Guru Papers

[KSA]

I would really recommend this book https://www.amazon.com/Guru-Papers-M...ds=guru+papers

It would give a lot of insight on cult dynamics.

[aron]

From Chapter 1

. . . a disciple of an Eastern guru recounted a vignette to illustrate how his master could teach a profound lesson in a few words. The guru was having a temple built in his honor. Disciples from all over the world had come to the cornerstone ceremony with treasures, many of them of considerable value, to buried in a large hole under the foundation. The narrator had been chosen as the first to deposit his offering in the hole. He describes how in his pride at being selected to be first, he chose a large rock and enthusiastically threw it in. He then looked at the master, who said to him quietly, "Too much 'getting' is going on here." The man concluded by saying: that his humbled ego became far wiser as a result of those few words.

For the chastised disciple, the guru's lesson was a statement that his giving was not pure enough. Another entirely different interpretation of the above scenario is possible: To have a temple built in one's honor and then to further waste valuable gifts by burying them to symbolize one's greatness is a sign of a monumental ego that has little constraint. One of the cheapest guru ploys is to make people feel inadequate by showing how their behaviors are tainted with self-centeredness - always an easy task. This guru, who was the recipient of all this "getting", could not even share a little bit of it with his disciple without making him feel bad about himself. Perhaps the disciple's gift, a mere rock, was not grand enough. But since the guru is viewed by his disciples as a person beyond duality and beyond ego, they could not even entertain the possiblity of our interpretation.

Consequently, the disciple entirely missed the real lesson of history: The guru's "getting" and self-enhancement are masked by images of enlightenment and selflessness and thus are made unconscious. Once his purity and hence superiority are taken for granted, it is assumed that he deserves to be "getting" precisely because he is thought enlightened. He can thus reprimand his disciple for the very activity he was involved in on a far grander scale without it seeming hypocritical. Who gets and who gives is never questioned because "spiritual" values mask what is really going on.

The elders of the church in Anaheim, loyal hand-picked men all, got to see behind the mask. They saw a man like themselves, trying to deal with his errant son, and the genuine conflicts that this produced. For the moment, the mask of selflessness disappeared, and the man behind the mask was revealed. A man like themselves.

Paul ran among the people crying, "We are men like yourselves!!" (Acts 14:15) He wouldn't let them elevate him to some pseudo-mystical realm, passed beyond the riven veil of common mortals. No, he was of the "demos", of the people. But this guru from the east convinced new disciple RK that there was "No self" in Witness Lee the Bible expositor, when in reality he had self just like the rest of us. But it was hidden in esoteric and recondite mysticism, doubly pernicious because it came wrapped in Protestant and post-Protestant (19th century Brethrenist) terminology. So a graduate of Princeton Divinity School, in this example, became convinced that the fast track to heaven, in this case the "Consummated New Jerusalem", was found in being absolutely submissive to this ascended master, who had somehow ascended far above, into cloudless empyrean realms.

"Don't ask" and "don't think" and "don't question" became the hallmarks of this group. They loudly waved the oneness that came from the Spirit which raised Christ Jesus from the dead, but actual oneness was only to be found in absolute submission to the Deputy God.

[aron]

More from Chapter 1, on how a false (human) concept of "oneness" and personal enlightenment can lead to absolute, authoritarian hierarchy, and the inevitable fall:

Asserting a basic unity permeating all existence does not automatically lend itself to hierarchy. Enlightenment is the way hierarchy is brought in by viewing a few individuals as special channels for, and greater manifestations of, this underlying unity. Once it is assumed that some people embody or express the true nature of reality more than others, an authoritarian hierarchy easily flows from that basic assumption. This also lays the foundation for perpetuating the hierarchy, because the one who knows best can decide who is enlightened and thereby transfer the mantle of authority. One person deciding when another is enlightened does indeed seem a bit strange. One would presume that if enlightened, one would know it without being told. yet this is what occurs within many spiritual frameworks.

The ideal of enlightenment at first blush seems completely innocent of human corruption because it is defined as being totally selfless. Yet it is this sacrosanct concept of perfection that allows authoritarianism to manifest, and indeed to flourish. Two mental constructions work in tandem: Enlightenment provides authorities, and karma as a cosmic moral law provides metaphysical justification for why some rather than others come to be enlightened authorities. . .

Whereas monotheism makes the revealed Word of God sacred, Eastern religions [or culture] make presumed enlightened beings sacred. Thus the concept of enlightenment brings authoritarianism at the personal, charismatic level (gurus, masters, avatars, and buddhas). Here the authority comes from living people, not an institution -- although they almost always create an institution around themselves or are already part of one. Not coincidentally, surrendering to and obeying the master is presented as a (usually necessary) step on the path to enlightenment.

The very nature of any structure that makes one person different and superior to others not only breeds authoritarianism, but is authoritarian in its essence. Just as there is no way for humans to question a remote God, there is really no way for a non-enlightened person to question the words or actions of a presumed enlightened one. This is why gurus can get away with anything - they are judged by different standards that make whatever they do perfect by definition. The idea that someone is no longer susceptible to the corruptions of power ensures that corruption will occur, promulgating self-delusion in all involved. So the concept of enlightenment, precisely because it is so exalted, almost inevitably lends itself to abuse and corruption. It can be used to justify any behavior, privileges, or excesses, creating an insidious double standard for the superior ones.

I especially note "Whereas monotheism makes the revealed Word of God sacred, Eastern religions [or culture] make presumed enlightened beings sacred." Lee the presumed ascendant master could even pan the scriptures as fallen, natural, and low, as mere concepts of sinful men vainly imagining God and their place within the cosmos. Nothing of the NT reception of the OT, or Christian reception of the NT (or OT) lends to this, save perhaps a few intemperate remarks by Luther which he quickly recanted of. Yet Lee had free reign to carve up the Bible into "inspired" and "revelatory" sections and shockingly large "fallen" sections, which he called "complex sentiments" because he felt God's word was mixed with human thoughts. Only Lee the enlightened one, of course, could ferret this all out, and lead us through the minefield of scripture. Don't think, don't question, don't ask; just take in the interpreted Word from heaven's Deputy. .. (cough, cough, glug).. ..

Anyone who spent time in the Local Churches of Witness Lee can see how close to the bone this cuts. Jesus knew all this, of course, and built it into His teachings. He who was given "all power", lowered Himself into the dust, was the Servant of all, and taught His disciples to do the same. "If you want to be great, be nothing". On the other side of the Bema, there was indeed to be a place where star differs from star in glory, but on this side, while we are yet in the flesh, the only safe position was (and remains) to take the seat at the end of the table.

While yet here in the flesh, the only safe position is to assume that "we are men like yourselves, of like passions" and foibles. Al Knoch and John Ingalls and Godfred Ototeye and Bill Duane got to see the frail and feeble man behind the mask. A man just like the rest of us.

[Ohio]

For the chastised disciple, the guru's lesson was a statement that his giving was not pure enough. Another entirely different interpretation of the above scenario is possible: To have a temple built in one's honor and then to further waste valuable gifts by burying them to symbolize one's greatness is a sign of a monumental ego that has little constraint. One of the cheapest guru ploys is to make people feel inadequate by showing how their behaviors are tainted with self-centeredness - always an easy task. This guru, who was the recipient of all this "getting", could not even share a little bit of it with his disciple without making him feel bad about himself. Perhaps the disciple's gift, a mere rock, was not grand enough.

But since the guru is viewed by his disciples as a person beyond duality and beyond ego, they could not even entertain the possibility of our interpretation.

aron, your quotes from this book are an incredible description of how Lee elevated himself above all. Key to this was Lee's questioning others' motives, as if he alone were pure and perfected. It's a little shocking even to me.

I remember a comment Titus Chu made about the Blendeds in a leaders' gathering. He was explaining the reasons for the tensions and suspicions surrounding his own ministry and the GLA. He explained that the Blendeds, "see brother Lee as god, whereas I see him as a man." At the time I was a little shocked, thinking he was perhaps exaggerating, but now I believe otherwise. Of course, in typical fashion, TC placed the blame for their error on them, and not on Lee, his "spiritual father."

Some have asked who and what determines who the Blendeds are. The first and foremost criteria is their unwavering belief that Lee was god, yet I doubt they ever even allowed their minds to consider what they really believed about Lee.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by KSA

I would really recommend this book https://www.amazon.com/Guru-Papers-M...ds=guru+papers

It would give a lot of insight on cult dynamics.

Hey KSA, so good to see you again!

Can you really wear shorts in Russia?

[UntoHim]

Consequently, the disciple entirely missed the real lesson of history: The guru's "getting" and self-enhancement are masked by images of enlightenment and selflessness and thus are made unconscious. Once his purity and hence superiority are taken for granted, it is assumed that he deserves to be "getting" precisely because he is thought enlightened. He can thus reprimand his disciple for the very activity he was involved in on a far grander scale without it seeming hypocritical. Who gets and who gives is never questioned because "spiritual" values mask what is really going on.

Man, does this one hits home like a 8 pound hammer right on the noggin. Are we certain this guy wasn't in the Local Church of Witness Lee?

The part I have underlined is a very good description of Witness Lee. He was always and forever "reprimanding his disciples" "for the very activity he was involved in on a far grander scale". Does anyone recall "The Perfecting Training"? Those training meetings were a red-letter example of what this guy has written here.

-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

The part I have underlined is a very good description of Witness Lee. He was always and forever "reprimanding his disciples" "for the very activity he was involved in on a far grander scale". Does anyone recall "The Perfecting Training"? Those training meetings were a red-letter example of what this guy has written here.

I was thinking the same thing.

I can still picture Lee sitting on the platform "perfecting" one brother. I can't remember his name (Art?), but he seemed to be gifted in the gospel, and talking to people about the Lord. In no time the poor brother was tearing himself to pieces in front of all, thinking that was pleasing God.

[Lisbon]

I was in the perfecting meetings and they were a complete farce. One young brother badgered Dick Bright unmercifully as WL looked on. You see what a real bond servant of Christ is.

What in the world is a bond servant? Is it really a dictator, king. top apostle, oracle? To hear RK's speaking at Lee's funeral does make one sick. But that is clearly what the Lord said when He caught the apostles bucking for top dog. "That is the way the gentiles carry on but it shall not be that way with you." Who ever will be leader, will be servant to all. WL's bible doesn't read the same as the NIV. Of course he writes his own recovery version as I think the JWs did also. OK for one cult, OK for another?

Lisbon

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Lisbon

I was in the perfecting meetings and they were a complete farce. One young brother badgered Dick Bright unmercifully as WL looked on. You see what a real bond servant of Christ is.

What in the world is a bond servant?

A bond servant in non-LSM Christian fellowship is different than you would find in LSM fellowship. Within LSM fellowship bond servant is a paradox. In LSM practices a bond servant lords over others.

What is perfecting meetings? Is it willfully subjecting one's self to verbal abuse?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

A bond servant in non-LSM Christian fellowship is different than you would find in LSM fellowship. Within LSM fellowship bond servant is a paradox. In LSM practices a bond servant lords over others.

What is perfecting meetings? Is it willfully subjecting one's self to verbal abuse?

Lee used to talk about how Nee would listen to the sharing of trainees and then speak a super-perfecting word customized for that individual brother's perfecting. All in attendance would oooh and ahhh about how all-wise and all-knowing was Nee. It was the stuff of legends.

The Perfecting Training was Lee's Version of that.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Lisbon

I was in the perfecting meetings and they were a complete farce. One young brother badgered Dick Bright unmercifully as WL looked on. You see what a real bond servant of Christ is.

Sarcasm duly noted.

In complete contradistinction to the apostles' warning "not to think yourself higher than others" (cf Phil 2:3; Rom 12:3 &c), the subjective mysticism of Nee, combined with ingrained eastern thinking, opened the door for not MVP but MEP, "Most Enlightened Person", who could tell us the 'feeling in the Body' and what the latest 'flow from the throne' was. LC'ers even used similar terminology: Lee "had the light".

Once you got the essential LC revelation, if he then said that we were (stupid) mooing cows, we were, because he had the light. If he said that nobody on earth had seen what he'd seen, then this was true because he had the light. If he told us we were dark, confused and impure, we were, because he was more enlightened and pure. Relatively speaking, of course: he'd always "claim the blood" and give the "I am nothing" qualifier. But if he was in the room, he was unchallenged MEP.

No wonder Bill Mallon, John Ingalls and others got expelled. They saw the man behind the mask.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Lee used to talk about how Nee would listen to the sharing of trainees and then speak a super-perfecting word customized for that individual brother's perfecting. All in attendance would oooh and ahhh about how all-wise and all-knowing was Nee. It was the stuff of legends.

Nee had read Fenelon and Guyon and now was the ascended master, the Most Enlightened Person in the room, the 'seer of the vision in the present age'. If you didn't get this conceit then the church life wouldn't work for you. All you'd see was bullying brothers who elevated themselves above the flock and lorded over the saints. You had to put on the LC glasses to make it work.

The reason we're discussing Nee & Lee is because they really believed that they were better than the rest, and had somehow been sufficiently "perfected" and had thus "passed the riven veil"; that's what made their schtick so convincing. They didn't say, "I'm the apostle of the age", (wink, nod). They really believed it. Their socially-derived understanding put in them the unquestioned belief that absolute submission to the Most Enlightened Person, the ascended master, was the rocket ship to nirvana (or, the New Jerusalem). And hey, someone has to be MEP! Don't hold it against me if I'm the guru! That was God's choice, not mine!

So they produced books of esoteric theology, with secret raptures and ecclesiastical ages, consummating in their logical conjectures like the 'Processed Quadrune God-man', or the Four-in One God, and could simultaneously ignore their neighbor, and ignore much of the Bible (you know, the unhelpful parts of it), and ignore all the warnings not to do exactly what they were doing. Because they had the light. They had the vision of the age.

[OBW]

One of the early Life Study Trainings (still in the Anaheim Convention Center), Lee asked someone among the "young elite" to explain some esoteric concept that he had just covered in the message. Can't remember if it was Romans or Hebrews. But first one started in on it. Pretty quickly Lee sat him down as not getting it and asked another. I don't recall who was put on the spot, but was someone(s) like Dick Taylor and/or other somewhat young elders.

One by one he sat them back down until one seemed to get it right. And he (Lee) made a big deal of it. Funny thing was that I never could figure out what was different between the first one and the last (and all the ones in between). I got more of the sense of nit-picking over some single word that wasn't perfect or something like that. It always bothered me. But on the whole "we" were impressed that this was some complicated concept that was really hard to get right and Lee was the one who knew it and we didn't.

But while I cannot recall the content of the discussion, I know that I left with the sense that there was a molehill somewhere in there that had been blown into a mountain. Probably smoke and mirrors. I didn't have enough experience at the time to read back through the particular passage and challenge the premise, but it was always a little unsettling.

And yet evidently not unsettling enough. It took almost 10 more years to decide to leave.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Nee had read Fenelon and Guyon and now was the ascended master. . .

Nothing wrong with Fenelon and Guyon, or Penn-Lewis. Also nothing wrong with Eastern culture per se. Not inferior to my Western culture. And if Nee and Lee were frightened little men, hiding behind bravado and clouds of words, maybe I moreso.

But what happened with Nee and Lee is that they insisted that they had no culture; and we were convinced they had no self, no ego. Their "someone here has to be God's Anointed Seer" was an unquestioned and culturally-ingrained statement which they took as truth, and they convinced us it was so, and created an institution. Thus self-delusion became collectivized, institutionalized. Which is arguably much worse than our own personal foibles, however tough they may be to struggle through on a daily basis.

We thought we could be free of self by taking Nee as our person, the Ascended Master who supposedly had no self. Dead end.

Originally Posted by OBW

"we" were impressed that this was some complicated concept that was really hard to get right and Lee was the one who knew it and we didn't. . .

it was always a little unsettling. And yet evidently not unsettling enough. It took almost 10 more years to decide to leave.

It took what it took. There's an old Russian proverb that says, "No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back." How far someone went is how far they went. Turn back. (And it somewhat reminds of the prophet telling the seven Asian churches, "Repent". Same words they'd heard on day one.)

[aron]

Here's a guru, whose followers bought up the tiny town of Antelope Oregon. They showed up with the Swami and 93 Rolls Royces. When I heard of this group, I was a card-carrying Protestant, who would never fall for such foolishness. Uh-huh.

Originally Posted by Wikepedia

"Bhagwan Shri Rajneesh"

Born Chandra Mohan Jain 11 December 1931 Kuchwada Village, Bareli Tehsil, Raisen Distt. Bhopal State, British India (modern day Madhya Pradesh, India. Died 19 January 1990 (aged 58) Pune, Maharashtra, India

Nationality Indian

Known for Spirituality

Notable work Over 600 books translated in several languages, several thousand audio and video discourses.

Movement Jivan Jagruti Andolan; Neo-sannyas

OSHO (11 December 1931 – 19 January 1990) was a mystic, guru, and spiritual teacher, born in India. The international Rajneesh movement has continued after his death.

Osho continues to be published by over 200 publishers worldwide and in over 60 languages. His commune, now known as a meditation resort, is one of India’s main tourist attractions, and offers a wide range of meditations.

A professor of philosophy, he travelled throughout India in the 1960s as a public speaker. He was a critic of socialism, Mahatma Gandhi and institutionalised religions. He advocated a more open attitude towards human sexuality, earning him the sobriquet "sex guru" in the Indian and later international press, although this attitude became more acceptable with time. In 1970, Osho settled for a time in Bombay, initiating disciples known as "neo-sannyasins" and expanded his spiritual teaching and work. In his discourses, he gave his original understanding and views on the writings of many religious traditions, mystics, and philosophers from around the world. His intelligent discourse and charisma attracted a growing number of westerners.

He moved to Pune in 1974, where his disciples established a foundation and an ashram for his presence and work, where a variety of transformational tools could be offered to the visitors. Among those transformational tools, the ashram offered various original meditations that Osho developed for the modern man, many with an original musical score specifically designed to accompany each meditation. In addition, therapies derived from ancient and modern Western traditions including the Human Potential Movement were offered in the ashram to function as a cleansing tool before the subject began meditation.

By the late 1970s, tensions mounted between the Indian government and the Ashram, which prevented the Ashram from obtaining a larger property away from big cities. The search then shifted to the United States. In mid-1981, ranch property was found and purchased in Oregon in the United States by a US Foundation devoted to Osho's work. The ranch comprised 64,000 acres in the semi-desert, 16 miles from the nearest town, Antelope, Oregon, which had fewer than fifty residents. The Foundation established an intentional community, later known as Rajneeshpuram, in the state of Oregon. Osho came to the Ranch at the end of August 1981. Almost immediately, the development met with intense local, state and federal hostility and opposition from the government, press and citizenry, who took numerous legal actions to limit and ultimately terminate its existence. Citizen groups were formed to stop the development. An Oregon court determined, based on polling evidence, that the group could not receive a fair trial. Multiple litigations sought to slow or stop the development.

In 1985 Osho revealed that his personal secretary and a small number of her close supporters had committed a number of serious crimes against their own community and against local residents and public officials, including the 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack on the citizens of The Dalles, Oregon, conspiracy to murder the US Attorney, attempted murder of Osho's physician and the local District Attorney, and a massive wiretap at Rajneeshpuram, including in Osho's bedroom. Osho was deported from the United States in accordance with a plea bargain.

After Osho was deported from the US twenty-one countries denied him entry, causing Osho to travel the world before returning to Poona, where he died in 1990. His ashram is today known as the Osho International Meditation Resort. His syncretic teachings emphasise the importance of meditation, awareness, love, celebration, courage, creativity, and humor— qualities that he viewed as being suppressed by adherence to static belief systems, religious tradition and socialisation. Osho's teachings have had a notable impact on Western New Age thought, and their popularity has increased markedly since his death.

Please note that this Wikipedia entry has clearly been heavily edited and/or composed by one of the Swami's faithful ones. Nonetheless you can see the chaos that followed him, and the supposedly liberating principles he espoused. "No religion, just joy." Uh-huh.

Note also that the swami gave "original views" on various subjects. His views didn't have to be self-consistent, or correspond to reality as we usually know it. He was enlightened, so his views were enlightened, and if you didn't get it then clearly you weren't enlightened.

[aron]

Confession: I continue to follow a guru to this day. He's from the East, the Near East to be precise. The Eastern Mediterranean Region, aka the Levant.

His name was Jesus and was held by many to be God's Anointed Christ, the King of the Jews. He was wisdom personified (Matt 12:42; 1 Cor 1:21), and Savior of the World (John 4:41; 1 John 4:14). His disciples called Him "Master" (Gk: kurios), also translated as "Lord". And these disciples, aka Christians, of whom I profess to be one, claim that God furnished proof of His divine character and status, by raising Him from the dead (Acts 17:31).

But I don't see any of His immediate followers claiming the "mantle" for themselves. Paul for example was an apostle, which means "sent one", which means today missionary, or traveling evangelist. Not Paul the Uber Boss, the Big Kahuna Maximus, who can do no wrong and whose every pronouncement is fawned over as "God's Oracle." No; that kind of man-elevation seems to come from a source outside of the Christian tradition.

Look at 1 Corinthians, for example. It is from "Paul and Sosthenes" (1:1). Who was Sosthenes? Perhaps the bearer of the letter. But his name was on the letter, too. This wasn't from the church of Paul. Nobody wrote, "Lovers of Jesus affiliated with the ministry of Paul". No; they were affiliated with Jesus, as was Paul, as was Sosthenes. Who was baptized in Paul's name (v.13)?

Was the apostle John "absolutely obedient" to or "absolutely one" with the leading of Paul, recognizing him as God's chosen vessel for that present age? No? Why not, was John then in rebellion against God? Or was maybe this reading of "one special [dominant] vessel per age" a kind of hopeful reading, and rather culturally-biased at that?

Did Paul really expect that the church in Corinth would identify themselves as "Lovers of Jesus, whe recommend the rich ministry of God's bondservant Paul"? I think Paul would have torn his clothes (see Acts 14:14) had he heard such nonsense.

On Witness Lee's death in 1997 the blendeds said that the age of Spiritual Giants was over, and it was the age of Small Potatoes. From whence cometh such statements? Not from scripture, history, or logic. Why should God have one Top Minister per age and give this up post-Lee? Was Lee really that good, that God couldn't find another charismatic soul and henceforth must rely on caretakers and bureaucrats?

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

On Witness Lee's death in 1997 the blendeds said that the age of Spiritual Giants was over, and it was the age of Small Potatoes. From whence cometh such statements? Not from scripture, history, or logic. Why should God have one Top Minister per age and give this up post-Lee? Was Lee really that good, that God couldn't find another charismatic soul and henceforth must rely on caretakers and bureaucrats?

The split between the Brasilians and Anaheim was because Dong Yu Lan wanted to be an Ascended Master, too. The Blendeds wanted him to be a nobody - no more Giants allowed, only caretakers. But DYL had a good thing going. Just like WL, his acolytes were on the street peddling his words. Just like WL, he could examine and expose everyone & everything but his personal affairs were a Black Box. Why should he give that up and become a nobody? Top of the heap, baby; he'd followed WL's game plan to the letter and now the world was his. Give it up? Not a chance.

What follows an account of an ex-acolyte, with the infamous 'black box' comment by apologist and promoter Ezra Ma. The 'guru' theme's written all over this one: Don't think, don't question, don't ask. Just follow the Program.

Originally Posted by aron

(Translated from Portuguese)

The Local Church Movement led by Dong Yu Lan in Brazil and South America was considered part of the Ministry of Witness Lee, from the arrival of DYL here until the death of Witness Lee in 1997.

But from WL's death, the relationship between the leadership of LSM and DYL, which has never been good, has been deteriorating to the total disruption of these movements and their congregations in 2005 and officially in 2009, when a Letter of Quarantine has been published the DYL.

I participated actively in this process of separation of the LSM with DYL, mainly because he considered extremely idolatrous WL Movement, centralized and authoritarian. These deviations were notorious and affected the consciousness of the brothers, particularly those that related internationally. There was an expectation, at least on my part, that in this break, the Local Church movement in Brazil and South America could fix their deviations, and bring his teachings to their practice.

Almost simultaneously, and as the work progressed in Africa and was successful, problems with the DYL leadership began to arise and develop, either in the teaching field, and in practice. In addition I began to question the Movement administration.

Although he was considered a leader, he did not participate in its management, but the Work in Africa, which I managed, is the movement of people and resources. At the time it was granted a Power of Attorney by the Association Tree of Life, for we function as a branch in Brasilia, with the specific purpose of supporting evangelization in Africa.

I thought up there, that all he was doing was by God and for God, but my conscience was becoming more sensitive, because of the inconsistencies I found, particularly in increasing promotion ladder, in your institution, and in business that arose with argument to sustain the work.

In 2008 I moved to São Paulo, in a maneuver exhausting logistics, which seriously compromised my family budget and care for my children. There are several versions on this topic, however, at that time I felt that I should approach the DYL leadership to try to somehow positively influence Movement direction. (some movement advocates said I had gone to SP to give a kind of "coup in DYL" qta imagination!)

At that time I had invested everything he had, property, family, and career on the belief that this movement was an expression of the restored church on earth. Would not it be logical that in the face of difficulties, I simply depart. I really wanted to make "the church" into something that rewards the dedication of the people.

The story is long. Facebook's Notes address in particular this disruption process. I am attaching some files that seek to describe a sequence of events.

Then came the administrative issue and the fear of legal responsibility.

In São Paulo I took note of a Warrant Search and Seizure, which was issued (later halted), due to a Concealment Process Goods and Money Laundering Association against the Tree of Life (AAV).

Were evident signs of administrative irregularities, particularly in resort Tree of Life, where a son of DYL managed an Engineering Company, which at the time was the only one to carry out works at Estancia (meeting place of the Congregations, an auditorium, accommodation, houses and hotel).

The ghost of being a mere orange, providing credibility to the operations, which at least seemed unethical by the Movement summit, began to haunt me.

I worried about being corresponsabilizado for something I lived, but not adequately met, and certainly not agree.

After the episode of the Warrant I went to the resort to talk to one of the main leaders of the Movement, who lived there (Ezra Ma, the chief marketer of Dong Yu Lan).

Surely it was aware qq thing that occurred there. So I argued with him in front of irregularities, what should be our position?

We should just sit on the 1st row and make clear to the brothers who were approving all that was done?

I told him to all the letters that I would not be Orange Movement, and that if there were any irregular or unethical situation, as such Engineering Company that had the monopoly of the works of EAV, so that the situation be corrected because they do not should expect from me what solidarity was not fair and legal.

He claimed not to know anything, but "the administration of EAV was a kind of black box, the Dong's exclusivity."

I argued that, if so, only after the crash is that we would know its contents. Finally we said goodbye. I think he got the message, they could not "trust" me administrative secrets.

There are other episodes that have marked my discontent and frustration.

There was a training in Pocos de Caldas (I think it was in 2009, in the 1st half) to promote the "current move of God," which at that time was through "banners and books of exhibitors".

For me, it completely lost the spiritual sense. A kind of "brainwashing" was characterized, which sought to "convince" the participants at the private setting method, permeated by repetitive, tiresome and theatrical witnesses and under the tireless and insatiable president of Dong Yu Lan, until all surrendered the "evidence" that it really was the work of "Holy Spirit". It is very likely that some had already noticed that I was nearly "edge."

I believe that from here, I had no future projections that place. My concern was how to referral and care for brothers and communities generated in Africa.

In October 2010, because of various events and disagreements, I broke completely with that movement. It was true that no longer recognized the group as "the church", neither its leadership as "anointed of God."

The main motivation that kept me yet integrated into the Group, as I said, it was like meet and take care of the families of full-time brothers who served in Africa, since the funds came from the congregations under the leadership DYL.

I understand that the events that preceded this disruption were not masked to African workers, and the decision of what to do before the apparent reduction of resources, because of the ministerial separation, would be at the discretion of each. This turned out and, miraculously, Heavenly Father has provided care to those who preferred to preserve the purity of their service, ie, they did not accept the impositions of the DYL Movement and also broke the relationship with him.

The episode that ended this disruption process occurred at the construction office in Africa in Brasilia. Files and administrative responsibilities I exerted myself were taken without warning, as in a police operation (I was away, traveling in Africa). This unusual situation, which could have been carried out with transparency, because the right of that function was sustained by an attorney, was carried rudely cable.

Given this, I remained two options: drive my moral, financial and professional damage to a human court, or follow my path of recovery. So me and my house we decided to take the damage, resuming our lives and leave the judgment to God.

Although it has lost many things, including physical health, I have preserved the faith, courage and a companion: Facebook.

The Movement decried me, guiding his followers not to speak with me. However, some members and companions, because they know me, too broke and continued friendship and care.

I went back to work. I got opportunities and today I am consultant hired by a Great Construction Company, in its defense business.

Gradually regained health and financial condition.

For all I saw and went through, I am absolutely convinced that man's religion has nothing to do with the Lord Jesus and with God, however, have always been opponents.

Sorry realize yet, especially in the movement from which I came, the commitment of many faithful, consuming their time, resources and faith itself (seen as occurs with many who left), serving religion and, day by day, up disappointed with it .

It is sad to see the proposed consecration being presented in the name of God, and people devoting their assets to support ideas of a sick and self-centered mind. I don't intend to convince or convert people of anything, nor could, but I can neither ignore facts and experiences. It would be a sin to keep silent. Some later on historical analysis of events may question whether the silence would not be a crime of omission.

I understand that there is not much I can do, particularly to members of the DYL Movement, because people are unnerved when talking to religious leaders, however trust in the heavenly Father who sovereignly all-seeing, all controls and ensures so their children are cared for.

I hope everyone there is freed and can finally experience real freedom in the Spirit and the unique headship of Christ.

Still echo in my ears a meeting that was hosted by DYL in the presence of the directors of AV Publisher in one of the rooms on the premises of AV Publisher and residence of DYL in São Paulo, to try to get my "repentance ". He talked about my "attacks" to their "ministry" and gave me the word.

I just repeated the observations he had made in the letter that I write to him, pointing to the problem of discomfort on the promotion of Dong Yu Lan and AV by congregations over the name of the Lord, and neglect the Word of the Apostles and of the Lord Jesus Himself in particular the emphasis on the teaching and practice with respect to business.

At this point there was something quite remarkable. When I mentioned that it was unacceptable that the "restoration" ignore the words of the Lord Jesus, so I started to quote the verse that Jesus spoke in the temple, "it is written, my house ..." (Luke 19:46). I could not finish. Dong Yu Lan stood up and started screaming, "Enough! Enough! U will not convince me of anything. If u want to follow me, follow me, if u do not want to follow me, do not follow me. " (with Chinese translation into Portuguese)

This is Donguismo !!!!

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

The split between the Brasilians and Anaheim was because Dong Yu Lan wanted to be an Ascended Master, too. The Blendeds wanted him to be a nobody - no more Giants allowed, only caretakers. But DYL had a good thing going. Just like WL, his acolytes were on the street peddling his words. Just like WL, he could examine and expose everyone & everything but his personal affairs were a Black Box. Why should he give that up and become a nobody? Top of the heap, baby; he'd followed WL's game plan to the letter and now the world was his. Give it up? Not a chance.

One thing that seems to escape LC members is that because Lee served as everyone's role model, it goes without saying that there would be some who would seek to initiate his self-appointed 'MOTA' status. To the extent that TC and DYL saw themselves as being special, that is a problem that can be attributed to Lee. He created them. He is who they sought to mimic. Does it really surprise anyone that in spiritual guru Leeland, that there were plenty line up ready to take his spot? I'm not surprised, not the least bit.

DYL or TC could have been his successor. Instead the blendeds won the grab for power.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

One thing that seems to escape LC members is that because Lee served as everyone's role model, it goes without saying that there would be some who would seek to initiate his self-appointed 'MOTA' status. To the extent that TC and DYL saw themselves as being special, that is a problem that can be attributed to Lee. He created them. He is who they sought to mimic. Does it really surprise anyone that in spiritual guru Leeland, that there were plenty line up ready to take his spot? I'm not surprised, not the least bit.

DYL or TC could have been his successor. Instead the blendeds won the grab for power.

Exactly. And that's all those quarantines were -- a power grab. Disguised by tract wars.

I was told by one former worker that TC told him personally about many in Asia who had begun a slogan, slowly gaining momentum: "Nee-Lee-Chu."

Compare that with our pattern Paul, supposedly the Proto-MOTA: "All in Asia have forsaken me." (2 Tim 1.15)

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Freedom

DYL or TC could have been his successor. Instead the blendeds won the grab for power.

The Blendeds won because they controlled the source of LCM lore and dogma — the LSM.

And while there are several Blendeds rather than just one, the issue is that they realized that with the diversity of what was actually practiced, and what was and was not known concerning the issues of the past, no one of them could reasonably rise to preeminence and maintain what was left. And even in that they failed because of TC and DYL.

But I would suggest that there is a "hidden" hierarchy among the Blendeds. In other words, some are more blended than others. Maybe a triumvirate of BP, RK, and RG. All others are given specific local or regional responsibilities, but these are more global.

And so

"Four legs good, two legs bad"

becomes

"Four legs good, two legs better"

As for the title of the thread, "Another Guru," I am reminded of a line from the Disney animated movie, Aladdin, in which some local guy watching a procession of pomp and circumstance of a noble coming to see the princess, says "another suitor for the princess" in a very sarcastic manner.

And so, with apologies to Monty Python, we have

"Another guru"
"And there was much rejoicing" "yea.."

[HERn]

It may be that the Anaheim blendeds knew they would be out of a job if TC or another ascended master was to take over. It will be interesting to observe the power plays when RK, EM and others start receding. The recovery is finished whenever the rate of members who leave exceed the number of marks who get recruited.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

It will be interesting to observe the power plays when RK, EM and others start receding.

I'm inclined to think that as the blendeds slowly disappear, members will struggle with an identity crisis. Who should they follow? What were they following? Who will lead them on? Those are all questions they will be forced to answer, as did members who where there when Lee passed on.

In a movement that is formed around a guru and is held together by the guru, it's continual existence is dependent upon the existence of that person. There was an LC leader who referred to the Chinese proverb "when the tree falls, the monkeys scatter" as a supposed 'proof' that the LC wasn't centered around Lee. Actually, the reason the LC is still in existence is because Lee had a "blendedfold intensified" continuation. They had enough credibility among members to assume his position. And even despite that, there was still somewhat of a mini identity crisis that still happened.

I really don't believe that the blendeds have any successor 'group' in mind. Of course they could put anyone they want up at the podium if that became necessary, but whose to say members will follow their appointed successors? The rank and file consider themselves to be dumb sheep, so they need a leader. If there isn't anyone filling those shoes who has credibility among members, then the LC will cease to exist as we know it.

[HERn]

The blendeds must be thinking of who can take over. Whoever it is will need to be uncompromising, faithful to Lee, disparaging of Christianity, and able to write nonsensical outlines using obtuse references to the bible. The body of Christ is much bigger than the sect known as the lords recovery.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

The blendeds must be thinking of who can take over. Whoever it is will need to be uncompromising, faithful to Lee, disparaging of Christianity, and able to write nonsensical outlines using obtuse references to the bible. The body of Christ is much bigger than the sect known as the lords recovery.

The blindeds know they will have to name a group of successors eventually, but in the meantime, as Ron has said - they ain't stepping aside for nobody.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

The Blendeds won because they controlled the source of LCM lore and dogma — the LSM.

The Blendeds won the tract wars because they had a bigger captive audience and a bigger printing press. But I doubt Dong is crying in his milk: he got to be Avatar. He got to be God's Deputy, the Oracle of the Divine Will, albeit in a smaller pond, rather than a nothing in a slightly bigger pond. And he probably took the trade-off without any hesitation.

The Message therefore lives on: We're the True Remnant Assembly, God's Little Flock, guided faithfully by God's Deputy, the Enlightened One with the Golden Riches of Heaven. And we're misunderstood, opposed, defamed, attacked, and persecuted by Deformed Monstrous Religion, including the California-based Blended Lieutenants of Lee.

Dong was nothing if not a faithful follower of Lee's play-book, here. And like Lee, he got to be the center of his own spiritual universe.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

. . . as Ron has said - they ain't stepping aside for nobody.

Whatever happened to thinking of others more highly than yourselves? Oh, I know, it disappeared on the Local Ground. The LG was a trojan horse to get you to accept a human cultural ethos centered upon the deification of one of its own. Without the elevation of one of the flock to God-Man status, untouchable and unquestionable, who'd be in charge? Chaos would reign! No, Good Order in the Church is predicated upon Authority and Submission. And in a Normal Christian Church this must be absolute.

All that other stuff, you know, brotherly love, compassion, confessing to one another, mutuality, respecting the gifts of each one member. . . ? It must either be subsumed by Today's Vision, or waved away as irrelevant. Sail on!

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by aron

Whatever happened to thinking of others more highly than yourselves? Oh, I know, it disappeared on the Local Ground. The LG was a trojan horse to get you to accept a human cultural ethos centered upon the deification of one of its own. Without the elevation of one of the flock to God-Man status, untouchable and unquestionable, who'd be in charge? Chaos would reign! No, Good Order in the Church is predicated upon Authority and Submission. And in a Normal Christian Church this must be absolute.

This one's pretty brash.... even for our brother aron!

To my dear brothers and sisters in the Local Churches: You may want to resist the temptation to consider this as simply the ramblings of a bitter former LC member turned "opposer", and instead file this under the "truth hurts" category. Oh, maybe it's something in between the two of these extremes, but an honest evaluation by sober people, both within and out of the Movement, points mostly to the objective truth in what aron has posted.

About 38 years ago the Local Church put out a pamphlet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of The Local Churches". An electronic version is published here:
http://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/faq.html

Under the frequently asked questions area you will find this:

Who is your leader?
Our unique leader is Christ. We have no official, permanent, organized human leadership. Furthermore, there is no hierarchy of any kind and no worldwide leader. We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly. On the contrary, we follow only those whose teaching and practice is in accordance with the truth of God’s Word.

I still remember, as a young college student, kind of cringing inside upon seeing this statement published. I mean, the objective reality was so different than what is stated here that it was almost embarrassing. Well, in less than a decade's time, Witness Lee was declared to be "The one apostle with the one ministry for the age" - "The one Master Builder" - "The Commander in Chief" - and some LSM trainers boasted: "even if Witness Lee is wrong, he is right!" and the worst of all, one mindless minion declared Lee to be "the fourth member of the trinity"!

Of course the Local Church movement is now partly populated with a large segment of young people who were not even born when these pompous proclamations went forth from the faithful, true believers. However, my dear friends, make no mistake, the Movement is now directed and controlled by people who absolutely believe and subscribe to these preposterous notions.

***Any Local Church elder, co-worker or LSM/DCP official who wants to dispute this is more than welcome to come and set us straight. Your retort will be promptly and prominently featured on the forum's main page. I did have a special module entitled "Soapbox of the saints" posted prominently on the forum for several months. We got almost 1,000 hits/views on this module, but not one LC member took advantage of the opportunity to sock it to us. Maybe you brothers taking the lead in the Local Churches and Living Stream Ministry can break the ice?

-

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ;49347

About 38 years ago the Local Church put out a pamphlet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of The Local Churches". An electronic version is published here:
http://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/faq.html

Under the frequently asked questions area you will find this:

Who is your leader?
Our unique leader is Christ. We have no official, permanent, organized human leadership. Furthermore, there is no hierarchy of any kind and no worldwide leader. We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly. On the contrary, we follow only those whose teaching and practice is in accordance with the truth of God’s Word.

Based on LC orthopraxy, the above is strictly for public consumption. Otherwise why is fear of man so prevalent so unhindered in the local churches. Someone doesn't agree with brother Maximum, he's disfellowshipped or subjected to some trivial discipline.

"We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly. " LC practices contradict the statement.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

About 38 years ago the Local Church put out a pamphlet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of The Local Churches". An electronic version is published here:
http://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/faq.html

Back in 2003-04, TC had all the GLA LC's get this booklet and read it together as a reminder of our supposed "mission statement."

Comparing that booklet to LSM-dominated LC's is just a joke.

[aron]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

About 38 years ago the Local Church put out a pamphlet entitled "Beliefs and Practices of The Local Churches". An electronic version is published here:
http://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/faq.html

Under the frequently asked questions area you will find this:

Who is your leader?
Our unique leader is Christ. We have no official, permanent, organized human leadership. Furthermore, there is no hierarchy of any kind and no worldwide leader. We regard no person as infallible, and we do not follow anyone blindly. On the contrary, we follow only those whose teaching and practice is in accordance with the truth of God’s Word.

Originally Posted by Freedom

as Ron has said - they ain't stepping aside for nobody.

So if there's no leader, and RK says that he won't step aside for anyone, why should anyone else step aside for him? And, why did he insist that TC and DYL step aside for the Blendeds? And why did RK and BP and many others step aside for WL?

This is an organization whose leaders say anything at any given moment, and who cares if it matches itself, or matches the Bible, or even makes sense, because the "oracle" can say whatever it needs to say. I guess. . . that's the central organizing principle: "I'm God's Deputy and whatever I say goes. I've got the Red Phone to the throne in heaven. I've got the 'mantle'." Not really much different from Leslie Gore singing, "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to."

But thankfully the Deputy God is such a Transformed and Humble Bondslave of Jesus Christ. If the Deputy God had ambition, wow that would be just terrible!

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

So if there's no leader, and RK says that he won't step aside for anyone, why should anyone else step aside for him? And, why did he insist that TC and DYL step aside for the Blendeds? And why did RK and BP and many others step aside for WL?

This is an organization whose leaders say anything at any given moment, and who cares if it matches itself, or matches the Bible, or even makes sense, because the "oracle" can say whatever it needs to say. I guess. . . that's the central organizing principle: "I'm God's Deputy and whatever I say goes. I've got the Red Phone to the throne in heaven. I've got the 'mantle'." Not really much different from Leslie Gore singing, "It's my party and I'll cry if I want to."

LC leaders have long since learned that they have the ability to say whatever they want, and expect little to no push-back. It all started with WL. Some days he was a humble bondservant, other days he brazenly claimed a MOTA status. The story was always changing, and his successors learned how to play the game.

[HERn]

"How can one surrender to a person who might put his self-interest first? Also it is difficult to surrender to someone who can make mistakes, especially mistakes that could have significant impact on one’s life. Consequently, the guru can never be wrong, make mistakes, be self-centered, or lose emotional control. He doesn’t get angry, he “uses” anger to teach."

Sounds like WL to me.

[HERn]

"Any of the following are strong indications of belonging to an authoritarian group: 1. No deviation from the party line is allowed. Anyone who has thoughts or feelings contrary to the accepted perspective is made to feel wrong or bad for having them. 2. Whatever the authority does is regarded as perfect or right. Thus behaviors that would be questioned in others are made to seem different and proper. 3. One trusts that the leader or others in the group know what’s best. 4. It is difficult to communicate with anyone not in the group. 5. One finds oneself defending actions of the leader (or other members) without having firsthand knowledge of what occurred. 6. At times one is confused and fearful without knowing why. This is a sign that doubts are being repressed."

Sound familiar?

[Freedom]

"Any of the following are strong indications of belonging to an authoritarian group: 1. No deviation from the party line is allowed. Anyone who has thoughts or feelings contrary to the accepted perspective is made to feel wrong or bad for having them. 2. Whatever the authority does is regarded as perfect or right. Thus behaviors that would be questioned in others are made to seem different and proper. 3. One trusts that the leader or others in the group know what’s best. 4. It is difficult to communicate with anyone not in the group. 5. One finds oneself defending actions of the leader (or other members) without having firsthand knowledge of what occurred. 6. At times one is confused and fearful without knowing why. This is a sign that doubts are being repressed."

Sound familiar?

The similarities are striking, but even more so is the fact that we once thought each of these factors to be unique to the LC. So many of the elements that were deemed to be unique to the LC were exactly the things that were the most abusive, and interestingly, the exact same things found in other abusive groups.

I've struggled with this a lot. We each took certain aberrant factors of the LC as a sort of 'proof' that the LC was the place to be. These are the very things that are common to abusive groups. The terminology differs, but the same elements are always at play.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Hope

Right after the meeting James Barber informed John So and I that WL was very upset. Francis Ball had tipped off James. WL did not want to have a quiet private talk but chose to dress the two of us down in the hall for all to see. As soon as the meeting was over, we two were marched to the front. Chairs were rearranged. John and I set by ourselves facing WL and about 50 brothers including James Barber who set behind WL in support of him. Scores of the attendance milled around the little court room and became an audience. WL never asked us to open our concerns but immediately launched into a tirade against us and issued a general warning that if we continued to question what the office and the ministry was doing we would cause a lot of damage to the saints and we would damage ourselves.

I can never forget the glare of despising we got from Ron Kangas as WL continued for about 10 minutes with the rebuke. Then he dismissed the meeting and we all went home. Was I ever in shock!!! So was John So. I was taking hospitality with Ned Sossaman. On the ride home he laughed and laughed. He said this regularly happened to the elders in Orange County.

Whatever happened to "God's humble bondslave" Witness Lee. . . it was a pretense, a sham, to be dropped if necessary. Other testimonies, for example by John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So, corroborate this kind of autocratic, imperious leadership style, and treatment of underlings. The humble and self-effacing servant-of-all persona, who was "least of all the saints" and who "controlled no one", was just a public front, to sell books and fill conference chairs. It was a marketing ploy.

I am so glad I got out of the LC of Lee.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

Whatever happened to "God's humble bondslave" Witness Lee. . . it was a pretense, a sham, to be dropped if necessary. Other testimonies, for example by John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So, corroborate this kind of autocratic, imperious leadership style, and treatment of underlings. The humble and self-effacing servant-of-all persona, who was "least of all the saints" and who "controlled no one", was just a public front, to sell books and fill conference chairs. It was a marketing ploy.

I am so glad I got out of the LC of Lee.

It is good that we have this window into the real Lee. Those like me who never met or heard Lee speak in person only got to know the 'bondslave' version of Lee that leaders made him out to be. And maybe the LC has toned things down a bit, but the example that Lee set is still there. His way of leadership is still viewed as the model that leaders follow. I'm sure the those who can handle it (such as FTT trainees) still get their share of 'perfecting'.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by HERn

The recovery is finished whenever the rate of members who leave exceed the number of marks who get recruited.

Mark, that's an interest term. In relation to the LC it can be defined as "Does not, or chooses not to, follow the backstage politics"....as we know there is politics in the local churches.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

Whatever happened to "God's humble bondslave" Witness Lee. . . it was a pretense, a sham, to be dropped if necessary. Other testimonies, for example by John Ingalls, Bill Mallon, and John So, corroborate this kind of autocratic, imperious leadership style, and treatment of underlings. The humble and self-effacing servant-of-all persona, who was "least of all the saints" and who "controlled no one", was just a public front, to sell books and fill conference chairs. It was a marketing ploy.

Just like the old Canon marketing tag; "Image is everything". Even 19 years after his passing, LSM has an image to project and distribute. Their business is Lee far more than Nee so it's imperative to market Lee as "a humble bondslave", "perfected", etc.

[JJ]

I also noticed the following statement in the Beliefs and Practices of the Local Churches pamphlet, which I remember believing when it came out.

I'd like other long time LCers to weigh in on whether this is true practice or not.

"All who have saving faith in the Lord Jesus are welcome to all our meetings, especially the Lord’s table, where we testify of the oneness of the Body of Christ. Although we must, for conscience' sake, stand apart from organized religion, we do not stand apart from our brothers and sisters in Christ. In faithfulness to the Lord, we stand on the unique ground of the church for the sake of the Lord’s testimony. But we do not take this stand with a narrow, exclusive, or sectarian spirit. On the contrary, we take our stand on behalf of the whole Body; we receive all believers even as the Lord has received us."

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by JJ

"All who have saving faith in the Lord Jesus are welcome to all our meetings, especially the Lord’s table, where we testify of the oneness of the Body of Christ. Although we must, for conscience' sake, stand apart from organized religion, we do not stand apart from our brothers and sisters in Christ. In faithfulness to the Lord, we stand on the unique ground of the church for the sake of the Lord’s testimony. But we do not take this stand with a narrow, exclusive, or sectarian spirit. On the contrary, we take our stand on behalf of the whole Body; we receive all believers even as the Lord has received us."

It all sounds like corporate strategy designed to grow business, and pilfer building material from the competition whenever possible to enlarge and expand the company. When the economy is down, the efforts will become more strident.

Originally Posted by Terry

Just like the old Canon marketing tag; "Image is everything". Even 19 years after his passing, LSM has an image to project and distribute. Their business is Lee far more than Nee so it's imperative to market Lee as "a humble bondslave", "perfected", etc.

Image is everything, however I was so concerned about the image of WL that I saw on his videos, that I sent one to a body language expert/physician. This expert is not a believer and had no idea who WL was. His verdict : WL showed all the signs of insincerity, much like untrained politicians, used car salesmen or news telecasters.

It's just business, nothing personal. The 2013 tax returns for the LSM shows that they have close to 100 million in assets, they bring in about 20 million per year and 75% of this goes to salaries and expenses.

[Freedom]

"All who have saving faith in the Lord Jesus are welcome to all our meetings, especially the Lord’s table, where we testify of the oneness of the Body of Christ. Although we must, for conscience' sake, stand apart from organized religion, we do not stand apart from our brothers and sisters in Christ. In faithfulness to the Lord, we stand on the unique ground of the church for the sake of the Lord’s testimony. But we do not take this stand with a narrow, exclusive, or sectarian spirit. On the contrary, we take our stand on behalf of the whole Body; we receive all believers even as the Lord has received us."

The environment of the local churches is what I would call a simulated reality. More specifically, rhetoric is what defines reality. What is spoken by leaders is what is believed to be true, no matter how far removed from reality it is. And the issue is not simply that LCers are living in their own world. The real issue is that the beliefs and ideology that LC members think that they are subscribing to are not what is actually practiced. For whatever reasons, LC members can't admit it. I do think that some members are aware of the discrepancy, however, there is the inability to discuss the true reality of the LC environment.

It's ironic that the Beliefs and Practices booklet was ever published. The audience was outsiders, and the reason that outsiders had become concerned about the LC is that they likely saw what was being practiced. So practice is what defined the LC in they eyes of the public. Beliefs were only known to members or those on the outside who had taken the time to assess Lee's teachings. In other words the false narrative presented was really only fooling members, and if it truly fooled them, that is highly concerning and disturbing.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Renee

Image is everything, however I was so concerned about the image of WL that I saw on his videos, that I sent one to a body language expert / physician . This expert is not a believer and had no idea who WL was. His verdict : WL showed all the signs of insincerity, much like untrained politicians, used car salesmen or news telecasters.

This is interesting. To carry over from the theme of my last post, it seems that with Lee, he really de-emphasized how the message was conveyed, and instead insisted everyone focus on what was spoken. What Lee spoke was thus considered to be an absolute and irrefutable truth. It follows then, that the obvious signs of deception didn't really mean anything to members. What is easily recognizable to outsiders means nothing to members. Witness Lee pulled the ultimate con. He convinced members that he was the singular conveyor of divine inspiration. He convinced members to look no further than himself.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Freedom

For whatever reasons, LC members can't admit it.

I've wondered about this too. From what I've been told, they overlook everything because reading/listening to WL gets them in their spirit. It has "life" unlike other ministries. I haven't experienced that. Often in meetings, I can see that they are in some kind of altered state.
The only thing I have to relate to this was as a college student I often went with a large group of people to a nightclub, where the main form of entertainment was a hypnotist on stage. With just a few words and usually within 30 seconds he could perform mass hypnosis. I could never be hypnotized but I could see so many that were, and they were instantly out of character and would do any silly thing by command, things they would never have dreamed of doing otherwise.
This is why I'm dubious when the instructions are to repeat phrases a few times, or many times, along with all the rhythmic "amen"s. Say "Oh Lord Jesus" out loud and for as long as it takes to "get in your spirit"! Is that according to Biblical instruction?

Matthew 6:7 “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. 8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him. 9 “Pray, then, in this way:

‘Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name............"

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Renee

It all sounds like corporate strategy designed to grow business, and pilfer building material from the competition whenever possible to enlarge and expand the company. When the economy is down, the efforts will become more strident.



Image is everything, however I was so concerned about the image of WL that I saw on his videos, that I sent one to a body language expert / physician . This expert is not a believer and had no idea who WL was. His verdict : WL showed all the signs of insincerity, much like untrained politicians, used car salesmen or news telecasters.

It's just business, nothing personal. The 2013 tax returns for the LSM shows that they have close to 100 million in assets, they bring in about 20 million per year and 75% of this goes to salaries and expenses.

My thinking is that LSM keeps that large amount of cash on-hand as a clear warning to those who publish books against them that "we have enough cash to sue you into bankruptcy, so don't even think about publishing negative things." I would think that a non-profit would not keep such a large cash stash on hand when there are so many needs out there and people groups who don't have the bible in their own language. Why does LSM need to sit on $100 million dollars?

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by HERn

I would think that a non-profit would not keep such a large cash stash on hand when there are so many needs out there and people groups who don't have the bible in their own language. Why does LSM need to sit on $100 million dollars?

I doubt it's a cash stash. It may include many of the meeting halls worldwide?

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Renee

I doubt it's a cash stash. It may include many of the meeting halls worldwide?

There is a cash stash. About 18 months ago I did a search of non-profits and LSM was shown to be sitting on a large chunk of cash. It may be in one of my posts as unregistered before I joined. I'm open to correction if I'm wrong. I was wrong about the $100 million figure, I think it was 1-5 million.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Renee

It's just business, nothing personal. The 2013 tax returns for the LSM shows that they have close to 100 million in assets, they bring in about 20 million per year and 75% of this goes to salaries and expenses.

I would think that only applies to United States. For example revenue and assets in Taiwan would not be considered?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by JJ

I'd like other long time LCers to weigh in on whether this is true practice or not.

"All who have saving faith in the Lord Jesus are welcome to all our meetings, especially the Lord’s table, where we testify of the oneness of the Body of Christ. Although we must, for conscience' sake, stand apart from organized religion, we do not stand apart from our brothers and sisters in Christ. In faithfulness to the Lord, we stand on the unique ground of the church for the sake of the Lord’s testimony. But we do not take this stand with a narrow, exclusive, or sectarian spirit. On the contrary, we take our stand on behalf of the whole Body; we receive all believers even as the Lord has received us."

Brothers who have been quarantined officially or unofficially cannot say this. Neither those localities of Seattle, Bellevue, Spokane, Tacoma, and etc who have closed their doors to "Indiana". Not "All" "are welcome", but some are welcome. When a brother stands up for himself after being pushed around, local elders in the Puget Sound region cannot have that. In their mind it's a sign of rebellion.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by HERn

There is a cash stash. About 18 months ago I did a search of non-profits and LSM was shown to be sitting on a large chunk of cash. It may be in one of my posts as unregistered before I joined. I'm open to correction if I'm wrong. I was wrong about the $100 million figure, I think it was 1-5 million.

HERn, you are not that far off. According to LSM's 2014 tax report (which is the most recent accessible, try www.guidestar.org), LSM has total net assets of over $93,000,000. Of that number, over $10,000,000 is in cash and savings accounts.

[Unsure]

Originally Posted by Renee

Image is everything, however I was so concerned about the image of WL that I saw on his videos, that I sent one to a body language expert/physician. This expert is not a believer and had no idea who WL was. His verdict : WL showed all the signs of insincerity, much like untrained politicians, used car salesmen or news telecasters.

It's just business, nothing personal. The 2013 tax returns for the LSM shows that they have close to 100 million in assets, they bring in about 20 million per year and 75% of this goes to salaries and expenses.

Do you happen to have a link to the video in question? Video analysis of the conferences and trainings could be quite insightful, and to members of the LC with doubts - excuse my language - damning.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Unsure

Do you happen to have a link to the video in question? Video analysis of the conferences and trainings could be quite insightful, and to members of the LC with doubts - excuse my language - damning.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hLNItKCiV08

This is the one -- in Chinese I think, so what was said was irrelevant as it was not understood.

[Freedom]

There was a video on youtube and I think the link has been since deleted, but it showed WL attempting to 'perfect' his translator. His translator had committed the unfathomable atrocity of saying the phrase "God's economy" instead of "the economy of God" like Lee wanted him to, and WL proceeded to tear into him. WL had a smirk on his face while doing so. Not the type of conduct you would expect from a man of God.

[InChristAlone]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Witness Lee pulled the ultimate con. He convinced members that he was the singular conveyor of divine inspiration. He convinced members to look no further than himself.

This is a mark of a false teacher: A true teacher draws people to God. A false teacher draws people to himself.

I believe that self-exaltation, exclusivity, lack of critical thinking, unquestioning commitment to WL and the blended brothers, blinkered attitude towards others (us-versus-them mentality and firm conviction that there is no life outside of the LRC), esoteric "high-peak truth", and blind certainty that WL and therefore his faithful adepts are always right (even when they are wrong) -- these are some signs of guruism in "the Church of Witness Lee."

[aron]

Originally Posted by InChristAlone

. . . self-exaltation, exclusivity, lack of critical thinking, unquestioning commitment to WL and the blended brothers, blinkered attitude towards others (us-versus-them mentality and firm conviction that there is no life outside of the LRC), esoteric "high-peak truth", and blind certainty that WL and therefore his faithful adepts are always right (even when they are wrong) -- these are some signs of guruism in "the Church of Witness Lee."

I'd like to stress one point, above: what kind of system posits that only one person is capable of critical thinking, and the rest, should they try, would only bring in confusion?

Now, as Christians we admittedly give a free pass to Christ. He could tell one and all, "Do you not yet understand?"

But someone please show me in subsequent Christian history where a single disciple of Christ puts him or herself in this position vis-a-vis the flock of God. It is unprecedented in anything resembling a normal Christian Church life.

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by aron

I'd like to stress one point, above: what kind of system posits that only one person is capable of critical thinking, and the rest, should they try, would only bring in confusion?

Thanks for clearly expressing my vague thinking on this one publication insistence.

Apparently it goes back to Watchman Née who insisted on the one publication, and WL had to submit anything he wrote for approval under the publishing rights of Watchman Née.

Then there's the copyright laws that enthralled WL, with even lawsuits against copyright infringement. It comes back to the ministry of WL, which was his corporation. He didn't own the local churches but he did own the LSM ministry, so he had the legal right to insist on anything he wanted and on what would be most profitable for his corporation.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by aron

I'd like to stress one point, above: what kind of system posits that only one person is capable of critical thinking, and the rest, should they try, would only bring in confusion?

What kind of system?

A system that is doomed to fail but will do a helluva lot of damage before it does.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

But someone please show me in subsequent Christian history where a single disciple of Christ puts him or herself in this position vis-a-vis the flock of God. It is unprecedented in anything resembling a normal Christian Church life.

That's easy.

The Pope.

John Darby and his "true" lineage.

Nee & Lee.

These are only the ones I am more familiar with.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

That's easy.

The Pope.

John Darby and his "true" lineage.

Nee & Lee.

These are only the ones I am more familiar with.

Desiderius Erasmus, father of modern humanism and critical thinker par excellence, managed to survive the Pope's thought police. I doubt he'd have co-existed with Darby.

He wouldn't make it in Lee's church - too independent. He tried to use the mind that God gave him. But only the MOTA, apparently, was and is capable of that feat.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Desiderius Erasmus, father of modern humanism and critical thinker par excellence, managed to survive the Pope's thought police. I doubt he'd have co-existed with Darby.

He wouldn't make it in Lee's church - too independent. He tried to use the mind that God gave him. But only the MOTA, apparently, was and is capable of that feat.

Haven't you heard that fallen minds such as ours can only produce natural opinions?

All of the ones that have left the LRM, including us, are guilty of one common denominator -- independent thought. In the minds of the true program loyalists, this has caused us to be "poisoned."

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Renee

Apparently it goes back to Watchman Née who insisted on the one publication, and WL had to submit anything he wrote for approval under the publishing rights of Watchman Née.

I have my doubts. It could be a fallacy intended to substantiate one publication because Nee allegedly set a precedence.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

HERn, you are not that far off. According to LSM's 2014 tax report (which is the most recent accessible, try www.guidestar.org), LSM has total net assets of over $93,000,000. Of that number, over $10,000,000 is in cash and savings accounts.

Curious if tax returns could be indicators if LSM donated money to CRI for publishing "We were wrong"?

Originally Posted by Koinonia

HERn, you are not that far off. According to LSM's 2014 tax report (which is the most recent accessible, try www.guidestar.org), LSM has total net assets of over $93,000,000. Of that number, over $10,000,000 is in cash and savings accounts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvar..._Public_Health

An LC leader gave $350 million to Harvard, and purchased $200 million in real estate around Harvard Square in Cambridge. Metro Boston has 20 full time workers on the colleges, meeting the students.

[UntoHim]

For some more details:

http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-china-blog-29234909


-

[Koinonia]

Here's a more detailed article on Gerald Chan, the LC billionaire, who is Ronnie Chan's brother and based out of Boston:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine...9oO/story.html

[Freedom]

A year ago, merchants and tenants in Harvard Square were feverishly trying to divine what Chan’s grand plan might be. Denise Jillson, who runs the Harvard Square Business Association, says those worries have largely abated, since Chan’s buying binge hasn’t been followed by any radical changes.

I hate to say it, but I think that whatever it is that Gerald Chan is doing with Harvard Square stinks badly. I don't know his motives, but it seems that whatever his intentions were in buying up all that property likely has something to do with the fact that the FTT-XB center is located at 1299 Massachusetts Avenue in Harvard Square. Coincidence? Me thinks not. And the reason that they started a FTT there is not even a logical one. They started the training extension because apparently WL had expressed desire that there would be a training there in Boston. So I don't think anyone is going to figure out what Gerald Chan's master plan is with that area is. It's likely that it's rooted in an LC plan that defies logic.

Gerald Chan has the right to do whatever he wants with his money, but I sure hate to think that with respect to the LC campus work there near Harvard, that they have deluded themselves into thinking that money can buy them influence or relevance on the campus.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I hate to say it, but I think that whatever it is that Gerald Chan is doing with Harvard Square stinks badly. I don't know his motives, but it seems that whatever his intentions were in buying up all that property likely has something to do with the fact that the FTT-XB center is located at 1299 Massachusetts Avenue in Harvard Square. Coincidence? Me thinks not. And the reason that they started a FTT there is not even a logical one. They started the training extension because apparently WL had expressed desire that there would be a training there in Boston. So I don't think anyone is going to figure out what Gerald Chan's master plan is with that area is. It's likely that it's rooted in an LC plan that defies logic.

Gerald Chan has the right to do whatever he wants with his money, but I sure hate to think that with respect to the LC campus work there near Harvard, that they have deluded themselves into thinking that money can buy them influence or relevance on the campus.

Actually, I would expect that Chan would not want his affiliation to the LC known. That wold also explain why he did not sign on to public statements like Titus Chu's and Dong Yulan's quarantine letters, even though he is an LC "coworker." He is from Boston and a graduate of Harvard Medical School.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Actually, I would expect that Chan would not want his affiliation to the LC known. That wold also explain why he did not sign on to public statements like Titus Chu's and Dong Yulan's quarantine letters, even though he is an LC "coworker." He is from Boston and a graduate of Harvard Medical School.

I'm from Southern California, and I never heard Gerald mentioned until the whole FTT Boston thing started, then all the sudden people here were talking about him.

Ironically, the talk wasn't about him being a 'coworker', it was about his deep pockets, and I was even told by a FTTA trainee that they were hoping to groom one of his sons to be a coworker.

Of course, most LCers probably don't know much about Mr. Chan (including me), but what all the gossip helped me to realize is that in the LC, money talks.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Gerald Chan has the right to do whatever he wants with his money, but I sure hate to think that with respect to the LC campus work there near Harvard, that they have deluded themselves into thinking that money can buy them influence or relevance on the campus.

Originally Posted by Peter Eagan

I have seen this man screaming at the the Lee Shouter Church trainees to "take Harvard." He has given hundreds of millions to that school. He or someone with deep pockets is funding a new Lee Shouter Church building nearby. They have dozens on campus.

It's a free country, and people have a right to donate money as they see fit, in this case Chan to his alma mater. And it's still a free country, for the moment, and people can openly (or quietly) affiliate with whatever religion they want, and participate in gospel outreach.

But given their authoritative nature, and penchant for manipulation and control, so strong that anyone who publicly notices is immediately marked out and expelled, one might ask what he meant by telling the LC cadre (who he's funding) by "take Harvard"? Chan gave to Harvard, and now he wants to take. Okay, take what? Influence and relevance, as Freedom says? Or, legitimacy? Or, given the Living Stream Ministry's oft-stated hunger for "good building material", do they want the bodies and souls of young, naive, and vulnerable college students?

[Betsy]

Ronnie Chan was a board of directors member on the auditing committee of Enron and profited from its fall by selling his shares before it crashed for over 800K.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Renee

Ronnie Chan was a board of directors member on the auditing committee of Enron and profited from its fall by selling his shares before it crashed for over 800K.

Not a problem; it's called "fleecing Egypt" when it's done to unbelievers, and "appealing to Caesar" when it's done to fellow believers. Or, because there is no "good or bad" in the economy of God you can just go with the flow of life. It's also much sweeter when there is a flow of cash associated with the flow of life!

[aron]

The guru's "getting" and self-enhancement are masked by images of enlightenment and selflessness and thus are made unconscious. Once his purity and hence superiority are taken for granted, it is assumed that he deserves to be "getting" precisely because he is thought enlightened. He can thus reprimand his disciple for the very activity he was involved in on a far grander scale without it seeming hypocritical. Who gets and who gives is never questioned because "spiritual" values mask what is really going on.

The Ascended Master (AM) can get some (businesses, donations, cash, material goods, servants, adoration, obedience) because the AM is "above it all" and thus incorruptible. Only the guru WL continually lived within the veil, everyone else was at best occasionally there, and then often only 'positionally'; i.e. because we were 'under the covering' of the AM.

But the AM was 'dispositionally perfected', as it were, able to live 'in spirit' continually. Even the Bible occasionally was written by fallen humans, according to their concepts of right and wrong, but the AM's teachings were always of revelatory and oracular status.

Once this is received uncritically, and made unconscious, then the would-be guru can lead you down the primrose path. They've got the hook in you, and can pull you wherever they want you to go. And you never see it, because you don't see the hook.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

The Ascended Master (AM) can get some (businesses, donations, cash, material goods, servants, adoration, obedience) because the AM is "above it all" and thus incorruptible. Only the guru WL continually lived within the veil, everyone else was at best occasionally there, and then often only 'positionally'; i.e. because we were 'under the covering' of the AM.
...
And you never see it, because you don't see the hook.

In the LC, they are harsh critics of Christians or groups who have been distracted by issues such as materialism. As a matter of fact, I was just reading about the wife of the founder of the Trinity Broadcasting Network who died. Their Newport Beach home is for sale to the tune of $4.6 million: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/c...e-newport.html

So you read this stuff, and it's hard not to criticize these kinds of groups. You then look at groups like the LC and there isn't an immediate appearance of materialism, so it is assumed that everything is okay. Lee didn't drive a convertible (or even drive at all?). He didn't have a multi-million dollar Newport Beach home. So to the unsuspecting eye, the LC might seem perfectly normal.

Thus, LCers wrongly assumed that such a fate would never fall upon Lee or any leaders. For current members, I'm sure they could never even entertain the possibility that businesses like Daystar happened. These lapses in judgement were supposedly something that was an exclusive problem with outsiders. In essence, no one saw the hook.

But Lee himself didn't need to be motivated by materialism. He had a family that he desired to take care of. He had sons who needed funding for their debauchery. For whatever reasons, Lee felt compelled to help them out. So like it or not, Lee was also motivated by what his ministry could provide to his family (prosperity).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

But Lee himself didn't need to be motivated by materialism. He had a family that he desired to take care of. He had sons who needed funding for their debauchery. For whatever reasons, Lee felt compelled to help them out. So like it or not, Lee was also motivated by what his ministry could provide to his family (prosperity).

Had Witness Lee just "stolen" a couple million a year to take care of his kids, I might not have a problem with that.

But to place them in leadership positions, with a trail of destruction everywhere they went, is quite disturbing. Then Lee manipulated the churches into buying his sons' "products" and "services." Those blendeds who became today's SUPER-BLENDEDS did so by kissing up to his son Phillip.

Disgusting!

[NewManLiving]

The chronic problem with WL "fleecing the flock" is a long and sordid one, reaching back into his early days in Taiwan. The problem with WL's ego and temper also has a long history, extending back to his relationship with Kaung, Sparks and others. Any honest person who has read the accounts and testimonies of many sincere brothers and sisters in Christ would certainly have to admit to this. WL had no peers because he eliminated them and elevated himself. In my observation his character never did change throughout his ministry. Perhaps on his death bed he had a sincere repentance.

[aron]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

The chronic problem with WL "fleecing the flock" is a long and sordid one, reaching back into his early days in Taiwan. The problem with WL's ego and temper also has a long history, extending back to his relationship with Kaung, Sparks and others. Any honest person who has read the accounts and testimonies of many sincere brothers and sisters in Christ would certainly have to admit to this. WL had no peers because he eliminated them and elevated himself. In my observation his character never did change throughout his ministry. Perhaps on his death bed he had a sincere repentance.

There was a song that was popular in the early ('68-'72) days,

"Oh home in the church, where we’ve ended our search, with the brothers rejoicing all day; where Christ is our life, and we’re through with all strife, now we’re home. Hallelujah to stay! Chorus: Oh, home in the church, yes, it’s here that we’ve ended our search, and through all our days we will shout to His praise, Hallelujah! for Christ and the church."

Today I see that song and I'm like, "Whaaaa. . . ?!?! . . . 'We've ended our search' . . . ?!?!"

Jesus taught, "Seek and you will find", and "Seek first the kingdom of God". . . did WL actually convince us to abandon our seeking, and to end our search?!?

Apparently that's what happened - we ended, or gave up on, our search. Absolutely amazing, in hindsight; WL convinced thousands of Jesus People to quit seeking, that they were home in his church. But our home is really in the heavens with our Father! Even Paul wrote, "I have not yet laid hold". Yet WL had us lay hold, and laid hold of us, through something he called the "local ground", which was merely a vehicle for his "local church", later to be replaced by "the Body" and then "the Ministry".

Yes Philip told Nathaniel, "We have found the one Moses wrote about in the Law, and about whom the prophets also wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." (John 1:45). Yes they did find such a Man. But what did Philip and Nathaniel find - a Man in a palace, or a Man selling merchandise? A Man fund-raising for a training campus and convention center? Or did they rather find a Man out on the street, with no place to lay His head (Luke 9:58)? An elusive Man, who'd continually withdraw from the crowds trying to make Him an earthly king(John 6:15)?

Christ is indeed the answer; He's surely the Way. Yet this answer, this way is a path, while here on earth - see e.g. Matt 4:19: "Come, follow Me". The way is not a fixed place, or static object. Even as you approach this One, of Whom Moses and the prophets indeed wrote, He recedes before you, inviting you to follow. This is His way of going before, and leading you back home to the Father. If you set down and rest, satisfied, you'll never make it. But WL convinced us to abandon our search, and to presumptuously sit down and declare, "We're home".

The danger of Babylon is that it convinces you to set up three tents, and stay there (Matt 17:4). Egypt is bad, but at least you know that you're not at home. Babylon tries to convince you that you're home, that you should abandon your search. Babylon lulls you into passivity. "Enjoy". Instead of the hungry, wandering, heaven-oriented, seeking church it becomes the complacent, torpid, earthly, self-oriented "churchy" church; with fat, heavy eyes, carefully minding its seating arrangements and ornamental trim.

Back to NML's post, above: WL knew what he was about; he was the same man who'd bullied and shamed the Shanghai elders into taking the sinful Nee back as unquestioned leader, who'd been caught smuggling gold. But now, coming into the USA, he was slow and careful. First, he convinced the frogs that a nice stainless steel pot was preferable to that muddy old pond. So clean, shiny! Enjoy! Then he slowly, slowly turned up the heat.

Our journey should be unremitting, while we dwell here in the flesh. Yet WL convinced the Jesus People of the late 1960s and early 1970s to "sit down and eat and drink, and to get up and play", a la Exodus 32:6; cf 1 Cor 10:7. The idol was human culture, carefully manicured and disguised. Only one unquestioned and unquestionable leader, only one 'apostle' per age. One Ascended Master, and the rest being Small Potatoes. One Guru, who lives within the veil, whose every word has oracular status; the rest, without exception, are poor, pitiful, darkened and ignorant. Mooing cows, WL called us, and we passively absorbed all the calumnies he heaped on our heads.

The local ground and the local church were merely engines, devices to separate the flock, thence to be lulled into lethargy and stupor. Then WL could sell them his Rainbow Booklets and calendars. The merchandizer finally found the perfect market. Guru-hood.

But as NML says, maybe on his death-bed he had a sincere repentance. If so, may we all likewise be blessed, with a broken spirit and a contrite heart. Mea culpa; I was there too - promoting "the latest speaking" as if it were manna from the throne of God. I was there, supposedly at home in WL's "local church". But then the Holy Spirit thrust me back into the wilderness, thanks be to God. The hunger and thirst eventually returned, and the journey continued. Praise God!

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by aron

WL knew what he was about; he was the same man who'd bullied and shamed the Shanghai elders into taking the sinful Nee back as unquestioned leader, who'd been caught smuggling gold. But now, coming into the USA, he was slow and careful. First, he convinced the frogs that a nice stainless steel pot was preferable to that muddy old pond. So clean, shiny! Enjoy! Then he slowly, slowly turned up the heat.

Haha, too funny 😄 I've often wondered how some of the early writing of Lee could devolve so thoroughly.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Had Witness Lee just "stolen" a couple million a year to take care of his kids, I might not have a problem with that.

But to place them in leadership positions, with a trail of destruction everywhere they went, is quite disturbing. Then Lee manipulated the churches into buying his sons' "products" and "services." Those blendeds who became today's SUPER-BLENDEDS did so by kissing up to his son Phillip.

Disgusting!

I would preface what I have to say by the lack of transparency regarding LSM finances leaves open allegations of impropriety even if brothers were careful to avoid any entanglements. Since there is no transparency, Sal's taped conversation with Witness Lee is as close to evidence of impropriety as there is in North America.
Say for example the property on Ball Road was indeed a gift from a wealthy Chinese brother on which the LSM/Church in Anaheim building was completed 1976/1977. Suppose Witness Lee decided to sell the property prior to the structure being built with free labor and give the proceeds to his sons, I'd have no problem with it.
However when thousands of brothers and sisters across the earth tithe money to their localities. Their localities in turn give money to LSM. In turn Witness Lee directs LSM to give money to his children. That I would have a problem with. Many brother and sisters being deceived LSM is for the churches and for the Lord's move on the earth when in fact it is used as a family enterprise under the guise as a non-profit religious entity.
Now that is disgusting. Even more disgusting are brothers who knew about it and looked the other way. Whatever happened to the money from North America intended for the Linko project in Taiwan?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

I would preface what I have to say by the lack of transparency regarding LSM finances leaves open allegations of impropriety even if brothers were careful to avoid any entanglements. Since there is no transparency, Sal's taped conversation with Witness Lee is as close to evidence of impropriety as there is in North America.
Say for example the property on Ball Road was indeed a gift from a wealthy Chinese brother on which the LSM/Church in Anaheim building was completed 1976/1977. Suppose Witness Lee decided to sell the property prior to the structure being built with free labor and give the proceeds to his sons, I'd have no problem with it.
However when thousands of brothers and sisters across the earth tithe money to their localities. Their localities in turn give money to LSM. In turn Witness Lee directs LSM to give money to his children. That I would have a problem with. Many brother and sisters being deceived LSM is for the churches and for the Lord's move on the earth when in fact it is used as a family enterprise under the guise as a non-profit religious entity.
Now that is disgusting. Even more disgusting are brothers who knew about it and looked the other way. Whatever happened to the money from North America intended for the Linko project in Taiwan?

Just within the last year, various Local Churches of Witness Lee in Southern California all donated money to purchase a camp. I heard that the purchase price was in the $8-10 million range, with part of that coming from donations, part of that from the proceeds of a sale of an existing camp, and the rest from loans. I also don't have a problem with anyone donating time/labor/money for such purposes, but the concern that came to my mind is ownership. Real estate is lucrative. Especially when the initial investment and subsequent improvements come free. It's not the local churches who end up participating in a collective ownership. It is a particular publishing house, likely through some type of front organization. That is a scam. They reap the benefit of those who are willing to freely give without a second thought.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Just within the last year, various Local Churches of Witness Lee in Southern California all donated money to purchase a camp. I heard that the purchase price was in the $8-10 million range, with part of that coming from donations, part of that from the proceeds of a sale of an existing camp, and the rest from loans. I also don't have a problem with anyone donating time/labor/money for such purposes, but the concern that came to my mind is ownership. Real estate is lucrative. Especially when the initial investment and subsequent improvements come free. It's not the local churches who end up participating in a collective ownership. It is a particular publishing house, likely through some type of front organization. That is a scam. They reap the benefit of those who are willing to freely give without a second thought.

LSM is like the US government trying to convince us that when they are wealthy then we all are too.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

LSM is like the US government trying to convince us that when they are wealthy then we all are too.

The LSM is an organization which benefits off of the ignorance of it's 'donors'. Members regularly dish out a ~$200 fee to go to semi-annual trainings with the presumption that they will be under the "divine dispensing." Members regularly pay $5 or so to ensure that by reading a HWFMR booklet so that they may remain "up to date." What is the common denominator in all this pseudo-spiritual terminology??? It requires an up front investment of the hard-earned $$$ of members.

2 Cor 2:17 For we are not, as so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I'm inclined to think that as the blendeds slowly disappear, members will struggle with an identity crisis. Who should they follow? What were they following? Who will lead them on? Those are all questions they will be forced to answer, as did members who where there when Lee passed on.

In a movement that is formed around a guru and is held together by the guru, it's continual existence is dependent upon the existence of that person. There was an LC leader who referred to the Chinese proverb "when the tree falls, the monkeys scatter" as a supposed 'proof' that the LC wasn't centered around Lee. Actually, the reason the LC is still in existence is because Lee had a "blendedfold intensified" continuation. They had enough credibility among members to assume his position. And even despite that, there was still somewhat of a mini identity crisis that still happened.

I really don't believe that the blendeds have any successor 'group' in mind. Of course they could put anyone they want up at the podium if that became necessary, but whose to say members will follow their appointed successors? The rank and file consider themselves to be dumb sheep, so they need a leader. If there isn't anyone filling those shoes who has credibility among members, then the LC will cease to exist as we know it.

This will be an interesting shift to watch here over the next period of time. As far as the "speaking blendeds" I believe the pool is smaller as several of them have been afflicted in their physical health to the point where they cannot give long messages anymore, and the ones still well enough just speak more messages instead to compensate. I am only aware in recent times of one addition to the typical group of brothers who speak messages. I just can't imagine there are many clamoring to take on that role, but stranger things have happened.

Who will lead them on, indeed? What on earth will be the glue that holds them together?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

This will be an interesting shift to watch here over the next period of time. As far as the "speaking blendeds" I believe the pool is smaller as several of them have been afflicted in their physical health to the point where they cannot give long messages anymore, and the ones still well enough just speak more messages instead to compensate. I am only aware in recent times of one addition to the typical group of brothers who speak messages. I just can't imagine there are many clamoring to take on that role, but stranger things have happened.

Who will lead them on, indeed? What on earth will be the glue that holds them together?

I think it's some degree of the nature of being a Guru, or Deputy God as LC called it, that only one person in the room can exhibit charisma, and the rest must devote themselves to promoting the Guru. This particular brand probably was helped by being Asian in parent culture, in which absolute deference to the Maximum Leader had a built-in expectation.

But it brings another problem - what of the next generation? Once the Guru is gone, then the Bureaucrats take over, who manage the organisation. Their authority is in direct relation to former associations with greatness. I can expect that at some point, whether the LC expands or diminishes, there will be one or two old-timers who will stand at the dais and say, "I was there with Brother Lee", and their association will guarantee them an audience. But how big of an audience if they have no native charisma? Clearly Nee and Lee had it. Once they're gone only Bureaucrats are left. Not a particularly great draw. And then more time passes, and it's left to the Caretakers of the memory of the Bureaucrats of their Guru's Charisma. Even less compelling.

But nobody is allowed Charisma, because that would be "ambition", that would be "drawing others after oneself". Only the Guru could do that without suspicion, without the taint of ambition. I'll never forget the first meeting when Brother Lee passed: "The age of Spiritual Giants is over, it is now the age of Small Potatoes". It was too clear: only the Guru was allowed greatness.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

I think it's some degree of the nature of being a Guru, or Deputy God as LC called it, that only one person in the room can exhibit charisma, and the rest must devote themselves to promoting the Guru.

Actually, those others with charisma were perceived as rivals and excommunicated.

Those without charisma then grabbed an office they had no ability to fill.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Actually, those others with charisma were perceived as rivals and excommunicated.

Those without charisma then grabbed an office they had no ability to fill.

This points to something I've been appreciating recently, and noting on this forum. I've been repeatedly bringing up the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, because to me this establishes his "charisma",* or status, on a permanent basis. Jesus got crowds of followers initially because of his works and the transformative power of his teachings. His words brought light to what had been dark, and obscure, and uncertain. Suddenly, a great light shined. Suddenly, there was a bona fide Great Person, of whom it was said "his sandals I'm not worthy to untie". And the resurrection sealed all this special-ness, and made it permanent, unchangeable forever, "in this age and in the ages to come" (Eph 1:20,21; 2:7).

I note this because the guru-builders will use Jesus as a stepping-stone to their own claim to charisma. They point to the continuation of great leaders, and prophets... the lineage of charisma supposedly runs thus: Moses, Jesus, Peter, Paul, Luther, Darby, Nee, Lee [Chu, Dong...]… with others, it might be Moses, then Jesus, then Joseph Smith, then Brigham Young. Or, Moses, then Jesus, then Mohammed. Or, Moses then Jesus then Mary Baker Eddy, or then Elisabeth Claire Prophet, or Sun Myung Moon or Haile Selassie whomever the Last Prophet is deemed to be, the Last Holder of Charisma who ushers in the New Age..

My point is that Jesus stands alone. He stands above the flock because God raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand, and gave him a name above every name, both in this age and that which is to come. Witness Lee and Mary Baker Eddy and Brigham Young got mausoleums and reflecting pools and fountains. Jesus, in resurrection, walks in the midst of the seven golden lamp stands. He alone got the charisma, the Christ-hood. The rest of us have to wait for the Bema, and should presume nothing until that time, other than "I am the least of all."

Now it should be noted that Peter had 'charism' by associating with and leading the promotion of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Thousands gathered and were saved. Cripples and sick people laid in Peter's way that his shadow might pass over them. But NT writers Luke and Paul take pains to show that Peter (and James) do not have some permanent Untouchable status. And Peter even affirms this, and his connection with Jesus the Nazarene, by saying that leaders should lead by humility, service, and love, not by lording over the flock. Jesus alone has elevated status. Jesus alone is Lord. Everyone else has to wait for the Bema. Jesus alone has passed the veil. Anyone else who makes such presumptions, while yet in the flesh of sin, is deluded and is in danger of leading astray the elect.

If people say that I'm a deluded follower of Jesus I say, Yes, Amen. And I receive and join with the other deluded ones. Praise the Lord! But I name no other, as scripture says there's no other name given whereby we may be saved.

*Here I define 'charisma' in the religious sense, as in a divinely conferred status, authority, and power. Jesus by definition (Messiah, Christ, Lord, High Priest, King, Saviour) had all of this in spades.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Jesus got crowds of followers initially because of his works and the transformative power of his teachings. His words brought light to what had been dark, and obscure, and uncertain. Suddenly, a great light shined. Suddenly, there was a bona fide Great Person, of whom it was said "his sandals I'm not worthy to untie". And the resurrection sealed all this special-ness, and made it permanent, unchangeable forever, "in this age and in the ages to come" (Eph 1:20,21; 2:7).

I note this because the guru-builders will use Jesus as a stepping-stone to their own claim to charisma.

My point is that Jesus stands alone.

As further confirmation of aron's points here, remember what happened on the mountain, with Jesus, Moses, and Elijah? (Matthew 17)

[Weighingin]

Originally Posted by Ohio

As further confirmation of aron's points here, remember what happened on the mountain, with Jesus, Moses, and Elijah? (Matthew 17)

I recall how WL would talk about the principle of incarnation using where Paul said not I but the Lord and so on. So I thought that must apply to his speaking too. This was added to what we had been taught about Noah, deputy authority, questioning the MOTA is in the principle of questioning Moses and other teachings in which I thought I had the realization that to disagree was to disagree with God Himself.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

I recall how WL would talk about the principle of incarnation using where Paul said not I but the Lord and so on. So I thought that must apply to his speaking too. This was added to what we had been taught about Noah, deputy authority, questioning the MOTA is in the principle of questioning Moses and other teachings in which I thought I had the realization that to disagree was to disagree with God Himself.

As I have often mentioned, Moses never was a type of the NT ministers, other than Christ Himself. In this regard Moses was absolutely unique.

Moses clearly stated that, "God will raise up a prophet from your midst like unto me." (Deut. 18.15-19)

Paul then makes it plainly clear that Jesus will build God's spiritual House. (Heb. 3.1-6) This corresponds with, "I will build My church." (Matt 16.18)

Thus to demand some accountability from some self-assumed MOTA, who is blatantly violating God's law, can never be applied to "questioning Moses."

It is dangerous, however, to dishonor our Heavenly "Moses" by questioning the authority of Jesus Christ and His word.

[Weighingin]

Originally Posted by Ohio

As I have often mentioned, Moses never was a type of the NT ministers, other than Christ Himself. In this regard Moses was absolutely unique.

Moses clearly stated that, "God will raise up a prophet from your midst like unto me." (Deut. 18.15-19)

Paul then makes it plainly clear that Jesus will build God's spiritual House. (Heb. 3.1-6) This corresponds with, "I will build My church." (Matt 16.18)

Thus to demand some accountability from some self-assumed MOTA, who is blatantly violating God's law, can never be applied to "questioning Moses."

It is dangerous, however, to dishonor our Heavenly "Moses" by questioning the authority of Jesus Christ and His word.

Yes, I've been trying to understand how I had gotten confused by these teachings when the word has been in front of me all of these years.
As you mentioned in Matt 17, "Hear Him." That's when Moses and Elijah were standing right next to Christ. Another contrast was John 17, law came through Moses, grace and reality through Jesus Christ.
Even though Moses representing God or being His deputy authority wasn't a wrong teaching, I've been trying to see how I misnderstood For many years that it applied to WL, the MOTA, and the NT age.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

Yes, I've been trying to understand how I had gotten confused by these teachings when the word has been in front of me all of these years.
As you mentioned in Matt 17, "Hear Him." That's when Moses and Elijah were standing right next to Christ. Another contrast was John 17, law came through Moses, grace and reality through Jesus Christ.
Even though Moses representing God or being His deputy authority wasn't a wrong teaching, I've been trying to see how I misunderstood For many years that it applied to WL, the MOTA, and the NT age.

You and me both.

Both Nee and Lee used both Moses and Noah to promote their "deputy authority" heresy. It had little to do with owning up to the tremendous responsibilities that would entail, rather it was all about others submitting to their authority in the face of failure. Since both Mariam and Ham were both cursed for their actions, what better way to instill the "fear of God" in your followers? Since both Nee and Lee had lots of "dirt under their rugs," those deputy authority teachings would come in handy at times.

Who am I to talk about "dirt under my rug," as I have plenty? What I don't have, however, is the ability to silence my detractors with "fear curses." In the end though, isn't it better to repent today, rather than hide it until it's too late?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

Yes, I've been trying to understand how I had gotten confused by these teachings when the word has been in front of me all of these years.

As you mentioned in Matt 17, "Hear Him." That's when Moses and Elijah were standing right next to Christ. Another contrast was John 1:17, law came through Moses, grace and reality through Jesus Christ.

Even though Moses representing God or being His deputy authority wasn't a wrong teaching, I've been trying to see how I misunderstood For many years that it applied to WL, the MOTA, and the NT age.

Originally Posted by Ohio

You and me both.

Yes, and I doubt a definitive answer is easily found. But I’ll share a few impressions. One theme in the gospels was Roman occupation (following that of Assyrian/Babylonian/Persian/Greek) and a desire for the liberating Kingdom of God eschaton in the “Son of David” promised by God’s prophets, and a second big issue was over the resurrection of the dead - remember the Saduccees/Pharisees were split along these lines & Paul still dealt with it in 1 Cor 15:13 &c (see also Acts 4:2, 23:6 &c). The resurrection of Jesus solved both issues definitively. He was the Firstborn from the dead, witnessed by many (1 Cor 15:4-8; Acts 1:3), which forever confirmed his status as the long-awaited Davidic heir who'd usher in the new age of peace under God’s rule. Even though Christians didn’t see all things yet under his feet, they treated it as fait accompli (Heb 2:8; 1 Cor 15:27).

Along similar lines is "the Prophet" in the NT. They asked John, “Are you the Christ” and “are you Elijah” (the promised fore-runner of the Christ[Matt 17:10]) and “are you the Prophet” in John 1:21 (cf John 6:24). In Deut 18 Moses had said that God would raise up another like him, who must be heard and obeyed, and this didn’t mean Jeremiah or Ezekiel, but rather another Law-giver, another Mediator who could stand between humanity and God. ''But since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face'' (Deut 34:10), and "There is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5).

My point here is that Witness Lee overlooked how “high Christology” this was, scandalously high, sacrilegious to those of Jewish religion. None could overturn Moses! But the NT argument was that Jesus alone fulfilled Moses and was therefore the only one who could and would give the Word from God as Moses had done. There was only a unique Second Moses, Jesus the Nazarene, and there would never be a third or fourth. This is what's behind John 1:17. The law came through Moses, grace and reality came through Jesus Christ. Jesus didn't overturn Moses, but fulfilled him, and brought God's Law to the next stage, of love. Thus only Jesus could say, "A new commandment I give unto you, that you love one another..."

For confirmation, Jesus said, “If you believed Moses, you'd believe me, for he wrote about me” in John 5, and the charge against Stephen in Acts 6: “For we've heard him say that Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and change the customs that Moses handed down to us.” Stephen’s response was that their forefathers had been disobedient to Moses, and now they were disobedient to the One whom Moses had promised them!

Witness Lee ignored the extremely “high Christological” significance of Deut 18, referencing 1 Cor 14:1, 3-5,24-25,31 and footnotes there (RecV Deut 18:15 [fn 1] and 18:18 [fn 1]). However, “You can all prophesy, one by one” in 1 Cor 14:31 hardly satisfies the question put to John the Baptist! “Are you the Prophet” referenced Moses' word, and this link to Deut 18 is explicitly made by Peter in Acts 3:22 and Stephen in Acts 7:37.

One other point should be made: Deut 33:2, Moses’ final blessing, says,
“The LORD came from Sinai,
And dawned on them from Seir;
He shone forth from Mount Paran,
And He came from among ten thousand holy ones;
At His right hand was a flaming fire, a law, for them.” (AMP)

If you look at the giving of the law as described in Deut 33:2 it's not “dead letters” on stone tablets but rather dynamic, living, flaming fire, shining forth. It's the Light of Humanity (John 1:4) that shines into the darkness, and the darkness doesn't overcome it. (v.5) The Word is the Light... John the Baptist wasn't the Light, but came to testify concerning the Light (v.8), concerning the True Light which came into the world (v.9). Moses received the Law, but even then it was a Shining Word of Light to men, and then the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and reality. This gives needed context to John 1:17 - the Word is the flaming Light at the right hand of God in Deut 33:2. This is the creating Word that came before all things (John 1:1-3), so this Prophet is incomprehensibly high above all. The Word is greater than Moses because the Word was before Moses. No wonder the Sanhedrin was scandalised.

There's a gold mine there, and Witness Lee missed it, but he got to be Recovery Guru, one in a line of Greats – Moses, Paul, Luther, Darby, Nee, then Lee... in the Recovery, these were the MOTAs, Untouchables with God’s Oracle. Moses and even Jesus were merely props in the Recovery drama. Of course Recovery folk demur, saying, “Christ, Only Christ”, but the Guru as Today's Moses and Today's Paul got to define the Recovered Christ didn't he? "Christ" was a prop, whatever the Guru needed to get through the day, and to bring along his nonspiritual sons that came with him. Suddenly "Christ" wanted Daystar, wanted Philip Lee as the Office, wanted Door-knocking and PSRP and the Vital Groups. Little Bankers. The New Move. Phosphorous. Lin-Ko. Gold Chairs. Whatever Today's Moses needed to get himself through another day.

[JJ]

In Matthew 5 Jesus said He came to fulfill the law and the prophets. It’s great to be liberated from the lie that Moses was a type of Lee. Jesus fulfills Moses’ prophecy. Hear Him!

[aron]

Originally Posted by JJ

It’s great to be liberated from the lie that Moses was a type of Lee. Jesus fulfills Moses’ prophecy. Hear Him!

John 6:14 After the people saw the sign Jesus performed, they began to say, "Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world."

John 7:40 On hearing his words, some of the people said, "Surely this man is the Prophet."

Deuteronomy 18:15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him."

Hear Him! There is no other.

For Deut 18:15, the RecV footnote said that Jesus as an Israelite prophet like Moses showed that he was human as well as divine. Huh? NT usage of this passage showed Jesus' Galilean disciples countering the accusation of the Judeans that they overturned Moses, by replying that it was the Judeans who were disobeying Moses (as their stiff-necked fathers had done) by not receiving the Prophet foretold by Moses! Only this One could give the new command, and could say, "It is written... but I say..."; only this One could walk among the seven burning lamps that Moses had seen - "You must make everything according to what you saw on the holy mountain." (Heb 8:5; Exod 25:40).

The Age of Moses was over, and the Age of Jesus Christ had come. It was an exceedingly high vision.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

There's a gold mine there, and Witness Lee missed it, but he got to be Recovery Guru, one in a line of Greats – Moses, Paul, Luther, Darby, Nee, then Lee... in the Recovery, these were the MOTAs, Untouchables with God’s Oracle. Moses and even Jesus were merely props in the Recovery drama. Of course Recovery folk demur, saying, “Christ, Only Christ”, but the Guru as Today's Moses and Today's Paul got to define the Recovered Christ didn't he? "Christ" was a prop, whatever the Guru needed to get through the day, and to bring along his nonspiritual sons that came with him. Suddenly "Christ" wanted Daystar, wanted Philip Lee as the Office, wanted Door-knocking and PSRP and the Vital Groups. Little Bankers. The New Move. Phosphorous. Lin-Ko. Gold Chairs. Whatever Today's Moses needed to get himself through another day.

Lee's so-called "High Peak" teachings were also a prop.

Lee desperately needed props to divert all of our attention from his own unseemly actions surrounding the expulsion of John Ingalls et.al. for properly exposing and excommunicating his profligate son Philip, the so-called LSM "Office Manager."

What better prop, what better diversion, what better spin, than to claim ministerial persecution and concoct new "recovered" truth? Not recovered from the Bible, but from the church "fathers." Seriously? We were supposed to pick up on this teaching that all the Evangelists and Apostles missed, yet was discovered by a church father? How does Lee then proclaim with a straight face that the Bible is out only "standard?"

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

It brings another problem - what of the next generation? Once the Guru is gone, then the Bureaucrats take over, who manage the organisation... Clearly Nee and Lee had it. Once they're gone only Bureaucrats are left. Not a particularly great draw... But nobody is allowed Charisma, because that would be "ambition", that would be "drawing others after oneself". Only the Guru could do that without suspicion, without the taint of ambition.

The Guru is allowed Charisma, even trades in it, but brooks no peers, who'd be deemed "ambitious" and "rebellious" and so forth. But when the Guru's gone where's the person that holds it all together? Again, "Christ, only Christ" is the LC refrain, but it's the Christ in a set of books. It's a conceptual Christ - the Body-Christ. The Ministry-Christ. The Processed-Christ. Mere concepts that when examined critically show the strains of inconsistency. The Bureaucrats try to prop up the teachings but the Charisma is a memory, fading.

Now here's Deuteronomy 33:2 -
“The LORD came from Sinai,
And dawned on them from Seir;
He shone forth from Mount Paran,
And He came from among ten thousand holy ones;
At His right hand was a flaming fire, a law, for them.” (AMP)

The LORD "dawned" and "shone forth". At His right hand was the Word as flaming fire. Even the "ten thousand holy ones" has strong association of light. "The Son of Man will come with the glory of the Father and the glory of the holy angels". There is the repetitive presentation of out-spilling divine light, in sheer transcendence such that Moses came down glowing.

Now, what Guru can compete with that? John said, "We beheld his glory" - do you think John held up Paul as MOTA, as "today's Moses", after that sight? Or do you think Paul ever held himself thus, versus the twelve? Jesus held all Charisma. He is our Lord and there is no other.

In the way John presents Jesus in the first chapter of the fourth gospel, as the Logos Light of God, we may sense why the Baptist said he wasn't worthy to touch his shoe (v. 27). When we see the incomparable greatness of his being, we're saved - saved from dreaming of our own greatness, and from submitting our will to the demands of a Guru (and there are many out there, clamoring for our attention and our souls). The Guru says that subsuming our souls into his will bring salvation. That only works with Jesus.