Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
In the book of Acts we see a lot of things that were not clearly written down as an instruction or a command. There was no Old Testament command that says "Christians don't have to be circumcised". The early Christians followed Christ. They followed Christ out of the Jewish synagogues and into the church. Christ forming the church was not clearly foretold by the OT prophets. The first time church was mentioned was Matt. 16:18. Had a person followed the Scripture at that time, they might have stayed in the Jewish synagogues. Just like the early Christians followed Christ out of Judaism, we try to follow Christ out of religious Christianity. We don't do this because there is a black and white command in the Bible to do so (well there is, if we consider Babylon), but because of the leading of the Lord. The important thing is that we follow the Lord. We believe that if the Lord leads one to the denominations then do that, if the Lord leads one out, then do that, if the Lord leads one to stay at home and not go to church, then do that too. This does not mean, however, that the denominations are approved by God, anymore than Jesus meeting with the Pharisees meant they were approved by God.
The idea of one city per church is meant to be about freedom from the religious institutions. If we leave "Babylon", believers in each city is what remains. That is, it is more about coming out of Babylon, than entering any particular thing called the "One City Per Church" church. We are not about building up another denomination in the name of a doctrine of one city per church. I know that is contrary to what many claim and experience, but this no way invalidates the ideals or God's plan.
|
I was with you until this statement, "Just like the early Christians followed Christ out of Judaism,
we try to follow Christ out of religious Christianity."
Let me comment on this. Your construct here is not from the Bible but from Lee and exclusivism.
Firstly, you say "religious Christianity." Let's be honest, for you this is any and all Christians outside of LSM approved LC's, including the GLA LC's who refused to be brought under their subjection. This comment becomes the most divisive belief of all, because it contains no specifics whatsoever. You simply categorize all outsiders, including those quarantined, as "religious Christianity," so that you can dismiss them and condemn them. Oh the arrogance.
The early Christians departed from the leadership of the Pharisees and the Sanhedrin because they killed their Savior, and then persecuted them. They never "
followed Christ out of Judaism." On the contrary, the entire early church, including the 3 thousand and the 5 thousand, remained in Judaism, albeit with their Messiah. They met in the temple and house to house, with most of them never leaving the decrees of Moses. It was not until the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple that Christians became basically liberated from the ordinances of the law. Oh the historical revisionism.
Secondly, since my time in the LC's which began in the mid '70's, I have watched an exodus of dear believers being led out of the Recovery due to corruption at LSM. Living through one scandal after another at LSM, life in the LC's was like living in America when the Clinton's were in power. After each round of whistle-blowers were expelled, leadership at LSM cranked up their smear machine in order to hold the remaining faithful in the delusional cloud of a pure and pristine MOTA, who was as infallible as the Pope. Oh the deception.
For LSM to manufacture numerous false standards (
one city one church, clergy laity, proper church name which supposedly is not a name, etc.) in order to condemn all others and justify their own existence, is no different than the Pharisees who attempted to kill Jesus for healing on the Sabbath. (John 5.16) Oh the hypocrisy.