Whistleblower

[Nell]

I pray this doesn't mean child molestation though I fear it does.

Originally Posted by NeverfreefromLC

...
I will make it clear that nobody within the LC had molested me personally but I do know some who were by LC members. Kids are considered lower on the totem pole than women there.
...
I wish you all the best in your journey!

Full post here:
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...2&postcount=38

Nell

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Nell

I pray this doesn't mean child molestation though I fear it does.
Full post here:
http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...2&postcount=38

Well I know if a very burning brother, who looked to be very given to the church, that was molesting his own daughters. But he wasn't in leadership, and it wasn't found out until the girls grew up and left the LC. I liked the brother. You never know someone.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by awareness

I've been reviewing this thread, and I'm so far left confused. Somebody help me please.
Have we determined beyond a shadow of doubt that rape was committed?

I don't think anyone is trying to determine that rape was committed. That's a red herring brought forth from our friend Drake. He produced a quote from Ohio from years and years ago on another thread. NOT RELEVANT TO OUR DISCUSSIONS HERE.

What is not in dispute is the fact that Phillip Lee was a sexual predator of the worse kind - one that was placed in a "position of trust". And the person who put Phillip in this person of trust position was none other than his father, Witness Lee. It is a documented fact that Witness Lee was made fully aware of Phillip's deviant behavior going back at least to the mid-70s. Can there be any doubt that it goes back further in time?

There is absolutely no excuse for Witness Lee allowing his son to be placed in a position of trust with women/sisters. The entire ministry of Lee and even the entire Local Church movement was polluted and defiled by these two men - Phillip as the predator and Witness as the enabler. Any blessing that was experienced in the Local Church was in despite of these two men, and not because of them. And we don't have to wait to "let the Lord judge"....The Lord has already judged sin and death. He has already condemned sin in the flesh. Yes, "we will all appear before the judgement seat" at some point in the future. But the church is NOW. The genuine New Testament ministry is NOW. Women and children should be honored and protected NOW...in this life - we don't have to worry about the life to come....God himself will see to it that women and children are honored and protected in his Kingdom.

The church is watching. The world is watching. The public is watching. Satan and his fallen angels are watching. God is watching too. Local Churchers talk a lot about "bringing the Lord back". What will he come back to?

Quote from John Ingalls in Speaking the Truth in Love:
"and all of this happened in what we call 'The Lord's Recovery'.".

Yes, brother John, all this happened in what we call The Lord's Recovery. And what is worse, I greatly fear, is that it is still happening to this very day. May God have mercy on us, his people.

[awareness]

Outstanding response bro Untohim.

So that's where rape entered this thread ; our dear brother Drake.

I feel for our brother. He's trying to defend the indefensible.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

So that's where rape entered this thread ; our dear brother Drake.

Here is my quote from 7 years ago on another thread ...

Originally Posted by Ohio

I have heard others express this line of reasoning. Sure PL increased revenues at LSM, but why would WL place PL in charge and then do nothing to prevent his son from potentially destroying his entire ministry and reputation. Placing PL as the "office" contradicted thousands of WL's own teachings.

PL's vices were well known in to those related to LSM. If WL just wanted his sons to be successful via some business venture, then why not just funnel money to him? Only the accountants would then know, rather than risking scandals regarding rape and immorality.

awareness, note what I actually said, "risking scandals regarding rape and immorality." Is that not what has happened? How many devoted brothers and sisters have left the LC's over the past 30 years due to "scandals regarding rape and immorality" at LSM? Actually I never accused Philip of rape. I wasn't in the room. But ... does not workplace sexual abuse of volunteer sister-help become a "scandal of rape" when the news hits the streets? Rumors always become bigger that life. Coverups only make it even worse.

My point then and now is the same: Why didn't Witness Lee, who knew the degenerate character of his son, place him in charge at LSM over all the elders and workers? Why did he then cover up for Philip, rather than act as a man of God, act with decency, act according to the scriptures, and act according to the law?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

My point then and now is the same: Why didn't Witness Lee, who knew the degenerate character of his son, place him in charge at LSM over all the elders and workers? Why did he then cover up for Philip, rather than act as a man of God, act with decency, act according to the scriptures, and act according to the law?

Why? I don't know. But it's obvious to me that what Lee expected of us, he wasn't welling to give the same ... to his own ministry. It must not have been worth as must he sold it as. Or he would have been as all in as we were ... for his ministry ... his own ministry.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by awareness

Outstanding response bro Untohim.

So that's where rape entered this thread ; our dear brother Drake.

I feel for our brother. He's trying to defend the indefensible.

Don't put that on me., awareness.

I'd be happy for Ohio to disavow it once and for all. Gave him plenty of opportunity to do it, I said he reserves the right to change his mind, I said he can clarify it if that is not what he meant......all sorts of face saving ways out of it.....but instead he replies with he can only go by what the witnesses who were there said. How convenient.

So, it is actually worse, it has morphed into the subtle innuendo vs the original outright accusation. A wink wink nod nod type of accusation. It really does not matter how long ago Ohio alleged rape by PL. He did. He did not have to see it firsthand. His allegation is secondhand. So what? Until and unless Ohio declares his changed belief we can assume he still holds onto it.

Ohio, disavow that PL committed or attempted rape once and for all. Then we can leave that accusation in the garbage pit where it belongs.

Drake

[Ohio]

Drake, it is you who are digging thru the garbage. Don't they call that "dumpster diving." You jumped in head first trying to rescue LSM. It's really sad that you can not distinguish between actual accusations and my dismay that Witness Lee would risk "scandals regarding rape and immorality" at his ministry.

Going back to my original 7-year-old comment that Drake is so obsessed with here, I wondered then and now why WL would not just funnel money to his kids? It was a conversation between Don Hardy and Samuel Cheng, W. Nee's brother-in-law, that alerted the readers to WL's long-term guilt concerning his sons. Why not just give them money? Why place Philip in charge at LSM, knowing what he was prone to do with women, thus risking "scandals regarding rape and immorality" at his ministry. Scandals which we are still discussing!

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Drake, it is you who are digging thru the garbage. Don't they call that "dumpster diving." You jumped in head first trying to rescue LSM. It's really sad that you can not distinguish between actual accusations and my dismay that Witness Lee would risk "scandals regarding rape and immorality" at his ministry.

Going back to my original 7-year-old comment that Drake is so obsessed with here, I wondered then and now why WL would not just funnel money to his kids? It was a conversation between Don Hardy and Samuel Cheng, W. Nee's brother-in-law, that alerted the readers to WL's long-term guilt concerning his sons. Why not just give them money? Why place Philip in charge at LSM, knowing what he was prone to do with women, thus risking "scandals regarding rape and immorality" at his ministry. Scandals which we are still discussing!

Ohio,

I have no need to "rescue" LSM. That is silly. Why would that be even needed? Rescue LSM from .....you? You could post 1000 more times on this topic, another 50 years of posting.... and it would not affect anything in the least at LSM. I have made my view clear... I'll repeat again for your benefit: Anything that could be destroyed should be destroyed. No props are needed. No rescue is needed. If it is not a work of ministry of the Lord then it will fall. It will fail. If it is the work of ministry raised up by the Lord then nothing you say or do here will ever affect it.

Rather, if my spirit is provoked it is because I find your reviling and railing allegations and innuendo of rape a lawless piling on. That there was sexual immorality is an awful, terrible, and repulsive thing... that you would heap on criminal allegations of rape in the face of evidence to the contrary is even worse. You appear to take special delight in dancing on the failures of others. Dumpster diving? You have taken up residence in it. Scandals? You decorate them. Obsession? I've never seen anyone so continuously preoccupied with ideas or thoughts about PL as you are. Well brother Ohio, I just hope your own life record is as righteous as you demand of others. I really hope your conduct in life has been free of sin, immorality, and failures. We will be judged according to standard by which we judged others. Our life record will be played to a broad audience someday. Ready for that?

You have had several opportunities to deny the allegation of rape. You didn't. I tried. You refused. The reader can decide now.

And here is an odd inconsistency. You and others claim to have the highest respect for John Ingalls the elder in the church in Anaheim during this time. Yet, Brother John never called the cops... so either he was delinquent, negligent, and complicit in the crime you allege by his inaction or ..... it did not reach the level of a crime. Would the John Ingalls you knew have reported a crime if he believed one was being committed? Yes, I believe he would have. Rather, his estimation was that it was a matter to be dealt with by the church. Did he not indicate that? Why? Because he considered it sin, or immorality, or something of the genre that the elders should deal with. Not the cops. Had he called the cops for something other than a crime, they would have told him the same thing Benson told him. They would have said that he needed to deal with it as it is under his jurisdiction not theirs.

Drake

[Koinonia]

Drake, you attack Ohio over a non-issue, yet will not say if Witness Lee was wrong for opposing Philip Lee's excommunication. It is the same way you criticize John Ingalls for not calling the police on Philip Lee--when it was Witness Lee, the minister of the age, who installed his son in the first place, led the cover-up of his sexual indiscretion and abuse over a 10-year period, kept him on the board of directors of LSM, the "work of ministry," and then quarantined Ingalls for not going along with it.

I think your priorities are out of order.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

Don't put that on me., awareness.

I'd be happy for Ohio to disavow it once and for all. Gave him plenty of opportunity to do it, I said he reserves the right to change his mind, I said he can clarify it if that is not what he meant......all sorts of face saving ways out of it.....but instead he replies with he can only go by what the witnesses who were there said. How convenient.

So, it is actually worse, it has morphed into the subtle innuendo vs the original outright accusation. A wink wink nod nod type of accusation. It really does not matter how long ago Ohio alleged rape by PL. He did. He did not have to see it firsthand. His allegation is secondhand. So what? Until and unless Ohio declares his changed belief we can assume he still holds onto it.

Ohio, disavow that PL committed or attempted rape once and for all. Then we can leave that accusation in the garbage pit where it belongs.

Drake

Would that make you feel better...Drake...? ...deciding, once and for all...what word to attach to a woman's ultimate humiliation? Her ultimate violation by the son of the man who she likely respected above all others? You weren't there. You don't get to decide. That you even insist on making it about what Ohio believes is totally perverse.

The women who were his victims know what word to use. They were forced. If it happened to your wife...your mother...your sister...would you be so cavalier?

Just leave it in the garbage pit and walk away.

Nell

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

Would that make you feel better...Drake...? ...deciding, once and for all...what word to attach to a woman's ultimate humiliation? Her ultimate violation by the son of the man who she likely respected above all others? You weren't there. You don't get to decide. That you even insist on making it about what Ohio believes is totally perverse.

The women who were his victims know what word to use. They were forced. If it happened to your wife...your mother...your sister...would you be so cavalier?

Just leave it in the garbage pit and walk away.

Nell

Nell,

I have been an advocate and supporter of your call to action. If a crime was committed call the cops. Drop a dime. Anonymously if needed. I even suggested that the labor board be contacted... start a civil suit which has a lower bar to clear to prove guilt. I am a champion of your main point. Blow the whistle long and loud.

However, in the particular examples given, I have to trust the judgement in this scenario of the elders. Repulsive, yes. Criminal? Not proven. Else they would have called the cops. You have to allow that the suggestion of force is not proof of it. It is a sad reality that not every accusation or allegation is to be believed as is. Someone claims they were forced, maybe they were. Sometimes it is consensual as the first instance indicated that Max addressed. Maybe it was pressure from a manager, that too is criminal. But it has to be proved. Consensus in this forum is not proof. I believe your personal account, no reason not to. So this is not about that.

But if in doubt... make the call. Do something. I am for that. I agree with your main point. It should be reported. Let the authorities sort it out. Prosecute. Civil suit.

But if it is not rape don't call it rape. That bar is higher.. or should be with us.

Drake

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Don't put that on me., awareness.

I'd be happy for Ohio to disavow it once and for all. Gave him plenty of opportunity to do it, I said he reserves the right to change his mind, I said he can clarify it if that is not what he meant......all sorts of face saving ways out of it.....but instead he replies with he can only go by what the witnesses who were there said. How convenient.

So, it is actually worse, it has morphed into the subtle innuendo vs the original outright accusation. A wink wink nod nod type of accusation. It really does not matter how long ago Ohio alleged rape by PL. He did. He did not have to see it firsthand. His allegation is secondhand. So what? Until and unless Ohio declares his changed belief we can assume he still holds onto it.

Ohio, disavow that PL committed or attempted rape once and for all. Then we can leave that accusation in the garbage pit where it belongs.

Drake

Thanks for clearing this up, or trying to anyway. Sorry, but I don't see a claim of rape either. And what I mean by rape is forced unconsensual sex.

But some could mean something else by rape, such as uninvited unwanted groping. That is, I suppose, a kind of rape. Unwanted force is at play.

But the testimony from Speaking The Truth in Love doesn't say any of that.

I don't know. Did the sister do things she didn't really want to do? But since it was Witness Lee's son, who was clearly in the inner circle of the leader she was giving her life to, she went along with it? Then was stricken by her conscience, and then came to the elder about it?

Unless there's contradictory evidence, that's one possible explanation for what went on in the LSM office.

I guess we need to define what we mean by rape.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Local Churchers talk a lot about "bringing the Lord back". What will he come back to?

Exactly what scripture tells us... His builded bride.

Do you know what this bride looks like?

You should.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Steel

Exactly what scripture tells us... His builded bride.

Do you know what this bride looks like?

You should.

If I were still attending LSM's trainings, then I would believe the builded bride looks like thousands of little "Witness Lee tape recorders" spouting off his footnotes on demand.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Ohio

If I were still attending LSM's trainings, then I would believe the builded bride looks like thousands of little "Witness Lee tape recorders" spouting off his footnotes on demand.

Or so you think you would.

Abiding in one's natural man will cause any of us to see things according to our offended feelings.