POLL: How do you generally view the LC?

[Sons to Glory!]

Here's a couple questions that might be interesting/fun to answer, regarding how you generally view the LC. It's a two question rating. The first part is whether you think the LC is promoting "another Christ & another gospel." The second part is concerning how you generally view the LC as being a move of God.

Here's an A - F scale for the first part.

Regarding the LC promoting another Christ and/or Gospel, it's:
A = A totally genuine Christ & Gospel
B = A mostly genuine Christ & Gospel (a couple things questionable)
C = A little unorthodox Christ & Gospel
D = Mostly a different Christ & Gospel (questionable & very unorthodox)
F = A completely different Christ & Gospel

Here's a 1-10 scale to use for the second part.

The LC :
10 = Is God's one, fresh move on the earth
9 = Is a very key move of God
8 = Is an important move of God
7 = Is one move of God
6 = Was once a genuine move, but slowly faded over time
5 = Was once a genuine move, but quickly got corrupted
4 = Had a couple good things at best
3 = Was somewhat off the mark from the very beginning
2 = Always preached downright heresy
1 = Was and is a tool of Satan

I'll go first and provide an example. My answer is C5 (yes - "middle-of-the-road"). Which means I think the LC promotes a "Little unorthodox Christ & Gospel;" and "Was once a genuine move, but quickly got corrupted."

It should be interesting to see other's answers! (and we could put it on our signature line so everyone will know where we are coming from . . . OK, maybe too much )

[Ohio]

When you say "LC" do you really mean the teachings of WL and the Blendeds at LSM? Obviously there were nuanced views from locality to locality, based on the elders and the region. Also, concerning "another gospel," what was promoted when I first met has changed dramatically over the years.

[Freedom]

My response is C3

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When you say "LC" do you really mean the teachings of WL and the Blendeds at LSM? Obviously there were nuanced views from locality to locality, based on the elders and the region. Also, concerning "another gospel," what was promoted when I first met has changed dramatically over the years.

I thought there might be a question about this. But rather than getting into all the subcategories of WL, LSM, WN, Blendeds, different regions, etc., I just put LC as a grouping of all. I guess if you also wanted to answer for specific categories, that's your prerogative.

Concerning things changing over the years, that's what the 2nd question is supposed to address.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Freedom

My response is C3

Thanks for your response. May I ask what region you were in?

[UntoHim]

The problem with StG's poll is that any movement based on the person and work of a mere human being(s) has great possibility to be ALL the things listed in both categories. The Local Church of Witness Lee is a movement of men based upon the person and work of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee, therefore at any given time, the LC could fit into any one of the categories..maybe even fit into different categories for different people at the very same time.

I'm always a little amused when people use this term "move of God", as if we can make a subjective judgment apart from what is plainly laid before us in the Word of God. It's kind of like making a subjective judgment or assessment of a man being an apostle apart from what is plainly laid before us in the Word of God. Witness Lee and his followers have always made these kind of judgments and assessments a "moving target". They define terms such as "move of God" and "apostle" so that they match up with their little sect and with their chosen guru. And this is why most other Christians (what little have even heard of WN/WL and the LC) have little to no respect or recognition of "The Lord's Recovery".

All this being said, my rating would be:
CDF - 321
-

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for your response. May I ask what region you were in?

Southern California

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I'm always a little amused when people use this term "move of God", as if we can make a subjective judgment apart from what is plainly laid before us in the Word of God. All this being said, my rating would be:
CDF - 321
-

Thanks. I went back and forth and word-smithed the questions numerous times before arriving at the "move of God" phrase. But it seemed to be at least somewhat applicable, hopefully. Is there another term you could suggest that would be more appropriate for this quasi-scientific purpose?

Averaging your ratings together would be a D - 2, which is "A mostly different Christ & gospel" and "Always preached downright heresy." (but probably not completely like that when you first arrived)

May I ask where in TLR you were?

[Ohio]

The 3 LC's I was a part of would be A8 when I started with them, but now B6

[UntoHim]

I was in a number of the Local Churches in Orange County, mostly within 15 minutes of Anaheim, from about mid-70s to about late 80s. Probably only missed Witness Lee speak in person a hand full of times during that period. Was briefly volunteer "tape room" brother under Mr. Philip Lee. Saw a lot. Heard a lot. Sat at the feet of Witness Lee for better part of 2 decades. Kind of, sort of know what I'm talking about when it comes to the teachings and practices.

I lived in brothers houses with several of what are considered "Co-Workers" and "Blended Brothers". I knew them before they were even elders or "responsible brothers". Knew some of them before they graduated college or married. So you could say that my "general view" of the Local Church of Witness Lee is pretty well informed. Doesn't make my judgments and assessments any better or any worse than anyone else's...only that they are well-informed.

As far as your use of "move of God", I took it at face value...meaning legitimate move of God, something initiated by God and approved by God. Did you actually have something else in mind?
-

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I was in a number of the Local Churches in Orange County, mostly within 15 minutes of Anaheim, from about mid-70s to about late 80s.

Thanks for that bro! I didn't know your background at all. There are a few still associated with the Scottsdale gathering that you perhaps crossed paths with. However, most of us here are either from the LCs in the Bay Area or the NW. I have to ask, since you rated the LC so low, why did you stick around there so long?

Regarding the "move of God" phrase, no, I think that is good enough for this - it communicates a basic perception and provides a springboard for dialogue I think.

[UntoHim]

Well I've been out of the Local Church of Witness Lee for the better part of 25 years. If I would have taken your poll back then my rating would have been a lot closer to yours. I left in good standing. I wasn't "quarantined" in any way shape or form. Aside from seeing a little glimpse of Philip Lee in action, I was totally oblivious to any kind of abuse. I adored Witness Lee. I thought he walked on water. Same goes for Watchman Nee. I refused to believe anything negative. It took sitting in John Ingalls' living room, hearing him relate to me in tears the things that were going on behind the scene. I knew in my heart and mind that the things that he was telling me were true, and that he was really "speaking the truth in love".

Then, slowly but surely, I did my own due diligence, contacting many trusted brothers (including some brothers that were co-workers before some of the yahoos there in Anaheim now), and they all confirmed for me what I already knew in my heart. "The Lord's Recovery" was neither - it wasn't the Lord's and it certainly wasn't his recovery. It was just another sectarian movement initiated and run by a man. It didn't take long to find out that Witness Lee was a fraud. He had already created a "Lord's Recovery" in Taiwan and other places in Asia, and he was found to be a fraud, a swindler and was already teaching and preaching a different gospel way back when. He was already hiring and firing elders and co-workers at his personal whim, all depending on their personal loyalty to his person and work (his authority and ministry).

Can you possibly expand your poll to include an F- ?
-

[aron]

It's an interesting and not illegitimate question, but perhaps unanswerable, to do a sliding scale like this. We’re called to be children of light, not look at gradations of darkness. I think God can differentiate shades of grey but we just stick to “black or white”, as in “to fellowship or to avoid”. And the LC's in my latter category, along with JW, Unification Church aka Moonies, Rastafarians, SDA, LDS, WWCOG, Iglesa ni Cristo, and Jesus Family. It’s a pseudo-Christian personality cult.

We suffer from selection bias, based on subjective history and ignorance. God is the Judge, but we still need to sense which groups might be profitable for fellowship versus which to avoid. But trying to pinpoint exactly where some cross the proverbial line and go from “aberrant but genuine Christian sect” to “cult” might be beyond our capacity. I do feel it’s beyond mine.

Here’s why the LC's in my “to avoid” category:

WL taught that the Son is the Father. How can the Father sit at His own right hand, a la Psa 110 and Matt 22? And yet no one noticed, or rather everyone pretended not to notice.

WL taught that most Psalms with imprecations were fallen human sentiments and not divinely inspired. We’re called to love our enemies, to bless and not to curse, right? Yet in other Psalms, imprecation is called a type of Christ defeating Satan. And yet none noticed this disparity, or rather they all pretended not to notice.

WL taught that women can’t teach in the church, yet his ministry still sells books by women teaching on the “three parts of man”, and cites them as foundational for the recovery of "God's economy”; and WN cribbed Jessie Penn-Lewis for his “Spiritual Man” so egregiously that the publisher had to acknowledge it in the preface to the Second Edition. And yet none noticed this, or rather everyone's forced to pretend not to notice. Mustn't upset the Teacher, and point out issues. Don't ask questions, because question marks are shaped like serpents.

WL taught that with the problem of sin in church, Matthew 18 principles apply unless the person involved is the Great Man himself: the Guru aka 'Ministry of the Age' aka 'God's Oracle' aka 'Seer of the Divine Revelation'. If the Guru errs, then one must pretend not to notice. It's a test from God, see -- if you can be subject to His Divine Government, or not. If the Great Man sins, one must "cover drunken Noah". Thus, the image of Ed Marks clapping his hands over his eyes and ears and saying, "I'm a monkey". Today Ed has a secure job promoting this ministry, because he's made himself blind and deaf, and is well-practiced at pretending not to notice.

When WL died his Chief Minions declared that an age of human history had passed, and another begun. “It's now the age of the small potatoes; the age of spiritual giants is over”. No more divine revelations; now one had to parse the Great Man’s writings for guidance. And no scripture was given. And nobody noticed, or rather, everyone pretended not to notice.

I could go on, with Daystar, Philip Lee aka The Office, what happened to Jane Anderson and dozens (hundreds? Thousands?) of others. Deceptive recruiting practices. Crass manipulation of church members. Information control, or “omerta”, that would make the Mafia jealous. Etc. The details of the whos, whats, hows, and whys are probably beyond my ken. I'd just say, “Avoid”. No Church is perfect. But prudence would dictate that some are best to simply stay away from. We don't need to know in some objective, doctrinal stance of "Same Christ yet funky" versus "different Christ". We're all funky, or most of us anyway. But at some point you just have to avoid. Or, if you're there, run away. Fast.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by aron

Don't ask questions, because question marks are shaped like serpents.

Just to zero in on a small part of your post above....

And yet somehow, the co-workers are allowed to ask questions and apparently in their minds somehow those questions are not serpents, e.g. from the shepherding words site on "Twisting Ron Kangas's Words" article:

"Would the critics have Ron skip the story of Miriam’s leprosy and the lessons to be learned from it? Would they have him ignore the lessons from our own history?"

Those are manipulative questions designed to shame and shut down. They are putting words in people's mouths that those people never said, with the intention of making them look stupid. But it's a blatant manipulative technique.

Interestingly enough, a similar question format shows up in the CRI We Were Wrong journal, which is supposed to have been written by the CRI people, but sounds a lot like the way the co-workers write. It's on page 20 in big bold print:

"Do the drafters and signers of the Open Letter really want to say that when the Spirit comes into the believers the Father and Son are left on the throne?"

Well, the drafters and signers of the open letter never said that, so why are they incredulously asking that question as if that's what the signers said?

Somehow these types of questions are not in the shape of the serpent when they come from the co-workers.

It's just manipulation and hypocrisy.

That's how I view the LC.

[Sons to Glory!]

Thanks trapped and Aron for your input, but can you please also provide a rating as was outlined in the first post - since that's the basis of this thread?

[TLFisher]

During my teen years in San Bernardino, CA I would say B-6. As an adult in Bellevue, wa I would say D-3. How as it I stayed as long as I did as an adult? Familiarity and family relations are several. Children raised in the local churches, to meet anywhere else is a foreign concept. Humanly speaking leaving one's comfort zone is a difficult decision. If you have social connections with brothers/sisters from another church denominational or non-denominational it is easier.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Terry

During my teen years in San Bernardino, CA I would say B-6. As an adult in Bellevue, wa I would say D-3. How as it I stayed as long as I did as an adult? Familiarity and family relations are several. Children raised in the local churches, to meet anywhere else is a foreign concept. Humanly speaking leaving one's comfort zone is a difficult decision. If you have social connections with brothers/sisters from another church denominational or non-denominational it is easier.

Yes, the comfort zone is . . . well . . . comfortable! Did you know any of the ones from the NW that moved to Scottsdale in around 1990?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Yes, the comfort zone is . . . well . . . comfortable! Did you know any of the ones from the NW that moved to Scottsdale in around 1990?

If he's still in Scottsdale, you may be familiar with Chuck. During the time I was still meeting with Bellevue, he visited for his sister's wedding. I knew Chuck's mom fairly well from my home meeting group. Back then in the mid-90's there was still animus towards those who went to Scottsdale (and Moses Lake too).
But on Chuck's visit, I saw nothing but love for him.
No one else I knew in Scottsdale having moved to Bellevue from San Bernardino in 1993.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Terry

If he's still in Scottsdale, you may be familiar with Chuck. During the time I was still meeting with Bellevue, he visited for his sister's wedding. I knew Chuck's mom fairly well from my home meeting group. Back then in the mid-90's there was still animus towards those who went to Scottsdale (and Moses Lake too).
But on Chuck's visit, I saw nothing but love for him.
No one else I knew in Scottsdale having moved to Bellevue from San Bernardino in 1993.

I assume you mean Chuck B, right? Yes he's here and doing well - a wonderful and encouraging brother! He's actually one of three elders here, and one of the six speaking brothers (who rotate giving the Sunday message. His sharing is always fresh, insightful and encouraging.

Animus toward those who went to Scottsdale? I actually don't know that much about when the ones here (in Scottsdale) were still in the NW. Why were there hard feelings?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I assume you mean Chuck B, right? Yes he's here and doing well - a wonderful and encouraging brother! He's actually one of three elders here, and one of the six speaking brothers (who rotate giving the Sunday message. His sharing is always fresh, insightful and encouraging.

Animus toward those who went to Scottsdale? I actually don't know that much about when the ones here (in Scottsdale) were still in the NW. Why were there hard feelings?

It would be one and the same.
I moved back to the area after ones from Seattle/Bellevue moved to Scottsdale. I was not well acquainted what happened in Seattle versus Anaheim. All I can tell you ones who went to Scottsdale as well as the ones meeting in Moses Lake were referred to as rebels. Didn't agree with it, but that's how it was.

[OBW]

D3

All the way back to the beginning (with Nee in China).

I will say that the scale is problematic. This "different Christ and difference gospel" theme tends to argue against even being Christian. But I would never say that. But unorthodox, definitely. And so many add-ons to Christ that it is hard to find the real person under the trappings.

But the thing I find most problematic is that their Christ is not really based on what can be seen in the gospels (in other words, first-hand Christ), but misunderstood writings of Paul. And Paul gets a lot of blame for misunderstanding by even much of evangelical Christianity. We don't really pay attention to what Christ said and did first, then read Paul with the understanding that he is talking about the Christ that can be seen in the gospels (even if those were not yet written). Instead, we read Paul, interpret it in a vacuum (using a lot of eisegeses — reading into), and then forcing that image onto Christ despite the direct record that often reads differently.

And the LC has been worse than the rest in that matter.

But you add the issues that are not covered in this brief questionnaire (abuse, sectarian, etc.) and they get rated as Christian but earning a failing grade as bearing the image of God.

[Sons to Glory!]

Yeah, the poll has it's shortcoming in that it only asks a couple things, and maybe the scale isn't the best . . . perhaps we should put together a longer, four quadrille questionnaire that can better reflect all the nuances of the varying experiences of folks on here. We could do that - who wants to start working on it?

[Ohio]

You should ask our views when we first contacted the LC, rather than 30-40 years later.

[Cal]

I agree with UntoHim. What is a "genuine move?"

Seems to be just leftover LR thinking and terminology.

The whole mindset is categorically wrongheaded.

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

perhaps we should put together a longer, four quadrille questionnaire that can better reflect all the nuances of the varying experiences of folks on here. We could do that - who wants to start working on it?

Again the premise of the thing is flawed. What is a "genuine move of God?" Give me an example of one. Give me an example of something that is not one.

[Sons to Glory!]

Thanks for the input, Cal . . . and your rating would be?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

You should ask our views when we first contacted the LC, rather than 30-40 years later.

Working on time machine now . . .

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for the input, Cal . . . and your rating would be?

Define "genuine move of God" and give me examples and I'll tell you.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but you might as well be asking me if the LR is a greater or lesser wulshank, while not even defining what a wulshank is.

The type of thing you are doing is precisely one big flaw of the LR--throwing around terms and ideas that they never clearly define, and expecting everyone to agree on what they mean.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Cal

Define "genuine move of God" and give me examples and I'll tell you.

I'm not trying to be difficult, but you might as well be asking me if the LR is a greater or lesser wulshank, while not even defining what a wulshank is.

The type of thing you are doing is precisely one big flaw of the LR--throwing around terms and ideas that they never clearly define, and expecting everyone to agree on what they mean.

Consider me duly admonished! However, me thinks yer putting too much thought into this (didn't mean it to be exactly a scientific poll . . .).

But since you asked, off the top here's what I would say is the definition of a "Genuine move of God:" A move that God has initiated; a concerted activity His Holy Spirit is engaged in among men. An example might be the Great Awakenings, Welsh Revival and the Jesus People movements (but also might be smaller in scale).

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Me thinks yer putting too much thought into this. But off the top, here's what I would say is the definition of a "Genuine move of God:" A move that God has initiated; a concerted activity His Holy Spirit is engaged in among men.

It seems to me, that except in very extreme and obvious instances, it is impossible for anyone to decide whether some subset of the Body of Christ is a "move of God" or was "initiated by God."

I think God has one move, and it includes everything his Holy Spirit is doing on earth. If the Holy Spirit is involved, how could that involvement not be part of God's move? It's the work of the Holy Spirit that is the move, not the group he is moving in. And he moves in every Christian group.

One aspect of cult thinking is that very subjective judgments are made and expected. Seems to me that the implied questions on this poll are asking us to make those kinds of very subjective judgments. Hence to me it indicates leftover LR thinking. No offense intended.

I think categorizing Christian movements or groups as great, okay, inferior, etc, is like taking those surveys on Facebook that tell you what kind of character you would have been in the Old West. Entertaining but meaningless.

God doesn't care about the group, anyway. He cares about the people in the group.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Cal

It seems to me, that except in very extreme and obvious instances, it is impossible for anyone to decide whether some subset of the Body of Christ is a "move of God" or was "initiated by God."

I think God has one move, and it includes everything his Holy Spirit is doing on earth. If the Holy Spirit is involved, how could that involvement not be part of God's move? It's the work of the Holy Spirit that is the move, not the group he is moving in. And he moves in every Christian group.

One aspect of cult thinking is that very subjective judgments are made and expected. Seems to me that the implied questions on this poll are asking us to make those kinds of very subjective judgments. Hence to me it indicates leftover LR thinking. No offense intended.

Oh boy . . . OK. No poll answer from you --> NEXT!

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Oh boy . . . OK. No poll answer from you --> NEXT!

Another aspect of LR thinking is the idea that God has levels of work. He has his "one true move." And he has everything else. This was how the LR elevated themselves above all, while conceding God was present elsewhere. This kind of thinking feeds elitism and I see it reflected in the premise of your survey. As I said, I think the premise is very flawed.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Cal

Another aspect of LR thinking is the idea that God has levels of work. He has his "one true move." And he has everything else. This was how the LR elevated themselves above all, while conceding God was present elsewhere. This kind of thinking feeds elitism and I see it reflected in the premise of your survey. As I said, I think the premise is very flawed.

Never said this flawed poll was all that good, but thanks for your input. My unsolicited opinion is this observation you expressed, is a reflection of what many on here seem to have, namely seeing and expressing everything through totally anti-LR glasses (and thereby projecting that upon me too).

Nonetheless, I never indicated it was a perfect or even good poll, in fact I indicated the inverse and just wanted to have some fun with it. So, feel free - do you want to come up with a better one bro, to express how folks generally view the LC? (or maybe you don't think this is anything worth determining, that's fine too)

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Nonetheless, I never indicated it was a perfect or even good poll, in fact I indicated the inverse and just wanted to have some fun with it. So, feel free - do you want to come up with a better one bro, to express how folks generally view the LC? (or maybe you don't think this is anything worth determining, that's fine too)

Okay, that's fine. Have fun! I thought you were saying that you actually believe there are truly strata of quality of "moves."

I'll play along. I think they were somewhere between C and D. As for the second half, I would say they were an odd mixture of "God was indeed there" and "off from the beginning."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Cal

Okay, that's fine. Have fun! I thought you were saying that you actually believe there are truly strata of quality of "moves."

I'll play along. I think they were somewhere between C and D. As for the second half, I would say they were an odd mixture of "God was indeed there" and "off from the beginning."

Thanks for playing! So your rating would be basically a C-D/7-3 nearest I could tell.

Maybe when enough ratings get posted, we'll do a graph. So far things aren't trending well for the LC in the responses . . .

[Curious]

I don't feel well qualified to rate myself and I've thought long about it. I'm overall at:
D3,
acknowledging that all these variables you've offered could be at play for any one individual or group at different times. My only other comment is: The deeper one gets entangled, the further along in the negatives, the relevant ratings become.
And I've seen it operate as a tool of satan, but not always.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Cal

I agree with UntoHim. What is a "genuine move?"

Seems to be just leftover LR thinking and terminology.

The whole mindset is categorically wrongheaded.

Again the premise of the thing is flawed. What is a "genuine move of God?" Give me an example of one. Give me an example of something that is not one.

Cal is right here. The question is almost impossible to answer because the phrase "move of the Lord" is poisoned.

I remember talking to a family member years back about this. He offered a testimony of someone getting saved in Puerto Rico as proof that the Recovery is "the move of the Lord." Huh?!?

How to even discuss a comment like that? I just let the topic go. Is that what some actually believe? Their God is so small that the salvation of one person in P.R. proves that the Lord is ONLY with the Recovery. Can it be that God cannot save a Baptist and a Presbyterian on the same day?

[byHismercy]

Right, Ohio! It is flawed logic. By using their logic I can argue that, because I was saved by the Lord OUTSIDE of the LC......it is proof that the Recovery is NOT the move of the Lord. Neither argument holds any water.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Cal is right here. The question is almost impossible to answer because the phrase "move of the Lord" is poisoned.

I remember talking to a family member years back about this. He offered a testimony of someone getting saved in Puerto Rico as proof that the Recovery is "the move of the Lord." Huh?!?

How to even discuss a comment like that? I just let the topic go. Is that what some actually believe? Their God is so small that the salvation of one person in P.R. proves that the Lord is ONLY with the Recovery. Can it be that God cannot save a Baptist and a Presbyterian on the same day?

Admittedly that 2nd question took quite a bit more effort to come up with and I revised the items in it numerous times. The first question was much easier to create. Eventually I came up with something that seemed at least okay at best, but I wasn't sure how else to phrase it. So what do y-all think might be a better question or way to ask that?

[byHismercy]

By the way, I give the LC a big fat F-1. I personally never once heard the gospel of Jesus there except to hear them degrade it as being low. Or I should say, attempt to degrade it. Our faith in His finished work is the power of salvation. The LC is incapable of actually degrading it.

I did hear a brother stand up in a big conference in Anaheim and declare that the blood of Christ does not wash us, does not cleanse us from our sin. I waited for clarification on that statement but never got any. It was hearing many little things just like that that caused me to lose interest, over time.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I did hear a brother stand up in a big conference in Anaheim and declare that the blood of Christ does not wash us, does not cleanse us from our sin. I waited for clarification on that statement but never got any.

That's dumbfounding! Could this really be?! If no one corrected this statement, that's a big shame on them!

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by byHismercy

I personally never once heard the gospel of Jesus there except to hear them degrade it as being low.

I would have to go back when I was still in high school (85/86) as the last time I heard the gospel of Jesus in a LC setting.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

That's dumbfounding! Could this really be?! If no one correct this statement, that's a big shame on them!

I know, StG. It almost made me stand up and walk out but I had to wait to hear the 'prophesy' corrected.....that never came either. I just remember looking around in disbelief, looking for some eye-rolling, something to tell me others heard it, and disagreed too. I didn't see that. Nobody said anything! But the conference's became of little value after that.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Terry

I would have to go back when I was still in high school (85/86) as the last time I heard the gospel of Jesus in a LC setting.

And those years were well before I met with the LC.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

That's dumbfounding! Could this really be?! If no one correct this statement, that's a big shame on them!

I've seen it happen. That's one of the criticisms of "everyone speaking". The leaders would rather have it go on than to correct the speaker.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Terry

I've seen it happen. That's one of the criticisms of "everyone speaking". The leaders would rather have it go on than to correct the speaker.

I guess I can see that, but what they said about the blood was such a critical, fundamental belief. In our gatherings, there's been a few times where someone spoke up and took issue regarding something erroneous (at least they thought it was) someone else had said.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for playing! So your rating would be basically a C-D/7-3 nearest I could tell. Maybe when enough ratings get posted, we'll do a graph. So far things aren't trending well for the LC in the responses . . .

Yeah, C-D. But no, not 7 to 3, maybe 4.5-3.

But then it also is #1. It definitely has become a tool of Satan. I'd say just ask Greg Casteel, but he's not with us anymore because of the LR.

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by Terry

I've seen it happen. That's one of the criticisms of "everyone speaking". The leaders would rather have it go on than to correct the speaker.

This is a beef of mine. I think this may be one area where the church kids get messed up. "Off" saints are given free liberty to share in the meeting and no one will correct their error. Meanwhile young church kids hear the error, look around and see people continue to "amen" or at least not disagree, and the error becomes a part of their foundation of truth going forward.

---

My answer to the poll is D-2,3,4.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Trapped

This is a beef of mine. I think this may be one area where the church kids get messed up. "Off" saints are given free liberty to share in the meeting and no one will correct their error. Meanwhile young church kids hear the error, look around and see people continue to "amen" or at least not disagree, and the error becomes a part of their foundation of truth going forward.

---

My answer to the poll is D-2,3,4.

I always viewed the open meetings as a positive thing. Risky? Yes, can be - people can say the darnedest things! But it is up to the Lord to provide us with the proper light if something off is said (and humans say a lot of "off" things . . .). This may come directly from Him or through another member of the body. Personally I would not trade the open meetings we have here (Scottsdale) - the benefit far, far outweighs the risk, at least to me. And I've seen the correction come many times if something was too far off.

And thanks for your poll answer!

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks trapped and Aron for your input, but can you please also provide a rating as was outlined in the first post - since that's the basis of this thread?

I'd say CDF / 123. Probably F1, should be treated with extreme caution. But as I said, we are too limited in view and to biased. Only God truly judges well. But I don't think we can be too cautious, and prudence should treat it as if it were the most dangerous kind of falsity. Again, we're called to be children of light, and dancing between gradations of grey doesn't work - just call it black and walk away.

But I'm biased, I'm sure. Only God is true.

Originally Posted by Ohio

You should ask our views when we first contacted the LC, rather than 30-40 years later.

It was heaven*.

Heaven with an asterisk. Heaven with red flags. You just had to ignore the fact that one person wrote all the books. There was a wall of "rainbow booklets", little pastel-colored pamphlets, all with one name on them. And the whispers about "storms" and "rebellions". And so on. Just ignore all that and it was great.

Eventually, of course, the red flags grew until they covered the horizon. Everyone talked of love but none was shown. Not real love. If you were good material, so-called, you got love-bombed. But if you had trouble, see ya. "We're not here for that". We're not here for the sick, the poor, the crippled and the lame, the prisoners or the hungry. We're not here for those who can't repay us in this age. No sirree, we're here to get paid in this age. None of that "reward in the resurrection of the righteous" in Luke 14:13,14 here. Nope - cash on the barrelhead in the LC. We've got a church to build, and a ministry to support.

We got manipulated into a Chinese personality cult. I think of the song, "I'm walking down the road that leads to glory"

I’m walking down the road
That leads to glory.
I’m pressing toward the mark
By enjoying God!
I don’t know so much,
Just to love Him.
I’m walking down the road,
Glory, here I come.

"I don't know so much" means that Lee has cut you off from historical Christianity so that he can re-invent it. Enforced ignorance is his tool. "Don't think, just enjoy" was the mantra. Shut off your mind and let Witness Lee re-wire it.

With the brothers and the sisters,
We enjoy Him day by day.
It’s so simple and easy,
Our worries flee away.
Now we’re growing together,
As one big family,
Abiding in the joy of the Lord.

"It's so simple and easy". This means to "be simple", and drop all the safeguards of millenia of historical Christianity. It's the Year One, in the Restored True Church (or Year 62, if Nee's 'Spiritual Man' signaled the New Age). So all the rules are gone. No need to do this and that, all those "dead works". No, "Just Enjoy".

We enjoy You, Lord Jesus,
In our experience.
We’re getting to know You—
It’s making us leap and dance.
Just eating and drinking,
It’s what we do the best,
Delighting in the love of the Lord.

"Eating and Drinking" - Jesus said that his food was to do the will of the Father. But in the LC it was pray-reading. No "dead works" of obedience for us. Just masticate the Processed Triune God and become God in Life and Nature. How enjoyable! (until the joy runs out) Our experience is not a sure peg in the wall. Jesus' experiences are. That alone is the rest, and focus, of our faith.

We’re walking, not running,
Cause we’re in the pasture land.
Our Shepherd is nearby,
We’re trusting in His hand.
He’s everything to us,
He’s all we ever need,
Resting in the peace of the Lord.

This one almost is good. But still the focus is on who? On the believer's ephemeral sensations. Not on Jesus Christ. Remember what Paul said? "It is no longer 'I' but Jesus Christ". The LC gets you to focus on your "experience", which means you're ripe for manipulation. The Scripture says, "In the midst of the Ekklesia I (Christ) will sing hymns of praise to You (Father)". The scriptural focus in the assembly is the life of Christ flowing through us, glorifying the Father. It is not on our selfish 'enjoyment'. Sorry, but that's the truth, if there's any such thing as truth in this world.

I was determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

If it's so simple and easy, why did they tell us to recruit "typical Americans" off the USA campuses? Because they wanted to hide the fact that it was a Chinese personality cult. Why lead us to Taiwan to practice door knocking? Because our "enjoyment" wasn't filling LSM coffers quick enough. And so forth. Simple and easy goes right out the window.

Here is a video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdBpDPHH7N0

The college students here, enjoying their experiences, are caught by their sensations. They get pressured to conform, pump fists in unison, then they get the euphoria of the Hive Mind when they buckle to pressure. Suddenly, how marvelous! How glorious! But 10 years from now they'll be "community saints" and forgotten as the LC bus rolls on, as the machine sucks up a new set of naifs. But today in the meeting, they don't care how many litter the trail behind, or what lies before. No, just be simple and enjoy the moment. They're the stars of the show, these college students. They're the center of the LC universe. But they don't realize that they're VIPs like a turkey is the centerpiece at Thanksgiving Dinner. They'll be consumed and tossed aside. They'll be "enjoyed" by the ministry. That road we walked down didn't lead to glory, but to Lee's lair. And I daresay the same spirit's running the show today.

Here is another song: "My soul is escaped as a bird/out of the snare of the fowler/the snare is broken and we are escaped"

A snare is a hidden wire, placed among the corn. The birds see the "enjoyment", the "food" and land to eat the corn. But the fowler pulls the wire and their feet are entangled and they're caught. But the snare's now broken and we're escaped. ~Psa 124:7

[Sons to Glory!]

I just wanted to post the feedback from an ex-LCer, Ron M, who gave me his answers to this little poll in an email. Some background - he was in the ministry with the Independent Baptists in the early 60s and knew a few people like Don Rutledge and DeVern Fromke who had come to the LC. He and his wife moved to Eldon Hall in LA around 1968 and said the experience of Christ, church-life and the moving of the Spirit was "absolutely off the charts" among them back then. But by the early 70s they began to see some very disturbing things with WL and LSM, and bailed on the whole thing. They then moved and went to some different non-LC churches in the Albuquerque area, before being drawn in the early 90s to the Scottsdale group, which had been split from LC/LSM several years before. (He and his wife actually meet most regularly with their family's church nearby, but still frequently fellowship with our group - lots of "cross-pollination" between our two groups)

Ron said his answers would probably be a B/4-5 (which surprised me a little, as I thought he might actually answer a bit lower)

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I just wanted to post the feedback from an ex-LCer, Ron M, who gave me his answers to this little poll in an email. Some background - he was in the ministry with the Independent Baptists in the early 60s and knew a few people like Don Rutledge and DeVern Fromke who had come to the LC. He and his wife moved to Eldon Hall in LA around 1968 and said the experience of Christ, church-life and the moving of the Spirit was "absolutely off the charts" among them back then. But by the early 70s they began to see some very disturbing things with WL and LSM, and bailed on the whole thing. They then moved and went to some different non-LC churches in the Albuquerque area, before being drawn in the early 90s to the Scottsdale group, which had been split from LC/LSM several years before. (He and his wife actually meet most regularly with their family's church nearby, but still frequently fellowship with our group - lots of "cross-pollination" between our two groups)

Ron said his answers would probably be a B/4-5 (which surprised me a little, as I thought he might actually answer a bit lower)

StG thx for the input. I found this informative.

1. The person had some experience with what we'd probably term "solid" Protestant Christianity.
2. Experience of Christ, church fellowship, Holy Spirit moving among them "off the charts" at Elden Hall.
3. Saw "disturbing things" with WL/LSM & moved on, but remained connected to the LC experience thru other LC expats meeting corporately elsewhere.

The LC experience sells itself as a legitimate heir of historical Christianity. It cloaks its self-narrative in the Protestant Reformation. But the "experience" that is so phenomenal may be a seduction to look away from the historical person Jesus Christ and at your own ephemeral and subjective responses. It may indeed be the Holy Spirit but it may be darkness cloaked as light. So we must be very careful of novelty. We all know the verses, like "If the light in you becomes darkness, how great is the darkness" and "Satan himself disguised as an angel of light". So great care and discretion is advised.

And if we were seduced by the wrong spirit, then we may stay waaaay too long, after "disturbing things" come to light. Because we got tricked, and put to sleep, spiritually. We lost all spiritual discernment. Our conscience got fried. We didn't trust our own capacity to think. All because, initially, we thought we were "off the charts" in "experiencing Christ" but it was something else, being deceptive. (this is not to characterize anyone's personal experiences but rather to make a caution for everyone).

Here are a few groups - guess what they all have in common:

Shincheonji Church of Lee Man-hee
Iglesia Ni Cristo of Felix Y Manalo
Gloriavale Christian Community of Neville Cooper
The Family of David Berg
Branch Davidians of David Koresh
People's Temple of Jim Jones
Heaven's Gate of Marshall Applewhite
Rastafarians of Haile Selassie
Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon
Latter Day Saints of Joseph Smith
World Wide Church of God of Herbert W. Armstrong

Answer: they all preached the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. But they all added proprietary stuff which effaced the victory of Christ over death, and subverted his rule. And many also used "experiences that were off the charts" else why would people follow them into such foolishness? First, they'll get you in a weakened and excited emotional state, then they reprogramme you. And then they control you. So my question is, how much different, fundamentally, are all those 'F1' groups from the Little Flock of Nee, and the Local Church of Lee? If it's only a matter of degree, then how to tell where "grey" becomes "black"? Best to avoid them.

Back to that song that I quoted in post #49: in two places it says "just"... that simple, innocuous word in a stroke cuts off historical Christianity and opens the bridge for a "new" or "novel" Christian experience which may not be Christian at all. It's very subtle and clever programming.

Imagine if I taught that by some revelation, in God's word, I found that you could wiggle your pinkie finger and God would come. A giant shining angel would come and do your bidding. Of course only you could see the angel, and hear his voice, but the Angel of God would appear, and you'd be brought "into the spirit world" and could control/manipulate the physical world. All you have to remember, is to "just" wiggle your finger a certain way. Like the song says, "It's so simple and easy" that any HS student can do it.

And the verse is right there - Luke 11:19. “But if I cast out demons with the finger of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you” And nobody seen this but me!! Hey, everybody, come join my Group - The Finger of God!! We can have conferences... I'll put out books on Daniel 5, with Belshazzar's feast, another on John 7 & 8, with Jesus writing in the dirt....

Do you see where I'm going? Anyone can get a "revelation" and drag some naifs along. Remember that useful word: "just". Make it simple. Give them one magical move, and the universe is theirs. Then they are yours. Now look at all those groups above, again. See how simple it is? Anyone can do it.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

Imagine if I taught that by some revelation, in God's word, I found that you could wiggle your pinkie finger and God would come. A giant shining angel would come and do your bidding. Of course only you could see the angel, and hear his voice, but the Angel of God would appear, and you'd be brought "into the spirit world" and could control/manipulate the physical world. All you have to remember, is to "just" wiggle your finger a certain way. Like the song says, "It's so simple and easy" that any HS student can do it.

And the verse is right there - Luke 11:19. “But if I cast out demons with the finger of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you” And nobody seen this but me!! Hey, everybody, come join my Group - The Finger of God!! We can have conferences... I'll put out books on Daniel 5, with Belshazzar's feast, another on John 7 & 8, with Jesus writing in the dirt....

Do you see where I'm going? Anyone can get a "revelation" and drag some naifs along. Remember that useful word: "just". Make it simple. Give them one magical move, and the universe is theirs. Then they are yours. Now look at all those groups above, again. See how simple it is? Anyone can do it.

I see this all along a spectrum. What you talked about above is at one extreme end of the spectrum, that is, that man can control God by what he does or says. Obviously this is an erroneous extreme. The other end of the spectrum, I suppose, would be that God has delegated no authority to man whatsoever. Therefore, man really has no authority or responsibility to affect anything in God's grand design. Both are "just" erroneous, non-biblical extremes, right?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I see this all along a spectrum. What you talked about above is at one extreme end of the spectrum, that is, that man can control God by what he does or says. Obviously this is an erroneous extreme. The other end of the spectrum, I suppose, would be that God has delegated no authority to man whatsoever. Therefore, man really has no authority or responsibility to affect anything in God's grand design. Both are "just" erroneous, non-biblical extremes, right?

Perhaps, but that has absolutely nothing to do with my point, which was on someone having a special interpretation of Jesus Christ and the Bible, the presumed validity of which allowed them, ultimately, to control others.

Ultimately, God has nothing to do with it. God is just a prop to gain your interest, then "undue influence" is applied until the subject becomes an automaton. The LC does this, as do the others I cited. They're F1 groups. (Actual philosophical positions are quite beside the point.) The fact that your contact said that his subjective experiences were "off the charts" indicates to me a sphere of heightened suggestibility, in which undue influence is then put to work, and people become ministry drones.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

Ultimately, God has nothing to do with it. God is just a prop to gain your interest, then "undue influence" is applied until the subject becomes an automaton. The LC does this, as do the others I cited. They're F1 groups. (Actual philosophical positions are quite beside the point.) The fact that your contact said that his subjective experiences were "off the charts" indicates to me a sphere of heightened suggestibility, in which undue influence is then put to work, and people become ministry drones.

Could be, but not necessarily. The Spirit was very strong back then, and most acknowledge that the Jesus People, and others then, were evidence of this move - a "genuine move of God" as a response to the mess that the counter-culture and turbulent times of the 60s gave us. Being young Christians without much discernment might allow many of those folks to be swayed more easily, which I think is your point.

And there were a lot of younger ones who came into "The Recovery" during that time. The couple I mentioned were probably in their early-mid thirties. And though they had been around the block maybe one and a half times, I could see where they perhaps were still somewhat susceptible. Again, nonetheless, God's Spirit was moving, and that includes places like Eldon Hall.

Another thing, that I personally experienced, is how folks who had been into drugs back then, often received the Lord with an experience of Him that they said was, "Much better than any drug!" This, I think, the Spirit did to conclusively draw people away. Over the years, He has been weaning me away from this more emotional high.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Could be, but not necessarily. The Spirit was very strong back then, and most acknowledge that the Jesus People, and others then, were evidence of this move - a "genuine move of God" as a response to the mess that the counter-culture and turbulent times of the 60s gave us. Being young Christians without much discernment might allow many of those folks to be swayed more easily, which I think is your point.

And there were a lot of younger ones who came into "The Recovery" during that time. The couple I mentioned were probably in their early-mid thirties. And though they had been around the block maybe one and a half times, I could see where they perhaps were still somewhat susceptible. Again, nonetheless, God's Spirit was moving, and that includes places like Eldon Hall.

Another thing, that I personally experienced, is how folks who had been into drugs back then, often received the Lord with an experience of Him that they said was, "Much better than any drug!" This, I think, the Spirit did to conclusively draw people away. Over the years, He has been weaning me away from this more emotional high.

The spirit of the 60’s and 70’s counterculture gave birth to many movements. There were the Rajneeshees, Hare Krishnas, Jesus people, Heavens Gate, Church of Satan as well as many others.

Many people were feeling the spirit. I have no doubt that there was a genuine move of the spiritual realm in those days but to claim this move of “the Spirit” was a move of God is claiming these eastern religion offshoots and other cults were of the same God. That of course is not true. If anything this goes to show that this particular spirit was indiscriminate of personal belief.

God moves where His gospel is preached and when there is repentance in response. Repentance is oddly missing from testimonies you hear coming out of the Jesus movement and most Charismatic movements in general. This alone is enough cause for concern.

The Jesus people movement was a charismatic restorationist movement which was similar in theological structure to that of the LC's, and it only lasted 10 years. This movement fails the Acts 5:38-9 test, however, I as well as many others became Christian’s outside of any religious movement. This proves that the movement God began in Acts 2 is, to this day, still very much in effect.

The Jesus movement is just another example to learn from in heeding Christ's warning in Matthew 24:24 and Paul's in 2 Thess 2:9 about chasing after signs and wonders as validation. Scripture however teaches the signs of a genuine believer is repentance and godliness. If either of those are missing, chances are it is not a move of God.

BTW, F1 is my answer to your poll. That applies to the movement itself and has no bearing on the individual and their salvation.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Many people were feeling the spirit. I have no doubt that there was a genuine move of the spiritual realm in those days but to claim this move of “the Spirit” was a move of God is claiming these eastern religion offshoots were of the same God. That of course is not true. If anything this goes to show that this particular spirit was indiscriminate of personal belief.

BTW, F1 is my answer to your poll. That applies to the movement itself and has no bearing on the individual and their salvation.

Thanks for your answer to this thread's poll questions! You are the first to put an outright F1: "A completely different Christ" & "Was and is a tool of Satan."

Concerning the bolded above, can you state this another way? I've read it three times and I'm not entirely sure what you are stating.

(as to the rest regarding the Jesus People, I'll let others respond . . .)

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for your answer to this thread's poll questions! You are the first to put an outright F1: "A completely different Christ" & "Was and is a tool of Satan."

(as to the rest regarding the Jesus People, I'll let others respond . . .)

I believe byHismercy holds that honor.

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Concerning the bolded above, can you state this another way? I've read it three times and I'm not entirely sure what you are stating.

For the reason that so many other spiritual movements began at the time of the Jesus movement alludes to the fact that it wasn't God's spirit operating in the forefront. Factor in the lack of repentance in many of the testimonies of that time supports this belief.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

I believe byHismercy holds that honor.



For the reason that so many other spiritual movements began at the time of the Jesus movement alludes to the fact that it wasn't God's spirit operating in the forefront. Factor in the lack of repentance in many of the testimonies of that time supports this belief.

You are right - ByHismercy did do the first F1. Well I'll have to take your prize away then . . . sorry.

Concerning God's Spirit moving, the fact that other nonChristian groups were exploding at the time doesn't mean God's Spirit was NOT moving then too! To think that is an obvious logical fallacy. I believe when the enemy moves, God will countermove, and visa versa.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

You are right - ByHismercy did do the first F1. Well I'll have to take your prize away then . . . sorry.

Concerning God's Spirit moving, the fact that other nonChristian groups were exploding at the time doesn't mean God's Spirit was NOT moving then too! To think that is an obvious logical fallacy. I believe when the enemy moves, God will countermove, and visa versa.

That's why I made sure to mention the lack of repentance within the testimonies of Charismatic movements in general. That applies to the Jesus movement as well.

Taking this into account, claiming that the Jesus movement was a move of God when there was a glaring absence of a very specific and necessary precursor to salvation is a biblical fallacy.

StG, were you by chance involved in the Jesus movement?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

StG, where you by chance involved in the Jesus movement?

Nope. I was a wanna-be hippie of sorts, but no.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Nope. I was a wanna-be hippie of sorts, but no.

Ok, I asked because you acknowledged the spirit of the Jesus Movement so I wasn't sure.

Would you say that same spirit was influencing the LC's in the 70's?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Ok, I asked because you acknowledged the spirit of the Jesus Movement so I wasn't sure.

Would you say that same spirit was influencing the LC's in the 70's?

Spirits are unseen. I was led of the Lord to the LC in early 70s, and He was there at that time. Who knows whatever spirits were also there . . .

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Spirits are unseen. I was led of the Lord to the LC in early 70s, and He was there at that time. Who knows whatever spirits were also there . . .

StG, it seems like you're backing off your previous statement where you were arguing in favor of the Jesus movement as being a genuine move of God's spirit;

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Could be, but not necessarily. The Spirit was very strong back then, and most acknowledge that the Jesus People, and others then, were evidence of this move - a "genuine move of God" as a response to the mess that the counter-culture and turbulent times of the 60s gave us.

For clarity I'm asking is if you're willing to commit to the belief that it was the same spirit involved in the growth of the LC's that was also heading the Jesus movement.

I'm curious to know your opinion on that since I wasn't a part of the Jesus people or a member of the LC's in the 70's like you were. Thanks.

[Ohio]

Careful StG, he is setting a trap for you.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks for your answer to this thread's poll questions! You are the first to put an outright F1: "A completely different Christ" & "Was and is a tool of Satan."

I equivocated, and probably will continue to do so, feeling that God alone is judge, and doesn't go by polls. Yet I don't feel remiss to view this group as among the worst of the worst, and think prudence and wisdom would counsel to avoid them completely, and warn those having escaped to shed any residual influence. Nothing of this group that I've seen stands up to scrutiny. The more you look, the worse it gets.

Another F1 group: The International Churches of Christ of Kip McKean

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...rist-religion/

I view ICOC as pseudo-Christian mind control group. The death of Jesus on the cross is incidental, as is his resurrection 3 days later. Those are bit players in their passion play, to make disciples for their Hive. I met with them for a spell during college, and do they ever put pressure on you! They'll get you to doubt everything you ever knew. Like the LC, they isolate vulnerable college students and aren't done until they're remade in their image, and out seeking others to infect with their mind virus. They literally break your will and erase your mind.

Some blanch to put WL's group in with such clearly nefarious pseudo-Christian groups, but I ask, how many people has Marshall Applewhite destroyed lately? And how many has the LC? In the 90's I heard WL speak of 15 to 20 million adherents in the PRC, and 12 years later LSM spokesman Chris Wilde said there were none [left?]. God only knows what happened. Oh, but you see that's a confusion around labels, says DCP. Witness Lee talked of the "shouters", you see, but the "shouters" of Chris Wilde were different. Yes, there's good shouters and bad shouters. And of course LSM knows the difference but they can't talk anymore because of persecution. And so on.. wherever one looks there's dissimulation and prevarication, there's a shell game of words, and who knows where the pea's hiding. And what one sees, repeatedly, are classic mind control techniques. Which is why I listed all those groups earlier. The patterns are strong and fairly consistent.

The gospel of Jesus Christ is become unrecognizable in their hands. Initially I thought it was because they'd taken Paul's writings and supercharged Jesus, but now I realise it's because they took Paul's writings and eliminated Jesus. We got an abstract Processed Triune God, whom we masticate to become God in life and nature. And the story of the actual Jesus and the actual people who followed him in the gospels and Acts got effaced. It's an entirely different spirit at work in the narrative's formation and dissemination. It's a different gospel in the clearest sense of the word.

I saw a movie where the main character, a thief and a rogue, says to his accomplice, "The best scam is where the victim doesn't know they've been had". (~Paul Newman, The Sting.) Likewise, the most effective control is where the mark doesn't know they're being controlled. Their thoughts are no longer their own, and they've lost critical faculties, and are fully reflexive. "Controlled?!? We're not controlled! Hey everyone, let's sing stanza 4 again, 'Just be simple, don't be hardened, drop your concepts, eat that tree!'" Just be simple, indeed - the LC turns thinking people into simpletons. And that's the best of it. The worst is perhaps as bad as any Krazy Kult out there. But the Lord knows how many were crushed into the dirt, who were drained and tossed aside. The Lord knows each one.

[Sons to Glory!]

Thanks Ohio for looking out for me bro! I guess I'll hafta depend on Christ in me to give a proper answer!

Originally Posted by Jo S

StG, it seems like you're backing off your previous statement where you were arguing in favor of the Jesus movement as being a genuine move of God's spirit;

For clarity I'm asking is if you're willing to commit to the belief that it was the same spirit involved in the growth of the LC's that was also heading the Jesus movement.

I'm curious to know your opinion on that since I wasn't a part of the Jesus people or a member of the LC's in the 70's like you were. Thanks.

I can see where you might think I was backing off the statement that the Jesus People were a genuine move of God's Spirit - not at all! They were a genuine move of God's Spirit, to be sure. My bad for using the ambiguous phrase, "Who knows whatever spirits were also there." I meant that there are always spirits of the enemy around, looking for opportunities for evil mischievousness - and especially where God's Spirit is moving. We are surrounded by the unseen world, which is influencing the seen. Evil spirits are always trying to manipulate people, Christian or not.

So was God's Spirit moving among the Jesus People? Certainly. Was God's Spirit moving among the LC members back then? Certainly! Eventually many of the Jesus People wound-up in places like Chuck Smith's Calvary Chapel, which I think most would agree preach a traditional Christ and gospel to this day (I enjoy going to Calvary Chapels when I'm traveling).

Evil spirits are always around, purposing to drag some off the mark (of Christ), right? And the enemy was/is certainly trying to influence the LC, and as has been enumerated many times on this forum, were definitely successful in influencing LC leaders. Now, the fruit in the LC is clearly seen after these many years, where they are grievously occupied in exalting a man, practicing elitism and doing other anti-Christ things.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Thanks Ohio for looking out for me bro! I guess I'll hafta depend on Christ in me to give a proper answer!

I can see where you might think I was backing off the statement that the Jesus People were a genuine move of God's Spirit - not at all! They were a genuine move of God's Spirit, to be sure. My bad for using the ambiguous phrase, "Who knows whatever spirits were also there." I meant that there are always spirits of the enemy around, looking for opportunities for evil mischievousness - and especially where God's Spirit is moving. We are surrounded by the unseen world, which is influencing the seen. Evil spirits are always trying to manipulate people, Christian or not.

So was God's Spirit moving among the Jesus People? Certainly. Was God's Spirit moving among the LC members back then? Certainly! Eventually many of the Jesus People wound-up in places like Chuck Smith's Calvary Chapel, which I think most would agree preach a traditional Christ and gospel to this day (I enjoy going to Calvary Chapels when I'm traveling).

Evil spirits are always around, purposing to drag some off the mark (of Christ), right? And the enemy was/is certainly trying to influence the LC, and as has been enumerated many times on this forum, were definitely successful in influencing LC leaders. Now, the fruit in the LC is clearly seen after these many years, where they are grievously occupied in exalting a man, practicing elitism and doing other anti-Christ things.

Thanks for clearing that up, StG.

I believe it's a topic worth touching on seeing as there are still many LC members from the 70's equating the spirit of the counterculture to the spirit of God. I strongly disagree with that idea for the reasons I've already stated but others are free to decide for themselves.

What's curious is that, similar to the LC’s, the Jesus People movement saw rapid growth in the early 70’s and then a sharp decline in growth by the late 80's. I find it very telling that their timelines perfectly coincide with each other.

What are your thoughts on that?

Also a main leader of the Jesus People movement, Lonnie Frisbee, was known to read the bible while tripping on LSD. Do you believe God would use such a person to head His revivals?

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Thanks for clearing that up, StG.

I believe it's a topic worth touching on seeing as there are still many LC members from the 70's equating the spirit of the counterculture to the spirit of God. I strongly disagree with that idea for the reasons I've already stated but others are free to decide for themselves.

What's curious is that, similar to the LC’s, the Jesus People movement saw rapid growth in the early 70’s and then a sharp decline in growth by the late 80's. I find it very telling that their timelines perfectly coincide with each other.

What are your thoughts on that?

Also the founder of the Jesus People movement, Lonnie Frisbee, was known to read the bible while tripping on LSD. Do you believe God would use such a person to head one of His revivals?

Doesn't everyone take LSD while reading the Bible!? (just to be clear, yes, I'm kidding) Reminds me of a brother I met hitchhiking in the mid-70s. He thought smoking pot and grovin' on Jesus was complementary. Just so there is no misunderstanding, I never approved of using drugs to compliment the pursuit of Christ . . . the anointing clearly tells me so!

Don't know much about Lonnie Frisbee (interesting name), but I know a little of Chuck Smith. And I remember a thread awhile back that talked some regarding the Jesus People movement. As I remember the discussion, it was pointed out that it was very hard to follow this demographic group, because they didn't have much organization, right? From what I understand, Calvary Chapel was probably the single biggest recipient of those kind of members. So did the Jesus People numbers decline coincide with the LC's? Don't know, maybe.

And as far as "equating the spirit of the counterculture to the Spirit of God," does anyone actually think that? My view is that the enemy was doing his best to spoil that generation through drugs, free sex, weird eastern philosophies, etc. And in the midst of that, God came in to rescue many.

[Sons to Glory!]

A little sidebar here. Jo C. mentioned Lonnie Frisbee, of the 1960/70s Jesus People movement, trying to equate the declining numbers in the LC with this movement. I'll just say this guy really puts the "freak" in the term "Jesus Freak" and I had not read about him before (thanks Jo!). What a character he was - into drugs, homosexuality . . . and Jesus too! Too bad the Anointing didn't work in him like He did in me and so many others who were victims of the whole so-called "counter-culture" thing back then. Many of us, around the late 60s & early 70s, were miraculously saved out of that destructive lifestyle - PRAISE GOD! (FYI: one day I absolutely loved smoking pot. The next day I had an encounter with the living God and suddenly pot smoking wasn't my thing any more; I had simply and miraculously lost my "taste" for it!)

Jo, I also read where Chuck Smith broke with Frisbee in 1971 because of Frisbee's abhorrent lifestyle. Too bad others were negatively influenced so much by this controversial "Jesus Freak."

A couple articles for those who care to know more regrarding Frisbee:
Short Article about Lonnie Frisbee

Long Research Paper about Lonnie Frisbee

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

(FYI: one day I absolutely loved smoking pot. The next day I had an encounter with the living God and suddenly pot smoking wasn't my thing any more; I had simply and miraculously lost my "taste" for it!)

Jo, I also read where Chuck Smith broke with Frisbee in 1971 because of Frisbee's abhorrent lifestyle. Too bad others were negatively influenced so much by this controversial "Jesus Freak."
[/B]

I've known people that had overcome addictions through eastern style meditation. I've known others who overcame addiction through the use of psychedelic drugs and then I've known those that overcame addiction through faith in God.

Usually those of faith overcome only after a time of testing and a season of repentance so the fact that you were smoking pot one day and had a religious experience the next that turned you off of smoking all together is quite interesting.

The point of highlighting the abhorrent practices of a main leader of the Jesus People movement was to show that the fruits of his life directly contradict that of a true believer, which is godliness. Usually people will look at the evidence and conclude rather than just being a failure on the part of the "anointing" it perhaps wasn't a godly anointing at all but a masquerading spirit. That's the conclusion I reach by looking at the evidence. The same goes for the spirit which was operating at the peak of the LC's in the 70's as well.

The concern is that, like you, others who still believe the spirit that led the Jesus People and the early LC's were of God are not only currently under deception but makes you prone to being deceived in the same way again. That's where I was going with all of this. It's also an example of why it's important to not be strung along by our inner subjective experiences or outward signs and wonders but to test all things because even Satan can manipulate our emotions and replicate all types of miracles to make it seem that they are of God.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Usually those of faith overcome only after a time of testing and a season of repentance so the fact that you were smoking pot one day and had a religious experience the next that turned you off of smoking all together is quite interesting.

You say I had a "religious experience." I know that I know that I know it was a living encounter with Him, after crying to Him desperately (I was in a horrible pit). Don't try to get too formulaic with God's methods bro, He doesn't adhere to any "formula" except His Son.

So I get your point, though I don't really agree with it. This is fine - again, I value clarity over agreement, and the oneness of the one Spirit over both!

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

You say I had a "religious experience." I know that I know that I know it was a living encounter with Him, after crying to Him desperately (I was in a horrible pit). Don't try to get too formulaic with God's methods bro, He doesn't adhere to any "formula" except His Son.

So I get your point, though I don't really agree with it. This is fine - again, I value clarity over agreement, and the oneness of the one Spirit over both!

I strongly disagree with this statement as it was His own Son that gave us a formula, 1.) Repent and 2.) Believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15)

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

I strongly disagree with this statement as it was His own Son that gave us a formula, 1.) Repent and 2.) Believe in the gospel (Mark 1:15)

And what is repenting - what does the word repent mean? To change the mind. And what is the good news of the gospel? His Son. Believe in Him. So change your mind and believe in Him.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And what is repenting - what does the word repent mean? To change the mind. And what is the good news of the gospel? His Son. Believe in Him. So change your mind and believe in Him.

Biblical repentance isn't a mere changing of your mind, as the Greek word suggests, lest a person boast in themselves. That's part of it but it's also so much more.

Repentance is a strong inner conviction of your sinful nature and a life lived in rebellion against God. It’s a notable work of God in your life prior to salvation; “Godly sorrow”, as Paul puts it (2 Cor 7:10), which is in contrast to worldly repentance. This conviction comes by turning to God in sincere humility and faith and not just one of merely turning into oneself. Christians are willing participants but it's a formula and a process not carried out by us but by God.

Anyone can have fleeting spiritual experiences but if it’s one of true repentance then it leads to a godly life and not the kind that you see the leaders of these movements lead; one's filled with pride, arrogance, debauchery, spiritual fornication, ect.

At an attempt to not muddy up your thread any more then it is, StG, you can always PM me if you'd like to discuss this topic further

[Curious]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Anyone can have fleeting spiritual experiences but if it’s one of true repentance then it leads to a godly life and not the kind that you see the leaders of these movements lead; one's filled with pride, arrogance, debauchery, spiritual fornication, ect.

Yes and by the same token, having a spiritual experience of God and an instant cure of some addiction or bessetting problem, does not preclude the person from also experiencing a genuine and sincere repentance before God.

Personally, I can attest that I had both. I just want to clarify that point alongside this discussion just as that's not clear from your comment.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Curious

Yes and by the same token, having a spiritual experience of God and an instant cure of some addiction or bessetting problem, does not preclude the person from also experiencing a genuine and sincere repentance before God.

Personally, I can attest that I had both. I just want to clarify that point alongside this discussion just as that's not clear from your comment.

Agreed. You can be saved and also experience healing. I've testified before on the forum to being delivered completely from depression but healings are not a biblical sign of saving faith because even Satan can heal (Luke 11:19). Godliness is the sign of genuine salvation. That was the point.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Agreed. You can be saved and also experience healing. I've testified before on the forum to being delivered completely from depression but healings are not a biblical sign of saving faith because even Satan can heal (Luke 11:19). Godliness is the sign of genuine salvation. That was the point.

When I was miraculously delivered, I knew who had done this, and who to thank. No doubt about it.

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

When I was miraculously delivered, I knew who had done this, and who to thank. No doubt about it.

That's great, Ohio. I could imagine most feel the same way however the bible still teaches us to examine the fruit because even the most assured and confident can be deceived (Matt 7:22, 24:24). For this reason we are even exhorted to examine and test ourselves whether we are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5).

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

That's great, Ohio. I could imagine most feel the same way however the bible still teaches us to examine the fruit because even the most assured and confident can be deceived (Matt 7:22, 24:24). For this reason we are even exhorted to examine and test ourselves whether we are in the faith (2 Cor 13:5).

And that full verse in 2nd Corinthians reads, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" I love that verse and share it with folks like JWs when the opportunity presents itself!

This is the test of tests . . . can you boldly declare that you know that you know that you know that Christ is in you?

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

And that full verse in 2nd Corinthians reads, "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you—unless, of course, you fail the test?" I love that verse and share it with folks like JWs when the opportunity presents itself!

This is the test of tests . . . can you boldly declare that you know that you know that you know that Christ is in you?

Early in my walk when I fell into a season of mysticism, I would have emphatically told you I knew Christ yet while my lips honored God my heart was far away from Him. I wasn't grounded in a proper understanding of scripture and so I was easy target to seducing spirits.

Unfortunately, boldly declaring something to be so isn't a sufficient enough test.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Early in my walk when I fell into a season of mysticism, I would have emphatically told you I knew Christ yet while my lips honored God my heart was far away from Him. I wasn't grounded in a proper understanding of scripture and so I was easy target to seducing spirits.

Unfortunately, boldly declaring something to be so isn't a sufficient enough test.

Do you know Christ is in you?

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Do you know Christ is in you?

Paul says there is more than one Christ preached among the churches (2 Cor 11:3-4)

With this knowledge the question shouldn't be, "Do you know Christ is in you?" it should be, "Do you know which Christ is in you?"

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Paul says there is more than one Christ preached among the churches (2 Cor 11:3-4)

With this knowledge the question shouldn't be, "Do you know Christ is in you?" it should be, "Do you know which Christ is in you?"

That sure seems like a dodge. So what did Paul ask? ". . . test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you?" He didn't ask "Which Christ is in you?"

You do not appear, for some reason, to want to answer this simple question . . .

[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

That sure seems like a dodge. So what did Paul ask? ". . . test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you?" He didn't ask "Which Christ is in you?"

You do not appear, for some reason, to want to answer this simple question . . .

Paul also said to examine yourselves "unless indeed you fail the test". So Paul is saying that we can indeed fail to be in the true faith.

With that said, it's not a dodge at all. You're asking a loaded question with the assumption that there is only one Christ.

If you are asking whether I know the "Christ" of the LC's, I already mentioned I do through my past flirting with mysticism.

If you are asking whether I know the Christ of scripture, then yes I do because I already know the counterfeit well enough.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Jo S

Paul also said to examine yourselves "unless indeed you fail the test". So Paul is saying that we can indeed fail to be in the true faith.

With that said, it's not a dodge at all. You're asking a loaded question with the assumption that there is only one Christ.

If you are asking whether I know the "Christ" of the LC's, I already mentioned I do through my past flirting with mysticism.

If you are asking whether I know the Christ of scripture, then yes I do because I already know the counterfeit well enough.

I'll see if someone else wants to respond to this, as it appears that perhaps we're not effectively communicating here . . .

[aron]

StG,

in an attempt to re-center this discussion, can you tell us how to have assurance that Bill Freeman and Patsy Freeman weren't two sides of the same coin? How can we be sure that Bill Freeman teaching "Christ in you as everything" and Patsy Freeman's relationship manipulation and meddling weren't just two aspects of the manifestation of one same spirit?

(I didn't know either but am summarising what I've read from various persons who reported knowing them)

Similarly, how do we know that Witness Lee teaching "exercise your spirit" and "God's economy" weren't apace with son Timothy and his motor home business, or "Philip Lee is the Office"? How do we know that these aren't aspects of one and the same spirit?

In my case, I got sober for 2 years before I "touched my spirit on the local ground", and promptly relapsed. Eventually I got sober again and stayed sober this time, but that relapse was a warning that I resolutely ignored, as the pull of spiritual seduction was too strong. Like your friend, I found "the moving of the spirit to be absolutely off the charts", and it impinged on any sobriety (pun intended), clear-headedness, and caution I might have had. Not that there was much to start with.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by aron

Stg,

in an attempt to re-center this discussion, can you tell us how to have assurance that Bill Freeman and Patsy Freeman weren't two sides of the same coin? How can we be sure that Bill Freeman teaching "Christ in you as everything" and Patsy Freeman's relationship manipulation and meddling weren't just two aspects of the manifestation of one same spirit?

(I didn't know either but am summarising what I've read from various persons who reported knowing them)

Did you think we were getting a little off topic? Well thanks for trying to recenter this discussion!

You ask a good question, and one I've wondered if someone on here might inquire of. Bill is actually a little bit of an enigma to me, and to others in Scottsdale I've talked with. I was surprised when one brother recently told me he felt really "betrayed" by Bill, choosing to leave with his wife, Patsy. Another brother surprised me when he said he still couldn't read most of Bill's writings, since his marriage was busted-up via Patsy. Lots of negative emotions from all that, obviously. But I also know several here, including me, who still enjoy Bill's writings. And many that were close to him have benefited immensely from Bill's skillful, academic methods for studying scripture (aka here as "laboring in the word"). I profit greatly from these ones, who've learned those skills directly from Bill.

Personally speaking, I have no experience with either Bill or Patsy, as the Lord brought me here immediately after the "big blow-up" in November 1998. I do know that the Anointing still tells me often that I am in the right place (yes, tis He: "My sheep know My voice"), and this is actually confirmed to me in various other ways, including what I see in scripture. I now see my whole life, especially after coming to the Lord in 1974, as being focused on Him eventually bringing me to this gathering. As I've said several times, I learned many things in the LC in the 70s & 80s, but it wasn't until coming to this gathering in Scottsdale, that He showed me how foundational His love was for everything (His motivation & purpose, the key to understanding scripture, etc.). And this seeing of His love, is what really began to seriously expose many of the teachings of WL and practices of the LC as being off the mark (fear based, elitism, central control, etc.) Praise God He brought me here - I am most thankful to Him daily!

So back to Bill being a mystery - from all I've gathered from those who knew him, Bill had one major failing, and that was Patsy. It's easy to "Monday morning quarterback" and say he shouldn't have let his wife do what she did, and then to decide to leave everything (i.e., the Scottsdale gathering) to go with her. But this is what Adam did, and I'm afraid it's just in our genes - "It was that women you gave me!" If you're a man, you probably understand the weakness for the fairer sex. That doesn't excuse either Bill or Adam for the subsequent messes created, but there it is . . .

I don't agree with everything Bill has written. Just this week there was something in his daily devotional, "The Supplied Life," that I was a little bothered by. But then again, I get a little bothered by something almost any Christian writes or says at some point. If you presented me a list of Christian sources, there are likely things I'm a little bothered by with every one of them (including - gasp - Billy Graham). That doesn't mean I throw all of them out. Why? Warts, my friend, warts - we all gots 'em. Of course, some have much bigger warts than others. This is one reason I almost never read anything by WL anymore - too many big warts. But Bill's writings - not so many warts. That is, I haven't seen him go beyond what I consider good, scriptural foundation for his teaching . . . at least in my most humble opinion. (That's my story and I'm sticking to it.)

So bottom-line in answer to your question: Were Bill and Patsy of "one same spirit?" Only God knows for sure, but I don't think so (and I think most around me in Scottsdale would agree, as outlined above). Might I be deceived? Sure, that's the nature of deception, but I don't believe so.

[Sons to Glory!]

For those interested, here's a tally of what the answers have been so far to the two poll questions, with 13 people responding. I've copied the answer key at the bottom (in blue) to refer to. For people that provided a range, like answering "CDF" for the first question, I averaged that response - therefore their answer became a "D". tHE Same for people providing a range of answers to the second question. Not perfect, but should be accurate enough for our purpose here.

1st Question Responses
A -None-
B Two
C Four
D Five
F Two

2nd Question Responses
10 -None-
9 -None-
8 -None-
7 One
6 -None-
5 Two
4 Two
3 Four
2 Two
1 Two

Overall, the answers for everyone averaged together are D+/3.3; In red below are the general corresponding averaged answer results.

(It should also be noted that a few people gave higher/lower answer ranges depending on the what timeframe of the LC they were referring to. For instance, earlier times, like in the 1960s & 70s, were regarded as better, and therefore higher ratings were given by some for those times. These people then also gave lower ratings for later times. If these higher ratings - for an earlier time - were factored in, I would guess the overall average answer might be somewhere around a "C/4" or perhaps a little higher. Of course, if the later times were factored in, the average rating would be lower, perhaps around a "D/2.75".)


ANSWER KEY

Regarding the LC promoting another Christ and/or Gospel, it's:
A = A totally genuine Christ & Gospel
B = A mostly genuine Christ & Gospel (a couple things questionable)
C = A little unorthodox Christ & Gospel
D = Mostly a different Christ & Gospel (questionable & very unorthodox)
F = A completely different Christ & Gospel

The LC :
10 = Is God's one, fresh move on the earth
9 = Is a very key move of God
8 = Is an important move of God
7 = Is one move of God
6 = Was once a genuine move, but slowly faded over time
5 = Was once a genuine move, but quickly got corrupted
4 = Had a couple good things at best
3 = Was somewhat off the mark from the very beginning
2 = Always preached downright heresy
1 = Was and is a tool of Satan

[Curious]

Though at the conclusion, this thread and other recent conversations on this forum have done more to cause me to conclude that ultimately today it is an F1, and any benefit to a beleiver is only a side effect of the 'sheep's clothing' the 'wolf' is disguised in!

Its been interesting to create a Poll. Good interactional tool.

[theLCfurry]

Originally Posted by Terry

During my teen years in San Bernardino, CA I would say B-6. As an adult in Bellevue, wa I would say D-3. How as it I stayed as long as I did as an adult? Familiarity and family relations are several. Children raised in the local churches, to meet anywhere else is a foreign concept. Humanly speaking leaving one's comfort zone is a difficult decision. If you have social connections with brothers/sisters from another church denominational or non-denominational it is easier.

I'd say I had a similar score in my teen years as well (still legally a teen at the moment) until last year. I'd say I was A9 until I rediscovered this website. Now.... it's closer to F2 for me. Sorry for being late to the polls as well

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Curious

Though at the conclusion, this thread and other recent conversations on this forum have done more to cause me to conclude that ultimately today it is an F1, and any benefit to a believer is only a side effect of the 'sheep's clothing' the 'wolf' is disguised in!

Its been interesting to create a Poll. Good interactional tool.

Well, maybe some will read this poll who are still in the LC, and perhaps the Lord will convict them through it. I certainly could not recommend a seeking Christian going to be with LC these days. I put them now in a small grouping of Christian-based organizations, which are too legal, elitist, autocratic and focused on some personality, to be considered as healthy. (like the 7 Day Adventists, RCC and maybe the Amish thing) I love our brother & sisters in the LC system, and welcome any fellowship with them.

It does pain me a little to say that, because the Lord definitely led me to the LC in the early 1970s. But as I always have to add, I praise Him he also lead me out, for good, in the late 1980s!

[HBJ]

I have to agree with the post by Sons to glory just before mine. As to my opinion the LC was C4 which quickly morphed to a 3. From my experience, Christians in the LC earnestly and honestly were seeking the Lord. However the 'degraded Christianity' bit became apparent quite quickly which makes me go with 3. I left the LC because of how I perceived it's mocking degradation of other Christians not in the LC. I have too many loving Christian relatives, none in the LC. I have also had many good experiences of sharing Christ together with other Christians from Baptist to Pentecostal to Messianic to Orthodox and yes even Christians in the RCC! I am not going to whack-a-mole another Christian on theology, I am going to seek Jesus together and let Him sort out the 'other stuff'.

Because of the mocking by the LC I have mentally emotional and spiritually given the LC a Zero in my heart, and have thrown everything from it all out in my heart because of the mocking. Maybe God will heal me more with time and show me something good that came out of the LC. I am not there yet.