The LCS Factor

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Roger

I sorta appreciated the Local Church policy of no dating among the young people, and still do. I got the impression that most of the young ones were saved from falling into lust because of it.


Roger

Roger,

I agree with you that young people shouldn't date. Especially among the high schoolers there needs to be education on peer pressures and a proper understanding communicated effectively why they should not dating. Of course an extreme reason why not to, is giving into temptations of the flesh which could result in children being born out of wedlock.

This teaching still leaves aun unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Terry

[Thankful Jane]

Originally Posted by Terry

Roger,

I agree with you that young people shouldn't date. Especially among the high schoolers there needs to be education on peer pressures and a proper understanding communicated effectively why they should not dating. Of course an extreme reason why not to, is giving into temptations of the flesh which could result in children being born out of wedlock.

This teaching still leaves aun unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Terry

Well, Terry, you are a parent and that is your job to figure out. This is none of the "church's" business. Each child is unique in the personality, needs, etc. This is why God gave children parents. He intended for each individual to be individually loved and nurtured and guided according to who they were, like He does us (when we let Him and quit looking to others for answers instead of looking to Him.)

Thankful Jane

[Thankful Jane]

While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results.

Whoever involves his/her self in making such a momentous decision other than the two parties and God may one day get blamed for the outcome, as they well should.

I think this is what I hate most about the LC teachings and practices. People were robbed of opportunities to have real experiences with God by looking to "the brothers" for advice and answers. God was robbed of His opportunities to teach His children about who He was and about His ways.

This is part of the harm to the second generation as Terry just (innocently) demonstrated. He was taught both verbally and by example to look to others to get His answers. I commend him for stepping outside of the LC box to find the wife God had for him.

Here is a hodge-podge of some reasons God and His children got robbed: leaders' unhealthy teachings; "body life" emphasis, i.e., don't act "independently"; saints desire to please the elders; laziness--it's too hard to learn of Christ for yourself and a bit risky; fear of violating one of those many unspoken rules; fear of following the devil--only the brothers know what was the Lord; fear of rejection; fear of offending God by being being in your soul thinking about things ... fear of being made an example of in a meeting ... fear of ..., fear of .... fear of .... etc.; elders coveting to fulfill their ambitions; elders seeking to keep WL happy and present him with an model church for their own reasons; elder's needing to control things to please Lee and also fulfill their own ambitions ... etc., etc., etc.

The LC teaching and all the dependence on "fellowship" from others was flat out unhealthy. Stick hierarchy and absolute submission into the mix and you have a recipe for disaster (one that obviously works). We should have been taught first and foremost to learn to depend on our relationship with Him. I've heard it said, "Well, it's not easy for young ones to hear what the Lord is saying and they can get deceived or make mistakes." If I knew what I know now, I would have said, "Well, if you don't get yourself and you voice out of the picture, they'll never learn the Lord's voice. Do they really need you as an intermediary? God will be there for them even if they make a mistake. Where will you be when they make your mistake?"

God is jealous for His relationship with each of us. All the getting "fellowship" practices opened us up to a world of hurt.

When I heard that Benson considered a prospective marriage in terms of the usefulness of a brother / sister--whether it would be increased or decreased, I wanted to vomit. He was definitely in the business of "using." How gross. Usurping, robbing God, playing with people's very lives and souls, using them to build his pyramids and treasure cities. Sorry, I know I'm foaming at the mouth. I'm just too close to some of the messes he made out of lives of people who followed his voice.

Back to the point: What about Jesus. What about Him being first in all things? Who are elders that they give "advice?" Instead of meddling in the practical lives of people and cheating them out of their inheritance of knowing God for themselves, they should have been laboring in the Bible for themselves to see what it really said.

They should have taught what it taught about husbands sacrificing for their wives and winning their wives love and willing submission. They should have taught about fathers spending major time to bring up their kids in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (nurture takes time, time, time) and made sure that they had plenty of time, time, time. (Sending children to babysittiing 6 days a week and children's meetings on Sunday, and leaving all the rest of the care of children to a wife who is exhausted from waiting hand and foot on all the "needs" of the church first, as dictated by the elders and the absentee fathers, just doesn't cut it.) They should have taught people about what how to bring every single detail of their life to Jesus because Jesus was longing to be involved with them, instead of telling them God was only interested in the church. They should have taught people they were free to follow Jesus even if that meant he led them somewhere else other than the LC.

I better quit and take a walk. Looking back, I don't see one LC "elder" that was doing the job described in the Bible. Even the very best had two minds and two masters. They vascillated between obeying Lee and his empire and their conscience. I think that's why God fired them all (see Ezek.34 and Jer. 23) and gave the sheep one Shepherd. Now if they can just ever figure out they don't have the job they botched any more.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow Me."

I am one happy little sheep who has returned to the great Shepherd of the sheep. I have been and will continue to pray that He will deliver all His little sheep out of the mouths of evil, double minded, shepherds and that He will bring them all out of all the folds of men into His pasture.

Thankful Jane

[Paul Cox]

Originally Posted by Thankful Jane

While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry...

Hi Jane,

Good points all. In the Local Church we were indeed robbed of the opportunity to have a personal relationship (outside the LSM agenda) with the Lord.

However, in any church, not just an LSM church, the eldership does have the responsibility of oversight. Part of that oversight has much to do with preserving a healthy atmosphere where the saints can go on unhampered.

In our locality, the most predominant Evangelical Church does an excellent job with the youth. They even provide a youth activity center. On several occasions it was clear that without the proper oversight, it would have just become a meat market, and certainly an opening for the destruction of the Church. The elders' responsibility for oversight is very well established in the Scripture, and the writers were indeed specific on certain issues.

It is important that we have a very personal relationship with Jesus. But the right personal relationship with Jesus will always lead to a gathering of the saints (assembly/church). This is indeed the Lord's corporate expression. At least in word, Witness Lee didn't get that wrong.

I feel that the LSM model is an extreme example of how not to do things. And...I think that the way things went had more to do with the fact that Watchman Nee and Witness Lee were Chinese, than anything else.

Roger

[bookworm]

[QUOTE=Thankful Jane;2627]While I’m at it, whatever happened to praying and asking Jesus about who to marry and trusting in Him to lead us concerning who to marry? Who are all these other church people that they should be involved in such a decision? I don't care if they are as experienced as Methusaleh, this decision is the man's and the woman's. Their job is to find out the mind of the Lord. The stories I know where this was done have excellent results.

Thanks, Jane, for the word about learning to seek the Lord and hear his speaking. It helped the light go on for me regarding realizing anew that as a single person I had, indeed, “given up” so to speak and asked the Lord to choose a husband for me—and amazingly enough I had this experience in the LC! Now I see why our marriage was not coerced or arranged! The Lord did this for us in His wisdom. There have been times since during our 36+ years of marriage I admit I have asked the Lord if He was sure this was such a good plan —however, there is no doubt in me or my husband that this is His plan.

The only item I regret is that we were talked into having a wedding meeting centered on the LC and a testimony of it. The theme was loving the Lord, but it was a wedding meeting even so and my poor family wanted to crawl under the floors. I am sorry I put them through this and wish I had not.

[YP0534]

Originally Posted by Terry

This teaching still leaves an unanswered question, at which age should young people date? 24,25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30?

Not everyone needs to or should go to college. (Another worldly LC myth.) The practical point for dating is the age of maturity for each individual. A generation or two ago, that age was generally much lower than it is has been since the invention of adolescence in our culture. Growing up is not a process that can be regulated like Henry Ford's assembly line but is a matter of life and maturity. One tomato plant bears fruit sooner than another and neither plant is defective.

But I would think that, generally speaking, children should be able to be equipped as adults by the age of lawful consent. Such equipping should probably include being able to make the determination for themselves that they aren't emotionally ready for such responsibilities as marriage and family. But, I mean, are helpful parents really going to try to prevent legal adults from having their own lives?

Did you really suggest 30 as a possibility? The current trend in our culture towards later marriage and child rearing is not a healthy sign, in my opinion. It demonstrates that the general culture isn't capable of producing healthy adult human beings. I think the enemy might really like a program where the only ones deemed fit to have families are the ones too old to have them!

Just throwing in my two-bits...