RE: Open Letter - Dear Saints in the Lord's Recovery - Joann Casteel

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Lee adamantly proclaimed the recovery to be the "move" of God, and not a "movement" of man. It was a factoid. Spoken regularly until we all believed it.

And even those who have left refer it as "The LORD's Recovery." Just look at the title of this thread.

I ask again : Is it now?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by awareness

And even those who have left refer it as "The LORD's Recovery." Just look at the title of this thread.

I ask again : Is it now?

Short answer: No.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Short answer: No.

Then let's stop calling it that. What's LR stand for?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by awareness

Then let's stop calling it that. What's LR stand for?

It stands for "What they call the Lord's Recovery but isn't."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

It stands for "What they call the Lord's Recovery but isn't."

Kind of like "the artist formerly known as Prince?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Kind of like "the artist formerly known as Prince?

Yes.

I've sometimes regretted my moniker "Igzy." Maybe I should change it to "Tafkai."

Also, I want to say that I came on too strong toward Jo S. Jo's point about being careful we don't become what we are resisting is valid. I apologize. We should always act in love. Love never fails.

[Cal]

Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love -> Grace -> Fellowship -> Conflict -> Mistakes -> Reconciliation -> Growth -> Love

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Also, I want to say that I came on too strong toward Jo S. Jo's point about being careful we don't become what we are resisting is valid. I apologize. We should always act in love. Love never fails.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Igzy

It stands for "What they call the Lord's Recovery but isn't."

Someone tell Greg and Jo.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by awareness

Someone tell Greg and Jo.

I think her calling it that was just habit.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

And even those who have left refer it as "The LORD's Recovery." Just look at the title of this thread.

I ask again : Is it now?

Long answer: That's what they call it.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by awareness

And even those who have left refer it as "The LORD's Recovery." Just look at the title of this thread.

I ask again : Is it now?

It is and it isn't. It depends how you define the word "Lord".

In Old Testament times, the Jews were constantly being seduced by foreign gods. One example of this is when Queen Jezebel introduced the false Canaanite god "Baal" into Jewish culture.

"Baal" literally translates into the word "Lord".

For the Jews, it was like a frog in boiling water. Slowly the bait and switch took place and before they knew it, they were worshipping the wrong "Lord". Yet I imagine they were still using the same terminology in worship.

Christians aren't immune to this. Many praise the Lord Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far away from him because they are worshipping the wrong "Lord".

So is the Lord's Recovery the Lord's Recovery? Well, yes and no.

Test all things!

[MrsFreedom]

The reason I called it the Lord's recovery in my letter was that I was directly speaking to the people in that system.

I knew I had one shot to reach them and hope they could hear what I had to say.

If I started out, "Dear Saints in the man-made system called the Lord's recovery..." I would have lost them. I was probably going to lose them anyway, but I wanted to at least try to reach them.

I no longer believe that "the Lord's recovery" is what I thought it was. For me personally when I was in it, I really believed that God was recovering christians from all over. The "ministry" and things "saints" said eventually caused me to realize it was just another system.

My use of the LC lingo throughout the entire letter was purely to reach the people still in it.

~J

[Jo S]

I think or hope most people understand that. We tend to get a bit overly philosophical here from time to time.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Jo S

I think or hope most people understand that. We tend to get a bit overly philosophical here from time to time.

Well, Harold does. Not me.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Jo S

It is and it isn't. It depends how you define the word "Lord".

In Old Testament times, the Jews were constantly being seduced by foreign gods. One example of this is when Queen Jezebel introduced the false Canaanite god "Baal" into Jewish culture.

"Baal" literally translates into the word "Lord".

For the Jews, it was like a frog in boiling water. Slowly the bait and switch took place and before they knew it, they were worshipping the wrong "Lord". Yet I imagine they were still using the same terminology in worship.

Christians aren't immune to this. Many praise the Lord Jesus with their lips but their hearts are far away from him because they are worshipping the wrong "Lord".

So is the Lord's Recovery the Lord's Recovery? Well, yes and no.

Test all things!

I hadn't thought of it that way. I can see how the Lord's Recovery is a empty claim, meant to lead the saints with a non-lord Lord.

If they were honest they'd call it Witness Lee's Recovery. After all, in 1994 Lee admitted that most of what he did for 32 yrs in America was by his natural man. As far as I was concerned by that time he didn't have to tell me that. I saw then, and now see, that just about all of the official line local church is natural man driven.

Years ago I saw that clearly when I discovered the elders were seeding the meetings, thereby subverting the Holy Spirit. It then took on the appearance of a cult to me. But I was only seeing the tip of iceberg at that time.

In truth, the whole official-line local church, the whole kit and caboodle, is natural man driven.

That's not to say that the saints didn't/don't touch the Lord in there, but they are following another guide than the Lord ... and the guide is Witness Lee.

So properly, it's a Witness Lees' Recovery.

[aron]

Originally Posted by awareness

So properly, it's a Witness Lees' Recovery.

If so then it's not Recovery but Continuation and Extension of Degradation. Kind of like FTTXB - it's rather FTTXD.

Speaking of the word "properly", Witness Lee used it a lot. What was "proper" and "genuine" and what was not. But what was the basis of such assessments? Personal preference, bias and self-interest.

There were two related mistakes at work here, both derived from missing the thrust of Jesus' teachings.

1. Thinking that the "beam" was in the other person's eye while yours only had a "splinter". This is backwards. It is your eye that has the worst impediment. This resulted in a teaching where "they" were deformed religion, the Mystery Harlot Babylon, while "we" were Isarael, in whom God sees no iniquity. What was the basis?

2. Jesus taught that when you are invited to a feast, take the least place. WN and WL tried to claim first place for themselves and their assemblies. Any problems or lacks were always with "Christianity" or those not under WN and WL, while their flocks were "real" and "legitimate".

On what basis was this said? Merely the wish that it were so. Better for book sales. So problems were unaddressed, growing. Look at what was posted yesterday on the Casteel FB page. Reports of things that are finally coming to light. The WL encomiums speak of messages given, books sold, churches established. They don't speak of lives damaged. But now people are talking about it.

May the Lord heal, restore, comfort, encourage, and yes recover. "Until we all arrive..."

[Cal]

There no reliable way of proving that the movement is uniquely "THE Lord's" or "THE Recovery" in the manner the LR says it is. Therefore doing so is presumptuous, reckless and irresponsible. They are putting words in the Lord's mouth.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

There no reliable way of proving that the movement is uniquely "THE Lord's" or "THE Recovery" in the manner the LR says it is. Therefore doing so is presumptuous, reckless and irresponsible. They are putting words in the Lord's mouth.

All things are the Lord's. Nothing has come into being that has come into being apart from Him.

Saying it is "the Lord's" recovery takes away any issue they can have with what the Lord does with what is His. Who are you to judge another person for what He does with what belongs to Him? If the Lord wants to use it as a cautionary tale on what can happen, that is His option. If the Lord wants to hold them up as an example to all the Lord's believers about what happens when you stumble the brothers that is up to Him. They cannot complain because their testimony has always been that it is "the Lord's" recovery.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If the Lord wants to hold them up as an example to all the Lord's believers about what happens when you stumble the brothers that is up to Him. They cannot complain because their testimony has always been that it is "the Lord's" recovery.

Even as an attendee I felt it was a tad hopeful and presumptuous to label your latest actions as "The Lord's move" (aka "The Lord's Move to Europe, Asia" &c). Or my all-time favourite, that what you're doing is "Central Lane of the Divine Economy". Oh really, says who?

As ZNP says, perhaps recent events are also "the Lord's move" to expose what isn't His, that maybe those "high peaks" weren't quite so high as they were claimed to be.