Posts Tagged ‘revisionism’

"We’ve changed, not that we needed to change."

September 1, 2004

My response to UBF’s “we’ve changed” argument (again, an argument that is sometimes made privately, never publicly by UBF leaders):

Date Posted: 12:54:18 08/03/04 Tue
Author: Joe
Subject: “We’ve changed, not that we needed to change.”
In reply to: Bong-Jin Kang ‘s message, “Re: “Things have changed” article?” on 19:46:27 07/29/04 Thu

>As I said on 8th,July’s post, the Korean UBF top [John Jun]
>leader insisted many changes has occured since SL’s
>He requested any present problems in ubf and any
>problems of SB if I want to argue with him further.

John Jun (and other UBF leaders) insist that unspecified things have changed and insist that people talk about the current state of UBF. Does this imply an admission on their part that there were serious problems in past? Of course not. Their trick is to say that “they’ve changed” without ever acknowledging–and at the same time actively minimizing–past wrongdoing. They want their cake and eat it, too. See John Jun’s recent responses to “past” UBF problems.

The same John Jun appears to have recently been “elected” to be the new “General Director” of UBF.

"Why Beat a Dead Horse?"

December 21, 2003

“Why beat a dead horse? Isn’t Samuel Lee dead? Why focus on a dead man?” Sometimes I am asked such questions. Of course, the same could be asked of UBF which celebrates things such as “UBF Founders Day” and talks about preserving Lee’s “spiritual legacy.” Here’s a RsqUBF discussion forum post about this subject by ChicagoXile that I heartily agree with:

Date Posted: 14:47:55 06/18/03 Wed

Author: ChicagoXile

Subject: Re: I think we are beginning to love to hate

In reply to: Tony Lang ‘s message, “I think we are beginning to love to hate” on 11:04:25 06/17/03 Tue

Tony, let me first say: thanks for your concern. I mean that sincerely.

>Lee damaged a lot of people, and

>in the letters that appear I can see a lot of hurt. I

>have a kind of feeling that this is the sort of thing

>that will make Lee very happy. Lee was a negative

>influence during his life time and I can see that

>this controling power that he had is continuing long

>after his death.


>I ask myself what is the best way to insult the memory

>of someone no longer present? I think it is to forget

>them. That is what we should do with Lee. Think of

>all the pleasure he is getting in hell knowing that

>the very thought of him brings out such negative

>emotion in people.

No one gets pleasure out of anything in hell. It’s just eternal torment in utter darkness. So, no, Lee isn’t laughing it up that people are still writing negatively about him.

Also, I don’t think anybody in UBF thinks it’s particularly funny that Lee’s true character continues to be revealed because Lee’s teaching and his family (including Barry) are still central to UBF.

I find that as Lee’s true character and the facts of his evil deeds are revealed, it leads some people in UBF to start questioning. For instance, see and, both recent posts. I think they start to question why their chapter leaders and shepherds revere Lee so much when there is ample testimony against him. They may start to see that the UBF “reality” is not reality at all. They may start to see and be disturbed by UBF’s “ends justify the means” philosophy as it is applied to Lee’s life by UBF leaders. They may start to see the personality cult within UBF. (As Andrew S. wrote after he left UBF: “I raced back to UBF and read more of the newsletter, and suddenly the articles there seemed very strange. They came into focus. These articles were praising Samuel Lee, UBF’s late chairman, instead of God.”)

People who wake up to the reality of what Lee really was may not necessarily leave UBF. But they might be more careful lest they prop up another Samuel Lee. Or they may decide that they’re not going to submit so easily to UBF’s destructive authoritarianism that continues in Lee’s name. So even those who stay in UBF might be bettered by the Lee reality check that we try to provide.

>Ubf is a worthless organisation, it is going down a

>road that leads to nowhere. My advice is to allow it

>to travel on . In these days of advanced education

>it will not survive.

Unfortunately, level of education has not been proven to protect people from cult involvement. M.D.’s, Ph.D.’s and engineers abound, not just in UBF, but in many other cultic groups and abusive churches.

>We should allow it to commit

>suicide which it most certainly will. It might take a

>little time, but in the not too distant future it will

>not be around.

Unfortunately again, the Moonies and Scientologists aren’t going away. Neither is North Korea. And neither is UBF. While we wait for them to just go away and do nothing, more lives are damaged.

"Unconditional love" for a price

December 16, 2003

The following is from and comes very close to capturing my experience and current view of UBF even though it was applied to the International Church of Christ.

I make the following charges against the principle participants in the formal leadership heirarchy of the International Church of Christ Movement. I want to stress that several of these are realities of which many of the “rank and file” members of the Movement would have no conscious awareness, though their participation in this system, no matter how unwitting, serves to support. However, I do charge the formal leaders with the responsibility for the “intentionality” and perpetuation of these offenses.

I charge the top leaders of the ICC Movement with:

* Mishandling and distorting (“twisting”) the Scriptures and their meanings, with great consistency and persistence, to reinforce their biased doctrines.

* Systematically and deliberately misrepresenting themselves and many of their ends (i.e., goals and purposes) to both grassroots members and outsiders.

* Offering what is called “unconditional love” for a price (i.e., thorough compliance of the would-be “convert”), amounting, in net effect, to spiritual “prostitution.”

* As a result of the practice of marketing this conditional “love,” painting and promoting a practical picture of God as a “Cosmic Pimp.” (This is strong language, but they have done all they have done, including much abusive behavior, with the bold assertion that God has sent them out to do it. How would you express that in an “unvarnished” way?)

* Distorting many facts of their history to dishonestly inflate and embellish their all-important image (another name for this is revisionism, and most tyrants and scoundrels in history have practiced it).

* Damaging, or even destroying, the relationships of family, marriage, and friendship with shocking regularity.

* Maliciously attacking the character and reputation of any “critics” who dare to take persistent stands even to question them, not to mention oppose them.

* Maliciously denying the legitimacy and reality of other devoted Christians and churches.

* Generally exploiting and manipulating people in these ways on a consistent, worldwide basis. (In other words, they may not all be the same in degree, but they are in kind.) And finally,

* Refusing almost all repeated, sincere attempts, for many years, to establish reasonable dialogue re. “mistakes” that have supposedly been made (and continue to be made) by ICC leaders.