“Can the Local Church Leadership Say, ‘We Were Wrong’?” (An Open Letter)

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I strongly believe that other people are very similar to myself....When you make a mistake and you are suffering under the burden of turmoil within, after 10 or 20 years you will wake up one day and finally decide it is time to do the right thing because you just can't manage this burden any longer.

I wouldn't be able to continue this way for more than 10-20 years myself, so I don't think Benson can either, says ZNP, 30-40 years later.

[OBW]

I have not read the book in some time, but I recall that while BP wasn't directly antagonistic during the BM/SC affair issue, he ultimately did nothing and said nothing. He did visit their house, the perfect opportunity to make some kind of apology, yet he did nothing except sort of hem and haw around, then leave. If that was the apology, then it was drastically different from the certainty with which he spewed on Jane all those years earlier. If he didn't recount his error, he didn't aplogize.

And if he had truly apologized, not only would there have been no book, he would not have felt free to speak with pride of his involvement in the incident that ultimately caused the book so many years later.

His little bit of time at Jane's door was sort of like Jimmy Swaggert's one show where he cried and said he failed, then "shot the finger" at anyone suggesting he should step down from his ministry, even just for a time.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

I wouldn't be able to continue this way for more than 10-20 years myself, so I don't think Benson can either, says ZNP, 30-40 years later.

The point is not that everyone will repent, but the reality is that many do, like a sinking ship BP will watch as one by one they leave, and that is exactly what has happened for the last 30 years.

Try this, take a Houston phone list of saints from 1977, choose only those "with the vision of Christ and the Church", eliminate those that have died. Now how many of those that are left still meet with the LRC? If it is only 50% why so few?

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The point is not that everyone will repent, but the reality is that many do, like a sinking ship BP will watch as one by one they leave, and that is exactly what has happened for the last 30 years

They have been leaving one by one over the last 30 years? Really? Who among the leadership has left since 1990?

Benson isn't watching a sinking ship. His rowboat may be tethered securely to the dock, treading water, but it ain't sinking.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

They have been leaving one by one over the last 30 years? Really? Who among the leadership has left since 1990?

Benson isn't watching a sinking ship. His rowboat may be tethered securely to the dock, treading water, but it ain't sinking.

Why do you pick 1990, this thread is discussing an event in 1977? When I was in Houston JI was considered a top leading brother, Gene Gruhler had a ministry for the children's work, John So was also considered an Apostle, Bill Mallon was more of a regional brother. Jane and her husband were "pillars" in the church. TC was considered another leading brother with a ministry. You ignore the obvious, how can your conclusions be accurate?

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The point is not that everyone will repent, but the reality is that many do, like a sinking ship BP will watch as one by one they leave, and that is exactly what has happened for the last 30 years.

Try this, take a Houston phone list of saints from 1977, choose only those "with the vision of Christ and the Church", eliminate those that have died. Now how many of those that are left still meet with the LRC? If it is only 50% why so few?

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Why do you pick 1990, this thread is discussing an event in 1977? When I was in Houston JI was considered a top leading brother, Gene Gruhler had a ministry for the children's work, John So was also considered an Apostle, Bill Mallon was more of a regional brother. Jane and her husband were "pillars" in the church. TC was considered another leading brother with a ministry. You ignore the obvious, how can your conclusions be accurate?

It seems that you're always lumping everything into two categories, the 70's, and everything since the 70's. Why not try something more like this --

1977
1987
1997
2000's

You described a slow, prolonged atrophy of saints, constantly pinging at Benson's consciousness over 30 years. All I'm saying is, aren't you really talking about what went down in the 80's? That's a little bit different. That was a generation ago.

Instead of going back to 1977, I could probably have come forward to 1997, what about the 14 years that Mr. Phillips has shared the top of the LRC totem pole? What sinking ship?

How can your conclusions be relevant, when your context is so narrow?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

You described a slow, prolonged atrophy of saints, constantly pinging at Benson's consciousness over 30 years. All I'm saying is, aren't you really talking about what went down in the 80's? That's a little bit different. That was a generation ago.

Instead of going back to 1977, I could probably have come forward to 1997, what about the 14 years that Mr. Phillips has shared the top of the LRC totem pole? What sinking ship?

How can your conclusions be relevant, when your context is so narrow?

Unless you know the earlier events, you cannot understand the key players involved. Without the earlier events, the major quarantines of the 00's could never have happened.

Brother RL, each one of us has unique perspectives based on times and locations. I have repeatedly found that these diverse viewpoints, upon closer examination, do not necessarily conflict with one another.

For example, those at LSM constantly involved with the young people, whether at Anaheim or Austin, saw a somewhat steady stream of young faces. Hence, they got the impression that the recovery was fairly fruitful. Actually, it was some of the best young people from all the LC's that provided that perspective. The LC's, on the other hand, watched as most of our yp either went to the world or to the ministry, and their churches had little increase.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Unless you know the earlier events, you cannot understand the key players involved. Without the earlier events, the major quarantines of the 00's could never have happened.

Brother RL, each one of us has unique perspectives based on times and locations. I have repeatedly found that these diverse viewpoints, upon closer examination, do not necessarily conflict with one another.

For example, those at LSM constantly involved with the young people, whether at Anaheim or Austin, saw a somewhat steady stream of young faces. Hence, they got the impression that the recovery was fairly fruitful. Actually, it was some of the best young people from all the LC's that provided that perspective. The LC's, on the other hand, watched as most of our yp either went to the world or to the ministry, and their churches had little increase.

Ohio, I appreciate learning about the past events. How many hours have I spent on these forums learning about the past, seminal events?

And I appreciate ZNP's perspective from the 70's, to the extent that he is willing to bear in mind that it was the 70's. As an example, since you brought it up, go back and read point 2 in post #24. There seems to be no appreciation on the part of ZNP that his experience was 10-12 years before the letter he's responding to. Reading this post, you would probably think it was the same timeframe, maybe even the same city.

But you really didn't respond to what I was saying in my post. Z was describing a 30-year string of resignations that would eventually register with Benson. Now and going forward. But it turns out that, apparently, 90% of what Z was referring to is stuff that happened in the 80's!

So let's talk about the past. Let's talk about how the past shaped the LRC, and shaped its leadership. I'm all for it. But how can we talk about 1988, as if it were 2008, and think that our conclusions will fit the context of what's really going on?

[ZNPaaneah]

Yes, I think an attempt to look at 30 years history would be beneficial. For example the ones that left in the 80s may have prompted the letter in 1988. Personally I don't know enough of the LRC after 1987.

I do know that no one has stepped forward since WL died

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The point is not that everyone will repent, but the reality is that many do, like a sinking ship BP will watch as one by one they leave, and that is exactly what has happened for the last 30 years.

Try this, take a Houston phone list of saints from 1977, choose only those "with the vision of Christ and the Church", eliminate those that have died. Now how many of those that are left still meet with the LRC? If it is only 50% why so few?

These departures mean nothing to the true exclusive. He just sees this as fewer saints being "faithful to the end." They are willing to be the "last of the Mohicans."

When I think about how many of the brothers in the GLA who have departed due to TC abuses, it is really incredible. They love the Lord and the church, yet departed for no other reason than "they had a problem with TC." The recent departure of the young people in Columbus and the saints in Cincy proves that not even a quarantine with all its turmoil, including lawsuits and busted families, can even put a dent in their armor.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

These departures mean nothing to the true exclusive. He just sees this as fewer saints being "faithful to the end." They are willing to be the "last of the Mohicans."

When I think about how many of the brothers in the GLA who have departed due to TC abuses, it is really incredible. They love the Lord and the church, yet departed for no other reason than "they had a problem with TC." The recent departure of the young people in Columbus and the saints in Cincy proves that not even a quarantine with all its turmoil, including lawsuits and busted families, can even put a dent in their armor.

My comment, which you quoted, was saying that the conscience within the saints would cause them to be troubled to the point of waking up and responding. One way in which they would respond would be to leave. The fact that so many have left strongly supports this point. I am not in any way saying, nor am I concerned, that all will feel this way (that is absurd -- if all felt that way then who is the source of the trouble?). I am not concerned with how the "true exclusive" feels. The principle is that the treasure in the LRC was the genuine believers, as these leave, you squeeze the life juice out of the LRC and turn it into something that is legalistic and devoid of life and love. You may think that "nothing can put a dent in the armor of a pride of lions" but if you look closely you will see that they are infested with parasites sucking the blood out of them. We have described the LSM as those that "make merchandise of the saints". Well if those saints leave and you are left with "the true exclusive" then who are you going to make merchandise of now? In the same way, if you removed all the true believers from the Earth you would be left with liars, thieves, psychopaths, etc. The Earth would become a man made hell. If all those with an active and sensitive conscience leave the LRC, then what will you have left?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The principle is that the treasure in the LRC was the genuine believers, as these leave, you squeeze the life juice out of the LRC and turn it into something that is legalistic and devoid of life and love.

2 points here --

I never heard a leader say that the real "treasure" in the recovery was the believers themselves. They might teach about God "selling all" to buy the pearl of great worth, but their "treasure" was the vision and the testimony, code words for the ways of her leaders. When saints left the recovery, it was often considered to be their loss, rather than our loss.

Secondly, I agree that every loving brother who departs, leaves the collective remainder more legalistic and void of His blessings of life. It was not WL or TC who was our source of life and truth, but the very Christ living in all those dear saints who departed.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

2 points here --

I never heard a leader say that the real "treasure" in the recovery was the believers themselves. They might teach about God "selling all" to buy the pearl of great worth, but their "treasure" was the vision and the testimony, code words for the ways of her leaders. When saints left the recovery, it was often considered to be their loss, rather than our loss.

Secondly, I agree that every loving brother who departs, leaves the collective remainder more legalistic and void of His blessings of life. It was not WL or TC who was our source of life and truth, but the very Christ living in all those dear saints who departed.

Ephesians1 talks about aa revelation of his inheritance in the saints