Teaching on Calling on the Name of the Lord

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

I am curious as to what your basis is for making such a sweeping generalization about denominations. Personally, I wouldn't take 'zeal' encountered in a meeting to mean anything. But you are more than welcome to do so as it relates to which group you want to be involved with.

People often have criticized Pentecostal groups as 'fake' or 'superficial', because what it seen in those groups might indicate that. But people might come to the same conclusion about the LC too. Since your personal experience in the LC gives you the view that certain practices are completely genuine, I respect that you want to view the LC that way. At the same time, I ask why you feel that your personal experience gives you the grounds to discredit denominations as 'degraded'.

Everyone functioning is the standard of a normal church according to the Bible. Christians that attend denominations normally only function when they leave the church service and exercise their spirituality in their daily life as individuals or families.

Ephesians 4:16 says, “All the Body, being joined together and being knit together through every joint of the rich supply and through the operation in the measure of each one part, causes the growth of the Body unto the building up of itself in love.”

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Everyone functioning is the standard of a normal church according to the Bible. Christians that attend denominations normally only function when they leave the church service and exercise their spirituality in their daily life as individuals or families.

Ephesians 4:16 says, “All the Body, being joined together and being knit together through every joint of the rich supply and through the operation in the measure of each one part, causes the growth of the Body unto the building up of itself in love.”

Surely you would agree that there are different kinds of functioning. In the LC, there is only one kind that is emphasized, and that is prophesying. Just because there is a common practice of one type of 'functioning', that can't be taken as evidence of anything. Similarily, just because a denomination has a single speaker doesn't 'prove' that no one else functions.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Surely you would agree that there are different kinds of functioning. In the LC, there is only one kind that is emphasized, and that is prophesying. Just because there is a common practice of one type of 'functioning', that can't be taken as evidence of anything. Similarily, just because a denomination has a single speaker doesn't 'prove' that no one else functions.

The one(or two or three) speakers for an hour or so long service, certainly proves that no one else functions in that hour, because no one else speaks. If anyone speaks it is to read a short verse or two from the bible. No one else except the pastor(s) is given the opportunity to speak for a couple of minutes on matters of spiritual importance, because they are seen as unqualified. If people speak it is normally to talk about the church programs or activities and not teaching the Bible.

Prophesy is emphasized because it was the one thing that Paul emphasized, which no one outside of the Lord's Recovery really does or talks about. Paul desired people to prophesy, there is little desire in most churches outside of the LC. In the LC the functioning also includes service (e.g. setting up the chairs), prayer, playing music, singing hymns, praise, etc.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The one(or two or three) speakers for an hour or so long service, certainly proves that no one else functions in that hour, because no one else speaks. If anyone speaks it is to read a short verse or two from the bible. No one else except the pastor(s) is given the opportunity to speak for a couple of minutes on matters of spiritual importance, because they are seen as unqualified. If people speak it is normally to talk about the church programs or activities and not teaching the Bible.

Paul taught that 2-3 should speak (1 Cor 14:29), and the practical reasons for such an arrangement are self-evident. It a large meeting it's just not feasible to allow everyone to speak given time constraints.

What is more troublesome is that you automatically equate speaking with functioning. The two can be synonymous, but a lack of speaking doesn't indicate a lack of functioning. Paul distinguishes between different functions including teaching and/or prophesying. He says that not all have the same function. So it's safe to say that an environment where few (or just one) speak, does not indicate that it's an environment where no one is functioning. And since not all function in the same way, then it is safe to say that in an environment where everyone is asked to perform the same function, that some would be acting outside of whatever function that they do have.

Just as an example, the LC likes to help everyone to be able to speak in meetings, and quite often not all are so inclined to do so, because a lot of people don't like speaking in public. Unless a person truly just needs 'practice' at learning to speak, such aversion to speaking could be evidence that it is not their function.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are people out there who want a personal platform. They want to be noticed and they want to be visible. It is quite possible what they have to say is not beneficial for the church to hear. Notwithstanding, the LC provides them a fulfillment for that kind of attention that they crave. I've seen more than a few of such types.

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Prophesy is emphasized because it was the one thing that Paul emphasized, which no one outside of the Lord's Recovery really does or talks about. Paul desired people to prophesy, there is little desire in most churches outside of the LC. In the LC the functioning also includes service (e.g. setting up the chairs), prayer, playing music, singing hymns, praise, etc.

Paul desired that all would prophecy, but that doesn't mean such an environment exists (or even can exist). And I would also argue that a lot of what is seen in the LC is not prophesying. It's called parroting what WL said in the HWFMR. If an LC outline of Exodus has a phrase "the science of drinking," members will parrot and declare it without any clue what it means. It's completely absurd. This is why no one takes seriously the practice seen in the LC. I'm not saying that there isn't genuine prophesying that takes place in the LC. But please don't try claiming that no one else outside the LC functions. I don't consider mindlessly repeating something that Lee said to be 'functioning'.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Paul taught that 2-3 should speak (1 Cor 14:29), and the practical reasons for such an arrangement are self-evident. It a large meeting it's just not feasible to allow everyone to speak given time constraints...

The prophesying in the meetings may not be ideal but consider, the denominational system shuts the people's mouths and our system does not. In the denominational system there is no room for anyone to prophesy or teach spiritual things, only the qualified person can do that. The church member of the denominations are restricted to speaking about personal testimonies, or non-spiritual church activities such as fund raising events and social events. In many cases during a 1 hour service there is not even any room for someone to speak about a personal testimony.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The prophesying in the meetings may not be ideal but consider, the denominational system shuts the people's mouths and our system does not. In the denominational system there is no room for anyone to prophesy or teach spiritual things, only the qualified person can do that. The church member of the denominations are restricted to speaking about personal testimonies, or non-spiritual church activities such as fund raising events and social events. In many cases during a 1 hour service there is not even any room for someone to speak about a personal testimony.

These are two different extremes. Notice that I'm not claiming that one is better than the other. But I do point to the shortcomings of the LC practice, as you also do for what is practiced in the denominations. If nothing else, the practice of having one person speak is just a matter of practicality for large gatherings. You can't have 200+ people in a room and let it be a free for all without risking getting a lot of people frustrated. Sure it satisfies those who wish the opportunity to speak, but what about the rest? One thing that really bugged me about LC meetings was the constant flipping back and forth between different subjects as different people stood up to share. There are valid reasons why most churches don't embrace this kind of model. Is the LC wrong to want to allow everyone to speak? I don't think so. It just doesn't work the way they think in real life.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Freedom

These are two different extremes. Notice that I'm not claiming that one is better than the other. But I do point to the shortcomings of the LC practice, as you also do for what is practiced in the denominations. If nothing else, the practice of having one person speak is just a matter of practicality for large gatherings. You can't have 200+ people in a room and let it be a free for all without risking getting a lot of people frustrated. Sure it satisfies those who wish the opportunity to speak, but what about the rest? One thing that really bugged me about LC meetings was the constant flipping back and forth between different subjects as different people stood up to share. There are valid reasons why most churches don't embrace this kind of model. Is the LC wrong to want to allow everyone to speak? I don't think so. It just doesn't work the way they think in real life.

There was a time when the Spirit of God was so alive in th LC meetings, at least the 3 LC's I was apart of. It was our practice to give testimonies after the message was given, and those times were so invigorating, refreshing, and enlightening. Perhaps not every testimony, but there is no way to compare the current so-called "prophecying" practice of repeating Lee's messages to that time.

I can't tell you how many times I heard an opening line starting with, "BruLeesaid," or another in Ohio, "Ti'said" for "Titus said." That's what happens when you ask the congregation to study their messages and repeat them. That must have sounded so weird to guests. Fortunately, or really unfortunately, we never had many guests. Actually we used to have many guests until we were instructed by outsiders what our meetings must look like.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

These are two different extremes. Notice that I'm not claiming that one is better than the other. But I do point to the shortcomings of the LC practice, as you also do for what is practiced in the denominations. If nothing else, the practice of having one person speak is just a matter of practicality for large gatherings. You can't have 200+ people in a room and let it be a free for all without risking getting a lot of people frustrated. Sure it satisfies those who wish the opportunity to speak, but what about the rest? One thing that really bugged me about LC meetings was the constant flipping back and forth between different subjects as different people stood up to share. There are valid reasons why most churches don't embrace this kind of model. Is the LC wrong to want to allow everyone to speak? I don't think so. It just doesn't work the way they think in real life.

Can't? The LC regularly have more than 200+ prophesying every Sunday.
Different subjects? Everyone speaks about the same topic - we have the weekly morning revival.

[micah6v8]

Originally Posted by Freedom

Paul taught that 2-3 should speak (1 Cor 14:29), ...

Hi all,

what do you make of 1 Cor 14:29? To me, it means that in each meeting, just 2-3 should prophesy. Not 30 people.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by micah6v8

Hi all, what do you make of 1 Cor 14:29? To me, it means that in each meeting, just 2-3 should prophesy. Not 30 people.

And interestingly, the rest of the attendants should evaluate or weigh carefully what the 2 or 3 just prophecied.

None of us should consider for one minute that real prophecying is merely repeating Lee's messages.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And interestingly, the rest of the attendants should evaluate or weigh carefully what the 2 or 3 just prophecied. None of us should consider for one minute that real prophecying is merely repeating Lee's messages.

Unfortunately, some people seem to want to insist that the LC is the only group that has a practice of prophecying. It is ironic then that what is practiced in the LC is the mere repetition of the words of one man. And as I have tried to explain to Evangelical, this repetition is often done without even having any understanding of what Lee was talking about.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And interestingly, the rest of the attendants should evaluate or weigh carefully what the 2 or 3 just prophecied. None of us should consider for one minute that real prophecying is merely repeating Lee's messages.

The local churches also believe that real prophesying is not merely repeating Lee's messages. Everyone is encouraged to compose a prophesy which is an inspired message from the Lord.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by micah6v8

Hi all, what do you make of 1 Cor 14:29? To me, it means that in each meeting, just 2-3 should prophesy. Not 30 people.

A church is supposedly 2-3, according to some here, so if that's the case, it's really saying that the whole church should prophesy.

See: Matt 18:20 "For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them."

[micah6v8]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

A church is supposedly 2-3, according to some here, so if that's the case, it's really saying that the whole church should prophesy.

See: Matt 18:20 "For where two or three gather together as my followers, I am there among them."

1 Cor 14 v 29 And as to prophets, two or three should speak, and the others discern.

Reading this verse, one can tell that Paul is not talking about a three-people church here.

There are at least four people in this verse:-
(1) Two speakers. (Room is given for a third speaker) (Paul does not give room for a fourth or fifth speaker).
(2) The others who are discerning:- The word is "others" so this means at least two people are discerning, possibly more.

It's hard to see how one can reach the conclusion that all should speak in a meeting.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by micah6v8

Hi all,

what do you make of 1 Cor 14:29? To me, it means that in each meeting, just 2-3 should prophesy. Not 30 people.

Been trying to make this statement for some time.

In addition, the phrase "all can prophesy" that comes later is in the context of a definition of who can prophesy (the 2 or 3), not the overturning of the statement that 2 or 3 should be designated.

[aron]

Originally Posted by micah6v8

what do you make of 1 Cor 14:29? To me, it means that in each meeting, just 2-3 should prophesy. Not 30 people.

I think context is important here. Paul was writing to a church where bedlam reigned in the meetings. Everyone was trying to out-shout each other. Like it was the day of Pentecost every day. Everyone trying to get into the tongues of angels.

Paul said, "If people come into this meeting, who will get saved?" (1 Cor 14:23) He was trying to restore a sense of order, and decorum. Witness Lee distorted it. Instead of the "You can all prophesy, one by one" Lee made it "You can ALL prophesy, one by one".

And anyone who went off (Lee's) message and gave a private revelation didn't get much of an amen. You'd do better to bust a vein, screaming an outline bullet point or a footnote phrase. Then you'd get the "ayyeemennn", the broad smiles and fist pumps.