Abuse from Christianity toward saints in a local church

[awareness]

I can't believe that DCP is defending Lee's outlandish statement that:

“Judaism is satanic, Catholicism is demonic, and Protestantism is Christless,”

But okay, let me slip into that mentality for a moment :

“Judaism is satanic, Catholicism is demonic, and Protestantism is Christless, and Lee's church of the recovery is man worship.”

And the fact that they feel they have to defend Lee is proof that they are man (flesh) worshipers.

[Paul Cox]

Hope,

As a young person entering the "church-life" in Texas, in the seventies, these words still ring in my ear: "In the recovery we_________(have life, are living, have the vision, have light) but in Christianity_________." The voice that rings loudest in my ear is that of Benson Philips. Next is yours.

Reading your post about Christianity being a vast waste land sent shivers up my spine and leads me to believe that you still don't get it when it comes to talking about "Christianity." I say that with all due respect.

I agree with CMW. The problem with the Local Church is not that they didn't have logical justification for criticizing Christianity. Who can't see their faults? The problem is that rather than being able to see the beam in their own eyes, they looked at themselves by comparison and found themselves quite good. That's pride, and yes, they have been judged for that pride which covers a broad spectrum of subjects and historic actions on the part of Witness Lee, the Local Church, and that heinous DCP.

Roger

[Hope]

Originally Posted by Roger

Hope,

As a young person entering the "church-life" in Texas, in the seventies, these words still ring in my ear: "In the recovery we_________(have life, are living, have the vision, have light) but in Christianity_________." The voice that rings loudest in my ear is that of Benson Philips. Next is yours.

Reading your post about Christianity being a vast waste land sent shivers up my spine and leads me to believe that you still don't get it when it comes to talking about "Christianity." I say that with all due respect.

I agree with CMW. The problem with the Local Church is not that they didn't have logical justification for criticizing Christianity. Who can't see their faults? The problem is that rather than being able to see the beam in their own eyes, they looked at themselves by comparison and found themselves quite good. That's pride, and yes, they have been judged for that pride which covers a broad spectrum of subjects and historic actions on the part of Witness Lee, the Local Church, and that heinous DCP.

Roger

Hello there Brother Roger,

All this time I thought you were a West Coast brother.

Your reference about "in the recovery ...but in Christianity ... Does not sound like something I would have said. I can never recall referring to the Local Churches as "the recovery." I would hear that from saints from the Far East and many times I stated that to say that meant they were a denomination. I often warned the young people in Dallas, in particular the leaders among the young people, that unless the Lord had mercy that we would become another denomination. (And it happened!)

Now did I call a spade a spade? I was probably more frank than Benson. I was never sympathetic to any religious system that kept men from Christ. Thankful Jane gave a report about my critique of my visit to Rome and said she still laughs about it.

I do not apologize for the errors of the local churches nor do I cover over their good points. I trust that is and was my attitude toward any group of Christians.

But ...

Just last night I was spending time with one of the new believers from Nepal. A convert from Hinduism. We were sharing on the power of the Cross, the Word of the Cross and Christ Crucified from 1 Cor. chapter 1. He asked us about the crosses that Catholics wore and images he had observed. This was confusing to him. In his spirit or conscience he did not feel at peace. What should I have told him? I spoke very frankly regarding what it was to believe in Jesus. I spoke very frankly regarding images. I never sugar coat the images of Catholics nor that system of error.

I did not state that we had the truth or attempt to set our little fellowship up as something special.

Let us have more fellowship over this matter. It is not an easy subject. Just as the leaders and followers in the LSM never want to admit a mistake or short coming so it seems some only want to paper over mistakes made by christianity.

I am at work and must go. But I really would like to say more and be sure I am being clear.


Hope

[aron]

Originally Posted by Hope

I did not state that we had the truth or attempt to set our little fellowship up as something special.

I apologize if I mis-read or mischaracterized your statements or experiences. I am certainly qualified to talk about my feeling about sitting in a meeting listening to the speakers discuss how poor other christians were.

But how much that overlaps your own experiences and responses I'm probably not qualified to say, especially from such a distance. I apologize if I overstepped my bounds.

[Paul Cox]

Originally Posted by Hope

Hello there Brother Roger,

All this time I thought you were a West Coast brother.

Your reference about "in the recovery ...but in Christianity ... Does not sound like something I would have said. I can never recall referring to the Local Churches as "the recovery." I would hear that from saints from the Far East and many times I stated that to say that meant they were a denomination. I often warned the young people in Dallas, in particular the leaders among the young people, that unless the Lord had mercy that we would become another denomination. (And it happened!)

Now did I call a spade a spade? I was probably more frank than Benson. I was never sympathetic to any religious system that kept men from Christ. Thankful Jane gave a report about my critique of my visit to Rome and said she still laughs about it.

I do not apologize for the errors of the local churches nor do I cover over their good points. I trust that is and was my attitude toward any group of Christians.

But ...

Just last night I was spending time with one of the new believers from Nepal. A convert from Hinduism. We were sharing on the power of the Cross, the Word of the Cross and Christ Crucified from 1 Cor. chapter 1. He asked us about the crosses that Catholics wore and images he had observed. This was confusing to him. In his spirit or conscience he did not feel at peace. What should I have told him? I spoke very frankly regarding what it was to believe in Jesus. I spoke very frankly regarding images. I never sugar coat the images of Catholics nor that system of error.

I did not state that we had the truth or attempt to set our little fellowship up as something special.

Let us have more fellowship over this matter. It is not an easy subject. Just as the leaders and followers in the LSM never want to admit a mistake or short coming so it seems some only want to paper over mistakes made by christianity.

I am at work and must go. But I really would like to say more and be sure I am being clear.


Hope

My wife and I went to the West Coast when Witness Lee gave the call for young people to go there for "training." We were there for two years.

I certainly would never state or imply that we shouldn't speak the truth when pointing out error. I still do that today. But I've found that my attitude in doing so has changed dramatically (for the better, I think).

Before, I held the common Living Stream attitude that "they" are in a poor and degraded situation, and I (as a representative of THE truth) was there to rescue them. It's that superior attitude that springs from pride.

By the Lord's mercy, the further I get away from LSM I have more of a fear and trembling towards those who are in some form of degradation, fearing that they not get the impression that I am proud, and there to save them.

My background is Catholic and I find myself talking to people from that denomination all the time. I sense a certain liberty in not being shackled with the burden of having to turn them from error to Witness Lee's body of truth. Inwardly I sense more of a true compassion and tender loving care for them, realizing that it’s only by the grace of God that I am not still there. At the same time, I am open to the Lord speaking to me through them. That was not my experience when I was in "God's Best."

Roger

[Hope]

Originally Posted by Roger

My wife and I went to the West Coast when Witness Lee gave the call for young people to go there for "training." We were there for two years.

I certainly would never state or imply that we shouldn't speak the truth when pointing out error. I still do that today. But I've found that my attitude in doing so has changed dramatically (for the better, I think).

Before, I held the common Living Stream attitude that "they" are in a poor and degraded situation, and I (as a representative of THE truth) was there to rescue them. It's that superior attitude that springs from pride.

By the Lord's mercy, the further I get away from LSM I have more of a fear and trembling towards those who are in some form of degradation, fearing that they not get the impression that I am proud, and there to save them.

My background is Catholic and I find myself talking to people from that denomination all the time. I sense a certain liberty in not being shackled with the burden of having to turn them from error to Witness Lee's body of truth. Inwardly I sense more of a true compassion and tender loving care for them, realizing that it’s only by the grace of God that I am not still there. At the same time, I am open to the Lord speaking to me through them. That was not my experience when I was in "God's Best."


Roger

Thanks for the post

I have put into bold letters points I believe to be critical to the discussion.

Sorry about your going to the West Coast in answer to the Orange County call. I hate myself for my part in promoting that. Forgive me if I in any way influenced you. For a while there, my discernment was not working and my promoting that was a big part of my sin against the Body of Christ.

I also recall the excessive pride exhibited during that time. Not only was the local church movement it, in particular those in Southern Cal. were the it among the it.

In 1977 a large group went from Orange County to a conference in Stuttgart. I also was there. I had spent a lot of time with the German brothers and actually spoke a little German. One of the Orange County young people leaders gave a big pep rally speech in an afternoon meeting for the European young people. It was full of pride and self delusion. The German brothers were very unhappy with it. I was basically confused. They realized I was not fully with the program of we are it and especially what is happening in Orange County is it. We had a very serious talk off line. From that day I and they began to look a little askance at the crowd from Anaheim. It was the pride and we are special that first began to bother me.

The Lord has no use for Spiritual pride. Rev 3:17-20, 'Because you say, "I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing," and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, 18 I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich, and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. 19'Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; be zealous therefore, and repent. NASB

In my opinion, Spiritual pride is at least in the top three or so of the sins in the LSM. Add divisiveness, add selective care for the more gifted, add Deputy authority vs the Headship of Christ, add "the Work" as a rival of the local assembly and then throw in sin and corruption and you pretty much have the problem identified.

I have been slow to discuss spiritual pride on the forum because it is somewhat of a subjective call. I also would not link a defense of Christianity with exposing the pride. Nor would I link a defense of Christianity with the exposing of the divisiveness.

Again, we can have a lot more to say.


Hope

Aron, We are good to go. No problems mate.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by Roger

My background is Catholic and I find myself talking to people from that denomination all the time. I sense a certain liberty in not being shackled with the burden of having to turn them from error to Witness Lee's body of truth. Inwardly I sense more of a true compassion and tender loving care for them, realizing that it’s only by the grace of God that I am not still there. At the same time, I am open to the Lord speaking to me through them. That was not my experience when I was in "God's Best."
Roger

Same here Roger,
In fact, God allowed me to lead my high school best friend to our Lord Jesus. But way before, she prayed 'publicly' and made Jesus her LORD & KING, I spent a year or so ministering the Word of God to her. Early on, she said to me "Carol. You KNOW I/we were raised Catholics and I am NOT going be something other than a Catholic." I responded: Erma. Were WE not raised to believe in GOD the Father, God the Son, Jesus Christ and God the Holy Spirit?" Yes. "Were we not taught to believe Jesus was born of a virgin, lived, suffered, died and shed His Blood for our Sins? And Resurrected on the Third day, Ascended into Heaven and is coming again?" Yes. "Well then. Am I telling you to believe in something different? Am I telling you to change 'religions'?" no. WELL THEN !!!

Then one time we went out for dinner. She makes the sign of the cross when we get ready to pray over our meal. She makes the sign w/o saying anything and just waves her hand over her head, hurriedly crossing her arms. You know what I'm talking about.

So I SLAP my hand on the table and 'scold' her telling her "IF YOU'RE Going to make the sign of the cross PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING !!" I stunned her. I then proceeded demonstrating how to concentrate IN the Name of the FATHER-GOD, IN the Name of the SON-JESUS and IN the Name of the Holy Spirit-Bless me."

She looked at me for a bit. Then said "WOW. We were never taught to pray like that, huh?"

I have NEVER once told her to 'leave' the RCC or ripped it to pieces on my own inititation. She is the one who slowly began to rip apart the RCC for being soo dead! It was then that I began to explain some things to her. Mostly though I keep taking her to the WORD of GOD. I have shared the Power of the Blood of Jesus and boy does she know how to apply the Blood !! I could go on sharing stories she tells me about applying the Blood of Jesus on her. Btw, she does not make the sign of the cross when we eat together anymore.

Point is:
We keep our eyes fixed on God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit praying the Holy Scriptures so that the Word of God is rooted and Grounded in us, Living and Operative and sharper than any two edged sword, dividing the soul from the spirit.......and GOD takes care of the rest. He is AWESOME. WE have an AWESOME GOD....and WE are on the WINNING Team!

YAHOO!!

[aron]

Originally Posted by Roger

Reading your post about Christianity being a vast waste land sent shivers up my spine and leads me to believe that you [Hope] still don't get it when it comes to talking about "Christianity." I say that with all due respect.

I agree with CMW. The problem with the Local Church is not that they didn't have logical justification for criticizing Christianity. Who can't see their faults? The problem is that rather than being able to see the beam in their own eyes, they looked at themselves by comparison and found themselves quite good.

I agree. Paul rebuked Peter, and then reproved the "bewitched" Galatians. Paul also censored the Corinthians severely. John excoriated the assemblies in Asia. But neither Paul nor John decided they'd had enough with the degraded "christianity" they found themselves part of, and then went and started their own, supposedly "pure" organizations, based on some scriptural ground or another. Surely they could have spun off some new improved sect, and many sheep would have followed. But they wisely abstained.

The cracks about Judaism and Protestantism and Catholicism are based on scripture, and as such are accurate exegeses to a degree. But they come from an abomination ten times worse than the intended targets. The splinter and beam analogy holds well here.

Remember the two men praying, and the first one says, "God, thank You I'm not like that sinner over there"? He actually was technically correct. The other man was, in fact, a sinner. But the first man thought that his condemnation of a fellow sinner could somehow stand before God. He left with nothing.

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by aron

The cracks about Judaism and Protestantism and Catholicism are based on scripture, and as such are accurate exegeses to a degree. But they come from an abomination ten times worse than the intended targets.

Based on scripture.
Accurate exegeses.


Ten times worse.


hmmmm

[awareness]

YP0534:
Based on scripture.
Accurate exegeses.
Ten times worse.
hmmmm

DCP Quote:
"The identity of Roman Catholicism and the woman in Revelation 17 is the subject of a scholarly work entitled The Two Babylons by Alexander Hislop. In his words...."

So okay, let us consider this statement and DCP's defense of it : “Judaism is satanic, Catholicism is demonic, and Protestantism is Christless,” (and Lee's LC is the Shining City of Perfection on Top of the New Jerusalem).

Let's say I'm someone that found this site on the web, and because religion seems to be a huge problem on the earth, I 'm intrigued by all three claims. So I read on. I'm aware that religious prejudice and bias exists but I'm looking for why people in religion can be so hateful.

I'm reading along and find that they use Alexander Hislop as a basis for their argument against the Catholic church ; that the church is the whore mentioned in Rev. 17.

Well that would be the end of my reading. Why? Because they use a Protestant Presbyterian of the 19th century to support their claim about the RCC, and by their own claim, "Protestantism is Christless.” Which means Alexander Hislop is Christless.

I would stop reading because I found their logical to be contradicting itself. Therefore their claim that : “Judaism is satanic, Catholicism is demonic, and Protestantism is Christless,” is defeated by their own argument, by using Protestantism to support their claim, who they themselves dismiss in their claim.

I would conclude therefore that all I found on this site was just another example of how hateful religious people can be. I would browse on, looking for reasons, and hopefully solutions, to why religious people have become more of a problem on the earth than a solution, and would dismiss Jesus as an answer because as this DCP website exemplifies, Jesus people are just as hateful as all the rest.

[hosepipe]

Awareness; I'm reading along and find that they use Alexander Hislop as a basis for their argument against the Catholic church ; that the church is the whore mentioned in Rev. 17.
--------------------------------------------
Funny how Hislop readers see the whore but miss/overlook the daughters of the whore..
Why is that?..

[Suannehill]

Originally Posted by hosepipe

Awareness; I'm reading along and find that they use Alexander Hislop as a basis for their argument against the Catholic church ; that the church is the whore mentioned in Rev. 17.
--------------------------------------------
Funny how Hislop readers see the whore but miss/overlook the daughters of the whore..
Why is that?..

No one person has ALL of the revelation...one lesson I've learned...