Christian Research Institute - Hank Hanegraaff

[Norm]

Just finished listing to both portions on the Bible Answer Man. What a snow job.

Take HH around the world. Wine and dine him. Let him speak in your meetings and even speak about quoting the Bible. Get two hours of HH helping you sell your package.

Behind the sceens, quarantine Titus for speaking differently and promoting the Bible. Use lawers, lawsuits and courts to drive out the believers you do not feel are one with the program.

Publicly talk about the seeking of oneness with all the believers.

After what I have passed through this was utterly revolting. I do not like smiley faces; but, if I had one pucking I would use it.

Sorry for my graphic frankness.

[YP0534]

I haven't had a chance to listen to it yet, Norm, but I have to say, this is exactly what I'm expecting when I get to it. I don't know how it could be otherwise.

However, I'll go back to something I said on the other board when I was quite new among this group and several people jumped on my stuff fifty ways from Sunday when I suggested that the LC is more compromising with mainstream Christianity than it used to be.

They were all like, REALLY??? HOW??? I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT!!!

I pointed out then that seeking approval of the Christian publisher's group was some evidence of that. I didn't bother to mention anything about all the academics they'd gathered to say they were kosher. The lawsuit against the cult book this time was pretty much proof of where they stood, I thought, in reading the court pleadings. They are basically espousing the position of being just another denomination and, in truth, that is exactly what they have become. On that basis, I agree with them that they don't belong in a cult book.

But I think this radio broadcast is even stronger evidence of what I previously suggested.

If you make your own bed in Babylon, it would be awful hard to denounce living in Babylon with a straight face, I think...

[Ohio]

Just finished listing to both portions on the Bible Answer Man. What a snow job.

I listened to about 20 minutes of the 2nd part. I liked Chris Wilde, excellent PR guy. He ought to be a Press Secretary for Obama's campaign.

What I heard kept referring back to original concepts of WN concerning oneness, and the early concepts of pray-reading. I agree with those concepts as Biblical practices, described in the scriptures, but not necessarily prescribed.

The problem is simple. Nothing I see in LSM remotely corresponds to what they told the Bible Answer Man. In the name of oneness, they are the most exclusive and divisive. In the name of pray-reading, what they really do is PSRP outlines rehashed by BB's of WL crystalization outlines which rehashed Life-Study Outlines of the Bible.

Listening to them speak is about the same as listening to politicians. Just switch your brain off, and it all feels so good.

[UntoHim]

If I didn't hear this with my own ears I wouldn't believe it....
Here we go...
Word-for-word...directly from the recording...

Mr. Chris Wilde
“…the Lords recovery did not begin,
nor would we say ends, with any particular group
or any particular servant of God”
:eek:


Mr. Andrew Yu
“…when we say that we are the Lord’s recovery,
it's like when we say we are the church,
we are not saying that we are the only church, we are part of the church,
in the same way when we say we are the Lords recovery
we are not saying that we are the only thing that is being recovered..”
:eek2:

“Anything that is a positive contribution to the body of Christ
is part of the Lord’s recovery”
:rollingeyesfrown:


Hanegraaff:
“...And so you see yourself not as exclusively the church, you don’t see yourself as the only expression of Christianity, you see a broader body of Christ and you desire fellowship and interaction with that larger Body”

Mr. Andrew Yu:
That’s right!
:gag:

[Indiana]

Dear brothers and sisters,

Of course, these brothers, Yu and Wilde, are toying with their brothers in Christ. (Wilde, naturally, has no idea what he is doing or saying, "recently" coming from remote locations in the NW - Spokane and Pullman - and landing in Anaheim and doing a job, yes, making money, as an employee for LSM).

(In an email to me in 2003, he said on behalf of Towle and Francis, who I was addressing, ongoing, that all the matters were closed to fellowship concerning our past and that I presented nothing new in my writings. - I don't believe he read ANY writings whatsoever, by me or anyone. He has no experience of the Anaheim saga and travesty and neither has he read writings concerning this.) Chris is a dear brother, but a pawn of LSM!

These two brothers, Yu and Wilde, have received much more revelation than their brother(s) who question them. But these two brothers, who fully believe that they are representatives of God's government on the earth, lie; they lie by not telling what they really think and how they really feel! They are politicians. And, they have their agenda. THEY KNOW HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT ORGANIZED CHRISTIANITY, and yes, the so-called Bible Answer Man, as well.

They are not being honest.

More Whoppers than Burger King?! I like this statement, but whether or not there are more Whoppers... it is for sure that what Whoppers they present are SIGNIFICANT to those concerned for the truth, and for the spiritual realm.

[YP0534]

These statements are obviously at odds with what most of us here already know and can explain about the general and common history and the teachings of this group and its leaders.

But I submit that they really are in the nature of conciliation and compromise rather than falsehoods. I think they may actually aspire now to shake hands across the fences. This is now most clearly the degraded Laodicea. They should feel quite comfortable settling back in amongst all the religious flavors of the rainbow.

(PS - For good measure, I'll also note the veiled reference to "universal church" which implies that they have now rejected a concept of a neo-papacy and seek to embrace the common definition of Protestantism, which I think is likely, since they clearly have no new pope after a decade.)

[Ohio]

Wilde, naturally, has no idea what he is doing or saying, "recently" coming from remote locations in the NW - Spokane and Pullman - and landing in Anaheim and doing a job, yes, making money, as an employee for LSM. He has no experience of the Anaheim saga and travesty and neither has he read writings concerning this.) Chris is a dear brother, but a pawn of LSM!


Indiana, this is what makes CW so good as a PR person! He doesn't know "all the truth" so he can effectivle face outsiders and "lie with a clear conscience." They do this all the time in politics.

[Prayerful]

Since they are now so enlightened, does this mean that the Quarantine is over? Are the lawsuits dropped?

This may be more a way to sell books than a change of heart.

[YP0534]

This may be more a way to sell books than a change of heart.

If you're talking about the brand of Christianity which is the CRI, it fits perfectly as both. If you listen to the podcast, be prepared to fast-forward through some seriously cheesy commercials advertising Hank's L.E.G.A.C.Y. Bible, the CR Journal and other such products for sale at their website...

[kisstheson]

Hello, dear ones. Having listened to both the broadcasted portion and the "extra bonus material", I was so turned off by the whole thing. Many things really grieved me, but I guess what bothered me the most was the smug attitude displayed by brothers Chris and Andrew.

What they basically said was this: "Everyone needs to come to us and apologize, but we have no need to apologize to anybody. Hank needed to apologize, Gretchen needed to apologize, and everyone who ever spoke anything against us needs to apologize. But us? Poor, persecuted, slandered, long-suffering us?! No way! We have never uttered a word that was too strong or too insulting! We have never had a small heart toward other believers! If you would just take the time to learn our vocabulary you would see how right we are about everything! And by the way, all our lawsuits were never, ever, about money or anything like that! All we have ever spoken and all that we have ever done came out of only the purest of motives! What do we have to apologize for?"

Dear Lord, do have mercy on us all!

[Ohio]

KTS, thanks for the concise reporting. It saves me the time listening to the whole thing. :)

[Paul Cox]

I'm wondering, on a scale of 1 to 10, 1 being a Christian who is not in the "proper" church life, and having little or no regard for "The Ministry," and 10 being, well...let's say a Ray Gravier, where does Hank handy graft place, and where does Titus Chu place?

From the Whistler witch trial, it would seem that Titus was nothing short of being in concert with the Devil. Somehow, Hank got ahead of him.

Wonder if ole Hank handy graft would be open to such questions? Nah, I don't think so. There is more to this charade than meets the eye. The Blendeds are using him, and for some reason he seems to need to use them.

Maybe I don't really know enough to comment, but I believe Chris is the official "spokesperson" because of his radio voice.

The saga continues.

Roger

[Ohio]

Since they are now so enlightened, does this mean that the Quarantine is over? Are the lawsuits dropped?

This may be more a way to sell books than a change of heart.

My, Prayerful, you're starting to look like one of the aging Brethren.

[UntoHim]

Mr. Chris Wilde
“…the Lords recovery did not begin,
nor would we say ends, with any particular group
or any particular servant of God”

So Mr. Wilde, since the Lord's recovery did not begin with "any particular group or any particular servant of God"...did the Lord's recovery just fall from a tree, or did it fall off the turnip truck, or did it come out of the woodwork? Really, inquiring minds want to know, because Witness Lee told me exactly when the Lord's recovery started, and who picked it up from there, and so on and so on...until the Lord's recovery kind of just ended with him. (how convenient).

Oh, oh, and speaking of the recovery ending...You say "nor would we say ends"...really? Did you take a trip out to Grace Terrace and somehow speak with Witness Lee about this..cause he kind of, sort of publicly declared that the "recovery" of all the important truths were recovered through him and the religion he founded. And he kind of, sort of said that nothing (much) would be recovered after him. So I was wondering if somehow, some way Witness Lee "took back" what he had been telling us for all those years. Surely you took your digital recorder with you that day so we can all hear for ourselves. Really, Mr. Wilde...a media savvy guy like you would surely of covered his bases and recorded this monumental turn-around in Witness Lee's view of the recovery...right?

[UntoHim]

Mr. Andrew Yu
“…when we say that we are the Lord’s recovery,
it's like when we say we are the church,
we are not saying that we are the only church, we are part of the church,
in the same way when we say we are the Lords recovery
we are not saying that we are the only thing that is being recovered..”

"...We are not saying that we are the only thing that is being recovered"? Mr. Yu, Mr. Yu, Mr Yu!? I spent the better part of a quarter of a century listening to Witness Lee and many "co-workers" like you tell me that the Local Church was "the only thing that is being recovered". So now are you telling me that Lee and you were "just kidding"?

[Paul Cox]

Mr. Chris Wilde
“…the Lords recovery did not begin,
nor would we say ends, with any particular group
or any particular servant of God”

So Mr. Wilde, since the Lord's recovery did not begin with any particular group or any particular servant of God...did the Lord's recovery just fall from a tree, or did it fall off the turnip truck, or did it come out of the woodwork? Really, inquiring minds want to know, because Witness Lee told me exactly when the Lord's recovery started, and who picked it up from there, and so on and so on...until the Lord's recovery kind of just ended with him. (how convenient).

Oh, oh, and speaking of the recovery ending...You say "nor would we say ends"...really? Did you take a trip out to Grace Terrace and somehow speak with Witness Lee about this..cause he kind of, sort of publicly declared that the "recovery" of all the important truths were recovered through him and the religion he founded. And he kind of, sort of said that nothing (much) would be recovered after him. So I was wondering if somehow, some way Witness Lee "took back" what he had been telling us for all those years. Surely you took your digital recorder with you that day so we can all hear for ourselves. Really, Mr. Wilde...a media savvy guy like you would surely of covered his bases and recorded this monumental turn-around in Witness Lee's view of the recovery...right?




"WORDS...JUST WORDS"

Witness Lee told us that the recovery began with Martin Luther. Hellllooo. These Witness Lee bobble heads have become shameless in their willingness to lie, and twist words. They used to word dance. Now they just come out and lie.

"WORDS...JUST WORDS"

Roger

[Nell]

Can someone please post the link to this recording? I can't find it.

Nell

[YP0534]

"WORDS...JUST WORDS"

Witness Lee told us that the recovery began with Martin Luther. Hellllooo. These Witness Lee bobble heads have become shameless in their willingness to lie, and twist words. They used to word dance. Now they just come out and lie.

"WORDS...JUST WORDS"

Roger

Roger, I hear what you're saying and you are right and that is exactly what they said, but I don't think that's really what they meant.

What they MEANT is that they do not claim to own "The Lord's Recovery" exclusively, that neither Witness Lee nor Watchman Nee were the founders of it, that the Local Church is not the only denomination subject to it, and that whatever it is exactly, it didn't die with Lee.

It is actually quite telling, however, that they did forget brother Luther at that point. I'd say that proves that they don't even know what "The Recovery" is any more.

I think they're still dancing, just not nearly as well...

[UntoHim]

Can someone please post the link to this recording? I can't find it.

If you go here, the publicly broadcasted part is 9/8
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/Bible_Answer_Man/archives.asp

I am not sure where the "bonus hour" part is. Maybe somebody can hunt through equip.org and find it.

[Nell]

Got it. Thanks!

[Indiana]

So many thoughts about what I heard - including the thought to meet with him, the brother, HH. Easier for DR to do, who lives nearby him.

My point being, there are levels of understanding in the local churches to consider. HH has no idea, at this point - But if he is a person who declares, "the truth matters", then he needs a session 2 and 3.

Can someone direct me to the bonus time w/Yu & Wilde? I tried to find it but could not.

[Ohio]

Can someone direct me to the bonus time w/Yu & Wilde? I tried to find it but could not.



I found the link in a post on another thread ... which since then has vanished.

[YP0534]

The CRI advertising in the radio program section was really crass and disturbing.

As curious at the LC "leaders" are in their presentations of several points, that whole CRI phenomenon is even more so to my way of thinking.

One thing I thought was really strange was when they began to devolve into a discussion about the economy and government of China.

It sometimes almost sounded like I was listening to a meeting of businessmen talking about a newly expanded overseas market...

[UntoHim]

The Webmaster of equip.org was kind enough to pass this link along:

Due to the large size of this file (+47mb), it is advisable to right-click on the link below and then choose "save link as"

http://bam.edgeboss.net/download/bam/bam_bonus/09-08-08bonus.mp3

For those who have need to obtain a compressed version (8.8mb) please PM Admin and I can get that to you.

[kisstheson]

The CRI advertising in the radio program section was really crass and disturbing.

This was also my feeling, dear brother YP0534. First of all, a big percentage of the time is taken up by advertisements (11.5 minutes of advertisements out of a broadcast that was 54 total minutes in length). Secondly, even being as gracious and broad-minded as possible, the advertisements themselves are really hard to take. During the ads, I found myself asking over and over again: "Is this really what LSM wants to be identified with? Do they really want to be assoicated with this?"

[Paul Cox]

This was also my feeling, dear brother YP0534. First of all, a big percentage of the time is taken up by advertisements (11.5 minutes of advertisements out of a broadcast that was 54 total minutes in length). Secondly, even being as gracious and broad-minded as possible, the advertisements themselves are really hard to take. During the ads, I found myself asking over and over again: "Is this really what LSM wants to be identified with? Do they really want to be assoicated with this?"

Brother kisstheson,

I recently had links to these two programs sent to me. The person sending it thought that it would "clarify" some things. Well, it did. It made me clearer than ever that the Living Stream Church has become a denomination, which engages in public relations schemes, and reeks of as much hypocrisy as the biggest and oldest denominations.

You said: "Do they really want to be associated with this?" That really is remarkable, isn't it? Consider all that they are willing to wink at, and swallow, extending the sweet hand of "fellowship" to Hank Hanegraaff, for the purpose of trying to have a shinny, pristine appearance before the public. While at the same time their criteria for fellowship among the longtime members is so strict, and exclusive that a refusal to go along with it in every detail results in "quarantine."

What hypocrisy. It stinks to high heaven.

Roger

[Paul Cox]

But I submit that they really are in the nature of conciliation and compromise rather than falsehoods.


One might believe that if it weren't for the fact that at the same time they are making this run at compromise, they are excluding long time members and co-workers from the "fellowship" using strict, unbiblical guidelines.

So either they know they are being dishonest, or their consciences are seared to the point that they can't discern the dishonesty. Both possibilities are quite disturbing.

Roger

[Ohio]

One might believe that if it weren't for the fact that at the same time they are making this run at compromise, they are excluding long time members and co-workers from the "fellowship" using strict, unbiblical guidelines.

So either they know they are being dishonest, or their consciences are seared to the point that they can't discern the dishonesty. Both possibilities are quite disturbing.

What appears to be a glaring contradiction of principle to you and I and perhaps most of the greater body of Christ, at the same time seems to be perfectly proper for those blended leaders who were trained directly by WL. The problem lies in their training. God made the conscience to operate according to its training or upbringing, always desiring to do "the right thing." The tragedy occurs when when "the right thing" does not coincide with "what is right" or what is scriptural for us as believers.

Here's a couple more examples of LC paradoxes. Being plainly taught by the Lord to "judge not," yet being training for decades how to judge ... uhhhh "critique" ... all things Christian. Being taught in plain words not to sue our brothers, yet being trained that lawsuits are "right" for the ministry.

This is why it is impossible to discuss LSM/LC problems using the scripture alone. The "faithful" have all been properly "inoculated." Of course, we never called in "indoctrination," but when "training" conflicts with plain scripture, what else should we call it?

As a "sidebar" here, perhaps the single most despicable and scathing wholesale condemnation upon all "outside" Christians can be found in Genesis Life Study #54, which likens the spiritual birth of all non-denominational, outside Christians, called "free groups," to the incestuous children of Lot. Read that message and you then can begin to understand the BB mindset. It's no wonder any faithful LC brother would lament the return to "denominations and free groups," after finally discovering the LSM way to be so unacceptable.

[Terry]

While at the same time their criteria for fellowship among the longtime members is so strict, and exclusive that a refusal to go along with it in every detail results in "quarantine."


Hi Roger. What would the criteria for fellowship be? Could you be more specific so that the reader might know whether it's anything different than we already know? That is taking only one ministry and one publication.

Terry

[YP0534]

So either they know they are being dishonest, or their consciences are seared to the point that they can't discern the dishonesty. Both possibilities are quite disturbing.

Roger

No doubt.
My impression is the latter.

[UntoHim]

This is why it is impossible to discuss LSM/LC problems using the scripture alone. The "faithful" have all been properly "inoculated." Of course, we never called in "indoctrination," but when "training" conflicts with plain scripture, what else should we call it?

Very good observation. "Indoctrination"...."Brainwashing"... I know, I know, brainwashing is a pretty heavy duty word. How about "Compromised"? In general, many LC'ers have had their hearts and minds compromised - they have been compromised because they take the mere words of a mere man as equal to the Word of God. In some cases they even take the words of this mere man above, or in contradiction to, the Word of God.

This phenomenon of making the words of a man equal to the Word of God should have stood out very prominent to Hank Hanegraaff, Gretchen Passantino and anybody else doing "research" on the Local Church. Of course one must take into account the possibility that Yu, Wilde et al did a very good job of pulling the wool over everybody's eyes. Nevertheless, Hanegraaff and Passantino have stated that they attended several LC meetings, so unless these were "setup" meetings (a distinct possibility) they should have noticed the average member's tendency to quote Witness Lee more then the Bible. Then throw in a heavy dose of the rude and crude judging of other Christians (or critiquing as Ohio says:rollingeyes2:), and these folks should have seen right through the smoke and mirrors.

But as the saying goes...sometimes people only see what they want to see.

[kisstheson]

Brother kisstheson,

I recently had links to these two programs sent to me. The person sending it thought that it would "clarify" some things. Well, it did. It made me clearer than ever that the Living Stream Church has become a denomination, which engages in public relations schemes, and reeks of as much hypocrisy as the biggest and oldest denominations.

You said: "Do they really want to be associated with this?" That really is remarkable, isn't it? Consider all that they are willing to wink at, and swallow, extending the sweet hand of "fellowship" to Hank Hanegraaff, for the purpose of trying to have a shinny, pristine appearance before the public. While at the same time their criteria for fellowship among the longtime members is so strict, and exclusive that a refusal to go along with it in every detail results in "quarantine."

What hypocrisy. It stinks to high heaven.

Roger

Amen, dear brother Roger. The original program and the "bonus material" really are painful to listen to. The LC has most definitely become a denomination and this "interview" with HH was a horrible public-relations scheme. When compared to LSM/DCP's recent quarantines and lawsuits in the GLA, this whole "chat" with HH does indeed stink to high heaven.

Really sad stuff. The supposed "openness" to brothers and sisters outside the LC, coupled with the simultaneous exclusivity and strictness being measured out to longtime members, is just too hyprocritical. I am reminded again of the quote about J.N. Darby's successor, William Kelly: "W.K. ever advocated the reception of all godly saints, except of course from other sections of Brethren!"

[Ohio]

I am reminded again of the quote about J.N. Darby's successor, William Kelly: "W.K. ever advocated the reception of all godly saints, except of course from other sections of Brethren!"

William Kelly corresponds to today's Ron Kangas in so many ways. Kelly learned the art of true exclusivism from "the master." The exclusive Brethren (especially the sisters) would pay any price to gain just one new member regardless of former association, unless, of course, they ever broke bread with that "dreaded" George Muller of Bristol.

Lord Jesus save us from any and all elitist exclusivism!

[kisstheson]

William Kelly corresponds to today's Ron Kangas in so many ways. Kelly learned the art of true exclusivism from "the master." The exclusive Brethren (especially the sisters) would pay any price to gain just one new member regardless of former association, unless, of course, they ever broke bread with that "dreaded" George Muller of Bristol.

Lord Jesus save us from any and all elitist exclusivism!

Dear brother Ohio,

It grieves me to no end that history is so clearly repeating itself. This is sad beyond words.

Amen, to your prayer, dear brother: "Lord Jesus save us from any and all elitiest exclusivism!"

[kisstheson]

Dear ones,

One of the main reasons I was initally attacted to the writings of dear brother Watchmen Nee all those years ago was his repeated speaking regarding our need to learn the lessons of the cross. He had much to say about the ever-present danger of exercising "the arm of the flesh", epscially while engaged in activity for the Lord. This kind of speaking was so healthy and so pure. Of course, I have since found this same kind of speaking in the writings of many other ministers of Christ, but I will forever be grateful for the help I received from WN on this matter.

This is one of the main reasons that the "chat" brother AY and CW had with HH grieves me so much. Brothers AY and CW presented such a sanitized, cleaned-up, view of LSM and the LC to HH and the public which differs so radically from the views spoken during internal LSM conferences/trainings. This was just plain dishonest. How much better it would have been for brothers AY and CW to state exactly who they think they are and what they really think of the rest of Christianity. That at least would have been genuine and honest and would have shown some trust in the Lord to vindicate their speaking. Instead, "the arm of the flesh" was exercised to sway public opinion. Watchman Nee's name was brought up many times to elicit maximum sympathy from HH, but WN's message of the cross was trampled underfoot. This grieves me to no end.

[Paul Cox]

In the programs CW said he felt the Local Churches has much to learn from the rest of the Body. Andrew was not so absolute in his endorsement of that statement. At any rate, does the Living Stream Church reeeealllly feel that they can learn something from the rest of Christianity? Or, is this just another dishonest statement?

They say they are willing to fellowship with all other Christians, as long as they agree on essentials. Are they really willing to learn from other Christians and have open fellowship with them? Or, do they just want an opportunity to bring other Christians unto themselves? Are they just looking for another opportunity to prove to the rest of Christianity that they are "God's best," and that they "have all the riches?"

Based on their past history and proclamations, I would definitely say the latter. Can any of you imagine people from the Living Stream Church going to a church service in denominational, or even non-denominational, Christianity, and being truly open to learn something? Can they go among a people they formerly called “Poor, poor fallen Christianity,” and “Babylon,” and be open to learn something?

Can you imagine any of them standing in a crowd of charismatic Christians, swaying to the music and speaking in tongues, while they keep their “prayreading” and “calling on the Lord” tucked safely away in their pockets and purses?

Try to imagine a young graduate of the LSM seminary (FTT) sitting humbly, quietly beside a traditional seminary professor, being tutored in theology.

Does anybody really believe that LSM is open to learning anything from the rest of the Body of Christ? If so, I’ve got some nice beachfront property that I’d like to sell you, in the middle of West Texas.

Roger

[Terry]

Can any of you imagine people from the Living Stream Church going to a church service in denominational, or even non-denominational, Christianity, and being truly open to learn something?


Roger, the self-proclaimed "recovery" is not what it once was; a local church for the general christian. The LSM church is not for everyone, but those that share the same vision, concepts, and ideals.

In this age a denomination can be a healthier alternative. If there's one lesson that can be learned from denominations, it's working to receive one another. I still meet with a local church, but it's a so-called denomination.

Terry

[Ohio]

This is one of the main reasons that the "chat" brother AY and CW had with HH grieves me so much. Brothers AY and CW presented such a sanitized, cleaned-up, view of LSM and the LC to HH and the public which differs so radically from the views spoken during internal LSM conferences/trainings. This was just plain dishonest. How much better it would have been for brothers AY and CW to state exactly who they think they are and what they really think of the rest of Christianity. That at least would have been genuine and honest and would have shown some trust in the Lord to vindicate their speaking.

KissTheSon, this quote of yours speaks volumes to me concerning LSM and the so-called "ministry of the age." They have one message for "insiders," and another message for "outsiders." They treat "insiders" one way, and then treat "outsiders" altogether differently. This is more and more disturbing to me. This exposes their motives.

This tells me that LSM leaders really don't believe their own message. Deep down they know that WL conflicts with the Bible, hence they don't have a leg to stand on. The leaders are using "the ministry' for their own selfish gain. They are using "the ministry" to manipulate and control the LC's. If they really "believed" their message, then they would trust the Lord for the results, and trust the Lord to vindicate their message.

Lawsuits and quarantines prove how little LSM believes what they teach.

[kisstheson]

KissTheSon, this quote of yours speaks volumes to me concerning LSM and the so-called "ministry of the age." They have one message for "insiders," and another message for "outsiders." They treat "insiders" one way, and then treat "outsiders" altogether differently. This is more and more disturbing to me. This exposes their motives.

This tells me that LSM leaders really don't believe their own message. Deep down they know that WL conflicts with the Bible, hence they don't have a leg to stand on. The leaders are using "the ministry' for their own selfish gain. They are using "the ministry" to manipulate and control the LC's. If they really "believed" their message, then they would trust the Lord for the results, and trust the Lord to vindicate their message.

Lawsuits and quarantines prove how little LSM believes what they teach.

It really is sad, dear brother Ohio. The fact that LSM is employing so many unscriptural means does indeed prove that they do not trust the purity of their teachings. If what they taught was pure and true and fully according to the Word of God, then they would have the full peace to trust God to defend and vindicate His own Word. Instead, they are caught in an ever-increasing downward spiral of fleshy human efforts void of God.

I really grieve for the Blended Brothers. They have become fully persuaded that the most fleshy and worldly means are justified in order carry out their program of continuing WL's ministry. There are so many areas in my life where I desperately need the Lord's shining and purging, so I dare not say too much; but, for the sake of all the confused and befuddled ones stuck in the LC system, I have to declare that LSM is leading the churches into further and further sin and darkness.

O Father God, have mercy on them and have mercy on us all! Yes dear Father, have mercy on us all!

[UntoHim]

Mr. Chris Wilde
“…the Lords recovery did not begin,
nor would we say ends, with any particular group
or any particular servant of God”
:eek:


Mr. Andrew Yu
“…when we say that we are the Lord’s recovery,
it's like when we say we are the church,
we are not saying that we are the only church, we are part of the church,
in the same way when we say we are the Lords recovery
we are not saying that we are the only thing that is being recovered..”
:eek2:

“Anything that is a positive contribution to the body of Christ
is part of the Lord’s recovery”
:rollingeyesfrown:

----------------------------


Hanegraaff:
“...And so you see yourself not as exclusively the church,
you don’t see yourself as the only expression of Christianity, you see a broader body of Christ
and you desire fellowship and interaction with that larger Body”

Mr. Andrew Yu:
That’s right!
:gag:





..this quote of yours speaks volumes to me concerning LSM and the so-called "ministry of the age." They have one message for "insiders," and another message for "outsiders." They treat "insiders" one way, and then treat "outsiders" altogether differently. This is more and more disturbing to me. This exposes their motives.


The Hankster claims that he went to several meetings of the Local Church as part of his "research". It is more then obvious now that these were "setup" meetings...everybody knew he was coming...so they put all their "Christianitly is Christless!" and "denominations are the daughters of the great whore!" smack talk away in the broom closet while the Bible Answer Man was among them. So all Hanegraaff heard was a few "oh Lord, Amen, Hallalujahs" and maybe a "praise the Lord for His Recovery" or two. Of course he would have no idea that when Local Churchers say "His Recovery" they mean THEIR little sect, and their little sect alone. Hank probably thinks since he is making "a positive contribution to the Body of Christ" he is "part of the Recovery" too.

[Hope]

KissTheSon, this quote of yours speaks volumes to me concerning LSM and the so-called "ministry of the age." They have one message for "insiders," and another message for "outsiders." They treat "insiders" one way, and then treat "outsiders" altogether differently.


This double standard for treating believers, those in or who were once in and those outside, has become so institutionalize they do it unconsciously. A year or so ago the following happened here. We have a brother who meets with us but whose wife is all out loyal to the LSM. We have saints among us who were once in the LSM/Lc and many who hardly know what it was. A sister, one of the latter, was attempting to show some kindness to the LSM sister. She offered to give her beach home to the sister and her husband for a week. The LSM sister wanted no part of it and was very rude. Our sister asked her why she had such an attitude toward someone whom she had never met. The LSM sister let her know that it was because she had left the ministry. Our sister responded that she was never in the local church and knows very little about it. Suddenly all was well and the sweet spirit that is really the LSM sister began to come out and the two became good friends and the couple took the vacation to the coast.

Hope, Don Rutledge

[Terry]

This double standard for treating believers, those in or who were once in and those outside, has become so institutionalize they do it unconsciously.


Hope, I would say the double standard as you say exists, but it is not the norm and when it does happen it's not done unconsciously.
When the double standard does happen it's because:
A Those that left the LSM fellowship are as modern day Benedict Arnold's
B There is a double standard against those that left because of a perception those that left will try to persuade others to leave.

I don't believe either is the case. No one is a traitor and no one is trying to persuade other's to leave.
Hope, what about those still meeting in LSM fellowship that still recieve and accept those that left?
That too wouldn't be considered the norm, but it does happen.

Terry

[Hope]

Terry,

I believe your two points are probably correct. I being a Benedict Arnold, and fairly well known, get the automatic institutional emphatic rejection. And I could be also accused of being a persuader to leave. (Of course, I prefer to be considered as a herald of truth but I suppose we cannot get what we would like.) Rather, I have been accused of “leading the rebellion in the Southeast.” Is it not strange, how just recognizing sin as sin and division as division and the usurping of the Headship of Christ can get you such a reputation. Until my involvement on the forums, I kept a very low profile. But any associated with me also gets you the automatic heave ho. So I suppose you could say it is all my fault. I have caused dear ones in the LSM/LC to give an institutional reaction to saints with whom I fellowship.

When the brothers in the GLA started reaching out four years ago, they invited the church in Raleigh to attend a conference in Cleveland. The invitation came to the church but was sans Don Rutledge. They specifically disinvited me. Dear brother John Meyer had the kindness to give me a call. He explained that they feared if I was there that the LSM/BBs would be able to accuse Titus of having “a coordination of dissension.” Whatever that means??? Keeping me at a safe distance did not seem to help as they were quarantined anyway.



Hope, Don Rutledge

[Ohio]

When the brothers in the GLA started reaching out four years ago, they invited the church in Raleigh to attend a conference in Cleveland. The invitation came to the church but was sans Don Rutledge. They specifically disinvited me. Dear brother John Meyer had the kindness to give me a call. He explained that they feared if I was there that the LSM/BBs would be able to accuse Titus of having “a coordination of dissension.” Whatever that means??? Keeping me at a safe distance did not seem to help as they were quarantined anyway.

Hope, the real reason you were not invited to Ohio is because they knew you secretly were a Longhorns fan. You know ... we gots to keep our priorities straight.

[Terry]

Rather, I have been accused of “leading the rebellion in the Southeast.” Is it not strange, how just recognizing sin as sin and division as division and the usurping of the Headship of Christ can get you such a reputation. Until my involvement on the forums, I kept a very low profile. But any associated with me also gets you the automatic heave ho. So I suppose you could say it is all my fault. I have caused dear ones in the LSM/LC to give an institutional reaction to saints with whom I fellowship.


Don,
How was it you were accused of "leading the rebellion in the Southeast"? Just because you did not want to go along with what was happening across the recovery?
My view of you for years had been a leading brother who wasn't named as one of the quarantined brothers, and since you could not go long with it, the Lord led you out of the recovery. As had been the case with other brothers. Personally, I'd rather have you speaking than to remain silent.

Terry

[Hope]

Don,
How was it you were accused of "leading the rebellion in the Southeast"? Just because you did not want to go along with what was happening across the recovery?
My view of you for years had been a leading brother who wasn't named as one of the quarantined brothers, and since you could not go long with it, the Lord led you out of the recovery. As had been the case with other brothers. Personally, I'd rather have you speaking than to remain silent.

Terry

Terry,

It beats me how I got that moniker. “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast.”

Well, let me see now. I invited John Ingalls to hold a conference in NC at the same time WL was holding a conference in Cleveland. When John could not come due to the turmoil in Anaheim, I gave most of the conference. This was seen as a competitive move against WL. My oh my!

In the conference, I spoke from the book of Ruth. WL had yet to give a training on this book so I must have been doing my own thing and bringing the Southeast into another flow. During the conference, I shared how Ruth was excited about what she had gleaned. I applied that to helping young believers get something from the Word for themselves and openly said it is best not to quote footnotes but rather the pure word and your own personal labor. At that time, there was a contagion of declaring "I have a footnote" or "I enjoyed a footnote" etc.

I was pulled aside twice and informed that I was violating the direction of the ministry by giving messages rather than just repeating a WL message or "allowing" the saints to recite a message and several were very unhappy with me for the statement about the footnotes.

In addition several from Atlanta and Florida asked me in personal fellowship if I was happy with what the office and the new way implementers were doing. I did not lie but told it like it was. Just the unvarnished truth.

There were some LSM would be missionaries who had come to the Southeast. Brother did they not like me!! I guess I did not show enough respect. (That is hard for an old country boy from the woods of Arkansas to do.) I did not cheerlead for them and I suppose that weakened their ability to ramrod the LSM program down the brothers and sisters throats.

I suppose this is part of where that label came from.

I know my dear brother and good friend Witness Lee had hopes that I would be recovered and he charged Benson to come and see me and to help me to return. This may have been part of the reason I was not put with Mallon, Ingalls and So. Bless their hearts; they took most of the heat. Yet I was with them in nearly all of their fellowships regarding the problems. In fact, I was very guilty of stirring up Bill and John.

I did talk to the brothers in Raleigh and told them I would no longer support the LSM office and what they were doing. In addition, I informed them that I had learned of immoral conduct on the part of Phillip Lee and would not be associated with anything he was working on.

I was invited to NY City and spent a week-end with the elders there. I was very open with them regarding my reservations and they too, especially James Chu, were very concerned about the direction coming from WL and the office.

There are other instances where I did not support the office or the new way. I guess if you put it all together the future BBs in their paranoia had to come up with a leader of the rebellion in the southeast.

Hope, Don Rutledge

[Ohio]

It beats me how I got that moniker. “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast.” ... I guess if you put it all together the future BBs in their paranoia had to come up with a leader of the rebellion in the southeast.

I never heard this information about Brother Hope. We in Greater Ohio were informed by LSM publications that the real “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast” was Bill Mallon. Because of his subversive activities in cahoots with John Ingalls, he was rightly quarantined. Recently I was informed again of the "tactics" which Bill Mallon employed, such as returning to the "pure word" of God.

The official line on Hope which I was told was that he moved to NC and got "swallowed up by the world," thus leaving the door open for this "backslider" to repent and be restored.

[Hope]

I never heard this information about Brother Hope. We in Greater Ohio were informed by LSM publications that the real “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast” was Bill Mallon. Because of his subversive activities in cahoots with John Ingalls, he was rightly quarantined. Recently I was informed again of the "tactics" which Bill Mallon employed, such as returning to the "pure word" of God.

The official line on Hope which I was told was that he moved to NC and got "swallowed up by the world," thus leaving the door open for this "backslider" to repent and be restored.

Ohio,

This is quite a surprise to me. If I had only gone into the world, why no contact? Why was I excluded from the invitation to the conference for fear that the BBs would have grounds to accuse Titus of "a conspiracy of dissension?" I was recently told that Titus warned the co-workers in 1989 regarding WL's ugly outburst in Atlanta that it was directed at me and they all needed to be careful for I had been much liked by WL in the past.

Yes, dear old Brother Mallon was the whipping boy for the Southeast. In the winter of 1988 in Irving, Bill and I confronted WL in a private meeting witnessed by a few of the BBs. WL seemed to take it from me but was very upset with Bill Mallon.

After the spring of 1989, I was never contacted by any of my old friends in Texas or by any of the brothers in the LSM loyal churches in the Southeast. One brother from Tennessee who attended the conference in 1989 where I spoke told me to his great surprise he had gotten life. He had been told I was in rebellion. Two young co-workers from the west coast where in Irving in the early 90s and took hospitality with couple in Arlington. Somehow my name came up and they gave the couple the title of "Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast." They rebuked these co-workers and showed them pictures of our children on their refrigerator.

Frank Corley's father informed me that he was told by brothers in Irving that I was "the leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast."

These are some of the sources where I picked this up.

By the way, how could someone in Ohio know if I had been "swallowed up by the world?" Who gave you that piece of gossip?


Hope, Don Rutledge

[YP0534]

It beats me how I got that moniker. “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast.”

...

In fact, I was very guilty of stirring up Bill and John.

...




Huh.

Sounds pretty obvious to me, there, Hope...

[Ohio]

I never heard this information about Brother Hope. We in Greater Ohio were informed by LSM publications that the real “Leader of the Rebellion in the Southeast” was Bill Mallon. Because of his subversive activities in cahoots with John Ingalls, he was rightly quarantined. Recently I was informed again of the "tactics" which Bill Mallon employed, such as returning to the "pure word" of God.

The official line on Hope which I was told was that he moved to NC and got "swallowed up by the world," thus leaving the door open for this "backslider" to repent and be restored.

Brother Hope,

This post of mine above was never intended to correct or dispute anything you have written, rather it was posted to provide you with the kinds of misinformation which floated around the LC's in the aftermath of the first quarantine. If I heard it, then others did too. I heard it from the local elder. In those days we were encouraged to believe the worst about anyone who left.

Things have changed over time. Perhaps the coveted "leadership" role passed from Bill Mallon to you. Perhaps some in SoCal initially had the impression that he was the "leader" because he was a SE regional worker before you moved there. Perhaps you inherited the title after the Texas folks took over LSM. Perhaps ... perhaps ...

I do find it a little troubling that Cleveland would invite your church and specifically disinvite you in the invitation. To cite ongoing regional tensions and suspicions is somewhat absurd. If they were worried about that, there's a thousand other things they would never have done. Cleveland always prided itself as those in the Recovery free from politicking, but ... then again ... so did Anaheim.

[Hope]

Dear Brother Ohio,

In my view that sometimes label (leader of rebellion) put on me was just the LSM way to discredit someone. I was also described by Phil Delp as having been brought into deep darkness by Bill Mallon, John Ingalls, John So and the brothers in Raleigh. Poor me.

You introduced me to a new label with the GLA label of going into the world. I did need to earn a living! I had three children who wanted to attend college. Times were tough and I did need to work a lot to make ends meet. But I never asked anyone for money while I was in the lc or after I left the LSM/LC. Working for a living? Maybe that means I was worldly?

I wonder where your elder got his information. Was it just his imagination? Did he add up 2 and 2 and get 17? If you picked up some irritation in my earlier post, you got it right. I get very riled by rumor mongering and gossip. We Christians need to be straightforward and let our yes be yes and our no be no. And yes, political moves are disgusting and pure flesh. What we try to hide will eventually be shouted from the housetop.

I have no problem with you but I just like to get to the bottom of some things and to create a record. The brothers who invented or spread rumors about others need to have some soul searching and effective repentance.

Your brother in Christ Jesus,

Hope, Don Rutledge

[Ohio]

You introduced me to a new label with the GLA label of going into the world. I did need to earn a living! I had three children who wanted to attend college. Times were tough and I did need to work a lot to make ends meet. But I never asked anyone for money while I was in the lc or after I left the LSM/LC. Working for a living? Maybe that means I was worldly?

I wonder where your elder got his information. Was it just his imagination? Did he add up 2 and 2 and get 17? If you picked up some irritation in my earlier post, you got it right. I get very riled by rumor mongering and gossip. We Christians need to be straightforward and let our yes be yes and our no be no. And yes, political moves are disgusting and pure flesh. What we try to hide will eventually be shouted from the housetop.

Brother Hope, I understand your irritation, but the event was as simple as this: One day I inquired of our elder, "what ever happened to Hope?" he replied something like, "I heard he moved to NC and got swallowed up selling NSA." He was just repeating what he had heard, in Cleveland I presume. I guess this occurred some 10-15 years ago.

I understand it is now more "honorable" to be called "leader of the rebellion" in the SE. :)

Sounds like 2+2 equals 282. :eek:

Imagine what they have said about me. The GLA rumor mill can be just as nasty as the LSM machinery.

[Hope]

Brother Hope, I understand your irritation, but the event was as simple as this: One day I inquired of our elder, "what ever happened to Hope?" he replied something like, "I heard he moved to NC and got swallowed up selling NSA." He was just repeating what he had heard, in Cleveland I presume. I guess this occurred some 10-15 years ago.

I understand it is now more "honorable" to be called "leader of the rebellion" in the SE. :)

Sounds like 2+2 equals 282. :eek:

Imagine what they have said about me. The GLA rumor mill can be just as nasty as the LSM machinery.

There is nothing honorable about leading a rebellion in the SE. I would say that was a riduculous charge. Bill Mallon did a lot more than I to fellowship with others. He mainly fellowshiped with brothers in Georgia and Florida. What little sphere I had if any in the Southeast was pretty much confined to NC. After moving here my main thrust was to stay out of the flows from Anaheim. I actually desired to be out of all the stuff going on. I avoided LSM activities and never went to any of the Taipei stuff. I had more contact with Europe than with Georgia or Florida. The stories about my being some kind of leader of a rebellion came from Irving Texas.

Of course I was not only not in the LSM flow but rather in fellowship with the rebellious brothers. Now I learn that I was also "swallowed up by selling NSA."

Southern California brothers were very guilty of being tale bearers. Texas brothers were deep into slander. It appears that you GLA brethern also knew how to spread tales. All spoke about things they did not know about.

It would be good for the brothers in the GLA to consider 2 Cor 7:11, For observe this very thing, that you sorrowed in a godly manner: What diligence it produced in you, what clearing of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, what vindication! In all things you proved yourselves to be clear in this matter.NKJV

Are the brothers in the GLA really clear in the matter of taking what WL and the LSM did to many saints in 1988-89.

Hope, Don Rutledge

[Terry]

Southern California brothers were very guilty of being tale bearers. Texas brothers were deep into slander. It appears that you GLA brethern also knew how to spread tales. All spoke about things they did not know about.

Are the brothers in the GLA really clear in the matter of taking what WL and the LSM did to many saints in 1988-89.


1. Is this what it means to remain faithful to the vision through Living Stream Ministry as the Lord's move on the earth?

2. Not just the great lakes area, but many responsible brothers nationwide and worldwide are not clear in this matter.

Terry

[Ohio]

Southern California brothers were very guilty of being tale bearers. Texas brothers were deep into slander. It appears that you GLA brethern also knew how to spread tales. All spoke about things they did not know about.

It would be good for the brothers in the GLA to consider 2 Cor 7:11, For observe this very thing, that you sorrowed in a godly manner: What diligence it produced in you, what clearing of yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what vehement desire, what zeal, what vindication! In all things you proved yourselves to be clear in this matter. NKJV

Are the brothers in the GLA really clear in the matter of taking what WL and the LSM did to many saints in 1988-89.

Last year I heard a story that made me sick. Brothers spreading rumors about brothers supposedly spreading rumors. It's so sad how religious zeal and man-pleasing forces precious brothers to play the "blame game." Face-saving and rapport with headquarters will subtly coerce some to betray even their comrades. Let's be honest here. "The work" still oversees and rules the churches. Many brothers still feel responsible to "the work" concerning the churches they serve. When things go sour, how much easier it becomes to find local scapegoats than it is to take ownership.

Your question about whether "the GLA is really clear in the matter of taking what WL and the LSM did to many saints in 1988-89," is surprising. I have not seen nor heard anything which would indicate this. GLA authors place the blame squarely on the BB's. Unofficially, they might now receive these quarantined brothers and you into fellowship, but that is a far cry from publicly owning any and all irresponsible actions from that time period.

Here's two verses which seems to govern GLA actions, 2 Tim 3.14, "Knowing from whom you have learned them" and 1 Co 4.15, "You do not have many fathers." I have heard these verses mentioned by some who have switched their allegiances from Anaheim to Cleveland. The point is simple, these ones who are our "father," from whom we have learned, we take note. "Fathers," like our human fathers, don't have to be perfect, so we cover them, we learn from them, we honor them, we protect them. Right or wrong is not ours to judge. This is the same mindset which governs the BB's, and which gave so much license to WL.

[Terry]

Your question about whether "the GLA is really clear in the matter of taking what WL and the LSM did to many saints in 1988-89," is surprising. I have not seen nor heard anything which would indicate this. GLA authors place the blame squarely on the BB's. Unofficially, they might now receive these quarantined brothers and you into fellowship, but that is a far cry from publicly owning any and all irresponsible actions from that time period.

Here's two verses which seems to govern GLA actions, 2 Tim 3.14, "Knowing from whom you have learned them" and 1 Co 4.15, "You do not have many fathers." I have heard these verses mentioned by some who have switched their allegiances from Anaheim to Cleveland. The point is simple, these ones who are our "father," from whom we have learned, we take note. "Fathers," like our human fathers, don't have to be perfect, so we cover them, we learn from them, we honor them, we protect them. Right or wrong is not ours to judge. This is the same mindset which governs the BB's, and which gave so much license to WL.

Ohio, we each have our responsiblity and accountablility. Whatever region brothers are from, they cannot play the blame game because LSM told untruths or white lies. If brothers are not clear on the matter, there is heavy searching to be done until these brothers are clear. If a brother is clear with what LSM relased concerning so-called "rebellious" or "ambitious" brothers, Amen.

The one who is our father is only one; Christ Jesus. It was Jesus who was crucified for me. It is Jesus whose name I was baptized in. I have had many instructors in Christ, but only one spiritual father. To cover brothers because there is a percieved spiritual obligation is absurd. I am thankful for instruction I have received, but by no way do I feel obligated to cover or protect.

Terry

[UntoHim]

"In the meantime, however, Passantino Coburn would do well to desist
from asking us to trust her judgment in the matter.
Gretchen, we’re interested in your research, not your résumé."


As Posted At:
http://www.religiousresearcher.org/blog/?p=293


Testimonies Are Not Enough: CRI, Answers in Action, and the Local Churches (http://www.religiousresearcher.org/blog/?p=293)

Posted by: Rob Bowman in apologetics (http://www.religiousresearcher.org/blog/?cat=21)

According to an article posted online two days ago at Christianity Today (http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009/januaryweb-only/104-11.0.html), “Two notable critics have changed their minds on the controversial ‘local churches’ movement that follow the teachings of Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.” The two critics are Hank Hanegraaff, president of the Christian Research Institute (CRI), and Gretchen Passantino Coburn, director of Answers in Action (AIA). The article refers to a booklet to which Hanegraaff and Passantino Coburn contributed and that the Defense and Confirmation Project, a pro-Local Churches group, published in November 2007. Entitled The Local Churches: “Genuine Believers and Fellow Members of the Body of Christ” (http://www.contendingforthefaith.com/eBooks/Hanegraaff-Passantino-Fuller.pdf), the booklet includes “Testimonies” (as the title page quite correctly calls them) from Hanegraaff, Passantino Coburn, and Fuller Theological Seminary. Fuller’s contribution is a statement representing the assessment of Richard Mouw, the school’s president, and two other Fuller professors.

I have been quite reluctant to enter the fray of this debate, which has actually been going on for several years, but have decided now to say something.

An Aside about Past Associations
Before I begin, in the interests of full disclosure, I should acknowledge that I have a past history with all three of these organizations (which will explain my reluctance). I graduated from Fuller Seminary with a Master’s in biblical studies and theology in 1981. Mouw was not the president at the time, and I have met him only once, when I talked with him later in his president’s office at the seminary. In 1984, I went to work at CRI under Walter Martin, and continued on staff after Martin’s passing and his succession by Hanegraaff in 1989. In January 1992, CRI terminated my employment, fraudulently claiming they were laying me off. (In truth, they got rid of me after I quietly protested Hanegraaff’s attempts to have me ghostwrite books for him.) Over the next several years, I participated in efforts to bring various accountability issues to the attention of CRI and its board, including playing a leading role in an ad hoc group of former employees and volunteers called the Group for CRI Accountability. In 1996, Gretchen Passantino (now Coburn, having remarried after the passing of her first husband in 2003) posted an article on the AIA web site (no longer there) that accused me, among others, of having made “false accusations” against Hanegraaff and of being a deceiver whom other Christians should avoid. The Passantinos never identified what these allegedly false accusations were and never retracted their statement (although they did eventually remove the offending web page). My last communication with both Hanegraaff and Passantino took place in June 2001, when I wrote letters to them (to which neither ever responded) regarding their public statements concerning D. James Kennedy and Hanegraaff’s plagiarism of Kennedy’s famous manual Evangelism Explosion. Those letters were also the last time I have written or said anything publicly concerning Hanegraaff and Passantino Coburn, until now.

None of this has anything to do with the Local Churches. However, if anyone is inclined to dismiss what I have to say here in an ad hominem fashion, there is plenty of grist for that mill.

Recent Events Concerning the Local Churches
The main point of the Christianity Today article (“Cult Watchers Reconsider: Former detractors of Nee and Lee now endorse ‘local churches’”) is that the November 2008 booklet marks a recent change in the view taken by Hanegraaff and Passantino Coburn of the Local Churches. It asserts that Hanegraaff and Passantino Coburn “each published their new support in a November booklet by the Defense and Confirmation Project, founded to rebut criticism of Nee and Lee.” However, the article’s claim that this is a new position is false. Two and a half years earlier, in August 2006, Hanegraaff filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief on behalf of the Local Churches (http://www.apologeticsindex.org/docs/HanegraaffSupportsLocalChurch.pdf) in its failed attempt to sue Harvest House for $136 million over the inclusion of the Local Churches in its book The Encyclopedia of Cults and New Religions. Gretchen Passantino also filed a letter to the court supporting Hanegraaff’s brief (http://www.apologeticsindex.org/docs/Passantino.pdf). Although the Christia

Numerous evangelical scholars and countercult ministry workers were appalled. In January 2007, over 60 such scholars and ministry leaders signed an “Open Letter (http://www.open-letter.org/pdf/OL_PressRelease.pdf)” asking the Local Churches to demonstrate their theological orthodoxy by specifically retracting or disavowing various statements in the published writings of Witness Lee. The Open Letter also asked the Local Churches to agree to stop using litigation to silence theological criticism from Christian writers and publishers. The signatories to this letter included the presidents or deans of eight evangelical seminaries, IRR’s Luke Wilson, former CRI researchers Craig Hawkins and Paul Carden, other countercult scholars and leaders such as James Bjornstad and Don Veinot, and E. Calvin Beisner—another former CRI researcher who also happens to be Gretchen Passantino’s brother. The following month, in February 2007—almost two years ago—Passantino posted an article on her web site saying much the same thing as her testimony in the November 2008 booklet. The article, “Apologetics Conclusions Reconsidered . . . . A Case in Point: The Local Churches & Living Stream Ministry (http://www.answers.org/news/article.php?story=20070223165418855),” announced that Passantino and Hanegraaff had completed a three-year reassessment of the Local Churches and concluded they were theologically orthodox. Passantino neither acknowledged nor attempted to address any of the criticisms of her support for the Local Churches’ lawsuit or the issues raised in the Open Letter.

With this background in place, I want to offer a response to the DCP booklet, focusing on the contribution of Passantino Coburn. (All parenthetical page references are to this booklet.) Let me make clear that my focus here is not on the salvation, spiritual condition, or even the theological orthodoxy of the people in the Local Churches. I am responding to the “testimonies” of the authors as they appear in the booklet. I am quite open to new information and reasoned reassessments of old conclusions. Unfortunately, the testimonies of Hanegraaff and Passantino Coburn offered neither new information nor reasoned reassessments.

Should We Trust Passantino Coburn?
Hanegraaff’s piece is essentially, as he rightly calls it, a “preface” to the lengthy testimony of Gretchen Passantino Coburn. According to Hanegraaff, “Gretchen is the quintessential example of a brilliant yet humble servant of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (9). This is the sort of effusive praise of a fellow believer in Christ with which I am loathe to disagree publicly, no matter what the evidence. I could and ordinarily would simply let it pass, but Passantino Coburn herself insists on making her résumé and her personal story and values an issue.

Passantino Coburn devotes several pages to her own spiritual journey and credentials (13-18). She declares, “Over the last 37 years I have become one of the leading Christian evangelical apologists determining whether spiritual movements that claim to represent biblical Christianity are orthodox or heretical” (14). Speaking of her conversion to the Christian faith, she reports, “My professors were profoundly disappointed that one of their brightest, most articulate young scholars had thrown her mind away on hysterical religion” (15). Her career path in apologetics, she says, “paired my voracious thirst for knowledge with my deep devotion to Christian truth” (16). “Over the years,” she tells us, she and her first husband Bob “became trusted as well-reasoned, empathetic, accurate, theologically conservative Christian apologists” (17). In her concluding “About the Author” she claims that AIA is “one of the oldest and most respected apologetics organizations” and that she “is a respected author of books and articles on apologetics, world religions, and theology” (28).

Her lack of humility aside, Passantino Coburn’s point in offering these self-descriptions is to encourage the reader to trust her judgment on the question of the orthodoxy and soundness of the Local Churches. Ironically, this is precisely what a good apologist and trustworthy scholar never does. The job of an apologist and scholar is to present the facts, along with a reasoned interpretation of those facts, to support the conclusion. Our job is to share the evidence with others in such a way that they are equipped to reach that same conclusion, not based on our trustworthiness or integrity or years of experience or brilliance or devotion to truth, but based on their own perception of the evidence and their own grasp of the arguments. Apologists gain respect not by asserting their reliability or assuring us they are respected but by doing reliable work that deserves respect. When an apologist says, “Trust me,” that apologist has just lost the argument.

Passantino Coburn claims that she has performed a much more thorough, complete, and cogent assessment of the Local Churches than the one she and Bob Passantino did in the 1970s, and therefore that we should accept her current assessment in place of her earlier work:
“Other apologetics colleagues continue to insist that the teachings and practices of the local churches are heretical and outside Christian orthodoxy. Surprisingly, they base their insistence on the very same incomplete work Bob and I produced between 1975 and 1980, despite the fact that I can demonstrate the insufficiency in breadth, depth, and analysis of that former research base. My current assessment should carry much greater weight than did that first endeavor. Unless and until any of my dissenting colleagues are willing to engage in the much larger body of documentation—enhanced by a much deeper application of the study of the wider Christian church not only in its diversity around the world, but also in its diversity through the centuries, and augmented by a much greater number of personal interactions and direct conversations with leading and ordinary members—their continuing denunciation is untenable.”

The problem here is twofold. First, not everyone who thinks the Local Churches are heretical base their view on the Passantinos’ earlier work. At least some of the critics of the Local Churches have done their own research, reading primary sources and talking directly to members in the Local Churches.

Second, in reality Passantino Coburn is asking her readers to accept her current testimony over the evidence she had earlier documented. She asserts that she “can demonstrate the insufficiency in breadth, depth, and analysis of that former research base.” Unfortunately, up to now she has not offered any such demonstration. She also claims that her new assessment is based on a “much larger body of documentation,” but so far—two years after first announcing her reassessment—she has not presented any of this alleged documentation. In the case of the earlier work, the Passantinos backed up their conclusions regarding the Local Churches with a heavily documented analysis of the movement’s teachings from its primary sources. Their appendix “The Local Church of Witness Lee” in the book The New Cults (by Walter Martin with Gretchen Passantino [Santa Ana, CA: Vision House, 1980], 379-406) contained quotation after quotation from Witness Lee and other Local Church publications to document the assessment offered there. Although the number of citations does not tell the whole story (quality of selection and interpretation is at least as important as quantity), it is worth observing that the 1980 appendix contained 56 endnotes, 43 of which referred to Living Stream publications. The body of the appendix included well over a hundred sentences of direct quotations from Living Streams publications that the reader could read for himself and from which he could reach an informed opinion as to the soundness of the Passantinos’ critical assessment of the Local Churches’ teachings. By contrast, Passantino Coburn’s 16-page testimony in the 2008 DCP booklet contains not a single sentence from any Living Stream publication, not a single sentence from Witness Lee, and not a single footnote, endnote, or other citation. In place of such documented evidence, she merely asks readers to trust her new assessment.

In her concluding “About the Author,” Passantino Coburn states that she is contributing to a forthcoming “multi-part reevaluation of local churches’ teachings and practices for The Christian Research Journal” (28). Apparently this reevaluation has been in the works for some time. In her February 2007 web article announcing her new assessment of the Local Churches as completely orthodox, she had likewise referred to such a forthcoming article: “AIA & CRI will publish their analysis of local church teachings in the Christian Research Journal (http://www.equip.org/journal/index.asp) later this year.” Two years later, the article has yet to appear. If and when it does, evangelical apologists should carefully and fairly consider whatever substantive arguments the publication presents for its reassessment of the Local Churches. In the meantime, however, Passantino Coburn would do well to desist from asking us to trust her judgment in the matter. Gretchen, we’re interested in your research, not your résumé.

[UntoHim]

I received the following email (errr...spam) from Hank Hanegraaff and CRI. (Quite a while back I tried to get in contact with Hank about why he has never made even the slightest attempt to interview ex Local Church members before he gave his knee-jerk "endorsement" of The LC/LSM. Instead of a thoughtful reply, I got a "form letter" from one of his flunkies, and then I got put on his spam list) So now, several times a week it seems, I get pleas for donations and/or to buy one of Hank's books. Usually I just delete them, but I'm glad I took a closer look at this one.

So Mr. Hank, let me get this straight. You wanna tell the world that the Local Church of Witness Lee is nothing close to a cult (not theologically or socially), and that the teachings of Lee are orthodox and in line with the historical Christian faith.... Yet you wanna tell us that Paula White, TD Jakes, Joyce Meyer, John Hagee, Joel Osteen and "a cast of characters" are "a cultic movement within Christianity that threatens to undermine the very foundation of the faith once for all delivered to the saints"?

Hank, your credibility (what little is left) is leaking like a sieve. Far be it from me to come to the rescue of the likes of Paula White, TD Jakes and the others listed here... but you're going to slap the "cultic movement" tag on these guys, all the while singing the praises and yukking it up with some people who tell their members that "the process of sanctification" is only taking place in their tiny little sect? Did Yu or Wilde get around to the part where they tell you that "James was devoid of the divine revelation"? Were you in the little boys room when they covered the part about "Judaism is satanic, Catholicism is demonic and Christianity is Christless"?

Really Hank... You're "research" is leaving a lot to be desired.

Dear Partner in the Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,
In the twenty-first century a host of prosperity preachers ranging from Paula White to T.D. Jakes and Joyce Meyer have created a crisis in Christianity and the culture that I could scarcely have imagined two decades ago.
And that is precisely why I have decided to launch a major new release titled Christianity in Crisis: 21st Century.
Christianity in Crisis: 21st Century unmasks the fatal flaws of a cultic movement within Christianity that threatens to undermine the very foundation of “the faith once for all delivered to the saints.”
It provides comprehensive information as well as biblical evaluation of the newest luminaries in the Faith constellation—virtual rock stars who command the attention of Presidential candidates and media moguls.
It exposes a cast of characters who uniformly traffic in make-believe miracles, urban legends, counterfeit Christs, and twisted theological pretexts including:
“God cannot do anything in this earth realm unless we give Him permission.”
“Keep saying it—‘I have equality with God’—talk yourself into it.”
“Being poor is a sin.”
“There is no sickness for the saint of God…not even a headache, sinus problem, not even a toothache—nothing!”
Televangelist John Hagee goes so far as to shamelessly promote the pretext of a prosperous Jesus—who lives in a “big house” and wears “designer” clothes—and brazenly depicts a sectarian Christ who “refused to be Messiah to the Jews.”
The progression from bad to worse continues with the pretexts of prosperity preachers ranging from Benny Hinn to Creflo Dollar.
This modern-day crisis continues to deepen as an ever-increasing number of such prosperity preachers convince devotees that what happens in their lives—whether good or bad—is a direct result of what they say. If you, like they, are healthy and prosperous, words created your reality. Conversely, if your baby dies or your wife contracts cancer, you are the prime suspect.
Says Joel Osteen, “The moment you speak something out, you give birth to it. This is a spiritual principle, and it works whether what you are saying is good or bad, positive or negative.”
Osteen’s words are eerily reminiscent of those of New Thought practitioner Joe Vitale—contributor to Rhonda Byrne’s The Secret. When asked by Larry King whether a nine-year old Florida girl who was brutally raped and murdered attracted this horror to herself, Vitale responded, “We are attracting everything to ourselves and there is no exception.”
While Osteen and Vitale have noteworthy differences, they are united in the belief that the force of faith is so powerful that even God (however you define him) is bound by its irrevocable reality.
My heart aches for the parent who put his dead baby on ice and in the midst of tears and desperation drove three hundred and fifty miles to a counterfeit revival center because he trusted the testimonies of Faith preachers who were touting resurrections from the dead.
I equally grieve the millions who have left Faith churches in the midst of failed faith formulas. Some conclude that God must not love them; others question the integrity of the whole Christian enterprise.
The tragedy is that all too often they have been deluded into looking for God in all the wrong places. The real experience is not found in counterfeit formulas but in Christian fundamentals.
Thousands have been helped out of the Faith movement by the Christian Research Institute, but many more must be rescued. Your gift today is not just to the Christian Research Institute and the Bible Answer Man broadcast—you are giving through CRI and touching the lives of men, women, and children— the majority of whom we will never know this side of eternity.
P.S.- For your gift of $250 or more I will sign a copy for you. And for your gift of $500 or more I will personalize a leather-bound, numbered, limited edition of Christianity in Crisis: 21st Century. Considering the ferocity of the battle and what is at stake, please send your most generous gift to keep the Bible Answer Man broadcast on the air, and CRI standing strong.

[IDon'tKnow]

Don't know any names in the email so I can't talk about them. So anyway

P.S.- For your gift of $250 or more I will sign a copy for you. And for your gift of $500 or more I will personalize a leather-bound, numbered, limited edition of Christianity in Crisis: 21st Century. Considering the ferocity of the battle and what is at stake, please send your most generous gift to keep the Bible Answer Man broadcast on the air, and CRI standing strong. This was seriously in Chris's email. Your not just funning. That was one of the things which bothered me right before leaving. I just couldn't see how a group who you consider to be Christless, synagogues of satan, degraded, and whatever, and you publicly state as such from the podium could give such a glowing endorsement towards you, maybe a grudging acceptance that you actually aren't the spawn of satan, but their almost certainly going to have a bit of a problem with you.

I'm wondering whether this quote could have something to do with the change of heart. At this point I don't really have a reason to think the brothers would actually bribe someone to endorse them. That said I now have reason to believe they did alot of things I didn't think they would do.

[Paul Cox]

Ole Hankey boy rails against the "prosperity gospel" and then wraps up his letter with a plea for an enhancement of his own prosperity (considering his checkered history of dealing with funds).

Oooh, a "personalized, leather-bound, numbered, limited edition of Christianity in Crisis: 21st Century." Gotta have one of them. Let me see, I'll go to Joel Olsteen and find out how to prosper to the tune of $500.00, then I'll be able to afford such a luxury.

Hank handy-graft is knee slapping, drop dead funny.

Roger

[countmeworthy]

is well known as 'The BIBLE ANSWER MAN'. Yeppers...he has 'all the answers'....

In the 80's and 90's, I listened to Hank on the radio almost religiously. He was very 'intelligent'...and appeared very 'learned'. I even caught 2 programs when he criticized the local church, calling it a cult back then !! He advised the caller to stay away from the LC. But true to his 'position', he criticized just about everyone who wasn't 'by the book', that is HIS BOOK.

I eventually stopped listening to him..simply because he was on when I couldn't listen to him. A couple of years ago, I picked him up on the radio again but this man's ego had grown to the size of a watermelon,imho! And his views on what I consider fundamental teachings of the Faith were beginning to change. I believe I heard him talk about the LC too and that their doctrine on the Triune God was sound. I can't remember what else he said about the LC. My concern was the way he was twisting things because of his 'intellectualism'.

I have seen a few of the LSM videos where the head honchos are speaking. And I can 'see' why they are getting along. There is a lot of 'intellectualism' floating around the LSM leaders. So it is the meeting of the 'MINDS' coming together in agreement.

Sadly...it is not the MIND OF CHRIST bringing Hank and the LSM together.

I am quite aware of the criticizisms TD JAKES, Paula White, John Hagee, Joel Osteen, Benny Hinn and many others have received from Hankee boy.
These people receive a LOT of criticism from many, many people in the Christian world as well.
I've listened to all of them and more not mentioned in this list for I want to be able to discern for myself with the Holy Spirit's leading who is credible and who is not. I don't want to criticize just because someone is turned off by them..or had a bad experience with a particular ministry.

Some ARE very credible..but a person has to know the Lord Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit AND the Word of God..to have spiritual discernment.

Eventually God is going to expose every single person who is a charleaton. It ain't gonna be pretty.

[djohnson]

IDon'tKnow you astutely address the hypocrisy that is the glowing trademark of LSM. Sure they'll play to their audience and lecture other Christians about "Christianity" calling us whores, etc. But when it suits their purposes they'll change hats and cozy up with Christianity and run around town trying to find some that will endorse them. What does that say about them and what does it say about those who endorse them? Peel back a few layers and religion is a dirty and nasty business.

[OBW]

Worse than that, they'll sue your pants off if you call them half the awful names they call the rest of Christianity.

Somehow I thought that the core commandment of Christianity was love -- love for both God and your fellow man. I guess the problem with the LC is that they refuse to be commanded to do anything except buy more LSM books.

[11of101]

An email from CRI peddling luxury cruise trip


Dear ******,
The Christian Research Institute has an incredible opportunity to share with our valued ministry partners.
Alaska...
We're thrilled at the opportunity to cruise the pristine and majestic Alaska coastline, and we're hoping you'll make the voyage all the more enjoyable by coming along with us!
We set sail on June 3, 2011 aboard the five-star Celebrity Millennium from lovely Vancouver, BC, bound for Juneau, Skagway, Hubbard Glacier and Ketchikan. And if you take advantage of placing your deposit before August 31st, 2010, you can experience this incredible adventure for as low as $796.00 plus taxes and fees.
Our cruise conferences have exceeded expectations in every possible way, and we anticipate even greater adventures ahead. Enjoy smooth sailing and gorgeous scenery along Alaska's beautiful Inside Passage. Invigorate relationships, old or new, as you refresh your spirit and strengthen your faith on this journey.
As you relax and marvel at the magnificence of God's creation, you'll also learn about some new exciting apologetic tools to defend your faith. Our teaching staff will be captained by the Bible Answer Man Hank Hanegraaff who will lead a team consisting of the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL editor-in-chief, Elliot Miller, and Grammy Award Winning Christian musician Steve Camp. Our team of scholars are preparing original material to share with you, messages sure to equip and inspire you. We'll also take some time to celebrate and remember God's faithfulness for 50 years of equipping and empowering the saints.
Won't you consider joining us in Alaska this June? If so, then take advantage of the incredible savings by registering before August 31st.
Registering for the cruise conference is easy. We' working again with our partners Sovereign Cruises and Events, and you can sign up via our website at www.equip.org or call 877-768-2784 ext. 101. Simply indicate your interest in the Christian Research Institute cruise, and their friendly staff will guide you each step of the way.
We look forward to seeing you in Alaska this coming June!
EQUIP.ORG 877-768-2784 ext. 101
*All bookings must be made through Sovereign Cruises and Events LLC to participate in the event.
================================

Thankfully there are still man-eating grizzly bears in Alaska, (the Exxon-Valdez slick didn't wipe them out?). oh Lord, send one to feast on HH as he takes a dip in the ocean. amen.

11of101

[11of101]

I listened to (yawn) the one hour HH-CW-AY broadcast of September 2008 last night, but I didn't catch the "whoppers from Burger King" part. I think I need to listen to the bonus hour for that. I can't find it on equip.org. Can someone please post a relevant up to date link to hear them whoppers for real.

Trekkies for Christ!!

11of101

[PriestlyScribe]

I listened to (yawn) the one hour HH-CW-AY broadcast of September 2008 last night, but I didn't catch the "whoppers from Burger King" part. I think I need to listen to the bonus hour for that. I can't find it on equip.org. Can someone please post a relevant up to date link to hear them whoppers for real.

Trekkies for Christ!!

11of101
I would also like to hear this HH broadcast for the first time.

Can anyone supply an active link?

P.S.

[11of101]

Better Call Saul

One of the things I find most distasteful about the LSM/CRI thing; if LSM were truly sincere in eleviating saints' fears about LR's cultlike image, they should have offered the "We were Wrong" article for free.

I wonder if LSM's legal counsel is like this guy, Saul Goodman...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiLvZJb7jcg

Yes, I'm a huge fan of the other BBs : Breaking Bad.

Resistance is not futile - Vive La Resistance mon freres!!!

11of101