Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
I notice that Lee made the assumption that the house churches could be automatically equated with being the church in that city. I see house churches as distinct assemblies because they are addressed as such. I would also turn around Lee's words and say that if we read the NT carefully, without bias, it isn't completely clear what house churches had any city-wide affiliation.
In Paul's epistle to Philemon, it was addressed to: Philemon... and to the church in your house. If we are to accept what Lee says, that the house church equals the city church, then why didn't Paul instead address the letter to: Philemon... and to the church in Colosse?
Better, yet, why didn't Paul request that his letter to Philemon and the house church be read in Laodicea just like he requested in his epistle to the Colossians? I see lots of problems with the kinds of assumptions Lee made. The exceptions to his teaching should have warranted a decent explanation at the very least, not just a few sentences claiming that the exceptions don't matter if we study the Bible carefully.
|
When I was meeting with the local churches, Philemon was nothing more than a footnote.
Seriously, could it be that Philemon doesn't fit into LSM theology which is why little attention is given this book?