Erroneous Teaching of Lee Concerning Natural Affection

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

TC always pooh-poohed friendships in the church, and preferred to emphasize spiritual "companionships."

Going a bit off topic

As I was making my last comment tracing the teaching of natural affection back to Watchman Nee, I couldn't help to think why this forum mostly lacks criticism toward Watchman Nee if much, if not all, of Lee's teaching were derived from him.

And then I thought how similar the lack of criticism of Nee is to that of Titus Chu here as well, especially when I view them all as part of the same polycephalic entity. Does anyone have a rational explanation for this before I start formulating theories?

Anyway, carry on....

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Going a bit off topic

As I was making my last comment tracing the teaching of natural affection back to Watchman Nee, I couldn't help to think why this forum mostly lacks criticism toward Watchman Nee if much, if not all, of Lee's teaching were derived from him.

And then I thought how similar the lack of criticism of Nee is to that of Titus Chu here as well, especially when I view them all as part of the same polycephalic entity. Does anyone have a rational explanation for this before I start formulating theories?

Anyway, carry on....

Can you restate your question? I am looking for a rational explanation to what you are asking.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Going a bit off topic

As I was making my last comment tracing the teaching of natural affection back to Watchman Nee, I couldn't help to think why this forum mostly lacks criticism toward Watchman Nee if much, if not all, of Lee's teaching were derived from him.

And then I thought how similar the lack of criticism of Nee is to that of Titus Chu here as well, especially when I view them all as part of the same polycephalic entity. Does anyone have a rational explanation for this before I start formulating theories?

Anyway, carry on....

Here are a few threads you should look at:

Nigel Tomes: LSM’s ‘Authority and Submission’ Tampers with the Trinity

What is the boundary of the Local Church

Reconsideration of the Vision

Misrepresenting God: Delegated Authority (Nee)

Wright Doyle’s Biography of Nee

“Early Nee” vs. “Later Nee”

The ground on Which the Church should be built [please note there are multiple threads on this doctrine of the ground of the church]

Article: Beware of the writings of the Watchman

Article: Nee’s ecclesiology

Authority and Submission

Nee’s ‘Ministry to the House or to the Lord’

Spiritual Authority by Watchman Nee

LSM’s Sacrament - the “Ground of the Local Church” Nigel Tomes

Problems with Watchman Nee

The “Functions” of the Parts of Man

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Here are a few threads you should look at:...…...

Thanks for that list ZNP. It's definitely a good place to start for anyone new to the forums if they'd like to catch up on Watchman Nee, BUT comparatively speaking the number of Lee and LSM leadership criticism far outweighs that of Nee and GLA on the forums. I think I alluded to this discrepancy once before...I can't help but come back to this.

Originally Posted by HERn

It may be that no one wants to touch Nee because he is some kind of exalted guru before Lee. But, really he was just a very smart brother that figured out how to get what he wanted from women while reigning as God's minister of the age. It's all Oriental Hocus pocus mind games that Lee codified as God's economy. As soon as the saints get tired of being abused Lee's kingdom will come crashing down.

I definitely would agree with the first part, HERn. Could it be that people are too scared to touch Titus Chu because they view him as the same type of exalted guru? I happen to think so...

The more provocative stuff I'm not too familiar with and honestly not interested in as Nee's doctrines tell me all I need to know.

The last part I just don't see happening considering the comparisons of the Local Churches to the Catholic church. Catholicism is riddled with controversy yet still stands strong. The Lord allows organizations like this to stand for a reason just as He allows the tares to grow amongst the wheat.


With that said, I apologize to Truthseeker for going off topic. I didn't want to start a new thread on that one question.

[byHismercy]

This is where the semantics of the Lee way really get confusing. There is no way to reconcile this baloney doctrine with holy scripture.

God is love. He so loved the world He gave His only begotten Son. His greatest commandment to us is to love Him first. Our next word is to love our neighbors, others as ourselves. How naturally affectionate the Father must be toward us!

I feel natural affection for all you folks here, shoot, anyone who is tender enough to open up towards me garners my natural affection almost immediately. This affection is from God our Father.....because He is love!! Are we not made in the very image of the God who is Himself, love? How can we not be filled with natural affection?

To claim this doctrine against natural affection is to throw out Gods' word. To dispute it. To find natural affection lacking was His warning to us....to know we would be in the last days. How can any believer reject Gods' word for this wicked doctrine of man?

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I feel natural affection for all you folks here, shoot, anyone who is tender enough to open up towards me garners my natural affection almost immediately. This affection is from God our Father.....because He is love!! Are we not made in the very image of the God who is Himself, love? How can we not be filled with natural affection?

Well said.

[awareness]

Brother Jo S Dr. Lily Hsu's book, exposing Nee's private sexual waywardness, brings Nee completely down. Turns out he loved not only natural affection, but the physical sort too.
Check out this thread :
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...ily+hsu&page=4

[Jo S]

Last post here on this topic otherwise UntoHim will get upset with me.

Originally Posted by awareness

Brother Jo S Dr. Lily Hsu's book, exposing Nee's private sexual waywardness, brings Nee completely down....

Awareness, my point wasn't to focus on the criticism of any person(s) or to balance out criticisms in general. It's to point out the glaringly obvious bias on the forum and find its meaning.

HERn, you said it all and I appreciate your transparency;

Originally Posted by HERn

As soon as the saints get tired of being abused Lee's kingdom will come crashing down.

This is the overwhelming agenda I see on this forum; to destroy Lee's kingdom, aka the LSM, all the while Nee and GLA go mostly unnoticed. This imbalance can't be explained away with "well, most don't have direct experience with Nee or Chu" when the fact is that many here have direct experience with the Chu influenced local churches and Nee's literature. Common sense tells me if the LSM is wiped off the face of the earth, then the very foundation of the Lord's Recovery is still left standing and not only that, but a new MOTA as well.

Ohio, what happened in 2006 was pure politics draped in bible-speak yet I have the feeling, like you, many here still buy into the martyrdom narrative GLA broadcasts hook, line, and sinker. And because of the conflict this belief creates, many are suffering. That's not to excuse LSM, they still spread the same false gospel.

I have no interest in politics, but others apparently do. I came here a year ago seeking advice and help for some friends but instead ran right into what seems like a proxy war instigated by some set on using this platform for settling scores.

And speaking of UntoHim; your forum is the only online community I know of that can serve in encouraging those coming out of the LC's. It's unfortunate that the politicking, which goes mostly unnoticed, largely hinders that potential.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I feel natural affection for all you folks here, shoot, anyone who is tender enough to open up towards me garners my natural affection almost immediately. This affection is from God our Father.....because He is love!! Are we not made in the very image of the God who is Himself, love? How can we not be filled with natural affection?

Amen! Hear! Hear! Amen!

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Going a bit off topic

As I was making my last comment tracing the teaching of natural affection back to Watchman Nee, I couldn't help to think why this forum mostly lacks criticism toward Watchman Nee if much, if not all, of Lee's teaching were derived from him.

And then I thought how similar the lack of criticism of Nee is to that of Titus Chu here as well, especially when I view them all as part of the same polycephalic entity. Does anyone have a rational explanation for this before I start formulating theories?

Anyway, carry on....

It may be that no one wants to touch Nee because he is some kind of exalted guru before Lee. But, really he was just a very smart brother that figured out how to reign as God's minister of the age. It's all Oriental Hocus pocus mind games that Lee codified as God's economy. As soon as the saints get tired of being abused Lee's kingdom will come crashing down.