My Testimony: Olvin

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Olvin

Brother Igzy, One thing I do know is: if it is your desire to have fellowship with a brother you probably should not start off by telling them they don't know what they are talking about, that they don't know the purpose God or the mystery of human life.

I'm saying if you still revere Lee's vision of things, then you have more to learn than you know. I hope you learn it, because the reality is better than what he taught. Much better.

I have not suggested that you don't know these things, my simple challenge was that apart from what you have learned from the ministry - do you know them.

Yes, I do. And I had to unlearn much of what Lee taught about it to actually get it right. I never truly understood what God's purpose is when I only had Lee's teachings.

Now maybe you were confused with the term "the ministry" if you think it means LSM then you don't get it. If you understand that it refers to all those faithful men and women who throughout history have contended for the faith, and have pointed us to the person and work of Christ, then you would be quit presumptuous to exclude WL.

The term "the ministry" is confusing and should be dropped. Lee abused it. It has a superiority connotation, especially when used in discussions involving him. But, regardless, the Bible doesn't talk in terms of "the ministry." The Bible says there are "many minstries." So talking about "the ministry" is really a form of exclusivism.

I believe that "it IS God's eternal purpose to have a group of people created in is image and likeness to be filled with Him as life to express Him and represent Him."

The problem isn't the words. The problem is how you understand them. The words are a shell. It's what you see when you hear them that matters. I don't have a problem with the words; I have a problem with what they mean to the LC.

Let me put it this way: The LC likes to talk about "expressing God." But that's nothing unique to them. All Christians know we need to express God. They might term it differently, but they mean the same thing. The problem with LCers is they congratulate themselves for saying it "right", but have not gotten around to actually doing it. In the meantime, a lot of other Christians whom LCers dismiss as not knowing God's purpose are actually expressing God. I think that's pretty ironic.

One final question: what is this mark that I have missed by a large margin?

The mark of the first and second commandments, which Lee replaced with his economy. The mark of genuine humility, sacrifice, and service, which are all too rare in those who follow Lee. You are not really expressing God if you don't have those things.

Olvin, forgive me for "jumping" on you. But I was being honest. I think you are more ignorant than you know. I think you need to get out and realize that the essence of God's purpose, not in Lee's terms, but the genuine essence of it, is being realized in a lot of places. And that is much more important that getting the terminology right.

If you think God's purpose is best summed-up in Lee's phraseology, then I'm afraid all you really have is a phrase. You haven't really experienced the reality as much as you might think. Sorry, I've seen it in myself and in too many others. Cold water? Yes, I guess. Loving water? That too.

[OBW]

Olvin,

It might be that Igzy's response to you here within your testimony was a poor choice of venue, but that does not make it incorrect.

And (this will sound funny to many coming from me) it may have been too blunt to achieve what he intended, but that does not make it incorrect.

Maybe the thing to do is to depersonalize the comments and read them again in terms of the things that you have been taught to believe for many years. To let his comments point to the ways that "the ministry" has hidden error behind a smokescreen of rhetoric that is actually not Christian and is in direct contradiction to the Bible that you have been taught you are following.

I have had a recent discussion with someone else concerning what I perceive as a system of error within the teachings of both Nee and Lee. It is a complex combination of real truth, highly charged terminology, special meanings for certain words (a private lexicon — that makes conversation with other Christians quite difficult), bandwagon thinking, an elevated status for "the ministry" so that we would not question or challenge things that should have set off significant red flags. All with the goal of placing Nee, then Lee, at the pinnacle of the local churches so that we would make such declarations that "even if he's wrong, he's right."

You may think you don't believe that. And you are probably being honest about it. But as you begin to peel away the errors, at some point, you will being to feel (as I have often felt) that you have been sold a bill of goods and didn't even realize it. No matter whether you think you are dumping everything Lee all at once or over time, you will find years later that some particular thing is still hanging on, and when you recognize it for what it is, your first thought will be "how could I have ever believed that." The answer is that we bought it one little bit hidden in an apparently healthy meal after another such meal. Eventually, we thought the Spam was Del Frisco steak and the jelly caviar. The garlic room that supposedly had Christianity befuddled was really right there in the meeting hall in "fill in the city name."

Let the bluntness of Igzy's words go on by you. Somehow we managed to switch roles this one time. I'm sure that neither of us will let it happen again.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by OBW

Let the bluntness of Igzy's words go on by you. Somehow we managed to switch roles this one time. I'm sure that neither of us will let it happen again.

Touché

[Friedel]

Originally Posted by Igzy

The term "the ministry" is confusing and should be dropped. Lee abused it. It has a superiority connotation, especially when used in discussions involving him. But, regardless, the Bible doesn't talk in terms of "the ministry." The Bible says there are "many minstries." So talking about "the ministry" is really a form of exclusivism.

Not so.

These statements have no basis in the Bible. "Ministry" is used often in the New Testament and Paul even said to the Romans, "I magnify my ministry" (Romans 11:3). To Timothy he wrote: "Fulfill your ministry" (2 Timothy 4:5).

Just because Witness Lee abused this word and made it exclusive, as if it belonged to him alone, does not invalidate it so that it should be scrapped.

"Ministry" carries within itself the sense of "serving" and that should be our goal.

We should never allow our disdain of Witness Lee's contemptible acts of lying, misrepresentation, etc. to want to delete words from the Bible. That is not for us to decide. If God put them there, who am I to touch them?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Friedel

Not so.

These statements have no basis in the Bible. "Ministry" is used often in the New Testament and Paul even said to the Romans, "I magnify my ministry" (Romans 11:3). To Timothy he wrote: "Fulfill your ministry" (2 Timothy 4:5).

Just because Witness Lee abused this word and made it exclusive, as if it belonged to him alone, does not invalidate it so that it should be scrapped.

"Ministry" carries within itself the sense of "serving" and that should be our goal.

We should never allow our disdain of Witness Lee's contemptible acts of lying, misrepresentation, etc. to want to delete words from the Bible. That is not for us to decide. If God put them there, who am I to touch them?

I think you missed the point. It is not that the word "ministry" is missing from the Bible. It is that there virtually no comment on ministry outside of the peculiar ministry than any particular person has.

It surely is important that the ministry that anyone claims to have is soundly within the charge for those who are called to minister. But nothing other than being within that rather large scope is distinctly defined as "the ministry" in the way that Lee talked of it. And the way he talked of it was to assert that his ministry was "the ministry" and that all others qualified as "so-called ministries" and were off the mark of "God's economy."

(I know that putting God's economy in quotes may be controversial, but it is not because God does not have an economy, but because what Lee called God's economy does not resemble anything that I can find as the logical content of such an economy.)

"The ministry" is to go forth to disciple, baptize, and teach (to obey). That is the way that Jesus put it. Paul repackaged it into functions of apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, and teachers (quite reasonable coming from the person who inroduced the idea of gifts given to the body as needed). But the content really did not change. Paul spent a lot of time teaching them to obey. He sent several letters to point out where they were not obedient. And before that, he had come through as an apostle and evangelist, being specifically sent by God to bring the good news to the people.

You are right that ministry brings the meaning of serving. And it should be the goal of everyone who has a ministry. And at some level, we all have a ministry. Not like Paul. Or like any number of modern "ministers" of our day. We mostly have "one talent" ministries. And that's all we have been asked to do.

And that one talent ministry does not need to be entirely on board with any particular man's ministry, whether Lee's or anyone else's. Just consistent with the message of Christ.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Friedel

Not so.

These statements have no basis in the Bible. "Ministry" is used often in the New Testament and Paul even said to the Romans, "I magnify my ministry" (Romans 11:3). To Timothy he wrote: "Fulfill your ministry" (2 Timothy 4:5).

Just because Witness Lee abused this word and made it exclusive, as if it belonged to him alone, does not invalidate it so that it should be scrapped.

"Ministry" carries within itself the sense of "serving" and that should be our goal.

We should never allow our disdain of Witness Lee's contemptible acts of lying, misrepresentation, etc. to want to delete words from the Bible. That is not for us to decide. If God put them there, who am I to touch them?

Friedel, As OBW said, you missed the point. It's not the word "ministry" I object to. It's the phrase "THE ministry," implying the one-and-only ministry" which can somehow be possessed by a subset of special ministers. This idea is not biblical.

Referring to the ministry you follow as "the ministry" is simply a glorified way of saying "I have the correct doctrines and you don't." It's just a more clever way of doing it.

[Ohio]

Couple comments here for the benefit of the "new guy" ...

The Great Lakes Area Local Churches are a kind of "Witness Lee Lite." In many regards, much to Titus Chu's credit, GLA LC's never saw the insidious extremes which prevailed in other parts of the country. It's kind of like a multi-car pileup on the freeway, with the first few drivers getting whiplash and face burns from airbags and the last few drivers just jamming the brakes and saying, "boy was I lucky."

The GLA LC's thus received a "sanitized" version of LSM from a distance, while other places witnessed and lived thru the extremes first hand. Thus the perceptions of LSM differ. For example, those ex-members on the forum will readily call the Recovery a "cult," while those within the GLA are reluctant to do so. There are (or were) many gifted shepherds in the GLA LC's who struggled to keep their churches in the reality of Christ, rather than to become along with their saints merely mindless ministry sycophants.

Many forum participants take a no-nonsense approach to numerous topics about Witness Lee which is a little unsettling to new posters. Personally I have many friends and family who were (or still are) in the Recovery. Many don't want to hear what really happened in Anaheim. Even those who have left don't want to hear derogatory comments about any of Lee's teachings.

I have always felt that teachings are secondary to the lives of the saints. Serious concerns relate to how people were treated. The kingdom of God is firstly righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. LC leaders felt they were above the law, and covered their unrighteousness. Consequently many were hurt. All the best teachings in the world cannot replace righteousness, honesty, and integrity in our leaders.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Couple comments here for the benefit of the "new guy"

Glad somebody seeks a benefit for bro Olvin. Some must know who he is, and so have reason unknown to the rest of us, for pouncing on him ... like they think he's been sent ... and didn't just come on his own to LCD.

All I can see is that he's come on his own. So I put myself in his shoes, and think back to how it was when I was at his stage of coming out of the local church.

If I'm seeing correctly we should be gentle toward our new brother.

If incorrectly, I got some pretty big rugs I could pull out from under him.

Until otherwise, I like our new brother. Even if he's in the LC, and likes Witness Lee.

And ... methinks this concern about "ministry" is a red herring. When the real problem, the thing that make's Lee's movement a cult is: The practice of Deputy And Delegated Authority.

[Olvin]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I'm saying if you still revere Lee's vision of things, then you have more to learn than you know. I hope you learn it, because the reality is better than what he taught. Much better

If by revere you mean to hold as holy or sacrosanct, no. I your mean to honor and respect yes. Let me be clear, and the brothers that know me from Cleveland, Lorain, and Elyria can attest to this; I never preached the ground and objected vehemently when this became the word of intro to new ones. I did not agree with the one publication, nor the mandate to read the WL's messages in our meetings. It was always clear to me that God was moving among His people everywhere. I could only be were I was at that time, and I am thankful that He took me that way. Remember His sheep go in and out and find pasture. You need to learn how to eat fish without chocking on the bones!

Yes, I do. And I had to unlearn much of what Lee taught about it to actually get it right. I never truly understood what God's purpose is when I only had Lee's teachings.

You had to unlearning his teaching on full salvation: regeneration, sanctification, transformation, confirmation, glorification. Now you have them right? Please enlighten me - please.

The term "the ministry" is confusing and should be dropped. Lee abused it. It has a superiority connotation, especially when used in discussions involving him. But, regardless, the Bible doesn't talk in terms of "the ministry." The Bible says there are "many minstries." So talking about "the ministry" is really a form of exclusivism.

As I stated before, just because you are confused about the terms does not mean all are. The bible uses the term "this ministry" "the ministry" referring to a unique ministry, excluding all those void of life. Read your bible more brother. 2Cor. 3:9, 4:1, 5:18, Acts 1:17 an more.

The problem isn't the words. The problem is how you understand them. The words are a shell. It's what you see when you hear them that matters. I don't have a problem with the words; I have a problem with what they mean to the LC.

Yes brother, but how we understand is in control of the Holy Spirit wouldn't you agree. 1Cor.2:13 says Paul taught combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. The natural man cannot receive the things of the spirit they are foolish to him even offensive. Recall John 6:63. Does eating and drinking the Lord, one of WL's favorite topics yet offend you?

Let me put it this way: The LC likes to talk about "expressing God." But that's nothing unique to them. All Christians know we need to express God. They might term it differently, but they mean the same thing. The problem with LCers is they congratulate themselves for saying it "right", but have not gotten around to actually doing it. In the meantime, a lot of other Christians whom LCers dismiss as not knowing God's purpose are actually expressing God. I think that's pretty ironic.

When I was a child we had an ice box in which we keep pop, which we drank sitting on a couch watching TV. 'You' may have had a refrigerator in which you keep soda or soft drinks, while sitting on a sofa watching the television set. I would never consider that you thought you we right and I wrong in using different terms. We both would have a cold drink, a soft seat, and a diversion. Maybe congratulations are in order for using the most syllables. I am not as confident as you that All christians know they need to express God, but what I am confident of is: that almost all christians care less about what LCers think about them than you do.

The mark of the first and second commandments, which Lee replaced with his economy. The mark of genuine humility, sacrifice, and service, which are all too rare in those who follow Lee. You are not really expressing God if you don't have those things.

Do you refer to loving God and neighbor being replaced by being filled with God and ministering God's life to others. Six in one hand half-a-dozen in the other, if you can count.

Olvin, forgive me for "jumping" on you. But I was being honest. I think you are more ignorant than you know. I think you need to get out and realize that the essence of God's purpose, not in Lee's terms, but the genuine essence of it, is being realized in a lot of places. And that is much more important that getting the terminology right.

Igzy, you ask for forgiveness while in the same breath calling me MORE ignorant than I (even) know. Brother you need to stay IN and realize your speech needs to be seasoned that you may minister grace. Brother it appears that you have been confused, befuddled, and dumbfounded, in respect to all the nonsense that went on in the LCs, this does not mean that everyone else was.

If you think God's purpose is best summed-up in Lee's phraseology, then I'm afraid all you really have is a phrase. You haven't really experienced the reality as much as you might think. Sorry, I've seen it in myself and in too many others. Cold water? Yes, I guess. Loving water? That too.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Olvin

Igzy, you ask for forgiveness while in the same breath calling me MORE ignorant than I (even) know.

Sorry, but it is not a necessarily a sin to call someone ignorant. And I don't accept your definition of graciousness. There are plenty of examples of strong language in the Bible in service of the truth. Methinks you doth protest too much.

You are the one who came on here and made the basic claim that we all know the meaning of life because of Witness Lee. I mean, come on bro. You really mean you don't realize what a whopper that is? Puh-leeze.

[Cal]

Here's what you said, Olvin.

"Still I challenge all who post here to do this: take your biblical understanding; subtract all the revelation you have received from "the ministry" and consider what you are left with. Can you minister life with that? Do you still see God's purpose, do you yet know the mystery of the human life? I doubt."

Now, I guarantee everyone here thought that by "the ministry" you meant Lee's ministry. And if you didn't, well, it's just unreasonable to expect anyone here to have realized that. The whole point of your post seems to be to defend what you got from Lee, to say that without it you would have next to nothing.

Was that not what you were doing? By "the ministry" did you mean general Biblical truth? If so, how did you expect us to know that, given the forum you are posting on, and the history of the phrase "the ministry" among such a culture? And especially since you put the phrase in quotes. It doesn't add up.

My point was that you don't need Lee to get "the ministry" if that's what you insist on calling truth. If your point was that we wouldn't have the truth unless we had the truth, that's seems a moot point to make.

So it still seems you were saying that we'd be nowhere without Lee. Which is hogwash.

[Olvin]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Here's what you said, Olvin.

"Still I challenge all who post here to do this: take your biblical understanding; subtract all the revelation you have received from "the ministry" and consider what you are left with. Can you minister life with that? Do you still see God's purpose, do you yet know the mystery of the human life? I doubt."[/QUOTE]





Now, I guarantee everyone here thought that by "the ministry" you meant Lee's ministry. And if you didn't, well, it's just unreasonable to expect anyone here to have realized that. The whole point of your post seems to be to defend what you got from Lee, to say that without it you would have next to nothing.





OLVIN: Brother I did mean "the ministry" which includes the ministry of WL, and it is his portion that I am referring to (I assumed thats why YOU put it in quotes); that which came through him, a continuation of all those that preceded him. Are you getting this. You spend more time defending yourself than listening. Let me make myself clear when (I) say - ministry I am referring to the contents of the faith. I am not speaking about practices beyond that.
Igzy, why don't you answer some of the straight forward questions I asked of you, then maybe I will understand you more. Otherwise with you its endless quarreling to no profit, which I have no more time for.







So it still seems you were saying that we'd be nowhere without Lee. Which is hogwash.[/QUOTE]

[Cal]

Brother I did mean "the ministry" which includes the ministry of WL, and it is his portion that I am referring to (I assumed thats why YOU put it in quotes); that which came through him, a continuation of all those that preceded him. Are you getting this. You spend more time defending yourself than listening. Let me make myself clear when (I) say - ministry I am referring to the contents of the faith. I am not speaking about practices beyond that..

Alright then, simply a misunderstanding. Most LCers when they speak of "the ministry" are speaking of Lee's ministry. Very few people I know of use the term in the way you do. So it's confusing.

But if "the ministry" is general then your initial point was moot. If ministry simply means the ongoing revelation of God through all his ministers, then I don't understand why you asked what have we have received beyond that, because by simple definition there is nothing else.

But it's not like you can ascribe that ministry to anyone special. It comes from God. Neither do I think we can categorize ministers that easily and say "these are part of the ministry and these aren't." Sometime Lee was part of it, and sometimes he wasn't. Sometimes I am and sometimes I'm not. Same with you, I'll wager.

So I hope you can see why I thought you were talking about Lee only, Lee ever, Lee all in all. Aside from that I still don't understand what your initial point was. I think everyone here thought you were lifting up Lee.

Why don't I answer those questions you asked? Because there are too many of them. Ask me one question and I'll answer it. Although try not to make them of the "are you still beating your wife" category.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Alright then, simply a misunderstanding... Very few people I know of use the term in the way you do. So it's confusing.

If we today are so easily confused about the usage, and meaning, of a word like "ministry", then how much more so if we see something like "Peter's angel" in Acts 12, or "The Spirit not yet [given]" in John 7, or the imagery to the seven churches in Asia in Revs 2 & 3, or the Great Angel of the OT. To declare a word or phrase's meaning because it fits our preconceived notions, when we have almost no idea of the shared understandings, several thousand years ago, between the writer and readers, seems presumptuous.

Beware of teachers who confidently proclaim that they have the definitive understanding, and "this means that", simply because it fits their scheme which they peddle for fun and profit. It's a confidence game and they're selling themselves and their assurance, above any objective, realized "truth", including Jesus Christ Himself. If they can convince their hearer that they are sure, this reassures and calms (read: stupefies) the mark, who then takes shelter under their ministration, even if it has little bearing on the text at hand. Thus we hear, "Our brother" told us this, or that, so relax and assume that we now have reality firmly in our sights. Beware: it's a perilous journey, and these are the hidden reefs we were warned against.

[Olvin]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Alright then, simply a misunderstanding. Most LCers when they speak of "the ministry" are speaking of Lee's ministry. Very few people I know of use the term in the way you do. So it's confusing.

Olvin: I love this saying, and believe it applies at least to you Igzy; "It is hard to get someone to understand the truth when their livelihood depends on them not understanding it" since this seems your life mission to date, to lambast the ministry of WL.
You are confused because you don't study to show yourself approved. You presume to talk about spiritual things yet you don't refer to scripture. You criticize WL for using terms like nature and metabolic saying; "there are better
definitions than he gave". Like? The scripture says; we have been made partakers of the divine NATURE in Peter. Romans 5 reminds us that we were made i.e. constituted sinners (use your Strong,s concordance if you own one) , thats WAS our nature. FYI thats what it means to be born again, we get a new life. Every life has it's own nature, God's is holy, ours was sinful - remember.
You will need your Strong's for this one too; 1Cor.15 and Romans 8 uses the word transformation i.e. metamorphoo - get it. But of course you have a better definition. You say "it's more about God changing your charACTOR".
I know you will hate this because it was taught to me by TC. He said you can tame a horse, even make him to dance, but you can't make a horse a dancer.
Get someone to explain that one to you.



But if "the ministry" is general then your initial point was moot. If ministry simply means the ongoing revelation of God through all his ministers, then I don't understand why you asked what have we have received beyond that, because by simple definition there is nothing else.


Olvin: Brother am glad the early church fathers did not have your "simple definition"; remember the line in Luther's hymn " the Lord has much more light and truth to break forth from His Word"




But it's not like you can ascribe that ministry to anyone special. It comes from God. Neither do I think we can categorize ministers that easily and say "these are part of the ministry and these aren't." Sometime Lee was part of it, and sometimes he wasn't. Sometimes I am and sometimes I'm not. Same with you, I'll wager.



Olvin: Have you ever heard the name Polycarp, or Justin Martyr, or Irenaus, or Origen, Tertullian, Augustine, these and many more all of which were 1000 years before the reformers. I don't need to give a short list of them; do I?
You have to read a little church history to know these things. Pilgrim's Church, and Miller's Church History is someplace you should start if your are really concerned about understanding the ministry. We CAN ascribe that ministry to everyone special, WL included. These were all faithful men not perfect men.
Do you understand the difference?





I think everyone here thought you were lifting up Lee.




Olvin: I was lifting up Lee, along with all those other faithful men to whom the word was committed, who were able to teach others also. Are you clear now?
And just like those mentioned and unmentioned, most, most at some point became a factor of division, and scandal, even the cause of death for many precious saints.



Why don't I answer those questions you asked? Because there are too many of them. Ask me one question and I'll answer it. Although try not to make them of the "are you still beating your wife" category.

Olvin: Igzy, make it easy on yourself pick any two of the "many" I posed that had to do with scripture.




k