[OBW]

I think that one of the things that I am unimpressed about is that I find no meaningful relationship between the guy in the video and the LRC, and then find nothing about him or his organization that gives him much more than the amount of weight that any of us get here on the internet — a place where anyone with a keyboard and an key can publish. If what is essentially an outsider is going to speak on the LRC, he needs to provide reasonable credentials. And when he seems to speak as if supporting what one might call "competition" for doing Nee right, his credibility goes down even more.

Now if Stephen Kuang (sp?) were to finally weigh-in on some of the self-made claims of Lee, I would listen because he is someone who, while following the premises of Nee, has not tried to compete with Lee and the LRC, but simply done what he has done without any reference to them.

I mean, if "Lioncubseal" (in the other forum, I think) and his alleged "Jesus come in the flesh," INES, were to make a video that said some of the same things, would you listen just because there is an organization name behind it?

Of course, I probably am revealing something about myself in this. I am much more impressed with religious teachers who are focused on Christians living this life in a fully righteous manner, and less impressed with those who are focused on the extremes — the adjectivized Christians, or those with some kind of superlative put before their name; ignoring the present and panting after the end times (and being of no current use); or those who are overly focused on "spiritual" things and ignore regular living. And those who are focused on how to figure out some kind of "the way" church that marginalizes other assemblies that do not meet their criteria. Anyone trying to create some kind of city-church is that for me. The "city-church" is something of impracticality unless your city is very small. It is strictly "universal" and not practical.