Against the LC Practice of Prophesying

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I know those feelings well. In the GLA, we would usually assign a brother or two (me included) who would prepare an opening and closing word for the prophesying time after the Lord's Table meeting. Whether I opened, closed, or just added my little bit, I always took this time seriously, and would prepare for, at minimum, several hours during the week ahead.

The HWFMR was like chewing on newspaper -- dead dry and lifeless. I could read it for hours and never benefit from it. But I needed something real and living to speak to others, so I always went back to the scriptures to find the anointing. Who could complain, since I used the same verses?

Usually one or more brothers will "open" the prophesying and another brother will close. Particularly with those who do the opening, half the time it will consist of just telling everyone what to do: "Let's all read the verses on day 1, then pray-read them..." or "Let's have sisters read Roman Numeral 1 and brothers will read Roman Numeral 2..." I am perfectly serious when I say this. I have heard openings that just consist asking everyone to do things like this.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Usually one or more brothers will "open" the prophesying and another brother will close. Particularly with those who do the opening, half the time it will consist of just telling everyone what to do: "Let's all read the verses on day 1, then pray-read them..." or "Let's have sisters read Roman Numeral 1 and brothers will read Roman Numeral 2..." I am perfectly serious when I say this. I have heard openings that just consist asking everyone to do things like this.

I understand that completely, it all came down to how much we had prepared, and how mature we are -- that determined the value of our gatherings.

Lee's program of "each one has ... " resulted in both the good and the worthless. Many a meeting I have left weary after listening to others, and of course them listening to me. Ministering on a regular basis to others is no easy endeavor. I will ever be thankful for all the training and encouragement I have received in the LC's to speak for the Lord. On the other hand, I was also upset when I discovered that Lee's motive was not just to help the one-talented members like myself, but to neutralize all the other gifted members that might be a rival to him.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I will ever be thankful for all the training and encouragement I have received in the LC's to speak for the Lord. On the other hand, I was also upset when I discovered that Lee's motive was not just to help the one-talented members like myself, but to neutralize all the other gifted members that might be a rival to him.

I would say that there were some positive things gained from this practice, if nothing else, learning to speak in front of people and learning to speak the Word.

In regards to all the "one-talented" members, I often wonder how necessary it really is to posses certain skills that should by no means be an expectation that someone. I will give an example of what I mean by this. Something I have seen is with many FTTA graduates, they will be put in situations where they have to speak more than an "opening word", such as maybe a short message or something like that. In some of the YP or college conferences, they will have random younger FTTA graduate type brothers give the messages. Not necessarily a problem, however, it's not as simple as asking them to speak and then letting them go do their thing. Quite the contrary, they are given an outline to speak from, and it is pretty obvious that someone is behind it all, "fellowship" with them on what to speak, how to speak, etc. I have listened to a number of messages given by inexperienced speakers, some can do a good job, others don't. I've never made is a point to try and judge anyone.

In my eyes the problem is that they put so many in a position where they are supposed to learn a skill, rather than exercise a gift. In the original excerpt I posted, I think Lee recognized that some don't have the gift to speak, and shouldn't, but that attitude is long gone. Instead many are put into shoes that they can't fill or even shouldn't fill. Some brothers can speak fine, but that doesn't mean their speaking is of any value.

Getting back to what Ohio posted, when all the "one talented" members can supposedly do the task that perhaps a gifted member should do, it essentially negates the function of someone who has a particular gift, such as the gift of ministering.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I would say that there were some positive things gained from this practice, if nothing else, learning to speak in front of people and learning to speak the Word.

But we don't gather together to have a Christian Toastmasters organization. It is to focus on Christ, not on us. That is one of the flaws of the "every meeting should have a testimony meeting section" mentality. It turns too much of the focus from Him to us — even when what we say includes reference to Him.

As far as meaningful prophesying is concerned, if the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, then I would presume that they are not often standing up to speak something that suddenly came over them, although that can happen. But, like the ones who gathered at Pentecost, and were then there to teach in the temple for the new church, they were trained. They were chosen for the task, so we cannot dismiss that it was also giftedness. They got over three years of training. But as they were learning, their giftedness was not so evident at times.

Yes, there are times that there is something that must be said on short notice, but even that is usually not from a vacuum, but from a wealth of knowledge and experience (for some, more knowledge and for others more experience, but except where there is literally something new spoken by God through a person, not new).

I can't comment on the ways of the FTTA because, at some level, it is like a seminary. It may fail in the charge to really teach sound principles of the study, exposition, and preaching of the Word, but it still is a seminary. And no matter your giftedness, if you are called to teach, then you will usually require some experience before it at least seems natural. (I know some who will say that it is never as easy at it seems.) So giving them an outline and coaching them on how to approach it is not necessarily something bad. The bad, if there is any, is somewhere else. It may be in the complete lack of true training. It may be in the very thing that they are charged to speak.

And it may be in the nature of the system within which the speaking is done.

But expecting anyone to avoid all kinds of instruction as they learn to speak before the group is not reasonable. Even for the LCM.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by OBW

As far as meaningful prophesying is concerned, if the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, then I would presume that they are not often standing up to speak something that suddenly came over them, although that can happen. But, like the ones who gathered at Pentecost, and were then there to teach in the temple for the new church, they were trained. They were chosen for the task, so we cannot dismiss that it was also giftedness. They got over three years of training. But as they were learning, their giftedness was not so evident at times.

Yes, there are times that there is something that must be said on short notice, but even that is usually not from a vacuum, but from a wealth of knowledge and experience (for some, more knowledge and for others more experience, but except where there is literally something new spoken by God through a person, not new).

I can't comment on the ways of the FTTA because, at some level, it is like a seminary. It may fail in the charge to really teach sound principles of the study, exposition, and preaching of the Word, but it still is a seminary. And no matter your giftedness, if you are called to teach, then you will usually require some experience before it at least seems natural. (I know some who will say that it is never as easy at it seems.) So giving them an outline and coaching them on how to approach it is not necessarily something bad. The bad, if there is any, is somewhere else. It may be in the complete lack of true training. It may be in the very thing that they are charged to speak.

And it may be in the nature of the system within which the speaking is done.

But expecting anyone to avoid all kinds of instruction as they learn to speak before the group is not reasonable. Even for the LCM.

To me, I don't think the issue is so much that they are encouraging or pushing inexperienced brothers to speak, it's that they don't take into consideration who would really be best to fit that role. Moving beyond just the young FTTA graduates, it's a phenomenon I've seen elsewhere in the LC. They seem to think that any "active" brother is a good candidate to be trained in who to speak a short message or more than just something in a prophesying meeting. The problem is that just because someone is handed an outline and told what to speak that doesn't mean that they are going to do a good job. Some times I've seen brothers just read off an outline, and it was obvious that there was a disconnect to the outline that they were supposed to be speaking from.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

To me, I don't think the issue is so much that they are encouraging or pushing inexperienced brothers to speak, it's that they don't take into consideration who would really be best to fit that role. Moving beyond just the young FTTA graduates, it's a phenomenon I've seen elsewhere in the LC. They seem to think that any "active" brother is a good candidate to be trained in who to speak a short message or more than just something in a prophesying meeting. The problem is that just because someone is handed an outline and told what to speak that doesn't mean that they are going to do a good job. Some times I've seen brothers just read off an outline, and it was obvious that there was a disconnect to the outline that they were supposed to be speaking from.

I still feel it is profitable to give every brother some opportunity to speak publicly for the Lord in a local church setting. Time will manifest whether he has been gifted by the Lord. What about those who get saved in college or afterwards, and never had the chance to go to a Christian college or seminary?

I know OBW gets heartburn every time I mention something positive about LC practices, but that's what I have concluded. The most serious failures of LC leadership were not initially their teachings or practices, but their abuses, coverups of their unrighteousness, and corruption.

That's my story. I'm sticking to it. OBW I'll send you some Tums.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I still feel it is profitable to give every brother some opportunity to speak publicly for the Lord in a local church setting. Time will manifest whether he has been gifted by the Lord. What about those who get saved in college or afterwards, and never had the chance to go to a Christian college or seminary?

I know OBW gets heartburn every time I mention something positive about LC practices, but that's what I have concluded. The most serious failures of LC leadership were not initially their teachings or practices, but their abuses, coverups of their unrighteousness, and corruption.

That's my story. I'm sticking to it. OBW I'll send you some Tums.

Just as I hear in local church settings, criticism of non-LSM churches that employ a pastor there's the reverse criticism; a word of caution towards the practice of everyone speaking. Some may speak an edifying word according to the Word, but there runs the risk of speaking differently from the Word. It's alarming there's no checks and balances in place against "speaking differently".

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I know OBW gets heartburn every time I mention something positive about LC practices, but that's what I have concluded.

You can save your Tums. I don't get heartburn. But I think I am seeing something that is worth at least considering. And it is not that everything about the LCM was wrong, evil, or corrupt. It is that the primary source of anything that caused there to be a LCM — Nee and Lee, now propped-up by the BBs, kind of like Bernie — did not pass the qualifications to actually be a minister of the Word no matter how gifted they may have seemed to be, therefore the group that collected around them should just back away and, in the words of Officer Barbrady "move along . . . there's nothing to see here."

I am not saying that the people should necessarily disband entirely. But they need new leadership and a new focus. If they can truly get it on their own, then OK. But my fear is that there is nothing to be gained to sticking together separate from others except for a lack of clarity on what is still hanging on you/us that needs to be removed. As long as we remain isolated from the rest of Christianity, it will be a fight to get sober. Like continuing to go to the bar while resisting the urge to drink.

And just like not everything that goes on at a bar is not bad, neither is everything that goes on in the LCM. And not every teaching of the LCM is bad. But to what extent are we still affected by Lee's leaven that is permeating even seemingly good and normal teachings. Do we still think of almost every teaching just a little different from how others see it. And it bothers us? Where did the difference come from? And how likely are you to figure it out if your source is still from the inside.

And I know that you are no longer on the inside. And over time — starting before you left all the way up to now — you are seeing different things that you did not see 6 years ago . . . 4 years ago . . . last year . . . even last month or yesterday.

I've been out for almost 28 years and I still see differences during the past year. But do you think I would be seeing it if I was still clinging to what I learned there? Outside of a real sense of friendship and fellowship which is somewhat difficult to duplicate, I'm not sure I really want what I learned there if I haven't come across it on the outside since. And that extra special fellowship may have been the result of all us prisoners sticking together. (Yeah, I know. Probably a little extreme, and I'm not sure I buy it either. But I don't think it was really about what Lee taught us. It was about who we were.)

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I still feel it is profitable to give every brother some opportunity to speak publicly for the Lord in a local church setting. Time will manifest whether he has been gifted by the Lord. What about those who get saved in college or afterwards, and never had the chance to go to a Christian college or seminary?

I know OBW gets heartburn every time I mention something positive about LC practices, but that's what I have concluded. The most serious failures of LC leadership were not initially their teachings or practices, but their abuses, coverups of their unrighteousness, and corruption.

That's my story. I'm sticking to it. OBW I'll send you some Tums.

But profitable for what? We weren't building up something of God, we were building up Witness Lee's personal empire. Which is now the Blended Brothers' personal empire. Which was supposed to have become Titus Chu's personal empire (at least in his mind).

And we were also building up little fiefdoms within the little empires.