It's about life

[jesusislord]

What does it means by it's about life? It's a kind of feeling?

this is a passage from lsm material

it's not a matter of asking whether something is right or wrong… [but] of checking with the life inside us whenever we do something.
What does the new life which God has given us tell us inwardly about this matter? What does our inner life say? If the life is strong and active within us, we can do this; if the life is cold and retreating within us, we should not. Our principle for living is inward instead of outward.
The standard of Christian living does not only deal with evil things but also with good and right things. Many matters are right according to human standards, but the divine standard pronounces them wrong because they lack the divine life…. Decisions should be made according to God’s life as it rises up or recedes within us…. Do we feel joyful inwardly about this matter? Do we have spiritual happiness and peace? These are the matters that decide our spiritual path. (Two Principles of Living (booklet), pp. 2-3, 6-9, 13-15)

in the bible paul's teaching is often direct, he's clear what is right and what is wrong. Like you shouldn't steal, shouldn't hurt others. Jesus's affirmation on the 10 commandments is also quite clear. but when it comes to lsm it is all about life. It gives me an impression that it's about feeling, a feeling from a group of people, it's superficial.

What if a brother sinned and he feels it's ok? doesn't it against the bible? lsm is one of the rare group that downplay what's obviously right and wrong and replace it with life. What's the root of this teaching?

[aron]

Originally Posted by jesusislord

What does it means by it's about life? It's a kind of feeling?

in the bible paul's teaching is often direct, he's clear what is right and what is wrong. Like you shouldn't steal, shouldn't hurt others. Jesus's affirmation on the 10 commandments is also quite clear. but when it comes to lsm it is all about life. It gives me an impression that it's about feeling, a feeling from a group of people, it's superficial.

I think the ministry mouthpiece also uses this expression. "The feeling in the Body is..." So they think one church leader can discern the feeling in the Body of Christ, because he gets 'life'. Whatever happened to the much discussion amongst the disciples in the Book of Acts?

It's about one person's subjective feeling, which they then can put on the mass, who have to accept it passively because that's 'life'. Reminds me of two prisoners in a holding cell. One came back from a sentencing hearing, the other asked what the judge said, and the first replied, "I got life".

That's the 'life' you get in the LC. Life in a gulag.

Here is a blurb from AffCrit in their critique of the True Jesus Church:

"Certainly there is joy in the Holy Spirit (Rom 14:17), but to link particular physical sensations and movements with the receiving of the Spirit is to incline the new believer toward the sensual and away from the preciousness of Christ's person."

A fairly large portion of AffCrit objections to TJC would fall also on themselves, but we all know the drill: "When we do it, it's okay, but if someone else does it, not okay."

The entire modus operandi of the LC is to "incline the new believer toward the sensual". All the repetition, shouting, hand waving, amen-amenning, fist pumping, heel rocking, neck rolling, sing-songy cadences, exhortations to "exercise your spirit!" etc etc etc... it's all about manufacturing sensation.

Step 1: get the 'new one' in cognitive dissociation via sensory overload.
Step 2: tell them, this is 'life' from the Throne of God.
Step 3: the reprogramming starts. Suddenly up is down, and "we don't care for right and wrong, only life"

[aron]

Where their life takes you, Part A:

In 2005 Benson Phillips also spoke on this “sisters‟ rebellion” saying I’d like to tell you a couple of stories in the recovery. In 1977 we had some sisters out on the West Coast. They started building up a kind of group around themselves. They were inviting sisters, and they were getting into the Word and were talking about doctrine, and they were getting clear on the church, getting clear on everything. Then it spread to Texas. I don’t know where else it spread to, but anyhow, some sisters in Texas got into the same flow. And because it had happened here in Anaheim and there in Texas, we brothers had to do something. And even Brother Lee, I remember, in a conference ... Brother Lee, he was so distraught and so grieved (I don’t know what word to use). In one meeting he said, “You three holy sisters, would you stand up?” (I think he asked them to stand up.) Well, I learned a lesson there that he did not mess around with factious people. And he said, “You three holy sisters,” and he asked them a question. Would you do that? Would you have the boldness to do that? Well, maybe one day you will have to do it. Then, in Texas, let me tell you this: They had their so-called, you know, party. It really was a party. They didn’t call it a party, but that’s what we’re talking about, a factious party, built up in the church. It may be sisters, it may be brothers, it may be young people, it may be co-workers, it may be anyone.

But to form a group around yourself is factious and sectarian because it keeps others out, and you become special. That is factious. Well, this one sister that we had to deal with, she was the leader. That was over 30 years ago by now. You know what she just came out with? A book against the recovery! Was she the right kind of person? Did we do the right thing? Absolutely, we did the right thing! If she can write a book against the recovery today, that seed was in her even then. Isn’t this something? Brothers, these kind of people, the factious people, those who form parties within the church, they have to be dealt with. Why? Because they are destroyers of God’s building. (2005 Anaheim Winter Training: Crystallization-Study of The Building of God, #11)

http://www.ourneedtoexamineourselves...eRebellion.pdf

So Witness Lee didn't get 'life' because the sisters were rebelling. And what was the enumerated crime? They were meeting together and studying the Bible! Horrors! Of course Benson and WL couldn't say that one of the sisters heard an elder confess of marital sin, and another of the sisters' husband confronted WL about his son's behaviours in the LSM Office. So they are said to be "forming a party" because they met together to study the Bible.

Which WL did as well. He also drew people after himself, formed a party, the LC. But when he did it, it's okay, because he got 'life'. If anyone else does it, he doesn't get 'life'. So they aren't allowed to, either.

Where their life takes you, Part B

From Jo and Greg Casteel open letter

I was in a constant cycle of fear, guilt, and anxiety. For example, a leading brother in our locality “prophesied” one day in the Lord’s Day meeting and told us that God did not need our love. That God needs our service and our time, but not our love. Everyone around was giving this leading one loud “amens” and nodding their heads in affirmation but I had a massive different feeling in my being that said, “God is love! Our whole relationship with God should be based on love!” I could not say amen to what he was saying.

As I talked with my husband about it after the meeting I was terrified by the fact I was going against God’s deputy authority. I would confess to the Lord my sin of being critical and negative and feel that I was an evil person for having those thoughts about my brother. I would then think the thoughts again about God being love and realize I was criticizing and not “thinking the same thing” again and the cycle of guilt and repentance would repeat itself.

And not only was I afraid of losing my relationship with God over my thoughts, I was eaten up with fear of God’s judgment on me over having these thoughts. I constantly worried about God bringing me to naught and causing me to lose everything for not “keeping the oneness.”

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...SOtSGH1DE/edit

Again, someone's parasitical concept of 'life' (personal benefit, enjoyment, comfort, safety) has been successfully transposed onto others such that they can't function without pleasing the the parasite (and this position of constant abject fealty doesn't always work - I was there & saw it).

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by jesusislord

What does it means by it's about life? It's a kind of feeling?

this is a passage from lsm material

it's not a matter of asking whether something is right or wrong… [but] of checking with the life inside us whenever we do something.
What does the new life which God has given us tell us inwardly about this matter? What does our inner life say? If the life is strong and active within us, we can do this; if the life is cold and retreating within us, we should not. Our principle for living is inward instead of outward.
The standard of Christian living does not only deal with evil things but also with good and right things. Many matters are right according to human standards, but the divine standard pronounces them wrong because they lack the divine life…. Decisions should be made according to God’s life as it rises up or recedes within us…. Do we feel joyful inwardly about this matter? Do we have spiritual happiness and peace? These are the matters that decide our spiritual path. (Two Principles of Living (booklet), pp. 2-3, 6-9, 13-15)

in the bible paul's teaching is often direct, he's clear what is right and what is wrong. Like you shouldn't steal, shouldn't hurt others. Jesus's affirmation on the 10 commandments is also quite clear. but when it comes to lsm it is all about life. It gives me an impression that it's about feeling, a feeling from a group of people, it's superficial.

What if a brother sinned and he feels it's ok? doesn't it against the bible? lsm is one of the rare group that downplay what's obviously right and wrong and replace it with life. What's the root of this teaching?

I don't see anything so wrong with the passage you quoted (but perhaps I'm missing something?). The sense of life and peace is something that is an indicator within us, that the Anointing conveys. The Lord said "I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live." (Duet 30:19) He has given us life in Christ (the Way, Truth & Life). Before we were regenerated unto a living hope, we only knew death, and death doesn't really even know it's dead! Jesus said clearly, "I came that they might have life . . ."

I know when I start to do or think a certain thing that's not so good, all of a sudden there is just a deadening affect. And when I listen to and obey the Anointing, there is a sense of life. Is it a feeling? Well, a feeling is usually provided with it, in that life makes me feel better than death. My mind also has more light, whereas death provides me with a sort of heaviness and my thinking is often clouded or unclear. Many times condemnation also comes with that and I "feel" further from the Lord (not actually true) and not so inclined to follow Him and/or maybe not so inclined to fellowship with other believers.

So again, no so much just a feeling, but there certainly is some sensation you might call feelings. (BTW - only someone alive has feelings - the dead don't feel much)

Does any of that make sense?

[Trapped]

I think a few things....

"the sense of life and peace" is not something we follow. We follow the Spirit. And the mind governed by the Spirit IS life and peace. How is it IS? No idea. But Romans says it.

So in that sense, it's kind of like so many other things that have happened in the LC. Rather than abiding in order to bear fruit, they chase after the fruit (new one on college campuses) and forget about the abiding. And here we aren't following the Spirit, but following the thing that is supposed to be produced when we rightly follow the Spirit. We're chasing after the wrong thing that seems right. It's subtle.

Deut. 30:19, if I remember correctly, is not talking about a "sense" of life versus death, but actual good prosperous life versus death and destruction, right?

Yes, we each have a choice of eternal life or the second death, but the Bible never tells us to "follow a sense of life". It tells us to keep His commandments. Again, subtle.

The issue is, the LC doesn't "care about right and wrong". Well, if you don't care about right and wrong, then that throws objective standards (like commandments) out the window. And we are all each left to do with "feels like life" inside, which is subjective and brings our own morality within each of us, rather than rooted in God.

I think we follow the Spirit (or the Lord's speaking) and our conscience. I don't think there is a "sense of life" that we follow. The Bible certainly never says to "check with life". Would any of us ever say, "let me check with my wife's life before I buy this golf set?" No. You'd say, "let me check with my wife." This, to me, is just another subtle teaching that sounds good but isn't in the Bible and depersonalizes God.

And is then used to control people by hitting them over the head with "your opinions are not of life!!!"

I dunno.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Trapped

And is then used to control people by hitting them over the head with "your opinions are not of life!!!"

I dunno.

Sure, it can and was abused. But that's not a reason, yet again, to throw the whole thing out because someone abused the idea.

[UntoHim]

Sure it is, especially if it was a really bad idea since the beginning...and I think that's part of Trapped's whole point.
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Sure it is, especially if it was a really bad idea since the beginning...and I think that's part of Trapped's whole point.
-

Did Jesus say He came that we might have life?

I've got the feeling that Sons of Glory is a pro LC. Every time the other posters have disagreements with the teachings of Nee and Lee, he defends those obvious errors like this thread.

[Curious]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Sure, it can and was abused. But that's not a reason, yet again, to throw the whole thing out because someone abused the idea.

Any deception to be effective, needs to come alongside and parallel a truth then take that truth into an opposite direction. That is how deception works, it has to be clever or it wouldn't work on anyone.

Being sensitive to our God-given conscience, which may check us in some areas, (and can be seared in others), can be a subjective inkling that steers us in the right direction. That is my belief anyway. I think when the sense of life is directing you towards the things that are in line with the word of God then that is your conscience and the Holy Spirit within you.

I sometimes have an instant bad feeling when I start to speak of someone in a way that is not honouring to that person. So I've learned to stop at that point. In my mind I've rationalised it as fine, so I'm in flow, but the check comes subjectivity and I've increased my personal integrity through that caution that I feel rather than think. The more times I notice it and respond in obedience, the stronger it gets.

I hope this helps. When both the subjective and the objective reflect truth, back it, and harmonise with it then we are good. Somewhere in the NT is says something like the Holy Spirit is not subject to the law.... Because by His very nature, God harmonises with the law, they can ever be in contradiction to one another. The test of our subjective feelings is do they line up, and we can test each one seperately.

I hope that helps.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Did Jesus say He came that we might have life?

Jesus said a lot of things, but I wouldn't boil it down to "it's about life". Jesus brought us peace, joy, righteousness, redemption, and yes, life. But take a look and see where your "sense of life" can over-rule plain right and wrong. Nowhere is where. Yet if you look at the ministry quote in the first post, it's clearly inferred.

I did a search on "Light" versus "life" in John's gospel. Chapter 1 has "life" once in v.4, then "light" in vv 4,5,7,8, and 9. Much more emphasis on light in the introductory chapter. Verse 4 says "in him was life, and the life was the light of men". Not the life of men but the light of men.

Then chapter 3. Verse 16 is the famous, "God so loved the world so much that He sent His Only Begotten Son, that whosoever believes might have eternal life". But vv 19-21 is on ones who don't believe, versus those who do: "And this is the verdict: The Light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness rather than the Light, because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever practices the truth comes into the Light, so that it may be seen clearly that what he has done has been accomplished in God.”

Then chapter 5:21-26 has a section on life, the resurrection in the end of times. "For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it... Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself."

Then verse 35, on John: "John was a lamp that burned and gave light, and you chose for a time to enjoy his light."

Then vv 39,40: "You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.'

Then an extensive section, John 6:40, 46-57 " For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day... No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me"

Then John 9:4,5 ''As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

Then John 10:10 "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full."

Then John 12:35,36 Then Jesus told them, “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. Whoever walks in the dark does not know where they are going. Believe in the light while you have the light, so that you may become children of light.” When he had finished speaking, Jesus left and hid himself from them.

Then vv 44:46, where believing is equated to seeing the light: Then Jesus cried out, “Whoever believes in me does not believe in me only, but in the one who sent me. The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me. I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness."

Then John 20:30,31 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Overall I'd say John stresses "light" more than "life" especially the all-important introductory chapter. Then chapter 3, after the "whoever believes has eternal life" there are 3 verses that are key to getting that life - from coming into the light. It says, "Light came into the world, but men loved darkness more than light."

Now, I stress that here, because the LSM operatives clearly hate the light. They stress the "sense of life" but they hate the light. So how is their life?

1. Witness Lee hated to hear the truth. He complained, it was like pouring cold water on him. Everyone learned: Give a good report, no matter what really was going on.
2. The DCP writers, when they are forced to acknowledge Daystar because of the Jo Casteel letter, never once mention Timothy Lee. Yet he was the one who suggested the plan, according to eye-witnesses. He's the one who ran it, profited, and took off with how much money... yet DCP never mentions his name. And the sons of Lee were involved in a number of business fiascoes. This wasn't a one-off. There was a pattern. But it's never mentioned. It's like he didn't exist.

If there's no light, how can there be life?

[Trapped]

Question:

When we refer to "life" (Gk., zoe, specifically) in this way, what exactly are we talking about?

Are we talking about the eternal life that we have and can rest assured knowing it is ours after we pass away?

Or is there some kind of thing called "life" that we deal in during our physical human life?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Question:

When we refer to "life" (Gk., zoe, specifically) in this way, what exactly are we talking about?

Are we talking about the eternal life that we have and can rest assured knowing it is ours after we pass away?

Or is there some kind of thing called "life" that we deal in during our physical human life?

"...it's not a matter of asking whether something is right or wrong… [but] of checking with the life inside us whenever we do something. What does the new life which God has given us tell us inwardly about this matter? What does our inner life say? If the life is strong and active within us, we can do this; if the life is cold and retreating within us, we should not. Our principle for living is inward instead of outward.

The standard of Christian living does not only deal with evil things but also with good and right things. Many matters are right according to human standards, but the divine standard pronounces them wrong because they lack the divine life…. Decisions should be made according to God’s life as it rises up or recedes within us…. Do we feel joyful inwardly about this matter? Do we have spiritual happiness and peace? These are the matters that decide our spiritual path." (Two Principles of Living, pp. 2-3, 6-9, 13-15)

They're talking about a subjective sense flowing from the connection that believers have to the life of God (zoe) within. We'd call it 'conscience' or 'intuition' but for LSM 'life' is suitably fuzzy for manipulation. But I would match this against scripture, otherwise they are going to manipulate you, take you somewhere that you don't want to go. The phrase "it's all about life" suborns common sense and even basic human understandings of right and wrong.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

I'd say John stresses "light" more than "life" especially the all-important introductory chapter. Then chapter 3, after the "whoever believes has eternal life" there are 3 verses that are key to getting that life - from coming into the light. It says, "Light came into the world, but men loved darkness more than light."

Now, I stress that here, because the LSM operatives clearly hate the light. They stress the "sense of life" but they hate the light. So how is their life?

1. Witness Lee hated to hear the truth. He complained, it was like pouring cold water on him. Everyone learned: Give a good report, no matter what really was going on.
2. The DCP writers, when they are forced to acknowledge Daystar because of the Jo Casteel letter, never once mention Timothy Lee. Yet he was the one who suggested the plan, according to eye-witnesses. He's the one who ran it, profited, and took off with how much money...

If there's no light, how can there be life?

3. Witness Lee put admittedly unspiritual son Philip in a position of authority, able to cause havoc in the LC. Then, when PL was repeatedly found molesting the help, Lee covered it over and smeared the witnesses. This shows that the needs of the guanxi network caused him to repress the truth, love the darkness, and hate the light. So, where is the life?

John 3:16-21 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

Here we see clearly that eternal life is connected to believing, which is connected to "living by the truth" and "coming to the light". If someone rejects the light, how can they have the eternal life? Witness Lee's "sense of life" was to build up his guanxi network. Losing face was impossible. So people got hurt, witnesses were smeared and ejected, and "life" went on. But it wasn't the life of the Bible but a parasitical life that fed on others who once they were wrung dry, were tossed aside. This isn't the divine life but it's opposite.

And yet people stayed. Why? Because their conscience and intuition were stunned, crippled, invalidated. Their ability to follow the sense of life was paralyzed.

We used to sing, "It's the life, life, life, that makes me want to shout, Hallelujah Praise the Lord" but if we hate the truth, and love the darkness, how can this be life?

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Curious

...Being sensitive to our God-given conscience, which may check us in some areas, (and can be seared in others), can be a subjective inkling that steers us in the right direction. That is my belief anyway. I think when the sense of life is directing you towards the things that are in line with the word of God then that is your conscience and the Holy Spirit within you.

I sometimes have an instant bad feeling when I start to speak of someone in a way that is not honouring to that person. So I've learned to stop at that point. In my mind I've rationalised it as fine, so I'm in flow, but the check comes subjectivity and I've increased my personal integrity through that caution that I feel rather than think. The more times I notice it and respond in obedience, the stronger it gets. ...

Curious,

I think we can safely say that the functioning of our conscience which, with normal Christian values, speaks to right and wrong, often "on the spot". I don't believe this healthy function of the Spirit approaches the Local Church "we only care for life" teaching. The function of a healthy conscience is personal and individual. It convicts us, individually, often with a "check" on our thoughts and actions.

"We only care for life" is "Lee speak" or "LC speak" for the benefit of the group, or others who may question the teaching...like us. This works because their version of the word "life" is loosely defined, and often depends on the situation. "We only care for life" has built-in avoidance of being held accountable for questionable behavior. Since it's not really defined, they can't really be held accountable. It sounds good. Right? Lee's "life" morphs to fit the situation. Lee's "life" is defined by whatever the audience needs to hear to end the questions ("reasonings").

Here, the word "life" is used differently as Lee was prone to do. I've heard it described as a "non-scriptural 'spiritual' teaching". I think that fits, and Lee was full of such teachings.

Again, this is not about the functioning of our conscience which is healthy, personal, individual and normal as we learn from being taught by the living Holy Spirit. It's about the "we only care for life" teaching being errant.

Nell

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Luker

I've got the feeling that Sons of Glory is a pro LC. Every time the other posters have disagreements with the teachings of Nee and Lee, he defends those obvious errors like this thread.

Since I don't think anyone else responded on this I will. I've been accused of being one of the few "middle-of-the-roaders" on here, or a "don't throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater" one. I DO have a few key things I object too regarding the LC/LSM movement - if anyone wants to know what they are, I will list them again.

However, most people on here tend to slant in the "anti-all-things-LC" direction. Therefore I often feel inclined to bring up some point that perhaps (hopefully, kinda, sorta) balances the conversation. Admittedly, this means I get a lot of pies thrown my way (how many of them actually hit, is up to y-all to decide).

BTW - a verse I ran across this morning in Daily Light for our reading pleasure: "For if, being enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved in His life!"

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

However, most people on here tend to slant in the "anti-all-things-LC" direction. Therefore I often feel inclined to bring up some point that perhaps (hopefully, kinda, sorta) balances the conversation. Admittedly, this means I get a lot of pies thrown my way (how many of them actually hit, is up to y-all to decide).

BTW - a verse I ran across this morning in Daily Light for our reading pleasure: "For if, being enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved in His life!"

Witness Lee: "the Bible is composed of 66 books...."
Lotsa LCDers: "heresy! you see, the number of the beast is 666, WL is basing his Bible teachings on the devil!"

[UntoHim]

It's not real hard folks.

When Local Churchers say "life" they really mean the personal teachings and opinions of Witness Lee. This is why when Lee and the teachings and practices are criticized, from within the movement or from without, no matter how valid the criticism, they will tell you that "they don't find life in your words" or that they "sense death in your speaking" or some such subjective garbage. It is purely and simply subjective, and really has nothing to do with the life of God described in the Bible. This is why Ron Kangas can call Steve Isitt "a man of death". Criticizing Lee and the teachings and practices = death.

There is little doubt that this all got started with the teachings and practices of Watchman Nee. Nee never publicly repudiated or renounced any of the unbiblical and dangerous things he wrote in The Spiritual Man. In fact, history shows that he built his entire ministry from the foundation of that book. Of course Witness Lee took many of the unbiblical, overly-subjective "sense of life" teachings of Nee and brought them up to a whole new level of absurdity and danger for thousands of his followers. The result: A bunch of people running around claiming that they are "the Lord's Recovery" and "we don't care for right or wrong, we only care for life". May God have mercy.
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

When Local Churchers say "life" they really mean the personal teachings and opinions of Witness Lee. This is why when Lee and the teachings and practices are criticized, from within the movement or from without, no matter how valid the criticism, they will tell you that "they don't find life in your words" or that they "sense death in your speaking" or some such subjective garbage. It is purely and simply subjective, and really has nothing to do with the life of God described in the Bible. This is why Ron Kangas can call Steve Isitt "a man of death". Criticizing Lee and the teachings and practices = death.

This makes sense and thanks! It makes it difficult to communicate effectively with each other when using the same words that have been shaded with different meanings! (much like what is happening with the polarization in this country . . .)

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Since I don't think anyone else responded on this I will. I've been accused of being one of the few "middle-of-the-roaders" on here, or a "don't throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater" one. I DO have a few key things I object too regarding the LC/LSM movement - if anyone wants to know what they are, I will list them again.

However, most people on here tend to slant in the "anti-all-things-LC" direction. Therefore I often feel inclined to bring up some point that perhaps (hopefully, kinda, sorta) balances the conversation. Admittedly, this means I get a lot of pies thrown my way (how many of them actually hit, is up to y-all to decide).

I have been taking shots from both sides since I left the LC. It has only served to help me search the scriptures and know whom I believe.

For me this is the healthiest place to be. During any debate or protest, joining the mob on either side might appear safer in the short term, but too many compromises are demanded in order to accommodate their positions. I would rather sacrifice a little safety for principle. Don't be a man-pleaser, but a God-pleaser. Paul told Timothy to "rightly divide" the truth, and elsewhere to purge out the old leaven.

I am constantly warned of this when I consider all those who have discarded their faith and love towards God when they left the recovery.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Raptor

Witness Lee: "the Bible is composed of 66 books...."
Lotsa LCDers: "heresy! you see, the number of the beast is 666, WL is basing his Bible teachings on the devil!"

Great points! I never saw the connection there.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

It's not real hard folks.

When Local Churchers say "life" they really mean the personal teachings and opinions of Witness Lee. This is why when Lee and the teachings and practices are criticized, from within the movement or from without, no matter how valid the criticism, they will tell you that "they don't find life in your words" or that they "sense death in your speaking" or some such subjective garbage. It is purely and simply subjective, and really has nothing to do with the life of God described in the Bible.

Great points, UntoHim.

To take this further, reading WL books do provide a certain flavor or familiar taste to the reader, often much different than other Christian authors. One can pick up any book of his, without seeing the cover title, and readily know whether it's WL or not. Part of this is in the terminology. Part in his pat teachings. Part of this is the arrogant attitude towards other Christians.

Those who still embrace his books and teachings (even some of my family members) look past this leaven and stress the Bible teachings within which they deem valuable. This is what they are used to. They are comfortable with it. Some call that "life." Some of them even deceptively believe that all of Lee's teachings were genuinely inspired by God, and that it was just his followers who messed things up.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

There is little doubt that this all got started with the teachings and practices of Watchman Nee. Nee never publicly repudiated or renounced any of the unbiblical and dangerous things he wrote in The Spiritual Man. In fact, history shows that he built his entire ministry from the foundation of that book. Of course Witness Lee took many of the unbiblical, overly-subjective "sense of life" teachings of Nee and brought them up to a whole new level of absurdity and danger for thousands of his followers.

Interesting concepts here, especially when we consider that book The Spiritual Man was plagiarized from Penn-Lewis's book, and apparently she single-handedly brought down Evan Roberts and the Welch Revival.

[Sons to Glory!]

I think I asked this question before, but don't remember getting a reply - I somehow wound-up with a copy of The Spiritual Man, but have never read it because of things various ones have said about it over the years. Should I throw it out, or donate it to the church lending library?

[Ohio]

Maybe send it to awareness?

[Sons to Glory!]

That's so nice of you to think of him - I can see you two have a really "special" relationship.

[Ohio]

Because he definitely reads a lot. I once sent him all of Jim "apologetic" Moran's stuff. He prefers the Kindle edition though. He prolly burns old books like that in his stove to stay warm thru the winter. If I had a wood stove I would do that too. Since I don't, I gave away all my books. No sense wasting space in the landfill.

[Curious]

Another very particular and defining feature of WL's writings is all the repetition of sentance that convey a theme. In one and a half A4 sheets of printout handed to me for a study for an evening's meeting, I counted 7 repititions of a one-line sentance that summerized the point being made. That is a feature I had never encountered before in any book I have ever read.

I straight away thought, 'isn't that a communist propoganda tactic, to keep repeating as if the number of repetitions will alone convince a person they are true' ?
At the time I had not much idea that something was amiss with this group.

(The counting of these repetitions was made easier by the fact that all these identical sentences had been highlighted with a highlighter pen, by my LC friend, hoping this added emphasis would further convince me as to the 'truth' of the statements!.... So sad this sort of effort is actually believed to be effective by LC people).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Curious

Another very particular and defining feature of WL's writings is all the repetition of sentance that convey a theme. In one and a half A4 sheets of printout handed to me for a study for an evening's meeting, I counted 7 repititions of a one-line sentance that summerized the point being made. That is a feature I had never encountered before in any book I have ever read.

I straight away thought, 'isn't that a communist propoganda tactic, to keep repeating as if the number of repetitions will alone convince a person they are true' ?
At the time I had not much idea that something was amiss with this group.

(The counting of these repetitions was made easier by the fact that all these identical sentences had been highlighted with a highlighter pen, by my LC friend, hoping this added emphasis would further convince me as to the 'truth' of the statements!.... So sad this sort of effort is actually believed to be effective by LC people).

Children also learn thru repetition. I don't see the sinister intention in the repetition by itself. Much of it may come from the editorial staff. They had a way of taking WL's spoken messages and fluffing them up into 2 or 3 written messages, apparently good for the bottom line.

Regarding brainwashing via unending propaganda, the entire world is bombarded with this daily, my friend. It's nearly impossible to hear something free from it. Definition of factoid: anything repeated often enough that it becomes "fact."

[Sons to Glory!]

I'm with Ohio on this. Repetition is how we learn. Marketing people know all about this, and they claim it takes 7 exposures before someone becomes aware of the message. We use this constantly in our training biz - we have participants listen to the lesson and read it multiple times, while also putting the ideas into practice. The more repetitions you have and the more senses you engage, the better chance that it will become real to you.

It's kinda like eating - you don't just eat once, but rather a number of times a day. It's how we were created.

Of course, this can be used for good or bad.