Bill Freeman

[Testing123]

Bill Freeman has been one of the most prominent of former Local Church leaders in recent times. Like others before and after, he has gone on to perpetuate his own version of "Local Church Lite," bringing to some of Witness Lee's theology his own trademark twist - including a penchant for Greek grammar, a heavy focus on church history and familiarity with historical Christian writings, an emphasis on community (including communal living), and a particularly mystical/subjective/introspective approach to the Christian life.

Freeman started out in the late 1960's in Yorba Linda, California, and later spearheaded the beginnings of the LC in Seattle. The imprint of his influence on the LCs in the whole Northwest of the USA was longstanding, and, to a certain extent, continues today. Very many of those in leadership positions in the LCs there would have been under Freeman's direct influence until the mid to late 1980s. At that time, Freeman and his wife left Seattle with a large segment of the Seattle congregation to begin a new group in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Before having separated from the LC and moving to Arizona, Freeman had been a prominent "co-worker" and apologist for Witness Lee and those churches associated with him. In the 1970s, LSM published two apologetics works by Freeman - one on mingling, the other on the Trinity. In the 1980s, Freeman began publishing works under his own imprint Northwest Christian Publications that were circulated among LC members. In Arizona, this publishing organization was transitioned to a new company known as Ministry Publications. At one time, both in Washington and Arizona, Freeman produced a daily radio program and a magazine (now defunct) known as The Christian. Freeman's closest associate was his son-in-law, Kirk Eland.

During the Arizona years, Freeman and his group attracted, for a time, other prominent ex-LC leaders seeking "Local Church Lite," including the likes of Bill Mallon (who relocated to Scottsdale) and Ransford Ackah, who brought the churches in Ghana into close coordination with Freeman and his associates.

However, over the years, old problems began to resurface among the group, particularly allegations that Freeman's wife, Patsy, was responsible for orchestrating the divorces of dozens of members from among the congregation. In 1999, following a protracted dispute, Patsy Freeman left her husband with a large segment of the Scottsdale congregation to Lake Oswego, WA. Scottsdale's ties with her husband were then severed, and two years later, Freeman himself moved to Moses Lake, WA, the site of a longstanding "independent" LC.

Eventually, Bill and Patsy Freeman reunited and, along with several of their most loyal followers, relocated to Spokane, WA with the apparent intention of a new attempt at "Local Church Lite." In a recent video, Bill Freeman can be seen preaching in (what appears to be) a private residence, using a text-only edition of the Recovery Version of the New Testament. The move to Spokane (2005-2006) was not without controversy. Numerous investigative articles were written by a local student-run newspaper after ten or more houses were purchased by group members.

Hope this is a good starting point. It's an important, interesting, and unfortunate topic.

Links

Ministry of the Word - Freeman's website

Rick Ross: The Freeman Group

Apologetics Index: Bill and Patsy Freeman

[djohnson]

I heard after both Freeman and his wife left the Scottsdale area the church they started continued on there for a while but eventually had at least one more major split unrelated to the Freemans. Do you know any details about this testing123?

[Testing123]

Originally Posted by djohnson

I heard after both Freeman and his wife left the Scottsdale area the church they started continued on there for a while but eventually had at least one more major split unrelated to the Freemans. Do you know any details about this testing123?

Sorry, djohnson, I don't know any details of this, but I'd be interested to know more if anyone does. Two prominent brothers in the church in Scottsdale were Dan Elkins and Dave McCarthy. I have believed that neither of the two continued with Freeman. Elkins recently spoke at a retreat hosted by The Church in Moses Lake, as can be found on their website. In the first message, he referred to still being in the Phoenix area.

This is the group that Freeman started in Scottsdale:

Scottsdale Church
12000 N Scottsdale Rd
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
480-948-4488

[djohnson]

From what I understand Elkins is still there and McCarthy and quite a number of others left. As to the "why" behind the split I have no details.

[countmeworthy]

Originally Posted by djohnson

From what I understand Elkins is still there and McCarthy and quite a number of others left. As to the "why" behind the split I have no details.

If you make a skip & a hop to the other board..go to the testimonies section or read the posts by Brent & Brad Barber. They go by Brent B & Brad B.

Brent I think, lived with the Freemans'. It's a horror story to be sure.

[finallyprettyokay]

When I first discovered the other forum, Brent used to post a lot. I am not sure if Brad was posting then or not. It is highly (HIGHLY) possible that I made them one person in my mind. Being new, and all.

I enjoyed him (or them ) very much. Does anyone know how he/they are? Well, I hope.

fpo

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Testing123

The imprint of his influence on the LCs in the whole Northwest of the USA was longstanding, and, to a certain extent, continues today. Very many of those in leadership positions in the LCs there would have been under Freeman's direct influence until the mid to late 1980s. At that time, Freeman and his wife left Seattle with a large segment of the Seattle congregation to begin a new group in Scottsdale, Arizona.

By the time I moved to Bellevue, WA in 1993 Bill Freeman was long gone. I never knew much about him other than bits and pieces I'd hear from various brothers and sisters.
One thing that puzzled me was there was no differentation with what happened in Seattle than what happened in Anahiem.
What did happen?

Terry

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

By the time I moved to Bellevue, WA in 1993 Bill Freeman was long gone. I never knew much about him other than bits and pieces I'd hear from various brothers and sisters.

One thing that puzzled me was there was no differentiation with what happened in Seattle than what happened in Anaheim.

What did happen?

Terry

Terry, the infamous Feb 1986 Elders' Training was in effect a quarantine of Bill Freeman. It was also the end of all other publications around the country. WL/LSM controls brought every leading brother under dominion. "Sign the form on the table, brother!" All those who didn't like the "new rules," were either asked or told to leave. I think Bill Freeman was just the first to go. Many more followed. Those who stuck around (John Ingalls et al) to protest, got "lynched" by WL minions, mainly BP and his Texan lieutenants.

[finallyprettyokay]

Okay. I was thinking about my post asking about the status of former posters, and I noticed that under the thread Whatever happened to ... the admonishment to please post only regarding former leaders, elders and co-workers.

SO, I hearby withdraw my inquiry. Of course, that is a fair, very fair, rule and I apologize for not thinking through my question better.

I agree with the rule.

Thanks, everyone. I am still learning ---

FPO

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Terry, the infamous Feb 1986 Elders' Training was in effect a quarantine of Bill Freeman. It was also the end of all other publications around the country. WL/LSM controls brought every leading brother under dominion. "Sign the form on the table, brother!" All those who didn't like the "new rules," were either asked or told to leave. I think Bill Freeman was just the first to go. Many more followed. Those who stuck around (John Ingalls et al) to protest, got "lynched" by WL minions, mainly BP and his Texan lieutenants.

Ohio, you are right to a point. I don't think Bill Freeman was quarantined. It's not so clear cut or definitive. Rather he was called out by brothers wanting Bill to cease his ministry and line up with Witness Lee. On one hand Bill Freeman wanted to go on in the Recovery, but on the other hand he didn't want to put up with what was being asked of him.
As for other brothers from this Elder's training, it may be the direction Witness Lee was speaking didn't sit well with some. I have not heard the tape so it would be interesting to hear what Witness Lee was speaking to cause brothers to walk out.

Terry

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Ohio, you are right to a point. I don't think Bill Freeman was quarantined. It's not so clear cut or definitive. Rather he was called out by brothers wanting Bill to cease his ministry and line up with Witness Lee. On one hand Bill Freeman wanted to go on in the Recovery, but on the other hand he didn't want to put up with what was being asked of him.

Quarantine only is applied to those who don't leave first. Had Bill resisted, then he would have had his own quarantine.

[KSA]

When Don Hardy came to visit us in Russia for the 1st time, I was still in LC. And I took him to one LC meeting. Actually that meeting very much sped up my departure. When I was having fellowship with brothers from Moscow, they, on the one hand, told me that Don is not quarantined and therefore can come to the meetings; on the other hand, they behind my back smeared Don's name in the churches in our region. So the fact that Bill was not served official "quarantine letter", means nothing. If he ventures to set his foot in LC land, he will right away find out that "verbal" and "mental" quarantine is as real as the "written" one. The absence of "written" quarantine helps to cloak the real quarantine in a hipocritical pseudo-spiritual garb - "we never quarantined him, he is welcomed any time".

[djohnson]

My understanding of the Freeman issue is that there was a constant problem with his wife interfering in the private lives of LCS members. This problem continued even after they left the LCS and contributed to the fiasco in Scottsdale. My guess is even if they stayed in the LCS under Lee's thumb it would have eventually imploded.

[Indiana]

I received the following email recently concerning brother Bill Freeman.

"He has been diagnosed with a very aggressive form of Pulmonary Thyroid cancer. It is in the lymph nodes and is pressing on his jugular vein and on his carotid artery. Without surgery he will die. With surgery he may also die. In any event it will be a very serious surgery. He is at the Mayo Clinic in Arizona now. I get the idea that they cannot wait very long to make a decision about the surgery."

He needs our prayers saints.

[Indiana]

The email that was posted earlier appears to have been inaccurate concerning Bill's health. Although he does have cancer, he told a brother by phone today that he was "not dying."

[Indiana]

this email is from Don Bowen concerning Bill

FYI AND PRAYER. BRO. BILL WILL BE OPERATED ON THIS FRIDAY
THE 16th. AS OF LAST WEEK...UNLESS .HE HAS ALREADY BEEN HEALED!

Don [former elder from Arizona]

[Indiana]

This email reports Bill's status following his operation.

Bill has made it thru surgery. He has had a muscle removed along with thyroid gland, lymph nodes and jugular vein. He will possibly need intense physical therapy for his shoulder due to one nerve that was moved around during surgery. He will start iodine radiation therapy for 4-6 weeks. Then a scan will be done to see If and WHERE else the cancer has spread. He does have his voice box. His hospital stay will last 2-7 days depending on drainage tubes in his neck. He will remain in AZ for at least a couple of months.

[Indiana]

from Don Hardy, today

HELLO DEAREST ONES: some of you asked me about Br.Bill Freeman. Several months ago Bill had surgery at Mayo Hosp. in PHX: they removed his thyroid & part of esophegus (sp? & correct report?). Main Point is, Bill is "cancer free." All glory to God & His Mercy. He said Mayo may still want to do a "blu-dye" test thru-out his body. But Bill is thanking & praising the Lord "at home." Br.Don H

[TLFisher]

Recently I listened to a message Bill Freeman gave in 1982 on the Outward and Inward Christian. First time I have heard this brother speak. Amazing how much the portion of his speaking relates to the present; individually and corporately.

http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audi...CenturyOfSelf/

Terry

[Paul Cox]

Originally Posted by Terry

Ohio, you are right to a point. I don't think Bill Freeman was quarantined. It's not so clear cut or definitive. Rather he was called out by brothers wanting Bill to cease his ministry and line up with Witness Lee. On one hand Bill Freeman wanted to go on in the Recovery, but on the other hand he didn't want to put up with what was being asked of him.
As for other brothers from this Elder's training, it may be the direction Witness Lee was speaking didn't sit well with some. I have not heard the tape so it would be interesting to hear what Witness Lee was speaking to cause brothers to walk out.

Terry

I went to see Bill in the summer of 1999. I didn't know of the turmoil that had gone on there. He seemed very happy that at his last visit with Witness Lee, Lee accused him of nothing, and basically told him that he felt he, Bill, has never really left. It's always been about what "Brother Lee" thought.

Roger

[TLFisher]

I had listened to a message of Bill Freeman's at:
http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audi...CenturyOfSelf/

The topic was Inward and Outward Christians

Bill Freeman's speaking was based on 1 John Chapter 2.

2:8Again, a new commandment write I unto you, which thing is true in him and in you; because the darkness is passing away, and the true light already shineth. 2:9He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother, is in the darkness even until now. 2:10He that loveth his brother abideth in the light, and there is no occasion of stumbling in him. 2:11But he that hateth his brother is in the darkness, and walketh in the darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because the darkness hath blinded his eyes. 2:12I write unto you, my little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake.

Four characteristics were described what an outward Christian is:
1. Walks In Darkness:
There's a condition of living, but because of the darkness is unable to see the real situation. Because of walking in darkness, an outward Christian is led into deception. There is lack of transparancy and a lack of confession or apology. There's no confession, apology, or repentance because an outward Christian feels they have nothing to repent or apologize for. Everything done has been right on.
2. Walks in disobedience:
Because of the walk in disobedience, the outward Christian is against the indwelling annointing which is the moving of Christ in us.
There's no real horizontal fellowship in life. An outward Christian has errected four walls to close themself in.
An outward Christian has a defensive behavior. This is due to a lack of an inner dealing with the Lord.
3. Walks in darkness by hating our brother
Because of hate, bitterness, or a grudge, an outward Christian is off in their interpretations of others and in their understanding of others.
4. Living without specific dealings

Four Characteristics of an Inward Christian:
1. Walks in the light
2. Confession/Apology
Because of an inward dealing, there is cleansing which issues in fellowship.
3. Does not Defend nor Vindicate themself
Because expression of the light is truth, an inward Christian is moved to confess or apologize for their behavior.
Because of the truth, obedience translates into increased love for God.
4 Having specific dealings
Even if you're a one week old Christian or one whose a 30 year old Christian you can have specific dealings.

Terry

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

1 John 2:9 "He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother, is in the darkness even until now."

A rather sobering word, there; that one can "say he is in the light" but not be in the light. Obviously there was the examples of the observant Jews, who claimed "Moses" but rejected Jesus, and thus were thrust aside, claims notwithstanding. Secondly, in the light of the epistles to the Asian assemblies, John could be saying this delusion of thinking one had light when one was actually in darkness also applies to some who call themselves "christian".

Now, hating the brother, is a difficult one for me. It is hard to find the line between "taking a stand for the truth" and "hating one another". In other words, if I am for the truth, and I observe a christian in error, and I try to correct them, and they refuse correction, and at some point I say "You are like the Gentiles to me" and turn away, am I then hating my brother? The other peril is to "love" everyone regardless of condition; then eventually the "truth" doesn't matter because we just play some "I'm okay- you're okay" game, irrespective of actual condition.

So I struggle with where to draw the line on that one. I try to speak the truth to all, best as I can, try to be nice to everyone, best as I can, and only in really, really extreme cases do I "turn away". Gross unrepentant sin, foaming at the mouth hysteria, etc. Other than that, I try to say, "Okay, Lord, this is who you gave me today."

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

Now, hating the brother, is a difficult one for me. It is hard to find the line between "taking a stand for the truth" and "hating one another". In other words, if I am for the truth, and I observe a christian in error, and I try to correct them, and they refuse correction, and at some point I say "You are like the Gentiles to me" and turn away, am I then hating my brother?
The other peril is to "love" everyone regardless of condition; then eventually the "truth" doesn't matter because we just play some "I'm okay- you're okay" game, irrespective of actual condition.

Actually there is a big gap between Matthew 18:16 and 1 John 2:9. We can take a stand for the truth, love our brothers, and love our sisters that they may recieve correction. If you turn away, you're not hating them. There is simply no way to compromise taking a stand for the truth. It's just like when I discipline my children. When their action or their behavior warrants discipline, my disciplining them is out of love. It is to correct their errant actions or behavior. In I John 2:9, the word says "He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother, is in the darkness even until now." So if you hate your brother, you're in darkness.

If you love when the "truth" doesn't matter, isn't that along the lines of creating a dysfunctional atmosphere? It causes one to ask "what is sacred anymore?" The actual condition does matter. To ignore the condition or sweep it aside is a clear sign the darkness has blinded the eyes. If we have light, the actual condition is seen.

Terry

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

A rather sobering word, there; that one can "say he is in the light" but not be in the light. Obviously there was the examples of the observant Jews, who claimed "Moses" but rejected Jesus, and thus were thrust aside, claims notwithstanding.

I have always wondered a little whether there is not still the original covenant in place for the Jews. Prior to Jesus, they were accepted based on their following. While it is not the same as following into salvation as we have in the NT, are they truly "thrust aside" or are they simply still within that old system, as ordained by God (assuming they are actively still in it), while we have chosen the better way of the "once-for-all" sacrifice?

Just wondering.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Terry

Actually there is a big gap between Matthew 18:16 and 1 John 2:9. We can take a stand for the truth, love our brothers, and love our sisters that they may recieve correction. If you turn away, you're not hating them. There is simply no way to compromise taking a stand for the truth. It's just like when I discipline my children. When their action or their behavior warrants discipline, my disciplining them is out of love. It is to correct their errant actions or behavior. In I John 2:9, the word says "He that saith he is in the light and hateth his brother, is in the darkness even until now." So if you hate your brother, you're in darkness.

If you love when the "truth" doesn't matter, isn't that along the lines of creating a dysfunctional atmosphere? It causes one to ask "what is sacred anymore?" The actual condition does matter. To ignore the condition or sweep it aside is a clear sign the darkness has blinded the eyes. If we have light, the actual condition is seen.

Terry

I find that the smile and nod of love and service in the face of error and rejection to be one of the true tests of love. While there is an aspect of "tough love" that a parent must give to a child, it is not the place for another child to give that kind of love to his siblings. It is the place of the parent. Within the confines of human existence, the only parent with respect to which Godly love exists in a "tough love" way is His love. We are but earthly siblings. The only part of His love for the world that we have position to display is not "tough love." We have only been granted a very little of it with respect to church discipline. Those not within the family of faith never have reason to face that.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by OBW

I find that the smile and nod of love and service in the face of error and rejection to be one of the true tests of love. While there is an aspect of "tough love" that a parent must give to a child, it is not the place for another child to give that kind of love to his siblings. It is the place of the parent. Within the confines of human existence, the only parent with respect to which Godly love exists in a "tough love" way is His love. We are but earthly siblings. The only part of His love for the world that we have position to display is not "tough love." We have only been granted a very little of it with respect to church discipline. Those not within the family of faith never have reason to face that.

Mark 12:28-12:31
28And one of the scribes came, and heard them questioning together, and knowing that he had answered them well, asked him, What commandment is the first of all?12:29Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one: 12:30and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. 12:31The second is this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.

In respect to church discipline, there can be love. It's exists or it doesn't. Love cannot be manufactured. In verse 31, the love Jesus is talking about is not a conditional love. When we love ourselves, there's nothing to consider. It just exists. Practically what's being said is if a brother refuses to repent, keep on loving him. If a brother is blinded by darkness, keep on loving him. As we love our neigbor as ourselves, the love never ceases.

Terry

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Terry

In respect to church discipline, there can be love. It's exists or it doesn't. Love cannot be manufactured. In verse 31, the love Jesus is talking about is not a conditional love. When we love ourselves, there's nothing to consider. It just exists. Practically what's being said is if a brother refuses to repent, keep on loving him. If a brother is blinded by darkness, keep on loving him. As we love our neigbor as ourselves, the love never ceases.

Seems we are dancing around the particular point in your previous post that caused me to post as I did. You said:

If you love when the "truth" doesn't matter, isn't that along the lines of creating a dysfunctional atmosphere? It causes one to ask "what is sacred anymore?" The actual condition does matter. To ignore the condition or sweep it aside is a clear sign the darkness has blinded the eyes. If we have light, the actual condition is seen.

There was something out of sync with what you said that I did not completely figure out. I was not sure how "loving" when "truth doesn't matter" that could create a "dysfunctional atmosphere." It seemed that you were suggesting that somehow loving in the face of an error in "truth" created a dysfunction. Of course what you actually said did not exactly say that. But I couldn't figure out any other way to understand it. (It was sort of like saying that it is important to know that when it is unimportant that it is important. Tilt)

My point was that truth is not a qualifier or measure that is checked before love is applied. Surely the ultimate truth is that Christ died for our sins and that accepting that frees you from those sins. But we do not withhold love from those who reject that truth. (And I don't think you are suggesting this.) So what truth is so much higher that it affects our love? Something about orthodoxy or even a Leeism that might actually be true? Surely truth is important, but not at the cost of love. There should be love no matter the disagreement concerning truth, doctrine, practice, etc. Even the notion of "turning away" was not so much as statement about rejecting their person as it was to refuse to listen to the nonsense. We can do that without withholding love. We do not need to excommunicate to not accept error in teaching. And we do not need for their thoughts about what is correct, truth, or error to correspond to ours to express love — the kind of love that we have for ourselves.

More than anything, I see this as a huge failing in the LC system going way back to its early troubles (maybe as far back as the 60s in the US) and continuing in increasing fashion under the BBs. The attitude toward insiders — Max, John (I and S) Bill M, Al K, Don R, Steve, Titus, etc. — has been all over the map, but has never displayed any love other than the love of the leadership for everyone staying in line under their authority. And that amounts to loving yourself as you love yourself. A little narcissistic.

[TLFisher]

There was something out of sync with what you said that I did not completely figure out. I was not sure how "loving" when "truth doesn't matter" that could create a "dysfunctional atmosphere." It seemed that you were suggesting that somehow loving in the face of an error in "truth" created a dysfunction. Of course what you actually said did not exactly say that. But I couldn't figure out any other way to understand it.

Mike, the dysfunction results when we don't love enough to rebuke. For example suppose a brother has comitted gross sin. Do we just gloss it over when there may be other individuals aware of the gross sin? Suppose a sister has become pregnant out of wedlock, do we just look the other way and say "we love out sister. we don't want to be judgmental". For a member in the assembly who sees these things transpiring, the question had to be asked "is this manner of living acceptable now?" This response I have just typed is how I see "loving" when "truth doesn't matter". This is a case where "a little leaven has leavened the whole lump".

Terry

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Terry

Mike, the dysfunction results when we don't love enough to rebuke. For example suppose a brother has comitted gross sin. Do we just gloss it over when there may be other individuals aware of the gross sin? Suppose a sister has become pregnant out of wedlock, do we just look the other way and say "we love out sister. we don't want to be judgmental". For a member in the assembly who sees these things transpiring, the question had to be asked "is this manner of living acceptable now?" This response I have just typed is how I see "loving" when "truth doesn't matter". This is a case where "a little leaven has leavened the whole lump".

Terry

I fully agree. But the examples are perplexing. You give the example of a sister who is pregnant out of wedlock. That might be no more than the result of a single indiscretion. (And I don't want to quibble over the apparent "down-sizing" of this sin. Sin is sin.) Do we chose to rebuke everyone who is known to have committed a sin? Did someone pass you on the way to the meeting and you were going the speed limit? (Ah. "Man's laws, not God's" you say. But I thought God said to obey man's laws.) When a rebuking word is required is not so easy.

Or is it? Paul mentioned a rebuke when there were those who were sinning and continuing in it despite its visibility. I do not recall a case where he said to check everyone's bedrooms and cabinets and get the radar guns out.

Yet it is easy to somehow make it clear that how that "bump" came to be was a sin, yet still love such a one. The shame is rebuke. Like Pinocchio's nose, there is no hiding the sin. But we should be sure and add a flogging anyway — I didn't think so.

So what is "gross sin"? Is it "gross" because of its nature or because of its wanton repetition, or does it require both? Is lying never "gross" even if repeated? Is sexual sin "gross" once or even just a few times? Does it take a longer period of calling on the Lord or a few more "Hail Marys" to get rid of a "gross" sin?

I'll give my two cents worth. There are crimes that require action on one occurrence. Murder comes to mind. Lying does not. Not so sure about adultery. I think that we should be slow to be the first to cast that stone.

I do not want to make the place for proper church discipline simply go away. But I think that we too often try to spread its applicability based on our personal notions of the nature of the sin. A private word of "rebuke" may be called for in cases where a public one is not. But the "stones" of church discipline are few and far between.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by OBW

So what is "gross sin"? Is it "gross" because of its nature or because of its wanton repetition, or does it require both? Is lying never "gross" even if repeated? Is sexual sin "gross" once or even just a few times? Does it take a longer period of calling on the Lord or a few more "Hail Marys" to get rid of a "gross" sin?

Mike, noted we all sin. I see a difference beween sin affecting an individual verses sin that may affect an assembly. For that reason it is extremely delicate how situations are handled. How to minister to those individuals, without losing them, and without offending the assembly.

Terry

[OBW]

I do not necessarily have any problem with what you have written in any post except that it is provided in a context that is flush with LC overtones even where we don’t intend them. So when you say “without losing them, and without offending the assembly” you have said a mouthful. In your hypothetical, there surely should be some sense, at least within someone in a responsible position, that the person has some sense of the fact of the sin and is not simply continuing in that sin.

On the other hand, what do you do with the unmarried couple that is not yet saved who has been coming and listening and learning and may be in the process of gaining that knowledge that leads to salvation. Do we need to censure them?

I think that in the case Paul so specifically mentions in 1 Corinthians, we have someone who is professing salvation and is wantonly engaged in sin that even the heathens identify as unacceptable. Here we have a problem, not because there is someone who is sinning, but who is almost boasting in their sin and is willful about it. And they claim to be part of those who are Christian. It taints the brand. Now being fragile and having failings at doing what is right is quite different from simply willing to do what is wrong. The one who struggles with alcohol or pornography is different from the one who produces pornography.

But in the face of all of this, how do you protect your flock? You protect them by teaching them correctly. If they know what is right, they are not weakened by the proximity of unsaved ones who have not yet determined that their living together is not the right choice, or by the girl within the circle of true “members” of the assembly who has given in to a desire of the flesh and is now pregnant. You do not need to protect the assembly by saying anything about her. Or about the man who you know is struggling with pornography. Now if someone is coming among you, or already among you, who is simply a sexual predator, then there is something to say.

I give the following story. It is a true account of Christian “righteousness” in an earlier time in the 20th century. A man and his wife with three kids were members of a small Presbyterian church in the Kansas/Missouri area. The man was abusive and a philanderer. After much tolerance, they separated, and eventually divorced. On the first Sunday after the divorce, all seemed OK. But then came the Sunday where communion was to be observed. Despite the upstanding position of the woman, she was met at the doors by two elders who escorted her to the balcony where she was allowed to observe but not participate. For the rest of her life, this was how it happened.

Now nothing you have mentioned hints of such heavy-handed treatment. But how often do we consider more than the “rightness” of our position before we decide to rebuke, or even excommunicate? The examples in scripture are not mild things. They are very wrong things. And there are almost no examples. Yet we busy ourselves with worrying about how righteous we appear at the cost of how much love we display.

Let’s see. The Great Commandment. Hear Oh Israel, the Lord you God is One God. You should love your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. And you shall display your righteousness and rebuke those who tarnish that display. All the law hinges on these two commands.

I’m not saying that there is no place for proper discipline. But we spend so much time worrying about who to rebuke and very little about who to love (everyone, even the one who actually requires rebuke). There is so much about love. God’s love. His love in us. Our love for our “neighbor.” And there is so little about rebuke. Yet we are more worried about whether they get their rebuke so we are certain about that and label it “tough love” so we don’t have to think about whether there is any real love involved.

I’ll be the first to say that there are certain ones who post such gushy, sweet, emotional things that I almost can’t stand it. But I’d rather them be the ones handing out church discipline than so many others. I may have a hard time getting through those posts at times. They can’t seem to take a strong stand about much of anything except the wonderful time they are having. But they understand love. I’d rather they were the one required to talk to the 16 year old who has shown up pregnant.

For sure the mainstream LC leadership would not be on my list. They are all about what is so right and proper. They only love the ministry. And any neighbor that will let them knock on their door and receive Christ (and preferably become part of the LC). But where’s the benefit in love? Why love someone who doesn’t hold your oracle in high esteem?

I just see a rush to judge and a reluctance to love. It may not be specifically in what you were originally saying. This all started with the phrase “taking a stand for the truth.” What is the truth? I’m not suggesting some kind of postmodern “whatever you think it is.” But do we hold to our version of truth so much stronger than we have the sense that the primary command was to love? And what is truth? I despise the simplistic “reality” that Lee supplied because all it did was create a new level of truth that was higher than others and he claimed was full of his teachings.

But the truth that sets us free is not gleaned from studying the scripture. It is not found in joining the “right” church. Jesus said that obeying his commands was the predicate to knowing the truth. “Hold to” does not merely mean to contend for. It means actually do. To live as if they are worthy of following. And if #1 is love, then worrying about arguing for “truth” is not #1.

Aron said

if I am for the truth, and I observe a Christian in error, and I try to correct them, and they refuse correction, and at some point I say ‘You are like the Gentiles to me’ and turn away...

But what are the “errors” that we think rise to this requirement? We would scoff if someone said head-coverings on women. But those have been the “errors” for some. We may have moved the line of ridiculousness. But Paul was not talking about eating pork v not eating pork; circumcision v no circumcision, etc. He was talking about someone coming and teaching error concerning the actual person of God/Christ or leading believers into sin. How often do we really face these things?

Sort of like Inigo Montoya, we have developed an over-active sense of error. For Lee and the BBs, it is more like an over-active sense of vengeance (which is what Inigo Montoya was said to have in the movie).

[aron]

OBW: To have someone who is professing salvation and is wantonly engaged in sin that even the heathens identify as unacceptable. Here we have a problem, not because there is someone who is sinning, but who is almost boasting in their sin and is willful about it. And they claim to be part of those who are Christian. It taints the brand.

Yes, there is a confusion about what it means to be "holy". It is not the sin that is the real issue: it is sinning and pretending to be holy. This introduces confusion in the hearts and minds of the new and the weak.

OBW: But in the face of all of this, how do you protect your flock? You protect them by teaching them correctly. If they know what is right, they are not weakened by the proximity of unsaved ones

Yes. It is the truth that sets us free. Our hearts are ready and willing to love, and obey; but our minds are so easily clouded by doubt and confusion.

OBW: I just see a rush to judge and a reluctance to love. It may not be specifically in what you were originally saying. This all started with the phrase “taking a stand for the truth.” What is the truth? I’m not suggesting some kind of postmodern “whatever you think it is.” But do we hold to our version of truth so much stronger than we have the sense that the primary command was to love?

I also see a rush to judge and to hold onto "truths" which quickly overturn our capacity to love one another. A rush to judge, to learn, to organize & arrange, to systematize, to teach the willing acolytes & reprove the unwilling. And somewhere in there a sprinkle of the obligatory platitudes about love.

I am becoming more convinced that no system can catch and hold God. Only if we let ourselves become caught by His flowing love, can we meet Him where He is. Then, the "righteousness" part will come along soon enough. We will seek after the righteousness part because we don't want to be separate from Him. Then it is not we who have caught He, but He who has fully captured us.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

I am becoming more convinced that no system can catch and hold God. Only if we let ourselves become caught by His flowing love, can we meet Him where He is. Then, the "righteousness" part will come along soon enough. We will seek after the righteousness part because we don't want to be separate from Him. Then it is not we who have caught He, but He who has fully captured us.

Excellent thoughts. Someone recently said that when we think we have it all figured out, we have created God in our image. I think certainty in God a large helping of humility with respect to everything else is needed.

I've been getting a little excited lately (a tough thing for in introvert like me). It is in coming to the realization that this Christian life is quite less propositional and much more action. Much more Orthopraxy and a lot less Orthodoxy. I don't suggest skipping belief. But beyond that, Jesus was much more interested in how we lived than how we gathered to worship. Here we all are, mostly former members of a group whose primary interest was how to worship. Obedience is better than sacrifice.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by OBW

But in the face of all of this, how do you protect your flock? You protect them by teaching them correctly.

Amen! Teaching correctly is according to healthy teachings found in the Bible.

Terry

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by aron

I am becoming more convinced that no system can catch and hold God. Only if we let ourselves become caught by His flowing love, can we meet Him where He is. Then, the "righteousness" part will come along soon enough. We will seek after the righteousness part because we don't want to be separate from Him. Then it is not we who have caught He, but He who has fully captured us.

Jhn 10:27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.

Originally Posted by Terry

Amen! Teaching correctly is according to healthy teachings found in the Bible.

Terry

Great thread. But no posts since 2009. Anyone know of Bill's whereabouts now?

[UntoHim]

The last I heard of the Freemans, they were in Spokane Washington. They did buy a number of houses there around the campus of Witworth Christian college. Unfortunately for them, their reputation followed them.
See this article: http://www.spokesmanreview.com/tools...f.asp?ID=83935

They still maintain the following website which contains a lot of Bill Freeman's messages, books, etc.
----------------------------------------------------
http://www.thechristian.org/info/
Ministry of the Word
PO Box 28338
Scottsdale, AZ 85255
Phone 509.466.4777
Toll-Free 1.800.573.4105
Email ministry@thechristian.org
----------------------------------------------------
I notice that the mailing address is now listed in Scottsdale Arizona, but the phone number there is a 509 area code which I believe is Washington State. So I'm not sure. Maybe somebody out there can straighten this out for us and give us an update on what's going on with the Freemans.

How can I get the brent and brad B posts

[aron]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

How can I get the brent and brad B posts

Here is a testimony from Brent B, whose father was one of the "leading brothers" in Witness Lee's Lord's recovery group.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My family moved to downtown LA in 1963, the year of my birth. We moved from the dusty plains of west Texas in a volkswagon beetle and a moving van. My dad was a youth minister at a baptist college and, after reading the inner life works, had somehow been given a reel to reel tape of W Lee. He was hooked and, after a few trips to LA, decided to give up everything for this new way. He later spoke emotionally of how at the last congregation at which he was an ordained Baptist reverend, he declared he was going on to "higher ground." We moved into ramshackle quarters near Watts during the riots. This was at Elden hall, later to be called hall 1. My memory of meetings is vague from that time, but I do remember it was intense and emotional. Downtown LA is a memory I will never forget. I watched my dad preach many Sundays and he was such a fierce lion everyone, including myself, was terrified of him.

But the raucous meetings were at least interspersed with trips to the beach. There the congreation gathered to burn precious possessions. I saw countless valuable items smashed and destroyed that could have been sold to at least support the needy. The most vivid memory I have of this time is when everyone was gathered around a bon fire located in a cave on the beach. We formed a semi-circle around the opening of the cave. In succession, people would come forward to offer an item to the flames. It usually consisted of deeply personal journals, books and photographs. It was a consecration to burn the images of those dearly precious to you. I felt very queasy during all of this. It felt wrong, even to my very young mind, to sacrifice your love for family. It felt sick inside, is the best way I can describe my feelings.

But the best was yet to come. My mom stepped forward to consecrate me and my brother Brad to the flames. She flung handfuls of photographs to the bonfire, mostly 8X10's of myself and Brad. Most fell in the flames, but the wind caught a few. An 8X10 of myself drifted 5 feet in front of the roaring fire and fell in plain view with my freckled kindergarten picture facing the crowd. I was startled.

Within a few seconds, some embers floated to the picture and it caught fire. I watched my picture slowly being eaten by flames as my face dissolved into melting running soot. I can't say I was thrilled about it, but I gulped and pretended it was great. Some years later someone who witnessed the event told me he felt I was to going to be rebellious but the fire of the Lord would eventually swallow me up. I can't say I was all that thrilled with the interpretation of those tongues of fire, but the sick feeling of violation persisted.

In 1970, Our family moved to hall 2 in the San Fernando Valley. For 5 years, I lived in a sister's house in Sepulveda, LA. (More on hall 2 later). For another 2, I lived at a brother's house in OKC, OK, as me and my bro had grown up enough to warrant the gender shift. When I had the misfortune of moving to Austin, TX to move in a communal living situation in my senior year of high school, I shared a converted half-garage with 5 other young men who paid $250 1980 dollars a month for the privelige of sleeping in the equivalent of a walk in closet. On weeknights, we spent 2 hours per evening doing dishes and other household chores for the main plantation household. On Saturday, we spent 6 hours pruning and weeding and tilling a large 5 acre grassland behind the house. At one point, the plantation owner admitted that he had no real need of that property, but that it was good for our spiritual growth and maturity, in keeping with Leeite transformationism. I looked at him askance from that time onward since I considered that something of the Lord's jurisdiction. However, I thanked him for the consideration.

The next year, after enrolling in the University of Texas, some rumblings began as I encountered other Christians and even attended a meeting of Christians on Campus. I was not too terribly impressed, but I had this horrible sense inside my young soul that it was wrong to dismiss and discount all of these believers who were so obviously attempting to follow the Lord.

Some word got back to Don Looper and the plantation owner and I was called on the carpet. In a kangeroo court, they demanded that I repent of my association with this non LC group. Even though I was quite indoctrinated and had an "elder" father, it wouldn't do for them to have an out of control member going around, without authorization, interacting with the enemy. In my young heart and mind, I knew I was bucking the whole system and how dangerous it was to make a stand with the Texas big dogs. But make a stand I did. It is one of the moments in my young Christian life I cherish the most. I flatly stated that it was ludicrous to discourage interaction and congregation with other Christians. I had been reading the bible from a very early age. There was no place for such arbitrary quarantine and self segregation.

They went hog wild. Don Looper almost lost it. I refused to back down and my dad had to fly down from OKC, OK to remedy the situation. One of the most funny scenes I remember from this trial is when we all finally got together in a room with my dad to discuss the situation. Don prayed. Then my dad. Then I prayed! Out of the corner of my eye I saw Don almost fall out of his chair. The unmitigated gall! An accused daring to pray as if he had a position of legitimacy! Yet I continued without hesitation. The trial turned out to be somewhat without resolution as I persisted in my contention that other Christians are just the same and it makes no sense to divorce ourselves from them. My dad had to reluctantly agree, although there was a lot of dissimulation about how we hate the system but accept the beleiver. I agreed with the stipulation of considering what I then had been taught to identify as the dead empty lifeless corpse which was denominational Christianity. Yet I refused to stop talking to non member Christians or attending their gatherings. I was ejected from the communal living housing the next month and I got an apartment.

For the second semester of my freshman year, I attended classes, occasionally went to meetings of both the Lee church and various campus ministries. I was cut off by the Lee church members. I was a pariah. I had a phone number listed, but never got one single call from any LC members. I got a lot of calls from fraternities. I ate steak dinner every wednessday night with the Phi Gi's. They were a friendly if rowdy bunch. I got more humanity from drunken fraternity louts than LC members. Eventually, the years of indoctrination caught up with me and I began to talk a great deal with Patsie Freeman on the phone, as I had visited Seattle the winter before.

I took the bait. I dropped everything after the end of my freshman year and moved to Washington. It felt glorious. There was a mind boggling feeling of euphoria in the air at that time in Bill Freeman's group. The contrast between Texas legalism and Seattle humanism was so profound, I could barely contain my curiosity. Here, perhaps, was a form of the LC where I could adopt and ratify the entire belief system of my youth, my parents and everyone I had ever known or loved my entire life.

Bill Freeman's ministry was an exciting departure from Lee's. I was enthralled with his constant references to historical church thinkers and writings. He spoke of the heart as I had never heard before. There was an intellectual richness to his messages I greatly admired. It was a heady contagious atmosphere. I felt enlivened. His incorporation of Lee's teachings were marginal. The singing was rapturous and I was invited to play the guitar. We went to camps and retreats at outback scenic resorts and talked up a big storm about the Lord coming back to the northwest. I lived in Bagely House, across from Bill's house and study/library. I was later to learn that this consisted of an "inner circle" which was highly coveted. But I had no thoughts of such things. I was liberated from the dungeon of Leeism and free to roam in the open pastures of Bill Freemanland.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

How can I get the brent and brad B posts

Here is another post, from Brad, the brother of Brent. (Both taken from the LC forum on the BARM website in the Philippines.)

---------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------

When Brent first let me know that he was posting his writings again, concerning our/his childhood experiences in wl's lc, I resigned myself to merely check in every now and then to read what he contributed. Garner a chuckle or two and be on my way. But I was appreciative of the gentleman who wondered if Brent's experience was possibly a Texas / Oklahoma "thing" and not practiced nationwide. Because of his question, I felt the need to add a short personal story. But before doing that, I would only say that from my observational viewpoint (and from over-hearing my father) that each locality receives the "vision" of how they should run their locality from "on high" but ultimately they can choose how they want to implement it.

Thankfully, many of the localities did not hold such an extreme, legalist viewpoint as the groups in Texas and Oklahoma City did. For some reason, discernment was just not in their makeup and when they swung their "sword of faith" it took off many heads. Some unintentionally, but that didn't seem to matter. Caring for the Mother Ship overrode care for the individual.

For the majority of the children that had the sad misfortune to be raised within said group we are forever grateful of the day we left. We all mark it as our "day of salvation". It didn't matter if we were tossed out, fell out, stumbled out, slid out, walked out or ran out. We were just forever thankful that it happened and it was over. After years of mind games and endless training in hyper self-introspection than did nothing more then leave you a mangled mess of nerves, we passionately kiss freedom on the lips every day.

We cherish our freedom and will never allow someone or something to steal that from us again. We identify wholeheartedly with William Wallace in the movie Braveheart, when he cries out for Freedom. We KNOW that feeling. His cry became our cry as we too have felt the life-long crushing oppression and finally chose to no longer allow it to have a hold on us. To those that have claimed their freedom, I salute you! To those that haven’t, "keep on playing those mind games forever."

Afterwards, it takes years to orient oneself to function in the outside world. But no amount of pain or suffering derived from that adjustment was ever worth contemplating going back. I watched ABC's Primetime the other night and they focused on a Mormon polygamist extremist group located in the small town of Colorado City, AZ. Although they are extremist in a different fashion and for a different cause than wl and his lc, the dress, body language, manor of speech, manor of singing, devotion to their leader was all surprisingly and eerily the same. It seems that when a group separates themselves from the whole, they tend to pick up similar characteristics. We laugh about it now, but while we were in the group, we used to make the Amish look good. Now that's just an observation on my part. No clinical diagnosis given at this time. That will come at the end of my story.

As Brent has mentioned, we were raised in wl's lc and starting from Jr high age on, participated in every aspect of it wholeheartedly. I read every life study from Genesis to Revelation, attended every training starting with the book of Hebrews, given in the convention center, prior to the facilities in Anaheim, CA being built. (Which I worked on as well as the facilities in Irving, TX) I owned and read every book wl and wn put out accept for the ones we were told not to read by Nee. (It seems Nee feel off the wagon a few times and lost the vision of God's Economy. So we were strongly discouraged from reading those books. Apparently, in those books, Nee discusses playing chess and other distracting games as acceptable. The shame he must have for saying such things.) I came prepared for just about every meeting and testified as often as possible. Both Brent and I played guitar in the meetings for many years until that too was no longer acceptable. (A little worldly, no doubt.) It didn't matter, we pressed on to the high calling before us. (At least we thought)

I mention all this to set the ground work for my story. Brent had moved off to Austin then on to Seattle starting around 1979/1980. Other than the times I spent helping to build the facilities in Irving, TX, I lived in Oklahoma City. Our father, James Barber, died in Oct of 1984. (If pressed, someday I may tell the reason why James had to leave beautiful sunny Southern California and move us to the lc's version of Australia during the colonial period.)

This was the beginning of the removal of the oppression for Brent and myself. It is considered impolite to say disparaging remarks concerning the dead, particularly if that person happens to be your father, but the truth is the truth. One of the many weaknesses of the lc is the fact that it is strongly based upon the personality of whoever is leading the group think in that locality. Without James' powerful messages being given on a regular basis, the smoke screen began to thin a bit for me.

By the end of 1988 I seriously wanted to do something more with my life and decided to join the Air National Guard. It would still allow me to be home and attend most of the meetings except for one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer. This was my decision and I signed up. I later found out that the leaders in the group-think did not like that I hadn't come to them first before making such as "rash" decision. But off I was, none the less. I left for San Antonio, TX in late Sep 1989 for my six weeks of basic training. Forty of us trained together and were housed in large barracks with twenty on each side of a wall. Day and night we never left each others side. I was informed at this point that I snored, rather loudly they said, but I never heard a thing. So I shouldn't have been surprised when I woke up on the floor a few times.

Under this level of tension some of the younger guys begin to show signs of stress. But with an encouraging word, most were able to pull it together and go on. Sadly a few didn't. I kept telling them it was only for 5 more weeks, 4 more weeks, etc..... Strangely, in that environment time seems to stand still. You have no contact with the outside world, no newspaper, or TV. We trained every day, seven days a week and only knew what the sergeant told us. (Sounds familiar doesn't it, except our sergeant showed more heart and soul, more caring in that six weeks then I was ever exposed to during my entire time in the lc.)

I tell you all this to lead up to my point. At week four into our training a young man in our unit, who was seventeen at the time, was pulled aside by our sergeant and informed that his brother and three of his closest friends from high school had slid off a rainy road in Knoxville, TN and crashed to their death. Understandably so, this young man was devastated. There seemed to be no way to console our buddy. It was close to the end of the day when this news arrived and the unit commander, a teenager himself, suggested that after we finished our evening chores those of us that wished to could meet in the Day Room with our friend for a time of prayer.

My first thought was, "now why didn't I think of that?" It was a good idea. But I immediately knew why I hadn't thought of it. I was used to and trained to only pray with those that were "in" the Lord's Recovery. Not these outsiders; these "barely saved" people from "poor, poor Christianity". In fact, I wasn't sure if God would even listen or care about someone outside of His Recovery. Why should He? There was nothing in it for him.

They weren't going to be His first fruits. They wouldn't be attending the Wedding Feast with us. How could they, they weren't in the Lord's Recovery. I had grown up resigned to that fact. I was reminded and scared into submission by that fact. Only those in the lc would be taken by the Lord upon His return. Everyone knew that! All others would, at best, have to wait and suffer a thousand years, wailing and gnashing their teeth, wishing, oh how hard they would be wishing they had become a member of the lc. Tough luck for them. You're either in or you're not.

But I had grown fond of my new friends and after we finished our chores, 18 very young men out of the forty showed up to pray. We stood in a circle holding hands and went around the room, each one saying a little prayer for our troubled friend in need. The prayers were genuine and sweet. Very caring and very dear. Every one of the 18 prayed. And you know what happened........well, I'll tell you, God listened!

God Himself came into that room that very evening. He was as real as you are reading this post. He deeply cared about this poor young man who had just lost so much. We all felt His presence in a very powerful and moving way. My friend was encouraged, he was strengthened and was able to go on and finish training.

As for me, I had ointment placed on my blind eyes. I began to see for the first time that God loves ALL his people. Not just those in the lc. God is so much bigger then the lc. Much bigger then I had been led to believe. I was, in essence, having my salvation experience for the first time. I began to see the big picture. Now, believe me, I didn't see it that way at the time. Later through the "generosity" of the lc I would.

Fast forward a few weeks and it's now Nov of 1989. I had just returned to Oklahoma City for a few weeks before being sent to Wichita Falls, TX to begin my nine months of technical training. I continued to think about the wonderful experience I had enjoyed while in basic training. In fact I was looking forward to sharing that with the Church. It was Sunday morning in Nov of 1989 and the "rainbow booklets" were the "new move" at this time and were receiving the full court press. Now these "booklets" were nothing more then regurgitated life studies that the lsm was putting out because they were always looking for a new revenue source and this was it for the moment. (As I look back, I'm surprised that I didn't catch the similarity between these booklets and Mao Zedong's little red book used in Communist China as a form of mind control. But wait, wl was from Communist China, there is no way he would use the same simple method that his predecessor did? Or would he?)

During the meeting I was informed of there power. In fact, I was told during this meeting, that if you put one in your shirt pocket and someone on the street saw it, they would cross the street just to inquire as to what this lively colorful booklet was you had in your shirt pocket. Upon pulling it out and handing the booklet to the person they would be so moved that they would follow you to the next meeting and become saved. If they were already saved, then they would become saved to a fuller extent. (I've been told that's possible in the lc) Well I patiently waited until the end of the testimonies, not wanting to change the subject at the beginning. (I was aware of such things) I kept watching the clock and as the end of the meeting drew near a pause occurred. I had butterfly's in my stomach but I knew it was my time. Now or never.

I stood up and was greeted happily by the group. I quickly recapped where I had been for the past six weeks for those that didn't know and went into the story of how God had showed up during a time of prayer for a lost young brother. I wasn't but a short way into the story when one of the group think leaders stood up and crossed his arms. I knew from years in the lc that this was the universal sign to sit down. But I had the floor and this was Sunday morning Church in America and I was going to finish my story. The group leader begin to shuffle back and forth letting me know of his growing irritation. But I knew I could continue until the group as a whole being to moan. If the moaning started, it would get louder and louder until it grew to a crescendo of calling out loud "Ohhhhhhhhhh Lord Jesus, Ohhhhhhhhhhh Lord Jesus over and over again. If that happened, I would be done for and have to sit down. But it didn't come. Surprisingly, I still had the floor and was able to complete this wonderful story of God meeting man in his time of need. At this point I know there wasn't going to be any "Amen's" when I finished. The message of control from the Borg was loud and clear. Now at the time I had no idea why the Borg was trying to stop me. Maybe they wanted to end the meeting a little early. Maybe they had a lot of announcements and needed more time. I didn't know. As far as I was concerned, I was sharing an experience of Christ with the Church and "that's a good thing", as Martha Stewart would say.

As I sat down, I was happy and pleased that others were able to hear the good news that God will meet you no matter where you are. That He is "out there" to be experienced and enjoyed by all. Any time, any place. That was glorious news to me. But my joy didn't last long as the group think leader, the head Borg, went into a twenty minute tirade explaining that ANY experience of the Lord outside the Church was a false one. A lie! I kid you not, he said that very thing. He went on to say that in fact, Satan, God's enemy throughout the ages, was behind these type's of experiences. Satan's goal was to lead you away from the real, true experience of Christ which can only happen in his Church. He explained, if you have an experience of God and it doesn't lead you immediately to the Church, it was a false experience. It wasn't God at all. Only a facsimile of him, but it was most definitely NOT God. He wanted to make that perfectly clear. "Sorry Charlie!" Thanks for playing, but you missed the boat big time on this one. It was "all-together.... not-so-very-good". I had not obeyed rule number one. Of course, rule number one, how could I have forgotton. Silly me. He went on, "we should be thankful everyday to wl and the lsm because we no longer need to toil in the sun in order to bring an offering to the meetings. Those days are over. No need to go out and dug up verses you may have enjoyed by yourself during the day, just read the rainbow booklet assigned for you to read that week and come to the next meeting ready to share from it and ONLY from it. Nothing more. Anything else is dross to be burned away by the fire of the Lord.

When this mini-dictator started I was still on a little high myself and didn't hear what he was saying at first and wasn't sure why he was making this point. But as thick as I was, it quickly dawned on me that he was referring to my experience. It was my experience that was false! It was my experience that was a lie. That Satan was using me to spread this falsehood in the Church.

Well, boys and girls, I had just about had enough of this. I know God, and I know He was there that day. I know he cares and loves all his people, not just this handful of Sad Sacks being dictated to by some neo-Communist demagogue. I knew now that my relatives were not evil or "worldly". They were not "barely saved" as I had been taught from infancy. No! They were all dear sweet Christians. It was this sick, maniacal, extremist group that was the one that was WAY off course. So during his ranting, I stood up once again, but this time it was to give a hearty quick wave to the people and the place before walking out of there for the last time. (Can I get an "Amen" out there)

Now, you have to ask yourself, what do you call a portion of the body that separates itself from the whole and continues to grow by pulling from the host body yet rejecting the host body at the same time. I know what I would call it, but I'll let you make up your own mind. You'll be surprised at what you find.

In the end, it is what it is. As Brent has said, "If it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, well it's a pretty fair bet you have a duck on your hands". (Somebody call Dick Cheney)

There are many posts on this site that go into the lc's practice of segregation. I only relate my story to fully support and reinforce what Brent has been writing.

[aron]

Note the similarities in points made by Brent and Brad B with some made on the "Asian mind and the Western mind" thread.

See, e.g. Brad's "Caring for the Mother Ship overrode care for the individual."

A lot of LC culture was probably merely Asian culture with biblical garb.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Note the similarities in points made by Brent and Brad B with some made on the "Asian mind and the Western mind" thread.

See, e.g. Brad's "Caring for the Mother Ship overrode care for the individual."

A lot of LC culture was probably merely Asian culture with biblical garb.

The accounts of both Barbers helped to expose the fruit of one (James Barber) who was an absolute supporter and zealous promoter of Lee.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Did you post this in the wrong thread?

Adding this to Freeman's thread seems odd.

Maybe UntoHim can help out.

See post #38, on this thread:

Originally Posted by Unregistered

How can I get the brent and brad B posts

Brent went to live with Bill and Patsy Freeman; this is mentioned at the end of his testimony (post#39).

http://patsyfreeman.blogspot.com/

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

(If pressed, someday I may tell the reason why James had to leave beautiful sunny Southern California and move us to the lc's version of Australia during the colonial period.)

I could be wrong, but my sense is James was sent to OKC because of Phillip Lee. Track record indicates whenever someone had a problem with Phillip, they were either gone or sent away from Southern California where Phillip was.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The accounts of both Barbers helped to expose the fruit of one (James Barber) who was an absolute supporter and zealous promoter of Lee.

Growing up in the LC with James Barber as your father? WOW! OMG! And I thought I had it bad growing up in the Southern Baptist. Thinking of the Barber kids, and what I can't even imagine they went thru, I now feel ashamed to complain about my SBC indoctrination. It had to be nothing by comparison.

And thanks Aron for posting that from the BARM. I'm speechless.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Growing up in the LC with James Barber as your father? WOW! OMG! And I thought I had it bad growing up in the Southern Baptist. Thinking of the Barber kids, and what I can't even imagine they went thru, I now feel ashamed to complain about my SBC indoctrination. It had to be nothing by comparison.

Lee convinced many of his most ardent supporters that serving him and his ministry was equal to serving God. After 50 years of this in the USA, we now can examine the fruit of this kind of life on our children. For every 2nd generation white child still active in the LC's, there are 99 damaged and wounded young people who want little to do with God any more.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by awareness

Growing up in the LC with James Barber as your father? WOW! OMG! And I thought I had it bad growing up in the Southern Baptist. Thinking of the Barber kids, and what I can't even imagine they went thru, I now feel ashamed to complain about my SBC indoctrination. It had to be nothing by comparison.

Having spent a year or two with a SBC assembly, I would venture to suggest the recovery is a hybrid brethren/SBC culture in United States at least.