Can you dismiss WL's ministry because of his sins?

Originally Posted by Thankful Jane

First, I'd like to make one thing clear. I never said Lee's ministry should be "rejected." This word was introduced in response to my post about Lee not being clean and was then argued with in strawman fashion. My actual words were that Lee's teachings could not be trusted. In my mind, there is a big difference.
I find that the root of much of their trouble is Lee's teachings that are imbedded in their brain.
Thankful Jane

Thankful Jane,

The distinction you make between teachings that cannot be trusted vs. teachings that should be rejected is a matter semantics. If you don't trust teachings then reject them until you are convinced otherwise.

"imbedded" in their brain? Are you a clinical psychologist? Seriously, it appears that you are engaging in subjective validation. You expect to see some telltale trait and sure enough there it is, you find it every time.

Besides, what beliefs are not "imbedded" in the brains of people? Are your beliefs not "imbedded" in your brain? If not, then where? I this whole idea about "de-webbing" is a bit nutty and maybe dangerous.

Cassidy

[UntoHim]

Cassidy, If you really want to be a stickler about semantics you would have noticed that Jane made a clear distinction between “teachings that cannot be trusted” and the rejection of Witness Lee’s entire ministry. Most reasonably people would have picked up on the difference. Actually, I think maybe you did to but are just trying to stir the pot... not that stirring the pot is against Forum rules, but don't forget the old adage that "too many cooks spoil the broth".

None of us who were subjected to the teachings of Witness Lee for a substantial period of time need to be a clinical psychologist to know the affect they had upon us. The teachings and practices had a profound affect both the heart and the mind, and sorry to say that for the most part the affect was not positive. This is the main reason why much of our discussions regarding The Local Church seem to gravitate towards the “negative” side of the ledger.

IMHO an all or nothing stance as it pertains to Bible teachers is somewhat childish. God gave us sober minds and discerning spirits and unlike Lee, the Blendeds, Titus Chu, etc. most Bible teachers today don't expect their audiences to accept everything they say as "the gospel truth". Adults discuss things and weigh things. So after hearing a sermon my wife and I discuss it on the way home and we may disagree with a few things or different things or whatever. So what? What's the big deal?

But I do know one thing: if I ever came across a teacher who expected absolute agreement and acceptance of his teachings as "the truth" = finding the nearest exit and escaping through it as quickly as possible! There's too many good teachers out there who don't think this about themselves to be fiddling around with those who do.

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Cassidy, If you really want to be a stickler about semantics you would have noticed that Jane made a clear distinction between “teachings that cannot be trusted” and the rejection of Witness Lee’s entire ministry. Most reasonably people would have picked up on the difference. Actually, I think maybe you did to but are just trying to stir the pot... not that stirring the pot is against Forum rules, but don't forget the old adage that "too many cooks spoil the broth".

None of us who were subjected to the teachings of Witness Lee for a substantial period of time need to be a clinical psychologist to know the affect they had upon us. The teachings and practices had a profound affect both the heart and the mind, and sorry to say that for the most part the affect was not positive. This is the main reason why much of our discussions regarding The Local Church seem to gravitate towards the “negative” side of the ledger.

Untohim,

I am not trying to stir the pot. I actually think the "de-webbing" practice is nutty and maybe dangerous. I mean, if something is unhealthy then it would be best to disconnect ourselves and others from it asap. I'd prefer that rather than this idea of staying in an unhealthy situation while someone attempts to remove trillions of synapses from my brain in an attempt to unravel my belief system. Sounds like a slow drip water torture version of de-programming.

Yet, I do agree with you that we don't need to be clinical psychologists to make decisions about our own experiences and share them with others both positive and negative. That is all part of what makes the world an interesting place to live.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

I am not trying to stir the pot. I actually think the "de-webbing" practice is nutty and maybe dangerous. I mean, if something is unhealthy then it would be best to disconnect ourselves and others from it asap. I'd prefer that rather than this idea of staying in an unhealthy situation while someone attempts to remove trillions of synapses from my brain in an attempt to unravel my belief system. Sounds like a slow drip water torture version of de-programming.

I'm jumping into a conversation and may mess up the context, but as I understand the "de-webbing" practice, it is to reject those teachings of WL which are not healthy, and hold onto those which match the Bible.

Some former members who did not properly "de-web" the good from the worthless (see Heb 5.14) have sadly discarded their faith also as they left the LC's. This is most unfortunate. This forum serves as an aid to expose all the dangers of WL's teachings without discarding what healthy things we have received from the Lord. Sometimes this is difficult, especially for ones like me who had very little Bible foundation before entering the Recovery.

[Cassidy]

Originally Posted by Ohio

... as I understand the "de-webbing" practice, it is to reject those teachings of WL which are not healthy, and hold onto those which match the Bible.

If that is what "De-webbing means then there is no need to call it "de-webbing'" because it is just part of normal human cognitive process. We all do it and not with just Witness Lee.

In fact, I'm doing it right now.

However, the poster meant more than that as is apparent from her description of "de-webbing" and the introduction of the term to describe the process of systematically unraveling someone's belief system over a period of time.

Even if such a meticulous mind-altering extraction where proven to be good therapy it should only be practiced by someone who is qualified to perform it. Otherwise, the rest of us should do our best to talk straight, be a friend, and pray a lot for those in need.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Otherwise, the rest of us should do our best to talk straight, be a friend, and pray a lot for those in need.

Good point. Amen to that!

It's better for Thankful Jane to respond to your questions about her posts.