Witness Lee's movement part 1

[countmeworthy]

Greetings friends in Christ,
In looking up something for myself, I ran across this Berean website. Don't know if it has been seen by anyone here or not but I thought I would post some of the observations made by a person who attended the LC meetings in Boston. I do not know who the person is btw....at least at this point.

From what I am reading, I find it to be fair and balanced. Really!

I am posting the observation in sections.

Question asked of Watchman Nee in China 1947, “If a servant of the Lord from another Christian group gives us more or higher spiritual light, do we receive it?” Watchman Nee thought for a while and then said: “God did not give us all the light. If somebody gives us more light, we should be very glad to receive it!”


Witness Lee's Local Church Denomination
(The Recovery Movement)
I. Summary
The Local Church Founders


In my ministry to the Chinese Christian community in the Boston area, the Lord has led me to minister among a group known as the "local church" or "Recovery Movement". Having attended a "local church" for about a year now, going to the main meeting and a weekly evangelistic study, these are some observations I have made in my ministry there. As with most Christian churches, there are those in the church who dogmatically follow the teachings of those considered "leaders", and there are those who follow their own ideas, and there are those who follow the Bible. I have found this to be true in the Local Church as well. The beliefs of individuals within the church do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of Witness Lee.

Nevertheless, if you go to such a church you will find literature displayed which was written exclusively by Lee and Watchman Nee and no others. Why is that? And their Bible - the "Recovery Version" - includes a commentary on every page written by Witness Lee. Their weekly Bible readings ialso include a teaching by Lee or Nee. I also attend a weekly Evangelistic Bible study in which at times the Bible is used very little, but rather in which the readings have consisted almost exclusively of Witness Lee's comments and opinions. Much as they affirm the Bible, they tend to filter everything through Witness Lee's Theology, and many times read his opinions as if they were the Bible.

Now there are also those outside the local church with the opinion that Witness Lee is off on points, but Watchman Nee's stuff is OK. But I have not found a significant difference between these two men other than Lee expressing his ideas in more extreme and irrational ways than Nee. Though I haven't read Nee widely. But Watchman Nee hold's a purgatory idea, for example, as does Witness Lee, of which I'll elaborate upon later.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html

[countmeworthy]

Their Attitude Towards Other Churches

While behaving as a denomination in its own right, the "local church" in my experience advocates dogma which tends to express a rather contemptuous attitude towards other churches and denominations revealed for example in their commentary on Matthew 16:18 which says "The Lord is not building His church in Christendom, which is composed of the apostate Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant denominations. This prophecy is being fulfilled through the Lord's recovery (meaning their movement), in which the building of the genuine church is being accomplished." (Implying that it isn't occurring elsewhere). In fact it is call the "Recovery" because they claim to be trying to recover the subjective experience of Christ which they seem to think was lost from the rest of the Christian community. And I find that the preaching during the assembly very commonly criticizes other churches, but not their own.

Then again, I have a similar accusation against many other churches who treat dogmatic teachings of their own founders or leaders as if they represented Biblical truth and have an unBiblical condescending elitist attitude towards other legitimate churches and Christians attending other churches. However, what is particular disturbing is when their opinions are far contrary to Biblical truth.

I will comment on Lee's theology further on.

On the other hand, they also presume that just about anyone with any trivial faith in Christ is saved and a brother in Christ, even if a person has fallen away and no longer believes, or even if they are living a lifestyle of sin. However, such people they believe will face purgatorial suffering, which I elaborate on later. They hold an elitist division among even those who are born of God. The overcomers who won't go to purgatory and the non-overcomers who will.

And once again I have to reiterate that the beliefs of Witness Lee and Watchman Nee do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of all the members of the local church. But this is what they are being taught there.

http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html

[countmeworthy]

Basic Deviations from Biblical Christianity

This is just a basic listing of some of their doctrinal deviations, which I elaborate on later. There are a number of ways in which the Recovery Movement deviates from Biblical Christianity as much of Modern Evangelicalism has.

Easy-Believism
Feel-Good Popular Christianity

There are some deviations which are more unique to the Recovery Movement, or find their origin in more deviant forms of Christianity.

Overcomer vs. Non-Overcomer division.
While there is a Biblical basis for categorizing the Christian community as for example the parable of the sower indicates, the manner in which the Recovery Movement does so I don't believe to be consistent with Biblical Theology. In Biblical theology, the categories are

1. Nominal Christians versus true Christians
2. Mature Christians versus Immature Christians

But the Recovery makes very little recognition of the first category, interpreting most passages which deal with nominalism, as if they were dealing simply with the maturity of those born of God. Thus they believe that there are people who have been born of God who might continue to live a lifestyle of sin, or whose lives may be otherwise characterized as non-Overcomers, contrary to the teachings of such passages as 1John 3:9,10 and 1John 5:3,4. But as I later elaborate on, I would say that the Bible categorizes such people as merely nominal Christians.

They also do not presume that everyone in their movement necessarily is an overcomer.

http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/lc.html

[countmeworthy]

The Recovery's Purgatory

Their doctrine of eternal security does not include salvation from purgatory during the 1000 year Millennial reign. That salvation is reserved for the elite overcomers. However, they do not view their purgatory as a judicial matter dealing with justification (eliminating the guilt of sin), but rather for sanctification (in order to become a sinlessly perfect person). Or one could say it is not to cleanse one of sin, but to cleanse one of one's sinfulness. As such they believe that after death, the non-overcoming Christian does not become sinlessly perfect automatically, but must go through purgatorial suffering to achieve that. But I asked the leaders also the obvious question as to how it is that the overcoming Christians who are not sinlessly perfect in this life achieve sinless perfection automatically without having to go through a purgatorial suffering. But they had no answer.

[countmeworthy]

On the Positive Side

As much as some would find the Recovery's doctrine to be significantly heretical, I find much of their deviations to be not atypical of many evangelical churches today. The best thing about the local church is its ecclesiastical structure, which allows someone like myself to minister more freely despite me being an outsider, while in other evangelical churches, which go by a lecture format and limit the congregation's interaction, I would be more suppressed in carrying out ministry.

I have been quite frank about by disagreement with the position of the Recovery on issues as I have mentioned, and even in the open assembly have at times stood up and made my disagreements known, but have so far experienced only a limited degree of hostility against me. I compare this with my experience at more orthodox churches. For even when I was an official Sunday school teacher at such churches and made my disagreements concerning the pastor's teaching or the church's practice known, I was greeted with much more hostility than I was as a stranger at the local church. That says something.

But as I'm on the subject, I must exhort the more bold among us to also be polite if they go to such meetings. For we should behave in a Christlike manner looking towards the edification of others, sharing not only what we disagree on when the time is appropriate, but also what we agree on, as the Spirit leads.

If the local church humbly allows its leaven to be removed, then I think it could indeed become a great movement of God. For most other churches ministry is limited to their leadership while the congregation are treated like stupid sheep, but the local church tends hold a deeper vision for the usefulness of the individuals, which I commend.

Furthermore, if its own anti-dogmatic stand ("that we may forsake all of those teachings, regardless of whether they are right or wrong" Witness Lee) could be applied to Lee and Nee's teachings themselves as it is applied to non-local church teachings, viewing them simply as their opinions rather than Biblical truth, then local church people might be more open to consider more Biblical interpretations without simply viewing them through the local church theological filter. And thus they may be more open to change than the more dogmatic orthodox churches, which are nonetheless deviant themselves on certain points.