The above excerpt is from 2001 New Year's address by Samuel lee. This particular message by samuel lee shows a lot about his personality and his intellectual and spiritual capacity. In the excerpt, he is trying to analyze the cause of the split in ubf organization. He argues that "Caleb Churng" is the first cause of the split because "he was always on my opponent's side in his mind." His argument is poor in the sense that he blames only one person for the big split in his organization instead of trying to address the issues that led to the split of his organization. He admits that Caleb Chung was alwasy on his opponent's side in his mind. From this premis he concludes that Calbe Chung was the main cause of the split. That is what makes his argument poor because it does not necessarily mean that opposing views lead to division.
If he knew that Caleb Chung was on his opponent's side, he should have deduced that the fact that Caleb Chung was on the opposite side should have contributed to the split. Then from that premise, he should have concluded that whatever had been making Caleb Chung stand on the opposite side could have been the real cause of the split.
It seems that he knew why Caleb Chung was on his opponent's side. He says that he tried to solve this issues by trying "to melt his heart, I bore with him for the last 30 years." He completely ignores any issues present between him and Caleb Chung. But instead he tried to "melt his heart." This shows a lot about his personality. If there is some real issue, maybe in his personality or in his organization, and a person objects it, he will try to solve the problem by melting the person's heart instead of trying to address the real issue itself. In other words, instead of trying to address the issue at hand, he would rather try to melt the person's heart so that the person would change his mind about the issue and finally admit that there is no real issue. In this way, he bore with "him" instead of "solving the issue." He thinks that he can solve a person's opposition by melting his heart without solving the real issue that has raised the opposition. Maybe this was the real cause of the ubf split.
Another point is that he thinks that any person who is on his opposite side is leading rebellion against him. How could one conclude that a person is leading rebellion just because he has a opposing opinion? Anyone who holds that kind of view clearly reveals flaws in his intellectual and spiritual capacity. How could samuel lee have implemented such doctrines in his organization with the one-to-one Bible study and strict "divine disciplines" among many college students? It could be very interesting topic to study to understand young college students. Coudl it be that young college students at the most vulnerable stage of their life seek some kind security through the this kind of doctrines?