Recovery Version

djohnson · 01-23-2009, 07:50 PM

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

UntoHim · 01-24-2009, 07:07 PM

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

djohnson · 01-25-2009, 10:30 AM

So far the silence is deafening.

countmeworthy · 01-25-2009, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

So far the silence is deafening.

They may not be on line..or maybe haven't even seen your question.

I don't know who all is in non-LSM/GLA.

Ohio · 01-25-2009, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

I don't suppose that you really expect me to visit all the GLA LC's and report back to you, do you? Some of the churches are using projectors for songs and scripture, so even if I happened to visit some place, I might not know what version they are using. Does it matter?

cityonahill · 01-25-2009, 04:08 PM

Ya, I asked a similar question on the other board about the distinctions between LSM and GLA regarding teaching sources and practices...I got no reply either!

reece

Overflow · 01-25-2009, 08:31 PM

I think it does matter. I keep checking back...wish someone would answer.

kisstheson · 01-25-2009, 09:05 PM

Dear ones,

I am not from the GLA, so I have no "definitive" answer to give. Lately, however, I have been listening to a lot of the spoken messages from past GLA conferences and trainings. These messages can be found at keepitintune.net and ministrymessages.org/.

There are also web sites for particular GLA assemblies which contain audio, and sometimes video, for messages spoken in that assembly. For example, video messages spoken in the GLA assembly in Toronto can be found at churchintoronto.org/Video.htm. Audio messages spoken in the GLA assembly in Columbus, OH, can be found at thechurchincolumbus.org/churchincolumbusenglish/html/bible/.

When you listen through many of these messages, you can catch some hints about the use of the Recovery Version in the GLA; however, there are certainly no definitive, all-embracing declarations to be found. This appears to be a matter of conscience for each believer to decide for themselves before the Lord.

Here is a short portion from a message spoken by dear brother John Meyer almost one year ago at the GLA Conference in Goshen, IN:

Quote:

"Please turn to Revelation chapter 2. Revelation chapter 2 verse 2. And now, this is Jesus talking, the ascended Lord Jesus who’s looking at the church in Ephesus, and He has something to say. I’m using the New King James Version, if you don’t mind."

So there you have it. At least one ministering brother in the GLA reads from the New King James Version!

I am sorry, but that is pretty much all the information I have related to this topic. Hopefully this information moves the conversation forward a little bit.

djohnson · 01-25-2009, 10:00 PM

Ohio as others have mentioned I think it indeed does matter. If what Tomes has written about the plagiarism going on at the LSM in the footnotes of the Recovery Version is true then how could a leadership with any integrity continue to use it and by example encourage others to do likewise?

Suannehill · 01-26-2009, 07:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

I've visited several, and have seen most versions that you can name used.

It's not an issue.

Making it an issue is very divisive to the Body of Christ.

Sue

TLFisher · 01-26-2009, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kisstheson

When you listen through many of these messages, you can catch some hints about the use of the Recovery Version in the GLA; however, there are certainly no definitive, all-embracing declarations to be found. This appears to be a matter of conscience for each believer to decide for themselves before the Lord.

I don't consider whether you do or don't to be an issue. I'm far from any GLA locality, but my feeling is it's as kisstheson has spoken; "of conscience for each believer to decide for themselves before the Lord".
Just as SuanneHill had said,

"Making it an issue is very divisive to the Body of Christ."

Terry

Norm · 01-26-2009, 12:50 PM

The Christians I fellowship with in Metro Detroit--some of us do and some of us don't and then tomorrow some of the does are the don'ts and the don'ts are the does and some are always and some are never and on Sunday morning we all use the World English Bible with our own preference in hand and some of us even use the Greek.

If you don't believe me go to http://www.churchindetroit.org/meetings.htm our portions of the Word for the week on this page are taken from the WEB version.

We are not hiding any deep dark secrets. I guess some people just seem to always see a troll hiding under the bridge if there isn't a sign, "No troll here!".

djohnson · 01-26-2009, 02:26 PM

I suppose my question should be further clarified: do teachers and/or leaders use the Recovery Version in their public ministry? I assume by the answers given so far it is a yes. This leads to my next question: prior to Tomes discovery that Witness Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism the GLA leadership could plead ignorance. Now they cannot. Why do they continue to promote by their example a version that comes from a source that so obviously lacks intellectual and spiritual integrity?

Norm · 01-26-2009, 02:50 PM

And if we say no will you than clarify it further by asking if we use it as a reference in our studies.

I guess even if the sign say "No troll here!", some will not give up the search.

Cal · 01-26-2009, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

I suppose my question should be further clarified: do teachers and/or leaders use the Recovery Version in their public ministry? I assume by the answers given so far it is a yes. This leads to my next question: prior to Tomes discovery that Witness Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism the GLA leadership could plead ignorance. Now they cannot. Why do they continue to promote by their example a version that comes from a source that so obviously lacks intellectual and spiritual integrity?

dj,

The charge of plagarism was put forth by Nigel Tomes, and as far as we can say it is his and his alone. No one else is obligated to support or act on it just because he published it.

Are you assuming or even expecting the GLA leaders walk in the lockstep you would likely decry if you saw it at LSM?

Sounds to me like you are getting ahead of yourself.

djohnson · 01-26-2009, 03:44 PM

Igzy either Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism or they did not. If they did Tome's is merely the messenger. A serious leadership (especially his own colleagues in the GLA) would investigate his findings to determine for themselves if they are true or not. If they are true what will they do about it as it pertains to their public use of the version? It has nothing to do with following Tomes in lockstep. It's a matter of intellectual and spiritual integrity.

I already knew about the LSM's sloppy scholarship prior to Tome's research but outright plagiarism - that takes the cake!

Cal · 01-27-2009, 09:24 AM

Tomes released this study only a short time ago. In fact, the document was placed on concernedbrothers.com only as early as 1/22/09, five days ago. Do you expect all GLA leaders to have investigated his claims and to have made a public declaration on their stance and recommendations in that short a time? You seem quite impatient.

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 10:34 AM

Actually Igzy what I would expect is that this would have been discovered long ago before the LSM GLA split i.e. there would have been high quality standards of scholarship in place and policed especially by the leadership. If such an atmosphere existed in the LCS then Lee and his colleagues would have been called to account for their antics and some level of integrity and credibility might have been maintained.

In another thread you stated that the main problem with the LCS is the authority structure and the ground of locality. One is structural and the other a made up "doctrine" for children to make them have a false sense of security that they are right and all others are wrong. But I would suggest another problem: the lack of integrity in the leadership and that includes being wimpy. Men of integrity would not have allowed Lee to do the things he did regardless of the other two items.

It remains to be seen what the GLA will do about the Recovery Version now that Tomes has published his findings. But I think it naive to believe Tomes is operating in a little vacuum all by his lonesome and the other leaders including Titus Chu know nothing about what he is going to publish. Suddenly, "Surprise, surprise look what Tomes wrote!" I seriously doubt it.

Norm · 01-27-2009, 11:21 AM

This is not a new topic to us in the GLA. Many of you on this forum, including djohnson were on the Bereans forum.

Here are a few of my posts related to the matter of plagerism.

From theBereans.net:

date: 07-05-08, 13:44
thread: History of the Local Church Movement
post: #905
content: ...When a publishing house such as LSM edits their publications to remove the names of those who are no longer in good standing, such as John So's name being removed from the Life-Studies, I believe those related to LSM play many games. When footnotes do not give the source of the original writers, I believe many games are being played....

date: 07-25-08, 14:10
thread: New Website—Assemblylife.com
post: #358
content: ...Let's talk about plagiarism.

LSM Hymns; hymn 403 is written by Frances R. Havergal. Any reason that no credit is given to the author and it is only marked with a dagger.

If you research a number of the hymns with the star (*) you will find they are rewrites of other Christian hymns , some verses almost identical to the original. No credit whatsoever is given to the original author....

date: 10-18-07, 09:16
thread: What's going on in Detroit?
post: #298
content: ... Silas also related the practice of Br. Lee in the receiving and using of material from other ministries. WL felt that if you read the works of another and then spoke them yourself they were now yours and you did not need to reference from who you received it. Silas said that was how he and many others had been trained by WL in the use of the ministries of other Christians.

This may explain why some of the footnotes in the RcV are highly polished and embellished quotes of other writers and yet they are not referenced. Footnote five of 1 Thes. 5:23 may be an example of such. Compare it to the passages in Life on the Highest Plane by Ruth Paxson, the Kregel 1996 edition page 27 specifically. There she speaks of the God-consciousness, the self-consciousness and the world-consciousness.

Those in the LC today are being deceived when they are being told to take Br. Lee only. Many of the things he spoke and wrote were the fruit of others labor. That should be acknowledged and recommended....

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 11:33 AM

And since others' work is not acknowledged and recommended in the Recovery Version, and since you now clearly know this, what will you do about it in your sphere of influence?

Norm · 01-27-2009, 12:05 PM

djohnson,

Please pursue your greatest joy of knowning Jesus Christ.

What we do here has nothing to do with you and is none of your business.

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 01:16 PM

Why would you, Tomes etc publish on public forums on the world wide web about such things as LSM's plagiarism if it's none of our business? By your actions you have made it our business. The question is: what is the GLA leadership doing about it other than yapping at the LSM?

UntoHim · 01-27-2009, 01:39 PM

I don't see how Norm is responsible for what Nigel Tomes put out. They don't even live in the same country. Of course Norm is free to comment on Tomes papers just like anybody else.

I really don't see all the GLA "Local Churches" being a monolithic block or federation... and why should they? Heck, that's the kind of thing they are probably trying to get away from I would think.

Anyway, no forum member is obligated to answer on behalf of anybody but themselves. If they are a leader or an elder in some particular fellowship, then they can certainly give as little or as much information about what is going on in their place if they so choose.

Let's discuss the issue(s) at hand, try not to get too personal, and try not to be nipping at heals.

Cal · 01-27-2009, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

In another thread you stated that the main problem with the LCS is the authority structure and the ground of locality. One is structural and the other a made up "doctrine" for children to make them have a false sense of security that they are right and all others are wrong. But I would suggest another problem: the lack of integrity in the leadership and that includes being wimpy. Men of integrity would not have allowed Lee to do the things he did regardless of the other two items.

You have a point here. The LSM/LC dynamic of authority makes it hard for individuals to stand up for what is right and speak truth to power. This is because LSM teaching and practice absolutely fails to resolve conflict between the respective values of righteousness and submission. This leads to the appearance of local leaders being "wimpy."

Some leaders may indeed be wimpy. But it is more likely that their moral constitution has been so trained to value "oneness" and "submission" that they experience a genuine moral dilemma when they must choose between conscience and going along with the program.

While most of us would simply walk away, LC folks and particularly LC leaders have been so trained to resist "going their own way" that doing so is against their nature, and many even after choosing to leave experience condemnation and second thoughts for a long time after doing so. They need our sympathy and prayers, though an occasional "snap out of it!" is probably not a bad thing either.

Hope · 01-27-2009, 02:26 PM

I have listed below some of the posts of dJohnson. I put in bold print his references to leadership of local churches in the Great Lakes area.

Somebody has a personal axe to grind with leadership in the local churches

and in particular at least some of the leadership in the Great Lakes Area. Maybe it is dJohnson’s friend who was once in the local church.

dJohnson, on another thread posters have indicated when their stay in the local churches started and ended. Do you have any idea about your friend and if he ever had contact with some of the leadership in the Great Lakes Area? The pejorative language in your posts betrays a personal animus on the part of someone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

I suppose my question should be further clarified: do teachers and/or leaders use the Recovery Version in their public ministry? I assume by the answers given so far it is a yes. This leads to my next question: prior to Tomes discovery that Witness Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism the GLA leadership could plead ignorance. Now they cannot. Why do they continue to promote by their example a version that comes from a source that so obviously lacks intellectual and spiritual integrity?

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Igzy either Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism or they did not. If they did Tome's is merely the messenger. A serious leadership (especially his own colleagues in the GLA) would investigate his findings to determine for themselves if they are true or not. If they are true what will they do about it as it pertains to their public use of the version? It has nothing to do with following Tomes in lockstep. It's a matter of intellectual and spiritual integrity.

I already knew about the LSM's sloppy scholarship prior to Tome's research but outright plagiarism - that takes the cake!

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Actually Igzy what I would expect is that this would have been discovered long ago before the LSM GLA split i.e. there would have been high quality standards of scholarship in place and policed especially by the leadership. If such an atmosphere existed in the LCS then Lee and his colleagues would have been called to account for their antics and some level of integrity and credibility might have been maintained.

In another thread you stated that the main problem with the LCS is the authority structure and the ground of locality. One is structural and the other a made up "doctrine" for children to make them have a false sense of security that they are right and all others are wrong. But I would suggest another problem: the lack of integrity in the leadership and that includes being wimpy. Men of integrity would not have allowed Lee to do the things he did regardless of the other two items.

It remains to be seen what the GLA will do about the Recovery Version now that Tomes has published his findings. But I think it naive to believe Tomes is operating in a little vacuum all by his lonesome and the other leaders including Titus Chu know nothing about what he is going to publish. Suddenly, "Surprise, surprise look what Tomes wrote!" I seriously doubt it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Why would you, Tomes etc publish on public forums on the world wide web about such things as LSM's plagiarism if it's none of our business? By your actions you have made it our business. The question is: what is the GLA leadership doing about it other than yapping at the LSM?

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 03:13 PM

Hope saying someone has a personal problem instead of addressing the issue itself is a red herring and one I'm sure you learned well from Witness Lee as it was one of his favorite ploys in his bag of tricks.

The lack of integrity of the leadership of the LSM is evident for all to see. It is no secret. The question is: does the GLA have anything better to offer in terms of intellectual and spiritual integrity among the leadership? A very reasonable and sensible question for anyone who is half way intelligent don't you think?

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 03:19 PM

UntoHim both Norm and Tomes address the plagiarism of the LSM (see Norm's post #19) on the world wide web and that is what I am referring to.

And anyone who thinks Nigel Tomes is up in Canada operating in a vacuum really has their head up in the clouds.

Cal · 01-27-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Hope saying someone has a personal problem instead of addressing the issue itself is a red herring and one I'm sure you learned well from Witness Lee as it was one of his favorite ploys in his bag of tricks.

dj,

In one breath you call Hope's bringing to attention the effects of your LC experience a red herring, and in the next you impune the effects of his LC experience. How about some intellectual integrity, cuz?

cityonahill · 01-27-2009, 07:06 PM

At the end of the day, how can people continue to use resources and teaching material that they criticize so much?

It does not make sense. Someone complains about a ministry who quarantines people and plagiarises teachings and then turns right around and uses those same materials and teachings. If that is true then dj is right. The GLA should either try to find their own identity in Christ or stop complaining about LSM while using their materials

-reece

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 07:49 PM

cityonahill that is the crux of the matter isn't it? Thank you for clarifying it.

In my view those GLA leaders who use the Recovery Version in public services after knowing plagiarism is involved are complicit in the misdeed. They cannot plead ignorance like they have done about the past history of Lee and the LSM e.g. the last quarantine in the late 1980s. Now they know. I liken it to drug users declaring that drug producers are terrible criminals. Really? And what is a drug user if not a cohort in the process?

djohnson · 01-27-2009, 07:54 PM

Igzy expecting intellectual and spiritual integrity from Christian leadership is not a result of my experience or my sources who were former members experiences with the LCS. It is outside such an unhealthy place that these expectations are formed.

UntoHim · 01-27-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djohnson

Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings?

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation.

Ok kiddies, let's take a step or two back to the beginning, shall we?

djohnson's original question is legitimate and relevant to our discussions I believe. At first I took it that he was referring to the text of the Recovery Version (silly me). Of course this thread has broadened out to the much, much wider issue of the acceptance, use and promotion of Witness Lee's teachings among those dear brothers and sisters who have "disassociated" (to one degree or another) from the Living Stream Ministry. Again, this is legitimate and relevant to our discussions.... but is there any possible way we can continue these discussions without kicking each other in the shins or handing out black eyes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cityonahill

At the end of the day, how can people continue to use resources and teaching material that they criticize so much?

Ah, on it's face, this seems like such a reasonable question.... but then again it is coming from somebody who has never been a Local Churcher. It's very easy to tell somebody to throw out the baby and the bathwater when they have had no personal, close connection to either. Sorry, Reece, I'm not trying to pick on you, but somebody has mentioned more then once that "it is one thing to take the Local Churcher out of the Local Church, and yet quite another to take the Local Church out of the Local Churcher".

Hey, if I could snap my fingers I would would make every Christian (or person for that matter) on earth see what I see and think what I think... but that would pretty much make me God anyway...right? In the meantime, while we're all waiting for everyone to see what we see and think what we think, could we all remember that we are not God or even becoming God (not even in life and nature)?

cityonahill · 01-27-2009, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UntoHim

Ah, on it's face, this seems like such a reasonable question.... but then again it is coming from somebody who has never been a Local Churcher.

Exactly. I've grown up in a denomination and have believed many dogmatic and unbiblical things in the process.(as every believer does at some point) The most important questions which have helped to change my mindset on certain things have come from other christians outside of my little bubble. Perhaps those in the LC could use an outside opinion every once in a while too...Those in the GLA/LSM LC don't have to agree with everything I say or stand for of course, but I do believe my question was a valid one(even as an "outsider"). Why would some critique LSM so harshly but still sit under its ministry by using their teaching material and resources? I guess it does not matter if you like me or not, that's a question that should be addressed.

Norm · 01-28-2009, 05:13 AM

Let me ask a very reasonable question. Which leaders in which assemblies are still propagating the Recovery Version in the GLA?

Here is what I know.

Detroit is not.

Toronto is not.

Cleveland is not.

Pittsburgh is not.

Columbus is not.

Mansfield is not.

Ann Arbor is not.

I use many different Bibles and hundreds of reference books. Most have doctrinal problems to my view and quite a few may have portions tending toward/ or are plagiarism. They are tools and I use them with discretion and inform those around me as to what I see as short-comings.

Now, concerning the assembly here in Detroit, we are very small, very beat up and beginning to enjoy a very fresh visitation from the Lord.

At least half of who are meeting have 35-40 years experience with the LC/LSM system, we will never be devoid of it but we can look to the Lord to not continue the abusive aspects. Many things we practice are found in the NT and we will not drop those. There are also 10-12 who are very new in our midst. They have no idea who or what is WL, LSM, the local church, etc., and we do not intend to take them into that mess. As the Holy Spirit leads we are growing in grace.

I personally have not met with any of the "leaders", as some would say, in the GLA are for almost a year now. I have been to only one conference meeting (less than 2 hours) in that same year also. What tight-knit fellowship and leadership are you talking about?

I have heard that some of the newer congregations in the GLA are calling their elders pastors.

Let's face it, the topic of leaders propagating the RcV and LSM publications is legit but why try to pin it on the GLA when we have paid a huge price for not going along with LSM.

One result of the trial is also a huge aversion by most here for anything that begins to smell remotely like what we have left.

What we were like 20 years ago and who we are today is becoming light years apart. Please get an up-to-date photo of who we are.

These are random thoughts but that is all the time I felt to give them.

Enjoy your discussion but please do not paint me according to your imagined image.

Cal · 01-28-2009, 05:20 AM

I don't think Tomes point was ever that LSM's materials are so tainted as to be unusable. I think his point has always been to knock LSM off its self-righteous, we're-the-unique-continutation-of-God's-Recovery, all-must-prostrate-at-our-judgment high horse. If he succeeds in that he's done a good thing, whether he continues to use their materials or not.

But as Norm has expertly testified, many GLA churches have abandoned the RcV. Hopefully that will satisfy dj and he can cut out the terrier imitation.

djohnson · 01-28-2009, 08:44 AM

Igzy for me the issue is not the "tainted" materials of the LSM. The LSM are a known quality and nothing I hear about them surprises me anymore. My question has been about the condoning of plagiarism by knowingly using materials publicly that contain it. I suspect the reason Tomes looked into it was because he was first accused of it by the LSM. It's merely tit for tat. And that is sort of unfortunate because the issue is beyond that in my view.

In an academic setting the plagiarizer would typically be fired. Those knowingly using the plagiarized materials would at minimum be required to discontinue the use and be given a warning. I suspect because Lee was never in a formal academic setting he learned to be fast and loose with the rules when it suited his purposes. The scholarship standards of the LSM are absolutely deplorable. To put it more clearly they are committing theft.

Norm that is very good news and my intent was not to "pin" anything on the GLA. It just so happens that the GLA is the latest region that has left the LSM enmasse and so they serve as a convenient example in the discussion.

Norm · 01-28-2009, 08:55 AM

djohnson,

Please find another sacrifical lamb. You really know nothing about us (you are 2,500 miles away) except from third parties or our own postings on the web. We are no longer a part of LSM and are putting that part of our life behind us and reaching forth to Christ.

djohnson · 01-28-2009, 09:37 AM

Sacrificial lamb? There is only one and I think we all know who that is!

Norm what is going on in GLA is part of the LCS stream of history and it has been made public on the world wide web by you and others. Surely you (collective) did not to publish to a world wide audience and expect no response. That would be rather naive don't you think?

Norm · 01-28-2009, 10:22 AM

Thank you universal corodinator and voice of the "world wide audience".

djohnson · 01-28-2009, 11:42 AM

A voice Norm. Just a voice. Welcome to the non-LCS world - where you won't hear amen after ever sentence you utter!

TLFisher · 01-28-2009, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norm

At least half of who are meeting have 35-40 years experience with the LC/LSM system, we will never be devoid of it but we can look to the Lord to not continue the abusive aspects. Many things we practice are found in the NT and we will not drop those. There are also 10-12 who are very new in our midst. They have no idea who or what is WL, LSM, the local church, etc., and we do not intend to take them into that mess. As the Holy Spirit leads we are growing in grace.

For what it's worth Norm, I view our time in the LSM/LC fellowship as an aspect of our Christian experience. As the assembly you meet with continues, as does the Christian experience for all who meet there.

Terry

Shawn · 01-28-2009, 12:22 PM

Hello All,

Just wanted to say that what we practice in Pittsburgh, is a de emphasis of the recovery version, placing it along side all the other various translations. Use it if you want, others are just as welcome in the fellowship.

The LSM ministry also has been de emphasised, with useful portions of ministry to be recieved, but not as the "only" ministry. Read it and fellowship from it if you choose to, but in no way take it as the only ministry profitable to the church.

No secret RCV meetings at midnight, no listening to LSM video trainings in secret locations. Please end the hyped up accusations of a LSM foundation within churches who are honestly seeking to follow the Lord, after having been mercifully delivered from a "LSM only" mentality.

Thanks

djohnson · 01-28-2009, 03:14 PM

Shawn asking questions and trying to get to the truth of a matter is not making accusations. As many have already stated on this thread this is a legitimate exploration. Plagiarism is a very serious matter. It is outright theft. Plain and simple.

Shawn · 01-29-2009, 07:31 AM

Well, since plagarism is the issue, let me ask a question I do not know the answer to:

I started seeking the Lord at a fellowship that based its teachings on the Schofield reference bible back in the 80's. I wonder if this reference bible noted its similar teachings to previous commentaries, such as Henry's?

In my study of the bible using the Schofield reference, I do not recall any exhaustive references to original ideas, but maybe I did not look in the back of the book.

Now I'm not defending the declarations of WL in saying "this is my original idea." I have seen enough from previous expositors to know this was an empty statement, but, in the end, as long as the truth is taught and that it is consitient with the bible, does it really matter who had the original thought?

Thanks,

Shawn

djohnson · 01-29-2009, 08:05 AM

Shawn what you have mentioned is different than plagiarism. All well learned scholars have difficultly separating out what are their original ideas and what are not because eventually it all blends together. (Although they are expected to try and to give credit where it is due.) However what Tomes has mentioned is full on plagiarism i.e. the lifting of entire passages out of others literary work and dropping it into their own and calling it their own. That is literary theft as dictionary defined.

Further as you have indicated Lee and his associate were arrogant and therefore found it necessary to pridefully boast of original ideas that were indeed not original. This only served to confirm their buffoonery.

Ohio · 01-29-2009, 01:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norm

If you don't believe me go to http://www.churchindetroit.org/meetings.htm our portions of the Word for the week on this page are taken from the WEB version.

Brother Norm, thanks much for posting your church site and the many heartwarming pictures of our dear brother DanR.

01-25-2009, 04:08 PM	#6
cityonahill Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 67	Re: Recovery Version Ya, I asked a similar question on the other board about the distinctions between LSM and GLA regarding teaching sources and practices...I got no reply either! reece __________________ "If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do..."(2 Cor. 10:7)

01-25-2009, 08:31 PM	#7
Overflow Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 22	Re: Recovery Version I think it does matter. I keep checking back...wish someone would answer.

01-26-2009, 12:50 PM	#12
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version The Christians I fellowship with in Metro Detroit--some of us do and some of us don't and then tomorrow some of the does are the don'ts and the don'ts are the does and some are always and some are never and on Sunday morning we all use the World English Bible with our own preference in hand and some of us even use the Greek. If you don't believe me go to http://www.churchindetroit.org/meetings.htm our portions of the Word for the week on this page are taken from the WEB version. We are not hiding any deep dark secrets. I guess some people just seem to always see a troll hiding under the bridge if there isn't a sign, "No troll here!". __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-26-2009, 02:26 PM	#13
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version I suppose my question should be further clarified: do teachers and/or leaders use the Recovery Version in their public ministry? I assume by the answers given so far it is a yes. This leads to my next question: prior to Tomes discovery that Witness Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism the GLA leadership could plead ignorance. Now they cannot. Why do they continue to promote by their example a version that comes from a source that so obviously lacks intellectual and spiritual integrity? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-26-2009, 02:50 PM	#14
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version And if we say no will you than clarify it further by asking if we use it as a reference in our studies. I guess even if the sign say "No troll here!", some will not give up the search. __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-23-2009, 07:50 PM	#1
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Recovery Version Is the non-LSM Local Church in the GLA still using the Recovery Version in their public meetings? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-24-2009, 07:07 PM	#2
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,793	Re: Recovery Version More importantly, are they using the teachings of Witness Lee in their weekly meetings? There is no doubt that Toronto has pretty much dropped the use of Witness Lee/LSM publications as their primary source... but what about Cleveland, Pittsburgh, etc? I think Ohio, Peter D and others could fill us in on this situation. __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11

01-25-2009, 10:30 AM	#3
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version So far the silence is deafening. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-25-2009, 10:00 PM	#9
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Ohio as others have mentioned I think it indeed does matter. If what Tomes has written about the plagiarism going on at the LSM in the footnotes of the Recovery Version is true then how could a leadership with any integrity continue to use it and by example encourage others to do likewise? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-26-2009, 03:44 PM	#16
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Igzy either Lee and his LSM engaged in plagiarism or they did not. If they did Tome's is merely the messenger. A serious leadership (especially his own colleagues in the GLA) would investigate his findings to determine for themselves if they are true or not. If they are true what will they do about it as it pertains to their public use of the version? It has nothing to do with following Tomes in lockstep. It's a matter of intellectual and spiritual integrity. I already knew about the LSM's sloppy scholarship prior to Tome's research but outright plagiarism - that takes the cake! __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 09:24 AM	#17
Cal Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: USA Posts: 4,330	Re: Recovery Version Tomes released this study only a short time ago. In fact, the document was placed on concernedbrothers.com only as early as 1/22/09, five days ago. Do you expect all GLA leaders to have investigated his claims and to have made a public declaration on their stance and recommendations in that short a time? You seem quite impatient.

01-27-2009, 10:34 AM	#18
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Actually Igzy what I would expect is that this would have been discovered long ago before the LSM GLA split i.e. there would have been high quality standards of scholarship in place and policed especially by the leadership. If such an atmosphere existed in the LCS then Lee and his colleagues would have been called to account for their antics and some level of integrity and credibility might have been maintained. In another thread you stated that the main problem with the LCS is the authority structure and the ground of locality. One is structural and the other a made up "doctrine" for children to make them have a false sense of security that they are right and all others are wrong. But I would suggest another problem: the lack of integrity in the leadership and that includes being wimpy. Men of integrity would not have allowed Lee to do the things he did regardless of the other two items. It remains to be seen what the GLA will do about the Recovery Version now that Tomes has published his findings. But I think it naive to believe Tomes is operating in a little vacuum all by his lonesome and the other leaders including Titus Chu know nothing about what he is going to publish. Suddenly, "Surprise, surprise look what Tomes wrote!" I seriously doubt it. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 11:21 AM	#19
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version This is not a new topic to us in the GLA. Many of you on this forum, including djohnson were on the Bereans forum. Here are a few of my posts related to the matter of plagerism. From theBereans.net: date: 07-05-08, 13:44 thread: History of the Local Church Movement post: #905 content: ...When a publishing house such as LSM edits their publications to remove the names of those who are no longer in good standing, such as John So's name being removed from the Life-Studies, I believe those related to LSM play many games. When footnotes do not give the source of the original writers, I believe many games are being played.... date: 07-25-08, 14:10 thread: New Website—Assemblylife.com post: #358 content: ...Let's talk about plagiarism. LSM Hymns; hymn 403 is written by Frances R. Havergal. Any reason that no credit is given to the author and it is only marked with a dagger. If you research a number of the hymns with the star () you will find they are rewrites of other Christian hymns , some verses almost identical to the original. No credit whatsoever is given to the original author.... date:* 10-18-07, 09:16 thread: What's going on in Detroit? post: #298 content: ... Silas also related the practice of Br. Lee in the receiving and using of material from other ministries. WL felt that if you read the works of another and then spoke them yourself they were now yours and you did not need to reference from who you received it. Silas said that was how he and many others had been trained by WL in the use of the ministries of other Christians. This may explain why some of the footnotes in the RcV are highly polished and embellished quotes of other writers and yet they are not referenced. Footnote five of 1 Thes. 5:23 may be an example of such. Compare it to the passages in Life on the Highest Plane by Ruth Paxson, the Kregel 1996 edition page 27 specifically. There she speaks of the God-consciousness, the self-consciousness and the world-consciousness. Those in the LC today are being deceived when they are being told to take Br. Lee only. Many of the things he spoke and wrote were the fruit of others labor. That should be acknowledged and recommended.... __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-27-2009, 11:33 AM	#20
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version And since others' work is not acknowledged and recommended in the Recovery Version, and since you now clearly know this, what will you do about it in your sphere of influence? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 12:05 PM	#21
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version djohnson, Please pursue your greatest joy of knowning Jesus Christ. What we do here has nothing to do with you and is none of your business. __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-27-2009, 01:16 PM	#22
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Why would you, Tomes etc publish on public forums on the world wide web about such things as LSM's plagiarism if it's none of our business? By your actions you have made it our business. The question is: what is the GLA leadership doing about it other than yapping at the LSM? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 01:39 PM	#23
UntoHim Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν κόσμον For God So Loved The World Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 3,793	Re: Recovery Version I don't see how Norm is responsible for what Nigel Tomes put out. They don't even live in the same country. Of course Norm is free to comment on Tomes papers just like anybody else. I really don't see all the GLA "Local Churches" being a monolithic block or federation... and why should they? Heck, that's the kind of thing they are probably trying to get away from I would think. Anyway, no forum member is obligated to answer on behalf of anybody but themselves. If they are a leader or an elder in some particular fellowship, then they can certainly give as little or as much information about what is going on in their place if they so choose. Let's discuss the issue(s) at hand, try not to get too personal, and try not to be nipping at heals. __________________ αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων ἀμήν - 1 Peter 5:11

01-27-2009, 03:13 PM	#26
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Hope saying someone has a personal problem instead of addressing the issue itself is a red herring and one I'm sure you learned well from Witness Lee as it was one of his favorite ploys in his bag of tricks. The lack of integrity of the leadership of the LSM is evident for all to see. It is no secret. The question is: does the GLA have anything better to offer in terms of intellectual and spiritual integrity among the leadership? A very reasonable and sensible question for anyone who is half way intelligent don't you think? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 03:19 PM	#27
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version UntoHim both Norm and Tomes address the plagiarism of the LSM (see Norm's post #19) on the world wide web and that is what I am referring to. And anyone who thinks Nigel Tomes is up in Canada operating in a vacuum really has their head up in the clouds. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 07:06 PM	#29
cityonahill Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 67	Re: Recovery Version At the end of the day, how can people continue to use resources and teaching material that they criticize so much? It does not make sense. Someone complains about a ministry who quarantines people and plagiarises teachings and then turns right around and uses those same materials and teachings. If that is true then dj is right. The GLA should either try to find their own identity in Christ or stop complaining about LSM while using their materials -reece __________________ "If anyone is confident that they belong to Christ, they should consider again that we belong to Christ just as much as they do..."(2 Cor. 10:7)

01-27-2009, 07:49 PM	#30
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version cityonahill that is the crux of the matter isn't it? Thank you for clarifying it. In my view those GLA leaders who use the Recovery Version in public services after knowing plagiarism is involved are complicit in the misdeed. They cannot plead ignorance like they have done about the past history of Lee and the LSM e.g. the last quarantine in the late 1980s. Now they know. I liken it to drug users declaring that drug producers are terrible criminals. Really? And what is a drug user if not a cohort in the process? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-27-2009, 07:54 PM	#31
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Igzy expecting intellectual and spiritual integrity from Christian leadership is not a result of my experience or my sources who were former members experiences with the LCS. It is outside such an unhealthy place that these expectations are formed. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-28-2009, 05:13 AM	#34
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version Let me ask a very reasonable question. Which leaders in which assemblies are still propagating the Recovery Version in the GLA? Here is what I know. Detroit is not. Toronto is not. Cleveland is not. Pittsburgh is not. Columbus is not. Mansfield is not. Ann Arbor is not. I use many different Bibles and hundreds of reference books. Most have doctrinal problems to my view and quite a few may have portions tending toward/ or are plagiarism. They are tools and I use them with discretion and inform those around me as to what I see as short-comings. Now, concerning the assembly here in Detroit, we are very small, very beat up and beginning to enjoy a very fresh visitation from the Lord. At least half of who are meeting have 35-40 years experience with the LC/LSM system, we will never be devoid of it but we can look to the Lord to not continue the abusive aspects. Many things we practice are found in the NT and we will not drop those. There are also 10-12 who are very new in our midst. They have no idea who or what is WL, LSM, the local church, etc., and we do not intend to take them into that mess. As the Holy Spirit leads we are growing in grace. I personally have not met with any of the "leaders", as some would say, in the GLA are for almost a year now. I have been to only one conference meeting (less than 2 hours) in that same year also. What tight-knit fellowship and leadership are you talking about? I have heard that some of the newer congregations in the GLA are calling their elders pastors. Let's face it, the topic of leaders propagating the RcV and LSM publications is legit but why try to pin it on the GLA when we have paid a huge price for not going along with LSM. One result of the trial is also a huge aversion by most here for anything that begins to smell remotely like what we have left. What we were like 20 years ago and who we are today is becoming light years apart. Please get an up-to-date photo of who we are. These are random thoughts but that is all the time I felt to give them. Enjoy your discussion but please do not paint me according to your imagined image. __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-28-2009, 05:20 AM	#35
Cal Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: USA Posts: 4,330	Re: Recovery Version I don't think Tomes point was ever that LSM's materials are so tainted as to be unusable. I think his point has always been to knock LSM off its self-righteous, we're-the-unique-continutation-of-God's-Recovery, all-must-prostrate-at-our-judgment high horse. If he succeeds in that he's done a good thing, whether he continues to use their materials or not. But as Norm has expertly testified, many GLA churches have abandoned the RcV. Hopefully that will satisfy dj and he can cut out the terrier imitation.

01-28-2009, 08:44 AM	#36
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	"To Commit Literary Theft" Igzy for me the issue is not the "tainted" materials of the LSM. The LSM are a known quality and nothing I hear about them surprises me anymore. My question has been about the condoning of plagiarism by knowingly using materials publicly that contain it. I suspect the reason Tomes looked into it was because he was first accused of it by the LSM. It's merely tit for tat. And that is sort of unfortunate because the issue is beyond that in my view. In an academic setting the plagiarizer would typically be fired. Those knowingly using the plagiarized materials would at minimum be required to discontinue the use and be given a warning. I suspect because Lee was never in a formal academic setting he learned to be fast and loose with the rules when it suited his purposes. The scholarship standards of the LSM are absolutely deplorable. To put it more clearly they are committing theft. Norm that is very good news and my intent was not to "pin" anything on the GLA. It just so happens that the GLA is the latest region that has left the LSM enmasse and so they serve as a convenient example in the discussion. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-28-2009, 08:55 AM	#37
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: "To Commit Literary Theft" djohnson, Please find another sacrifical lamb. You really know nothing about us (you are 2,500 miles away) except from third parties or our own postings on the web. We are no longer a part of LSM and are putting that part of our life behind us and reaching forth to Christ. __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-28-2009, 09:37 AM	#38
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Sacrificial lamb? There is only one and I think we all know who that is! Norm what is going on in GLA is part of the LCS stream of history and it has been made public on the world wide web by you and others. Surely you (collective) did not to publish to a world wide audience and expect no response. That would be rather naive don't you think? __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-28-2009, 10:22 AM	#39
Norm Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 31	Re: Recovery Version Thank you universal corodinator and voice of the "world wide audience". __________________ ...All Are Yours... 1 Cor 3:22

01-28-2009, 11:42 AM	#40
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version A voice Norm. Just a voice. Welcome to the non-LCS world - where you won't hear amen after ever sentence you utter! __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-28-2009, 12:22 PM	#42
Shawn Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 54	Re: Recovery Version Hello All, Just wanted to say that what we practice in Pittsburgh, is a de emphasis of the recovery version, placing it along side all the other various translations. Use it if you want, others are just as welcome in the fellowship. The LSM ministry also has been de emphasised, with useful portions of ministry to be recieved, but not as the "only" ministry. Read it and fellowship from it if you choose to, but in no way take it as the only ministry profitable to the church. No secret RCV meetings at midnight, no listening to LSM video trainings in secret locations. Please end the hyped up accusations of a LSM foundation within churches who are honestly seeking to follow the Lord, after having been mercifully delivered from a "LSM only" mentality. Thanks

01-28-2009, 03:14 PM	#43
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Shawn asking questions and trying to get to the truth of a matter is not making accusations. As many have already stated on this thread this is a legitimate exploration. Plagiarism is a very serious matter. It is outright theft. Plain and simple. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!

01-29-2009, 07:31 AM	#44
Shawn Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 54	Re: Recovery Version Well, since plagarism is the issue, let me ask a question I do not know the answer to: I started seeking the Lord at a fellowship that based its teachings on the Schofield reference bible back in the 80's. I wonder if this reference bible noted its similar teachings to previous commentaries, such as Henry's? In my study of the bible using the Schofield reference, I do not recall any exhaustive references to original ideas, but maybe I did not look in the back of the book. Now I'm not defending the declarations of WL in saying "this is my original idea." I have seen enough from previous expositors to know this was an empty statement, but, in the end, as long as the truth is taught and that it is consitient with the bible, does it really matter who had the original thought? Thanks, Shawn

01-29-2009, 08:05 AM	#45
djohnson Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 318	Re: Recovery Version Shawn what you have mentioned is different than plagiarism. All well learned scholars have difficultly separating out what are their original ideas and what are not because eventually it all blends together. (Although they are expected to try and to give credit where it is due.) However what Tomes has mentioned is full on plagiarism i.e. the lifting of entire passages out of others literary work and dropping it into their own and calling it their own. That is literary theft as dictionary defined. Further as you have indicated Lee and his associate were arrogant and therefore found it necessary to pridefully boast of original ideas that were indeed not original. This only served to confirm their buffoonery. __________________ My greatest joy is knowing Jesus Christ!