Open Letter to Ron Kangas

[Indiana]

www.HidingHistoryintheLordsRecovery.us/RonKangasLetterOct2009.pdf

Ron Kangas and others, I am told, feel that I am the "embodiment of the Accuser of the brethren", when all that I have been addressing over the last 8 years is their own false accusations of the brethren, which are well-documented. This letter in the link addresses Ron Kangas and his defamatory word spoken about me in Ecuador to South American co-workers.

(In the letter, expect a pause of less than a minute at the beginning of the tape of his speaking.)

www.HidingHistoryintheLordsRecovery.us/RonKangasLetterOct2009.pdf

[Terry]

I've listened to Ron's message in Ecaudor and read the open letter. If there's a lie Steve has spoken, an offense comitted, Ron should definitely speak a similar word at a training or at a blending conference in North America. If there's an offense warranting public announcement, appropriate steps should be taken.
Until that time, since Steve hasn't been called a man of lies, that implies his historical-based writings have merit.

Below are Watchman Nee's words on what lies are.

http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?id=%23%23%5D%5B%2E%0A

Terry

[YP0534]

Below are Watchman Nee's words on what lies are.

http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?id=%23%23%5D%5B%2E%0A

Terry


Terry, can you please give the citation?

LSM doesn't permit deep linking...

[Terry]

Terry, can you please give the citation?

LSM doesn't permit deep linking...

Message to New Believers (3)
Chapter: WORDS

"B. What Lies Are
1. Double-tongued
To be double-tongued is to lie. A person is lying when he first says one thing and then turns around and says something else, when he first says yes and then no, when he first says that something is good and then says that it is bad, or when he first agrees that something is right and then says that it is wrong. This is not just a matter of a wavering mind but a matter of lying.

2. Speaking according to What One Likes or Dislikes
We tell others what we like and keep silent about what we do not like. We speak about what is profitable to us and keep silent about things that are not profitable to us. This is also a kind of lying. Many people purposely withhold half of a story. They withhold the things that are profitable to others, especially things that are profitable to their enemies, and remain silent about them. Instead, they talk about things that hurt, damage, or bring loss to others. This is lying. Many people do not speak according to truth and reality, but according to their own likes and dislikes. Many words are not based on facts but on sentiments. Such people speak certain things because they like to speak them, or they speak about certain persons because they like them. They change their tone when the conversation turns to people or things they do not like. This kind of speaking is totally according to one's likes and dislikes. It is speaking according to one's emotion, not according to truth and reality. Please keep in mind that this is lying. Inaccurate words are a serious sin. Willful deception is even more serious, and it is a greater sin before God. We must not speak according to our emotion but according to facts. Either we must not speak at all, or we must speak according to facts and the truth. We cannot speak according to our feeling. If we do, we are lying willfully before God.

3. Speaking according to One's Hopes
Furthermore, we must learn to put away our own feelings; we should not have any expectations of others. Many words today represent hopes rather than facts. They do not convey facts; they only convey a man's hopes. A person often reviles a sister or a brother according to his sentiment rather than according to fact. He only hopes that a sister is as bad as he thinks, yet he speaks as if the sister is indeed that bad. Or he only hopes that a brother will fall, yet he speaks as if the brother has fallen already. He speaks according to what he wishes would happen, not according to what has actually happened. Do you see the fundamental problem here? Often a person speaks according to what he expects in his heart. His words do not convey what has actually happened. Rather than speaking of the actual situation, he speaks of what he expects the situation to be.

4. Adding One's Own Thoughts
Why is it that many words are altered when they pass from one mouth to another? A statement often is changed completely after passing through three or four mouths. Why? This is because each person adds his own thoughts instead of finding out the facts. No one tries to find out the facts, yet everyone tries to add his own thoughts. This is lying.

There is one basic principle of speaking: One must not speak according to his feeling or hope. A person is lying when he is not speaking according to truth and reality but according to expectation and hope. We should learn to speak according to facts and not express any opinion of our own. If we are giving our opinion, we need to make it clear that this is our opinion. When we are speaking a fact, we need to state that this is a fact. We must separate our opinions from facts. We should not mix facts with our opinions. What we think a person is and what a person actually is are two different things. At the most we can say that the fact indicates one thing but we have a different thought concerning the matter.

5. Exaggeration
There is another type of lie which is very prevalent in the church—exaggeration. Please bear in mind that inaccurate numbers and inaccurate words, as well as the love of big words, strong words, or exaggerated words, are different forms of lies because there is falsehood in all of them.

Today if you want to know where a saint's heart is before the Lord, all you have to do is tell him something and ask him to tell others about it. You will immediately know where his heart is before the Lord. A person who fears God, who has learned the proper lessons, and who has been dealt with by God will consider speaking a great thing. He will not dare to speak carelessly or spread words carelessly. He will pay attention to accurate words. When you commit a word to a person who has not been dealt with or disciplined by the Lord, he will spread the word zealously. In his spreading you will find that he is a frivolous, deceitful, and dishonest person. He can add many words of his own and withhold words that should be spoken."

Terry

[awareness]

www.HidingHistoryintheLordsRecovery.us/RonKangasLetterOct2009.pdf

Ron Kangas and others, I am told, feel that I am the "embodiment of the Accuser of the brethren", when all that I have been addressing over the last 8 years is their own false accusations of the brethren, which are well-documented. This letter in the link addresses Ron Kangas and his defamatory word spoken about me in Ecuador to South American co-workers.

(In the letter, expect a pause of less than a minute at the beginning of the tape of his speaking.)

www.HidingHistoryintheLordsRecovery.us/RonKangasLetterOct2009.pdf

Steve, I listened to brother Ron in Ecuador, and am shocked at the claptrap coming out of him. He uses discernment of the two trees in the Eden to basically drive home the notion that, LSM and Co. is life, and all else is death.

He might just as well have stood up and said, "Everything coming from Lee, LSM, and the Blended Brothers is the tree of life, and anything coming from anywhere else is the tree of knowledge of good and evil, especially anything coming off the web, or from Steve Isitt."

Brother Ron has been drinking too much of the kool-aid at LSM. As a result, your efforts to reconcile with him will fail. Those affiliated with the LSM LC are like the Borg. They're hooked up to command central, and can not allow anything foreign in their minds. They need to be infected with a virus that reaches the core. Good luck with that.

[Terry]

He uses discernment of the two trees in the Eden to basically drive home the notion that, LSM and Co. is life, and all else is death.


Harold, that's the perception I received from listening to the audio. Steve's writing equals the Tree of Knowledge. It's understandable. Whenever someone has a word to remove the veil and exposing the light, it is decried as being from the Tree of Knowledge.

As to your notion that LSM, DCP, etc is life and all other ministries is death, how can I take that seriously? There are other edifying ministries out there. All one has to do is listen, discern, and receive.

Terry

[Indiana]

Steve, I listened to brother Ron in Ecuador, and am shocked at the claptrap coming out of him. He uses discernment of the two trees in the Eden to basically drive home the notion that, LSM and Co. is life, and all else is death.

He might just as well have stood up and said, "Everything coming from Lee, LSM, and the Blended Brothers is the tree of life, and anything coming from anywhere else is the tree of knowledge of good and evil, especially anything coming off the web, or from Steve Isitt."

Brother Ron has been drinking too much of the kool-aid at LSM. As a result, your efforts to reconcile with him will fail. Those affiliated with the LSM LC are like the Borg. They're hooked up to command central, and can not allow anything foreign in their minds. They need to be infected with a virus that reaches the core. Good luck with that.


Yes, well, who could argue (intelligently) with what you have said.

[kisstheson]

Dear ones,

Wow! There is a really sobering, hard-hitting excerpt form WN in the middle of dear brother Steve I's letter:

"I would like to draw your attention to the basis of our oneness. This is fundamental. The basis of our oneness is the forsaking of sins. Please bear in mind that God's children are divided today because of the problem of sins. The matter of sins is always implicated. Because of many sins, there are many divisions. Many of God's children have a basic misunderstanding; they think that patience and forbearance are the basis of oneness. There is no such thing as this. The Bible never takes patience or forbearance as the basis of our oneness. The Bible always takes the forsaking of sins as the basis of our oneness.

If anyone wants to have fellowship with God today, he must walk in the light. We will have fellowship with one another when we are in the light. We may say that fellowship is the basis of our oneness, but the basis of fellowship is our dealing with sin and our removal of sin. When all of us are in God's light, we have fellowship one with another. Other than this, there is no fellowship.

…So, the basis of oneness is not in tolerating sin but in judging sin. There is no possibility of oneness between those who judge and those who do not judge. If anyone desires to seek oneness with God’s children, he must judge sin with all the children of God. If some judge sin and others do not, can there be oneness? But it is right to judge sin. He who judges sin is one with all who judge sin. May God be merciful to him who does not judge sin that he too may rise up and judge.”

(Watchman Nee, Love One Another, pp. 148-151)

Oh my! This shines a whole new light on the events of the late 1980's regarding those who overlooked the recurring sin and thought it best to "became like an ostrich with their head in the sand". I would ask the BB's: Dear ones, who were the real divisive ones in the late 1980's? I know you think very hightly of WN, so I beg you to please take heed to this quotation in brother Steve's letter. If even WN's words find you wanting, how much more may the True Judge's assessment of your words and actions in the late 1980's find you sadly wanting?

Dear BB's: REPENT!! Repent while there is still time to repent!!

[awareness]

kistheson:
I would ask the BB's: Dear ones, who were the real divisive ones in the late 1980's?

That would be the divide ones ; the ones pulling a bait and switch, or selling one thing and delivering another. Outer division in a system comes from inner division in the system.

When we're told that God's eternal purpose is the outpouring of God's Spirit, into human spirits, and then what's delivered is spirit delivered from an earthly command center, we've been sold a deceptive/defective product.

So it starts out divided, and the fruit of it is divided.

[Terry]

As I was listening to Art Katz's message "What if?" http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_John21/What_if_by_Art_Katz_Intro_E032.mp3

I realized why Ron spoke so negatively about Steve Isitt. Man by nature do not have the stomach for truth. Our spirit recognizes truth, but our fallen man reacts against it.
Art's example was the Dachau Concentration camp. If you go there now, everything is tidied up. Hardly a resemblance of 1945. In our fallen nature the easy path is to sweep things under the rug.

Terry

[Terry]

To get a better understanding on Ron Kangas' characterizing Steve Isitt as "man of death", one would need to listen to Bill Freeman's message on Need for Transparent Relationships which can be heard at http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/

Bill Freeman spoke this word in 1984 and this specific portion is from verse references in Luke 11: 20-23. It is what Bill Freeman called "a settled down mind"

Luke 11: 20-23

But if I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed.
But when someone stronger than he attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armor on which he has relied and distributes his plunder.
He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with me, scatters.

Bill speaks the word armed (verse 21) is in the perfect tense. In the Greek implying a settled state. The possessions are at peace. “Don’t change me. Don’t disturb my way of thinking. My way of thinking has been intact for years. It’s all here in peace. I’ve reasoned a certain way. I’ve thought a certain way. I’ve expressed myself a certain way. I’ve related to people in a certain way. I’ve been well fortified and armed.” This is the settled down mind. In 2 Corinthians 10:4 Paul calls this a stronghold.

Terry

[Terry]

Indiana, considering how the system operates of not responding to opposers consider what a guest of this forum suggested to me.

He has pointed out to me how the book of Nehemiah details the scriptural way to deal with opposers:

Nehemiah 6:1-4

1 Now it came to pass, when it was reported to Sanballat and Tobiah, and to Geshem the Arabian, and unto the rest of our enemies, that I had builded the wall, and that there was no breach left therein; (though even unto that time I had not set up the doors in the gates;.)
2 that Sanballat and Geshem sent unto me, saying, Come, let us meet together in one of the villages in the plain of Ono. But they thought to do me mischief.
3 And I sent messengers unto them, saying, I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down: why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you?
4 And they sent unto me four times after this sort; and I answered them after the same manner.

Terry

[PriestlyScribe]

Hi everyone, I have graduated from being a guest of this excellent forum - to becoming a member. :)

What Terry mentioned below was brought to my attention first through a random message on the internet. Here is a link to that particular audio by Pastor Steve Nelson:
http://blendedbody.com/Slander/

Any who have some experience with trying to report deviation in the local churches should be absolutely amazed by what you hear in the linked audio! When it comes to properly dealing with problems, this young sounding pastor causes all the leading ones in the [Western] Lord's recovery to look like toddlers by comparison! And what seems to be totally missing from his words and tone is any whiff of THE FEAR OF MAN!

It is very worrisome to realize that over the years we brothers became deaf and dumb acceptors [even enablers] of a gradually deteriorating quality of leadership. To get ourselves fully awakened, we may need to pass around some strong smelling salts - like this brother's word!

[Terry]

Hi everyone, I have graduated from being a guest of this excellent forum - to becoming a member. :)

What Terry mentioned below was brought to my attention first through a random message on the internet. Here is a link to that particular audio by Pastor Steve Nelson:
http://blendedbody.com/Slander/


PriestlyScribe, welcome to the forum. I did listen to the audio. Based on the pastor's speaking, a scriptural approach was taken towards the offending brother:

Matthew 18:15-17

15And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
16 But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established.
17 And if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church: and if he refuse to hear the church also, let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican.

Nehemiah 5:7
Then I consulted with myself, and contended with the nobles and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I held a great assembly against them.

Terry

[PriestlyScribe]

I have no intention to give brother Ron a pass by posting this, but the following portion from Glenn Hendrickson's blog (http://www.blendedbody.com/Slander/NehemiahWasAtLibertyToReadAndReplyToAtLeast5Letter sFromOpposers.htm), illustrates another clear case (outside the realm of the local churches) where leaders have not only employed an "ostrich" type of wrong response to reported concerns, but they have pressured followers to do likewise. So, this obviously is not exclusively a "local church" type of response. Rather, this may simply be a natural fallen human dynamic which can be detected within many human (natural) organizations - religious or secular. For more reading regarding this psychological dynamic, check out Gerald W. Tritle's excellent article on "groupthink (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/GroupthinkASinisterSnareForEldersAndCongregationsA like.htm)".

Now for Nehemiah to be "voluntarily-vitally" concerned about the condition of God's returned remnant, we have to assume that he possessed the OT equivalent of the "Mind of Christ". Hence, it follows that his pattern of confronting opposing views and conflicting interests was also with bold & godly forthrightness instead of with cowardly withdrawal - like we see with many of the blended brothers, Ron K. in particular.

By the way, I believe that Watchman Nee touched the root of this issue when he targeted the elders "boasting and withdrawing" FLESH in this short portion from the book, --> The Assembly Life (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/WordsOfWisdom/Misc/fleshlyboastingeldership.txt). (should include coworkers & Apostles too)

From the New Testament we never see the Apostles sweep anything under the rug - except maybe in Acts 15. Real god-men will reply to letters of concern and will not reject them "out-of-hand" when they are likely to contain words which can make one feel uncomfortable. Words that require an action on the reader's part, i.e. - THE WORD OF THE TRUTH!

Laser-logic from Glenn Hendrickson's Blog (http://www.blendedbody.com/Slander/NehemiahWasAtLibertyToReadAndReplyToAtLeast5Letter sFromOpposers.htm):
"I feel as though I have been asked not to read certain things which I would be unable to identify without reading it! As absurd as it sounds my church, Faith Community Church in Irvine, has issued a letter in the Sunday (April 6th) announcements asking us to not read blogs, emails or websites which attack "FCC." In addition I am not to "receive any letters or calls from them." Not only is reading forbidden, now I am not to pick up the phone? Do I need to get the phone numbers of these people so I can not answer when they call?"

"In the letter it makes reference to Nehemiah and his dealings with Sanballat. What strikes me as a disjunct from the text of Scripture is that Nehemiah was sent messages four times (Neh. 6:4). Nehemiah did not ignore them, He answered them! His answers were consistent and coherent, for "[he] answered them in the same way" (v. 4). The fifth letter from Sanballat is forever recorded in Holy Scripture (Neh. 6:6-7). Please someone tell me why Nehemiah was at liberty to read and reply to at least 5 letters, why we can read the fifth letter as recorded in the Bible which we all cherish, why we can read Nehemiah's reply (v. 8), but I am not allowed to read criticisms about my church? If anything, this gives Dr. Bob biblical warrant to explain himself and correct those who lie about him." more.... (http://www.blendedbody.com/Slander/NehemiahWasAtLibertyToReadAndReplyToAtLeast5Letter sFromOpposers.htm)

[Terry]

Indiana, no need for vindication from our natural man. May the blessing our Lord Jesus spoke in Luke 6:22 be your organic reality.

"Blessed are you when men hate you and when they separate you from them and reproach you and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of Man's Sake"

Terry

[PriestlyScribe]

Bill speaks the word armed (verse 21) is in the perfect tense. In the Greek implying a settled state. The possessions are at peace. “Don’t change me. Don’t disturb my way of thinking. My way of thinking has been intact for years. It’s all here in peace. I’ve reasoned a certain way. I’ve thought a certain way. I’ve expressed myself a certain way. I’ve related to people in a certain way. I’ve been well fortified and armed.” This is the settled down mind. In 2 Corinthians 10:4 Paul calls this a stronghold.

Terry, tonight I located a very similar portion in Volume One of the Collected Works of Watchman Nee.
http://www.livingstreambooks.com/catalog/0870835890.jpg on Page 99, I found the following...
E. His (satan's) People
(1) Satan works within man's heart, yet man is not aware of it. "The spirit which is now operating in the sons of disobedience" (Eph. 2:2).
(2) He blinds man's eyes. "The god of this age has blinded the thoughts of the unbelievers" (2 Cor. 4:4).
(3) He gives a false peace. "When the strong man, fully armed, guards his own homestead, his possessions are in peace" (Luke 11:21). Those who are under the authority of Satan think that they have great peace. Little do they realize that this peace is merely the peace of being free from trouble; it is not the true peace and blessing of a Christian.
(4) He secretly causes men to oppose the truth. "In meekness correcting those who oppose [the truth], if perhaps...they may return to soberness out of the snare of the devil, having been caught alive by him, unto His will" (2 Tim. 2:25-26). There are numerous people who rebel against and oppose the truth. Actually, they are deceived by the devil and are in his snare!

And, in case some readers are having trouble finding Bill's recorded Messages, here are the direct links:


Bill Freeman - Inward and Outward Christians (11/18/82) - Message (72min) (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/Inward-and-OutwardChristians-Message_NR-E016.mp3) Testimonies (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/Inward-and-OutwardChristians-Fellowship_NR-E016.mp3)
Bill Freeman - Need for Transparent Relationships (06/02/84) - Part One (44min) (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/RealmOfLifeAndXparentRelatInGodsBldg-A_032.mp3) Part Two (40min) (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/RealmOfLifeAndXparentRelatInGodsBldg-B_032.mp3) http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/speaker-hq.gifRealm Of Death Clip (5 min) (http://www.blendedbody.com/_cl/_audio/_2ndgen/CenturyOfSelf/MiscDocuments/Warnings/RealmOfLifeAndXparentRelatInGodsBldg_ManOdeath_016 aud.mp3)

P.S.

[Indiana]

Letter from a sister formerly in the church in Berkeley 1975-1978


Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 04:34:03 -0700
Subject: Re: FW: Ron Kangas Letter

Hi Steve,

This was quite a thoughtful letter you wrote. By now I have also skimmed through the previous email attachment you sent entitled Twenty Five Years in the New Way. Since I wasn't around for the New Way wave, I have a hard time getting into all the details of it, so please forgive me for not reading that document in its entirety. I must admit that I am curious to know whatever happened to John So. When I was first in the church, I remember hearing incredible stories about his days in San Francisco and how on fire for God he was.

It is completely tragic that Ron did not respond to your letter. It makes me wonder if he is even truly a brother in the Lord.... I guess that's for the Lord alone to judge after all is said and done. But all of this exchange has prompted me to really ponder what is really going on behind the scenes. I can't help but question if these "brothers" (including WL) actually know/knew the same Lord Jesus I know! Perhaps they did at one time know Him, but strayed from the truth? Perhaps selfish ambition came in and they were tempted? Maybe actual demon spirits came in an seduced them, so that, like the Pharisees, they still look religious, but they are of a different spirit, not the Holy Spirit? Perhaps, like the Pharisees, they truly believe they are honoring God by behaving in the way they are behaving? Whatever the case, may God have mercy on them!

Unfortunately I have to agree that indeed it seems that the eight years you spent sincerely attempting reconciliation between those who were "in" and those who were "out" of the recovery appears to have been completely futile. Yet I believe the Lord has been using your giftings in communication to help many of us out here understand some things we would never otherwise "get." I know it has been very encouraging for me to put together certain puzzle pieces that previously remained a mystery to me as far as the LC is concerned.

So it looks like the next piece I'll be reading of yours in the next few days is what you describe as the first thing you wrote. I'm looking forward to it!

Aloha,
Carolyn (my response below)

Carolyn, John So is living in San Francisco with his wife. He travels to fellowship with saints and churches that have gone on in the way they new before the New Way came in. He ascribes to the ground of oneness teaching. I talked to him on the phone once in 2005 and wrote two emails. He is not open to address matters of the past, saying "I don't want to fight". He became so disillusioned by Witness Lee and events that transpired in the new way, especially that took place between him (Stuttgart) and LSM and England and LSM. But, "if the brothers want to repent, have them give me a call", he said.

What you said about seducing spirits among the leaders has much merit. They are under Satan's domination in a spiritual stronghold. They cannot break through. So, even though truth is spoken to them, it looks like a lie and an attack. How can God's oracle be wrong? How can the God-men be wrong? (blending brothers)

Refer to _________ letter in the attachment written nine years ago - 2001

Hi Steve. I felt I needed sit on (pray on) what you shared. Admittedly I have a lot of mixed feelings. I want my Lord’s feeling. I was in leadership for fifteen years in a wide variety of churches. I saw and heard a lot of things. Now it’s been fifteen years since I’ve been out of the garlic room. I am no longer as idealistic as I once was. I am probably now too realistic for simple faith to work. I am working on that. Everything I learned about LC authority, rank and file, how dissenters were dealt with, taught me this: no one admits to wrongdoing. The Church way is right, everyone else is wrong. The slightest hint of criticism was ground for being marked out and destroyed. Bro. Lee once said in an elders’ meeting that any elder that criticized the lead was finished. His career was over. “If you can’t agree”, he said, “be a gentleman and leave”. Oneness was always with W. Lee and the “Lord’s move”. Opposers and dissenters were always the enemy to be overcome. Their “truth system” in the LC does not allow any ground or room for making mistakes or being wrong. How can they admit to mistakes? This is the “Lord’s recovery”. They were just following Brother Lee who is God’s man on the earth today. Their denial factor is HUGE!!

I say all that to say this: It may take years of persistent praying and interceding for those walls to crack or come down as Bill Mallon shared. It may take some significant suffering, affliction, trials, and or pain to bring them to any table of fellowship. Your burden is right; your attitude is right….but how can the godmen be wrong?? I hate to say this and I don’t want to daunt your mission in any way; but, I don’t think 1,000 testimonies would put a dent in that iron wall of self-righteousness. They have a well-defended castle. Their attorney/generals are battle tested.

God can touch their heart and make them soft. Maybe He is, and they are, and I don’t see it. Maybe you have heard of a crack in their armor. Maybe they are praying to the Lord right now how they can win us all back. To tell you the truth, most I know don’t want to go back EVER!

I, too, love the brothers, and miss the fellowship of the dear saints, our friends, who we fought the battle with for many years. Dave Higgins has asked me to come back. He said they desperately need shepherds. Mel Porter has asked me to come back for the same reason.

I asked how I can assist you. At this point, all I can commit to is to pray. The other matters I will address in another letter next week.

Eventually, we will all be reconciled. What a glory to the Lord for the breach to be healed now in Satan’s territory, to his shame. Read Is. 58:1-12…“now unto Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all we ask or think.”

[Unregistered]

Hello, an active local church member here and proud of it. I've been lurking this forum for some time now and have not seen anything new or interesting. So, I will like to ask, what happend to "Steve Isitt vs Ron Kangas et. al."? Any news? The other forum is very quiet, no post on the subject since April 1.

The Lurker

[manna-man]

Hello, an active local church member here and proud of it. I've been lurking this forum for some time now and have not seen anything new or interesting. So, I will like to ask, what happend to "Steve Isitt vs Ron Kangas et. al."? Any news? The other forum is very quiet, no post on the subject since April 1.

The Lurker

Greetings active local church member,

It appears as though nothing is happening. DOA.

It also seems as though the LC leadership is showing the greatest amount of indifference towards Steve Isitt. To ignore a brother in Christ that is concerned for the LC is truely sad. At least that is my humble opinion.

Lurker, if you don't mind answering a question for me?

Do you believe the Local Churches have the Hi-Peak gospel? That their gospel some how is higher than Christians outside of the LC?

Thank you in advance for your reply.

May our God of Grace and Mercy supply all your needs daily in Him!

Don Jr.

[ZNPaaneah]

Lurker, if you don't mind answering a question for me?

Do you believe the Local Churches have the Hi-Peak gospel? That their gospel some how is higher than Christians outside of the LC?

Thank you in advance for your reply.


Is this question directed to the forum?

[manna-man]

Is this question directed to the forum?

ZNP, not at all.

It was directed to the lurker aka current active member of the local churches.

Thanks,

Don Jr

[Terry]

Lurker, if you don't mind answering a question for me?

Do you believe the Local Churches have the Hi-Peak gospel? That their gospel some how is higher than Christians outside of the LC?

Thank you in advance for your reply.

May our God of Grace and Mercy supply all your needs daily in Him!

Don Jr.

Amen Don! May I ask what is the high peak gospel to you? My mind has been opened up what the high peak gospel is. What my mind sees is also the vision I see.

[Unregistered]

manna-man (Don Jr.)

I don't mind answering your question. Yes. I believe that the churches in in the Lord's recovery have hi-peak gospel/truth/divine revelation. Other believers have something of it, but not as crystal clear as in the Lord's recovery.

Something about me:
1. Prior to enter into the Lord's recovery, I am a third generation Pentecostal.
2. My grandfather (dad side), was a semi-missionary, lead-preacher and lead pastor of a Pentecostal group. He also was in the board of one of the main Pentecostal councils of the country (which country, I won't tell). My dad was on his way to be a prominent Pentecostal pastor (he now meets with in the Lord's recovery).
3. On the other side (mom side) my grandparents were Preachers/Pastors of a different Pentecostal group and my mom lead church service.
4. My grandparents were not wishy-washy believers. They were serious believers, strong in their faith, and clear in regards to what is important, the Word of God.
5. I will not dared to consider myself to be a Timothy, but from my childhood I've been in an environment were 30 minutes of Bible reading (at 5am, 10am, 3pm, 6pm, 10pm) followed by prayer was practice. The gospel was proclaimed in season and out of season. Visiting the ill, giving to the poor and cooking for the hungry was a great joy and honor.

I know from first hand what true Christian fellowship can offer and do. I'm grateful for my up-bring, but will never trade what I now have in the Lord's recovery. I lurk in this forum as well as the other for two reasons: 1. i'm taking care of new ones in my locality and some found out about the two forum, so i need to read what you guys say in order to know haw to inoculate them; 2. in Paul's word, "I marvel" (Galatians 1:6) who people can turn away from something so awesome as the Lord's recovery, deserting the grace of Christ and backsliding to wherever you are.

Don't think I'll post aging.

The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
The Lurker

[manna-man]

Amen Don! May I ask what is the high peak gospel to you? My mind has been opened up what the high peak gospel is. What my mind sees is also the vision I see.

Greetings Terry,

My definition of the high peak-gospel is Christ Crucified for our sins so that we may be able to approach Him in boldness after being released from our guilt. This Gospel is simply the plain truth.

I have a problem with those that use it in the way it was intended to be used'

There are some out there that proclaim they are better because of "Their Reality/Wisdom in Christ" that they are the sole remnant that is worthy to carry the testimony of God to the nations.

These ones claim to be standing on the proper ground in Christ yet deny their fellow brothers.

These are modern day Pharasees/Religious that do more harm than good by stoning those very ones with their religious knowledge and zeal that Jesus Christ died for.

These are the ones who are be-witched by the same law they were set free from by His work on the cross.

I have a problem with the term high peak because of the way it is used and why it is used.

This is why I asked the question, hoping for a humble responce that wasn't laced with religious pride.

Peace to you brother Terry,

Don jr.

[ZNPaaneah]

Greetings Terry, My definition of the high peak-gospel is Christ Crucified for our sins so that we may be able to approach Him in boldness after being released from our guilt. This Gospel is simply the plain truth.

Yes I very much dislike the term ("High Peaks Gospel" or "High Peak Truths"). It is not scriptural and it reeks of pride. And what does it say? That some truths of the gospel are not high revelations? Is it disrespectful to the Lord's earthly ministry or is it trying to merely be disrespectful to the Christians who have gone before us? I have used the terms in my writing a few times, always in quotes, and always as an example of the hubris of the LSM. According to the NT the heavens rejoice when one sinner repents, but apparently to the LSM that is not "the high peak revelation". This term makes me ashamed to have ever been involved with the LSM.

[Ohio]

manna-man (Don Jr.)

I don't mind answering your question. Yes. I believe that the churches in in the Lord's recovery have hi-peak gospel/truth/divine revelation. Other believers have something of it, but not as crystal clear as in the Lord's recovery.

Something about me:
1. Prior to enter into the Lord's recovery, I am a third generation Pentecostal.
2. My grandfather (dad side), was a semi-missionary, lead-preacher and lead pastor of a Pentecostal group. He also was in the board of one of the main Pentecostal councils of the country (which country, I won't tell). My dad was on his way to be a prominent Pentecostal pastor (he now meets with in the Lord's recovery).
3. On the other side (mom side) my grandparents were Preachers/Pastors of a different Pentecostal group and my mom lead church service.
4. My grandparents were not wishy-washy believers. They were serious believers, strong in their faith, and clear in regards to what is important, the Word of God.
5. I will not dared to consider myself to be a Timothy, but from my childhood I've been in an environment were 30 minutes of Bible reading (at 5am, 10am, 3pm, 6pm, 10pm) followed by prayer was practice. The gospel was proclaimed in season and out of season. Visiting the ill, giving to the poor and cooking for the hungry was a great joy and honor.

I know from first hand what true Christian fellowship can offer and do. I'm grateful for my up-bring, but will never trade what I now have in the Lord's recovery. I lurk in this forum as well as the other for two reasons: 1. i'm taking care of new ones in my locality and some found out about the two forum, so i need to read what you guys say in order to know haw to inoculate them; 2. in Paul's word, "I marvel" (Galatians 1:6) who people can turn away from something so awesome as the Lord's recovery, deserting the grace of Christ and backsliding to wherever you are.

Don't think I'll post aging.

The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
The Lurker

I may not have such a fine Christian "pedigree" as you have, but I did devote my best years to the Recovery. There were many very positive things concerning the saints, but for conscience sake, I had to depart ways from leaders who far too often were abusive to the flock.

You have not told us where you are from, but I do know that the Recovery is not in an homogenous state. Regions and localities can vary widely, as do people, which explains hos each person's perspective can differ so widely. Places like Malaysia are thriving while some places are dying.

What has troubled me so greatly is the abusive ways WL and LSM has treated those who spoke up about wrong doings at LSM. Some of these things happened many years ago, but were hidden from the saints, hence when the actual events are made known, a kind of righteous indignation rose up within me. I discovered that godliness at LSM was just a facade, much like the Pharisees of old.

Dear Guest, "The Lurker," since you have read some of these reports on these forums, how do you reconcile these things knowing that righteousness and lawlessness have no portion together, neither do light and darkness have any fellowship together? (II Cor 6.14)

[manna-man]

Dear Brother Lurker,

If in fact you do have the high peak gospel, could you define it? I'm sure those new ones in your care would be interested to see how you would answer as well. What is the high peak gospel, And just how much more crystal clear does it need to be besides what I defined previously two or three posts earlier?

I must declare that I have not turned away from My Lords ministry, but I have turned my back to a man and his ministry. A ministry that is bigoted from the get go. A ministry so intolerant that instead of reaching out to base men who could and would appreciate some of what you have to offer instead, cries out from their meeting halls "Poor Poor Christianity!" The Pharasees did as much. What a shame.

Peace and Mercy and patience abide on you dear brother!

Don Jr.

[Terry]

Something about me:
5. I will not dared to consider myself to be a Timothy, but from my childhood I've been in an environment were 30 minutes of Bible reading (at 5am, 10am, 3pm, 6pm, 10pm) followed by prayer was practice. The gospel was proclaimed in season and out of season. Visiting the ill, giving to the poor and cooking for the hungry was a great joy and honor.


The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you.
The Lurker

Thank you for telling about yourself. Your experience I have quoted, this is the churchlife. It begins in the home. Where one happens to meet is irrelevant. What's relevant is the churchlife beginning at home.

[Terry]

Greetings Terry,

My definition of the high peak-gospel is Christ Crucified for our sins so that we may be able to approach Him in boldness after being released from our guilt. This Gospel is simply the plain truth.

I have a problem with those that use it in the way it was intended to be used'

I have a problem with the term high peak because of the way it is used and why it is used.

Brother Donnie,
I don't have a definition. Something I've seen over the last year is a deficiency in the Living Stream ministry oriented local churches that I haven't seen in several churches in my area. That is the matter of the love of Christ. I have not seen this in the local churches. When I mention loving your neighbor or loving your enemies, the word that cmes full circle is trust. Whether or not a brother or sister can be trusted, is the degree love. In this sense there's a natural, conditional love mentioned in the Gospel of Luke.

Luke 6:32
"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them."

To have the love of Christ, you'd have to refer to Luke 6:27
"But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,"
or another passage in Luke 10 where Jesus speaks of the Good Samaritan parable. Loving your neighbor is to show mercy. In verse 27 of this chapter,
"YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND ; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

On at least three occasions in the locality where I last met, there was belittling of Christians outside the LSM fellowship. We see so much and Christianity sees so little. In this sense Living Stream Ministry's high peak ministry is as a sequoia or a redwood tree whereas Jesus Christ is as a lowly vine; spreading out laterally and not vertically.

In Witness Lee's ministry he did speak a Word of Love which I've posted on. What happened to that word? Has it become a mere footnote to his ministry?
There has been ample opportunity for the churches through the ministry to get back on course. Here's a youtube video of Witness Lee from his final conference
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swcs5pbzoDI

What Witness Lee spoke is evident and truly apparent. It is also in black and white how Living Stream translated his words.

This is from chapter 6 of the High Peaks book The Experience of God's Organic Salvation Equaling Reigning in Christ's Life. As the video points out there was heavy editing done on what was actually spoken which took brother Lee's words out of context. Witness Lee was calling for the brothers in the local churches to examine where we were wrong and to do so in mutual fellowship. Since his speaking wasn't brought back to the churches verbatim and since his speaking wasn't translated verbatim, how could have his burden been carried out?

"If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal." 1 Corinthians 13:1

[manna-man]

Brother Donnie,
I don't have a definition. Something I've seen over the last year is a deficiency in the Living Stream ministry oriented local churches that I haven't seen in several churches in my area.

Morning Brother Terry,

Actually the term "High Peak Gospel" is something made up.
It is code for: We are special, we are the only ones standing on the proper ground in Christ. It also means that all others apart from them have fallen into a depraved spiritual state and the only way to remedy their situation is to receive their doctrine. (There are many precious saints in the Lords Recovery, whether they understand at all that this teaching is divisive in the universal body, only The Lord Knows.) This doctrine is narrow minded. It teaches that God is limited because of mankind and his actions.

It means nothing to anyone outside of the Local Churches. Now, if there was such a term out there in the rest of Christianity it most likely would be:
" The High Calling." because our high calling is to Hear, believe and receive and then ultimately obey/abide and preach Christ Crucified.

I don't make it a habit to use the words high peak gospel. Although I have heard them. I simply was fishing and hoping for light/truth to come from this covert member that wanted to know more about those on this forum.

Until the whole world hears,

Don Jr.

[ZNPaaneah]

Don I remember clearly back in the 70s we were driving to a conference in Austin Tx. We were driving an old American car owned by a brother named Hector when the car just up and died as we were driving along at 45 or 50. He wasn't phased, opened the hood, looked around a little and determined that the points had frozen. In this car he traveled with an extra set. So he pulls out a little metal part, couldn't have weighed more than an ounce or two, but because of it the entire car weighing more than a ton had come to an abrupt stop.

Regardless of what truths you want to classify as "high peaks" you wind up demeaning the other truths. All of Christianity has the truth concerning Christ died for our sins. Without that truth how does anything work? So if that truth is not high peaks how foolish is that?

Paul said you could know all mysteries but without love it is nothing. In Revelation it says that in Thyatyra there were some that would walk with the Lord in white because "they didn't know the deep things of Satan". So knowing that we need to love the Lord with all our heart and to love one another seems to be sufficient, even if you don't know all mysteries. Clearly, not knowing some mysteries can be a very good thing.

Then of course there is Laodicea that seemed to think they were rich and knew all mysteries and yet were wretched and poor.

On the one hand I love the ministry of the apostle Paul, I love the mysteries of Christ and the Church, but let's be real. The minute someone tries to make those mysteries into "high peak truths" that separate them from the rest of the Body of Christ they have fallen into a trap.

[manna-man]

ZNP,

I don't end up demeaning anything. Only one making assumptions can do that. I'm just stating facts as I understand them. Imagine if you will, that I could convey everything in one paragraph. :D We wouldn't be having this conversation right now because your understanding would be complete. But we know that is not the real situation here don't we? :)

But we know there is a sequence/order to how we grow. First we hear, then we believe and then receive and finally obey/abide. Does this explain everything? Of course it doesn't. But if we stay true/heed our Lord we can understand more.

It wasn't my intention to really define "High Peak" it was my intention to expose it. For it is clear that anyone that has received it has cut themselves off and is denying themselves the balance of riches from the vine.(and that's putting it nicely.)

Much grace to you,

Don Jr.

[Terry]

ZNP,

I don't end up demeaning anything. Only one making assumptions can do that. I'm just stating facts as I understand them.
It wasn't my intention to really define "High Peak" it was my intention to expose it. For it is clear that anyone that has received it has cut themselves off and is denying themselves the balance of riches from the vine.(and that's putting it nicely.)

Much grace to you,

Don Jr.

Brother Don,
I didn't receive ZNP's post being directed at you. It's the phrase high peaks that is demeaning. It's demeaning of what Christ's death, resurrection, and ascension is all about. It's demeaning of basic Christian fundamentals. SO much has been glossed over. As I have seen it expressed in prophesying meetings, the phrase has muted a speaking, but exalted a ministry through doctrine as a means to differentiate Living Stream Ministry churches from the rest of Christianity.

[manna-man]

I hear ya Terry, No offense was taken. ZNP is the bomb in my eyes.

Maybe I misunderstood what he meant by " the truths you want to classify as high peaks"

Nevertheless, I get it. The High Peak doctrine erodes unity in the body of Christ. I think that is exactly what I've been trying to convey all this while.

Peace,

Don Jr

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

Hello, an active local church member here and proud of it.

The Lurker

Thank you for your honesty. Undoubtedly Pride is the chief characteristic of the LSM churches, themselves built upon the proud words of Witness Lee. Neither God nor the Saints here care for your pedigree. If you are so well read of the Word, surely you know that of all men, Paul had cause to boast - yet he accounted himself as lesser than the least of all the saints.

You cannot inoculate people from the testimonies of their brethren and from the truth shared in Love. Surely you can 'spin' what you hear, but that is the extent of what you can do.

Be careful in your handling of fellow believers. Christ has promised that we will answer for it.

In Christ,

NeitherFirstnorLast

[Ohio]

On the one hand I love the ministry of the apostle Paul, I love the mysteries of Christ and the Church, but let's be real. The minute someone tries to make those mysteries into "high peak truths" that separate them from the rest of the Body of Christ they have fallen into a trap.

If there is a high peak, it must be "Christ and Him crucified." Nothing can be deeper or more mysterious than that.

Yet, we considered the initial faith as so common. We demeaned the rest of the body of Christ for "going to heaven."

For years we struggled with the "high peak" saying. Firstly, if it was so crucial, why was it not in the scripture? We somehow prided ourselves that God had kept this highest truth just for us in these final days. Personally, I had hoped to see some good fruit from these "high peaks." Even something little. But I saw none. No blessing and no fruit. Instead backbiting and suspicious innuendo ending in quarantines.

You shall know the teaching by its fruits.

[manna-man]

If there is a high peak, it must be "Christ and Him crucified." Nothing can be deeper or more mysterious than that.

Yet, we considered the initial faith as so common. We demeaned the rest of the body of Christ for "going to heaven."

For years we struggled with the "high peak" saying. Firstly, if it was so crucial, why was it not in the scripture? We somehow prided ourselves that God had kept this highest truth just for us in these final days. Personally, I had hoped to see some good fruit from these "high peaks." Even something little. But I saw none. No blessing and no fruit. Instead backbiting and suspicious innuendo ending in quarantines.

You shall know the teaching by its fruits.

Amen Ohio.

Christ Crucified is the fulfillment/consummation of Gods plan for us. To God and us what could be higher?

I guess if I had to find a word to replace "High Peak" it would have to be "arrogance" Yeah....The arrogance doctrine. :rolleyes:

C~ya!

Don Jr

[aron]

I believe that the churches in in the Lord's recovery have hi-peak gospel/truth/divine revelation. Other believers have something of it, but not as crystal clear as in the Lord's recovery.

Dear Lurker,

Were the Spirit to prompt a brother to write you, He might say, "To the messenger (angel) of the assembly in _____, affiliated with the ministry of the Blended Brothers *,

"I know your works, and your labors, and your seven feasts and trainings, and your publishing house, and your web sites, and your publications, and your teachings. Your labors are great, relatively speaking. But I have something against you. You compare yourselves with others. You think you are rich, and others are not as rich as you. In this you err, like the man who thanked God that he was not like the other man nearby, a sinner (Luke 18:9-14)."

"You have not taken to heart the message of the Son, Jesus the Firstborn from the dead. He clearly taught that if you think you see, then your blindness remains (John 9:41). Later, He had to chastise the saints in Laodicea (Revelations 3) who had not learned from the earlier tragedy of the Pharisees."

"So let go of your high truths, which lead both you and your followers into the ditch. The only truth is found in Jesus Christ, not in a teaching or a doctrine. Stop thinking you know so much, and I will come and teach you My ways, and My paths."

"Because nobody knows My paths. They are inscrutable to men. Remember John 3:8, and stop thinking that your doctrines can put Me in a box. You'll end up with an empty box, worshipping it as if it were God. Let go of your laborious and well-intentioned creation, and turn to the Creator of all."

Or something like that.

Grace to you from your fellow lurker.

aron

* You have to append the address to the assembly there in ______ with "...affiliated with the ministry of the Blended Brothers" because Lurker's fellowship doesn't recognize any assembly unless it is affiliated with the Blended Brothers. Other fellowships meet according to geography (the church in Grovers Corners) but don't claim affiliation (read: submission) to "the ministry of the age" and so are disqualified in their eyes. Others likewise claim affiliation with the ministries of Mssrs. Nee and Lee, but they are not submissive to the current curators of Mr. Lee's ministry in Anaheim, the Blendeds. So in order to reach Lurker et al with a message you have to tag their fellowship with its affiliation.

[aron]

I lurk in this forum as well as the other for two reasons: 1. i'm taking care of new ones in my locality and some found out about the two forum, so i need to read what you guys say in order to know haw to inoculate them; 2. in Paul's word, "I marvel" (Galatians 1:6) who people can turn away from something so awesome as the Lord's recovery, deserting the grace of Christ and backsliding to wherever you are.

I lurk in this forum not to convince others that they are somehow in need of (my) correction. Rather I post to de-toxify myself from bad ideas. Bad ideas, once uncritically accepted, lead to bad thinking and erroneous rationalizations, which lead to bad behavior explained away, and thus repeated interminably.

Here is an example: the ministry of a man, above, being equated to "the grace of Christ". I left the ministry of one man, but have not left the grace of Christ. When I left the unbalanced fixation on one man's ministry, I began to see things, in the Bible, that I could not have perceived under the blinders of his teaching.

One example is the "ekklesia". Mr. Lee, like many christian scholars, comes to the word "church" from Paul, not from Jesus. They say, "The church is the Body and Bride of Christ". Of course, these notions are correct. But they are incomplete. When Jesus introduced the word in the gospels, He didn't say "I will build My Body", or "I will build My Bride", but "I will build My ekklesia". The word had a meaning already. This is ignored, in the rush to get to Paul. Thus the incompleteness.

The word was used dozens of times in the extant scriptures (OT/Septuagint). Psalms 22:22 is a good example, quoted in Hebrews 2. And Stephen in Acts 7 referred to the ekklesia of Moses and the fathers in the wilderness.

Today, based on their interpretation, they try to have "ekklesia" (meetings) of the "ekklesia" (church), because they don't even understand the word as it was used. Which is okay; it is okay to not understand. The problem I have with the Lee-ites is that they think they do understand. So their blindness remains.

Another example: "oikonomia". Again, the Lee school uses Paul to contravene Jesus' use of the word. Jesus taught many, many parables on stewardship, i.e. the responsibility of a servant to take care of his Master's house. The word stewardship in Greek is "oikonomia". See the parable of the unrighteous steward in Luke 16.

This becomes, through the unbalanced, Paul-fixated focus, something where "...we masticate on the processed Triune God and become God in life and nature and not in the Godhead". And our responsibility to our neighbor is largely ignored, or at least determined by whether or not they are "positive" towards "the ministry".

So yes, I have turned away from something as "awesome" as your organization. But I am not "negative" or an "opposer" or "attacker"; I am just a believer trying to rid myself from bad thinking.

[aron]

One example [of erroneous teaching] is on the "ekklesia"... another example: "oikonomia" ...

Another erroneous teaching is Lee's assertion that "the gates of Hades" attack the ekklesia in Matthew 16. Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of human affairs, especially military affairs, realizes gates are for keeping things in. Gates do not attack.

But Lee taught that the gates of Hades would assault the fortress church, but would not prevail against it. Completely backward. The gates of Hades were the entrance to the underworld, and no one who went in (i.e. died) ever came out. These gates were supposedly built on adamantine pillars, which was the strongest substance in the universe. Jesus was saying that when you gather in My name and agree, even the gates of Hades cannot withstand you. You can go into death itself and pluck out the prisoners.

Satan was on the offensive in Genesis 3... "Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned--" Romans 5:12. ... and from then on his posture was essentially defensive. Satan had his realm, his kingdom. He was, truly, at Jesus' time, the "ruler of this world" (see John 12).

Then One man, Jesus, came to set us all free. This is the gospel, the good news, and when we gather (this is the ekklesia, or assembly) to affirm, acknowledge, announce, and celebrate this revelation, Satan's kingdom falls. The gates of Hades are broken.

Lee had it backward. I mentioned this on a website populated by a number of Lee-ites, and they said I was speaking nonsense. Then I posted a long article from their allies Bob and Gretchen Passantino, who essentially said the exact same thing as I did. The Lee-ites then quickly lost appetite for the discussion.

See http://www.answers.org/bible/gatesofhell.html

Now, my point is not merely to discuss Lee's errors interpreting the gates of Hades, per se, nor for that matter his take on "ekklesia" or "oikonomia". We all err occasionally in thought and deed; I probably more than most. My point is that presuming to be absent of error is perhaps the worst error of all. The Bible says "We all like sheep have gone astray"; notice it says ''we ... sheep'', not ''we ... goats''. All of the sheep, all of the people of God, err occasionally.

But these Lee-ite posters would not entertain the notion that the teachings of their "oracle" could be imperfect or incomplete. That, to me, is the real tragedy of Mr. Lee's ministry, beyond any single point of doctrine. The real error is not the occasional error, but the refusal to admit the possibility of error.

When that happens, as Jesus put it so well, "your blindness remains". (John 9)

[Unregistered]

Dear manna-man,

My understanding of the high peak gospel is the gospel of grace + the gospel of the kingdom. In a nutshell, Grace saves us from eternal perdition and the law so that we may received God’s life, places us as a member in the Body and causes us to enjoy all the blessings of been in Christ. I learned this in “poor poor Christianity!” The gospel of the kingdom ushers us in the practical way to live out the gospel of grace for the reality of the Body of Christ (functioning of ALL the members), thus hastening Christ second coming. This, I never heard in “poor poor Christianity!” Believing in this view or not depends upon your knowledge and believed of eschatology in relation to God’s kingdom. My advice is if you want to be clear about something in the Bible, well then, read the Bible.

I’ve been researching on http://ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooks.cfm the term “poor Christianity”, and every time Witness Lee said those word, he is speaking of (pay attention because I’ll only say it once) the system and not the people trap in the system. It was all of us (yes I’m including myself) that took those words incorrectly. Our attitude toward fellow believers in Christ was one of belittling them thinking we're superior to them. The funny thing is that all of you here in this forum have something negative to say about the ministry and person of Witness Lee (fellow believer in the Lord), yet some of you dare to say, as NeitherFirstnorLast said in post #36, “be careful in your handling of fellow believers.”

Many of you have said that those in the recovery follow a person rather than the Lord. Well, if you are meeting in your home alone/family then you are not following a man. You are just following yourself detached from the real and practical fellowship of the Body. If you are meeting with a “non-denominational group” (the best group I’ve seen is “home-church movement), whether you like it or not you are following the pastor/minister/elder/bishop/rabbi/preacher. Whether you want to accept it or not , there is no way around it.

No doubt, it is a blessing and honor to be part of God’s move on the earth today. Here in the recovery, I have a sense of purpose and direction. So I’ll say this again for “NeitherFirstnorLast” sake, I’m an active local church member and proud of it. I have no shame in saying those words. I’m just been true to how I feel to spare you all from self humility. When Paul and other characters in the Scriptures displayed humility as a virtue, they did so in a mature state of their life. There is no gain pretending to be something else. I’ve been told before about my pride, but I prefer to be honest, open and transparent as to who I am and where I am in my Christian life for the sake of sanctification, transformation, correction and perfecting. Remember, he who love his soul-life and does not take the cross to lose it now for the Lords sake, but wants to save it, will lose it.

“Spin”? Hummm? Are you speaking from experience. I’ve been lurking this forum before you became a member and I’ve seen all kinds of ‘spin’ here. Some new believes that I’m caring for are confused or have questions when they touch this forum. What kind of testimony is this? I have to know what they are reading in order to know how to inoculate them. There is no need to “spin” anything. No need to convince anybody. Truth sets people free.

Go ahead, ‘spin’ my words.

The Lurker

[Igzy]

Dear Lurker,

It's also an honor for me to be in God's Move today. And I don't have to join your movement to be in it. I hope you will be honest and acknowledge that. God's move is not reserved to a tiny self-absorbed movement of less than 100,000 people.

The problem with the LRC is not so much the positive things it aspires to, but rather how it denies those things to others or presumes to set the conditions for how those things are dispersed. It thinks it has distribution rights on God.

You are a victim of propaganda, son. Your attitude is sectarian. If you really cared about the "poor" in Christianity, you'd be seeking to feed them. Not calling attention to your riches. You don't know half of what you think you know. Trust me, I was there. You have knowledge, but you don't know the Lord's heart.

You need to pray for clarity. Have you ever really prayed whether the things you are learning are true? Or did you just swallow them because they sounded good?

I challenged one LRCer to pray 10 minutes a day for a month to the Lord asking Him whether what he believed was true. Do you know what he said? He said he didn't need to pray that way. That told me all I needed to know about him.

Igzy

[Ohio]

My understanding of the high peak gospel is the gospel of grace + the gospel of the kingdom. In a nutshell, Grace saves us from eternal perdition and the law so that we may received God’s life, places us as a member in the Body and causes us to enjoy all the blessings of been in Christ. I learned this in “poor poor Christianity!” The gospel of the kingdom ushers us in the practical way to live out the gospel of grace for the reality of the Body of Christ (functioning of ALL the members), thus hastening Christ second coming. This, I never heard in “poor poor Christianity!” Believing in this view or not depends upon your knowledge and believed of eschatology in relation to God’s kingdom. My advice is if you want to be clear about something in the Bible, well then, read the Bible.



Dear Lurker,

In many regards, the LC's do have teachings which are never heard in "poor poor Christianity!" In fact, since the movement is so obsessed with teachings, there are many things you will hear in the LC's that you will not hear elsewhere. Much of that is good. If LSM leadership really lived and served according to the "gospel of the kingdom," many of us former members would still be active there, I know I would.

And that is perhaps the most serious problem, in a nutshell, for LSM. Like the Pharisees of old, they proclaimed to have all the wonderful things of God, yet practiced little of it, so the Lord rightfully declared them to be hypocrites. Paul in Romans declares the kingdom of God to be firstly "righteousness." Without righteousness, all our teachings, even though they be the best and the richest and the highest, are just vain. This, sadly, is the hugest indictment of WL and the Blendeds.

I hope you don't think I am "spinning" anything. I actively devoted my best thirty years to Christ and the church, only to begin to study our real history at the outbreak of this latest quarantine. WL and the Blendeds over the years have hidden behind many unrighteousnesses, and then smeared the reputations of any who dared to speak their conscience. Unfortunately, these unrighteousnesses are kept from all the saints. They only get to know the teachings of WL and the Blendeds, not the many unrighteousnesses, which God sees.

[ZNPaaneah]

Dear manna-man,

My understanding of the high peak gospel is the gospel of grace + the gospel of the kingdom. In a nutshell, Grace saves us from eternal perdition and the law so that we may received God’s life, places us as a member in the Body and causes us to enjoy all the blessings of been in Christ. I learned this in “poor poor Christianity!” The gospel of the kingdom ushers us in the practical way to live out the gospel of grace for the reality of the Body of Christ (functioning of ALL the members), thus hastening Christ second coming. This, I never heard in “poor poor Christianity!” Believing in this view or not depends upon your knowledge and believed of eschatology in relation to God’s kingdom. My advice is if you want to be clear about something in the Bible, well then, read the Bible.
The Lurker

Hello, I am very glad to have an opportunity to discuss these truths. I believe that the four books of Paul referred to by WL as "the heart of the divine revelation" really touch on these truths. For example, Galatians talks about having Christ revealed in us, and that it is no longer I that live but Christ that lives in me. It is this revelation that delivers me from "the concision" etc. So this is the practical way to live out the gospel of grace. Ephesians reveals the church as the Body of Christ and as "the one new man" which WL referred to as the highest revelation of the church during the Ephesians training. Repeatedly WL shared that only Paul had the revelation of the church being the Body of Christ, and that the One New Man is even higher. So again, I feel that these revelations must be what they refer to as "the high peak revelation" and what you refer to as the practical way to live out the gospel of grace. Philippians goes into great detail about how we can experience Christ in our life, practically. And Colossians gives a very high revelation concerning the Christ we can experience. "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:". I don't want to bore you but I am hoping that you will agree with me that this is in fact the gospel of the kingdom which you are referring to and which added to the more common gospel of grace comprises these "high peak truths".

I bring this up because in George Mueller's biography there is a story that inspired me. He was running an orphanage in England by faith in the Lord's word "seek ye first the kingdom and all these things shall be added unto you". He had made a vow that the day he could not feed the children would be the day that he would close the orphanage and that day came. it was a Sunday and they came to him saying that there was no food in the kitchen to make dinner. Even if someone walked in at that minute with money to buy food for the hundreds of people it wouldn't matter because in those days the stores were closed on Sunday. So he gathered the staff together for a prayer meeting. As they prayed a knock was heard. A driver was outside with a truck full of meat asking if they wanted it. Apparently he had arrived making a delivery in the town but the store was closed, the car was not refrigerated, and the meat would go bad. So he had asked if there was anyplace he could give the meat away and had been directed to the orphanage. Now to me this story definitely presents a man that "to him to live is Christ". To me this story is glorious because of Christ in him, the hope of Glory. His mission was like the front lines of the gospel, the enemy was trying to put him to an open shame and instead Christ was glorified. This was a result of prayer, faith, and many members, not just him. There were the people in the town that directed the driver to the orphanage, there was the driver whose conscious would not let him just throw the food away, etc. I have read other similar stories as well, some were related by WN concerning different brothers (in Christianity), some were from other biographies.

As for me I also had a similar experience, but I am afraid to say, less glorious. While serving in the training in Taipei I had to leave the country every 6 months because of my visa. I flew to Hong Kong. I was on the way back, had just checked out my hotel and was waiting for the bus to take me to the airport when I remembered I hadn't got my wife a present. I then noticed that across the street there was a woman's clothing store. I went in there and purchased a nice woman's blouse that cost every last penny of Hong Kong money I had. I went back, got on the bus with my ticket and went to the airport. Once at the airport I realized I didn't have the money for the airport tax. I was a missionary, I didn't have a cell phone or credit cards and I didn't have a single penny on me. I couldn't even afford to call my brother in law in Taiwan with the idea that he could pay the tax with a credit card. So I prayed. When I opened my eyes there was a man standing there waiting to talk to me. He said that he and his wife had too many bags to check in and saw that I only had one carry on bag. I told him I would be happy to check his bags on for him if he would pay my tax. I feel the Lord answered my prayer. I was a missionary and He was the choragus (as mentioned in Philippians -- the one that supplies all the needs of the chorus).

So I am sorry, I strongly disagree that the concept of "the practical way to live out the gospel of grace for the reality of the Body of Christ" is not taught in Christianity. That is false. These experiences may be rare in Christianity but they are also rare in the LRC. I find it incredibly arrogant to assume that the LRC has a monopoly on these truths. The mere fact that "this I never heard in Christianity" is hardly evidence that they didn't have the truth, anymore than my saying there are no gold mines on earth because I dug in my back yard and didn't find gold, so therefore there is no point looking anywhere for gold.

[ZNPaaneah]

I’ve been researching on http://ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooks.cfm the term “poor Christianity”, and every time Witness Lee said those word, he is speaking of (pay attention because I’ll only say it once) the system and not the people trap in the system. It was all of us (yes I’m including myself) that took those words incorrectly. Our attitude toward fellow believers in Christ was one of belittling them thinking we're superior to them. The funny thing is that all of you here in this forum have something negative to say about the ministry and person of Witness Lee (fellow believer in the Lord), yet some of you dare to say, as NeitherFirstnorLast said in post #36, “be careful in your handling of fellow believers.”

The Lurker

Unfortunately you included me when you said "all of you here in this forum" so I will respond. What are you referring to? I post on two forums, so I am really not sure what it is I have said on this forum that you are referring to. On the other forum I did ask the question if the teaching of one publication is scriptural. That seems like a reasonable question for any Christian to ask. I quoted a number of quotes from WL and tried my best to get the full context (I took these quotes from a Faithful word, so these were quotes that the BBs were using to support this teaching). Concerning his person I have heard others relate the history of JI, or PL, or Daystar, or BM, or things that took place in Taiwan, etc. But if you are accusing me of hypocrisy in treating WL by a different standard than I would treat any other brother or sister please refer me to the post in question.

[ZNPaaneah]

Many of you have said that those in the recovery follow a person rather than the Lord. Well, if you are meeting in your home alone/family then you are not following a man. You are just following yourself detached from the real and practical fellowship of the Body. If you are meeting with a “non-denominational group” (the best group I’ve seen is “home-church movement), whether you like it or not you are following the pastor/minister/elder/bishop/rabbi/preacher. Whether you want to accept it or not , there is no way around it.

The Lurker

By this definition everyone that has ever stood in line follows a man. I have two very big issues with the teaching of the LSM, and please note I served in the LSM from the late 70s through the mid 90s. It wasn't continuous, but the great majority of those years I was serving in the LSM.

Issue 1 -- The teaching of the Minister of the Age.
Issue 2 -- The teaching of the one publication.

To me this is much different than having a pastor, or a mentor, or a spiritual older brother. We have discussed these two issues in great detail on another forum and if necessary I'm sure we could carry that discussion over here. But this oversimplification as though the issue is following a man is offensive to me. WL said repeatedly that he had looked at all of Christianity and that there was no oracle, no speaking of God, he looked at the books being published and there was no fresh speaking of God. Now if you don't see that as arrogant you are in denial.

[Terry]

No doubt, it is a blessing and honor to be part of God’s move on the earth today. Here in the recovery, I have a sense of purpose and direction. So I’ll say this again for “NeitherFirstnorLast” sake, I’m an active local church member and proud of it. I have no shame in saying those words. I’m just been true to how I feel to spare you all from self humility. When Paul and other characters in the Scriptures displayed humility as a virtue, they did so in a mature state of their life. There is no gain pretending to be something else. I’ve been told before about my pride, but I prefer to be honest, open and transparent as to who I am and where I am in my Christian life for the sake of sanctification, transformation, correction and perfecting. Remember, he who love his soul-life and does not take the cross to lose it now for the Lords sake, but wants to save it, will lose it.

Amen! As members of the Body, we are all part of God's move on the earth. Not through any singular ministry or movement, but through the Body of Christ. Jesus said in the gospels, HE will build his church.
I believe it was in a post of ZNP, he brought up the one publication issue. This is a matter that distinguishes which churches are received/recognized and which ones are not. Something you won't find in the New Testament Ministry nor in Witness Lee's ministry. Since you meet with the local churches and obviously one in your locality, and prefer to be honest, open and transparent, please speak on this matter. What about local churches that won't take a specific publication such as Living Stream? As I see, that should not be grounds from excluding fellowship.

[manna-man]

Dear manna-man,
My understanding of the high peak gospel is the gospel of grace + the gospel of the kingdom. In a nutshell, Grace saves us from eternal perdition and the law so that we may received God’s life, places us as a member in the Body and causes us to enjoy all the blessings of been in Christ. I learned this in “poor poor Christianity!” The gospel of the kingdom ushers us in the practical way to live out the gospel of grace for the reality of the Body of Christ (functioning of ALL the members), thus hastening Christ second coming. This, I never heard in “poor poor Christianity!” Believing in this view or not depends upon your knowledge and believed of eschatology in relation to God’s kingdom. My advice is if you want to be clear about something in the Bible, well then, read the Bible.Lurker, EXACTLY!

Believing in this view does depend on your understanding of the gospel/bible. When you started attending the LC's obviously somebody echoed something they had heard and it made sense to you. The issue shouldn't be that you never heard it outside of the Local Churches, it should be that it is in Gods word and always has been.

We all should be careful not to forget that all light comes from our Lord, not from any one ministry. If we boast in anything, it will be Christ Crucified.

I’ve been researching on http://ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooks.cfm the term “poor Christianity”, and every time Witness Lee said those word, he is speaking of (pay attention because I’ll only say it once) the system and not the people trap in the system. It was all of us (yes I’m including myself) that took those words incorrectly. Our attitude toward fellow believers in Christ was one of belittling them thinking we're superior to them. The funny thing is that all of you here in this forum have something negative to say about the ministry and person of Witness Lee (fellow believer in the Lord), yet some of you dare to say, as NeitherFirstnorLast said in post #36, “be careful in your handling of fellow believers.”
Thank you, I appreciate your one time admission of taking those words incorrectly.

Last year I paid a visit to a Local Church, while I was there enjoying The Lord with them I did hear repeatedly "Poor Poor Christianity! and it was being said in a condescending manner and being echoed from a publication that was allotted for their reading of that week.(this grieved my spirit) and you are so right in pointing out that it was the "SYSTEM"

I believe the saints no matter where on this earth need to be careful and not fall into any system, but enter into Christ through the door/gospel of Christ He has opened for us. If we don't stand vigilant we may find ourselves on auto-pilot and grieve our Dear Lord.

What say ye on this?

Many of you have said that those in the recovery follow a person rather than the Lord. Well, if you are meeting in your home alone/family then you are not following a man. You are just following yourself detached from the real and practical fellowship of the Body. If you are meeting with a “non-denominational group” (the best group I’ve seen is “home-church movement), whether you like it or not you are following the pastor/minister/elder/bishop/rabbi/preacher. Whether you want to accept it or not , there is no way around it.
No doubt, it is a blessing and honor to be part of God’s move on the earth today. Here in the recovery, I have a sense of purpose and direction. So I’ll say this again for “NeitherFirstnorLast” sake, I’m an active local church member and proud of it. I have no shame in saying those words. I’m just been true to how I feel to spare you all from self humility. When Paul and other characters in the Scriptures displayed humility as a virtue, they did so in a mature state of their life. There is no gain pretending to be something else. I’ve been told before about my pride, but I prefer to be honest, open and transparent as to who I am and where I am in my Christian life for the sake of sanctification, transformation, correction and perfecting. Remember, he who love his soul-life and does not take the cross to lose it now for the Lords sake, but wants to save it, will lose it. So, you you are the remnant? You think you and your group has arrived and become the only true testimony on the earth?

Dear friend, You need to get out a bit more and listen to yourself. I do believe that the saints of the recovery are saved and enjoying fellowship with The Lord. But I do worry because of the System/LSM and the influence/guiding/power it has to usurp His leading.

I can't say for sure because I no longer meet with the LC'rs but I would take a guess based on my experience that every meeting in the Local Churches are affected by the power of the LSM.

What say ye?

“Spin”? Hummm? Are you speaking from experience. I’ve been lurking this forum before you became a member and I’ve seen all kinds of ‘spin’ here. Some new believes that I’m caring for are confused or have questions when they touch this forum. What kind of testimony is this? I have to know what they are reading in order to know how to inoculate them. There is no need to “spin” anything. No need to convince anybody. Truth sets people free. Go ahead, ‘spin’ my words.
The Lurker
The only spin here is that upon Christs return, All motives will be exposed and dealt with.

May we all lift up our heads and our hands to our maker and lift Him up!

As Always, Peace to all men!

Don Jr

[Ohio]

By this definition everyone that has ever stood in line follows a man. I have two very big issues with the teaching of the LSM, and please note I served in the LSM from the late 70s through the mid 90s. It wasn't continuous, but the great majority of those years I was serving in the LSM.
Issue 1 -- The teaching of the Minister of the Age.
Issue 2 -- The teaching of the one publication.

For me personally, what initially "sold me" on these aberrant teachings was a misguided view of history. WL continually presented his self-serving overview of church history, emphasizing how the "recovery" needed a continual string of notable ministers to take the lead in every age. The more I studied actual church history, the more I discovered how faulty this view really is.

Just as the so-called "authenticity" of today's pope needs an historical succession of popes starting with Peter, the "Minister of the Age" (MOTA) teaching requires a continual succession of MOTA's starting with Luther. There's just a small problem -- not even "recovery" history provides such a succession. WL's book Vision of the Age lists Madame Guyon as one such MOTA. Now, I'm not demeaning this dear sister in any way, but to call her a MOTA borders on absurdity. For that matter, to call any servant of God a MOTA is just absurd. No historian has ever done this, except WL, and that's why I say his distorted views of church history are so self-serving.

[Igzy]

For me personally, what initially "sold me" on these aberrant teachings was a misguided view of history. ....

It's amazing that the LRC can simultaneously hold the belief that women should not teach with authority to men, and at the same time hold that Madame Guyon was the "minister of the age." That's so ironic it's bizarre.

Besides the historical curve-fitting Lee used to prop up the MOTA idea, it's totally lost on them that the subjective nature of determining who is the MOTA leads to the sensible conclusion that such an idea cannot do the heavy lifting of expecting and requiring people to assent to it. Yet that's what they do. They go around wondering why people don't fall in line and claim they are out of God's move for not doing so. It's just nutty, but there it is.

[aron]

It's amazing that the LRC can simultaneously hold the belief that women should not teach with authority to men, and at the same time hold that Madame Guyon was the "minister of the age." That's so ironic it's bizarre.

Don't forget "Miss M.E. Barber" who, we are told, molded the young Nee into what he became spiritually.

Google "Margaret E. Barber" and the first two websites are apparently composed by the "Chicago Bibles and Books" people. The Wikipedia entry mainly cites James Reetzke and Living Stream Ministry as references.

We know that God is not a respecter of persons. If there is a rule, it should apply to everyone, accross the board, irrespective. With the LRC historians, however, there seem to be special people, to whom the conventions (e.g. "a woman should not teach") don't apply.

Which, conveniently, carries over into the current leadership; there are rules for the small potatoes, and rules for the MOTA. I find this to be subjectivism run amok; subjectivism masquerading as objective truth.

[Ohio]

It's amazing that the LRC can simultaneously hold the belief that women should not teach with authority to men, and at the same time hold that Madame Guyon was the "minister of the age." That's so ironic it's bizarre.

Besides the historical curve-fitting Lee used to prop up the MOTA idea, it's totally lost on them that the subjective nature of determining who is the MOTA leads to the sensible conclusion that such an idea cannot do the heavy lifting of expecting and requiring people to assent to it. Yet that's what they do. They go around wondering why people don't fall in line and claim they are out of God's move for not doing so. It's just nutty, but there it is.

If there is only one publication, and that's the only literature that the members read, then the members only get to hear WL's version of history, and it's all supposed to make sense because he said so.

Personally, I was never limited to LSM. I spent my college days under the ministry of Phillip Comfort, who refused to be limited by any and all publications. He was Bible first, and then selected from a whole host of authors for reference. He encouraged us all to develop libraries. Phil was also influenced by Bill Freeman.

One time I was with the two of them (~ frigid winter of '77-'78) and Phil casually asked Bill if it was still worthwhile for us to study the original Greek text of the New Testament, since so many quality books had already written on the subject. I loved the abrupt answer Bill gave, "what? God wrote in Greek!" Most of us know what the future had in store for Phil Comfort. (http://www.tyndale.com/Philip-W-Comfort/bio)

[Ohio]

Don't forget "Miss M.E. Barber" who, we are told, molded the young Nee into what he became spiritually.

Google "Margaret E. Barber" and the first two websites are apparently composed by the "Chicago Bibles and Books" people. The Wikipedia entry mainly cites James Reetzke and Living Stream Ministry as references.

We know that God is not a respecter of persons. If there is a rule, it should apply to everyone, across the board, irrespective. With the LRC historians, however, there seem to be special people, to whom the conventions (e.g. "a woman should not teach") don't apply.

Which, conveniently, carries over into the current leadership; there are rules for the small potatoes, and rules for the MOTA. I find this to be subjectivism run amok; subjectivism masquerading as objective truth.

Have you forgotten that beloved sister in China who preached the gospel to WL brought him to the Lord.

[aron]

Have you forgotten that beloved sister in China who preached the gospel to WL [WN, actually] and brought him to the Lord.

Right. Dora Yu. How would Dora Yu fare under the blendeds today? What would Ron Kangas do when faced with a "spiritual sister" like that?

[Ohio]

Right. Dora Yu. How would Dora Yu fare under the blendeds today? What would Ron Kangas do when faced with a "spiritual sister" like that?

He has already told us.

.

He would send that spiritual sister to the kitchen to finish the dishes.

[Terry]

I’ve been researching on http://ministrybooks.org/SearchMinBooks.cfm the term “poor Christianity”, and every time Witness Lee said those word, he is speaking of (pay attention because I’ll only say it once) the system and not the people trap in the system. It was all of us (yes I’m including myself) that took those words incorrectly. Our attitude toward fellow believers in Christ was one of belittling them thinking we're superior to them.

The Lurker

The Lurker, Witness Lee also said in 1997 "You must bring this message back, read it once, read it twice, and come together to fellowship with one another. Then you will see that, we, in the past, were wrong! Of course, denominations are wrong. The sectarianism is what God condemns the most."

Nearly thirty years earlier Witness Lee spoke these words in The Practical Expression of the Church

“It is only by being so liberal and general that we can receive all the saints in a proper way. If we are otherwise, we cannot avoid being sectarian in the matter of receiving. If we are special in anything and insist upon that, we will probably not receive those who differ from us in certain matters."

"We must have such a proper receiving of all the saints that we may keep the proper unity; otherwise, we can never keep ourselves from being sectarian and causing much confusion and damage to the church life. To practice the church life by keeping the proper unity, such a general receiving is necessary. May the Lord have mercy upon us!”

Key theme in these quoted words of Witness Lee is sectarianism. Your post touches on this characteristic which you worded as "Our attitude toward fellow believers in Christ was one of belittling them thinking we're superior to them." The local churches weren't able to keep from being sectarian. If there wasn't a problem with sectarianism, Witness Lee wouldn't need to speak on it. This belittling you speak of is what I consider to be sectarianism expressed. I had heard it enough times in my locality to stop meeting on Sundays. Before I stopped meeting I did bring it to the attention of an elder. He was unphased. This is why a 1968 publication such as The Practical Expression of the Church is so important. It's biblical context is in Romans 12 & 14 on the matter of receiving. As I quoted our brother, "may the Lord have mercy upon us!"

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

When Paul and other characters in the Scriptures displayed humility as a virtue, they did so in a mature state of their life. There is no gain pretending to be something else. I’ve been told before about my pride, but I prefer to be honest, open and transparent as to who I am and where I am in my Christian life for the sake of sanctification, transformation, correction and perfecting. Remember, he who love his soul-life and does not take the cross to lose it now for the Lords sake, but wants to save it, will lose it.

Lurker, do you see what you are saying here? You "have been told before about (your) pride, but prefer to be honest, open and transparent as to who (you are)?"

Pride is a great sin. It is the sin which lead Satan into rebellion:

Proverbs 16:18 "Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before the fall."

How can you say that you are okay with this sin, as it is just "where you are" or "who you are"? Consider a murderer, or a liar, or a thief, who professed to be a follower of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ but who also refused to repent of the sin, saying instead "Hey, Paul didn't murder anyone or lie or steal, but he was mature. I'm not, and I prefer to be honest about that." That is false humility.

Lurker, let me remind you of James 2:10
"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

You cannot hold on to a sin. Not one. Confess and repent of every sin, and He who is just will be faithful to forgive you your sins and cleanse you from all unrighteousness.... And if you will not repent of that sin, then you cannot be forgiven it.

Why do you not care to be forgiven this sin? Why do you not care to let Christ have His way in you? Why do you not repent and be cleansed? Precisely because your pride will not permit you to bend your knee to Him.

The Pharisees were guilty of the same, and look what He said would become of them.

This is the hard truth, and I mean to say it not to shame you but to expose you - for that which is left in the dark may remain hidden, but when the light shines, it must flee or be seen.

In Christ,

NeitherFirstnorLast

[ZNPaaneah]

I feel like everyone has piled on the Lurker and I don't feel that is a balanced approach to what he was saying. I agree with him that you can find many gatherings of Christians that have a simplistic view of the gospel. They may teach the truth, but it seems that, for the most part, their gospel ends with the Gospel of John. It is very easy to attack WL and the LRC because their views are published and taught and regurgitated frequently. Other groups of Christians have a very different focus, perhaps they are focused on worship and service. They may not teach nearly so much on some of these truths instead saying something to the effect of "Jesus is our Example" or "WWJD". However, if you were to fellowship with the individual members in detail you would learn that many of them have a very spotty understanding of the NT, or even a blatantly wrong understanding that borders on being saved by good works, etc. It may be that the ministry of WL and WN was very good in connecting the dots between the experiences of Christians recorded over the last 2,000 years and the teachings of Paul in his epistles.

So, I don't have an issue with the truths, I think they are wonderful and I am very happy that I was helped to understand the NT in greater depth. However, I believe there is an incredible disconnect where the LRC teaching has lost the realization that this teaching grew in part out of the experiences of Christians recorded over the last 2,000 years. Somehow they have become proud and arrogant as though they alone have this teaching and therefore, having the teaching means having the experience. On the contrary it may very well be that the groups that are seemingly poor in teachings are actually quite rich in the genuine experience, while those that boast of how rich they are in the teachings are in fact poor in experience and even blind to this fact.

[aron]

Have you forgotten that beloved sister in China who preached the gospel to WL brought him to the Lord.

Peace Wang. I confused her with Dora Yu.

Another "spiritual sister" who would be a threat to the blendeds.

Reminds me of the time Jesus said how they kill the prophets, and later decorate their tombs (Matt 23).

The LRC builds mausoleums for these sisters, while they wouldn't tolerate them for a second if they were here in the flesh.

[OBW]

I'm not sure that the view that the gospel is just in the "Gospels" is such a simple thing. But is there anything added to the truth beyond that other than commentary on how it played out, including letters, mostly from Paul, that directed the believers back to the path. All Paul had was the existing scripture (the OT) and what Christ had taught and patterned while visibly on earth.

If there is anything "simple" about the gospel as presented in the four "gospels" it is our over-simplifying it down to just a matter of knowing and believing but not obeying — or at least not obeying the parts that require any act of our mind, emotions, will, or body (other than believing in our minds). We have misread Paul to eliminate the call to a different way of achieving the righteousness demanded in the law. Christ did not abolish the demand for righteousness. He provided a different way to achieve it. One that is greater than our will and effort and has guaranteed success.

"Go and disciple the nations. Baptize them. And teach them to obey all that I have taught you." Too much of Christianity, including the LRC, has abandoned that last charge. The LRC and some other inner-life groups replaced obedience with spiritual stuff. Others replaced it with a different kind of cheap grace in which everything is about your mental assent and agreement. But many are beginning to return obedience into the mix. Without obedience, even salvation has somewhat of a question mark.

And when you layer in Paul, one of the more prolific commentators, he did not say that obedience was being spiritual. He said there were spiritual truths that provided the way to obey. Like in Galatians. He didn't tell anyone to be crucified. He said that we have been and because of that we should not be doing what we are doing, but instead be righteous.

And then Peter came along and said that we already have everything we need for righteousness. But Lee didn't think so. He said we needed more dispensing. And he didn't like the book of James because it described the Christian life from the opposite viewpoint. If you are not obeying, then your spirituality is to be questioned. That does not contradict anything that Paul said. Paul just said that because you have this spiritual reality, obey. Paul said how and James gave us a benchmark to review success and failure.

Waiting for dispensing is not the gospel. "I'm free from the law" is not the gospel. (You are free from the bondage of the law, but not from its righteous requirement.) Just call on the Lord, meaning "say 'Oh Lord Jesus' three times" is not the gospel. That is cheap grace. We need no realization of our depravity or repentance. We just get a different feeling — one supported, and maybe created by the enthusiasm of the crowd around us. And we don't have to obey after that. Just sit back and take in the dispensing and all our sins, whatever they are, will fall off us without any act of our own will to set our mind and walk.

No we have probably rejected the most extreme parts of that kind of teaching. But do we still resist doing? Abiding was not for abiding. It was to provide the means to do. It is probably what Paul called setting the mind. It is not floating in a spiritual dream, soaking in dispensing, but communing with God to tap into the means to do.

Remember that God didn't put man here to be spiritual, but to have dominion over the earth. We were not put here to worship, but to do. And God provided his truth when he gave the Israelites the law. It was about living righteously and having no other God. And because they would fail, he provided the animal sacrifice as a substitution for the requirement of their own life. And we now think that God just abandoned the whole righteousness thing because there is no more system of sacrifices. That is erroneous thinking. The primary law is not abolished. There are too many passages in the NT saying that we are to be obedient, to follow, to do, etc., and we jump on the one place that says we are dead to the law and presume that means that all those other passages are wrong. More like we are wrong about what being dead to the law meant in that one place. Seems more like wishful thinking. Wanting to not have to obey and finding a few words that can be twisted to mean it despite many words that say otherwise. The volume of words that speak against that position leaves the only conclusion to be that we don't understand what being dead to the law is.

[NeitherFirstnorLast]

I'm not sure that the view that the gospel is just in the "Gospels" is such a simple thing...

Amen to that Brother, 100%.

[aron]

Christ did not abolish the demand for righteousness. He provided a different way to achieve it. One that is greater than our will and effort and has guaranteed success.

...many are beginning to return obedience into the mix. Without obedience, even salvation has somewhat of a question mark.

Paul... said there were spiritual truths that provided the way to obey. Like in Galatians. He didn't tell anyone to be crucified. He said that we have been and because of that we should not be doing what we are doing, but instead be righteous.

And then Peter came along and said that we already have everything we need for righteousness. And James said... if you are not obeying, then your spirituality is to be questioned. That does not contradict anything that Paul said. Paul just said that because you have this spiritual reality, obey. Paul said how and James gave us a benchmark to review success and failure.

...Remember that God didn't put man here to be spiritual, but to have dominion over the earth. We were not put here to worship, but to do. And God provided his truth when he gave the Israelites the law. It was about living righteously and having no other God.

It seems as though Jesus (and then Paul, Peter, James, etc) presents us with a different notion of dominion. Jesus didn't really boss anyone around. He was the "Master" (Gk kurios) to the disciples, but again more like the master-copy, the template to follow in order to be saved.

And his example was to be obedient to the Father. "Behold I come to do Thy will; in the roll of the book it is written concerning Me".

So Jesus was the "Master" (i.e. expert) servant. He emptied Himself and took the form of a man, and always stood as the Son of Man. And because Jesus was "under authority", as the Roman centurion rightly noted, even the wind and the waves obeyed Him, and ultimately the Father glorified Him.

But you are fundamentally right. It was all about doing God's will. And it remains so. Only now, instead of Moses' law facing us, we have the glorified Jesus facing us. And we, hopefully, can see this One, and not be led about by winds of teaching. He is, and remains, the way home to the Father.

We believe, and because we believe, our actions change.

[Igzy]

However, I believe there is an incredible disconnect where the LRC teaching has lost the realization that this teaching grew in part out of the experiences of Christians recorded over the last 2,000 years. Somehow they have become proud and arrogant as though they alone have this teaching and therefore, having the teaching means having the experience.

"We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know." 1 Cor. 8:1-2

Paul saw the error of the LRC long before they committed it. If the LRC is so clear on Paul, then how did they miss 1 Cor 8? The answer is right there in the verses. They did not know as they ought to know.

You have two knowings here. One sounds good, looks good and leaves the holder with a sense of having arrived. But it is a knowing that is not according to how knowledge ought to be. The other knowing is proper knowing. It's the knowing of knowing a Person and being humbled by experience.

Yes, there are some ignorant Christians out there. But at least they know they don't know. Those in the LRC think they know but actually know little. Who is worse off?

[Terry]

"We know that we all possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. The man who thinks he knows something does not yet know as he ought to know." 1 Cor. 8:1-2

Paul saw the error of the LRC long before they committed it. If the LRC is so clear on Paul, then how did they miss 1 Cor 8? The answer is right there in the verses. They did not know as they ought to know.

Yes, there are some ignorant Christians out there. But at least they know they don't know. Those in the LRC think they know but actually know little. Who is worse off?

Good verse Igzy. In non-LSM Christianity, it has been refreshing and encouraging. True, they may not be exposed to a ministry of types and figures. To a certain extent these Chrsitians express 1 Corinthians 13.

[Unregistered]

How many times did we hear Witness Lee condesendingly repeat, "Poor, poor, Christianity." ,"Plastic Christians. Songs/ Slogans were sang, repeating "Overcome Degraded Chrisitianity!!! At some point in most meetings traditional Christians and Christianity were attacked, mocked, called "deadened" "but the Local Churches, well --we are the Lord's highest recovery HALELUJAH AMEN chant louder !!!

Wow!! Chanting and saying the same thing over and over ! what a way to make some people feel better than everyone else!! repeat AMEN loudly after Lee's every word! Just like mind control!!
Gee, don't you feel so much superior now and God loves you best now that you are in this "church" group? And if you are an elder I'm sure your easy paycheck is worth just following orders.