Our Journey to Elden in Jan 1971

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Nothing could be further from the truth. It was the gospel that was prevailing and the Spirit convicted people during the Love Feasts on Saturday nights where we primarily sang and testified of the gospel of the glory of Christ. Christ was the center and not the ministry.

Thanks Elden1971

Another brother, Don Hose, a.k.a. poster hosepipe, has posted similar reports of those days in Elden Hall.

Another brother Don Rutledge, a.k.a. poster Hope, has also posted that during the first Elders and Workers Gathering in January 1974, Witness Lee brought sweeping changes into the recovery, rapidly bringing the blessing to an end. Hope also testified that Elden Hall grew stale, and thus Lee needed a new start in Anaheim.

You mentioned Brethren history. About 10 years ago, the Lord gave me the interest to study their first split, with the excommunications of Newton and Muller. I became convinced that the motive for Darby's actions were his ambitions to be the sole leader of the movement. Likewise, the horrific splits and lawsuits that were about to occur in the Great Lakes Area were all due to a power struggle between Titus Chu and leading Blendeds.

[Elden1971]

Don Hose and his family lived in the same duplex with us and I just renewed contact with him today thanks to Harold.
With all due respect to Hope Elden did not grow stale but angry and disappointed.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Don Hose and his family lived in the same duplex with us and I just renewed contact with him today thanks to Harold.
With all due respect to Hope Elden did not grow stale but angry and disappointed.

What do you mean angry?

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What do you mean angry?

Righteous indignation at the evil we had seen.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Righteous indignation at the evil we had seen.

So how much credit would you give Lee for the blessing in Elden Hall, and how much of the anger would you ascribe to Lee?

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So how much credit would you give Lee for the blessing in Elden Hall, and how much of the anger would you ascribe to Lee?

I give God all the glory and God alone. Lee was embarrassed and humiliated by the Daystar failure because this was to be the means of financing the migrations and of course helping his sons. Certainly Phillip and Timothy benefited but everyone else lost and then Lee faced serious legal consequences so he felt he had to raise the money to repay those saints that were hurt the most financially. Thus the "training fees" and exclusive book sales commenced and sadly have never stopped.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Thanks Elden1971

Another brother, Don Hose, a.k.a. poster hosepipe, has posted similar reports of those days in Elden Hall.

Another brother Don Rutledge, a.k.a. poster Hope, has also posted that during the first Elders and Workers Gathering in January 1974, Witness Lee brought sweeping changes into the recovery, rapidly bringing the blessing to an end. Hope also testified that Elden Hall grew stale, and thus Lee needed a new start in Anaheim.

You mentioned Brethren history. About 10 years ago, the Lord gave me the interest to study their first split, with the excommunications of Newton and Muller. I became convinced that the motive for Darby's actions were his ambitions to be the sole leader of the movement. Likewise, the horrific splits and lawsuits that were about to occur in the Great Lakes Area were all due to a power struggle between Titus Chu and leading Blendeds.

https://sites.google.com/a/berean-tr...volume-12/love

I find the ministry of J B Stoney to be a real blessing.
I do not agree with your conclusion regarding Darby. If you examined more deeply you would reach the same conclusion. I do understand how you could draw that conclusion as I felt the same way initially but after years of reading hundreds of sources I have great respect and appreciation for Darby's ministry and manner of living. Certainly he was not without flaws but was greatly used in many different countries.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

https://sites.google.com/a/berean-tr...volume-12/love

I find the ministry of J B Stoney to be a real blessing.
I do not agree with your conclusion regarding Darby. If you examined more deeply you would reach the same conclusion. I do understand how you could draw that conclusion as I felt the same way initially but after years of reading hundreds of sources I have great respect and appreciation for Darby's ministry and manner of living. Certainly he was not without flaws but was greatly used in many different countries.

I'm not saying that Darby was not a gifted minister who led a strict life, but how could his actions in Plymouth and Bristol ever be justified?

WL also led a strict and moral life above reproach, as many would testify on his behalf, yet look at how he treated other brothers.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm not saying that Darby was not a gifted minister who led a strict life, but how could his actions in Plymouth and Bristol ever be justified?

WL also led a strict and moral life above reproach, as many would testify on his behalf, yet look at how he treated other brothers.

Plymouth was justified due to heresy, but Bristol was not and it was one of Darby's regrets. Due to the cover up of gross immorality one must question Lee's morality. Also are we not admonished not to associate with fornicators. There is none righteous no not one. We will all stand before the judgment seat.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Plymouth was justified due to heresy, but Bristol was not and it was one of Darby's regrets. Due to the cover up of gross immorality one must question Lee's morality. Also are we not admonished not to associate with fornicators. There is none righteous no not one. We will all stand before the judgment seat.

Concerning the "heresy" of Newton at Plymouth being justified, I have to disagree. Newton's writings, taken as they are, are well within the boundaries of orthodoxy. It was Darby's misreading, adding in excessive doses of his own dramatic hyperbole, which incited unnecessary alarm within the Plymouth saints.

Elden1971, are you aware of the following events?

During Darby's lengthy stay in Plymouth, due to the sheer weight of his own character, slowly many of the leading brothers in that church were turned against Newton in favor of Darby, Wigram and the exclusives. Nearly two decades later, by 1866, some of these learned men of God, primarily William H. Dorman, began to study in-depth the teachings of Darby concerning the humanity of Jesus our Savior under the "federal headship of Adam." Their exhaustive study of Darby's teachings convinced them that his teaching in substance was identical to Newton's in Plymouth back in the 1840's.

With W.H. Dorman, were other renowned Brethren formerly of Plymouth, namely Captain Percy Hall, Joseph Stancomb, and Thomas Newberry (The Englishman's Bible.) Since Darby and his supporters on Park Ave. in London refused to entertain the notion, nor even consider their research, these brothers could no longer bear the hypocrisy, and parted ways with Darby.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Concerning the "heresy" of Newton at Plymouth being justified, I have to disagree. Newton's writings, taken as they are, are well within the boundaries of orthodoxy. It was Darby's misreading, adding in excessive doses of his own dramatic hyperbole, which incited unnecessary alarm within the Plymouth saints.

Elden1971, are you aware of the following events?

During Darby's lengthy stay in Plymouth, due to the sheer weight of his own character, slowly many of the leading brothers in that church were turned against Newton in favor of Darby, Wigram and the exclusives. Nearly two decades later, by 1866, some of these learned men of God, primarily William H. Dorman, began to study in-depth the teachings of Darby concerning the humanity of Jesus our Savior under the "federal headship of Adam." Their exhaustive study of Darby's teachings convinced them that his teaching in substance was identical to Newton's in Plymouth back in the 1840's.

With W.H. Dorman, were other renowned Brethren formerly of Plymouth, namely Captain Percy Hall, Joseph Stancomb, and Thomas Newberry (The Englishman's Bible.) Since Darby and his supporters on Park Ave. in London refused to entertain the notion, nor even consider their research, these brothers could no longer bear the hypocrisy, and parted ways with Darby.

Thanks for mentioning that I will see what Wm. Kelley had to say about it.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Thanks for mentioning that I will see what Wm. Kelley had to say about it.

Instead of reading what an exclusive said, why not read what an open said?

That's like asking Ron Kangas for the official history of Elden Hall.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Concerning the "heresy" of Newton at Plymouth being justified, I have to disagree. Newton's writings, taken as they are, are well within the boundaries of orthodoxy. It was Darby's misreading, adding in excessive doses of his own dramatic hyperbole, which incited unnecessary alarm within the Plymouth saints.

Elden1971, are you aware of the following events?

During Darby's lengthy stay in Plymouth, due to the sheer weight of his own character, slowly many of the leading brothers in that church were turned against Newton in favor of Darby, Wigram and the exclusives. Nearly two decades later, by 1866, some of these learned men of God, primarily William H. Dorman, began to study in-depth the teachings of Darby concerning the humanity of Jesus our Savior under the "federal headship of Adam." Their exhaustive study of Darby's teachings convinced them that his teaching in substance was identical to Newton's in Plymouth back in the 1840's.

With W.H. Dorman, were other renowned Brethren formerly of Plymouth, namely Captain Percy Hall, Joseph Stancomb, and Thomas Newberry (The Englishman's Bible.) Since Darby and his supporters on Park Ave. in London refused to entertain the notion, nor even consider their research, these brothers could no longer bear the hypocrisy, and parted ways with Darby.

About the year 1860 Mr. Stuart's attention was called to the position taken by those Christians commonly called "Plymouth Brethren" (though they have consistently rejected any such title), represented in Reading by a large "gathering," amidst which ministered the late Wm. Henry Dorman, a former Congregational minister, whose connec­tion with the "brethren" dated from about the year 1840. In the years 1845-1848 Mr. Dorman figured as a trusted ally of the late John Nelson Darby in the formation of what has since been denominated the "Exclusive" section of brethren, the continued unhappy effect of which his eldest son, Mr. W. H. Dorman, of Stafford, endeavoured to some extent to remedy. Mr. Stuart became convinced, under the late Mr. Dorman's influence, of the untenable character of his own churchmanship, and without more ado took his place, as the expression was, in the Reading fellowship, which for years was identified especially with his own name.
During the years 1864-1866, Mr. Stuart's fidelity to "J. N. D. ," like that of others, was tested by Mr. Dorman's uncompromising opposition to Mr. Darby' s teaching with reference to a class of sufferings of our Lord, dis­criminated as "non-atoning," as derived from His associa­tion with Israel. This doctrine "W.H.D." put on the same plane as that of B. W. Newton, which brought about the split in 1848. The close acquaintance, however, of C. E. Stuart with the usage of Hebrew words which came into play for any Biblical scholar having to consider such a question, aided him in determining the direction of his own sympathies in the matter. He did not follow the example of his Reading associate, who then seceded from the Darby fellowship.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

About the year 1860 Mr. Stuart's attention was called to the position taken by those Christians commonly called "Plymouth Brethren" (though they have consistently rejected any such title), represented in Reading by a large "gathering," amidst which ministered the late Wm. Henry Dorman, a former Congregational minister, whose connection with the "brethren" dated from about the year 1840. In the years 1845-1848 Mr. Dorman figured as a trusted ally of the late John Nelson Darby in the formation of what has since been denominated the "Exclusive" section of brethren, the continued unhappy effect of which his eldest son, Mr. W. H. Dorman, of Stafford, endeavoured to some extent to remedy. Mr. Stuart became convinced, under the late Mr. Dorman's influence, of the untenable character of his own churchmanship, and without more ado took his place, as the expression was, in the Reading fellowship, which for years was identified especially with his own name.

During the years 1864-1866, Mr. Stuart's fidelity to "J. N. D. ," like that of others, was tested by Mr. Dorman's uncompromising opposition to Mr. Darby' s teaching with reference to a class of sufferings of our Lord, discriminated as "non-atoning," as derived from His association with Israel. This doctrine "W.H.D." put on the same plane as that of B. W. Newton, which brought about the split in 1848. The close acquaintance, however, of C. E. Stuart with the usage of Hebrew words which came into play for any Biblical scholar having to consider such a question, aided him in determining the direction of his own sympathies in the matter. He did not follow the example of his Reading associate, who then seceded from the Darby fellowship.

In this segment, taken from Pickering's collection, shows only that Stuart was loyal to Darby until death. Though he was a dear brother (they all were!) Brethren culture by this time demanded unwavering loyalties to the established leader. Contrary voices of reason could never, and would never, be accepted lest the MOTA mystique which surrounded Darby be shattered.

A word of explanation here. The teachings in question refer to whether or not Jesus as a man, born of a virgin, a true Israelite, come under the law, during his 30+ years on earth passed through "non-atoning" sufferings or not. In other words, did Jesus suffer as a normal man in Israel would have? Was He disciplined as a child, did he ever get hurt on the job, did He ever fall and get a boo-boo, was He ever bullied, etc.? Newton, in a few messages shared that Jesus lived a "normal" life, not unlike His peers. Except for glimpses of brilliance in the Temple at age 12, Jesus never stood out in Nazareth as a boy wonder.

Darby publicly crushed the recently widowed Newton for this teaching, destroying his reputation among the Brethren, ridiculing him to open shame, summarized by his statement, "Newton's Savior needs a Savior."
Newton provided tracts to reject what he never said, but Darby was never interested in just the truth. Darby needed his rival removed from the scene.

Fast forward to the 1860's, many notable scholars among the Brethren (and there were many!) such as Dorman gathered together the teachings of both Darby and Newton on this very topic for comparison. They concluded that Darby took Newton's teachings as his own after he condemned Newton for them! Stuart, as noted above, stood with Darby by citing some obscure Hebrew words to differentiate the teachings of the two.

When I first read this sad 20 year Brethren story spanning the original attacks on Newton until the final departures of many brothers influenced by Dorman et. al. was during the time leading up to the quarantine of Titus Chu. I was literally in the midst of tract wars, and a war of words. The more I studied both sides' views, the more I realized rhetoric without substance, that we were simply repeating Brethren history, and that their split like our own had nothing to do with teachings and practices, rather both ugly scenes from history were simply power struggles. Ambitious men fighting to be first in line.

Once I realized this, it all made so much sense, and I decided it was about time to leave.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hope also testified that Elden Hall grew stale, and thus Lee needed a new start in Anaheim.

I don't remember the details now. I wonder if Don was commenting from his own observation or from the word he and/or other edlers got from Lee in those early elders meetings.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I don't remember the details now. I wonder if Don was commenting from his own observation or from the word he and/or other edlers got from Lee in those early elders meetings.

In his account, Don Rutledge wrote this ...

Life Ebbs at Elden

An interesting thing occurred in Elden hall which now was one of four halls in Los Angeles. Witness Lee and John Ingalls had stayed there. Up until then, many had equated the blessing on Elden with having the ministry of Witness Lee and to a lesser extent the ministry of John Ingalls. By early 1973 I began to hear of the staleness and flatness of the Elden hall church meetings. I visited there and frankly most of the new churches were much more on fire and lively in Christ than Elden was. Elden still had the ministry, but it was clear the blessing was not there. I heard Witness Lee state on many occasions that he needed to leave Elden, and that the Lord needed a new start with his ministry.

Eventually in 1974, Elden Hall was given up. The remaining saints in Elden moved to the city of Rosemead, and Witness Lee, John Ingalls, Max Rapaport and a few hundred others moved to Anaheim.

Anaheim never prospered and was a continual hole into which people and money were poured with no increase and no blessing. The Daystar experience was a great frustration to the move of the Spirit. In 1975, we were having a conference in Dallas. Before the meetings, we would pray in the large home on our property and then would walk across the parking lot to the large new hall we had just built. One evening I was walking with Brother Lee. He stopped, turned to me and then put his arm around my shoulder. (Never before and never since have I seen him embrace a brother. Thus, I realized he was about to tell me something very serious. He told me that he had made a terrible mistake with Daystar. He said that if he saw Brother Nee he would not know what to say since Brother Nee had warned him not to mix the church with financial matters or business. He then told me that he had once told Watchman Nee that he was not following him (Watchman Nee), but rather was following the truth and vision that Brother Nee taught. Furthermore, that he (Witness Lee) would not follow Watchman Nee if Brother Nee left the vision, but he (Brother Lee) would continue to follow the vision. He then looked me straight in the eye and charged me, “Brother Don, if I leave the vision do not follow me, but follow the vision.” I was a little speechless but I did manage to return the embrace and assure Brother Lee that I would remain true to the vision and the truth.

Daystar

Starting around 1972, Witness Lee expressed a concern for the financial suffering of the migrating saints and their need to be able to purchase proper meeting places. I was in a meeting of visiting elders and co-workers in which he introduced the Daystar business. He shared that his son Timothy had approached him about a business and that the business seemed to Witness Lee to be ideal for us (the local churches). The brothers and sisters could invest money, earn a nice profit of around 35%, and generate significant profit for the support of the new churches. He then spoke of manufacturing only the finest product. We could produce the product in Taiwan, which would help the believers there with employment and sell the product in the USA. He spoke at length concerning how the members of the churches should only invest their surplus and that he felt very positive that this was of the Lord. The business consisted of manufacturing and selling an expensive motor home. This was certainly a very different meeting than anything I had ever attended. I and others left with our heads spinning. I was bothered and asked James Barber what was going on. He replied that Witness Lee was God’s anointed and I should be very careful about criticizing. He declared that even if Witness Lee was wrong, God would bless the endeavor.

Shortly after this meeting, Witness Lee was scheduled to come to Houston for a conference in late 1972. I planned to attend. By that time I had left teaching for a sales job. The night before the conference I had a dream. I was sitting in the living room of Ben McPherson in Houston with Witness Lee. The other brothers in the room were very clear to me, as was where they were sitting. Suddenly, Witness Lee turned to me and said he wanted me to work for him in Daystar. In the dream, the Lord made it very clear I was not to take the offer. The next night there we all were, sitting in exactly the right seats. Witness Lee turned to me and offered me a job. Thank the Lord for the warning. I never worked for Daystar and never invested a dime.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In his account, Don Rutledge wrote this ...

Eventually in 1974, Elden Hall was given up. The remaining saints in Elden moved to the city of Rosemead, and Witness Lee, John Ingalls, Max Rapaport and a few hundred others moved to Anaheim.

Interestingly the blessing went to Rosemead with Samuel Chang and Don Hardy and 31 others (only 1 young person). One year later they had increased to over 100 and Anaheim had no increase(except for our son that was born!) We were as previously posted the first to move to Anaheim and Bro. Lee moved down the street from us until his home was built. We later moved close to the meeting hall and Al Knoch and Max and many others.

[Elden1971]

Originally Posted by Ohio

In his account, Don Rutledge wrote this ...

Anaheim never prospered and was a continual hole into which people and money were poured with no increase and no blessing. The Daystar experience was a great frustration to the move of the Spirit.

The difference between Anaheim and Elden prior to Daystar was like night and day. Also our experience in Hall 4 (east LA ) and Hall 6(North Hollywood) was quite positive. It did always bother me that 3 of the six halls were in other cities. Why did we not meet as the Church in Van Nuys and the Church in North Hollywood instead of being Halls of the Church in LA? What happened to the ground of locality?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

Anaheim never prospered and was a continual hole into which people and money were poured with no increase and no blessing. The Daystar experience was a great frustration to the move of the Spirit.

The difference between Anaheim and Elden prior to Daystar was like night and day. Also our experience in Hall 4 (east LA ) and Hall 6(North Hollywood) was quite positive. It did always bother me that 3 of the six halls were in other cities. Why did we not meet as the Church in Van Nuys and the Church in North Hollywood instead of being Halls of the Church in LA? What happened to the ground of locality?

The ground of locality has proven to be a farce.

My city now has 2 LC's standing on the ground of oneness. Some cities have 4 or 5.

The corollary to one city/ one church (OCOC) was the appointment of elders by the approved "apostle."

Officially, we were against all hierarchy and the system of "bishops." But that is exactly what we had become.

[Elden1971]

http://www.stempublishing.com/author...cts/prize.html

Nee and Lee followed Govett...too bad they didn't follow Kelly

[ABrotherinFaith]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

http://www.stempublishing.com/author...cts/prize.html

Nee and Lee followed Govett...too bad they didn't follow Kelly

Thanks for this link. We had a heated discussion about just this topic in our home meeting about 2 months ago.

[Ohio]

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