I was surprised to received a call from an elder of the local churches asking me to remove my research article about Witness Lee and his religious group from this site. He asked if we could meet in Metro Manila area. When three of the local churches elders came to meet me along with two of my Christian friends on October 2002, they again requested the removal of my research works about Witness Lee and the Lord’s Recovery, I did not give in to their threat of litigation. One of them mentioned the Lord’s Recovery might sue me for libel. At the back of my mind I mused, “Our country’s judicial body has no time anymore for this ‘religious’ litigation.” In fact, there is nothing libelous in my research material. It’s purely to unveil their heretical doctrines and not to attack or lambaste the personality of their founder. I believed our local judicial body will never entertain such religious complaint. I thought, if that ever happened, then I have the opportunity to inform the Filipino people about their being a cult of Christianity. If they are successful in litigating people in the west, I believed they will not be successful here in our very own country. After all, we are a free nation who practices freedom of religion engaging different people in religious discussion.

One of the Local Church elders also reasoned to this effect: “How come the largest Christian organization in the Philippines embraced us as ‘brothers,’ and you cannot even extend the same hand of fellowship towards us?” I asked, “Is the head of that Christian organization aware that Witness Lee believed Jesus and the Holy Spirit are ‘one person?’ Sure, I would like to sit down with him so I can show proofs that Witness Lee was truly a modalist (‘Oneness’) not an orthodox Trinitarian.” He immediately remained silent and did not want to pursue such dialogue anymore.

Even though Mr. Hank Hanegraaff, Ms. Gretchen Passantino, and the Fuller Theological Seminary endorsed the Lord’s Recovery (a.k.a., Church of Recovery, or Local Churches) as a Christian group, the believers around the world should consider that careful and honest research and opinion of the great majority of Christian scholars, theologians, and apologists concerning the perverted theology of Witness Lee and the Local Churches. Upon reading the booklet of Witness Lee entitled The Organism of the Triune God in the Organic Union of His Divine Trinity, he plainly stated,

Our organic union with the Lord is also in the Spirit. Christ and the Spirit are not two separate persons. They are one person. This is a divine mystery that is beyond human understanding. Christ is the Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45b; 2 Cor. 3:17). The One who did on the cross, resurrected from the dead, and ascended to the heavens is Christ. But this Christ enters into us as the Spirit. When we call ‘O Lord Jesus,’ the Spirit gets into us. 1

Let me hear Mr. Hanegraaff, Ms. Passantino, and the Fuller Theological Seminary people declare this same statement saying: “Christ and the Spirit are not two separate persons. They are one person.” Let’s see them explain if that very statement is orthodox Trinitarianism without beating around the bush. My plea to Mr. Hanegraaff and Ms. Passantino is not to justify the obvious heresy. Mr. Lee and the Lord’s Recovery people are playing with theological words. Unfortunately our brothers and sister fell for it. As Dr. Warren W. Wiersbe clearly explained,

In 2 Peter 2:3, Peter pointed out that the false teachers used “feigned words.” The Greek word plastos, from which we get our English word plastic. Plastic words! Words that can be twisted to mean anything you want them to mean! The false teachers use our vocabulary, but they do not use our dictionary. 2

The Lord’s Recovery people may use the word Trinity, but their “Trinity” is defined differently to suit the ancient heresy of modalism. Whether the Local Church leaders admit it or not, Witness Lee is still a false teacher in light of the Scriptures’ teaching and a “Oneness” teacher in the assessment of numerous conservative evangelicals.