The LCS Factor

Paul Cox · 08-20-2008, 10:27 PM

Man, this thread moves so fast, I'm having a hard time keeping up. Gotta go to bed, but just wanted to say this:

I sorta appreciated the Local Church policy of no dating among the young people, and still do. I got the impression that most of the young ones were saved from falling into lust because of it.

However, I do not agree with arranged marriages, where one or more party really has reservations, but buries them to keep favor with "the brothers."

Buenos Noche
Roger

TLFisher · 08-20-2008, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

I sorta appreciated the Local Church policy of no dating among the young people, and still do. I got the impression that most of the young ones were saved from falling into lust because of it.

Roger

Roger,

I agree with you that young people shouldn't date. Especially among the high schoolers there needs to be education on peer pressures and a proper understanding communicated effectively why they should not dating. Of course an extreme reason why not to, is giving into temptations of the flesh which could result in children being born out of wedlock.

This teaching still leaves aun unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Terry

Thankful Jane · 08-21-2008, 05:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terry

Roger,

I agree with you that young people shouldn't date. Especially among the high schoolers there needs to be education on peer pressures and a proper understanding communicated effectively why they should not dating. Of course an extreme reason why not to, is giving into temptations of the flesh which could result in children being born out of wedlock.

This teaching still leaves aun unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Terry

Well, Terry, you are a parent and that is your job to figure out. This is none of the "church's" business. Each child is unique in the personality, needs, etc. This is why God gave children parents. He intended for each individual to be individually loved and nurtured and guided according to who they were, like He does us (when we let Him and quit looking to others for answers instead of looking to Him.)

Thankful Jane

Thankful Jane · 08-21-2008, 05:31 AM

While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results.

Whoever involves his/her self in making such a momentous decision other than the two parties and God may one day get blamed for the outcome, as they well should.

I think this is what I hate most about the LC teachings and practices. People were robbed of opportunities to have real experiences with God by looking to "the brothers" for advice and answers. God was robbed of His opportunities to teach His children about who He was and about His ways.

This is part of the harm to the second generation as Terry just (innocently) demonstrated. He was taught both verbally and by example to look to others to get His answers. I commend him for stepping outside of the LC box to find the wife God had for him.

Here is a hodge-podge of some reasons God and His children got robbed: leaders' unhealthy teachings; "body life" emphasis, i.e., don't act "independently"; saints desire to please the elders; laziness--it's too hard to learn of Christ for yourself and a bit risky; fear of violating one of those many unspoken rules; fear of following the devil--only the brothers know what was the Lord; fear of rejection; fear of offending God by being being in your soul thinking about things ... fear of being made an example of in a meeting ... fear of ..., fear of .... fear of .... etc.; elders coveting to fulfill their ambitions; elders seeking to keep WL happy and present him with an model church for their own reasons; elder's needing to control things to please Lee and also fulfill their own ambitions ... etc., etc., etc.

The LC teaching and all the dependence on "fellowship" from others was flat out unhealthy. Stick hierarchy and absolute submission into the mix and you have a recipe for disaster (one that obviously works). We should have been taught first and foremost to learn to depend on our relationship with Him. I've heard it said, "Well, it's not easy for young ones to hear what the Lord is saying and they can get deceived or make mistakes." If I knew what I know now, I would have said, "Well, if you don't get yourself and you voice out of the picture, they'll never learn the Lord's voice. Do they really need you as an intermediary? God will be there for them even if they make a mistake. Where will you be when they make your mistake?"

God is jealous for His relationship with each of us. All the getting "fellowship" practices opened us up to a world of hurt.

When I heard that Benson considered a prospective marriage in terms of the usefulness of a brother / sister--whether it would be increased or decreased, I wanted to vomit. He was definitely in the business of "using." How gross. Usurping, robbing God, playing with people's very lives and souls, using them to build his pyramids and treasure cities. Sorry, I know I'm foaming at the mouth. I'm just too close to some of the messes he made out of lives of people who followed his voice.

Back to the point: What about Jesus. What about Him being first in all things? Who are elders that they give "advice?" Instead of meddling in the practical lives of people and cheating them out of their inheritance of knowing God for themselves, they should have been laboring in the Bible for themselves to see what it really said.

They should have taught what it taught about husbands sacrificing for their wives and winning their wives love and willing submission. They should have taught about fathers spending major time to bring up their kids in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (nurture takes time, time, time) and made sure that they had plenty of time, time, time. (Sending children to babysittiing 6 days a week and children's meetings on Sunday, and leaving all the rest of the care of children to a wife who is exhausted from waiting hand and foot on all the "needs" of the church first, as dictated by the elders and the absentee fathers, just doesn't cut it.) They should have taught people about what how to bring every single detail of their life to Jesus because Jesus was longing to be involved with them, instead of telling them God was only interested in the church. They should have taught people they were free to follow Jesus even if that meant he led them somewhere else other than the LC.

I better quit and take a walk. Looking back, I don't see one LC "elder" that was doing the job described in the Bible. Even the very best had two minds and two masters. They vascillated between obeying Lee and his empire and their conscience. I think that's why God fired them all (see Ezek.34 and Jer. 23) and gave the sheep one Shepherd. Now if they can just ever figure out they don't have the job they botched any more.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow Me."

I am one happy little sheep who has returned to the great Shepherd of the sheep. I have been and will continue to pray that He will deliver all His little sheep out of the mouths of evil, double minded, shepherds and that He will bring them all out of all the folds of men into His pasture.

Thankful Jane

Paul Cox · 08-21-2008, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thankful Jane

While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry...

Hi Jane,

Good points all. In the Local Church we were indeed robbed of the opportunity to have a personal relationship (outside the LSM agenda) with the Lord.

However, in any church, not just an LSM church, the eldership does have the responsibility of oversight. Part of that oversight has much to do with preserving a healthy atmosphere where the saints can go on unhampered.

In our locality, the most predominant Evangelical Church does an excellent job with the youth. They even provide a youth activity center. On several occasions it was clear that without the proper oversight, it would have just become a meat market, and certainly an opening for the destruction of the Church. The elders' responsibility for oversight is very well established in the Scripture, and the writers were indeed specific on certain issues.

It is important that we have a very personal relationship with Jesus. But the right personal relationship with Jesus will always lead to a gathering of the saints (assembly/church). This is indeed the Lord's corporate expression. At least in word, Witness Lee didn't get that wrong.

I feel that the LSM model is an extreme example of how not to do things. And...I think that the way things went had more to do with the fact that Watchman Nee and Witness Lee were Chinese, than anything else.

Roger

bookworm · 08-21-2008, 08:18 AM

[QUOTE=Thankful Jane;2627]While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results.

Thanks, Jane, for the word about learning to seek the Lord and hear his speaking. It helped the light go on for me regarding realizing anew that as a single person I had, indeed, “given up” so to speak and asked the Lord to choose a husband for me—and amazingly enough I had this experience in the LC! Now I see why our marriage was not coerced or arranged! The Lord did this for us in His wisdom. There have been times since during our 36+ years of marriage I admit I have asked the Lord if He was sure this was such a good plan

—however, there is no doubt in me or my husband that this is His plan.

The only item I regret is that we were talked into having a wedding meeting centered on the LC and a testimony of it. The theme was loving the Lord, but it was a wedding meeting even so and my poor family wanted to crawl under the floors. I am sorry I put them through this and wish I had not.

YP0534 · 08-21-2008, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terry

This teaching still leaves an unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Not everyone needs to or should go to college. (Another worldly LC myth.) The practical point for dating is the age of maturity for each individual. A generation or two ago, that age was generally much lower than it is has been since the invention of adolescence in our culture. Growing up is not a process that can be regulated like Henry Ford's assembly line but is a matter of life and maturity. One tomato plant bears fruit sooner than another and neither plant is defective.

But I would think that, generally speaking, children should be able to be equipped as adults by the age of lawful consent. Such equipping should probably include being able to make the determination for themselves that they aren't emotionally ready for such responsibilities as marriage and family. But, I mean, are helpful parents really going to try to prevent legal adults from having their own lives?

Did you really suggest 30 as a possibility? The current trend in our culture towards later marriage and child rearing is not a healthy sign, in my opinion. It demonstrates that the general culture isn't capable of producing healthy adult human beings. I think the enemy might really like a program where the only ones deemed fit to have families are the ones too old to have them!

Just throwing in my two-bits...

OBW · 08-21-2008, 05:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

I sorta appreciated the Local Church policy of no dating among the young people, and still do. I got the impression that most of the young ones were saved from falling into lust because of it.

On one hand, I agree a little. Just dating around because it's the thing to do is a potential trap. But even when we deal with lust, it is sin. And sin is sin. The problems that arise from the rapid marriages are also sin. And sin is sin.

I really don't think that 2 months from "my name is" to "I do" is wise in any way. (That is a little overstated, but virtually true.) My sons have mostly been involved in group activities. That means they go do things with 4 to 8 people, guys and gals. The younger one met and dated one girl for a while. That has cooled for now, but they are still part of the same larger group from which these smaller groups continue to emerge for particular activities. Even this was discouraged in the LC. That is a reasonable alternative to the "on/off" of suddenly private dataing and then not dating.

Of course, doing much of anything that wasn't a meeting was discouraged in the LC. It would seem that the meeting schedule was designed to keep us all busy enough that having much private socialization was just hard to plan.

Thankful Jane · 08-21-2008, 05:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBW

On one hand, I agree a little. Just dating around because it's the thing to do is a potential trap. But even when we deal with lust, it is sin. And sin is sin. The problems that arise from the rapid marriages are also sin. And sin is sin.

I really don't think that 2 months from "my name is" to "I do" is wise in any way. (That is a little overstated, but virtually true.) My sons have mostly been involved in group activities. That means they go do things with 4 to 8 people, guys and gals. The younger one met and dated one girl for a while. That has cooled for now, but they are still part of the same larger group from which these smaller groups continue to emerge for particular activities. Even this was discouraged in the LC. That is a reasonable alternative to the "on/off" of suddenly private dataing and then not dating.

Of course, doing much of anything that wasn't a meeting was discouraged in the LC. It would seem that the meeting schedule was designed to keep us all busy enough that having much private socialization was just hard to plan.

Sounds like you are doing a good job of parenting. Do the folks in your current church dictate what the dating habits of your children should be?

Thankful Jane

OBW · 08-21-2008, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thankful Jane

Sounds like you are doing a good job of parenting. Do the folks in your current church dictate what the dating habits of your children should be?

Thankful Jane

Absolutely not. And within a congregation of beyond 4,000 there have been all kinds of things happen. However, for a congregation of 4,000, the track record is really pretty good. Far from perfect. And I obviously do not know the entire 4,000. Within that number, sometimes it's hard to find some of the 300 that were there when we started 21 years ago. They are mostly still there, but hard to find.

As for our job of parenting, we did go through a scare a few years ago. During our oldest's second year in college, he met a girl that he went mildly insane over. We met her that fall. Before the end of the semester, they were thinking about getting married. I sent some long emails to reason with him. He agreed to take it a little slower. By the end of February, it was over. A year later, she was married (already pregnant). She was excessively needy due to problems in her home (and we had seen that). It would have ended their college careers and probably not ended well for them. Now, 7 years later, we are trying to not push him to get into more social groups so that he has a "fishing hole." He is just too busy with grad school (seminary), work, church, and the little socialization he does with his friends on campus (quite a small group). In his case, waiting a little longer is probably best.

Overflow · 08-21-2008, 05:38 AM

I think this is something that really effected me growing up, not the dating specifically, but the fear of letting children sin. Until we sin, its hard for us to grasp the need we have for a Savior. I think LC protected children too much from making mistakes. And used one persons mistakes to try to teach the entire flock the errors of failure rather than the grace of our Savior. My prayer for my young children is that they will make mistakes and lots of them while they're under the umbrella of my husband and I's protection. And that each time we can remind them that their is forgiveness because of the cross. I pray that these little slips while they're young will protect them from the experience of huge sin when they're older....but even then, God's grace is still sufficient! I'm not saying...sin cause there's forgiveness, but the fact is we are NOT PERFECT beings and I think the LC really hoped to make us that! Woudn't need Jesus except as a bud if we were!!

Thankful Jane · 08-21-2008, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Process

I think this is something that really effected me growing up, not the dating specifically, but the fear of letting children sin. Until we sin, its hard for us to grasp the need we have for a Savior. I think LC protected children too much from making mistakes. And used one persons mistakes to try to teach the entire flock the errors of failure rather than the grace of our Savior. My prayer for my young children is that they will make mistakes and lots of them while they're under the umbrella of my husband and I's protection. And that each time we can remind them that their is forgiveness because of the cross. I pray that these little slips while they're young will protect them from the experience of huge sin when they're older....but even then, God's grace is still sufficient! I'm not saying...sin cause there's forgiveness, but the fact is we are NOT PERFECT beings and I think the LC really hoped to make us that! Woudn't need Jesus except as a bud if we were!!

Hi Process,

You are right on. As children of God we need the freedom to follow Him and make our own mistakes. I still remember saying to someone when I was beginning to wake up from my stupor (still deep in the LC), "I wish I could be free just to have a problem." I wondered why I always had to come to the meeting praising and thanking the Lord like I was in "the victory" when many times I was just plain having a hard time. I needed to be able to be sad when I was sad, mad when I was mad, struggling when I was struggling, etc. without having to perform like a monkey on a chain.

If you have a houseful of other people living with you, as I did, you had to be in performance mode 24/7. Of course, I never made that standard. I think the real help came to those sisters that lived with us when my performance ability failed. I still remember one sister who had heard one of my husband and my not too quiet "discussions" through the wall of our house, saying to another sister who was dying to get married, "If you want to get cured of that, just come live with the Andersons!" Well, maybe we did some good after all.

Thankful Jane

OBW · 08-21-2008, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Process

I think this is something that really effected me growing up, not the dating specifically, but the fear of letting children sin. Until we sin, its hard for us to grasp the need we have for a Savior. I think LC protected children too much from making mistakes. And used one persons mistakes to try to teach the entire flock the errors of failure rather than the grace of our Savior. My prayer for my young children is that they will make mistakes and lots of them while they're under the umbrella of my husband and I's protection. And that each time we can remind them that their is forgiveness because of the cross. I pray that these little slips while they're young will protect them from the experience of huge sin when they're older....but even then, God's grace is still sufficient! I'm not saying...sin cause there's forgiveness, but the fact is we are NOT PERFECT beings and I think the LC really hoped to make us that! Woudn't need Jesus except as a bud if we were!!

I have to agree. And agree with Jane's comments on this as well.

I also think it goes deeper. We need to let our children encounter the opinions of the world. They do not need to be ignorant of the popular culture of the day, whether it is the trend to immorality, or efforts to define God our of existence through science and other academic pursuits. They need to have had a serious consideration of evolution, postmodern's "no absolute truth," and even many of society's ills before they leave the home. While there are valid reasons for home schooling, I have always tended away from it for this reason. It is better to send them to a Christian private school.

If we have an open relationship with our children, they can come and talk about anything. And even when we butt heads, they will know that we are not just being mean and controlling. The best way to prepare for life in the world is to begin that experience with an adviser. Who better than the ones who managed to keep you alive to age 5 and beyond.

(On the Christian private school suggestion, I remember someone (I think it was Ray Graver) talking about his daughter's experience with the girl's basketball team at the little Christian school she went to (Baptist, I think). It was not some "protected" environment, even if the adults and teachers thought it was. They stopped at a convenience store on the way to a tournament and most of the girls were shoplifting.)

finallyprettyokay · 08-21-2008, 08:30 AM

Roger said this is a fast moving thread. Boy oh boy. Some of us need to be getting more sleep!

So, there are a couple of things I would like to add to, and I think I am not going to take the time to find the quotes -- most of them have several places and people to quote, anyway.

About dating: Not dating does go some distance with avoiding falling into lustful sin. Unfortunately, I think the very quick marriages are one of the results of not having any sort of natural contact and situations with each other. So there has to be something in the middle. Girls on one side of the meetings, boys on the other just doesn't give young people a chance to learn about the other gender and about themselves in those situations. What kind of person you like and what kind you don't like, who would be a good lifetime partner and who wouldn't. I was shooting in the dark with this stuff, had no idea how to know a good partner when I saw one.

So the idea that several people have put forth about group situations, 6 or 8 people hanging out doing something together is a great idea. Or the very innovative idea I wrote about somewhere, where the parents said yeah, you can 'date' -- in the front yard.

But if you are not 'allowed' any contact with the other gender, those fast marriages are one result. My husband and I knew each other across the meeting hall for two years, but really I barely knew his name, we certainly didn't know each other at all. One day, the thought occurred to both of us and it might have been 3 weeks later that we were married, but I think it was two. Strangers married to each other. Next month will be 35 years for us, so I think we are going to make it.

Here's something I'll throw into the mix, see what comes of it. Regarding arranged marriages, I know of 2 or maybe 3 marriages that were arranged after the brother had gone to the 'elders' and shared that he was gay, or thought maybe he was. The 'fellowship'? Get married. That will solve the problem. One of the instances I am thinking about, the elders went to the brother and told him they thought he was gay, and that he should get married ASAP. In none of these cases were the sisters in on the discussion or given any information. Interestingly, the marriage where the elders were the ones who thought there was a problem worked out pretty well. At least, they are still married. They seem happy, I assume they are what they seem. (I knew that brother well, and am here to tell you that all the sisters liked him lots. He treated women well. He was kind and very much a gentleman.) But the cases where the brothers had self-identified as gay --- a disaster. And what a devastating thing for both the brother and the poor sister that had no idea she was supposed to be a 'cure'.

Anyone else know of similar cases? Tragic.

And, as I have written before, alot of the problem was young, inexperienced, untrained 'elders', in way over their head.

This thread has traveled over many paths, but I think it is still on topic -- how does the LC influence effect children, families.

Matt Anderson · 08-21-2008, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by finallyprettyokay

Here's something I'll throw into the mix, see what comes of it. Regarding arranged marriages, I know of 2 or maybe 3 marriages that were arranged after the brother had gone to the 'elders' and shared that he was gay, or thought maybe he was. The 'fellowship'? Get married. That will solve the problem. One of the instances I am thinking about, the elders went to the brother and told him they thought he was gay, and that he should get married ASAP. In none of these cases were the sisters in on the discussion or given any information. Interestingly, the marriage where the elders were the ones who thought there was a problem worked out pretty well. At least, they are still married. They seem happy, I assume they are what they seem. (I knew that brother well, and am here to tell you that all the sisters liked him lots. He treated women well. He was kind and very much a gentleman.) But the cases where the brothers had self-identified as gay --- a disaster. And what a devastating thing for both the brother and the poor sister that had no idea she was supposed to be a 'cure'.

The sad thing here is that I just read this and didn't react to it. I wasn't shocked by it. I should be. It just kind of fit with so much of what I have seen and heard. I do know of one situation like this, but I cannot speak of it.

Matt

Hope · 08-21-2008, 09:48 AM

The issue of dating vs courtship and marriage opens the door to many considerations. I have been reading with great interest the various posts and to me it is very clear that different cultures have a great impact on the various points of view and emphasis. While in college one of my majors was sociology. When I received my BA in addition to my declared major I had six minors. How come? Well to me the university was like a candy store that I had full access to. Since I was on scholarship for most of the time I was not limited in what I could take. Even though a good focused student could graduate with 120 hours, I wound up needing 173 to meet the criterion. I had a minor in behavioral psychology. So please bare with me for just a little bit. Our various cultures had a lot to do with our lc experience and our reaction to it.

My culture effects me to this day. I try to watch out for it lest it derail me from following the Lord purely but often I realize I am doing many things not because of the Bible Truth or the Lord’s leading but because that is the way my mother raised me.

A big problem comes from spiritualizing our culture and then imposing it on others. People came up hard in my culture. The individual was called upon to sacrifice his own personal interest for his family and for the community. When I was a senior in high school, I was the captain of the football team and the middle linebacker on defense and called the defensive plays. During the second game on the first play from scrimmage, I broke my foot. I told the coach I was hurt and needed to come out. He replied we must have you on the field. You are the team leader. You must just get through it. I even punted twice but they let me out of those duties after the second pathetic punt. Of course they did not know at the time my foot was broken. I had a very high pain threshold but that night was the worst agony I have ever experienced. I often looked back and wondered why I put myself through that. The coaches never apologized to me and did not feel they needed to. It happened because the team needed me and the individual must sacrifice for the community. I did a lot of that in the lc not because of the lc but because it was my natural culture. I promoted denial of personal interest for the sake of the community, church. I do not blame others for my cultural slant but with real spiritual maturity you will learn to recognize when your culture is being spiritualized.

I see a conflict going on between the culture of "every tub must sit on its on bottom" and "it takes a village." Is child raising the exclusinve responsibility of the parents, or does the extended family need to get involved or how about the village, a la Hillary Clinton?

The Texas culture puts rugged individualism and personal responsibility way way up there. Boy do I hear that coming through loud and clear from some of the posters. It is just me and God. On the other hand the Texas culture demands strong leaders who focus the community on the job at hand. The model for all real Texans is William Travis and drawing a line in the sand at the Alamo. All Texas school kids are raised on that tale. You choose death for the sake of the whole.

Another problem is that people may exalt superstition and myths and they become part and parcel of the culture. Things like James Barber’s the Lord is coming maybe as soon as 1994, therefore give your all for Christ and the Church. Things like Jacob getting the blessing and we should all desire the blessing and the blessing comes from close association with anything from WL or the co-workers or the elders. Or the flip side of that, this is the way to be immune to problems and failures. Of course, superstition and myths never work out but when they are an intergal part of the culture great disapointment and hurt is sure to to follow.

I have read a lot about our relationship to the Lord. That is surely a given. But is it just “me and God?” It is certainly that but watch out rugged individualist. We also should hear the Lord and be in a relationship with Him as we read the Word. Do not just pick up principles and doctrines. When I am with another believer, whoever they may be, I am very excercized to hear what the Lord is saying to me. THE BODY OF CHRIST IS A REALITY. The Lord speaks to us through His members. When I am reading the posts on this forum, I am seeking to know more of the Lord and hear what He is saying to me. I seek to especially listen up when someone is giving me a hard time or disagreeing with me. We just have to shut off some of the natural defensiveness or prejudices that flare up.

In Christ Jesus there is hope for us all,

Hope, Don Rutledge

PS If you have problems with this post because I once was a lc elder,an evil shepherd who was fired by the Lord, I apologize. Please have mercy on me.

SpeakersCorner · 08-21-2008, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

The sad thing here is that I just read this and didn't react to it. I wasn't shocked by it.

I know what you mean, Matt. I heard of a local church where a brother lived openly in incestuous sin with another woman and the elders said nothing. This same church had regular love feasts where the saints sat segregated and didn't even intermingle. They were famous for suing one another. They were divided, idolatrous, immoral. A disgrace to God's kingdom ...

What I find shocking, though, really shocking, is how Paul addressed his letter to them: "To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be holy, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours:"

Brain cramp there, eh?

SC

Shawn · 08-21-2008, 10:00 AM

Hi Matt,

I wanted to comment on your position that all in the LC have unknowingly fallen into idolatry, due to the fixation of that group to the teachings of Witness Lee.

First, your critical examination of the fruit of the hearts of the LC’ers falling into idolatry, seems to parallel the BB’s “examination” of contemporary Christian music leading to idolatry that is being enjoyed by the Young People around the GLA. To argue against their criticism is to attempt to prove there are no idols before the listeners; and who can say we are without idols? So, your argument is valid only on the base that anything and everything can lead to idolatry, or, who is without idols cast the first stone.

The second charge is the focus on the oneness of the body of Christ. The difference I see is whether this is a practice, or a replacement of the consecration of our hearts to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Yes, it can be a replacement, but only if one applies his teachings in the way of making it a necessary tenet of the faith, versus the way of practice. I know many who practice the oneness without making it a doctrine of faith.

I believe from my start in the LC in the late 80’s, that I have attempted to live seeking the oneness of all believers as a practice, carried out by my faithfulness in following my Lord as led by the Holy Spirit. No, my walk has not been “idol free,” but I believe I have been led in the process of being stripped of the idols as I grow in the grace of our Lord and savior, Jesus! Yes, even though I am still in the “idolatry wrecked LC!”

A more practical presentation of idolatry would be in the recognizing of the two paths that have developed among the LC believers as shown by our brother Hope, in following the “ministry” as opposed to following the Lord.

Shawn

Matt Anderson · 08-21-2008, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn

I believe from my start in the LC in the late 80’s, that I have attempted to live seeking the oneness of all believers as a practice, carried out by my faithfulness in following my Lord as led by the Holy Spirit. No, my walk has not been “idol free,” but I believe I have been led in the process of being stripped of the idols as I grow in the grace of our Lord and savior, Jesus! Yes, even though I am still in the “idolatry wrecked LC!”

A more practical presentation of idolatry would be in the recognizing of the two paths that have developed among the LC believers as shown by our brother Hope, in following the “ministry” as opposed to following the Lord.

Shawn

Shawn,

As for the parallel with the BB, I get what you are saying. Here is the only real big difference I see. I'm not out to sway a group of people under my wings and I don't have control over their lives by means of saying This thread is God's Oracle on the Earth Today.

I'm just speaking as truthfully as I know how for those who are willing to listen. I believe you can take it or leave it as the Lord leads.

As for any current idolatry in the LC... Please consider the following:

In 1986 almost all the elder's in the LC signed a written document that gave allegiance to the indispensable nature of Witness Lee to the Christian faith. This is an oath. This is specifically called out in the law of God as a NO, NO. This has a binding effect. It binds both the elders and the commoners who submit to the elder's authority into a very serious form of idolatry.

So, I am not just trying to say, "Idolatry is everywhere in the LC, idolatry is everywhere in the LC". I'm really not. The fact is that what is in the LC has hit a very high threshold of very serious idolatry. Through repentance of oath's like this one, I believe light will start to shine in. Light is needed.

I am reposting the letter here for your reconsideration in light of the recent discussions on idolatry and to give you a sense that I am not just crying "wolf" on this issue. There is something very substantively large here on this issue of idolatry and the LC.

I consider the following letter to simply be objective evidence of an underlying and pre-existing condition that was already fully in place. This oath further steeped the LC deeper into an idolatrous condition.

Quote:

February 21, 1986
Anaheim, California

Dear Brother Lee,

After hearing your fellowship in this elders’ training, we all agree to have a new start in the Lord’s recovery. For this, we all agree to be in one accord and to carry out this new move of the Lord solely through prayer, the Spirit, and the Word. We further agree to practice the recovery one in: teaching, practice, thinking, speaking, essence, appearance, and expression.

We repudiate all differences among the churches, and all indifference toward the ministry, the ministry office, and the other churches. We agree that the church in our place be identical with all the local churches throughout the earth.

We also agree to follow your leading as the one who has brought us God’s New Testament economy and has led us into its practice. We agree that this leading is indispensable to our oneness and acknowledge the one trumpet in the Lord’s ministry and the one wise master builder among us.

We further agree to practice the church life in our locality absolutely in a new way: to build the church in, through, and based upon home meetings; to lead every member to get used to functioning without any idea to depend on any giant speakers; to teach all the saints to know the basic truths in an educational way that they may teach others for the spreading of the truth; to build up the saints in the growth in life that they may minister life to others, shepherd each other, and take care of the backsliding ones; to lead all the saints to preach the gospel in every possible way; to avoid leadership as much as possible; and to have home gatherings for nurturing the saints in life and big meetings for educating the saints in truths.

We agree that all the preceding points are the clear and definite teaching of the Bible according to God’s New Testament economy.

Finally, we agree that the success of this new move is our responsibility and will rise up to labor and endeavor with our whole being, looking to the Lord for His mercy and grace that we would be faithful to the end.

Your brothers for the Lord's recovery

Matt (little drummer boy with just one drum for now)

OBW · 08-21-2008, 02:28 PM

I still think that the general line of inquiry into idolatry is not that profitable. And Shawn has said it in a different way:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawn

First, your critical examination of the fruit of the hearts of the LC’ers falling into idolatry, seems to parallel the BB’s “examination” of contemporary Christian music leading to idolatry that is being enjoyed by the Young People around the GLA. To argue against their criticism is to attempt to prove there are no idols before the listeners; and who can say we are without idols? So, your argument is valid only on the base that anything and everything can lead to idolatry, or, who is without idols cast the first stone.

While I am more than sure that there is plenty of idolatry in the LC, are we really able to discern what is and what is not idolatry in any particular LC member or leader? No matter how hard you try to make a case, I believe the answer must be “No.”

Why? Because we do not know the thoughts and intents of the heart. All we see are actions, and they may give an indication, but they do not reveal the truth of the heart.

Outside of the LC, there are many who would be excited to get to hear certain particular Christian minister who has come to town for some kind of seminar. Is this idolatrous? For one person entering the seminary, the answer may be “Yes.” For the one following them in the door, the answer is “No.” Can we tell the difference from the outside? No.

Neither can we make such sweeping statements about any of the LC members or leaders. And if we are simply painting everything that could come between a person and Christ as idolatry, then search your own heart. Is ambition idolatry? Maybe. Paul mentioned that some may seek to be an elder (or desire to be, or whatever the translation you look at says). This is a level of ambition. Is this ambition sinful? No. But some ambition is. Some ambition becomes something that is put above Christ. In the broader definition of idolatry, it now fits. Do we know where any particular ambition fits? We may guess, and that guess may be good in some cases. But do we really know?

Rather than collect a lot of things together that we think we know the underlying heart about and put a label on it — idolatry — why don’t we just look at each clear error for what it is. It is unnecessary to search the heart about why Benson took a trip to Houston to slander Jane. That he did says enough. He did the deed. It speaks volumes without the label of idolatry attached to its motives. It even says something about whether he should be in leadership.

It is unnecessary to figure out why a series of elders and their wives went to such great effort to convince BlessD to marry someone she didn’t want to marry. They did it (unfortunately successfully) and the consequences fall partly (mostly?) at their feet. (We can never avoid our own part, no matter how small we think it is.)

Was any of this because they put something ahead of Christ? Isn’t every error we make for that reason? Isn’t the reason that we are unable to forgive that person (or whatever) because we put our holding the anger/offense over and above the command of Christ to forgive? Doesn’t that technically fit the definition of idolatry if it is something that is simply above Christ? Doesn’t that make the label of idolatry almost meaningless?

Now I’m not diminishing true idolatry, even the kind where some have elevated the LC, or Lee and his teachings effectively above Christ. But can we truly identify that (other than within ourselves)? Or can we merely speculate, and if we have the position, make that speculation to the person potentially guilty of the sin so that they might be awakened from their stupor and see their error. I do not see that identifying the LC leaders as complicit in the underlying problems of the LC second generation and/or their marriages as due to idolatry solves anything. Instead it seems more to be a way to point a finger and say “that’s really bad.” We already know that. But we’re going to keep saying it over and over. “Let’s all say ‘that’s really bad’ together for three minutes.”

I won’t actually put it in, but that “beating a dead horse” smilie is tempting right now.

Last. As I said in my second paragraph (the first one after Shawn’s quote), “I believe.” This is my opinion. Some think that this discussion is important. I wasn’t sure at first, but now do not agree. I have now said why. Consider it. It would be better to not just dismiss it without thought. But either way, take it or leave it as you will.

TLFisher · 08-21-2008, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by finallyprettyokay

So the idea that several people have put forth about group situations, 6 or 8 people hanging out doing something together is a great idea.

This thread has traveled over many paths, but I think it is still on topic -- how does the LC influence effect children, families.

FPO, I just have to share this experience. It's from a Young People's Conference held at a camp near Yucaipa, CA in the spring of 1985. Talk about young people hanging out. That's exactly what we were doing in mid-afternoon. There was about 3-4 of us high school brothers from my locality with one of the brothers talking to a sister and several of her friends from a Orange County locality. Suddenly a serving brother comes running over and promptly admonishes us for talking to one another.
I'm on board for dissauding high schoolers from dating, but from not talking? How could they get used to social interaction without having to shudder in condemnation should this brother or that sister start speaking to her or him.
Maybe times have changed how the young people are taken care of? Maybe it's ok for young people of opposite genders to communicate without bizarre overreactions in 2008? In 1985, it wasn't.

Terry

finallyprettyokay · 08-21-2008, 07:51 PM

Terry:

You know who gets it right with activities for the young people? Mormans. I know I talk about them alot, but just remember I am in the SLC region, and believe me, the LDS church is noticeable here

.

Most of their buildings have gyms in them, basketball courts and all. They have dances

and all sorts of things. They have 'wards' (the designated meetings) that are Singles Wards --- all sorts of single adults in them. And they have College Wards --- obviously, college kids. They figured out how to help young people stay pure (so they can get married in the Temple

) and stay busy at the same time. I know of one college girl who converted just because she figured being in that church increased her chances of getting married

. It did.

Something to think about --- they get it right in this area.

fpo

blessD · 08-21-2008, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBW

I have to agree. And agree with Jane's comments on this as well.

I also think it goes deeper. We need to let our children encounter the opinions of the world. They do not need to be ignorant of the popular culture of the day, whether it is the trend to immorality, or efforts to define God our of existence through science and other academic pursuits. They need to have had a serious consideration of evolution, postmodern's "no absolute truth," and even many of society's ills before they leave the home. While there are valid reasons for home schooling, I have always tended away from it for this reason. It is better to send them to a Christian private school.

If we have an open relationship with our children, they can come and talk about anything. And even when we butt heads, they will know that we are not just being mean and controlling. The best way to prepare for life in the world is to begin that experience with an adviser. Who better than the ones who managed to keep you alive to age 5 and beyond.

(On the Christian private school suggestion, I remember someone (I think it was Ray Graver) talking about his daughter's experience with the girl's basketball team at the little Christian school she went to (Baptist, I think). It was not some "protected" environment, even if the adults and teachers thought it was. They stopped at a convenience store on the way to a tournament and most of the girls were shoplifting.)

The successes I have seen in this area (both mine and others) seem to have these key factors irrespective of the culture, background, or church community:

1. Unconditional love & open, unselfish communication
2. Early and continuous training & consistency in teaching
3. Prayer & Faith
4. Staying calm
5. Trusting your kids & helping them to know they can trust you
6. In the area of teaching the virtue of abstinence, follow steps 1-5.

djohnson(XLCmember) · 08-21-2008, 11:06 AM

Hope further to my post #352 I would add the following:

1. Evangelical kids tend to marry young mainly due to raging hormones. In their early 20s they are ill-equipped and lack the maturity to handle marriage esp in the midst of the complexities and demands of modern life.

2. Hypocrisy of some high profile leaders who teach against divorce, get divorced themselves for non biblical reasons and remain in public ministry.

3. Lack of spiritual growth and depth among evangelicals of all ages i.e. the absence of a deep reservoir of wisdom inside of people.

4. Selfishness, self-centeredness and self-glorification which is exacerbated by the performance based atmosphere of "stars" on center stage with an audience watching as a church model.

5. Hyperactivity and number growth emphasis teaches multi-dimensional busyness as a way of life. When carried into marriages it can create an atmosphere of overcommitment and emotional exhaustion.

I of course would add the Satanic influence which you mentioned. My intent when it was first mentioned by you was not to blow it off but to suggest it was a given.

Hope · 08-21-2008, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Hope further to my post #352 I would add the following:

1. Evangelical kids tend to marry young mainly due to raging hormones. In their early 20s they are ill-equipped and lack the maturity to handle marriage esp in the midst of the complexities and demands of modern life.

2. Hypocrisy of some high profile leaders who teach against divorce, get divorced themselves for non biblical reasons and remain in public ministry.

3. Lack of spiritual growth and depth among evangelicals of all ages i.e. the absence of a deep reservoir of wisdom inside of people.

4. Selfishness, self-centeredness and self-glorification which is exacerbated by the performance based atmosphere of "stars" on center stage with an audience watching as a church model.

5. Hyperactivity and number growth emphasis teaches multi-dimensional busyness as a way of life. When carried into marriages it can create an atmosphere of overcommitment and emotional exhaustion.

I of course would add the Satanic influence which you mentioned. My intent when it was first mentioned by you was not to blow it off but to suggest it was a given.

From your post #352

Hope I appreciate your last post addressed to me. To be clear the 34% is among evangelicals in general not the specific church I attend. In any event like you said even 5% is a tragedy.

I will ponder your question in more depth and answer in detail but one thing comes immediately to mind: a certain looseness in our theology i.e by overemphasizing God's acceptance, love, forgiveness this gives people the impression that they can do whatever they want including divorce and God will just forgive them. Which He will but I think the way it is taught gives license to some people esp those who are spiritually immature.

dj,

Thank you for an excellent summary of issues Christians are facing today. The entire American society is anti-family, and anti-good parenting. We Christians need to face this head on and be on the alert. I would say all of your points plus the post #352 are worthy of a serious consideration and sober minded search before the Lord for meeting each of those challenges.

In Christ Jesus there is hope for us all. (Without him we will not win but in Him we have won the victory we just don't always see it in the present time.)

Hope, Don Rutledge

Ohio · 08-21-2008, 05:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBW

I really don't think that 2 months from "my name is" to "I do" is wise in any way. (That is a little overstated, but virtually true.)

While I totally agree, I do know of a couple of blessed marriages of GLA leaders that had courtships of literally only days. The couples just met and fell in love and got married, and still love each other to this day. While they are not secretive about their short engagement, they don't recommend it as a pattern for others.

Jay · 02-25-2024, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBW

On one hand, I agree a little. Just dating around because it's the thing to do is a potential trap. But even when we deal with lust, it is sin. And sin is sin. The problems that arise from the rapid marriages are also sin. And sin is sin.

I really don't think that 2 months from "my name is" to "I do" is wise in any way. (That is a little overstated, but virtually true.) My sons have mostly been involved in group activities. That means they go do things with 4 to 8 people, guys and gals. The younger one met and dated one girl for a while. That has cooled for now, but they are still part of the same larger group from which these smaller groups continue to emerge for particular activities. Even this was discouraged in the LC. That is a reasonable alternative to the "on/off" of suddenly private dataing and then not dating.

Of course, doing much of anything that wasn't a meeting was discouraged in the LC. It would seem that the meeting schedule was designed to keep us all busy enough that having much private socialization was just hard to plan.

Yeah this is a tough one because the Bible portrays fornication as like the worst thing a person can do almost. "sin against their own body." Ok, but is jumping into a bad marriage better? Which is more harmful? I'd argue that a bad marriage, particularly if children are involved, is much more harmful than fornication. Fornication can be over quickly, a bad marriage can shave decades off someone's life

I know brother Lee loved to joke around about marriage in his sermons. He would say "oh another marriage, another 'funeral' har har" and joke like that. But if you've lived through a dysfunctional marriage you know it's the furthest thing to joke about. It's horrible, and can quite literally ruin your entire life and everything about you can become shambles through a bad marriage. You could come out of a bad marriage a completely different person. Lee would likely sardonically turn that somehow into a positive saying something like "well you'll gain the Lord har har." Which he often did in his ministry. He loved to take horrible twisted things and use them as an opportunity to plug transformation and sonship or whatever the flavor term for the week was. And all the front row brothers would heartily below out "AMEN!" as he did so. Which clearly gives precedent to just shuck off family dysfunction as if it's somehow a normal part of our transformation

I went through my parents ugly dysfunctional marriage. They weren't right for each other, but they fell into lust and felt the pressure of getting married because they were in the local church. And they were a terrible fit and it ruined everything. I'm in my 40's and still recovering from what I went through as a child with their bad marriage. Certainly nothing to joke about

Ohio · 02-25-2024, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay

I know brother Lee loved to joke around about marriage in his sermons. He would say "oh another marriage, another 'funeral' har har" and joke like that. But if you've lived through a dysfunctional marriage you know it's the furthest thing to joke about. It's horrible, and can quite literally ruin your entire life and everything about you can become shambles through a bad marriage.

After leaving the LC, I looked back on my years watching marriage counseling, sometimes close up and sometimes from a distance. I concluded that, for the most part, no LC leader really had any idea what he was doing. Nearly no leader in that program ever learned to actually be discrete. Advice coming from our regional leader was perhaps only applicable in early 20th century China. Some of the counsel was just naive at best, illegal at worst, and none of it valuable in the long term.

It wasn't until I left the LC that I learned there was a brother in Ohio was who actually schooled and practicing Christian marital and family counseling. What a blessing to the body of Christ that could have been. Unfortunately he is no longer with the LC. I doubt if his ministry would have any place in that system, though I'm sure they would object.

02-26-2024, 06:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

After leaving the LC, I looked back on my years watching marriage counseling, sometimes close up and sometimes from a distance. I concluded that, for the most part, no LC leader really had any idea what he was doing. Nearly no leader in that program ever learned to actually be discrete. Advice coming from our regional leader was perhaps only applicable in early 20th century China. Some of the counsel was just naïve at best, illegal at worst, and none of it valuable in the long term.
It wasn't until I left the LC that I learned there was a brother in Ohio was who actually schooled and practicing Christian marital and family counseling. What a blessing to the body of Christ that could have been. Unfortunately he is no longer with the LC. I doubt if his ministry would have any place in that system, though I'm sure they would object.

I spent a lot of years in LC, and I can attest that all of their past and current attempts to somehow make it sound that they ever did value families and honored marriages is just that, an attempts to cover their heads and wash their hands of their own failures. In my time there, which is well over a decade, there wasn’t a single one conference, training, or any of theirs seven years reinstituted feasts dedicated for families, young couples or marriages.

Furthermore, I truly believe that these issues go further than just surface mundane things that all families and marriages deal with, there is absolute lack of knowledge and abilities to offer any constructive advice, tangible and genuine support. All of these coworkers and the blended bros, only have one agenda: to make sure the name and the image of Lee is upheld to the highest of standards. They have no idea on how to shepherd or care, and possess no knowledge or abilities on how to tend to a broken, hurt people and marriages. Their best assets are the writings of Lee, and their best practices are those that he instituted, and if anyone has had a chance to just search out what Lee said about marriage and how to deal with true realities - it’s some of the worst advice one can give to anyone, let alone a brother or sister in Christ.

Here is some samples of the advice we got from Witness Lee: (all of these are available online, you can find it with very little effort)

Quote:

-Every parent, regardless of how smart or foolish he is, has a talent for raising children. Child raising is not a special talent; it is a talent given by birth.
-We are here not for our studies, not for the family, not for raising children, not to care for homes, and not for doing business. We are here for the service.
-If the service in the church is functioning properly, we will be fully occupied by all the new ones that we bring forth. If we do not bear new fruit and our numbers are the same year after year, there will be no need for raising children.
-Today we do not hear much truth in Christianity. The saddest thing is that in the chapels in the United States we hear of nothing but marriage, careers, or other things such as raising children, none of which is the pure and deep truth.
-If we care for the church, then our marriage, education, job, and future will all be covered. Some people have condemned me for being too much for the church.
-Strictly speaking, God is not interested in our marriage, education, job, health, family, husband, wife, children, or parents. God is interested in the church.
-Marriage life is an example of this kind of imprisonment. In a good sense, our marriage does not usher us into a banquet but into a "prison”.
-Have you seen God, Christ, the Church, and the Churches? The sisters must forget about their husbands, and the brothers must forget about their wives. We must forget about our preoccupations and see God, Christ, the Church, and the churches. Hallelujah!
-Likewise, if our marriage is only for ourselves, we will miss the mark of God's will, but if our marriage is for the building up of the Body, it will be according to God's will. Furthermore, in relation to migration, our primary concern should not be our job or our house but should be the building up of the church as the Body of Christ.
-Our marriage, education, living, and whatever we do must be for the unique will of God, that is, for the Body. If a young brother prays about marriage, he may say, "Lord, which sister is most suitable for Your Body?" When he prays about his education, he should say, "Lord, which line of study best fits with Your Body?" When he considers buying a house, he may say, "Lord, what kind of house suits Your Body?" If we care for God's will, we will know whom to marry, what line of education we should pursue, and what house we should buy.
-As long as we come to Him and seek His will, He will paint us; that is good enough. He cares not for our marriage or schooling but for this painting.

I always wondered why there is extremely rare cases in LC of true marriage relationships, where it’s a types of Christ and the church. After I left, and dug around for archaeological roots, and there they are.

Jay · 02-26-2024, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unreg

I spent a lot of years in LC, and I can attest that all of their past and current attempts to somehow make it sound that they ever did value families and honored marriages is just that, an attempts to cover their heads and wash their hands of their own failures. In my time there, which is well over a decade, there wasn’t a single one conference, training, or any of theirs seven years reinstituted feasts dedicated for families, young couples or marriages.

Furthermore, I truly believe that these issues go further than just surface mundane things that all families and marriages deal with, there is absolute lack of knowledge and abilities to offer any constructive advice, tangible and genuine support. All of these coworkers and the blended bros, only have one agenda: to make sure the name and the image of Lee is upheld to the highest of standards. They have no idea on how to shepherd or care, and possess no knowledge or abilities on how to tend to a broken, hurt people and marriages. Their best assets are the writings of Lee, and their best practices are those that he instituted, and if anyone has had a chance to just search out what Lee said about marriage and how to deal with true realities - it’s some of the worst advice one can give to anyone, let alone a brother or sister in Christ.

Here is some samples of the advice we got from Witness Lee: (all of these are available online, you can find it with very little effort)

I always wondered why there is extremely rare cases in LC of true marriage relationships, where it’s a types of Christ and the church. After I left, and dug around for archaeological roots, and there they are.

-Every parent, regardless of how smart or foolish he is, has a talent for raising children. Child raising is not a special talent; it is a talent given by birth.
A talent? Idk about that. I know of plenty of people who are clunky and awkward around children and seem very stiff and odd as parents
-We are here not for our studies, not for the family, not for raising children, not to care for homes, and not for doing business. We are here for the service.
I guess if ULTIMATELY the goal is to build the church and to be an overcomer this is kinda true because ultimately much of the "big things" of this life will not follow us into the New Jerusalem. However this is still a dangerous statement and I'm sure it primed many people to act unbecomingly to their families. One example, which isn't technically a family matter, is how saints treat friendships. I've had many instances of being friendly and kind to certain saints in the LC and they were cold back to me because they were of the mind that friendships are "natural" and should be condemned.
-If the service in the church is functioning properly, we will be fully occupied by all the new ones that we bring forth. If we do not bear new fruit and our numbers are the same year after year, there will be no need for raising children.
There are little to no new ones in most localities that I've ever met regularly with. And this is just a crazy statement if you look at it objectively. Why would new ones even want to come around your locality if you don't exhibit love and kindness towards your own family? Certainly they can sniff out the cult like behavior and frankly the type of vibe that creates is very exclusive and insular. So naturally you won't have new members. This is just logically silly
-Today we do not hear much truth in Christianity. The saddest thing is that in the chapels in the United States we hear of nothing but marriage, careers, or other things such as raising children, none of which is the pure and deep truth.
Well that's kinda just human nature. When I was in Spokane LC the way they shepherded me was to ask how I was doing in school and things like that. For some people those are too personal of questions, and from time to time I don't like that type of question myself because it's sort of intrusive and TMI (too much information to give out) but it's just kind of a way to show kindness and care for others.
-If we care for the church, then our marriage, education, job, and future will all be covered. Some people have condemned me for being too much for the church.
This is just a silly statement, obviously life needs work. Yes we need to put God first, that goes without saying as it's what the Bible tells us. But to act like we don't need to work at our careers and our families is pretty neglectful and someone who isn't mature minded could easily be damaged by such a statement
-Strictly speaking, God is not interested in our marriage, education, job, health, family, husband, wife, children, or parents. God is interested in the church.
Same as what I said above, just silly dangerous statements that can be damaging if misapplied by immature people

-Marriage life is an example of this kind of imprisonment. In a good sense, our marriage does not usher us into a banquet but into a "prison”.
What a comforting and warming statement

No wonder so many saints are cold when it comes to relations and their families etc. This makes you not even want to get married
-Have you seen God, Christ, the Church, and the Churches? The sisters must forget about their husbands, and the brothers must forget about their wives. We must forget about our preoccupations and see God, Christ, the Church, and the churches. Hallelujah!
Very very culty statement. A potentially very damaging and divisive thing to say
-Likewise, if our marriage is only for ourselves, we will miss the mark of God's will, but if our marriage is for the building up of the Body, it will be according to God's will. Furthermore, in relation to migration, our primary concern should not be our job or our house but should be the building up of the church as the Body of Christ.
Somewhat correct statement in a sense. But also full of potential problems if it leads an immature person to cast away wisdom and planning, which then it becomes a very dangerous statement. I believe that it's just worded wrong. It's not that there is nothing for ourselves per se, that's not what the Bible says- 3 John 1:2, and elsewhere where it talks about how our souls and bodies are comforted by ourselves and also by God. To imply that God doesn't want us to have anything for ourselves is certainly not biblical.
-Our marriage, education, living, and whatever we do must be for the unique will of God, that is, for the Body. If a young brother prays about marriage, he may say, "Lord, which sister is most suitable for Your Body?" When he prays about his education, he should say, "Lord, which line of study best fits with Your Body?" When he considers buying a house, he may say, "Lord, what kind of house suits Your Body?" If we care for God's will, we will know whom to marry, what line of education we should pursue, and what house we should buy.
If a young person read this then you can imagine how it could be misapplied. It could potentially redirect someone's entire life course if they took it in the wrong way and went looking for negatives about the person they are thinking about being with. Ex. "oh so and so is very interesting and attractive but because of such and such reason or behavior I don't think they would be good for my future in the church." You could only imagine how easily this could be misapplied, particularly by a young person. I know the LC has walked back this type of talk and now they say things like "don't ask me who you should marry" etc. Funny how when probably they see the fruit of such dangerous talk they flip and play dumb
-As long as we come to Him and seek His will, He will paint us; that is good enough. He cares not for our marriage or schooling but for this painting.
Absolutely incorrect and unbiblical statement. 1 Peter 5:7, Matthew 10:26-31. God absolutely cares about the affairs of our life, even in small details. If it matters to us then I'm sure it matters to him

Ohio · 08-21-2008, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

However, I do not agree with arranged marriages, where one or more party really has reservations, but buries them to keep favor with "the brothers."

Somehow we saints had the impression that if the elders "endorsed" a relationship, then God's "blessing" would be upon the marriage. Whether the marriage was "arranged" or not then became difficult to discern. With the belief that His coming was soon, and that marriage was only a means to "transformation," it was compelling indeed to many dedicated young people to have such a "blessing" from the leaders. In those days we could not believe that divorce could ever occur in the LC. We believed that God's grace was sufficient for any problem we might encounter.

I remember, as a young single brother in Cleve-ville, watching from "a distance" a time when TC "fellowshipped" with a group of single saints who were "marriage ready," but had no particular "interest" in any other brother or sister. Apparently all the other saints knew that TC had "one of those talks" with the group of singles, so I somehow found out too. I watched those saints, and right away they were all "paired up" and setting marriage dates. Everyone was happy for them. Life is so good! I somehow thought this was "God's way" for marriage in the church. It was so contrary to "the world," that it must be "of God." And ... it saved the young people from all the dangers of promiscuity. "Everybody's a winner," as they say. Right?

Years later, I learned that at least two of those specific marriages had ended poorly, with strange news indeed reported about them. Things too strange to repeat. Theirs were not the only marriages that were to fail either.

I must admit that the early days had many strange concepts that fueled off the "no dating" command. There were also strong forces compelling young ones to marry "inside" the LC. Think of the O.T. curses on "mixed marriages." Due to all the marriage failures, some saints I know decided it was far better to marry "outsiders," and some of them even married unbelievers. Church increase, right? While I wouldn't recommend this, they had to find someone they really loved and "connected" with, trusting God to work out salvation at a later date. Thus the dangers of control and legalism -- many will do just the opposite.

SpeakersCorner · 08-21-2008, 06:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I remember, as a young single brother in Cleve-ville, watching from "a distance" a time when TC "fellowshipped" with a group of single saints who were "marriage ready," but had no particular "interest" in any other brother or sister. Apparently all the other saints knew that TC had "one of those talks" with the group of singles, so I somehow found out too. I watched those saints, and right away they were all "paired up" and setting marriage dates.

Ohio,

Here's another TC story but with a different interpretation.

A young sister from southern California, born and raised in the LC, came to stay with us. She was a student at Purdue and stayed with us in the summer. Anyway, she went to one of TC's college summer schools (or whatever they called them). TC had a question and answer session. Someone asked about marriage. TC answered, "Marry the one you love." He talked at length about romantic love, falling in love, and just being with the one you love. This young sister was floored. She came back and told us, "I've never heard anything like that in California."

I know you, Ohio, have some issues with TC and I understand where you're coming from. But have you ever considered how the brothers that were "trained" by him are so much more interesting a people than those coming out of the BB boot camp? Compare the speaking of Peter Debelak's father with any of the BB: is there any doubt who's better? The same could be said for most of the brothers TC trained. JM and TM (Tom McNaughton) could make a living as standup comics. Spend a weekend with a group of these guys and I guarantee you one thing: you won't be bored.

I'm not a TC apologist despite how this post may sound. I do know this though about him and it is a crucial point which I think needs to be made: he never sacrificed his humanity on the altar of "oneness." A lot of the negatives I'm reading on this thread came out of situations where that was done.

There. I'm done.

SC

Paul Cox · 08-21-2008, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Ohio,

I'm not a TC apologist despite how this post may sound. I do know this though about him and it is a crucial point which I think needs to be made: he never sacrificed his humanity on the altar of "oneness." A lot of the negatives I'm reading on this thread came out of situations where that was done.

There. I'm done.

SC

Thanks SC.

"He never sacrificed his humanity on the altar of 'oneness'." As a result the LSM body spit him out. Regardless of what faults you can find in him, that is a wonderful example for us to follow.

I have listened to some of the recent audio of brothers from the Midwest. I was compelled, impressed, kept awake, and fed. Compare that with the current speaking of the "Blendeds." Unless you are under the hypnotic trance, and blending into the incessant drone of "amen," you are either bored, or can't wait to turn it off.

I have suffered through many of their messages in recent years, simply to be able to know what I am talking about when speaking of them. But, believe me, it was a suffering.

Roger

SpeakersCorner · 08-21-2008, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger

I have suffered through many of their messages in recent years, simply to be able to know what I am talking about when speaking of them. But, believe me, it was a suffering.

Roger,

That's my biggest beef with them, bigger even than their idiotic quarantine. They're boring, incredibly, utterly boring. Sure, occasionally we're all boring. But the BB have perfected it to an art form. They ought to have a class in that at their seminary: "Lifeless Speaking 101." They could have one unit on how to cheerlead: EM could teach that. Then another on how to threaten and warn: MC could teach that. Another on how to use jargon no one understands: they could team teach that. And maybe a unit on long speaking: again, a team project.

The semester exam could be to have students give testimonies that never end. The rest of the class could pick up points for every rote Amen they uttered (one point per Amen) and the speaker would get an A if and only if he could put them all to sleep. He'd get an extra credit point for every Amen uttered from a sleeping soul.

I'm too hard. But hey, if the shoe fits ...

SC

Paul Cox · 08-21-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

Roger,

That's my biggest beef with them, bigger even than their idiotic quarantine. They're boring, incredibly, utterly boring. Sure, occasionally we're all boring. But the BB have perfected it to an art form. They ought to have a class in that at their seminary: "Lifeless Speaking 101." They could have one unit on how to cheerlead: EM could teach that. Then another on how to threaten and warn: MC could teach that. Another on how to use jargon no one understands: they could team teach that. And maybe a unit on long speaking: again, a team project.

The semester exam could be to have students give testimonies that never end. The rest of the class could pick up points for every rote Amen they uttered (one point per Amen) and the speaker would get an A if and only if he could put them all to sleep. He'd get an extra credit point for every Amen uttered from a sleeping soul.

I'm too hard. But hey, if the shoe fits ...

SC

Hey, you must be a teacher

Ohio · 08-22-2008, 04:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpeakersCorner

I know you, Ohio, have some issues with TC and I understand where you're coming from. But have you ever considered how the brothers that were "trained" by him are so much more interesting a people than those coming out of the BB boot camp? Compare the speaking of Peter Debelak's father with any of the BB: is there any doubt who's better?

SC, I totally agree. And I have come to believe that both types of reports are true. All the good reports and all the bad reports about TC are true ... hence the dilemma -- some love him and some quarantine him.

You mentioned PD's dad ... but don't forget that he, like many others, can't work with TC any longer ... and not for messages like "marry the one you love."

Let me say this too ... did TC share that "marriage gem" just because she was from SoCal ... knowing that could heighten the contrast between him and the blendeds?

I have said this repeatedly ... I love brother Titus and appreciate his ministry, but can no longer accept the pattern of mistreatments he displayed, and often got duplicated in his workers. He never needed to do this. He was "shooting himself in the foot." He learned bad things from WL.

.................................................. ................................................

I see that this thread has really moved on ... again ... now to idolatry ... what's next? ... I can't keep up! ... kind of like the old Bereans "cry room" thread ...

The good thing is, they're not "beating up" on Hope any more ... the bad thing is that SC is now "getting it" ...

Hey SC, I'll ask Hope to Fedex that 2x4 back to you ... I had passed it on to him ... maybe he don't need it any more!

Matt Anderson · 08-22-2008, 06:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

I see that this thread has really moved on ... again ... now to idolatry ... what's next? ... I can't keep up! ... kind of like the old Bereans "cry room" thread ...

The good thing is, they're not "beating up" on Hope any more ... the bad thing is that SC is now "getting it" ...

Hey SC, I'll ask Hope to Fedex that 2x4 back to you ... I had passed it on to him ... maybe he don't need it any more!

Ohio,

I get the fact that I am in the extreme here. I'm going to stay out here in the extreme for a while and really backup what is being said. The main reason why is because it is one of the root causes of the destruction of families and something that has had a lot of impact on the 2nd generation. I really can back this up. I know that not everyone will buy it. That's fine with me and I will defend my position rigorously on this issue. I'll also challenge the likes of SC and Hope when the defense that is attempted is subpar.

And yes, there is a Cry Room of sorts on this forum. I can Leed the way over there and show it to you.

For years, you listened to Lee castigate the RCC and didn't have a problem with that. Why do you have a problem with this?

I'm wondering if you realize that your stance has completely changed based on one apparent factor.

When you thought that these issues are pointed only at the Leedership then you didn't have as much of a problem with it. However, when it changes to possibly apply to everyone (Leedership and Leemen), then you interpret it differently. I'm not 'beating you up', just making a pretty simple observation for consideration.

No one, including me, likes it when the topic points homeward.

Matt

P.S. Couldn't resist a few Leeisms in memory of Reuben.

Ohio · 08-22-2008, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matt

Ohio,

I get the fact that I am in the extreme here. I'm going to stay out here in the extreme for a while and really backup what is being said. The main reason why is because it is one of the root causes of the destruction of families and something that has had a lot of impact on the 2nd generation. I really can back this up. I know that not everyone will buy it. That's fine with me and I will defend my position rigorously on this issue. I'll also challenge the likes of SC and Hope when the defense that is attempted is subpar.

And yes, there is a Cry Room of sorts on this forum. I can Leed the way over there and show it to you.

For years, you listened to Lee castigate the RCC and didn't have a problem with that. Why do you have a problem with this?

I'm wondering if you realize that your stance has completely changed based on one apparent factor.

When you thought that these issues are pointed only at the Leedership then you didn't have as much of a problem with it. However, when it changes to possibly apply to everyone (Leedership and Leemen), then you interpret it differently. I'm not 'beating you up', just making a pretty simple observation for consideration.

No one, including me, likes it when the topic points homeward.

Matt

Reuben, is that you?

Matt, eventually I and my family suffered much when I "put into action" all that WL "hate talk" against the RCC back during the Revelations Training. One brother who initially helped me in the LC, wanted me to go back to the RCC and "publicly resign" and rebuke those people. Fortunately I didn't do that. But ... I did accuse my family of idolatry, and it did little good ... other than to puff me up as some present day "Elijah." Did you read my story about getting a rope tied to my car and pulling down that huge idol a couple doors down from the Cleveland Meeting Hall? Fortunately, I didn't do that either.

I do believe the loving gospel of grace is far more effective.

Matt, it does NOT help to take extreme views here. When you said "challenge the likes of SC and Hope," it seems to me that you are more bent on creating enemies than helping people. This is why I appear in my posts to be concerned.

And just to prevent any confusion, the joke about the 2x4 was in no way intended to hit someone, but rather to "prop them up" when the pressure is on.

Jay · 02-25-2024, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ohio

Somehow we saints had the impression that if the elders "endorsed" a relationship, then God's "blessing" would be upon the marriage. Whether the marriage was "arranged" or not then became difficult to discern. With the belief that His coming was soon, and that marriage was only a means to "transformation," it was compelling indeed to many dedicated young people to have such a "blessing" from the leaders. In those days we could not believe that divorce could ever occur in the LC. We believed that God's grace was sufficient for any problem we might encounter.

I remember, as a young single brother in Cleve-ville, watching from "a distance" a time when TC "fellowshipped" with a group of single saints who were "marriage ready," but had no particular "interest" in any other brother or sister. Apparently all the other saints knew that TC had "one of those talks" with the group of singles, so I somehow found out too. I watched those saints, and right away they were all "paired up" and setting marriage dates. Everyone was happy for them. Life is so good! I somehow thought this was "God's way" for marriage in the church. It was so contrary to "the world," that it must be "of God." And ... it saved the young people from all the dangers of promiscuity. "Everybody's a winner," as they say. Right?

Years later, I learned that at least two of those specific marriages had ended poorly, with strange news indeed reported about them. Things too strange to repeat. Theirs were not the only marriages that were to fail either.

I must admit that the early days had many strange concepts that fueled off the "no dating" command. There were also strong forces compelling young ones to marry "inside" the LC. Think of the O.T. curses on "mixed marriages." Due to all the marriage failures, some saints I know decided it was far better to marry "outsiders," and some of them even married unbelievers. Church increase, right? While I wouldn't recommend this, they had to find someone they really loved and "connected" with, trusting God to work out salvation at a later date. Thus the dangers of control and legalism -- many will do just the opposite.

I gotta chime in on this one because it's such a big and kinda terrible issue in a lot of ways. Where the "elders giving the blessing on marriage" thing came into play I don't know....how or why, but obviously it's rife with problems. I know of at least three marriages that didn't work out (just in general, I don't think they were "arranged"), and I have a sibling who knows of two in particular that never got off the ground because the elders intervened based on their own opinion or "feeling" regarding the compatibility of the couple in question. One of those instances caused the sister to leave the LC forever because she was so heartbroken. Hard for me to think of a more horrible thing than for someone to step in like that and control the outcome of the rest of two young people's lives, based on what? I have no idea. How is this not like super similar to the Catholic church or the like? How would an elder have that much power and control over saint's lives? Yet it happened and was a large part of the LC culture for decades and decades. Just unconscionable

But I do think this fits right in perfectly with this entire thread on the damage of the control and culture that the LC fostered in its fear of the world etc. Divorce is pretty much 50% in the world. I would venture to say it's less in the LC, people have done studies on Christianity divorce and it's very high, similar to the world I think, but the point is it's not uncommon. But how much pressure is put on young people surrounding this issue?

I know growing up in the LC I wanted a wife at a young age. Probably around 21. I didn't realize that I needed to be a "gung ho brother" to get one. I needed to appear as if I was in the running for rank of elder and I needed to have a college degree and I needed to go the full time training as is the culture in the LC. Mostly I think this pressure is put on young people from their parents. Or I should say the parents of the would be bride. It's funny how loving and graceful saints are up until it comes to who their daughter marries. And then it's standards through the roof. The culture of marriage in the LC is very very sketchy to say the least. It kind of "just happens" sometimes too, like they go off to camp and all of a sudden someone's getting married in a few months. Probably because they fell into fornication and got pregnant or felt guilty like they would lose their millennial reward if they didn't consummate the sex with marriage. I've seen that happen. But this is one of those subjects that is really really something that is subtle and low key a big problem, mostly for the parents of the would be bride

Even with all of that culture and pressure you have elders coming in and giving their uninformed opinions on the "blessing" of the couple. Which is just highly weird and aside from the example of Isaac and Rebekah, I don't think it's biblical at all. Even Isaac and Rebekah wasn't quite done how it's done in the LC. But I see no precedent for it. It's just a unique random OT story that doesn't give us any indication that that's how it should be done in today's church. So aside from maybe like an older brother sort of playing matchmaker, which does happen, but is different than an elder giving a blessing, I don't see how it could be rationalized as normal or even God-ordained

btw all my experiences with this subject happened from 2005 and on. The ones my sibling encountered happened in the 90's. I'm not sure if they still give blessings or arrange marriages or not to this day. I really don't know, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. I wouldn't be surprised if members still go to the elders and try to hook up a marriage or ask for a blessing on a marriage. Which is just so silly and wrong. If I was an elder I would absolutely turn someone away and say that is none of my business, nor is it anything I could possibly ever know what's right for the person. Which would be a normal rational response to such a silly scenario. If elders actually did that thinking they are giving God's blessing I can't even fathom how narcissistic that is. I've been to the elders and asked for healing and for them to lay hands on me and they joked around, balked, and just ended up not doing it thinking it was all a joke, laughing as they walked away. Yet the laying on of hands is quite literally right there in the Bible. But I see no such thing in the word when it comes to giving blessing for a marriage. It sounds like a mafia mobster thing or something. Just so so weird. The elders are supposed to be slaves of the saints, not overlords intervening and interposing themselves into saint's personal lives. How that culture got fostered I have no idea but it's bizarre to say the least

08-21-2008, 08:18 AM	#6
bookworm Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 42	[QUOTE=Thankful Jane;2627]While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results. Thanks, Jane, for the word about learning to seek the Lord and hear his speaking. It helped the light go on for me regarding realizing anew that as a single person I had, indeed, “given up” so to speak and asked the Lord to choose a husband for me—and amazingly enough I had this experience in the LC! Now I see why our marriage was not coerced or arranged! The Lord did this for us in His wisdom. There have been times since during our 36+ years of marriage I admit I have asked the Lord if He was sure this was such a good plan —however, there is no doubt in me or my husband that this is His plan. The only item I regret is that we were talked into having a wedding meeting centered on the LC and a testimony of it. The theme was loving the Lord, but it was a wedding meeting even so and my poor family wanted to crawl under the floors. I am sorry I put them through this and wish I had not. Last edited by bookworm; 08-21-2008 at 08:27 AM. Reason: Smiling face placement

08-21-2008, 05:38 AM	#11
Overflow Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 22	Sin I think this is something that really effected me growing up, not the dating specifically, but the fear of letting children sin. Until we sin, its hard for us to grasp the need we have for a Savior. I think LC protected children too much from making mistakes. And used one persons mistakes to try to teach the entire flock the errors of failure rather than the grace of our Savior. My prayer for my young children is that they will make mistakes and lots of them while they're under the umbrella of my husband and I's protection. And that each time we can remind them that their is forgiveness because of the cross. I pray that these little slips while they're young will protect them from the experience of huge sin when they're older....but even then, God's grace is still sufficient! I'm not saying...sin cause there's forgiveness, but the fact is we are NOT PERFECT beings and I think the LC really hoped to make us that! Woudn't need Jesus except as a bud if we were!!

08-21-2008, 09:48 AM	#16
Hope Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Durham, North Carolina Posts: 313	Culture The issue of dating vs courtship and marriage opens the door to many considerations. I have been reading with great interest the various posts and to me it is very clear that different cultures have a great impact on the various points of view and emphasis. While in college one of my majors was sociology. When I received my BA in addition to my declared major I had six minors. How come? Well to me the university was like a candy store that I had full access to. Since I was on scholarship for most of the time I was not limited in what I could take. Even though a good focused student could graduate with 120 hours, I wound up needing 173 to meet the criterion. I had a minor in behavioral psychology. So please bare with me for just a little bit. Our various cultures had a lot to do with our lc experience and our reaction to it. My culture effects me to this day. I try to watch out for it lest it derail me from following the Lord purely but often I realize I am doing many things not because of the Bible Truth or the Lord’s leading but because that is the way my mother raised me. A big problem comes from spiritualizing our culture and then imposing it on others. People came up hard in my culture. The individual was called upon to sacrifice his own personal interest for his family and for the community. When I was a senior in high school, I was the captain of the football team and the middle linebacker on defense and called the defensive plays. During the second game on the first play from scrimmage, I broke my foot. I told the coach I was hurt and needed to come out. He replied we must have you on the field. You are the team leader. You must just get through it. I even punted twice but they let me out of those duties after the second pathetic punt. Of course they did not know at the time my foot was broken. I had a very high pain threshold but that night was the worst agony I have ever experienced. I often looked back and wondered why I put myself through that. The coaches never apologized to me and did not feel they needed to. It happened because the team needed me and the individual must sacrifice for the community. I did a lot of that in the lc not because of the lc but because it was my natural culture. I promoted denial of personal interest for the sake of the community, church. I do not blame others for my cultural slant but with real spiritual maturity you will learn to recognize when your culture is being spiritualized. I see a conflict going on between the culture of "every tub must sit on its on bottom" and "it takes a village." Is child raising the exclusinve responsibility of the parents, or does the extended family need to get involved or how about the village, a la Hillary Clinton? The Texas culture puts rugged individualism and personal responsibility way way up there. Boy do I hear that coming through loud and clear from some of the posters. It is just me and God. On the other hand the Texas culture demands strong leaders who focus the community on the job at hand. The model for all real Texans is William Travis and drawing a line in the sand at the Alamo. All Texas school kids are raised on that tale. You choose death for the sake of the whole. Another problem is that people may exalt superstition and myths and they become part and parcel of the culture. Things like James Barber’s the Lord is coming maybe as soon as 1994, therefore give your all for Christ and the Church. Things like Jacob getting the blessing and we should all desire the blessing and the blessing comes from close association with anything from WL or the co-workers or the elders. Or the flip side of that, this is the way to be immune to problems and failures. Of course, superstition and myths never work out but when they are an intergal part of the culture great disapointment and hurt is sure to to follow. I have read a lot about our relationship to the Lord. That is surely a given. But is it just “me and God?” It is certainly that but watch out rugged individualist. We also should hear the Lord and be in a relationship with Him as we read the Word. Do not just pick up principles and doctrines. When I am with another believer, whoever they may be, I am very excercized to hear what the Lord is saying to me. THE BODY OF CHRIST IS A REALITY. The Lord speaks to us through His members. When I am reading the posts on this forum, I am seeking to know more of the Lord and hear what He is saying to me. I seek to especially listen up when someone is giving me a hard time or disagreeing with me. We just have to shut off some of the natural defensiveness or prejudices that flare up. In Christ Jesus there is hope for us all, Hope, Don Rutledge PS If you have problems with this post because I once was a lc elder,an evil shepherd who was fired by the Lord, I apologize. Please have mercy on me.

08-21-2008, 10:00 AM	#18
Shawn Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 54	Idolatry in the LC Hi Matt, I wanted to comment on your position that all in the LC have unknowingly fallen into idolatry, due to the fixation of that group to the teachings of Witness Lee. First, your critical examination of the fruit of the hearts of the LC’ers falling into idolatry, seems to parallel the BB’s “examination” of contemporary Christian music leading to idolatry that is being enjoyed by the Young People around the GLA. To argue against their criticism is to attempt to prove there are no idols before the listeners; and who can say we are without idols? So, your argument is valid only on the base that anything and everything can lead to idolatry, or, who is without idols cast the first stone. The second charge is the focus on the oneness of the body of Christ. The difference I see is whether this is a practice, or a replacement of the consecration of our hearts to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Yes, it can be a replacement, but only if one applies his teachings in the way of making it a necessary tenet of the faith, versus the way of practice. I know many who practice the oneness without making it a doctrine of faith. I believe from my start in the LC in the late 80’s, that I have attempted to live seeking the oneness of all believers as a practice, carried out by my faithfulness in following my Lord as led by the Holy Spirit. No, my walk has not been “idol free,” but I believe I have been led in the process of being stripped of the idols as I grow in the grace of our Lord and savior, Jesus! Yes, even though I am still in the “idolatry wrecked LC!” A more practical presentation of idolatry would be in the recognizing of the two paths that have developed among the LC believers as shown by our brother Hope, in following the “ministry” as opposed to following the Lord. Shawn

08-21-2008, 11:06 AM	#24
djohnson(XLCmember) Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Hope further to my post #352 I would add the following: 1. Evangelical kids tend to marry young mainly due to raging hormones. In their early 20s they are ill-equipped and lack the maturity to handle marriage esp in the midst of the complexities and demands of modern life. 2. Hypocrisy of some high profile leaders who teach against divorce, get divorced themselves for non biblical reasons and remain in public ministry. 3. Lack of spiritual growth and depth among evangelicals of all ages i.e. the absence of a deep reservoir of wisdom inside of people. 4. Selfishness, self-centeredness and self-glorification which is exacerbated by the performance based atmosphere of "stars" on center stage with an audience watching as a church model. 5. Hyperactivity and number growth emphasis teaches multi-dimensional busyness as a way of life. When carried into marriages it can create an atmosphere of overcommitment and emotional exhaustion. I of course would add the Satanic influence which you mentioned. My intent when it was first mentioned by you was not to blow it off but to suggest it was a given. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

08-20-2008, 10:27 PM	#1
Paul Cox Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 181	Man, this thread moves so fast, I'm having a hard time keeping up. Gotta go to bed, but just wanted to say this: I sorta appreciated the Local Church policy of no dating among the young people, and still do. I got the impression that most of the young ones were saved from falling into lust because of it. However, I do not agree with arranged marriages, where one or more party really has reservations, but buries them to keep favor with "the brothers." Buenos Noche Roger

08-21-2008, 05:31 AM	#4
Thankful Jane Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Georgetown, Texas Posts: 295	While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results. Whoever involves his/her self in making such a momentous decision other than the two parties and God may one day get blamed for the outcome, as they well should. I think this is what I hate most about the LC teachings and practices. People were robbed of opportunities to have real experiences with God by looking to "the brothers" for advice and answers. God was robbed of His opportunities to teach His children about who He was and about His ways. This is part of the harm to the second generation as Terry just (innocently) demonstrated. He was taught both verbally and by example to look to others to get His answers. I commend him for stepping outside of the LC box to find the wife God had for him. Here is a hodge-podge of some reasons God and His children got robbed: leaders' unhealthy teachings; "body life" emphasis, i.e., don't act "independently"; saints desire to please the elders; laziness--it's too hard to learn of Christ for yourself and a bit risky; fear of violating one of those many unspoken rules; fear of following the devil--only the brothers know what was the Lord; fear of rejection; fear of offending God by being being in your soul thinking about things ... fear of being made an example of in a meeting ... fear of ..., fear of .... fear of .... etc.; elders coveting to fulfill their ambitions; elders seeking to keep WL happy and present him with an model church for their own reasons; elder's needing to control things to please Lee and also fulfill their own ambitions ... etc., etc., etc. The LC teaching and all the dependence on "fellowship" from others was flat out unhealthy. Stick hierarchy and absolute submission into the mix and you have a recipe for disaster (one that obviously works). We should have been taught first and foremost to learn to depend on our relationship with Him. I've heard it said, "Well, it's not easy for young ones to hear what the Lord is saying and they can get deceived or make mistakes." If I knew what I know now, I would have said, "Well, if you don't get yourself and you voice out of the picture, they'll never learn the Lord's voice. Do they really need you as an intermediary? God will be there for them even if they make a mistake. Where will you be when they make your mistake?" God is jealous for His relationship with each of us. All the getting "fellowship" practices opened us up to a world of hurt. When I heard that Benson considered a prospective marriage in terms of the usefulness of a brother / sister--whether it would be increased or decreased, I wanted to vomit. He was definitely in the business of "using." How gross. Usurping, robbing God, playing with people's very lives and souls, using them to build his pyramids and treasure cities. Sorry, I know I'm foaming at the mouth. I'm just too close to some of the messes he made out of lives of people who followed his voice. Back to the point: What about Jesus. What about Him being first in all things? Who are elders that they give "advice?" Instead of meddling in the practical lives of people and cheating them out of their inheritance of knowing God for themselves, they should have been laboring in the Bible for themselves to see what it really said. They should have taught what it taught about husbands sacrificing for their wives and winning their wives love and willing submission. They should have taught about fathers spending major time to bring up their kids in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (nurture takes time, time, time) and made sure that they had plenty of time, time, time. (Sending children to babysittiing 6 days a week and children's meetings on Sunday, and leaving all the rest of the care of children to a wife who is exhausted from waiting hand and foot on all the "needs" of the church first, as dictated by the elders and the absentee fathers, just doesn't cut it.) They should have taught people about what how to bring every single detail of their life to Jesus because Jesus was longing to be involved with them, instead of telling them God was only interested in the church. They should have taught people they were free to follow Jesus even if that meant he led them somewhere else other than the LC. I better quit and take a walk. Looking back, I don't see one LC "elder" that was doing the job described in the Bible. Even the very best had two minds and two masters. They vascillated between obeying Lee and his empire and their conscience. I think that's why God fired them all (see Ezek.34 and Jer. 23) and gave the sheep one Shepherd. Now if they can just ever figure out they don't have the job they botched any more. "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow Me." I am one happy little sheep who has returned to the great Shepherd of the sheep. I have been and will continue to pray that He will deliver all His little sheep out of the mouths of evil, double minded, shepherds and that He will bring them all out of all the folds of men into His pasture. Thankful Jane

08-21-2008, 08:30 AM	#14
finallyprettyokay Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 129	Roger said this is a fast moving thread. Boy oh boy. Some of us need to be getting more sleep! So, there are a couple of things I would like to add to, and I think I am not going to take the time to find the quotes -- most of them have several places and people to quote, anyway. About dating: Not dating does go some distance with avoiding falling into lustful sin. Unfortunately, I think the very quick marriages are one of the results of not having any sort of natural contact and situations with each other. So there has to be something in the middle. Girls on one side of the meetings, boys on the other just doesn't give young people a chance to learn about the other gender and about themselves in those situations. What kind of person you like and what kind you don't like, who would be a good lifetime partner and who wouldn't. I was shooting in the dark with this stuff, had no idea how to know a good partner when I saw one. So the idea that several people have put forth about group situations, 6 or 8 people hanging out doing something together is a great idea. Or the very innovative idea I wrote about somewhere, where the parents said yeah, you can 'date' -- in the front yard. But if you are not 'allowed' any contact with the other gender, those fast marriages are one result. My husband and I knew each other across the meeting hall for two years, but really I barely knew his name, we certainly didn't know each other at all. One day, the thought occurred to both of us and it might have been 3 weeks later that we were married, but I think it was two. Strangers married to each other. Next month will be 35 years for us, so I think we are going to make it. Here's something I'll throw into the mix, see what comes of it. Regarding arranged marriages, I know of 2 or maybe 3 marriages that were arranged after the brother had gone to the 'elders' and shared that he was gay, or thought maybe he was. The 'fellowship'? Get married. That will solve the problem. One of the instances I am thinking about, the elders went to the brother and told him they thought he was gay, and that he should get married ASAP. In none of these cases were the sisters in on the discussion or given any information. Interestingly, the marriage where the elders were the ones who thought there was a problem worked out pretty well. At least, they are still married. They seem happy, I assume they are what they seem. (I knew that brother well, and am here to tell you that all the sisters liked him lots. He treated women well. He was kind and very much a gentleman.) But the cases where the brothers had self-identified as gay --- a disaster. And what a devastating thing for both the brother and the poor sister that had no idea she was supposed to be a 'cure'. Anyone else know of similar cases? Tragic. And, as I have written before, alot of the problem was young, inexperienced, untrained 'elders', in way over their head. This thread has traveled over many paths, but I think it is still on topic -- how does the LC influence effect children, families.

08-21-2008, 07:51 PM	#22
finallyprettyokay Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 129	Terry: You know who gets it right with activities for the young people? Mormans. I know I talk about them alot, but just remember I am in the SLC region, and believe me, the LDS church is noticeable here . Most of their buildings have gyms in them, basketball courts and all. They have dances and all sorts of things. They have 'wards' (the designated meetings) that are Singles Wards --- all sorts of single adults in them. And they have College Wards --- obviously, college kids. They figured out how to help young people stay pure (so they can get married in the Temple ) and stay busy at the same time. I know of one college girl who converted just because she figured being in that church increased her chances of getting married . It did. Something to think about --- they get it right in this area. fpo