"Should the reformed UBF be a church" & "What's up, doc?" (2 of 2) -- RSQUBF Discussion Boards 2001 highlights

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 23:43:53 10/03/02 Thu
Author: rsqarchive
Subject: "Should the reformed UBF be a church" & "What's up, doc?" (2 of 2)
In reply to: rsqarchive 's message, ""Should the reformed UBF be a church" & "What's up, doc?" (1 of 2)" on 23:40:37 10/03/02 Thu

Steve Klassen

Re: What's up Doc?

Well its hard to know where to begin, but following this exchange for a while, I feel compelled to respond. First of all I must say that I really don't get this obsession with annonymity. Why are people afraid to use their real names. The lack of accountability for one's words that annonymity creates really seems to lower the quality of debate. Addressing eachother with respect and compassion seems basic to me. Annonymous, were you really in UBF for 20 years? If so I probably know you. I should apologize for the fact that I don't know how to make paragraph breaks in this format, so this may be hard to follow. >It really distresses me to hear this endless obsessing with figuring who's in and who's out, as if following Jesus was some kind of childs club house. Why don't we work as hard at emulating Jesus (beyond his use of sarcasm). I think a large dose of humility is in order here. Paul said that we "see through a glass darkly" yet somehow everything is crystal clear to us?! The fact is that God doesn't need us to play gate-keepers. God chooses who to work through, and like Jonah, sometimes we just have to get over it. The sad thing is that it is much easier to carry on a diatribe from behind a veil of secrecy than it is to put into practice the kind of Love that is at the heart of Jesus' message. Speaking of love, Jesus chose the Samaritan as the example of
"who is my neighbor", because they were hated for being religiously in error. So yes of course God works through UBF. I'll even go out on a limb and say that I partly agree with doc about UBF's methods helping some American students. As much as I hate authoritarianism (I left) I knew a few people that were so bad off before UBF, that I think that UBF saved them from harming themselves gravely. But no, I don't think that that in any way justifies UBF's obviously twisted and psychotic leadership. As for reforming UBF, I'd say that I agree in principal that the leadership should be held accountable, but realistically, I don't think its going to happen. Lets not bang our heads against a brick wall. All this energy should be put into making Gods love visable on earth, not Sam's ugliness (I am not refering to his appearance). God has other options, he doesn't need UBF, reformed or not, although as I said, he can work through either.

3/2/2001

Amateur historian

Re: What's up Doc?

Actually, Dr. John Lee in Chicago comes to mind. He and his family left UBF, but then they came back. I really wonder what his thinking is about SL and UBF.

Anonymous, you're right about Doc not really being a serious Christian. Anyone who thinks that God is working through the Jehovah's Witnesses, known by everyone to be a cult, to accomplish his purposes is definitely not a Christian, or at most a very ignorant one. Why not say God works through the Moonies and the Satanists too? And let's not leave out the atheists, Communists, and Nazis.

3/1/2001

PJ

Re: What's up Doc?

Yeah, Dr. John Lee's family came back, but they were sort of pushed out to the DePaul chapter. David Jung's family also comes to mind, though I don't know if they could be categorized as former reformers.

3/2/2001

x=ubf member

Re: What's up Doc?

My understanding is that Doc John Lee was not pushed out to go to De Paul, also is my understanding that the one that insisted on comming back to ubf after the 89 reform was his wife. He was very much for going to De Paul, this way he would be a little indenpendent from SL, maybe this way he could put up with him. I just hope that the real estate that he bought is in his name only, since he sold his house to buy it.

3/9/2001

UBF member

Re: Doctrine

Dear Theologian, you paint a one-color picture of UBF as a brainwashed anti-church like cult. As with all "simple explanations" this is not the full picture.
I think you get the full picture if you recognize one particularity in UBF, namely that it's "official" teaching is pretty much different from it's practices and "unspoken rules". As already mentioned somewhere, unspoken rules are often much stronger than rules spoken out. But on the other side, as soon as you speak them out, they become evidently false and even ridiculous, so they are sometimes called "cannot-speak-rules". The official statement of faith is very orthodox. Bible study is mostly ok. Grace, love, forgiveness, Holy Spirit, "obey God more than men" etc. IS PREACHED IN UBF and taught in bibles studies. Anyway, we read the bible in UBF, and the bible has it's own power. You cannot neglect this. The problem is, that through the unspoken rules and authoritative structure, all those teachings are one level below. Effectively, in the end, the cannot-speak-rules rule UBF. There is also another point with the particularity mentioned above: Because there is such a big gap between the "official doctrine" (e.g. we are saved by faith alone) and the "cannot-speak-rules" (e.g. if you don't feed 12 sheep you go to hell), UBF is sort of schizophrenic.
I see already one good effect of reform: Discussing with reformers and reform-oriented coworkers, the traditional UBF members more and more have to speak out their "cannot-speak-rules". But after spoken out, they loose their power. So anti-reformers have already lost much of their authority and influence.

2/26/2001

KJ68

Re: Doctrine

Unfortunately, your proceeding from the presupposition that UBF is a cult and nothing but a cult blinds you as much as you think that the reform people are blinded. I don't want to get into an argument about what a cult is. There are plenty of clear-cut cults out there: the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormon Church, the Unification Church, etc. But I've seen lists of cults on anti-cult web pages that include the likes of CCC, Labri and the Navigators for goodness sakes! It's obvious that some people try very hard to look for a cult within a group of genuine Christians instead of looking for a group of genuine Christians within a cult or cult-like group. I'm going to ask you flat out, have you read the reform documents? Because much of what you posted is already recognized by the reform people. They written plenty about the baggage they have to throw off from their years in UBF. I've heard that in some reform chapters in Korea, there's some awkwardness because the relationship between "shepherd" and "sheep" is being redefined. It's like gaining freedom and trying to figure out what to do with it. It's awkward, but it's also beautiful. Don't you see?

Anonymous

Re: Doctrine

KJ68,

Sorry if it seems like I am attacking UBF. But my job here is not to point out all of the good points about UBF, besides most of the good points are undermined by bad ones.

My main point should not be taken that UBF is an evil place and filled with corrupt people. Rather I know that it is filled with good people who mean well, unfortunetly they are inept at doing good.

I am not trying to say that UBF should be destroyed or that reform is pointless because the reformers are unredeemable, hardly! But what I'm trying to say is that 10 or thirty years of abuse is going to take time to heal. In the interim period UBF should become a Bible study fellowship, and for a time encourage people to attend other churches.

As far as I can see UBF was concerned with people attending its church for several reasons;

1. Numbers
2. The fear that people would run away and join a different church
3. To teach Samuel Lee's teachings in a controlled environment.

Yes, I have read the reform document, all of them. But I am not so immature to assume that this means much more than a hopeful start.

I support the reform, and I know that most of them are good people. My concern is that they have many repressed wounds and inner pain that need time to heal. I am suggesting an interim period whrere reformed chapters can stay together, help each other, and at the same time see the Christian world and make outside connections.

I see the isolationalism of UBF to be one of the reasons it has gotten so far from reality. Don't you think some healing time and outside help could be useful?

2/27/2001

anonymous

Re: Should the reformed UBF be a church?

I wanted to reinforce the message posted by Theologian. I too am a former member of the UBF, but from the Cincinnati chapter. It seems to suffer from all the same issues as the Chicago
group.

I think the reformers are completely missing the point of the reform needed. The unchecked power of the leadership is only a piece of the problem. A real church brings people to an
understanding with God. It does not arrange marriages, trick and manipulate people into membership, destroy loving relationships between students and their families, brainwash its
members to following a single doctrine, or punish or banish people for independent thought.

Until the UBF reformers accept that the basic way the group exists on its most fundamental level is flawed it cannot heal and become a true church. Korean missonaries must acknowledge
their part in the mass failure of UBF in becoming a true church. It became a cult because they have made it into one. People of good conscience have been coerced into selling out Godly
principles to achieve their own goals. Whether or not the UBF disbands is not the issue; I am more concerned about how many more people's lives you are going to ruin, how much more
money are you going to steal in the name of God, and how long are you going to continue serving the wong master.

Wake up and set your sheep and yourselves free!

2/23/2001

Jacob Kim

Re: Should the reformed UBF be a church?

Dear Anonymous,

Thank you for your concerns. I haven't had enough chances to talk to you, but I alredy appreciate you for your challenging remarks, for reformers want to learn and want reform chapters to become learning chapters. I sincerely hope to learn from you in the future. for now, before I get up and go away, let me state briefly that our reform is a radical one, not just denying M. Samuel Lee's wrongs. We want to have a genuine community of Jesus' people and Jesus-learners. We want to reverse many M. Samuel Lee's wrong directions. We want to stregthen individual Christians, Christian families, communities and other local churches. Hope to talk to you soon. Gratefully, Jacob Kim.

3/18/2001

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]