Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
Does it have to be done the way Lee prescribed to be biblical? And if it's not done the way Lee said, then how can you say that your local church is "absolutely identical" to the rest, with no differences whatever? Because that's what Lee prescribed in the footnotes. And Lee can't be wrong, ever, because then the whole thing would crumble like a house of cards. If people ever began to think critically, or act differently, the whole thing would come apart.
|
I noticed that Evangelical has yet to back up his assertion that what the LC labels as "
calling on the name of the Lord" is something more than just a practice peculiar/unique to the LC. The main problem, of course, is that WL wanted everyone to think that his version of practices represented the true Biblical form (if there were such to begin with). I'm not out to detract from things that LCers appreciate, but I take issue with with the promotion of certain LC practices as if those not practicing such things are deficient or lacking. Take example for the the practice of LC "love feasts." What many groups would simply call a lunch, is what the LC would give a name found in the Bible, as if to validate it as something 'better' than what other groups are doing.
While all groups have unique practices, and might have some amount of disagreement on the specifics, the LC is the only group that I know of that claims to practice things that they alone have 'recovered'. It's kind of convenient for them to be able to do this, because when they speak of a practice that no one else does, they don't have to engage in discussion of the 'correct' way to do it. They just have to provide sufficient justification for the practice to those willing to listen.