I love the local church

[UntoHim]

Yes, "unregistered", please feel free to register, it makes the process of posting a lot easier and faster.

Your point about "Most messages on these forums are anti-local churches" is well taken, at least by me. One thing I can tell you is that the reason for this problem is that most of the registered members are former members, and so this accounts for the lopsided number of "anti-local church" postings. There is a "cure" for this problem however - when more current members register and post we will see that lopsided number come closer together, and this would be a good thing. One of the major problems between current and former members is COMMUNICATION. And this is one of the major reasons for this forum, two way, back and forth communication! So please, take advantage of this venue, it is here for current members as well as former members. As the administrator of this forum, I will do my best to see that you are treated with the courtesy and respect you deserve.

[ToGodAlone]

I too welcome you to the forum and encourage you to register.

I just wanted to address one of your points regarding all members prophesying. You said

I wish all churches (non-local churches) would stop the one man speaking and let every member function.

This is something that I believe is a misconception of non LRC churches by those who have spent a considerable amount of time in the LRC context. I have been a member of several churches (all non LRC) in my short lifetime, and all of these churches did use the pastoral/elder/whatever else system and thus had the "one man speaking" every week. However, what I think some people fail to recognize (or perhaps are not even aware of) is that although there is a speaker every week, there are smaller group contexts in which every person has the opportunity to share (ie prophesy). And everyone is encouraged to attend these small groups so there is in fact no true "suppression" of each individual member's ability to speak about God's Word.

That being said, the reason for having the pastor speak every week is so that everyone has the opportunity to hear the Word preached by one who has been trained in Biblical study and who would therefore have a deeper insight into the Word of God than those who didn't have such extensive study. This actually happens in the LRC context as well, although it probably isn't as obvious. Are not the main speakers at trainings and conferences, and even those that "lead" or "facilitate" the Lord's day meetings those who have attended the FTT, the LRC version of seminary? Going back to the reason for the pastoral system, the Bible says that there are those who have been gifted with the ability to speak or teach and for some, their calling is into full time ministry as a pastor. The main function of the pastor is not only just to speak, but to help guide (or shepard, going along with the connotation of pastor) the members of the church. They are not necessarily above any other member of the church (although they probably have more administrative power, it is far from absolute), but rather are serving as any other member would in their own way. Not everyone is called to such things.

I guess in summary of this long rant, there is no reason to stop using this system because it is more beneficial for the church as a whole to have someone (or people) to guide them. In the case of churches who do not use this system, what happens? It pops up anyway. WL was essentially the head pastor and all the FTT graduates are the elders/pastors in today's LRC. What do they do? They guide everyone so that they conform to the ministry. You say something that conflicts with the ministry, you can bet that they'll be the first to let you know. In my opinion, the difference between a pastor (though they are far from perfect, like anyone else, let's consider the normal case where they're not corrupt ) and a FTT graduate is that the pastor helps the church conform to the Bible and the Gospel message and the FTT graduate helps conform the church to the LRC interpretation of the Bible. I realize what I have said will probably spark discussion about denominations and whatnot, but this is not my point.

[ToGodAlone]

Also I feel semi obligated to note your prior experience with the Pentecostal church. It's very possible that this being your only other church experience other than the LRC could have shaped much of your views on other groups "enjoying Christ" and whatnot. I've attended LRC meetings and those of denominational and non denominational churches. I can safely say that the LRC does not have a richer enjoyment of Christ than anyone else. Also regarding the HWMR, I have never needed such books to enjoy books like Psalms or Isaiah or whatever else there's a HWMR on. Perhaps I am a bit biased in this opinion, but to me it seems as though the HWMR teaches members of the LRC to focus only on the things that they want you to focus on. I think there's a topic on here regarding the HWMR on the Psalms and how there was one Psalm where half the passage was ignored because it did not agree with the LSM teaching. Now, I have not read the entirety of any HWMR so I could be wrong on some things, but if that was actually the case, isn't there something wrong there? There's also much talk about how the LRC discounts the book of James and to me, any group that discounts a part of the Bible is in some serious error. There is much I can say on these topics (and I'm sure many on this forum can say far more) but that's not really relevant right now.

I apologize if I seem that I'm attacking you in any way, I just get a bit perturbed when anyone mentions the idea of the LRC doing anything better than a non LRC church. Perhaps it's defensiveness on my part, but all the same I say all these things out of genuine love and respect. So hopefully no offense.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ToGodAlone

WL was essentially the head pastor and all the FTT graduates are the elders/pastors in today's LRC. What do they do? They guide everyone so that they conform to the ministry.

I agree that there are many benefits to having the opportunity for all to share. WL and the Blendeds have sold their brand of meeting for decades. If it was just an alternative style of Christian meeting, then it wouldn't be so obnoxious, but prophecying supposedly is the only proper way to meet, and the weekly speaking of some pastor is supposedly proof that all Christianity is pitiful and degraded. So I was taught for many years.

The down side of the prophecying meeting is the tasteless, doctrinal and uninspirational monotone that often accompanies it. There are lots of people who should not be given the microphone on a weekly basis. They are just not gifted to share with a larger audience than the dining room table. Many cannot hold a coherent thought, and many others get sidetracked by meany things. But more importantly, how can Anaheim know the spiritual needs of any church. If systematic, one-size-fits-all teaching was never used by the Apostles, then why should it work for us today.

With every upside is an accompanying downside. There is just no perfect, God-ordained way, contrary to the LC belief system. Jesus is our unique way, and the Spirit of the Lord can use an endless number of diverse ways to meet the needs of God's children. I don't believe that any way can ever be THE way, and I do believe that any way can be abused by those who are hungry for power.

The bigger question, in my mind, is -- what is the reason for promoting this method of meeting. Is it protection or is it control? We were told for years that prophecying will protect us from all the inherent dangers of the clergy-laity system. I bought into that reasoning, as did all of my colleagues. But who protects us from the inherent dangers of having only one man --WL -- teach? The Bible never promoted the ministry of just one man. Who protects us from the errors that WL introduced?

I have concluded that the real reasoning for WL/LSM's method of prophecying is control. What they are doing, in essence, is little different than the missals of Rome which I grew up on. Any Sunday of the year, I could go to any Catholic church in the English world, and basically get the same church service. By eliminating the speaking of local leader/teachers, and demanding that all the LC's use the same materials, the same format, and the same hymnal, Anaheim has effectively usurped control of all their member churches. That, my dear friends, is the very definition of a denomination.

Another important matter to weigh in on is the fate of all those gifted men of God who have come and gone over the years. Some were forced out via quarantines, some were shamed into obscurity, some refused to be bullied into submission, and others just left. Their voices are no longer heard in the LC's. How convenient! Nearly all of them left because they were silenced by headquarters. Ask them. It was WL's way or the highway! Our God, however, delights in diversity, and that is one ingredient sorely lacking in the Recovery. Our God also desires to raise up shepherds to tend to the local flocks, but so many dear saints have departed because the program structured by LSM did not help them at all.

The one common denominator of all those who remain is this -- they all are sold out for the ministry of a man. His own unique ministry is what holds them together, and builds the wall around them.

[Paul Cox]

Welcome to the forum,

It would hardly make sense for any of us to argue with you on the bases of your liking the Local Church.

"No, don't like it! Stop liking it! I don't like it, so neither should you!" LOL

I was recently in Taiwan and listened intently to one of my nephews tell me how crazy he is about the Catholic Church. It turns out to be the best thing that ever happened to him. Now I was raised in that system from Childhood to adult. I was very active in it. But when I got saved I came out of it like a bolt of lightening. I could have had a lot to say to him. But my days of trying to talk someone out of Catholicism are long gone.

However, for those who are zealots for Catholicism, and have nothing better to do but tell me that it is the original church, to which the Lord will be eternally devoted...well, then we can go to town.

If you like the Living Stream Church; if you are having the time of your life, then please go in peace. But none of your experience changes the boastful arrogance of the Living Stream Church, and certainly none of your experience in the Local Church changes their dark history, nor their blatant hypocrisy.

Having a wonderful time at a Catholic youth event does not change the historical fact of illegitimate sons following their papal fathers' footsteps into the Papacy. Neither does it change the fact that they still wrongfully believe that the Pope is the sole vicar of Christ on the Earth, and that they alone are the only church which has the Lord's full blessing.

So, "O Lord, Amen, Hallelujah" all you want. But that doesn't change any of the facts that have been brought out about Witness Lee, his dark deeds, and the Laodicean nature of the Living Stream Church.

P.C.

[TLFisher]

This first post is in response to ToGodAlone and UntoHim.

"I have been a member of several churches (all non LRC) in my short lifetime, and all of these churches did use the pastoral/elder/whatever else system and thus had the "one man speaking" every week. However, what I think some people fail to recognize (or perhaps are not even aware of) is that although there is a speaker every week, there are smaller group contexts in which every person has the opportunity to share (ie prophesy). And everyone is encouraged to attend these small groups so there is in fact no true "suppression" of each individual member's ability to speak about God's Word. " ToGodAlone

Yes, this has been my experience also. Presently meeting with a community church that encourages small group meetings. This is ideal for everyone to function and everyone can.
Is this much different from the local churches? Many either don't feel comfortable functioning in a large meeting or feel constricted by HWFMR to speak according to their daily walk with the Lord.

"One of the major problems between current and former members is COMMUNICATION. And this is one of the major reasons for this forum, two way, back and forth communication! " UntoHim

Yes, this is accurate UntoHim. For concerned brothers and sisters who want to communicate their concerns, there is no ear to hear by the Blended brothers and by many local elders. Those who do have an ear to listen is few and far between.
You can write emails as I have to several blended co-workers and due to the nature of issues at hand, those emails have gone unresponded to.
It's due to forums such as this, I do not feel alone nor isolated in my concerns. Imagine from 1990-2003 I thought I was the only who had issues with quarantines of specific brothers and whether there was merit for such actions.
Without having such forums, how can there be honest dialogue between former and current members of the local churches? I do believe there are current members who do have concerns, but there's the trust factor. How do you as a current member express concerns without bringing youself into the crosshairs?

[Cal]

Welcome to the forum.

A couple of comments on your statements.

First, contrary to your implication, the word is not interpreted that well in the LC. There is some good and some bad. Some is really bad. The minister of the age stuff is off-the-charts bad. If you are getting all your Bible insight from Lee and Nee, you are getting a very distorted view of the truth.

Your statements about one man speaking in other churches versus many speaking in the LC is an example of the way things get twisted around in the minds of LCers. If many people are simply repeating one man's ministry, how many men are speaking? Just one. And if his speaking is getting so amplified while all other ministers are getting silenced then his speaking has more influence than is appropriate.

At least in other churches people are allowed, even encouraged, to get and share speaking directly from the Lord, even if in their large services there is only one speaker. I'll take the latter over the former any day.

Frankly, large meetings with public testimony are unwieldy. Most people understand that. They only worked in the LC because everyone knew not to contradict "THE MINISTRY," (plus the churches are relatively small.) So everyone effectively became Lee's personal megaphones. That's nothing to brag about.

Finally, if you are truly enjoying Christ then there will be fruit in your life. One major fruit is loving and receiving all believers. Claiming to be the one true move of God is contradictory to that fruit.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The down side of the prophecying meeting is the tasteless, doctrinal and uninspirational monotone that often accompanies it. There are lots of people who should not be given the microphone on a weekly basis.

The bigger question, in my mind, is -- what is the reason for promoting this method of meeting. Is it protection or is it control? We were told for years that prophecying will protect us from all the inherent dangers of the clergy-laity system. I bought into that reasoning, as did all of my colleagues. But who protects us from the inherent dangers of having only one man --WL -- teach? The Bible never promoted the ministry of just one man. Who protects us from the errors that WL introduced?

I have concluded that the real reasoning for WL/LSM's method of prophecying is control.

First on prophesying. I can't begin to tell how many times I've heard prophesying that ridicules non-LSM Christianity and goes un-checked. How I see it is putting down Christians outside the LSM fellowship in order to build themselves up. This is not edifying. This type of speaking does nothing to build up the Body. Rather this is an example of risks non-pastoral churches take of opening up the floor without oversight.
Prior to 1987 I liked the format of prophesying which was basically testifying of your walk with Christ during the week. It had nothing to do with the ministry and much more about your Christian experience. The format change to HWFMR I can see merit to Ohio's post. When your speaking is according to a ministry, if there's a point the ministry is in error, then your speaking will be in error. That's the risk being taken.
The problems that have taken place in Great Lakes Area in the last decade, it's about control. Churches that deem it's not profitable for their locality were considered in rebellion thus needing replastered. Control in this indicates churches exist for the ministry and not the ministry existing for the churches.

I made the last post because I could not find any positive thing about the local churches in this forum. Anyone who came to this forum would be influenced to avoid the local church, which I don't think is fair. Each local church is unique with only the teachings being common. The practices will be different and based on the leading brothers' understanding of the word. So, unless you taste and see each local church, you cannot know whether it is good.

As for the experiences some of you have had, it is unfortunate. But, since I am not part of the local churches you were in, I do not see any reason to hate local church in my locality. There are external influences but nothing that cannot be accepted and nothing that does not occur in other denominations. From my experiences, the local churches are similar to most denominations with an organisational set-up.

[Paul Cox]

Excuse me, but did somebody here tell you that you need to hate the Local Church in your locality?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I made the last post because I could not find any positive thing about the local churches in this forum. Anyone who came to this forum would be influenced to avoid the local church, which I don't think is fair. Each local church is unique with only the teachings being common. The practices will be different and based on the leading brothers' understanding of the word. So, unless you taste and see each local church, you cannot know whether it is good.

As for the experiences some of you have had, it is unfortunate. But, since I am not part of the local churches you were in, I do not see any reason to hate local church in my locality. There are external influences but nothing that cannot be accepted and nothing that does not occur in other denominations. From my experiences, the local churches are similar to most denominations with an organisational set-up.

Good point.

I try to differentiate between the bad leaders in the Recovery and the many precious saints. Many local leaders have learned how to cultivate the local saints and keep the mandates from LSM at an arm's length. Unfortunately, I have been too often connected with too many brothers who understood God's high calling to be how absolutely one we were with ministry leaders.

Dear unregistered guest, I don't believe any of the posters here would question your experience inside your local church. Even on this thread I cited some positive things about the way we met in the Recovery. I have numerous posts over time appreciating the positive that I came away with. If nothing more, file away what you have read here on the forum as a warning for the next "storm" that blows through.

You said that you have been a part of the LC's for 10 years, so obviously you have heard about the recent and past quarantines of certain brothers once serving in the recovery. I can tell you, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that what you were told by LSM and your local leaders does not match what really happened.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Each local church is unique with only the teachings being common. The practices will be different and based on the leading brothers' understanding of the word. So, unless you taste and see each local church, you cannot know whether it is good.

What you have stated here is a bit of an contradiction. You see one of the major teachings of Witness Lee is that EVERY Local Church should be exactly the same in teaching and practice. Lee taught that the only differences between local churches in the bible are negative things (supposedly such as we see in Revelation 3). Of course he totally ignored the rest of the New Testament, which clearly shows that there were differences between the churches, even between regions.

I don't know what part of the world (or universe) you are in, but in the churches under the Living Stream Ministry, leading brothers are forbidden to lead their churches in teachings OR practices that are not in total alignment with the spoken and written ministry of Witness Lee. This mandate has apparently been extended to include the interpretations of Witness Lee via the Blended Brothers. Those who deviate are first warned, (strongly) and then those who do not fall into line are "quarantined", which is nothing more then a mealy-mouthed way of saying ex-communicated or dis-fellowshiped.

However, maybe you are so far from Anaheim that the leading brothers in your local church have taken some liberties...if this is the case I think it is a very positive development. Without disclosing your location, please feel free to let us know about these "different practices" in your local church. I am genuinely interested to know.

Also, please take to heart what Paul Cox just posted. This forum is a place for dialogue and communication. We are not here to express hatred for the Local Church, Witness Lee or Watchman Nee. Disagreement does not equal hatred. However, if you see something posted that you believe expresses hatred than you can point that out to me and we can talk about it.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

However, maybe you are so far from Anaheim that the leading brothers in your local church have taken some liberties...if this is the case I think it is a very positive development. Without disclosing your location, please feel free to let us know about these "different practices" in your local church. I am genuinely interested to know.

Also, please take to heart what Paul Cox just posted. This forum is a place for dialogue and communication. We are not here to express hatred for the Local Church, Witness Lee or Watchman Nee. Disagreement does not equal hatred. However, if you see something posted that you believe expresses hatred than you can point that out to me and we can talk about it.

Amen! Yes UntoHim, key word is disagreement. The may be mistrust, but not hatred. To the contrary, it's because of love for the brothers and sisters we know in the local churches there is groaning for change. A change to local churches which is general in it's receiving. A change that is impartial to whoever walk throught the meeting hall doors. A change in forgiving one another. I would love to see localities such as Moses Lake, Rosemead, etc be received and acknowledged as a local church without fellowship with LSM being a prerequisite.

[SavedbyGrace]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

However, maybe you are so far from Anaheim that the leading brothers in your local church have taken some liberties...if this is the case I think it is a very positive development. Without disclosing your location, please feel free to let us know about these "different practices" in your local church. I am genuinely interested to know.

Like I said in my first post, I am far from Anaheim and Taipei. And, from what I have read on the internet, I think not being close to Anaheim, location-wise is better. But, at the same time, I want to clarify that we do not have any 'different practices'. What we have is some leading brothers who are tolerant. It is fine even if you do not agree with every word by Br. Witness Lee, as long as you do not create divisions.

For instance, if you want to speak from your reading of the Bible, you are free to do so. But, most of the saints use the HWMR. Similarly, I know brothers who have not understood some of the teachings (like Jesus is the Father and he is also the Spirit) but can co-exist with me, who understands most of the writings of Brother Lee.

I love the local churches and almost all the writings. My major disagreement, if any, is regarding the practices.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I don't know what part of the world (or universe) you are in, but in the churches under the Living Stream Ministry, leading brothers are forbidden to lead their churches in teachings OR practices that are not in total alignment with the spoken and written ministry of Witness Lee. This mandate has apparently been extended to include the interpretations of Witness Lee via the Blended Brothers.

I believe being far from Anaheim helps. At the same time, I also know of local churches in my country where leading brothers are more intolerant than the leading brothers in my local church.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

There are external influences but nothing that cannot be accepted and nothing that does not occur in other denominations. From my experiences, the local churches are similar to most denominations with an organisational set-up.

Sir, thank you for your candor. However, do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about denominations? Do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about organisations?

[SavedbyGrace]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Sir, thank you for your candor. However, do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about denominations? Do you know what the Minister of the Age taught about organisations?

I'd much rather people call the local church an organisation than a cult. Most lay people do not have any idea what 'cult' means. They just know that it has bad connotations and refuse to give it a chance.

And, I do not subscribe to everything that Brother Lee says nor do I accept that he is 'the' minister of the age. I do not see the Bible having one minister. Paul worked along with Peter, John, James and other Apostles.

I agree with brother Lee that denominations are bad. But, it seems that it cannot be helped. The good thing, IMHO, is that the local churches have a rich word, though others in this forum may not agree.