Why I Attended Samuel Lee’s Memorial Service

yRonwad Thicke made this interesting comment about my attendance at Samuel Lee’s memorial service last month: “…most of you continue to engage in this form of idolatry. Even Mr. Toh, who–for all his recent enlightened and reformed thinking–still cannot help but fall on his own sword for Samuel Lee…”

Though I do not know who Ronwad Thicke is, I usually enjoy responding to comments made about me, especially those that are not complementary, because they are simply a lot of fun. I especially love his statement that I “still cannot help but fall on (my) own sword for Samuel Lee.” By the way, I think that some traditional UBFers would love such a statement, though I seriously doubt that they would believe that it is true of me! Anyway, here is my brief response.

I attended the memorial service because I was personally invited to attend by a son-in-law of Samuel Lee who has always treated me graciously and warmly. Did I consider not attending this service? I do not know. But since I was personally invited I did not have any hesitation whatsoever to attend.

Besides being personally invited, why did I attend the memorial service? The primary reason would be the fact that God used Samuel Lee in countless ways to influence me toward a Christ-like life from 1980 when I first became a Christian to 2002 when he died. Though it freaked me out at the time, Lee helped me to marry by faith, which was the best thing I ever did, after accepting Christ as my Lord and Savior. Beyond that, Lee had the single most profound influence on my Christian life. Despite his authoritarianism, his life was the most formative, foundational, positive, spirited and inspiring Christian influence on me. He prompted in me my love, delight and study of Scripture (Ps 1:2). He repeatedly stressed an intentional life lived for the kingdom of God (Mk 1:15) through making disciples (Mt 28:19), which I love to this day. Therefore, in his mentoring of me over the last 22 years of his life, I am profoundly grateful and thankful for his endless and tireless labor, love and prayer for me, my family and my fellowship (1 Th 5:18).

Yes, there are things that I do not agree with nor approve of that were done by him or other UBF leaders, such as recently shared about in Toledo or Yekaterinburg or the way some leaders think that it is their absolute God-given right to dictate and control the marriages of their members in the name of marriage by faith, as though that is an absolute non-negotiable biblical mandate. From time to time I will seriously address them in person, privately, publicly, unashamedly, clearly and repeatedly (much to the chagrin of some current UBF leaders!). UBF should know that they taught me doggedness to the point of death (Rev 2:10)!

I know full well that I am threading a very delicate and fine line. I love my brothers and sisters who are still in UBF. I also love those who were hurt by UBF and have since left UBF. More and more I also wish to get to know and love non-UBF Christians and especially non-Christians. Obviously, I do all of the above imperfectly, poorly and quite messily.

In my mind, I believe that my participation at the memorial service simply reflects my love, gratitude and respect for my former mentor, his family and current UBF people.

I do not believe that I compromised my Christian faith nor advocated bad and unbiblical practices. Am I? If I am, then I stand to be corrected and exhorted (as Ronwad Thicke did).

35 comments

  1. Ben, I do not think you compromised your faith. You acted according to your own conscience. I respect people with a “be your own man” mentality :)

    I cannot say the entire service was biblical, nor am I thankful for my time in ubf or the “training” done to me there. I don’t know much about SLee himself; all I know is that his ideology enslaved me. Now I’m on a journey of recovery from my ubf entanglements during my entire formative years.

    The gravesite group photo each year has become a power-monger’s paradise. Certain ubfers love to take pictures on SLees’ gravsite, almost as a way to inherit his power and glory.

    The memorial service was held in a disrespectful way that dishonors the American soil on which the service was held. The group grave photo was horrific to me. I’m ashamed such an event was held on American soil.

    Now if they had done a private memorial service at a church building and kept it private, instead of publishing the photos and emailing out the graveside lecture summary, then I would not be reacting so strongly.

    And yes I have the summary that was emailed out to people. That summary contradicts what was published for the public to see, as you already know Ben. The lecture given on SLee’s gravesite in 2013 was horrendous. If any American or Russian or Mexican or other non-Korean is in ubf, I suggest getting a copy of what was actually said…

  2. As one who grew up in Southeast Asia for the first 25 years of my life, a memorial service at a grave site is not offensive to me. I may be wrong but I also don’t think that it is offensive to most Asians. I think it simply, mainly or primarily reflects our ethnic cultural biases and preferences.

    For instance, I switch off the moment the weather report comes on during the news because I never heard nor cared about weather reports growing up. But my wife perks up whenever the weather report segment begins and I think that that is really kind of odd and silly. So I always tease her for being so alert and attentive over a boring weather report, while she starts talking to me intentionally whenever I the sports report come on! You can surmise that our love language is to annoy each other.

    Regarding the “horrendous lecture,” you are right that no American or non-missionary or even 2nd gen will like it. That was why the offensive parts were edited out.

  3. So then, this memorial service is a perfect test case or snapshot of both the cultural layer and the ideological layer of problems in the ubf ministry.

    In regard to culture: As “missionaries” to America, why would the Korean not respect the culture they are living in? Furthermore, why would the Koreans insist on their Western hosts adopting to their Eastern ways? Missionaries who are ambassadors of Christ don’t persuade the host culture to confrom to the sending culture, yet that is what this memorial service does.

    In regard to ideology: As “missionaries” to America, why do they teach that “true succession” in ministry should not go to the host country people? Why do the ubf Koreans continue to teach that succession in ministry leadership is about passing on the SLee heritage and imitating the ubf context only? Missionaries who are ambassadors of Christ don’t teach succession this way, yet that is one of the messages from this graveside service.

  4. Great questions that certainly deserves answers, Brian. As my previous post based on a book review suggests (http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/09/why-churches-stop-growing/), the problems in UBF are clearly not confined to UBF, or to Korean missionaries, or to ethnic churches, but are a systemic problem of many churches, likely throughout 2,000 years of church history.

    You will find surprisingly similar problems experienced by British missionaries and their “native sheep” in the early 1900s in Roland Allan’s classic book, Missionary Methods.

    That said, each church, ministry and generation would need to courageously and transparently address and respond to the questions that you posed. I believe that they need to be continually asked until genuine dialogue and interaction and communication occurs.

  5. Ben,

    Ps. 1:1 might be a good place to start looking for an answer to your question. This verse does not have exception for dear mentor’s grave ceremony or his relаtive’s invitation.

  6. Hi AndreyP,

    I have very little doubt that you and likely countless others have been very much hurt, insulted, dehumanized, treated like slaves and servants, and condescended upon by certain UBF missionaries, that can be directly or indirectly attributed to the teachings and influence of Lee.

    Personally, I am very very sorry for this, as a long-standing member of UBF. I have no words that can be of much comfort, consolation or healing for you and others, though I believe that our gracious God through his Son and by his Spirit has given you much consolation and healing by his grace.

    I personally believe that more and more UBF missionaries are beginning to realize and even acknowledge the error of their reprehensible and inexcusable elitist and imperialistic ways.

    But sadly, there will likely be some missionaries who may never ever realize or acknowledge how rude, disrespectful and offensive they may have been this side of the eschaton. Though I believe that most of them are still Christians, it is a blind spot and a sin for which grace was insufficient to lead them to repentance.

    Sorry for my long elaborate comment in response to your short comment.

    • Ben,

      Next time it is better to skip the part about my wounds and healing for two reasons. First, I left ubf not because of what was done to me but of what was done to others. Second, it will instantly make your posts shorter.

      As Brian told us he was enslaved by SL ideology. We know that ubf ideology enslaved thousands of bright people who never met with SL or saw him only a few times in their lives. One example is a Moscow-3 shepherd whose sogam can be found right now on the first page of ubf site. He is a Moscow state university graduate. Once he was bright. But then he too was enslaved by ubf ideology. Let me show to the what extent. Recently one shepherdess from Moscow-1 ubf chapter called their home to greed his wife a happy birthday. When he picked up the phone the very first thing he asked was whether she got a permission from a missionaries of Moscow-3 ubf chapter to call their home or not. And he was not a joking. This is just another evidence of how powerful and evil ubf ideology and practices are. SL invented and developed them all his life. And this very person was your mentor for 22 years.

      Do you think that aberration in your thinking and ethics caused by his direct mentorship is less than that of Moscow-3 shepherd, Brian, Chris or me? Or do you think you restored faster than others? I wish it would the case. But what I see even in this post: adoration of SL, caring for ubf top managers and not for the members, and even the way you hold a discussion are still looks ubf-aberrated.

      The way how you adore your mentor is your personal matter. I agree with that. But when you attend public adoration ceremony on his graveyard and silently participate in praising him (we all know there were nothing except praise) this is unfair to all victims of organization he established. Previous and current ones. One could do that only being indifferent to all of this victims.

      Unfortunately adoration of leaders and indifference to ordinary memebers are also included in ubf heritage. Next time you will think about «showing unconditional love» to ubf top managers, please consider also showing some love to that Moscow-3 shepherd or any other victims of your mentor ideology. You may also think about newcomers. BTW, did I miss your answer on my question of what you feel when you see them in ubf?

      I appreciate your effort to make Chris’ posts being heard by broad ubf audience even I do not agree with your assessment of his tone. I do not see any anger in his words – just facts unbearable for ubf defenders. I hope that you corrects ubf managers with the same zeal your show on this forum, starting from explaining them that having two versions of the grave message – public and elite one – is a kind of ungodly and scornful. Otherwise, you are not consistent.

      From this post we all know how you love SL. I would apprecite if you let us know what did you do with the case of two versions of the grave message as a current member of you mentor organisation with access to its top managers.

    • “Next time it is better to skip the part about my wounds and healing for two reasons. First, I left ubf not because of what was done to me but of what was done to others.”

      Thanks, Andrey. I could not agree more with this remark! It always bothers me to read that we left because of what has been done to us or that we are bitter for what has been done to us as if this was only a personal matter. Yes, mean things have been done to me and my wife while we were in UBF. But we stayed anyway. We only left later, and the reason we left was that all the unethical and unbiblical things suddenly were revealed during the reform movement, together with the fact that UBF was unwilling to do anything about these things, they would neither admit anything, nor apologize, nor change anything, nor discuss anything, but rather cover up or slander the critics. That was the reason we left. Not our personal hurt.

      On the other hand, I see UBF members defend UBF by pointing out what has been done to them personally and how everything is fine in their life and their UBF chapter, without caring for what has been done to others worldwide or theunethical behavior the top leadership now and in the past.

      I don’t understand why UBFers always reduce everything to the personal level (for themselves or for Ex-UBFers) and don’t care for the other people and whether things are ethical and biblical or not.

    • Chris, thanks, I agree. Indeed this way of thinking is so widespread among ubf members it can be considered as their hallmark. It is definitely the result of long term staying in a cult. May be not enough attention was given to this phenomenon.

      I also wander on what are the reasons of this kind of thinking of ubf long term members. I think the main reason is inability to love. When a person joins ubf usually he is young and immature. All he knows at this age about love is his parents or siblings love. But after joining ubf all connections to relatives and friends gets limited sometimes to the point of nothing. If some amount of love is transmitted to him by limited relations – it is always considered as being worldly or even sinful. What ubf barters him? It implants him into the structure where two majors types of relations are supported – submission to leaders and dominance over sheep. What is considered love and love expression to God and to neighbours in this structure? To accept a mission, to give and to accept training, to rise 1:1 numbers, to bring more money, to bring more sheep to the conference. If he gets married he is married to a person also immersed in the same kind of relations not to mention active participation of outsiders in every ubf marriage. (Only years after we left I come to know of what my wife really felt when we were in ubf.) So despite countless bible studies there are very very few chances in ubf to experience and come to know of what the love is. I do know people in ubf often write in their sogams and reports they experience God’s love every week through bible study, ubf conference or their shepherd care. If so, why they so indifferent?

      Finally we get what we have – a group of indifferent people talking in biblical language. They don’t care for what is happening to others right in front their eyes. If someone’s personality or family is crashed next door to them they simply do not care. But they become very active if their neighbours start to criticise organisation. They call themselves history makers while taking care nothing for what has happened in their organisation just two or three days ago.

      Now I better understand why you and others appear space aliens to them when you ask about previous reform attempts and why I appear a foreigner talking unknown language when I ask about newcomers. It is sad to see Christians to have ethics like this. I am confident that loving God with all one’s heart and loving neighbour as one love oneself have nothing common with indifference and ethics of this kind.

  7. Joe Schafer

    I think it’s a matter of personal judgment whether attending an event like this one can do more harm than good. Reasonable people will disagree, and that’s ok. Judging from the uncensored report about what was said, I would have found many aspects of the graveside service highly objectionable, and I’m glad that I was not there. But Ben’s relationships and roles are different from mine, and I believe he followed his conscience.

    Back in 1982, Billy Graham caused an uproar by visiting the Soviet Union. Some Christians thought (and still think) it was wrong, but others say that it opened doors for Russians to hear the gospel.

    I appreciate what Psalm 1:1 says, but I’m also aware that Jesus regularly associated with tax collectors and public sinners, and he did so before they repented, not after.

  8. I’d like to know whether the person who clicked “dislike” did not like that you did not attend or that you somehow defended the attendants. Anyway, though I don’t “dislike” your posting, I cannot follow your argumentation.

    Concerning the Billy Graham argument: Billy Graham made a preaching tour to the Soviet Union. He did not go there on the 1st of May Parade to watch the weapons and listen to the praises of communism. That would have been more analogous to attending the founders day ceremony.

    (By the way, I’d like to know how you think about Rodman’s visit of Kim Jong Un, and making friends with him, without addressing any of the problems. Personally, that behavior nauseated me.)

    Unfortunately, I can’t follow your Biblical argumentation either:

    “I appreciate what Psalm 1:1 says, but I’m also aware that Jesus regularly associated with tax collectors and public sinners,”

    Yes, Joe, with tax collectors and public sinners. Which is a very different group from the leadership elite of UBF who profess to be holier than anybody else, the green berets of Christendom and the teachers and shepherds of the university student elite, able to train them, give them “spiritual orientiation” and demand obedience. If you want to compare them with people of Jesus’ times, they are more like the pharisees. And I don’t see where Jesus associated with them, quite to the contrary, he very directly and openly rebuked them in Mt 23. The Bible says we shall not associate with those who call themselves brothers and still continue to sin, refusing to repent for obvious sin, not to speak of those who not only call themselves brothers, but “shepherds” and “teachers”. Just read 1 Cor 5:9-13 or 2 Jo 1:10 or Mt 18:17. If people in the church continue to sin and refuse to be corrected and repent for very obvious sins, then this is a big issue, not something to turn a blind eye. The fact that they claim to be Christians does not speak for them, but against them, because they know the truth and refuse to obey it. I know there is the excuse that they “just have a blind spot” and don’t see their sin because they are Koreans. But I don’t buy it. So many Koreans in UBF saw the problems very clearly and wrote about it, just think of the 1976 letter and the letters that have been writte by the late James Kim and others in the 1980s and 1990s. Misappropriation of money, forced abortions, emotional and physical torture in the name of training, lying etc. are all things that everybody understands are wrong and sinful. It’s not something subtle that they just are not aware of. It’s plain pride and unrepentance. Unrepentance is the only sin that has no cure. Probably the “unforgivable sin” is just unrepentance, refusing to listen to the voice of the Spirit calling to repent for dedaces. And you surely will not help unrepentant people by associating with them and pretending everything is normal.

    • Joe Schafer

      Chris, I never said it was a good idea to be “associating with them and pretending everything is normal.” I haven’t been doing that, and neither has Ben.

      By now you should know that I have no intention of defending ubf’s leaders in regard to any of the things that you mentioned. Now, on the rare occasions that I do see them, I make it very clear that the status quo is unacceptable and changes must be made.

      The only point that I wished to make was this. I don’t want to judge Ben for going, just as I don’t want him to judge me for not going. Ben is obeying his conscience and trying to follow God’s leading in these matters.

      I agree that many ubf leaders resemble the pharisees of Jesus’ day. And Jesus sometimes associated with pharisees.

    • Joe, I know that. I don’t judge you or Ben. I know that you are speaking up. Still, attending such an event is a decision I personally would not make and personally cannot understand. It’s an event where the one person in UBF is praised and remembered who was most authoritarian, abusive, inaccountable and unrepentant. There is no sense in attending such an event for anybody.

  9. Recently I saw this picture of Kim Jong Un surrounded by some of his lieutenants (the news were about public executions going on in North Korea in order to intimidate the people). Somehow, this picture immediately reminded me of UBF. Note how the dear leader stands alone “explaining” while all the others listen as if God is speaking to them. Note how everyone of them is holding a pen and a notebook. I remember how I got a severe bollocking (sorry for my British) in front of all when I failed to have a pen and paper ready during a journey when our dear national direcor Abraham Lee gave his prayer topics while waiting for a bus. It’s a combination of adoration and subservience that is expected of the members. Now that Samuel Lee is dead only the adoration part is left over, but you can see it all the more clearly. I would not want to be part in that kind of leadership worship.

  10. By the way, I never heared that UBFers held similar meetings at graveyards for anybody, not for those who “buried there bones in the mission field”, not for the unborn babies who were aborted, not for those who commited suicide because UBF could not help them adequately but pushed them even more into depression and feelings of guilt and religious paranoia, not for those who tragically died of cancer in their young age while serving UBF. Only for the dear leader. So don’t tell me it’s a “tradition” in UBF to come together on graveyards. It’s not. Some were even told to not attend the funeral of their relatives when it concurred with a UBF conference or worship service, quoting Luke 9:16.

    The only graveyard ceremony I ever heared of was one for a young missionary who tragically died in the early 1980s in Germany in a car crash while going to a UBF conference together with her husband and two students. Her UBF name was Monica. As far as I remember only her husband survived. He re-married and is still in Cologne UBF. But the ceremony was held only after more than 20 years, and I think it was the only occasion where CMI and UBF came together. Probably both had a bad conscience about the event and the fact that they never processed it appropriately. But of course you will not read such things in the UBF newsletter. It was always kept somewhat secret, probably because it also did not fit into the teachings of Samuel Lee who preached things like that those who do not follow the UBF calling experience accidents and those who follow it are blessed.

  11. Chris, I hope that you do not think that I am judging you. But don’t you think that you are doing to “them” almost exactly what you feel they did to you and others? Your angst, anger and intolerance toward “them” is exploding through your words (even if that is not what you may be feeling when you write them).

    I agree with almost all of your complaints and disagreements. But if your tone and manner of expression in your words is the way they have been, then I think that it will only fall on deaf ears (which I guess you do not care).

    As someone said to me, “UBFriends complains that UBF is boring and predictable. But UBFriends is also boring and predictable.” Honestly, I tend to agree. Sinners, including “them” respond primarily to unconditional love and grace of the gospel. Jesus even died for the Pharisees with brokenness and compassion.

    BTW, I am mainly preaching this to myself and not really to anyone else.

    • Angst? I do not have angst at all. Yes, I’m angry about these people, and yes, I am intolerant towards their way of practicing Christianity because it harmed and still harms people. Also, I like people who are predictable. If someone in the church sins openly and refuses to repent, then the Apostle Paul predictably challenged that person. He did not say one day this and one day another thing. I don’t understand why being predictable should be a bad thing. Since the issue of UBF stays the same, my reaction towards it stays the same. The tone and manner of expression in Jesus words towards the Pharisees in Mt 23 was not milder than mine. He did not care whether he fell on deaf ears. Just like John the Baptist when he preached against sin. I am very compassionate and tolerant with ordinary sinners, but I am intolerant with those who claim to be God’s servants and use their self-given autority to push their agenda on others.

    • “Angst” means “a feeling of anxiety, apprehension, or insecurity”.

      Knowing Chris a little bit better these days, I would say Chris does NOT have angst.

      In fact, angst is the best word to describe my primary feeling during my 24 years in ubf. Ex-ubfers commonly report losing angst and gaining a tremendous sense of security and peace and freedom, even though some trauma triggers do flare up from time to time, expressed as anger. But angst is not normally associated with former members of ubf except for a brief period rather soon after leaving (like wondering how it could be that I am a Christian and not “in” ubf).

  12. Even if Samuel Lee was every bit the angel of God that he is portrayed to be by his devotees in UBF, the level of adoration for a person that is exemplified by this “memorial service” should make any normal Christian leader raise an eyebrow in concern, even leaders steeped in Korean culture.

    Ben, do you think Samuel Lee would have wanted these large memorial services to be held every year in his honor. And do you think he would have approved of your many words praising him?

    • Ben, do you think Samuel Lee would have wanted these large memorial services to be held every year in his honor. And do you think he would have approved of your many words praising him? – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#more-7170

      I’ll admit these were both loaded questions. I was around Mr. Lee just as long as you were, Ben. And I am certain that the answer to both questions above would be YES. Yes, Mr. Lee would have wanted these large memorial services, and yes, he craved being honored by men and the praise of men. My motive isn’t to attack you. It’s to point out this unhealthy culture of leader adoration/veneration/worship–whatever you want to call it–that was pushed in UBF by Mr. Lee. It goes hand-in-hand with the authoritarianism that you rightly acknowledge exists in UBF.

      FWIW, as someone who attended one more UBF international conference than you did this year, I’m not one to “condemn” you for attending that “memorial service”. We both have our reasons, and we both walk a fine line.

  13. @Sibboleth, “Ben, do you think Samuel Lee would have wanted these large memorial services to be held every year in his honor. And do you think he would have approved of your many words praising him?” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#comment-11428

    “No” to your first question.

    Regarding my “words praising him” I honestly did not think I was praising him. I am simply honestly expressing his impact and influence upon my life. I am sorry if this is too hard for some to hear this, but that is the simple truth. God used Lee to influence and shape my life more than anyone else. By saying this I am not saying that I will not speak out strongly against the things Lee said and did that were obviously hurtful and harmful, which I already have countless times, both in private and in public.

    Whether or not Lee or anyone else would approve or disapprove of what I write means little to me. It does not mean that I refuse to hear or consider what others say or think. In fact, I read and consider everything others say as much as I can. But ultimately I will decide to do or say what I believe, regardless of the approval or disapproval of others and regardless of the agreement or disagreement of others. The only time I might hedge on this a little bit and concede is with my wife! because “a happy wife is a happy life.” I believe all you husbands out there know this to be true!

    • “God used Lee to influence and shape my life more than anyone else.”

      Did he shape it for the good or for the worse, Ben? When Lee was still around, you followed his style of spiritual abuse. You were part in the cover up of misconduct of Lee’s daughter and the terrible handling of Hazel’s marriage. During the reform movement, you actively hindered progress. You saw that there was unaccountable dealing with money by Lee, but you did nothing to change it. Later you did similar things yourself as you confessed. So, from an outside observer, Lee had a really bad influence on your life. Only recently you could free yourself from this ideology. Your preaching and conduct became better only after Lee was not around anymore. Strangely, I don’t see that you are as thankful to those who helped you seeing these problems, as you are still thankful to the one who implanted all these false ideas in your mind in the first place and made you a slave of a system.

      Yes, Lee gave some people some love and some money. But it is easy to do that it you don’t have a day job, don’t need to care for your living, have all these people serving you and can deal with the offering money as you like. Again, I don’t see that those who got money from Lee praise the generousness of those who offered that money in the first place; they only praise the generousness of Lee who used it as if it was his own. Lee never worked with his own hands like Paul or Jesus, yet he claimed to have learned from them and be a “tentmaker”. Lee also provided some with good wives or husbands. But again, it is not the task as a spiritual leader to play matchmaker, particularly not if the same spiritual leader first enforces rules to make sure that no dating is allowed and people have no other chance to marry than through the dear leader. And if you want to thank Lee for this, then you have to also blame him for the many failed marriages, divorces and horrible matches. Again, I don’t see this happening with UBF people. They are just lucky when they had a good marriage, but don’t care what happened to others.

      Also, even if Lee had done so many good things which I believe is not true, it simply does not outweigh the evil. Sin cannot be outweighed by doing good things, but only be dealt with through repentance. Since Lee never repented, personally I do not even consider him a Christian. The hallmark of Christians is repentance. A Christian who is unable to do this is no Christian. .A year before his death Lee told the reformers “only God can punish me if I am wrong”. These are not words of a Christian, but words of an egomaniac, unaccountable cult leader. And even if your measuring stick is lower, you should still admit that a Christian who refuses to repent is not somebody who should be publicly praised as a role model. And that event was nothing else than public praise of Lee and reinforcement of the Lee heritage. The UBF news reported about it etc. and exploited the number of attendants as proof of how the top UBFers still agree with the leadership style of Lee.

      It’s something completely different whether you just want to point out some good things that Lee did or whether you attend such an event, which is always a public statement. It relays the message that you condone not only with what Lee did in his life but also the way how he is worshipped today, without dealing with his failures and how the evil in his ideology is never addressed. There was a brave man, James Kim who served diligently with his wife, using his own money and not offering money, who wrote several letters to challenge the Lee ideology and helped so many UBFers see the problems. Why are these brave people not memorized, but Lee is memorized instead? Don’t you see that this bothers us?

  14. Am I incorrect to say this? Some (perhaps and especially those who read and comment on UBFriends) think that because Samuel Lee said and did some horribly bad things, then all his “good things” should be negated, disregarded, ignored, never mentioned again and always taken with a grain of salt.

    This is what I perceive because whenever I say anything that is “positive” about Lee, I get much kick back. The response I receive is virtually similar to Samuel Lee supporters and loyalists in UBF whenever I say anything that is “negative” about him.

    That is why I made my comment that Chris and others are responding to anything positive about Samuel Lee in the same strong way (with all kinds of ad hominems and caricatures) as UBF lovers and loyalists respond to anything negative that I say about Lee. Am I wrong?

    • Ben, I clicked “disklike” on this comment.

      I’ll try to explain why more clearly. You are correct about the paradigm where exubfers can sometimes fall into the same trap that ubfers do, but only in reverse. That is a correct observation.

      But I clicked dislike because making that observation in the context of your article about the memorial service is highly irritating to both former members and current members.

      Furthermore, the issue here about the memorial service is not whether a person’s bad deeds outweigh his good deeds, but whether we should be praising a man’s good deeds with folding chairs and 132 people on his grave 11 years after he died.

      Like I said before, I respect your decision-making based on your own conscience. But how can your conscience be ok with a public graveside praise service? Does that really happen in Eastern cultures?

      So in other words, if the same service had been held privately in a building somewhere, and you attended that, I would not be so agitated by the event, namely because I probably wouldn’t have known about it.

      I guess that’s the issue for me: I would plead with ubf to stop making these “founder’s day/memorial service” events public. Because of Slee’s bad deeds, those who praise him must do so in private in my opinion.

      And yes I do believe what you say: “Some (perhaps and especially those who read and comment on UBFriends) think that because Samuel Lee said and did some horribly bad things, then all his “good things” should be negated, disregarded, ignored, never mentioned again and always taken with a grain of salt.”

      Now that is something I would agree to. I will always take the words of any ubfer with a grain of salt. And yes, Slee’s good things should be negated, disregarded, ignored and never mentioned again. Is that not the Christian thing to do? Why does ubf spend so much time praising each other anyway?

      Romans 3:1-31 and the messages of the gospel further explain why I hate the annual Slee praiseology and all the flattery and self-glorification that goes on in ubf. And this thinking is not the reverse-ubf mindset but an entirely new mindset.

      And Romans 3:8 describes my entire ubf experience. The ubf ideology I drunk up like koolaid essentially taught me “Let us do evil that good may result”. And the Slee services send that message to us former members loud and clear.

  15. Among some UBF lovers, I am bitter, immature, disloyal, negative, discouraging, not UBF, uncommited, critical, etc.

    Among some UBFrienders, maybe I am blind, loyal, brainwashed, stuck in the (UBF) box, flattering (to Lee), a typical UBFer, etc.

    Can I possibly be both?

    • “Among some UBFrienders, maybe I am blind, loyal, brainwashed, stuck in the (UBF) box, flattering (to Lee), a typical UBFer, etc.”

      I’m not sure who would think of you like that after all you have written here. Personally, I don’t think like that, be assured.

      I’m just reminded of how deep the manipulation of Lee and other UBF leaders was in making people believe they owe them everything (their life, their spouse, their salvation), while downplaying all the other influence in your life (the love of your parents, friends, education by teachers, direct leading by God and the Holy Spirit). That’s the evil “now you owe me” trick of UBF: Give people the impression (using methods of mind control and coercive persuasion) that they owe all these things to you, and then you are free to to everything, people will always defend you and you will be praised even after your death, no matter how bad you behaved. This manipulation goes very deep, it has been deeply implanted into your mind and soul. So I don’t judge you for that, it just reminds me of the manipulative capabilities of UBF leaders like Samuel Lee or Peter Chang in Bonn. You can see this trick at work in every cult.

  16. Joe Schafer

    Ben, you are not wrong. I’m glad that you are sticking to your guns and continuing to say what you believe about SL. You take on him is a bit different from mine, because your experience of him was different from mine. Regardless of what people may say about you, are not judging him from a distance. You knew him well and witnessed many of the things he did with your own eyes.

    I’m reminded of what people say about Herbert W. Armstrong, the controversial founder of the Worldwide Church of God. He was not equivalent to SL. But after his passing, the leaders of the church (especially his successor) came to recognize that many of his teachings and practices were seriously off-base and unbiblical. The church experienced corporate repentance and apologized for its wrongdoings, but the process was rocky and many loyalists refused to go along. Armstrong’s successor, Joseph Tkach, wrote a book about it, which is available for free on the internet. His final chapter was his own assessment of the late founder. He begins the chapter this way:

    I’ll be honest with you: This chapter is the hardest one in the whole book for me to write. There are many reasons why this is so.

    First, Mr. Armstrong himself was a very complex man. It’s not always easy to understand the motivations that drove him or the influences that helped shape him. He could be both loving and harsh, gracious and antagonistic, humble and proud. He is not an easy man to categorize.

    Second, my task in this chapter is difficult because I know my readers come from one of at least two vastly different audiences. One group is made up of people who greatly admire Mr. Armstrong and everything he said. They will be watching closely to see if I attack my former mentor and spiritual leader. The other group is at the other end of the spectrum. Its members want me to denounce Mr. Armstrong, to call him a false prophet who led thousands of people into serious spiritual error.

    I am afraid that I will disappoint both groups, for I won’t be taking either of these two options. I intend neither to canonize Mr. Armstrong as a sinless saint nor to condemn him as a hateful heretic. My goal is to try to come to some understanding of who he was as a man and as a leader, as well as to see how he laid the foundation for where we stand today in the Worldwide Church of God. It is necessary to be honest about the errors that he taught, yet it is appropriate to show respect to him as the founder of a movement that taught Jesus as being the only name under heaven by which we can be saved.

    Regardless of what you may personally think of Herbert W. Armstrong, one fact is incontrovertible: The overriding reason our reforms have developed and taken root is that Mr. Armstrong himself always insisted that those who want to follow God must find out what God’s Word really says, then go and do it. As we have followed his instruction in the past few years, we have discovered many things in our church that needed to be changed.

    The full chapter is available here:
    http://www.gci.org/aboutus/truth12

  17. Thanks, Joe, for sharing this. Joseph Tkach virtually took the words out of my own mouth! I have simply replaced Armstrong’s name with Lee, and Worldwide church with UBF.

    “(Lee) could be both loving and harsh, gracious and antagonistic, humble and proud. He is not an easy man to categorize.

    I know my readers come from one of at least two vastly different audiences. One group is made up of people who greatly admire (Lee) and everything he said. They will be watching closely to see if I attack my former mentor and spiritual leader. The other group is at the other end of the spectrum. Its members want me to denounce (Lee), to call him a false prophet who led thousands of people into serious spiritual error.

    I am afraid that I will disappoint both groups, for I won’t be taking either of these two options. I intend neither to canonize (Lee) as a sinless saint nor to condemn him as a hateful heretic. My goal is to try to come to some understanding of who he was as a man and as a leader, as well as to see how he laid the foundation for where we stand today in (UBF). It is necessary to be honest about the errors that he taught, yet it is appropriate to show respect to him as the founder of a movement that taught Jesus as being the only name under heaven by which we can be saved.”
    – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#comment-11446

    Yes, it will be very very painful for some readers of UBFriends to hear, because they have primarily experienced the gut-wrenching agony, pain and abuse of certain UBF missionaries and chapter directors on so many people while they were in UBF, and they virtually lay all of the blame on Lee. Personally, I would rather call out the individual offenders who are still alive and in prominent leadership positions, because even if they were greatly influenced by Lee, yet they are 100% fully responsible for adopting those teachings and practices.

  18. In this comment where I received 5 dislikes, I asked two questions:

    “Am I incorrect to say this? Some (perhaps and especially those who read and comment on UBFriends) think that because Samuel Lee said and did some horribly bad things, then all his “good things” should be negated, disregarded, ignored, never mentioned again and always taken with a grain of salt.

    “That is why I made my comment that Chris and others are responding to anything positive about Samuel Lee in the same strong way (with all kinds of ad hominems and caricatures) as UBF lovers and loyalists respond to anything negative that I say about Lee. Am I wrong?” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#comment-11471

    I think this is the first time I received 5 dislikes in any comment or article. This is fun and telling! Also there were 3 consecutive dislikes of another comment of mine and of Joe’s insightful comment of how people responded to Armstrong’s Worldwide church ministry that was also accused of being a cult, yet strongly defended by loyal members. I think we are onto some interesting and unfamiliar territory here.

    I asked two questions in my comment above that perhaps is too hard for UBFrienders to answer: “Am I incorrect to say this? Am I wrong?” Maybe you did answer, but the answer included ad hominems and caricatures, something exUBFers often accuse UBF lovers for doing.

    • Ben, I was not one of the dislikers, but I think the reason why your comment was disliked is because you somehow created a red herring when you claimed you were criticized for saying something positive about Samuel Lee, when in reality you were only criticized for attending this dubious event. Also, you fell back to the “your tone is not appropriate” argument again. Please see it positively: People on this forum seem to want moving up in the disagreement hierarchy and dislike if we accidentally fall back to the lower levels again.

    • Joe Schafer

      Here is one of the many reasons why, I believe, that comments about the legacy of SL will produce strongly divergent reactions.

      Some people believe that they were helped by SL and that he influenced them in positive ways. (One could argue that they are mistaken, but they believe it nevertheless.)

      And SL hurt many people as well — some by his direction action, others indirectly through the influence of his teachings and practices.

      By and large, those who are in the first group have ordered their lives in such a way that they rarely see or encounter or talk to those who are in the second group. They don’t really have a clue how large that second group is. They are surrounded by people who continue to put positive spin on SL’s legacy. So when they encounter strong criticism of SL, they tend to think that they criticism is unbalanced, extreme and over-the-top, because the many who were directly or indirectly hurt by SL and his ministry are largely invisible to them.

  19. “Here is one of the many reasons why, I believe, that comments about the legacy of SL will produce strongly divergent reactions.”

    Fully agree with your explanation.

    “They don’t really have a clue how large that second group is.”

    And they don’t have a clue how deep the damage is that Lee did directly to people and indirectly through establishing the unhealthy system in which authoritarian leaders and unbiblical practices could flourish. They also don’t see the many unnecessary splits and divisions and quarelling caused by him and his way of leadership, up to the quarelling that is going on here on this forum. Many don’t even know what happened in 1976 or 2001. Sadly, they don’t even want to know. They just don’t care.

  20. “They don’t really have a clue how large that second group is.” And they don’t have a clue how deep the damage is… – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#comment-11482

    And the damage is not just deep and wide, but also ongoing. Let’s widen the timespan to include 2013. How many ubf people really know what is going on outside their little sphere within their chapter? Did anyone ever look into the sexual abuse allegations, etc. in Taiwan ubf?

    I’ve been dialoging with a young man who is considered a “shepherd” in the “common life house”. Yet he didn’t understand how marriage-by-faith works. He is now questioning the Korean missionary teachings, but would not have found out many things if not for this blog and our dialogues.

    So the tentacles of the ubf heritage system Slee invented back in 1961 is reaching into the lives of young adults today. At least now this blog reveals much of the system and let’s people decide for themselves.

  21. Hi Ben! I have been away for a few days so no, I am not one who has disliked any of your comments. However, I will say something generally by observation. I believe most of the ‘regulars’ use the Like buttons. But I believe that the Unlike buttons are used by silent readers where the ‘regulars’ will generally post a comment expressing disagreement in kind. (Correct me if I am wrong.)

    Do I think that Ben Toh was wrong for visiting the gravesite of an old friend? Absolutely not! Do I think he needs to justify why he did so? Again, absolutely not!

    What I do get from the present atmosphere is plain and simple. Do not condone such events as ‘Founder’s Day’ or anything that requires a group attendance for memorial and worship of the founder. I hazzard to post the kind of hostility that might occur when SB finally does pass away. How many will demonstrate their devotion? How many will condemn those who did so? Personally let it go if you were hurt. Those that are moved so, are going to gather together in remembrance. I know many people have been hurt, but so have I via the heritage and system.

    I think the crisis of Ben Toh is also related to the voice of Ben Toh. Ben Toh has an apparant influence for the factioning long standing UBFers. Ben, you are indeed a prominent voice for change alongside people like Joe. It is a shame that you cannot do what compels you without being judged.

    People! Would it be better if Ben went privately and quietly in his own time to visit SL’s grave in remembrance? In this way he could do so in good conscience without participating in the group gathering at the grave site. OR! Is it just the fact that he chose to go and remember SL – Who, as Ben has explained was many things including a friend.

    I am neither a supporter of Ben’s actions nor a critic. I never knew SL. But I have known many directors and leaders who remember him. I have been affected both negatively and positively from the system that he created.

    If you asked me I would say do not do it – the only thing separating the event from traditional ancestor worship was that I could not see any food littered around the grave in the photo. But, I would never stop anyone from visiting in their own personal time to remember.

    Like or dislike my comment, I am not so concerned about that. What I do want to see is an acceptance that Ben has acted according to his conscience. Let us remember these primary articles from Ben (where, yes, Ben Toh had to justify and explain himself):
    http://www.ubfriends.org/2011/01/03/why-samuel-lee-was-deified-and-demonized/
    http://www.ubfriends.org/2012/08/24/samuel-lee-was-not-overbearing/
    http://www.ubfriends.org/2012/08/27/my-original-intent/

  22. Thanks, gc. I probably would not have gone if I was not personally invited. As it is many UBF lovers already want nothing to do with me. Many whom I have known for 2-3 decades have “unfriended” me on facebook, or they refuse my friend request. They cannot bear to see or read my blogs that I post on facebook, because it is highly disturbing to them. They feel both hurt and angry. I understand how much pain and betrayal they feel from me. Yet, they are still my friends and they are still Christians with some blind spots just like everyone else on UBFriends (unless some on UBFriends think they do not have any blind spots).

    I went to the memorial not to condone ancestor worship. That wasn’t even in my conscious thought. It was certainly not to endorse the abusive things that SL did. I am sorry for those who link my attendance to the service with hero worship or with condoning UBF abuses.

    Just as Joe posted about Armstrong, UBF lovers and haters, cannot agree that Lee, an influencial leader like Armstrong, “could be both loving and harsh, gracious and antagonistic, humble and proud. He is not an easy man to categorize.” – See more at: http://www.ubfriends.org/2013/11/12/why-i-attended-samuel-lees-memorial-service/#comment-11486

    UBF lovers only think of Lee as loving, gracious and humble (plus tons more positive Christ-like attributes), while becoming very very angry with Lee critics and with UBFriends for repeatedly tarnishing their hero, mentor and loving friend.

    UBFriends only think of Lee as harsh, antagonistic and proud (plus tons more sinful attributes), while becoming very angry with anything they think continues to promote the goodness of Lee or UBF, including attending a memorial service.

    My personal opinion is that both positions are quite similar at the opposite extreme. It is also unloving to those who still can’t see as clearly as you want them to see it, as Joe’s latest comment suggests. Forcing them to see how horrible Lee or UBF is is not going to help them see anymore than they want to.

    Just as I want to be friends with exUBFers, I also want to be friends with UBF lovers, many of whom cannot see how bad Lee was or how bad UBF is no matter how much you or I keep “bashing” Lee and UBF. They have heard it ad nauseam already, and now refuse to hear it anymore. So, I just wish to be friends with them and not attack them. I can even attend a memorial service with the attitude of a friend who also loves our former pastor. Hopefully, if they soften their hearts, we can meet face to face again and talk again rationally and unemotionally.