The Bridge and Channel of God - The Early Lee

[JJ]

I recall reading the first part of Witness Lee’s book The Bridge and Channel of God (based on messages he spoke in Manila in 1953) and being really turned off by it (and the Holy Spirit never let me finish it). Isn’t this book proof “the early Lee” was really no different than “the later Lee”?

[JJ]

Originally Posted by JJ

I recall reading the first part of Witness Lee’s book The Bridge and Channel of God (based on messages he spoke in Manila in 1953) and being really turned off by it (and the Holy Spirit never let me finish it). Isn’t this book proof “the early Lee” was really no different than “the later Lee”?

OK, so I’ve killed off quite a few great discussions with preachy, overly wordy, or nerdy posts but this is a new record, not one response. Too bad, I really wanted to know what others thought about my OP. In fairness to Lee and LSM copyright I was hoping to avoid posting small pieces of this many page book here to get the discussion going.

Is this really a dead topic I’m attempting to resurrect that is better left dead?

[Weighingin]

Was this part of the Collected Works of WL?? Or was it printed as a book before the compiling of his ministry? I don’t want to spend any more on LSM materials.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JJ

I recall reading the first part of Witness Lee’s book The Bridge and Channel of God (based on messages he spoke in Manila in 1953) and being really turned off by it (and the Holy Spirit never let me finish it). Isn’t this book proof “the early Lee” was really no different than “the later Lee”?

Originally Posted by JJ

OK, so I’ve killed off quite a few great discussions with preachy, overly wordy, or nerdy posts but this is a new record, not one response. Too bad, I really wanted to know what others thought about my OP. In fairness to Lee and LSM copyright I was hoping to avoid posting small pieces of this many page book here to get the discussion going.

Is this really a dead topic I’m attempting to resurrect that is better left dead?

Hi JJ, I think I started this "early Lee -- later Lee" paradigm in an attempt to explain the changes which took place in Lee's ministry. Over time, I realized that both Darby and Nee also also had changes in their ministries in a similar way. The many changes which I used to define this transition could be summarized as a "power grab."

Many posters, however, pushed back on my ideas, including our beloved moderator. How dare I say that WL was ever good? They provided evidence, such as the book you mentioned, to contradict my views. My ideas were developed to help explain why I came here in the first place, i.e. "how could something so good become so bad?"

Admittedly things were not perfect in the beginning, but the blessing of God and the anointing Spirit were definitely present, not because of Lee, but because of His children seeking Him. It's really a shame that Lee tried to take credit for the glory of God, and in doing so, ended up destroying what ever good was there.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

Was this part of the Collected Works of WL?? Or was it printed as a book before the compiling of his ministry? I don’t want to spend any more on LSM materials.

I first saw it as a separate book in 2005 when one of my close friends who hadn’t left (but I had) gave it to me. I’m with you on LSM books generally but will delve back into them when I remember a topic I’d like to discuss on these boards. I don’t think it right or fair to speak about something Nee, or Lee, or a Blended Bro said (and/or was printed) without providing the reader an opportunity to read it in its context and as completely as they wish. But, I share your pain

[JJ]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hi JJ, I think I started this "early Lee -- later Lee" paradigm in an attempt to explain the changes which took place in Lee's ministry. Over time, I realized that both Darby and Nee also also had changes in their ministries in a similar way. The many changes which I used to define this transition could be summarized as a "power grab."

Many posters, however, pushed back on my ideas, including our beloved moderator. How dare I say that WL was ever good? They provided evidence, such as the book you mentioned, to contradict my views. My ideas were developed to help explain why I came here in the first place, i.e. "how could something so good become so bad?"

Admittedly things were not perfect in the beginning, but the blessing of God and the anointing Spirit were definitely present, not because of Lee, but because of His children seeking Him. It's really a shame that Lee tried to take credit for the glory of God, and in doing so, ended up destroying what ever good was there.

Yes, thanks for filling me in. I have ended up having a similar experience because God used TLR to finally break through my resistance to the gospel, and saved me there. Then I had mostly good (and many strange and not so good) experiences there for seven years. Then bam! What I thought was a sweet church life turned incredibly bitter almost overnight. And I have spent and continue to spend far too much time trying to understand, learn from it, move on, and warn others about it. My conclusion after 5 years on these boards now mirrors yours. I’m also convinced the blessing was also related to the fact that in those days (1970’s and early 1980’s) we actually had our Bibles open, were reading them, and saints were testifying, praying and praising the Lord from that and not just “what Brother Lee or Nee said”. Over time that was increasingly restricted to “just from LSM” and the freedom and joy of the Holy Spirit became much, much less. Too bad!



Sounds like But, if anyone wants to see why Ohio and I think this book could be Exhibit A for checking if early Lee and later Lee were different (and see the answer was “not much” just minor terminology changes), need only read the last two paragraphs of the first chapter where Lee talks about God desiring to mingle himself with man so man can become a god-man in nature but not godhead. This was 1953. Forty-one years later that was his “High Peak Revelation” (making it sound like a new thing).

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Weighingin

Was this part of the Collected Works of WL?? Or was it printed as a book before the compiling of his ministry? I don’t want to spend any more on LSM materials.

It's available to read online at ministrybooks.org.

Click the "books A-Z" link at the top left, then "B", then scroll to the title.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Many posters, however, pushed back on my ideas, including our beloved moderator. How dare I say that WL was ever good? They provided evidence, such as the book you mentioned, to contradict my views. My ideas were developed to help explain why I came here in the first place, i.e. "how could something so good become so bad?"

One of the problems with this "how could something so good become so bad?" notion is that it creates a kind of false dilemma. The simple truth is that all movements of man are probably never quite as good as we might think, and they are probably never quite as bad as we might think. None of us like to think that we were that deceived, or that our experiences of the Lord, or the blessings of oneness with others, were somehow invalided by the sins of one man. But if we did have genuine experiences of the Lord, they are just that - genuine experiences of the Lord. Nothing anyone says today can invalidate those experiences we had.

Some of us only have so much energy and so much time. I prefer to use my energy and my time on this forum to speak what I know to be the truth about the false teachings and practices originally taught and propagated by Witness Lee, and now are taught and propagated by the Blended Brothers. Other forum members might have the inclination to speak of the positive experiences and blessings of years gone by. No Problem! I have neither encouraged nor discouraged such speaking on the forum, and I never will. What I do discourage is not being respectful and accurate about what our fellow forum members have posted about Witness Lee, or any other brother or sister.

[JJ]

I’m struck by the divergence between today’s “Quotes and Quips” on this site’s main page: “God became man that dehumanized men might become true men.
We become true men in the community of the incarnate, the suffering and loving,
the human God.” and Lee’s so-called High Peak Truth “God became man so that man might become God in life and nature but not in the godhead”. I much prefer the first!

[JJ]

Since a judge or jury won’t convict on one piece of evidence... In Chapters 6-8 of the subject book I found:

A very good section where Witness Lee encourages the saints in Manila to be open to the Holy Spirit’s leading;

Lee says “man is the way” (not Jesus, really);

Lee praises when a preacher put a young sister on the spot for the clothes she was wearing;

Blames the saints in Manila for not gospelizing all of the Phiilipines in the years of their existence as the church in Manila;

Advocates “systematic service”;

Tells those who want to serve in the church to “look for one in authority to be under and submit to their authority”;

And he talks about the church in Manila’s sixteen week training

Same old Lee. Meet the new boss. He’s the same as the old boss

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXrmQBPg2s0

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Hi[B]Admittedly things were not perfect in the beginning, but the blessing of God and the anointing Spirit were definitely present, not because of Lee, but because of His children seeking Him. It's really a shame that Lee tried to take credit for the glory of God, and in doing so, ended up destroying what ever good was there.

I admit that I have been one of the strongest naysayers. But in these two senteces you said it right. And another way of saying that is that the people of the LRC had a chance at something at least somewhat special, but unfortunately it came with baggage — Lee — and it was doomed from the start. It just took time to come to that conclusion.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by JJ

Yes, thanks for filling me in. I have ended up having a similar experience because God used TLR to finally break through my resistance to the gospel, and saved me there. Then I had mostly good (and many strange and not so good) experiences there for seven years. Then bam! What I thought was a sweet church life turned incredibly bitter almost overnight. And I have spent and continue to spend far too much time trying to understand, learn from it, move on, and warn others about it. My conclusion after 5 years on these boards now mirrors yours. I’m also convinced the blessing was also related to the fact that in those days (1970’s and early 1980’s) we actually had our Bibles open, were reading them, and saints were testifying, praying and praising the Lord from that and not just “what Brother Lee or Nee said”. Over time that was increasingly restricted to “just from LSM” and the freedom and joy of the Holy Spirit became much, much less. Too bad!



Sounds like But, if anyone wants to see why Ohio and I think this book could be Exhibit A for checking if early Lee and later Lee were different (and see the answer was “not much” just minor terminology changes), need only read the last two paragraphs of the first chapter where Lee talks about God desiring to mingle himself with man so man can become a god-man in nature but not godhead. This was 1953. Forty-one years later that was his “High Peak Revelation” (making it sound like a new thing).

JJ, I really would like to read your introductory post, but I couldn't find it. Do you remember the title?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I admit that I have been one of the strongest naysayers. But in these two senteces you said it right. And another way of saying that is that the people of the LRC had a chance at something at least somewhat special, but unfortunately it came with baggage — Lee — and it was doomed from the start. It just took time to come to that conclusion.

Several posters here -- Elden1971, Hosepipe, etc -- have said that Elden Hall was a blessed place when WL was just one of several ministers, and then the blessing ended when WL became THE minister.

Then Romans 12.3 raised its ugly head to destroy a good thing?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then Romans 12.3 raised its ugly head to destroy a good thing?

I had to laugh at this sentence. (in a good way)

It is too true.

But it also seems soooo wrong because the verse is not saying that thinking more highly of yourself is going to happen and cause problems, but that we should not think more highly of ourselves so that this kind of thing does not happen. Taken that way, Rom 12:3 should mean that there would be no Lee rearing HIS ugly head. And imagine if that had been the case.

But in this particular environment, it is what the verse warns against that is what happened. And thus the very correct application of the verse to the early LRC in the US.

[JJ]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

JJ, I really would like to read your introductory post, but I couldn't find it. Do you remember the title?

I have not been able to find it either. Maybe it is like an ROUS and doesn’t exist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXjl1eMczN0

I just posted “my testimony” as a new thread.

[OBW]

Again, busy snooping around in older threads. And this is one that even I posted in at the time.

Early Lee v Later Lee.

I know that I gave Ohio some grief on this notion because at the time he started in on it I had been busy finding that even Nee was much like the Lee that was being demonstrated as "later Lee."

However, I did relent some, and in hindsight, I will even more so.

In the US, Lee clearly came in presenting something that would change. He did not arrive as the iron-fisted ruler of the local churches in Taiwan seeking to expand them to the US. Instead, he brought some teachings — heavily Nee's at first — that were gaining popularity within "inner life" circles. His personal connection with Nee also gave him favor with some.

And he joined small home groups without directing them. He provided some encouraging thoughts and teachings as there began to actually be "local churches" in a few places, like Elden Hall. But bit-by-bit it changed. And the more drastic changes of the 70s and into the 80s marked the stark line of "early" v "later."

So, as Obi-Wan Kenobi said to Luke concerning his claim that Anakin was killed by Darth Vader, it is somewhat a matter of perspective. Everything that we call Later Lee was there long before he came to the US. And this particular book that JJ references (and I have never read) may be the proof of the ultimate character of Lee. But it was not evident, given the perception of an Early Lee. And in practice, there was an Early Lee. He was meek (it seemed). He provided his teaching as a help. But in reality, he was already Later Lee dressed in an Early Lee costume. So Ohio was right, from one perspective. And I was right, from another perspective. Neither was simply right or simply wrong.

But what made me more sure of a "no early Lee" perspective was my finding that Nee was really not what we have so often considered him to be. He was the author of "wait for the dispensing" even though he never said it directly. But read one of his more popular booklets, Sit Walk Stand, and you can see it in there. You have to sit before you can walk. Or stand. You should not walk, or even try to walk until you have sufficiently sat.

The core of the errors in teaching goes back to mainland China. And Lee's penchant for manhandling the churches for personal gain also goes back to Taiwan. Before Taiwan, he was at best #2, therefore unable to be so controlling. But he had an excellent teacher in Nee. While Nee was excommunicated for a period due to sexual improprieties (the crux of which was not some overstep as Lee tried to claim) he prepared for his coup d'etat and returned (through Lee's manipulations) to give the messages that would be Spiritual Authority (aka Authority and Submission) which would deny anyone other than God directly the right to challenge the supreme leader (my rephrase, not Nee's term). This was the source of Deputy Authority. It was the basis to rebut Paul for saying an elder should be publicly rebuked and instead refuse that rebuke of an elder could even happen.

And this was already part of Lee's arsenal when he arrived in North America. He hid it and therefore created the illusion of an Early Lee. So from the perspective of practice, there was an Early Lee in the US. And the LCs in the 60s and early 70s were different from later times. But it was mainly because Lee had not removed his mask to reveal Palpatine was really a Sith Master in Republic clothing.

So I have a different perspective than Ohio, but respect his experience as demonstrating an Early Lee that was not visibly the same as Later Lee.

It is a complicated thing.