Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Hope,
It's no secret that the LC sees the local church in the city as one submitting to one set of elders. This is very much implicit in their model. It's their "ace in the hole" over their members. In other words, basically the elders are the church.
My purpose is to show that thought to be internally self-defeating to the idea of oneness.
I agree with you and others, Hope. Elders should be servants. To address Shawn's thought as well, if an entire city of Christians happens to agree to follow one group of elders then more power to them! That's fine. But no one can say that therefore every other Christian that comes along must submit to those elders too.
Why didn't the Lord just plainly specify one church per city? I think it's because if he had it would have been much harder to reform once religion got entrenched. History would have unfolded differently. The Catholic church would have always set up one "church" per city and any rivals would have easily been condemned as rebellious and un-Biblical. The Reformation might have been defeated. Who knows? Anyway, I think the Lord always provides a way for His real seekers to break away from the religion of the day, even when that religion is embodied in the "local church."
Who knows how many believers miserably remain in the LSM churches simply because their consciences are compelled by the false application of the city-church teaching--that to cross the elders is to cross the church.
This is what I am taking on in this thread. I hope people will try to understand that.
|
Hi Igzy,
I thought the Lord did address the church in each city in Chapter 2 and 3 of Revelation?
However I do not want to justify the one church = one city, based on these verses, I will only say that the Lord could say "the church in Philadelphia" because at this early time in church history, all the Christians were one in each city. Today it is different, for there are many groups giving many names to each of their fellowships and the purity of one church = one city has been lost.
Has this been recovered by taking the ground? I do not think any group that "takes the ground" can claim the one church one city, for the reality of all the Christians being in oneness has truly not taken place; until all Christians are meeting without division, the one church = one city is just an empty slogan.
Igzy, when I consider the ministry of brother Lee, I look for the truths and apply them where they fit, as I do with all ministries I receive. I do not take the LSM/LC model as faultless and to be followed by every publication that has been produced by them. I agree with you the the LSM/LC model is a problem that will be repeated again and again, because buried in its teachings are the seeds of exclusivism that will always come forth in due time.
When I respond to you, it is not in defense of the LSM/LC model, it is looking beyond that to what it is to be a church and how we can practice this today.
Now concerning the submission to elders, I like Hope's word concerning becoming servants to the church, for if this is part of the criteria for elder selection, it will produce servants and not lords.
To come to your concerns about submitting to elders, the history recorded in the bible does indicate there were elders in each city, would it seem right that new ones coming into this city or older brothers relocating should not recognize the ones who have already been appointed by the community already? I am sure there are many scenarios that could occur where the elders may produce discord, but I think the purpose they were intended to fill is necessary and vital to a churches growth; just not out of the LSM/LC playbook.