Leaders of the Lord's Recovery

[Betsy]

Originally Posted by Indiana

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

Letter excerpt from Bellevue brother:

In Brother Lee's book "the experience of life" he talks about being right with God and with the body. The main factor is the matter of the proper dealing. THE SCOPE OF THE OFFENCE DETERMINES THE SCOPE OF THE DEALING. If one commits a sin only in the mind, it can be cleared up very easily. All the person has to do is confess to the Lord and claim the Lord's blood and he is forgiven. If one sins in speaking a word that he shouldn't have to a member of the body, then he has to not only confess to the Lord but also ask forgiveness from the person he spoke the word to. If one sins against the church, then he has to confess to the Lord and ask forgiveness publicly from the church. If one sins against the recovery, he has to confess to the Lord and also ask forgiveness from the entire recovery. You have most certainly sinned against the entire recovery. The website of your "book" and also the website of your "fellowship" with those such as Don Harding and others is now a VERY BIG PROBLEM FOR YOU. Your thought about the recovery being wrong is your major problem. Brother Lee was never wrong about anything that happened regarding the rebellion with John I. in the late 1980's. Brother Lee is a different person than Phillip Lee. Brother Lee would never do things that others would do. What I said in my previous letter is what has to be done. As long as you think that you are right about what you did but that the problem is that the brothers from the local churches are not open, this is a proof that you have no light on this matter. And until you get light, you have no way with the Lord. Without light, you will never be able to come back to the Lord's recovery. Because you just don't know how to handle this situation. You are completely in the dark. Repentance is a mercy that is granted to us only by the Lord. But repentance only comes when one realizes that he is altogether WRONG.

www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

2001 Letter on past page- p3

Oh my, what a dreadful letter! LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Renee

Oh my, what a dreadful letter! LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.

This word from Renee is perfect - post#470 Bellevue letter


I just sent this revised Seattle letter this morning.

"Dear brother Martin, (and Jim Bundy) _ I knew you both,

Your names are on a letter addressed to me that indicated an undefined problem that several men of God had with me.

Is there really a problem, brothers?"


www.lordsrecovery.us/SeattleLetter2016B.pdf

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Renee

LR has always said that vague / ill-defined accusations are always from Satan. A revelation of error from Christ comes across as sweet and crystal clear.

posts stored in 2013


IGZY
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...8&postcount=38

TERRY
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...6&postcount=40

OHIO
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...8&postcount=41

ALWAYS LEARNING
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...5&postcount=42

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I think it's interesting that Kangas chose to call Steve Isitt a "man of death." Why didn't he call him a "man of sin?" Because if he did that he'd have to specify his sin, and he can't do it because there is none.

When Ron publicly defamed Steve, he did so using vague terminology and accusations. And by that I mean language that is elusive to outsiders. His intended message, however, is crystal clear to those within the LC. As Igzy pointed out, it is significant that Ron was not willing to convey a definitive position that he could subsequently stand behind. He didn’t even initiate a public ‘quarantine’ letter like has been done for others.

As it turns out, what Ron spoke is only a modern example of a pattern that has long existed within the LC. The pattern which I am referring to is a large amount of vagueness in conveying accusations presented as cause for church discipline. Just look at what WL had to say on the subject:

We must see, however, that to make a public announcement of a kind of excommunication involves a person’s name, position, and status in today’s society. This is serious and very risky. This involves families and human relationships. In this matter we have been under the influence of the tradition of Christianity, but in my experiences over the past fifty years I have surely learned that to make a public announcement, especially in a matter concerning immorality, is not so safe and profitable. If we announce a certain person’s being excommunicated in a public meeting, he could appeal to a court of law and say that we are spoiling his name. He would claim that since you said he committed immorality, you must provide the evidence in a court of law. This would cause much trouble. This one may have committed that sin, but according to law you must present the evidence. This sinning one may not have that much growth in the Lord, but he may bold a high position in society. He would vindicate himself by bringing this case to the law court to clear up his name. This shows us the turmoil that such a public announcement could cause…

According to our present knowledge of the New Testament, I do not believe there is the need of making a public announcement…

Witness Lee, Elders’ Training, Book 4, Ch 7

WL was not hesitant in making “public announcements,” but he had a different way of doing it, one that had the end effect of absolving himself of all accountability. The notion of ‘quarantine’ that he set forth is very deceptive. To the naïve, it seemingly represents a ‘gentle’ approach to correct those in err. In the LC, the true purpose of quarantine is that it serves as an effective excommunication without having to present real facts and evidence to support the action.

Quarantine implies someone is sick and there is no choice to but to set that person aside. To go along with the analogy, being sick or leprous is the sole accusation, so what exactly does that mean? That is what Lee refused to define. He didn't want to justify his actions. He wouldn't stand behind things that he did. That's not the pattern the Apostle Paul set. Paul made a case and then said to "deliver such a one to Satan." If LCers aren't willing to stand behind their statements or actions in the same way that Paul did, then they shouldn't be making them.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

When Ron publicly defamed Steve, he did so using vague terminology and accusations. And by that I mean language that is elusive to outsiders. His intended message, however, is crystal clear to those within the LC. As Igzy pointed out, it is significant that Ron was not willing to convey a definitive position that he could subsequently stand behind. He didn’t even initiate a public ‘quarantine’ letter like has been done for others.

Here's Mr. Ronald Kangas taking out time from his busy schedule to explain himself ...

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Here's Mr. Ronald Kangas taking out time from his busy schedule to explain himself ...

I lost all respect for Ron when I discovered that he is a man who will not stand behind his words. He goes and calls a fellow brother a "man of death." When called to explain his position, he wouldn't even afford Steve a simple response. That is something that I have no respect for.

[NewManLiving]

Apparently, Ron and other Blendeds were heavily influenced by Phillip Lee. Instead of looking away unto Jesus they looked away unto Phillip Lee. It does not surprise me that they resemble Phillip more than they resemble Christ.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

Apparently, Ron and other Blendeds were heavily influenced by Phillip Lee. Instead of looking away unto Jesus they looked away unto Phillip Lee. It does not surprise me that they resemble Phillip more than they resemble Christ.

I used to find it hard to believe that any of the blendeds would have looked up to Philip Lee. I assumed that if anything, he was tolerated for the sake of WL, a past issue that they would be glad to sweep under the rug.

Quite to the contrary, an Anaheim elder, Philip Lin, expressed a great appreciation for Philip Lee. It makes me want to gag:

Recalling the beginnings of the Anaheim LSM Station in 1974, I think about how everything was ragged and rough, without financial support and with a shortage of manpower. It was a very tough start. However, after years of labor, it became a rather big and well-organized publisher. It was the Lord’s blessing. It was also the hard work of Brother Philip Lee and many faithful saints who gave their whole being to the ministry of Witness Lee. It is appropriate to describe the beginning of LSM by quoting Brother Lee’s wife, Sister Lee, as she told me: “this was the result of the father with his son, two men beginning work like a “swap-meet.” It is admirable. It is also the Lord’s doing.

Lin, Philip (2014-07-02). Sacrifice and Sail On: My View of Witness Lee, A Bond Slave of Jesus Christ (Kindle Location 1292). Sail On Publishers. Kindle Edition.