Local Church Discussions  

Go Back   Local Church Discussions > Various Living Stream Ministry Publications

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-21-2018, 09:43 PM   #1
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default One Publication

I didn't see a thread anywhere dedicated to the "One Publication" letter put out by LSM. The letter is reproduced below, but can be found online here: https://www.lsm.org/onepublication/


PUBLICATION WORK IN THE LORD’S RECOVERY

Through Brother Lee’s fellowship over the years, we have long realized that there should be one publication among us. The one publication is not only a testimony of our oneness in the Body but also a safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord’s recovery. Without one publication, there is no way to preserve the integrity of the Lord’s ministry among us, which is crucial to the practical oneness among the local churches. Brother Lee gave this word of testimony on this crucial matter in the Lord’s recovery:

When we were on mainland China, only Brother Nee had a publication, and the Gospel Room belonged solely and uniquely to him. He asked me to help in the publication work. I did write some books, among which were a book on the genealogy of Christ, a translation of part of Pember’s Earth’s Earliest Ages, and some books on the kingdom of the heavens. I never published anything by myself. I always mailed my manuscript to the Gospel Room, which was under Brother Nee and his helper. It was up to their discernment whether my manuscript should be published or not. I liked to have my writings checked as to whether there might be some inaccuracy in the truth. It is not a small matter to write a book that expounds the kingdom of the heavens. I liked my material to pass through their checking. This helped and protected me. Brother Yu, the eye specialist, translated some of the mystical books, but he did not publish anything. We only had one publication. Everything was published through Brother Nee’s Gospel Room because the publication is really the trumpeting. The sounding of our trumpet is not just in the verbal message but more in the publication. (Elders’ Training, Book 8: The Life-pulse of the Lord’s Present Move, pp. 161-162. See the larger context of this quotation in the attached ministry portions.)

According to the practice established by Brother Nee in China, the one publication has always been trumpeted by one practical publication endeavor—in Brother Nee’s day by his Gospel Room, during Brother Lee’s years after he left mainland China by Taiwan Gospel Book Room, and during his years in the United States by Living Stream Ministry. Today we must be diligent to continue this practice of the trumpeting in the one publication in a practical way through the publication service of Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room. Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room publish both the past ministry that was delivered to us by Brother Nee and Brother Lee and the ongoing, up-to-date speaking that comes out of the fellowship of the blended co-workers and is based on the ministry materials of Brother Lee and Brother Nee. These are the materials that have been used regularly in the church life in the Lord’s recovery, and these constitute the one publication among us today.

When Brother Lee was among us, he took the lead in both the ministry and the publication work. As he released the Lord’s ministry to the churches, he directed Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room to publish that ministry throughout the churches so that the saints everywhere could be kept in the up-to-date fellowship of the one ministry. Because the ministry was released originally in either English or Chinese, he formed Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room as publication offices that would carry out the practical service of publishing the ministry for the churches. Today, by the Lord’s mercy, the ministry continues. Now it is carried out by fellow slaves who serve in a blended way according to Brother Lee’s realization and fellowship shortly before he went to be with the Lord. He called this “the Lord’s sovereign provision for His Body, and the up-to-date way to fulfill His ministry” (A Letter of Fellowship with Thanks, March 24, 1997). It is important to note that Brother Lee spoke directly about the continuation of the ministry among us. He felt that after his departure the ministry should be carried out by a group of co-workers who are blended, just as his own service in the ministry was under his coordination with the co-workers. Further, the need to publish the ongoing ministry still exists, and to this end Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room, a blended service overseen by a group of blended brothers who serve in coordination with the blended co-workers, continue to publish the Lord’s speaking among us in all the seven annual “feasts” and the weekly ministry meetings. In a meeting with the brothers to whom he committed the responsibility for Living Stream Ministry, Brother Lee said, “My burden is for the recovery based on the interpretation of Brother Nee and me. I am the continuation of Brother Nee; I would like to have a continuation of me, and this needs a corporation...The Living Stream corporation will continue this ministry” (from unpublished notes of a meeting of Living Stream, July 12, 1996). He placed the direction of this corporation for the continuation and publication of the ministry in the hands of a group of blended brothers, who labor to fulfill this charge before the Lord.

What Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room do, as set forth in the Living Stream’s Articles of Incorporation, is “to promote the enlightenment and revelation regarding the Bible as interpreted by the teachings of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.” It was Brother Lee’s express wish that Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room would be the sole publishers of his and Brother Nee’s ministry. According to this wish and arrangement, Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room should be responsible for the publication of the ministry materials of these two brothers, and any use of Brother Lee’s materials or of The Collected Works of Watchman Nee should be done in coordination with Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room, and only with their express permission, according to their guidelines, and in proper fellowship with them. This includes the translation of these materials into any language as well as any republication in any form or through any medium. Further, Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room also publish the ongoing ministry in the Lord’s recovery as the extension of the ministry of these two brothers. The ongoing ministry is carried out according to the fellowship of blended co-workers and is based on outlines compiled from Brother Lee’s and Brother Nee’s ministry materials. As has been apparent to all the saints everywhere, this labor produces the same ministry with the same taste as has been enjoyed in all the churches since Brother Nee’s time. The up-to-date speaking among us is published primarily in the outlines of the messages for the seven “feasts,” The Holy Word for Morning Revival, and The Ministry magazine by Living Stream Ministry and in corresponding publications by Taiwan Gospel Book Room. In addition, Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room publish works that support the Lord’s ministry. There are a number of publications which Brother Lee initiated that fall into this category, most notably the journal Affirmation & Critique, which presents the truths of the Lord’s recovery to an academically-trained audience as we have received them from Brother Lee. As much as possible, Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room avoid venturing into other kinds of publications, but according to Brother Lee’s own example, occasionally there may be publications of these other kinds which Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room feel to publish either under their own names or under special imprints that serve particular publication needs. For example, Living Stream Books (as opposed to Living Stream Ministry) publishes God’s Plan of Redemption by Mary E. McDonough, and A&C Press publishes a translation from French of a scholarly study on deification in the early church.

At times there may be writings among us that could be considered for publication as part of the one publication among us. As Brother Lee points out in the quote from Elders’ Training, Book above, these proposals should be “checked as to whether there might be some inaccuracy in the truth.” Discernment must always be exercised when expressing matters related to the divine truth, the divine life, and the gospel. The exercise of this sort of discernment not only protects the teaching among us and the spiritual supply to the saints; it also helps and protects those who endeavor to write. Hence, it is proper that those who endeavor to write in this way bring their work to those who take the lead in the ministry and those who take the lead in the publication work, and those who take the lead should exercise the discernment as to whether or not such proposals should be published as part of the one publication. This was the practice when Brother Nee took the lead in the ministry and in the publication work in China, and it was our practice when Brother Lee took the lead in the ministry and in the publication work among us. It should be our continued practice today. Thus, those who wish to write in this way should bring their proposals to the blended co-workers as well as to Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room and have their proposals checked to see whether they should be published or not. In every way, this practice of passing everything that we publish through a discerning check is best for all of us and best for the sounding of the one trumpet in the Lord’s recovery today.

We all must realize that the one publication in the Lord’s recovery is quite a serious matter. Anyone who participates in it must genuinely have the portion from the Lord to do so, and this portion should be easily recognizable to the churches and affirmed by those who take the lead in the ministry and those who take the lead in the publication work. No one can take up this portion in the Lord’s recovery on his own. While we all have a basic right to publish, in the Lord’s recovery we are governed by the higher vision of serving under the cross in a blended way in the Body, especially when it affects the churches and the dear saints everywhere. Since Brother Nee’s day we in the Lord’s recovery have been “restricted in one publication” (Elders’ Training, p. 161), and this restriction has resulted in one testimony among us. For decades we all have been nurtured and richly supplied by the one publication. The benefits of being restricted in one publication can hardly be denied.

But being restricted in the one publication does not mean, and has never meant, that individual churches are not free to produce and distribute materials for their local needs. We have always had publications like this among us, and there have generally been no problems related to these. Songbooks, local tracts, church meeting outlines, testimonies, etc., have long been produced among us without controversy. These are actually not part of the one publication among us in that they do not involve all the churches. These are publications that address local needs. Problems can be caused, however, when these local and non-permanent publications gain larger geographical status. Further, it is particularly problematic when new technologies, such as the Internet, are used to distribute these local publications. The elders should take special care to assure that what is produced for their local churches remains a local matter. Otherwise, damage may result. Although technologies now exist that permit the easy dissemination of material, we should not use these technologies at the risk of causing confusion among the saints and of damaging the one accord among the churches. The elders and saints everywhere should exercise the same caution that Brother Lee spoke of when he testified concerning the one publication in mainland China: all the saints and all the churches everywhere should similarly be restricted in one publication in the Lord’s recovery.

Technology today allows almost any individual to publish whatever he or she desires, and it should not be the intention of the responsible ones in the Lord’s recovery to suppress the rights of individuals to express themselves (unless, of course, such expressions are sinful, heretical, or divisive). Some saints have a desire to write church histories, to produce children’s materials, to record music, and even to give and publish messages. Without much effort these can be reproduced in a variety of media and distributed widely, especially on the Internet and on CDs and DVDs. But the fact that these publications can be produced and distributed should not give them any more credence among the churches than anything else that can be published today, secular or religious. These are simply other publications that our brothers and sisters may or may not be interested in. They are not part of the one publication in the Lord’s recovery, and they are not necessarily beneficial to the spiritual good of the saints among us. The churches, through the elders, should be educated to understand this, and the saints and the churches need to discern the value of these publications for themselves. As shepherds of the flock of God (1 Pet. 5:2), the elders everywhere should have a proper care for the churches with regard to publications, and they should guard the flock from things that could cause damage (Acts 20:28-29). As long as the churches do not become platforms for the dissemination of these publications, these publications should not become matters of issue among us.

Finally, all the churches and saints everywhere must understand that the matter of one publication is not a matter of the common faith but something related to the one ministry in the Lord’s recovery. The ministry is the sounding of the trumpet among us in the Lord’s recovery, and there should be no uncertain sounding of this trumpet, as Brother Lee has mentioned on a number of occasions. However, the one publication should not become the basis of our accepting or rejecting any persons in the communion of faith or in the fellowship of the churches; it should not be insisted on as an item of the faith. If any are not inclined to be restricted in one publication, these ones are still our brothers; they are still in the genuine local churches. We would like to conclude with these words from our Brother Lee and wish to recommend that the full context of his words be read from Elders’ Training, Book 7: One Accord for the Lord’s Move, pp. 74-75:

Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry...

I have to be faithful to the Lord, faithful to so many of you who have been very much affected by this ministry, and faithful to myself. For this reason, this ministry cannot allow anyone to pretend to be in it and yet still say something different. This does not mean that I ask you to stay away from your local church or that your local church is no longer a local church. What I am fellowshipping about is the impact of the ministry for the fighting of the Lord’s interest in His recovery.

The blended co-workers in the Lord’s recovery

June 30, 2005
Ministry Portions
BEING RESTRICTED IN ONE PUBLICATION

One thing that has caused the Lord’s recovery trouble is the fact that we have different publications. If we mean business for the Lord’s recovery, we must avoid any kind of involvement in problems. When we were on mainland China, only Brother Nee had a publication, and the Gospel Room belonged solely and uniquely to him. He asked me to help in the publication work. I did write some books, among which were a book on the genealogy of Christ, a translation of part of Pember’s Earth’s Earliest Ages, and some books on the kingdom of the heavens. I never published anything by myself. I always mailed my manuscript to the Gospel Room, which was under Brother Nee and his helper. It was up to their discernment whether my manuscript should be published or not. I liked to have my writings checked as to whether there might be some inaccuracy in the truth. It is not a small matter to write a book that expounds the kingdom of the heavens. I liked my material to pass through their checking. This helped and protected me. Brother Yu, the eye specialist, translated some of the mystical books, but he did not publish anything. We only had one publication. Everything was published through Brother Nee’s Gospel Room because the publication is really the trumpeting. The sounding of our trumpet is not just in the verbal message but more in the publication.

I hate to see that some of the brothers would try to publish something by copying my points mixed with their “spices” and their “color.” Why do they need to put out some points from my writings in this way? Brother Nee taught us concerning the kingdom of the heavens. I received the basic knowledge from his teaching, but he never expounded on it very much; he simply gave a sketch. It was I who from 1936 began to expound upon the sketch given to me by Brother Nee. After I published my exposition, Brother Nee admired it and told me personally that it was very good.

I hope that some of you brothers would do much development and expounding of all the messages I give. Do not merely speak some points, adding your own “color” and “spices.” This changes the taste. It damages my messages. You must receive the ability to expound all these things. I am not narrow. I would like to see that all of you will be great servants used by God. How wonderful that would be. But I do not like to see that some would merely repeat what I have said, pretending that it is their work with their spices and color.

It bothers me that some brothers among us still put out publications. According to my truthful observation there is no new light or life supply there. They may contain some biblical doctrines, but any point of life or light has been adopted from the publications of Living Stream Ministry. There is nearly no item of life or light that has not been covered by our publications. Based upon this fact, what is the need for these brothers to put out their publications? Because all the publications are mine, it is hard for me to speak such a word. But I am forced to tell the truth. By putting out your own publication, you waste your time and money. You waste the money given by the saints, and you waste their time in reading what you publish. Where is the food, the life supply, and the real enlightenment in the other publications among us? Be assured that there is definitely at least one major revelation in every Living Stream Ministry publication.

I was burdened to publish the Life-study Messages to stress the matter of life because this matter has been neglected, missed, and even lost to the uttermost in today’s Christianity. In most of the commentaries and expositions there is not much of life. Even the term Life-study is a new term. I have used this term for thirty-two years. In 1954 and 1955 I finished a Life-study on the entire Bible, from Genesis to Revelation in Taipei.

This does not mean that I am so capable or so knowledgeable. It all depends upon whether or not our sovereign Lord has given you this portion. Even though I wrote some books in mainland China, I never dared to publish anything by myself. I do not like to have another sounding. Our sounding must be one, so we must be restricted in one publication. My intention in calling a writers’ conference was to encourage you to write something, but not in the way that came out. This fellowship may preserve and protect us from doing things lawlessly.

If some localities would have gone the proper way of the recovery, using all the materials of the ministry, their number would have increased greatly. Some are wasting their time by writing and publishing their own material. This is not their portion. I would like to see that many brothers had this portion with the riches of truth. This would be marvelous and wonderful, but this is our problem today. I advise all of you to take care of this matter. You have to swallow up the dissension. Do not let dissension eat you up.

I hope this fellowship will render some help to all the churches. Take these principles, pray before the Lord, and consider the real situation in your locality. Then you can make some adjustment of the eldership. (Elders’ Training, Book 8: The Life-pulse of the Lord’s Present Move, pp. 161-164, Witness Lee)

FULFILLING THE LORD’S COMMISSION TO HIS RECOVERY

The Lord’s commission is His recovery, and His recovery today is to recover Christ as life, to recover the church as our living, to recover the enjoyment of Christ as everything to us, and to recover all the significances of the church life for the purpose of not only preaching the gospel but also spreading the truth. I believe that this is the unique reason that He has given us nearly all the truths in today’s Christianity. He has given us His truths for us to spread them not only to Christians but even to the unbelievers. The entire globe is under darkness. Every human being on the earth needs to hear the truth, but our spreading of the precious truths we have received has been strongly limited. There have been many strong testimonies concerning people getting attracted and caught by the notes in the Recovery Version, but who has the burden to go out and spread these truths?

Some brothers who are with us do not use these truths when they teach and preach. They teach and preach what they feel is good, yet they do not realize how poor their messages are. Some brothers among us continually put out some publications. I was honest to tell them that there was no light and nothing new in what they put out. The points in our publications are full of life and light, but these brothers would not present them as they are. I could not understand why they have to change the messages we publish to present something in their own style and in their own way. There are no new points of life or light in what they publish. Any life or light in their material is altogether adopted from this ministry. I have been observing this situation among us for years. I would like to see whether some younger brothers among us would be raised up by the Lord to speak something. If I could see this, I would praise the Lord. On the other hand, I have seen some who like to build up something around themselves.

The Lord has commissioned us with His recovery, and He has surely opened up the New Testament to reveal many dear and precious truths to us. What the Lord needs is for thousands of His dear saints who love Him, who live to Him, and who know nothing but His recovery to take one way. Regardless of whether the saints are from Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, England, Thailand, Indonesia, or the United States, we all bear the same burden, take the same way, and spread the same truths. We dispense the truths embodied in the “gold bar,” the Recovery Version. We have no other merchandise! If we would be like this, the entire earth will be taken!

It breaks my heart to see some practicing to have another ministry, using the material of the ministry. We all have to pray, “Lord, rescue me from my ambition to be somebody in the recovery.” We should only know the truths of God’s New Testament economy. We only use one way by one accord, prayer, the Spirit, and the Word. This is what I believe the Lord is after, and this is what we all expect in the depths of our being. Everyone will feel happy about this.

When we go out, we do not go in a dissenting or ambitious way. If you go out with your ambition to build yourself up and I go out with my ambition to build my ministry up, we are finished. The Lord has to go to others. We all need to go out in one way like an army. Then we will have the morale and the impact.

We do not need to do that much. We just need to go out with a pure heart, without anything to ourselves but all things to Him. Just go out with all the truths and the Recovery Version to read to people. I assure you that you will catch someone every week. You do not need to preach your teaching or your kind of doctrine with your terminology. We have to see what the Lord’s recovery is. The Lord’s recovery has been commissioned with a big enterprise to spread the Lord’s truths. He has given us the truths which we are holding. But we need the faithful, pure-hearted ones, who do not have any intention to live to themselves but to Him, to go out to spread these “gold bar” truths. There is no need for you to preach or teach in your way. Open up the Recovery Version and read some of the notes with the hungry ones.

Actually, though, I do not care that much for the increase. I care for the spreading of the truths so that they can get into the needy hearts. If we spread these truths, we will become the faithful servants to serve food to the Lord’s people at the appointed time (Matt. 24:45). Then we will fulfill the commission of the Lord’s recovery. This is where my heart is. I will die to this. I told the brothers in the Far East I will not stop until my entire being is exhausted by this ministry. I hope you all will say the same thing.

If the Lord can gain ten thousand saints in the United States to go full-time with one kind of teaching, one kind of preaching, one kind of material, one kind of publication, one kind of way, and everything one kind, this will be our morale! The wise way is that we all take the full-time way and speak the same thing, think the same thing, present the same thing, and teach the same thing, having the same essence, appearance and expression. Then we will have the morale, the impact, to defeat the enemy. This is what the Lord needs! (Elders’ Training, Book 8: The Life-pulse of the Lord’s Present Move, pp. 123-127, Witness Lee)

THE MINISTRY AND THE CHURCHES

Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry. The citizens of the United States may say many things to criticize the government and the commander in chief of the Armed Forces. But when you get into the army and become a soldier, you lose your right to say anything. It is possible to argue, debate, and even fight in the Senate, but even when the senators get in the army and become soldiers, they have to be quiet. There is no uncertain sounding in the army. The ministry is not like the Senate. The ministry is not a Congress for anyone to come here to express his opinion. The ministry has no capacity for that. The ministry is altogether filled up with a fighting spirit. I do not control any church. All the saints who have left the denominations, the divisive sects, and stand on the proper ground are a local church in their locality. They can express their opinions, but they may have nothing to do with this ministry.

Paul told us that all who were in Asia turned away from him (2 Tim. 1:15). The believers in Asia who had formerly received the apostle’s ministry now forsook him. They did not lose their status as local churches due to the fact that they gave up Paul’s ministry, but in fighting the battle, Paul’s ministry could not depend upon them. For Paul’s ministry they could not be counted on. To say that the ministry cannot depend upon a certain church does not mean that that church has been cut off from being a local church. It is still a local church, but we must realize that the ministry is a fighting unit. In this fighting unit there is no capacity and no time for your opinion.

I mean business for the Lord’s interest. I have sacrificed my entire life for the Lord’s ministry. I gave up everything to take the way of the Lord’s recovery. Now I must be faithful to myself. Furthermore, through my ministry on this globe, thousands of saints have come into the recovery, so I must be faithful to them. Many of the saints have given up high degrees to follow the Lord in His recovery, yet it seems what they are in is tending to be disappointing. This burdens me. Some of the saints became what they are in the Lord one hundred percent due to my ministry, and I do not want my ministry to waste their time. I have to do something to insure their investment of their whole being into the Lord’s recovery. They have given up their future in the world, but they cannot have much encouragement in the Lord’s recovery. I have to be faithful to the Lord, faithful to so many of you who have been very much affected by this ministry, and faithful to myself. For this reason, this ministry cannot allow anyone to pretend to be in it and yet still say something different. This does not mean that I ask you to stay away from your local church or that your local church is no longer a local church. What I am fellowshipping about is the impact of the ministry for the fighting of the Lord’s interest in His recovery.

Whatever I would say concerning the home gatherings, the full-timers, the truth lessons, and the spreading of the gospel is not for anyone who does not feel good about my ministry, who is dissenting to my ministry, who is pretending to be here under the ministry yet actually is not. I still love all the dear saints who may fall into this category and still count them as brothers in Christ, but we need to have an army full of impact, and this army has no capacity and no time for anyone to express any kind of opinion. We are fighting a battle. The army began the fighting already in Taiwan. Now we want to see this army increasing to fight the battle not only in the United States but also in Canada, in Central America, in South America, in Europe, in Africa, in Australasia, and in the entire continent of Asia. This is what I want to see. I am not talking about the churches, I am talking about the ministry. The ministry is one thing, and the churches are another thing. These two things can be differentiated in the Epistles written by Paul. Paul’s ministry is one category, and the churches are another category. Paul never tried to force all the churches to follow him in his ministry, but Paul surely had a ministry for the churches. (Elders’ Training, Book 7: One Accord for the Lord’s Move, pp. 74-76, Witness Lee)

© 2005 Living Stream Ministry
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2018, 09:59 PM   #2
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

I realize the shortcomings of this type of forum as the vehicle for discussion of a letter of this length and concerning what I know is a topic that has caused a lot of problems, so I am not sure how this will go. I'd love to go line by line, or paragraph by paragraph, but it is difficult in a forum format.

What I really want is a sober-minded, non-inflammatory, logical, rational look at the document. I personally see many flaws and double-speak, but I don't want to get into it in an irrational way.....I am looking for more of a "detached" analysis, if you will. A level-headed discussion about it without getting into high emotions. Please note that I have no intention to dismiss the many, many hurts, pains, sufferings, or lives that have found themselves thrown off a moving vehicle and skidding along a gravel highway at 100 mph because of this letter and the ramifications thereof. I have just personally found that if I speak to elders or co-workers in a more analytical way about things like this, they are much more willing to listen and even agree. An emotional response is more than valid given what has occurred in the local churches, I fully recognize that, but within the restrictions of what I am trying to accomplish with this thread, a more detached approach would help.

I don't even know where to start but wanted to get this much written for now so I would be on the hook to keep going.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2018, 10:20 PM   #3
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
PUBLICATION WORK IN THE LORD’S RECOVERY

Through Brother Lee’s fellowship over the years, we have long realized that there should be one publication among us. The one publication is not only a testimony of our oneness in the Body but also a safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord’s recovery. Without one publication, there is no way to preserve the integrity of the Lord’s ministry among us, which is crucial to the practical oneness among the local churches. Brother Lee gave this word of testimony on this crucial matter in the Lord’s recovery:

I guess I can start out with the first paragraph.

1. My first issue is the title. If LSM truly considers the "recovery" work of the Lord to have broadly started with Martin Luther as they say (see 3rd bullet point here: https://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/recovery/), and claim that "the Lord's Recovery" is not a name used to refer to the churches under Nee/Lee, then the title right off is ludicrous.

2. "...there should be one publication among us." To say "among us" is instantly divisive in the Body of Christ, as Nee himself stated. To paraphrase, "if we use the term "we" or "us" to refer to anything other than all the believers in a city, then we are schismatic."

3. "testimony of our oneness in the Body" - I didn't know there was supposed to be a separately grouped entity in oneness within the Body! I thought the whole Body was supposed to be one.

4. "safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord's recovery" - what does this mean exactly? What is the Lord's recovery, defined? Again, if it goes back to Luther, then Lee/Nee cannot claim uniqueness in anything, and the ones upon whose shoulders they stood should be part of this ministry.

5. I can't even go on, they throw so many overblown buzzwords into the next sentence that my brain short circuits - "no way" "preserve" "integrity" "crucial" "practical oneness" - enough already.

I don't even know if I can do this. Others are more than welcome to jump in and make suggestions for this thread. I just wanted to at least give a place for the One Publication letter specifically.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 07:01 AM   #4
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
What I really want is a sober-minded, non-inflammatory, logical, rational look at the document. I personally see many flaws and double-speak, but I don't want to get into it in an irrational way.....I am looking for more of a "detached" analysis, if you will. A level-headed discussion about it without getting into high emotions............I don't even know where to start but wanted to get this much written for now so I would be on the hook to keep going.
Commendable Trapped, but there are few threads able to maintain the standard of sober minded, logical, rational without high emotions in this forum. Nevertheless, it is a worthy discussion and your posting the whole document here as a reference may help.

I’m not sure going paragraph by paragraph is the best way because there are clarifications near the back that explain the what is near the front.

Thanks
Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 07:23 AM   #5
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post

PUBLICATION WORK IN THE LORD’S RECOVERY

Through Brother Lee’s fellowship over the years, we have long realized that there should be one publication among us. The one publication is not only a testimony of our oneness in the Body but also a safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord’s recovery. Without one publication, there is no way to preserve the integrity of the Lord’s ministry among us, which is crucial to the practical oneness among the local churches. Brother Lee gave this word of testimony on this crucial matter in the Lord’s recovery:
This is what Paul told the Corinthians ...
4. Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit.
5. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord.
6. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all.
7. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. (I Cor 12)
By mandating their "One Publication" bull, LSM has negated the scriptures. They have robbed the body of Christ of a varieties of ministries by allowing only the ministry of Lee.

Rather than keeping the oneness of the body, this divides the body. This makes all the member LC's "of Lee." The oneness of the body of Christ requires the work of the Spirit thru many gifts and the work of the Lord thru many ministries. LSM has replaced the work of God with the fleshly efforts of a publishing house in Anaheim.

By veering way off the instruction of the scripture, LSM continues to produce the exact opposite results of their published objectives.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 07:43 AM   #6
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
I guess I can start out with the first paragraph.

1. My first issue is the title. If LSM truly considers the "recovery" work of the Lord to have broadly started with Martin Luther as they say (see 3rd bullet point here: https://www.localchurches.org/beliefs/recovery/), and claim that "the Lord's Recovery" is not a name used to refer to the churches under Nee/Lee, then the title right off is ludicrous.

2. "...there should be one publication among us." To say "among us" is instantly divisive in the Body of Christ, as Nee himself stated. To paraphrase, "if we use the term "we" or "us" to refer to anything other than all the believers in a city, then we are schismatic."

3. "testimony of our oneness in the Body" - I didn't know there was supposed to be a separately grouped entity in oneness within the Body! I thought the whole Body was supposed to be one.

4. "safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord's recovery" - what does this mean exactly? What is the Lord's recovery, defined? Again, if it goes back to Luther, then Lee/Nee cannot claim uniqueness in anything, and the ones upon whose shoulders they stood should be part of this ministry.

5. I can't even go on, they throw so many overblown buzzwords into the next sentence that my brain short circuits - "no way" "preserve" "integrity" "crucial" "practical oneness" - enough already.

I don't even know if I can do this. Others are more than welcome to jump in and make suggestions for this thread. I just wanted to at least give a place for the One Publication letter specifically.
Ok... so...

I’d like to approach it differently and get the lay of the land from a higher slope rather than start hiking in the canyon so to speak.

Therefore, I ask, what explanation is provided in the document about the document? What does it say about its purpose? What problem was it trying to solve, if any? Is there anything in the document that provides context or explains the situation? In what way do the proposed solutions address the problem and are there alternatives to address the same issue? Is scope defined? Are there limitations defined?

I’d say the document addresses most of those questions.

To your first point Trapped about the “Lord’s recovery”... the scope... I do not find the scope of this document to encompass the broader definition of “Lord’s recovery” beginning with Luther. Brother Lee and the document repeatedly state that a narrower definition is being used... it says “According to the practice established by Brother Nee...” and again “When we were on mainland China...” . This is one of the vectors in the scope of the document ... that is, the document is addressing something in these current phases of the Lord’s recovery. If we were to try to apply the points of the document to the broader definition of the Lords recovery beginning with Luther is doesn’t apply or make sense. So anything stated in the document only applies to the period in the Lords recovery, approximately the last hundred years, till today from His recovery beginning, or part way into,in China.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 07:48 AM   #7
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
4. "safeguard for the unique ministry in the Lord's recovery" - what does this mean exactly? What is the Lord's recovery, defined? Again, if it goes back to Luther, then Lee/Nee cannot claim uniqueness in anything, and the ones upon whose shoulders they stood should be part of this ministry.
Using Martin Luther as the starting point of "Recovery" requires extensive historical revisionism. Without a doubt Luther stood with many Reformers across Europe to work with the Spirit of God. Luther himself, however, declared "I am a Hussite" when he starkly realized that his faith and teachings merely duplicated that of the Bohemian martyr John Huss a century before him. And who was Huss's predecessor? You get the point.

Yes, the dark ages were dark indeed, but there never was a time when the faith or the scriptures were completely "lost" as Lee would want us to believe. In yet another irony, Martin Luther is simultaneously declared the first Minister of the Age (MOTA) and a total failure for the Lutheran state church. Supposedly he began the recovery but ruined the church. Oh well.

The tenets of the "Recovery" are built on the sinking sands of hagiography. It exists merely to serve the legitimacy needs of their MOTA. In principle there is no difference from the RCC's claim that Peter was their first Pope, and the recovery's claim that Luther was their first MOTA. Like the mythological lineage of popes, it really gets crazy when they attempt to establish the lineage of MOTAs after Luther. Anyone ever hear of Madame Guyon? Yep, a bona fide MOTA. Just ask LSM archivists.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 08:12 AM   #8
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Ok... so...

I’d like to approach it differently and get the lay of the land from a higher slope rather than start hiking in the canyon so to speak.

Therefore, I ask, what explanation is provided in the document about the document? What does it say about its purpose? What problem was it trying to solve, if any? Is there anything in the document that provides context or explains the situation? In what way do the proposed solutions address the problem and are there alternatives to address the same issue? Is scope defined? Are there limitations defined?

I’d say the document addresses most of those questions.

To your first point Trapped about the “Lord’s recovery”... the scope... I do not find the scope of this document to encompass the broader definition of “Lord’s recovery” beginning with Luther. Brother Lee and the document repeatedly state that a narrower definition is being used... it says “According to the practice established by Brother Nee...” and again “When we were on mainland China...” . This is one of the vectors in the scope of the document ... that is, the document is addressing something in these current phases of the Lord’s recovery. If we were to try to apply the points of the document to the broader definition of the Lords recovery beginning with Luther is doesn’t apply or make sense. So anything stated in the document only applies to the period in the Lords recovery, approximately the last hundred years, till today from His recovery beginning, or part way into,in China.

Drake
Does this make any sense? Call on Martin Luther et. al. for legitimacy, and then say "oh by the way, we change the rules." Luther, via the printing press, opened the floodgates of diverse writings about scripture. Anybody and everybody now had a voice. And a pen. Only the money changers at LSM think this is bad.

W. Lee led us to believe many things about China under W. Nee. Today I don't believe anything he told us. To believe Lee is to negate every other author, both from within and without the Little Flock movement in China. Either W. Lee is right and all other co-workers and historians are liars, or ... You fill in the blanks.

Actually, in the early days in the US, roughly from 1962 to 1980, there were many writers and publishers within the LCM. Lee was just one of many ministers, that is until he took over and threw the rest of them under the bus. By 2010 LSM's takeover was complete when they excommunicated Titus Chu in Cleveland and Dong Yu Lan in Brazil. They have finally purged the last holdouts.

Now they claim "we have always had only one publication, and that's why we have always been so one."

Hypocrites.


.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 02:33 PM   #9
leastofthese
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 499
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
I don't even know if I can do this. Others are more than welcome to jump in and make suggestions for this thread. I just wanted to at least give a place for the One Publication letter specifically.
Trapped,

I think the letter speaks for itself, it doesn't even take a critical eye so see its absurdity (I don't intend for this to be inflammatory, but I know of no other way to describe this message). Some passages I found interesting from different paragraphs:

Without one publication, there is no way to preserve the integrity of the Lord’s ministry among us, which is crucial to the practical oneness among the local churches.

Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room publish both the past ministry that was delivered to us by Brother Nee and Brother Lee and the ongoing, up-to-date speaking that comes out of the fellowship of the blended co-workers and is based on the ministry materials of Brother Lee and Brother Nee. These are the materials that have been used regularly in the church life in the Lord’s recovery, and these constitute the one publication among us today.

It is important to note that Brother Lee spoke directly about the continuation of the ministry among us. He felt that after his departure the ministry should be carried out by a group of co-workers who are blended, just as his own service in the ministry was under his coordination with the co-workers.

occasionally there may be publications of these other kinds which Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room feel to publish either under their own names or under special imprints that serve particular publication needs.

Thus, those who wish to write in this way should bring their proposals to the blended co-workers as well as to Living Stream Ministry and Taiwan Gospel Book Room and have their proposals checked to see whether they should be published or not.

We all must realize that the one publication in the Lord’s recovery is quite a serious matter. Anyone who participates in it must genuinely have the portion from the Lord to do so, and this portion should be easily recognizable to the churches and affirmed by those who take the lead in the ministry and those who take the lead in the publication work.... For decades we all have been nurtured and richly supplied by the one publication. The benefits of being restricted in one publication can hardly be denied.

Problems can be caused, however, when these local and non-permanent publications gain larger geographical status. Further, it is particularly problematic when new technologies, such as the Internet, are used to distribute these local publications. The elders should take special care to assure that what is produced for their local churches remains a local matter.

Finally, all the churches and saints everywhere must understand that the matter of one publication is not a matter of the common faith but something related to the one ministry in the Lord’s recovery. The ministry is the sounding of the trumpet among us in the Lord’s recovery, and there should be no uncertain sounding of this trumpet, as Brother Lee has mentioned on a number of occasions. However, the one publication should not become the basis of our accepting or rejecting any persons in the communion of faith or in the fellowship of the churches; it should not be insisted on as an item of the faith. If any are not inclined to be restricted in one publication, these ones are still our brothers; they are still in the genuine local churches. We would like to conclude with these words from our Brother Lee and wish to recommend that the full context of his words be read from Elders’ Training, Book 7: One Accord for the Lord’s Move, pp. 74-75:

I have to be faithful to the Lord, faithful to so many of you who have been very much affected by this ministry, and faithful to myself. For this reason, this ministry cannot allow anyone to pretend to be in it and yet still say something different. This does not mean that I ask you to stay away from your local church or that your local church is no longer a local church. What I am fellowshipping about is the impact of the ministry for the fighting of the Lord’s interest in His recovery.
__________________
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.
leastofthese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 03:17 PM   #10
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Ok... so...

I’d like to approach it differently and get the lay of the land from a higher slope rather than start hiking in the canyon so to speak.

Therefore, I ask, what explanation is provided in the document about the document? What does it say about its purpose? What problem was it trying to solve, if any? Is there anything in the document that provides context or explains the situation? In what way do the proposed solutions address the problem and are there alternatives to address the same issue? Is scope defined? Are there limitations defined?

I’d say the document addresses most of those questions.

To your first point Trapped about the “Lord’s recovery”... the scope... I do not find the scope of this document to encompass the broader definition of “Lord’s recovery” beginning with Luther. Brother Lee and the document repeatedly state that a narrower definition is being used... it says “According to the practice established by Brother Nee...” and again “When we were on mainland China...” . This is one of the vectors in the scope of the document ... that is, the document is addressing something in these current phases of the Lord’s recovery. If we were to try to apply the points of the document to the broader definition of the Lords recovery beginning with Luther is doesn’t apply or make sense. So anything stated in the document only applies to the period in the Lords recovery, approximately the last hundred years, till today from His recovery beginning, or part way into,in China.

Drake
The scope of this document further narrows the subject.... (within that time period of the Lords' recovery commencing during Watchman Nee's ministry to the present) to the ministry... not the Lord's recovery in its entirety.

Brother Lee explains as follows:

"Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry."

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2018, 09:14 PM   #11
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
The scope of this document further narrows the subject.... (within that time period of the Lords' recovery commencing during Watchman Nee's ministry to the present) to the ministry... not the Lord's recovery in its entirety.

Brother Lee explains as follows:

"Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry."

Drake
Once again this quote by Drake shows the gross disconnect between actions taken by LSM and what some book says. Operatives from LSM came into every Midwest LC 10 years ago to divide these churches over this very matter. The quote by Lee supposedly addresses the ministry only. Actually it places standards on churches, whether they are genuine local churches or not.

Let me be honest here but blunt -- I continue to find everything Drake posts about LSM to be nothing more than horse manure!

I am a contemporary of Drake. I first contacted the LC in Cleveland in 1973. I was actively serving greater Ohio churches for 30 years. Then they came in as thieves to divide and destroy every Midwest church over this one matter -- do we use LSM's books exclusively in our meetings?
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 06:09 AM   #12
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 859
Default Re: One Publication

If "the ministry" as defined by a bunch of old fat men in "the one publication", were all it claimed to be, it would in fact be UNSTOPPABLE. If you have to legislate allegiance to your "ministry", there is something really wrong with your "ministry."

Does the Bible owe its longevity to a bunch of old fat men who, by mandate, crammed it down the throats of the faithful for centuries in order to keep it alive?

In fact, the nature of God is to give people the freedom to choose to follow Him---or not. We have the Bible today because of the faithful men and women, Divinely inspired and empowered, who chose to keep it alive for centuries. We are told that the Word of God is living (not the "one publication"). In the beginning was the Word...the Word was God...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

How does this compare to "the ministry" of Witness Lee, in which Lee points the way to himself and not to Jesus? This "one publication" letter/document/whatever is an embarrassment to those who wrote it...as Trapped has noted. Further, this document is an obvious admission that Lee's "ministry" cannot stand on its own. That is, Lee's "ministry" can only stand as long as some old fat men prop it up with bogus mandatory loyalty imposed on those over whom they have "power". This "one publication" edict is an admission that the "ministry" of a dead man will die without someone (a bunch of old fat men) pumping air into it.

Why do we need "the ministry," the "one publication", when we have the eternal, unstoppable Bible?

Nell
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 07:51 AM   #13
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
If "the ministry" as defined by a bunch of old fat men in "the one publication", were all it claimed to be, it would in fact be UNSTOPPABLE. If you have to legislate allegiance to your "ministry", there is something really wrong with your "ministry."

Does the Bible owe its longevity to a bunch of old fat men who, by mandate, crammed it down the throats of the faithful for centuries in order to keep it alive?

How does this compare to "the ministry" of Witness Lee, in which Lee points the way to himself and not to Jesus? This "one publication" letter/document/whatever is an embarrassment to those who wrote it...as Trapped has noted. Further, this document is an obvious admission that Lee's "ministry" cannot stand on its own. That is, Lee's "ministry" can only stand as long as some old fat men prop it up with bogus mandatory loyalty imposed on those over whom they have "power". This "one publication" edict is an admission that the "ministry" of a dead man will die without someone (a bunch of old fat men) pumping air into it.

Why do we need "the ministry," the "one publication", when we have the eternal, unstoppable Bible?

Nell
Why are you giving "old fat men" such a bad name?
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 08:24 AM   #14
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
Why do we need "the ministry," the "one publication", when we have the eternal, unstoppable Bible?

Nell
Nell, Your post conflates two things. In this post I’ll address the first here which suggests that since we have the Bible we don’t need the ministry.

The answer is stated in the Bible itself, ......the Bible, though available to almost every person in the world who wants one, does not build up the Body of Christ by itself. Therefore, Christ in His ascension gave gifts to men to perfect the saints for the work of ministry unto the building up of the Body of Christ.

“For He Himself gave some as apostles and some as prophets and some as evangelists and some as shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints unto the work of ministry , unto the building up of the Body of Christ.” Ephesians 4:11-12

Therefore, we have the Bible but we also need the gifts Christ gave.... for instance we need the teachers to teach God’s Word. Every gift given by Christ to us has a function to perfect the saints.

If we neglect the gifts we neglect the perfecting and we miss participation in the ministry that builds up the Body of Christ according to Ephesians 4:11-12

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 09:25 AM   #15
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
Does the Bible owe its longevity to a bunch of old fat men who, by mandate, crammed it down the throats of the faithful for centuries in order to keep it alive?

How does this compare to "the ministry" of Witness Lee, in which Lee points the way to himself and not to Jesus?
Nell,

Your second point above is not accurate and even the document itself refutes that statement. If you really believe it then you’ll need to show us out of the tens of thousands of pages released through this ministry where Brother Lee does not point to Jesus..... for he dedicated this ministry to all that pertains to Christ as the subject in nearly every message.. This ministry’s focus is on Christ as life and the Church as His Body and the expression of the testimony of oneness of the Body in each locality. That is what attracted me to this way over forty years ago..... and still does. Yet, your experience is different, I get that, but it is a completely inaccurate to say this ministry does not point to Jesus but to Brother Lee... so let’s examine this document as the base note specified...,

Your first point above says “mandate”.... ... if there is a mandate implied in the document of any sort it is what LSM will publish on their presses under the banner of this ministry. It is not a read only mandate for everyone, it is not a mandate to every local church to read what LSM publishes, it is not a mandate that no other writings can be published by local churches for its own needs, it is not a mandate for the Lords recovery...etc. On the contrary, any member can read what they want, a local church is a local church whether they use LSM materials or not, any locality can publish their own material for their own need,..it is something directly about the ministry not the Lord’s recovery in general.

The implication of mandate in your post is stretched well beyond the definition in the document and what Brother Lee has said himself.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 09:42 AM   #16
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,657
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
If we neglect the gifts we neglect the perfecting and we miss participation in the ministry that builds up the Body of Christ according to Ephesians 4:11-12
Hey Drake. Thanks for bringing this up.

My gift got more than neglected. It got rejected. It got pushed out. Not because I rejected Jesus, God, or the Bible ... or the church. All because of one thing : because I rejected the Lee as the MOTA thing.

They liked my delivery, but told me to restrict my testimonies to repeating Lee, and/or the elders.

All other gifts get neglected and rejected. At least it was that way way back then. Has it changed? I keep an eye on it, and see no proof of that yet.
__________________

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 10:31 AM   #17
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Hi awareness,

I understand. Based only on your testimony in the past, I have a deep impression that the Lord’s provision for you in that situation was Ron’s shepherding ... his plea and request for you to join him.

It did not happen, it’s water under the bridge, but looking in the rear view mirror that is how it appears from here.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 10:31 AM   #18
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Nell, Your post conflates two things. In this post I’ll address the first here which suggests that since we have the Bible we don’t need the ministry.
The answer is stated in the Bible itself, ......the Bible, though available to almost every person in the world who wants one, does not build up the Body of Christ by itself. Therefore, Christ in His ascension gave gifts to men to perfect the saints for the work of ministry unto the building up of the Body of Christ.
“For He Himself gave some as apostles and some as prophets and some as evangelists and some as shepherds and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints unto the work of ministry , unto the building up of the Body of Christ.” Ephesians 4:11-12
Therefore, we have the Bible but we also need the gifts Christ gave.... for instance we need the teachers to teach God’s Word. Every gift given by Christ to us has a function to perfect the saints.
If we neglect the gifts we neglect the perfecting and we miss participation in the ministry that builds up the Body of Christ according to Ephesians 4:11-12
Every Christian -- and Nell too -- agrees that the body of Christ needs the "work of ministry" for the building up. The Bible says it and we agree.

The real question is why Lee and LSM have twisted this into an abusive money making exclusive book publisher and training center which lords it over all the LC's? This is the question you refuse to answer.

Also, where are all of these "perfected" saints?
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 10:47 PM   #19
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
The scope of this document further narrows the subject.... (within that time period of the Lords' recovery commencing during Watchman Nee's ministry to the present) to the ministry... not the Lord's recovery in its entirety. Brother Lee explains as follows: "Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry."
Well...................................

While the message quoted may say that, unfortunately the title of the whole letter is "...in the Lord's recovery" so it's difficult to see how they don't mean just that.

Another issue with the quote you provided is "in the Lord's ministry". They should have said "no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in Nee/Lee's ministry". This is one big problem I have seen over and over again - LSM equates/conflates/substitutes "Witness Lee's ministry" with "the ministry" with "the Lord's ministry" with "the New Testament ministry".

The Lord's ministry is actually all over the whole earth and is much larger than just Nee or Lee's ministries. It is THE LORD'S! The Lord is working in people's lives through people all over the earth in ways that have nothing to do with Lee or Nee. THAT is the Lord's ministry, not just that which proceeds out through the mouth of Lee, in which case it once again is ludicrous to say there should only be one publication in the whole of the Lord's ministry.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 11:03 PM   #20
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Ok... so...

I’d like to approach it differently and get the lay of the land from a higher slope rather than start hiking in the canyon so to speak.

Therefore, I ask, what explanation is provided in the document about the document? What does it say about its purpose? What problem was it trying to solve, if any? Is there anything in the document that provides context or explains the situation? In what way do the proposed solutions address the problem and are there alternatives to address the same issue? Is scope defined? Are there limitations defined?

I’d say the document addresses most of those questions.

To your first point Trapped about the “Lord’s recovery”... the scope... I do not find the scope of this document to encompass the broader definition of “Lord’s recovery” beginning with Luther. Brother Lee and the document repeatedly state that a narrower definition is being used... it says “According to the practice established by Brother Nee...” and again “When we were on mainland China...” . This is one of the vectors in the scope of the document ... that is, the document is addressing something in these current phases of the Lord’s recovery. If we were to try to apply the points of the document to the broader definition of the Lords recovery beginning with Luther is doesn’t apply or make sense. So anything stated in the document only applies to the period in the Lords recovery, approximately the last hundred years, till today from His recovery beginning, or part way into,in China.

Drake

To respond to your first post, I will be fine if some posts in this thread are emotional rather than analytical given the seriousness of repercussions that resulted from the letter, I just don't want the thread to be dominated by it and I don't expect it will.

Regarding your suggestion above, I like that approach better than mine, but it will take some time for me to be able to provide any kind of coherent response. (Of course others can provide their responses in the meantime!)

The very short answer seems to be that the letter is saying "hey look, anyone can publish, but if you do it won't be considered part of the awe-inspiring 'One Publication'". Long-story-short it's basically it's a book publisher saying "we only publish Nee and Lee and if anyone else writes something it won't be endorsed by us and we are heavily insinuating that it will most likely cause damage so run away from it." Sadly they are addressing this letter to a specific collection of churches, which is why we are known as LSM CHURCHES!!!!

I got a little sarcastic there but let me get serious again: one thing that would help me to respond is to know a little bit more about the context of what was going on in the local churches before this letter was put out. It wasn't written in a vacuum, right? It seems obvious it is in response to some turmoil and most likely is attempting to address the "problems" inherent in the situations. Could you (or anyone) give me some background info there?
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2018, 11:15 PM   #21
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
If "the ministry" as defined by a bunch of old fat men in "the one publication", were all it claimed to be, it would in fact be UNSTOPPABLE. If you have to legislate allegiance to your "ministry", there is something really wrong with your "ministry."

Does the Bible owe its longevity to a bunch of old fat men who, by mandate, crammed it down the throats of the faithful for centuries in order to keep it alive?

In fact, the nature of God is to give people the freedom to choose to follow Him---or not. We have the Bible today because of the faithful men and women, Divinely inspired and empowered, who chose to keep it alive for centuries. We are told that the Word of God is living (not the "one publication"). In the beginning was the Word...the Word was God...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.

How does this compare to "the ministry" of Witness Lee, in which Lee points the way to himself and not to Jesus? This "one publication" letter/document/whatever is an embarrassment to those who wrote it...as Trapped has noted. Further, this document is an obvious admission that Lee's "ministry" cannot stand on its own. That is, Lee's "ministry" can only stand as long as some old fat men prop it up with bogus mandatory loyalty imposed on those over whom they have "power". This "one publication" edict is an admission that the "ministry" of a dead man will die without someone (a bunch of old fat men) pumping air into it.

Why do we need "the ministry," the "one publication", when we have the eternal, unstoppable Bible?

Nell
I do have to say in agreement....the only one who can have "up-to-date speaking" after his death is Jesus! He is the only one! For the blended brothers to claim that Lee's refried and rehashed ministry contains the Lord's up-to-date speaking 20 years after the mortal human being passed away is just ridiculous.

I have had conversations with elders in which I asked why we still do certain things (e.g. some aspects of the seven feasts) and they admitted that we only continue to do them because it was the practice that Lee set forth, even though as time goes by the reasons for doing them are no longer relevant and it would actually be beneficial to be able to make a change, but we can't because the man behind it is dead and we are unable to do anything different. (paraphrasing and editorializing a little obviously) We have trapped ourselves into not being able to take care of the needs of the saints and the churches in the best and most beneficial way!

In one sense it is "better" for a church to gather around a practice or teaching, like baptism by immersion or speaking in tongues, rather than gather around a specific man's ministry, because the practice/teaching can last forever, but what does a group of churches do after the man they followed dies?! Pump air into it, like you said
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2018, 08:20 AM   #22
UntoHim
Grateful Servant
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,489
Default Re: One Publication

Salient points to keep in mind regarding "The One Publication":

First and foremost, it should be noted and understood that nothing...absolutely nothing... in this "declaration" varies or detracts one iota from what Witness Lee clearly and strongly taught for over 50 years - to wit - the he, Witness Lee, was the only person on earth speaking as God's oracle, at least since 1945. The New Testament Ministry was vested in Lee's person and work. PERIOD. No other person, no other work, shall be considered. PERIOD. When Lee died over 21+ years ago, the person died, but his personal work, The Ministry lives on...NOT in the persons or works of mere mortal men, but in an American registered corporation - The Living Stream Ministry.
"I would like to have a continuation of me, and this needs a corporation...The Living Stream corporation will continue this ministry
(from unpublished notes of a meeting of Living Stream, July 12, 1996)

I would make this the first and foremost point because over the years many dear brothers have made the claim that The Blended Brothers have wondered from or even misrepresented Witness Lee. This is not true. Over the years I have challenged anyone to show me where the BBs have wavered from, altered or misrepresented Lee in any significant point of teaching or practice. No one has been able to meet my challenge, and nobody will, because the simple fact is that these men have, for better or for worse, faithfully fulfilled their vow and obligation to become "brother Lee's continuation".
He placed the direction of this corporation for the continuation and publication of the ministry in the hands of a group of blended brothers, who labor to fulfill this charge before the Lord.
(From The One Publication, paragraph 4)
Again, as with the late Witness Lee, these men are totally unambiguous regarding what ministry shall be accepted and imbibed in the Local Churches. Again, The New Testament Ministry was and is vested in the personal ministry of Witness Lee. "God, in these last days, has spoken", not merely by His Son, or the Holy Scriptures, or in the teachings and practices of the Apostles, but in the person and work of 李常受; Lǐ Chángshňu.

Of course there are number of facets and details of this document we can, and should, delve into on our little forum. But I wanted to make a clarification lest some here become successful with their attempt to distract, distort, mitigate, apologize for and water down what this declaration means for current members and for anyone thinking of joining the Local Church movement.

-
__________________
Now Unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy (Jude 24)
UntoHim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2018, 10:18 PM   #23
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
At times there may be writings among us that could be considered for publication as part of the one publication among us. As Brother Lee points out in the quote from Elders’ Training, Book above, these proposals should be “checked as to whether there might be some inaccuracy in the truth.” Discernment must always be exercised when expressing matters related to the divine truth, the divine life, and the gospel. The exercise of this sort of discernment not only protects the teaching among us and the spiritual supply to the saints; it also helps and protects those who endeavor to write. Hence, it is proper that those who endeavor to write in this way bring their work to those who take the lead in the ministry and those who take the lead in the publication work, and those who take the lead should exercise the discernment as to whether or not such proposals should be published as part of the one publication.

There is a paragraph one or two above this one quoted that states essentially that LSM is the sole publisher of Nee and Lee's materials. I have no problem with that, in principle. What I get confused by is when statements are made such as the ones bolded in the above paragraph. Can anyone define what "the one publication" even is? That phrase is paraded and repeated over and over in the letter, but there is no definition. By inference I would think the one publication are Nee and Lee's materials only; however, what does "writings among us that could be part of the one publication" even mean after both men's death, practically? Does this mean that if Brother Smith wrote a book, it would be submitted to LSM for review, and if it passed whatever nebulous test LSM would put it through, that LSM would publish that book showing it as written by Smith? Or if it had the same "flavor" as Nee/Lee, it would just be published as LSM material with no mention of Smith? Is anyone here aware of any example, besides those provided in the letter itself (the only true one of which seems to be Affirmation and Critique which are LSM publications but which include articles authored by other people), where this has occurred? Where a non-Nee/Lee writing among the LCs has been published and disseminated officially as part of "the one publication"?

Is Journey through the Bible that used to be used years ago one of those? I don't think so. Who wrote and published that?
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2018, 05:09 AM   #24
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Simple. The One Publication Policy was a means for Lee and the Blendeds to remove their rivals and potential threats to their power.
.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2018, 09:06 PM   #25
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
"Whether or not a certain church takes the ministry does not decide whether that church is a genuine local church. The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry."

This is to further detail out the contradiction found in the statement quoted above when compared to the contents of the letter.

Unfortunately, the letter goes on to make a very clear connection between the one publication and the Lord's recovery (not the Lord's ministry), over and over.

Letter itself

1. In the title: PUBLICATION WORK IN THE LORD’S RECOVERY
2. First paragraph: ... this crucial matter in the Lord’s recovery
3. Third paragraph: These are the materials that have been used regularly in the church life in the Lord’s recovery, and these constitute the one publication among us today.
4. Sixth paragraph: the sounding of the one trumpet in the Lord’s recovery today.
6. Seventh paragraph: We all must realize that the one publication in the Lord’s recovery is quite a serious matter.
7. Seventh paragraph again: Since Brother Nee’s day we in the Lord’s recovery have been “restricted in one publication”
8. Eighth paragraph: all the saints and all the churches everywhere should similarly be restricted in one publication in the Lord’s recovery.
9. Tenth paragraph: Finally, all the churches and saints everywhere must understand that the matter of one publication is ... something related to the one ministry in the Lord’s recovery.

Ministry portion following letter

1. First paragraph: One thing that has caused the Lord’s recovery trouble is the fact that we have different publications.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 05:28 AM   #26
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
This is to further detail out the contradiction found in the statement quoted above when compared to the contents of the letter. Unfortunately, the letter goes on
Wait.

If we are going to be precise let’s be so in all aspects.

The statement quoted was from the letter. Not that the letter said one thing and the statement quoted was only found elsewhere.

So then, is your objection that the content of the letter contradicts itself?

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 06:40 AM   #27
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 859
Default Re: One Publication

The following link is a post from the Lawsuits topic. It discusses Witness Lee's deposition in the Mindbenders lawsuit as compared to the "One Publication."

Title: Witness Lee's Sworn Statements vs. Local Church Teachings
Post by: afazio on November 11, 2005, 02:39:21 AM
On the Bereans Forum (now defunct as related to the Local Churches).

http://localchurchdiscussions.com/vB...9&postcount=15

Nell
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 10:59 AM   #28
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Wait.

If we are going to be precise let’s be so in all aspects.

The statement quoted was from the letter. Not that the letter said one thing and the statement quoted was only found elsewhere.

So then, is your objection that the content of the letter contradicts itself?

Drake

Yes, exactly. The statement you quoted was part of the letter. That statement itself says that we are not talking about one trumpet in the Lord's recovery, but in the Lord's ministry. However, in that letter itself it says many times the one trumpet or one publication in the Lord's recovery.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 11:35 AM   #29
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
Yes, exactly. The statement you quoted was part of the letter. That statement itself says that we are not talking about one trumpet in the Lord's recovery, but in the Lord's ministry. However, in that letter itself it says many times the one trumpet or one publication in the Lord's recovery.

So Drake is now "Trapped."
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 01:08 PM   #30
Terry
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Renton, Washington
Posts: 3,199
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
[/SIZE][/FONT]Since Brother Nee’s day we in the Lord’s recovery have been “restricted in one publication”
[FONT=Verdana][SIZE=2]
]
Is this really accurate?
I seem to recall up until a particular time during the 70's perhaps, there were multiple publications available in bookrooms. Restriction to one publication as the author indicates didn't occur until later.
__________________
"Even a neutral has a right to take account of facts, even a neutral cannot be asked to close his mind or close his conscience."- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Terry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 01:08 PM   #31
ZNPaaneah
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,026
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
Yes, exactly. The statement you quoted was part of the letter. That statement itself says that we are not talking about one trumpet in the Lord's recovery, but in the Lord's ministry. However, in that letter itself it says many times the one trumpet or one publication in the Lord's recovery.
Great point. To work for a publisher whose policy is the "one trumpet" is quite reasonable. To then apply this policy to the church which by definition is full of members who are not part of this publisher is abusive. It is also confusion. If you were a volunteer who served in this ministry without ever becoming an employee are you also now bound by this policy?

I have no issue with anyone serving in LSM and thinking they are serving the Lord. I may get a little uncomfortable when they uplift a man, I may disagree with some of their doctrines, and I may feel that they need to be more accountable and responsible with dealing with sin.

The real issue I have with them is when they bring the Body of Christ into bondage based on a lie all with the goal of making merchandise of the saints.
__________________
They shall live by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God
ZNPaaneah is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 01:50 PM   #32
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
Yes, exactly. The statement you quoted was part of the letter. That statement itself says that we are not talking about one trumpet in the Lord's recovery, but in the Lord's ministry. However, in that letter itself it says many times the one trumpet or one publication in the Lord's recovery.
Trapped,

We may be as two knights passing on a ship... or something like that...

what I mean is the letter includes the statement and is part of the letter since the signatories are below that statement. That statement is also repeated in the supplement reading from Brother Lee below the signatories.

It should be included as part of the letter since it is in the body of the letter. That is how I see it,

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 02:22 PM   #33
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Trapped,

We may be as two knights passing on a ship... or something like that...

what I mean is the letter includes the statement and is part of the letter since the signatories are below that statement. That statement is also repeated in the supplement reading from Brother Lee below the signatories.

It should be included as part of the letter since it is in the body of the letter. That is how I see it,

Drake

I am so sorry....I'm not trying to be obtuse but I'm just stuck. I just can't grasp what you are trying to say. Could you restate it, or slip-n-slide into it from farther away with the background of what is behind it? I feel dumb but I do want to understand your point.


It is included as part of the letter. Did I somehow make it seem like it wasn't? Help me out here!
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 02:49 PM   #34
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
I am so sorry....I'm not trying to be obtuse but I'm just stuck. I just can't grasp what you are trying to say. Could you restate it, or slip-n-slide into it from farther away with the background of what is behind it? I feel dumb but I do want to understand your point.


It is included as part of the letter. Did I somehow make it seem like it wasn't? Help me out here!
Ok..... flying in for a ducky landing after circling the pond....... it may not be a perfect landing but I’ll try...

....in post 25 you indicated that the statement I quoted was not part of the content of the actual letter. In post 26 I argued that it was.... then you seemed to acknowledge it was but then said in the “letter itself” indicating Brother Lees statement was not part of the letter itself... throwing me off ...

Here is the point I am making......That the letter itself includes the statement about this being a matter of the ministry not the Lords recovery by Brother Lee. It is part of the letter itself since it is above the signatory of the letter. Therefore, I asked if your problem was that the letter itself is contradictory seeming to say two different things, that is, in the front part of the letter itself it says a matter of the Lord’s recovery... but in the latter part of the letter the statement by Brother Lee says not a matter of the Lords recovery.

The difference is meaningful.... if Brother Lees statement is not in the actual letter but only found elsewhere then the authors of the letter could have inadvertently or deliberately left out Brother Lees statement.... but if the authors included it in the body of the letter itself then Brother Lees statement must be taken as part of the definition of the letter since the authors took the time to include it juxtaposed next to their statement.

That is what I meant.... sorry I probably confused us.

Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 03:15 PM   #35
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Ok..... flying in for a ducky landing after circling the pond....... it may not be a perfect landing but I’ll try...

....in post 25 you indicated that the statement I quoted was not part of the content of the actual letter. In post 26 I argued that it was.... then you seemed to acknowledge it was but then said in the “letter itself” indicating Brother Lees statement was not part of the letter itself... throwing me off ...

Here is the point I am making......That the letter itself includes the statement about this being a matter of the ministry not the Lords recovery by Brother Lee. It is part of the letter itself since it is above the signatory of the letter. Therefore, I asked if your problem was that the letter itself is contradictory seeming to say two different things, that is, in the front part of the letter itself it says a matter of the Lord’s recovery... but in the latter part of the letter the statement by Brother Lee says not a matter of the Lords recovery.

The difference is meaningful.... if Brother Lees statement is not in the actual letter but only found elsewhere then the authors of the letter could have inadvertently or deliberately left out Brother Lees statement.... but if the authors included it in the body of the letter itself then Brother Lees statement must be taken as part of the definition of the letter since the authors took the time to include it juxtaposed next to their statement.

That is what I meant.

Drake

Ding! I understand now. Thanks.

I did not intend to indicate in post #25 that the statement you quoted was not part of the content of the actual letter. That was not my intention or position (as revealed by my confusion in the last post!) - I fully acknowledge from the get-go that the statement you quoted is part of the letter. I think I should have said something like "then ELSEWHERE in the letter" or "when compared to the OTHER contents of the letter" but just neglected to say that because it was obvious in my mind and isn't everyone else a mind-reader?

Yes, my problem is that the letter itself is contradictory seeming to say two different things. When one quote says "I don't mean x linked to z" but repeated throughout the letter is "x is linked to z", then that, in my eyes, is a problem. The one instance of "I am not talking about something in the Lord's recovery" gets swallowed up by the repeated point that there must be one publication in the Lord's recovery.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 03:24 PM   #36
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
Ding! I understand now. Thanks.

I did not intend to indicate in post #25 that the statement you quoted was not part of the content of the actual letter. That was not my intention or position (as revealed by my confusion in the last post!) - I fully acknowledge from the get-go that the statement you quoted is part of the letter. I think I should have said something like "then ELSEWHERE in the letter" or "when compared to the OTHER contents of the letter" but just neglected to say that because it was obvious in my mind and isn't everyone else a mind-reader?

Yes, my problem is that the letter itself is contradictory seeming to say two different things. When one quote says "I don't mean x linked to z" but repeated throughout the letter is "x is linked to z", then that, in my eyes, is a problem. The one instance of "I am not talking about something in the Lord's recovery" gets swallowed up by the repeated point that there must be one publication in the Lord's recovery.

In my eyes the ramifications are significant.

The quote states that the genuineness of a local church is not determined by whether or not that church "takes the ministry" (which I have to assume means Nee/Lee's ministry?).

It then goes on to explain that the one trumpet should be in the Lord's ministry, rather than in the Lord's recovery, indicating that a church that does not take the ministry/one trumpet is still a genuine local church. Since ministry is juxtaposed with recovery, the implication is that if the letter stated the one trumpet should be in the Lord's recovery, then churches that do not take the ministry are thus not genuine local churches.

The problem is, the letter states that - one trumpet in the Lord's recovery - in spades.
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 04:13 PM   #37
Drake
Member
 
Drake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,898
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
Ding! I understand now. Thanks.

I did not intend to indicate in post #25 that the statement you quoted was not part of the content of the actual letter. That was not my intention or position (as revealed by my confusion in the last post!) - I fully acknowledge from the get-go that the statement you quoted is part of the letter. I think I should have said something like "then ELSEWHERE in the letter" or "when compared to the OTHER contents of the letter" but just neglected to say that because it was obvious in my mind and isn't everyone else a mind-reader?

Yes, my problem is that the letter itself is contradictory seeming to say two different things. When one quote says "I don't mean x linked to z" but repeated throughout the letter is "x is linked to z", then that, in my eyes, is a problem. The one instance of "I am not talking about something in the Lord's recovery" gets swallowed up by the repeated point that there must be one publication in the Lord's recovery.
Ok Trapped... thanks for the clarification.

Prior to this conversation, I never considered there to be a perceived contradiction between the ministry and the Lord's recovery.... because in my mind they are related but not synonyms. When I hear the ministry I think of the work of the gifts to the Body.. and when I think about the Lord's recovery I think about the actions that God has directed in various era's to recover His original purpose to establish His kingdom on earth, that is to bring the Lord back and depose the evil powers and take over the earth with His saints.

Therefore, I see your point in what appears like an obvious contradiction... the wording appears to be contradictory right on the surface. However, I see no substantive contradiction...so I'll explain my thoughts using the document itself... since that is the point of this thread.

Therefore, we have two seeming contradictory statements:

1) I'll use one from your list which should cover most of the similar statements since this one sounds most contradictory: 4. "sixth paragraph: the sounding of the one trumpet in the Lord’s recovery today."

2) And this one near the end: "
The title of this message does not say “no uncertain sounding of the trumpet in the Lord’s recovery” but “in the Lord’s ministry.” I am not talking about something in the Lord’s recovery, but I am talking about the ministry."

The reason I labored on the point about both statements being in the letter is because if they weren't then it could easily be understood that the authors inadvertently or deliberately left out Brother Lee's statement and in so doing showed they would have not been expressing his thoughts on the matter... and as has been said many times in this forum the blended brothers are faithful to Brother Lee's word to them.

So, with the two statements above there are four possibilities of what the authors intended to mean by including both statements:

First, they may have intended the reader to understand that the first statement (penned by the authors) was their meaning but not the second. That is not logical.... why include the second statement at all then.

Or secondly, they may have intended the reader to understand that the second statement (by Brother Lee) was their intended meaning but not the first. That is even less sensible because they are the authors of the first statement!

Third option is that the authors did not mean either statements to be their intended meaning. That would be ridiculous.

Fourth then and lastly , the authors included both statements because they believed that both statements are the intended meaning. This really is the only logical choice. If the one publication had been penned and released by a single author then it might be reasoned that the author was out of touch ... but since it was probably at least 8, 10, or a dozen brothers reviewing and agreeing on the release of this document, its content, and its intended meaning, then it is of a surety that they meant both seemingly contradictory statements to be true... and they were perfectly comfortable juxtaposing them for public consumption.

If that is the case, and the logic favors that view, then the only question is how two seemingly contradictory statements are in fact not contradictory in the minds of the authors?

I'll pause here before providing my own point of view on that last question.

thanks
Drake
Drake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 09:06 PM   #38
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
(to save forum space I won't quote Drake's post)

I agree that it was probably a number of brothers who wrote/reviewed/edited/agreed on the document. Having said that, I personally think it is a very clunky, repetitive, unclear, undefined, bloated, meandering piece of work which could have used several additional months of refining, revising, consolidating, and clarifying. And I say that without a derisive tone.....to me it really is a clunky manatee that isn't up to the normally stringent standards of editing and clarity that LSM holds itself to.

The cynical side of me actually thinks that the letter is that way by design - when something like this is this long and wandering and repeatedly uses undefined nebulous phrases like "the one trumpeting" then that is one tactic that can be used to impose a particular impression without being on the hook to explicitly state it.

My own view on the contradictory statements, which is going to sound cynical again, is that you are giving the authors too much credit that it was intentional to include both statements and hold them as not contradictory. My view is simply that they threw in the quote in question so they could point to it when the inevitable accusation would come that LSM is issuing an edict to all the churches that they can only use LSM materials. The quote in question allows them to say "see, the ministry is not a requirement of a genuine local church" and "see, we aren't restricting the recovery, just the ministry". Even though the rest of the letter says it clearly, there is a portion they can wave on high to try to convince those who disagree otherwise.

Interested in your point of view!
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 10:23 PM   #39
UntoHim
Grateful Servant
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,489
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
... very clunky, repetitive, unclear, undefined, bloated, meandering piece of work.
Wow, Trapped...you just described the "ministry" of one brother Witness Lee! Well maybe this explains just how and why these follows came up with something so clunky, repetitive, unclear, undefined, bloated and meandering...they had been absorbing Witness Lee so long that anything they ever produced was bound to come out just like one of those "Life Studies". And By Golly Gee Whiz if these guys didn't disappoint. The One Publication "is what it is". The first time I read it I thought it was actually written directly by Lee. Of course most of us know that it pretty much was written by Witness Lee. There is nothing in the One Publication declaration that did not come straight from Witness Lee's lips at one time or another.
Quote:
The cynical side of me actually thinks that the letter is that way by design - when something like this is this long and wandering and repeatedly uses undefined nebulous phrases like "the one trumpeting" then that is one tactic that can be used to impose a particular impression without being on the hook to explicitly state it.
__________________
Now Unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy (Jude 24)
UntoHim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 11:20 PM   #40
Nell
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 859
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trapped View Post
I agree that it was probably a number of brothers who wrote/reviewed/edited/agreed on the document. Having said that, I personally think it is a very clunky, repetitive, unclear, undefined, bloated, meandering piece of work which could have used several additional months of refining, revising, consolidating, and clarifying. And I say that without a derisive tone.....to me it really is a clunky manatee that isn't up to the normally stringent standards of editing and clarity that LSM holds itself to.

The cynical side of me actually thinks that the letter is that way by design - when something like this is this long and wandering and repeatedly uses undefined nebulous phrases like "the one trumpeting" then that is one tactic that can be used to impose a particular impression without being on the hook to explicitly state it.

My own view on the contradictory statements, which is going to sound cynical again, is that you are giving the authors too much credit that it was intentional to include both statements and hold them as not contradictory. My view is simply that they threw in the quote in question so they could point to it when the inevitable accusation would come that LSM is issuing an edict to all the churches that they can only use LSM materials. The quote in question allows them to say "see, the ministry is not a requirement of a genuine local church" and "see, we aren't restricting the recovery, just the ministry". Even though the rest of the letter says it clearly, there is a portion they can wave on high to try to convince those who disagree otherwise.

Interested in your point of view!
Trapped,

This post is a masterpiece of breaking down “the ministry of doublespeak”. Well done, bro.

Nell
Nell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2018, 04:38 AM   #41
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nell View Post
Trapped,
This post is a masterpiece of breaking down “the ministry of doublespeak”. Well done, bro.
Well said, Nell.

Spiritualized legalese by the masters.

Reminds me of all the "new" teachings the Exclusive Brethren came up with after every excommunication and division they instigated. That's the beauty of being in the "recovery."
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2018, 08:19 AM   #42
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,657
Default Re: One Publication

While y'all go on about particulars, I must point out that One Publication is the same thing as The People's Republic of China declaring that there will be only one internet provider in China.

Then LSM becomes the gatekeeper mainly of Nee (they have copyright on Lee - and non-Recovery Christians like Nee). It's just LSM trying to eliminate all competition. It's a corporation holding to the bottom-line at any cost. It's about mammon. It's the only business Lee could pull off. Another of his business scams ... like Daystar ... and his history of ripping off saints.

But it's working. After all, how many other publishers of Nee do we have left today?
__________________

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2018, 09:57 AM   #43
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

A number of great papers were written on this subject of One Publication.

Here is a brief response by Professor and Brother Nigel Tomes to Benson Philips, President of LSM, who instituted this disastrous policy which later divided all the LC's:

Nigel Tomes, "If One Publication is causing Division, How Many Publications will create Oneness?" - A Rejoinder to Bro. Benson Phillips.

A number of other articles are published on the Concerned Brothers site such as these:
  • Nigel Tomes' "PUBLICATION WORK IN THE LORD’S RECOVERY” – ANALYSIS & RESPONSE - Response and Fellowship to LSM's Booklet on One Publication. (English)
  • Nigel Tomes' Letter to the Letter from Southern California Coworkers. (English)
  • Nigel Tomes, "The Bible: Our Only Standard" (English)
  • Nigel Tomes, "Honesty in History - Aginst Historical Revisionism" (English)
  • Nigel Tomes, "The One Publication Campaign" (English)
  • Nigel Tomes, "LSM’s Eisegesis - How Not To Interpret the Bible!" (English)
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2018, 01:57 PM   #44
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,657
Default Re: One Publication

“The Scriptural Basis of One Publication” – According to the LSM-brothers
The LSM-brothers assert that ‘One Publication’
“is solidly based on many fundamental
Scriptural principles, including the following:
1. the uniqueness of the teaching and fellowship of the apostles,
2. the apostles teaching the same thing in every church,
3. the Lord's speaking to one church being His speaking to all of the churches,
4. the oneness of the Body of Christ,
5. the one accord,
6. thinking the same thing,
7. speaking the same thing,
8. the one ministry of the New Testament,
9. the one work with one goal, and
10. serving in the one flow of the Lord's move.”

Sounds like The One Publican in the local church is tantamount to The Book of Mormon to the LDS ... minus Moroni and the golden plates ... but with Nee and Lee as their idols.
__________________

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2018, 05:45 PM   #45
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 10,434
Default Re: One Publication

With these many demands, just stick to the Bible, the One Publication Policy by LSM negates them all.
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!

.
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2018, 07:26 PM   #46
awareness
Moderator of Alternative Views
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,657
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio View Post
With these many demands, just stick to the Bible, the One Publication Policy by LSM negates them all.
The LDS have Joseph Smith Jr. and Brigham Young. They organized the Church of Christ, later LDS, calling it a restoration of the early Christian church.

The local church have Nee and Lee, claiming the same thing. And they have their Book of Mormon. They just call it One Publication ; Their canon ; Their 'book of Mormon.'

Which one is better? They're both personality cults -- for them they have Smith Jr. & Young, for the LC they have Nee and Lee. What I'd like to know is, which one is less of a cult than the other?

My judgement is biased ... skewed, if you will. I fell for the Nee-Lee. So that's not a cult as much as the LDS to me.

But upon closer look, I'm not so sure.
__________________

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
.
awareness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2018, 09:49 PM   #47
Trapped
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 180
Default Re: One Publication

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drake View Post
Fourth then and lastly , the authors included both statements because they believed that both statements are the intended meaning. This really is the only logical choice. If the one publication had been penned and released by a single author then it might be reasoned that the author was out of touch ... but since it was probably at least 8, 10, or a dozen brothers reviewing and agreeing on the release of this document, its content, and its intended meaning, then it is of a surety that they meant both seemingly contradictory statements to be true... and they were perfectly comfortable juxtaposing them for public consumption.

If that is the case, and the logic favors that view, then the only question is how two seemingly contradictory statements are in fact not contradictory in the minds of the authors?

I'll pause here before providing my own point of view on that last question.

thanks
Drake

Hi Drake,

If you are still interested in providing your point of view on this, I am also still interested to hear it. Hope the cynical bents communicated in my view didn't turn you off.

Thanks,

Trapped
Trapped is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 PM.


3.8.9