Local Church Book Table

[Vandyyke]

  Hey, I walked right by the "Christian Students" on campus today. I can't help but feel a wave of nostalgia when I see them. Tomorrow I think I will try to get some info on the current state of the Local Church. Since brother Lee is dead has a new leader emerged? Do they still "Chant" "Pray Read" the scriptures? etc...


btw I remember Joe Bush telling me that this church would collapse! Funny how things work out!

[Joe Sperling]

btw I remember Joe Bush telling me that this church would collapse! Funny how things work out!

Dave---

Not sure---but most likely it did collapse, and may have been "reborn" in another form.  Most times when the leader of a "cult" or "cult-like" group dies, the group dies with it.  Take the "Worldwide Church of God" for example.  When Herbert W. Armstrong died, the church faded quickly, and actually repented. The last I heard they had splintered off into a couple of valid churches (not sure of this though).  So, most likely, when Witness Lee died, the church "split" or changed in some way, and I'll bet their views are a bit different now.  Try to find out Dave---it would be interesting to see what they teach now.

--Joe

[Vandyyke]

Right after I left GG's church I was hooked up with a former L.C. Elder through E.V. Free. He was suppose to help me adjust. (I wanted him to show me from the scriptures where GG was wrong but all he could say was, "Go out and relax, take a break")  I ran into another guy at Mac-Donald's one evening. He told me that quite a large group had left Witness Lee and were meeting elsewhere.  This said,  "Living Stream Ministries" is bigger than ever! Their headquarters is in Anaheim. They own mega properties that stretch along two miles of Ball Road.


     I have often wondered why Witness Lee was so successful (Compared to GG) They/he exponentially outgrew the Assembly.


http://www.livingstream.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchman_Nee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Stream_Ministry


Lee liked to advertise Watchman Nee as if they were together in the "Local Church" but I ran into a group of "Little Flock" in San Francisco and they had nothing to do with the L.C's

[Vandyyke]

Witness Lee was a megalomaniac who used developed an aberrant Plymouth Brethren style cult. Yet unlike GG Witness Lee's creation stretches across every international boundary, his literature is published in numerous languages, he by any comparison was, and still is, considered a success. Why?  Why was/is W.L. successful and GG NOT?

   I think GG was his own undoing! His demand of complete control and paranoia wouldn't allow him to release/send out missionaries at the same rate as W.L. Think about it, he could have allowed The Valley to start "Breaking Bread" in 75! And the other Assemblies much earlier. This could have resulted in the sending out of numerous missionaries at a comparable rate as W.L. Now think about it! How many "saints" do you know who were seriously praying to be "sent out". I know I wanted to! I know of numerous others! He could of had people all over the world!  Sharing the gospel/sharing The Assembly!


     But GG couldn't do it! He had to have people who were completely loyal to him, he had to believe they would do everything he wanted. He just couldn't do it!  If he did, The Assembly might look much different than it does today!


   He was/is weak inside. His psyche has a deep, deep flaw!

 

[outdeep]

Yes.  I thought of this as why Chuck Smith's ministry flourished over George's.  I imagine that might be true about Witness Lee as well.  Also, I think there was a strong support in Hong Kong as well.  When I was there in 1983, I looked up a Little Flock.  While walking there I ran into someone who was going to the Local church meeting across the street.  I explained "Watchman Nee", not "Witness Lee".  He said "Oh", and let me to the correct meeting place.  I got the impression from that and other conversations I had that in Asia both groups flourished and there wasn't the word "cult" flung back and forth as there is here.

Honestly, I don't know.  I was once told that in the Local Church brother's house they handed over their entire paycheck (they had all things common) but then later told that wasn't the case.  Nevertheless, I remember in college that if a controversy developed, they would take out full page advertisements to defend their cause.  Money had to come from somewhere. 

[Margaret]

In college I met an LC guy on campus, who of course tried to influence me. At that time I was at Westmoreland Chapel, which is where Witnesss Lee originally landed when he came from China. He tried to take over the Chapel but was unsuccessful, so he left, splitting the group. A little later, after Steve and I were married, we visited the LC in Los Angeles on a Sunday. Oh my word, the meeting was incredible. Their "pray-reading" of scripture is an extremely powerful mind-control method, very very intensely emotional, magnified by the huge crowd doing it all at once at high volume. It seems to me it created groups disciples who were willing to do anything, go anywhere, together.Their method was to have a whole segment of a Local Church relocate to a new locality and have an instant large congegration that reproduced the same intense mind-control atmosphere.

In the Assembly, only one or two individuals were "sent" somewhere, and had to start from scratch.

[Oscar]

Witness Lee was a megalomaniac who used developed an aberrant Plymouth Brethren style cult. Yet unlike GG Witness Lee's creation stretches across every international boundary, his literature is published in numerous languages, he by any comparison was, and still is, considered a success. Why?  Why was/is W.L. successful and GG NOT?

   I think GG was his own undoing! His demand of complete control and paranoia wouldn't allow him to release/send out missionaries at the same rate as W.L. Think about it, he could have allowed The Valley to start "Breaking Bread" in 75! And the other Assemblies much earlier. This could have resulted in the sending out of numerous missionaries at a comparable rate as W.L. Now think about it! How many "saints" do you know who were seriously praying to be "sent out". I know I wanted to! I know of numerous others! He could of had people all over the world!  Sharing the gospel/sharing The Assembly!


     But GG couldn't do it! He had to have people who were completely loyal to him, he had to believe they would do everything he wanted. He just couldn't do it!  If he did, The Assembly might look much different than it does today!


   He was/is weak inside. His psyche has a deep, deep flaw!

 

Folks,

Witness Lee was an associate of Watchman Nee for many years in China.  Nee's work goes back all the way to the 1920's.  He was heavily influenced by both the Exclusive Brethren and the Honor Oak movement in England. 

So, when the Communists imprisoned Watchman Nee in the 1950's, there was already a very large base of faithful people to build upon. Large numbers of their followers went to Hong Kong and Taiwan.  Lee was able to gain the support of a large number of the Little Flock adherents.  Others split off, claiming they were faithful to Watchman Nee's teachings.  IMHO, they both believed much the same thing.

I think a major difference was that in the the case of WN and WL, their teachings were erroneous but understandable.  GG's teachings were both erroneous and incomprehensible.  For example, I read many of WN's books, which were mostly transcribed ministry, just like GG's.  Did anyone ever read one of GG's "books" all the way through?  If it actually happened, the unfortunate readers must have believed that they were reading wonderful things that were just too high for their understanding.

I led post "ministry" discussion groups at seminars for years.  I always had to spend all the time on, "What did he say?".  Usually, no one had a clue.  They had picked up individual statements, but rarely, if ever, followed his argument to its conclusion. 

I tried to read a couple of the books.  They were gobbledegook!  I couldn't get beyond the first few pages.   :rofl:

Tom Maddux

[Vandyyke]

Nee and Lee believed the same thing? As I understood it Nee's books edited/translated by Lee supports this assertion! yet I wasn't familar with it apart from Lee.

          Nee believed in the "co-mingling"? "God/Jesus became the church woops Church"? "God the Father, Son, Spirit are three manifestations of One God/person" ?  Again, Nee taught these things/modalism?

[Joe Sperling]

I tried to read a couple of the books.  They were gobbledegook!  I couldn't get beyond the first few pages.

I'd have to agree. A few nights back I retrieved one of George's books out from under one of the legs of a
wobbly chair I have in the den. I read a few pages, as the chair rocked back and forth, and very
quickly returned it to it's proper place under the chair leg. I picked up a book by Spurgeon and had
a very nice read. George's book did do a very nice job of steadying the chair though, so I guess it does
have some merits.

[Vandyyke]

George taught "Three Aspects of Salvation"


    1. Your Spirit is "Saved" (rejuvenated) when you are "Born Again"

    2.  Your Soul is being "Saved" through "Sanctification"

    3. Your Body will be "Saved" in the "Resurrection"

     4. He also taught "rewards and consequences" which I know he tended to mix with 1 & 2 (gobbldygook?)

     It is my opinion that he has plenty of verses to support his claims. However, I understand that it is in complete opposition to "Reformed Theology"


  Tom,  the question is, when did the Nee Church reject the Lee church?  (I know they did because I attended one of  their seminars up in San Francisco.) If it was before 1968 you would have to concede that Lee still outgrew GG by leaps and bounds apart from Nee's support.




                   

[Mark C.]

  Yes, I must credit VanDave with keeping the conversation going here--- and with a very wide array of topics to-boot.  By the time I try to catch up with the different threads he has moved on!  Thanks Dave for doing this, as I agree with you there is value in keeping this forum going and functioning.  I understand many will feel the need to "move-on", and that is fine, but it is my belief that the spirit of the Assm. still lives on in many different forms in the world today and that former members have an "expertise" to help those hurt in such groups.

  Of the many different topics (from Peter and the Wolf, music, GG, Witness Lee/Watchman Nee, etc.) I would like to comment on the distinctions between The Local Church  and Watch. Nee:

  I know that many Christian "cult watching groups" center their arguments re. "what is a cult" on doctrinal distinctions, with only a passing mention of abberant practices by these groups.  Jesus seemed to make the bad behavior exhibited by those in control of Jewish religious life a more important indicator of what it means to be a church group in the will of God.

  Jesus did challenge their incorrect beliefs, but it was always connected to how they treated others. In the parable of "The Good Samaritan " a man who had erroneous doctrine nevertheless was found to be an example of fulfilling God's will by loving a wounded man, while those in the religious orthodoxy walked on by.

  Watch. Nee taught certain things re. spirituality that I would consider wrong, and possibly even harmful, but I don't think that his groups used the kind of abusive control that were exemplified in the Lee or Assm. groups (I just don't know that much about how "The Little Flock" groups operated to make a judgment re. them).  It is the systematic domination of the members by leaders that qualify a group as a cult like group, and the Lee group, without a doubt, used the loyalty to group prerequisites as a means to trap and control members.

  I think that when the power structure of a religious group is asked some honest searching questions and they become defensive, vs. open to constructive criticism, you have touched the central nerve of a cultic mindset.  The question becomes: "Is your group (meaning the leader's authority in the group) able to accept entreaty---- or can you as a leader admit you could be wrong?"  When a leader (and the group mindset) think that they perfectly represent God's thinking, and can do no wrong, they will only grow into an even stronger expression of cultic activity.

                                                                          God Bless,  Mark C.

 

[Vandyyke]

I appreciate your point about Jesus.  Yes I think behavior should have been given much more focusonf all the "How to identify a Cult" literature written in the 70's.


   When I approched the "Christian Students" I said, "Local Church"?  They both had that Jackie Gleason "Hamena, Hamena Hamena..."  stutter going!

         

[Oscar]

George taught "Three Aspects of Salvation"


    1. Your Spirit is "Saved" (rejuvenated) when you are "Born Again"

    2.  Your Soul is being "Saved" through "Sanctification"

    3. Your Body will be "Saved" in the "Resurrection"

     4. He also taught "rewards and consequences" which I know he tended to mix with 1 & 2 (gobbldygook?)

     It is my opinion that he has plenty of verses to support his claims. However, I understand that it is in complete opposition to "Reformed Theology"


  Tom,  the question is, when did the Nee Church reject the Lee church?  (I know they did because I attended one of  their seminars up in San Francisco.) If it was before 1968 you would have to concede that Lee still outgrew GG by leaps and bounds apart from Nee's support.




                   

VanDave,

1, 2, and 3 are understandings that are shared by most evangelical Christians.

Regarding the "Nee Church" and the "Lee Church" I'm not sure of all the details of each individual groups splitting off from the main group. The Foochow church split in 1948.  The Hong Kong church split in 1970.  I can remember that even back in the 1960's Stephen Kaung had a "Nee" group in New York.  There was a little "Nee" group in the Los Angeles area in the late 1970's as well.  Deciding to remain faithful to Nee's teachings, however, did not keep one from believing and doing wonky things.

 Here is a quote from "Secrets of Watchman Nee" by Dana Roberts.

"In this same chapter, (Roberts is referring to "Further Talks on Church Life"), while offering his continuing support of the revelation of "locality" Nee nullifies the practical reality of the local churches' independence.  Nee tells his trainees, "Therefore, brothers, when you , a co-worker, reside in a locality, you are there as both an apostle and an elder."  Thus the regional center governs all other local churches, not through an episcopal control, as is the case in Roman Catholic, Episcopal, and Methodist churches, but through a pedagogoc control."

"The dynamics of this polity work on the principle that there are spiritual men capable of teaching others to do the "work".  As practiced in the postwar local church in China, there are actually only two "spiritual men" who are doing the teaching: Watchman Nee and Witness Lee.  Whether a co-worker trained in the regional center at Shanghai or Foochow, the training lessons were the same-standardized by Nee's and Lee's revelations on the meaning of God's Word."

In other words, Nee and Lee had the authority to tell everyone else what the Bible meant.  Lee may have come up with his mingling teaching after Nee was in jail.  However, he seems to have been on the same page in most ways.  Roberts refers to him in one place as Nee's "most faithful co-worker".  They seem to have taught local independence in the early years, and then worked to gain absolute control of the movement later on.  This was done by sending their own trained workers into assemblies with the "revelation" that these were to be accepted as elders.

It seems to have worked out just like GG's assemblies.  Each assembly was completely independent, except that all the leadership was trained and appointed by GG himself. 

Tom Maddux

[Vandyyke]

         So your point is Nee and Lee were really the same. Nee and Lee were in control of the teaching?
  This is what makes them aberrant but not "gobbledygookish" as GG?

   My experience with Nee was "The Normal Christian Life" and the open fellowship I received by
"The Little Flock" in S.F. (It was only during one convocation meeting, about 1000 people)

  Yet my experiences with the Lee people were pretty strange. In the quad at F.C. I observed these people making a real spectacle of-themselves, "Oh Lord Jesus...OH LORD JESUS..."  on and on it went louder and louder.

   Then I tried to get a handle on their theology. Mingling....Jesus is God the Father is God the Holy Spirit...(All three were on the cross) 


  So I don't know where you are going in this conversation. Nee and Lee are the same? because they exercised the same polity?



   My original assertion had to do with the growth of the Lee group. I suspect that Lee was much more liberal in sending out missionaries whereas GG wasn't. I suspect GG had to have 100% complete assurance that missionaries would do his will...etc...  I think GG could have sent out people at a much faster rate. Karen Crusek? (Spelling) was on GG and Betty for 20 years "I believe I am suppose to be a missionary to China!" Yet they just kept telling her to "pray about it some more"   Again, look at all the young people who earnestly desired to be sent out!  Look at all those young college age singles who waited...waited...through their twenties, thirties, forties....and literally rotted on the vine! Look at all the invitations we received from Africa! Come and visit us!  But GG would cut it off! NO WAY!  I suspect GG feared that if things were too spread out then someone would find out about his past, or develop enough confidence to reject his authority,  "Brother we have decided to no longer send you the offering money."


   Do you disagree? If so its no big.


   Most evangelicals believe the three aspects of your salvation?  In those same words?  That's news to me. My experience with the Plymouth Brethren taught me that my Soul was saved! Yet if I didn't bring forth fruits of my salvation then it could be suspected that I was really a tare and not a wheat! If you ask anyone at E.V. Free Fullerton, Do you believe your soul is SAVED?  Who would tell you, "NO, its in a process of sanctification!"     Who? Dale Burke? (Spelling)


  George's teaching is "gobbledygook"  Yes, I agree. A person really can't be "Saved" and be in the Lake of Fire" at  the same time. Yet Lee's Mysticism is a lot worse! Lee's teachings along with his prayer chanting can make scrambled eggs out of your grey matter a lot faster than GG's teachings!


    I think that Nee's group and Lee's group are apart from each other. Lee uses his association with Nee to support his ministry. Yet whenever you find a Nee book published by Lee it has been edited, revised.

                                                                                   

                                         



   


     

[Oscar]

VanDave,

So your point is Nee and Lee were really the same. Nee and Lee were in control of the teaching?
  This is what makes them aberrant but not "gobbledygookish" as GG?

Nee and Lee shared  the same views on the nature of man, the spiritual life, church government, Christian work, the 'higher" life, on and on.  However, Nee was sidelined by his imprisonment by the Chicoms in 1952.

After that Lee seems to have added some teachings.  I do not know if the "mingling" was invented by him or if he got it from Nee.  I do know that he invented the "pray reading" custom where they repeated "Oh Lord Jesus" a zillion times. That was about 1965.  I had a friend who had been involved.  He and some others had separated from Lee's meeting in LA when they started the pray reading thing.  Once we went to a meeting there and he stomped out when some guy hollered, "Take off your mind and stay a while".  Everyone said "Praise the Lord!"

By GG's "gobbledegook" I was referring to the fact that his thoughts were frequently incoherent, as well as his attempts at writing.  When the first issue of the Torch and Testimony was published it contained two articles; one by GG and one by Steve Irons.  George's article, which he had written himself, was simply incomprehensible.  I remember underlining one sentence and asking my wife to read it and tell me what it said.  She replied, "It doesn't say anything", which was what I had been thinking.  Nee and Lee could be understood, however aberrant their beliefs were.

  My experience with Nee was "The Normal Christian Life" and the open fellowship I received by
"The Little Flock" in S.F. (It was only during one convocation meeting, about 1000 people)

Nee's "Normal Christian Life" was an interpretation of Romans 7 according to standard Keswick teaching.  Nee had been a speaker at the 1938 convention there.

   My original assertion had to do with the growth of the Lee group. I suspect that Lee was much more liberal in sending out missionaries whereas GG wasn't. I suspect GG had to have 100% complete assurance that missionaries would do his will...etc...  I think GG could have sent out people at a much faster rate. Karen Crusek? (Spelling) was on GG and Betty for 20 years "I believe I am suppose to be a missionary to China!" Yet they just kept telling her to "pray about it some more"   Again, look at all the young people who earnestly desired to be sent out!  Look at all those young college age singles who waited...waited...through their twenties, thirties, forties....and literally rotted on the vine! Look at all the invitations we received from Africa! Come and visit us!  But GG would cut it off! NO WAY!  I suspect GG feared that if things were too spread out then someone would find out about his past, or develop enough confidence to reject his authority,  "Brother we have decided to no longer send you the offering money."

I agree with you.  GG was too much of a control freak to allow others to accomplish anything.  It had to be about him. 

Most evangelicals believe the three aspects of your salvation?  In those same words?  That's news to me. My experience with the Plymouth Brethren taught me that my Soul was saved! Yet if I didn't bring forth fruits of my salvation then it could be suspected that I was really a tare and not a wheat! If you ask anyone at E.V. Free Fullerton, Do you believe your soul is SAVED?  Who would tell you, "NO, its in a process of sanctification!"     Who? Dale Burke? (Spelling)

Dave, it is a standard understanding of what the Bible teaches.  It is found in the Schofield Reference Biblefor example. (Check the footnote under Romans 1:16).  The idea is that a Christian's spiritual state is saved and secure, but that what is now true and real in the spiritual realm is being worked into our lives as we progress in sanctification in the space/time realm.  Then finally the final aspect of salvation will be manifested in its fulness when we put off our earthly bodies and are clothed in spiritual bodies in the resurrection.  I don't think Dale Burk would bat an eye at that statement. It is frequently referred to as the "three tenses of salvation".  I know that the professors at Talbot would agree with it.

Yet Lee's Mysticism is a lot worse! Lee's teachings along with his prayer chanting can make scrambled eggs out of your grey matter a lot faster than GG's teachings!

Well said!  As Mark commented, it is a powerful mind control technique.  GG just left you saying, "Huh?"

Tom Maddux