Judge not that ye be not judged...

[Nell]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

Thank you Ohio. I am fully behind your position here and Jesus is the Way. He is the only way. The LC 'the new way' just offended my heart so thoroughly...it seemed another usurpation of Christ and His headship, His position of being our way to the Father. Something so wrong with it. And I agree, He cannot be limited to the LSM 'way'.....just the idea of every believer He justifies, He sanctifies, He called, He redeemed by the sacrifice at the cross....to believe that every precious one of these is somehow lacking the 'way' if they are outside the LSM system is so far fetched, so presumptuous!

Nell, I don't mean to change the subject of this thread, I just don't know anything about it.

BHM,

Do you have questions or comments about the first post in this thread?

Nell

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Nell

BHM, Do you have questions or comments about the first post in this thread?

Only that, I agree with you. I see nothing wrong with compensating pastors, church leaders, full-timers, serving ones.....just don't give your private system special terminology then lamblast all others for the exact same practice. A horse of a different color.....is still a horse. That is not charity, not equitable, even. A sin, I think.

As to the other question of judgment....I cannot speak to that. That will be between them (those who don't reject this sin) and the Lord.

[Evangelical]

According to the writings of Nee and Lee, a servant of God is not supposed to receive any salary.

If we serve God then we should ask God for our salary. If we serve man then we should ask man for our salary. (paraphrased Nee)

But giving is a matter of free will. The question is , are payments in the local church today free will giving or are they some sort of salaried, contractual arrangement. If it's salaried like the denominations then it would be hypocritical. If it is free will giving it is not hypocritical in my view, there is a clear difference.

A hypocrite is someone who has a log in their own eye but only sees a speck in another person's eye. I don't know that the amount of salary giving in the local churches is as much as the denominations. I think it is more of a "speck" in terms of volume.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

According to the writings of Nee and Lee, a servant of God is not supposed to receive any salary.

If we serve God then we should ask God for our salary. If we serve man then we should ask man for our salary. (paraphrased Nee)

But giving is a matter of free will. The question is , are payments in the local church today free will giving or are they some sort of salaried, contractual arrangement. If it's salaried like the denominations then it would be hypocritical. If it is free will giving it is not hypocritical in my view, there is a clear difference.

Sorry Evan G. it is unfortunate that all you seem to know is book knowledge, not from the Bible books, but from Nee's and Lee's books.

I know a dear brother who quit being a full-timer and reentered the workforce in a sales commission job. He told me that he felt he was now serving God and living by faith more than all his time as a full-timer.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sorry Evan G. it is unfortunate that all you seem to know is book knowledge, not from the Bible books, but from Nee's and Lee's books.

I know a dear brother who quit being a full-timer and reentered the workforce in a sales commission job. He told me that he felt he was now serving God and living by faith more than all his time as a full-timer.

It's a strange comment from you - looking to God for our needs, particularly as God's servants, is biblical.

There are different ways to serve God, most ways don't depend on how we feel about it. "I feel like I'm serving God" is not a reliable indicator.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

But giving is a matter of free will. The question is , are payments in the local church today free will giving or are they some sort of salaried, contractual arrangement. If it's salaried like the denominations then it would be hypocritical. If it is free will giving it is not hypocritical in my view, there is a clear difference.

Can you explain what you mean by payments in the local church being free will giving?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Can you explain what you mean by payments in the local church being free will giving?

If there is giving by free will to support someone it is not a salary.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If there is giving by free will to support someone it is not a salary.

Do you mean giving by free will by the saints who offer money to the church knowing that the church has discretion over how that money is used, including using it to support elders or serving ones?

Or, do you mean giving by free will by the church to the serving ones?

Or, do you mean when certain saints or localities (outside of the locality in question) know of a serving one who needs to be supported and, of their own free will, "pledge" (for lack of a better word) to provide that support for a particular serving one for either a specified or unspecified period of time?

In your most recent response to Nell, which I read after I wrote the three paragraphs above, you contrasted a pastor receiving an ongoing salary of $56k with the local churches supporting elders "by free will giving". I cannot say that I see the difference without a further explanation of what you mean by free will giving. I'm not trying to belabor the point; I am really trying to understand.

I believe more often than not it is the norm for those elders or serving ones who receive support to be able to expect that support in a regular, ongoing, consistent (monthly? bi-monthly?) way until or unless funds run out (i.e. what we all would call "a salary")............just like in a denomination.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

According to the writings of Nee and Lee, a servant of God is not supposed to receive any salary.

Uh. Yeah. We don't follow Watchman Nee or Witness Lee anymore. Maybe you missed that. We fact check everyone's ministry with the Bible as the standard. We are particularly put off by hypocrisy.

If we serve God then we should ask God for our salary. If we serve man then we should ask man for our salary. (paraphrased Nee)

I believe we should make our requests known to the Lord regardless of who writes the check.

But giving is a matter of free will. The question is , are payments in the local church today free will giving or are they some sort of salaried, contractual arrangement. If it's salaried like the denominations then it would be hypocritical. If it is free will giving it is not hypocritical in my view, there is a clear difference.

I like this quote: "God's word declares that our lives, our beings, our breath---come as gifts from God. Of ourselves we have nothing. All our notions of ownership are an illusion; all our pride, a deception. We are not sovereign but completely dependent. Everything we have---our possessions, our money, our riches, every moment of our lives---everything has been given to us.

Every heartbeat is borrowed. … “

A hypocrite is someone who has a log in their own eye but only sees a speck in another person's eye.

I know what a hypocrite is.

I don't know that the amount of salary giving in the local churches is as much as the denominations. I think it is more of a "speck" in terms of volume.

So as long as the LC doesn't pay as much in salaries as their Christian brothers do, it's all good? That's rich.

Nell

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Nell

Uh. Yeah. We don't follow Watchman Nee or Witness Lee anymore. Maybe you missed that. We fact check everyone's ministry with the Bible as the standard. We are particularly put off by hypocrisy.

You misapplied Matt. 7:1-6. You don't seem to know the difference between a log and a speck. If denominations all over are giving their pastors guaranteed ongoing salaries of 56k, that would be a log, and if the local churches are supporting elders by free will giving (not salary), that would be a speck. You seem to have ignored the point Jesus was making - ignoring the log but focusing on the speck.

Your OP says Lee criticized a "practice of hiring pastors and preachers to serve their flocks". Maybe he criticized the practice, not necessarily the giving of money to workers.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You misapplied Matt. 7:1-6. You don't seem to know the difference between a log and a speck. If denominations all over are giving their pastors guaranteed ongoing salaries of 56k, that would be a log, and if the local churches are supporting elders by free will giving (not salary), that would be a speck. You seem to have ignored the point Jesus was making - ignoring the log but focusing on the speck.

Your OP says Lee criticized a "practice of hiring pastors and preachers to serve their flocks". Maybe he criticized the practice, not necessarily the giving of money to workers.

As usual, I was not speaking to the Bible itself, but your INTERPRETATION of the Bible. Witness Lee's entire ministry is based on his INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

Of course, all we have is our reading of the Word and our understanding of what we read. Your "understanding" includes a double-standard that allows you to criticize others for doing the same thing you are doing.

I think you are confused. You, Witness Lee and the LSM are the critics. You have the log-in-the-eye problem. Lee started the name-calling by calling his brothers "hirelings". Your Christian brothers formally requested that you all stop your denigrating behavior toward them.

Matthew 7:3-5 English Standard Version (ESV)
3 Why do you (and Witness Lee) see the speck that is in your brother's eye (the eyes of other Christians), but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you (Witness Lee) say to your/his brother (other Christians), ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

According to my understanding, neither logs nor specks are acceptable. Both need to be removed. You take care of your log and leave your brothers alone...as they requested. You have your compensation plan, they have theirs.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Nell

As usual, I was not speaking to the Bible itself, but your INTERPRETATION of the Bible. Witness Lee's entire ministry is based on his INTERPRETATION of the Bible.

Of course, that's all we have is our reading of the Word and our understanding of what we read. Your "understanding" includes a double-standard that allows you to criticize others for doing the same thing you are doing.

If the LSMers did not have their "double-standards," they would not have any standards at all. Think lawsuits. Thinks smear campaigns. Think surreptitious campus activities. Think wholesale categorical condemnations on all Christians. Apparently the Christian life is a whole lot easier for LSM without standards to restrain them on the narrow way that leads to life.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

According to the writings of Nee and Lee, a servant of God is not supposed to receive any salary. If we serve God then we should ask God for our salary. If we serve man then we should ask man for our salary. (paraphrased Nee)

Please provide a documented quote from Witness Lee. I don't recall Lee saying anything like this. Not sure about Nee, but since you Local Churchers don't follow Watchman Nee (at least when he contradicts Lee) I'm not as interested in what Nee taught.

I would think there are quite a number of sisters/women who volunteered tens of thousands of hours at the Living Stream who are wishing Philip Lee never got any salary...from God or from man. After all, if his Acting God daddy had not showered him with a lavish salary, maybe he would have had to get a real job, and then he wouldn't have had as much time on his hands to sexually abuse and harass those poor sisters, or to use all that expendable cash on booze, porn mags and Rolex watches.

But giving is a matter of free will. The question is , are payments in the local church today free will giving or are they some sort of salaried, contractual arrangement. If it's salaried like the denominations then it would be hypocritical.

Have you reviewed any of the tax forms released by the Living Stream Ministry? There are quite a number of "salaried" employees. Some are payed rather handsomely, with some pretty nice benefits and perks. Do you think Benson Phillips has no "contractual arrangement"? How about Kerry Robichaux - do you think a smart guy like him is just hoping and wishing that he'll get paid? Not on your life. He gets a salary..he has a contractual arrangement.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Have you reviewed any of the tax forms released by the Living Stream Ministry? There are quite a number of "salaried" employees. Some are payed rather handsomely, with some pretty nice benefits and perks. Do you think Benson Phillips has no "contractual arrangement"? How about Kerry Robichaux - do you think a smart guy like him is just hoping and wishing that he'll get paid? Not on your life. He gets a salary..he has a contractual arrangement.
-

And let's not be fooled into thinking that one's "salary" or "contractual arrangement" with LSM has absolutely no effect on one's decisions and Christian service. Once all of these brothers, grown up in the LC's, leave their home church and become employed by LSM, they lose all independence. They become captives, or as Evan G calls them "hirelings."

The Bible teaches us that our loyalties and service ultimately must be to the Lord Himself. Throughout the centuries untold men of God have sacrificed their own lives and futures because they refused to compromise their service. LSM regularly condemns this type of "independence," but without a certain amount of it, all workers become compromised "man-pleasers." I definitely prefer that workers and ministers are supported by their home churches, than by some distant book publisher, which places loyalty to them above all.

Look at Titus Chu of Cleveland or Dong Yu Lan of Sao Paulo. Both of them were connected for years to the work at LSM. They both had long term relationships which they had no intention to sever, but they also maintained a certain independence from the financial / bureaucratic / legalistic / and exclusive theological bondage to LSM. Because of that her Blended authorities could not control them, and viewed them as threats, which demanded surgical removal at all cost -- even the collateral damage of hundreds even thousands of saints.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Please provide a documented quote from Witness Lee. I don't recall Lee saying anything like this. Not sure about Nee, but since you Local Churchers don't follow Watchman Nee (at least when he contradicts Lee) I'm not as interested in what Nee taught.

I would think there are quite a number of sisters/women who volunteered tens of thousands of hours at the Living Stream who are wishing Philip Lee never got any salary...from God or from man. After all, if his Acting God daddy had not showered him with a lavish salary, maybe he would have had to get a real job, and then he wouldn't have had as much time on his hands to sexually abuse and harass those poor sisters, or to use all that expendable cash on booze, porn mags and Rolex watches.

Have you reviewed any of the tax forms released by the Living Stream Ministry? There are quite a number of "salaried" employees. Some are payed rather handsomely, with some pretty nice benefits and perks. Do you think Benson Phillips has no "contractual arrangement"? How about Kerry Robichaux - do you think a smart guy like him is just hoping and wishing that he'll get paid? Not on your life. He gets a salary..he has a contractual arrangement.
-

I'm not sure what you mean by not following Nee - we read Watchman Nee's books.

The matters you raised are not the same thing as "local churches paying elders a salary". These matters you raised has nothing to do with my giving going to support an elder's salary.

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I'm not sure what you mean by not following Nee - we read Watchman Nee's books.

The matters you raised are not the same thing as "local churches paying elders a salary". These matters you raised has nothing to do with my giving going to support an elder's salary.

I’m not sure, Untohim may be right?

It depends on what your definition of is is...

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I'm not sure what you mean by not following Nee - we read Watchman Nee's books.

Wow. Just wow. Please ask you local elder, or better yet, shoot an email or make a call to one of the Blended Brothers and ask them about following Watchman Nee. Nee is the founder and the father of the Local Church movement. Are you saying you don't follow the founder and the father of your movement? This would be like a Mormon saying "I don't follow Joseph Smith", or a Seventh Day Adventist saying "I don't follow Ellen G. White, or a Christian Scientist saying "I don't follow Mary Baker Eddy".

The matters you raised are not the same thing as "local churches paying elders a salary". These matters you raised has nothing to do with my giving going to support an elder's salary.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

According to the writings of Nee and Lee, a servant of God is not supposed to receive any salary.

So you don't consider the brothers over there on La Palma Ave in Anaheim as "servants of God"? Well then, my brother, you better skip that call about asking about following Watchman Nee, and tell them that you are initiating a class action suit against the Blended Brothers for taking a salary when it is clearly against the teachings of Nee and Lee.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Wow. Just wow. Please ask you local elder, or better yet, shoot an email or make a call to one of the Blended Brothers and ask them about following Watchman Nee. Nee is the founder and the father of the Local Church movement. Are you saying you don't follow the founder and the father of your movement? This would be like a Mormon saying "I don't follow Joseph Smith", or a Seventh Day Adventist saying "I don't follow Ellen G. White, or a Christian Scientist saying "I don't follow Mary Baker Eddy".





So you don't consider the brothers over there on La Palma Ave in Anaheim as "servants of God"? Well then, my brother, you better skip that call about asking about following Watchman Nee, and tell them that you are initiating a class action suit against the Blended Brothers for taking a salary when it is clearly against the teachings of Nee and Lee.

Are you saying that Witness Lee contradicted Watchman Nee's teaching about servants of God receiving salaries?