"Globalization of Chinese Christianity: A Study of Watchman Nee and..."

[Koinonia]

Globalization of Chinese Christianity:
A Study of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee’s Ministry1

Liu Yi
Shanghai University

Abstract
Watchman Nee (Ni Tuosheng, 1903-1972) is one of a few Chinese who have had a significant impact on Western Christianity. As the leader of an independent Chinese church, Nee built his international connections through his writing, traveling and personal relations in the mission field. Just before the Communist takeover in 1949, his co-worker Witness Lee (Li Changshou, 1905-1997) brought the ministry abroad and led great revivals in Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and America from 1950s through 1970s. Now, under the direction of Taiwan Gospel Book Room and Living Stream Ministry based in Anaheim, CA, this originally Chinese ministry has developed a global network of Local Churches across the five continents. It is a rare example of an Asian Christianity assuming global significance.

Keywords
globalization; Chinese Christianity; Watchman Nee; Witness Lee; Local Churches.

This research is supported by the National Grant for Social Sciences of China, “Global Pentecostalism and Christianity in Contemporary China” (11CZJ009).

Introduction

On June 9th 1997, after more than sixty years’ service for the “Lord’s Recovery” (Zhu de huifu),2 Witness Lee (Li Changshou, 1905-1997) went to rest peacefully with God, as Watchman Nee’s most intimate co-worker, “a bondslave of the Lord,” and a “God-man.” During the memorial service on July 9 of 1997 in Anaheim of southern California, his life, divided into five periods, was recalled: the first period started from 1933 when he was called to serve, through the first three decades of his work both in mainland China and Taiwan; the second period was from 1964 to 1974, beginning with his move to America and ending with his settling in Anaheim; the third period covered his ministry of the New Way in Taiwan from 1974 to 1984; the fourth period (1984-1994), marked by his message about the God-man, was considered the peak of his ministry; the last period was the crowning years of his life from 1994 to his death. In between the recollection of each period, portions from 2 Corinthians chapter two and three were read, describing the six aspects of the New Testament ministry: its triumph, effect, function, competency, glory, and superiority. A controversial figure both in China and in the Christian world, Witness Lee’s journey exemplifies a Chinese church becoming globalized as a result of political, religious and international changes in the latter half of the 20th century.3

Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age4

The story of Witness Lee cannot be told without reference to Watchman Nee (Ni Tuosheng, 1903-1972), one of the most prominent Chinese Christians who won fame in the English-speaking Christian world due to his works such as The Spiritual Man and The Normal Christian Church Life (Rethinking the Work/Concerning Our Missions), and as a symbol of persecuted Christians under communist rule.

As a third generation Christian, Nee was saved at the age of 17 under the influence of Dora Yu (Yu Cidu,1873-1931)’s preaching,5 and through the guidance of Margaret E. Barber (1866-1930),6 a faith missionary working in Fujian province. Through Miss Barber, he became acquainted with the writings of Jeanne de La Mothe Guyon (1648-1717), G. D. M. Panton (1870-1955), Andrew Murray (1828-1917) and Jessie Penn-Lewis (1861-1927). In addition, the life of George Müller (1805-1898) of Bristol and Hudson Taylor (1832-1905) of the China Inland Mission had a large influence on him. One Sunday evening in 1922, Nee along with his mother and Mr. and Mrs. Leland Wang (Wang Zai, 1898-1975)7 remembered the Lord by breaking bread. They found such joy and release in worshiping God without minister or pastor that they decided to do this frequently thereafter with newcomers joining. This is called the beginning of the “Lord’s Recovery” in China. In 1923, Nee began publishing The Present Testimony, which was succeeded by The Christian in 1926. In 1927 Nee moved to Shanghai, the center of the Christian movement in China. In 1928, The Spiritual Man was published, which is “the first and last book he ever sat down and wrote.” At the same time, a hymn book entitled The Little Flock was published in 1930. It was around that time that the group gathered around Nee got its name “Little Flock.”

Nee’s ministry had an international dimension from the beginning. In the 1920s, he visited Malaysia and Singapore and had fellowship with Fujian immigrants there. He visited these areas two more times in the 1930s and 1940s. His key connection was with the British Brethren.8 Due to Miss Barber’s introduction of some English books, Watchman Nee wrote to a London publisher, and corresponded with a Mr. George Ware belonging to the strict Darbyite persuasion of the London Brethren. In 1930, Nee had fellowship with an English businessman in Shanghai, Charles Barlow, who was associated with the London Brethren. Barlow was impressed with Nee and facilitated a group of six men and the wives of two of them from the Brethren to visit Shanghai in 1932. In response, Nee was invited to visit Britain and America in 1933. In addition to the arranged trip accompanied by Barlow, Nee also visited George Cutting, author of the widely used gospel booklet Safety, Certainty and Enjoyment, and tried to contact T. Austin-Sparks, founder of the Christian Fellowship Center. In 1937, Nee traveled to Europe again. He met T. Austin-Sparks first and they went together to the annual Convention for the Deepening of Spiritual Life in Keswick. He also met W. H. Aldis, Home Director of the China Inland Mission, and D. M. Panton, a close friend of Margaret Barber. In May 1939, just before he left, the English translation of Rethinking the Work appeared in London under the title Concerning Our Missions. It is in this book that Nee clearly expressed his idea about the ground of the church, which also represented the peak of Nee's thinking.

Early in the 1940s, Nee developed a blueprint of church building in China. However, the war and turmoil in the church prevented him from implementing his program. In 1948, he began to plan the evangelization of China. The new meeting hall in Shanghai and the training in Guling mountain of Fujian province were symbols of a coming revival. He even traveled to Southeast Asia during this period. But, as the civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists was ending, he saw no hope for this great dream. Nee had to devise another plan, which was to send one of his most intimate co-workers to explore development overseas while he himself chose to stay with his followers in mainland China as a martyr. During the political campaign in the 1950s, Nee was imprisoned on economic, political and religious charges, and remained a captive till his death in 1972.9 While separated from his co-workers and followers, he left with them a legacy of theology and church building. Most importantly, he was fortunate to have a close brother with the talent as a master-builder and the determination and loyalty to continue his ministry.

Witness Lee, a Christian Master-Building in Taiwan, America and the World10

Witness Lee (Li Changshou, 1905-1997) was a fourth generation Christian on his mother’s side. He was taught at a school founded by Southern Baptist missionaries and was trained in the Bible through the Brethren of Benjamin Willis Newton’s tradition. He was touched by a sermon of Peace Wang (Wang Peizhen, 1899-1969).11 He first knew Watchman Nee through the latter’s publication. In 1932, Nee was invited to preach in Shandong province where he met Witness Lee and they developed a warm relationship with each other. In 1933, Lee was called to serve the Lord full time and moved to Shanghai in 1934 at Nee’s invitation. In Shanghai, Lee worked with Nee in publication and other church affairs, and learned much from the latter. During this period, Lee became one of the most intimate co-workers of Nee. He also helped Nee work through two turmoils in 1934 and in 1946 due to the latter’s marriage and involvement in business. In addition, Lee proved his talent as a master-builder even in these early days. In 1942, a great revival broke out in Chefoo (Yantai) under Lee’s leadership. About eight hundred believers consecrated themselves and all their income to the church which resulted in a migration of these believers to Inner Mongolia and northeast China. He was also beginning to develop his own thought, one of which was his discovery of ‘the tree of life’. While denying he tree of knowledge as a symbol of Satan, Lee affirmed and promoted the tree of life as a representation of God. For Lee, life is the true way.

In 1949, just before the regime change in mainland China, Lee was sent by Nee to explore new fields in Taiwan. In 1950, they had their last fellowship in Hong Kong. It was in Taiwan that Lee began to show his talents as a church builder. He visited Christians from mainland China along the north-south railway. He also had some practical skills, such as posting gospel advertisements in the street, distributing gospel pamphlets by household, organizing gospel parades with bands and banners, and quickly taking down the new comers’ address and keeping in touch with them. The achievement was palpable. By the end of 1949, there were 505 new baptized persons from six gospel preaching events. Their number increased thirty-fold from just over thirty original members to over nine hundred. By the end of 1955 the number of believers in Taiwan had reached forty thousand. Lee also continued Watchman Nee’s ministry in other ways. One was the publication of The Ministry of the Word. Another was the various conferences and training sessions. He began with a series of studies on sixty crucial topics of truth in the Bible. In 1952, about eighty people quit their jobs and gave themselves to full-time service. Lee intensified his work with a training session that lasted four months starting from September 1953. One hundred and eighty three believers from Taiwan and overseas attended the session and went on to play a founding role in the building and spreading of churches in the Far East. In 1959, Lee held the first large gospel meeting in the Military Stadium (Sanjun Qiuchang) of Taiwan with more than ten thousand attendees. Financially, he also received generous support from a Philippine businessman for ten years which not only overcame his financial crisis, but also gave his ministry a solid foundation in Taiwan.

During this period, an episode concerning his relationship with T. Aus-tin-Sparks must be mentioned.12 Austin-Sparks had been a good friend of Nee in the 1930s. Due to this historical friendship, Austin-Sparks was invited to fellowship in 1955 and 1957. While sharing many similar views, these two men disagreed on the ‘ground of the church’.13 It also led to the departure of some young co-workers from Lee. Lee visited Austin-Sparks in England in 1958, but they did not reach agreement on this topic. On this trip, he also visited America and other European countries. Another of Lee’s achievements in this period was his work in Southeast Asia, which was a continuation of Nee’s work before 1949. He visited Malaysia and cared for the church in Hong Kong. Besides Taiwan, the Philippines be-came his largest concern. From 1950 to 1960, he spent 3-4 months in the Philippines each year. There was also a beginning of the “Lord’s Recovery” in Japan. One controversy was when Witness Lee started the practice of ‘eating and drinking the Lord’ from 1958. The phrase would not be a problem when referring to eating and drinking at Communion, but when applied to reading God’s words and living God’s life it provoked negative reactions.

In the early 1960s, there was another great move of the “Lord’s Recovery.” Witness Lee visited the United States for the third time in 1961, and decided to stay there to promote the Lord’s work. His concern was that, “America was a leading country of the whole earth and that for the recovery to spread further, the ministry had to be brought into the English-speaking world.” At that time, Lee was in his late fifties and had spent most his life in the Chinese-speaking world, but he made up his mind to begin his ministry in English. It was not until 20 years later that he began the Chinese-speaking work in America. His main concern was white Americans instead of Chinese immigrants. In December 1962, Lee held a conference in the house of Samuel Chang (Zhang Yilun, Nee’s brother-in-law) in Los Angeles, where he released messages on The All-inclusive Christ. In 1963, he began to publish the magazine, The Stream, through which many Christians became acquainted with his ministry. Unlike his work in Taiwan, he paid more attention to the spiritual dimension due to the condition of American Christians. In 1962, he began practicing “calling on the Lord’s name” (Huhan zhuming) in Los Angeles. In contrast to the generous financial support in Taiwan, Lee experienced financial embarrassment. The saints in Taiwan and America both assumed that the other side had given him adequate support. But this didn’t stop or discourage him. He traveled extensively to speak in an old car driven by Samuel Chang, and enjoyed writing hymns on these long trips. In 1965, they acquired a meeting hall on Elden Avenue in Los Angeles. A wave of young people joined after 1969, most of them having been part of the hippie movement. This led to a revival along with the “Jesus Movement” in the 1970s. A group of four to five hundred believers moved from Los Angeles to other main cities of America in 1970. Lee also brought 138 believers from America to Taiwan for a four-week international conference and training session. Through such exchanges, his ministry in Taiwan and America merged.14 His work spread to Brazil in 1959 through some immigrants from Taiwan, Hong Kong and the Philippines. Lee visited Sao Paulo in 1964, 1965 and 1967, and in 1975 a group of more than two hundred students joined them. The “Lord’s Recovery” also began in South Korea, Australia and New Zealand.

In 1974, Lee moved from Los Angeles to Anaheim, and the Living Stream Ministry was established. Lee had a two-fold burden: releasing of ‘life-studies’ of the Bible15 and winning more young people for the “Lord’s Recovery”. While the church in Huntington Beach functioned as the frontline for preaching the gospel, the church in Anaheim functioned to support the spread of his ministry. In 1976 he directed his co-workers to move to Long Beach, Fullerton, Irvine, and Cypress for campus work and to start churches. Later, a standard procedure was established, namely, getting children saved and baptized before entering Junior High and then preparing them through their high school and college years to join full-time training. Summer Schools of Truth were also established to train young people. His largest and most important burden was to carry out the “life-study” of the Bible (shengming dujing). He said that though a lot of teachers in history had written various books of the Bible with countless commentaries and expositions, most of them touched only the objective and doctrinal aspect of divine revelation while failing to emphasize its life aspect. It would take him more than twenty years to finish this remarkable and exhaustive job. Other things Lee did included the Chinese-speaking meeting since 1982 and the first Chinese-speaking international blending conference during the Chinese New Year holidays of 1983. To better fill the believers’ need, Spanish and Korean language meetings were started in America.

In 1984, at the age of 80, Lee took the decisive step, after much consideration, to go back to Taiwan to study and practice the “New Way” (xinlu) for the purpose of providing the “Lord’s Recovery” with a new wineskin. He said that he was specifically burdened over three matters: (1) practice of the God-ordained way, (2) the establishment of a full-time training center, and (3) the building of a big meeting hall.

Concerning the God-ordained way, he encouraged each saint to be a “normal, living, and vital person” by practicing morning revival and daily overcoming. He further encouraged them to be “normal, organic and functioning members of the Body of Christ” by practicing “begetting, nourishing, perfecting, and building up.” In this way all the saints could begin to function as the New Testament priests. According to Acts 2: 42-46, the church was made up of small groups with the saints meeting from house to house. Lee paid so much attention to this point that, he said, “Heaven can be annulled and the earth can pass away, but we should never forsake the small group meetings.” And he believed that the two-thousand-year-old tradition of degraded Christianity—“one man speaking with all others listening”—needed to be overthrown. The practice of everyone prophesying as in 1 Corinthians 14:26 must be fully recovered.16

In the meantime, full-time training in Taiwan began in 1986 (FTTT). He used this training as a laboratory to research the New Way for bringing in the new culture of church life in the “Lord’s Recovery.” This was the practice of begetting, nourishing, perfecting, and building (BNPB). He stated clearly in a letter to the trainees, “Our training is not a school, a theological seminary, or a Bible School to produce professional evangelists. Our training is to cause the young people who have a heart to pursue the Lord to grow in Christ to become living, normal, functioning members in the Body of Christ to build up the Body of Christ directly.”17

He awakened the churches to the need to produce full-timers for the “Lord’s Recovery,” and encouraged the churches to support one full-timer for every twenty saints. He personally frequently provided financial support to care for the daily necessities of the full-timers. Another goal of this training was to evangelize Taiwan. In January 1989 the trainees were sent to villages all over Taiwan to propagate the testimony of the “Lord’s Recovery.” In five years ninety-three Local Churches were firmly established.

After his success in Taiwan, Lee also tried to promote this New Way in other places. One area was full-time training: in addition to Taiwan, other centers were established in the Philippines in 1984; Anaheim, California in 1989; Moscow, in 1992; Hamilton, New Zealand, in 1993; Jakarta in 1995; Seoul in 1996; and London in 1997.18

One result of the full-time training was the ability to supply trained people for ministry in other parts of the world. The former Soviet Union was an obvious case. Lee’s burden for Russia dated back to 1981. Even during the Soviet era he encouraged the translation, publication, and distribution of materials into the Russian language. He contributed financially for this purpose from his personal pocket and continued his support faithfully over the years. He shared his burden at the International Memorial Day Weekend Conference in May 1991. A migration training in Anaheim was set up for believers with a burden for Russia. On November 4, Lee gave his farewell speech to the first group of full-timers emigrating to Russia. A few days later, the first group of nineteen trainees arrived in Moscow on November 6, 1991, to begin the Lord’s work of “recovery” there. The experience also spread to the former communist countries in Eastern Europe: Poland in 1991, Romania in 1994, and Czech in 1996. New work was opened in Hungary, Bulgaria, and Croatia in the late 1990s.

In July 1995, Lee finally finished his voluminous life-study of the Bible.19 Lee believed that the culmination of divine revelation is God’s becoming man in order to make man God so that the two—God and man—may become altogether the same in life, nature, and appearance but not in the Godhead. He also composed a hymn to express this great revelation: “What Miracle! What Mystery!”

From February 1994 until his last public ministry in February 1997, Lee released many messages concerning this topic. In May 1994, he said, “The ‘Lord’s Recovery’ is to build up Zion.”20 In February 1996, he explained the two aspects of God’s salvation: the judicial aspect is the procedure of God’s salvation to fully meet the righteous requirement of his law; the organic aspect is the fulfillment of God’s salvation through the life of Christ for the believers to be transformed and to grow and mature in the life of God. In October of 1996, he talked the three stages of God’s eternal economy, i.e. the three “becomings” of Christ: God becoming flesh, the flesh becoming the life-giving Spirit, and the life-giving Spirit becoming intensified sevenfold to build up the church to issue in the Body of Christ and to consummate the New Jerusalem. In November 1996, he revealed the incorporation of the believers with the consummated Triune God. In the winter training of 1996 and in the Chinese-speaking conference in February of 1997, the last conference of Lee, he concluded that the experience of God’s organic salvation equals the reigning in Christ’s life. To explain it further, God’s complete salvation is for us to reign in life by the abundance of grace (God himself being the all-sufficient supply for our organic salvation) and the gift of righteousness (God’s judicial redemption applied to us in a practical way).21

On June 9, 1997, Witness Lee died peacefully as “a bond slave of the Lord,” Nee’s most intimate co-worker, and a ‘God-man’. As an heir of Watchman Nee and a master-builder, he pushed the global expansion of the ministry to every main continent; at the same time, he also reached a new peak of the divine revelation through this process. During the last two years, he greatly enjoyed church life in Anaheim, as his “home church” and “the paradise of God.” He was still preparing for the first international Spanish-speaking conference to be held four days later when he died. The Hsinchi Building was to be finished less than one year later, a symbol of his work in Taiwan. Ironically, Lee seemed to have no word for mainland China, the largest remaining mission field and the original place of his ministry, even though the restoration of Hong Kong was the most impressive event for Chinese in the same year.

Globalization of Chinese Christianity: Achievements and Limitations

The ministry continues to expand after Witness Lee’s death through his co-workers in Taiwan and the United States.22 The Hsinchi Building in the diamond area of Taipei, just a few minutes’ walk to Taipei 101, was finally completed. It has a museum about Watchman Nee and Witness Lee’s ministry and a large meeting hall for two thousand people.23 A larger piece of land was bought in Anaheim, California, and used to build convention centers with a capacity for four to six thousand people. The gospel work continues in America with programs such as “Bible for America” and “GTCA” (“Gospelize, Truthize, and Churchize America”).24 However, China is destined to be a major field for the future, and students and scholars coming to America have become the first target. In 2003, the “Mainland Scholars/ Students Work” was formally established. Two former scholars from mainland China took the lead in this new program.25 There are also gospel workers among the Chinese migrant workers, white collar professionals, university students, and businessmen, especially in coastal cities such as Shanghai and Xiamen. Known as “Local Church,” “the Lord’s Recovery” or “the Yellers,” the ministry became a target of China’s security departments and the agencies of religious administration. However, representatives from the Living Stream Ministry managed to contact and communicate with the relevant government officials. Through an unofficial compromise, its meetings were recognized. In fact, the ministry shares many features with China’s house churches. There are no exact statistics, but it is estimated that there are about eighty to a hundred thousand followers in mainland China. In Shanghai alone the number ranges from five to eight thousand.26

Though it has been claimed that they are not an organization and have no headquarters, the Local Churches undoubtedly have formed a global network with distinctive characteristics that make it look like a denomination. By the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century, it is estimated that there are about 173 churches in Taiwan with two hundred thousand baptized believers, among whom 120,000 are keeping normal contacts with the church and about 60,000 are participating in the church affairs regularly and actively. There are 60,000 baptized believers in the Philippines, 3,500 in Singapore, 11,000 in Malaysia, 1,500 in Thailand, 2,800 in Hong Kong, 3,000 in Japan, 50,000 in South Korea, 4,500 in India, 80 in Sri Lanka, 50 in Saipan, 1,500 in Vietnam, and 160 in Cambodia. In South America, there are about 600 churches and 20,000 believers; there are 1,500 in Ghana, 800 in Nigeria, and 200 in South Africa. There are about 500 in Australia and 1,100 in New Zealand. In total, there are about 3,500 churches and 500,000 believers.27 The statistics may not be reliable, but one thing is sure: Local Churches are found in every continent. The fact itself is amazing: a church from the non-Western world has become globalized. Furthermore, following the principles of the “Local Church,” the converts in every locality are mainly people of local origin rather than Chinese immigrants.

How did all this happen? Mission and immigration are two methods that make possible the trans-national movement of Christian churches. The international dimension of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee’s ministry is no exception, since it began with Chinese immigrants in Southeast Asia, especially among the Fujian people. However, its global development can be attributed to its strong conversional emphasis and Lee’s beginning his ministry in America in English rather than Chinese. It is in the United States that Witness Lee solidified his vision and purpose in building a global ministry. Both his choice of America and the English language are clearly intentional. One important factor in his success was the ministry of the Word. Both Watchman Nee and Witness Lee paid close attention to the use of the English language.28 While reflecting the traditional Chinese respect for literature, this emphasis not only projected an image of Christianity not just as the religion of the poor, but also one that goes beyond the mountains and rivers of China, over national boundaries and great oceans. Their strategy transcended mental barriers and led to the formation of a global fellowship within one Body. Practical and organizational skills were also a contributing factor to its success, such as the gospel band that Lee established in Taiwan and his emphasis on the need for keeping touch with each other. Vital group dynamics and the practice of calling on the Lord’s name are effective innovations of Lee. New technologies, especially the internet and other new media, will continue to prove their effectiveness in the future. However, we cannot deny the contextual factors in this process, such as the condition of Christians in China in the 1920s, the political situation in Taiwan in the 1950s, and the hippie environment in America in the 1970s. Now the spiritual crisis that is developing after three decades of reform and opening up in China is providing a new opportunity which has turned China into the most promising mission field of our time. So, though Witness Lee did have a global vision and mission since his work in US, the Chinese prove to be his most solid and potential group. Although it appears that development is limited by its place of origin, people and language, what Lee wanted to build is a global fellowship with a strong Chinese character.

All in all, both theologically and historically, it is "God's economy" that determines the success story of the Local Churches.29 As in other parts of the non-Western world, indigenization is also seen as a key factor in the spread of Christianity in China. And to a great extent, it is also a criterion for evaluating success, especially in comparison to the experience of Buddhism. However, a general shortcoming of the historiography of Christianity in China is that scholars are too familiar with the Chinese context and pay too much attention to Chinese distinctiveness, while simultaneously ignoring the characteristic of Christianity itself as a global religion that has developed successfully throughout the world. The author has no intention of denying the indigenization explanation and believes its interpretative capability to some extent. However, from a global and religious perspective, we should go beyond this, and look for alternative factors. As some recent research shows, the success of the Chinese independent church may lie in its continual and resolute search for a true and right church rather than accepting a model imported by missionaries of a synthesis of Christianity and Chinese culture.30

Conclusion

There is no easy way. While appreciating the success of the “Local Church,” we have to understand the endeavor and even struggle that made it possible. In 2009, a former critic of the “Local Church,” the Christian Research Journal, published a special issue entitled “We Were Wrong.”31 As a symbolic action, it represents a new assessment of the status of the “Local Church,” after nearly half century’s struggle in the context of American Christianity. The “Local Church” boomed in the local environment of southern California, along with a lot of other “New Testament churches.” Neighboring the well-known Fuller Theological Seminary, it also learned something from the church growth experts there; or at least, it does share some commonalities with the latter.32 However, if there is a booming “Christian market,” it also means competition. In the vast field of American Christianity, opportunity and challenge always come together. Sometimes the situation is so difficult that the “Local Churches” have to “sue in front of Caesar” for their rights and legitimacy.33 Actually, they do rely on “Caesar” for their legal status, though religious and professional authorities are more important. In 2009, Watchman Nee became one of the few non-Westerners to be praised by the US Congress. This event can be seen as another symbol of the ministry’s development in America.

However, in its Chinese homeland, the “Local Church” is still operating as a “house church,” with small groups of fifteen to twenty meeting in private apartments or houses. To a great extent, they are targeted as an “evil cult” (xiejiao) and called “the Yellers” (huhan pai). Some scholars think that the “Local Church” was a model for the house churches in China due to similarities in their publications and organization.34 But, mostly “the Local Churches” keep their distinctiveness and are separate from other groups, claiming that they are the true church and the most suitable church model in China. The struggle in the American context may have ended. However, in mainland China, their original and future mission field, they still face great challenges both politically and religiously. This is the most important task for the “Local Churches” as they enter a new stage of development.35

About author
LIU Yi (Ph.D., Chinese University of Hong Kong) is Associate Professor of History at Shanghai University. He is author of Religion and Politics in a Global Context (Shanghai: Shanghai University Press, 2011).



1 The name for this subject is a problem, for they do not regard themselves as an organization or movement. They are known by various names: “Little Flock,” “Assembly Hall,” “Local Church,” or “Lord’s Recovery.” In Taiwan, it was registered as the Christian Assembly Hall; in United States, Living Stream Ministry is its legal agency. In most localities, they are just named after the city’s name, such as “Church in Los Angeles,” “Church in Taipei,” and “Church in Shanghai,” so “Local Church” be-comes a popular label. “The ministry of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee” is an official term they often use, which is also a way to show their respect and acknowledgement of these two persons’ work.

2 “Lord’s Recovery” is a phrase often used for the Local Church movement; it means going back to the original church of the New Testament or to the apostles’ time. Its modern history can be traced to the Moravian Brothers in the 18th century as well as the Plymouth Brethren in the 19th century. Watchman Nee and Witness Lee are believed to be the first to introduce this idea in the Chinese context.

3 Witness Lee: Speakings from the Memorial Meetings (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1997), 7.

4 See Witness Lee, Watchman Nee: A Seer of the Divine Revelation in the Present Age (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1991). Another influential biography of Watchman Nee is Angus Kinnear, The Story of Watchman Nee: Against the Tide (Fort Washington, PA: Christian Literature Crusade, 1998).

5 About Dora Yu, see Silas H. Wu, Dora Yu and Christian Revival in 20th-century China (Boston: Pishon River Publications, 2002).

6 Margaret E. Barber was sent to China by the Church Missionary Society in 1895. She went to Fuzhou and taught in a girls’ school. Seven years later, she left due to the jealousy and slander of her colleagues. Under the influence of David Panton, she separated from the Anglican Church and went to China again at the age of 40. As an independent missionary, she lived in Baiyatan opposite the Luoxing Pagoda ferry of Mawei, where she met Leland Wang and Watchman Nee. On Margaret E. Barber, see James Reetzke, M. E. Barber: A Seed Sown in China (Chicago: Chicago Bibles and Books, 2007).

7 Leland Wang, an early co-worker of Watchman Nee, was born in a non-Christian family. In 1920, he converted under the guidance of his wife and left his navy career to serve God in 1921. Separating from Watchman Nee, he was ordained as a minister of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. In 1929, he together with others founded the Chinese Foreign Missionary Union (zhonghua guowai budaotuan), the first missionary organization from China to propagate the gospel abroad. Later he got a doctoral degree from Wheaton College, and was known as the “Moody of China.”

8 About the Brethren, see F. Roy Coad, A History of the Brethren Movement: Its Origins, Its Worldwide Development and Its Significance for the Present Day (Vancouver, BC: Regent College Publishing, 2001).

9 On Watchman Nee’s fate in Communist China, see Ying Fuk Tsang, Fandi, aiguo, shulingren: Ni Tuosheng yu jidutu juhuichu yanjiu [Anti-imperialism, Patriotism and the Spiritual Man: A Study on Watchman Nee and the Little Flock] (Hong Kong: Christian Study Center on Chinese Religion and Culture, 2005); Joseph Tse-Hei Lee, “Watchman Nee and the Little Flock Movement in Maoist China,” Church History, 74: 1 (March 2005), 68-96.

10 Among the Local Churches, Witness Lee was well-known as a “master-builder,” especially in contrast to Watchman Nee who is a great seer of divine revelation. Lee himself claimed that he was continuing Brother Nee’s ministry. At a meeting of Asian churches in 1981, Lee presented a complete history of the Local Church, which was collected as a two-volume work entitled Lishi yu qishi [History and Revelation] (Taipei: Taiwan Gospel Book Room, 2001). For a concise English version, see Witness Lee, The History of the Church and the Local Churches (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1991). On Witness Lee, see Zhuo Zunhong, Zhou Xiuhuan, and Lin Xiuhua, Jidu yu zhaohui: Li Changshou xiansheng xingyi fangtanlu [Christ and Church: An Oral Record of Witness Lee’s Journey] (Taipei: National Institute of History, 2010).

11 Peace Wang was born in the family of a government official of Anhui province. She was educated in the mission school in Hangzhou. After graduating from Jinling Girls’ College, she decided to be an evangelist. An early co-worker of Watchman Nee, she had a great influence on Witness Lee personally and worked together to overcome the turmoil in the ministry. In 1956, she was imprisoned along with other co-workers until her death during the Cultural Revolution. Another female co-worker of Watchman Nee was Ruth Lee (Li Yuanru, 1894-1969). She was of great help to Watchman Nee especially in the ministry of the word. Different from Peace Wang and Witness Lee, she was involved in the turmoil against Watchman Nee in the 1940s. From 1950 to 1952, she tried her best to publish Watchman Nee’s messages during the training in Guling Mountain. She was also put into prison in 1956 and died in the same year as Peace Wang.

12 Theodore Austin-Sparks (1888-1971), usually known as “Mr. Sparks” or just “TAS,” was a British evangelist and author. He became a Christian at the age of 17 and was ordained as a Baptist pastor at the age of 24. From 1912 to 1926, he led three congregations in greater London and was closely related to Jessie Penn-Lewis. In 1926, he resigned his ordination and established a conference and training center, the Christian Fellowship Center at Honor Oak in southeast London. In addition, he also published a bi-monthly magazine, A Witness and a Testimony from 1923 until his death in 1971. Among his many books, at least three are regarded as Christian classics: The School of Christ, The Centrality and Supremacy of the Lord Jesus Christ, and We beheld His Glory.

13 “The ground of church” is a key teaching of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee’s ministry. Literally, it means the location of the church should follow the public administrative boundary. In general, it should be a city. Its origin can be traced to the seven churches in Revelation, and it is said to be the only way to organize churches instead of denominations or sects. So there are only two kinds of churches, the Church as the Body of Christ and the local churches as their physical representatives on earth.

14 About Witness Lee’s early days in America, see James Reetzke, Recollections with Thanksgiving: A Brief History of the Beginnings of the Lord’s Recovery in the United States (Chicago: Chicago Bibles and Books, 2001, 2004).

15 “Life study” represents Witness Lee’s interpretation of the Bible. He promoted “life study” as an approach, in contrast to the normal way of reading and learning. His point is that, the Bible is not teaching or knowledge, but a living way. His approach is Christ-centered, focusing on the move of the Holy Spirit.

16 On the God-ordained way, see Witness Lee, The Exercise & Practice of the God-Ordained Way, (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996). The vital group is a key factor in the practice of the New Way. For discussion of the vital group, see Witness Lee, The Vital Groups (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996).

17 From Witness Lee’s letter to the trainers and trainees in the second full-time training on February 5, 1991, http://www.fttt.org.tw/ (accessed August 30, 2012).

18 For an introduction of the full-time training, see: http://ftta.org/ (accessed August 30, 2012).

19 The life-study of the Bible has an online study program, radio program, and versions for handhelds, PCs, and E-readers. Ref: http://www.lifestudy.com/ (accessed August 30, 2012). After this, Lee continued with the Crystallization-study series by special themes. Another important work is the translation of the Recovery Version of the Bible. Witness Lee completed the New Testament. The complete English edition appeared in 1999 and the Chinese version with notes and commentaries was published in 2005. Currently the Recovery Version of the Bible has editions in Spanish, Japanese, Korean, Philippines (north and south), Indonesian, Russian, French, Portugal, Thai, and Malaysian.

20 Witness Lee, The Practical Points Concerning Blending (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1994), 46.

21 These “High Peak” truths are discussed in The High Peak of the Vision and the Reality of the Body of Christ (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1994); The Organic Aspect of God’s Salvation (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996); The Secret of God’s Organic Salvation: “the Spirit Himself with Our Spirit”(Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996); The Experience of God’s Organic Salvation Equaling Reigning in Christ’s Life (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996); Incarnation, Inclusion, and Intensification (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1996); The Holy Word for Morning Revival: The New Jerusalem: The Highest Point of the Apostles’ Living and Work (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1997).

22 The Taiwan Gospel Book Room and the Living Stream Ministry are two front organizations of the Local Church. Readers can get access to them at: http://www.twgbr.org.tw; http://www.lsm.org/ (accessed August 30, 2012).

23 The building is located at the intersection of Hsinye Road (Xinyi lu) and Keelong Road (Jilong lu), so it is called Hsinchi Building (Xinji dalou). Xinji means faith in Christ.

24 Ref: www.bibleforamerica.org; http://gtca.us/ [last access on August 30, 2012].

25 Ref: http://mswe1.com (accessed August 30, 2012).

26 The number of Christians in China is one of the most curious and controversial issues. Regarding the case of the Local Church, there are several versions according to the author’s experience. This number came from a responsible local brother when the author just started this research in 2011. The estimate of one million in China and 100,000 in Shanghai is probably exaggerated, as it is not corroborated by other global statistics.

27 These figures are from Zhuo Zunhong, Zhou Xiuhuan, and Lin Xiuhua, Christ and Church: An Oral Record of Witness Lee’s Journey, 167-187, 196-212. In Lee, Lishi yu qishi [History and Revelation] and the memorial pamphlet of Witness Lee, there are also some general estimates for 1981 and 1997. However, according to the author’s communication with some leading persons of the movement, there is no exact statistics of its members. Sometimes, they do not even know where these numbers come from. Generally, it is said that there are 250,000 to 500,000 believers.

28 An example is the development of the Taiwan Gospel Book Room. See Taiwan fuyin shufang liushinian: fengman zouguo yijiazi, 1949-2010 [Sixty Years of the Taiwan Gospel Book Room] (Taipei: Taiwan Gospel Book Room, 2010).

29 “God’s economy” is a popular term in Witness Lee’s ministry. A word from the New Testament, it means the administration of the God’s household and represents God’s plan in this world. See Witness Lee, The Economy of God (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1968; 2005); God’s New Testament Economy (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1986); The Divine Economy (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1986). Another related key term is “Lord’s Recovery.” See Witness Lee, Concerning the Lord’s Recovery (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1983); A Brief Presentation of the Lord’s Recovery (Anaheim, CA: Living Stream Ministry, 1990).

30 For this, the author was inspired by Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye’s research on the True Jesus Church, see Melissa Wei-Tsing Inouye, “Miraculous Mundane: The True Jesus Church and Chinese Christianity in the Twentieth Century,” PhD Dissertation at Harvard University, 2010.

31 See Christian Research Journal 32 no. 6 (2009). It was published by the Christian Research Institute based in Charlotte, North Carolina. The editor, Hank Hanegraaff, is also host of the Bible Answer Man broadcast. In the middle of 1970s, there was a conflict between the Local Church and the Christian Research Institute due to the latter’s evaluation of the former as a cult.

32 Southern California is really a nest of various new churches. Fuller Theological Seminary provided theological sources for the new developments. Most influentially, the church growth professor, Peter Wagner, published numerous books on the new trends, e.g. The New Apostolic Churches (Ventura, CA: Regal Press, 1998).

33 In the 1980s, the conflict between the Local Church and some publishers came to a point where the former sued them in court. Though they won the suit, it brought harm to the ministry. Some prominent scholars were quoted to support them, including J. Gordon Melton (Director of the Institute for the Study of American Religion), John Albert Saliba, S. J., Eugene Van Ness Goetchius (professor of Biblical Languages), Rodney Stark (past President of Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and Association of Sociology of Religion), H. Newton Malony (professor of psychology at Fuller Theological Seminary), and Edwin S. Gaustad (past president of the American Society of Church History).

34 See Lian Xi, Redeemed by Fire: The Rise of Popular Christianity in China (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010), chapter 9.

35 E.g. a symposium on Watchman Nee was held in Taiwan in December 2011. Some mainland scholars joined the discussion with church members from Taiwan. The author presented a paper in this symposium, entitled “Universal Body & Local Churches: Watchman Nee’s Legacy in the Chinese Context.”

[aron]

Originally Posted by Liu Yi

On June 9th 1997, after more than sixty years’ service for the “Lord’s Recovery” (Zhu de huifu), Witness Lee (Li Changshou, 1905-1997) went to rest peacefully with God, as Watchman Nee’s most intimate co-worker, “a bondslave of the Lord,” and a “God-man.” During the memorial service on July 9 of 1997 in Anaheim of southern California, his life, divided into five periods, was recalled: the first period started from 1933 when he was called to serve, through the first three decades of his work both in mainland China and Taiwan; the second period was from 1964 to 1974, beginning with his move to America and ending with his settling in Anaheim; the third period covered his ministry of the New Way in Taiwan from 1974 to 1984; the fourth period (1984-1994), marked by his message about the God-man, was considered the peak of his ministry; the last period was the crowning years of his life from 1994 to his death. In between the recollection of each period, portions from 2 Corinthians chapter two and three were read, describing the six aspects of the New Testament ministry: its triumph, effect, function, competency, glory, and superiority. A controversial figure both in China and in the Christian world, Witness Lee’s journey exemplifies a Chinese church becoming globalized as a result of political, religious and international changes in the latter half of the 20th century.

I'd like to key on the insert: 2 Corinthians 2 and 3. "Six aspects of the New Testament ministry: its triumph, effect, function, competency, glory, and superiority." Now, it seems to me that the gospel is about Jesus Christ. The New Testament shows us the apostles, holding up scripture (what we call the Old Testament), and saying that it was prophetic in nature, and its fulfillment was found in Jesus. The prophetic word of his suffering, his triumph, and his glory, was now clear to all. There was no more excuse for darkness. The light had come.

The paragon of this is the speech of Peter in Acts 2. Paul reinforces this trend repeatedly in his testimonies in Acts, and his epistles never stray from this. Nor do other epistles such as Peter's and "To the Hebrews". The New Testament concludes with "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants..." (Rev 1:1)

Now, what has happened? As we see above, the focus has shifted to the "New Testament ministry" and "the building of the church". In other words, the minister, his person, theology and works, and his history in building an organization. This is a kind of usurpation, in my view.

Originally Posted by Liu Yi

Furthermore, following the principles of the “Local Church,” the converts in every locality are mainly people of local origin rather than Chinese immigrants.

This kind of statement seems to be propaganda, what the Living Stream Ministry wants us to believe. The author is either unwitting dupe or consciously providing erroneous information. Where did this idea come from? Observation? Or wishful thinking? My own observation, quite limited I admit but reinforced by some reading on this site, is that if you took away the immigrants and thier children the local church would nearly vanish. The ones who migrated 40+ years ago to "take the ground" are aged, their children are either "in the world" or "serving the ministry" somewhere. Only recent Chinese immigrants have stemmed the loss.

The irony is that there's hardly anything local at all about the Local Church of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

...there's hardly anything local at all about the Local Church of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.

I think the title is also interesting: "Globalization of Chinese Christianity" -- The Little Flock/Local Church assemblies grew and spread as an Asian reaction to Western globalist imperialism. The indigenous assemblies were indeed local, and were also Chinese, because the people living there were exclusively Chinese.

Nee looked abroad, yes, but for the legitimacy of the Protestant reformation. And thus we see the rise of yet another Protestant splinter cell, claiming Luther as its wellspring. "Salvation is by faith", not obedience to the Church authority.

But look how it turned. Nee's localist movement became consolidated in the "Jerusalem Principle", and became nationalist, then spread to an internationalist movement under Witness Lee. So the "local" reaction to foreign imperialism became imperialist, expansionary, yet another irony... none of which should really be shocking in retrospect. As Jesus noted well, it's the way of the Gentiles.

If the highest revelation of the Bible really were about "building up the Church as the Body of Christ", then Luther probably never should have left Catholicism. That was the point of the RCC: the Church (their church, not the EO) held the legitimacy and access to God. They held, "There's no salvation apart from the sacraments of the Church". Now it's become quite similar, here: the spirit of fear and control., aka "You must do what I say, or I'll be unhappy." To me it looks like self-absorption, cloaked in human reasoning. And if you go to the "Local Church" in the USA, you'll see mostly Chinese immigrants and their offspring, because this kind of reasoning jives well within their cultural yardsticks. Tight operational control equals order and prosperity.

But, Local? No.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

I think the title is also interesting: "Globalization of Chinese Christianity" -- The Little Flock/Local Church assemblies grew and spread as an Asian reaction to Western globalist imperialism. The indigenous assemblies were indeed local, and were also Chinese, because the people living there were exclusively Chinese.

You have a good point here, and I can’t help but notice the underlying implications in these attempts to color the LC as a global movement of value. Of course, from a LC perspective, the concept of globalization is synonymous with the notion that there is a so-called ‘Recovery’ needing to be spread to the ends of the earth. The author of this paper obviously repeats certain propaganda that was created to support such a notion, and others like Chang are actively seeking to introduce and promote Nee/Lee as global figures in Christianity.

To those who are pro-LC, the concept of globalization is obviously something that is viewed positively. I wouldn’t go so far as to label globalization as distinctly positive or negative, it’s just highly ironic that it would be automatically viewed positively despite what's really going on within the movement. To start with, if the LCM is to be recognized as a movement that is relevant world-wide, then we must ask the question of how a displaced indigenous movement has adapted in order that it can function in all the various places that it exists. Otherwise, for all we know, it could just be a fish out of water. So if we attempt to answer this question, it brings relevancy into the equation. And if you look at certain places, such as the U.S., the picture is a bit bleak. There is limited acceptance and relevance, leading to the conclusion that the LCM is not a one-size-fits all deal. So with that in mind, I think that discussion of globalization leads to the opposite conclusions that these pro-LC scholars would have expected.

Even at a very general level, I do not see much evidence to suggest that a globalized movement is something positive or even worth pursuing. When you look at how churches/movements have formed and spread throughout history, there is a distinct pattern of growth in wake of schisms and splits. New groups form due to a common desire to hit the “reset button.” The battle has often been distinctly against globalization and external control. The Church of England formed because King Henry VIII didn’t like the RCC telling him that he couldn’t get a divorce. Out of so many better reasons, it was a silly thing to split with the RCC over, but it was symbolic of gaining independence from the RCC. That was the driving force behind it.

Fast-forward to when the colonists came to America, they naturally sought independence from the groups they had been a part of before, including the Church of England. Now instead of being the underdog, the Church of England was the ‘oppressor’. As British rule was called into question, so was the Church of England as well as other denominations there. But it wasn't so much a issue related to doctrine and practice, just as much the concern was related to control and the overseas influence. Thus, what replaced the Church of England and other groups were sometimes the same denominations, bearing striking similarities, but with an American 'face'. There arose Anglicans among others. Was American Anglicanism really that much different from the Church of England? Probably not. And this leads to the realization that simple independence was a goal as much as anything else.

Getting back to Nee, the principles upon which the LCM were founded were hopelessly intertwined with desires for freedom and autonomy. I’m not saying that the he used his teachings as simple ‘excuses’ to separate from others, however, I think it’s completely fair to identify concerns like autonomy as being factors in the equation. It’s been a driving force behind so many movements, and it only makes sense. As movements exceed the boundaries of nationality, they naturally take on a different form. Thus, the whole idea of a globalized movement seems questionable as to both its continual feasibility and applicability.

[OBW]

I can only say that it is hoped that such things as The God Men (even if it lost a legal hearing that it could not fight), and the letter from the large number of concerned Christian leaders and theologians will keep the LRC in its place.

[aron]

"... out from whom all the body grows, building up itself in love"

Originally Posted by Freedom

As movements exceed the boundaries of nationality, they naturally take on a different form. Thus, the whole idea of a globalized movement seems questionable as to both its continual feasibility and applicability.

One could possibly make the same critique of Christianity; not a few have done so. As time went on and the message spread, it changed.

Did Paul fundamentally change the gospel of Jesus Christ? I daresay no. "The love of God, which He recommended to us, by sending His Son" is what was spoken of, from the day of Pentecost forward. Paul relates that when he presented his gospel message to the brothers in Jerusalem they did not modify it, as was being done to some like Apollos, who had enthusiasm and power, but needed clarity.

No, Paul had clarity. As did John, Peter, James (both of them) etc. Unless we are explicitly told someone lacked clarity, we shouldn't reason our way there. This leads me to some considerations:

1. Nowhere do I see Paul or any NT writer recommending the rejection of scripture as "fallen" or "natural concepts". Yet WL did this wholesale.

2. Nowhere do I see advocating of a separate or special group with its own carefully evolved theology, in which the explicated truths take our focus away from God's saving love. You know what I'm referring to: the Consummation of the Processed Triune God, becoming God in life and nature but not the Godhead, God's New Testament Economy, One Trumpet, the Central Lane of God's Move Today, the Deputy God principle etc. All of which are sold as love practically expressed but don't seem to resemble the many instances of love practically expressed in the NT, in the gospels by Jesus, in the Acts, in the epistles.

3. This globalization of Chinese Christianity emerged from a back-drop of Western imperialism, Western economic, military, and cultural domination, and became imperialistic in its own right, not so much military or political but certainly economic (monopolistic merchandising) and cultural.

3b. The globalizing movement claimed to stand for "all the body" but it rejected all other members of the body as not standing for the body (via the local ground). So how can all the body build itself up in love? By exclusively buying publications by the Living Stream Ministry? How can we as the body build? It makes no sense. So this exported message became the globalization of yet another form of sectarianism, through the propagation of a culturally-infused, i.e. Chinese, Christianity.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by aron

One could possibly make the same critique of Christianity; not a few have done so. As time went on and the message spread, it changed.

This is where it's important for people to differentiate between spreading the gospel versus spreading a movement. Obviously, it's churches/movements that serve to tell others about Jesus. But more or less, there is always the additional concern with the health and growth of the group. Nothing wrong with that. But what happens when the growth of the movement takes precedence over the gospel? Then the 'gospel' becomes whatever serves to help the group grow. Admittedly, it's a trap that a lot of Christian groups have fallen into.

Part of my purpose with what I posted yesterday was to address the inevitable sociological/political issues that influence the formation and growth of different movements. And as far as I’m concerned, such things are factors in all groups, like it or not. Notice though, how I avoid the temptation to characterize such aspects as being something negative. Understandably, people might feel that the implications of such things might 'detract' from the image of any given group, but I don't really think that's any reason to shy away from talking about that. The real issue is not the imperfections or shortcomings, but it is any assumption that such things don’t factor into the equation.

Take the LC for instance, they would like to think that their group is free from anything related to cultural, politics, etc. As such, they have proceeded to attempt to spread their movement everywhere introducing the same cookie-cutter template wherever they go. It is for that very reason that they have been met with a tepid response.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The LCM have proceeded to attempt to spread their movement everywhere introducing the same cookie-cutter template wherever they go. It is for that very reason that they have been met with a tepid response.

Originally Posted by aron

in the full-blown cults of Asia, some of whom btw call "Lord Changshou", they also share this curious trait: The Age of the Word is over, it's now the Age of the Spirit. That's the saying, among them. In other words, ignore scripture and pay attention to whatever the Guru is speaking today..

Freedom's point of the cookie-cutter template ("Just call O Lord - He'll change your life") makes me wonder about the source of the phrase, "The age of the Word is over; it is the age of the Spirit". That was the one of the catch-phrases used when the LCM went into the mainland after China opened in 1979.

My question is, What was the source of that phrase? Was it given by Lee, or taken out of context by some LCM operative working on the Mainland? Or was it merely the next phase in the Early Lee/Later Lee phenomenon, where the safety of orthodoxy was left further and further behind?

Safe, reasoned theology of thousands of years' precedent became cookie-cutter catch-phrases, some of it turned disastrous. At best it missed the beauty and depth of the revelation of Jesus Christ. At worst it brought ruin. The Shouters' experiences in the Mainland, following phrases like that, is case in point.

[aron]

"Despite her unfulfilled dreams of a university education, her literacy was apparently not insignificant, for she soon began to pour out streams of prophecies that blended the incoherent and the indignant with the startling and the heartening. Here word were then recorded, edited, and compiled into several volumes by seven unmarried women whom Zhao appointed as "the seven stars" and "the seven Spirits" to serve the "female Christ." Zhao himself assumed the new office of "the high priest" (da jisi) to manage the merging enterprise in her name. In Xiao shujuan, or the Little Book, which also reappeared under several other titles displayed her considerable command of the mystical , eschatological vocabulary beque3athed by the Little Flock. She announced the passage of the Age of Grace, the second period of human history that Jesus had inaugurated, and the dawning of the Age of the Kingdom with her own appearance.

The claim may have been extravagant, but it required no great leap of imagination her part: in transplanting premillennial dispensational claims (with its basic tripartite structure) from the West into Chinese soil more than half a century earlier, Watchman Nee not only secured for the Little Flock the preeminent place dint God's end-time scheme, he also inadvertently - and continually - dangled in front of the eschatologically astute fresh messianic possibilities. Since the current age was soon to expire, a new cosmic age with its new revelations waited at the doorstep."

Redeemed by Fire: the Rise of Popular Christianity in Modern China, by Xi Lian

And when Lee died, they told us, "It is now the Age of Small Potatoes. The Age of Spiritual Giants is over." Not coincidental at all, I'd bet. Same cultural lens.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Freedom's point of the cookie-cutter template ("Just call O Lord - He'll change your life") makes me wonder about the source of the phrase, "The age of the Word is over; it is the age of the Spirit". That was the one of the catch-phrases used when the LCM went into the mainland after China opened in 1979.

My question is, What was the source of that phrase? Was it given by Lee, or taken out of context by some LCM operative working on the Mainland? Or was it merely the next phase in the Early Lee/Later Lee phenomenon, where the safety of orthodoxy was left further and further behind?

Let’s leave theology for now and go back to historical development.

In 1967 Witness Lee started the “Calling Out” (or “Shouting”) Movement . He said that the Age of the Word had ended, and now it was the Age of the Spirit. Witness Lee taught that believers must “eat the Lord” (吃主) and the way to do this was by calling out or shouting his name . Calling out his name was the way to release the Spirit in this Age of the Spirit.[10]

After Deng Xiaoping’s “opening up” of China in 1979, many foreigners visited China. At some point between 1978 and the early 1980’s, Witness Lee sent many followers from overseas to Wenzhou in Fujian Province to contact believers from Watchman Nee’s Local Church movement. They reportedly brought with them large amounts of Witness Lee’s books, pamphlets and recordings. Within a few short years, their influence had spread throughout Zhejiang, Fujian, Henan, Guangdong and other places.[11] During their meetings they would shout “Jesus is Lord!” in an attempt to practice Witness Lee’s teaching about calling out the Lord’s name. This is how they got the nickname “Shouters” .[12]

http://www.facts.org.cn/ebook/201310...11_1137654.htm

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

Safe, reasoned theology of thousands of years' precedent became cookie-cutter catch-phrases, some of it turned disastrous. At best it missed the beauty and depth of the revelation of Jesus Christ. At worst it brought ruin.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with this little part, or if you maybe didn't quite say what you intended. I would say that even as cookie-cutter phrases, assuming they are underpinned with the reasoned theology of the thousands of years, it can't be too bad.

I think that wanting everyone to appreciate the "depth and beauty" of the revelation of Jesus Christ may be misinterpreting the real meaning of "beauty." Sort of like misunderstanding "joy" in the face of extreme hardship or love in the context of Lord of the universe and created being. I am not belittling these as irrelevant, but the past 200 or so years has seen love become more and more something romantic rather than solid and stable. Romantic is neither. It is subject to flights of fancy and voids when you just "can't get that feeling" again.

Like those guys said in their marriage seminars years ago. Love is a choice. Not a feeling or an experience. That is how arranged marriages work. They choose. We think we are choosing from long before marriage, but then continue to choose all the way to the divorce court because our choice is based on feelings and whimsy. Not on commitment to the choice made.

[aron]

Globalization of Christianity via sloganeering and catch-phrases becomes an invitation (to me) to shallowness at best, and error at worst. "God loved us and sent His Son" and "God is light" are arguably summations by their authors, and can be profitably unpacked in scripture (and experience) over a lifetime.

But scripture is scripture, and theology is theology. "The Father is the Son" and "God became man to make man God" are examples of the latter. "The Age of the Word is over; it is now the Age of the Spirit" as well. In my mind, crude and over simplistic at very best, and an invitation to deviation in actual practice as it spreads into the world. And that's what I contend happened, on the mainland China as the Shouters morphed away from LCM control. The slogans took on a horrific life (or, anti-life) of their own.

Good theology brings us to appreciate what Paul meant when he wrote of the height, the depth, the breadth of the kingdom of God's Christ. One may hold forth simple theology, and perhaps one should, but it carries it recipient into inexhaustible beauty as they subsequently traverse scripture. The danger of Lee's sloganeering is that it carried one away from scripture, and into Lee's ministry. The focus shifted from scripture to ministry to minister. And I think it was deliberate. The disaster that followed wasn't anticipated (who ever could have?) but it followed hard upon.

[OBW]

But . . .

The Age of the Word is over; it is now the Age of the Spirit

is not scripture or theology. It is misdirection wearing the mask of the Spirit to fool people. The same can be said for the nonsense about "the Father is the Son," "Christ is now the Spirit," and that nonsense about making man God.

It is not just poor theology. It is not correctly theology as it does not arise from the study of God, but the ignoring of what is available with which to study God and instead using the whimsy of (a) man.

Quit allowing such nonsense to continue to wear the mask of legitimacy. It is not legitimate. It is fully illegitimate. It is evidence of spiritual fornication. They use enough scripture in their speaking to hide their lack of actual legitimate use of it from the masses.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by OBW

But . . .
is not scripture or theology. It is misdirection wearing the mask of the Spirit to fool people. The same can be said for the nonsense about "the Father is the Son," "Christ is now the Spirit," and that nonsense about making man God.

It is not just poor theology. It is not correctly theology as it does not arise from the study of God, but the ignoring of what is available with which to study God and instead using the whimsy of (a) man.

Quit allowing such nonsense to continue to wear the mask of legitimacy. It is not legitimate. It is fully illegitimate. It is evidence of spiritual fornication. They use enough scripture in their speaking to hide their lack of actual legitimate use of it from the masses.

The New Testament actually did not come from theology, yet it is legitimate. Not everything legitimate must come from Scripture or theology. For example, in the New Testament, Jude and Paul cited things not found in the Old Testament - the "book of Enoch", "the Assumption Of Moses", not Scripture but nonetheless truthful.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

But . . It is not scripture or theology. It is misdirection ... the ignoring of what is available with which to study God and instead using the whimsy of (a) man..

Whimsy is exactly the right word. "The age of spiritual giants is over" was what we heard at WL's passing; that's whimsy. "The age of the Word is over; it is the age of the Spirit" again is cheap sloganeering, devoid of basis. And its simplicity helped the promulgation of a ministry and organization but entirely at the expense of truth.

The reason globalized Chinese Christianity, or this variant at any rate, has taken hold predominantly among the Chinese diaspora is they can't smell the stench of fallen human culture in the slogans. To them it's the normal Christian church life. Now, one may argue that Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny are likewise fallen human culture. Fine. But why is Asian culture a better replacement?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The New Testament actually did not come from theology, yet it is legitimate. Not everything legitimate must come from Scripture or theology. For example, in the New Testament, Jude and Paul cited things not found in the Old Testament - the "book of Enoch", "the Assumption Of Moses", not Scripture but nonetheless truthful.

Interesting statements. But not responsive to what I posted.

This in no way explains the taking of something like one of those to create theological musts that stand in opposition to what is in scripture. Neither Jude's nor Paul's quotes of non-scriptural sources negate existing scripture so they are not somehow to be understood as having weight equal to or above that of scripture.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

Neither Jude's nor Paul's quotes of non-scriptural sources negate existing scripture.

And nowhere did Paul or Jude or any of the speakers and writers of the NT say that some scripture wasn't written according to the spirit but according to the fall, i.e. according to the poisonous tree of knowledge of good and evil. Nowhere.

Yes the law brought death but not because the law (or the psalms, or the prophets) was tainted by the fall. The law and the prophets and psalms rather: 1) temporarily shepherded and guided humanity until the light could come; 2) was continually held in the NT as itself prophetically pointing to the coming light. Nowhere does NT eisegesis say that it contravened the light. Nowhere.

The scripture is neither vain words nor fallen human concepts - rather it points us to the Christ. In this, NT reception of scripture is consistent.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The New Testament actually did not come from theology, yet it is legitimate. Not everything legitimate must come from Scripture or theology. For example, in the New Testament, Jude and Paul cited things not found in the Old Testament - the "book of Enoch", "the Assumption Of Moses", not Scripture but nonetheless truthful.

I think the fact that the Spirit included these quotes in scripture negates the importance of their source.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by HERn

I think the fact that the Spirit included these quotes in scripture negates the importance of their source.

There is also a place in Paul's comments about his coming death and how he has done that he is almost quoting Socrates. I was listening to something being read from Socrates at one point years ago and was struck how similar a small part was to what Paul had said. I can't give references now, but it was interesting.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by HERn

I think the fact that the Spirit included these quotes in scripture negates the importance of their source.

Right, it doesn't really matter that the Book of Enoch wasn't authored by Enoch.

Drake

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by HERn

I think the fact that the Spirit included these quotes in scripture negates the importance of their source.

The fact that the Spirit quoted these non-scriptural sources, is proof of what I say that some of what the non-scriptural sources say is truthful.

My comment before that a statement not from the bible or theology can be truthful, is well supported by these facts.

Witness Lee's statements regarding the "Age of the Spirit" may be truthful, even if it is not found in the bible or theology.

If we believe otherwise, we would have to say to Paul "Paul, you quoted from non-scriptural sources, therefore what you say is false".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The fact that the Spirit quoted these non-scriptural sources, is proof of what I say that some of what the non-scriptural sources say is truthful.

My comment before that a statement not from the bible or theology can be truthful, is well supported by these facts.

Witness Lee's statements regarding the "Age of the Spirit" may be truthful, even if it is not found in the bible or theology.

If we believe otherwise, we would have to say to Paul "Paul, you quoted from non-scriptural sources, therefore what you say is false".

It's truth because Paul, one of the apostles, wrote it.

WL's statements, on the other hand, are not true in itself, rather must be compared with the truths in the Apostles' teachings.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It's truth because Paul, one of the apostles, wrote it.

WL's statements, on the other hand, are not true in itself, rather must be compared with the truths in the Apostles' teachings.

But the truth stands by itself.
For example, "the sky is blue" is a true statement.
Whether WL or Paul says or writes it, does not change its truthfulness.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

But the truth stands by itself.
For example, "the sky is blue" is a true statement.
Whether WL or Paul says or writes it, does not change its truthfulness.

But to say that one age has passed, and another has begun, is another matter than saying the sky is blue or the Earth spherical. Clearly this kind of pronouncement supports a remnant dispensationalist theology and the furtherance of Lee's brand of globalized Chinese christianity.

But what supports this so-called truth? I probably have more basis to say it's now the age of charlatans and their mind control cults.

And don't we have clear scriptural counsel about changing seasons and times?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by aron

But to say that one age has passed, and another has begun, is another matter than saying the sky is blue or the Earth spherical. Clearly this kind of pronouncement supports a remnant dispensationalist theology and the furtherance of Lee's brand of globalized Chinese christianity.

But what supports this so-called truth? I probably have more basis to say it's now the age of charlatans and their mind control cults.

And don't we have clear scriptural counsel about changing seasons and times?

It was Watchman Nee who said the age of the spiritual giants was over.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

It was Watchman Nee who said the age of the spiritual giants was over.

I never heard it from Nee, but heard it from Lee and the Blendeds on many occasions.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I never heard it from Nee, but heard it from Lee and the Blendeds on many occasions.

If Nee said it originally, it was based on what? His subjective assessment of the sweep of Christian history? And why was his subjective assessment (i.e. opinion) superior to mine or yours? How is Nee's opinion the equivalent of truth?

And was this statement made by Nee before he "recovered" the so-called Jerusalem Principle, and began promulgating "know who is ahead of you and get in line", which centralizing ideas seem to lead straight to Lee and the Blendeds' "one apostle per age" theorem?

Or did the Lee/Blended theorem deviate? The whole thing seems so horribly subjective, just like Nee was. He discovered "truths" to meet this week's agenda. Doesn't matter if they contradicted last weeks truths. This was carried forward to this day by his LSM/Arvore Da Vida/GLA disciples.

No, thanks. I'll stick to the printed Bible. At least it stays the same.

[Evangelical]

Quotes from WN:

...In the church there have been many spiritual giants who have brought about many spiritual things. ... Saints like Martin Luther, Madame Guyon, John Nelson Darby, Evan Roberts, and Mrs. Penn-Lewis all left us with some spiritual wealth. .... Yet today even if we should succeed in being a Martin Luther, a Madame Guyon, a Darby, a Roberts, or a Mrs. Penn-Lewis, we would still be a failure because we would not have seen the central point-the flow of the Spirit. (The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, vol. 55)

...I believe that the age of giants is over in the church life. Perhaps in the next generation, the so-called "giants" that we have now will disappear altogether. Today is the end time for giants. ... (The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, vol. 6)

[aron]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

...I believe that the age of giants is over in the church life. Perhaps in the next generation, the so-called "giants" that we have now will disappear altogether. Today is the end time for giants. ... (The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, vol. 6)

It certainly seems more benign the way WN puts it, prefaced with "I believe". . .

But I believe that the age of the giants ended in the flood in the book of Genesis, and if WN had a little more circumspection he'd never have applied such a questionable metaphor.

And WL was less circumspect still, in his "It is the age of the Spirit" maxim; when it went forth into the Shouter assemblies it didn't carry any cautionary preface. I don't know if you ever saw some of the videos smuggled out of China 20 years ago? They'd scream WL's slogans, over and over. That's partly why I'd call it an evil mind control cult. Any freedom to exercise your God-given mind was gone. Just shout the slogan of the day, over and over and over again. On the mainland you could really see the WL indoctrination programme for what it was.

The Maximum Brother's subjective whim became objective reality in the collective - this can be seen by the fact that when they quoted WN from the podium after WL's passing, it had a completely new meaning. Now, "The age of spiritual giants is over" meant that WL alone had stood astride the landscape. Now, they said, it was the age of us small potatoes. And the Bible was never even referenced.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Quotes from WN:

...In the church there have been many spiritual giants who have brought about many spiritual things. ... Saints like Martin Luther, Madame Guyon, John Nelson Darby, Evan Roberts, and Mrs. Penn-Lewis all left us with some spiritual wealth. .... Yet today even if we should succeed in being a Martin Luther, a Madame Guyon, a Darby, a Roberts, or a Mrs. Penn-Lewis, we would still be a failure because we would not have seen the central point-the flow of the Spirit. (The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, vol. 55)

...I believe that the age of giants is over in the church life. Perhaps in the next generation, the so-called "giants" that we have now will disappear altogether. Today is the end time for giants. ... (The Collected Works of Watchman Nee, vol. 6)

Quite duplicitous coming from the man who would later say that you would always know who was the most spiritual person in the room and defer to him.

Nee was a master of understatement. He "suggested" and "believed a lot, making it sound less extreme. But if you understood how strongly he believed it, you would realize that his was a belief in the top-f-the-heap position of one person — himself. Just like Lee who was to come later in Taiwan and America, he spoke of himself indirectly but the impact and intent of his words was very direct. He was the MOTA that preceded Lee.

And I expect that one or more of the blendeds will eventually latch onto this ruse and become the current and final MOTA. It worked for Nee when he said it was already over. Then for Lee who was after Nee.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

And I expect that one or more of the blendeds will eventually latch onto this ruse and become the current and final MOTA. It worked for Nee when he said it was already over. Then for Lee who was after Nee.

And look at the Eastern Lightning et al on the mainland PRC. The various Shouter splinter sects: The apocalyptic "final apostle to end the age" motif continues to cycle through the flock like a cyclone of destruction, in various iterations.

They may say the age of giants is over, but they keep bringing it back. It's irresistible. Maybe we need to amend MOTA to FATETA.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

And look at the Eastern Lightning et al on the mainland PRC. The various Shouter splinter sects: The apocalyptic "final apostle to end the age" motif continues to cycle through the flock like a cyclone of destruction, in various iterations.

They may say the age of giants is over, but they keep bringing it back. It's irresistible. Maybe we need to amend MOTA to FATETA.

Aron,

These aberrant groups are not affiliated with the Lord's Recovery, just as Christian Identity does not represent Fundamental Christianity.

Drake

[UntoHim]

"Christian Identity" did not spring from the teachings and practices established in "Fundamental Christianity". But of course Drake is very aware of this, but he, like the current leadership in the Local Church of Witness Lee, are desperately trying to disown this unruly religious offspring.

Of course those of us who where actually there in the LC movement back in the 70s know exactly where all the aberrations and extremes of the Shouters came from - they came straight from the mouth of Witness Lee himself. No doubt, some of these folks in China have jumped off the deep end, but the genesis and catalyst for the crazy and heretical abnormalities have their roots in the religion invented by Lee himself.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

And look at the Eastern Lightning et al on the mainland PRC. The various Shouter splinter sects: The apocalyptic "final apostle to end the age" motif continues to cycle through the flock like a cyclone of destruction, in various iterations.

They may say the age of giants is over, but they keep bringing it back. It's irresistible. Maybe we need to amend MOTA to FATETA.

FATETA had long been the LC battle cry.

It's amazing how easily MOTA becomes FATETA, which then slithers into False Christs. Remember the warnings of Jesus Himself:

Take heed that no one deceives you. "For many shall come claiming to represent Me, saying that I am the Christ, yet shall deceive many" (Mt. 24. 4-5)

For false Christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

Most troubling to me was how Lee initiated aberrant teachings about "God became man to make man god" in order to redirect the LC's in the aftermath of those pathetic scandals at LSM circling his degenerate son Philip Lee. Now we see the fruit of such action -- Chinese cults shouting Lee's name as if he were god.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

"Christian Identity" did not spring from the teachings and practices established in "Fundamental Christianity". But of course Drake is very aware of this, but he, like the current leadership in the Local Church of Witness Lee, are desperately trying to disown this unruly religious offspring.

Of course those of us who where actually there in the LC movement back in the 70s know exactly where all the aberrations and extremes of the Shouters came from - they came straight from the mouth of Witness Lee himself. No doubt, some of these folks in China have jumped off the deep end, but the genesis and catalyst for the crazy and heretical abnormalities have their roots in the religion invented by Lee himself.
-

Untohim,

Why do you continue to pile on with a false narrative about this knowing full well that the PRC uses it to persecute, imprison, and martyr faithful believers in China?

Seriously, has your despising of Witness Lee and the Lord's Recovery consumed you to the extent that you would lend aid and comfort to the narrative created by cruel and murdering atheists?

I suggest you and others think and rethink what you are doing here, the propoganda you are collaborating with, and the potential impact you may be having on dear Christians who are suffering under it.

Then again, it is easy to sit in American suburbia carelessly spreading PRC atheistic propoganda from your computer while never spending a minute huddled in a little room in China with precious believers who if overheard singing, praying, and worshipping the Lord could be persecuted without a moments notice.

So please do not tell us how informed you are about this matter. Whatever "suffering"you endured 40 years ago cannot be compared to what has been happening to faithful believers in China.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shouters

No one will be able stand before the Lord and claim ignorance for having stumbled these little ones.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Untohim,

Why do you continue to pile on with a false narrative about this knowing full well that the PRC uses it to persecute, imprison, and martyr faithful believers in China?

Seriously, has your despising of Witness Lee and the Lord's Recovery consumed you to the extent that you would lend aid and comfort to the narrative created by cruel and murdering atheists?

I suggest you and others think and rethink what you are doing here, the propoganda you are collaborating with, and the potential impact you may be having on dear Christians who are suffering under it.

Then again, it is easy to sit in American suburbia carelessly spreading PRC atheistic propoganda from your computer while never spending a minute huddled in a little room in China with precious believers who if overheard singing, praying, and worshipping the Lord could be persecuted without a moments notice.

So please do not tell us how informed you are about this matter. Whatever "suffering"you endured 40 years ago cannot be compared to what has been happening to faithful believers in China.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shouters

No one will be able stand before the Lord and claim ignorance for having stumbled these little ones.

Drake

Obviously brother UntoHim was not speaking of "precious believers huddled in a little room in China, who if overheard singing, praying, and worshipping the Lord could be persecuted without a moments notice."

But do remember dear brother Drake, it was Witness Lee himself who condemned all the precious gatherings such as these (go read that pathetic Genesis Life Study #54 or so, concerning Lot) as "free groups," the illegitimate and incestuous children of Lot.

So why don't you slowly climb down off your high horse and own up to your own master's pathetic teachings about the many children of God around the globe gathering in His name?

[aron]

Drake,

I read the Wikipedia article you linked. It focuses on an incident in 1983. "There is reason to doubt connection".

What about the last 34 years? What about Witness Lee, from the podium, claiming affiliation of 20 million Shouters in the mid-'90s?

Speaking of abandoning the dear, precious saints, what about the guy caught with 30,000 LSM Bibles, whom was promptly disavowed of any connection, who got saved from jail by the "atheist" U.S. Government? LSM didn't know anything about how this guy got 30,000 of their Bibles.

LSM seems to be willfully ignorant. Forgive us if we point out glaring connections between these groups. Sorry about having to state the apparently obvious. I was a recruiter once, for the LSM, and the "we are just Christians" tactics, the divide-and-conquer, the isolation, the paranoia, the persecution complex, the "obey without question", the "Big Brother is always right", the "everybody but us is Great Harlot Satanic Babylon Dragon" refrains, the simplistic slogans repeated ad nauseum as if repetition creates reality, the "don't ask any questions" themes, the constant negativity about everyone else and "don't be negative" about anything in the group, are all just too similar to pretend to ignore.

But other than that, yes, perhaps there's no connection what so ever.

[UntoHim]

My friend Drake, you all all washed up with your facts. There is no evidence - NONE - NADA - ZILTCH - that anything that is posted on LocalChurchDiscussions is used by the communist to persecute genuine Christians in Mainland China. There is plenty of evidence, however, that many of the aberrant and heretical teachings and practices of groups like the Shouters come directly from the teachings and practices established by Witness Lee himself. In fact, Lee admitted as much when he was alive and apparently thought the Shouters were something positive.

And while I'm glad that you've finally grown a conscience, I'd like to know where you and your newfound sanctimonious conscience were when sisters were taken advantage of sexually by Witness Lee's son WITH HIS FULL KNOWLEDGE, and the knowledge of MANY LC/LSM leaders?....I suspect you were there within the confines of a meeting hall somewhere in American suburbia doing some shouting yourself, and uplifting the name and ministry of the very same man.

Please do not tell us how "this is not the Lord's Recovery I'm familiar with". This is an insult, and let me remind you that you too will stand before the Lord regarding the stumbling of these little sisters and their families. You have done nothing but express support and approval of the men who enabled Witness Lee and his sons to stumble these little ones instead of calling them to repentance before God and his people.

By the way I have NEVER ONCE said that I "suffered". NOT ONE TIME. You confuse speaking the truth in love with the old Local Church "bitter ex member" garbage. What's next? Are you going to warn me that a piano in going to fall on me, or that I'm gong to contract some terrible disease? I'm not bitter now and never have been. I have nothing to be bitter about. I do have some grave concerns for the dear brothers and sisters who genuinely suffered in the Local Church of Witness Lee. Some have suffered some terrible psychological and spiritual damage. Many at the hands of the very men who claim to be "brother Lee's continuation". These men have NO BUSINESS leading an entire Christian organization or movement, and your blind approval and promotion of them is nothing less than despicable.
-

[Drake]

Originally Posted by aron

What about the last 34 years? What about Witness Lee, from the podium, claiming affiliation of 20 million Shouters in the mid-'90s?

Aron,

The article explained the transmutation of the term "shouters".

Drake

[Drake]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

There is no evidence - NONE - NADA - ZILTCH - that anything that is posted on LocalChurchDiscussions is used by the communist to persecute genuine Christians in Mainland China.

Untohim,

I don't think burying one's head in the sand is an excuse either.

2,000,000 internet police in China (larger then the Red Army) creating reports, tamping down criticism, targeting banned groups (a.k.a. "Shouters" and "shouters") , and generating propaganda is not enough for you to believe that statements made on this forum are not used by them to justify their own falsehoods?

Granted, there are no pictures of arrested christians in China with a note on the reeducation labor camp gate that says "Shouters inside courtesy of localchurchdiscussions.com". Why would you wait for evidence like that anyway?

What I am saying is that it is reckless to feed that false narrative that the atheists have created and that they use to persecute precious brothers and sisters in China. And if you had some sense of the danger facing them I would hope that you would set aside your hatred for their sake.

It appears either you don't know, don't want to know, don't care, and therefore you won't.

By the way I have NEVER ONCE said that a piano will fall on your head or that you will contract some terrible disease. NOT ONE TIME.

Drake

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But do remember dear brother Drake, it was Witness Lee himself who condemned all the precious gatherings such as these (go read that pathetic Genesis Life Study #54 or so, concerning Lot) as "free groups," the illegitimate and incestuous children of Lot.

So sad to express that attitude knowing in the early 60's Witness Lee would frequently visit a free group in Las Vegas where my dad was meeting at the time. Not only that, a brother from this free group would drive Witness Lee to Twin Falls, ID where another free group was receiving his ministering.

[UntoHim]

Actually Drake, I would be burying my head in the sand if I engaged you in your argument from ignorance fallacy. Godless, evil men have been creating false narratives against God's people since the beginning, and our Lord even said as much. They hated him and they will hate those who follow Him - always have, always will, and nothing that is posted on LocalChurchdiscussions is going to change this fact. You guys may have been able to pull the wool over the eyes of an extremely compromised and decidedly ignorant (talk about head in the sand) Hank Hanegraaff et al, but you see, I DO know, and I DO care, and that's what LocalChurchDiscussions is all about.

No piano hey? No terrible disease? Cool, I appreciate that.
-

[Drake]

"...nothing that is posted on LocalChurchdiscussions is going to change this fact."

Under the circumstances, I think it matters in this case, Untohim.

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

"...nothing that is posted on LocalChurchdiscussions is going to change this fact."

Under the circumstances, I think it matters in this case, Untohim.

Drake

This is just more fear mongering by LSM and their surrogates. Create evil imaginations which threaten those who might speak out their concerns. Drake, you have no basis in facts, or even common sense.

The only concern you have is salvaging your internet reputation. Perhaps repentance and Biblical actions of reconciliation would do far more for the cause.

If Nigel Tomes' article has any errors, why don't you address those?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Perhaps repentance and Biblical actions of reconciliation would do far more for the cause.

Yes it would, but image is everything. Following Witness Lee's death, I had hoped the blended brothers would bring the local churches into a ministry of reconciliation, but there was no such thought. The image who Witness Lee was became the overriding factor.
As soon as a brother or brothers became out of favor with LSM fellowship, he could not be counted on to "be one with the brothers" and could not be trusted. In my local church experience the issue of trust has far more importance than reconciling.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Terry

So sad to express that attitude knowing in the early 60's Witness Lee would frequently visit a free group in Las Vegas where my dad was meeting at the time. Not only that, a brother from this free group would drive Witness Lee to Twin Falls, ID where another free group was receiving his ministering.

WL would of course visit "free groups", i.e. un-named and unaffiliated sects. But he was grooming them for takeover. Nobody stayed free for too long, once WL came to town.

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

Quite duplicitous coming from the man who would later say that you would always know who was the most spiritual person in the room and defer to him.

Nee was a master of understatement. He "suggested" and "believed a lot, making it sound less extreme. But if you understood how strongly he believed it, you would realize that his was a belief in the top-f-the-heap position of one person — himself. Just like Lee who was to come later in Taiwan and America, he spoke of himself indirectly but the impact and intent of his words was very direct. He was the MOTA that preceded Lee.

And I expect that one or more of the blendeds will eventually latch onto this ruse and become the current and final MOTA. It worked for Nee when he said it was already over. Then for Lee who was after Nee.

MOTA, FATETA AND THE GROUND

I think that the "local ground" was merely a setup for what followed. Like with the Brethren before them, the indigenous churches of China fell prey to Nee's strong-arm tactics. The Jerusalem Principle and "get in line" and "know who is ahead of you"and "handing over" were all machineries of centralization and control.

It probably wasn't planned that way, though. The contradictions of the various Protestant sects, the teachings of the Brethren, and the yearning for the Chinese to be free from foriegn domination all opened the doors for the mass exodus. And Nee's cultural lens dictated what the "normal Christian church" should look like: in his eyes, one with strong central control.

Thus the Little Flock/LC MOTA concept came forth, heightened with eschatological fervor into the FATETA, the final apostle to end the age. So a remark made in passing by Nee, that the age of spiritual giants was over, was spoken to us upon Lee's passing as if an age in human history had now turned.

But I wanted to make three remarks on this. First that the Lord Jesus did say that there were spiritual giants. There were one- and ten-talented persons. Paul echoed this by saying some stars shine more brightly. Some have degrees of glory. But Jesus made it clear that the glory was to come, not to be seized in this age. If you have ambition, be nothing. Let the Master raise you up. Over and over Jesus hammered this theme. Nobody knows whether Billy Graham, for example, is an extremely loud one-talented brother or a ten-talented one. We just don't know. Don't create distinctions of persons. And I think Billy Graham would probably agree. Place is given by God, not by human arrangement.

Second, Paul said that "God gave some as apostles, some as prophets" etc speaks to what was there. The 12 disciples were witnesses. That was their job. Paul came alongside, but nowhere did Paul or anyone else assume primacy. The apostles had a special role, because they were the ones who saw Jesus, day after day. Thus their testimony was crucial. If you wanted to be a Jesus-follower, you had to hang out with them. There was no Bible. There were no written gospels. So you had to be a disciple of a disciple, to follow Jesus. Paul was the exception, getting his revelation from the Lord, but here the exception proves the rule. And Paul never said his revelation should rule anyone else's experience. If he'd even hinted it, it would be antithetical to Jesus' teachings.

His organizational schemas (appointing elders, exhortations to obey those watching over you) were merely assenting to what was there. People clot together and some take the lead. Paul knew that. But nowhere did his work anticipate overthrowing Jesus' dictum to take the last place. Of course the danger is always there - the disciples showed it, in angling for "first place" and so forth. But Jesus shut it down. Never was it to be revived, by Paul or anyone else.

Third, neither did any of the other 12 kow-tow to Paul as having the "ministry of the age". They merely accepted him. But did John subject himself to Paul? Not for one minute. Nor should he. Only in the cultural lens of Nee was this a requirement. But this cultural lens required distortion of the scriptural record.

And that lens, that predeliction, led us to the "one trumpet" and the "Philip Lee is the office" and the FATETA, spoken to us as Lee departed. "It is now the age of small potatoes" is what I heard. And not one single Bible verse was given to support the new age. It was the tradition of men, and we were now caught in the net. No pretense of biblical support was even tried.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by aron

. . . the FATETA, the final apostle to end the age.

At some level, there was a FATETA . . . . almost 2,000 years ago.

Not positive who it was, although some would make a case for John.

While I understand the generic meaning of apostle as "sent one," it was much more than that in the scripture. It wasn't just any sent one. It was certain sent ones. Might have been more than just the 11, Paul and a couple of others. But it wasn't every believer who got the "calling" to go somewhere else.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by aron

WL would of course visit "free groups", i.e. un-named and unaffiliated sects. But he was grooming them for takeover. Nobody stayed free for too long, once WL came to town.

Groups that stayed free groups was due to "not seeing the vision" and perhaps that's when the "illegitimate and incestuous" characterization came in.

[aron]

Bc

Originally Posted by OBW

At some level, there was a FATETA . . . . almost 2,000 years ago.

Not positive who it was, although some would make a case for John.

While I understand the generic meaning of apostle as "sent one," it was much more than that in the scripture. It wasn't just any sent one. It was certain sent ones. Might have been more than just the 11, Paul and a couple of others. But it wasn't every believer who got the "calling" to go somewhere else.

The apostles saw the Lord. Their position was unique. Paul affirms this in writing, claiming that he was one born out of time. 1 Cor 15:8

Anyone who anoints themselves today is suspect. When the only work involved is publishing and book sales, doubly so.

And those who dub themselves age-turners are cranks, or deluded by them. Jesus is the age turner. Stop assuming positions. Love God and your neighbour. Pursue peace. Feed the lambs. Stop with the hysterical pronouncements. Ignorance and fervour won't do it. Sorry.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

At some level, there was a FATETA . . . . almost 2,000 years ago.

Not positive who it was, although some would make a case for John.

While I understand the generic meaning of apostle as "sent one," it was much more than that in the scripture. It wasn't just any sent one. It was certain sent ones. Might have been more than just the 11, Paul and a couple of others. But it wasn't every believer who got the "calling" to go somewhere else.

I agree with this.

For Witness Lee to parse the etymology and claim all believers can be "sent ones going door-knocking" just disrespects the twelve initially commissioned by the Lord. If this were not so, then their names would not be written on the foundations of the walls of the city, New Jerusalem. (Rev 21.14)