Open - Interactive Letter to The Co-Workers in The Lord's Recovery

[ACuriousFellow]

Originally Posted by Jay

There's a lot to unpack here. First of all the term church just means congregation. In the original Greek it means 'gathering of the called out ones.' So in a sense wherever believers meet there is the church. Ok.....but, we have Deuteronomy chapter 12 where the Lord clearly says we can't just meet at any old place we want to, but at the place of his choosing. So where is that then? That's a golden question in this equation.

The New Testament already tells us where to worship while explicitly referencing the temple of the Old Testament. You have already been given scriptural examples that you are unfortunately disregarding.

We will no longer worship on the mountain or the temple, but in spirit.

We are God's temple, God's dwelling place.

God has already explicitly outlined his house of worship: his people.

The fulfillment of the temple is not churches named according to arbitrary city boundaries made by men. The fulfillment of the temple is God's people. A house that is not built by the hands of men. Cities are made by the hands of men. City boundaries are established by men. Stop trying to use such arbitrary things to place unscriptural limits on the assemblies of God.

You have provided no scriptures that make any such overt and explicit connections between the temple and how we name our assemblies, and you have provided no scriptures that in any way implies such a level of importance for the naming of churches according to the cities they are found in. If it was that important, it would be that explicit. Do not compare the naming of the churches to something as crucial and grand as the holy temple of the old testament when it clearly does not have that level of importance.

As others have mentioned, you are taking something descriptive in the New Testament and presenting it as something prescriptive.

Tell me, Jay, what do you know of the church in Cenchreae and the church in Phoebe's house?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

The New Testament already tells us where to worship while explicitly referencing the temple of the Old Testament. You have already been given scriptural examples that you are unfortunately disregarding. We will no longer worship on the mountain or the temple, but in spirit.....

I love this post. Truth wise, it encapsulates the clearest rebuttal to the errant “ground of oneness” teachings. After reading Jay’s post, I was putting thoughts together to write, and then I read ACF’s post. He said it much better than I.

Such a simple summary should have readily liberated me years ago from the fetters of Recovery teachings. Should have. Unfortunately I needed to watch in real time my own church being divided in half by the same ministry that indoctrinated me for 30 years with these oneness teachings. How could this happen? Slowly, too slowly in fact, I came to the realization that the purpose of these “ground of oneness” teachings was never to keep the genuine oneness of the Spirit, but to place walls around one man’s kingdom, and that man was not Jesus.

Having also read much church history during this time frame, I have studied how JND, WN, and WL all used the same exclusive teachings to build their own “empires.”

[Nell]

Jay,

Your last post, in violation of the forum Mission Statement, has been administratively deleted. Your sarcasm and disrespect of other forum members will not be tolerated.

Nell
Admin/Moderator

[Jay]

So you all can bash the LC to no end, but if I say something mildly condescending I get reprimanded because I simply don't think the same homogenous way you do. Pot meet kettle. Gotta love the hypocrisy
-

[UntoHim]

Jay, this forum is named "Local Church Discussions", not "Local Church Bashing". We are all here to discuss, not to bash.

We all have Bibles, and they all presumably have a book called Deuteronomy. Many of us sat under at the feet of Witness Lee for decades. We all know what he taught about what is written in Deuteronomy 12. Many (most) of us can recite the rhetoric that your presenting here in our sleep.

There is something you must understand. Deuteronomy was written over 700 years before the Lord Jesus proclaimed "the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him".(John 4:24) And do you know what Jay? This was a direct answer to a person who sounded a lot like you - "Jerusalem is the place where people ought to worship!". (v:20) Instead of confirming this persons concept of a physical place to worship, the Lord Jesus directed her to the God-ordained place to worship - in spirit and in truth.

The rest of the Gospels and the teachings of the apostles confirm the words of the Lord Jesus in John 4. The place for God's people to worship him is in spirit and in truth. The sign outside of the physical meeting place (or lack thereof) means little to God. He cares about S(s)pirit, and he cares about Truth.
Much more to say of course.
-

[ACuriousFellow]

I'm not entirely sure what's transpired, but I suppose I can answer my own question.

The churches in Cenchreae and Phoebe's house break the pattern that The Lord's Recovery obsesses over.

Cenchreae (mentioned in Romans 16:1-2) is a district of Corinth. This would be like saying that the church in New York exists at the same time as the churches in Queens and Manhattan. Paul does not care to prescribe such hard limits on the naming of the assemblies.

The church in Phoebe's house (Romans 16:5) takes this one step further. Phoebe was a deacon in the church of Cenchreae (also mentioned in the passage in Romans). So, not only is there a church based on a district rather than a city, there is also a church based on a house/household that further breaks the pattern within the very same city of Corinth!

I must insist once more that if this pattern was so crucial and important, there would be no leeway for such things, yet you insist on taking Lee's way. Further still, I will insist again, as many others have, that patterns do not make rules. Even if it is better to name ourselves so simply, it is not just or scriptural or spiritual to condemn others for not following the same pattern. At best, this is like the concept of marriage: it may be better to abstain and serve the Lord than to be married and have to give much of your time to your family, but in no way should we condemn those who get married or make them out to be lesser Christians. If we were as strict with this clearly superior pattern that was explicitly mentioned by Paul as Lee is with church naming, then we should be condemning all those who get married for not giving more of their time with the Lord.

Well... actually I've seen many young people in TLR be discouraged from getting married because the elders want them to serve full-time... so... TLR already does that to a degree. Anyways... that'll be a whole different conversation.

Anyhow, in the same way, it may be simpler and even beneficial to name ourselves according to our location (cities/districts/households) rather than denominational names, but this is not something to condemn others for so harshly as Lee has. Once more I insist, those who divide themselves because they think they are right in naming themselves after a city boundary are not more righteous than an assembly who call themselves "1st Baptist Church" yet are full of love and spirit and are willing to fellowship and work and pray and worship with other church groups.

Neverminded the fact that Lee created a denomination that divides itself based on a simple name. This group should be called the "Church of Cities" rather than The Lord's Recovery or The Local Churches. If we will say that many Baptist churches are too concerned about baptism and that many Pentecostal churches are too concerned about demonstrations of spiritual power, then we can also say that this "Church of Cities" is obsessed with labels and names based on the cities they are in.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow

Well... actually I've seen many young people in TLR be discouraged from getting married because the elders want them to serve full-time... so... TLR already does that to a degree. Anyways... that'll be a whole different conversation.

Great points. In I Cor 4 Paul informs us about the final days, how many real believers will depart from the faith, which in 2 Thess 2 he calls "The Apostasy." In principle, deceptive spirits will employ the hypocrisy of men, whose own consciences are already ruined. These ones will present "abstinence" as a form of "spirituality." Obviously this is trending throughout culture since it is now "virtuous" to eat bugs and abstain from carbon cows.

If those leaders in the Recovery really embraced the oneness and their other claims, and seriously practiced in the spirit of love and peace and tolerance, (Phil 4.5) I and many others would have far more respect for them. Today they are known for how many lawsuits and threats of lawsuits they have brought against their brothers. So shameful.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Jay

So you all can bash the LC to no end, but if I say something mildly condescending I get reprimanded because I simply don't think the same homogeneous way you do. Pot meet kettle. Gotta love the hypocrisy
-

Jay, sorry if you feel I am bashing you. I was deceived by this teaching of the ground of locality. It puffed me up with pride, and gave me a judgmental attitude towards other believers. It damaged me and others. I am upset with that deception, not with you or any of the precious saints in the Recovery.