Where Has All the Orthopraxy Gone?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I suppose there is a lot that we will never know, however, what I do know is that Nee was happy to work with others, much more than Lee was. Also, after reading Steve's recent writing on Nee, it is clear that Nee was not the person that Lee portrayed him as.

I'm not sure about that. Why would he develop a theological construct -- one church one city -- which in effect condemns all others, if he was "happy" to work with them?

Both Nee and Lee worked a system of public shamings and rebukes which automatically placed them on top -- they alone were above reproach.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I'm not sure about that. Why would he develop a theological construct -- one church one city -- which in effect condemns all others, if he was "happy" to work with them?

Both Nee and Lee worked a system of public shamings and rebukes which automatically placed them on top -- they alone were above reproach.

Maybe he wasn't completely "happy" working with others, it's probably better to say he was at least willing to work with others. The contrast is that Lee only wanted other who would work for him(minions and yes men), although I'm sure that was also true of Nee, just to a lesser extent.

[Freedom]

I am not aware of any of Nee's coworkers whom Lee went on to work with. Lee had no peers, correct? I know that when Lee came to the US there were some Chinese saints like brother Samuel Chang who had already been following Nee/Lee, however, I would guess that they must have viewed Lee as a leader or father figure as opposed to one of their peers.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I am not aware of any of Nee's coworkers whom Lee went on to work with. Lee had no peers, correct? I know that when Lee came to the US there were some Chinese saints like brother Samuel Chang who had already been following Nee/Lee, however, I would guess that they must have viewed Lee as a leader or father figure as opposed to one of their peers.

As a frame of reference, Stephen Kaung is the only one I am familiar with. If other brothers such as Stephen Kaung who were discipled by Watchman Nee, did not share Lee's emphasis on localism. They were more influenced by Nee and Sparks. Due to the agree to disagree relationship, Lee considered himself as having no peers.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Terry

As a frame of reference, Stephen Kaung is the only one I am familiar with. If other brothers such as Stephen Kaung who were discipled by Watchman Nee, did not share Lee's emphasis on localism. They were more influenced by Nee and Sparks. Due to the agree to disagree relationship, Lee considered himself as having no peers.

Has anyone on this forum met Stephen Kaung?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Has anyone on this forum met Stephen Kaung?

I have and I am sure Indiana has and maybe others on this forum have too. Stephen Kaung's wife told me he (Stephen Kaung) is open to the local churches. I guess from that statement, it does not mean the feeling is mutual. Rather the LSM/LC elects to put up a wall when it comes to fellowship outside the LSM influence.
Say what you want about the LSM dealings with CRI, but I see that as a PAC brokering. That's more politics than it is fellowship.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Has anyone on this forum met Stephen Kaung?

Indiana, or Steve Isitt, told me recently that he met with a Kaung group. And there's videos of Stephen speakings.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Maybe he wasn't completely "happy" working with others, it's probably better to say he was at least willing to work with others. The contrast is that Lee only wanted others who would work for him (minions and yes men), although I'm sure that was also true of Nee, just to a lesser extent.

I can say the same thing about Titus Chu -- "only wanting others who would work for him (minions and yes men)"-- as you said about Witness Lee. In fact, that was the assessment of his lifelong companion in NYC, Benjamen Chen, at his Quarantine meeting in Whistler, BC, Canada.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I can say the same thing about Titus Chu -- "only wanting others who would work for him (minions and yes men)"-- as you said about Witness Lee. In fact, that was the assessment of his lifelong companion in NYC, Benjamen Chen, at his Quarantine meeting in Whistler, BC, Canada.

I noticed the great irony with Dong Yu Lan also; he was charged with being ambitious, manipulative, controlling, and paranoid. I thought, "Gee, he learned his lessons well - why is he being censored for 'closely following the apostle'?"

I think the blendeds were jealous that Dong "out-Lee'd" them and made them look bad. They were curators of the Lee Museum, and Dong was becoming the new Lee.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I can say the same thing about Titus Chu -- "only wanting others who would work for him (minions and yes men)"-- as you said about Witness Lee. In fact, that was the assessment of his lifelong companion in NYC, Benjamen Chen, at his Quarantine meeting in Whistler, BC, Canada.

Actually, i should clarify this -- TC despised "yes-men," challenging others publicly to be creative and innovative, yet demanding absolute submission. TC also liked to take credit for all ideas proffered by subordinates.