Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregon
Hi Ohio,
I understand your statement and where you are in your thoughts somewhat. Firstly....I'm not an LSMer. I would never support the actions and views of what the "Local Church" has become. Nor am I of Lee. But to go as far as some of the posters have on this site is simply too much. The word gives us more than just a picture of the "early" church. There may not be literal commandments in the NT regarding one church in every city but to just say that such a situation didn't exist in Paul's day is almost purposeful denial.
I have gone to many meetings of dear saints not meeting as "local churches" and have been ministered to by God many times. I would never judge our fellow believers meeting in various denominations and independant fellowships. But to say certain things are not in the Word as some promote here is just going way to far. It's almost like making a statement such as....."the bible doesn't say anything against smoking marijuana therefore it's OK."
Do you think that if the apostolic church woud have divided itself in those early years and put names up saying...."The Church of This" or "The Church of That" that it would have been just fine. There's no way I'm going to believe that.
|
Oregon, I think the issue is that your principled positions seem to not provide you with a course of action. In other words for example, you don't believe in signs or names. What action are you going to take because of that? Condemn people who do? What do you think that will accomplish?
Or you believe that the pattern of one church in the city is plain. Okay, so what action are you going to take based on that? What action do you expect others to take?
Do you expect everyone in a city of a million simply to agree on who the elders are in order to serve some overriding principle of "oneness?" What if some in their conscience can't do that. What then?