Publication Work in The Lord's Recovery aka The One Publication

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

The point is simple -- UntoHim owns this forum, it is his. He has the right to set the rules. You don't like it, leave. What UntoHim doesn't have the right to do is to tell me I can't start my own forum.

Right. And Titus has is own "forum" as did Dong... no one told them they couldn't. But, the responsible brothers did not allow them to impose their brands on the rest of the local churches. They can't stop them from doing their own thing and they can't stop them from publishing their own books.... but the responsible brothers have to follow the leading of the Spirit and that includes not allowing anyone to impose their brand/ministry on the local churches across the planet. If local churches choose to follow them, as occured, then that is their decision and prerogative... they answer to the Lord directly.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Likewise the church belongs to the Lord ("church of Christ"), it belongs to God ("church of God") and it belongs to the saints ("church of the saints"). It does not belong to a ministry. Paul rebuked the Galatians for allowing someone else to come in and put them into bondage. That is what LSM is doing with this edict and with the application in their excommunication of Titus.

Yes, the church belongs to the Lord..... and by the Spirit He directs men to carry out its practical affairs on earth. That we cannot deny.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Right. And Titus has is own "forum" as did Dong... no one told them they couldn't. But, the responsible brothers did not allow them to impose their brands on the rest of the local churches. They can't stop them from doing their own thing and they can't stop them from publishing their own books.... but the responsible brothers have to follow the leading of the Spirit and that includes not allowing anyone to impose their brand/ministry on the local churches across the planet. If local churches choose to follow them, as occurred, then that is their decision and prerogative... they answer to the Lord directly.

Have not the Blendeds "imposed their brands on the rest of the local churches?" LSM has done exactly what they accuse Titus Chu of. And worse.

Once again, Apostle Paul's words to the self-righteous is fulfilled. (Romans 2.1)

TC, however, gave elders the choice of what to use in their meetings. LSM has taken away this liberty.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

R but the responsible brothers have to follow the leading of the Spirit and that includes not allowing anyone to impose their brand/ministry on the local churches across the planet.

Wait, wait, wait.

How do you know the Holy Spirit is leading the "responsible brothers" to restrict people from influencing the local churches? What if God sends a minister to the local churches and the "responsible brothers" object. Who are they to object? What is their purview? Where does such authority come from? What if the minister is being led by the Holy Spirit and the "responsible brothers" are not? Whether you like it or not, that is entirely possible.

And who gave the "responsible brothers" the authority to keep ministers from the local churches in the first place? Do they have "first dibs" on them? Do they own them? What gives them the right to decide who can minister where? Why can they impose their brand on local churches but no one else can?

You'd better be careful before speaking on behalf of the Holy Spirit. He may be doing something he hasn't clued you in on. Did you ever think of that?

My goodness. The presumptiveness never ceases to amaze me.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

My goodness. The presumptiveness never ceases to amaze me.

That is "One Publication" in a nutshell.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Wait, wait, wait. .....

....My goodness. The presumptiveness never ceases to amaze me.

Whoa! Hold on there big fella.

You know there is no such word as “presumptiveness” don’t you?

... but let’s go with it anyway.

You probably meant to express the thought “such presumption!” or “boy, they have presumptive ideas!”?

They both work in a way.

Presumptive: “giving grounds for reasonable opinion or belief”

Presumption: an attitude or belief dictated by probability : ASSUMPTION
b : the ground, reason, or evidence lending probability to a belief
3 : a legal inference as to the existence or truth of a fact not certainly known that is drawn from the known or proved existence of some other fact

Drake

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

You know there is no such word as “presumptiveness” don’t you?

No, I didn't. I presumed there was. That was my presumptiveness. Anyway, there should be such a word. Actually, I still think there might be....

Whatever, if you are reduced to taking shots at my vocabulary I know I must be doing a good job. So, I'm encouraged.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Igzy

No, I didn't. I presumed there was. That was my presumptiveness. Anyway, there should be such a word. Actually, I still think there might be....

Whatever, if you are reduced to taking shots at my vocabulary I know I must be doing a good job. So, I'm encouraged.

Ok Igzy. Let’s moderate ourselves for a moment.

I believe it is the irony in your posts that caught my attention. The irony being you take a high position of speaking down to believers in the local churches and to leading brothers in particular, sort of lecturing about things that you do not appear to fully understand, and talking about God’s love yet your posts appear completely devoid of it, no trace of its reality.

And then, your fake word.

Look, I really don’t care about your command of the English language. I don’t really care about your derogatory opinions of the Lords recovery, the local churches, the serving ones, or brothers like me. However, I do care about whether you represent the truth accurately and to some extent I care about the way you prosecute your case.

We all butcher the language every now and then. You can call me on it when my time comes. If you want to invent a new word, then give me a heads up so I can brace myself!

Drake

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm not choosing Drake, but he did say when he joined the forum that he was a LCer for 40 years. He said that He knew Lee and the Blendeds personally. I got the impression he lived in Texas for awhile.

Perhaps you got him mixed up with others who have trolled us. Drake has made it clear that he supports all of LSM's positions. He told us he was a Christian before joining the LC's ~1976, when I did.

I have repeatedly challenged Drake over the Phillip Lee quagmire at LSM, since he lived thru it, and told us he knew all the people. He decided not to answer any of my questions, and then a few months ago refused to respond to any of my posts, effectively making him an "anti-troll" towards me.

Drake displays typical troll characteristics. He is intelligent, yet also seems maddeningly clueless when the discussion reaches the moment of truth, when someone has made a clear and valid point and has painted him into a corner. At that point he consistently does one of several things:

• Disappears.
• Simply says he disagrees in the face of logic no sensible person would turn his back on.
• Focuses on some minor issue to try to discredit the other person (as when he made an issue of my use of "presumptiveness.")
• Has a startling character change for a moment where his unctuous demeanor changes to something like an adolescent.

But you see the MO, over and over. He will probably disappear for awhile, then reappear in a few days as if nothing happened, and continue his merry way. And it will go around and around with him again. That's what he wants. He has no intention of honestly engaging anyone here. His goal is simply to pretend he is doing that, to fool you just enough to trust him. But he's shown time and again he's not interested in any evidence given to him in favor of anything he doesn't want to believe.

The reason Drake doesn't engage you anymore, Ohio, is because you beat him. You've given so much evidence about the abuse and duplicity of the Blendeds that it has reached the point where he just looks stupid saying "I don't know nuttin' 'bout dat," and so he just pretends you are not there.

I had just made a very valid and, I think, insightful point about how the Blended's narrow-mindedness, rather than preserving the Lord's light, actually hinders it, and so actually produces darkness. This is an irrefutable point, or at least one that any fair mind would consider and discuss. Did Drake consider it? Did he comment on it? No, he brushed it aside in favor of criticizing my vocabulary, and then went on to put into question my integrity by accusing me of using a "false word." Leave alone for a moment that his favorite MOTA, Lee, invented words all the time (see "Son-ized," etc.). But jumping on someone's language, grammar or spelling to try to deflect a discussion? That's the kind of thing preteens do. That kind of shift, from unctuous gentleman to mocking brat, is weird.

Was "borderline sociopath" too strong? I would say those who display such blase attitudes about real people hurt by the system they defend are definitely leaning that way. They've definitely hardened their hearts to hurt.

The Lord said the first commandment is to love. Defending the LC system in the face of all the damage it's done to his children is direct disobedience of that command. Matthew 25:45 warns strongly about this. At judgment some will claim to have done all kinds of things for the Lord (including perhaps defend "the Recovery"). He will tell them, if you hurt my little ones you totally missed it.

But Drake may not even be a real LCer. He may just be a guy who has nothing better to do. He certainly has given no evidence that he is personally acquainted with anyone or anything to do with the LC. All his displayed knowledge is general and can be found on the internet. He never talks about meetings he's been to, brothers he's spoken to, or the like. He has no personal anecdotes. Compare him to Ohio or ZNPaaneah, who are regularly relaying experiences and history. Drake never does that. Don't you think that is strange?

But I'm through playing his game. I'm going to call it like I see it from now on. I'm a sheep dog.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Drake displays typical troll characteristics. He is intelligent, yet also seems maddeningly clueless when the discussion reaches the moment of truth, when someone has made a clear and valid point and has painted him into a corner. At that point he consistently does one of several things:

• Disappears.
• Simply says he disagrees in the face of logic no sensible person would turn his back on.
• Focuses on some minor issue to try to discredit the other person (as when he made an issue of my use of "presumptiveness.")
• Has a startling character change for a moment where his unctuous demeanor changes to something like an adolescent.

But you see the MO, over and over. He will probably disappear for awhile, then reappear in a few days as if nothing happened, and continue his merry way. And it will go around and around with him again. That's what he wants. He has no intention of honestly engaging anyone here. His goal is simply to pretend he is doing that, to fool you just enough to trust him. But he's shown time and again he's not interested in any evidence given to him in favor of anything he doesn't want to believe.

The reason Drake doesn't engage you anymore, Ohio, is because you beat him. You've given so much evidence about the abuse and duplicity of the Blendeds that it has reached the point where he just looks stupid saying "I don't know nuttin' 'bout dat," and so he just pretends you are not there.

But I'm through playing his game. I'm going to call it like I see it from now on. I'm a sheep dog.

Igzy, I completely agree. Drake uses the exact same techniques that LSM has mastered for decades to cover unrighteousness, to deflect the light of God, to attack the "gnats" in other's words, to twist the truth for base gain, to protect themselves from any accountability, etc. Personally I think Drake is no different than political operatives skilled in spin. Where could he learn this ... but by reading and/or writing for LSM?

Consider my last line of questioning in this thread. I lived thru the recent quarantines, so I asked Drake how does one agree with how the LSM Publishers can excommunicate TC for ministering to China "cause Lee said not to." At first, Lee and LSM claimed all the "Shouters" as their own fruit, until their errors became apparent. TC then goes to China, his birthplace, to help these ones, and Lee/LSM publicly condemn him. LSM then quarantines TC and disavows any connection to these "Shouters." There's a billion people in China that need Jesus. How can any book publisher declare exclusive rights to them?

Reminds me of that brother from Hong Kong who smuggled LSM Bibles into China. He was a hero at LSM until he got caught. TC brought up this matter in the exchanges prior to his quarantine. The Blendeds threw that brother under the motor home in order to protect themselves. These people are enemies of the cross of Christ. (Phil 3.18-19)

[Cal]

Oh, one more thing trolls do. They will engage in all their exasperating feigned obtuseness with the express purpose of driving you crazy. When you finally call them on it, and you usually have to do this with some firmness, then they shift to playing the outraged victim. Or, they accuse you of being a bad person, or, as Drake accused me, of being unloving.

It's just a game. They enjoy the dance. No matter how much sense you make, no matter how good an argument you present compared to theirs, you will make no headway with them. When you finally react to their sly obtuseness with some impatience, that's what they want, because then they can play the abused victim, and so forth.

Real LCers and other observers deserve better than our dancing around with those kinds of people. We look ridiculous continuing to give them the benefit of the doubt. They should be marked out and called on it. If they don't get real they should be restricted. Don't worry, they will always put on the outraged act when that happens. Like I said, it's a game to them, one that never ends.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

They don't blow up people physically. They just blow up reputations, lives, marriages, families, ministries, works, churches--basically the whole rest of the Body of Christ is all--just to defend their crazy world view. They even have their manifestos, which read like manifestos--like rants from bright but deluded minds. Sounds like unabomber-lite to me.

Drake regularly comes on board to inform us that we all are in danger of God's judgment for exposing these lies perpetrated over the years by LSM. What about all of those innocent Christian lives that were "blown up" for their own self-gains. Wasn't this Publisher's bottom line, not the truth of the gospel at all, but their own reputation -- which equals revenue? Hence they are guilty of filthy lucre, clearly and repeatedly warned about in the N.T.

It seems like, more today than I have ever seen in my lifetime, many people are just willing to believe lies. They reject the truth, so God sends them a powerful delusion, that they would believe falsehoods. (II Thess 2.10-12)

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Drake regularly comes on board to inform us that we all are in danger of God's judgment for exposing these lies perpetrated over the years by LSM.

Thankfully God is not taking direction from Drake.

For everyone's information, I regularly pray, "God if I'm wrong in my beliefs and opinions, please show me. But I'm going to hold them until you tell me not to. I know I can be highly-opinionated. Please course-correct me if needed."

Do you think anyone in the LC movement does that? Do you think Drake does? I still remember asking an LC brother to at least pray about whether the LC was wrong. His response? "I don't need to pray."

That's what we are dealing with here. From a Christian standpoint, that's mental illness.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I've had testimony from a brother that you corresponded with him and said you really weren't that much for the LC, but rather that you just enjoyed being a foil to the people here.

Now THAT is total fake news.

You should find better sources.

Igzy, you might be confusing me with someone else. Who, I have no clue. Just to be clear, all your evidence about what I haven't shared is right here in this forum for anyone to read. Before flaming on with a personal tirade and ad hominem attack against this sincere contributor you should have read what I already posted. Anyone who has conversed with me on a variety of topics knows that your characterizations are completely baseless. Had you done the due diligence (even a little) then you could have crafted your attack on something real. I have plenty of shortcomings so you could have easily found something real to condemn.

And yet, I'm not really asking you to do the due diligence. It's up to you and I really don't mind what beliefs you hold about me, even erroneous ones as yours are. If you choose to remain misinformed after one or two corrections then I'll just assume that you don't care to know. No problem... to me it's like water off a duck's back so to speak.

I've said this before, but for clarity to anyone who gives a hoot, my participation in this forum is intermittent due to several personal factors, I'll try to offer a point of view on topics I believe I can contribute to in the time allotted, and with some posters I may mostly or totally put them on ignore if I think their only interest is to badger and engage in ad hominem attacks instead of focusing on the topic at hand.

That's just me but that is neither the behavior of an internet troll nor is it the modus operandi of a freelancer.

Now how about you brother Igzy? Why the condescension toward brothers in the Lord....even in this forum? Why the ad hominem attacks? May I ask, shouldn't a message about God's love be accompanied by some expression of it even toward your enemies? I am your enemy in your eyes, aren't I? Still, brotherly love or none, can you disagree without becoming disagreeable? I'm not trying to hurt your feelings and I'd like to hear your point of view on several topics but your outbursts in these last few posts are distractions... this thread is not about Drake.

But look, if you want to open a thread all about Drake I may or may not join you.. but at least you would be on topic!

Drake

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

Drake

Drake,

I'm sorry, but you have little credibility with me. I honestly do not know if you are lying or telling the truth. I've watched you spin on this forum so much that frankly I'm dizzy. I honestly think you are full of sh*t.

I've seen you dodge, bob and weave and flat out lie through your teeth here. You cannot possibly be as obtuse as you pretend to be. You claim you've never seen the offenses that Ohio has posted reams of proof of. Yet you claim to know your stuff. Both can't be true. And I believe Ohio.

Offending a brother in Christ? How about all the brothers in Christ you and your homies have offended and wrecked down the years? How about them? Please don't tell me you care about brothers in Christ.

Whether you are the former troll I associate you with or not, you have much more in common with him than you should want to. Trust me on that one. The similarities are scary. Of course, this speculation, if it is speculation, would be completely unnecessary if you would stop playing so coy and just be completely up front. But like most LC-affected people, you play games.

Stop spinning and come clean.

By the way, "the Recovery" is a hoax.

Igzy

[Cal]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I consider his posts very helpful for me to examine the question in hand. No one else is defending these doctrines so it is essential to hear what a genuine defense would sound like.

Second I cannot condemn WL's rude and insulting aspects of his ministry and then condone Igzy (aka "Not my momma"), which is far more slanderous and without even the slightest Biblical basis.

"Far more slanderous?" Are you serious?

Here's the problem, Z. We go around and around, and these guys hide behind thinly-veiled words and pseudo-Christian protocol. Whenever pressed, they stonewall. When you press harder, to the point of impatience, they start asking for decorum. It's their hiding place.

Without the slightest Biblical basis? Jesus and Paul did not give in to such squeamishness. They blew up those hiding places.

Jesus called the Pharisees "vipers" (Matt 12:34). He called them "whitewashed tombs" (Matt 23:27) Paul called the Jews "dogs" (Phil 3:2). He called the high priest Ananias a "whitewashed wall" (Acts 23:3).

These words were reserved for religious hypocrites, and that's exactly what Drake and the Blendeds are.

So I call them "mentally ill" and "full of sh*t." Does that really have any appreciable difference from the tone and words Jesus and Paul used? Are you going to make that argument? I'd like to see you try.

Don't tell me I'm out of line with the Bible. I'm right in line.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Drake

Igzy,

You are way out of line with the Bible and the Holy Spirit.

Don't delude yourself into thinking that your profanity-laced speaking is the Holy Spirit's utterance. Even unbelievers would call you on that.

Don't fool yourself by thinking the berating of fellow brothers in the Lord is condoned by the Lord or would be by Paul. Believers are not Pharisees or Jews that attacked His believers and persecuted His church....that is where you also err in your comparison.

Drake

BTW Drake,

If I thought for a moment that you had any credibility, standing or authority to lecture anyone in the Body of Christ about anything, I might be inclined to listen to you. But since you insist on being a callous apologist for a corrupt religious organization which has engineered the damage of thousands of Christians and many churches, and since you remain unrepentant of your part in that assault on the Body, I am not going to lose any sleep about you or your pompous pontifications.

But, again, this is the hypocrisy once more. Instead of honestly addressing the questions about the undeniable damage of the LC leadership's lording over the saints of God, Drake has opportunistically found yet another way to dodge the important issues by focusing on the fact that I've said he was full of sh*t. Let alone for a moment that such an utterance is completely accurate and appropriate in his case.

Even the unbelievers know you are full of it, Drake. That's the funny part.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

"Far more slanderous?" Are you serious?

Here's the problem, Z. We go around and around, and these guys hide behind thinly-veiled words and pseudo-Christian protocol. Whenever pressed, they stonewall. When you press harder, to the point of impatience, they start asking for decorum. It's their hiding place.

Without the slightest Biblical basis? Jesus and Paul did not give in to such squeamishness. They blew up those hiding places.

Jesus called the Pharisees "vipers" (Matt 12:34). He called them "whitewashed tombs" (Matt 23:27) Paul called the Jews "dogs" (Phil 3:2). He called the high priest Ananias a "whitewashed wall" (Acts 23:3).

These words were reserved for religious hypocrites, and that's exactly what Drake and the Blendeds are.

So I call them "mentally ill" and "full of sh*t." Does that really have any appreciable difference from the tone and words Jesus and Paul used? Are you going to make that argument? I'd like to see you try.

Don't tell me I'm out of line with the Bible. I'm right in line.

Both Lee and the Blendeds have called dear brothers like John Ingalls et. al. "Lepers," implying that they are so deathly sick that even their families should not sit at meal with them.

The Blendeds publicly stated that these "lepers" should have their houses torn down or re-plastered.

How can Drake continually protect these characters, and yet claim we are tossing "ad hominems" unfairly.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Igzy,

You are way out of line with the Bible and the Holy Spirit.

Don't delude yourself into thinking that your profanity-laced speaking is the Holy Spirit's utterance. Even unbelievers would call you on that.

Don't fool yourself by thinking the berating of fellow brothers in the Lord is condoned by the Lord or would be by Paul. Believers are not Pharisees or Jews that attacked His believers and persecuted His church....that is where you also err in your comparison.

Drake

Read the book of Acts or Galatians. What LSM has done to Midwest LC's is far worse than what the Judaizers have done.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Igzy

No, I didn't. I presumed there was. That was my presumptiveness. Anyway, there should be such a word. Actually, I still think there might be....

Whatever, if you are reduced to taking shots at my vocabulary I know I must be doing a good job. So, I'm encouraged.

ne·ol·o·gism Dictionary result for neologism
/nēˈäləˌjizəm/Submit
noun
a newly coined word or expression.
synonyms: new word, new expression, new term, new phrase, coinage, newly coined word, made-up word, invented word, invention, nonce word; portmanteau word
the coining or use of new words.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

they answer to the Lord directly.

So they are not bound by the "One Publication"?

It is the claim of this thread that we all answer to the Lord directly and are not desirous to be under the law.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

So they are not bound by the "One Publication"?

It is the claim of this thread that we all answer to the Lord directly and are not desirous to be under the law.

You’re losing me now Brother ZNP. Can’t follow and don’t have the time to devote to sorting it out. I’ll leave you the last word.

Thanks
Drake

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Drake

You’re losing me now Brother ZNP. Can’t follow and don’t have the time to devote to sorting it out. I’ll leave you the last word.

Thanks
Drake

According to the One Publication edict you need to have your speaking vetted. Even WL would not presume to publish something without getting a senior brother like WN to vet his words. Yet you say that these blended brothers "answer directly to the Lord". That is contrary to this edict. If they answer directly to the Lord they do not need to have an intermediary approve their speaking.

Why is it that everyone who defends this rule (you are the only one on this thread) and every one that enforces this rule does not submit to it? Why do you expect everyone else but yourselves to submit to this rule?

You don't get your posts vetted. Why is that?