View Full Version : 6 Major Sins of The Local Church Unrefuted

04-21-2008, 01:05 PM
1. Calvinism

a. The ministry shows both sides - i.e. God's sovreignty and man's free will. Brother Lee does not claim to know how they work together, but He does state that the bible does show both aspects clearly.

b. These matters occupy a very very small portion of Brother Lee's ministry, unlike a lot of denominations which place extreme emphasis upon it.

What I find interesting is that you list it as a major sin, and yet you give Arminius a break on the matter of insecurity of salvation, which in my opinion is rather strange. Such a teaching implies that one does not have faith in the perfect and complete redemption of Christ.

As for those holding to Calvinism being arrogant or proud to think that God chose them above everyone else, I think the opposite is true. They believe that they are absolutely unworthy to have received the redemption from God and that only God's mercy, not even their own will played any part in their receiving salvation.

I think whatever viewpoints people hold Troy, you need to approach them in a loving way and have calm and proper discourse with them. I have observed many of your postings, and I don't think you can honestly tell me that you have been behaving in a Christ-like manner.

The problem with calvinism is not being address by this leeist which is the false teaching of total depravity that requires a person be premade for salvation without first regard for their choice and others bound for hell also without consideration for their choice. We are not robots.

Arminius never claimed to believe in the insecurity of salvation, but rather only said there seemed to be verses that suggest this. His view was still OSAS. He didn't realize those verses were really referring to loss of rewards during the millennial reign of Christ for non-overcomer believers.

There is nothing wrong with God choosing a people for Himself. That is not the issue. The problem is in professing robots which this leeist prides himself on without authentic free-will made in God's image.

It is with the love of Christ that I tell you this truth about God's way of saving. It is not loving at all in your many posts to tell people to be saved in a way God does not save. You lead them down a false path.

Watchman Nee did not believe in the way this leeist or Witness Lee wanted to be saved.

2. I believe you are referring to calling on the name of the Lord. Troy if you do not like the practice of calling upon the name of the Lord, then don't do it. The bible says "Make joyful noise to the Lord." Also you often talk about the bible saying that we shouldn't make vain repetitions. Do you think that the Lord's name is vain? Do you think that all the people mentioned in the bible who also called upon the name of the Lord were vain in their calling ?

It is not calling on the name of the Lord to shout out short quips of two or three words repetitively then call it prayer and reading. There is no joyful noise in these vain repetitions that are quite aggressive and obnoxious. Cults brainwash you to control you through mindless repetitions.

Concerning suing. Actually this has been addressed already. If you haven't read it already, take a look http://www.localchurch-vs-harvesthou...igation.html#8 (http://www.hidefriends.info/index.php?q=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5sb2NhbGNodXJjaC12cy1oYX J2ZXN0aG91c2UuY29tL3F1ZXN0aW9ucy1hbnN3ZXJzLWxpdGln YXRpb24uaHRtbCM4##8)

Nothing in this link justifies suing someone for faith. You lost the court case as well.

4. You should know better than this Troy. Does Modalism teach the coexistence and coinherence of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit from eternity to eternity ? If so please provide a resource. Otherwise Troy, please stop repeating this false accusation.

Coexistence and coinherence are not possible if the Father is the Son. Modalism teaches the Son is the Father and the Godhead is a Person. Witness Lee and others in this cult such as Kangas are quoted many times saying the Son is the Father, and Lee even said the Godhead is not 3 Persons but a Person. Since you can't find in the Bible that the Father is the Son and the Godhead is a Person, then realize you worship another which you can only believe in if you are an unregenerate because the Holy Spirit indwelling a believer does not guide a believer into believing in modalism. Christianity has never taught modalism throughout the centuries. It is more than doubtful twenty centuries later the leeist is correct because never is Jesus treated as being the Father in God's Word.

5. You are talking about deification. Again this shows that you have absolutely no idea what you are actually talking about. We do not teach that believers are God Himself. We teach that we have His life and His nature, just as a kitten as the life and nature of both parent cats, so we as children of God are God in life and nature but not in the Godhead. Note, we are not saying that we are God fullstop, just as the kitten is not her parent(s). We partake of the Divine nature and we are born of the life of God.
Deification is wrong. Never ought you to call yourself God, nor in any way shape or form. There are two kinds of leeists. With many quotes we find leeists calling themselves God and Witness Lee did. And there are other leeists who try to rationalize this by saying they are God in nature and life. But this is wrong too because you are not God in nature and life. Only God is God in nature and life. A Christian, however, has God's nature and life. Buddhists and Mormons teach you too will become God in nature and life but not in the Godhead.

6. Were you a co-worker of Watchman Nee? Do you know what took place between these brothers first hand ? If not, you have no authority to make any such accusations.

You don't need to have lived over a half a century ago to realize Witness Lee altered Nee's writings. In TSM in chapter 2, the CFP translation shows us the three main aspects of emotion: affection, desire and sensing/feeling with corresponding verses. The Witness Lee LSM alteration changes these words to love, hate and being affected with a whole set of different verses. In Part 7 there are 3 chapters on affection, desire and sensing/feeling. There are no chapters in TSM called love, hate or being affected. Chapter 2 proves the 3 aspects of emotion and Part 7 later goes into detail to talk about them, which the leeist version does as well, but the leeist version does not have chapters on love, hate and being affected which it ought to if it translated chapter 2 part 1 correctly. It's not difficult to see the incongruity of the LSM version of chapter 2 with other chapters when it confuses hate for desire without any followup chapters on hate. Affection can be strong or negative, not strictly love; therefore, love is not the full gambit of emotions for affection. And feelings being affected lack the truth that by our innerman properly led by the Holy Spirit we can have feelings that are not being externally affected.

One comes to the realization Witness Lee restricted the emotions of his followers to control them which caused them to be dysfunctional and isolated from society.

Our prayers go out to all leeists to seek deliverance from the cult of The Local Church Living Stream Ministry.