"Home Trainings" (with video)

[NewManLiving]

I'm not surprised. There is no Life left in the LSMLC - it's all scripted now. Any casual observer will immediately notice that the Lord Himself is not included in this rediculous scenario- just a bunch of LC nonsense

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

I'm not surprised. There is no Life left in the LSMLC - it's all scripted now. Any casual observer will immediately notice that the Lord Himself is not included in this rediculous scenario- just a bunch of LC nonsense

Scripted is right. And this video is just plain weird. I wonder how "new ones" would react if they knew the actual extend of just how 'scripted' their interactions really are.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Scripted is right. And this video is just plain weird. I wonder how "new ones" would react if they knew the actual extend of just how 'scripted' their interactions really are.

What "new ones" may not know is the extent Lee is elevated. Not nearly as blatant as in years past, but in coded phrases only a regular LC member knows the interpretation.

• The Ministry
• The Apostle's Teaching
• The New Testament Ministry

If a new one implied "Lee wasn't an apostle, but just another Christian writer", it would be as if pouring ice water upon the devoted LC attendees. "This one doesn't have the vision".

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

What "new ones" may not know is the extent Lee is elevated. Not nearly as blatant as in years past, but in coded phrases only a regular LC member knows the interpretation.

• The Ministry
• The Apostle's Teaching
• The New Testament Ministry

If a new one implied "Lee wasn't an apostle, but just another Christian writer", it would be as if pouring ice water upon the devoted LC attendees. "This one doesn't have the vision".

What I see in some of these videos is an obsession with having a high level of control over 'molding' these new members/recruits into good LC material.

I guess that is somewhat necessary because of what they are attempting to do with these new members. If a new member were told outright that there is a 'MOTA' whose books are used exclusively, whose teaching is heralded as the "New Testament Ministry", people would likely run away fast. I think the goal is to produce a dependency on the system. Once someone is dependent, they are less likely to run away, even if bothered by what they see.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Freedom

What I see in some of these videos is an obsession with having a high level of control over 'molding' these new members/recruits into good LC material.

I guess that is somewhat necessary because of what they are attempting to do with these new members. If a new member were told outright that there is a 'MOTA' whose books are used exclusively, whose teaching is heralded as the "New Testament Ministry", people would likely run away fast. I think the goal is to produce a dependency on the system. Once someone is dependent, they are less likely to run away, even if bothered by what they see.

I wonder if the LC will follow the path of SDA who don't openly preach that they follow the teachings of Ellen White, but nonetheless use her writings as the basis of their eschatological doctrine? Why belong to a group where you need to hide who you follow?

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by HERn

I wonder if the LC will follow the path of SDA who don't openly preach that they follow the teachings of Ellen White, but nonetheless use her writings as the basis of their eschatological doctrine? Why belong to a group where you need to hide who you follow?

Speaking from my own experience, whenever we attempted to preach the gospel, there was always some amount of effort to 'hide' our connections.

On the campus, when inquired as to what churches we were associated with, we would tell people that we were "believers of various backgrounds". When I participated in BFA distributions, it was the same deal. People were obviously curious as to what the RcV was and what our relationship with the publisher was, but we just told them that we were volunteers for Bibles for America. I remember being specifically instructed to avoid answering the "what church do you attend?" question.

As Christians, the Bible instructs us to walk in the light. It really nauseates me to think that we made some amount of effort to obscure our true connections when making contact with the public. Telling the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" was spoken. All for what? It wasn't about the gospel so much as it was attempting to bring WL to a broader audience.

[HERn]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Speaking from my own experience, whenever we attempted to preach the gospel, there was always some amount of effort to 'hide' our connections.

On the campus, when inquired as to what churches we were associated with, we would tell people that we were "believers of various backgrounds". When I participated in BFA distributions, it was the same deal. People were obviously curious as to what the RcV was and what our relationship with the publisher was, but we just told them that we were volunteers for Bibles for America. I remember being specifically instructed to avoid answering the "what church do you attend?" question.

As Christians, the Bible instructs us to walk in the light. It really nauseates me to think that we made some amount of effort to obscure our true connections when making contact with the public. Telling the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" was spoken. All for what? It wasn't about the gospel so much as it was attempting to bring WL to a broader audience.

Just asking, who is WL that he should be brought to a broader audience? Can WL save us from our sins? Can WL sanctify us? Can WL satisfy our spiritual longings? WL created a sect of Christianity that excluded all who did not take his LSM publications.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

As Christians, the Bible instructs us to walk in the light. It really nauseates me to think that we made some amount of effort to obscure our true connections when making contact with the public. Telling the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" was spoken. All for what? It wasn't about the gospel so much as it was attempting to bring WL to a broader audience.

Perhaps among the local churches, "the end justifies the means" however in practice telling "the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" is no different than in the book of Acts what Ananias and Sapphira did. Or, I should ask, what is different?
I would argue something is being withheld.

[micah6v8]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Speaking from my own experience, whenever we attempted to preach the gospel, there was always some amount of effort to 'hide' our connections.

On the campus, when inquired as to what churches we were associated with, we would tell people that we were "believers of various backgrounds". When I participated in BFA distributions, it was the same deal. People were obviously curious as to what the RcV was and what our relationship with the publisher was, but we just told them that we were volunteers for Bibles for America. I remember being specifically instructed to avoid answering the "what church do you attend?" question.

As Christians, the Bible instructs us to walk in the light. It really nauseates me to think that we made some amount of effort to obscure our true connections when making contact with the public. Telling the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" was spoken. All for what? It wasn't about the gospel so much as it was attempting to bring WL to a broader audience.

Hi Freedom and HERN


The video links provided by Koinonia are posted in the channel called “Home Trainings Church of God Singapore”. In the “About” tab of this channel, it mentions that “This channel is for the promotion of the 2nd Initiative (home training) of the Church of God in Singapore.”


I have some understanding of the situation in Singapore. Currently there is a “five initiatives” plan in Singapore to increase the number of saints in the church.


Initiative 2 (which was in those youtube videos) is to conduct home trainings so that there will be more new serving ones.


Initiative 5 involves contacting and having dialogue with Christian believers.
To this end, “Life-O” was set up in which forums are conducted. If you visit the webpage/facebook page, you will not find the link with LSM
http://life-o.org/
www.facebook.com/LifeO.sg

[aron]

Originally Posted by Freedom

On the campus, when inquired as to what churches we were associated with, we would tell people that we were "believers of various backgrounds". When I participated in BFA distributions, it was the same deal...we made some amount of effort to obscure our true connections when making contact with the public. Telling the partial truth was commonplace, and even an occasional "white lie" was spoken. All for what? It wasn't about the gospel so much as it was attempting to bring WL to a broader audience.

Telling people that Witness Lee had God's ministry of the age and was Deputy God on earth might turn them off, at the first meeting. We were counseled to get the hook in them, get leverage, before beginning to turn the screws. "The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" became instead, selective aspects of the truth, carefully doled out. Other unhelpful aspects of the truth were suppressed or avoided.

The gospel, in these hands, is merely a vehicle to get people into the Local Church Life. And the LC life is merely a vehicle to enslave people, body soul and spirit, to a publishing house in southern California. To see young girls, some of them still in their teens, holding up signed documents pledging to focus on "ministry" readings with their "trainers" . . . that's the gospel, today? Why not just stamp "property of LSM" on their foreheads? Make it a little more clear?