Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
This section stood out to me ...
I wish current LC members would think about what they are saying. They love to promote their "no-name" oneness, as if they are onto something special. Actually Paul never rebuked them for names per se, but that they had divided themselves from one another by selecting who they wanted to follow exclusively.
Now what in the world do they think just happened in Chicago?
Greater Chicago formerly was "of Titus," and now they are "of Lee" ... again. Are they so naive as to think this is not so? Do I really have to walk around wearing a sandwich sign reading " I am of Titus," and parroting the phrase repeatedly, for this to occur???
I went thru the recent divisions and quarantines first hand. My LC elders told us repeatedly, " we have to stand for the truth!" which really meant that we are for Titus and by Titus and of Titus. Some of the others in my LC disagreed and said the same thing, " we have to stand for the truth!" which really meant that we are for Lee and by Lee and of Lee.
Then there were a few oddballs like me who said, " we have to stand for the truth!" which really meant that we are the church, and we don't have to take sides when ministries decide to fight. Few people listened to me.  |
"The church in..." (or "church of the...")
is a name. Because it defines the group that LCers believe to be the
actual "practicality" of church in any given location. Witness Lee had it right when he taught that "the church in" describes the spiritual reality of all of the believers in a given location being in God's eyes the church in that place. But over time this phrase, instead of being a mere "description," become a
name, used to define their group.
It is the spiritual equivalent of proclaiming to be "I am of Christ," in the very passage quoted.