LordsRecovery.Org Exposing the Christian Cult of Witness Lee's Local Church

[UntoHim]

New informative website/blog concerning the Local Church of Witness Lee

The Lord's Recovery
Exposing the Christian Cult of Witness Lee's Local Church Movement

-
-

[Freedom]

It looks like a lot of time was spent on this site, and I think it will be very informative to those who come across it.

[Ohio]

The site owner comes right out and identifies himself, which I found quite shocking. If he has any vulnerabilities at all, DCP will immediately swoop in to exploit them. Perhaps he is unaware of the dangers he faces.

Perhaps this exposes my suspicious nature towards those who regularly abuse their power, but how else do we explain the Casteel tragedy?

[Sons to Glory!]

I've amazed that the domain name "thelordsrecovery.org" was available! I too was impressed that he came right out and IDed himself and gave his story.

I must also confess that I'm still surprised a little when people strongly use the word "cult" in connection with the LC, as this brother does. But reading this on his "About" page makes it pretty clear:

The Recovery baited me with Jesus, the Bible, and talk of oneness of the church by means of the one Spirit of God. Then they started switching our devotion over to a man named Witness Lee, following him and his teachings only. Our “oneness” had nothing to do with God keeping us one; it was about Witness Lee.

I left the Recovery in 2017 for a few months, troubled by the clear deification of this man Witness Lee, but I eventually went back because I feared all of the discipline from God that the Recovery had convinced me was biblical.

The Lee deification wasn't so apparent to me in Berkeley in the 70s, or Columbus in the 80s. But I saw this firsthand when I visited the LC in Tacoma a few years ago, that is, Lee worship had replaced the fresh experience and testifying of Christ. (and I should also say that the fear of leaving the LC was starting to be instilled in us even back in the 70s)

[aron]

Originally Posted by thelordsrecovery.org

It conditions its members into legalism. For example, a special elder called a “blended brother”, a speaker from the pulpit at a major national conference for the Recovery, says not to wear worldly clothing. That speaker is wearing a tie in a room that requires all men to wear a tie, obviously implying ties are somehow not worldly.

Good point, here. Ill-defined and arbitrarily-applied terms like "worldly" versus "proper" become levers for control. But no one questions, even if it begins to strain at absurdity, because no one wants to be "negative".

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

Good point, here. Ill-defined and arbitrarily-applied terms like "worldly" versus "proper" become levers for control. But no one questions, even if it begins to strain at absurdity, because no one wants to be "negative".

I am so thankful to be with a group that doesn't impose any such nonsense, either overtly or covertly!! (at any gathering we might have people with ties on and also those wearing shorts & flip flops . . .) Having this kind of external focus is off the mark of pursuing Christ alone.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

Good point, here. Ill-defined and arbitrarily-applied terms like "worldly" versus "proper" become levers for control. But no one questions, even if it begins to strain at absurdity, because no one wants to be "negative".

It really is all about control. What makes matters even worse is that a lot of the rules are unspoken, so when someone does try to protest, there is gaslighting involved.

When I lived in a brothers house, there was a list of rules we had to agree to and sign: no secular music, no movie viewing, video games, etc. What was it that made any of these things wrong? I still don't know. But the rules were the rules. And I think in many cases (such as with myself), we were too naive to know any better, so they got away with calling some things worldly, other things spiritual. It was completely arbitrary.

[JacobHoward]

Hey there! I'm Jacob Howard, the site owner and admin of thelordsrecovery.org.

I recently started a blog within the website, and the first blog entry is up on https://thelordsrecovery.org/2019/12...rch-romans-16/. Give it a read, and if you have any connections to current members, feel free to pass the site along!

One of the major manipulating factors that the Recovery uses to constrain its members into staying is that it offers only one right choice to members, one city being one church in name, the Recovery's genuine ground of oneness argument. This blog series attempts to address and debunk that.

Deconstructing these major and unorthodox doctrines by exposing their obvious logical fallacies can give members a fighting chance at being critical thinkers again, allowing them to look to God for truth rather than the Recovery. That's the aim of this blog series, and my prayer and hope is that it could empower members to leave and be free to serve the Lord alone.

God bless!

[Sons to Glory!]

Welcome to the LCD forum Jacob! I was the one that connected with you earlier regarding linking to this forum on your resource page.

The other thing they tell members is there is only one ministry, namely LSM. When the Lord got me past this erroneous thinking (Praise Him!!), I found many anointed authors/speakers out there and it opened up a whole new view of the body of Christ!

[JacobHoward]

Thanks for the welcome! Excited to be interfacing on here with the broader, established community.

I've named one blog "Deconstructing False Doctrine," currently with a specific blog series on One City, One Church (OCOC) doctrine. My hope is that OCOC will have several concise yet compelling expositions of clear logical fallacies that help members have "Aha!" moments.

One Ministry would most definitely be a blog series, but I'll make sure to keep each post short, sweet, and meaty.

There will be more blog series within Deconstructing False Doctrine, but OCOC is just the start. And with all of the resources available on here and help from the broader community, I think we're just getting started

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

Thanks for the welcome! Excited to be interfacing on here with the broader, established community.

I've named one blog "Deconstructing False Doctrine," currently with a specific blog series on One City, One Church (OCOC) doctrine. My hope is that OCOC will have several concise yet compelling expositions of clear logical fallacies that help members have "Aha!" moments.

One Ministry would most definitely be a blog series, but I'll make sure to keep each post short, sweet, and meaty.

There will be more blog series within Deconstructing False Doctrine, but OCOC is just the start. And with all of the resources available on here and help from the broader community, I think we're just getting started

JacobHoward have you seen the "ConcernedBrothers" website? It popped up during the Midwest quarantines to rebut LSM and DCP which used their "a faithful word" (what a joke!) website.

In the last decade, Nigel Tomes also has written numerous papers, well-researched, and undermine many tenets of the Recovery. He also has a sub-forum here. Unfortunately, there is no table of contents with links to all of his papers. Since LSMers invested so much to go after him, one has to wonder just how much impact he has had on their rank and file. What LSM fears most is truth, truth reaching their people, which truth they label "poison."

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

One of the major manipulating factors that the Recovery uses to constrain its members into staying is that it offers only one right choice to members, one city being one church in name, the Recovery's genuine ground of oneness argument. This blog series attempts to address and debunk that.

Deconstructing these major and unorthodox doctrines by exposing their obvious logical fallacies can give members a fighting chance at being critical thinkers again, allowing them to look to God for truth rather than the Recovery. That's the aim of this blog series, and my prayer and hope is that it could empower members to leave and be free to serve the Lord alone.

It's great to have these types of resources available. The LC is able to get away with much of what it teaches because they have made a particular point to silence all opposing viewpoints.

The more content like this that is available on the internet, the greater likelihood that people in the LC will come across it and maybe even begin to question the LC.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

It's great to have these types of resources available. The LC is able to get away with much of what it teaches because they have made a particular point to silence all opposing viewpoints.

The more content like this that is available on the internet, the greater likelihood that people in the LC will come across it and maybe even begin to question the LC.

I completely agree. The more reasoned and distinct voices that are heard, the better for those who are trying to see through the fog. It's a tremendous resource for those who are being recruited and need an objective voice, and for those currently enmeshed in LC-thought and trying to find a way out.

Two suggested topics:

1. Why in the RecV footnotes is the Psalmist imprecating his enemy in one passage supposedly typifying Christ defeating Satan, whilst elsewhere it's panned as "fallen" and "natural" not to love one's enemy and turn the other cheek? Was David then wrong at throwing a rock at Goliath? Lee's interpretation of Psalms makes no sense and should be brought into the light of objective discussion and analysis.
2. Why do they sell books by Mary McDonough ("God's Plan of Redemption") on the LSM website, right next to Nee and Lee, and lionize other "founding sisters" like Barber, Peace Wang, Ruth Lee (etc etc) and yet say that women can't teach with any authority in the LC? Why did women have such prominent "recovery" roles 100 years ago, but none today? It doesn't make any sense.

There are other examples as well, some quite glaring. And the more that questions like these are put before the reading public, the more that the illogic underlying the Witness Lee Mind Conditioning Programme gets exposed. And it should be exposed.

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

Deconstructing these major and unorthodox doctrines by exposing their obvious logical fallacies can give members a fighting chance at being critical thinkers again, allowing them to look to God for truth rather than the Recovery. That's the aim of this blog series, and my prayer and hope is that it could empower members to leave and be free to serve the Lord alone.

The strength of the site is also that, like the Casteel Open Letter, it's reasonable and thoughtful. The LC is based on emotional, soul-warping neediness (the proverbial co-dependent and dysfunctional relation of "I need you to do this") and clear thought is both a goal and a way out. Scripture is written, and we all can think about what's written, not just repetitively shout slogans.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

The strength of the site is also that, like the Casteel Open Letter, it's reasonable and thoughtful. The LC is based on emotional, soul-warping neediness (the proverbial co-dependent and dysfunctional relation of "I need you to do this") and clear thought is both a goal and a way out. Scripture is written, and we all can think about what's written, not just repetitively shout slogans.

And there is some real, critical back & forth between forum members. There are some very good "Bereans" on here who examine things in light of scripture . . . and don't let me get away with anything too wild. (and most of the time it is even done in love )

[UntoHim]

Thanks Jacob for all your hard work and creativeness on LordsRecovery.Org! As far as I'm concerned, it will be a great information resource for current and former Local Church members, Christian apologists and leaders seeking information, concerned family and friends, and even the general public. Please feel free to "cross pollinate" LordsRecovery.Org with LocalChurchDiscussions.Com Of course you are also welcome to participate in our discussions here as much as your time and interest allow.
-

[JacobHoward]

Originally Posted by aron

I completely agree. The more reasoned and distinct voices that are heard, the better for those who are trying to see through the fog. It's a tremendous resource for those who are being recruited and need an objective voice, and for those currently enmeshed in LC-thought and trying to find a way out.

Two suggested topics...

...The strength of the site is also that, like the Casteel Open Letter, it's reasonable and thoughtful. The LC is based on emotional, soul-warping neediness (the proverbial co-dependent and dysfunctional relation of "I need you to do this") and clear thought is both a goal and a way out. Scripture is written, and we all can think about what's written, not just repetitively shout slogans.

Agreed! Thanks for the suggestions, too. Keep 'em coming! I just put up another blog https://thelordsrecovery.org/2020/01...-on-romans-16/, talking about how Witness Lee had no consistent arguments against Romans 16 and "one city, one church" doctrine. Praying and hoping it will help a member, new or fully immersed, to see through the gunk and get to the truth!

[aron]

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

Agreed! Thanks for the suggestions, too. Keep 'em coming! I just put up another blog https://thelordsrecovery.org/2020/01...-on-romans-16/, talking about how Witness Lee had no consistent arguments against Romans 16 and "one city, one church" doctrine. Praying and hoping it will help a member, new or fully immersed, to see through the gunk and get to the truth!

And thanks for your graciousness to listen to suggestions. Jesus promised, As one does to others (show grace by listening and considering), so others will do in return (show grace by paying attention). May we all have such hearts. Regarding Romans 16 and OCOC, your quote of Witness Lee is worth repeating.

Witness Lee: The church in their house was the church in Rome. There were not two churches in Rome, one called the church in Rome and another which met in the house of Aquila and Prisca. The church in Rome simply met in the house of this couple, so there was a church in their house.

I'd add to your remarks, which were good (esp that of Cenchrea in Corinth), that the NT usage pattern shows 'ekklesia' fitting the previous scriptural context, that of the LXX Greek. "In the midst of the 'ekklesia' I will sing hymns of praise to you" ~Psa 22 etc. Ekklesia meant 'meeting' or 'gathering', so one could have multiple 'ekklesia' in one city. In the LC they do it, and label them 'meetings', like 'home meetings' and 'prayer meetings' and 'college-age meetings' and condemn everyone else who doesn't have their labeling system. It's subjectively biased, self-serving, and not based on logic logical at all. At it's core it's like there's an unhappy 6-year-old saying "I can do it, but you can't".

Acts 19:41 ~ "And with these words he dismissed the 'ekklesia'" - was this 'ekklesia' in Ephesus the Church in Ephesus? Of course not - it was a public gathering, which was threatening to become disorderly. So the town clerk dismissed the participants. Truth is, there are 'ekklesia' all over, in the NT view. Big cities can have many of them.

Another issue that could be raised is that in the LC, Watchman Nee is celebrated for using multiple sources, but his followers are effectively forbidden from copying this practice. I wrote this earlier:

Originally Posted by aron

"In many counselors is safety, and success", said Proverbs. Watchman Nee drew on this motif heavily, and his use of multiple sources was celebrated by Lee and other followers. Yet somehow with Nee, this adage was fulfilled and completed, and a new age had dawned? Somehow, after Nee, many counselors would only bring in confusion?

Does this make any sense? It makes no sense to me..

It really helps to show that we can critically and profitably examine concepts which conflict and contradict each other, and are non-sensical and irrational, and cause real human psychological distress. Being released from the grip of disjointed thinking is part of our journey home.

[aron]

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

Agreed! Thanks for the suggestions, too. Keep 'em coming!

If I may be somewhat importune, may I suggest "God's economy" as an area worth consideration? Some of us on this forum have looked at it and concluded (surprise) that there's nothing there. Or little, at any rate.

And "God's economy" is perhaps the best way to see the Lee mind meld, other than OCOC and a few other sacred LC teachings. (Think the opposite of the Spock mind meld in Star Trek: in this case Lee's thoughts become your own).

Everyone in the LC knows that Paul wrote Timothy to remain in Ephesus and to tell certain ones not to teach things other than "God's economy" (RecV translation) which is in faith. But Paul didn't say what "God's economy" was other than to link it with faith. In the LC we got book after book on "God's economy". It was God dispensing Himself into man to make man God in life and nature. It was enjoying Christ as everything for the building up of the body. It was the NT believer enjoying grace. It was man being made in God's image, to contain Him, like a glove contains the hand. Like a soda bottle being made to contain soda, man was made to contain God. This "dispensing" was "God's economy".

But if you look at Paul and Barnabas in Acts 12:25, they came to Antioch when the "dispensing" in Jerusalem was completed (RecV translation; others say "ministry" or "ministration" or "service"), and that dispensing wasn't of the type alluded to above. When the brothers in Jerusalem told Paul to "remember the poor" (Galatians 2:10), he didn't say, "No, sorry, that's a dead work - I'm here to enjoy Christ on the proper ground". No, Paul replied that he was eager to do it. If you look at Corinthians and Romans he makes some mention of this remembrance, that folks are to lay aside something for the poor of Jerusalem. Then at the end of Acts he told the opposing ones that after many years he returned to Jerusalem, bringing alms for his people (24:17). And this fits with the Jerusalem church, which was "daily dispensing" (Acts 6:1) to the widows and orphans, as Jesus had taught, and the OT commanded the righteous to do. Take care of those who can't care for themselves. Perhaps this is the "God's economy" that Paul alluded to in the epistle to Timothy.

Instead we got the selfish, self-oriented "enjoying God", which was then ripe for manipulation. Jesus taught to care for the despised other, and your reward would be great in heaven. There are two separate possible versions of "God's economy" seen here (there may be others, of course). I'll go with second version, which seems to have more scriptural support.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JacobHoward

Agreed! Thanks for the suggestions, too. Keep 'em coming! I just put up another blog https://thelordsrecovery.org/2020/01...-on-romans-16/, talking about how Witness Lee had no consistent arguments against Romans 16 and "one city, one church" doctrine. Praying and hoping it will help a member, new or fully immersed, to see through the gunk and get to the truth!

JacobHoward in my study of this OCOC teaching in the New Testament, all of the apostles, except John in Revelation 2-3, failed to "see the vision." In fact, Paul was the worst offender. He obviously never got these naming conventions right. Nee and Lee would have had him quarantined for his "heresy."

[JacobHoward]

Originally Posted by Freedom

It's great to have these types of resources available. The LC is able to get away with much of what it teaches because they have made a particular point to silence all opposing viewpoints.

The more content like this that is available on the internet, the greater likelihood that people in the LC will come across it and maybe even begin to question the LC.

@Freedom, I really think you're spot on. I think the Recovery's grip on information control within itself is loosening faster than ever because of the Internet. They've had much of their control through propaganda and fear-mongering. I love how we have the means to reach new members, fully immersed members, ex-members, and non-members alike with solid information. Truly amazing!

[UntoHim]

O Lord Three Times - The False Gospel of Witness Lee
Jacob Howard

On the one hand, when Recovery members preach the gospel to outsiders, they can and do preach the gospel according to the gospel of the Bible, which is the gospel. I can speak to this from personal experience. But on the other hand, Recovery members sometimes preach a false gospel that cannot save.

One of those false gospels is the “O Lord Three Times” gospel:

We have seen that to reach the unbelievers, no preaching is necessary. If we help them to say “O Lord” three times, they will be saved. If they open the window, the air will get in. All they have to do is to open their mouth and say, “O Lord, O Lord.” Even if they have no intention of believing, still they will be caught. Regardless of whether they have the intention or not, as long as they open the window, the air will get in.
Witness Lee, The Seven Spirits for the Local Churches, Chapter 5, Section 2 (Emboldened Emphasis My Own)

This is a false gospel that cannot save. Since a false gospel does not come from the one true God, a false gospel does not serve God; it serves a false god; it serves nothing. The O Lord Three Times gospel has nothing to do with Jesus or God. To put His name on it is meaningless. It is a false gospel preached by Witness Lee, serving a god that doesn’t exist.

To be clear, here are my direct contentions with Witness Lee’s O Lord Three Times gospel:
*1. To reach unbelievers, preaching is essential (Romans 10:14).
*2. Saying “O Lord” three times for salvation is a made up idea.
*3. Confessing the Lord’s name (which is Jesus, not just “Lord”) must be paired with belief (Romans 10:9-12).
*4 Saying “O Lord” three times does not open some mystical window in unsaved people. Again, this is made up.

The Bible: Believe and Confess

Take a look at Romans 10:9-12 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. (ESV)

Romans 10:9 makes it clear that you will be saved if you do the following two things:
*1. Confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord
*2. and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead.

Romans 10:10 gives us the reason for those two things being qualifiers for being saved:
*1 The heart is the internal part of you with which you believe God raised Jesus from the dead and are thus justified
*2 and the mouth is the external part of you which you use to confess Jesus as Lord and are saved!

Then Romans 10:11-12, once again, talks about belief with the heart and confession with the mouth:
*1. Romans 10:11 talks about those who believe not being put to shame and *2. Romans 10:12 talks about the Lord being the same Lord of all who call upon Him.

Finally, Romans 10:13 says:
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

If this last verse is taken out of context, someone might conclude that an unsaved person just needs to call Jesus’ name to be saved. But if you read the preceding verses, it’s obvious that calling on Jesus’ name is confessing His name, which is just one part of salvation.

The Bible: Preaching and Hearing Required Romans 10:14 says the following:

"How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?

Romans 10:14 (ESV)
Witness Lee’s O Lord Three Times gospel asserts that no preaching is necessary. The Bible asserts that it is:
17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
Romans 10:17 (ESV)

The Bible tells us that faith comes from hearing through the word of Christ, that an unsaved person cannot believe until they’ve heard the gospel, that an unsaved person cannot hear the gospel unless someone preaches it.

Conclusion: O Lord Three Times is a False Gospel

Leading an unsaved person to say “O Lord” three times will do nothing. It has no biblical standing, and it is a false gospel that does not come from God. Unless the Recovery as a movement repents of this gospel, the O Lord Three Times false gospel of Witness Lee is just another heretical doctrine within the Recovery that proves it is a Christian cult.

[Freedom]

Quite frankly, I think that the LC has this kind of teaching because they want some sort of way to filter people out who won't follow directions.

The thing about the gospel is that it requires an individual response. The LC is not a group that values individuality, so I don't think that they would want being a believer to be the sole membership criteria for their group.

When LC members meet someone and tell them that they can experience something by calling on the Lord three times, what they're really asking, is for that person to blindly do something that they might not fully understand. This often comes before it has been explained to them what they're doing or why they're doing it. The type of people who would agree to do so without pushing back at all are the ones that the LC wants.

[Trapped]

I know this was taught and is also in print, but my experience (and it's just that, my personal experience) is that this is not a "prevalent" teaching that has seeped all through the LC. The fulltime serving ones who are on the college campuses don't go around just trying to get people to call "Oh Lord". That's not what the serving ones do and it's not what they tell the college students to do either. They teach the "sinners prayer" on the back of the Mystery of Human Life that involves repentance and confession of sin and belief. This is addressed at the beginning of the article where he acknowledges that the gospel is actually preached in the LC, and from what I've seen, typical gospel preaching is much more common than the "call 3x" gospel preaching.

I think the call 3x teaching is one of those things they should take out of print, and there may be some fanatics inside who will totally espouse this teaching, but in general I don't think most live by it.

I may be wrong though.

[UntoHim]

I'm glad to hear that Trapped! I would image that the practice does vary from region to region/locality to locality. My understanding is that the full-timers/serving ones are also instructed not to mention the name "Brother Lee" to new ones at the start of recruitment. Of course the very first "real" Local Church meeting they go to they will hear that name big time, and see his name on every book, etc.

I can tell you that the things that Jacob has posted were absolutely practiced in the Local Churches in So.Calif in the 70s and 80s at just about every one of the hundreds of gospel meetings I attended. Witness Lee taught that simply calling on the Lord would get a person saved. This is what he taught and this is what we practiced for many years.
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I'm glad to hear that Trapped! I would image that the practice does vary from region to region/locality to locality. My understanding is that the full-timers/serving ones are also instructed not to mention the name "Brother Lee" to new ones at the start of recruitment. Of course the very first "real" Local Church meeting they go to they will hear that name big time, and see his name on every book, etc.

I can tell you that the things that Jacob has posted were absolutely practiced in the Local Churches in So.Calif in the 70s and 80s at just about every one of the hundreds of gospel meetings I attended. Witness Lee taught that simply calling on the Lord would get a person saved. This is what he taught and this is what we practiced for many years.
-

Okay, and are we talking about calling on the Lord as "Oh Lord" or "Oh Lord Jesus, come into me"? Or do you see them as the exact same thing? Calling on the name of the Lord to be saved is scriptural, plain and simple, right? (and, of course, we're not talking about the "Oh Looord Jeezus" chanting thing, as has been often pointed out)

And yes, belief must be there, but doesn't the Spirit supply even that to the person?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I think the call 3x teaching is one of those things they should take out of print, and there may be some fanatics inside who will totally espouse this teaching, but in general I don't think most live by it.

I may be wrong though.

I don't know how things were in other localities, but where I was there was quite a lot of pressure for us to preach the gospel. They would always tell us though that we shouldn't waste time with people who might come across as argumentative or people who had to many questions. So that kind of pushed us in the direction of trying to find people who we could get to do things like call on the Lord three times. I don't even know if that was intentional or not. It was just more of the parameters that we were expected to operate under, and I don't think any of us really questioned it.