Kaung and Lee Lines in America - A History

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Drake

However, when you formulate speculation into the basis of an argument then I will speak up because at that point you are arguing from silence, a fallacy in argument. There are fallacious arguments in your post above. For instance, just because you haven’t heard an explanation does not mean that one has not been provided.... or there could be any number of reasons why Kaung choose not to embrace the ground of locality as clearly taught by Nee.

The lack of a viable explanation to defend Lee's behavior says a lot. Kaung gave a clear explanation about what happened with him and Lee:
"Brother Lee came to New York and told me, ‘You need to call yourself the church in New York.’ I said we cannot do that. There are only about 200 of us and there are so many of God’s people in NY, how can we claim to be the church in New York? That would excommunicate all the believers in New York. We have to testify for the local church, but we cannot claim ourselves as the local church. That’s the difference we had. Brother Lee said, ‘If you don’t claim yourself as the church in New York... alright... then there is no church in New York.’ Then he began to take over.”

In the LC, they rarely even mention Kaung, much less talk about why him and Lee went their own ways. If an 'official' explanation about what happened existed, I'm sure we would know about it already. So I only have Kaung's side of the story to go off of. Lee insisted on something that Kaung didn't feel comfortable insisting on, and it resulted in him and Lee not being able to work together anymore. That's really sad, but even worse, it is part of a pattern in Lee's legacy.