One Church - One City - Biblical?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

So even though I can show you one church per city in the Bible and from history, you say it is "not a rule". You cannot really claim you are following the Bible then. At least, you cannot claim to be doing church the way it should be done, the way it was setup by God from the beginning.

I suppose then you would be okay with replacing the communion wine (or grape juice) and bread, with peanut butter and kentucky fried chicken? There is no rule about that.

I suppose then you would be okay with replacing the baptismal water with a bucket of sand? There is no rule about that either.

This is where you get a little crazy. Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of Me." There is no verse that says every Christian in town must be under one eldership and ministry.

The Bible also says "repent and be baptized every one of you." This is why all Christians teach and practice baptism. The Bible mandates it.

There is more scriptural basis for head-covering and communism (all things common) than there is for your brand of "practical oneness."

Sorry, Evan, but you have been sold a bill of goods. Ask any believer.

And, in regards to the breaking of bread, there is no scripture that demands bleached white flour be used for the bread, as LSM insists on. Bleached flour was not invented until the late 19th century, just in time for the Recovery to reach China, and obviously no church in history has ever broken bread properly until Nee and Lee came along.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

This is where you get a little crazy. Jesus said, "Do this in remembrance of Me." There is no verse that says every Christian in town must be under one eldership and ministry.

The Bible also says "repent and be baptized every one of you." This is why all Christians teach and practice baptism. The Bible mandates it.

There is more scriptural basis for head-covering and communism (all things common) than there is for your brand of "practical oneness."

Sorry, Evan, but you have been sold a bill of goods. Ask any believer.

And, in regards to the breaking of bread, there is no scripture that demands bleached white flour be used for the bread, as LSM insists on. Bleached flour was not invented until the late 19th century, just in time for the Recovery to reach China, and obviously no church in history has ever broken bread properly until Nee and Lee came along.

There is no rule that bread and wine be used for communion. But everyone does it, why? Because they know that's how Jesus did it. Now I'd like to see you suggest or propose that you use something different in your next communion, and you can tell everyone "folks, it's okay, there's no rule about it, as long as we pass around some food and drink and remember the Lord it will be okay".

In the same way then, we follow one church per city. Because we know that's how they did it. And we believe how they did it was how God told them to do it.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

There is no rule that bread and wine be used for communion. But everyone does it, why? Because they know that's how Jesus did it. Now I'd like to see you suggest or propose that you use something different in your next communion, and you can tell everyone "folks, it's okay, there's no rule about it, as long as we pass around some food and drink and remember the Lord it will be okay".

In the same way then, we follow one church per city. Because we know that's how they did it. And we believe how they did it was how God told them to do it.

What about LSMs demand for bleached white flour?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What about LSMs demand for bleached white flour?

What's wrong with that, it's still bread.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

What's wrong with that, it's still bread.

Do you always purposely miss the point?

[NewManLiving]

This drivel is getting nauseous. The local church of Witness Lee is a denomination. I gave you the litmus test in another post Evangelical, which you did not address. LSM does not accept all true believers who do not accept the so-called Oracle - meaning WITNESS LEE. You are NOT free as you say to fellowship outside the confining parameters of their dogma. LSM is completely divisive in shoving WL down everyone's throat and shunning those who choose not to accept this. LSM churches are a sect. Anyone can see this except the mentally ill or spiritually deceived. Even the unbeliever knows it's a sect at the very least and at most it is a cult. The fact remains that diehard LSMERS are of WITNESS LEE !

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by NewManLiving

This drivel is getting nauseous. The local church of Witness Lee is a denomination. I gave you the litmus test in another post Evangelical, which you did not address. LSM does not accept all true believers who do not accept the so-called Oracle - meaning WITNESS LEE. You are NOT free as you say to fellowship outside the confining parameters of their dogma. LSM is completely divisive in shoving WL down everyone's throat and shunning those who choose not to accept this. LSM churches are a sect. Anyone can see this except the mentally ill or spiritually deceived. Even the unbeliever knows it's a sect at the very least and at most it is a cult. The fact remains that diehard LSMERS are of WITNESS LEE !

NewManLiving I think you are overstating things. The fact is that the local churches do accept all true believers even ones who do not accept Witness Lee. Anyone is free to fellowship wherever they like. There is no one checking about where we fellowship and with whom. I cannot say the same of every local church, every local church is autonomous.

I did not think your litmus test to be much of a test. You wanted me to read something not written by Witness Lee in the meeting to see if it upsets people. But then where does your litmus test end? Suppose I read CS Lewis and people are okay with that. Then would you require me to keep on reading books by different people, until I find where their tolerance level is at? I would not read the Quran in your church because I'm sure people would not like that.

Anyway I think you should show me some sort of prescriptive command (as Nell called it) from the Bible (or even a descriptive text), that says we cannot read things written by one person in the meetings.