Whistleblower

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Ohio,

So you are saying that Warren Peterson’s eyewitness testimony is inaccurate and that brothers John and Godfred received a confession and repentance from the sister when they should not have since she was a victim and not a willing participant.

If you believe that then why didn’t they call the cops?


“"...when they began to engage in mutually compromising immoral physical contact........The elders then went to the sister to confront her on the matter and she immediately confessed that the story was true and broke down in tears. She was very sorry and expressed her remorse and repentance to the elders. “

Your sensational charge of rape does not hold up. The eyewitness testimony states consensual and Brothers John and Godfred, the elders, did not report the crime. Unless you believe the elders were also negligent in caring for the flock by not reporting a crime and complicit in the crime by allowing it to go unchecked for a year or more.

Drake

Get your facts straight.

These events happened a decade apart.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Get your facts straight.

These events happened a decade apart.

Well ,ok. Indiana just tossed that in without putting it a timeframe, so don’t get so snippy.

Take your pick..... neither support the rape allegation you made.

What testimony makes that case? Nothing presented thus far substantiates that allegation.

Don’t you think that if Brother John thought a rape was committed that he would have called the police?

Seriously, what kind of person do you think he was?

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Well ,ok. Indiana just tossed that in without putting it a timeframe, so don’t get so snippy.
Take your pick..... neither support the rape allegation you made.
What testimony makes that case? Nothing presented thus far substantiates that allegation.

So I am "snippy" for telling you to get your facts straight before you challenge men of God and defend that degenerate Philip Lee?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Ohio

So I am "snippy" for telling you to get your facts straight before you challenge men of God and defend that degenerate Philip Lee?

Right. Snippy.

Provide the citation that substantiates rape. And stop mischaracterizing my objections. I am not defending Philip Lee.

Drake

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Drake

Right. Snippy. Provide the citation that substantiates rape. And stop mischaracterizing my objections. I am not defending Philip Lee.

Drake, were the Anaheim elders right to excommunicate Philip Lee? And was Witness Lee wrong to oppose the measure?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Drake, were the Anaheim elders right to excommunicate Philip Lee? And was Witness Lee wrong to oppose the measure?

Yes, they were.

Do you think excommunication was sufficient?

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes, they were.

Do you think excommunication was sufficient?

Was Witness Lee wrong to oppose the excommunication?

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes, they were.
Do you think excommunication was sufficient?

Sufficient or not, this rightful and righteous excommunication of the unapologetic and unrepentant sexual predator, Phillip Lee, was "undone" by those pack of man-pleasing, puppet elders in Anaheim at the direct order of Witness Lee. I know of many dear brothers and sisters who left the LC of Lee because of this dastardly act of cowardness and betrayal to the victims. Of all the lowdown, despicable things done by Witness Lee and those puppet elders, this one act stands out as the worst....and let me tell you...that takes some doing.
-

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Do you think excommunication was sufficient?

NO!

Bible says to rebuke before all, that all may learn and be in fear. (I Tim 5.20)

In the same section, Paul instructs Timothy "not to lay hands or appoint men prematurely because the sins of some men are quite obvious, preceding them to judgment, but the sins of others surface later."

Philip's character and sins were obvious to all the brothers who knew him. By all accounts he was an unsaved reprobate. No spiritual minister would ever allow such a one as Philip to go near the people of God without posted guards. Yet WL promoted him to 2nd in command while he was in Taiwan. Unbelievable! Not just over his printing presses, but over all the workers around the globe!

WL was great at instructing everyone else how to serve in the church, but apparently never applied his teachings to himself.

Yet what disturbs so many of us the most is what WL did to these men of God, these whistleblowers, these ones like John Ingalls who spoke their conscience, acted like real shepherds, and were willing to suffer for righteousness sake. Then WL had new puppet elders appointed in Anaheim who reinstated Philip without repentance.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Drake

Yes, they were.

Do you think excommunication was sufficient?

Philip wasn't in the church anyway ... so excommunication a non-starter.

And wasn't he brought back? Like Watchman Nee ... by Witness Lee?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Right. Snippy.
Provide the citation that substantiates rape. And stop mischaracterizing my objections. I am not defending Philip Lee.

By defending the Lee's and attacking whistleblowers, you align yourself with sleazy.

No one is mischaracterizing you. You don't any help for that.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Ohio

By defending the Lee's and attacking whistleblowers, you align yourself with sleazy.

No one is mischaracterizing you. You don't any help for that.

No one is attacking whistleblowers. You are not a whistleblower.