God-men or Con-men in the Lord's Recovery

[Freedom]

Philip Lin says of Lee “he was not perfect, no one is perfect.” I consider statements like these to be a ploy. Because Lee was presumed to be a pristine leader, the commonly held view within the LC is somewhere along those lines, or at least there has been a refusal to admit that he had any imperfections ("even when he's wrong, he's right").

Because so much information regarding the true Lee has been made available on the internet, leaders would look foolish if they were to completely deny that Lee had faults. They have to put a spin on things from a different angle. So what does Lin do? He make a quick admission to that fact without delving into the details. His statement is as generic as they come and in essence he has said nothing at all.

I have read Lin's book and I can say from reading it, he knew very well that his intended audience might include people such as those on this forum. He mentions questionable periods in LC history that many members would know nothing about, yet he doesn't fully address these things. He mentions it as if these things have long since come and gone and were resolved long ago. It's a ploy to get people to let their guard down who might otherwise be suspicious of things.

The problem with running a con for so long is that after more and more have been scammed, there will be more and more vocal detractors. If leaders truly believe that they are not con-men, then now is the time for them to come forward and address long overdue concerns. Sweeping things under the rug will only make matters worse.

[Ohio]

Philip Lin says of Lee “he was not perfect, no one is perfect.” I consider statements like these to be a ploy. Because Lee was presumed to be a pristine leader, the commonly held view within the LC is somewhere along those lines, or at least there has been a refusal to admit that he had any imperfections ("even when he's wrong, he's right").

Because so much information regarding the true Lee has been made available on the internet, leaders would look foolish if they were to completely deny that Lee had faults. They have to put a spin on things from a different angle. So what does Lin do? He make a quick admission to that fact without delving into the details. His statement is as generic as they come and in essence he has said nothing at all.

It was not until I read Ingalls' account in STTIL in 2005 that my blinders began to be removed. Before then, I totally viewed Nee and Lee as the "purest" life forms known to man, having spent their entire lives being wrongly accused and persecuted by all those around them. In my mind, they were like Joseph, David chased by Saul, and Jesus Himself, hated without a cause, and suffering every atrocity for God, for the truth, for the gospel, and for righteousness.

Even though the internet had been around for some time, it was not until the pending GLA quarantines that I and others began searching for answers. The Berean and LCD forums then became a clearinghouse for the actual factual history of the LCM and LSM. Former members, many of whom I had known and respected, began to write their stories, and the Nee/Lee facade of godly "purity" vaporized like the morning fog.

Saying things like "everyone makes mistakes" and "no one is perfect" merely creates a ruse to keep members from looking further. It is strictly deception to categorize Lee and Sons' checkered history as "mistakes" or such. This explains why active and positive members, such as myself, would get instantly "poisoned" upon learning the truth of past "storms." Not only was our sordid past covered over and "sanitized" with the halo of persecution, but the record was whitewashed with alternative and supposedly "believable" versions of history, e.g. "global conspiracies concocted overnight by ambitious men to destroy God's testimony."

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Saying things like "everyone makes mistakes" and "no one is perfect" merely creates a ruse to keep members from looking further. It is strictly deception to categorize Lee and Sons' checkered history as "mistakes" or such. This explains why active and positive members, such as myself, would get instantly "poisoned" upon learning the truth of past "storms." Not only was our sordid past covered over and "sanitized" with the halo of persecution, but the record was whitewashed with alternative and supposedly "believable" versions of history, e.g. "global conspiracies concocted overnight by ambitious men to destroy God's testimony."

Over the years, there were several times where I made a passing reference to a concern that I had. The typical response was along the lines of "well, the brothers aren't perfect you know." It's as if that was the one size fits all excuse for questionable behavior or practices.

At a very basic level, it's insulting that merely expressing a concern would be immediately equated with us expecting leaders to be perfect. LC leaders like to characterize us as purposely trying to nitpick at WL or as trying to expose his faults. That's a complete mis-characterization of the issue. It's understandable why they do avoid talking about imperfections. Is not that imperfections would normally be a big deal, but because of the amount of things that have been swept under the rug, addressing even simple concerns could quickly lead to discussion of problems that are fundamental to the LC.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Over the years, there were several times where I made a passing reference to a concern that I had. The typical response was along the lines of "well, the brothers aren't perfect you know." It's as if that was the one size fits all excuse for questionable behavior or practices.

The brothers aren't perfect is a default answer for any questioning of personal behavior, ethical behavior, or party to any decision making that could warrant civil or criminal litigation. (That includes obstruction of justice.) The bottom line is ANY AND ALL scrutiny is equal to nitpicking.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

The brothers aren't perfect is a default answer for any questioning of personal behavior, ethical behavior, or party to any decision making that could warrant civil or criminal litigation. (That includes obstruction of justice.) The bottom line is ANY AND ALL scrutiny is equal to nitpicking.

Then why does Lee et. al. get a free pass to recklessly and indiscriminately condemn the rest of the body of Christ as hopeless and helpless, "poor, poor ... " Don't they know that "nobody is perfect," and "we all make mistakes."

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then why does Lee et. al. get a free pass to recklessly and indiscriminately condemn the rest of the body of Christ as hopeless and helpless, "poor, poor ... " Don't they know that "nobody is perfect," and "we all make mistakes."

It is inconsistencies like these that prompted me to start that double standards thread awhile back. I suppose those in the LC are reluctantly willing to acknowlege their own imperfections, but I think that because they feel themselves to be the pinnacle of the past 2000 years, that the imperfections don't matter.

LC members are obsessed with criticizing others, because a supposed ill state of all other Christians is what is taken to define the notion of 'recovery'. Because they believe themselves to be so much better, it's easy for them to dismiss the "bones and feathers" as being mere "growing pains." After all, thats what Lee did.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then why does Lee et. al. get a free pass to recklessly and indiscriminately condemn the rest of the body of Christ as hopeless and helpless, "poor, poor ... " Don't they know that "nobody is perfect," and "we all make mistakes."

The hypocrisy is strong. Watching Lee continually beg our indulgence in what he referred to as the "messy kitchen" of LC life, while obsessively nit-picking all ills, both real and imagined, of "Christianity", reminds one of the man Jesus told us about in Matthew 18:21-35. The man demanded forgiveness, but refused to give it.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by aron

The hypocrisy is strong. Watching Lee continually beg our indulgence in what he referred to as the "messy kitchen" of LC life, while obsessively nit-picking all ills, both real and imagined, of "Christianity", reminds one of the man Jesus told us about in Matthew 18:21-35. The man demanded forgiveness, but refused to give it.

Andrew Yu covering of Witness Lee
“There has never been a case, either in the Scriptures or in church history, where a servant of God has been found to be perfect. A perfect person does not exist. None of us can claim to be perfect.” (p. 5 An Affirmation of the Proper Authority in the Body of Christ)

Witness Lee covering of Philip Lee
John Ingalls reports, “after the board meeting was adjourned, Sister Lee and Philip Lee left the room, and Brother Lee continued to talk at length with Francis Ball and myself about the current situation. I just listened, saying very little. He said how much he and Philip Lee and their families had suffered through all the talk about them. He then stated, “Philip, of course, is not perfect; nobody is perfect!” It shocked me that he would make such an inappropriate statement as that after all that had been said and done.

John Ingalls on Philip Lee - Philip Lee’s name is mentioned 51 times with grave concern about him revealed throughout John Ingalls’ book, Speaking the Truth in Love, related to events and concerns of the late eighties turmoil.

Bill Mallon on Philip Lee – 50 times in an 8-page letter to Witness Lee, Philip or the office is referred to with great consternation over interferences from Philip, Benson, and Ray Graver in the Southeastern churches.

John So on Philip Lee – 49 times in his address in Manila, John So referred to Philip Lee or the office, as the source of major grief and despair for the brothers in Europe.

The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion on Witness Lee - Not a contrary word said about him.

The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion on Philip Lee - No mention of his name in the book. He is referred to as “the office” or “the Living Stream manager”, and only in a positive sense, as if he was a non-factor in the late 80s turmoil, and not a major cause of it and division, as he surely was.

Yet, voices of truth do speak. John So sums up the difficulties of conscience in dealing with the problem of Brother Lee and his son during their tandem leadership reign in the churches.

http://www.unfaithfulwitness.org/Eur...Depart1989.pdf

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then why does Lee et. al. get a free pass to recklessly and indiscriminately condemn the rest of the body of Christ as hopeless and helpless, "poor, poor ... " Don't they know that "nobody is perfect," and "we all make mistakes."

Whatever happened to the hundreds or thousands if not millions intended for the Linko project?.....Nobody's perfect....

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Whatever happened to the hundreds or thousands if not millions intended for the Linko project?.....Nobody's perfect....

Whatever happened to all those lovely sisters molested by Philip .... Nobody's perfect....

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I have read Lin's book and I can say from reading it, he knew very well that his intended audience might include people such as those on this forum. He mentions questionable periods in LC history that many members would know nothing about, yet he doesn't fully address these things. He mentions it as if these things have long since come and gone and were resolved long ago. It's a ploy to get people to let their guard down who might otherwise be suspicious of things.

The problem with running a con for so long is that after more and more have been scammed, there will be more and more vocal detractors. If leaders truly believe that they are not con-men, then now is the time for them to come forward and address long overdue concerns. Sweeping things under the rug will only make matters worse.

God-man Living

Philip, you said that with the Lord Jesus, “His living and His working had no distinction” and that it was the same with the apostle Paul, “his living was his teaching; his teaching was his living” and, “with Brother Lee we can testify that his living was the best interpretation of what he taught. What he lived out and worked out was the very essence of the message he constantly delivered to the churches in the recovery”, (taken from his eulogy) You live Christ out sometimes, Philip; I live Christ out sometimes; brother Lee lived Christ sometimes. If we speak just of the sometimes, we all would be considered God-men in our living. But you added “He often said that he had been repenting for not being faithful and living Christ in his daily life.” Sometimes he lived Christ, many times he did not, like others. He also made mistakes as he at rare times admitted.

"Although I have always intended to do the right thing, I have nevertheless made many mistakes, even some big mistakes. I certainly hate these mistakes..."
(Eph. Life Study p. 273, W. L.)

Also at the onset of the new way, he shared that only the Lord Jesus was mistake-free and that “all of us” have made mistakes.

Witness Lee: "My point is this—do not think that any leader could not make a mistake. Only the Lord Jesus, the unique Leader, never made any mistake. It is absolutely impossible for Him to be mistaken. However, all of us, including Peter, have made many mistakes." (One Accord for the Lord’s Move, E. T., Book 7, p. 113)

"All responsible brothers in all localities need to learn. The eyes of the brothers and sisters all need to be opened. Too many things we need to learn.

I admit that in the past we have all made mistakes, including myself. For this I repented before the Lord in tears.

You must bring this message back, read it once, read it twice, and come together to fellowship with one another. Then you will see that, we, in the past, were wrong! To understand and analyze this needs a fair bit of effort.

We have to receive people according to the Son of God, not deviating from the path.”
(W.Lee Final message Chinese New Year Conference, Anaheim, February 1997)

***

Philip Lin’s book was designed to spruce up the image of Witness Lee and son Philip to impress especially the young people that this tandem leadership on display from 1974 to 1989 was completely beyond reproach. The Witness Lee that Philip Lin did not talk about was a controversial figure. It was quite serious with him, and the saints should know who this Witness Lee was and learn from his history also, which had cost the church dearly.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Indiana

"Although I have always intended to do the right thing, I have nevertheless made many mistakes, even some big mistakes. I certainly hate these mistakes..."
(Eph. Life Study p. 273, W. L.)

Also at the onset of the new way, he shared that only the Lord Jesus was mistake-free and that “all of us” have made mistakes.

Witness Lee: "My point is this—do not think that any leader could not make a mistake. Only the Lord Jesus, the unique Leader, never made any mistake. It is absolutely impossible for Him to be mistaken. However, all of us, including Peter, have made many mistakes." (One Accord for the Lord’s Move, E. T., Book 7, p. 113)

In a normal church setting, I think that most people understand that leaders can and will make mistakes. More often than not, that has already been accounted for. In the LC, however, the mistakes being made were horrendous and monumental, enough so that I think that members had already exhausted the amount of leniency they were willing to give to WL.

It's probably fair to say that many leaders were more lenient towards Lee than they should have been. For example, those who were kicked out in the 80's didn't really make a fuss about Daystar, even though they probably could have raised concerns at that point in time. Thus, WL's ministry was already living on borrowed time, and it's appalling to see that he would admit to making mistakes only in a vague way.

WL was given the benefit of the doubt much more than he ever deserved. He never was grateful about that, he just turned right around and took advantage of it.