An Outsider's Story

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

I think that if she was forced to choose, she would not always side with WL's views (ie his hymns being the only valid form of worship), but would tend to do so most of the time.

FYI, there are more hymns in the hymnal that just Witness Lee's. It's just most hymns written by other saints over the last 100 years or so are not given acknowledgment that his are with a *. Unless you know a hymn and whose the hymn's author is, you wouldn't know unless credit is given. Case in point Blessed Assurance by Fannie Crosby. This hymn is in the hymnal, but you wouldn't know it was Fannie who wrote it unless you already knew. Maybe I'm nit-picking, but I'm just trying to make a point regarding the hymnal local churches use.

[ToGodAlone]

Originally Posted by Terry

FYI, there are more hymns in the hymnal that just Witness Lee's. It's just most hymns written by other saints over the last 100 years or so are not given acknowledgment that his are with a *. Unless you know a hymn and whose the hymn's author is, you wouldn't know unless credit is given. Case in point Blessed Assurance by Fannie Crosby. This hymn is in the hymnal, but you wouldn't know it was Fannie who wrote it unless you already knew. Maybe I'm nit-picking, but I'm just trying to make a point regarding the hymnal local churches use.

I've only seen the hymnal once and everything that was sung out of it was to my knowledge and WL written/modified hymn. I have seen that I Am Not Skilled to Understand by Dorothy Greenwell is in there and that there was a modified version of All in All, so I know that not EVERYTHING in there is written by WL.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

I've only seen the hymnal once and everything that was sung out of it was to my knowledge and WL written/modified hymn. I have seen that I Am Not Skilled to Understand by Dorothy Greenwell is in there and that there was a modified version of All in All, so I know that not EVERYTHING in there is written by WL.

It is a real shame, the old hymnal had the names of the writers, the music, the composer, etc. It was a wonderful collection. The newer hymnal is, in my opinion, a joke. It is just a bunch of words. How would you figure out the tune if you come across a new hymn? How would you learn the names of some marvelous hymn writers? How would you see who the composers were of some of these great hymns? I still have my old hymnal, but only for reference, it is far too delicate to carry to a meeting in anything other than a box.

Perhaps they had to ditch the old hymnal if they wanted to erase JI name from the history, I don't know.

[ToGodAlone]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It is a real shame, the old hymnal had the names of the writers, the music, the composer, etc. It was a wonderful collection. The newer hymnal is, in my opinion, a joke. It is just a bunch of words. How would you figure out the tune if you come across a new hymn? How would you learn the names of some marvelous hymn writers? How would you see who the composers were of some of these great hymns? I still have my old hymnal, but only for reference, it is far too delicate to carry to a meeting in anything other than a box.

Perhaps they had to ditch the old hymnal if they wanted to erase JI name from the history, I don't know.

Because knowing the names of those hymn writers would direct them outside of LSM? That's my guess. Who's this JI character you speak of?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

Who's this JI character you speak of?

That would be John Ingalls. He is a brother who worked on the fiirst edition of the New Testament Recovery Version. If you have time, here is his story of events that transpired in 1987-1989.
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...read.php?t=411

He is a respected brother who served in the recovery from 1962-1989.

[ToGodAlone]

Originally Posted by Terry

That would be John Ingalls. He is a brother who worked on the fiirst edition of the New Testament Recovery Version. If you have time, here is his story of events that transpired in 1987-1989.
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...read.php?t=411

He is a respected brother who served in the recovery from 1962-1989.

Wow that's long.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to read that whole thing. From a quick skim it seems as though he's someone who eventually came to disagree with something within the LRC and got excommunicated. Would that be accurate? One thing that stood out to me in my quick skim was this particular quote:
"Statements made by some of the trainers in Taipei amazed us, as I am sure they did many others. Some examples are as follows:

1) “There is no need to pray about what to do; just follow the ministry.”
2) We don’t even need to think; we just do what we are told.”
3) “Follow Witness Lee blindly. Even if he’s wrong, he’s right.”
4) “If you leave the training, you’ll miss the kingdom.”
5) Our burden is to pick up Brother Lee’s teaching and way to make us all Witness Lees, like a Witness Lee duplication center.”
6) “To be one with the ministry is to be one with Brother Lee, the office, and Philip Lee.”
7) Since Christianity is in ruins, the Lord raised up the recovery; since the recovery is in ruins, the Lord raised up the FTTT."

If that is truly what was said in the FTT, then the LRC is in a worse state than I had previously thought. Especially #3 and #5. This is explicit WL worship. There was also a rather lengthy quote in part 4 that I found interesting. I think it was made by Titus Chu who, if I recall correctly, has something to do with the GLA split. There were 8 points, but I will only talk about the first two.

"1. Brother Lee’s position among the churches was overly exalted. The matter of greatest concern is that he would be idolized and thus replace the position of the Lord and the Holy Spirit in the church.
2. Brother Lee’s teachings and messages were overly read and repeated in the churches, causing us to be concerned that the position of God’s Word would be replaced. The words of man flourishes, and the Word of God languishes. The opportunities for the Holy Spirit to speak are scarce. These first two points are the fundamental problems."
I think these two points demonstrate exactly the problem I saw with the LRC when I first looked it up and when I attended the meetings. They are, in my opinion, correctly put as the fundamental problems. It was definitely to a far lesser extent in the meetings, but the emphasis on the HWfMW being used as the main text for the Lord's Table meeting instead of the Bible is a pretty good example of #2. I won't even go into what I think of the footnotes.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

Wow that's long.

TGA, let me provide a brief history, summarizing John Ingall's book:

JI was an elder in Anaheim for years, a well-respected pillar and "founding father" of the movement in this county. He helped put together the hymnal, edited books, gave conferences, etc. Anaheim is where LSM was headquartered, and its manager was the profligate son of WL named Philip, who was an obnoxious, drunk, unregenerate bully who abused church leaders around the globe.

JI and numerous other godly men around the globe began to resist LSM's takeover activities and at the same time attempted to remove Phillip from LSM management after several women were molested by him. Instead of listening to these men of God, WL and his lackeys ran a smear campaign accusing JI et. al. of forming a global conspiracy to overthrow his ministry, and branded JI a rebellious leper who needed to be quarantined or shunned by all.

That's the abbreviated version. "Short, quick, and to the point" as they used to instruct us.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

3) “Follow Witness Lee blindly. Even if he’s wrong, he’s right.”
5) Our burden is to pick up Brother Lee’s teaching and way to make us all Witness Lees, like a Witness Lee duplication center.”
If that is truly what was said in the FTT, then the LRC is in a worse state than I had previously thought. Especially #3 and #5.

On point #5 I have never heard a trainee I have known speak that way. It could well have been a product of overzealous trainers?
On point #3 I've heard that, but I believe over time not even the top leading brothers can say that now. Not with all the LRC historical information available. These days, the response that has likely replaced #3 is "Everybody makes mistakes. Nobody's perfect." Except for Jesus.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

Wow that's long.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to read that whole thing. From a quick skim it seems as though he's someone who eventually came to disagree with something within the LRC and got excommunicated. Would that be accurate? One thing that stood out to me in my quick skim was this particular quote:
"Statements made by some of the trainers in Taipei amazed us, as I am sure they did many others. Some examples are as follows:

1) “There is no need to pray about what to do; just follow the ministry.”
2) We don’t even need to think; we just do what we are told.”
3) “Follow Witness Lee blindly. Even if he’s wrong, he’s right.”
4) “If you leave the training, you’ll miss the kingdom.”
5) Our burden is to pick up Brother Lee’s teaching and way to make us all Witness Lees, like a Witness Lee duplication center.”
6) “To be one with the ministry is to be one with Brother Lee, the office, and Philip Lee.”
7) Since Christianity is in ruins, the Lord raised up the recovery; since the recovery is in ruins, the Lord raised up the FTTT."

If that is truly what was said in the FTT, then the LRC is in a worse state than I had previously thought. Especially #3 and #5. This is explicit WL worship. There was also a rather lengthy quote in part 4 that I found interesting. I think it was made by Titus Chu who, if I recall correctly, has something to do with the GLA split. There were 8 points, but I will only talk about the first two.

"1. Brother Lee’s position among the churches was overly exalted. The matter of greatest concern is that he would be idolized and thus replace the position of the Lord and the Holy Spirit in the church.
2. Brother Lee’s teachings and messages were overly read and repeated in the churches, causing us to be concerned that the position of God’s Word would be replaced. The words of man flourishes, and the Word of God languishes. The opportunities for the Holy Spirit to speak are scarce. These first two points are the fundamental problems."
I think these two points demonstrate exactly the problem I saw with the LRC when I first looked it up and when I attended the meetings. They are, in my opinion, correctly put as the fundamental problems. It was definitely to a far lesser extent in the meetings, but the emphasis on the HWfMW being used as the main text for the Lord's Table meeting instead of the Bible is a pretty good example of #2. I won't even go into what I think of the footnotes.

I don't doubt that JI heard those things and repeated them accurately. However, I was a trainer in the FTTT and was very close to some others and I can assure you we would have strongly rebuked anyone who said any such foolishness. The only one I heard was the Witness Lee duplication center and to be sure I thought it was idiotic, but the environment was such that you couldn't say anything.In hindsight it looks like WL worship, at the time it seemed like novice brothers speaking foolishness (I never heard any of the trainers speak this, only visiting saints). I do know that Andrew Yu, who was in charge of the training was outraged at these accusations and spoke some very strong words to everyone in the Training to sober up and stop the foolishness.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It is a real shame, the old hymnal had the names of the writers, the music, the composer, etc. It was a wonderful collection. The newer hymnal is, in my opinion, a joke. It is just a bunch of words. How would you figure out the tune if you come across a new hymn? How would you learn the names of some marvelous hymn writers? How would you see who the composers were of some of these great hymns? I still have my old hymnal, but only for reference, it is far too delicate to carry to a meeting in anything other than a box.

Perhaps they had to ditch the old hymnal if they wanted to erase JI name from the history, I don't know.

And to think that I used to consider that hymnal was "inclusive." Hymnals are used by denominations to divide the body of Christ. The GLA just put out a new hymnal, and you would think that LSM would want their hymns to be included in another hymnal, so that "all their riches could enrich the body of Christ." What a joke! LSM refused to grant such permission. I remember years ago hearing how poor, poor Christianity refused to give LSM such permission for their hymnal.

[ToGodAlone]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And to think that I used to consider that hymnal was "inclusive." Hymnals are used by denominations to divide the body of Christ. The GLA just put out a new hymnal, and you would think that LSM would want their hymns to be included in another hymnal, so that "all their riches could enrich the body of Christ." What a joke! LSM refused to grant such permission. I remember years ago hearing how poor, poor Christianity refused to give LSM such permission for their hymnal.

My experience tells me that hymnals used in denominational churches (that is, churches who have a denominational name ie First Baptist Church, etc) are purely used for worship. I've encountered several different hymnals in my lifetime and haven't seen any of them be exclusive except for the LRC hymnal.

[Lisbon]

Originally Posted by Terry

FYI, there are more hymns in the hymnal that just Witness Lee's. It's just most hymns written by other saints over the last 100 years or so are not given acknowledgment that his are with a *. Unless you know a hymn and whose the hymn's author is, you wouldn't know unless credit is given. Case in point Blessed Assurance by Fannie Crosby. This hymn is in the hymnal, but you wouldn't know it was Fannie who wrote it unless you already knew. Maybe I'm nit-picking, but I'm just trying to make a point regarding the hymnal local churches use.

Terry,

I just left two and half years ago and the regular hymnals had the authors in the back of the book. Not as obvious as WL's and other Chinese authors but they were there.

Lisbon

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Lisbon

Terry,

I just left two and half years ago and the regular hymnals had the authors in the back of the book. Not as obvious as WL's and other Chinese authors but they were there.

Lisbon

Curious when was the printing of your hymnal? The edition I have doesn't have the authors in the back of the book.

[Lisbon]

Originally Posted by Terry

Curious when was the printing of your hymnal? The edition I have doesn't have the authors in the back of the book.

I do beg your pardon. Having been in the LRC for 40 years most of my books are ancient. Sorry about that.
Lisbon

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Lisbon

I do beg your pardon. Having been in the LRC for 40 years most of my books are ancient. Sorry about that.
Lisbon

No problem. How I figure is books originally published by The Stream Publishers are not identical in text to the same books published by Living Stream Ministry.
Since 1990 Living Stream had been busy with much editing. That is editing certain names out of their publications.
I am sure much of the same was done with the Hymnals.