A Review of Hank's Recent Book.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

To me it depends on where those "popcorn testimonies" are getting their source. If it's sourced in a man, then yeah. But if "popcorn" people are speaking according to the Anointing and there's real life and genuine help being conveyed, that's profitable.

Over time one knows whether or not the speaking is bringing them into closer fellowship with Christ and helping them walk in spirit or not.

I don't care how much anyone wraps their (or others') words in outward signs of exuberance or of deep emotional impact, you can't just presume "anointing" if the source of what raised the outward evidence is polluted. Said in a different way, if you are speaking from a polluted source (and unless you are speaking against the pollution in that source) then any claim of anointing is suspect, at best. That means that anything that impresses you positively will be more likely to be given the mantle of "anointing."

And returning to my comments on well-trained sources, I do not presume that no one else can make a useful statement. And if it reasonably fits with whatever scripture might be applicable and/or mentioned, that is good. But I would never consider that to be a preferable source since it would be, by its very nature, more subject to wandering from the center of truth.

As for real-life and genuine help, when I look at the LRC landscape, I cannot find lasting evidence that there is any such thing. Maybe on an individual basis for a time. But if "fruit that remains" is the criteria on which we track things, then anything that arises from the teachings of the LRC should be suspect. Just because something is/was appealing does not grant it a pass.

I'm not trying to squelch anything. But I think that being too strong in favor of practices from a group with so many bad practices and doctrines is a spiritually dangerous place to be. It is a position that needs more than feelings. This is what I had to do for myself years ago to begin to see how much the fog in Lee's garlic room hid.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I don't care how much anyone wraps their (or others') words in outward signs of exuberance or of deep emotional impact, you can't just presume "anointing" if the source of what raised the outward evidence is polluted. Said in a different way, if you are speaking from a polluted source (and unless you are speaking against the pollution in that source) then any claim of anointing is suspect, at best. That means that anything that impresses you positively will be more likely to be given the mantle of "anointing."

I'm thankful that God's heart is much bigger than you portray here. The Spirit of God is able even to use "polluted sources" to speak to God's children and to anoint them. Did not the Spirit of the glorified Son of Man speak to God's children in all 7 churches in Revelations?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm thankful that God's heart is much bigger than you portray here. The Spirit of God is able even to use "polluted sources" to speak to God's children and to anoint them. Did not the Spirit of the glorified Son of Man speak to God's children in all 7 churches in Revelations?

Your presumption as to how complete the corruption in some of those places was is not supported by the scripture. Besides, the speaking actually recorded in the scripture was not from within those churches, therefore not subject to their corruption.

And in any case, you miss the point I was making. I am not saying that nothing good can come out of anything Lee/Nee said or was printed by the LSM (of course those are nearly synonymous). I am pointing to the uncertainty of true spirituality of what was read or heard. I know now that there were times that I, and everyone around me, had a rising sense of enjoyment from what we were hearing. Yet years later I have come to recognize that what we were hearing was actually incorrect, and the sense we received was more from the novelty and uniqueness of it than anything of true spirituality. In restrospect, we are too often swept-up in a bandwagon of thinking and acting.

I now recognize that I gave 14+ years of my life to a group that I would now recommend even an Anglican church over. They may not be the most up-to-date thing around. And they won't be preaching/teaching all of the nuggets that might (or might not) be hiding in the fortune cookies of scripture. But they are teaching their people the love of Christ and His love for the world — not just for the members of their group. And encouraging them to live that love in all of their lives. You might get a more theological sermon somewhere else, but is that really what we need?

If the goal is righteousness, peace, and joy, then we need to pursue it all. And joy is not just the spiritual equivalent of being LSU fans last Monday night. And in the grand scheme of things in the world, even that win is of little consequence. Yeah, some money will go to the schools, and a few of the players may get rich playing in the NFL. But outside of reminiscing about the game years in the future, it has little if any real impact.

The same can be said for things in the spiritual realm. Getting excited when I learn of something that will actually make a change (for the better) in my life is really something. But if it is just learning something that is already true and that knowing does not change, there is something hollow in getting excitied about it. If I am not studying to be an engineer, but learn that the camshaft in a 4-cycle engine turns at half the speed of the crankshaft, it is interesting, but makes no difference because I am already benefitting from that fact. But if I get excited about it and go out onto the commons at the university and start shouting about the impact this newly learned fact is having and act superior for knowing and speaking about it, I am little more than a fool, even though what I am saying is correct.

But returning to what the Spirit can make from even chaos and error, I freely agree that the Spirit can do much. But when I cannot see an actual divine being saying whatever it is I am hearing, and I am inclined to like to hear from otherwise untrained individuals who pop up to excitedly speak what they think they got from something that I now consider potentially suspect, I need more than a good feeling to endorse it. That feeling may be agreement by the Spirit, it may be just my preference for the kind of speaking happening, it may be my personal liking for the person speaking, or it may be the happy state of my stomach after a good breakfast or dinner. I need something more than my feelings to corroborate.

And if I lived in the first century in the city of Thyatira, I might be concerned if I came to realize that some of the teachings I was receiving were more correctly described as deep things of Satan. If I was not a Bible scholar (and I am not), I might want to find out what teachers I could trust. (Seems a little like reversing some of Paul's concerns about Corinth.) And if I came to understand that certain of the teachers were salting their teaching with error, I might rather avoid those, or at least listen with skepticism. I do not say that the Spirit cannot bring truth out of a bad well. But I also know that if the well is known to be bad, then it is risky to drink the water from it.

And unnecessarily risky if there are good wells available.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Your presumption as to how complete the corruption in some of those places was is not supported by the scripture. Besides, the speaking actually recorded in the scripture was not from within those churches, therefore not subject to their corruption.

And in any case, you miss the point I was making.

No, I did not miss your point.

You disputed SonsToGlory's assertion that a LC "popcorn" testimony could be anointed because it was sourced in God Himself. Here is his actual post:

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

To me it depends on where those "popcorn testimonies" are getting their source. If it's sourced in a man, then yeah. But if "popcorn" people are speaking according to the Anointing and there's real life and genuine help being conveyed, that's profitable.

Over time one knows whether or not the speaking is bringing them into closer fellowship with Christ and helping them walk in spirit or not.

I agree with STG wholeheartedly. He did not say that everything in the LC was perfect, right, or holy, rather that many of the testimonies there were definitely anointed by the Spirit of God. Like I said, I agree wholeheartedly. STG then provided the "fruit test," i.e. whether that testimony brought him in closer fellowship with Christ and benefited his Christian walk.

As a rule, concerning what we as Christians hear, we must separate the good from the bad, and this often involves proving by testing, as STG has done. (I Ths 5.21, I Jn 4.1, Rm 12.2, Ep 5.10) Jesus warned His disciples to "beware of the leaven." (Lk 12.1) Those who lake the maturity to adequately "de-leaven" their Christian walk (Heb 5.11-14) are in serious danger of shipwrecking their faith. (I Tim 1.19) This is a very serious danger. We have witnessed many who gave up their faith in God completely after leaving the Recovery. The cognitive dissonance is far too much than they can bear.

OBW, you do seem overly caustic or resentful of your LC experience. I encourage you to find the good, and hold on to it. One wise Christian counselor Gary Smalley called this practice "treasure hunting." He had counseled hundreds who had endured far worse experiences, and became much the better using this soul-searching technique.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

OBW, you do seem overly caustic or resentful of your LC experience. I encourage you to find the good, and hold on to it. One wise Christian counselor Gary Smalley called this practice "treasure hunting." He had counseled hundreds who had endured far worse experiences, and became much the better using this soul-searching technique.

It might appear that way. But I found during my years moving from simply not being there, then to questioning more than just poor practices and Phariseeism, then beyond that, that there was something insidious that affected us all. It took people truly seeking for God and substituted something else. And that something else was wrapped in teachings that everything about us was superior, from our teachings to our practices to even the words we used.

My discovery was that I needed to have the whole house fumigated because I couldn't simply find and kill every cockroach in the rooms, walls, ceilings, etc. Or another word picture — I decided that continuing to drink water that was only partly polluted rather than seriously polluted was no more acceptable. So, to the extent that I can, I do not hang onto anything that is not somewhat run-of-the-mill Christian belief, doctrine, and practice. Not because I fear the LRC, but because I think it is healthier.

And I know that some do not agree on my somewhat scorched-earth position on all things LRC. And I do not refuse you or others to speak as you do. But I think it is a reasonable warning, or at least something worthy of consideration. Do you think I should just go away and never say it again?

As for being caustic or resentful, you have no idea. My experience in the LRC was not that bad other than the aloofness and failing teaching that seemed to be predominant in Irving in the mid-80s. It was surely doing my family no good. Prior to that, I had it easy. I was almost never really in "corporate" living since my entire family was in the church. And I was not trying to be a front-row, burning, go-getter. I just thought we had the best teaching (something I now see differently). I did know personally of at least one situation where a leading one in Dallas went off on an older man in a Saturday morning meeting. I later learned that some of the other leaders/elders were floored at the event but felt that the one doing it was sort of an Anaheim plant so they stayed out of it. But my only animosity at any level is reserved for Lee (and even Nee indirectly) for capturing such a group of dear Christians to have in his pocket to pay for his living. I didn't even know about his degenerate sons by the time I left. That was to be exposed during the following year or so and I got little information until almost 20 years later.

Ahd knowing what I do now, I have a problem with certain of the continuing leadership, just as we speak about them here on the forum. But I do not hate them. I would rather that they see the light shining on their ways and the error that come with getting enamored with that little man with the coke-bottle glasses who took us all for a ride.