Subtle Issues of Right and Wrong During the late 80s Rebellion

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Indiana

What things are we CHARGED BEFORE GOD to do WITHOUT PARTIALITY? We are charged to make ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that sinning leaders of God's flock are exposed and PUBLICLY REBUKED if they are in sin, have been approached about that sin, and have failed to repent and turn from that sin. In fact, the only clear rendering of verse 22 that I have seen is the Wuest translation. It says: "Be laying hands hastily on not even one [elder, that is, do not reinstate a sinning elder hastily], neither be a partner in others' sins."

I understand this to say that if we, through carelessness or sentimentality, allow a corrupt leader to remain or return to "authority," and they continue in sin, we ourselves become a "partner" in that sin.

I had the impression that "laying hands on hastily" referred to, shall we say, being too quick to get someone in trouble? Sort of the opposite of "reinstating" someone.

Originally Posted by Indiana

God cares for the church. We old LCers know how drastically God dealt with Moses for being in authority and misrepresenting God to His people. No doubt, the demand for public exposure of sinning elders (once it is clear on the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses) is for the protection of the flock. Such men should NOT be "covered" or their sins not dealt with. Every believer is charged with impartiality to deal within the house of God for pure leadership. I, for one, would never be willing to be a part of that wicked movement---even though I know there are many dear, ignorant saints (apart from the leadership) who are blindly held hostage there.

Yes, there are many who are unaware of the things that went on.

But I always have this nagging reminder of all those folks (not in the leadership) who do know, who plow ahead as committed as ever, if not more committed than before.

What do we make of that?

[rayliotta]

Sorry to post again, but this whole thing really boils down to this --

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Indiana

However you slice it, there is no escaping this fact -- some brothers have left us and started another, separate group. Some on our side are against your side. Some on your side are against our side. This is division. There is no other word for it. No matter how many good, solid, correct and utterly righteous reasons there may have been for it, some have formed a division. Above EVERY other sin, division is the worst! This you already know to be true. And we both have allowed our leaders to commit division. We cannot stand with them in this matter.

This paragraph, within the context of a larger letter, expresses well the bondage WL placed us in. He identified so-called "division" as the worst sin of all. What a prison of fear to hold all the members of the LC! And I should add this is exactly the same indictment leveled by Rome against all the Reformers.

There is no way that we can honor the man of God, Martin Luther, for his mighty work of faith, and then condemn John Ingalls for the same actions. Both brothers acted for conscience' sake, in obedience to the word of God, against the perceived evils of their day. They left an aberrant and deteriorating system, and subsequently met with other like-minded believers. Both were condemned with starting a division.

The greatest division is to create a system which separates God from His people. To leave that system, with the goal of returning to the Lord and His word, cannot be condemned as a "division," any more than the Reformation could be. Why cannot those who leave the Recovery meet with other believers? WHY does LSM condemn them for simply following their conscience? Why does LSM demand that these ones live forever in isolation? Why does LSM continually distort the real reasons these ones have left?

These are the real questions we should be addressing.

[ZNPaaneah]

This reminds me of Hebrews where they were "for all their life held in bondage in fear of death".

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

There is no way that we can honor the man of God, Martin Luther, for his mighty work of faith, and then condemn John Ingalls for the same actions. Both brothers acted for conscience' sake, in obedience to the word of God, against the perceived evils of their day.

Martin Luther with the RCC and John Ingalls with LSM, how can these brothers reconcile what was expected from the system of their time and their conscience?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Indiana

The more you write, the more you solidify yourself and others into division. Again, as I stated above, you have been an excellent scribe in recording much of the truth of what has happened among us. And I do not question the accuracy of your reporting or of your love of the Lord, the saints, the Word, or matters of the divine truth. But I feel that your writings are on the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The fact that you are correct in the details and facts only shows that you are on some of the so-called 'good' branches' of the evil tree. Being 'right' does not mean being in life. This is a hard lesson but I have learned the truth of it in my over 30 years in the church.

While I do appreciate the kind attitude displayed towards Steve Isitt, these concepts are troublesome. Steve has been documenting the brief history of the so-called Recovery in America. His goal is to preserve the facts of history to positively effect the many members in the LC's. To relegate his work to "the tree of knowledge," is in principle the same as eliminating half of the Old Testament. How many millions of Bible readers have read of David's sins with Bathsheeba? How much better would it have been to strike those portions of scripture, and record only the noble accomplishments of the "man after God's own heart?" Surely David as the "type" of the later MOTA's should have re-written history in a more favorable light! Shouldn't King David have held a Whistler-like Quarantine for Nathan the Prophet before turning him into a pile of rubble?!?

But alas ... the Bible is not the words of man, neither written nor re-written by our past leaders. The Bible addresses failures without the respect of persons. God has good reasons to do this! More troublesome to me than just dwelling on "some 'good' branches' of the evil tree," is the crafty system of error which so shields itself of all culpability.

The corollary to this thought is the equally upsetting, though unspoken, premise that every ministry book is part of the "tree of life."

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The corollary to this thought is the equally upsetting, though unspoken, premise that every ministry book is part of the "tree of life."

Ohio is being generous. Here is Witness Lee quoting John Ingalls (!), courtesy of Steve Isitt:

John Ingalls gave the highest endorsement imaginable of Brother Lee’s ministry, which is recorded in seven pages of The Fermentation of the Present Rebellion, p. 44-51. Brother Lee shares, “As late as March 1986, John spoke strongly for the one accord and the ministry in a conference in Mexico City, saying that ‘when you leave the ministry you leave your first love’; that ‘when we leave the ministry we have fallen’; that ‘the ministry brings us the tree of life’; that ‘the ministry prepares us in such a way to be faithful unto death’; that ‘when we take this ministry…we get the hidden manna’; that ‘the ministry is like the morning star to us’; that ‘the Lord is coming through the ministry’; that ‘the ministry brings us the seven Spirits’; and that ‘by keeping the ministry we become Philadelphia’. This message was given only one month after I gave the messages on one accord in the elders’ training in February 1986. Surely it was a strong confirmation of my messages, showing that the speaker was more than positive toward my ministry”.

http://www.hidinghistoryinthelordsre...yAddressed.pdf

[ZNPaaneah]

Wow! WL equated all of those things that JI said towards "the ministry" with "my ministry"? I think this establishes beyond a doubt that by 1986 WL had gone over the deep end. He may have had this unspoken thought his entire life, don't know, but this is clearly scary by 1986.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow! WL equated all of those things that JI said towards "the ministry" with "my ministry"? I think this establishes beyond a doubt that by 1986 WL had gone over the deep end. He may have had this unspoken thought his entire life, don't know, but this is clearly scary by 1986.

Z, if you haven't already, you might read the rest of the section, on p. 11 of the link to Steve Isitt's site.

Witness Lee seems awfully comfortable making repeated references to "me" and "my ministry".

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Z, if you haven't already, you might read the rest of the section, on p. 11 of the link to Steve Isitt's site.

Witness Lee seems awfully comfortable making repeated references to "me" and "my ministry".

I couldn't stand to read any of his later ministry after the Life Study of the NT.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Witness Lee seems awfully comfortable making repeated references to "me" and "my ministry".

Of course. While Witness Lee was among us, his ministry was his ministry. However don't confuse Witness Lee's ministry with the Lord's Ministry.

[manna-man]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Z, if you haven't already, you might read the rest of the section, on p. 11 of the link to Steve Isitt's site.

Witness Lee seems awfully comfortable making repeated references to "me" and "my ministry".

Yawn,,,

Like were really on to something...

Despite all of the negative there was plenty of positive.

It has been said that Witness Lee had repented of his shortcomings before his end on this sphere.

I have heard this from credible men close to him.

Therefore, the subtle issue to me at least is:
Is this right or wrong making assumptions not based on fact?

I am often amazed by the types that frequent this board.(Don't get me wrong, I recognize and appreciate many here for their gift of expression.)

However, I am quite perplexed by those who have moved on and profess to be in the body life outside of the LC. Surely there has been some growth of maturity here?

It seems as though this board is turning into the "Bereans worst" board. Yikes!

Let me leave you with this statement,
May we all be judged according to the way we judged. Yikes! once more!

Peace,

Don Jr.

[ZNPaaneah]

For with what judgement we judge we shall be judged. Good enough to say twice (I mean thrice)
.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Indiana

However you slice it, there is no escaping this fact -- some brothers have left us and started another, separate group. Some on our side are against your side. Some on your side are against our side. This is division. There is no other word for it. No matter how many good, solid, correct and utterly righteous reasons there may have been for it, some have formed a division. Above EVERY other sin, division is the worst! This you already know to be true. And we both have allowed our leaders to commit division. We cannot stand with them in this matter.

As I stated above, very little of what you are sending me is news. Speaking only for myself, I readily recognize, admit and concede that there were evils -- both gross and subtile -- committed among us that were not properly and swiftly dealt with as they should have been, to the detriment and stumbling of many dear saints. And some who committed these evils are still among us. It is a grief and a shame.

The divisions must stop. And it first must stop with you and with me. Of two things, I am sure. For the divisions to cease will come from the small saints, not from the leading ones. And it will not come from facts, but through love and forgiveness. Without Love and Forgiveness, then I fear we are BOTH in sects, and can join the Brethren in the history books.

I agree with some of the content here the brother wrote to Steve as I have those portions in bold. Definitely without love and forgiveness. Honestly, the love that exists is not the love of God, but the love of man; a natural love. A kind of love Jesus speaks of in Luke 6:32 "If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them." How can there be forgiveness if there's no willingness to even acknowedge those that offended. The brother writing the email brought up Max's name. What about Max. What if he repented? What if I said Max went to Francis Ball's memorial a few years ago?

Divisions must stop and it must stop with you and me. Amen! Simultaneously would ones meeting in the local churches raise an objection next time a blended brother makes references to rebellions? I can understand why brothers in places like Toronto, Detroit, etc may feel it's not profitable to bring up past matters. Many of come in to the local churches since 1990.

It's this same matter that has bothered me when I did meet with the local churches. Elders/co-workerds have been unimpeded in their speaking or in print in running down brothers and even localities that separated from LSM fellowship. Is this normal in other Christian circles? In other words instead of running down brothers, is there grace given. In Acts 15:39 Paul and Barnabas separated over Mark. In Paul's letter to the Colossians, Paul wrote if Mark came they were to receive him.