QUESTION: If *Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island

Sons to Glory! · 04-19-2020, 12:38 PM

and there were several "religious" groups you could meet with, consisting only of:

Mormons
Jehovah Witnesses
Buddhists
Roman Catholics
Hindus
Orthodox Jews
Muslims
Local Churchers

who would you gather with regularly to seek God, worship & fellowship?

UntoHim · 04-19-2020, 12:55 PM

If these were my only choices, than I'm afraid I would have to do what Steve McQueen did at the end of the movie "Papillon".

Skip to the 1:00 (1 minute) mark for the good part!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XGWXmxmaoE

-

Sons to Glory! · 04-19-2020, 02:02 PM

Just for you, I've included the word "hopelessly" in the title of the thread: "If Hopelessly Stranded . . ."

(imagine the waters totally infested with the most voracious sharks)

So there you are, stuck *hopelessly* on this island with these various religious groups, and knowing deep within the exhortation to "not forsake the assembling of yourselves together" . . .

UntoHim · 04-19-2020, 02:55 PM

Boy it's sounding more and more hopeless! So you're going to make me choose between the voracious sharks in the water or the ravenous wolfs in sheep's clothing on the island?

StG, I hope you realize that the exhortation to "not forsake the assembling of yourselves together" assumes that you're assembling with Christians that follow the Word of God, and not the dictates of a man and his ministry? Furthermore, there's lot's of other exhortations just as important, if not more important. One would be to preach the Gospel to everyone who needs it. So instead of gathering regularly with any of of these, you would probably find me preaching the Gospel to the people in ALL 8 of these groups. To be sure, some need the Gospel more than the others. Some consider themselves Christians, but have been taught a false gospel, and have fallen pray to "another gospel" and "another Jesus". I'd probably spend more time with them if the Lord would let me.

Wow...things are not looking as hopeless as I thought! So does this island have Internet service? Can I still keep up with my duties here on LCD? Can I assume that all the social distancing rules will be lifted?

-

Sons to Glory! · 04-19-2020, 03:10 PM

Interesting points to be considered! So would you say that two or three (maybe four) of these groups follow "another gospel" or "another Jesus" and should be shied away from as far as routine worship and fellowship?

And if you want internet there, then there is internet! (however, no virus thingie, so you can hug 'em all

)

UntoHim · 04-19-2020, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So would you say that two or three (maybe four) of these groups follow "another gospel" or "another Jesus" and should be shied away from as far as routine worship and fellowship?

Mormons
Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus. Follow a man who said he got his "visions" from God. Millions upon millions have been deceived for 170 years. They need the Gospel desperately.
Jehovah Witnesses
Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus. Follow a man who said he got his "visions" from God. Millions upon millions have been deceived for 70+ years. They need the Gospel desperately.
Buddhists
Really more of a philosophy/worldview than a religion. They need the Gospel desperately.
Roman Catholics
Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus. Follow the teachings and traditions established by men above and beyond the Word of God. Millions upon millions have been deceived for centuries. They need the Gospel desperately.
Hindus
Really more of a philosophy/worldview than a religion. They need the Gospel desperately.
Orthodox Jews
For my personal views on who and what the Jews and the Jewish nation are, read the Old Testament. They need the Gospel desperately.
Muslims
Worship another god altogether. A religion/philosophy/political worldview that has become as toxic and dangerous as any throughout history. They need the Gospel desperately.
Local Churchers (The Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream ministry)
Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus. Follow a man who said he got his "visions" from another man who said he got them from God. Thousands upon thousands have been deceived for close to a century now. They are closer to the truth than any of the others, but sometimes closer can be just as dangerous as light years away. Though most LC members are genuinely saved and are seeking to love and serve God, they need the Gospel desperately.

-

04-19-2020, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Local Churchers (The Local Church of Witness Lee/Living Stream ministry)
Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus. Follow a man who said he got his "visions" from another man who said he got them from God. Thousands upon thousands have been deceived for close to a century now. They are closer to the truth than any of the others, but sometimes closer can be just as dangerous as light years away. Though most LC members are genuinely saved and are seeking to love and serve God, they need the Gospel desperately.

-

What makes the Recovery's gospel false?

UntoHim · 04-19-2020, 07:18 PM

Thank you so much for having the interest and taking the time to post this question!

Please excuse me for answering a question with a question, but I really feel it is necessary in this case.

Question: What makes the Recovery's gospel true?
-

04-19-2020, 07:27 PM

Do you mean to say they have a wrong view of the gospel? That's the question I want an answer.

UntoHim · 04-19-2020, 07:52 PM

Not altogether sure what you mean by "view". But I'll try to head your way.

Witness Lee taught another gospel.
Witness Lee taught that one could simply "Call on the Lord" and be saved. This is another gospel. He taught that man is becoming God in life and nature. This is another gospel. He taught that Satan indwells our flesh. This is another gospel.

Witness Lee taught another Jesus.
Witness Lee taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus is called the Father. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was part of "the processed triune God". This is another Jesus.

Obviously I have just given you the shorthand answer. The full answer to your question is contained within the thousands of threads posted throughout this forum over the past 12 years. I think you have some catching up to do.
-

theLCfurry · 04-19-2020, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

and there were several "religious" groups you could meet with, consisting only of:

Mormons
Jehovah Witnesses
Buddhists
Roman Catholics
Hindus
Orthodox Jews
Muslims
Local Churchers

who would you gather with regularly to seek God, worship & fellowship?

Personally, I wouldnt meet with any of them and try to signal for help to any ship coming or passing by for help

Trapped · 04-19-2020, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Do you mean to say they have a wrong view of the gospel? That's the question I want an answer.

Here's a ministry quote of what they think of the gospel....

“Today there is a shallow gospel with a shallow revelation of Christ telling a person that he is a sinner, that God loves him, and that God gave His Son for him. God's Son came to be the Savior who died on the cross, resurrected, and is now in the heavens. He loves all men. If a person believes in Him, he will be saved, and when he dies, he will go to heaven. Since he has been saved, he has to be good, improve his character, and glorify God. Christ cannot build the church upon such a shallow revelation of Himself. We have been laboring in the United States for twenty-three years, trying the best to uplift the situation. I really suffer in my spirit to see the saints brought down to something shallow and elementary.”

I don't even have words.

They also teach that you have to follow the minister of the age (Witness Lee). They acknowledge there are believers serving God apart from the minister of the age, but say those believers are not “following the vision” and that their service isn’t acceptable to God.

It’s what Jesus did that makes us acceptable to God……not who Witness Lee is. What a mess they are.

04-19-2020, 09:04 PM

Is there a specific thread that examines The Mystery of Human Life as it is one of their evangelism tools? I have problems with it specifically the verses are taken out of context.

Ohio · 04-20-2020, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Is there a specific thread that examines The Mystery of Human Life as it is one of their evangelism tools? I have problems with it specifically the verses are taken out of context.

Not sure, but it seems like a great topic for a new thread. Either of us could start it. Can you register a username so we can discuss the topic? Otherwise I can't distinguish one "unregistered" from another.

I would like to examine this charge that W. Lee taught "another gospel." Some think so, but I have reservations. Perhaps that little booklet could help this discussion.

Ohio · 04-20-2020, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

and there were several "religious" groups you could meet with, consisting only of:

Mormons
Jehovah Witnesses
Buddhists
Roman Catholics
Hindus
Orthodox Jews
Muslims
Local Churchers

who would you gather with regularly to seek God, worship & fellowship?

I would prolly meet with Cat'lics or LC'ers since I have developed the necessary filters to arrive at the oneness of the faith. Everyone needs friends, eh? Or are we stranded on this island because we are hopelessly quarantined due to some Chinese bat flu?

Sons to Glory! · 04-20-2020, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I would like to examine this charge that W. Lee taught "another gospel." Some think so, but I have reservations. Perhaps that little booklet could help this discussion.

That is my basic thought when starting this thread. Over the years I've read and read things posted on here - and many other places - about the whole LMS/WN/WL/LC thing, and in good conscience don't believe I could say they taught/teach another gospel. Of course, lots & lots of things that have gone sideways, poor decisions, sins and abuse, but "another gospel" or "another Jesus?" I don't see it.

Let's face it, every Christian group has just a piece of this measureless pie. And, as I like to say, we all have our warts (flesh) to contend with. I doubt very much that you would have to dig very far to find all kinds of things with any Christian group. I'm not excusing things that LSM/WL did by any means, or disputing that certain teachings may have gone a little far. But God doesn't use perfect beings - except for the Perfect One who was given to us and lives in us!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I would prolly meet with Cat'lics or LC'ers since I have developed the necessary filters to arrive at the oneness of the faith. Everyone needs friends, eh? Or are we stranded on this island because we are hopelessly quarantined due to some Chinese bat flu?

Me too. Clearly Mormons and JWs preach another gospel with an entirely different Christ that is devoid of basic salvation. However, there are certainly believers and I think those who hear His voice in both the RCC and LC, as the letters to the churches in Revelation attest.

UntoHim · 04-20-2020, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

That is my basic thought when starting this thread.

Yeah, that's what I thought. You have started several threads along this vain. The problem is that when someone engages you to defend the unorthodox, aberrational and heretical teachings and practices of the Local Church of Witness Lee, you tend to just take your ball and go home. I love and respect you brother, but this gets very frustrating for me as the moderator, and I'm sure I'm not the only disillusioned with all the threads you start that end up going nowhere.

I am not saying...repeat, NOT saying, that you have to agree we me or anyone else. What I am saying is that you actually engage in meaningful dialogue, even when it gets a little confrontational and/or uncomfortable. Don't bail out as soon you are asked to explain and defend your positions. Let us value clarity over agreement. (a la Dennis Prager) Arguments that bring forth the obvious such as "nobody's perfect" or "every Christian group has problems" are frankly a little facetious, and have a tendency to cause honest, fruitful discussions to come to a full stop before they even get off the ground.

All this being said....Let me start off by reiterating:

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Witness Lee taught another gospel.
Witness Lee taught that one could simply "Call on the Lord" and be saved. This is another gospel. He taught that man is becoming God in life and nature. This is another gospel. He taught that Satan indwells our flesh. This is another gospel.

Witness Lee taught another Jesus.
Witness Lee taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus is called the Father. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was part of "the processed triune God". This is another Jesus.

I know this is probably a lot to chew on for the first bite. Maybe you could address these contentions one by one at your convenience. And let's please just stick to what Witness Lee taught, and compare and contract with what is taught in the New Testament. Please don't try to sidetrack by claiming that "John Piper taught the same kind of thing!". Also please try to avoid making the non sequitur argument of "Well, Witness Lee also taught this or that". I'm sure you understand that when someone makes a heretical/false/aberrational statement, the fact that they then make an orthodox statement in the next breath, does not in any way mitigate, much less nullify, the heretical/false/aberrational statement.
-
***What I have posted is not just for Sons to Glory! Ohio or anyone else is welcome to jump in!***
-

Trapped · 04-20-2020, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

And let's please just stick to what Witness Lee taught, and compare and contract with what is taught in the New Testament. Please don't try to sidetrack by claiming that "John Piper taught the same kind of thing!". Also please try to avoid making the non sequitur argument of "Well, Witness Lee also taught this or that". I'm sure you understand that when someone makes a heretical/false/aberrational statement, the fact that they then make an orthodox statement in the next breath, does not in any way mitigate, much less nullify, the heretical/false/aberrational statement.
-
***What I have posted is not just for Sons to Glory! Ohio or anyone else is welcome to jump in!***
-

This won't get the topic rolling but I just wanted to say "yesssssssss".

It drives me up the wall when the LSM/DCP guys points to others. Like "they murdered too so our murder is okay!" No....no it's not. Mistakes made by otherwise intelligent people are still mistakes.

And "Lee clearly taught that modalism was a heresy!" Well....then he turned around and taught that same modalistic heresy. Saying "murder is wrong" doesn't make it okay when you say "murder is totally acceptable" in another book. Argh!

"The Son and the Father are eternally distinct!"

"The Son IS the Father!"

Lord, help me.

OBW · 04-20-2020, 05:25 PM

Quite a quagmire you have created. The only somewhat viable options are the LC and the RCC. Both have problems, but both are actually Christian. (Sorry, Unto (and Ohio). the RCC is not simply dismissable because of errant teachings. I find errant teachings everywhere. Some as egregious, such as worshipping nations and political leaders as part of their time of worship.)

I chose none of the alternatives. But I might be compelled to accept the sound Christian teaching that hides behind some errors at the RCC over the LC. Worship with them as if it is Anglican — ignore the hail Marys and prayers to saints. I have only one actual Sunday (well, Saturday night) mass to refer to personally, but I did not find it simply dismissable.

Or slowly see about moving some of the people to be more like Anglicans or Lutheran. It might seem easier to lure some LCers to be like Bible churches, but they are so closed that I don't think it could be done. So I would abandon my conservative and evangelical roots before I would simply give in to the LC.

UntoHim · 04-20-2020, 06:54 PM

Thanks for stopping by again Mike! Good to hear from you. I see you haven't lost your touch in throwing a little wrench into the proceedings.

Where did I ever say that the Local Church is not "Christian"? The fact is, I have never said such a thing and never would. Same goes for Roman Catholics. Some of the finest, devout and most sincere Christians I have ever known have been in the Local Church of Witness Lee, and some even in the Roman Catholic Church.

This is all a matter of the truth. And the truth is that there are many false teachings and harmful practices in the Local Church. It is not a healthy place for young people or new believers to be sure. Witness Lee was not a genuine apostle. That doesn't make him Jim Jones or David Koresh, but there is absolutely a legitimate need for former LC members and even outside Christian apologists to sound the warning regarding the damage that has been caused by this movement over the past 50+ years.

And as the end of that Hokey Pokey song ends..."That's what it's all about!"
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-24-2020, 12:15 PM

Dear brother UntoHim, I read all your admonishments and coaching regarding the manner in which you wish me to reply. I don't know how well I will do "coloring" within these stated lines, but let's see . . .

You stated also that I "have some catching up to do" regarding the thousands of posts that have been put on here over the past 12 years. Certainly there has been a tremendous amount of discussion on a wide range of topics concerning all things LSM/WN/WL/LC on here. I have little desire to delve into all these things, ad nauseam. Maybe I should clarify where I am coming from. I had exposure to the LC in the 70s and 80s. I know I was miraculously led of the Lord, over 2000 miles across the country, to originally find the LC. Twenty years after that, the Lord began to open my eyes that various things regarding that movement, were not as they seemed and as we had been taught.

But I think I have stated on this forum, a number of times, that I am not in the camp of immediately throwing everything of the LC out - baby along with dirty bathwater. Some practices and teachings I still hold, while many others I have received light on and tossed. Perhaps ones on here have received more light than I have on these various things - that may certainly be the case. However, I think there is perhaps a "shell" of basic things that is profitable to retain. On one hand, I do prefer the open style of meetings greatly, for instance. On the other hand, I abhor the fleshly elitism which the one-church-one-city teaching has produced.

You stated, "The problem is that when someone engages you to defend the unorthodox, aberrational and heretical teachings and practices of the Local Church of Witness Lee, you tend to just take your ball and go home. I love and respect you brother, but this gets very frustrating for me as the moderator, and I'm sure I'm not the only disillusioned with all the threads you start that end up going nowhere. Okay, we seem to have a disconnect here bro in your and my thinking. I guess I thought that these various discussions had simply run their course, and didn't realize that I was bailing out prematurely. I saw in these discussions that some were believing one way and others believed another way, and still others somewhere in between. To be sure, I don't necessarily see a blatant heretical teaching everywhere that some do. But to me, there just oftentimes seems like nothing more to add in these discussions. (and when Ohio comes out with his "beating the dead horse" icon for instance) Then we've usually gotten to a point where we're not going to convince each other of anything (kinda like republicans talking to/at democrats these days . . .), so therefore it's time to stop - at least that's the way it seems to me.

Plus, let me add, that it's just not a strength of mine to go past a certain point. I'm probably more of an initiator by nature. If I keep going, to me there needs to be some clear profit (eternal) in it. If it gets into the perceived realm of numbers of angels dancing on the pinhead, then I'm pretty much outa here as there's no perceived profit in it. (plus there are times it seems like a pile-on of fleshly bashing - perhaps just my thin skin for such things)

Back to my original intention in posting this thread. We can certainly rail against a system that's in error and holds people captive. All the groups I listed are in this vein, however, two have Christian beliefs and Christians in them - the RCC and the LC. If there was only these two groups of Christians around, would we divide from them, or count ourselves in the one Spirit to be one with them? Again, I'm not talking about the abhorrent system they're in . . . As a believer, with Christ in me, I would seek out others to be with who have Christ in them. Period. (and I believe there was at least one other person who replied on this thread, that they would likely do the same.)

As far as your contention that another gospel and another Jesus is advocated by WL and the LC, let me make a few comments. In light of this thread's intention, the question should be: Do these things constitute reasons for not meeting with the LC, if they were the only group around? Below is what you posted:

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Witness Lee taught another gospel.
Witness Lee taught that one could simply "Call on the Lord" and be saved. This is another gospel. He taught that man is becoming God in life and nature. This is another gospel. He taught that Satan indwells our flesh. This is another gospel.

Witness Lee taught another Jesus.
Witness Lee taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus is called the Father. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was part of "the processed triune God". This is another Jesus.

Obviously I have just given you the shorthand answer. The full answer to your question is contained within the thousands of threads posted throughout this forum over the past 12 years. I think you have some catching up to do.
-

So you have listed six things in particular that you believe substantiate the claim that WL and the LC preaches another gospel and another Jesus. Let's look at each of these six items briefly.

"Another Gospel"
1. Calling on the Lord to be saved - this seems simple. I am saved every day by calling on His name. "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Joel, Acts & Romans)
2. Man becoming God in life and nature - this seems a stretch by WL. It is a big mystery exactly what we shall be, but no where in scripture (that I know of) says it in those words.
3. Satan indwells our flesh - this could also be a stretch by WL. I think I know Lee's teaching on this ("Sin personified"). However, Jesus did say, "You are of your father, the devil." Was He just speaking metaphorically?

"Another Jesus"
4. Jesus became the Holy Spirit - I remember participating in a thread about this . . . too much to state here probably. I think it's another mystery and not so easy to nail down.
5. Jesus is called the Father - Addressed this a few messages ago. He's not?
6. Jesus was part of the processed triune God - the words seem unorthodox, to be sure. I could trot out all the usual verses WL used for this, but most everyone knows them. However, they shouldn't be discounted either, just because Lee used them!

Frankly, the only one I see much issue with is #2. Regarding number 1 I think it is incorrect to say this isn't scripture - am I missing something? Concerning number 3, well, it's sorta "so what!?" to me. Does that really rise to the level of "another gospel"?

And all the points regarding "Another Jesus" (#4-6), we can go around and around (and have) on each of these. Again, I sort of glaze over when getting into these endless discussions about the exact nature of the triune God. (and they are endless - at least for 20 centuries now) God is a mystery, and if we could figure it all out, He wouldn't be God, right?!

Bottom-line - back to the question: Do these things constitute reasons for not meeting with the LC, if they were the only group around? My contention is "no," these six things do NOT constitute grounds for the accusation of another gospel or another Jesus. Are they unorthodox or unorthodox sounding? Sure. So what! (orthodox to me just means they are in the full approval of organized Christianity) Are these specific reasons for not meeting with them if they were the only game around? No, not according to the understanding of the Bible I read.

So I hope that was a response that is in line with the wishes you stated bro. Please let me know where you think I am off the mark (or maybe you think it easier to say where I was ON the mark. L

L).

(and let me be clear, I have plenty of other issues with LSM & WL (& his imitators) - like the aforementioned elitist OCOC teaching and the 1000 year punishment for the unripened and the overt centralized authority - but I just don't see the above 6 points as that big of an issue, at least not rising to the level of another gospel/Jesus)

Ohio · 04-24-2020, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Yeah, that's what I thought. You have started several threads along this vain. The problem is that when someone engages you to defend the unorthodox, aberrational and heretical teachings and practices of the Local Church of Witness Lee, you tend to just take your ball and go home. I love and respect you brother, but this gets very frustrating for me as the moderator, and I'm sure I'm not the only disillusioned with all the threads you start that end up going nowhere.
-
***What I have posted is not just for Sons to Glory! Ohio or anyone else is welcome to jump in!***
-

Couple, perhaps controversial, thoughts here since my paths have crossed with Sons to Glory! a while back. Concerning your comment "take your ball and go home," that could also be viewed as "walking away from a food fight." Posters on this forum can take a beating at times, especially when trying to take a middle-of-the-road position. Objects often come flying from all directions.

More importantly are the differences between the Midwest LC's and some other LC's. Back in the day, we had many more gifted brothers in the Midwest who were NOT WL-tape-recorders, and viewed his ministry from a more Biblical view. Philip Comfort, the primary teacher in the church in Columbus at the time, was a prime example. Case in point was this "call on the Lord" defining "another gospel." I disagree with this. We saw this matter entirely based on Paul's teaching in Romans 10:8-15.

Never once, in all my 30 years in the LC, did I ever hear a Midwest brother promote "call on the Lord and be saved" apart from "believing in the heart that God had raised His Son from the dead." This was a total mischaracterization of Lee's teachings on the subject, a classic case of "taking it out of context" and smearing the man. If the Blendeds these days have made salvation out of some mechanical and robotic babbling, like praying the rosary, then that is on them, and not on the truths concerning calling on the Lord's precious name.

In this regard, Lee's teaching DID match Paul's teaching in the Bible. Also Peter's word in Acts 2.21 quoting Joel 2.32 confirm this. And I still hold to this day that Lee's footnote #1 in Acts 2.21 (from old recovery version) concerning calling on the name of the Lord is one of the best he ever wrote.

UntoHim · 04-24-2020, 01:05 PM

Sons to Glory! and Ohio,

Thank you so much for your responses! I read them with great interest. A little later today, or perhaps tomorrow, I plan on giving you the comprehensive response that you both deserve.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-24-2020, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sons to Glory! and Ohio,

Thank you so much for your responses! I read them with great interest. A little later today, or perhaps tomorrow, I plan on giving you the comprehensive response that you both deserve.
-

I look forward to it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Couple, perhaps controversial, thoughts here since my paths have crossed with Sons to Glory! a while back. Concerning your comment "take your ball and go home," that could also be viewed as "walking away from a food fight." Posters on this forum can take a beating at times, especially when trying to take a middle-of-the-road position. Objects often come flying from all directions.

The middle of a food fight - I love that analogy! Yes, I think I do probably have a more middle-of-the-road perspective . . . back when Evangelical & Drake were regular posters (the "good ol' days"

) the food used to really fly from all directions!

Jo S · 04-24-2020, 02:33 PM

StG, going back to your original post I'd say most people will look at your question and decide an answer based on what would personally suite them best. Assuming my walk with the LORD is solid and my doctrine is in line with the truth, I'd pick any one of them. I love a good challenge.

With that said, many rely solely on community for growth in the LORD or even just sustainability in the faith. That's the main reason it's so hard for many to separate from their respective groups, even if they are abusive toward them.

In a recent post I touched on the importance of the individual relationship with God first. I came to realize this was sorely missing within the Local Churches. It was obvious there was a large dependency on corporate meetings. If there is ever a time that LC members are being tested, it's now. This forced isolation figuratively is a desert island for many.

For me, I know I'd be just fine on an island with a group of people with differing beliefs because I don't place my hope in others to make me whole in the Lord. This is not to say fellowship can't be a help or even a necessity for us, it just shouldn't be the sole dependency in a Christian's life. We look at the life of Christ and see that he often spent time alone with the LORD. (Luke 5:16)

The first commandment is a relationship with God and then the second is a relationship with our neighbor. Too often young Christians leap into fellowship hastily and fall prey to harmful groups. They value camaraderie over God and so neglect the first commandment which results in stunted growth. Their groups then tell them to "not forsake the fellowship” and so guilt them from ever even thinking about leaving or setting themselves apart for a time to the LORD. Yet they don’t realize the context of Hebrews 10:25 which spoke to Jewish believers separating themselves from the gentile believers. It did not speak about general fellowship. What was Paul’s first inclination after being saved? He did not run to Jerusalem to fellowship but rather went to Arabia to spend time alone with the LORD.

I understand that’s not practical for all believers. My point is to not forsake the fellowship with the LORD. He should always take first priority. That way when seeking fellowship, you’ll be more concerned about how you can be of help rather than how you can benefit.

My question would be; If you were stranded on an island alone, would you find fellowship with the LORD?

UntoHim · 04-24-2020, 10:42 PM

Brother Ohio,

Thanks for your response.

Maybe we are not talking about the same thing when it comes to "Calling on the Lord". What I am talking about is what was clearly taught and practiced in the Local Church of Witness Lee, as clearly taught by Witness Lee and his closest co-workers, in the 1960's - 1970's in So. California. What I am talking about is loudly verbalizing the word's "Oh Lord Jesus!". Are you talking about something different?

I must tell you, being in Orange County, within minutes of the original Anaheim training meeting hall on Ball Rd, I lived in houses which hosted trainees from all over the country, including the Mid-West/Great Lakes area, for dozens of bi-annual trainings, and I never once heard any out-of-town brother or sister demonstrate that "Calling on the Lord" was anything different from "Oooooh Lllllooooorrrrd Jeeeeeeesussss". Some had better lungs then others and were louder. More than one brother was just plain obnoxious.

Just recently I quoted Witness Lee where he clearly stated that one could be saved by calling "Oh Lord Jesus". This is what the man taught. I was there at his feet. Nobody here on this forum is giving a "total mischaracterization of Lee's teachings on the subject", much, much less "smearing the man". I was at dozens upon dozens (hundreds?) of Friday night gospel meetings where people were instructed to simply call out "Ooooohhhh LLLLooooRRRRRd Jeeeeesuuuusss" to be saved. No asking for belief. No asking for repentance. Just "Call on the Lord". And yes, those verses in Romans 10 were quoted. These meetings were the typical, the norm. These meetings were "lead" by many of the brothers who are now the Blended Brothers and "The Co-Workers in the Lord's Recovery". They were preaching and teachings this version of "Calling on the Lord" because this is exactly what Witness Lee taught.

Ohio, I'm so happy that you were blessed to be taught by and in fellowship with brothers who taught and practiced in a more biblical way. But I'm hoping what you could do is tell us more about this more biblical way of "Calling on the Lord". Please don't take this as a "food fight". We are talking about the salvation of souls. We are talking about the truth. And yes, we are talking about the true and proper interpretation of "Calling on the Lord".
-

Jo S · 04-24-2020, 11:07 PM

Excerpts from http://www.callingonthelord.org/quotes/quotes.html ;

C. The Purpose of Calling On the Lord

1. To Be Saved

"Why do we need to call on the name of the Lord? Men need to call on the name of the Lord in order to be saved (Rom. 10:13). Suppose a particular person hears the gospel and begins to believe in the Lord. You can help him to be saved by having him pray to the Lord in a very quiet way, and I have seen many persons saved in this manner. However, if you would not only help him to pray, but also to call upon the name of the Lord, his experience of salvation would be much stronger. The first way, the way of praying quietly, does help people to be saved, but not so richly. The second way, the way of calling loudly, helps people to be saved in a richer and more thorough way. Thus, we need to encourage people to open themselves and to call on the name of the Lord Jesus."

E. The Need of Practice

"Calling on the name of the Lord is not merely a doctrine. It is very practical. We need to practice it daily and hourly. We should never stop our spiritual breathing. We hope that many more of the Lord’s people, especially new believers, will begin the practice of calling on the Lord. Today, many Christians have found that they can know Him, that they can be brought into the power of His resurrection, that they can experience His spontaneous salvation, and that they can walk in oneness with Him by calling on His name. In any situation, at any time, call: “Lord Jesus, O Lord Jesus!” If you practice calling on His name, you will see that it is a wonderful way to enjoy the Lord’s riches."

(Witness Lee, Calling, 1-11)

Trapped · 04-25-2020, 12:40 AM

Don't slap me upside the head here, but, can I ask what Romans 10:13 means by "calls upon the name of the Lord"?

These are the verses just prior to that one:

9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.”
12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Verses 9 and 10 both delineate between declaring with mouth and believing with heart. Then verse 11 mentions just the believing (with heart), and it seems that verses 12-13 apply to the declaring (with mouth).

In other words, does the phrase "call upon the name of the Lord" simply mean declaring "Jesus is Lord"?

I noticed verse 13 is a quote, which actually refers back to Joel 2:32. Looking at the other ways the Hebrew word for "call" in Joel is used, it seems it is used in other verses in the sense of "proclaim, summon, cry out". https://biblehub.com/hebrew/yikra_7121.htm

For example, Zechariah 13:9 also talks about calling on His name:

This third I will put into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are my people,’ and they will say, ‘The Lord is our God.’ ”

It almost seems like calling on His name here is equivalent to saying "The Lord is our God", which sounds a lot like "Jesus is Lord" from Romans 10:13.

Is this what "calling on the Lord" means? Proclaiming who He is? As opposed to just saying His name repeatedly?

Or could it mean "call upon" as in "to invoke"?

Here is Strong's Greek on "to call upon" - https://biblehub.com/greek/1941.htm

I've never thought about what the verse means by it and don't know that I have a good answer, now that I'm thinking about it.

04-25-2020, 01:54 AM

Is everyone who calls on the name of the Lord saved or not? by Matt Slick

Quote:

So, when the Bible says we are to call upon the name of the Lord, it is presupposing that there is only one God in all existence and that the one God is prayed to, worshipped, adored, etc. To call upon the name of the Lord is to subject one's self to the majesty and holiness of the divinely sovereign God of the universe. So, when someone "calls upon the name of the Lord" in order to be saved, it means he or she is putting hope and trust in God himself, the true God, the real God, not a false God.

Finally, repeating a mere sentence does not save. It is not reciting a phrase that makes a person a Christian. Instead, our salvation is dependent upon the sovereign work of God. Our calling upon his name in order to be saved is a manifestation of his work in us (John 6:44; 6:65). In this way, God gets all the glory

Ohio · 04-25-2020, 05:37 AM

I had a lengthy response, but "my token had expired," and the post was lost.

So frustrating.

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 08:12 AM

Owwch! I feel your pain! Occasionally I get stupid and forget my own advise to make longer posts on some off-line program (Like MS Word or some other program that has spell check). This is only if you're making a longer post - if you just making a quickie, one paragraph post probably no need. I like MS Word because it performs an "auto-save" every couple of minutes or so.

Now it seems some others have contributed since my post. So maybe you could take these into consideration in your response. Take your time bro...we're all stuck at home for another 3 weeks anyway!

-

Ohio · 04-25-2020, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Owwch! I feel your pain! Occasionally I get stupid and forget my own advise to make longer posts on some off-line program (Like MS Word or some other program that has spell check). This is only if you're making a longer post - if you just making a quickie, one paragraph post probably no need. I like MS Word because it performs an "auto-save" every couple of minutes or so.

Now it seems some others have contributed since my post. So maybe you could take these into consideration in your response. Take your time bro...we're all stuck at home for another 3 weeks anyway!

-

I refuse to stay home. I go out every day. Sunshine is the best disinfectant!

The problem is posting on a phone/tablet. I tried to go back in history, but I could not get the select function to scroll for copy and paste. Ugh! It's happened before.

I get that you take issue with LC practice taken to extremes, me too, but so can ANY biblical practice. Will you admit that calling on the Lord is scriptural?

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 11:19 AM

I keep asking and you keep avoiding. We are not going to get anywhere this way.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "CALLING ON THE LORD"?

Please tell us exactly what you mean, and then link your interpretation to the actual text in the Bible. You say it is "scriptural", but you don't actually link the practice with the text of the Bible.

Before we go further I think we need to get our terms straight.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I keep asking and you keep avoiding. We are not going to get anywhere this way.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "CALLING ON THE LORD"?

Please tell us exactly what you mean, and then link your interpretation to the actual text in the Bible. You say it is "scriptural", but you don't actually link the practice with the text of the Bible.

Before we go further I think we need to get our terms straight.
-

I guess I assumed this had been discussed before on here to the inth degree, has it not? (since it's such a fundamental LC teaching . . .)

OBW · 04-25-2020, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Where did I ever say that the Local Church is not "Christian"? The fact is, I have never said such a thing and never would. Same goes for Roman Catholics.

Then you didn't say what you meant to say.

When you say "Preach and teach another gospel and another Jesus" you indicate that they teach something other than the Gospel. And if you get saved under that, what are you? I can't clearly answer because it is unclear.

If they only teach another gospel (healthy, wealthy, and wise, or other diversions) then I am clear that those who still believe in Jesus are Christian.

But if they teach a different Jesus, then they are not engaged in the same endeavor in any way and cannot be called Christian. But if you say they misrepresent much concerning Christ, or they have additional heretical teachings, then I can agree that they are Christian, even if not healthy.

But as written, you have cast the LC and the RCC in with the JWs and Mormons.

But, accepting that this was not your intention, I stand by my preference for the RCC over the LC. Too many good, fundamental/evangelical churches are full of idolatry. Their rock-star preacher or worship team. The flag on the platform that would turn people's faces beet red if it was removed. The near worship of the president as some kind of modern savior.

I might pick one of those over the RCC, but not the LC.

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I guess I assumed this had been discussed before

Oh it's been discussed quite a bit...probably ad nausium for most of the forum members. But my brothers StG and Ohio are insisting that what was/is taught in the Local Church has an "extreme" version and then there is the scriptural/biblical way. I am trying (once again!) is to get you fellows to tell us what exactly are you talking about? I don't understand why you insist that there is a biblical way, and you and others have taught and practiced it...BUT YOU WON'T TELL US WHAT THIS BIBLICAL WAY LOOKS LIKE. WHAT DOES IT SOUND LIKE? This not a "catcha" thing. I am trying to understand. I am trying to get clear.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 12:01 PM

I was waiting on Ohio's response (he must be outside enjoying the healing properties of the sun . . .), as I think he'll probably do a better job and was likely part of the ad nauseam discussions (and I'm curious how he will go about it).

Here's a question in the meantime: "Lord Jesus help me!" Is that calling on the name of the Lord to you?

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

"Lord Jesus help me!" Is that calling on the name of the Lord to you?

Sure! That would be something akin to what David and others did which was recorded for us in the Psalms. (Rescue me, O my God! - Psalm 71:4) But this is not really the mainstay practice in the Local Church of Witness Lee.

Please don't wait for Ohio. His "version" of calling on the Lord may be different anyway. Once again, I'm looking for clarity, not necessarily agreement. I want to be clear on what a biblical version of calling on the Lord looks and sounds like as opposed to the extreme/unbiblical (your words) way of the Local Church.
-

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 12:41 PM

While you guys hash it out in brotherly love, he’s my quick take. Scripture says that when a Christian prays, it is the Holy Spirit in them that intercedes. It’s not by an effort of their own.

David was a prophet of God. The Holy Spirit didn’t indwell him like it does today in genuine Christians, but he was given a measure of the spirit. When David called on the Lord’s name, he did so in worship and in distress. This was because the Holy Spirit interceded on his behalf. Scripture is God breathed and since these instances are recorded, we know they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

When you create a practice, like “calling on the name of the Lord” (as found in the LC’s), it’s designed to bring the inflow of “spirit” into a practitioner rather than being an organic outflow of God’s spirit from an individual. This is works based spirituality and is what’s known as mysticism. I know this is a touchy word and subject for many here because I’ve received a lot of backlash in the past for it, but it is what it is. When a movement isn’t biblically based they always fall into this type of spirituality. This is true of Mormonism, Catholicism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the LC’s.

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBW

Then you didn't say what you meant to say.

But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough. (2 Cor 11:3,4)

Maybe I should have posted these verses at the head of my post. These verses are what I was basing my argument on. So, since you think I didn't say what I meant to say

....let me fall back upon Paul's argument to the Corinthians. His word's "led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ" would strongly indicate that he was speaking to Christians. Yet it seems that they had "accepted a different gospel".

Son to Glory! was the one who made up the theoretical list, not me. I just ran with the choices he gave me. Since the biblical/true Gospel is preached along side of a another/false Gospel in the Local Church, and thus the majority are probably saved (making the LC "Christian") I guess I should have delineated them from the others. My bad.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sure! That would be something akin to what David and others did which was recorded for us in the Psalms. (Rescue me, O my God! - Psalm 71:4) But this is not really the mainstay practice in the Local Church of Witness Lee.

Please don't wait for Ohio. His "version" of calling on the Lord may be different anyway. Once again, I'm looking for clarity, not necessarily agreement. I want to be clear on what a biblical version of calling on the Lord looks and sounds like as opposed to the extreme/unbiblical (your words) way of the Local Church.
-

Good! That gives a basic foundational understanding. I need to make my weekly store run (yes, all COVID appropriate fashion worn) in a bit, so it'll be brief and more practice centered.

When I first hit the LC in 74, I thought the way to know the Lord must be to call on Him repeatedly and loudly, as that seemed to be the teaching. I remember once not feeling the Lord's presence after something of a spiritual hiatus, and thinking I must need to call on His name a kazillion times. So I did, and basically wore myself out after calling out loud I don't know how many times. And I realized I didn't "feel" His presence any better afterward. This actually discouraged me a bit, and I thought I must have been doing it wrong. So I backed off this extreme practice.

Now days I still call on His name, but not in the rote way as described above. I'm aware, at the very least, that as John 1:12 states, "Even to those that believe on His name" that there is power in His name. Therefore "No man can say 'Lord Jesus' except by the Holy Spirit." Help comes when my mouth utters those words - and even if I just mentally call on Him! Most times there is no feeling, but whatever I have called on Him for, He is able to save and does.

I can go for long periods not thinking of Him at all, and then realize that I can just turn and in a small way say, "Lord Jesus, thank you for giving yourself and for saving me right now!" Or some thought can enter my mind and by calling His name in maybe just a whisper, that small turn can totally dispel the grievous thought! Or it may just be something simple like, "Lord Jesus I love you and need you now."

So that's a start - gotta go get vittles!

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

While you guys hash it out in brotherly love, he’s my quick take. Scripture says that when a Christian prays, it is the Holy Spirit in them that intercedes. It’s not by an effort of their own.

David was a prophet of God. The Holy Spirit didn’t indwell him like it does today in genuine Christians, but he was given a measure of the spirit. When David called on the Lord’s name, he did so in worship and in distress. This was because the Holy Spirit interceded on his behalf. Scripture is God breathed and since these instances are recorded, we know they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

When you create a practice, like “calling on the name of the Lord” (as found in the LC’s), it’s designed to bring the inflow of “spirit” into a practitioner rather than being an organic outflow of God’s spirit in an individual. This is works based spirituality and is what’s known as mysticism. I know this is a touchy word and subject for many here because I’ve received a lot of backlash in the past for it, but it is what it is. When a movement isn’t biblically based they always fall into this type of spirituality. This is true in Mormonism, Catholicism, Jehovah’s Witness, and in the LC’s.

I read this going out the door, but had to respond. Yes, I probably was one of the ones who might have given some of the aforementioned "backlash" on this. This might go to what the LC calls the "exercise of the spirit" right? So if I get what you're saying correctly . . . is it that we are not to call on the Lord's name until the Spirit wells up inside us and does so? Or can we use our will and decide to call on Him?

Ohio · 04-25-2020, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I keep asking and you keep avoiding. We are not going to get anywhere this way.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "CALLING ON THE LORD"?

Please tell us exactly what you mean, and then link your interpretation to the actual text in the Bible. You say it is "scriptural", but you don't actually link the practice with the text of the Bible.

Before we go further I think we need to get our terms straight.
-

Perhaps your post highlights the problem. You seem to want mechanics. Procedures. Guidelines. Decibel levels. Terminologies. Liturgical prescriptions.

But calling on the name of the Lord is spiritual. Like faith, it is foreign to the natural man. The Bible provides little of these necessary details. To "call" on the Lord indicates to "invoke" Him, as another poster wrote. There is only the caller and the heavenly "Callee." There is no audience. Hence all performance is vanity.

Lee, like others, did teach something spiritual. Something from the Bible. I referenced the footnote #1 from Acts 2.21. Do you accept or reject it? All of it? Part of it? Then, as you say, people practiced something you object to. Probably too much performance or showmanship. That is NOT calling on the Lord. Nobody gets saved during these performances. Jesus warned us about those.

I have seen Christians, however, take all sorts of practices to extremes. Myself included. Those with a zealous or fervent disposition are often prone to this. I see the value of a multitude of diverse Christian practices, including calling on the name of the Lord. Sometimes "overdoing" a practice in the short term is not such a bad thing. Helps us to find our way. And know the Lord within. Faith needs such practices, but without faith, all practices are just vain. But in all these practices we must seek Him, not some practice, even the so-called best ones. But as long as some practice helps us love God and love our neighbor, it's not a bad thing, eh?

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So if I get what you're saying correctly . . . is it that we are not to call on the Lord's name until the Spirit wells up inside us and does so? Or can we use our will and decide to call on Him?

Calling on the Lord's name is in fact an example of a precursor to being saved in the New Testament. However scripture says that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father draws them. So even before the LORD reveals Himself to an individual, the Holy Spirit is already at work in their lives. In a sense it was the will of the believer to call but God was also involved in drawing them. Even so, “calling” unto salvation is not a repetitious practice. However in the LC's it's not done as a precursor to initial salvation. Calling on the Lord is made into a practice where one, through chanting in unison, empties their mind in order to be filled with the "spirit". It’s approach is methodical, it’s dry (meaning no characteristics of typical communication), and it is imposed upon - none of which are found in scripture.

In Matthew 7:22, there are those who do practices in the Lord's name yet do not know Him. So when you do a practice outside of God's express will through His indwelling or Him intervening prior to salvation, even if it’s done in His name, it’s of the natural man and is what's know as mysticism.

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

You seem to want mechanics. Procedures....

I have clearly stated what I want. You're making it something much more complicated and involved. You are the one citing the practice of calling on the Lord. I am simply asking you to give a practical, real-life example. I don't think that's too much to ask. StoG at least made a try of it.

Quote:

The Bible provides little of these necessary details.

Well that should tell you something, now shouldn't it?

Quote:

I referenced the footnote #1 from Acts 2.21. Do you accept or reject it?

The Recovery Version with footnotes is no longer available online. Could you please post he footnote here when you get a chance?

Quote:

Sometimes "overdoing" a practice in the short term is not such a bad thing.

Well this is only true if the practice is biblical. The practice of "calling on the Lord", AS WAS TAUGHT BY WITNESS LEE AND PRACTICED IN THE LOCAL CHURCH, is not biblical, and nothing you have posted here so far has changed that fact.

But I hoping you're not through.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Calling on the Lord's name is in fact an example of a precursor to being saved in the New Testament. However scripture says that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father draws them. So even before the LORD reveals Himself to an individual, the Holy Spirit is already at work in their lives. In a sense it was the will of the believer to call but God was also involved in drawing them. Even so, “calling” unto salvation is not a repetitious practice. However in the LC's it's not done as a precursor to initial salvation. Calling on the Lord is made into a repeated practice where one, through chanting in unison, empties their mind in order to be filled with the "spirit". It’s approach is methodical, it’s dry (meaning no characteristics of typical communication), and it is imposed upon - none of which are found in scripture.

In Matthew 7:22, there are those who do practices in the Lord's name yet do not know Him. So when you do a practice outside of God's express will through His indwelling or Him intervening prior to salvation, even if it’s done in His name, it’s of the natural man and is what's know as mysticism.

So a mystic is someone who tries to do something quasi-Christian thing before receiving the Spirit/salvation? Just trying to understand where yer coming from. And is a Christian mystic the same thing (i.e. unsaved)?

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

Is this what "calling on the Lord" means? Proclaiming who He is? As opposed to just saying His name repeatedly?

Or could it mean "call upon" as in "to invoke"?

In the NT calling unto salvation is to invoke. It's just as in any situation where one is in dire need of help. It's a situation that requires acknowledging you cannot help yourself and so you are persuaded to call for outside help. It's something that takes the laying down of pride and also the belief that you can be helped. So from a humble heart and a trusting conviction, calling on the LORD leads to salvation. But in the LC's they make it into a practice and call with a prideful and arrogant heart thinking they are more spiritual then all those outside of their movement. This kind of calling is dead works and the LORD does not hear them.

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So a mystic is someone who tries to do something quasi-Christian thing before receiving the Spirit/salvation? Just trying to understand where yer coming from. And is a Christian mystic the same thing (i.e. unsaved)?

A mystic is someone that practices spirituality apart from the intervention of God. They do so through deceiving spirits. The term "Christian mystic" is an oxymoron. Christians can fall into mysticism and if not corrected can eventually lead to apostasy.

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

A mystic is someone that practices spirituality apart from the intervention of God. They do so through deceiving spirits. The term "Christian mystic" is an oxymoron. Christians can fall into mysticism and if not corrected can eventually lead to apostasy.

Thanks for that clarification. To hearken back to what I said a few posts ago, is the LC's exhortation to "exercise your spirit" fall into the mystic camp?

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for that clarification. To hearken back to what I said a few posts ago, is the LC's exhortation to "exercise your spirit" fall into the mystic camp?

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this term. What do the LC's teach about "exercising your spirit"? Do you mean their practice of calling?

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this term. What do the LC's teach about "exercising your spirit"? Do you mean their practice of calling?

I'm surprised you haven't heard that term, but maybe you weren't around the LC that long - I seem to remember you stating that at one point. Well this might prove to be a whole bunch of fodder for the idea that the LCs practice a form of mysticism!

I'll let someone else supply the scriptures that are cited by WL for this (or perhaps I can do that later), but the basic is this: Saved ones have a spirit that is joined to Him, and their spirits are subject to them like any other part of their being. So the believer can choose to "exercise their spirit" by calling on the Lord, singing spiritual songs, pray-reading, etc. I'll leave it at that for now.

Trapped · 04-25-2020, 05:43 PM

I'll be curious to see if anyone can drum up any verses that support "exercising" your spirit.

The biggest issue I have with this teaching is that it is often used in contrast to "getting out of your mind", which is an abusive teaching. Scripture doesn't contrast the two (out of mind, into spirit) like the LC does. It's not an either/or like the LC teaches it.

As a church kid I never, and I mean EVER, knew if or when I was "exercising my spirit". No one ever explained what it meant or how to do it aside from "push your spirit out!" (which just translated to being louder) and pumping your arm. One time I was being pressed so hard to "touch my spirit", I and another young person fell apart laughing it was so ridiculous. The serving one then said "See!! NOW you're touching your spirit!"

How could laughing at how crazy it was to be told to do something without being told HOW to do it, actually BE that very thing? Needless to say I was left confused for years.

ExLCMillennial · 04-25-2020, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with this term. What do the LC's teach about "exercising your spirit"? Do you mean their practice of calling?

You might want to read this small booklet that is available online at ministrybooks.org

The Key to Experiencing Christ--the Human Spirit

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I'm surprised you haven't heard that term, but maybe you weren't around the LC that long - I seem to remember you stating that at one point. Well this might prove to be a whole bunch of fodder for the idea that the LCs practice a form of mysticism!

I'll let someone else supply the scriptures that are cited by WL for this (or perhaps I can do that later), but the basic is this: Saved ones have a spirit that is joined to Him, and their spirits are subject to them like any other part of their being. So the believer can choose to "exercise their spirit" by calling on the Lord, singing spiritual songs, pray-reading, etc. I'll leave it at that for now.

Ok, I understand. So the question would be; in calling, singing, and pray-reading, is there an intended spiritual result which was lacking prior to preforming the practice? If so, then yes it's mysticism. If you pray, sing, or read scripture by the clear provocation and leading of the Holy Spirit indwelling you, then it is not mysticism. It's the subtle difference between a real relationship and a relationship experience.

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

As a church kid I never, and I mean EVER, knew if or when I was "exercising my spirit". No one ever explained what it meant or how to do it aside from "push your spirit out!" (which just translated to being louder) and pumping your arm. One time I was being pressed so hard to "touch my spirit", I and another young person fell apart laughing it was so ridiculous. The serving one then said "See!! NOW you're touching your spirit!"

How could laughing at how crazy it was to be told to do something without being told HOW to do it, actually BE that very thing? Needless to say I was left confused for years.

LOL!

Sorry, Trapped, I don't mean to laugh at your expense but perhaps they though it was "holy" laughter. You find that going on a lot in charismatic movements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_laughter

ExLCMillennial · 04-25-2020, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

I'll be curious to see if anyone can drum up any verses that support "exercising" your spirit.

The verse that comes to mind is Romans 8:6 as it is used often in the LC.

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExLCMillennial

You might want to read this small booklet that is available online at ministrybooks.org

The Key to Experiencing Christ--the Human Spirit

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExLCMillennial

The verse that comes to mind is Romans 8:6 as it is used often in the LC.

Thanks. I think I get the gist of it. If that's the only verse in support of the practice, then it's a weak one.

In Romans 8, it doesn't prescribe a practice. Paul is merely making the point that those who are of Christ are already spiritually minded and those not of Christ are carnally minded. Notice that the mind is not done away with in either circumstance. If anything, it teaches that the indwelling spirit exercises the mind of the believer.

Trapped · 04-25-2020, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

LOL!

Sorry, Trapped, I don't mean to laugh at your expense but perhaps they though it was "holy" laughter. You find that going on a lot in charismatic movements.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_laughter

No worries, laugh away. It was yet another confusing thing when it happened, but as an adult I have more understanding of why my little mind that could never sort it all out was bewildered so much!

I think the serving one's point was that the laughter showed we were "released". Except it didn't. It just showed we didn't get it at all, and neither did the serving ones.

ExLCMillennial · 04-25-2020, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Thanks. I think I get the gist of it. If that's the only verse in support of the practice, then it's a weak one.

In Romans 8, it doesn't prescribe a practice. Paul is merely making the point that those who are of Christ are already spiritually minded and those not of Christ are carnally minded. Notice that the mind is not done away with in either circumstance. If anything, it teaches that the indwelling spirit exercises the mind of the believer.

Yes! Romans 8:6 is not an exhortation for believer to switch sides. It speaks between two kinds of people — believers and unbelievers. Setting the mind on the flesh is to continually think about and desire the things that lost people desire. Setting the mind on the Spirit is to think about the reality of God's love for us in Christ and to constantly joyful righteousness. It is conscious effort to pursue holiness and delight in God.

I found another similar link to setting the mind on the spirit.

Setting Our Mind on the Spirit by Ed Marks

Trapped · 04-25-2020, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ExLCMillennial

The verse that comes to mind is Romans 8:6 as it is used often in the LC.

Interesting. Depending on the translation, you could argue that the verse is much more about exercising the mind than exercising the spirit.

The mind set on the flesh is death, and the mind set on the spirit is life and peace. To be "carnally minded" or "spiritually minded".

It's more like we are supposed to use our mind and set it on the right things. Not "exercise our spirit".

I agree with Jo S....if that's the main verse, it's a weak one to create a whole teaching that doesn't even sound like the verse itself.

EDIT: yes, those who are of Christ are already spiritually minded.

I also read most of The Key to Experiencing Christ-The Human Spirit.

He delineates between the body, soul, and spirit, and calls the spirit the right organ, and all other organs the wrong organ.

The problem is, we definitely DO use our soul and our body to contact and worship God.

Body: We close our EYES, we bow our HEAD, we use our MOUTH, we confess with our LIPS.

Soul: We use our MIND to pray and sing and confess, every single time. As human beings we can never NOT use our mind. The Bible even says to love the Lord our God with our whole soul! It also says somewhere that we sing with the spirit but also sing with our mind. We also can choose (use our WILL) to worship or not worship.

I think the book is an example of Lee sounding Biblical but not being Biblical. Particularly because he once again used it as a chance to make sure to let us know that "most Christians have missed the mark".....I've learned that's a good red flag to inspect Lee's teachings really closely, because it usually means he created something out of nothing that's not really there in order to put down other believers.

Also, I think someone mentioned the verse in John 4 about "true believers worshipping in spirit and truthfulness". This is in contrast to worshipping "on the right physical ground" earlier in the chapter. The point is that they don't need to go to a physical place (on this mountain, in Jerusalem) anymore.

ExLCMillennial · 04-25-2020, 07:07 PM

That's the problem for some people instead of immersing themselves in the Text. If they are spending more time in commentaries like the Life-study messages than in the Word, they are only depending of man's work.

Now going back to the text. It's clear that when you look at the Greek text. There is no verb in that verse.

Trapped · 04-25-2020, 07:13 PM

The mind OF the flesh, the mind OF the spirit, right?

ExLCMillennial · 04-25-2020, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Romans 8: 5-9

5 For those who live according to the flesh think about the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit, about the things of the Spirit. 6 For the mind-set of the flesh is death, but the mind-set of the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind-set of the flesh is hostile to God because it does not submit itself to God’s law, for it is unable to do so. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 You, however, are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, since the Spirit of God lives in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.

Paul here contrasts the mindsets of both the unregenerate (those who are in the flesh) and the regenerate (those who are in the Spirit).

The unregenerate who are only of the flesh and do not have the Spirit of Christ, is unable to set their minds on Spiritual things. They are dead to the things of God's Holy Spirit and so they are only concerned about the things of the flesh. They are preoccupied with material and physical things, and they do not concern themselves with the things of the Holy Spirit. In fact, they are not only neutral about God, but they are even hostile toward Him....

On the other hand the regenerate, because they are indwelt by the Holy Spirit of Christ, they are now made alive spiritually and their mindsets are also transformed. When once they only concern themselves with the material (the things of the flesh). But now they are concerned about the things of God. Thus he is now able to please God.

Sons to Glory! · 04-25-2020, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

The mind OF the flesh, the mind OF the spirit, right?

Yes, I like that translation better. "Of the flesh" and "of the spirit" indicates that there is already a mind OF these two. (however, the Recovery Version is not the only one that uses the word "set")

Two other verses are used: "Exercise yourselves rather unto godliness" and "Fan into flames the gift of God which is within you." 1 Tim 4:7 & 2 Tim 1:6

Ohio · 04-25-2020, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I have clearly stated what I want. You're making it something much more complicated and involved. You are the one citing the practice of calling on the Lord. I am simply asking you to give a practical, real-life example. I don't think that's too much to ask.
-

I'm sure you want examples from the Bible.

When Job was a laughing-stock to his neighbors, then he called on God, who answered him. (12.4)
When Abram came to Canaan, after the Lord appeared to him, he built an altar and called on the Lord (Gen 12.8)
Moses said God is so near to Israel whenever they called on Him (Deut 4.7)
At his death, in the Philistines temple, Samson called unto the Lord and said "O Lord Jehovah, remember me I pray to you." (Judges 16.28)
In numerous Psalms, David called on the Lord in his distress (18.3)
Isaiah said, "Give thanks unto the Lord, call upon His name, declare His doings among the peoples, make mention that His name is exalted." (12.4)
Joel says that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord will be delivered. (2.32)

In these 7 examples, only with Samson do we read what is actually said when he called on the Lord. Yet, we have no idea whether he spoke to God in his heart, perhaps a soft whispering prayer, or maybe he screamed at the top of his lungs. We have no way to know. The temple came crashing down, so who even recorded this? UntoHim seems obsessed with the details. But isn't it more important that God heard Samson's calling and prayer? Do we really think that God demanded specific instructions so that slobs like me can repeat verbatim?

And that's my point. All of the men of God called on the name of the Lord. The Bible sometimes records the events surrounding this, but sometimes not. They called, God answered, and the Bible records it. That's what we know. They did it and then told us to do it too. Yet there is nearly no instructions how to do this perfectly. What are the exact words? What is the exact volume? Call fast or call slow? How often? Where oh where is an actual recording of one man of God calling on the Lord, so we can learn the right way?

If only we had YouTubes for dear brother UntoHim!

Jo S · 04-25-2020, 09:36 PM

Ohio, you're on board with the "Oh Lord Jesus" chant as being unbiblical, correct? If I'm not mistaken, I recall you criticizing this before.

In the more detailed biblical instances of calling on the Lord's name, there is an explicit request contained within the invocation. This is characteristic of normal person to person communication. In the LC's practice, it's simply an ecstatic outburst or expression repeated in unison.

Oh Lord Jesus..what?

I suppose UntoHim is trying to delineate between the differing approaches rather than falsely equating the two.

UntoHim · 04-25-2020, 10:22 PM

So Ohio, since you won't answer my questions about how you practice calling on the Lord (I give up...you wore me down...you win)

Let me ask you this. So I guess you believe that this practice of calling on the Lord (as it is taught and practiced in the Local Church) was "recovered" by Witness Lee and his followers? I'm sure you realize that there is no record of Christians calling out "Oooooohhhhh LLLLooooorrrrrd Jeeeesssuuus for entire history of the church, right? So actually my dear brother Ohio, it is you that is in need of a YouTube that shows Christians "calling on the Lord" in the way that is taught and practiced in the Local Church of Witness Lee. Good luck with that.
-

Ohio · 04-26-2020, 03:06 AM

Sorry that the name of Jesus has become so onerous to you guys. I doubt that the constant mockery pleases Him.

Please do show our audience exactly how Peter would have instructed his hearers in that very first gospel message on Pentecost how to call on the name of the Lord and be saved.

Since I got it all wrong, please help me to be saved.

UntoHim · 04-26-2020, 08:23 AM

Yikes! Now I REALLY want off this island! Sorry Sons to Glory! I guess I'll have to take my chances with the voracious sharks after all.
-

Jo S · 04-26-2020, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sorry that the name of Jesus has become so onerous to you guys. I doubt that the constant mockery pleases Him.

Wouldn't you agree it's important to sort out the difference between sincerity in humility and vanity? I'm willing to bet using the Lord's name in vain doesn't please him either.

Sons to Glory! · 04-26-2020, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Wouldn't you agree it's important to sort out the difference between sincerity in humility and vanity? I'm willing to bet using the Lord's name in vain doesn't please him either.

And I would say that this is the point. Our conjecture is that what the LC practices is vain, that is, the repetitious chanting of the Lord's name, right?

Therefore, also our contention (if I read this discussion right) is a a sincere calling on the Lord from a pure heart will always be honored and answered by Him. ("pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart." 2 Tim 2:22)

Another verse about what's in His name: "and that by believing you may have life in His name." John 20:31

Ohio · 04-26-2020, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Wouldn't you agree it's important to sort out the difference between sincerity in humility and vanity? I'm willing to bet using the Lord's name in vain doesn't please him either.

Since you brought it up, if you have taken the Lord's name in vain, then simply repent. The Lord is rich in mercy, and gracious to forgive.

I have said repeatedly that calling on the Lord should never be a performance. One must call on the Lord out of a pure heart as Paul cautions. Jesus Himself warns us about vain babbling, praying like the Gentiles do.

Jo S · 04-26-2020, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Since you brought it up, if you have taken the Lord's name in vain, then simply repent. The Lord is rich in mercy, and gracious to forgive.

I have said repeatedly that calling on the Lord should never be a performance. One must call on the Lord out of a pure heart as Paul cautions. Jesus Himself warns us about vain babbling, praying like the Gentiles do.

All of what you said is right, but it's important to note that vanity doesn't only consist of emotionless recitations, as you'll agree we find in Catholicism, it also includes using His name for the purpose of selfish psychological and spiritual gain, even if done passionately. In the Local Churches, calling is no longer a principled call for help, but becomes a tool for pleasure seeking. Chances are if you call on the Lord and it doesn't resemble a verbal expression typical in normal language and communication, it's for vanity's sake.

Jo S · 04-26-2020, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And I would say that this is the point. Our conjecture is that what the LC practices is vain, that is, the repetitious chanting of the Lord's name, right?

Therefore, also our contention (if I read this discussion right) is a a sincere calling on the Lord from a pure heart will always be honored and answered by Him. ("pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart." 2 Tim 2:22)

Another verse about what's in His name: "and that by believing you may have life in His name." John 20:31

Sincerity in itself is fairly ambiguous. You can be sincere in doing evil. The question is; are you in a state of sincere humility when you are calling on the LORD? God is a person. Christians are not in an equal relationship with Him, as we are with a spouse, but we are in a dependent relationship with Him.

I don't mean to get graphic, but it's to make a clear point. In what relationship scenario can you find a person calling out another's name in ecstatic outbursts of pleasure?... Do you really think God wants that kind of relationship with His children?

I’ve used this example before but there are non-Christian Hindi groups that also use Jesus’s name in their practices of “calling”. They too call out to Jesus yet they do so with the end being a heightened emotional state. This is exactly what calling in the LC’s accomplishes. You can achieve that same thing with simply repeating “Om”. It’s a form of transcendental meditation guised in biblical Christianity.

Sons to Glory! · 04-26-2020, 12:31 PM

It seems we are generally in agreement about this part of the discussion - calling on the Lord's name. That is, there is a vain way and a pure way. Can we move on now and go back to the main topic?

If so, I want to ask UntoHim something: Can you please go back to my long reply to your question a couple days ago, and address it specifically?

(I've copied the key part of my reply below for convenience - from post #21)

So you have listed six things in particular that you believe substantiate the claim that WL and the LC preaches another gospel and another Jesus. Let's look at each of these six items briefly.

"Another Gospel"
1. Calling on the Lord to be saved - this seems simple. I am saved every day by calling on His name. "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Joel, Acts & Romans)
2. Man becoming God in life and nature - this seems a stretch by WL. It is a big mystery exactly what we shall be, but no where in scripture (that I know of) says it in those words.
3. Satan indwells our flesh - this could also be a stretch by WL. I think I know Lee's teaching on this ("Sin personified"). However, Jesus did say, "You are of your father, the devil." Was He just speaking metaphorically?

"Another Jesus"
4. Jesus became the Holy Spirit - I remember participating in a thread about this . . . too much to state here probably. I think it's another mystery and not so easy to nail down.
5. Jesus is called the Father - Addressed this a few messages ago. He's not?
6. Jesus was part of the processed triune God - the words seem unorthodox, to be sure. I could trot out all the usual verses WL used for this, but most everyone knows them. However, they shouldn't be discounted either, just because Lee used them!

Frankly, the only one I see much issue with is #2. Regarding number 1 I think it is incorrect to say this isn't scripture - am I missing something? Concerning number 3, well, it's sorta "so what!?" to me. Does that really rise to the level of "another gospel"?

And all the points regarding "Another Jesus" (#4-6), we can go around and around (and have) on each of these. Again, I sort of glaze over when getting into these endless discussions about the exact nature of the triune God. (and they are endless - at least for 20 centuries now) God is a mystery, and if we could figure it all out, He wouldn't be God, right?!

Bottom-line - back to the question: Do these things constitute reasons for not meeting with the LC, if they were the only group around? My contention is "no," these six things do NOT constitute grounds for the accusation of another gospel or another Jesus. Are they unorthodox or unorthodox sounding? Sure. So what! (orthodox to me just means they are in the full approval of organized Christianity) Are these specific reasons for not meeting with them if they were the only game around? No, not according to the understanding of the Bible I read.

So I hope that was a response that is in line with the wishes you stated bro. Please let me know where you think I am off the mark (or maybe you think it easier to say where I was ON the mark. L

L).

Trapped · 04-26-2020, 01:41 PM

The VOTA and MOTA doctrine alone qualifies for another gospel, and possibly another Jesus.

The MOTA doctrine says that in any given age, God's people have to follow the MOTA (Witness Lee, naturally) or else their service is not acceptable to God.

Granted, it doesn't say they are not saved. But it places an extra layer on top of believers to be accepted by God, in any way, over and above the blood of Jesus Christ.

It's says the death of the Son of God is not enough for you to be fully accepted by God.

To me, that's another gospel, and it's also another Jesus, because it creates a Jesus who's death is insufficient for us, and that's certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

Ohio · 04-26-2020, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

All of what you said is right, but it's important to note that vanity doesn't only consist of emotionless recitations, as you'll agree we find in Catholicism, it also includes using His name for the purpose of selfish psychological and spiritual gain, even if done passionately. In the Local Churches, calling is no longer a principled call for help, but becomes a tool for pleasure seeking. Chances are if you call on the Lord and it doesn't resemble a verbal expression typical in normal language and communication, it's for vanity's sake.

I'm not buying this. Not one bit. Vanity is defined by mouthing words disconnected from the heart. Calling on the name of the Lord, whether repetitiously in song, in prayer, for help, for love, or for comfort is NOT what I would ever consider "selfish psychological and spiritual gain." That makes no sense. Compare that to David, the Psalmists, or the prophets.

UntoHim · 04-26-2020, 03:02 PM

Ok Son to Glory! I was just about ready to jump into the abyss with the Great Whites...you saved me!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

"Another Gospel"
1. Calling on the Lord to be saved
This seems simple. I am saved every day by calling on His name. "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Joel, Acts & Romans)

You didn't quote me correctly. Here's what I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Witness Lee taught that one could simply "Call on the Lord" and be saved. This is another gospel.

I stand by this 100%. Are you saying someone is saved by simply calling out "Oh Lord Jesus"? Please tell me you don't believe that. Calling on the Lord saves you everyday? Ok, that's great, but that's not what we're talking about.

Quote:

2. Man becoming God in life and nature - this seems a stretch by WL. It is a big mystery exactly what we shall be, but no where in scripture (that I know of) says it in those words.

I hate to break the bad news to you brother, but what you call a stretch, most educated, respected Christian theologians call a heresy. Even if you are right that it is a big mystery exactly what we shall be, we know for sure that we are not becoming God in life and nature. That's why there is not such a teaching in the Bible.

Quote:

3. Satan indwells our flesh - this could also be a stretch by WL. I think I know Lee's teaching on this ("Sin personified"). However, Jesus did say, "You are of your father, the devil." Was He just speaking metaphorically?

Right. And he also told Peter "Get behind me Satan!" Was Peter actually Satan? Or was he speaking metaphorically? This kind of teaching is the result of someone who is making things up as he goes along. No orthodox, reputable Christian teacher has ever taught such a thing. And that should tell you something.

Quote:

"Another Jesus"
4. Jesus became the Holy Spirit - I remember participating in a thread about this . . . too much to state here probably. I think it's another mystery and not so easy to nail down.

There's nothing mysterious about what I actually said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Witness Lee taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. This is another Jesus.

What Witness Lee taught was some form of Modalism. Of course he taught this along side the orthodox understanding, which makes his teachings all the more harmful and dangerous. StG, do you know who else uses the same verses to justify their teachings that Jesus Christ became the Holy Spirit? Ever heard of the "Oneness Pentecostals"? There are others that teach this heresy as well. I'll have to get back to you for the others.

Quote:

5. Jesus is called the Father - Addressed this a few messages ago. He's not?

So Isaiah 9:6 is saying that God the Son, Jesus Christ, is not only called the Father, HE IS God the Father. Right? Is that what you believe StG?

The Son is called the Father; so the Son must be the Father. We must realize this fact. This very Son who has been given to us is the very Father.
The All-Inclusive Spirit of Christ(emphasis mine)

This is what the Athanasian Creed calls "Confounding the Persons". This is also what most orthodox theologians and apologists call heresy. The Son is not the Father. The Father is not the Son. No widely accepted, orthodox teacher or theologian has ever taught such a thing. Why is that StG?

Quote:

6. Jesus was part of the processed triune God - the words seem unorthodox, to be sure. I could trot out all the usual verses WL used for this, but most everyone knows them. However, they shouldn't be discounted either, just because Lee used them!

Well maybe these words seem unorthodox because they are unorthodox. Of course when one doesn't have any standard of orthodoxy then maybe it really doesn't matter? It's all a big mystery...right? The fact that nobody else has ever taught that God is processed should tell you something.

My brother, nobody that I know of is trying to figure out "the exact nature of the triune God". Certainly not me. But God has not been silent regarding his nature and his character. He has given us his Word. He has also given us many godly men and women who have studied and investigated and prayed and fellowshipped over the nature of the triune God for centuries. The results of all this studying, investigating, praying and fellowshipping are now at our fingertips. We can read many, if not most, of their works online. We have just about every translation of the Bible in just about every language. Most every city of any size (at least here in America) has Christians who meet to worship the Lord and preach and teach the genuine Gospel. They worship the one true God in Spirit and in truth. They break bread in remembrance of the Lord's death. They baptize new believers in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Quote:

Bottom-line - back to the question: Do these things constitute reasons for not meeting with the LC, if they were the only group around?

So that's the bottom line? I have to meet with the ones who are the least unorthodox. The least heretical? The least cultic? What if I stayed on the island and started my own fellowship...and then declare that my church is the only legitimate church on the island, and declare myself the One Minister with the One Ministry for the island? Sharks anyone?
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-26-2020, 03:27 PM

Thanks for the thoughtful reply UntoHim! Hopefully this will get us back on track with the main idea of this thread.

I will consider these things you presented. While reading, I kept thinking of the recent impeachment proceedings. As I recall, the final thought in all that was, "Do these things rise to the level of an impeachable offence?" (Half the country seemed to think they did, while the other half didn't.) In this case, it would be: "Do these items (the 6 you listed) rise to the level of another gospel and another Jesus?"

Again, I have to give that some additional thought . . . (others feel free to jump in)

Jo S · 04-26-2020, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm not buying this. Not one bit. Vanity is defined by mouthing words disconnected from the heart. Calling on the name of the Lord, whether repetitiously in song, in prayer, for help, for love, or for comfort is NOT what I would ever consider "selfish psychological and spiritual gain." That makes no sense. Compare that to David, the Psalmists, or the prophets.

Your definition for vanity doesn't line up with its actually meaning. Doing a practice in vain simply means that its end is futile or unprofitable. In context of the Christian faith, it's works that do not profit a relationship with God.

Vanity isn't based on the lack of the heart. The heart is wicked and deceitful above all things. You can do or say anything passionately from the heart, but if it's ego-centered and self-seeking, God will not respond. Another spirit may however.

"The way to be holy is to call on the name of the Lord Jesus. By calling on His name all the sinful, evil, and unclean things will be breathed out, and all the positive things—the riches of the Lord—will be breathed into you". -Witness Lee

With Witness Lee, calling is all about receiving positive benefits. That was the main focus of the practice. He even went so far as claiming calling on the Lord, which he also equates to a breathing exercise, can make you more holy. The superficiality in his approach is quite evident.

You may ask; what's wrong with wanting positive things? Well, Christians are not made holy through breathing exercises, God accomplishes that through sanctification and that's done by discipline and carrying our crosses daily. However, the hedonistically minded will want all the benefits without the pain. That's why mysticism is so appealing to many.

John Piper, who coined the term "Christian hedonism", is quoted as saying; "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." That's not scripture. God was glorified on the cross.

I don't know what your "calling" looks like, Ohio, but if it's in line with Lee's philosophy then I'd strongly reconsider your practice.

Sons to Glory! · 04-27-2020, 01:34 PM

I've given this some extra thought regarding whether the 6 things you (UntoHim) listed and whether they rise to the level of another gospel and another Jesus." Here's my thinking - only #2 bears any real potential issue for me. The rest are not something gross that I would shun another believer for! They may seem unorthodox, but again - so what!? Heresy? I doubt that these things - again with the possible exclusion of #2 - are an outright heresy.

The #1 item, "Call on the Lord and be saved," is that so far off the mark? First of all, as the scripture has been pointed out, it is in the Bible. Hey, I've heard all kinds of "formula" people have come up with that they claim is the scriptural way to be saved. One group was all about that a person has to intently be convicted of their sins and repent, demonstrating many tears. Another group says baptism has to happen to be saved. Yet another says one has to walk backwards while reciting a catechism (OK, made that one up). But from what I see, the Bible keeps it simple. Do I think a person should also believe in Christ when they call on Him? Good question - where does the believing even come from!?!? And as I related, I had my own realization about the futility of mindlessly repeated "Ohhhh Loorrdd Jeezus" over and over, so I get that. But is it off the mark to say, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved?" No - it's scripture, and one could certainly go much farther off the mark than this!

The #2 item, "Becoming God in life & nature" does seem too much to me, and I wouldn't say it. There is much scripture that can be cited, regarding us receiving His life and partaking of His nature. We are His sons by the new birth, and this is way more than even the Roman form of adoption. We are the body of Christ, who is part of the Godhead. It does not yet appear what we shall be and we shall be like Him. (1 John 3:2)

So much more can be cited about this mystery (eye has not seen nor ear heard) of what He has made us and is bringing us into! I think most in Christianity don't go far enough regarding what the Bible says of our new identity. However, WL probably does cross the whole man becoming divinity line. But I can see that this is a line easy to cross, when trying to explore and show what God has in store for them that love Him. I definitely glaze over a little when someone starts talking about crossing a "heretical" line with regards to the nature of the triune God, because it's just too big of a mystery. Its like a bunch of 1st grade children talking about quantum physics or nuclear fission - it really makes little difference. So too, IMHO, is the conversation about what God has in store for His children!

WL may have gone too far with that #2 item, but to me it's certainly not nearly in the realm of heresies that other groups like Mormons or JWs promote, which undermine the very deity of Christ. Other things with the LC, such as some of their practices, are more damaging I think. But in any case, I'm hard-pressed to think that any of it rises to the level of another gospel or another Jesus.

Curious · 04-30-2020, 03:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

The VOTA and MOTA doctrine alone qualifies for another gospel, and possibly another Jesus.

The MOTA doctrine says that in any given age, God's people have to follow the MOTA (Witness Lee, naturally) or else their service is not acceptable to God.

Granted, it doesn't say they are not saved. But it places an extra layer on top of believers to be accepted by God, in any way, over and above the blood of Jesus Christ.

It's says the death of the Son of God is not enough for you to be fully accepted by God.

To me, that's another gospel, and it's also another Jesus, because it creates a Jesus who's death is insufficient for us, and that's certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

I have had this thought for a while:

If a person wants to identify for themselves weather the claims of dishonesty and hidden agenda are true as they experience the efforts of some LC members to build relationship and foster a connection with them, then I suggest the following test:

Ask the following simple question, sweetly and politely:

‘Is the gospel you are presenting here, the SAME gospel as ….the rest of Christianity/ the one I know, or is it a different gospel’?

-If they answer….’it’s the same’, then ask: ‘ well then, why do you stay so sperate from the rest of the church?’

-If they answer …..’it’s a different gospel’ then ask: ‘why did you not make that clear, so you are trying to lead me out of the religion I belong to and into something else, without me knowing?

Either way they are exposed, and the enquirer can discover for themselves that they are up to something that does not add up. and it puts the question of weather it is a different gospel back onto the LC themselves!!

Further to that, I think there is:

A right way to pray-read, and a wrong way.
A right way to ‘call on the name of the Lord’, and a wrong way.
A right way to eat the bread of life and drink of the living waters, and a wrong way.
A right way to prophecy and a wrong way.

The LC probably does both:

When repeatedly reading a scripture is done to help familiarise one and meditate on it, that’s good. When a person believes that the words themselves have a supernatural ability to impart righteousness to the person through repetition, that can be wrong.

If a person calls on the Lord’s person and help in time of need through calling His name, that’s great. If they feel that the repeated habit of ‘calling’ as a detached spiritual exercise like an incantation to usher in His presence is what they should do, then I don’t think that will help them.

It is natural to receive God’s supply of His Spirit into our beings, bringing peace and strength to our hearts, as we pray, worship, and seek him, weather we focus on it as a doctrine or not. It happens because He responds to us this way, and it is His spirit that is working. If we make a doctrine of believing this only happens because we make a big song and dance about eating and drinking, and how exclusive this is, then that is wrong.

When our ‘prophecy’ is from out heart and God's Spirit in us, it is genuine, when it is controlled or constituted by the words of WL, then it is wrong.

I think that is where some of these disagreements come from. All these elements can be good and positive and paly a role. But they can also be practised in a way that is wrong and deceived. I think the deeper you go into the LC the more the wrong versions of these practises becomes the norm.
when you are a 'seeker', you can be free to be lead by your own heart and enjoy yourself. when you are being 'reeled in', the clamps come down, and the other ways of practicing these things gets imposed.

that was my experience anyway.

UntoHim · 04-30-2020, 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

"Call on the Lord and be saved," is that so far off the mark? First of all, as the scripture has been pointed out, it is in the Bible.

"It is in the Bible". WHAT is in the Bible? This is exactly what I have been trying to get you and Ohio to plainly and clearly describe for us. I have plainly and clearly stated that the Local Church practice of "Ooooohh Lllooooorrrd Jeessssuuussss" is not biblical. Both you brothers have admitted this (kind of) but you say that you have been taught and have practiced a way that is biblical. Great! I happy for you, I really am!

Brothers, please bear with me in my folly but for a minute or two. "Work out your own salvation" is in the Bible. May I ask you, does this earth shaking declaration stand alone? After all, at face value, it deals with salvation. What could be more crucial? What could be more basic? What could be more integral? Yet, standing alone, it seems to lack any practical way to know it's meaning without being placed in a wider context. It seems to be begging for an interpretation. And most importantly, since it seems to stand in direct contradiction to the clear NT teaching of salvation by faith alone, it must have a deeper meaning, which requires placing it in a wider context.

And so it it with this term "Calling on the Lord". Simply uttering "Oh Lord Jesus" (the sole interpretation of Witness Lee/Local Church) seems to stand in direct contradiction to any number of Old and New Testament teachings. The ones that apply the most would be Matthew 7:21,22 "Not everyone who says to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, "Lord, Lord...." Also Matthew 15:8,9 “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men."

Brothers, I am not, repeat: NOT making the claim that what you brothers practice is "in vain". And far be it from me to even faintly imply that your hearts are far from the Lord (I happened to know that you both are seeking to love and honor the Lord) Yet I still feel to respectfully challenge you to provide some strong biblical proof that your version/interpretation/practice of "Calling on the Lord" is indeed biblical, and for bonus points, you can point us to other examples in church history where Christians have practiced the Local Church way of calling on the Lord.
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-30-2020, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

"It is in the Bible". WHAT is in the Bible? This is exactly what I have been trying to get you and Ohio to plainly and clearly describe for us. I have plainly and clearly stated that the Local Church practice of "Ooooohh Lllooooorrrd Jeessssuuussss" is not biblical.
-

"Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:3 There, it's in the Bible - period. (don't you love when someone says "period" as if it's really the final word?) No one is saying the "Ooooohh Lllooooorrrd Jeessssuuussss" chant the LC practices is Biblical. And no one is saying that belief should not enter into this - but did you catch the question in my last post - "Where does the believing even come from?"?

But my point is that man has made about everything in the Bible into a rote, repetitious thing - it's what we do . . . make dead religious methods to replace a fresh, living pursuit of Him. So the LC grabbing onto this and doing what it does, seems little different to me than many other dead, religious practices other groups might form. Therefore it does not rise to the level of another gospel, at least in my mind. (if you want to be really narrow, we could probably filter out most all Christian denominations and other Christian groups, by applying a severely strict standard . . .)

Ohio · 04-30-2020, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

"It is in the Bible". WHAT is in the Bible? This is exactly what I have been trying to get you and Ohio to plainly and clearly describe for us. I have plainly and clearly stated that the Local Church practice of "Ooooohh Lllooooorrrd Jeessssuuussss" is not biblical. Both you brothers have admitted this (kind of) but you say that you have been taught and have practiced a way that is biblical. Great! I happy for you, I really am!

-

Calling on the name of the Lord Issssssssssss in the Bible. Look it up. Get a concordance, or ask Google. Read my last posts, ask Siri, or ask your pastor.

What you don't like is Hoooooowwwwwww it was done 45 years ago in some SoCal meeting. I have talked about that. I don't like it either. Neither does SonsToGlory. When did we ever promote that?

Your argument is exactly the same as two ex-Catholics talking about prayer. The first one constantly berates prayer because there is no Rosary in the Bible, clamoring for the second one to show him the Roooooosssssaaaaarrrrryyyyyyy!!!!! "Show me the Roooooosssssaaaaarrrrryyyyyyy!!!!! the first one keeps repeating. The practice of prayer is NOT biblical! Show me the rosary in the Bible"The other ex-Catholic keeps saying that the rosary is not real prayer. That real prayer is all over the Bible. That there are many verses on prayer. That the Bible says don't make endless repetition like the Catholics. That real prayer pleases God. But the first Catholic can't hear the second because 45 years ago that's all he heard.

UntoHim · 04-30-2020, 10:19 AM

OK brother Ohio. Calm down. Take a deep breath and tell us how your calling on the Lord is different than 45 years ago in some SoCal meeting. That's all I'm asking.

Same for you brother StG. We all know the actual words "C A L L O N T H E L O R D" are there in the Bible. So are the words "BE YE PERFECT". Is there anything else to say besides "it's in the Bible"?
-

Sons to Glory! · 04-30-2020, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

OK brother Ohio. Calm down. Take a deep breath and tell us how your calling on the Lord is different than 45 years ago in some SoCal meeting. That's all I'm asking.

Same for you brother StG. We all know the actual words "C A L L O N T H E L O R D" are there in the Bible. So are the words "BE YE PERFECT". Is there anything else to say besides "it's in the Bible"?
-

Think I did this in a previous post - do you want me to repeat myself over & over repetitiously?

Okay, that's how we learn (i.e., repetition) . . . for me it's often more about breathing the name of Jesus whenever I realize I need Him. For instance, "Lord Jesus, I need you" or "Lord Jesus, I give this to you" or "Lord Jesus you are the very best husband and you live in me - please live through me right now" or "Lord Jesus, be my response to UntoHim" and so forth. But sometimes it seems I just have the strength to only breath His name, "Lord Jesus!" (as in "Lord help me in my weakness")

There! Is that the "perfect" answer (since you admonished us to "be perfect")?

Jo S · 04-30-2020, 11:14 AM

The context of calling in the New Testament is for the purpose of initial salvation. However, the LC's teach that you need to make an endless practice of calling in order to become more holy. So calling becomes a means, not to initial salvation, but a means to sanctification. This is unequivocally works based salvation. It is in fact a different gospel as others have already alluded to.

Repetition doesn't only point to a practice where phrases are repeated 5x in unison as in ” Oh, Lord Jesus”; it can also mean to unnecessarily repeat a practice daily, weekly, or even monthly. It does not matter whether it is done in a group or alone or what it looks like outwardly. If you feel you have to call more than once in sincere humility and faith in order to be saved, then you are practicing in vain.

If David continually called on the LORD it was because he did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit as believers do today. Scripture says that those born of God already have the promise of salvation by being born again through the spirit of God. And so through this indwelling, God is with us indefinitely. He will not leave us nor forsake us to the point where we ever need to call on Him as we did when we were still sinners.

The word “call” suggests distance between the caller and the one being called. You don’t need to call on someone that is next to you. As unsaved people, we had to call on the Lord but if you claim to be a Christian, you no longer need to call, you can now pray and communicate in normal conversation with the LORD as Jesus did.

I believe the issue here may be that some are equating prayer to calling. Even so, prayer can be done in vain as well.

Jo S · 04-30-2020, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Okay, that's how we learn (i.e., repetition) . . . for me it's often more about breathing the name of Jesus whenever I realize I need Him. For instance, "Lord Jesus, I need you" or "Lord Jesus, I give this to you" or "Lord Jesus you are the very best husband and you live in me - please live through me right now" or "Lord Jesus, be my response to UntoHim" and so forth. But sometimes it seems I just have the strength to only breath His name, "Lord Jesus!" (as in "Lord help me in my weakness")

StG, do the LC's teach that Jesus is a believer's husband? Being a male yourself, you do not find that idea a bit strange?

Sons to Glory! · 04-30-2020, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

The context of calling in the New Testament is for the purpose of initial salvation. However, the LC's teach that you need to make an endless practice of calling in order to become more holy. So calling becomes a means, not to initial salvation, but a means to sanctification. This is unequivocally works based salvation. It is in fact a different gospel as others have already alluded to.

Here's a verse to consider in 2 Timothy 2:22, "Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart." Also Act's 9:21 ""Is this not the one (Saul) having ravaged those in Jerusalem calling on this name? And he had come here for this, that he might bring them, having been bound, to the chief priests.""

Sons to Glory! · 04-30-2020, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

StG, do the LC's teach that Jesus is a believer's husband? Being a male yourself, you do not find that idea a bit strange?

Does Christ live in you bro, and does He live through you?

Jo S · 04-30-2020, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Here's a verse to consider in 2 Timothy 2:22, "Now flee from youthful lusts and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, with those who call on the Lord from a pure heart." Also Act's 9:21 ""Is this not the one (Saul) having ravaged those in Jerusalem calling on this name? And he had come here for this, that he might bring them, having been bound, to the chief priests.""

This is where we get into Greek grammar and understanding tenses. The term "call" (or Greek epikaleo) in verses like Acts 9:21 is aorist or indefinite meaning the duration of the action of calling isn't clearly indicated. What is certain is that no translation renders the term as “calling” in a present progressive tense as you have done.

So what's left is interpreting verse like these is context. In Timothy, Paul could be simply equating "those who call upon the Lord" as those who have already called and are saved but one thing is for sure is that the term "call" does not indicate a continual practice anywhere in scripture. Since the NT specifically describes calling as an initial means to salvation and not a practice, then that's the lens I personally interpret through with verses using that term.

StG, It seems you however are reading into the text without any scriptural context whatsoever, only your presuppositions. That’s what’s called eisegetical interpretation. You find this as the norm within the LC’s and it eventually leads to unbiblical teachings and practices as we see with calling.

I hope that makes sense.

Jo S · 04-30-2020, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Does Christ live in you bro, and does He live through you?

Yes, of course. However, I say that with a caveat. Figuratively, Christ lives in me by the indwelling spirit of God which lives in him also. Jesus himself is in heaven as a glorified human being. If you mean in terms of the LC teachings of the indwelling Christ where an individual needs to continually "feed" on Christ in order for him to live in you as a spirit, then no. So it really depends on the meaning of the terminology used.

byHismercy · 04-30-2020, 04:09 PM

I just wanted to say from the outside of this conversation, (but from within the body of Christ) that I very much appreciate this conversation as it is playing out. Even with some disagreement, I believe so much light is being shined on this subject....and I personally am receiving so much clarity. Thank you, each of you brothers. I appreciate both sides. Best of all is the reality that we have the Holy Spirit who searches mens' hearts, knows us intimately whether we like it or not, and witnesses whether our calling and worship is in truth and Spirit, as the Lord desires. I know He is able to discern the truth....and I believe He knows every call, if it is in truth and Spirit, and He certainly honors that, whether or not we were taught wrongly by some errant ministry or not. I have to say, this seems wacky, but I agree with each of you! Truth. :-) God bless you brothers. I am just loving the Lord and so encouraged to see the body concerning itself with matters related to prayer and calling on His name, when around us, so many people couldn't care less about Jesus, even with the current viral affairs and troubles.

Jo S · 04-30-2020, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I am just loving the Lord and so encouraged to see the body concerning itself with matters related to prayer and calling on His name, when around us, so many people couldn't care less about Jesus, even with the current viral affairs and troubles.

Wow, I haven't thought of it like that. Even in the midst of all that is going on the Lord, through His people, is more concerned about matters of His Word than the distractions of the world. Thank you for that, it's very encouraging!

Ohio · 04-30-2020, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

The context of calling in the New Testament is for the purpose of initial salvation.

That's not true.

Romans says that the Lord of all is rich to all who call upon His name. Doesn't sound like initial salvation. Sounds to me like the riches of the Lord are foreign to you, and your relationship to Him is just dead doctrines.

Second Timothy says to pursue righteousness with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. Doesn't sound like initial salvation. Sounds to me like righteousness is also foreign to you.

aron · 05-01-2020, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Romans says that the Lord of all is rich to all who call upon His name. Doesn't sound like initial salvation... Second Timothy says to pursue righteousness with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. Doesn't sound like initial salvation...

Perhaps Jo S' point my be summed by the following verse:

It is not everyone that says to me, 'My Lord, my Lord'', who enters the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does the will of my Father who is in Heaven. ~Matt 7:21 (from Aramaic)

The calling "My Lord" is the initial salvation. The path of continual obedience that follows is implicitly assumed in the quotes in 2 Timothy and Romans. The calling itself is merely vain, if not followed by continual, unbroken practices of obedience.

Yet Witness Lee taught just that - "Just call, O Lord" was the refrain from the popular LC song. The 'just' part of that phrase was important, crucial even, to LC doctrine. What one actually did was deemed irrelevant, or nearly so. "Just keep calling" was the admonition. One's behaviours were relegated to "dead works" whilst "calling" was akin to "life" and "drinking God" to bring "an inward metabolic transformation" which eventually culminated in "becoming God in life and nature".

Yet when confronted publicly with the grievous and continual sin of WL's son, and its impact on the lives of the church members, one prominent follower of Witness Lee said, "I'm proud to be an ostrich with my head stuck in the sand", and another said, "I'm a monkey" with his hands clapped over his ears.

Some transformation.

Yet they kept calling: "Let's all call on the Lord", as they convened to quarantine Titus Chu at Whistler. Ohio, you reported this to the forum. The danger is not merely the calling of itself as regarded as instrumental to the Christian life, subsuming all else. The danger is that people leave the LC physically but keep the doctrines. Many posters on this forum seem to fondly hold aspects of a Christian walk that was frankly ruinous. That is the danger of the LC. Not only it robs (captures) your body, but it even penetrates your mind and robs your soul.

It has taken me years, post-LC, to see how pernicious the mind-control programme was. You think you are 'out' but you are in an LC fog.

(all of this my have zilch to do with Ohio's point, and his walk, of course. I'm a sinner trying to disentangle myself from an all-encompassing thought control system. Forgive me if I roar like a bear as I shed the ropes)

Think about it this way: "Just call O Lord" was a way to control God. If you called, God had to come. God had to bless. God had to "infuse you with all His riches". Didn't matter if you sinned, failed, whatever. Just call O Lord.

Instead, it should be the opposite. We are controlled by God. We should obey. Yes, we should call: that is His command. "Repent and be baptized, calling on His name". But the life of continual obedience, of discipleship, is a necessary component of the process.

Yet in the LC, "calling" was a "magic formula" which would make God subservient to our bidding. To me this is utter perversion. (again, I do pray that all posters and readers will grant me the grace to offer my opinion. My experiences, and views, are just that.)

Ohio · 05-01-2020, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Perhaps Jo S' point my be summed by the following verse:

It is not everyone that says to me, 'My Lord, my Lord'', who enters the Kingdom of Heaven, but whoever does the will of my Father who is in Heaven. ~Matt 7:21 (from Aramaic)

The calling "My Lord" is the initial salvation. The continual obedience that follows is implicitly assumed in the quotes in 2 Timothy and Romans. The calling, in and of itself, is merely vain, if not followed by continual practices of obedience.

Yet Witness Lee taught just that. "Just call, O Lord" was the refrain from the popular LC song. The 'just' part of that phrase was important, crucial even, to LC doctrine. What one actually did was deemed irrelevant, or nearly so. "Just keep calling" was the admonition. One's behaviours were relegated to "dead works" whilst "calling" was akin to "life" and "drinking God" to bring "an inward metabolic transformation" which eventually culminated in "becoming God in life and nature".

Yet when confronted publicly with the grievous and continual sin of WL's son, and its impact on the lives of the church members, one prominent follower of Witness Lee said, "I'm proud to be an ostrich with my head stuck in the sand", and another said, "I'm a monkey" with his hands clapped over his ears.

Some transformation.

Yet they kept calling: "Let's all call on the Lord", as they convened to quarantine Titus Chu at Whistler. Ohio, you reported this to the forum.

All of the OT men of God and NT apostles called on the name of the Lord and obeyed the Lord. What has been presented by others here are two extremes, both bad choices in my view.

This should not be the case. I also presented the example of prayer and the rosary. I was told to "calm down." I get it. This is a website hostile to all things Lee. Even when some of these things have strong scriptural basis. OK, you win. Have it your way. I won't bring up the matter again.

I had wrongly thought that the mission of the site was to help LC members be free in Christ. I saw too many ex-members who ditched all the good with the bad. That troubled me. They saw only two bad choices: LC extremist nonsense and agnostism/atheism.

A wise Christian counselor once advised that we should dig for the good in all bad situations. The habit of calling His name from a believing heart has helped my love and faith in the Lord, during some fiery trials in my life. But not all feel this way. That's fine. Like I said, I won't bother you again with this matter.

aron · 05-01-2020, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I have to say, this seems wacky, but I agree with each of you! Truth. :-) God bless you brothers. I am just loving the Lord and so encouraged to see the body concerning itself with matters related to prayer and calling on His name, when around us, so many people couldn't care less about Jesus, even with the current viral affairs and troubles.

I think it's good and profitable to fellowship like this in mutuality (and there is mutuality - the agreement is the basis for the considerations). One of my watershed verses post-LC was in the Acts 15 conference in Jerusalem, it doesn't say that everyone listened passively to one Grand Poohbah aka "MOTA" hold forth on his recent "light".

Instead, when they came together there was "much discussion" - some versions render it "dispute" or "debate". I don't see this as a bad thing, but part of the process of going forward together. The author of Acts doesn't cast it negatively, but intrinsic to the group going forward together.

"In many counselors is safety" says Proverbs, 3 times in fact. (In case you didn't get it the first 2).

Jo S · 05-01-2020, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

That's not true.

Romans says that the Lord of all is rich to all who call upon His name. Doesn't sound like initial salvation. Sounds to me like the riches of the Lord are foreign to you, and your relationship to Him is just dead doctrines.

Second Timothy says to pursue righteousness with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. Doesn't sound like initial salvation. Sounds to me like righteousness is also foreign to you.

In other words, you believe riches and righteousness come through works.

Unfortunately the only righteousness that will come by the LC's traditional practice of calling, is the self-righteousness of the Pharisees and the only riches that will come from it will be the riches of Laodicea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

Yet they kept calling: "Let's all call on the Lord", as they convened to quarantine Titus Chu at Whistler. Ohio, you reported this to the forum. The danger is not merely the calling of itself as regarded as instrumental to the Christian life, subsuming all else. The danger is that people leave the LC physically but keep the doctrines. Many posters on this forum seem to fondly hold aspects of a Christian walk that was frankly ruinous. That is the danger of the LC. Not only it robs (captures) your body, but it even penetrates your mind and robs your soul.It has taken me years, post-LC, to see how pernicious the mind-control programme was.

You think you are 'out' but you are in an LC fog.

Well said, Aron. I agree in that as long as you retain the unbiblical teachings of Lee, no matter whether you've left physically, you're still very much a part of the Lord's Recovery. That's why I believe it's so hard for many to shake loose from their grasp years and even decades later. And so I do what I can to bring attention to those practices in the light of scripture in the hopes that error becomes evident. Unfortunately, things get lost in translation and some mistake the attack on pretension as an attack on their person. That's not my goal. I believe most of us all share a common goal in exposing this movement with the measure of grace each of us has been given.

The issue is that certain traditions are so embedded and ingrained from years of indoctrination that it can be quite a challenge to let them go. It's why (in the case of the LC's) I suggest it's best to throw it all out, seek a fresh start in the Lord apart from large congregations and the writings of Nee/Lee, and return to the simplicity and explicitness of scripture. Our God is a jealous God and I believe He's calling many to Himself, especially in times such as these.

UntoHim · 05-01-2020, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

What has been presented by others here are two extremes, both bad choices in my view.

Ok, then tell us about the happy medium that you have heard about and practiced. Help us extreme brothers out, will ya? And remember, we all have Bibles and are very familiar with all the calling on the Lord verses, so if you could please just skip the quoting of the verses and give us some practical examples of your practice of calling on the Lord.

Quote:

This is a website hostile to all things Lee.

Except when it comes to reasonable, measured and tempered brothers like you and Sons to Glory! Am I right? You guys are part of the forum, right? I'm sure if brother Lee was here he would thank you for being so fair and balanced!

Quote:

Even when some of these things have strong scriptural basis.

Just quoting a verse does not justify or prove that your interpretation is correct. You've been given ample opportunity to do so, but for some reason you'd rather fly off the handle and flame the other posters. You are much better than that my brother.

Quote:

I had wrongly thought that the mission of the site was to help LC members be free in Christ. I saw too many ex-members who ditched all the good with the bad. That troubled me.

What troubles me as the Admin/moderator is to see longtime, respected forum members accuse others of posting in bad faith. Trust me when I tell you that neither current nor former Local Church members are helped when this happens. What also troubles me is when some former LC members try to dictate to some others what teachings and practices need to be kept, and which ones need to be thrown out. Speaking strictly for myself, I was in the Local Church of Witness Lee for 20+ years, and have now been out for about 25 years...I think I will decide for myself what's bathwater and what's baby, if that's ok with you.
-

Jo S · 05-01-2020, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Speaking strictly for myself, I was in the Local Church of Witness Lee for 20+ years, and have now been out for about 25 years...I think I will decide for myself what's bathwater and what's baby, if that's ok with you.
-

And this is something I can't quite relate to so I do ask the forum for grace for any lack of subtlety in my approach; that being the rip off the band-aid swiftly approach. Some respond with relief, others with pain.

Trapped · 05-01-2020, 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I think it's good and profitable to fellowship like this in mutuality (and there is mutuality - the agreement is the basis for the considerations). One of my watershed verses post-LC was in the Acts 15 conference in Jerusalem, it doesn't say that everyone listened passively to one Grand Poohbah aka "MOTA" hold forth on his recent "light".

Instead, when they came together there was "much discussion" - some versions render it "dispute" or "debate". I don't see this as a bad thing, but part of the process of going forward together. The author of Acts doesn't cast it negatively, but intrinsic to the group going forward together.

"In many counselors is safety" says Proverbs, 3 times in fact. (In case you didn't get it the first 2).

One neat thing about Acts 15 also is that the whole church in Jerusalem was present to hear the discussion. This wasn't a "how dare you ask any questions, how dare you know what's going on, how dare you want to know how a situation is handled" thing like the co-workers' screed from their recent Q&A site. There was a big debate in the church and everyone was involved, not kept in the dark.

Trapped · 05-01-2020, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ok, then tell us about the happy medium that you have heard about and practiced. Help us extreme brothers out, will ya? And remember, we all have Bibles and are very familiar with all the calling on the Lord verses, so if you could please just skip the quoting of the verses and give us some practical examples of your practice of calling on the Lord.

I'm not any of the posters who have been participating in this quite-warm discussion, but I'll just throw in my personal practice in case it helps.

This isn't because any verse describes it this way, but it's just what I do.

I usually don't call when I'm happy or overjoyed, but when I'm not doing well, or at the end of my rope. So.....my calling can be described as "breathing out".

Imagine you had a long day at work and a hectic night at home and the kids are finally in bed after running around the house for hours, and you walk over to your spouse and put your forehead on their shoulder, and close your eyes and say, "sighhhhhoney, I've had such a long day."

That's mine. "Oh Father" or sometimes still, yes, "Oh Lord Jesus". But it's a quiet, desperate, "i need help", sometimes head-bowed, basically said as I'm breathing out kind of calling.

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

Imagine you had a long day at work and a hectic night at home and the kids are finally in bed after running around the house for hours, and you walk over to your spouse and put your forehead on their shoulder, and close your eyes and say, "sighhhhhoney, I've had such a long day."

That's mine. "Oh Father" or sometimes still, yes, "Oh Lord Jesus". But it's a quiet, desperate, "i need help", sometimes head-bowed, basically said as I'm breathing out kind of calling.

So precious!

UntoHim · 05-02-2020, 09:58 AM

Thanks Trapped for this helpful and heartfelt post.

And this brings up something that is sorely lacking in our "discussions" (if that's what we can call it

) regarding this term "calling on the Lord".

What Trapped has described is something that I think all Christians experience (or should experience) at one time or another. And this is true for everyone - Brothers, sisters, young, old, newborn Christian or a seasoned vet. "Breathing" is an appropriate metaphor here. Most of the time our breathing is automatic. We area not inhaling and exhaling conscientiously. Yet at times, we find ourselves being very "intentional" about our breathing. I think this is what Trapped has so poignantly described for us here. Sometimes our breathing may come in the form of "oh Lord" or "oh Lord Jesus" or "oh God I need you".

I sincerely doubt that the "calling on the Lord" in the Bible is the kind of breathing that Trapped has described for us. I see no supporting biblical evidence that the calling on the Lord is uttering the words "Oh Lord Jesus" or anything like that. I am NOT saying that uttering or even loudly calling "Oh Lord Jesus" is necessarily a bad thing, or even an unbiblical thing. What I am saying is that the calling on the Lord in the Bible does not correspond with this kind of practice. It's kind of like saying that Jesus Christ is the life-giving Spirit - He may very well be the life-giving Spirit to us...or that we have a feeling or realization that Jesus is imparting life to us as the Spirit....but this is absolutely different than claiming that 1 Corinthians 15:45 is teaching us that Jesus Christ became the Holy Spirit.

Hope this makes some sense.
-

Jo S · 05-02-2020, 11:14 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, Trapped, but you're describing sighing. It's something we all do. When we're stressed, anxious, or relieved we sigh as it typically has an instant calming effect on our psychology. People sigh without words but even using words like "Oh, God", "Oh, Lord", or "Jesus Christ" as you're sighing is something found even among unbelievers.

What we have been discussing here is the Local Church belief that "calling" on the Lord's name imparts God's spirit onto us on command. It's a methodology within the LC's that is also believed to further sanctify a believer. This of course is not only not found in scripture but is also a dangerous belief where one now has to work toward sanctification rather than rely on God's grace through faith. The LC's make the mistake of equating the psychological benefits of mind altering practices to God's spirit and this then snowballs into a different kind of spiritual system.

I don't believe all practitioners that follow LC's philosophy on calling actually believe that it's required to further sanctify but it is a fine line and can easily be crossed if not careful. In my opinion it's just safer to find other methods of instant stress relief available to us (diet, exercise, hobby or even just sighing in general) without conjuring up new extra-biblical doctrines.

Trapped · 05-02-2020, 12:11 PM

Hey Jo S,

I understand what you mean, and I'm not talking about the "Jesus Christ" or "Oh God" sighing done by unbelievers. I'm talking about a pausing, a directing of my inner being to God, and an inward leaning on Him as I say His name, with the implication behind it that I need Him. The only analogy I could come up with in the tangible world was when you lean on your spouse and rest on them.

Yeah, I know what I described isn't the "calling" of the LC being discussed here. There were just a lot of posts asking for someone, anyone, to describe how they call, so I just tried to answer in hopes it would open the gates for others to try to describe in words what they mean by "calling".

Trapped

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 12:29 PM

"no one can say, 'Jesus is Lord,' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:3)

UntoHim · 05-02-2020, 12:40 PM

Great StG. Love that verse! But what does it have to do with "calling on the Lord"?
-

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 01:02 PM

I believe any time we honor Jesus as Lord, it is something prompted by the Holy Spirit. If I breath, "Lord Jesus" as a way of calling on Him for help, is it not the same thing?

BTW: Was there much difference from what Trapped conveyed as to what I also conveyed of my experience (twice)? The responses to Trapped were pretty positive, whereas it seemed that what I related as my practical experience, of calling on the Lord, was pretty much ignored. Just feeling a little like the proverbial "red-headed step-child" a little . . .

Jo S · 05-02-2020, 02:40 PM

The implication here is that because the words "Lord Jesus" are used within a practice, by association, it automatically validates it as a genuine move of the Holy Spirit. I recall member Evangelical using this line of reasoning as well and I even believe it was in one of your older threads, StG.

To summarize my argument to Evangelical was: 1.) Matthew 7:21 clearly refutes that interpretation and 2.) There are other real world examples, like the Hindu yogis of Yogananda, that also mouth the words "Lord Jesus" in their meditation practices but are not themselves Christian.

If you were to offer money to an unbeliever, I'm willing to bet you'll easily find someone able to mouth the words "Jesus is Lord". That's not what the verse means if that's what you're getting at, StG. 1 Cor 12:3 is conveying the idea that no one can genuinely proclaim the Lordship of Jesus over their lives unless it is by the Holy Spirit nor can they deny his Lordship if they have the Holy Spirit indwelling them.

And if you were referring to me who ignored you previously, I apologize. Your comment wasn’t that much different from Trapped’s however I was distracted by your "Jesus is our husband" statement and completely lost track of the rest.

To be clear, when I’m talking about sighing, I don’t mean in the sarcastic way that some unbelievers use the Lord’s name. Unbelievers also sigh using the Lord’s name in a genuine search for relief. It’s more subconscious but being conscience of it I don’t think really makes it any different or anymore “Christian”. And it’s not what I would refer to as ”calling”.

If however you think it is the Holy Spirit that is coming through and relieving your anxiousness by sighing and you make it into a practice with the explicit intent to alter your mood and feelings then that’s where I'd say you are crossing the line. That was actually the starting point Lee began from, and it eventually snowballed into the five fold chant. The lesser of the extremes is still extreme in my view.

I remember once witnessing what to me was the strangest thing while talking to an LC member. In the middle of conversation, they spontaneously began uttering quietly under their breath “Jesus”, “Lord Jesus”, “Oh Lord Jesus” over and over again. I didn’t ask what they were doing but to me it was some sort of posturing; not as a display of pride or piety, but one of masking anxiety or nervousness. All that to say; if you’re using the Lord’s name superficially as a means of stress relief or in seeking heightened emotional states of ecstasy, then it’s a vain practice. The Lord seeks a conversation with us and so that’s how I believe we should approach Him.

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 03:06 PM

Actually, I was not thinking of you (not acknowledging my calling examples), but rather UntoHim, who has asked me a couple times what calling on Him looks like in practice to me personally. And the husband comment . . . yeah, you did take some umbrage to that, didn't you?! I don't think I answered your question regarding that (if interested, maybe we could do that elsewhere). We - you, me, others on here - just view the life within and lived through us differently. It's a mystery, okay? Our differences are no big deal in my book - I'll still gladly fellowship with you!

BUT irregardless (as my grandfather would say), the topic of this thread is about would you gather with the Christians who are called the Local Church? And a sub-topic therefore became, "Does what the LC teaches and practices rise to the level of another gospel or another Jesus?" Again, I think not, and nothing in this current discussion about UntoHim's #1 item regarding calling on the Lord, that we've been hashing out here, rises to that aforementioned level IMHO.

Wanna start on another of UntoHim's six items? (see post 21 for the items enumerated)
-

Jo S · 05-02-2020, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

We - you, me, others on here - just view the life within and lived through us differently. It's a mystery, okay? Our differences are no big deal in my book - I'll still gladly fellowship with you!

I strongly disagree and it is a big deal. I'm sorry but I can't go along with this 'let's all coexist with our differing inner beliefs' bit in good conscience. And I don't think you should either. Before Christ was revealed he was a mystery, but now that he is revealed he is no longer a mystery to the church. It's good to flush things out in graciousness and mutual respect. Let's test all things as scripture commands us to do without taking offense.

I believe many of us here have provided sufficient argumentation, in this thread and others, to prove that the LC's do in fact teach a different gospel and through it a different Jesus. At least you can agree that it is a reasonable possibility. I'm glad you're willingly participating in discussing these matters but sometimes I get the sense the train goes in only one direction. That's true of me as well but I've already seen what's at the other end through past mistakes.

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 04:05 PM

Gotcha, and I understand. And I think we've achieved a level of clarity (but not agreement - to quote UntoHim à la Prager), which is good! But there are very few of us on here that take more of a "middle-of-the-road" approach (to quote Ohio), so being one of them, I think I have to be perhaps a little louder to be acknowledged. It's just I believe we've presented pretty much what we can on the calling on the Lord topic, at least without venturing into the ad nauseam realm. We've discussed both sides and neither is convinced much . . . now it's up to the Spirit of Jesus Christ to illuminate each of us. Capiche?
-

Jo S · 05-02-2020, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

It's just I believe we've presented pretty much what we can on the calling on the Lord topic, at least without venturing into the ad nauseam realm. We've discussed both sides and neither is convinced much . . . now it's up to the Spirit of Jesus Christ to illuminate each of us. Capiche?

Except that in regards to the Christian faith, there are only two roads; the wide and the narrow. Taking the "middle road" is what scripture calls being lukewarm. Let's encourage each other to follow the narrow road. Amen?

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Except that in regards to the Christian faith, there are only two roads; the wide and the narrow. Taking the "middle road" is what scripture calls being lukewarm. Let's encourage each other to follow the narrow road. Amen?

Okay - don't wanna be lukewarm!!!

And I would say the show of hands on this thread, of those who would meet with the LC if they were the only game around, is perhaps two (people), because we believe them to be genuine Christians who don't preach "another Jesus" or "another gospel" (albeit rather flaky in some areas).

What else shall we discuss . . . anyone?

Trapped · 05-02-2020, 05:49 PM

Did my VOTA/MOTA comment not qualify for another gospel? Post #76.
-

Sons to Glory! · 05-02-2020, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

Did my VOTA/MOTA comment not qualify for another gospel? Post #76.

Below is Trapped's post #76

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

The VOTA and MOTA doctrine alone qualifies for another gospel, and possibly another Jesus. The MOTA doctrine says that in any given age, God's people have to follow the MOTA (Witness Lee, naturally) or else their service is not acceptable to God.
Granted, it doesn't say they are not saved. But it places an extra layer on top of believers to be accepted by God, in any way, over and above the blood of Jesus Christ. It's says the death of the Son of God is not enough for you to be fully accepted by God.
To me, that's another gospel, and it's also another Jesus, because it creates a Jesus who's death is insufficient for us, and that's certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

You know, I did see this and thought it was interesting and perhaps it bears another look. What the LC does, as you point out, is surely exclusive and elitist, to be sure. And I think they do believe that you have to be part of them to at least be an overcomer. However, I'm not sure if this onerous teaching/practice is much worse than other onerous teachings/practices out there in Christendom.

For instance, in Galatians Paul was warning about the Judaizers, for adding more requirements to ongoing salvation in Christ . . . namely the law. So in that respect you may be correct in that it can be said that the LC is adding something to salvation (at least to be an overcomer). But I must say that in much the same way, I hear Christian groups adding the practice of the law to Christ, or adding something outside of Christ alone (e.g., good psychology). Are they preaching another gospel too?

Trapped · 05-02-2020, 06:23 PM

Well, a few things:

1. your original post wasn't about comparing to other Christian groups, in fact, other Christian groups were nowhere to be found as options. So that wasn't the OP, but we can compare to them if you want.

2. other Christian groups also having "Jesus +" teachings doesn't mean the LC's aberrant teaching in this regard is thus OK.

3. can you explain a little more what you mean when you say other Christian groups add the practice of the law to Christ? Your example of good psychology still left me confused. Thanks. (also, as a pre-comment, yes, probably plenty of Christian groups imply there are additional requirements, and I think this is why the topic of spiritual abuse is on the rise.)
-

UntoHim · 05-03-2020, 09:25 AM

My dear brother Sons to Glory! You seem to be "out of touch" with what is being taught and practiced among orthodox, evangelical protestant churches. What particular churches are "adding the practice of the law to Christ"? Just because every Sunday message doesn't revolve around "life" or "Christ as our life" or other such lingo does not mean they are adding the practice of the law to Christ. Maybe you should consider actually going out and attending the worship/teaching services of some other churches in your area. I believe that you would be pleasantly surprised, especially if you attend one of the evangelical, non-denominational community churches. The Lord is (still) moving among his people, especially those in the younger generations. (which means pretty much everyone for oldies but goodies!)

Your quip "adding something outside of Christ alone" is extremely over-generalized and could mean almost anything. Someone just giving a message or preaching could be considered adding something outside of Christ alone. The church having a potluck after the service could be adding something outside of Christ alone. People delivering meals to older folks or disabled people could be considered adding something outside of Christ alone. I'm sure you get my point.
-

Sons to Glory! · 05-03-2020, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapped

Well, a few things:

1. your original post wasn't about comparing to other Christian groups, in fact, other Christian groups were nowhere to be found as options. So that wasn't the OP, but we can compare to them if you want.

2. other Christian groups also having "Jesus +" teachings doesn't mean the LC's aberrant teaching in this regard is thus OK.

3. can you explain a little more what you mean when you say other Christian groups add the practice of the law to Christ? Your example of good psychology still left me confused. Thanks. (also, as a pre-comment, yes, probably plenty of Christian groups imply there are additional requirements, and I think this is why the topic of spiritual abuse is on the rise.)
-

I brought up other groups as was related to Paul's message in Galatians - adding something. If we say the LC has added something to Christ and is therefore preaching another gospel, we should consider other groups as well in Christendom as possibly adding things to Christ.

Sons to Glory! · 05-03-2020, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

My dear brother Sons to Glory! You seem to be "out of touch" with what is being taught and practiced among orthodox, evangelical protestant churches. What particular churches are "adding the practice of the law to Christ"? Just because every Sunday message doesn't revolve around "life" or "Christ as our life" or other such lingo does not mean they are adding the practice of the law to Christ. Maybe you should consider actually going out and attending the worship/teaching services of some other churches in your area. I believe that you would be pleasantly surprised, especially if you attend one of the evangelical, non-denominational community churches. The Lord is (still) moving among his people, especially those in the younger generations. (which means pretty much everyone for oldies but goodies!)

Your quip "adding something outside of Christ alone" is extremely over-generalized and could mean almost anything. Someone just giving a message or preaching could be considered adding something outside of Christ alone. The church having a potluck after the service could be adding something outside of Christ alone. People delivering meals to older folks or disabled people could be considered adding something outside of Christ alone. I'm sure you get my point.
-

There are a lot of people posting on this forum, so I can't expect you to remember various things I've said. Nonetheless, I have conveyed many times how I visit other groups and there is a good deal of what I call "cross-pollination" other Christians with my particular group. And when I travel I always visit other groups. Plus I listen to a fair amount of messages on various Christian radio stations. We've had this discussion before, right?

To be sure, if we're honest, we all add things to Christ, right? It's just what the flesh does. I love the letter to the Galatians as it points this out so clearly. Do you think it just means we should be wary of adding circumcision? Of course not. And I hear some aspect of the law being added and preached on a continual basis with some, but maybe I'm more attuned to this. I see it in the LC and I see it in Christendom. Christ set us free from all aspects of the law, but we still gravitate toward it. I can't be the only one on here that sees this.

I hesitate to share specifics with you, bro - because while you often ask for them, you rarely seem to comment after I post them, so not sure what purpose it serves . . .

(With that said, I still enjoy meeting with other believers even though they're not "perfect"

in my eyes, as there's One in me who just loves His children of all shapes, sizes & preferences! And recognizing we all have warts and all that - it used to be hard to enjoy meeting with other groups that I thought were "shallow" or too focused on things other than Christ, but the Lord worked in me to realize He wasn't judging them, so I shouldn't either! Then the enjoyment of Christ was much better after that. And actually, some of the teachings of other groups have been very good!)

Jo S · 05-03-2020, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I brought up other groups as was related to Paul's message in Galatians - adding something. If we say the LC has added something to Christ and is therefore preaching another gospel, we should consider other groups as well in Christendom as possibly adding things to Christ.

StG, at the risk of being hypocrites isn't it best to first vet our own beliefs before properly criticizing the beliefs of others? Even so, hasn't there been enough judgment toward the whole of Christendom within the LC's to last one a lifetime?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

There are a lot of people posting on this forum, so I can't expect you to remember various things I've said. Nonetheless, I have conveyed many times how I visit other groups and there is a good deal of what I call "cross-pollination" other Christians with my particular group. And when I travel I always visit other groups. Plus I listen to a fair amount of messages on various Christian radio stations. We've had this discussion before, right?

These other groups you visit, are they like the church you currently attend; one's that are still loosely affiliated with the teachings and practices of the Lord's Recovery?

Sons to Glory! · 05-03-2020, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

StG, at the risk of being hypocrites isn't it best to first vet our own beliefs before properly criticizing the beliefs of others? Even so, hasn't there been enough judgment toward the whole of Christendom within the LC's to last one a lifetime?

These other groups you visit, are they like the church you currently attend; one's that are still loosely affiliated with the teachings and practices of the Lord's Recovery?

Yeah, that should be the case as there was plenty of that in the LC! But just calling it as I see it - trying to take that middle (lukewarm

) ground between the two extremes (i.e., LC is all bad and Christianity all good vs. Christianity is all bad & LC is all good).

Jo S · 05-03-2020, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Yeah, that should be the case as there was plenty of that in the LC! But just calling it as I see it - trying to take that middle (lukewarm

) ground between the two extremes (i.e., LC is all bad and Christianity all good vs. Christianity is all bad & LC is all good).

I don't believe anyone is arguing from either of those positions, StG. If anything the dichotomy has been;

-The LC and the rest of Christianity should find middle ground and coexist.

and

- The LC is all bad and the plain teachings of scripture is good.

I’m of course coming from the latter and you from the former. I believe that’s why we often find ourselves at odds with one another. You may see my position as too extreme. I however see yours as a negative compromise, meaning the truth does not benefit whatsoever; only the validation of the person.

The reason I think this way toward the LC’s is because I believe there is a line that when crossed there is no longer possibility of reconciliation within a movement; this is when the movement teaches a different gospel and through it another Jesus. In cases like these, scripture is clear that Christians should not meet with such people and groups who do not bring the whole of Christ’s teaching.

What did Christ teach? He taught a foundation of faith, repentance, and spiritual rebirth or baptism; none of which you find expounded upon within the LC’s and all of which are required in order to be saved. Why would you need any of those things when you can just call on the Lord? Calling in the LC circumvents God’s grace which is absolutely essential to salvation. So according to 2 John 1:9-10, we shouldn’t attempt to find middle ground with such groups, we should run in the other direction.

This is also the reason why such measures should not be taken toward the majority of Christendom. You may find flawed teachings here and there, but for the most part you do not find a different gospel being preached.

When you find yourself in a place where a different gospel is being taught, extreme measures should be taken. Even though you may have some correct doctrine; having a compromised foundation compromises and taints the whole; this is because it prevents people from understanding and accessing the core essentials of biblical salvation (Matt 23:13). That's why I gravitate toward the "extreme" of throwing it all out and seeking a new beginning in the Lord.

Many here are trying to free themselves completely from the grip of the LC’s. From what I've seen personally, one of the reasons it's a struggle to do so is because of the guilt that has been ingrained through fear concerning the twisting of Hebrews 10:25 of not forsaking fellowship. You may see some get frustrated with the position you present on the forum. This is because you’re “middle road” perspective projects and conveys that fear whether you are aware of it or not. I’m here to say it's perfectly good to take a hard-line stance against the teachings and traditions of groups such as the LC’s because that’s what’s taught in scripture. God does not want us to compromise when it comes to His truth.

UntoHim · 05-04-2020, 09:29 AM

One of the main issues in dealing with the teachings and practices of the Local Church of Witness Lee is the "all or nothing" kind of stand and attitude that was espoused by Witness Lee, and now is taught and practiced by his most ardent of followers. Lee was always making ominous declarations such as "When you join the army you must drop all choice and opinion, and follow all orders no matter what!" (close paraphrase) It was always "whoever is not with me is against me!"

This is one of the main reasons that I would not consider joining the Local Church group on StG's theoretical island - even if they were the only "Christian" group on the island. It would be virtually impossible to meet with them without having to swallow everything - hook, line and sinker. Like I said before, I would rather just go around and preach the genuine Gospel to all who would listen, and then hope the Lord would raise up some people who want to love the Lord and his Word and seek to worship in Spirit and in truth, apart from all the fuss, fanfare and nonsense that goes along with following "the One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age".
-

UntoHim · 05-04-2020, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Nonetheless, I have conveyed many times how I visit other groups and there is a good deal of what I call "cross-pollination" other Christians with my particular group.

And this is why I can't understand your largely negative view of what is taught and practiced among orthodox, evangelical Christians. So these Christians with whom you "cross-pollinate" are "adding the practice of the law to Christ" and such things? Have you tried to fellowship with them about this? What positive things, if any, has your group picked up in teaching or practicing from this cross-pollination? Or is it just a one-way street where your people are telling the others about all the riches and light your church has? (I'm not trying to imply that is what you're doing, I'm just trying to understand more about this "cross pollination".)

Quote:

I hesitate to share specifics with you, bro - because while you often ask for them, you rarely seem to comment after I post them, so not sure what purpose it serves . . .

Admittedly, I am not omnipresent. Sometimes I miss posts, and I do have a life outside of the forum (kind of, sort of), but I must tell you that I don't recall you sharing any such specifics. Could you point us to a particular post?
-

Sons to Glory! · 05-04-2020, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

This is one of the main reasons that I would not consider joining the Local Church group on StG's theoretical island - even if they were the only "Christian" group on the island. It would be virtually impossible to meet with them without having to swallow everything - hook, line and sinker. Like I said before, I would rather just go around and preach the genuine Gospel to all who would listen, and then hope the Lord would raise up some people who want to love the Lord and his Word and seek to worship in Spirit and in truth, apart from all the fuss, fanfare and nonsense that goes along with following "the One Minister with the One Ministry for the Age".
-

I think you are generally right about your observations here! The LC was generally kind ofan all or nothing kind of proposition - at least in many places - wasn't it!? But I reject the notion that you have to "join" anything. We're already joined in Christ. I didn't say you had to sell everything you had and move in with them - just fellowship with them. (although admittedly, if at some point you weren't completely in the tank for all things LSM/LC/WN/WL, they may decide to shun you any way - I'll concede that

)

Jo S · 05-04-2020, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I think you are generally right about your observations here! The LC was generally kind ofan all or nothing kind of proposition - at least in many places - wasn't it!? But I reject the notion that you have to "join" anything. We're already joined in Christ. I didn't say you had to sell everything you had and move in with them - just fellowship with them. (although admittedly, if at some point you weren't completely in the tank for all things LSM/LC/WN/WL, they may decide to shun you any way - I'll concede that

)

Scripture says that there is more than one Christ being preached among the Churches. (2 Cor 11:4)

Knowing that, StG, how can you be so sure all those who profess Christ are serving the same Christ? What is your standard of measurement in determining that? Is it based on whether they are preaching the true gospel of Jesus Christ, or is that based on desires of personal acceptance and acknowledgment? If neither then what should the standard be?

In Christian terms, fellowship means sitting at the same table together and sharing in the same Savior. It’s a very intimate gathering. If you knew others were not following the same Christ, as in the Mormons for example, would you still fellowship with them given that scripture says you cannot eat at the Lord's Table and at the table of demons? (1 Cor 10:21). Can we agree that a certain amount of discernment should be exercised before making those types of decisions? That’s not to say you should not meet with those that have differing beliefs but if Christian fellowship was not an option what would be left to do with those on your list of island inhabitants?

This is something that bothered my conscience concerning Watchman Nee’s character and what I still see permeating the Local Churches today. Nee saw the people he met with as a means to further himself along his spiritual journey. He often spoke about how everyone had a measure of “light” to offer. That’s not always true, BTW… Well, he definitely succeeded in becoming spiritual, but he did so by falling into a system of false spirituality. This was because his approach to spiritual growth was self-centered, and through his indiscretion he mingled himself with those that taught a different Jesus.

This is some of what I see in the question you posed. It is this mindset of “what group can offer me the most light” rather than “how can I best serve them with the gospel of Jesus Christ”.

So going back to your post in being joined to Christ; on the surface it would look like an encouragement toward unity, but because of its presumption in that all professing Christians serve the same Christ, it really is what I spoke about it my last post. You're generalizing Christ as a means to discourage people from separating themselves completely from the LC's. As far as witnessing the gospel, I agree we should not separate ourselves from members of the LC. As for fellowship, that’s a different story altogether and a topic open to discussion. We shouldn’t make sweeping generalizations either way (because I have no doubt there are sincere Christians that become ensnared by groups such as these), but first we need to properly vet our own beliefs and then practice discernment as to not be so liberal with fellowship as Nee was. I believe that’s what’s reflected in scripture. What are your thoughts?

Sons to Glory! · 05-05-2020, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

And this is why I can't understand your largely negative view of what is taught and practiced among orthodox, evangelical Christians.
-

A hasty generalization and sorry if that's what you think I was communicating. I have a very positive view of my fellow Christians (cuz we all have Christ in us). But to say that it's just in our nature to add other things to Christ isn't being negative, rather (sorry to say) that's just how it is. We all do it (maybe not you bro

). We al have the flesh. No writer in the NT shies away from the fact that the flesh will taint everything if it can, right? So is the NT negative? No, it's realistic and puts it all out there.

aron · 05-05-2020, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Scripture says that there is more than one Christ being preached among the Churches. (2 Cor 11:4)

Knowing that, StG, how can you be so sure all those who profess Christ are serving the same Christ? What is your standard of measurement in determining that? Is it based on whether they are preaching the true gospel of Jesus Christ, or is that based on desires of personal acceptance and acknowledgment? If neither then what should the standard be?

In Christian terms, fellowship means sitting at the same table together and sharing in the same Savior. It’s a very intimate gathering. If you knew others were not following the same Christ, as in the Mormons for example, would you still fellowship with them given that scripture says you cannot eat at the Lord's Table and at the table of demons? (1 Cor 10:21). Can we agree that a certain amount of discernment should be exercised before making those types of decisions? That’s not to say you should not meet with those that have differing beliefs but if Christian fellowship was not an option what would be left to do with those on your list of island inhabitants?

This is something that bothered my conscience concerning Watchman Nee’s character and what I still see permeating the Local Churches today. Nee saw the people he met with as a means to further himself along his spiritual journey. He often spoke about how everyone had a measure of “light” to offer. That’s not always true, BTW… Well, he definitely succeeded in becoming spiritual, but he did so by falling into a system of false spirituality. This was because his approach to spiritual growth was self-centered, and through his indiscretion he mingled himself with those that taught a different Jesus.

This is some of what I see in the question you posed. It is this mindset of “what group can offer me the most light” rather than “how can I best serve them with the gospel of Jesus Christ”.

So going back to your post in being joined to Christ; on the surface it would look like an encouragement toward unity, but because of its presumption in that all professing Christians serve the same Christ, it really is what I spoke about it my last post. You're generalizing Christ as a means to discourage people from separating themselves completely from the LC's. As far as witnessing the gospel, I agree we should not separate ourselves from members of the LC. As for fellowship, that’s a different story altogether and a topic open to discussion. We shouldn’t make sweeping generalizations either way (because I have no doubt there are sincere Christians that become ensnared by groups such as these), but first we need to properly vet our own beliefs and then practice discernment as to not be so liberal with fellowship as Nee was. I believe that’s what’s reflected in scripture. What are your thoughts?

I've read the above post, and think there's a lot to affirm, and unpack, but will do so in my own way.

Suppose your pastor was doing well, and membership was increasing, and the church hall got remodeled. There are elders, deacons, a secretary, a flourishing music service, a packed "summer camp" for the children and so forth. Then the pastor decides to hire his son as "office manager" and the son runs roughshod on the elders & deacons. Then they catch the son repeatedly mauling the secretaries (it occurs over years, with multiple victims). And every time, the pastor runs the elders out of church, disregards the parishioners who leave as "rebels" and so forth. Then the pastor convinces church members to invest in another son's for-profit business.

Now, it doesn't even matter that the business goes bankrupt and some of the church members lose life savings which they are told to consider a church donation. The very fact that the pastor siphoned off church funds for family business tells us enough. Paul says to avoid every appearance of evil, yet here we see evil appear again and again.

But church members live with it because the pastor has the ministry of the age....? A guy that shouldn't even be church elder per Paul's advice in Titus 1:6 is held to be untouchable, unquestionable, because he's God's anointed oracle for planet earth....?

So my question is, in this above scenario, is this church preaching another Christ, another gospel? Everyone's going to have their own minds on that, but it's possible to say, "Yes, they are." This is arguably so far from the clear and consistent NT pattern that it's become a different gospel. All the rest doesn't matter - the shiny new hall, the skilled church musicians, the fancy weekly newsletter, the solemn, even tearful intonations of Orthodox Church Dogma. The simple, gross, blatant, repeated violations of essential NT principles make this into something else. You can call it a cult, a personality cult, a sect, a gulag, or a synagogue of Satan. It's not a Christian church, fellowship, or assembly by any useful definition.

And I'll come at it from another view, since I like being elliptical... I've been thinking about the verse, "You must be born again." Most of us think this must be referring to someone else, since we (as Christians) are all born-again. But again I ask, if you continue in gross, unbiblical practices, don't you think a hard stop is in order? If you allow continual violations of NT directives because the pastor says so, or because he/she has some 'revelation' that lets you explain it all away, don't you think a hard stop is needed?

I am not saying that you're not a Christian, and need to be re-baptised if you already confess Jesus as Lord. But don't you think a lot of stuff that you've assumed is good, really isn't, if you allow such brutal violation of the Bible? In my case, I'd go to 'trainings' and WL would say stuff that really was sketchy, that pushed the envelope, that violated NT precedent, and therefore should be questioned, but nobody questioned, because everybody knows "You don't question the MOTA." Is that really a Christian church?

My point is this. Nicodemus was a teacher of the Jews. He had a lot of 'good' and 'biblical' stuff. Jesus said, "Drop it." Start over. Get born again. Get a new life. Likewise, the Spirit told the churches in Revelation, "Repent". Did Witness Lee ever repent for what he did for to so many? No. Because he couldn't. His entire "Normal Christian Church Life" schema was based on one Untouchable at the top. It was an oriental personality cult, not a church. That goes for both Nee and Lee. They were both deeply flawed men who set up a system that was entirely built for the purpose of covering their flaws. Anyone who pointed them out got run out of town as "ambitious" or "divisive" or "rebellious". The whole thing wasn't Christian in any sense of the term.

Sorry for the hit-and-run posting. I've been distracted of late, as you may imagine. But the conversation is worth having. Thanks for letting me share.

Sons to Glory! · 05-05-2020, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

So going back to your post in being joined to Christ; on the surface it would look like an encouragement toward unity, but because of its presumption in that all professing Christians serve the same Christ, it really is what I spoke about it my last post. You're generalizing Christ as a means to discourage people from separating themselves completely from the LC's. As far as witnessing the gospel, I agree we should not separate ourselves from members of the LC. As for fellowship, that’s a different story altogether and a topic open to discussion. We shouldn’t make sweeping generalizations either way (because I have no doubt there are sincere Christians that become ensnared by groups such as these), but first we need to properly vet our own beliefs and then practice discernment as to not be so liberal with fellowship as Nee was. I believe that’s what’s reflected in scripture. What are your thoughts?

I've posted many, many issues I have with LSM and LC practices. I would NOT encourage anyone to meet with them, at least not with their eyes anything but wide open to all these things. However, we may differ on what some of these things are. I've also posted many, many things about how the Lord lead me out of the group (He lead me there too, just for the record). I believe He preserved me from a lot of the really funky stuff that went on in the LC system. And He is continuing to expose errors from the LC to me (this really began when He showed me that His love for us is His main motivation).

Hope that addresses your post adequately - please let me know otherwise.

Sons to Glory! · 05-05-2020, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

So my question is, in this above scenario, is this church preaching another Christ, another gospel? Everyone's going to have their own minds on that, but it's possible to say, "Yes, they are." This is arguably so far from the clear and consistent NT pattern that it's become a different gospel. All the rest doesn't matter - the shiny new hall, the skilled church musicians, the fancy weekly newsletter, the solemn, even tearful intonations of Orthodox Church Dogma. The simple, gross, blatant, repeated violations of essential NT principles make this into something else. You can call it a cult, a personality cult, a sect, a gulag, or a synagogue of Satan. It's not a Christian church, fellowship, or assembly by any useful definition.

Let's consider another group that I think shares a lot of similarities with the LC, and that is the 7th Day Adventists. SDA has a dead leader, Helen White, which many adhere closely too. To say the least, she had some funky, sideways teachings, and followed or advocated prophesies (with dates) that didn't turn out. Many would say SDAs have added something to Christ with their preaching and practices. The system the SDA has can be quite legal in some points, such as the insistence that Saturday is the one God decreed Sabbath Day, and say we are absolutely commanded by God to follow that practice. I think there are other parallels to the LC, and maybe someone more familiar with them can add to this . . . But I believe they are definitely born again, and I've had great fellowship with SDA folks over the years.

As far as I can tell, SDAs preach that one must be born-again and must believe into Jesus. They promote the deity of Christ. Some SDA speakers are quite gifted in scripture and I have been watered by them (ever tune into a TV program called "Table Topics"?). But yet, there are certain issues . . .

So are SDA folks promoting another Jesus or another gospel?

Jo S · 05-05-2020, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I've posted many, many issues I have with LSM and LC practices. I would NOT encourage anyone to meet with them, at least not with their eyes anything but wide open to all these things. However, we may differ on what some of these things are. I've also posted many, many things about how the Lord lead me out of the group (He lead me there too, just for the record). I believe He preserved me from a lot of the really funky stuff that went on in the LC system. And He is continuing to expose errors from the LC to me (this really began when He showed me that His love for us is His main motivation).

Hope that addresses your post adequately - please let me know otherwise.

You haven’t addressed my question about what standard you judge other groups by, but that’s fine. It’s something to think about.

So I’d respond to this by saying that the Lord's Recovery is larger than LSM. There still are other branches that adhere to the beliefs of the movement. That includes the Midwest (GLA) local churches and churches like yours in Scottsdale. Even though you’re separate from LSM it doesn't mean you’re free from the system because you still subscribe to the vision of Watchman Nee. That’s what I’ve been trying to convey. Some get it while others struggle with it and that’s understandable given the time some people invested in the movement.

Nee claimed he was the sole possessor of Christ’s vision for the entire Church. The issue is if Nee’s vision is false (which I believe it is) it implies another Jesus for the reason that if it wasn’t the Jesus of scripture that revealed the vision to him, then it had to be another. If you adhere to a false vision that you claim comes from the spirit of Jesus then you too are in danger of following a different Jesus. That’s why I encourage everyone to test all things with scripture and prayer.

With that said if LSM was Catholicism then those that branched off are akin to the Protestants. Both groups are viewed in a negative light within the Lord’s Recovery which I find ironic given their current predicament.

My experience was with the GLA branch of the Lord’s Recovery. What I saw there was the desire for lesser clergy along with an adherence to the original vision of their founder. The same sentiments are what I see being conveyed in many of your posts, StG. It’s why I believe you attempt to reconcile those that no longer want anything to do with the Lord’s Recovery to those that are anti-LSM alone but still tied to the LR in some way.

I just challenge you and others to keep testing all things Watchman Nee / Witness Lee in the light of scripture putting aside any personal feelings that you may have and I’m confident that you’ll find that along the way the middle road eventually merges with the broad road which leads to destruction.

Jo S · 05-05-2020, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So are SDA folks promoting another Jesus or another gospel?

I personally don't know too much about the Adventists other than they practice things like a Saturday sabbath so maybe others can chime in on this. I believe byHismercy has some knowledge of this group but from what I understand they do preach salvation by grace alone through faith alone. If however they claim that observing sabbath sanctifies a believer, similar to what calling does within the LC's, then yes it would be another gospel. If they claim the sabbath only bestows extra blessings and favor upon a believer then as long as they preach grace through faith alone, adding works to their doctrine wouldn't itself infringe upon the core fundamentals of biblical salvation however it would place unnecessary burdens upon believers.

Curious · 05-05-2020, 08:31 PM

SDA's (Seventh Day Adventists) have factions within. The extremist end, that beleive the mark of the beast IS to worship on Sunday and that Saturday worship is soon to be outlawed by governments. It IS the way to be pleasing to God and as the 4th commandment, it is the most important. The rest of us are spiritual Babylon, even that exact term used. I have a friend, (demoted to acquaintance) fully into this who has laid it all out to me in these terms. I am not saved till I worship on Saturday as far as this person is concerned. They are also deeply into all things Ellen White. Their prophet, or MOTA equivalent. Hotly anticatholic too (unless that is more personal to my acquaintance). The only way to be in the ark at the end times is to be in it with them.

This belief set definitely surpasses the cross and allows for rigid certainty and spiritual superiority.

The rest of SDA's aren't interested in Ellen White particularly, just worship on a Saturday. In my town their church has lots of issues but stuck in them due to feeling the need to put-up as there are no other options for sabbath worship for Christianity. Nowhere else to go to express their conviction on this matter.

They are much more normal and within healthy boundaries of beleif. They sit uncomfortably with the other set.

That's all I have gathered about them.

aron · 05-06-2020, 04:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curious

The rest of SDA's aren't interested in Ellen White particularly, just worship on a Saturday. In my town their church has lots of issues but stuck in them due to feeling the need to put-up as there are no other options for sabbath worship for Christianity. Nowhere else to go to express their conviction on this matter.

I like the word "stuck" as a picture of the situation, once in. I also think of Paul in Galatians 2:4: "We didn't bear with such ones; not even for an instant." He was referring to those who'd compel Gentiles to get circumcised, but I think he'd take the same tack with those who'd compel Gentiles to observe the Sabbath (cf Rom 14:5,6). If Ellen White showed up at the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15 they'd laugh her out of the room, along with Mssrs Nee & Lee. They wouldn't go along with such 'apostles', even for an instant.

Most NT believers were Sabbath observant simply because they were law-keeping Jews (Acts 22:12; 10:14; 16:1-3). If James' statement in Acts 21:20 about thousands of law-keeping Jews in Jerusalem was abhorrent to Paul (or Luke the writer) it would have been noted, yet it passed without comment. But the NT also settles it that Gentile believers don't follow Jewish customs and practices.

I don't hold White, Nee, and Lee personally accountable, and forgive their folly. They were ignorant humans (like us), trying to follow God. But it's a measure of the times that: a) they went so far astray; b) they found such traction within the larger populace; c) we're even having this discussion.

Sorry if this may seem caustic, bitter, or dismissive, but I won't entertain such ideas, but rather refute them. I've also been recruited by Sabbath-keepers, and was strongly against it. Later, one came round and tried to "enjoy" a Protestant hymn with me. Interesting to see them lean on Protestantism for legitimacy, then reject Protestants (and other Christians) who don't take up the 'revelation' of their founder. In this the SDA, LC, and LDS are all apace. They pretend to be legitimately Christian, for recruiting purposes. Once inside, then it's all about the founders' visions and revelations. In the LC the buzz-word is 'restrictions'... as Curious implies, once the founders' premises are received, there are no other options. With such groups, the Bible is a prop in their stage play, as is Jesus himself.

Sons to Glory! · 05-06-2020, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

You haven’t addressed my question about what standard you judge other groups by, but that’s fine. It’s something to think about.

So I’d respond to this by saying that the Lord's Recovery is larger than LSM. There still are other branches that adhere to the beliefs of the movement. That includes the Midwest (GLA) local churches and churches like yours in Scottsdale. Even though you’re separate from LSM it doesn't mean you’re free from the system because you still subscribe to the vision of Watchman Nee. That’s what I’ve been trying to convey. Some get it while others struggle with it and that’s understandable given the time some people invested in the movement.

Nee claimed he was the sole possessor of Christ’s vision for the entire Church. The issue is if Nee’s vision is false (which I believe it is) it implies another Jesus for the reason that if it wasn’t the Jesus of scripture that revealed the vision to him, then it had to be another. If you adhere to a false vision that you claim comes from the spirit of Jesus then you too are in danger of following a different Jesus. That’s why I encourage everyone to test all things with scripture and prayer.

With that said if LSM was Catholicism then those that branched off are akin to the Protestants. Both groups are viewed in a negative light within the Lord’s Recovery which I find ironic given their current predicament.

My experience was with the GLA branch of the Lord’s Recovery. What I saw there was the desire for lesser clergy along with an adherence to the original vision of their founder. The same sentiments are what I see being conveyed in many of your posts, StG. It’s why I believe you attempt to reconcile those that no longer want anything to do with the Lord’s Recovery to those that are anti-LSM alone but still tied to the LR in some way.

I just challenge you and others to keep testing all things Watchman Nee / Witness Lee in the light of scripture putting aside any personal feelings that you may have and I’m confident that you’ll find that along the way the middle road eventually merges with the broad road which leads to destruction.

Interesting question about how I "judge other groups." I actually do my best NOT to judge other groups. As Aron states (below), if they get into folly (as we all do) then I should forgive them and love them, right? I'm not ignorant concerning where they are far off in the weeds, by any means. But much of man's judgement is also folly.

So let's see if I can vocalize something quasi-coherent to answer your question. I would hold a short list of things I might look for when considering if someone is a genuine, born-again believer (with Christ living in them), and by extension, those they meet with. First would be just that - they have believed into the Lord Jesus Christ and accepted Him personally as the one who gave Himself in their place and for their sins. Perhaps secondly is that they believe Jesus is Lord over all and is God manifested in the flesh. Maybe third would be that He died and rose bodily from the dead. Beyond that, I don't know that I should care all that much about the other, minor things (i.e., don't major in the minors). Is there something essential I'm missing? Perhaps - I'm open to hear and consider other points that should be included as main ingredients of the faith.

Would I meet with the LC or SDA or Baptists or Episcopalians or Catholics if there was the opportunity? Sure, and I have. I've had a rich enjoyment of Christ with those in these groups, as He has show me over time that He cares little for all the minor things. Does that mean they are not in some sort of a system of error? No, certainly not, but there are many believers in all those places, right? I'd rather focus on the oneness of the One Spirit, than all that seems to divide us. And when Christ returns, all these division follies will evaporate in an instant, in the kingdom of the Son of His love.

And let me say that I encourage no one to meet with the LC, as you apparently stated above. There is way too much going sideways there! Regarding believers on this forum, there is a wide spectrum of thought when it comes to the LC. Jo, my perception is you are on the far extreme of anti-all things LSM/LC, along with a number of others on here. That's fine, as this discussion forum certainly attracts that kind of stance. Let me repeat, it's fine and that's what this forum is about - airing the good, bad and ugly (yes, I said "good") of the LC.

Therefore your perspective is pretty much zero tolerance and causes you to believe there is no "baby" - it's all just dirty bathwater which in all cases must be immediately exorcised . . . at least that's my perspective - is this correct? But I must say that you don't do it in a mean-spirited way and present your ideas thoughtfully, and I thank you for that. I am not, of course, that far on the anti-all-things-LC spectrum as you are (as you've expressed, you disdain the "middle-of-the-road" and seemly want to disparage me regarding that stance).

Those of us meeting in here in Scottsdale are just fine. We have rich fellowship one with another, and that includes many who don't gather with us all the time. We have those with us who have been invited to speak and even pastor other bonefide Christian groups, and do so with joy in our hearts. We've had various ones from other groups speak in our gatherings - we really don't even consider them separate from us as fellow partakers of Christ. We encourage fellowship with all born-again ones seeking Christ. Nothing wrong with that. There is something special here, and I'll just leave it at that. (and as I've said repeatedly on here - God tells me often that I am in the right place and where He has put me, so I'd rather listen to His speaking than man's words)

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

I don't hold White, Nee, and Lee personally accountable, and forgive their folly. They were ignorant humans (like us), trying to follow God. But it's a measure of the times that: a) they went so far astray; b) they found such traction within the larger populace; c) we're even having this discussion.

Yes, totally agree bro, including points A, B and C!

Curious · 05-06-2020, 04:01 PM

Interestingly, it's medically established and known that SDA's have better gut health than the rest of the population in the US. Her ideas about plant based wholefoods and rejection of cigar smoking were good. Ahead of her time, actually.

Incidentally, my handling of the efforts of my SDA acquaintance to steam-roller me into their priorities of Christian practice, were so helped by what I have learned through this forum. It has been such a help in keeping a clear head under the barrage of guilt-and-doubt inspiring tactics used to pressure a person into agreement!

Learning to hold one's own position politely and firmly, and not get confused, it's a place that takes work and effort for me to get to. Because I will entertain the conversation.

The Independent Fundamental Baptist group is another one with their own seperate platform. Much derision and judgement coming from them to the rest of Christianity.

Jo S · 05-06-2020, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Interesting question about how I "judge other groups." I actually do my best NOT to judge other groups. As Aron states (below), if they get into folly (as we all do) then I should forgive them and love them, right? I'm not ignorant concerning where they are far off in the weeds, by any means. But much of man's judgement is also folly.

So let's see if I can vocalize something quasi-coherent to answer your question. I would hold a short list of things I might look for when considering if someone is a genuine, born-again believer (with Christ living in them), and by extension, those they meet with. First would be just that - they have believed into the Lord Jesus Christ and accepted Him personally as the one who gave Himself in their place and for their sins. Perhaps secondly is that they believe Jesus is Lord over all and is God manifested in the flesh. Maybe third would be that He died and rose bodily from the dead. Beyond that, I don't know that I should care all that much about the other, minor things (i.e., don't major in the minors). Is there something essential I'm missing? Perhaps - I'm open to hear and consider other points that should be included as main ingredients of the faith.

Would I meet with the LC or SDA or Baptists or Episcopalians or Catholics if there was the opportunity? Sure, and I have. I've had a rich enjoyment of Christ with those in these groups, as He has show me over time that He cares little for all the minor things. Does that mean they are not in some sort of a system of error? No, certainly not, but there are many believers in all those places, right? I'd rather focus on the oneness of the One Spirit, than all that seems to divide us. And when Christ returns, all these division follies will evaporate in an instant, in the kingdom of the Son of His love.

And let me say that I encourage no one to meet with the LC, as you apparently stated above. There is way too much going sideways there! Regarding believers on this forum, there is a wide spectrum of thought when it comes to the LC. Jo, my perception is you are on the far extreme of anti-all things LSM/LC, along with a number of others on here. That's fine, as this discussion forum certainly attracts that kind of stance. Let me repeat, it's fine and that's what this forum is about - airing the good, bad and ugly (yes, I said "good") of the LC.

Therefore your perspective is pretty much zero tolerance and causes you to believe there is no "baby" - it's all just dirty bathwater which in all cases must be immediately exorcised . . . at least that's my perspective - is this correct? But I must say that you don't do it in a mean-spirited way and present your ideas thoughtfully, and I thank you for that. I am not, of course, that far on the anti-all-things-LC spectrum as you are (as you've expressed, you disdain the "middle-of-the-road" and seemly want to disparage me regarding that stance).

Those of us meeting in here in Scottsdale are just fine. We have rich fellowship one with another, and that includes many who don't gather with us all the time. We have those with us who have been invited to speak and even pastor other bonefide Christian groups, and do so with joy in our hearts. We've had various ones from other groups speak in our gatherings - we really don't even consider them separate from us as fellow partakers of Christ. We encourage fellowship with all born-again ones seeking Christ. Nothing wrong with that. There is something special here, and I'll just leave it at that. (and as I've said repeatedly on here - God tells me often that I am in the right place and where He has put me, so I'd rather listen to His speaking than man's words)

I don’t mean to single you out StG but to be fair you are the only one engaging. My comments are directed toward you but not at you. I hope you understand the difference.

With that said, scripture tells us to stop judging by mere appearances but to judge righteously (John 7:24).

Many groups outwardly profess the things you’ve listed concerning Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection including the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses. Are you too willing to go to their respective churches and fellowship with them? I’d suspect you wouldn’t and I would support you on that point, but the question remains; what really is the underlying factor in determining who you choose to fellowship with?

I can’t help but to think that you’re fellowship is not based on the accuracy of the gospel being preached or even the person of Christ, but I suspect you are doing so based on a certain ideological belief. That underlying belief, I believe, is Nee’s vision of One Church One City which you are not alone in.

Like Aron so succinctly stated, the LC’s and Mormons pretend to be legitimately Christian for recruiting purposes only. And once inside, then it's all about their extra-biblical revelation. This mentality still remains in all churches that retain Nee’s vision. If LSM, GLA, or your church in Scottsdale or any others affiliated with Watchman Nee meet with outside groups (whether aware of it or not) it’s for the express purpose of conforming them to this particular ideology because that has always been the spirit of Watchman Nee. The Local Church doesn’t = LSM only, OCOC = the Local Church. You discourage people from meeting with the Local Churches, which is good, but you fail to realize that you still are the Local Church.

John 7:24 teaches us not to be content with mere outward professions but to dig deeper. Christ also teaches us that we are to judge by the fruits, and the fruits of OCOC can be clearly seen in the condition of the Local Churches today. Their ground has caused nothing but factions and divisions amongst their very own. This very same ecumenical mindset existed in the early Roman church. Look where it got them. The Local Churches are repeating history and are just now beginning to see what happens when you try to consolidate Christ’s church outside of His express will. The LORD is more than capable of establishing His church. If He thought that coalescing all believers into one place under one unifying ideology was a good idea He would have left Babel alone. Unity is only good when it’s rooted in God’s truth. Unfortunately, Watchman Nee and Witness Lee focused on the oneness of the wrong spirit and it's something that I'd hope to see you and others avoid.

I admit that I too was drawn to the doctrine of Locality. It was at a time where I was seeking community. I was tired of all the divisions within the Body of Christ and was searching for that elusive fellowship where no division existed. One thing I noticed in the LC was the emphasis on community. On the surface it appeared they did it well, but I soon realized that because it was so one sided (meaning the individual bond to Christ was lacking) it became apparent that it was merely a strength drawn from culture rather than scripture.

While OCOC does read good on the surface and works to validated the feelings of all those seeking unity, it isn’t something expressly prescribed in scripture or expected to be realized in this age. I had to come to terms with that. It wasn’t easy but it was necessary. Too often we mistake our own desires for God’s leading and my hope is that you’re not making that same mistake. This doesn’t mean that fellowship isn't possible but it does mean we first have to set our priorities straight. You can’t execute the second commandment well enough unless you have established the first. Like the apostle John would you be able to have fellowship with the LORD if you were on an island alone or do you require a group to accomplish that for you?

I’m not being disparaging toward you or your current church. I am challenging you to not only test all the traditions you’ve become accustomed to follow but to also test your own heart. We should always be doing this as to not become complacent in our walk lest we find ourselves being spit out of the Lord’s mouth.

Sons to Glory! · 05-06-2020, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

With that said, scripture tells us to stop judging by mere appearances but to judge righteously (John 7:24).

Many groups outwardly profess the things you’ve listed concerning Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection including the Mormons and the Jehovah Witnesses. Are you too willing to go to their respective churches and fellowship with them? I’d suspect you wouldn’t and I would support you on that point, but the question remains; what really is the underlying factor in determining who you choose to fellowship with?

I can’t help but to think that you’re fellowship is not based on the accuracy of the gospel being preached or even the person of Christ, but I suspect you are doing so based on a certain ideological belief. That underlying belief, I believe, is Nee’s vision of One Church One City which you are not alone in.

So the Mormon's or the JWs would fail my little 3 pointer - no deity of Christ - aka God manifested in the flesh; and not born again with Christ in them.

No one here ever discusses the OCOC - FYI.

Nell · 05-06-2020, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So the Mormon's or the JWs would fail my little 3 pointer - no deity of Christ - aka God manifested in the flesh; and not born again with Christ in them.

No one here ever discusses the OCOC - FYI.

What about this discussion?
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...0184#post50184

Jo S · 05-06-2020, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

So the Mormon's or the JWs would fail my little 3 pointer - no deity of Christ - aka God manifested in the flesh; and not born again with Christ in them.

No one here ever discusses the OCOC - FYI.

They do and they don't, it's all in the semantics. You can make the same case for the Local Churches yet you still meet with their members...

As far as OCOC, it's been discussed here quite a lot and you know this because you've started a thread on this yourself. Another I recall is the thread Nell posted and also a thread I started.

But for the most part "calling" and OCOC are avoided because they're touchy subjects as those traditions are still held in high esteem by some here and typically lead to heated discussion.

Speaking of heated, I can imagine how the Pharisees felt when Jesus came along and challenged their traditions. They interpreted him as one seeking to destroy the law and their practices yet he was only there to proclaim them fulfilled in him.

In the same sense, I’m not trying to do away with calling and OCOC. I am however attempting to put them in their proper context as I see them in scripture. That is if you've been born-again, calling has been fulfilled in your salvation. And concerning OCOC, this ideal will only be fulfilled at Christ's second coming in glory when he gathers all his believers into the New Jerusalem. Just be patient and have faith. Try not to place tradition above God's word. That's the message.

Sons to Glory! · 05-06-2020, 09:56 PM

Nell & Jo: When I said we never discuss OCOC, I mean we never discuss it here in my Scottsdale ekklesia. You (Jo) said my Scottsdale group is still caught up in the system of LC/OCOC. There's no focus or anything about it ever mentioned in this Scottsdale gathering . . . zip, zero, nada, zilch. Just not important. Anyway, sorry for any confusion.

FYI - Some here (again, Scottsdale gathering) have borne a certain amount of scorn from family members who are still in the LC - they won't even take the Lord's table with us as they evidently see us as just another division in the body of Christ, and therefore shouldn't "officially" recognize us thereby.

Jo S · 05-06-2020, 10:13 PM

Thanks for clearing that up. However isn't OCOC implied in your church's name, "The Church in Scottsdale"?

If the case is you do retain this belief as a whole, it would worry me more if your church didn't talk about it openly then if they actually did.

Sons to Glory! · 05-06-2020, 10:27 PM

Oh, I don't think you need to worry about that bro!

Actually, no one ever mentions the legal name, "The Church in Scottsdale." The sign out front just says "Scottsdale Church." See here: Scottsdale Church website

But again, no one ever talks about this in the Scottsdale gathering (don't want to use that word "here" here - haha). Trust me on this - there's much bigger fish to fry, like preparing our hearts to see Jesus!

Jo S · 05-06-2020, 10:55 PM

I was aware of the name modification. However originally it was The Church in Scottsdale.

I'm reminded of the Freemasons. If you're not aware, there are 33 degrees of progression within the organization. The first 13 or so focus solely on brotherhood, community, and charity. It's not until you're firmly vested in the group that you are initiated into the higher occult knowledge and their true intentions begin to be made known.

I hope the same isn't true for those that are just coming into your church and don't know its original name and don't hear about the doctrine of locality.

Am I over thinking things? I really do hope so...

Sons to Glory! · 05-06-2020, 11:04 PM

Oh good gravy - yes you are overthinking things . . . a lot! I've been here 22 years and haven't been initiated into the "true intentions." (But then again, maybe I've been excluded for some mysterious reason.)

Jo S · 05-06-2020, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Oh good gravy - yes you are overthinking things . . . a lot! I've been here 22 years and haven't been initiated into the "true intentions." (But then again, maybe I've been excluded for some mysterious reason.)

Ok then StG. Peace and blessings to you in the Lord Jesus Christ. You hung in the discussion longer then most would have

aron · 05-07-2020, 08:41 AM

Witness Lee often compared the LC (aka Lord's Recovery) to what he called "Christianity", e.g., those not affiliated with his group and ministry. Christianity was ignorant, superstitious, devilish, satanic, deformed, fallen, hopelessly corrupted; thus the need for God to recover the Church.

WL set up his proposed recovered church in divergent and ultimately contradictory ways: on the one hand it was deemed the outgrowth of all genuine, legitimate expressions of faith in Jesus Christ through history, and on the other hand it absolutely and unequivocally rejected all current collective expressions of Christian faith (assemblies/churches/groups) besides its own. It simultaneously based its legitimacy on that of others even as it rejected their legitimacy as valid expressions of Christ. It claimed history's witness and simultaneously denied its relevance to any but itself.

So one got the strange experience of going into the LC meeting, hearing standard Protestant hymns, and then at some point, getting a message that either inferred or rejected outright all other Protestant expressions, and all other Christian faith-matrices (or belief sets) as invalid, as deficient to the point of categorical rejection. In LC parlance, God had to do something "new". They'd sing old-timey hymns, then segue to newly-composed LC songs about how everything was made new. But my question is, in making everything new, is the LC still connected to Jesus and the twelve and the apostolic church/faith expressions of the NT, or did it become "so new" that it was a "new" Jesus, and a different gospel? I’m tending at this point toward the latter opinion.

At one point I left, accepting as valid (and valuable) its teachings and practices, but looking for a new venue. I had a burden for the poor, the dispossessed, the so-called "street people" and the LC "trainers" in Anaheim had made it abundantly clear that this wasn't the mission. So I moved on, but with years of 24/7 immersion my thinking was still deeply affected. I've slowly ferreted it out, identified and rejected it, not merely in its treatment of the poor, sick, and imprisoned, but in its view of God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ. What really opened my eyes was looking at reports of foreign off-shoots of the LC, and their recruiting operations, and holding that against recent reports of recruiting practices from those who've left, and then what I remember from being there, myself.

First, I read published stories about the recruiting practices of groups that split off the LC. In them, blatant deception was a tool: members were explicitly told to infiltrate Christian groups, build connections, and slowly move their contacts away and into the 'new revelation' of the cult. You see, the Bible was now passe, and it was the age of a new revelation. The Group Leader had a direct connection to the divine. So the Bible was merely a stepping stone into the group - it was initially affirmed, and then ultimately rejected as superseded by the New Revelation of Today’s Ascended Master. The Bible was a prop in the recruiting process, to be used and then discarded. (And look at WL's biography of Nee: "Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation". How many Seers are there? Only one, by definition. All other ministry is now subsumed, and through the Seer the Bible's revelation is re-made, and even un-made.)

Second, I read something on Facebook by a former member named Jo Casteel, who with her husband publicly left the group, and posted an open letter on FB telling why. One thing they noted was that LC recruiters won't use LSM materials at first, like their RecV translation, but use KJV to impress new ones with their Christian bona fides. As with Eastern Lightning tactics: first get them comfortable, ingratiate them, then maneuver them into the proprietary teachings. The Casteels said that this is deceptive recruiting, and unethical, and I agree. You're hiding information until there's leverage, and gradually special in-group teachings and experiences will increase that leverage.

Third, when there I’d watch Witness Lee give an “orthodox” or traditionally-affirming view, then veer off into personal revelation, which strained at the edges of heterodoxy or crossed it. An obvious example is that he called much of scripture “fallen”, or mere “human concepts” or “mixed sentiments” or such. I’m not talking about Job’s wife telling him to curse God and die (2:9) or Peter in the gospels telling Jesus, “Not so, Lord! This will never happen to you”. No, this was the bulk of the Psalms, with much that wasn’t cited in the NT treated thus, along with James, Peter, Jude, Job, and Proverbs. If WL couldn’t mine it for his personal “God’s economy” metric he’d pan the scripture as an example of fallen human beings trying to please God.

And back to the second point, this was exactly what I saw the cultic LC off-shoots do in China. God’s word, and Jesus, are merely props in the maneuvering process, to be used, and then discarded, as necessary. So I conclude that this as a Pseudo-Christian group. They pretend to be Christian, because it helps the recruiting process. But the fact that they reject their fellow heirs of the common faith should have tipped me off at the beginning. Just like the Mormons, they’ll sing classic Christian hymns, then reject all others, including the groups where the hymns were written! Christianity for them is a false front – it’s a useful pool from which to lure gullible converts, who can be persuaded that the New Revelation by the Ascended Master supersedes historical Christianity itself. The End of Christianity has come in the form of Witness Lee's Crystallization Study. They variously called it the High Peak, the Crystallization, the Consummation, or The New Way, among other terms, but it was really no longer Christianity any more, but its replacement.

Sons to Glory! · 05-07-2020, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo S

Ok then StG. Peace and blessings to you in the Lord Jesus Christ. You hung in the discussion longer then most would have

Thanks bro - we're getting sharpened aren't we!?

And Aron, you wrote some very interesting things! Your "first, second, third" things were all good observations. I moved away from the California churches in the late 70s and went to the Ohio churches in the early 80s. Therefore, as has been mentioned before, I was somewhat insulated from the funkier side of the Recovery . . . and didn't experience most of the things you mentioned. This forum has been revealing in that respect. I appreciate the time and places I was with the LC, but I'm also very thankful He took me out of that system (and has been taking that system out of me!).

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

At one point I left, accepting as valid (and valuable) its teachings and practices, but looking for a new venue. I had a burden for the poor, the dispossessed, the so-called "street people" and the LC "trainers" in Anaheim had made it abundantly clear that this wasn't the mission. So I moved on, but with years of 24/7 immersion my thinking was still deeply affected. I've slowly ferreted it out, identified and rejected it, not merely in its treatment of the poor, sick, and imprisoned, but in its view of God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ.

I do remember being admonished many times by LC folks (WL in particular) to "go after the good building material." Good building material meant people who were educated and/or had good jobs. These were the ones the Lord supposedly wanted to build His church with. If someone wasn't "good material" then don't bother with them. What an unChrist-like view of mankind! I'm still looking (OK, not really), but haven't found this "only approach good building material" idea anywhere in scripture . . .

One sure thing I can say about the Recovery, and WL confessed this at the very end of his life, is it was largely devoid of love. When I left the LC and started fellowshipping where I am now, I began to see clearly that God's motivation toward us is all wrapped-up in His great love for us! This is the foundation of our walk with Him, and the very basis for our Christian life. When I saw this, the word began to open to me like never before!

Curious · 05-09-2020, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aron

First, I read published stories about the recruiting practices of groups that split off the LC. In them, blatant deception was a tool: members were explicitly told to infiltrate Christian groups, build connections, and slowly move their contacts away and into the 'new revelation' of the cult....

Second, I read something on Facebook by a former member named Jo Casteel, who with her husband publicly left the group, and posted an open letter on FB telling why. One thing they noted was that LC recruiters won't use LSM materials at first, like their RecV translation, but use KJV to impress new ones with their Christian bona fides. As with Eastern Lightning tactics: first get them comfortable, ingratiate them, then maneuver them into the proprietary teachings. The Casteels said that this is deceptive recruiting, and unethical, and I agree. You're hiding information until there's leverage, and gradually special in-group teachings and experiences will increase that leverage.

Third, when there I’d watch Witness Lee give an “orthodox” or traditionally-affirming view, then veer off into personal revelation, which strained at the edges of heterodoxy or crossed it. An obvious example is that he called much of scripture “fallen”, or mere “human concepts” or “mixed sentiments” or such. I’m not talking about Job’s wife telling him to curse God and die (2:9) or Peter in the gospels telling Jesus, “Not so, Lord! This will never happen to you”. No, this was the bulk of the Psalms, with much that wasn’t cited in the NT treated thus, along with James, Peter, Jude, Job, and Proverbs. If WL couldn’t mine it for his personal “God’s economy” metric he’d pan the scripture as an example of fallen human beings trying to please God.

And back to the second point, this was exactly what I saw the cultic LC off-shoots do in China. God’s word, and Jesus, are merely props in the maneuvering process, to be used, and then discarded, as necessary. So I conclude that this as a Pseudo-Christian group. They pretend to be Christian, because it helps the recruiting process. But the fact that they reject their fellow heirs of the common faith should have tipped me off at the beginning. Just like the Mormons, they’ll sing classic Christian hymns, then reject all others, including the groups where the hymns were written! Christianity for them is a false front – it’s a useful pool from which to lure gullible converts, who can be persuaded that the New Revelation by the Ascended Master supersedes historical Christianity itself. The End of Christianity has come in the form of Witness Lee's Crystallization Study. They variously called it the High Peak, the Crystallization, the Consummation, or The New Way, among other terms, but it was really no longer Christianity any more, but its replacement.

I resonate strongly with this as my experience. They went from not mentioning 'brothers Nee or Lee' at all.... to referring to them constantly. From bible study.... to WL teachings, and from love-bombing.... to funny coldness at times, with criticisms beginning about impressions they made of myself and family, on a personal level, commenting directively on matters that were none of their business and not even accurately observed. And growing assertiveness about denominations being spiritual fornication etc. Yes it was all there. Just as you and Jo Casteel say.

Ohio · 05-09-2020, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curious

I resonate strongly with this as my experience. They went from not mentioning 'brothers Nee or Lee' at all.... to referring to them constantly. From bible study.... to WL teachings, and from love-bombing.... to funny coldness at times, with criticisms beginning about impressions they made of myself and family, on a personal level, commenting directively on matters that were none of their business and not even accurately observed. And growing assertiveness about denominations being spiritual fornication etc. Yes it was all there. Just as you and Jo Casteel say.

Not only were "good material" actively sought, but that "good material" was often manipulated by others to become "gooder material."

The pattern of manipulation was systemic, starting at the top, and flowing down until it reached every finger and toe of the body. Curious did you not just enumerate many of the forms this manipulation would take on? And were these not just the same way they were "raised up?"

Curious · 05-09-2020, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

The pattern of manipulation was systemic, starting at the top, and flowing down until it reached every finger and toe of the body. Curious did you not just enumerate many of the forms this manipulation would take on? And were these not just the same way they were "raised up?"

Yes, if you mean by ‘the same way they were raised up’ is ‘that’s all they know, it’s how they’ve raised and trained to think and operate’.

Further, how I learned to make sense of my experience with them was through studying this forum especially, and elsewhere on the internet.
(Because I’ve always got more to say), I’ll add some more comment!

1. I think it horrible to consider all the work they put into ‘the long way’ of recruiting…(all the while, denying to us that any effort towards recruiting was taking place, which puts them in a place likely for disappointment from the outset). It required so much effort from them, time and energy from their own resources. I hate for them that it was all for naught because their end goal was not a place that was possible to achieve for me.

2. They relied on familiarisation and repetition of their lingo, their regular presence in my week, and teachings, to convince me. It was not part of their schema of understanding to consider that it could require more than repetition and familiarisation to convince a person. That I could separate between the gospel that I know and where they began directing things, however long it took them to begin doing that. That I could think about and understand concepts, was missing from their understanding. It seems so naïve of them in a way. I feel sorry for them for that too.

3. Lastly, on the topic of their conduct as a reflection of all they are immersed in from within the LC…whilst meeting with them was a regular part of my life, I tracked subtle but awful manipulative and destructive behaviors from a member, directed to and at the expense of, their own spouse. I was troubled about this as the spouse demonstrated signs of mental instability and depression, which were being callously inflamed by their marriage partner. I couldn’t identify that any other member could see what was happening from the same angle as me. I think the LC members were all in judgement alongside the toxic one.

When I learned more about WL’s modus operandi, it suddenly made sense, became clear. This toxic person had learned to operate in the same way as WL…charming, deceptive, shaming, manipulating, to name a few tactics, trying to manage their marriage with these methods. It’s like they were a mini WL! It therefore seems to me, that the system runs deeper than just his teachings and set-up. An impartation of the ability to inflict psychological damage in this case, to manage relationships, has been gained from the MOTA, the master. With him as the example, (we become what we worship) it seems unsurprising in the end. I think that is one of the most harmful aspects and biggest concerns of all, of this group.

Just my observation.

Ohio · 05-10-2020, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curious

When I learned more about WL’s modus operandi, it suddenly made sense, became clear. This toxic person had learned to operate in the same way as WL…charming, deceptive, shaming, manipulating, to name a few tactics, trying to manage their marriage with these methods. It’s like they were a mini WL! It therefore seems to me, that the system runs deeper than just his teachings and set-up. An impartation of the ability to inflict psychological damage in this case, to manage relationships, has been gained from the MOTA, the master. With him as the example, (we become what we worship) it seems unsurprising in the end. I think that is one of the most harmful aspects and biggest concerns of all, of this group.

Just my observation.

Curious you have explained in much more detail a similar observation I made after I left. I had stepped away from the Recovery, and reading many others' accounts online, coupled with numerous of my own personal memories, I arrived one day at this stark realization: this program transforms beloved brothers into bullies..

I saw it on every level. National. Regional. Local. Homes. I saw it everywhere. I even saw it in myself. It was a ministry of condemnation. We talked life, but ministered law instead of love, often losing the basics of respect in all these relationships. We thought that being tough on others was serving God.

Sons to Glory! · 05-10-2020, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Curious you have explained in much more detail a similar observation I made after I left. I had stepped away from the Recovery, and reading many others' accounts online, coupled with numerous of my own personal memories, I arrived one day at this stark realization: this program transforms beloved brothers into bullies..

I saw it on every level. National. Regional. Local. Homes. I saw it everywhere. I even saw it in myself. It was a ministry of condemnation. We talked life, but ministered law instead of love, often losing the basics of respect in all these relationships. We thought that being tough on others was serving God.

Yes, it was justified as "tough love." Problem is, there was little love being experienced (so it was just tough)! In the absence of love, Christianity - and especially the LC - just becomes a minister of law.

It's simply a natural gravitation of the flesh. Genuine love, God's love, really is the one thing that can't be faked, and will be present if Christ is.

Curious · 05-10-2020, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Curious you have explained in much more detail a similar observation I made after I left. I had stepped away from the Recovery, and reading many others' accounts online, coupled with numerous of my own personal memories, I arrived one day at this stark realization: this program transforms beloved brothers into bullies..

I saw it on every level. National. Regional. Local. Homes. I saw it everywhere. I even saw it in myself. It was a ministry of condemnation. We talked life, but ministered law instead of love, often losing the basics of respect in all these relationships. We thought that being tough on others was serving God.

How awful. This is where it certainly becomes a tool of satan, well and truly.

Because I sat in my own space and did not side against the 'targeted' person, the tension against me mounted. I bailed at that point as there was nothing more I could do. Back in my own church, which had been my spiritual home for years longer, I felt soooooo relieved. So appreciative to be part of an environment without all that toxic soap-opera drama going on. I felt a fresh appreciation for everyone, and their way of practising and understanding Christian faith and how it out-works amongst a community of people.

It did nothing to allay my concerns for the welfare of those I separated from in the LC though.

Curious · 05-10-2020, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

the LC - just becomes a minister of law.

And the law kills. And who was a murderer from the beginning?....................................

Sons to Glory! · 05-12-2020, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Curious

And the law kills. And who was a murderer from the beginning?....................................

.................

Curious · 05-13-2020, 04:45 PM

STG, where would this Forum be without your sense of humour! I love it!!

04-19-2020, 02:02 PM	#3
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Just for you, I've included the word "hopelessly" in the title of the thread: "If Hopelessly Stranded . . ." (imagine the waters totally infested with the most voracious sharks) So there you are, stuck hopelessly on this island with these various religious groups, and knowing deep within the exhortation to "not forsake the assembling of yourselves together" . . . __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-19-2020, 03:10 PM	#5
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Interesting points to be considered! So would you say that two or three (maybe four) of these groups follow "another gospel" or "another Jesus" and should be shied away from as far as routine worship and fellowship? And if you want internet there, then there is internet! (however, no virus thingie, so you can hug 'em all ) __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-19-2020, 07:18 PM	#8
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Thank you so much for having the interest and taking the time to post this question! Please excuse me for answering a question with a question, but I really feel it is necessary in this case. Question: What makes the Recovery's gospel true? - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-19-2020, 07:27 PM	#9
Unregistered Guest Posts: n/a	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Do you mean to say they have a wrong view of the gospel? That's the question I want an answer.

04-19-2020, 07:52 PM	#10
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Not altogether sure what you mean by "view". But I'll try to head your way. Witness Lee taught another gospel. Witness Lee taught that one could simply "Call on the Lord" and be saved. This is another gospel. He taught that man is becoming God in life and nature. This is another gospel. He taught that Satan indwells our flesh. This is another gospel. Witness Lee taught another Jesus. Witness Lee taught that Jesus Christ, the second of the Godhead, became the Holy Spirit, the third of the Godhead. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus is called the Father. This is another Jesus. He taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was part of "the processed triune God". This is another Jesus. Obviously I have just given you the shorthand answer. The full answer to your question is contained within the thousands of threads posted throughout this forum over the past 12 years. I think you have some catching up to do. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-19-2020, 12:38 PM	#1
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island** and there were several "religious" groups you could meet with, consisting only of: Mormons Jehovah Witnesses Buddhists Roman Catholics Hindus Orthodox Jews Muslims Local Churchers who would you gather with regularly to seek God, worship & fellowship? __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-19-2020, 12:55 PM	#2
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	Re: QUESTION: If Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . If these were my only choices, than I'm afraid I would have to do what Steve McQueen did at the end of the movie "Papillon". Skip to the 1:00 (1 minute) mark for the good part! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XGWXmxmaoE - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11

04-19-2020, 02:55 PM	#4
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Boy it's sounding more and more hopeless! So you're going to make me choose between the voracious sharks in the water or the ravenous wolfs in sheep's clothing on the island? StG, I hope you realize that the exhortation to "not forsake the assembling of yourselves together" assumes that you're assembling with Christians that follow the Word of God, and not the dictates of a man and his ministry? Furthermore, there's lot's of other exhortations just as important, if not more important. One would be to preach the Gospel to everyone who needs it. So instead of gathering regularly with any of of these, you would probably find me preaching the Gospel to the people in ALL 8 of these groups. To be sure, some need the Gospel more than the others. Some consider themselves Christians, but have been taught a false gospel, and have fallen pray to "another gospel" and "another Jesus". I'd probably spend more time with them if the Lord would let me. Wow...things are not looking as hopeless as I thought! So does this island have Internet service? Can I still keep up with my duties here on LCD? Can I assume that all the social distancing rules will be lifted? - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-19-2020, 09:04 PM	#13
Unregistered Guest Posts: n/a	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Is there a specific thread that examines The Mystery of Human Life as it is one of their evangelism tools? I have problems with it specifically the verses are taken out of context.

04-20-2020, 05:25 PM	#19
OBW Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: DFW area Posts: 4,384	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Quite a quagmire you have created. The only somewhat viable options are the LC and the RCC. Both have problems, but both are actually Christian. (Sorry, Unto (and Ohio). the RCC is not simply dismissable because of errant teachings. I find errant teachings everywhere. Some as egregious, such as worshipping nations and political leaders as part of their time of worship.) I chose none of the alternatives. But I might be compelled to accept the sound Christian teaching that hides behind some errors at the RCC over the LC. Worship with them as if it is Anglican — ignore the hail Marys and prayers to saints. I have only one actual Sunday (well, Saturday night) mass to refer to personally, but I did not find it simply dismissable. Or slowly see about moving some of the people to be more like Anglicans or Lutheran. It might seem easier to lure some LCers to be like Bible churches, but they are so closed that I don't think it could be done. So I would abandon my conservative and evangelical roots before I would simply give in to the LC. __________________ Mike I think . . . . I think I am . . . . therefore I am, I think — Edge OR . . . . You may be right, I may be crazy — Joel

04-20-2020, 06:54 PM	#20
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Thanks for stopping by again Mike! Good to hear from you. I see you haven't lost your touch in throwing a little wrench into the proceedings. Where did I ever say that the Local Church is not "Christian"? The fact is, I have never said such a thing and never would. Same goes for Roman Catholics. Some of the finest, devout and most sincere Christians I have ever known have been in the Local Church of Witness Lee, and some even in the Roman Catholic Church. This is all a matter of the truth. And the truth is that there are many false teachings and harmful practices in the Local Church. It is not a healthy place for young people or new believers to be sure. Witness Lee was not a genuine apostle. That doesn't make him Jim Jones or David Koresh, but there is absolutely a legitimate need for former LC members and even outside Christian apologists to sound the warning regarding the damage that has been caused by this movement over the past 50+ years. And as the end of that Hokey Pokey song ends..."That's what it's all about!" - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-24-2020, 01:05 PM	#23
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Sons to Glory! and Ohio, Thank you so much for your responses! I read them with great interest. A little later today, or perhaps tomorrow, I plan on giving you the comprehensive response that you both deserve. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-24-2020, 02:33 PM	#25
Jo S Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Ohio Posts: 488	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** StG, going back to your original post I'd say most people will look at your question and decide an answer based on what would personally suite them best. Assuming my walk with the LORD is solid and my doctrine is in line with the truth, I'd pick any one of them. I love a good challenge. With that said, many rely solely on community for growth in the LORD or even just sustainability in the faith. That's the main reason it's so hard for many to separate from their respective groups, even if they are abusive toward them. In a recent post I touched on the importance of the individual relationship with God first. I came to realize this was sorely missing within the Local Churches. It was obvious there was a large dependency on corporate meetings. If there is ever a time that LC members are being tested, it's now. This forced isolation figuratively is a desert island for many. For me, I know I'd be just fine on an island with a group of people with differing beliefs because I don't place my hope in others to make me whole in the Lord. This is not to say fellowship can't be a help or even a necessity for us, it just shouldn't be the sole dependency in a Christian's life. We look at the life of Christ and see that he often spent time alone with the LORD. (Luke 5:16) The first commandment is a relationship with God and then the second is a relationship with our neighbor. Too often young Christians leap into fellowship hastily and fall prey to harmful groups. They value camaraderie over God and so neglect the first commandment which results in stunted growth. Their groups then tell them to "not forsake the fellowship” and so guilt them from ever even thinking about leaving or setting themselves apart for a time to the LORD. Yet they don’t realize the context of Hebrews 10:25 which spoke to Jewish believers separating themselves from the gentile believers. It did not speak about general fellowship. What was Paul’s first inclination after being saved? He did not run to Jerusalem to fellowship but rather went to Arabia to spend time alone with the LORD. I understand that’s not practical for all believers. My point is to not forsake the fellowship with the LORD. He should always take first priority. That way when seeking fellowship, you’ll be more concerned about how you can be of help rather than how you can benefit. My question would be; If you were stranded on an island alone, would you find fellowship with the LORD?

04-24-2020, 10:42 PM	#26
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Brother Ohio, Thanks for your response. Maybe we are not talking about the same thing when it comes to "Calling on the Lord". What I am talking about is what was clearly taught and practiced in the Local Church of Witness Lee, as clearly taught by Witness Lee and his closest co-workers, in the 1960's - 1970's in So. California. What I am talking about is loudly verbalizing the word's "Oh Lord Jesus!". Are you talking about something different? I must tell you, being in Orange County, within minutes of the original Anaheim training meeting hall on Ball Rd, I lived in houses which hosted trainees from all over the country, including the Mid-West/Great Lakes area, for dozens of bi-annual trainings, and I never once heard any out-of-town brother or sister demonstrate that "Calling on the Lord" was anything different from "Oooooh Lllllooooorrrrd Jeeeeeeesussss". Some had better lungs then others and were louder. More than one brother was just plain obnoxious. Just recently I quoted Witness Lee where he clearly stated that one could be saved by calling "Oh Lord Jesus". This is what the man taught. I was there at his feet. Nobody here on this forum is giving a "total mischaracterization of Lee's teachings on the subject", much, much less "smearing the man". I was at dozens upon dozens (hundreds?) of Friday night gospel meetings where people were instructed to simply call out "Ooooohhhh LLLLooooRRRRRd Jeeeeesuuuusss" to be saved. No asking for belief. No asking for repentance. Just "Call on the Lord". And yes, those verses in Romans 10 were quoted. These meetings were the typical, the norm. These meetings were "lead" by many of the brothers who are now the Blended Brothers and "The Co-Workers in the Lord's Recovery". They were preaching and teachings this version of "Calling on the Lord" because this is exactly what Witness Lee taught. Ohio, I'm so happy that you were blessed to be taught by and in fellowship with brothers who taught and practiced in a more biblical way. But I'm hoping what you could do is tell us more about this more biblical way of "Calling on the Lord". Please don't take this as a "food fight". We are talking about the salvation of souls. We are talking about the truth. And yes, we are talking about the true and proper interpretation of "Calling on the Lord". - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-24-2020, 11:07 PM	#27
Jo S Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Ohio Posts: 488	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Excerpts from http://www.callingonthelord.org/quotes/quotes.html ; C. The Purpose of Calling On the Lord 1. To Be Saved "Why do we need to call on the name of the Lord? Men need to call on the name of the Lord in order to be saved (Rom. 10:13). Suppose a particular person hears the gospel and begins to believe in the Lord. You can help him to be saved by having him pray to the Lord in a very quiet way, and I have seen many persons saved in this manner. However, if you would not only help him to pray, but also to call upon the name of the Lord, his experience of salvation would be much stronger. The first way, the way of praying quietly, does help people to be saved, but not so richly. The second way, the way of calling loudly, helps people to be saved in a richer and more thorough way. Thus, we need to encourage people to open themselves and to call on the name of the Lord Jesus." E. The Need of Practice "Calling on the name of the Lord is not merely a doctrine. It is very practical. We need to practice it daily and hourly. We should never stop our spiritual breathing. We hope that many more of the Lord’s people, especially new believers, will begin the practice of calling on the Lord. Today, many Christians have found that they can know Him, that they can be brought into the power of His resurrection, that they can experience His spontaneous salvation, and that they can walk in oneness with Him by calling on His name. In any situation, at any time, call: “Lord Jesus, O Lord Jesus!”** If you practice calling on His name, you will see that it is a wonderful way to enjoy the Lord’s riches." (Witness Lee, Calling, 1-11)

04-25-2020, 12:40 AM	#28
Trapped Member Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 1,523	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Don't slap me upside the head here, but, can I ask what Romans 10:13 means by "calls upon the name of the Lord"? These are the verses just prior to that one: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Verses 9 and 10 both delineate between declaring with mouth and believing with heart. Then verse 11 mentions just the believing (with heart), and it seems that verses 12-13 apply to the declaring (with mouth). In other words, does the phrase "call upon the name of the Lord" simply mean declaring "Jesus is Lord"? I noticed verse 13 is a quote, which actually refers back to Joel 2:32. Looking at the other ways the Hebrew word for "call" in Joel is used, it seems it is used in other verses in the sense of "proclaim, summon, cry out". https://biblehub.com/hebrew/yikra_7121.htm For example, Zechariah 13:9 also talks about calling on His name: This third I will put into the fire; I will refine them like silver and test them like gold. They will call on my name and I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are my people,’ and they will say, ‘The Lord is our God.’ ” It almost seems like calling on His name here is equivalent to saying "The Lord is our God", which sounds a lot like "Jesus is Lord" from Romans 10:13. Is this what "calling on the Lord" means? Proclaiming who He is? As opposed to just saying His name repeatedly? Or could it mean "call upon" as in "to invoke"? Here is Strong's Greek on "to call upon" - https://biblehub.com/greek/1941.htm I've never thought about what the verse means by it and don't know that I have a good answer, now that I'm thinking about it.

04-25-2020, 05:37 AM	#30
Ohio Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greater Ohio Posts: 13,693	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** I had a lengthy response, but "my token had expired," and the post was lost. So frustrating. __________________ Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!. Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

04-25-2020, 08:12 AM	#31
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Owwch! I feel your pain! Occasionally I get stupid and forget my own advise to make longer posts on some off-line program (Like MS Word or some other program that has spell check). This is only if you're making a longer post - if you just making a quickie, one paragraph post probably no need. I like MS Word because it performs an "auto-save" every couple of minutes or so. Now it seems some others have contributed since my post. So maybe you could take these into consideration in your response. Take your time bro...we're all stuck at home for another 3 weeks anyway! - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-25-2020, 11:19 AM	#33
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . I keep asking and you keep avoiding. We are not going to get anywhere this way. WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY "CALLING ON THE LORD"? Please tell us exactly what you mean, and then link your interpretation to the actual text in the Bible. You say it is "scriptural", but you don't actually link the practice with the text of the Bible. Before we go further I think we need to get our terms straight. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-25-2020, 12:01 PM	#37
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** I was waiting on Ohio's response (he must be outside enjoying the healing properties of the sun . . .), as I think he'll probably do a better job and was likely part of the ad nauseam discussions (and I'm curious how he will go about it). Here's a question in the meantime: "Lord Jesus help me!" Is that calling on the name of the Lord to you? __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-25-2020, 12:41 PM	#39
Jo S Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Ohio Posts: 488	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** While you guys hash it out in brotherly love, he’s my quick take. Scripture says that when a Christian prays, it is the Holy Spirit in them that intercedes. It’s not by an effort of their own. David was a prophet of God. The Holy Spirit didn’t indwell him like it does today in genuine Christians, but he was given a measure of the spirit. When David called on the Lord’s name, he did so in worship and in distress. This was because the Holy Spirit interceded on his behalf. Scripture is God breathed and since these instances are recorded, we know they were inspired by the Holy Spirit. When you create a practice, like “calling on the name of the Lord” (as found in the LC’s), it’s designed to bring the inflow of “spirit” into a practitioner rather than being an organic outflow of God’s spirit from an individual. This is works based spirituality and is what’s known as mysticism. I know this is a touchy word and subject for many here because I’ve received a lot of backlash in the past for it, but it is what it is. When a movement isn’t biblically based they always fall into this type of spirituality. This is true of Mormonism, Catholicism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and the LC’s.

04-25-2020, 05:43 PM	#52
Trapped Member Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 1,523	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** I'll be curious to see if anyone can drum up any verses that support "exercising" your spirit. The biggest issue I have with this teaching is that it is often used in contrast to "getting out of your mind", which is an abusive teaching. Scripture doesn't contrast the two (out of mind, into spirit) like the LC does. It's not an either/or like the LC teaches it. As a church kid I never, and I mean EVER, knew if or when I was "exercising my spirit". No one ever explained what it meant or how to do it aside from "push your spirit out!" (which just translated to being louder) and pumping your arm. One time I was being pressed so hard to "touch my spirit", I and another young person fell apart laughing it was so ridiculous. The serving one then said "See!! NOW you're touching your spirit!" How could laughing at how crazy it was to be told to do something without being told HOW to do it, actually BE that very thing? Needless to say I was left confused for years.

04-25-2020, 07:07 PM	#61
ExLCMillennial Member Join Date: Apr 2020 Posts: 7	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** That's the problem for some people instead of immersing themselves in the Text. If they are spending more time in commentaries like the Life-study messages than in the Word, they are only depending of man's work. Now going back to the text. It's clear that when you look at the Greek text. There is no verb in that verse.

04-25-2020, 07:13 PM	#62
Trapped Member Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 1,523	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** The mind OF the flesh, the mind OF the spirit, right?

04-25-2020, 09:36 PM	#66
Jo S Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Ohio Posts: 488	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Ohio, you're on board with the "Oh Lord Jesus" chant as being unbiblical, correct? If I'm not mistaken, I recall you criticizing this before. In the more detailed biblical instances of calling on the Lord's name, there is an explicit request contained within the invocation. This is characteristic of normal person to person communication. In the LC's practice, it's simply an ecstatic outburst or expression repeated in unison. Oh Lord Jesus..what? I suppose UntoHim is trying to delineate between the differing approaches rather than falsely equating the two.

04-25-2020, 10:22 PM	#67
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . So Ohio, since you won't answer my questions about how you practice calling on the Lord (I give up...you wore me down...you win) Let me ask you this. So I guess you believe that this practice of calling on the Lord (as it is taught and practiced in the Local Church) was "recovered" by Witness Lee and his followers? I'm sure you realize that there is no record of Christians calling out "Oooooohhhhh LLLLooooorrrrrd Jeeeesssuuus for entire history of the church, right? So actually my dear brother Ohio, it is you that is in need of a YouTube that shows Christians "calling on the Lord" in the way that is taught and practiced in the Local Church of Witness Lee. Good luck with that. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-26-2020, 03:06 AM	#68
Ohio Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Greater Ohio Posts: 13,693	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** Sorry that the name of Jesus has become so onerous to you guys. I doubt that the constant mockery pleases Him. Please do show our audience exactly how Peter would have instructed his hearers in that very first gospel message on Pentecost how to call on the name of the Lord and be saved. Since I got it all wrong, please help me to be saved. __________________ Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!. Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

04-26-2020, 08:23 AM	#69
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Yikes! Now I REALLY want off this island! Sorry Sons to Glory! I guess I'll have to take my chances with the voracious sharks after all. - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-26-2020, 12:31 PM	#75
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . It seems we are generally in agreement about this part of the discussion - calling on the Lord's name. That is, there is a vain way and a pure way. Can we move on now and go back to the main topic? If so, I want to ask UntoHim something: Can you please go back to my long reply to your question a couple days ago, and address it specifically? (I've copied the key part of my reply below for convenience - from post #21) So you have listed six things in particular that you believe substantiate the claim that WL and the LC preaches another gospel and another Jesus. Let's look at each of these six items briefly. "Another Gospel" 1. Calling on the Lord to be saved - this seems simple. I am saved every day by calling on His name. "And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Joel, Acts & Romans) 2. Man becoming God in life and nature - this seems a stretch by WL. It is a big mystery exactly what we shall be, but no where in scripture (that I know of) says it in those words. 3. Satan indwells our flesh - this could also be a stretch by WL. I think I know Lee's teaching on this ("Sin personified"). However, Jesus did say, "You are of your father, the devil." Was He just speaking metaphorically? "Another Jesus" 4. Jesus became the Holy Spirit - I remember participating in a thread about this . . . too much to state here probably. I think it's another mystery and not so easy to nail down. 5. Jesus is called the Father - Addressed this a few messages ago. He's not? 6. Jesus was part of the processed triune God - the words seem unorthodox, to be sure. I could trot out all the usual verses WL used for this, but most everyone knows them. However, they shouldn't be discounted either, just because Lee used them! Frankly, the only one I see much issue with is #2. Regarding number 1 I think it is incorrect to say this isn't scripture - am I missing something? Concerning number 3, well, it's sorta "so what!?" to me. Does that really rise to the level of "another gospel"? And all the points regarding "Another Jesus" (#4-6), we can go around and around (and have) on each of these. Again, I sort of glaze over when getting into these endless discussions about the exact nature of the triune God. (and they are endless - at least for 20 centuries now) God is a mystery, and if we could figure it all out, He wouldn't be God, right?! Bottom-line - back to the question: Do these things constitute reasons for not meeting with the LC, if they were the only group around?** My contention is "no," these six things do NOT constitute grounds for the accusation of another gospel or another Jesus. Are they unorthodox or unorthodox sounding? Sure. So what! (orthodox to me just means they are in the full approval of organized Christianity) Are these specific reasons for not meeting with them if they were the only game around? No, not according to the understanding of the Bible I read. So I hope that was a response that is in line with the wishes you stated bro. Please let me know where you think I am off the mark (or maybe you think it easier to say where I was ON the mark. LL). __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-26-2020, 01:41 PM	#76
Trapped Member Join Date: Mar 2018 Posts: 1,523	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** The VOTA and MOTA doctrine alone qualifies for another gospel, and possibly another Jesus. The MOTA doctrine says that in any given age, God's people have to follow the MOTA (Witness Lee, naturally) or else their service is not acceptable to God. Granted, it doesn't say they are not saved. But it places an extra layer on top of believers to be accepted by God, in any way, over and above the blood of Jesus Christ. It's says the death of the Son of God is not enough for you to be fully accepted by God. To me, that's another gospel, and it's also another Jesus, because it creates a Jesus who's death is insufficient for us, and that's certainly not the Jesus of the Bible.

04-26-2020, 03:27 PM	#79
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . Thanks for the thoughtful reply UntoHim! Hopefully this will get us back on track with the main idea of this thread. I will consider these things you presented. While reading, I kept thinking of the recent impeachment proceedings. As I recall, the final thought in all that was, "Do these things rise to the level of an impeachable offence?" (Half the country seemed to think they did, while the other half didn't.) In this case, it would be: "Do these items (the 6 you listed) rise to the level of another gospel and another Jesus?*" Again, I have to give that some additional thought . . . (others feel free to jump in) __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now* Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-27-2020, 01:34 PM	#81
Sons to Glory! Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Scottsdale, AZ Posts: 2,617	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** I've given this some extra thought regarding whether the 6 things you (UntoHim) listed and whether they rise to the level of another gospel and another Jesus." Here's my thinking - only #2 bears any real potential issue for me. The rest are not something gross that I would shun another believer for! They may seem unorthodox, but again - so what!? Heresy? I doubt that these things - again with the possible exclusion of #2 - are an outright heresy. The #1 item, "Call on the Lord and be saved," is that so far off the mark? First of all, as the scripture has been pointed out, it is in the Bible. Hey, I've heard all kinds of "formula" people have come up with that they claim is the scriptural way to be saved. One group was all about that a person has to intently be convicted of their sins and repent, demonstrating many tears. Another group says baptism has to happen to be saved. Yet another says one has to walk backwards while reciting a catechism (OK, made that one up). But from what I see, the Bible keeps it simple. Do I think a person should also believe in Christ when they call on Him? Good question - where does the believing even come from!?!? And as I related, I had my own realization about the futility of mindlessly repeated "Ohhhh Loorrdd Jeezus" over and over, so I get that. But is it off the mark to say, "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved?" No - it's scripture, and one could certainly go much farther off the mark than this! The #2 item, "Becoming God in life & nature" does seem too much to me, and I wouldn't say it. There is much scripture that can be cited, regarding us receiving His life and partaking of His nature. We are His sons by the new birth, and this is way more than even the Roman form of adoption. We are the body of Christ, who is part of the Godhead. It does not yet appear what we shall be and we shall be like Him. (1 John 3:2) So much more can be cited about this mystery (eye has not seen nor ear heard) of what He has made us and is bringing us into! I think most in Christianity don't go far enough regarding what the Bible says of our new identity. However, WL probably does cross the whole man becoming divinity line. But I can see that this is a line easy to cross, when trying to explore and show what God has in store for them that love Him. I definitely glaze over a little when someone starts talking about crossing a "heretical" line with regards to the nature of the triune God, because it's just too big of a mystery. Its like a bunch of 1st grade children talking about quantum physics or nuclear fission - it really makes little difference. So too, IMHO, is the conversation about what God has in store for His children! WL may have gone too far with that #2 item, but to me it's certainly not nearly in the realm of heresies that other groups like Mormons or JWs promote, which undermine the very deity of Christ. Other things with the LC, such as some of their practices, are more damaging I think. But in any case, I'm hard-pressed to think that any of it rises to the level of another gospel or another Jesus. __________________ LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS!

04-30-2020, 10:19 AM	#86
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,824	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . . OK brother Ohio. Calm down. Take a deep breath and tell us how your calling on the Lord is different than 45 years ago in some SoCal meeting. That's all I'm asking. Same for you brother StG. We all know the actual words "C A L L O N T H E L O R D" are there in the Bible. So are the words "BE YE PERFECT". Is there anything else to say besides "it's in the Bible"? - __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11**

04-30-2020, 11:14 AM	#88
Jo S Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Ohio Posts: 488	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** The context of calling in the New Testament is for the purpose of initial salvation. However, the LC's teach that you need to make an endless practice of calling in order to become more holy. So calling becomes a means, not to initial salvation, but a means to sanctification. This is unequivocally works based salvation. It is in fact a different gospel as others have already alluded to. Repetition doesn't only point to a practice where phrases are repeated 5x in unison as in ” Oh, Lord Jesus”; it can also mean to unnecessarily repeat a practice daily, weekly, or even monthly. It does not matter whether it is done in a group or alone or what it looks like outwardly. If you feel you have to call more than once in sincere humility and faith in order to be saved, then you are practicing in vain. If David continually called on the LORD it was because he did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit as believers do today. Scripture says that those born of God already have the promise of salvation by being born again through the spirit of God. And so through this indwelling, God is with us indefinitely. He will not leave us nor forsake us to the point where we ever need to call on Him as we did when we were still sinners. The word “call” suggests distance between the caller and the one being called. You don’t need to call on someone that is next to you. As unsaved people, we had to call on the Lord but if you claim to be a Christian, you no longer need to call, you can now pray and communicate in normal conversation with the LORD as Jesus did. I believe the issue here may be that some are equating prayer to calling. Even so, prayer can be done in vain as well.

04-30-2020, 04:09 PM	#94
byHismercy Member Join Date: Apr 2018 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 439	*Re: QUESTION: If Hopelessly* Stranded on an Inhabited Island . . .** I just wanted to say from the outside of this conversation, (but from within the body of Christ) that I very much appreciate this conversation as it is playing out. Even with some disagreement, I believe so much light is being shined on this subject....and I personally am receiving so much clarity. Thank you, each of you brothers. I appreciate both sides. Best of all is the reality that we have the Holy Spirit who searches mens' hearts, knows us intimately whether we like it or not, and witnesses whether our calling and worship is in truth and Spirit, as the Lord desires. I know He is able to discern the truth....and I believe He knows every call, if it is in truth and Spirit, and He certainly honors that, whether or not we were taught wrongly by some errant ministry or not. I have to say, this seems wacky, but I agree with each of you! Truth. :-) God bless you brothers. I am just loving the Lord and so encouraged to see the body concerning itself with matters related to prayer and calling on His name, when around us, so many people couldn't care less about Jesus, even with the current viral affairs and troubles.