Other forum for discussing LC stuff

Hi all,

I'm a former LC'er and have deeply appreciated this board. so many stories to relate to and testimonies. one of the things I wish I had back then is a resource like this one earlier on (i found this site much later after much digging) that is beyond the heavily censored wikipedia page by probably the fulltimers in anaheim. I put together a page on reddit where people can post links and discuss matters related to LSM. Hopefully some will find it useful. Please feel free to delete if this is in violation of forum rules, as I'm just trying to put something out there that brings more of the LC to light to help other and have 0 financial interests.

reddit.com/r/lordsrecovey

Note from Admin: The link above appears to be incomplete and/or broken. I think this might be the site the poster is referring us to -
https://www.reddit.com/r/lordsrecovery/

[leastofthese]

From the link provided in this thread:

“We also have the burden to help the trainees to grow absolutely in the divine life. Finally, they have to be built up in their character. They need to be trained to dress properly and to give people a good impression of their appearance. If we do not have a good appearance, who will listen to us or respect us? We must adjust ourselves. If a co-worker teaches the truth without a necktie, the people’s confidence in him will be killed. The way we dress, cut our hair, and comb our hair will give us a proper appearance which can help gain people’s regard and respect. In the past we were too loose and self-contented. Those who work for the Lord should dress in a way that is fitting in the Lord’s work.”
Witness Lee, Elders’ Training Book 9 – The Eldership and the God-Ordained Way (1), p. 15, ch. 11

They linked this from http://www.ftta.org/incoming-trainee...uidelines.html


I found this interesting and immediately thought of Matthew 3, "4 Now John himself had a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; 6 and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins."

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

From the link provided in this thread:

“We also have the burden to help the trainees to grow absolutely in the divine life. Finally, they have to be built up in their character. They need to be trained to dress properly and to give people a good impression of their appearance. If we do not have a good appearance, who will listen to us or respect us? We must adjust ourselves. If a co-worker teaches the truth without a necktie, the people’s confidence in him will be killed. The way we dress, cut our hair, and comb our hair will give us a proper appearance which can help gain people’s regard and respect. In the past we were too loose and self-contented. Those who work for the Lord should dress in a way that is fitting in the Lord’s work.”
Witness Lee, Elders’ Training Book 9 – The Eldership and the God-Ordained Way (1), p. 15, ch. 11

They linked this from http://www.ftta.org/incoming-trainee...uidelines.html


I found this interesting and immediately thought of Matthew 3, "4 Now John himself had a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; 6 and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins."

When I was in a Pentecostal church they more or less said the same thing. If we want to reach business people for example, they won't listen to someone dressed like a homeless person, they'll think you are asking for money. Most leaders in Pentecostal churches wear business attire.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

From the link provided in this thread:

“We also have the burden to help the trainees to grow absolutely in the divine life. Finally, they have to be built up in their character. They need to be trained to dress properly and to give people a good impression of their appearance. If we do not have a good appearance, who will listen to us or respect us? We must adjust ourselves. If a co-worker teaches the truth without a necktie, the people’s confidence in him will be killed. The way we dress, cut our hair, and comb our hair will give us a proper appearance which can help gain people’s regard and respect. In the past we were too loose and self-contented. Those who work for the Lord should dress in a way that is fitting in the Lord’s work.”
Witness Lee, Elders’ Training Book 9 – The Eldership and the God-Ordained Way (1), p. 15, ch. 11

I found this interesting and immediately thought of Matthew 3, "4 Now John himself had a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; 6 and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins."

I just recently listened to a message, posted by Igzy, on marriage by Will Davis at Austin Christian Fellowship. The brother had on a pair of jeans and an untucked shirt, with no necktie. Imagine that, no fancy suit, yet very presentable, and his fellowship was more anointed than most of the slick-suited minister I have heard over the years.

In fact, I daresay that most shiny suits are merely a coverup for the lack of spiritual content and anointing. Did the apostles impress the believers with nice clothing or their life, living, and message?

When I left the LC's I was fed up with polished speakers from LSM in nice suits spewing death and doctrine about distorted oneness, legalistic traditions, and the ministry of condemnation from one of Lee's books.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

When I was in a Pentecostal church they more or less said the same thing. If we want to reach business people for example, they won't listen to someone dressed like a homeless person, they'll think you are asking for money. Most leaders in Pentecostal churches wear business attire.

I think the speaker's clothing ought to fit his audience. Jesus, I'm sure, thought so too.

What's worse? A homeless guy, who really needs a meal, asking for money? Or the wealthy pastor in his tailored suit and Audi A8 asking for money?

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I just recently listened to a message, posted by Igzy, on marriage by Will Davis at Austin Christian Fellowship. The brother had on a pair of jeans and an untucked shirt, with no necktie. Imagine that, no fancy suit, yet very presentable, and his fellowship was more anointed than most of the slick-suited minister I have heard over the years.

Yes that may be true, but did you see the excellent point about the homeless Pentecostal man?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

Yes that may be true, but did you see the excellent point about the homeless Pentecostal man?

You mean John the Baptist?

[Evangelical]

I think that it is easy to reject someone because they are dressed too poorly.
No one can really complain and say "you are dressed too nicely".

If there is something we can do to make it easier for someone to accept the gospel then we should do it. For example, turning up to a meeting on time, dressing nicely. It's ultimately based on the second great commandment. But casual irreverence does not really present the right image.

People will dress nicely for a job interview, a wedding or a funeral, but won't dress nicely for God.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I think that it is easy to reject someone because they are dressed too poorly.
No one can really complain and say "you are dressed too nicely".

If there is something we can do to make it easier for someone to accept the gospel then we should do it. For example, turning up to a meeting on time, dressing nicely. It's ultimately based on the second great commandment. But casual irreverence does not really present the right image.

People will dress nicely for a job interview, a wedding or a funeral, but won't dress nicely for God.

Dressing 'nicely' is defined by culture/society, not the presence or absense of things like a necktie. And as we all know, that definition of what is nice changes over time. But WL says that not wearing a tie would automatically cause people to lose confidence in a co-worker. Most people do not wear ties nowdays, even in the business world. So standards have changed. And such standards have nothing to do with God.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Dressing 'nicely' is defined by culture/society, not the presence or absense of things like a necktie. And as we all know, that definition of what is nice changes over time. But WL says that not wearing a tie would automatically cause people to lose confidence in a co-worker. Most people do not wear ties nowdays, even in the business world. So standards have changed. And such standards have nothing to do with God.

Yes but today many members do not wear neck ties. Some even wear colorful socks that do not match. Still, I don't think anyone would complain a person is not wearing a tie. But they might complain if they are wearing a business shirt without a tie.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I put together a page on reddit where people can post links and discuss matters related to LSM. Hopefully some will find it useful.

Hi Unreg, thanks for the link. On the 'books' section of the page, you should list the book "A future and a hope" by John Myer.

http://assemblylife.com/about.html

The author of this book, John Myer, was a member and leader in the Local Church Movement for twenty-six years. His personal exodus from the group was complete in 2010, when he left deciding to pursue a more evangelical expression of the Christian faith.

The content of the book represents John’s distilled experience and observations about the group’s eccentricities, extremes, and points of concern. He also outlines how its member congregations can transition to healthier forms of church life.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Dressing 'nicely' is defined by culture/society, not the presence or absense of things like a necktie. And as we all know, that definition of what is nice changes over time. But WL says that not wearing a tie would automatically cause people to lose confidence in a co-worker. Most people do not wear ties nowdays, even in the business world. So standards have changed. And such standards have nothing to do with God.

The Bible says next to nothing about workers' attire, but speaks volumes about their teachings, behavior, and attitudes. Should we not follow these Biblical patterns?

Do we respect ministers because of their dress? Do we now "win respect" in the LC's and follow Lee's instructives to always wear a necktie? Preferably an LSM issued blue or brown necktie with their own logo?

Perhaps Lee's dismissive attitudes towards the book of James blind his followers into being "respecters of persons." (James 2.1-6). Remember it was THE RICH, wearing their "respectable" neckties, from LSM's own "Defense and Confirmation Project" who dragged us brothers in the Great Lakes Area LC's into the courts, and brought so much shame to His name.

[leastofthese]

"I have never heard anyone at anytime ever tell anyone else that they can't leave the church life. Holding people, verbally or physically, against their will would be an abusive practice."

Never mind the fact that the quote above is clearly a classic fallacy in reasoning - appealing to extremes - the LSM never fails to surprise me. In regards to the FTTA:

12. I understand that I do not have the option of dropping this training after the third week.

BUT -

11. I also understand that the training has the right to dismiss me at any time.

https://www.docdroid.net/kBfl7zp/con...ement.pdf.html - linked from the reddit forum

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Ohio

You mean John the Baptist?

I wonder what it would have looked like if John was led by the ministry of Witness Lee rather than the Holy Spirit? He could have reached so many more college students... and had much more fashion sense.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I wonder what it would have looked like if John was led by the ministry of Witness Lee rather than the Holy Spirit? He could have reached so many more college students... and had much more fashion sense.

We have had a number of ex-LC members here who have cited LSM's shortage of repentance, so it's no wonder that John was downplayed in the Recovery, as were Barnabas, Peter, and other men of God.

LSM ministers can go on and on about the failures of men of God in the Bible, but never admit their own.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I think the speaker's clothing ought to fit his audience. Jesus, I'm sure, thought so too.

What's worse? A homeless guy, who really needs a meal, asking for money? Or the wealthy pastor in his tailored suit and Audi A8 asking for money?

Normally when a person gives a presentation in front of people, they will or should dress appropriately. Jeans and a shirt does not sound appropriate, rather unprofessional and disrespectful to the audience.

So there are these big churches, plenty of money, the best sound and lighting equipment, the best stage effects if required, and the pastor, who is on a salary of who knows what, he can afford a decent suit, probably has one at home, decides to "dress down" so he can appear more "John the Baptist"-like. At least, do it for the sake of the women. Women mostly, pay attention to these things, and prefer men dress neatly rather than sloppily.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Normally when a person gives a presentation in front of people, they will or should dress appropriately. Jeans and a shirt does not sound appropriate, rather unprofessional and disrespectful to the audience.

So there are these big churches, plenty of money, the best sound and lighting equipment, the best stage effects if required, and the pastor, who is on a salary of who knows what, he can afford a decent suit, probably has one at home, decides to "dress down" so he can appear more "John the Baptist"-like. At least, do it for the sake of the women. Women mostly, pay attention to these things, and prefer men dress neatly rather than sloppily.

Did you see that video? Was the brother dressed sloppily? I don't think so. Maybe this pastor is not on a salary of "who knows what?" Perhaps he is just a down-to-earth guy who is unpretentious. Perhaps he is not trying to be anybody else, including John the Baptist.

Why is it you are soooo suspicious of every minister outside the Recovery? You are suspicious of them wearing suits. You are suspicious of them in plain clothes. Does it not bother you that you pre-judge every one you meet, and also those you have never met?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did you see that video? Was the brother dressed sloppily? I don't think so. Maybe this pastor is not on a salary of "who knows what?" Perhaps he is just a down-to-earth guy who is unpretentious. Perhaps he is not trying to be anybody else, including John the Baptist.

Why is it you are soooo suspicious of every minister outside the Recovery? You are suspicious of them wearing suits. You are suspicious of them in plain clothes. Does it not bother you that you pre-judge every one you meet, and also those you have never met?

Down to earth guy who doesn't know how to dress for a presentation. I thought we learnt these things at school, well I did. While it is true that God looks at the heart, you are forgetting that men look at outward appearances. Dressing up or dressing down is for the sake of men, not for the sake of God. An irony is that sometimes homeless people wear suits, to go to job interview, or ask for money, or appear to be richer than they are. Pastor of a church tries not to, because he does not want to appear to be rich, when he is. Both are types of pretension.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Down to earth guy who doesn't know how to dress for a presentation. I thought we learnt these things at school, well I did. While it is true that God looks at the heart, you are forgetting that men look at outward appearances. Dressing up or dressing down is for the sake of men, not for the sake of God. An irony is that sometimes homeless people wear suits, to go to job interview, or ask for money, or appear to be richer than they are. Pastor of a church tries not to, because he does not want to appear to be rich, when he is. Both are types of pretension.

Here's a verse that came to mind ...

To the pure all things are pure: but to them that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. -- Titus 1.15

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Here's a verse that came to mind ...

To the pure all things are pure: but to them that are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. -- Titus 1.15

Clothing says something about our character. 1 Timothy 2:9–10 indicates our dress should match our character. The bible talks about a certain way of dressing that indicates that one is a prostitute. God clothed Adam and Eve in sheep skin. John the baptist's clothing was determined by God. Joseph had a technicolor dreamcoat. So there is a purpose for clothing beyond just covering up our naked bodies.

In regards to pre-judging, I hope you're not going to cover yourself in tattoos and then tell me to stop prejudging you if I mistake you for one of the Hell's Angels.

In a denominational church, the most heavily tattooed person is usually the youth pastor, and I'm sure you've heard of Todd Bentley. Anyone could pick that guy out as false just because of his many tattoos. But numerous Christians were flocking to him for a healing or a kick in the face.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Clothing says something about our character. 1 Timothy 2:9–10 indicates our dress should match our character. The bible talks about a certain way of dressing that indicates that one is a prostitute. God clothed Adam and Eve in sheep skin. John the baptist's clothing was determined by God. Joseph had a technicolor dreamcoat. So there is a purpose for clothing beyond just covering up our naked bodies.

Yes indeed, clothing does speak about our character, and your criticism of clothing speaks about your character.

In regards to pre-judging, I hope you're not going to cover yourself in tattoos and then tell me to stop prejudging you if I mistake you for one of the Hell's Angels.

Wow, are you out of date! Hell's Angels' tats have nothing on this whole generation of millennials.

I was at the corner barber shop couple weeks ago, and this guy's entire body was tatted -- head, face, neck, everything I could see.

Some of the most precious brothers (and sisters) I have known, had tats. Who cares!?!

In a denominational church, the most heavily tattooed person is usually the youth pastor, and I'm sure you've heard of Todd Bentley. Anyone could pick that guy out as false just because of his many tattoos. But numerous Christians were flocking to him for a healing or a kick in the face.

It's just like you to characterize the whole of Christianity by a few bad sheep.

How would you like it if I characterized all LC'ers by Philip Lee?
.

[CAF76]

Hi! I was wondering what would they do to you if you do leave after the 3 weeks of the training? or you get a job and leave? Just wondering. Never made it to fulltime got out just in time.. but did grow up in LC with the goal of being sent to fulltime in the future. Back then it would ve been in the late 90's.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by CAF76

Hi! I was wondering what would they do to you if you do leave after the 3 weeks of the training? or you get a job and leave? Just wondering. Never made it to fulltime got out just in time.. but did grow up in LC with the goal of being sent to fulltime in the future. Back then it would ve been in the late 90's.

They'd go back to their day to day lives, study or work.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Yes indeed, clothing does speak about our character, and your criticism of clothing speaks about your character.

Wow, are you out of date! Hell's Angels' tats have nothing on this whole generation of millennials.

I was at the corner barber shop couple weeks ago, and this guy's entire body was tatted -- head, face, neck, everything I could see.

Some of the most precious brothers (and sisters) I have known, had tats. Who cares!?!

It's just like you to characterize the whole of Christianity by a few bad sheep.

How would you like it if I characterized all LC'ers by Philip Lee?
.

I'm curious, what does it say about my character if I like people to dress nicely?

Well tats indicate something about a person. Just like cops know that a woman dressed in a miniskirt and fishnets on the side of the road late at night is not selling hotdogs.

You do seem to characterize all LC'ers by the events which occurred 30-40 year ago, and the sayings or actions of the leading brothers or Lee himself.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

You do seem to characterize all LC'ers by the events which occurred 30-40 year ago, and the sayings or actions of the leading brothers or Lee himself.

Read my posts again.

When do I ever characterize all LC'ers by the actions of leaders at LSM, either 30 years ago, or yesterday?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Read my posts again.

When do I ever characterize all LC'ers by the actions of leaders at LSM, either 30 years ago, or yesterday?

Well you make general statements about the LC and LSM, the same as I make general statements about Christianity and denominations.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Well you make general statements about the LC and LSM, the same as I make general statements about Christianity and denominations.

I was active in the LC's for 30 yrs. It is completely appropriate to discuss events and characteristics common to all LC's.

"General statements" are quite a bit different from your grossly disparaging condemnations on all of Christianity.

But anyways, this discussion has gone off course.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I was active in the LC's for 30 yrs. It is completely appropriate to discuss events and characteristics common to all LC's.

"General statements" are quite a bit different from your grossly disparaging condemnations on all of Christianity.

But anyways, this discussion has gone off course.

I was active in denominations for many years. It's completely appropriate to discuss events and characteristics common to all denominations. And, I don't characterize "all of Christianity" by a "few bad sheep", but the steadfast, enduring evil organizations (which do much good in the world, religion is very good, but which is a mixture with the world) like the Roman Catholic church et al. . Yes, how can we tie this back to neck ties?

Originally Posted by aron

Hi Unreg, thanks for the link. On the 'books' section of the page, you should list the book "A future and a hope" by John Myer.

http://assemblylife.com/about.html

Hey Aron -

Just updated the sidebar. Thank you very much for the suggestion! I am trying to round up the best resources for those who come across the page googling so I am open to whatever else others have found.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Hey Aron -

Just updated the sidebar. Thank you very much for the suggestion! I am trying to round up the best resources for those who come across the page googling so I am open to whatever else others have found.

John Ingalls account Speaking The Truth In Love ia an absolute must.

[aron]

The links

*18 Points Reconsidered
and
*Deviating from the path in the Lord's Recovery

don't go anywhere.

What happened to Steve Isitt's writings? I see it on Amazon

https://www.amazon.com/Hiding-Histor.../dp/1503213072

But not online. Steve's website "twoturmoils" seems to be down.

If you haven't read Steve Isitt's history of the Lord's Recovery in the USA & Europe, you really should.

At one meeting, Witness Lee said, "We should find out what happened to those who left the Recovery", and Steve did. When he brought his findings to the 'responsible brothers', they told him not to bother them. "We don't have a heart for this", etc. When he persisted, he was expelled from the group.

[aron]

Unregistered,

You also might post a link to an objective biography of Watchman Nee.

http://www.bdcconline.net/en/stories/n/ni-tuosheng.php

A lot of the so-called biographies of Nee are very biased, to say the least. This biography lists his repeated sexual indiscretions.

Also it notes that the indigenous churches in China flourished against a back-drop of anti-Westernism, versus merely anti-denominationism.

Also it notes that his 'Spiritual Man' was an unattributed copy of Jessie Penn-Lewis.

Also says that his original first two "co-apostolic" allies were women: Peace Wang and Ruth Lee. Is that "normal" or "bibical"? Not arguing against women in leadership roles, but rather noting the hypocrisy in this movement. Ultimately it assured that Nee, like Lee after him, would have control. Neither of them would brook any peers. In this, Lee learned well from Nee.

Also it notes that Nee "mesmerised" his listeners during meetings. Not sure that is a positive thing. If you look at the history of mesmerisation in Christian meetings in North America in the 20th century, it's the doorway to deviation. From Aimee Semple McPherson riding a motorcycle into a meeting, to the Local Church and it's "moves" and "flows" to the so-called Toronto Blessing and so-called Lakeland Revival. I see excitement, even frenzy, whilst basic truths of Christian faith are marginalised.

I write all this because many who are disenchanted with the Local Church experience think that Nee was pure as snow but somehow the thing "deviated" along the way. Instead, perhaps deviation was built into the foundation.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I think that it is easy to reject someone because they are dressed too poorly.
No one can really complain and say "you are dressed too nicely".

If there is something we can do to make it easier for someone to accept the gospel then we should do it. For example, turning up to a meeting on time, dressing nicely. It's ultimately based on the second great commandment. But casual irreverence does not really present the right image.

People will dress nicely for a job interview, a wedding or a funeral, but won't dress nicely for God.

Actually, in this day and age, too much dressing-up is generally considered pretentious. It may be that dressing too far down is not really preferable, but most people are more likely to reject the pretentious. Less likely to reject those that are not pretentious.

You can argue for the necktie, but it is strictly putting lipstick on a pig. Not making any comment on any particular person or group. Just noting that the presumption will be that being excessively out of sync with societal norms (which have generally dumped the suit and tie outside of law firms and maybe a very few other professional organizations) will be seen as trying to hide something behind the suit and tie.

It is sort of a variant on the argument that the nature of your vocabulary (assuming we are not otherwise talking about speaking in an illiterate manner) actually changes what it is talking about. Hiding behind a tie is sort of like not letting your "yes" be "yes."

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Anyone could pick that guy out as false just because of his many tattoos.

You really don't understand the scripture you toss around in support of your exclusivist, sectarian nonsense.

There is nothing in the fact of one or more tattoos that makes anyone either true or false. To suggest otherwise is to reveal your self-righteous ignorance. The Pharisees had nothing on you.