apply the same words to themselves regarding all the Reformers, many of whom were martyred.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Mr. E.
Witness Lee used these terms interchangeably. As a Local Church member you are not allowed to say which is better and which is worse. Even the Blended Brothers cannot do this. Watch your step.

So, what Martin Luther was doing was "putting lipstick on a pig"? Really? That's kind of far out there bro....even for you. No objective person could deny that Witness Lee considered his movement a "reformation" of "Poor, Poor, Christianity." In fact, Lee was always trying to bring about a reformation of "The Recovery". Sometimes it was called a new "flow". Sometimes it was called "the New Way". Lee was always in the business of tearing down, mostly so that he could claim to be the only one to build back up. This is why Lee is referred to as "The Master Builder".
-

I think Luther was trying to reform a pig, initially. Perhaps he did not know its true nature at first. He maintained a belief that it was the true church. But eventually he realized it was not possible, or it became not possible beyond his control. The reformation became something else. It removed the icons, and recovered salvation by faith alone, however its outward form was still like the Catholic church - the church of England. The Puritans tried to reform a pig as well, but also failed, and so separated completely.

I think Lee and the recovery did what Luther and the Puritans should have done from the start, in hindsight, forget about reforming a pig, start afresh.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

To deride the reformation as mere "lipstick on a pig" is to reject the work of the Spirit and the faith many died for.

I would only ask, "who at LSM is willing to suffer like them?" Many, many reformers gave up their lives for the Lord and His word. LSM, on the other hand, will sue you or quarantine their own people for the slightest of correction.


It seems that those who always like to warn us of our criticisms of LSM in light of the judgment seat of Christ, ought to apply the same words to themselves regarding all the Reformers, many of whom were martyred.

The Spirit and the reformers were recovering the truth. Meanwhile, the reformation became a movement of bloodshed and violence. Catholics were killing Protestants and Protestants were killing Protestants/anabaptists. That is the lipstick on the pig I'm talking about.

[Evangelical]

To clarify my statement about lipstick on a pig, the Reformation was in 3 stages:
1. The initial stage of liberty from Catholicism - this is what everyone wants the Reformation to be known for, this is where the Holy Spirit recovered truths.

2. Union of the church with the state and abandonment of religious liberty by the Reformers. Just like the Catholic church they fought in many battles. Alignment of church with state was just like Constantine and the Roman Empire.

3. Persecution of believers by Protestant state churches - by now these state churches look very much like the Catholic church.

By the end of the Reformation, there were entities which looked very much like the Catholic entity before. The difference between the two was only superficial. They all engaged in violence to solve their problems. They were all aligned with the state, notably, the Church of England.

If stages 2. and 3. did not occur, there would have been no need for the Puritan movement, the Pentecostal movement, the Brethren movement, and the recovery.

These are historical facts, you can read about them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The Spirit and the reformers were recovering the truth. Meanwhile, the reformation became a movement of bloodshed and violence. Catholics were killing Protestants and Protestants were killing Protestants/anabaptists. That is the lipstick on the pig I'm talking about.

If hatred is murder, as our Lord has instructed us, then Lee and LSM are guilty of as many murders as the Catholic Church.

I lived thru decades of movements coming out of Lee and LSM, winds and waves of teaching, new ways and practices, endless and fruitless vain experiments thrust on the LC's.

These were all "makeup on a moo cow." Even Lee himself would admit to this. He regularly called us all "moo cows."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

To clarify my statement about lipstick on a pig, the Reformation was in 3 stages:
1. The initial stage of liberty from Catholicism - this is what everyone wants the Reformation to be known for, this is where the Holy Spirit recovered truths.

2. Union of the church with the state and abandonment of religious liberty by the Reformers. Just like the Catholic church they fought in many battles. Alignment of church with state was just like Constantine and the Roman Empire.

3. Persecution of believers by Protestant state churches - by now these state churches look very much like the Catholic church.

Should we not consider all the LAWSUITS filed by LSM against other Christians as the union of the LOCAL church with the state?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

So Drake, do you agree with your comrade Mr. E? Were Luther, Zwingli, Calvin et al simply putting "lipstick on a pig"?

Yes or No.
-

YES.

As defined in Post #18.

Drake

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Drake

YES.

As defined in Post #18.

Drake

So Drake and Evangelical, do you think I'm in a pig movement?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So Drake and Evangelical, do you think I'm in a pig movement?

The metaphorical “pig” refers to the Catholic Church.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

The metaphorical “pig” refers to the Catholic Church.

Few would dispute your depiction of the Catholic Church as a "pig." Even the Lord Jesus referred to some as swine or pigs. (Mt 7.6)

Thus E's comment "putting makeup on a pig" insinuates that nothing of biblical value and spiritual reality characterized the reformers nor existed in the reformation movement. All of their work could be characterized as "lipstick."

History overwhelming informs us that these Reformers changed the course of Western civilization, ending an entire millennium of what is called the "dark ages." Think about how little impact the "Recovery" has had, and perhaps saying that the LCM is merely "makeup on a moo cow" is too generous.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I think Lee and the recovery did what Luther and the Puritans should have done from the start, in hindsight, forget about reforming a pig, start afresh.

So how is it that Nee and Lee started afresh? As I recall, Lee never claimed that. He said he was standing on the shoulders of great men from the past, as I remember it. That's not starting afresh.

But I remember the recovery explained. The simple story is that it started with Luther, and progressed to The Recovery ; the Recovery being the final stage before Jesus comes back.

Has the idea of the recovery evolved since I was in? Has it changed since Lee died? Are the blended brothers the final stage now? When is The Recovery finally accomplished? If it even exists? It may just be a contrived illusion.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

So how is it that Nee and Lee started afresh? As I recall, Lee never claimed that. He said he was standing on the shoulders of great men from the past, as I remember it. That's not starting afresh.

But I remember the recovery explained. The simple story is that it started with Luther, and progressed to The Recovery ; the Recovery being the final stage before Jesus comes back.

Has the idea of the recovery evolved since I was in? Has it changed since Lee died? Are the blended brothers the final stage now? When is The Recovery finally accomplished? If it even exists? It may just be a contrived illusion.

When Lee and LSM needed a little credibility, then they "stand on Luther's shoulders."

When Lee and LSM demanded exclusive authenticity, then they alone "started afresh."

It may just be a "contrived illusion" to the entire body of Christ, but they just need their own folks to believe it.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When Lee and LSM needed a little credibility, then they "stand on Luther's shoulders."

When Lee and LSM demanded exclusive authenticity, then they alone "started afresh."

It may just be a "contrived illusion" to the entire body of Christ, but they just need their own folks to believe it.

There's no doubt that The Recovery is a contrivance. There's no such term in the New Testament.

So to draw the picture of the Recovery from scripture, Lee had to hijack the 7 churches in the Apocalypse, on which he drew to contrive his imaginary Recovery. He wasn't the first to interpret them as prophetic progression of the church down thru, or up thru, history. The Recovery, of course, as I understood it back then, is Philadelphia ; the end of the progression.

But if the 7 churches represent models of the development of the church, up thru history, all the way up to until Jesus returns, there's a principle in the modeling they like to overlook. And that is : The Laodicea principle.

The Laodicea principle is that the church reaches Philadelphia and falls back. As the Recoveryite's tell it, Luther broke the church free from Rome, but created a church that is pretty much a cookie-cutter image of the RCC, but based on faith and not works.

And Laodicea has happened over and over again, ever since, to each and every step of the 'recovery,' as the Recoveryite's like to see it.

And now, they like to think, in the final stages of the historical churches, we have Lee's Recovery.

I tried and failed to keep the local church from becoming Laodicea way back in the 70's. It fell much deeper into Laodicea after I left. I'd hate to see it today. Again, why do people join and stay in cults? I'm in awe of the mysterious power that holds them. I broke free long ago ... and my head is still spinning.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When Lee and LSM needed a little credibility, then they "stand on Luther's shoulders." When Lee and LSM demanded exclusive authenticity, then they alone "started afresh." It may just be a "contrived illusion" to the entire body of Christ, but they just need their own folks to believe it.

The narrative is so self-serving as to astound - talk about "signs and wonders" - one wonders how anyone over 12 years of age can accept it on face value?

The Church Age was filled with Spiritual Giants, one after the other, until Lee died. Then, poof! The Age of Spiritual Giants was over; now it was the Age of Small Potatoes.

Or, each stage of the Recovery Narrative claims that it's the Final Stage, with no more modifications necessary. Somehow the Recovered Truth isn't quite right until The Final Apostle came along (Darby/Nee/Lee), with the Final Modification. Then it somehow became perfect, complete and entire. Mustn't change anything, or you'll be ambitious, divisive, and rebellious.

(Aka, Just because I did it, doesn't mean you can!)

In that vein, Watchman Nee could use some 3,000 "Christian classics" but don't dare violate the One Publication Bull today! Just because he was free to pick and choose his sources doesn't mean you can.

And Nee learned much of his theology and spirituality from Margaret Barber, Jessie Penn-Lewis, Madame Guyon et al, but no uppity sister better try to teach today, or be a Blended Co-Worker, because we all know women can't teach in the church! Doesn't matter that Ruth Lee and Elizabeth Fischbacher edited all his original books. That was then, this is now.

Ohio noted a doozy - the LC trumpets it's "goodly heritage" from the Protestants; that is, until the LC wants to move on, and then Protestants are "daughters of the whore".

Or the idea of "locality" of the "local churches" being promoted until HQ suddenly decides it's time to take control, then they "recover" the Jerusalem Principle. Suddenly we don't want to do anything "outside the fellowship" of the Big Boss in Central HQ.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by aron

The narrative is so self-serving as to astound - talk about "signs and wonders" - one wonders how anyone over 12 years of age can accept it on face value?

I might add : "Welcome to the Recovery. Check your brain at the door."

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by aron

The narrative is so self-serving as to astound - talk about "signs and wonders" - one wonders how anyone over 12 years of age can accept it on face value?

Like frogs in a boiling pot - the only way to “accept at face value”. This is why the prescribed evangelism strategy in the CSOC is to slowly introduce Lee and his church. Too much too fast - students run...fast.

The validity of Witness Lee’s ministry crumbles under its own weight and pales in comparison to the Spirit’s move today. This is why Lee’s movement and his churches are quickly dying out.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

This is why Lee’s movement and his churches are quickly dying out.

When they lost their MOTA, they lost their MOJO.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Or the idea of "locality" of the "local churches" being promoted until HQ suddenly decides it's time to take control, then they "recover" the Jerusalem Principle. Suddenly we don't want to do anything "outside the fellowship" of the Big Boss in Central HQ.

Both John Darby, Watchman Nee, and Witness Lee all started their ministries emphasizing "local" assemblies as a way to extricate seeking Christians from the established denominations of their day, using the so-called Antioch principle. After their movements became established, due to the labors of numerous gifted ministers, then Darby, Nee, and Lee each deemed it necessary for the Lord's work to have just one leader. Each then used various theological or practical issues to subjugate all of their perceived "rivals" into subordinate positions in the movement.

This never seemed to go very well for the movements, and quarantines or excommunications were then necessary to influence their adherents into believing that God had raised up only one oracle / brother / MOTA per age. Since the Bible never really justified their actions, in each case it really was the shear weight of personal character which elevated them to the top, while banishing "rivals." Many new teachings were thus employed to expedite this transition period including the change to the "Jerusalem" principle of "the work."

Each movement suffered as a result, losing the freshness and the blessing of the Holy Spirit, the oneness of the body of Christ, and the notable characteristic of brotherly love. Each of the three leaders also left the fresh anointing of the Spirit for the deep, exclusive, and somewhat esoteric teachings they later became known for.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Kevin

So Drake and Evangelical, do you think I'm in a pig movement?

No, not at all. But it is a movement responsible for persecuting the independent churches.

See "THE DEFICIENCY OF THE REFORMATION" by Watchman Nee

Luther came out of Babylon but did not enter Jerusalem. He thought politics could help the church. Likewise, Calvin aligned the church and the state, and then persecuted heretics.

Calvin did not practice Sola Scriptura - he believed in a state church, persecution of perceived heresy, and infant baptism - these are Catholic ideas.

The Reformed churches (Lutheran, English ) look like Catholic churches in many ways.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

No, not at all. But it is a movement responsible for persecuting the independent churches.

See "THE DEFICIENCY OF THE REFORMATION" by Watchman Nee

Luther came out of Babylon but did not enter Jerusalem. He thought politics could help the church. Likewise, Calvin aligned the church and the state, and then persecuted heretics.

Calvin did not practice Sola Scriptura - he believed in a state church, persecution of perceived heresy, and infant baptism - these are Catholic ideas.

The Reformed churches (Lutheran, English ) look like Catholic churches in many ways.

Historical revisionism by Mr. E.

How about we change the title of this forum to "THE DEFICIENCY OF THE RECOVERY?"

And the recovery looks much like the Catholic Church in so many ways:

• Headed by a MOTA much like the Pope
  Ruled by Blendeds much like the Cardinals
  Like a Monsignor, many LC's are administered by a LSM worker
  Elders in name only, actually rule like parish priests
  Daily readings in HWFMR like the Catholic Missal
  Meeting content the same all over the world
  One centralized publishing house for entire church
  Deformed practices of oneness like the RCC
  Quarantine dissenters like the heretics of old

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Historical revisionism by Mr. E.

How about we change the title of this forum to "THE DEFICIENCY OF THE RECOVERY?"

And the recovery looks much like the Catholic Church in so many ways:

• Headed by a MOTA much like the Pope
  Ruled by Blendeds much like the Cardinals
  Like a Monsignor, many LC's are administered by a LSM worker
  Elders in name only, actually rule like parish priests
  Daily readings in HWFMR like the Catholic Missal
  Meeting content the same all over the world
  One centralized publishing house for entire church
  Deformed practices of oneness like the RCC
  Quarantine dissenters like the heretics of old

Right on points bro Ohio.

When Mel Porter told me that I had to take his personality as my own, the whole point, that I had to agree to without questioning, was that, Lee was the one and only apostle on the earth, I said, "Well brother Mel, that looks like the Roman Catholic Church to me, with Lee as our Pope."

His response was, "Well brother, it's the way of life."

Get that. RCC Pope = death. LSM/LCM Pope = life.

I didn't see life. I didn't see taking someone else's personality as life. I didn't see Pope Lee as life.

The whole thing folded like a house or cards. I had no choice but to leave it behind. Thank God.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Historical revisionism by Mr. E.

How about we change the title of this forum to "THE DEFICIENCY OF THE RECOVERY?"

And the recovery looks much like the Catholic Church in so many ways:

• Headed by a MOTA much like the Pope
  Ruled by Blendeds much like the Cardinals
  Like a Monsignor, many LC's are administered by a LSM worker
  Elders in name only, actually rule like parish priests
  Daily readings in HWFMR like the Catholic Missal
  Meeting content the same all over the world
  One centralized publishing house for entire church
  Deformed practices of oneness like the RCC
  Quarantine dissenters like the heretics of old

And irony of ironies, I could see all the problems and faults of the RCC system, and the glaring missteps of the SDA church, but was so blind to 'my' cult....why? How could I not see what I now see? I think the culture of silence doesn't differentiate from a culture of deception or outright lies....I recently had an unpleasant run in with an LC sister who cut off contact with me months ago, and who was instrumental in my search for truth and an explanation for behavior I was witnessing in LC saints....she had completely revised what happened in our families case....and was vocal about blaming me for our split....I was shocked and honestly couldn't believe her stance....I am pretty sure the ones NOT answering my calls, texts, and emails are officially the ones doing the shunning....I have come to the conclusion that they are lying to me, and maybe even themselves.....

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by awareness

Right on points bro Ohio.

When Mel Porter told me that I had to take his personality as my own, the whole point, that I had to agree to without questioning, was that, Lee was the one and only apostle on the earth, I said, "Well brother Mel, that looks like the Roman Catholic Church to me, with Lee as our Pope."

My response to finding that out was similar, Awareness.....when I heard the MOTA junk, and the one publication junk, I was revulsed instantly and thoroughly....I know it was the Holy Spirit within....elevation of this man Lee....this makes me angry.....how dare they glorify Lee.....I am just sick of the silent, unspoken reverence for a man and his 'way'....that was it for me.

[aron]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I could see all the problems and faults of the RCC system, and the glaring missteps of the SDA church, but was so blind to 'my' cult....why? How could I not see what I now see?

The LC resembles the RCC and LDS in that The Church is their end-all and be-all. At least Luther and Wesley got that right - salvation is through faith in the name of Jesus Christ, not loyalty to the Hive.

Christianity's not the problem or the solution. Sin is the problem and believing in the name of Jesus is the solution.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Christianity's not the problem or the solution.

Excellent point.

There is no perfect, orthodox, catholic, reformed, restored, or recovered church.

Even if the Spirit pours out heavenly blessing upon your congregation, there is no guarantee that it will continue more than a few years -- 25 years max -- church history proves that, even for the Apostles.

Look at how much diversity -- both good and bad -- in the seven apocalyptic churches. Yet there was no call by the Spirit of God for the perfect church!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

My response to finding that out was similar, Awareness.....when I heard the MOTA junk, and the one publication junk, I was revulsed instantly and thoroughly....I know it was the Holy Spirit within....elevation of this man Lee....this makes me angry.....how dare they glorify Lee.....I am just sick of the silent, unspoken reverence for a man and his 'way'....that was it for me.

It was indeed by his mercy ...

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

My response to finding that out was similar, Awareness.....when I heard the MOTA junk, and the one publication junk, I was revulsed instantly and thoroughly....I know it was the Holy Spirit within....elevation of this man Lee....this makes me angry.....how dare they glorify Lee.....I am just sick of the silent, unspoken reverence for a man and his 'way'....that was it for me.

Which explains how your friend can love you one day, and then suddenly abandon you the next -- all because you can't haul your family 30 miles to their meeting.

I would bet that your friend was abruptly instructed by her "elder" not to invest her time in you or your children -- "not good material for their building."

[awareness]

To those in "The Church," whether the Mormon "The Church," The Recovery "The Church," or actually, all the other "The Churches," I have this to say :

Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. Be not afraid to be as the wind. - John 8:32 & 3:8

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

To those in "The Church," whether the Mormon "The Church," The Recovery "The Church," or actually, all the other "The Churches," I have this to say :

Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. Be not afraid to be as the wind. - John 8:32 & 3:8

awareness,

I get the truth part... but the wind part appears to be a misappropriation of 3:8.

What do you mean exactly and how does this verse add validation to your meaning?

Drake

[awareness]

Thanks for asking. I think this sums it up :

The wind blows where it wishes . . . So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

Thanks for asking. I think this sums it up :

The wind blows where it wishes . . . So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

I see.... but how to you apply its meaning? I'm not making the connection.

A description of a regenerated person born of the Spirit is not a call "to be as the wind".

Please elaborate what you are trying to say in layman's terms.

Thanks
Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

I see.... but how to you apply its meaning? I'm not making the connection.

A description of a regenerated person born of the Spirit is not a call "to be as the wind".

Please elaborate what you are trying to say in layman's terms.

Thanks
Drake

I guess that verse can be confusing. Is a person born of the Spirit like the wind? Jesus says the wind blows where it wishes? Is that what he means about the person born of the Spirit?

If we add truth shall set you free, it certainly sounds like it.

At any rate, I doubt it means to be joined to "The Church," Mormonism, Local-Churchism, or otherwise.

That aside, what do you think the verse means?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

I guess that verse can be confusing. Is a person born of the Spirit like the wind? Jesus says the wind blows where it wishes? Is that what he means about the person born of the Spirit?

If we add truth shall set you free, it certainly sounds like it.

At any rate, I doubt it means to be joined to "The Church," Mormonism, Local-Churchism, or otherwise.

That aside, what do you think the verse means?

awareness,

I think it means that a person who is born of the Spirit, that is regenerated, is like the wind... in that, it is a bit hard to put your finger on it, but when you hear its sound, or watch trees sway in its wake, or it blows your toupee off then you know its there.... so it is with a regenerated person, you may not completely understand what happened to them and its not fully recognizable but it is a fact.. just like the wind. The context appears to support that interpretation.

Thanks
Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

awareness,

I think it means that a person who is born of the Spirit, that is regenerated, is like the wind... in that, it is a bit hard to put your finger on it, but when you hear its sound, or watch trees sway in its wake, or it blows your toupee off then you know its there.... so it is with a regenerated person, you may not completely understand what happened to them and its not fully recognizable but it is a fact.. just like the wind. The context appears to support that interpretation.

Thanks
Drake

So to you the verse and context means that someone born of the Spirit is as real as the wind?

Interesting. Thanks.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

So to you the verse and context means that someone born of the Spirit is as real as the wind?

Interesting. Thanks.

Not exactly.

All people are real.. obviously... but this verse is not talking about how real they are.... that would be over simplistic...rather, a regenerated person is different and their reality is not something you can always put your finger on. The "real" in the case of a regenerated person is like the wind... can't see it but you know something is there because you can hear it or see its effect. So, its not a statement that people born of the Spirit are real like all people are, believer and unbeliever alike. Rather, this is specifically about regenerated people and the reality of their regeneration.

That the Lord used sound as the evidence of the wind may have something to do with the testimony of He and his disciples mentioned in V11. They were making a sound and Nicodemus recognized it but could not define it exactly... so he seeks Jesus out to find out more and the Lord appears to be saying to Nicodemus something like ... we speak, you recognize something that you could not precisely define, and what you heard from us is mysterious just like the wind, you're not sure where it came from or where it is going but it is a fact and a reality.

Something like that.

Hope that helps... but in any case, I still don't see how it has anything to do with your initial counsel. Got the truth will set you free... but still don't understand how you meant "be as the wind" when applied to Christians in the local churches.... even using a different definition of what the "wind" is ... that may be because I don't know what your definition if "wind" is.

Feel free to clarify.

Drake

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by aron

The LC resembles the RCC and LDS in that The Church is their end-all and be-all. At least Luther and Wesley got that right - salvation is through faith in the name of Jesus Christ, not loyalty to the Hive.

Christianity's not the problem or the solution. Sin is the problem and believing in the name of Jesus is the solution.

I agree, Aron. The building is becoming an idol. The builder is greater than the building....I will try to find the scripture...but to forsake the love for 'the way'....not Christ our way, but Lees' way....this is idolizing the church I think. An elevation of the building over the Builder....this is upside down!

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by awareness

I guess that verse can be confusing. Is a person born of the Spirit like the wind? Jesus says the wind blows where it wishes? Is that what he means about the person born of the Spirit?

If we add truth shall set you free, it certainly sounds like it.

At any rate, I doubt it means to be joined to "The Church," Mormonism, Local-Churchism, or otherwise.

That aside, what do you think the verse means?

I agree, Awareness...it has to do with our freedom in Christ Jesus....the LC or any one of 'The Church' churches are prisons, doctrinal prisons. But He has set us free in reality....we will blow or go wherever we will....and we are free, regenerated, redeemed by our faith in Jesus finished work, no assembly,no man, has the right to burden us with 'another' gospel, 'another' spirit....we are not constrained to the lie! Set free in our Lord we are....He prepared the way for us....He set good works for us to simply walk in them...He goes before us...He guards us from behind...He even opens shut gates and doors for His gospel to go forth....we are free, and the LC and others who perpetuate falsehoods cannot hold us responsible to doctrine of man....it makes me hoppin mad to see what they teach as truth really is 'spying out our freedom'....

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by aron

The LC resembles the RCC and LDS in that The Church is their end-all and be-all. At least Luther and Wesley got that right - salvation is through faith in the name of Jesus Christ, not loyalty to the Hive.

Christianity's not the problem or the solution. Sin is the problem and believing in the name of Jesus is the solution.

That's right, Aron....cut right through the baloney....believing in the name of Jesus is the solution....the Father doesn't put any other qualifiers on us....but imputes righteousness on us for our trust in His beloved Son....additions by the LC or anyone else are shackles and chains.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Not exactly.

All people are real.. obviously... but this verse is not talking about how real they are.... that would be over simplistic...rather, a regenerated person is different and their reality is not something you can always put your finger on. The "real" in the case of a regenerated person is like the wind... can't see it but you know something is there because you can hear it or see its effect. So, its not a statement that people born of the Spirit are real like all people are, believer and unbeliever alike. Rather, this is specifically about regenerated people and the reality of their regeneration.

That the Lord used sound as the evidence of the wind may have something to do with the testimony of He and his disciples mentioned in V11. They were making a sound and Nicodemus recognized it but could not define it exactly... so he seeks Jesus out to find out more and the Lord appears to be saying to Nicodemus something like ... we speak, you recognize something that you could not precisely define, and what you heard from us is mysterious just like the wind, you're not sure where it came from or where it is going but it is a fact and a reality.

Something like that.

Hope that helps... but in any case, I still don't see how it has anything to do with your initial counsel. Got the truth will set you free... but still don't understand how you meant "be as the wind" when applied to Christians in the local churches.... even using a different definition of what the "wind" is ... that may be because I don't know what your definition if "wind" is.

Feel free to clarify.

Drake

That's an interesting explanation of why Jesus used "wind." It may be true, then again maybe not. Maybe Jesus meant that a person of the Spirit is as free as the wind.

The Greek word used here for wind is pneuma. It could mean a current of air. But it's also used as breath, breeze, figuratively as spirit ; sometimes as the rational soul, vital principle, or mental disposition. Also as angel, daemon, God, Christ’s spirit, the Holy spirit, and ghost, life, spirit and mind.

Here, pneuma clearly means blowing wind. And the wind, "blows where it wishes." Back to freedom again.

[aron]

Originally Posted by awareness

To those in "The Church," whether the Mormon "The Church," The Recovery "The Church," or actually, all the other "The Churches," I have this to say :

Ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free. Be not afraid to be as the wind. - John 8:32 & 3:8

John 1 tells us, "The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God" I was touched by "believe into his name". We believe into his name, and have the right to become children of God. Either this is true, or not. I believe it is true.

Again in Acts 3, Peter and John were in the temple at the third hour prayer, and Peter spoke to the astonished crowd, "By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has completely healed him, as you can all see."

Again we have faith in the name of Jesus. There's power in the name, and the faith in this name appropriates the power. We have the power to live, as he lived; the power to heal, to forgive, to encourage, to teach, to bless, and the right to become God's children. Now, does the Bible speak of other things? Of course. But if you ask me what is truth, I would say this kind of word comes awfully close. If there's any objective reality available for appropriation, it's something like this: believe into the name of Jesus Christ and be saved.

The rest of it, called "the central lane of the divine economy" or "the Church" or "the body" or "the ministry of the age" or "God's current speaking" or some special "recovered truth" is foofaraw. The subtle one beguiled Eve and he's been beguiling ever since. 2 Cor 11 "But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ."

There is nothing else except Jesus Christ, crucified and raised to glory. In the simplicity of truth, there is safety. Beware of those offering special, proprietary teachings.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by awareness

That's an interesting explanation of why Jesus used "wind." It may be true, then again maybe not. Maybe Jesus meant that a person of the Spirit is as free as the wind.

The Greek word used here for wind is pneuma. It could mean a current of air. But it's also used as breath, breeze, figuratively as spirit ; sometimes as the rational soul, vital principle, or mental disposition. Also as angel, daemon, God, Christ’s spirit, the Holy spirit, and ghost, life, spirit and mind.

Here, pneuma clearly means blowing wind. And the wind, "blows where it wishes." Back to freedom again.

Didn’t realize this convo would be so long winded- can we move to a different thread?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Didn’t realize this convo would be so long winded- can we move to a different thread?

Not necessary on my side. I'm done.... didn't know if Brother awareness had a deeper insight and thought it might be relevant.

thanks
Drake

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Didn’t realize this convo would be so long winded- can we move to a different thread?

It can be moved wherever is appropriate...It took me forever to figure out how to post my OP....sorry it ended up where it did. I am still getting familiar with the forum. Thank you everybody for this fellowship! Blessing me....

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

It can be moved wherever is appropriate...It took me forever to figure out how to post my OP....sorry it ended up where it did. I am still getting familiar with the forum. Thank you everybody for this fellowship! Blessing me....

Hey BHM, sorry... I was referring to the wind comments - thus my attempt at a “wind” pun. Thanks for your OP. It sounds like Drake is done.

Anyone the has spent time with Mormons and those within the Witness Lee churches know that there are many similarities. Now there is yet another.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

The rest of it, called "the central lane of the divine economy" or "the Church" or "the body" or "the ministry of the age" or "God's current speaking" or some special "recovered truth" is foofaraw. The subtle one beguiled Eve and he's been beguiling ever since. 2 Cor 11 "But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ."

There is nothing else except Jesus Christ, crucified and raised to glory. In the simplicity of truth, there is safety. Beware of those offering special, proprietary teachings.

Foofaraw! Yeah! You tell them.

Where do you get these words?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Hey BHM, sorry... I was referring to the wind comments - thus my attempt at a “wind” pun. Thanks for your OP. It sounds like Drake is done.

Anyone the has spent time with Mormons and those within the Witness Lee churches know that there are many similarities. Now there is yet another.

I think I have Mormons targeting my little subdivision. There are numerous families with young children who have moved in and they all seem to know each other. When one family hosted "elders" and then moved to Provo, Utah, that was enough to inform me.

I know little about them. Can you say more about them?

Are there any code words I can use to know who is Mormon?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Anyone the has spent time with Mormons and those within the Witness Lee churches know that there are many similarities. Now there is yet another.

You could go to a Baptist church and say the same.


Mormons are often compared to the Baptists for their remarkable similarities in their beliefs about baptism, the atonement, and the Second Coming, which are the teachings of traditional Christianity.

https://difference.guru/difference-b...s-and-mormons/

[Drake]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

That's right, Aron....cut right through the baloney....believing in the name of Jesus is the solution....the Father doesn't put any other qualifiers on us....but imputes righteousness on us for our trust in His beloved Son....additions by the LC or anyone else are shackles and chains.

byHismercy,

How about the additions of the writer of Hebrews?

Consider this....

"For when we sin willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fervor of fire, which is to consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three witnesses. By how much do you think he will be thought worthy of worse punishment who has trampled underfoot the Son of God and has considered the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay"; and again "The Lord will judge His people". It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Hebrews 10:29-31

This word, is aimed at correcting any thought or idea that God is so merciful, and that His words of grace so cover His chosen, that while the unbelievers will suffer the punishment of His indignation, they who had been sealed with His Spirit's seal will somehow escape.

Baloney?

This word is spoken to believers byHismercy. It is not an easy word, not a comfortable word, not a comforting word, but it is His word and we cannot ignore it.

Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

byHismercy,

How about the additions of the writer of Hebrews?

Consider this....

"For when we sin willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fervor of fire, which is to consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three witnesses. By how much do you think he will be thought worthy of worse punishment who has trampled underfoot the Son of God and has considered the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay"; and again "The Lord will judge His people". It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Hebrews 10:29-31

This word, is aimed at correcting any thought or idea that God is so merciful, and that His words of grace so cover His chosen, that while the unbelievers will suffer the punishment of His indignation, they who had been sealed with His Spirit's seal will somehow escape.

Baloney?

This word is spoken to believers byHismercy. It is not an easy word, not a comfortable word, not a comforting word, but it is His word and we cannot ignore it.

Drake

The word you quoted says, "if we sin willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth". . . why did Witness Lee dun the flock for cash to fund his son Timothy's business (Daystar), even after knowing that this had already caused so much harm already (Taiwan & Seattle World's Fair 1962)? Why did he let Son Philip remain in a position of responsibility even after knowing this had caused much stumbling to those for whom Christ died?

Why did Lee continue in his behaviours after causing so much harm, and why do LSM operatives continue in whitewashing his criminal deeds (i.e. money-laundering)? Where's the "fearful expectation of judgment" evidenced, o indignant one? And then you try to intimidate others?? I'm more worried about facing the Lord if I don't say something.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You could go to a Baptist church and say the same.


Mormons are often compared to the Baptists for their remarkable similarities in their beliefs about baptism, the atonement, and the Second Coming, which are the teachings of traditional Christianity.

https://difference.guru/difference-b...s-and-mormons/

You obviously haven’t spent time with Mormons. I will say this, my Mormon friends would take offense to me comparing them to The Witness Lee church...

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think I have Mormons targeting my little subdivision. There are numerous families with young children who have moved in and they all seem to know each other. When one family hosted "elders" and then moved to Provo, Utah, that was enough to inform me.

I know little about them. Can you say more about them?

Are there any code words I can use to know who is Mormon?

Ask them how many kids they have, that’s an easy one. They’ll also be wearing BYU gear - so you can ask about that. You can ask where they went on mission. Some are very awkward, but most I’ve met at really fun (these ratios are the opposite when compared to the LSM churches). They’re a friendly people, intelligent, well versed in explaining why their beliefs are superior and defending their religion. They are all about being Mormon and doing and saying the right things Mormons are supposed to do and say.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

Where's the "fearful expectation of judgment" evidenced, o indignant one? And then you try to intimidate others?? I'm more worried about facing the Lord if I don't say something.

"o Indignant one"?

Better read those verses again aron and pay close attention to who is described there as indignant..... and then have a closer read of Matthew 5:22 and talk to the Lord to resolve the on-going problem you have with certain brothers... while you are still on the way... before its too late and you have to meet the Lord at His BEMA in your present condition.

Now, awareness got us going on the wind track.... and LofT is trying to bring it back... what do you have to share about the topic of this thread?

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

You obviously haven’t spent time with Mormons. I will say this, my Mormon friends would take offense to me comparing them to The Witness Lee church...

Is it wise for you to keep company with anti-Christ? (2 John 1:10 )

[Drake]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I will say this, my Mormon friends would take offense to me comparing them to The Witness Lee church...

I believe that LofT..... but why would your Mormon friends take offense? Have you talked to them about Witness Lee and the local churches?

I have worked for and have had Mormons work for me... consider some as close work colleagues. I have never found any of them to be very volatile... at least not touchy to take offense.

Drake

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Drake

I believe that LofT..... but why would your Mormon friends take offense? Have you talked to them about Witness Lee and the local churches?

I have worked for and have had Mormons work for me... consider some as close work colleagues. I have never found any of them to be very volatile... at least not touchy to take offense.

Drake

I agree, not touchy or volatile at all... I love it when we agree Drake! I’ve only known one Mormon since learning about Witness Lee and I didn’t discuss Lee’s church with him.

Why would they take offense? Well I guess it would be the same reason you take offense of those who compare the LSM churches to the Mormon church...

[Drake]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I agree, not touchy or volatile at all... I love it when we agree Drake! I’ve only known one Mormon since learning about Witness Lee and I didn’t discuss Lee’s church with him.

Why would they take offense? Well I guess it would be the same reason you take offense of those who compare the LSM churches to the Mormon church...

I don’t take offense. Compare away!

The more someone compares, the more obvious it becomes that they don’t know what they pretend to know.... if they ever knew 3 or 4 decades ago they prolly forgot.

So, no. I think your comments about Mormons becoming offended at the comparison is your projecting your feelings onto them without ever having brought the topic up with them.

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I agree, not touchy or volatile at all... I love it when we agree Drake! I’ve only known one Mormon since learning about Witness Lee and I didn’t discuss Lee’s church with him.

Why would they take offense? Well I guess it would be the same reason you take offense of those who compare the LSM churches to the Mormon church...

No one here has taken offense at comparing the local churches to the Mormon sect. We can note that the thread was started with a remark about legal action and that this would be a burden on the tax payer, no doubt a light-hearted attempt at humor, but definitely not a fair comparison.

That said, if anyone should have a right to be offended, it would have to be local church members reading these forum posts.

When you wrote "You obviously haven’t spent time with Mormons. I will say this, my Mormon friends would take offense to me comparing them to The Witness Lee church..."

It implies that you spend time with Mormons, and they are your friends. But now it seems that you only have one Mormon friend, so your "Mormon friends" are an imaginary group of friends that you created to legitimize your knowledge about Mormons and infer that I don't know much about Mormons.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Drake

byHismercy,

How about the additions of the writer of Hebrews?

Consider this....

"For when we sin willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment and fervor of fire, which is to consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three witnesses. By how much do you think he will be thought worthy of worse punishment who has trampled underfoot the Son of God and has considered the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing and has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said "Vengeance is Mine; I will repay"; and again "The Lord will judge His people". It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Hebrews 10:29-31

This word, is aimed at correcting any thought or idea that God is so merciful, and that His words of grace so cover His chosen, that while the unbelievers will suffer the punishment of His indignation, they who had been sealed with His Spirit's seal will somehow escape.

Baloney?

This word is spoken to believers byHismercy. It is not an easy word, not a comfortable word, not a comforting word, but it is His word and we cannot ignore it.

Drake

Drake, Gods' word is living and operative in those who believe, Jesus the Christ is the Word of God Himself, and everything in the word is breathed out by the living God, we will live by the word.....I know I wasn't referring to His word when I used the word baloney, but I want you and everyone else to know also. I was referring to doctrine of devils that come out of Lees' ministry. It's a bunch of baloney.

Are you possibly equating Lees' doctrines with Gods' word?

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It implies that you spend time with Mormons, and they are your friends. But now it seems that you only have one Mormon friend, so your "Mormon friends" are an imaginary group of friends that you created to legitimize your knowledge about Mormons and infer that I don't know much about Mormons.

I learned about Witness Lee in 2015... do you want a detailed account of my interactions and friendship with Mormons prior to 2015? Send me a private message and I’ll fill you in.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

You obviously haven’t spent time with Mormons. I will say this, my Mormon friends would take offense to me comparing them to The Witness Lee church...

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Is it wise for you to keep company with anti-Christ? (2 John 1:10 )

Are they not human beings that God loves, and need to hear the gospel of salvation?

Why was it OK to visit Buddhists during the New Way in Taipei with their incense altars, but not Mormons?

Did not Jesus keep company with with the worst of sinners? And with Judas, possessed by the devil?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I learned about Witness Lee in 2015... do you want a detailed account of my interactions and friendship with Mormons prior to 2015? Send me a private message and I’ll fill you in.

I wouldn't waste my time. I don't think E wants real discussion.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I learned about Witness Lee in 2015... do you want a detailed account of my interactions and friendship with Mormons prior to 2015? Send me a private message and I’ll fill you in.

Not necessary, you have made clear that you have had only one Mormon friend since 2015. So I am not worried about the hypothetical group of Mormon friends.

I am not basing my comments on how many Mormons I know or used to know . I posted a website whose purpose for existence is to compare things and they have a comparison of Baptists and Mormons.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Drake

I don’t take offense. Compare away!

The more someone compares, the more obvious it becomes that they don’t know what they pretend to know.... if they ever knew 3 or 4 decades ago they prolly forgot.

So, no. I think your comments about Mormons becoming offended at the comparison is your projecting your feelings onto them without ever having brought the topic up with them.

Drake

Ummm... Ok.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I wouldn't waste my time. I don't think E wants real discussion.

Is your post #74 an example of a real discussion, is it? A discussion is an exchange of thoughts in order to reach a conclusion. Your posts are best described as commentary on a discussion, as highlighted by your previous posts:

"I wouldn't waste my time. I don't think E wants real discussion."

"Foofaraw! Yeah! You tell them."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Is your post #74 an example of a real discussion, is it? A discussion is an exchange of thoughts in order to reach a conclusion. Your posts are best described as commentary on a discussion, as highlighted by your previous posts:

"I wouldn't waste my time. I don't think E wants real discussion."

"Foofaraw! Yeah! You tell them."

Post #74 says you have misaimed by saying that Mormons are the antichrist and we should not keep company with them.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Drake, Gods' word is living and operative in those who believe, Jesus the Christ is the Word of God Himself, and everything in the word is breathed out by the living God, we will live by the word.....I know I wasn't referring to His word when I used the word baloney, but I want you and everyone else to know also. I was referring to doctrine of devils that come out of Lees' ministry. It's a bunch of baloney.

Are you possibly equating Lees' doctrines with Gods' word?

Bhm,

You appeared to suggest that any teaching about punishment of the believer was baloney, shackles, and chains. You said that God imputs righteousness on us for our trust in His Son.... and you said that the Father places no further qualifiers on us

I provided you a scripture that shows clearly God will judge and punish even believers... that the righteousness through our belief in His Son does not eliminate the judgement in Hebrews or Matthew 5:22.

Please consider those verses in the context of your beliefs above. I think you will find the two are incompatible.

Do not be swayed by voices in this forum that slander brothers in a very personal way and then excuse the consequences by teaching that God will overlook that sin because they believed in the Son. Scripture shows otherwise.

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Post #74 says you have misaimed by saying that Mormons are the antichrist and we should not keep company with them.

To a Mormon Jesus is just one of 3 distinct beings called God. Sounds anti-Christ to me.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Drake

Bhm,

You appeared to suggest that any teaching about punishment of the believer was baloney, shackles, and chains.

Drake

Drake, that never happened. I do not recall reading anything in this thread regarding punishment of the believer. I never referred to punishment of the believer. I am sorry you misunderstood me. Maybe the smoke got in your eyes?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Drake, that never happened. I do not recall reading anything in this thread regarding punishment of the believer. I never referred to punishment of the believer. I am sorry you misunderstood me. Maybe the smoke got in your eyes?

“Worse punishment” in the Hebrews verses I quoted.. I even bolded it so it would not be missed.

Well then bhm, what was your point about righteousness comes by our trust in the Son, and the Father has no additional qualifiers, etc. and what was the baloney that Aron cut through that so pleases you. He knows what he meant, but do you know what he meant? I know what he meant. .... but you are an independent thinker and don’t need to ride anyone’s coattails to make your own point so please clarify this....

What qualifiers? Qualifiers for what? Are there not additional qualifiers for entrance into the millennial kingdom? If not, then what is the meaning of Matt 5:22?

Thanks
Drake

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

Better read those verses again aron and pay close attention to who is described there as indignant..... and then have a closer read of Matthew 5:22 and talk to the Lord to resolve the on-going problem you have with certain brothers... while you are still on the way... before its too late and you have to meet the Lord at His BEMA in your present condition.

My present condition is to point out the discrepancy between the Bible and the LC of Nee and Lee. I have pointed them out, and somehow this is construed as an offense against God. Rather I think the offense is to keep one's mouth shut, yet knowing of the problems. Witness Lee wanted us to forgive his messy kitchen yet he continually pointed out deficiencies in others.

Either God raised Jesus from the dead on the third day or no. Either you believe or no. This is the gospel message. Not the "recovered church".

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

Do not be swayed by voices in this forum that slander brothers in a very personal way and then excuse the consequences by teaching that God will overlook that sin because they believed in the Son. Scripture shows otherwise.

Witness Lee and his ilk the Blendeds have slandered brothers and sisters in a very personal way and we had to passively sit there and absorb the curse. No longer.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

To a Mormon Jesus is just one of 3 distinct beings called God. Sounds anti-Christ to me.

Then apparently you disapprove of preaching the Gospel to the likes of Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, Buddhists, idolaters, etc. Who then are the select few qualified to hear your gospel? Only the already saved?

There is a troubling statement of exclusive Brethren affairs in the opening of C. H. Macintosh's Treasury which laments their own abandon of the gospel. Here he sadly rebuts the common Exclusive "wisdom" of his day.

Our divine Master called upon sinners to repent and believe the gospel. Some would have us to believe that it is a mistake to call upon persons dead in trespasses and sins to do anything. "How," it is argued, "can those who are dead repent? They are incapable of any spiritual movement. They must first get the power ere they can either repent or believe."

What is our reply to all this? A very simple one indeed -- our Lord knows better than all the theologians in the world what ought to be preached ... Our Lord preached repentance, and He commanded His apostles to preach it; and they did so constantly.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

“Worse punishment” in the Hebrews verses I quoted.. I even bolded it so it would not be missed.

Well then bhm, what was your point about righteousness comes by our trust in the Son, and the Father has no additional qualifiers, etc. and what was the baloney that Aron cut through that so pleases you. He knows what he meant, but do you know what he meant? I know what he meant. .... but you are an independent thinker and don’t need to ride anyone’s coattails to make your own point so please clarify this....

What qualifiers? Qualifiers for what? Are there not additional qualifiers for entrance into the millennial kingdom? If not, then what is the meaning of Matt 5:22?

Thanks
Drake

Drake loves to chastise young believers emerging from the bondage of LSM's legalities, warning them with the weight of bolded scripture in order to silence those asking for assistance.

ByHisMercy you are not the first precious child of God to suffer judgmental backlash from LSMers while you by His mercy are seeing thru the smoke and mirrors what LSM is really all about.

This has been happening for decades. Unfortunately I viewed it from afar for 30 years and believed W. Lee when I heard his lies about those who spoke against the corruption at LSM. He adamantly instructed us that he was suffering persecution as a faithful follower of Jesus. What a falsehood!

Then I witnessed it first hand during the Ohio quarantines 10 years ago. The Lord shined a bright light on their pathetic ways. They damaged and divided every church in the name of oneness. Can you believe it? It was not the "oneness of the Spirit" which the Bible speaks of, but a twisted oneness with Witness Lee and his ministry which they demand of all.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

My present condition is to point out the discrepancy between the Bible and the LC of Nee and Lee. I have pointed them out, and somehow this is construed as an offense against God. Rather I think the offense is to keep one's mouth shut, yet knowing of the problems. Witness Lee wanted us to forgive his messy kitchen yet he continually pointed out deficiencies in others.

Either God raised Jesus from the dead on the third day or no. Either you believe or no. This is the gospel message. Not the "recovered church".

No brother, it is not about disagreement or discrepancy, and we should be diligent to examine the scriptures against any mans teaching. All that is fine and even healthy.

However, you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22, recounting the sins of others while excusing your own sins, using the name of God and the things of Christ to justify your words and deeds against members of the Body of Christ. In so passing judgment on others for their sins, weaknesses, and shortcomings in this age you presume to wrest it from the hands of the One who will judge righteously His house, not yours, in the next. And your defense? Others before me did the same thing....

...... well, good luck with that.

Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by aron

Beware of those offering special, proprietary teachings.

Great post aron.

I remember when preaching the gospel -- which was really preaching the local church life -- and when talking with visitors, stumbling in the conversation with the specific LC nomenclature. We not only had "proprietary teachings," but, "proprietary nomenclature." Part of bringing in a newbie was explaining the inside terminology. Once they understood that, it was hoped, they'll have "The Vision."

In the LSM/Recovery branded local churches -- "The Vision" -- has a very strong gravitational pull, circling Witness Lee. A orbit that can be very hard to pull out of.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

No brother, it is not about disagreement or discrepancy, and we should be diligent to examine the scriptures against any mans teaching. All that is fine and even healthy.

However, you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22, recounting the sins of others while excusing your own sins, using the name of God and the things of Christ to justify your words and deeds against members of the Body of Christ. In so passing judgment on others for their sins, weaknesses, and shortcomings in this age you presume to wrest it from the hands of the One who will judge righteously His house, not yours, in the next. And your defense? Others before me did the same thing....

At least I'm not charging 50 bucks a head like your so-called apostle did.

I like the term "reasonable". It reminds me of the terms "genuine" and "proper"; the true meanings of which could only be sussed out by "the oracle" who had "the mantle". I'm pointing out the absurdity of the LC position. It's built on sensory experience of rhythmic calling and chanting and shouting and the commensurate thought-repression. If that makes you uncomfortable too bad. Maybe you should think about why that is so.

[awareness]

Gosh! This thread is busy.

Originally Posted by Drake

This word is spoken to believers byHismercy. It is not an easy word, not a comfortable word, not a comforting word, but it is His word and we cannot ignore it.

Bro Drake, who knows the mind of God? We can walk away from God. -- I had to after leaving the local church -- but that doesn't mean God walks away from us. I don't care what you think Hebrews means. I know differently.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

Gosh! This thread is busy.


Bro Drake, who knows the mind of God? We can walk away from God. -- I had to after leaving the local church -- but that doesn't mean God walks away from us. I don't care what you think Hebrews means. I know differently.

Well, ok. What is the meaning of those verses in Hebrews? What is “worse punishment “ and why is it worse?

Be happy to hear you out ....since you know differently.

Drake

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

At least I'm not charging 50 bucks a head like your so-called apostle did.

I like the term "reasonable". It reminds me of the terms "genuine" and "proper"; the true meanings of which could only be sussed out by "the oracle" who had "the mantle". I'm pointing out the absurdity of the LC position. It's built on sensory experience of rhythmic calling and chanting and shouting and the commensurate thought-repression. If that makes you uncomfortable too bad. Maybe you should think about why that is so.

Aron,

I get uncomfortable and alarmed when I see any brother wallow in the gutter and headed for the judgment loaded down with a truck load of offenses against members of the Body of Christ such as you have, Yet, please don’t over value the impact of your slanders in this forum... what seems to you like a hurricane has really only blown over a lawn chair or two. The consequences of your deeds and actions will fall upon you and you alone. My warnings to you are like those who cry out when they notice a child walking through a busy intersection.

It’s okay to disagree. Brothers can and often do.....but you’ve gone too far.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

No brother, it is not about disagreement or discrepancy, and we should be diligent to examine the scriptures against any mans teaching. All that is fine and even healthy.

However, you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22, recounting the sins of others while excusing your own sins, using the name of God and the things of Christ to justify your words and deeds against members of the Body of Christ. In so passing judgment on others for their sins, weaknesses, and shortcomings in this age you presume to wrest it from the hands of the One who will judge righteously His house, not yours, in the next. And your defense? Others before me did the same thing....

...... well, good luck with that.

Drake

Drake, I know you wont respond to my posts because I have exposed LSM's deceitful activities, including those in the Midwest, but I would only ask the reader:

How is it "hate-mongering" to warn others about the dangers of LSM? These ones come to this forum after an internet search and ask questions. Do not ex-members have a responsibility to warn others?

Where was Drake when Lee and sons damaged so many trusting saints? Where was Drake when Phillip Lee was molesting the sisters who volunteered at LSM? Where was Drake when the saints' life savings were wiped out by investing in the Daystar motor home boondoggle? Is not the top priority of every real shepherd to protect the church of God? Why has Drake made it his life's mission to protect a ministry which damages people in the name of God?

Instead of threatening the forum shepherds with biblical judgments, Drake should read about the biblical warnings about evil shepherds.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Well, ok. What is the meaning of those verses in Hebrews? What is “worse punishment “ and why is it worse?

Be happy to hear you out ....since you know differently.

Drake

That's an easy one bro Drake. Thanks for asking. I don't know the meaning of those verses. Nor am I particularly concerned about it. Why fix what ain't broke?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

[B]How is it "hate-mongering" to warn others about the dangers of LSM? These ones come to this forum after an internet search and ask questions. Do not ex-members have a responsibility to warn others?

Where was Drake when Lee and sons damaged so many trusting saints? Where was Drake when Phillip Lee was molesting the sisters who volunteered at LSM? Where was Drake when the saints' life savings were wiped out by investing in the Daystar motor home boondoggle? Is not the top priority of every real shepherd to protect the church of God? Why has Drake made it his life's mission to protect a ministry which damages people in the name of God?

Instead of threatening the forum shepherds with biblical judgments, Drake should read about the biblical warnings about evil shepherds.

Seems as if Drake is being a tad subjective: forum posters are "wallowing in the gutter" and "hate-mongering" and indulging in "slander" and are due for divine justice, but Lee & Company were and are "proper" and "frank" and "honest" and so forth. And these assertions are made on what basis, what criteria? Well, evidently that he wishes it were so.

The Mormon Church, like the Jehovah's Witnesses & the Local Church of the Living Stream Ministry, are all interested in Jesus Christ, but only as a springboard to their proprietary "recovered truth" in which they pin the unwary.

We've here noted the failure in the LC teachings and the harm done to many of the adherents. I for one apologize if my tone isn't very nice. I wish there were a way to make the case more pleasantly. Certainly some have done better than I. But the case still should be made.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Drake

you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22

"Gleefully"? Now who's imputing, Mr. Rolleyes?

Originally Posted by Drake

It’s okay to disagree. Brothers can and often do.....but you’ve gone too far.

How is it that no one, at any time, got to tell Mr. Lee, "You've gone too far"? When his hand-picked cadre of "senior co-workers" tried, they were sacked. Apparently they never got the memo that Asian culture doesn't allow Big Boss to get exposed.

Now, Asian culture isn't inferior to Swiss or Swedish. But it isn't heavenly, and the tale that God found "virgin soil" in China is hogwash. Paul wrote, "Against an elder don't receive accusation unless by two or three witnesses". ~1 Tim 5:19. But there were far more than two or three witnesses against Papa Witness & sons. If they'd been heard, this forum probably wouldn't exist, with all the "gleeful name-calling" as you suppose it to be.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

However, you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22, recounting the sins of others while excusing your own sins, using the name of God and the things of Christ to justify your words and deeds against members of the Body of Christ. In so passing judgment on others for their sins, weaknesses, and shortcomings in this age you presume to wrest it from the hands of the One who will judge righteously His house, not yours, in the next. And your defense? Others before me did the same thing....

Though I am admittedly sarcastic at times, and for good reason, there is no "Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment," as you say. Many faithful LC members have been hurt by those at LSM whom you protect, many of them, young and old, and yet you still refuse to repent or take ownership for any of it.

It's hard to believe that you could casually dismiss all of their pain and suffering. Let me remind you what our Lord said once about a millstone.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

Seems as if Drake is being a tad subjective:

Subjective?

Nay. nay aron.... anyone who reads your posts knows exactly what is written. They may not admit it or want to admit it for whatever reason.

Still, what I find amazing is how brazen you are to justify berating and ridiculing christians day in and day out. The moral equivalency argument you advance may help you sleep at night, assuming your conscience is not already shipwrecked, but it won't stand up in the day of the Lord at least if Matthew 5:22 and Hebrews is any indication. I mean, do you really think that when your posts are reviewed in that Day that you will be getting high fives? Hopefully, you know better.

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

The Mormon Church, like the Jehovah's Witnesses & the Local Church of the Living Stream Ministry, are all interested in Jesus Christ, but only as a springboard to their proprietary "recovered truth" in which they pin the unwary.

I cannot see how anyone can make such a comparison - the Jesus Christ of the Mormon Church is an alien being of a tri-God.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then apparently you disapprove of preaching the Gospel to the likes of Muslims, Hindus, Mormons, Buddhists, idolaters, etc. Who then are the select few qualified to hear your gospel? Only the already saved?

There is a troubling statement of exclusive Brethren affairs in the opening of C. H. Macintosh's Treasury which laments their own abandon of the gospel. Here he sadly rebuts the common Exclusive "wisdom" of his day.

Our divine Master called upon sinners to repent and believe the gospel. Some would have us to believe that it is a mistake to call upon persons dead in trespasses and sins to do anything. "How," it is argued, "can those who are dead repent? They are incapable of any spiritual movement. They must first get the power ere they can either repent or believe."

What is our reply to all this? A very simple one indeed -- our Lord knows better than all the theologians in the world what ought to be preached ... Our Lord preached repentance, and He commanded His apostles to preach it; and they did so constantly.

I was not talking about preaching the gospel. I was talking about making friends. Oh, unless the only way you know how to preach the gospel is to pretend to be someone's friend - "Friendship evangelism". You could do one better, like leastofthese has done you could pretend that you have a group of Muslim friends then pretend that they would offended if they were compared to the Local Church. Maybe you have pretend Muslim friends that you preach the gospel to, I don't know.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

No brother, it is not about disagreement or discrepancy, and we should be diligent to examine the scriptures against any mans teaching. All that is fine and even healthy.

However, you and a few others have not only crossed the line of reasonable and reputable disagreement, but are well into the ditch of hate-mongering of brothers in the Lord. Gleefully you engage in name calling, reckless abandonment, and neglect of Matthew 5:22, recounting the sins of others while excusing your own sins, using the name of God and the things of Christ to justify your words and deeds against members of the Body of Christ. In so passing judgment on others for their sins, weaknesses, and shortcomings in this age you presume to wrest it from the hands of the One who will judge righteously His house, not yours, in the next. And your defense? Others before me did the same thing....

...... well, good luck with that.

Drake

What about you? You crossed the same line and did the same thing you accuse others of doing. Hypocrisy and condescension.
.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Drake loves to chastise young believers emerging from the bondage of LSM's legalities, warning them with the weight of bolded scripture in order to silence those asking for assistance.

ByHisMercy you are not the first precious child of God to suffer judgmental backlash from LSMers while you by His mercy are seeing thru the smoke and mirrors what LSM is really all about.

This has been happening for decades. Unfortunately I viewed it from afar for 30 years and believed W. Lee when I heard his lies about those who spoke against the corruption at LSM. He adamantly instructed us that he was suffering persecution as a faithful follower of Jesus. What a falsehood!

Then I witnessed it first hand during the Ohio quarantines 10 years ago. The Lord shined a bright light on their pathetic ways. They damaged and divided every church in the name of oneness. Can you believe it? It was not the "oneness of the Spirit" which the Bible speaks of, but a twisted oneness with Witness Lee and his ministry which they demand of all.

Ohio, I am so sorry you were under the deception for so long...It saddens and angers me to realize how deceived you were, and I was, and we all were. I believed everything I was told because I was surrounded by christians....never once thinking there could exist such deception in the body....you said rightly 'twisted oneness with Lee and his ministry'. That is the truth of the LC in a nutshell. That is the perfect example of some LC baloney...only not as innocuous as it sounds. That unrighteous requirement for oneness with these saints is exactly what is dividing them from the body of Christ. It gets even uglier when they accuse all other christians of causing the division, when they cannot take the LC way, the new way, the Lee way. My comfort in the face of that sort of accusation is that God Almighty sees what they do, and knows the truth. They will never look at Jesus' face and get away with telling Him, `it was they who divided from us, Lord`.

[Kevin]

LCM has shown its true colors.

[Evangelical]

If Drake crossed any lines, it was because he was baited into it.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Drake crossed any lines, it was because he was baited into it.

Poor guy! Victim of a vast internet conspiracy, for sure.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Still, what I find amazing is how brazen you are to justify berating and ridiculing christians day in and day out.

This comment is so deceptively disingenuous. Drake knows better.

To say "christians" here is to cast aspersions on the entire body of Christ. This is what Lee and LSM have done for decades. They have categorically condemned "poor, poor, Christianity" on false and vague accusations of "division."

aron, and this forum however, specifically address the teachings and actions of Lee and leaders at LSM. Huge difference! The Bible teaches us not to judge people, but rather instructs us to test their teachings and actions.

Will Mr. E now claim that Drake was "baited" into doing this? I would say rather that brother Drake has been programmed by W. Lee during which time he was taught not to think or to use his mind, since that was too "dangerous" for the future of the LCM.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Ohio, I am so sorry you were under the deception for so long...

Hopefully ... in some way ... that encourages you.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

What about you? You crossed the same line and did the same thing you accuse others of doing. Hypocrisy and condescension.
.

Hi Nell,

Happy to have this conversation.

Please show where I crossed the line of “reasonable and reputable disagreement” with brother Aron.

Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Drake crossed any lines, it was because he was baited into it.

Bro Drake seems to be okay to me. I'm just mystified how he can be in the LC as long as I've been out.

Basically, when I discovered the LC is a cult he joined it. WOW! What's more, it took me 10 years to discover that the LC is a cult. So it mystifies that he hasn't discovered that after 40 years. He seems smart.

Maybe brother Drake, and Evangelical, have spent all their time in the dreamland section of the LC. And we on LCD weren't so lucky.

At any rate, it neither breaks my leg or picks my pocket that they are in the LC. Same for those in the Mormon "The Church." Or Tom Cruise. It's the death cults that concern me ... and the sex cults (tho that one is okay too, I guess, if it's only consenting adults).

That to me is the important factor. There are what I call "consenting cults." Those cults don't use force to get members, nor use physical force to keep them. Members are free to come and go as they please.

Consenting cults are psychological cults ; like personality cults, cults of loyalty to a dynamic leader.

Just like my brother Drake, I don't know why people join them. This latest cult in the news, NXIVM, offers, "personal and professional development seminars through its "Executive Success Programs"." Oh, and getting to sleep with the world's greatest genius, Keith Raniere, and have his initials burnt into your lower abdomen. WOW! Sign me up!

I have to admit that I'm a funny guy. I think the local church must have permanently bent my Palm Tree. (Or maybe I'm just outta my tree ... you decided). I realize that trying to save others from the local church is just whacking at the leaves, and not the roots.

The problem is much bigger than the LC ; like solving the problem of why humans join cults in the first place, of any kind. It's a widespread problem, even in Christendom.

In the early days of Christianity there were lots of cults. Putting aside that the Romans considered the Jesus movement to be a cult, during the post-apostolic period there arose in the Jesus movement what came to be called heresiologist's, or those fighting against heretical cults that was springing up.

Today we have even more Christian cults. Walter Martin is famous for pointing out and fighting against Christian cults in his, "The Rise of the Cults: An Introductory Guide to the Non-Christian Cults" and " The Kingdom of the Cults: An Analysis of Major Cult Systems in the Present Christian Era."

He founded the Christian Research Institute (CRI). He also listed Lee's local church movement as a cult. To which Hank Hanegraaff later released "We Were Wrong."

As a result CRI can no longer be considered a credible Christian Anti-Cult institution. They lost that when Walter Martin died.

So here we are, whacking at the leaves. Before LCD there was "The Bereans.net." They were an anti-cult website. They had a Local Church section, that because of historical content, and many personal testimonies, was much better than LCD. At least they addressed the wider problem, of Christian cults of every kind.

While here, we're only concerned with the LC cult. We don't even care about those in the title of this thread.

[byHismercy]

Awareness, bent or not, without your and everyone elses testimonies here on LCD, I would still be completely confused and feeling condemned after my disposal by the LC saints. I would have never known how they truly operate, the reality of their exclusivist practices, the damage their divisive beliefs can cause. I thought it was my failure...my possible punishment from my Lord...it was the confusion and distress that really stood out to me as being something of the enemy, not my Lord....He is the God of peace, not confusion. And after the LC sucked me in with their upholding the wonderful scriptural tenets of oneness, one Spirit, one body, one Lord, all the truth they preach.....to come to find out this was just lipservice for this group....the reality of what they practice in dividing our Lords' body was a shocking surprise, to put it mildly. I thank Him for the truth being trumpeted here. And where would I and others still be if the real testimonies weren't made public knowledge. It is not to bait Drake and Evangelical, or any LC members, but the hidden practices have to come into the Lords' light. He promised to shine on all hidden things of darkness, and He is being faithful to His word. Every LC christian must ask themselves, Why? Why are we expected to be silent or not look at any 'negative' (to the ministry) thing? God in His righteousness does not hide the truth from us....He trumpets the truth through the death of His son and in every way, He does not abide with the lie. Isn't hiding divisions and the reality of the practices being one with darkness, and the lie? (I am speaking specifically here about the way the reality of their practices are hidden from ones like me, who were probably never considered %100 for the ministry. Praise Jesus, logistics and physical distance, and my own reticent personality traits kept me from being present with them, and therefore not 'one with the ministry' for so many years.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hopefully ... in some way ... that encourages you.

Actually, Ohio, it does. The shame and embarrassment that comes with having been deceived so successfully by the LC....let me just say that knowing I am not alone in this is a balm to my wounds! Especially seeing brothers and sisters here who love our Lord and trust His word...and have His shining....this is comforting. He also has comforted me through His word, enormously. I see in His word all the ways the Lee doctrines contradict scripture, and it has made it easy to set them behind me. Flee from them, actually. The contributions to this forum have blessed me greatly, and I hope so many unsuspecting believers will be steered away from the Lee church by this public conversation. God bless everyone who reads these testimonies with light and truth!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Actually, Ohio, it does. The shame and embarrassment that comes with having been deceived so successfully by the LC....let me just say that knowing I am not alone in this is a balm to my wounds! Especially seeing brothers and sisters here who love our Lord and trust His word...and have His shining....this is comforting. He also has comforted me through His word, enormously. I see in His word all the ways the Lee doctrines contradict scripture, and it has made it easy to set them behind me. Flee from them, actually. The contributions to this forum have blessed me greatly, and I hope so many unsuspecting believers will be steered away from the Lee church by this public conversation. God bless everyone who reads these testimonies with light and truth!

Amen and amen byHismercy ....

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Actually, Ohio, it does. The shame and embarrassment that comes with having been deceived so successfully by the LC....let me just say that knowing I am not alone in this is a balm to my wounds! Especially seeing brothers and sisters here who love our Lord and trust His word...and have His shining....this is comforting. He also has comforted me through His word, enormously. I see in His word all the ways the Lee doctrines contradict scripture, and it has made it easy to set them behind me. Flee from them, actually. The contributions to this forum have blessed me greatly, and I hope so many unsuspecting believers will be steered away from the Lee church by this public conversation. God bless everyone who reads these testimonies with light and truth!

You should appreciate and hold onto everything precious you have received from the LC and your LC brothers and sisters. Our Heavenly Father brought you in contact with them for a reason. There are positive takeaways from every experience we pass thru. In Psalm 23 David realized that God was with him, and comforted him, even though He had brought him thru the valley of the shadow of death. Even when surrounded by his enemies, David's portion of God was at His table.

This is how we all must view our walk with the Lord. Our time in the LC was valuable because the Lord was with us. He led us to the LC for a season, and then He led us out. The shame is not on us, but on the LC for their policies, uplifting the one man Lee, instead of the one Man Jesus Christ. When Jesus is our center, we are one and brotherly love abounds. When the teachings of Lee are our center, then the system of man-pleasers places legalistic demands on ones like you to conform ... or be cast out.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

To clarify my statement about lipstick on a pig, the Reformation was in 3 stages:
1. The initial stage of liberty from Catholicism - this is what everyone wants the Reformation to be known for

You are framing the argument in a way that may have made sense in 16th century Europe but hardly in 21st century global Christianity. What about the EOC? What about the churches that split after Chalcedon in the 4th century? Your argument seems to assume they didn't ever exist. Even though they didn't exist, practically speaking, for Luther (he was persecuted by the RCC), they should exist for us, in our thinking of church history. Why frame an argument of historical narrative so contrary to the facts on the ground (there are [and were] more Christians than merely those affiliated with Protestants and RCC)?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

You are framing the argument in a way that may have made sense in 16th century Europe but hardly in 21st century global Christianity. What about the EOC? What about the churches that split after Chalcedon in the 4th century? Your argument seems to assume they didn't ever exist. Even though they didn't exist, practically speaking, for Luther (he was persecuted by the RCC), they should exist for us, in our thinking of church history. Why frame an argument of historical narrative so contrary to the facts on the ground (there are [and were] more Christians than merely those affiliated with Protestants and RCC)?

Yes but the context is the Reformation - are churches splitting in the 4th century really relevant? Numerous rebellions, splits and offshoots occurred before the Reformation for various reasons, but no serious historian considers these as part of the Reformation.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Yes but the context is the Reformation - are churches splitting in the 4th century really relevant? Numerous rebellions, splits and offshoots occurred before the Reformation for various reasons, but no serious historian considers these as part of the Reformation.

But why does LSM discussion of the Reformation always seem to assume that meaningful church history only began with the Reformation? Statements like, "The Reformation was lipstick on a pig" implies tacitly that there are 3 choices emerging from history: the RCC, Protestants, and the Recovered/Degraded Recovered spinoff of the Protestants. The pig, the lipstick, and us. But church history didn't start in 1500. And there have always been other churches besides the RCC.

Again, in 1525 Germany the point was moot, for Luther. Not for us, today. Our horizons are not his, and our narrative shouldn't presuppose only his as its basis.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

But why does LSM discussion of the Reformation always seem to assume that meaningful church history only began with the Reformation? Statements like, "The Reformation was lipstick on a pig" implies tacitly that there are 3 choices emerging from history: the RCC, Protestants, and the Recovered/Degraded Recovered spinoff of the Protestants. The pig, the lipstick, and us. But church history didn't start in 1500. And there have always been other churches besides the RCC.

Again, in 1525 Germany the point was moot, for Luther. Not for us, today. Our horizons are not his, and our narrative shouldn't presuppose only his as its basis.

Yes, just read Broadbent's seminal work, "The Pilgrim Church" about the primitive ekklesia in the dark ages. There have have always been a remnant that didn't take man's way (and were often persecuted for it).

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

But why does LSM discussion of the Reformation always seem to assume that meaningful church history only began with the Reformation? Statements like, "The Reformation was lipstick on a pig" implies tacitly that there are 3 choices emerging from history: the RCC, Protestants, and the Recovered/Degraded Recovered spinoff of the Protestants. The pig, the lipstick, and us. But church history didn't start in 1500. And there have always been other churches besides the RCC.

Again, in 1525 Germany the point was moot, for Luther. Not for us, today. Our horizons are not his, and our narrative shouldn't presuppose only his as its basis.

I still don't see the relevance or that it changes much. Why would we not be concerned mostly with European/Western church history?

I think that viewing history in such a way - "Catholic to Reformation" is characteristic of evangelicalism as a whole. Catholicism also pretends that these other groups did not exist and that absolutely everyone was Catholic.

This way of viewing the world is common. Take American history for example. It is now known that maybe the Chinese or Phonecians discovered America first. I don't see those historical facts changing the narrative, nor is it so relevant.

The way I see it, the contributions of these obscure and often unheard of groups, are exaggerated beyond proportion.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The way I see it, the contributions of these obscure and often unheard of groups, are exaggerated beyond proportion.

The EOC is obscure? The Syrians and Ethiopians are unheard of? Maybe in Germany in the late Middle Ages, but today?

In one sense I understand, given that it was my view once; it's also common to find a conscious, resolute myopathy, a total lack of curiosity when that's necessary to maintain the coherence of one's narrative. (And it fits on a thread about Mormonism!)

But the ignorance level of a medieval Western Europe is hardly appropriate for what purports to be a global Christianity in the 21st century (again, note the similarity to Mormonism).

WL once told us that no one had taught him anything new in 45 years. That's probably one of the most telling things he ever said.

Originally Posted by LSM Church History

There was Jesus, and then there was the Church (Matthew 16 is cited; Acts 2; Acts 10). Then the Church got degraded (2 Timothy; Revelation 2 & 3). Then there were 1,500 years where nothing of interest happened. Then Luther began the Recovery out of Great Harlot Babylon RCC with Justification. Then Darby & Brethren recovered 'Christ' in OT types and figures. Then we recovered the Church!

The internal cohesiveness of the Luther/Darby/Nee/Lee segment in the Recovered Church History needs a 1,500-year blank spot: "No light there; nothing to see folks; move along!" Of course LSM may occasionally wave Fenelon and Guyon as props; pad teachings with quotes from Augustine & Jerome. But one finds a stubbornly-held antipathy for anything outside their primitivist, massively truncated story. The level of determined and conscious ignorance, of "shutting out" required to hold it all together is amazing. It's really quite a window into psychopathology.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

The EOC is obscure? The Syrians and Ethiopians are unheard of? Maybe in Germany in the late Middle Ages, but today?

In one sense I understand, given that it was my view once; it's also common to find a conscious, resolute myopathy, a total lack of curiosity when that's necessary to maintain the coherence of one's narrative. (And it fits on a thread about Mormonism!)

But the ignorance level of a medieval Western Europe is hardly appropriate for what purports to be a global Christianity in the 21st century (again, note the similarity to Mormonism).

WL once told us that no one had taught him anything new in 45 years. That's probably one of the most telling things he ever said.



The internal cohesiveness of the Luther/Darby/Nee/Lee segment in the Recovered Church History needs a 1,500-year blank spot: "No light there; nothing to see folks; move along!" Of course LSM may occasionally wave Fenelon and Guyon as props; pad teachings with quotes from Augustine & Jerome. But one finds a stubbornly-held antipathy for anything outside their primitivist, massively truncated story. The level of determined and conscious ignorance, of "shutting out" required to hold it all together is amazing. It's really quite a window into psychopathology.

If you are going to allude to these other groups then you best state clearly why you think we should consider them.

I will present why we should not, this is taken from

https://www.gotquestions.org/Coptic-Christianity.html

about the Coptic Christians:


Theologically, Coptic Christianity is very similar to Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. They profess to be genuine followers of Jesus Christ and a part of His worldwide Church. But, as with Catholicism, they tend to emphasize meritorious works in salvation along with liturgical ritual rather than salvation through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Perhaps you can state clearly what you believe Coptic Christianity can contribute to the Recovery today? I think you will find they are stuck in their age-old traditions like the EOC and broke with the rest of Christianity at an early time, over disagreement about the nature of Christ.

Did God recover salvation by faith alone through them? Clearly, no, so what's your problem?

It's one thing for you to criticize what I wrote for not being cohesive and all inclusive of all Christian groups in history. It's another thing for you to be able to say something intelligent about them that shows why I/we should not have excluded them from the narrative.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Perhaps you can state clearly what you believe Coptic Christianity can contribute to the Recovery today? I think you will find they are stuck in their age-old traditions like the EOC and broke with the rest of Christianity at an early time, over disagreement about the nature of Christ.

Perhaps you can state clearly why the EOC never had a reformation, why all the spin off groups like the LDS, JW, SDA, Christian Science and LSM all seem to emerge from Protestants and not EOC, and what EOC teaches concerning justification by faith? Is their justification "tradition" from the Bible or no? If no, why did cult-watcher Hanegraaf join them?

Or must we consider the EOC as one of your unheard-of groups? Again, EOC may have been unknown in 1517 Bavaria, but not in 21st-century global Christian faith.

Originally Posted by Evandelical

It's one thing for you to criticize what I wrote for not being cohesive and all inclusive of all Christian groups in history. It's another thing for you to be able to say something intelligent about them that shows why I/we should not have excluded them from the narrative.

Intelligent? I may not know much, but I know that a teaching of church history that has 3/4 of its timeline as blank space is hardly promoting intelligence. No, but "Get out of your mind" is the default response to those who think, seek, and ask.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If you are going to allude to these other groups then you best state clearly why you think we should consider them.

For some we need to 5Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou repent.

For others, we need to know their tribulation and the blasphemy of them that say they are Jews and are not. This is so we would not be ignorant of Satan's devices.

For others we need to learn about the teaching of Balaam and the teaching of the Nicolaitans, stumbling blocks to the church.

Still we also need to be inoculated against the evil influence of Jezebel, false prophets and false prophetesses.

With others we need to 3Remember therefore how thou hast received and didst hear; and keep it, and repent.

With all of them the Lord says 8I know thy works so it is crucial that we also know their works.

Finally, a major error some make is to be boastful 17Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked: 18I counsel thee to buy of me gold refined by fire, that thou mayest become rich; and white garments, that thou mayest clothe thyself, and that the shame of thy nakedness be not made manifest; and eyesalve to anoint thine eyes, that thou mayest see. 19As many as I love, I reprove and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Being reproved by the Lord is not a reason for us to ignore their example, nor does it indicate He loves them any less.

Finally, I would point out that Philadelphia is composed of saints who have experienced some of the failed church experiences:

12 He that overcometh, I will make him a pillar in the [h]temple of my God, and he shall go out thence no more: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and mine own new name.

Indicating that these experiences are crucial for the church to become a church of overcomers.

That is why we should consider them.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Perhaps you can state clearly what you believe Coptic Christianity can contribute to the Recovery today? I think you will find they are stuck in their age-old traditions like the EOC and broke with the rest of Christianity at an early time, over disagreement about the nature of Christ.

Bro E, Recovery to what? If recovery back to the early church days, the Coptic church claims to go back to Mark the Evangelist.

And bro aron. Our old standing Christian churches, like the RCC & EOC, are the touch stone, or baseline, that Cultologist's use to measure what it is to be a cult.

And by that standard The Recovery is a cult. And so is the church that don't want to be called Mormon.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by awareness

Bro E, Recovery to what? If recovery back to the early church days, the Coptic church claims to go back to Mark the Evangelist.

And bro aron. Our old standing Christian churches, like the RCC & EOC, are the touch stone, or baseline, that Cultologist's use to measure what it is to be a cult.

And by that standard The Recovery is a cult. And so is the church that don't want to be called Mormon.

The Coptic church does not believe in salvation by faith alone as they did in the early church. So clearly the recovery is needed.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

Perhaps you can state clearly why the EOC never had a reformation, why all the spin off groups like the LDS, JW, SDA, Christian Science and LSM all seem to emerge from Protestants and not EOC, and what EOC teaches concerning justification by faith? Is their justification "tradition" from the Bible or no? If no, why did cult-watcher Hanegraaf join them?

Or must we consider the EOC as one of your unheard-of groups? Again, EOC may have been unknown in 1517 Bavaria, but not in 21st-century global Christian faith.



Intelligent? I may not know much, but I know that a teaching of church history that has 3/4 of its timeline as blank space is hardly promoting intelligence. No, but "Get out of your mind" is the default response to those who think, seek, and ask.

Let's keep talking about the Coptic church as that is the church you mentioned.

This church was rejected by Catholicism, EOC and Protestantism since they did not believe the orthodox view of Christ's nature.

That is a good enough reason why the recovery is not coming from the Coptic church.

If you don't think the Coptic or EOC need recovery then why aren't you joining them like Hanegraaf ?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

For some we need to 5Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou repent.

For others, we need to know their tribulation and the blasphemy of them that say they are Jews and are not. This is so we would not be ignorant of Satan's devices.

For others we need to learn about the teaching of Balaam and the teaching of the Nicolaitans, stumbling blocks to the church.

Still we also need to be inoculated against the evil influence of Jezebel, false prophets and false prophetesses.

With others we need to 3Remember therefore how thou hast received and didst hear; and keep it, and repent.

With all of them the Lord says 8I know thy works so it is crucial that we also know their works.

Finally, a major error some make is to be boastful 17Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked: 18I counsel thee to buy of me gold refined by fire, that thou mayest become rich; and white garments, that thou mayest clothe thyself, and that the shame of thy nakedness be not made manifest; and eyesalve to anoint thine eyes, that thou mayest see. 19As many as I love, I reprove and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Being reproved by the Lord is not a reason for us to ignore their example, nor does it indicate He loves them any less.

Finally, I would point out that Philadelphia is composed of saints who have experienced some of the failed church experiences:

12 He that overcometh, I will make him a pillar in the [h]temple of my God, and he shall go out thence no more: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and mine own new name.

Indicating that these experiences are crucial for the church to become a church of overcomers.

That is why we should consider them.

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Coptic church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community? What have they taught you that you did not know before? If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Coptic church is.

My point is that omitting such groups and others like them has no impact on Luther recovering salvation by faith alone.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Coptic church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community? What have they taught you that you did not know before? If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Coptic church is.

My point is that omitting such groups and others like them has no impact on Luther recovering salvation by faith alone.

Could we apply that same line of reasoning to Witness Lee’s churches?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Could we apply that same line of reasoning to Witness Lee’s churches?

Of course, go ahead. Let's compare how many things have been recovered by Nee/Lee as compared to the Coptic church. Many positive things have come out of the recovery and these are even stated on this forum if you look hard enough.

I do not recall however anyone posting about how much the Coptic church has benefited them, or even the EOC for that matter.

If anyone thinks these churches don't need recovering or reforming then why not join them like Hanegraaf did? Based on his words that the EOC did not have a Reformation, I suspect we shall see Aron's conversion to the EOC any day now.

[leastofthese]

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Witness Lee church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community?

Lee's teaching forced me to really question my sense of reality, who God is, and how He's moving on the earth. It is a different gospel - focused solely on the works of a fallen man and the culture he desired for the group that meets in his name. The Lord very physically removed me from this group and placed me back on solid ground - He is so gracious to me in so many ways. I couldn't speak for certain, but I would have to say that Witness Lee has had no impact what so ever on my community. In speaking more in more broad sense of community I would also say that Witness Lee likely has had no impact.

What have they taught you that you did not know before?

Nothing. Anything I could attribute to Witness Lee and his church that would be considered positive, I have also found through other means outside of the "recovery". I could list dozens of things I have been taught that would be considered negative.

If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Witness Lee church is.

If I asked 10 believers I know, 0 would know anything about Witness Lee and his supposed recovery. I could ask 50 believers, 100, the answer would still be 0.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Witness Lee church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community?

Lee's teaching forced me to really question my sense of reality, who God is, and how He's moving on the earth. It is a different gospel - focused solely on the works of a fallen man and the culture he desired for the group that meets in his name. The Lord very physically removed me from this group and placed me back on solid ground - He is so gracious to me in so many ways. I couldn't speak for certain, but I would have to say that Witness Lee has had no impact what so ever on my community. In speaking more in more broad sense of community I would also say that Witness Lee likely has had no impact.

What have they taught you that you did not know before?

Nothing. Anything I could attribute to Witness Lee and his church that would be considered positive, I have also found through other means outside of the "recovery". I could list dozens of things I have been taught that would be considered negative.

If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Witness Lee church is.

If I asked 10 believers I know, 0 would know anything about Witness Lee and his supposed recovery. I could ask 50 believers, 100, the answer would still be 0.

It seems that you being in the recovery was a waste of time, should have joined the Coptic or EOC.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It seems that you being in the recovery was a waste of time, should have joined the Coptic or EOC.

Yes it was a waste in many ways. I’m embarrassed by my time there and very rarely talk about it outside of this forum. I have evangelized to EOC folks in Europe. I would disagree that my time would have been better spent there - I’m not sure if I would be more or less embarrassed if I had spent a year in their churches.

The recovery is a joke.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The Coptic church does not believe in salvation by faith alone as they did in the early church. So clearly the recovery is needed.

The early church was Jewish. Are we recovering back to that? And again, recovery to what?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Coptic church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community? What have they taught you that you did not know before? If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Coptic church is.

Goodness, I don't think we know how much we today owe to Coptic versions of books of the Bible. In fact, the earliest we have of NT books is in Coptic, not Koine Greek.

Originally Posted by E

My point is that omitting such groups and others like them has no impact on Luther recovering salvation by faith alone.

So recovery is to go back to before the RCC kicked in salvation by works? But not back to the earlier days, when there were more than one way to salvation? Consider James, of Jerusalem, the brother of Jesus. He made Paul prove that he wasn't abolishing the law.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by awareness

Goodness, I don't think we know how much we today owe to Coptic versions of books of the Bible. In fact, the earliest we have of NT books is in Coptic, not Koine Greek.

The KJV and its variants use the Coptic versions do they? Even Coptics today do not use ancient Coptic versions of the Bible, they use NKJV etc. Coptic being a dead language is one reason, but more so modern versions being much more complete and useful.

Originally Posted by awareness

So recovery is to go back to before the RCC kicked in salvation by works? But not back to the earlier days, when there were more than one way to salvation? Consider James, of Jerusalem, the brother of Jesus. He made Paul prove that he wasn't abolishing the law.

Not back to Judaism, no. But are you saying that recovery is not needed? Perhaps you should join the EOC if that is the case, it's the real authentic church since the time of Christ in its perfect unrecoverable state.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If anyone thinks these churches don't need recovering or reforming then why not join them . . .

That's not an option here in Kentucky. Neither is the so called recovered churches. I'm in the church of no city, since I live out in the county. But there are plenty of Christians in this church, all around me. Do they need perfecting in Christ? Yes! Just like the rest of us, including those in the so called recovered churches. The recovered churches just think they are better than all the rest ... but they are not ... their cultic ways make them worse.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by awareness

That's not an option here in Kentucky. Neither is the so called recovered churches. I'm in the church of no city, since I live out in the county. But there are plenty of Christians in this church, all around me. Do they need perfecting in Christ? Yes! Just like the rest of us, including those in the so called recovered churches. The recovered churches just think they are better than all the rest ... but they are not ... their cultic ways make them worse.

That is no excuse, Kentucky is where they recovered the church back to Noah's Ark isn't it?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It seems that you being in the recovery was a waste of time, should have joined the Coptic or EOC.

I had a totally new respect for Coptic Christians after we saw 21 of them slaugtered like sheep by ISIL/ISIS.

LSM would have filed lawsuits.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If you don't think the Coptic or EOC need recovery then why aren't you joining them like Hanegraaf ?

You feign ignorance of my argument to avoid facing it. The LSM tries to legitimize its existence by presenting a Kiplingesque "Just So Story" of church history, conveniently omitting anything that doesn't line up with the narrative thrust of "recovery". I point out that there are more churches than the RCC and the Protestants, some of whom apparently believe in justification by faith.

Then you reply they're too insignificant to note. I point out one significant example, perhaps missed in medieval Germany but hardly so today, and you tell me to go join them.

The LSM version of church history is hardly worth teaching to grade schoolers, much less college graduates at their full time training centres. Its coherence necessitates the omission of the bulk of what actually has and does happen on the ground. Only then can this "Christianity" be a convenient foil for their "recovery".

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

For some we need to Remember therefore whence thou art fallen, and repent and do the first works; or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou repent.

For others, we need to know their tribulation and the blasphemy of them that say they are Jews and are not. This is so we would not be ignorant of Satan's devices.

For others we need to learn about the teaching of Balaam and the teaching of the Nicolaitans, stumbling blocks to the church.

Still we also need to be inoculated against the evil influence of Jezebel, false prophets and false prophetesses.

With others we need to Remember therefore how thou hast received and didst hear; and keep it, and repent.

With all of them the Lord says I know thy works so it is crucial that we also know their works.

Finally, a major error some make is to be boastful Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold refined by fire, that thou mayest become rich; and white garments, that thou mayest clothe thyself, and that the shame of thy nakedness be not made manifest; and eyesalve to anoint thine eyes, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I reprove and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

Being reproved by the Lord is not a reason for us to ignore their example, nor does it indicate He loves them any less.

Finally, I would point out that Philadelphia is composed of saints who have experienced some of the failed church experiences:

He that overcometh, I will make him a pillar in the [h]temple of my God, and he shall go out thence no more: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God, and mine own new name.

Indicating that these experiences are crucial for the church to become a church of overcomers.

That is why we should consider them.

"These experiences are crucial for the church to become a church of overcomers."

Amen. One of the great ironies of the Nee/Lee saga is that it prohibits the very thing it's supposedly based on. We're told that Nee read all the great works of Christian history & learnt from them. He read widely & broadly, looked far afield & profited from the enormous base of work he digested. Somehow all these competing points of view were able settle in his mind & build something solid, something that approximated reality as it is.

Now, the LAST thing the LSM wants its captive flock to do is follow Nee & dispassionately consider varied sources. Today, there can be only one source - the printing press in Anaheim.

The irony could hardly be more striking. Someone should make a movie - Hollywood loves this stuff. The free thinker who struck out on his own and started a personality cult that programs its followers to only think his thoughts.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

You feign ignorance of my argument to avoid facing it. The LSM tries to legitimize its existence by presenting a Kiplingesque "Just So Story" of church history, conveniently omitting anything that doesn't line up with the narrative thrust of "recovery". I point out that there are more churches than the RCC and the Protestants, some of whom apparently believe in justification by faith.

Then you reply they're too insignificant to note. I point out one significant example, perhaps missed in medieval Germany but hardly so today, and you tell me to go join them.

The LSM version of church history is hardly worth teaching to grade schoolers, much less college graduates at their full time training centres. Its coherence necessitates the omission of the bulk of what actually has and does happen on the ground. Only then can this "Christianity" be a convenient foil for their "recovery".

Ok Aron, why don't you list these churches that you say believe in justification by faith. Maybe it is not Luther or Calvin who we should be thanking for sola fide and sola scriptura but these other groups.

But if you really know history as you pretend to, you would know that there is no clear line of development of the doctrines prior to Martin Luther. For that reason, the "LSM version of church history" is in many ways alignment with the evangelical Reformed understanding of church history, as it goes , apostles to Catholics, Reformers, and to today.

You pointed out the EOC, that is a no-brainer. Yet for some reason Luther did not choose to join the EOC, probably because they worship saints.

You have failed to mention that there are very good reasons why the EOC and other groups should not be included in the story of the recovery - the EOC worshipping saints is one reason. They needed reforming as much as the Catholics.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

My point is best seen by a question - what has the Coptic church done for your faith or anyone else you know in your community? What have they taught you that you did not know before? If we ask that question to 10 believers we know, I doubt many would even know what and where the Coptic church is.

My point is that omitting such groups and others like them has no impact on Luther recovering salvation by faith alone.

My point was that we should be aware and cognizant of the "works" done by all the preceding Christian groups. Otherwise we can go off on half baked, incomplete works, or become proud and boastful yet ignorant of our poverty.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by aron

"These experiences are crucial for the church to become a church of overcomers."

Amen. One of the great ironies of the Nee/Lee saga is that it prohibits the very thing it's supposedly based on. We're told that Nee read all the great works of Christian history & learnt from them. He read widely & broadly, looked far afield & profited from the enormous base of work he digested. Somehow all these competing points of view were able settle in his mind & build something solid, something that approximated reality as it is.

Now, the LAST thing the LSM wants its captive flock to do is follow Nee & dispassionately consider varied sources. Today, there can be only one source - the printing press in Anaheim.

The irony could hardly be more striking. Someone should make a movie - Hollywood loves this stuff. The free thinker who struck out on his own and started a personality cult that programs its followers to only think his thoughts.

Lots of ironies.

1. Nee studied history extensively yet missed the point that history involves many individuals with many insights and is an ongoing process.

2. The entire doctrine of blending is based on many members yet one body, but the irony is they want one body without the varied talents of the many members.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

That is no excuse, Kentucky is where they recovered the church back to Noah's Ark isn't it?

Ha ha. Good one bro. Ky recovered the church back to the Flintstones, when people rode dinosaurs.