Combating LC Arguments

[awareness]

http://www.lsmradio.com/hearing-of-f...an04whatis.pdf

They use Bible verses all foot loose and fancy free, like the Jehovah's Witnesses ... how did I ever fall for something like Witness Lee?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

http://www.lsmradio.com/hearing-of-f...an04whatis.pdf

They use Bible verses all foot loose and fancy free, like the Jehovah's Witnesses ... how did I ever fall for something like Witness Lee?

I'm more concerned about what happened to you after you left.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Brother ZNP, my suggestion is to post what is on your heart, and not try to win arguments. Some folks just love to challenge everything. It is just a trap. The way out, at least for me, is to write unto the Lord for the unseen reader. Let the other poster disagree, and then let the reader decide.

Great advice. I have just gone on summer vacation, had a little time to get mischievous and look how quickly I fall

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Great advice. I have just gone on summer vacation, had a little time to get mischievous and look how quickly I fall

Hopefully you don't get in the way of Irene.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I have heard one argument that in the LRC you have to adopt this practice or else you are not "one". Yet, this approach of attacking this practice is to me no different, just the other side of the pendulum...

Amen. It certainly can be, if the critique comes from you and not the Lord. Paul mocked the Corinthians for bearing well with those who beat them, while he needed to ask permission to counsel them(2 Cor. 11:20). So this approach has some precedent, but there is indeed a danger in an anonymous internet site where you can scorn with impunity (not saying OBW was wrong, or mocking, per se, just that you do indeed have a valid point).

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This thread is "combating LC arguments". Someone brought up pray reading and my response was to use RG's book as a place where you could meet and fellowship with this person. I feel that they would be open to the fellowship and it might help them to see that their practice, if it is the case, is mindless and not what was practiced by the saints of old.

I think a good way to combat LC argument is similar to what you say: find a source of common understanding and work respectfully from there. If you treat others with understanding and respect, it may be reciprocated, and your words may carry more heft than an "attack".

On the other hand, with this group, it may not. They may counsel you to pray until you 'get the revelation' (as I was told), when I indicated a lack of agreement. Then, when I persisted in my objections to the Lee line of thought, I was told that my heart was dark, that I harbored frustrated ambitions to be something, and was trying to draw off others of the flock. Things deteriorated from there.

Maybe OBW is already at that end point, and would rather dispense with the niceties. I don't know.

My point on combating LC arguments was as follows (see my discussion of 'Paul to the church in ..........'): don't take the premise of the LC expositors (Nee/Lee/BBs) for granted. Take a look for yourself at what the scriptures say. OBW is good at this. Most importantly, have a conversation with God in His word. God likes to speak. Sit there and wait for a revelation. If God seems to tarry, stamp your feet and shout a little. Demand to be fed from the Father of lights. You will get fed. Father likes to feed his children.

Then, you will have something to say. Not just to "combat LC arguments", but you will have something to say to your neighbor, your family, the clerk in the grocery store, your fellow college students or workers or whatever. Don't just try to figure out how to oppose the LC arguments. Find you what God has to say to you in His word, and then be faithful to speak that to others. You will do just fine.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by aron

I think a good way to combat LC argument is similar to what you say: find a source of common understanding and work respectfully from there. If you treat others with understanding and respect, it may be reciprocated, and your words may carry more heft than an "attack".

Then, you will have something to say. Not just to "combat LC arguments", but you will have something to say to your neighbor, your family, the clerk in the grocery store, your fellow college students or workers or whatever. Don't just try to figure out how to oppose the LC arguments. Find you what God has to say to you in His word, and then be faithful to speak that to others. You will do just fine.

Excellent points aron. Thanks.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

That is funny. I did hear that story in Houston but not from RG. He did not speak jokes like that while ministering. RG was quite puritanical.

And do you get the joke yet?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

And do you get the joke yet?

What are you saying I'm stupid? Well if I'm stupid you're, you're, you are disagreeable! So there!

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

What are you saying I'm stupid? Well if I'm stupid you're, you're, you are disagreeable! So there!

No, that's not what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that your own indefatigable nature, if you will, may keep you from seeing another side to their meaning.

As Robert Plant once said, "______________________".

Will you fill in the blank?

[ZNPaaneah]

Sure, the guy who wrote lyrics about JRR Tokien's books. As Robert Plant once said "I once tried to be Elvis".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

The idea that Ray Graver wrote a book defending "pray reading" as a scriptural practice, yet was not actually trying to defend the prevailing practice of "pray reading", as practiced in the Recovery, is absolute nonsense.

It's good to see you exercise your 1st amendment right to post on internet forums.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Ohio

It's good to see you exercise your 1st amendment right to post on internet forums.

Thankfully I still have my 1st amendment rights, in spite of what you apparently think about them!

Sincerely,
Da High School Brat

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

The fact that this book can be seen by anyone as a kind of "defense" of WL's form of pray-reading is what is so distasteful to me. All one has to do is read the little booklet published by LSM entitled Pray Reading the Word and then read RG's book Lord . . . Thou Saidst and one can readily see that the two are light-years apart. It just strikes me as one more example of how differently LSM presents themselves to outsiders to gain credibility with "Christianity" vs. how they actually believe and practice internally.

I definitely am with you on these points. I never knew RG in my early days in the Recovery, but after reading the book Lord . . . Thou Saidst, I had a favorable impression of him. Then I met him several times related to building church properties, and wondered about the discrepancy.

Concerning the contradiction between the "internal and external" appearances, I also have seen many families operate this way. Together they treat outsiders and guests so well, so one might get the impression that they are this way all the time. But within the family, when the outsiders are gone, they mistreat one another continually. Many LC leaders were this way -- charming to outsiders, nasty to each other.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I definitely am with you on these points. I never knew RG in my early days in the Recovery, but after reading the book Lord . . . Thou Saidst, I had a favorable impression of him. Then I met him several times related to building church properties, and wondered about the discrepancy.

Concerning the contradiction between the "internal and external" appearances, I also have seen many families operate this way. Together they treat outsiders and guests so well, so one might get the impression that they are this way all the time. But within the family, when the outsiders are gone, they mistreat one another continually. Many LC leaders were this way -- charming to outsiders, nasty to each other.

All of us are capable of good and evil. (I amaze myself sometimes in this capacity.) Ultimately, though our lapses into evil are evidence of deeper problems. We have to humble ourselves before the Lord for him to treat those issues. We are often unwilling to do this because we don't want to give up long-held convictions about ourselves or our beliefs. I.e. we are blind to what is really going on.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

Hello dear ones. I have to admit that my respect for Ray Graver's book entitled Lord . . . Thou Saidst has plummeted since this discussion began. I still like the contents of the book, but the reason it was written was very disingenuous, to say the least. Based upon LSM's own words in the booklet entitled Pray Reading the Word, other Christians had PLENTY to be concerned about regarding LSM's version of pray-reading...

I do not understand this post. It seems that based on this testimony anyone in the LRC who ministered the word would be condemned because they did so within the LRC. I will say this from personal experience, I don't believe that RG had a disingenuous bone in his body. I am fully convinced that he believed every word he wrote, and that this had a profound impact on his own walk with the Lord. In considering RG I am very thankful that all judgement has been given to the Lord because I would never know how to sort out his life.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

Also, if Ray was so broad-hearted, why did he and Benson begin traveling around the U.S. greatly emphasizing WL and telling churches that they had not done enough for "the apostle" [i.e. WL] and that they needed to "have an account with the apostle"? This was a huge step in turning the LC's into sectarian, narrow, LSM-ministry churches, which seems to be the polar opposite of the spirit of Lord . . . Thou Saidst.

Whoa, let's not get carried away here. I never meant to suggest Ray was "broad hearted" only that he didn't ask more of others than he asked of himself.

[ZNPaaneah]

Well I stepped away for a couple of hours and I am glad I did, Ohio did a much better job than I could have done.

[kisstheson]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Whoa, let's not get carried away here. I never meant to suggest Ray was "broad hearted" only that he didn't ask more of others than he asked of himself.

And let's not be so touchy here. Get a clue and get over yourself. Your pompous attitude and your arrogance reek to high heaven.

I did not come up with the idea of Ray Graver being "broad hearted" from you, but from his book itself. If he really believed that so many other dear brothers and sisters throughout Church History had valuable portions to share with us, he never would have turned so quickly and exhorted the LC's to focus on Witness Lee only. Ray's study of the history of pray-reading should have led him to see that there is so much of value in other ministries. He should have seen that Witness Lee discarded a lot of rich points in other ministries in his claim to be "standing on others' shoulders". Instead, Ray became the biggest Witness Lee cheerleader in the Recovery. Ray bears a lot of responsibility for the extreme narrowness which have characterized the LC's since the 1980's.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

And let's not be so touchy here. Get a clue and get over yourself. Your pompous attitude and your arrogance reek to high heaven.

I did not come up with the idea of Ray Graver being "broad hearted" from you, but from his book itself. If he really believed that so many other dear brothers and sisters throughout Church History had valuable portions to share with us, he never would have turned so quickly and exhorted the LC's to focus on Witness Lee only. Ray's study of the history of pray-reading should have led him to see that there is so much of value in other ministries. He should have seen that Witness Lee discarded a lot of rich points in other ministries in his claim to be "standing on others' shoulders". Instead, Ray became the biggest Witness Lee cheerleader in the Recovery. Ray bears a lot of responsibility for the extreme narrowness which have characterized the LC's since the 1980's.

RG is a great irony. Right after the Philippians training he latched onto this idea that WL was "the apostle", etc. He was pushing this idea when the Irving hall was going up. He appears to be a simple brother who runs from theological debates and instead loves to spend 16 hours a day as a foreman on the Irving site. Yet in my mind he deserves credit (responsibility) for the entire MOTA teaching, though others have shown that WL was always prone to walk this path. His book presents a wonderful picture of saints praying over the word of God, yet as you have pointed out he is happy to push a practice that bears no resemblance to what he wrote about 30 years ago. He was very puritanical, once he commended John So because he was always seen with the top button to his shirt buttoned. Yet he hid his eyes and covered his mouth when JI shared about PL. They did a hatchet job on Jane as recounted in "the Thread of Gold", and sat in on a similar meeting with me where I was told I had 2 strikes against me. Yet he was quick to notice when I was acting strange my first year, learned that I was selling blood, and called me into a meeting with all the elders to get me to stop. I remember once, in Irving, we had had a disastrous time in trying to build one of the planters. So he called a meeting with me and the brother who had been building the planter (I was there because I was the crew chief). Inwardly I was thinking "thank God I didn't do this". Then Ray starts hitting his fist into his hand and saying "Who is responsible for this! That's what I want to know!" That's when it hit me, oh, I am. I may be called as a witness when he appears before the judgement seat, but thank God I won't be the judge.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

And let's not be so touchy here. Get a clue and get over yourself. Your pompous attitude and your arrogance reek to high heaven.

I did not come up with the idea of Ray Graver being "broad hearted" from you, but from his book itself. If he really believed that so many other dear brothers and sisters throughout Church History had valuable portions to share with us, he never would have turned so quickly and exhorted the LC's to focus on Witness Lee only. Ray's study of the history of pray-reading should have led him to see that there is so much of value in other ministries. He should have seen that Witness Lee discarded a lot of rich points in other ministries in his claim to be "standing on others' shoulders". Instead, Ray became the biggest Witness Lee cheerleader in the Recovery. Ray bears a lot of responsibility for the extreme narrowness which have characterized the LC's since the 1980's.

Brother KisstheSon, you shocked me with your opening line to brother ZNP!

Let me try to explain this apparent contradiction regarding RG being "broad-hearted." Now I am only speaking generally, since ZNP and Igzy have first-hand contact with RG.

Let me address the portions in red, as I understand exclusivism in operation within the Recovery. RG believed there were many rich portions in the ministries of the saints now passed. Supposedly WN and WL have incorporated all of these portions in their ministry. After they came along, there is no more ministry of value in Christianity, hence he promoted WL and the Recovery unreservedly, thinking that was well-pleasing to God.

Thus is all misplaced religious zeal. If the rudder of our faith is the love of God poured out upon us, then replacing that rudder with a man and his ministry, just displaces us from the love of God. Hence, some have gone off-course to the point that killing is considered service to God!

Igzy's testimony confirms that certain dispositions are more vulnerable to the dangers of exclusivism. This is why I have long concluded that if WL were the great Apostle that many say he was, he would never have allowed these zealots to so promote and exalt him.

[kisstheson]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This is true, which is why I still like you. You don’t stop until I can get to the punch line. Everything I have shared is relevant to the comment, but doesn’t establish that the word was designed for this purpose...

Good Lord! This has to be one of the WORST examples of "proof-texting" run amok that I have ever seen. This is ludicrous. Utter rubbish.

I know that all sounds harsh and I apologize for the tone, but someone had to say it, dear brother. The Bible is not our plaything! When we have mastered the PLAIN speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles - and there is a great deal of that in the New Testament - then maybe we can start trying to get clever and fancy with allegorizing and proof-texting. May we turn and become as little children and simply obey our Lord and Master.

[UntoHim]

Ok guys, let's get back to the topic of pray-reading in the Local Church. This book "Thou Saidst" is fair game, but all the issues surrounding Ray Graver may be getting a little off topic.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by kisstheson

One thing I don't understand is that if the brothers and sisters were reading biographies in those days, why in the world were sisters like Thankful Jane and Max R's wife condemned for reading Christian biographies? Also, if Ray was so broad-hearted, why did he and Benson begin traveling around the U.S. greatly emphasizing WL and telling churches that they had not done enough for "the apostle" [i.e. WL] and that they needed to "have an account with the apostle"? This was a huge step in turning the LC's into sectarian, narrow, LSM-ministry churches, which seems to be the polar opposite of the spirit of Lord . . . Thou Saidst.

Good questions. Apparently these are contradictions which cannot be reconciled, forcing us into either of extreme positions.

I got lots of help researching Brethren history. How could JNDarby be so kind to the saints, sacrificing his life, visiting saints every day, keeping himself pure from evil, spending endless hours corresponding, etc. ... and then be so viciously cruel to other leaders, publicly shaming them, ridiculing them before the saints, writing circulars damaging their reputations, etc.? One Brethren historian summarized Darby in this way, "With JND there is so much good, and there is so much more wrong."

I believe the anomalies must be understood in the context of exclusivism, with its many descriptors. Brother ZNP alluded to these contradictions when he said ...

So it may be that my understanding of that book was not its intended meaning, how could I know what RG intended? I am not omniscient. But I will say this, there were four things that RG shared as elder that left an indelible mark on me. All four of them had to do with standing on the Lord's word and having faith that God would honor His word. Second, my impression of RG was that he never asked more of anyone than he asked of himself. I do not believe that he was a hypocrite. What I do find easier to believe is that in his zeal to be absolute he was deceived. That is the most credible interpretation I have at the present. The biggest surprise for me in coming to these forums was to learn of the errors of BP and RG. WL was not a surprise, and I had already pegged PL by meeting him once without having to know any details.

I do not understand this post. It seems that based on this testimony anyone in the LRC who ministered the word would be condemned because they did so within the LRC. I will say this from personal experience, I don't believe that RG had a disingenuous bone in his body. I am fully convinced that he believed every word he wrote, and that this had a profound impact on his own walk with the Lord. In considering RG I am very thankful that all judgement has been given to the Lord because I would never know how to sort out his life.

RG and others really believe that WL was today's "Apostle Paul." As such, WL should be promoted and protected at all cost. Whatever is done to promote and protect "the Apostle," covers over all apparent anomalies. So, for example, if reading Christian biographies seems good for the Apostle and his "program," then RG promotes the reading of Christian biographies. If, however, the reading Christian biographies seems to discredit the Apostle and his authority, then RG condemns the reading of Christian biographies as being dangerous for the church.

Thus, in the recovery, they do not evaluate people or practices on their inherent value, but on how much value they are to the ministry. One day you promote the ministry, so they love you. The next day you "voice a concern" about the ministry, and they throw you under the bus. Never forget who is driving the bus!

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

As time passes I respect mainstream Christianity more and more.

Me too. I have my (outlandish) theories, of course, but I really love to go into the Grovers Corner Baptist Church and say, "Hey, I'm one of you guys." I can hardly describe how comforting and encouraging it is just to be one of the flock. That is 'special' enough. No need to go beyond what is the common faith.

There is a safety in the mass of common christianity. There is the accumulated wisdom and strength of thousands of years and countless souls, carrying us forward.