The Process of God's Full Salvation - CANFIELD

[UntoHim]

http://www.thechristianfaith.org/page-gfs-pamphlet.htm
-
-

[Cal]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

http://www.thechristianfaith.org/page-gfs-pamphlet.htm
-
-

I appreciate the touch where, in About, clicking on the link of "What We Believe" brings up a picture of the Bible. Well done!

At the same time, though I respect Canfield's earnestness in standing for what he believes, his seeming wholesale support of the writings of Witness Lee--meaning his unwillingness to identify the mistakes in Lee's teachings--shows a lack of complete sobriety of mind.

I appreciate Canfield's boldness in calling out the Living Stream Publishers for their errors. But he needs to see, admit and take time to point out that Witness Lee made some whoppers as well, otherwise he is doing a disservice to the Body of Christ. Blaming all the problems of "the Recovery" on Living Stream is not the answer. Lee needs to be held accountable as well.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I appreciate the touch where, in About, clicking on the link of "What We Believe" brings up a picture of the Bible. Well done!

At the same time, though I respect Canfield's earnestness in standing for what he believes, his seeming wholesale support of the writings of Witness Lee--meaning his unwillingness to identify the mistakes in Lee's teachings--shows a lack of complete sobriety of mind.

I appreciate Canfield's boldness in calling out the Living Stream Publishers for their errors. But he needs to see, admit and take time to point out that Witness Lee made some whoppers as well, otherwise he is doing a disservice to the Body of Christ. Blaming all the problems of "the Recovery" on Living Stream is not the answer. Lee needs to be held accountable as well.

Canfield has been well-trained in the "Good Lee-Bad Blended" school of thought. Titus Chu and the Chicago leaders drilled this for many years.

Apparently he has not been listening to anything we have said.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Canfield has been well-trained in the "Good Lee-Bad Blended" school of thought. Titus Chu and the Chicago leaders drilled this for many years.

Apparently he has not been listening to anything we have said.

Perhaps Canfield still views Lee as some kind of Minister of the Age, and that God will somehow bless those who only speak well of him even to the point of ignoring his errors.

Such a mindset is definitely not sober. No one is beyond criticism. And certainly we should not honor the authority of deceased former leaders. How can God correct our course if we take such an attitude?!

Come out of the fog, LCers. God wants to correct your errors and bring you along. Let Him!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Perhaps Canfield still views Lee as some kind of Minister of the Age, and that God will somehow bless those who only speak well of him even to the point of ignoring his errors.

Such mindset is definitely not sober. No one is beyond criticism. And certainly we should not honor the authority of deceased former leaders. How can God correct our course if we take such an attitude?!

Come out of the fog, LCers. God wants to correct your errors and bring you along. Let Him!

When it comes to the Blended's errors, Canfield is knowledgeable. But to really understand the LC system, one must become aware of how Witness Lee handled unrighteousness in his ministry, and then mistreated those who spoke their conscience as whistle-blowers.

It's kind of like the recent case of Edward Snowden blowing the whistle on the NSA. Here's a guy who broke the law by informing us how the authorities were breaking worse laws, ones designed to protect us against government tyranny. So ... who is right?



Loyal LSM'ers felt that those (like John Ingalls, John So, Bill Mallon, etc.) who spoke out against ministry abuses broke the higher law by violating the principles of deputy authority, citing the failures of O.T. authorities like Noah and Moses. LSM'ers feel the oneness of the body was damaged, and divisions were brought in, to them this is the "unforgiveable sin."

Those aligned with spokesmen like Ingalls et. al. reject this assumed deputy (almost Papal) authority at LSM. They feel that righteousness is the higher law, and that covering up serious sins would rob us of the blessings of God and bring in His judgment. If, as the Lord has told us, that the whole law can be summarized as loving God and loving our neighbor, then the higher law concerns how this ministry has unrighteously abused so many members.

[Cal]

It's one thing to respect authority in one's church or flock. It's another to take that so far as to not even be able to learn from the mistakes of those who have gone before.

The LSM/LC mindset is wrong because it resists the correction of God and locks in error. Canfield cannot learn from the mistakes of Witness Lee because he will not allow himself to acknowledge them. Thus those he ministers to will be led astray.

This is the fruit of extreme teaching of authority, submission and unity. Like all doctrines of demons it takes something good and perverts it by going to an extreme.

If forgoing marriage for the gospel is good, then forbidding to marry must be better! If respecting and listening to leaders is good, then treating them as if they are practically flawless must be better!

No, it isn't. Just check the fruit.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

It's one thing to respect authority in one's church or flock. It's another to take that so far as to not even be able to learn from the mistakes of those who have gone before.

The LSM/LC mindset is wrong because it resists the correction of God and locks in error. Canfield cannot learn from the mistakes of Witness Lee because he will not allow himself to acknowledge them. Thus those he ministers to will be led astray.

This is the fruit of extreme teaching of authority, submission and unity. Like all doctrines of demons it takes something good and perverts it by going to an extreme.

If forgoing marriage for the gospel is good, then forbidding to marry must be better! If respecting and listening to leaders is good, then treating them as if they are practically flawless must be better!

No, it isn't. Just check the fruit.

All are great points, Igzy.

Imagine my shock as a new believer happening upon these verses in Paul's first letter to Timothy ...

But the Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, through the hypocrisy of men that speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified through the word of God and prayer.

Having grown up in the Catholic Church, with my namesake a Catholic Franciscan priest OFM, I just could not believe that the Bible so specifically stated that to forbid marriage was a doctrine of demons from a seducing spirit through the hypocrisy of men branded in their conscience! There it is in black and white folks! Not only that, it was spoken by the great Apostle Paul, who supposedly established celibacy for the servants of God. And I have not started to talk about the custom of not eating meat on Friday which is a mortal sin ...

The parallels between the Roman Catholics, the exclusive brethren, and the Recovery LC's become all too obvious once an individual steps away and examines these programs in the light of scripture. In each of these systems, errors worsened over time because of the excessive authority granted to their leaders. At first these deviations are merely nuances over interpretations of scripture, and eventually they grow to become blatant violations of the clear commands of scripture. Those within these systems, however, just can't see this because their teachings, in the guise of "proper interpretation" are designed to conceal from them the actual word of God.

[Cal]

I'll go a step farther, Ohio. I think it is, to some extent, just a garden-variety pride issue. These people just don't want to admit they were wrong. They don't want to admit they were dupes. They don't want to admit they were too gullible to perform their due diligence. So they continue to act as if Lee was generally blameless.

They've mistaken reckless credulity for purity. It's embarrassing. So they are sticking to their story no matter what.

[Cal]

After all, all sins, in the end, boil down to pride.

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by Igzy

I'll go a step farther, Ohio. I think it is, to some extent, just a garden-variety pride issue. These people just don't want to admit they were wrong. They don't want to admit they were dupes. They don't want to admit they were too gullible to perform their due diligence. So they continue to act as if Lee was generally blameless.

Actually in addition to those who are too proud to admit to their own gullibility IMHO there are several other "categories" of people who remain in the various versions of the LC and accept whatever the elders and coworkers dish up. Here are a few and I'm sure there are many more:

1. Those who know the "hidden history" but sincerely believe it should be covered up and ignored based on the Noah/Ham etc teachings. They mostly live in fear of leaving "the church" or "speaking against the authority".

2. Those who heard a little something but quickly put their heads in the sand so they could remain blissfully ignorant a/k/a Pollyannas.

3. Those who know the truth both historically and biblically but basically do a cost/benefit analysis e.g. "All churches are imperfect. If I leave the LC I will lose my friends and have to make the effort to find another imperfect church and make new friends etc. Why bother? I'll just stay here. I'm comfortable here. It's what I know."

4. Those who know the truth and are OK with it being exposed but are still loyal to the LC because it is the only church e.g. Roman Catholics who know about the priests molesting kids but still remain faithful to the RC.

5. Those who know the truth but will experience some material loss e.g. a 45 year old fulltimer who's income and housing will disappear if they speak out. "What will I do at my age? Who would hire me? How will I feed my family?"

6. Those who are truly ignorant and think the LC is the best thing since sliced bread.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

Actually in addition to those who are too proud to admit to their own gullibility IMHO there are several other "categories" of people who remain in the various versions of the LC and accept whatever the elders and coworkers dish up. Here are a few and I'm sure there are many more:

1. Those who know the "hidden history" but sincerely believe it should be covered up and ignored based on the Noah/Ham etc teachings. They mostly live in fear of leaving "the church" or "speaking against the authority".

2. Those who heard a little something but quickly put their heads in the sand so they could remain blissfully ignorant a/k/a Pollyannas.

3. Those who know the truth both historically and biblically but basically do a cost/benefit analysis e.g. "All churches are imperfect. If I leave the LC I will lose my friends and have to make the effort to find another imperfect church and make new friends etc. Why bother? I'll just stay here. I'm comfortable here. It's what I know."

4. Those who know the truth and are OK with it being exposed but are still loyal to the LC because it is the only church e.g. Roman Catholics who know about the priests molesting kids but still remain faithful to the RC.

5. Those who know the truth but will experience some material loss e.g. a 45 year old fulltimer who's income and housing will disappear if they speak out. "What will I do at my age? Who would hire me? How will I feed my family?"

6. Those who are truly ignorant and think the LC is the best thing since sliced bread.

Good assessment. I agree with these. We have to face the fact that there is a diversity in the LC membership with various reasons for staying.

Years ago I would talk to Catholics and could not believe why they would stay after learning their sordid history during the dark ages. Boy I was a little naive. Likewise we can't expect LC members today to depart based on what Philip Lee did in Anaheim a quarter century ago. Whether one joins or leaves a church is largely based on personal and family reasons.

Canfield has now become part of a remnant of a remnant. He is among the few in the Chicago area that have parted ways with the Anaheim Blendeds and their adherents, yet still attempts to remain true to the original "ideals" of the Recovery.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Good assessment. I agree with these. We have to face the fact that there is a diversity in the LC membership with various reasons for staying.

Years ago I would talk to Catholics and could not believe why they would stay after learning their sordid history during the dark ages. Boy I was a little naive. Likewise we can't expect LC members today to depart based on what Philip Lee did in Anaheim a quarter century ago. Whether one joins or leaves a church is largely based on personal and family reasons.

Canfield has now become part of a remnant of a remnant. He is among the few in the Chicago area that have parted ways with the Anaheim Blendeds and their adherents, yet still attempts to remain true to the original "ideals" of the Recovery.

I have no great problem with people staying in the LC. Every movement has a history and few have no skeletons in the closet. You can't spend your whole life starting over. We usually have to make the best of where we are.

What I have a problem with is a systemic mindset which prevents the Lord's correction, which locks in error. Those who refuse to look at Witness Lee as just another historic Christian leader whose mistakes we can learn from are doomed to repeat his mistakes and pass them on to others. By unreservedly recommending Lee and his outspoken, often over-the-top and sometimes mistaken ministry, Canfield and his camp are risking the perpetuation of error.

The LC and its various offshoots cannot truly reform until they honestly admit the mistakes of Lee.

Let's learn from mistakes. Surely that is what the Lord wants us to do.

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by Igzy

By unreservedly recommending Lee and his outspoken, often over-the-top and sometimes mistaken ministry, Canfield and his camp are risking the perpetuation of error...The LC and its various offshoots cannot truly reform until they honestly admit the mistakes of Lee.

Of course I agree with this and I think this is yet another "category" i.e. the reformers. But I think they are not merely "risking the perpetuation of error" they are actively participating in promoting it.

Canfield and others in the GLA including Chu have this idea that Witness Lee is a-okay and the BB/LSM are the bad guys. (BTW I don't think Titus actually believes this but he pretends to because he considers Witness Lee as his "spiritual father" who's errors etc. should be covered as a matter of honoring him etc. This may have more to do with his culture than anything else.) Anyway IMHO this would be like Luther saying the Pope is a-okay and the Curia are the bad guys.

Personally I think LC reformers are wasting their valuable time if they really think anything will change for the better. Regardless of which version of the LC is embraced it still has an entrenched culture. The LC with Witness Lee, the ground of locality, we are better than other Christians attitude, etc minus the BB is still the LC.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

What I have a problem with is a systemic mindset which prevents the Lord's correction, which locks in error. Those who refuse to look at Witness Lee as just another historic Christian leader whose mistakes we can learn from are doomed to repeat his mistakes and pass them on to others. By unreservedly recommending Lee and his outspoken, often over-the-top and sometimes mistaken ministry, Canfield and his camp are risking the perpetuation of error.

Since Canfield obviously has spent a fair amount of time researching and writing on the Recovery, it surprises me that he could still present himself as a "pure Darby-Nee-Lee-Chu-ist," hoping to Recover the Recovery back to her blessed roots.

It is just amazing to consider how many groups / denominations out there are endeavoring to return to early-Darby, early-Nee, early-Lee, and Chu, with each one claiming exclusive rights to the purest of God's Recovery. Both the Plymouth Brethren and the Recovery just seem to spin off more divisions as time passes, each one longing for those early days when their leader MOTA walked the earth, yet none of them can get along with another, though they all proclaim the oneness of the believers as their premier objective.

[Cal]

As I look over the "God's Full Salvation" pamphlet it strikes me how theoretical it is. Yes, it's lofty. Yes it's all satisfying in its tidy seeming completeness. But, really, all the talk about "life" transforming us and needing "the cross" strike me as abstract substitutes for the real thing.

All Christians know God wants to change us to be like Him. All know that the Holy Spirit does this, and that God uses our obedience to Him in our circumstances to practically bring this about. I am so thankful that I'm in a church that keeps it real. We don't use the terms "transformation" or "the cross," but I guarantee you people are being changed into His likeness. They are doing it by having a relationship with God and being obedient, not by talking about "life" and "transformation" and "the cross" as if they are shibboleths of the kingdom.

The LC still thinks it is on to some special revelation that nobody else has. Really what they have is a set of terms that few use. But I'm afraid transformation (aka change) and the cross (aka obedience) are a lot more widespread than they know. Lofty catchwords are not required. Getting real is.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

As I look over the "God's Full Salvation" pamphlet it strikes me how theoretical it is. Yes, it's lofty. Yes it's all satisfying in its tidy seeming completeness. But, really, all the talk about "life" transforming us and needing "the cross" strike me as abstract substitutes for the real thing.

All Christians know God wants to change us to be like Him. All know that the Holy Spirit does this, and that God uses our obedience to Him in our circumstances to practically bring this about. I am so thankful that I'm in a church that keeps it real. We don't use the terms "transformation" or "the cross," but I guarantee you people are being changed into His likeness. They are doing it by having a relationship with God and being obedient, not by talking about "life" and "transformation" and "the cross" as if they are shibboleths of the kingdom.

The LC still thinks it is on to some special revelation that nobody else has. Really what they have is a set of terms that few use. But I'm afraid transformation (aka change) and the cross (aka obedience) are a lot more widespread than they know. Lofty catchwords are not required. Getting real is.

Great points. How much we need this today.

We have been reading thru the gospels hanging out at the local Panera's. People stop by all the time and say odd things like, "who's the pastor here? where do you go to church? what version do you read?" But last night one unassuming brother stopped by and said "hi, I saw the Bibles out, what are you reading?" I try to mix it up saying something off the wall, "there's some crazy stories in this book, like this one about some lad afflicted with a dumb spirit, and then Jesus came along."

He knew the story, he knew the point, and what he said was real. "Jesus said, if you can." That's right, "if you can." It was like the Lord had spoken this to us too.

Later on, after that brief exchange, my sluggish memory came to life. "I know who that guy was." I couldn't remember his name, but I remembered praying for him and why he moved to town. Then it all slowly came to me ... but it's not necessary to discuss that information here ... just an unassuming brother at the coffeeshop who has experienced the reality of faith.

Igzy's point is well taken. It's so easy for God's children to masquerade behind special verbiage, spouting (or shouting) shibboleths to impress others. Jesus, however, used simple words with eternal significance. "If you can." What's real is faith, and what's needed the most today is faith, not long-winded spiritual-sounding words designed only to impress others.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It's so easy for God's children to masquerade behind special verbiage, spouting (or shouting) shibboleths to impress others. Jesus, however, used simple words with eternal significance. "If you can." What's real is faith, and what's needed the most today is faith, not long-winded spiritual-sounding words designed only to impress others.

Amen, Ohio. I've often thought about how faith was hardly emphasized in the LC. It bothered me when I was there and really bothered me years later. But it took experience for me to see why.

Lee, in his usual way, attempted to redefine faith to fit his process model, calling it a "sense" by which we "substantiate" spiritual things (based on a faulty interpretation of Hebrews 11:1). But other than that we barely talked about faith in the LC. Why? Because we didn't need it! We knew! We knew God's eternal purpose. We knew God's economy. We knew how to touch our spirit. We knew the process of God's full salvation. Who needs faith when you know everything?

Turns out we did. Turns out walking by faith is what it is all about. Not because faith is the "sense" by which we "substantiate" reality. But because God honors those who trust in him. It's simple. It's relational. It's real.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Amen, Ohio. I've often thought about how faith was hardly emphasized in the LC. It bothered me when I was there and really bothered me years later. But it took experience for me to see why.

Lee, in his usual way, attempted to redefine faith to fit his process model, calling it a "sense" by which we "substantiate" spiritual things (based on a faulty interpretation of Hebrews 11:1). But other than that we barely talked about faith in the LC. Why? Because we didn't need it! We knew! We knew God's eternal purpose. We knew God's economy. We knew how to touch our spirit. We knew the process of God's full salvation. Who needs faith when you know everything?

Turns out we did. Turns out walking by faith is what it is all about. Not because faith is the "sense" by which we "substantiate" reality. But because God honors those who trust in him. It's simple. It's relational. It's real.

We had endless teachings on faith, i.e. whether we have the faith of Christ or the faith in Christ, yet when the time came for a brother to walk by faith following the Great Shepherd, he was quickly ushered back to the safety of the fold. How dare he do his own work contrary to the one work of God headed up and initiated by LS.

..............................

Igzy, can you say more about the misunderstanding of faith as a sense, substantiating the real and invisible things of God?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

http://www.thechristianfaith.org/page-gfs-pamphlet.htm
-
-

I'm surprised that UntoHim has posted this piece, since he has in the past expressed his annoyance with certain ones who only use his forum as a bulletin board to post their writings.

Canfield has never come on board here to respond to any of our concerns.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by alwayslearning

Actually in addition to those who are too proud to admit to their own gullibility IMHO there are several other "categories" of people who remain in the various versions of the LC and accept whatever the elders and coworkers dish up. Here are a few and I'm sure there are many more:

1. Those who know the "hidden history" but sincerely believe it should be covered up and ignored based on the Noah/Ham etc teachings. They mostly live in fear of leaving "the church" or "speaking against the authority".

2. Those who heard a little something but quickly put their heads in the sand so they could remain blissfully ignorant a/k/a Pollyannas.

3. Those who know the truth both historically and biblically but basically do a cost/benefit analysis e.g. "All churches are imperfect. If I leave the LC I will lose my friends and have to make the effort to find another imperfect church and make new friends etc. Why bother? I'll just stay here. I'm comfortable here. It's what I know."

4. Those who know the truth and are OK with it being exposed but are still loyal to the LC because it is the only church e.g. Roman Catholics who know about the priests molesting kids but still remain faithful to the RC.

5. Those who know the truth but will experience some material loss e.g. a 45 year old fulltimer who's income and housing will disappear if they speak out. "What will I do at my age? Who would hire me? How will I feed my family?"

6. Those who are truly ignorant and think the LC is the best thing since sliced bread.

Good points alwayslearning.
One question I have had is how many Local Church responsible brothers (elders, deacons, and co-workers) have suffered mental health issues over what they know?
On one hand you have the covering of Noah teaching and on the other hand it goes against everything you know within your spirit. There's a continual conflict over what the ministry teaches versus the leading of the Spirit. With no outlet, there is a breaking point.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Good points alwayslearning.
On one hand you have the covering of Noah teaching and on the other hand it goes against everything you know within your spirit. There's a continual conflict over what the ministry teaches versus the leading of the Spirit. With no outlet, there is a breaking point.

I believe covering the shortcomings of leaders is to be practiced. I don't think it is anyone's business if a church leader stayed home and drank too much of his home-made wine. Not something I would recommend on a regular basis, but occasionally it might relieve stress, or something like that.

But no one is hurt. No crimes are committed. No one is taken advantage of.

And this is where things unravel for LSM. We have Daystar, sexual impropriety, abuse, misappropriation of monies, public smear campaigns, etc. at LSM over the years. Lots of people got hurt! And then you expect us to be silent and cover the sins of Lee, his family, and his staff.

The bottom line is we need to heed the plain teachings of the New Testament long before we believe someone's self-serving interpretation of Old testament types and figures.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm surprised that UntoHim has posted this piece, since he has in the past expressed his annoyance with certain ones who only use his forum as a bulletin board to post their writings.

Canfield has never come on board here to respond to any of our concerns.

Actually I received an email with a link to this work. I simply posted the link without comment. Canfield did not ask me (or anyone else as far as I know) to post the link on the forum. If you feel that it does not belong here then let Igzy know and I'm sure he will consider removing it.