To "The Precious Saints Who Are No Longer Meeting With Us"

[Trapped]

I spent a little time scrolling through the other memorial videos for Benson.

-Ron Kangas is back, clearly having lost weight. He managed to get a nice slap down on all the saints by saying something like, "I have to be frank, but very few brothers and sisters in the church life are actually mature".

So......whose fault is that exactly? How much more "in the central lane" can they get at this point?

I was thinking about the overall common thread of the subjects in the TLRU YouTube channel, and it's as if the local church is Satan's way of keeping believers immature. If discerning good from evil is something mature believers do, if having knowledge keeps you from being stumbled in some cases, if having distinctions is what allows you and your gifts to flourish, if dropping the LSM false God's economy can make you more open to other Christians who do not follow God's economy, if the church is stunted because everyone "gets out of their mind" .... all these things are barriers to growth, maturity, wisdom, etc...

So if the co-workers want to tell all the saints that very few are mature, the co-workers can circle that blame back to themselves for keeping the saints immature. But they probably know that already.

-Ed Marks spoke of Benson "just wanting to repeat whatever brother Lee said" as some kind of laudable attribute.

-the ministry of the age and the minister of the age was repeatedly uplifted

-Ben said that Benson felt that those who leave the church "never saw the vision in the first place", because if they had actually seen the vision, they would never leave. (thanks for the blame game rather than much needed introspection!)

-Bob Danker spoke of Benson meeting with "dissenters" who were asking what about this, what about that, who were obviously "on the line of knowledge", and that Benson stayed so steadfast to remain "on the line of life". Well, having watched the Two Trees YT videos a time or two now, I have never been more assured that these two "lines" do not exist in the way they apply them.

-Dennis Higashi got up and praised the full-time training, and spoke of how special it was that Witness Lee's granddaughter was in the FTT and how he wished he could tell brother Lee that. He then turned to what must have been Benson's grandkids in the audience and basically publicly told them they should go to the FTT, if the Lord wills of course. I felt so bad for the kids to be publicly pressured like that.

-Barbara was the only sister to speak at the indoor Anaheim meeting, and her stories of Benson were again some of the strangest ones I've heard. The pain of a silenced woman, basically. Although mixed in with some endearing comments about getting to go to "the uttermost parts of the earth" with Benson.

-one of the co-workers called Benson "a bonafide apostle".

-at the outdoor graveside service, Hank Hanegraaff said that when Benson first saw him, "Benson reproved me by walking over to me and saying, 'Brother Hank, I testify to you, we are not modalists, we are thoroughly Trinitarian. Brother Hank, I testify to you that we do not believe that we can be as God is in the Godhead. We do not share His sovereignty or His persons and we cannot be worshipped as God. Brother Hank, I testify that we are not the only church, we are only the church.' And then he sat down. Those words are yet emblazoned on the canvas of my consciousness. They were few, they were eloquent, and 20 years later I still remember everyone of those words, and that changed the disposition between CRI and LSM, the LC, etc...."

Yeah...so many problems with what Benson said there, but we've dissected them all already, so I won't get into it again.

Anyway, it mostly made me glad I'm not there anymore. They are truly stuck in a time capsule, and I could STILL finish many of the sentences before they did because so much of what is said is just rote repetition of the same old phrases.

Trapped

[GraceAlone]

Originally Posted by Trapped

-Ben said that Benson felt that those who leave the church "never saw the vision in the first place", because if they had actually seen the vision, they would never leave. (thanks for the blame game rather than much needed introspection!)



Anyway, it mostly made me glad I'm not there anymore. They are truly stuck in a time capsule, and I could STILL finish many of the sentences before they did because so much of what is said is just rote repetition of the same old phrases.

Trapped

Oy vey.

SO MUCH one could respond to here.

I keep thinking of my loved ones who were sitting in these memorial meetings, either physically or virtually. I can't help wondering ... at any point do any of them start to just take notice? Like, "Oh interesting, so much talk about how he followed Witness Lee with such devotion, maybe even more than talk about following Jesus with ardent devotion." {Note: Out of respect for the deceased, I'm not commenting on whether he did or did not follow WL more than Jesus; I can't know that anyway. I'm referring to the reports of his legacy as communicated in these meetings.}

Or what do they, our loved ones, think when they hear these ignorant, logically fallacious, and generalized statements about those of us who left? Since they knew us for so long, can they really agree that we "never saw the vision in the first place"? It's like distancing yourself from the heartbreak of a friend's divorce by saying, "Oh, well, they were never really married in the first place."

I love these individuals, so I don't actually wish them pain, but I DO pray that even if leads to some uncomfortable cognitive dissonance, they might start to compare what they know as true to what they're hearing and, at the very least, entertain the internal questions.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by GraceAlone

I can't help wondering ... at any point do any of them start to just take notice? Like, "Oh interesting, so much talk about how he followed Witness Lee with such devotion, maybe even more than talk about following Jesus with ardent devotion." {Note: Out of respect for the deceased, I'm not commenting on whether he did or did not follow WL more than Jesus; I can't know that anyway. I'm referring to the reports of his legacy as communicated in these meetings.}

In the Lord’s Recovery devotion to the ministry is synonyms to devotion to Jesus. There isn’t a difference in their eyes. An outsider looking would see how much emphasis there is on “following the ministry” rather than following Jesus, but someone steeped the TLR it’s not visible. Remember The Ministry is THE New Testament ministry, the ministry of THE age, it’s THE high peak of the divine revelation. If that’s your understanding, you wouldn’t even notice how much emphasis there is because they are the same in your eyes.

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Trapped

I spent a little time scrolling through the other memorial videos for Benson.

-Ron Kangas is back, clearly having lost weight. He managed to get a nice slap down on all the saints by saying something like, "I have to be frank, but very few brothers and sisters in the church life are actually mature".

So......whose fault is that exactly? How much more "in the central lane" can they get at this point?

I was thinking about the overall common thread of the subjects in the TLRU YouTube channel, and it's as if the local church is Satan's way of keeping believers immature. If discerning good from evil is something mature believers do, if having knowledge keeps you from being stumbled in some cases, if having distinctions is what allows you and your gifts to flourish, if dropping the LSM false God's economy can make you more open to other Christians who do not follow God's economy, if the church is stunted because everyone "gets out of their mind" .... all these things are barriers to growth, maturity, wisdom, etc...

This was a sobering realization I had when I left. A sister openly challenged their "Overcomers" doctrines and one of the elders' wives said that she had to be removed from our group chat because several people had "nightmares" after listening to her. I was initially excited because someone finally wanted to have open and frank discussion about testing Lee's doctrines, but then I was disheartened to see that so many people were scared. Outright scared. I responded by sharing 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and talking about the importance of proper teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, and then people started looking to me and crying "death." One college-ish aged sister in her paranoia said that she suspected that the woman who was kicked out had gotten a hold of my phone and that all my texts were just full of "death." I had not even met the woman by that point but rather only interacted with her in that group chat. It was so surreal.

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want sing and "pray-read" and chant his name rather than truly wrestle with the scriptures and grow as children of God.

I have a theory of what happened. We went in to have a good time, to "enjoy God" in the "marvelous church life". We got love-bombed. We were special, we were welcomed and wanted. Fabulous!

But then what happened? We sat there under the ministry of the age, so-called, who then began to disparage others. Anyone who wasn't meeting with us was not on the proper ground. Anyone who'd questioned anything in the past was divisive, ambitious, lost to God. Anyone who tried to actually think was "in their mind" and had left the proper enjoyment. Nobody else had understood the Bible in it's "high peak" since Paul had penned his epistles. (Even Peter and James were "low" and "natural")

Now, what happens when you passively absorb all those judgments, curses and imprecations? You become terrified lest they should fall on you! You're supposedly safe as long as you're under the "perfecting" and "covering" of such words. But on the flip side, anyone who challenges the leader is cursed. So even when the leader is wrong, you can't do anything, because the curses will fall on you. That's where the fear comes out - you're afraid of the curse. By passively listening to it, you gave it power over yourself.

The way out is to reject it. Reject the curse. When the group leaders start panning everyone else as fallen, dark, deficient, twisted, corrupted, etc. the answer is "no". We're here to bless, not curse. If you bless, you get blessed, if you curse you get cursed by the same words you speak. And by the exact same token, I have to be careful about the words I use here. Too often I've used judgmental language, and had to apologize for it. Instead of compassion, understanding, humour, grace, I'd used narrow, harsh characterizations. So I'm trying to avoid the same trap that caught Lee et al. The Bible teaches us that the very same hole we dig for another, we will eventually fall into it ourselves.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

This was a sobering realization I had when I left. A sister openly challenged their "Overcomers" doctrines and one of the elders' wives said that she had to be removed from our group chat because several people had "nightmares" after listening to her. I was initially excited because someone finally wanted to have open and frank discussion about testing Lee's doctrines, but then I was disheartened to see that so many people were scared. Outright scared. I responded by sharing 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and talking about the importance of proper teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, and then people started looking to me and crying "death." One college-ish aged sister in her paranoia said that she suspected that the woman who was kicked out had gotten a hold of my phone and that all my texts were just full of "death." I had not even met the woman by that point but rather only interacted with her in that group chat. It was so surreal.

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

ACuriousFellow, I had to laugh and cry with your post. Lots of this is, I suppose, just human nature. Ironically I did not see this during my tenure in the Midwest region of the Recovery. Perhaps that's why we were expelled, I mean "quarantined," almost 20 years ago.

I did, however, just see this scenario play out recently in two other settings. First, in a Baptist church where several "teachers" basically freaked out when I questioned their dogmatic stance on "Pre-Trib Rapture For All." I was simply looking for Berean style Bible inquiry and discussion. Not on this topic! Was this then, as you say, just a feel-good early Sunday morning social "clubbing" with coffee and deserts?

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Ohio

ACuriousFellow, I had to laugh and cry with your post. Lots of this is, I suppose, just human nature. Ironically I did not see this during my tenure in the Midwest region of the Recovery. Perhaps that's why we were expelled, I mean "quarantined," almost 20 years ago.

I did, however, just see this scenario play out recently in two other settings. First, in a Baptist church where several "teachers" basically freaked out when I questioned their dogmatic stance on "Pre-Trib Rapture For All." I was simply looking for Berean style Bible inquiry and discussion. Not on this topic! Was this then, as you say, just a feel-good early Sunday morning social "clubbing" with coffee and deserts?

I have to say, Ohio, I recently got heated discussing the millennial age with an older man. What bothered me was not so much his stance against me, but because of how he made assumptions about the rest of my beliefs and countered what I presented based on those assumptions. It felt like I was speaking with the elders from The Lord's Recovery all over again. Still, I got quite emotional and backed out even though I began the discourse and debate. I was still too raw from what I had experienced during my departure to handle such things.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

I have to say, Ohio, I recently got heated discussing the millennial age with an older man. What bothered me was not so much his stance against me, but because of how he made assumptions about the rest of my beliefs and countered what I presented based on those assumptions. It felt like I was speaking with the elders from The Lord's Recovery all over again. Still, I got quite emotional and backed out even though I began the discourse and debate. I was still too raw from what I had experienced during my departure to handle such things.

I guess I’ve been surrounded by “hot heads” all my life, but I must have inherited my own mother’s calm demeanor. In person, I usually back down from conflict, not wanting to say something I didn’t mean, especially in the LC setting. It’s always been a horrible dilemma for me when others blame me for their tantrums. What, it’s my fault you blew up? I pushed your button? Do I then also “have the right” to lose it all over you?

Here, dozens of stories come to mind. I remember this one time with elders. I grew some courage, and decided not to take the blame for something stupid he did. The more I calmly related the facts, he went ballistic. I was nearly hospitalized, but I felt the Lord was happy within. I stood up against the bully. Physically hurt, but I had my dignity! I had the truth! Worth suffering for, eh?

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I guess I’ve been surrounded by “hot heads” all my life, but I must have inherited my own mother’s calm demeanor. In person, I usually back down from conflict, not wanting to say something I didn’t mean, especially in the LC setting. It’s always been a horrible dilemma for me when others blame me for their tantrums. What, it’s my fault you blew up? I pushed your button? Do I then also “have the right” to lose it all over you?

Here, dozens of stories come to mind. I remember this one time with elders. I grew some courage, and decided not to take the blame for something stupid he did. The more I calmly related the facts, he went ballistic. I was nearly hospitalized, but I felt the Lord was happy within. I stood up against the bully. Physically hurt, but I had my dignity! I had the truth! Worth suffering for, eh?

Crafting our language to avoid “triggering” others is certainly beneficial in many instances. For example, a rape victim who was assaulted when she was walking home drunk at night need not hear “actions have consequences!” when opening up to someone about what happened. Could there potentially be a conversation at a later date on how to conduct oneself safely? Safety in numbers? Designated drivers? Learning one’s alcohol limits? Sure. But not now.

Still, there are instances where one may get “triggered” no matter how the other’s speech or text is crafted or whether it is in the moment or sometime in the future. Take Benson Phillips, for example. When John Ingalls fellowshipped with him about the Lees and the direction The Lord’s Recovery was headed in, he was quite calm and modest. Godfred Otuteye, on the other hand, was frank and earnest with what he felt was wrong. He wasted no time with the usual song and dance that Recovery leaders like to do when defending themselves. He did not desire multiple hours-long sessions of "fellowship" which consisted of talking in circles and getting virtually nothing done. John was like a flowing stream, while Godfred was like a bolt of lightning. Regardless, both of these brothers were seen as “contentious” and “divisive” and “rebellious” by Benson Phillips and Witness Lee. This was not because of their choice of words or their demeanor, but because they did not immediately and unquestionably submit to “the Ministry” and dared to even assume that something was wrong. To Benson, this was simply garbage, perhaps even “true trash,” that needed to be avoided. It was a cancer that needed to be removed. Lepers that needed to be put out.

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

Crafting our language to avoid “triggering” others is certainly beneficial in many instances.

Still, there are instances where one may get “triggered” no matter how the other’s speech or text is crafted or whether it is in the moment or sometime in the future. Take Benson Phillips, for example. When John Ingalls fellowshipped with him about the Lees and the direction The Lord’s Recovery was headed in, he was quite calm and modest. Godfred Otuteye, on the other hand, was frank and earnest with what he felt was wrong.

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

ACuriousFellow, I definitely agree with you on all points. Eventually, however, some people use their temper to intimidate others or prevent them from even voicing their convictions. No matter how kind or gentle one frames the discussion, they will be triggered. Yes, there are real victims, and they need empathetic love and care, but some just prefer the perks of victim status.

I didn't know Godfred, but I can understand his impatience. (Did he ever write his account?) I did, however, read what John Ingalls wrote about TC. Firstly, he was totally understanding listening to JI talking about the chaos and damage to the saints in Anaheim. Then overnight he flip-flops, demanding JI to submit to WL. Obviously TC had talked to WL, and was forced to choose sides. I remember one regional meeting where TC was preparing a letter to JI and the elders. Silent was all the debauched actions of Philip Lee creating chaos in the first place. Rather the tone of the letter was demeaning, scolding the elders as in a vacuum. We were all made to believe that the Anaheim elders suddenly "rebelled" in some coup d'etat to overthrow God Himself.

Regarding the OP's thoughts about the saints' returning. I was reminded of one message by Ron Kangas (circa 2000) post-WL, where he basically prophesied that many saints would return to the Recovery. At that time I had no idea what underlying reasons sparked the departure of John Ingalls et. al. years prior. I was hopeful hearing that. Not long after, I'm hearing those same old whispers of animosity between Cleveland and Anaheim. Then I read the Phoenix Accord which was shockingly childish. "We agree to be fair and treat each other nice." Huh? Soon they started preparing for another division in the body.

LSM has never been honest about past "storms." They live in a total delusion about their own sordid history. Because they do not love the truth, God has given them over to an operation of error. (2 Thess 2.10-12)

[Recovering]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

This is why I understand the OP’s thoughts. Does Benson’s son Ben really want to know what happened? Do they really care about why these people left? Or do they just want them to come back and “take Christ.” Just “let go and let God” and ignore the “bones and feathers” of The Lord’s Recovery? Forget about all the bad stuff and don’t talk about it because it makes everyone feel uncomfortable?

Thanks Curious Fellow. I thought I'd share a short follow-up story — a couple of months ago, I met up with an old friend who still meets in the LC. We had formed a bond making music together and had even done some recordings back in the cassette-tape days. Anyway, we reconnected over lunch after several years out of touch (mostly because we had split into different districts years ago, and the in-person Table Meetings stopped during COVID), and he seemed a little surprised to hear I wasn't meeting with the LC any more. But rather than ask what happened or try to find any more, he strongly asserted "Brother, I still love you. I don't care that you left or why. It doesn't matter, and it doesn't change our relationship." And to be sure, that was nicer to hear than condemnation or disappointment. But at the same time, he showed no curiosity (and actually some active avoidance) about what had happened.

I had two thoughts. (1) If he (or anyone else there we'd been in relationship with) truly believed we'd lost the Lord's blessing by leaving, why not desperately engage with us to convince us to return? If leaving TLR would cause us to "lose the kingdom", shouldn't we be the top priority for their outreach? But their words and actions (Ben Philip's exhortation being a prime example) are a performance that seems primarily aimed at those inside. And I wonder how much the saints actually believe those things. (2) I think my friend was probably very worried about what he would find out if he asked my story, because then he would have to confront his own doubts and dissonances.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

When I saw how scared everyone was to talk about even the CONCEPT of teaching, correction, rebuke, and instruction in righteousness, I realized that what you say is exactly what is happening: Many in The Lord's Recovery have their spiritual growth stunted, so much so that they are scared, terrified even, of real discussion and discourse. They use the Lord's Name as a pacifier to avoid these things and would only ever want to sing and "Pray-Read" and chant his Name rather than truly wrestle with the Scriptures and grow as children of God. The Lord's Recovery, as far as I saw, was no different than going clubbing. People didn't meet to really mature and grow. They met to have a good time.

To be frank, there is a fear of man instead of fear of God in the Local Churches.
Anything to contradict the ministry Living Stream publishes by going to the Holy Word is scary. Brothers and sisters alike fear the elders, co-workers etc more than they fear God. That is why it is difficult to find anyone in the Local Churches open to a real sincere discussion in regard to the teachings.