Why isnt anybody besides Cal, Jo, and Andria speaking out about the Church?

[theLCfurry]

I was watching a youtube video about abusive cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses today. I know that theres a lot of videos about the abuse going on inside the organization, but I tried to search up anything about the Lords Recovery and besides Cal's videos online, there was hardly anyone speaking out about the organization, which makes my blood boil that many people on YouTube are talking about Jehovah's Witnesses and the abuse going on in the organization, yet hardly anybody is talking about the abuses in the Lord's recovery, which in my opinion, might operate a bit similarly. Theres less of this online, where hardly anyone has testimonies about it. I only find this type of discussion going on in this forum. Anyone might know why this is the case?

[UntoHim]

Well BJS103, it looks like you have a keyboard and a mouse....GO FOR IT! This is one of the reasons that LocalChurchDiscussions was initiated - to give a voice and venue for speaking out!

Keep in mind that not every former member (or current member for that matter) wants to post on places like Facebook where anonymous postings are not allowed (supposedly) Some people still have family in the Local Church and do not want to see their relationships damaged. Also, many don't feel they have the burden or capacity to produce a YouTube video. Thus comes in the value and function of LCD.

Actually, I think the Lord is doing a wonderful thing lately among so many former Local Church members. Why, just in the past few days another helpful site has popped up - https://thelordsrecovery.org - Praise Him. Thank Him. God is speaking through the Body.
-

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by BJS03

I was watching a youtube video about abusive cults such as the Jehovah's Witnesses today. I know that theres a lot of videos about the abuse going on inside the organization, but I tried to search up anything about the Lords Recovery and besides Cal's videos online, there was hardly anyone speaking out about the organization, which makes my blood boil that many people on YouTube are talking about Jehovah's Witnesses and the abuse going on in the organization, yet hardly anybody is talking about the abuses in the Lord's recovery, which in my opinion, might operate a bit similarly. Theres less of this online, where hardly anyone has testimonies about it. I only find this type of discussion going on in this forum. Anyone might know why this is the case?

The LCM has a litigious reputation, and I think there is definitely an element of fear involved. No one wants to be targeted for simply speaking out. And that is exactly what the LC does.

As UntoHim mentioned, I think its encouraging to see the recent sites/videos that have appeared. Personally, I've been wanted to buy up a few domains to maybe have a couple sites, but when it comes to the content for those sites, I'm not sure what would be the best.

[theLCfurry]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Well BJS103, it looks like you have a keyboard and a mouse....GO FOR IT! This is one of the reasons that LocalChurchDiscussions was initiated - to give a voice and venue for speaking out!

Keep in mind that not every former member (or current member for that matter) wants to post on places like Facebook where anonymous postings are not allowed (supposedly) Some people still have family in the Local Church and do not want to see their relationships damaged. Also, many don't feel they have the burden or capacity to produce a YouTube video. Thus comes in the value and function of LCD.

Actually, I think the Lord is doing a wonderful thing lately among so many former Local Church members. Why, just in the past few days another helpful site has popped up - https://thelordsrecovery.org - Praise Him. Thank Him. God is speaking through the Body.
-

Also one quick question, is it a bad idea to ask a prominent youtuber (that was a former Jehovah's witness and is now an athiest) in the comments section who discusses about cults (ie Jehovah's witnesses) to take a look into the recovery and ask for his opinion about it?

[Nuclear]

Originally Posted by BJS03

Also one quick question, is it a bad idea to ask a prominent youtuber (that was a former Jehovah's witness and is now an athiest) in the comments section who discusses about cults (ie Jehovah's witnesses) to take a look into the recovery and ask for his opinion about it?

Thats a great idea, its got my approval!

Also just something to consider as to why there seem to be so many who speak out about Jehovah's Witness and so few with the LC is size.

JW has millions of members in North America alone, where the LC (the great and recovered and full of richness clearly) only has 25 000 or so. It just kind of follows that less people will be speaking out about it.

Its also sobering looking at numbers like that. The LC may seem like a giant to many of us, but in the grand scheme of things they are small and pathetic.

[Trapped]

Why?

DCP litigation, stalking, harassment.

Shunning, quarantining, being labeled divisive or negative.

Losing your whole social circle.

The threat that speaking up means rebellion against God.

Essentially, fear. The marker of an abusive group.

Also, skills to do the things you are mentioning. While it is easier than ever to put up a website or do a YouTube channel, maybe the older saints who would want to don't know how to, and the younger saints who may know how don't want to spend their time on it.

"The ministry" and DCP's responses are also so incredibly twisted and manipulative it takes a certain kind of person to want to sit down and wade through all the muck.

[Ohio]

Are all apostles? Do all speak in tongues?

That was one of Paul's responses to those who demanded the same actions from all.

I personally believe that the numerous and diverse posts on this forum have paved the way for other venues to be used. Without doubt, the internet has turned the tables on LSM's grip on information. Anonymous user forums were the first internet vehicle developed to meet this need. UntoHim and others started on the Bereans and then moved here when that platform fell apart. Personally I have always found that the insights of former members were far more beneficial than some outside expert.

Perhaps others will use Twitter feeds or some other social media. These recent messages by LSM prove how lttle control they still have over their members. Our goal was never to decimate the LC's, but rather to educate all the members, so that none of them are hurt or held in fear.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Nuclear

Also just something to consider as to why there seem to be so many who speak out about Jehovah's Witness and so few with the LC is size.

JW has millions of members in North America alone, where the LC (the great and recovered and full of richness clearly) only has 25 000 or so. It just kind of follows that less people will be speaking out about it.

Its also sobering looking at numbers like that. The LC may seem like a giant to many of us, but in the grand scheme of things they are small and pathetic.

Right - I was thinking the same thing: over the past 45 years, almost no one I've mentioned the LC to (outside of direct LC experience) has known anything about it! If someone knew about Watchman Nee, they may have had some awareness . . . but again, very, very few in the U.S. seem to have even heard of the LC.

[OBW]

Many have spoken on this forum (and its predecessor, run out of the Philippines) over many years. But certain parts of the discussion became less engaged, and those who did speak often do not continue to resurrect the old discussions because of 1) the disinterest of others, 2) the hijacking by the LC faithful, 3) or comments that it is old news.

Yes, it often is old news. Buried way back in the archives and never seen by the newcomers unless they have the will to dig through for themselves.

And maybe the real issue for today is simply the current structural issues and the abuse of the saints in their care. Maybe the more in-depth discussion of the problems in the underlying theology of both Lee and Nee are no longer needed. I've been gone too long to really know what is happening today except as it is reported here. I hear nothing about it from my brother or sister because the LC is the elephant in the room and no longer mentioned.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by OBW

And maybe the real issue for today is simply the current structural issues and the abuse of the saints in their care. Maybe the more in-depth discussion of the problems in the underlying theology of both Lee and Nee are no longer needed. I've been gone too long to really know what is happening today except as it is reported here. I hear nothing about it from my brother or sister because the LC is the elephant in the room and no longer mentioned.

The LC tends to make a big deal about other Christians not accepting certain teachings of WL/WN. When I was beginning the process of leaving, it certain became of interest to me to see how the LC differed from mainstream Christianity. But I'm not sure that everyone in the LC would have that same interest. Some of the theological issues end up being somewhat of a rabbit hole anyways because of all various views that exist.

One thing I wasn't fully aware of right away was realizing the full extent of types of abuses that are occurring within the LC today. In light of everything that has been going on recently, it seems that it is becoming increasingly important for LC members who are in the process of leaving to come forward with their stories. The more people speak up and call abuse for what it is, the less the LC will be able to get away with pretending that such problems don't exist in the LC.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The LC tends to make a big deal about other Christians not accepting certain teachings of WL/WN. When I was beginning the process of leaving, it certainly became of interest to me to see how the LC differed from mainstream Christianity. But I'm not sure that everyone in the LC would have that same interest. Some of the theological issues end up being somewhat of a rabbit hole anyways because of all various views that exist.

Right. So I also don't immediately discard something I heard in the LC, because there are a lot of varying views on theological things and misc. practices. No group has the market cornered, and we need the entire body to grasp the full dimensions of Christ. And the LC does get some things right . . .

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And the LC does get some things right . . .

That actually makes them worse, not better.

[Cal]

Addressing the subject of this thread... I'm of course flattered, but the LR is really a tiny sect. The Jehovah's Witnesses have almost 10 million members. The LR is lucky if it has 150,000.*

So there is just a smaller pool of people from which some might emerge to speak out. But it is changing. For example, this website: https://thelordsrecovery.org/

* Of course, the LR must be ambivalent about being bigger than 144,000, because by Witness Lee's own words the 144,000 first fruits are a literal number. So of if they get more members than that, say 150,000, there are always going to be some thinking, "Am I in the 6000 that won't make it?!"

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Cal

That actually makes them worse, not better.

I get your point, that is, having some truth mixed in makes the rest more appealing. But, as I've stated many times before on here, let me say again that I am thankful for the Lord leading me miraculously to the LC in Bazerkely back in 74. I am also thankful he lead me back out in the late 80s and brought me to this gathering in Scottsdale. It was the foundation that He choose and saw fit to establish in me.

Life is full of good, bad and ugly, but He uses it all. Some things I picked up in the LC He needed to tear down and correct, but others teachings He's building upon. These days I would not recommend the LC to any one, especially seeing what it's become these past 35 years.

[OBW]

While I might not disagree that those who came into the LC could have been led by Christ, I am not convinced that it is simply true. And I do not subscribe to the determinist/Calvinist view that everything "happens for a reason" and is "from the hand of God." I do believe that God will use whatever we give him to his glory. But I cannot find evidence that he gives us all of the situations that he then uses to our benefit. I think we often decide to (fill-in-the-blank) on our own. And I think that God NOT stopping that car from running the red light and T-boning your car is not because that is what he pre-ordained to happen, but simply what happened.

Not saying God could not, but that he is not simply pre-ordaining everything. If that were the case, then I guess God really wants that televangelist to have an affair with his secretary. Or those towers to be destroyed by airplanes.

Sorry. I can't find that as the way it works in the Bible. I would never say that God doesn't sometimes cause what I might otherwise wish he did not. But I do not believe that we can presume everything in our life to have been good because God would not have led us into something bad. Instead, God may not have led us anywhere but was diligent to work even the bad out for our good.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Life is full of good, bad and ugly, but He uses it all.

I guess the bottom line is that every group/person has faults, so the question becomes: are those faults ones of weakness or evil?

It's not black and white, it's a spectrum. So another question is: how far into the wrong end of the spectrum are you?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

While I might not disagree that those who came into the LC could have been led by Christ, I am not convinced that it is simply true. And I do not subscribe to the determinist/Calvinist view that everything "happens for a reason" and is "from the hand of God." I do believe that God will use whatever we give him to his glory. But I cannot find evidence that he gives us all of the situations that he then uses to our benefit. I think we often decide to (fill-in-the-blank) on our own. And I think that God NOT stopping that car from running the red light and T-boning your car is not because that is what he pre-ordained to happen, but simply what happened.

Not saying God could not, but that he is not simply pre-ordaining everything. If that were the case, then I guess God really wants that televangelist to have an affair with his secretary. Or those towers to be destroyed by airplanes.

Sorry. I can't find that as the way it works in the Bible. I would never say that God doesn't sometimes cause what I might otherwise wish he did not. But I do not believe that we can presume everything in our life to have been good because God would not have led us into something bad. Instead, God may not have led us anywhere but was diligent to work even the bad out for our good.

One verse bro: "God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God . . ." How many things? ALL! Whether it fits into our thinking, scripture says it. So either we believe it's true or not.

I get the whole Armenian vs Calvinistic thing, but I've long concluded both views are true, since I can find both in the Bible. How can that even remotely be possible? Only one answer - God.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by OBW

Not saying God could not, but that he is not simply pre-ordaining everything. If that were the case, then I guess God really wants that televangelist to have an

The best example is Satan. God permitted and uses Satan, but Satan still deserves judgment. As Joseph said, "You meant it for evil. But God meant it for good." Gen 50:20

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

One verse bro: "God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God . . ." How many things? ALL! Whether it fits into our thinking, scripture says it. So either we believe it's true or not.

I get the whole Armenian vs Calvinistic thing, but I've long concluded both views are true, since I can find both in the Bible. How can that even remotely be possible? Only one answer - God.

The thing to realize is that the fact that God uses the evil of evildoers to work ultimate good does not excuse the evil.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

One verse bro: "God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God . . ." How many things? ALL!

And I did not disagree. Read it again. Use your grammar and dictionary.

The "cause" is not simply to "all things," but to "all things working together." It does not say that God causes all things, then uses them to work together for good. It says that he causes "all things to work together." A paraphrase would be that God uses all things in our life to result in good for us. Reading it as "causes all things" is based on the Calvinist understanding of predestination. It is all already ordained.

Similarly, another verse says that we should rejoice IN all things. Not rejoice FOR all things. We do not rejoice that we have been diagnosed with cancer. But in the midst of it, we rejoice. To rejoice should part of the life of the Christian. We rejoice IN Christ.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

And I did not disagree. Read it again. Use your grammar and dictionary.

The "cause" is not simply to "all things," but to "all things working together." It does not say that God causes all things, then uses them to work together for good. It says that he causes "all things to work together." A paraphrase would be that God uses all things in our life to result in good for us. Reading it as "causes all things" is based on the Calvinist understanding of predestination. It is all already ordained.

Similarly, another verse says that we should rejoice IN all things. Not rejoice FOR all things. We do not rejoice that we have been diagnosed with cancer. But in the midst of it, we rejoice. To rejoice should part of the life of the Christian. We rejoice IN Christ.

Okay, this is good! "God causes all things" is not the complete thought . . . He "causes all things to work together." I think, as you say, it is about the ultimate result. He does not specifically control everything . . . He has delegated the earth to man, who gave it away. Therefore, Jesus prayed that, "Your will be done on earth, even as it is in heaven." The fact is, there is a "ruler of this world" still at work and causing bad things.

God, however, can take what the enemy does and turn it all for good to those who love Him. So your point about praising Him in the circumstance, and not necessarily for the circumstance, is well taken.

There is a teaching by some (not just WL) that "there are no second causes." That is, everything that happens to us is a vehicle from God, to usher us back the Him. I'm still chewing on that thought . . .

I sort of see things like a big chess game with God playing the enemy. The enemy makes a move that seems to be the final nail in the coffin, but God does a counter move and it eventually becomes apparent to all that the enemy played right into His hands. (of course you could say that Christ already did the check in this game, and the complete checkmate will be manifested shortly)

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

God, however, can take what the enemy does and turn it all for good to those who love Him. So your point about praising Him in the circumstance, and not necessarily for the circumstance, is well taken.

Reminds me of the joke about the good Calvinist who fell and broke their leg. "I'm glad that's over with now."

Presumes that all of life is predestined. That would mean that "whosoever will" is a ruse because you can only will if God has predestined it to be so. (Wouldn't that fit well in an inerrant bible view?) There is something very wrong in that whole line of thinking. I think that it comes from an overly expansive view of Paul's discussion in Romans 9 and following where he notes that God specifically chose concerning certain things. Such as Jacob to be the heir even though he was actually second-born. Surely God can choose and can act in whatever manner he wants. He can make a pot (like Pharoah) to have a hard heart for the furtherance of his will. But that does not presume that everything is therefore chosen and set in place before the foundation of the earth. That God simply does intervene in everything and sets everything in motion with the intent that it happens the way it does.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by OBW

Reminds me of the joke about the good Calvinist who fell and broke their leg. "I'm glad that's over with now."

Presumes that all of life is predestined. That would mean that "whosoever will" is a ruse because you can only will if God has predestined it to be so. (Wouldn't that fit well in an inerrant bible view?) There is something very wrong in that whole line of thinking. I think that it comes from an overly expansive view of Paul's discussion in Romans 9 and following where he notes that God specifically chose concerning certain things. Such as Jacob to be the heir even though he was actually second-born. Surely God can choose and can act in whatever manner he wants. He can make a pot (like Pharoah) to have a hard heart for the furtherance of his will. But that does not presume that everything is therefore chosen and set in place before the foundation of the earth. That God simply does intervene in everything and sets everything in motion with the intent that it happens the way it does.

Funny regarding the Calvinist with the broken leg!

I am convinced that when we stand before the Bema, there will be no such excuse on our part, such as "How could I have done this or that Lord? You made me a certain way!" Back to the delegation idea. It's a free will thing and He lets us have authority within a certain realm of things. When people say stuff like, "Yer the master of your own destiny" and "The words you speak become reality," they are partially right. Why? Because God has given the earth to men - delegated it to us. (Psalm 115:16) I praise Him that this verse is true: "Many are the plans in a person's heart, but it is the LORD's purpose that prevails." (Prov 19:21)

As a leader, when you delegate something to someone, you expect them to be a good steward over what you've given them. However, as the leader you still retain ultimate authority. But for a period of time controlled by the leader, they let the delegatee have control. Eventually, there comes an accounting of things done in the body. (2 Cor. 5:10)