To "The Precious Saints Who Are No Longer Meeting With Us"

[Recovering]

You may (or may not) be interested in visiting the Memorial Meeting website put up to honor Benson Phillips [link here]. The main feature of the website is a 4hr 23min video of the event.

I visited the site because a friend of mine pointed me to Ben Phillips (Benson’s son) “concluding word”, which contains an appeal to those who left. People I know and love were at the memorial, and I wanted to hear what they'd heard. [It starts at 3:48:20 if you want to see for yourself]. He talks about having a burden to say something to four categories of people: (1) the 1st generation (of the Lord’s Recovery in the US; those who “came in” in the 60s and 70s and knew Brother Lee personally - I'm not sure about those of that generation who didn't actually know him), (2) the 2nd generation (their kids), (3) the 3rd generation (the current young adults), and (4) “the precious saints who are no longer meeting with us”.

To the 1st generation, his word was essentially - thank you, we owe you everything. To the 2nd generation (of which he is a member), he said it’s time to rise up and take the baton, but interestingly he acknowledged (1) that a successful handoff would be pretty much unprecedented in church history (2) his generation has been kind of confused about whether they're supposed to keep ambition in check or rise up to take the lead. He exhorted the 3rd generation to somehow get themselves to the Full Time Training, where everything would come together and they would “see the church.”

His word “to the precious saints who are no longer meeting with us” starts at (4:02:25 - 4:04:43). What follows is not an exact transcription, but it’s close:

I don’t know why you left. There are a million reasons to leave, good reasons perhaps. I don’t know what you’ve been doing. But one thing I do know, and I believe deep down in your heart you also know, and that this is the church; this is God’s family, and you belong here. You’re our brothers and sisters. Figuratively speaking, the Father is standing on the front porch and he’s looking down a long country road and he’s waiting for your silhouette to pop up on the horizon with the sun behind you. And when he sees you, that you’re heading home, he’s going to run to you, and he’s going to hug you and kiss you. Don’t say things have gotten too complicated. Don’t tell me you’ve gotten involved in too many bad things. We need you. The Lord needs you. The church needs you. The Lord is coming back. Why don’t you come back? Just come back! Let’s all say “Just come back!” [leads the audience in a chant “Just come back!”, again, stronger, etc] Just come back… You’ve got everything you need - you’ve got the blood and you’ve got the cross. I don’t care what you’ve done, what you’ve been involved in; just come back. We love you, just come back.

There’s a lot to unpack from such a short exhortation. I have had a few personal interactions with Ben, and they were all positive. I have no doubt he is sincere in his love for the Lord and for the church and church life that he knows. I am sure he is genuinely sad that so many have left and thinks that he is being loving with such a word. So I’m also sure he has no idea that his exhortation was a microcosm of what has caused so many to leave. My goal here is not to mock, expose, or dishonor him, but such an appeal deserves a response.

To start with, why don’t you know why we’ve left? If there are good reasons, why haven’t you listened to or read them? It’s not hard to find where many have laid out their reasons clearly and in good faith. Are you afraid of being “poisoned”? (For what it’s worth, Ben's not unusual. No one from TLR has asked me or my wife why we left. We told some people by way of explanation while we were leaving, but no one has asked.) I guess all that is “on the wrong tree”.

Similarly, he said he doesn’t know what we’ve been up to, and the context of his statements indicates he doesn’t really care. Enough said.

It was clearly an emotional time for him because he just lost his father; thus the image of the loving Father on the porch with the country road is not too surprising, but it is a little shocking in its assumptions.

The "Just come back" chants can’t possibly have actually been directed at those of us who have left. "Just" implies we’re supposed to put aside all the reasons we left, never mind if they’re good or not. It implies nothing has changed, but we need to change, we need the blood (for repentance) and the cross (to eliminate our natural selves). Maybe those chants were meant to soften the hearts of those in the room toward those who left, which is noble. But it was Weird. It didn't make me want to just go back.

"We love you" - Well, thank you. But what does that mean, practically? Loving means desiring the good of another. For many people, that means listening and apologizing where appropriate, valuing who they are and what they have to say regardless where they meet. Is that what you mean?

"We need you" - Yes, probably you could benefit from the experience and knowledge of genuine believers outside the bubble. But are you willing to listen and receive it? History, and my personal experience say "not so much." Your consistent conflation of "leave the church" with "no longer meet in the LSM-affiliated local church" suggests the same.

Finally, I guess I found it more than a little odd that he would conclude his father's memorial with such a tone-deaf appeal. Maybe he was hoping that would honor his father's memory. I suppose I was hoping he would post his email on the blue chalkboard and say "Let’s talk". Wouldn't that have been refreshing?

[Ohio]

If he’s serious, why doesn’t Ben talk to Jane and John Anderson

[I tell the truth]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gDqy-ZD3HXw


I wanted to share this video. This was a post migration video of a couple that moved to Europe. It was used to encourage others to get up and move. With this think this is why they believe many of you should just return and come back.

In the announcement for the memorial, this email address was provided:
"Emails of appreciation to the family may be sent to: bensonphillips@lsm.org"

Regarding the memorial, at first Benson's 3 children spoke about their Dad; then his 9 (?) grandchildren spoke about their "Pawpaw"...how much they loved him and how much he loved them back; then Barbara spoke about her husband. There were plenty of funny stories about their lives with Benson as Dad, as Pawpaw and as a husband. From those closest to him, we heard about who Benson was a real, loving "person". Overall, this was a very sweet time.

Unfortunately, not many of us got to live this life with our family that Benson freely lived with his. Because of his position in the organization, he was free to live the life he chose. I do not begrudge his family, but I grieve for those of us under Benson's "care" who did not have the same liberty. Why? "If you take care of the church, God will take care of your family." Clearly, Benson took care of his own family.

If Ben doesn't know why someone left, Ohio is right, talk to the Andersons. Read their book. It's clear why they left. Then tell the Andersons "just come back." To anyone who really wants to know why people leave the LC, the information is readily available.


Just a thought

[GraceAlone]

Originally Posted by Just a thought

If Ben doesn't know why someone left, Ohio is right, talk to the Andersons. Read their book. It's clear why they left. Then tell the Andersons "just come back." To anyone who really wants to know why people leave the LC, the information is readily available.

Just a thought

Yes, and not just the Andersons, but plenty of others’ stories are available both online and, if invited, through personal conversations if someone were willing to listen. That lack of curiosity or willingness to hear is part of the hurt.

Reading what Recovering described made me grateful that a friend had just sent me the following podcast episode on spiritual abuse and healing from it. It’s excellent.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas...=1000521464840

[Trapped]

I watched some of the memorial meeting, and man, there are so many things going on. I can see how a saint listening might think the meeting was so "sweet" or "a time of remembrance of our dear brother", but seeing it from the outside now, there were so many problems.

1. To my recollection, aside from the family members, it was overwhelmingly brothers sharing. Okay, Benson was a brother and a co-worker, but do no sisters have any interactions with Benson to share?

2. All of the stories his wife, Barbara, shared, had hurt and offense and abandonment simmering beneath them.

One story was that as newlyweds, Benson was gone every night. Barbara represents herself as "murmuring to the Lord" about this situation and how difficult it is to "submit in every way", and saying that the Lord responded to her He knows how hard it is as He had to submit to the death. While I acknowledge the truth found there, the message is that wives need to quietly accept that its okay for their husbands to de-prioritize them every single night, even as newlyweds, and that God endorsed this!!

Another story was that whenever Witness Lee called Benson, Benson's response was always "yes, we will be there on Monday", IIRC the implication was that they would migrate/move immediately. Barbara relayed how she was so offended that Benson would never check with her or ask her opinion or how she felt, as well as saying that this "drop everything and move" was not easy for her, and then Barbara said, "eventually I realized it's because Benson TRUSTED me, that wherever he went I would go!" (or maybe that's what you tell yourself, rather than admitting the truth, that your husband lays his life down for Witness Lee, and not for you...)

Another story is that she said Benson "just wanted her at home". He wanted her to be home whenever he happened to swing by for 15 minutes. She says that she asked him if she could help (at LSM I think?), and his response to her was...get this....."no, we don't need any queens there." And so she concludes that she's so happy to be at home, serving this man. Of course sisters being at home is perfectly fine, the issue is Benson's manner.

So her stories relay a person who discarded her, who abandoned her nightly right after marriage, who put Witness Lee's desires above her desires every time literally without ever asking her how it affected her, and who "put her in her place" if she ever wanted to help out in any way other than being kept at home all the time. All of her "dear stories" have mistreatment flowing out of them, passed off as a glorious situation.

3. Sorry, but every time I see Rick Scatterday all I can think is that he looks like he has about a million dark and tormenting secrets trapped in his being.

4. Regarding Ben's sharing, I guess I don't understand his choice of venue for his "word to the saints no longer meeting with us". Does he think that people who left the LC are all still flocking to meetings behind the scenes or something? I had no plan to listen to one second of this meeting until I heard of this "word to those who left", and I ended up quick-scrolling through the meeting to see if there was anything new or noteworthy. Nope - just more "brother Lee this", "the Lord's Recovery that", etc...

His word to the first generation almost made me sad. Firstly he presents Watchman Nee's imprisonment as something that was almost necessary because "the Lord needed someone to pray". As if......the millions of other Christians around the globe weren't praying so God imprisoned Nee so he could dedicate his prison life to nonstop prayer? This doesn't make any sense, but is consistent with the spin they put on everything. Secondly, while I appreciate that they are acknowledging the feelings of uselessness some of the older saints feel as they get older, to relegate them to "prayer" is like "here sit in this room, that's your portion now". No - there are so many other things elderly believers can still do that they could be a part of if they were part of an actually healthy church! Some churches have "homebound" ministries, where they make sure to visit those who are stuck at home and help with practical needs. Some churches have things like creating packages for soldiers or people in hospitals - something an older person can do sitting at a table. I know of a church that has a food ministry, and some of the elderly members come to separate cans and packages of pasta/rice, etc......something that is SO valuable to the community and to the recipients who would be without food otherwise. While prayer is valuable, acting like they are only good for prayer makes me so sad for those who hear that.

His word to the second generation was also very interesting. I have heard time after time Minoru in particular telling that generation that they need to "rise up!" and "take the baton!" and that he is clearly frustrated that it's not happening. But, as Recovering you pointed out, Ben actually acknowledged there is total confusion about how they are supposed to do that! Any action taken without "covering" or "fellowship" is slammed down, and yet.....the leading brothers apparently aren't taking the necessary action to "pass the baton on", but are rather annoyed that no one is taking the baton from them. They've created a shoot-self-in-the-foot kind of situation. Fascinating to hear that dilemma acknowledged, though.

The word to the third generation fell on my ears as essentially, "come to the indoctrination center so you don't leave!" Witness Lee and his vision are so much less important to third gens because he's no one they ever saw in person. The ground of the church being the "vision" that they will see indicates to me, and this is consistent with what I concluded myself, that the ground of the church is ultimately one of the big "the things" that keeps people in, even if they see many other problems. They may see abuses, they may see a elitist attitude, but they still cannot leave "the ground" or else they are toast. "Get to the FTTA so you will be trapped!"

But, Recovering, all of your points about his word to us prodigals are spot on. To act like they have no idea why anyone leaves, and to act like the reasons are insignificant.......I give up. I just wish somehow that they could be freed to see that there is a larger genuine body of Christ out there, and that someone leaving them is not tantamount to leaving the Father or being a prodigal. They are bearing unnecessary pain and burden by believing things that are not true!

Trapped

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Recovering

His word “to the precious saints who are no longer meeting with us” starts at (4:02:25 - 4:04:43). What follows is not an exact transcription, but it’s close:

I don’t know why you left. There are a million reasons to leave, good reasons perhaps. I don’t know what you’ve been doing. But one thing I do know, and I believe deep down in your heart you also know, and that this is the church; this is God’s family, and you belong here. You’re our brothers and sisters. Figuratively speaking, the Father is standing on the front porch and he’s looking down a long country road and he’s waiting for your silhouette to pop up on the horizon with the sun behind you. And when he sees you, that you’re heading home, he’s going to run to you, and he’s going to hug you and kiss you. Don’t say things have gotten too complicated. Don’t tell me you’ve gotten involved in too many bad things. We need you. The Lord needs you. The church needs you. The Lord is coming back. Why don’t you come back? Just come back! Let’s all say “Just come back!” [leads the audience in a chant “Just come back!”, again, stronger, etc] Just come back… You’ve got everything you need - you’ve got the blood and you’ve got the cross. I don’t care what you’ve done, what you’ve been involved in; just come back. We love you, just come back.

As I read this I sadly heard, "Don't you guys know what you're missing . . . we're it! We're the very pinnacle of what what God is doing, and where you are is not! You made a big mistake, so why not leave what is inferior and off the mark, and return to the real thing!?"

To me, this is the prideful utterance of someone in Laodicea (Rev 3:17), who has no idea that the riches of Christ are being enjoyed elsewhere and aren't exclusive to their church.

[SpeakersCorner]

I watched the Ben Phillips section. It was quite interesting to me. He seemed authentic, strangely charming, both inarticulate and articulate at the same time. I thought his tears real and his plea to those who have left sincere. I also thought he had a different flavor than the Blendeds as I recall them having. I even thought he got a few passive-aggressive jabs in at them or at least Anaheim. Couldn't break all the codes but I felt that.

But his plea for us to come back fell flat with me. His father wrote me a letter and compared me and others in my area to Korah in rebellion against Moses. Really? So I was Korah and they were Moses? At the time that really bothered me but today, looking back, I wear it as a badge of honor.

And in his call to come home, he painted a nice word-picture of the Father on the porch, looking to the hilltop, waiting for our silhouetted figures to emerge over the top, running to greet us. Nice imagery but let me see: the Father is the Father here, right? And we are the Prodigal Sons. Not sure that kind of imagery works for a lot of people.

One time years ago a leading brother from Chicago told me, "They were all good brothers. We just mishandled them." He was talking about those who had left over the years. Ben Phillips should've taken that tack. I understand he was in a precarious setting for such words but it would've been striking had he taken that approach.

That all said, I thought he spoke from the heart and I appreciate that.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Recovering

I suppose I was hoping he would post his email on the blue chalkboard and say "Let’s talk". Wouldn't that have been refreshing?

Who’s you accept an invitation like that? What would your goal be?

[zeek]

Based on his speech, Ben Phillips seems to believe that to be one with the Father, one has to come back to Witness Lee's group. Do they uniquely possess the Father? Have we left the Father because we are not meeting with them?

[JJ]

Come back?

When something makes you nauseated, the last thing you want to do is go anywhere near it.

Honestly, that’s how I feel about the pig slop that is served up in TLR. Just the opposite of the prodigal son story. I’m with The Father at His table where I’m at.

Oh no, I won’t go back, I’ll never go back any moororor.

[SpeakersCorner]

I edited my above post to exclude a name. I felt bad about it after the fact even though what I said concerning that person was not negative. I also considered editing the comment concerning the Korah/Moses situation. It wasn't fair of me to say they called me Korah; they simply warned me not to become Korah. In a legal sense, there's a difference (I guess).

Posting here always causes me conflicted feelings. I have no desire to attack brothers on a public forum but it's so easy to slide into that area.

[SpeakersCorner]

Ben Phillips said at one point that no group that has stepped outside of the status quo (my words, not his) of mainstream Christianity has ever been able to pass the torch successfully to the next generation. It was clear from his speaking that he feels the LR is failing in that regard as well though his plea for prayer and coming forward were a cry to prevent that outcome for the first time in church history.

It's an interesting point to me. Idealism is a short-lived drug with long-term after-effects. I believe the LR had a successful launch in the US was because the zeitgeist of the time was perfect for it: a growing, powerful hugely idealistic youth culture that was increasingly distrustful of institutions. In those early days, the LR really did have a unique stance against institutional Christianity, at least in my opinion. Our meetings were like nothing else and trust me, I had been to every form of Christiandom possible in that period.

I exaggerate of course but I attended well over 50 different churches in a four-year period, I spend a weekend in a monastary, visited the Catholic charismatic group that spawned Amy Coney Barret, was in many Pentecostal churches, Jesus houses, I spend a weekend at Ichthus in Wilmot, Kentucky (a mini-Christian Woodstock), went to two vastly different Christain colleges, one Southern Baptist, the next one Mennonite, went to Teen Challenge meetings ... the list goes on. Nothing was like the local church meetings and nothing was like the saints back then. We called on the Lord audibly and obnoxiously constantly, in each other's faces, did Chinese firedrills at drive-in restaurants and banks screaming "O Lord Jesus" at every car in our circle. We had a whole new vocabulary for spiritual things like "Buried" instead of "Baptised." I could write a book on it.

It truly changed my life. I am now forever outside mainstream Christianity and that's fine with me. Being outside it opens your eyes to a lot of things, not the least of seeing the divided heart within yourself. So I am grateful to my time in the LR and some would say I'm still in it ... but I'm sure the LSM crowd wouldn't say that.

I need to sum this up. What is my point? Good question. I taught writing for decades and had to ferret out students' "points" for years. I'll leave it to you all to do it for me here.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Posting here always causes me conflicted feelings. I have no desire to attack brothers on a public forum but it's so easy to slide into that area.

While there are times that some do slip into unnecessary attack, I would categorize the truth of what is said about the leadership in the local church more along the lines of what is said about Diotrephes in 3 John or about the super/false apostles in 2 Corinthians 11. Neither John nor Paul considered their descriptions to be an "attack", but rather a saving warning. These are things that should be publicly identified in order to save some people from decades of pain.

Trapped

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Based on his speech, Ben Phillips seems to believe that to be one with the Father, one has to come back to Witness Lee's group. Do they uniquely possess the Father? Have we left the Father because we are not meeting with them?

I’m listening to BP’s funeral talk second hand thru some posters here, but zeek kind of summarized LSM’s core message best: “only we have the Father and the Son, you leave us, and you leave God. If you really want God, you can only find Him by returning to us.”

This kind of thinking is dangerous. The Jewish leaders felt the same way when they crucified Jesus and His followers. Later on, the Catholics also when they persecuted and inquisitioned the Protestants. Thinking like that is not merely naive, it can be dangerous.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Trapped

While there are times that some do slip into unnecessary attack, I would categorize the truth of what is said about the leadership in the local church more along the lines of what is said about Diotrephes in 3 John or about the super/false apostles in 2 Corinthians 11. Neither John nor Paul considered their descriptions to be an "attack", but rather a saving warning. These are things that should be publicly identified in order to save some people from decades of pain.

Trapped

Trapped,

Good points. Witness Lee improperly used the word "attack" to silence people from telling the truth. It's a sad day when "truth" is morphed into "attack". The Unchained youtube "Yes, Witness Lee's teaching DOES justify the covering up of gross sin" is a good reference on how this "attack vs. tell the truth" thought developed. We were conditioned with words like "rebellion", "attacks", "opposers", and others (28 min.) because we didn't want to be accused and shunned ourselves for speaking up.

Another way to say it "If you see a problem, you ARE the problem."

Nell

[zeek]

... thus by surpressing self expression for the sake of "Oneness" , Witness Lee crushed every possible way to Oneness but his own.
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

It truly changed my life. I am now forever outside mainstream Christianity and that's fine with me. Being outside it opens your eyes to a lot of things, not the least of seeing the divided heart within yourself. So I am grateful to my time in the LR and some would say I'm still in it ... but I'm sure the LSM crowd wouldn't say that.

That was a fascinating read - thanks for sharing your experience! I too (as well as most on here) would also say the LC really changed our lives. And I agree (some on here may disagree) that the exposure to those kinds of over-the-top expressions of zealousness for the Lord in the early days was a good experience on the whole. Things in the LC went south at some point, and many left. The overall theme of this forum seems to be determining what was dirty bathwater and what was baby, and some think it was all dirty bathwater. To me, certain things were very good and worthy of retention, such as the open style of meeting, which encourages all to function.

And, like you, I have been to various Christian groups since my LC days (although maybe not as many as you). At first, I was highly critical of them because they didn't do this or that according to some standard. But eventually the Lord showed me the primary thing is love and every single regenerated one/group is precious in His sight. And He showed me that fellowship was only possible when I dropped my critiquing attitude. I guess I don't see myself as being "outside mainstream Christianity" because I really do see all believers as being one in Him. But, in a superficial sense, I do meet with a group that retains some of the LC trappings, so in that respect it could be said we are out of the "mainstream." But I prefer not to think of what separates us and focus on the reality of our oneness in Christ.

So bottom-line, I too am grateful for the time in the LC. I firmly believe the Lord led me there (quite miraculously), but I also believe he led me out of there too! And yes, the Lord has been working on me to expose the erroneous things I picked up from LSM (there are a number of them). And by looking to Him and His word, He is faithful to expose those erroneous things as He sees fit!

[LeftLR]

All leaders with LSM are talking or speaking out the following:

1. How important is HWMR / MOTA / Reading Life Study books
2. You must Listening & attending all 7 major LSM conferences
3. LC is THE Only Way to God
4. WL & LC has and has the highest Truth

What i know / heard / see LSM's teaching, is the reason for me to leave.
The day when i dead, i am sure Jesus is the one i will be facing, NOT WL or anyone in LSM.

Bible does not say, we will meet WL in heaven, the JESUS and the Lord will be there.

[SpeakersCorner]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

The overall theme of this forum seems to be determining what was dirty bathwater and what was baby, and some think it was all dirty bathwater. To me, certain things were very good and worthy of retention, such as the open style of meeting, which encourages all to function.

Thanks for the feedback. I agree with much of what you said. I note your tagline: maybe we crossed paths somewhere in the past.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Zezima

Who’s you accept an invitation like that? What would your goal be?

If he wrote his email, would you accept an invite?

[Recovering]

[

Originally Posted by Zezima

If he wrote his email, would you accept an invite?

Thanks to just a thought we have an email address now. If he (BP) had invited conversation, I would probably respond, but it’s hard to say. To be clear, he did not solicit any stories or conversation nor give any indication he was interested in them. That kind of invitation to dialog is so foreign to LC culture that if he’d made it I’d probably be shocked into action. And if it were a regular part of the culture, it’s likely many of us would not be here processing through our trauma together.
But he didn’t invite it, and I don’t feel like becoming fodder for a “special word” to this or that group of saints. So I’ll pass.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Recovering

[

Thanks to just a thought we have an email address now. If he (BP) had invited conversation, I would probably respond, but it’s hard to say. To be clear, he did not solicit any stories or conversation nor give any indication he was interested in them. That kind of invitation to dialog is so foreign to LC culture that if he’d made it I’d probably be shocked into action. And if it were a regular part of the culture, it’s likely many of us would not be here processing through our trauma together.
But he didn’t invite it, and I don’t feel like becoming fodder for a “special word” to this or that group of saints. So I’ll pass.

What’s the email? I missed it.

I’d love to have some open dialogue, maybe for closure or to help me understand how / why things are the way they are.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Just a thought

In the announcement for the memorial, this email address was provided:
"Emails of appreciation to the family may be sent to: bensonphillips@lsm.org"

Phillips family email address.
bensonphillips@lsm.org

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Nell

Phillips family email address.
bensonphillips@lsm.org

Oh, so not an email for convo just email for the funeral.

[Recovering]

Originally Posted by Zezima

Oh, so not an email for convo just email for the funeral.

That was my point. No conversation was invited, only emails of appreciation.

[I tell the truth]

I don't think any of you will get a response from that address if you're critical. It's Benson's old email when he worked at Lsm. Probably workers or family members check it. After Andrew Yu jumped off the stage during a training meeting screaming that Jesus would return I got fired up and contacted him.

To my surprise he replied within a day and said that he hoped I would too be a overcomer. I tried contacting Ron and Ed after that training too to say I enjoyed it but was ignored.

During that conference someone also called Ron and left a voicemail on his home phone. So when he returned home from giving a message he was greeted by someone praying to Satan.

[Zezima]

I’ve come back to this post a few times in consideration. Not sure if we’d ever get the chance to have an open dialogue with the leadership in the LR. If we did, would it be genuine or disingenuous, my heart says disingenuous. Regardless, if we could, pondering what one would say really helps with processing what your feel. Highly recommend it

[Recovering]

Originally Posted by Zezima

I’ve come back to this post a few times in consideration. Not sure if we’d ever get the chance to have an open dialogue with the leadership in the LR. If we did, would it be genuine or disingenuous, my heart says disingenuous. Regardless, if we could, pondering what one would say really helps with processing what your feel. Highly recommend it

@Zezima Thank you for that. I'm glad it has helped. I spent time during and after writing the original post thinking through what I would say, given the chance for an honest, open dialog. As you said, it helps.

Did you come to any conclusion? If you could have a guarantee they would take one thing you said to heart, what would it be? And if you could get an honest answer to one question, or maybe leave one question resonating in their mind, what would it be?

[I tell the truth]

The Anaheim memorial meeting took place today and is now posted at the link below. I reposted the link so you don't have to go looking for it.

https://www.memorial-meeting.org/index.php

[Trapped]

I spent a little time scrolling through the other memorial videos for Benson.

-Ron Kangas is back, clearly having lost weight. He managed to get a nice slap down on all the saints by saying something like, "I have to be frank, but very few brothers and sisters in the church life are actually mature".

So......whose fault is that exactly? How much more "in the central lane" can they get at this point?

I was thinking about the overall common thread of the subjects in the TLRU YouTube channel, and it's as if the local church is Satan's way of keeping believers immature. If discerning good from evil is something mature believers do, if having knowledge keeps you from being stumbled in some cases, if having distinctions is what allows you and your gifts to flourish, if dropping the LSM false God's economy can make you more open to other Christians who do not follow God's economy, if the church is stunted because everyone "gets out of their mind" .... all these things are barriers to growth, maturity, wisdom, etc...

So if the co-workers want to tell all the saints that very few are mature, the co-workers can circle that blame back to themselves for keeping the saints immature. But they probably know that already.

-Ed Marks spoke of Benson "just wanting to repeat whatever brother Lee said" as some kind of laudable attribute.

-the ministry of the age and the minister of the age was repeatedly uplifted

-Ben said that Benson felt that those who leave the church "never saw the vision in the first place", because if they had actually seen the vision, they would never leave. (thanks for the blame game rather than much needed introspection!)

-Bob Danker spoke of Benson meeting with "dissenters" who were asking what about this, what about that, who were obviously "on the line of knowledge", and that Benson stayed so steadfast to remain "on the line of life". Well, having watched the Two Trees YT videos a time or two now, I have never been more assured that these two "lines" do not exist in the way they apply them.

-Dennis Higashi got up and praised the full-time training, and spoke of how special it was that Witness Lee's granddaughter was in the FTT and how he wished he could tell brother Lee that. He then turned to what must have been Benson's grandkids in the audience and basically publicly told them they should go to the FTT, if the Lord wills of course. I felt so bad for the kids to be publicly pressured like that.

-Barbara was the only sister to speak at the indoor Anaheim meeting, and her stories of Benson were again some of the strangest ones I've heard. The pain of a silenced woman, basically. Although mixed in with some endearing comments about getting to go to "the uttermost parts of the earth" with Benson.

-one of the co-workers called Benson "a bonafide apostle".

-at the outdoor graveside service, Hank Hanegraaff said that when Benson first saw him, "Benson reproved me by walking over to me and saying, 'Brother Hank, I testify to you, we are not modalists, we are thoroughly Trinitarian. Brother Hank, I testify to you that we do not believe that we can be as God is in the Godhead. We do not share His sovereignty or His persons and we cannot be worshipped as God. Brother Hank, I testify that we are not the only church, we are only the church.' And then he sat down. Those words are yet emblazoned on the canvas of my consciousness. They were few, they were eloquent, and 20 years later I still remember everyone of those words, and that changed the disposition between CRI and LSM, the LC, etc...."

Yeah...so many problems with what Benson said there, but we've dissected them all already, so I won't get into it again.

Anyway, it mostly made me glad I'm not there anymore. They are truly stuck in a time capsule, and I could STILL finish many of the sentences before they did because so much of what is said is just rote repetition of the same old phrases.

Trapped

[GraceAlone]

Originally Posted by Trapped

-Ben said that Benson felt that those who leave the church "never saw the vision in the first place", because if they had actually seen the vision, they would never leave. (thanks for the blame game rather than much needed introspection!)



Anyway, it mostly made me glad I'm not there anymore. They are truly stuck in a time capsule, and I could STILL finish many of the sentences before they did because so much of what is said is just rote repetition of the same old phrases.

Trapped

Oy vey.

SO MUCH one could respond to here.

I keep thinking of my loved ones who were sitting in these memorial meetings, either physically or virtually. I can't help wondering ... at any point do any of them start to just take notice? Like, "Oh interesting, so much talk about how he followed Witness Lee with such devotion, maybe even more than talk about following Jesus with ardent devotion." {Note: Out of respect for the deceased, I'm not commenting on whether he did or did not follow WL more than Jesus; I can't know that anyway. I'm referring to the reports of his legacy as communicated in these meetings.}

Or what do they, our loved ones, think when they hear these ignorant, logically fallacious, and generalized statements about those of us who left? Since they knew us for so long, can they really agree that we "never saw the vision in the first place"? It's like distancing yourself from the heartbreak of a friend's divorce by saying, "Oh, well, they were never really married in the first place."

I love these individuals, so I don't actually wish them pain, but I DO pray that even if leads to some uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, they might start to compare what they know as true to what they're hearing and, at the very least, entertain the internal questions.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by GraceAlone

I can't help wondering ... at any point do any of them start to just take notice? Like, "Oh interesting, so much talk about how he followed Witness Lee with such devotion, maybe even more than talk about following Jesus with ardent devotion." {Note: Out of respect for the deceased, I'm not commenting on whether he did or did not follow WL more than Jesus; I can't know that anyway. I'm referring to the reports of his legacy as communicated in these meetings.}

In the Lord’s Recovery devotion to the ministry is synonyms to devotion to Jesus. There isn’t a difference in their eyes. An outsider looking would see how much emphasis there is on “following the ministry” rather than following Jesus, but someone steeped the TLR it’s not visible. Remember The Ministry is THE New Testament ministry, the ministry of THE age, it’s THE high peak of the divine revelation. If that’s your understanding, you wouldn’t even notice how much emphasis there is because they are the same in your eyes.

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I spent a little time scrolling through the other memorial videos for Benson.

-Ron Kangas is back, clearly having lost weight. He managed to get a nice slap down on all the saints by saying something like, "I have to be frank, but very few brothers and sisters in the church life are actually mature".

So......whose fault is that exactly? How much more "in the central lane" can they get at this point?

I was thinking about the overall common thread of the subjects in the TLRU YouTube channel, and it's as if the local church is Satan's way of keeping believers immature. If discerning good from evil is something mature believers do, if having knowledge keeps you from being stumbled in some cases, if having distinctions is what allows you and your gifts to flourish, if dropping the LSM false God's economy can make you more open to other Christians who do not follow God's economy, if the church is stunted because everyone "gets out of their mind" .... all these things are barriers to growth, maturity, wisdom, etc...

This was a sobering realization I had when I left. A sister openly challenged their "Overcomers" doctrines and one of the elders' wives said that she had to be removed from our group chat because several people had "nightmares" after listening to her. I was initially excited because someone finally wanted to have open and frank discussion about testing Lee's doctrines, but then I was disheartened to see that so many people were scared. Outright scared. I responded by sharing 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and talking about the importance of proper teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, and then people started looking to me and crying "death." One college-ish aged sister in her paranoia said that she suspected that the woman who was kicked out had gotten a hold of my phone and that all my texts were just full of "death." I had not even met the woman by that point but rather only interacted with her in that group chat. It was so surreal.

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want sing and "pray-read" and chant his name rather than truly wrestle with the scriptures and grow as children of God.

I have a theory of what happened. We went in to have a good time, to "enjoy God" in the "marvelous church life". We got love-bombed. We were special, we were welcomed and wanted. Fabulous!

But then what happened? We sat there under the ministry of the age, so-called, who then began to disparage others. Anyone who wasn't meeting with us was not on the proper ground. Anyone who'd questioned anything in the past was divisive, ambitious, lost to God. Anyone who tried to actually think was "in their mind" and had left the proper enjoyment. Nobody else had understood the Bible in it's "high peak" since Paul had penned his epistles. (Even Peter and James were "low" and "natural")

Now, what happens when you passively absorb all those judgments, curses and imprecations? You become terrified lest they should fall on you! You're supposedly safe as long as you're under the "perfecting" and "covering" of such words. But on the flip side, anyone who challenges the leader is cursed. So even when the leader is wrong, you can't do anything, because the curses will fall on you. That's where the fear comes out - you're afraid of the curse. By passively listening to it, you gave it power over yourself.

The way out is to reject it. Reject the curse. When the group leaders start panning everyone else as fallen, dark, deficient, twisted, corrupted, etc. the answer is "no". We're here to bless, not curse. If you bless, you get blessed, if you curse you get cursed by the same words you speak. And by the exact same token, I have to be careful about the words I use here. Too often I've used judgmental language, and had to apologize for it. Instead of compassion, understanding, humour, grace, I'd used narrow, harsh characterizations. So I'm trying to avoid the same trap that caught Lee et al. The Bible teaches us that the very same hole we dig for another, we will eventually fall into it ourselves.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

This was a sobering realization I had when I left. A sister openly challenged their "Overcomers" doctrines and one of the elders' wives said that she had to be removed from our group chat because several people had "nightmares" after listening to her. I was initially excited because someone finally wanted to have open and frank discussion about testing Lee's doctrines, but then I was disheartened to see that so many people were scared. Outright scared. I responded by sharing 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and talking about the importance of proper teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, and then people started looking to me and crying "death." One college-ish aged sister in her paranoia said that she suspected that the woman who was kicked out had gotten a hold of my phone and that all my texts were just full of "death." I had not even met the woman by that point but rather only interacted with her in that group chat. It was so surreal.

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

ACuriousFellow, I had to laugh and cry with your post. Lots of this is, I suppose, just human nature. Ironically I did not see this during my tenure in the Midwest region of the Recovery. Perhaps that's why we were expelled, I mean "quarantined," almost 20 years ago.

I did, however, just see this scenario play out recently in two other settings. First, in a Baptist church where several "teachers" basically freaked out when I questioned their dogmatic stance on "Pre-Trib Rapture For All." I was simply looking for Berean style Bible inquiry and discussion. Not on this topic! Was this then, as you say, just a feel-good early Sunday morning social "clubbing" with coffee and deserts?

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Ohio

ACuriousFellow, I had to laugh and cry with your post. Lots of this is, I suppose, just human nature. Ironically I did not see this during my tenure in the Midwest region of the Recovery. Perhaps that's why we were expelled, I mean "quarantined," almost 20 years ago.

I did, however, just see this scenario play out recently in two other settings. First, in a Baptist church where several "teachers" basically freaked out when I questioned their dogmatic stance on "Pre-Trib Rapture For All." I was simply looking for Berean style Bible inquiry and discussion. Not on this topic! Was this then, as you say, just a feel-good early Sunday morning social "clubbing" with coffee and deserts?

I have to say, Ohio, I recently got heated discussing the millennial age with an older man. What bothered me was not so much his stance against me, but because of how he made assumptions about the rest of my beliefs and countered what I presented based on those assumptions. It felt like I was speaking with the elders from The Lord's Recovery all over again. Still, I got quite emotional and backed out even though I began the discourse and debate. I was still too raw from what I had experienced during my departure to handle such things.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

I have to say, Ohio, I recently got heated discussing the millennial age with an older man. What bothered me was not so much his stance against me, but because of how he made assumptions about the rest of my beliefs and countered what I presented based on those assumptions. It felt like I was speaking with the elders from The Lord's Recovery all over again. Still, I got quite emotional and backed out even though I began the discourse and debate. I was still too raw from what I had experienced during my departure to handle such things.

I guess I’ve been surrounded by “hot heads” all my life, but I must have inherited my own mother’s calm demeanor. In person, I usually back down from conflict, not wanting to say something I didn’t mean, especially in the LC setting. It’s always been a horrible dilemma for me when others blame me for their tantrums. What, it’s my fault you blew up? I pushed your button? Do I then also “have the right” to lose it all over you?

Here, dozens of stories come to mind. I remember this one time with elders. I grew some courage, and decided not to take the blame for something stupid he did. The more I calmly related the facts, he went ballistic. I was nearly hospitalized, but I felt the Lord was happy within. I stood up against the bully. Physically hurt, but I had my dignity! I had the truth! Worth suffering for, eh?

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I guess I’ve been surrounded by “hot heads” all my life, but I must have inherited my own mother’s calm demeanor. In person, I usually back down from conflict, not wanting to say something I didn’t mean, especially in the LC setting. It’s always been a horrible dilemma for me when others blame me for their tantrums. What, it’s my fault you blew up? I pushed your button? Do I then also “have the right” to lose it all over you?

Here, dozens of stories come to mind. I remember this one time with elders. I grew some courage, and decided not to take the blame for something stupid he did. The more I calmly related the facts, he went ballistic. I was nearly hospitalized, but I felt the Lord was happy within. I stood up against the bully. Physically hurt, but I had my dignity! I had the truth! Worth suffering for, eh?

Crafting our language to avoid “triggering” others is certainly beneficial in many instances. For example, a rape victim who was assaulted when she was walking home drunk at night need not hear “actions have consequences!” when opening up to someone about what happened. Could there potentially be a conversation at a later date on how to conduct oneself safely? Safety in numbers? Designated drivers? Learning one’s alcohol limits? Sure. But not now.

Still, there are instances where one may get “triggered” no matter how the other’s speech or text is crafted or whether it is in the moment or sometime in the future. Take Benson Phillips, for example. When John Ingalls fellowshipped with him about the Lees and the direction The Lord’s Recovery was headed in, he was quite calm and modest. Godfred Otuteye, on the other hand, was frank and earnest with what he felt was wrong. He wasted no time with the usual song and dance that Recovery leaders like to do when defending themselves. He did not desire multiple hours-long sessions of "fellowship" which consisted of talking in circles and getting virtually nothing done. John was like a flowing stream, while Godfred was like a bolt of lightning. Regardless, both of these brothers were seen as “contentious” and “divisive” and “rebellious” by Benson Phillips and Witness Lee. This was not because of their choice of words or their demeanor, but because they did not immediately and unquestionably submit to “the Ministry” and dared to even assume that something was wrong. To Benson, this was simply garbage, perhaps even “true trash,” that needed to be avoided. It was a cancer that needed to be removed. Lepers that needed to be put out.

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

To be frank, there is a fear of man instead of fear of God in the Local Churches.
Anything to contradict the ministry Living Stream publishes by going to the Holy Word is scary. Brothers and sisters alike fear the elders, co-workers etc more than they fear God. That is why it is difficult to find anyone in the Local Churches open to a real sincere discussion in regard to the teachings.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Nell

Trapped,

Good points. Witness Lee improperly used the word "attack" to silence people from telling the truth. It's a sad day when "truth" is morphed into "attack". The Unchained youtube "Yes, Witness Lee's teaching DOES justify the covering up of gross sin" is a good reference on how this "attack vs. tell the truth" thought developed. We were conditioned with words like "rebellion", "attacks", "opposers", and others (28 min.) because we didn't want to be accused and shunned ourselves for speaking up.

Another way to say it "If you see a problem, you ARE the problem."

Nell

Because Witness Lee improperly used the word "attack", that has been a comprehensive catch phrase in the Local Churches.
When a concerned brother/sister uses the ministry publications to make a point, they're "using the ministry to attack the ministry".
To be one expressing concerns, you are attacking.
When a brother/sister has an offense to rectify with an elder, "they're attacking the elder".
When something that is not happening in a positive manner to the Recovery or to a locality, "we're under attack". A good example was in 1995/1996 the Church in Bellevue was expanding their meeting hall. During the expansion the Church in Bellevue did not get the trusses delivered/released in a manner not suitable to their timing. Thus the locality was under attack. How exactly was this an attack?
Is it any wonder there have been countless number of people diagnosed with some form of a mental illness because of being conditioned against speaking up/expressing concerns in the Local Churches? No one wants the label of rebel, opposer, attacker, etc.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

Crafting our language to avoid “triggering” others is certainly beneficial in many instances.

Still, there are instances where one may get “triggered” no matter how the other’s speech or text is crafted or whether it is in the moment or sometime in the future. Take Benson Phillips, for example. When John Ingalls fellowshipped with him about the Lees and the direction The Lord’s Recovery was headed in, he was quite calm and modest. Godfred Otuteye, on the other hand, was frank and earnest with what he felt was wrong.

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

ACuriousFellow, I definitely agree with you on all points. Eventually, however, some people use their temper to intimidate others or prevent them from even voicing their convictions. No matter how kind or gentle one frames the discussion, they will be triggered. Yes, there are real victims, and they need empathetic love and care, but some just prefer the perks of victim status.

I didn't know Godfred, but I can understand his impatience. (Did he ever write his account?) I did, however, read what John Ingalls wrote about TC. Firstly, he was totally understanding listening to JI talking about the chaos and damage to the saints in Anaheim. Then overnight he flip-flops, demanding JI to submit to WL. Obviously TC had talked to WL, and was forced to choose sides. I remember one regional meeting where TC was preparing a letter to JI and the elders. Silent was all the debauched actions of Philip Lee creating chaos in the first place. Rather the tone of the letter was demeaning, scolding the elders as in a vacuum. We were all made to believe that the Anaheim elders suddenly "rebelled" in some coup d'etat to overthrow God Himself.

Regarding the OP's thoughts about the saints' returning. I was reminded of one message by Ron Kangas (circa 2000) post-WL, where he basically prophesied that many saints would return to the Recovery. At that time I had no idea what underlying reasons sparked the departure of John Ingalls et. al. years prior. I was hopeful hearing that. Not long after, I'm hearing those same old whispers of animosity between Cleveland and Anaheim. Then I read the Phoenix Accord which was shockingly childish. "We agree to be fair and treat each other nice." Huh? Soon they started preparing for another division in the body.

LSM has never been honest about past "storms." They live in a total delusion about their own sordid history. Because they do not love the truth, God has given them over to an operation of error. (2 Thess 2.10-12)

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I remember one regional meeting where TC was preparing a letter to JI and the elders. Silent was all the debauched actions of Philip Lee creating chaos in the first place. Rather the tone of the letter was demeaning, scolding the elders as in a vacuum. We were all made to believe that the Anaheim elders suddenly "rebelled" in some coup d'etat to overthrow God Himself.

Regarding the OP's thoughts about the saints' returning. I was reminded of one message by Ron Kangas (circa 2000) post-WL, where he basically prophesied that many saints would return to the Recovery. At that time I had no idea what underlying reasons sparked the departure of John Ingalls et. al. years prior. I was hopeful hearing that. Not long after, I'm hearing those same old whispers of animosity between Cleveland and Anaheim. Then I read the Phoenix Accord which was shockingly childish. "We agree to be fair and treat each other nice." Huh? Soon they started preparing for another division in the body.

LSM has never been honest about past "storms." They live in a total delusion about their own sordid history. Because they do not love the truth, God has given them over to an operation of error. (2 Thess 2.10-12)

When I think of life in the Local Churches, I remember:
"Growing up, it all seems so one-sided
Opinions all provided". Simply those in the lead do not want a transparent history. Thus opinions are provided.
Back to the letter TC was crafting, I seem to recall an old bereans.net post when Norm was active. Something to the effect it wasn't Titus crafting the letter, but Benson? I could be wrong should anyone know concretely.
Ohio, I remember the Phoenix Accord. It sure didn't last long. If memory serves Nigel ended up being blind-sided at one of the following winter trainings?

[Recovering]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

Thanks Curious Fellow. I thought I'd share a short follow-up story — a couple of months ago, I met up with an old friend who still meets in the LC. We had formed a bond making music together and had even done some recordings back in the cassette-tape days. Anyway, we reconnected over lunch after several years out of touch (mostly because we had split into different districts years ago, and the in-person Table Meetings stopped during COVID), and he seemed a little surprised to hear I wasn't meeting with the LC any more. But rather than ask what happened or try to find any more, he strongly asserted "Brother, I still love you. I don't care that you left or why. It doesn't matter, and it doesn't change our relationship." And to be sure, that was nicer to hear than condemnation or disappointment. But at the same time, he showed no curiosity (and actually some active avoidance) about what had happened.

I had two thoughts. (1) If he (or anyone else there we'd been in relationship with) truly believed we'd lost the Lord's blessing by leaving, why not desperately engage with us to convince us to return? If leaving TLR would cause us to "lose the kingdom", shouldn't we be the top priority for their outreach? But their words and actions (Ben Philip's exhortation being a prime example) are a performance that seems primarily aimed at those inside. And I wonder how much the saints actually believe those things. (2) I think my friend was probably very worried about what he would find out if he asked my story, because then he would have to confront his own doubts and dissonances.

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Recovering

I had two thoughts. (1) If he (or anyone else there we'd been in relationship with) truly believed we'd lost the Lord's blessing by leaving, why not desperately engage with us to convince us to return? If leaving TLR would cause us to "lose the kingdom", shouldn't we be the top priority for their outreach? But their words and actions (Ben Philip's exhortation being a prime example) are a performance that seems primarily aimed at those inside. And I wonder how much the saints actually believe those things. (2) I think my friend was probably very worried about what he would find out if he asked my story, because then he would have to confront his own doubts and dissonances.

The simplest possible answer is their "leper" ideology. Talking about why you left may "poison" him and bring him "death," so he would rather avoid it. I remember what they recommended to us when saints started to drift: don't try to convince them, just love on them. Chances are, he doesn't want to hear what you have to say and subsequently try to convince you that you are wrong. If anything, he just wants to "love on you" until his love makes you wanna come back. After all, it's not about "knowledge" or about "right vs. wrong," but about "life vs. death" and "taking Christ."

It's so much easier to do this than to actually hear someone out and go through the pain of figuring this stuff out together.