Teaching on Calling on the Name of the Lord

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I cannot think why a person would think teaching about calling on the Lord to be peculiar (not referring to you, but the author of the site that said it was a peculiar teaching), unless they had a love of religion but an aversion to the Lord's presence, like the Pharisees.

On two different sections of the site you linked, I came across the following statements:
Some Christians may consider calling on the Lord equivalent to the same as praying to Him. It is true that calling is a type of prayer, but calling is not merely praying. For example, Jeremiah 29:12 clearly differentiates the two: “Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me, and I will listen to you.”

When we call loudly with an open mouth we experience Psalm 81:7a, 10b. As we love the Lord with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30), we call upon Him with all of our being. The use of the word “wide” in Psalm 81:10 implies a strenuous exercise. Opening our mouth this way leads us into a richer experience of Christ.

It is troubling that they would distinguish calling and prayer. The two can be the same thing. A prayer can be a cry out to God. It's these kind of statements that raise a bit of a question mark. They provide one example of a difference between calling and prayer and then they ready to make a claim about what other Christians fail to 'see' or practice.

The second sentence is even more troubling. It talks about audible calling. I don't necessarily have a problem with that by itself, but it also suggests it should be 'loud' and finally says that it should be a "strenuous exercise." When there start to be assertions about the intensity or volume at which it should be practiced, that's where things can get questionable and give people the ground to label it as a peculiar teaching.

A number of years ago, I attended a college conference where there was a message given on the subject of calling on the Lord. The brother who gave that message mentioned listening to some old tapes of WL speaking on the subject of calling on the Lord, and he was impressed by the way that WL had demonstrated "calling on the Lord." Apparently, the example WL gave was done at the top of his lungs with much more exuberance than it is normally practiced. So the brother was trying to make the point that there was supposedly a minimal level of intensity at which it should be practiced (I guess this might have been what WL taught at some point).

Later that day after getting back, we had a home meeting with a few who had been at the conference. One person in the meeting (who was at that conference) had a history of being a bit mentally unstable. During the meeting, we wanted to try to practice what the brother had talked about at the conference. As we were all shouting "Oh Lord Jesus" the unstable person started shouting louder and louder, and after a minute or so, this person had worked himself into a fit of rage and was yelling at all of us in the room. It took some effort to calm him down and the situation was a bit scary as it was completely unexpected.

Apparently, he had gotten angry that the rest of us weren't calling loud enough, based upon what he heard at the conference. Anyways, my point here is that the whole situation was instigated by a message claiming that the practice of calling on the Lord should have a certain level of 'intensity' to it. The person who was mentally ill took it to the extreme, but the rest of us didn't know any better either. We were just attempting to practice what we had been taught. This is where peculiarity comes into play. At least from what I've seen, what the LC teaches about calling on the Lord has the potential to be (and has been) taken to certain extremes.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

On two different sections of the site you linked, I came across the following statements:
Some Christians may consider calling on the Lord equivalent to the same as praying to Him. It is true that calling is a type of prayer, but calling is not merely praying. For example, Jeremiah 29:12 clearly differentiates the two: “Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me, and I will listen to you.”

When we call loudly with an open mouth we experience Psalm 81:7a, 10b. As we love the Lord with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength (Mark 12:30), we call upon Him with all of our being. The use of the word “wide” in Psalm 81:10 implies a strenuous exercise. Opening our mouth this way leads us into a richer experience of Christ.

It is troubling that they would distinguish calling and prayer. The two can be the same thing. A prayer can be a cry out to God. It's these kind of statements that raise a bit of a question mark. They provide one example of a difference between calling and prayer and then they ready to make a claim about what other Christians fail to 'see' or practice.

The second sentence is even more troubling. It talks about audible calling. I don't necessarily have a problem with that by itself, but it also suggests it should be 'loud' and finally says that it should be a "strenuous exercise." When there start to be assertions about the intensity or volume at which it should be practiced, that's where things can get questionable and give people the ground to label it as a peculiar teaching.

A number of years ago, I attended a college conference where there was a message given on the subject of calling on the Lord. The brother who gave that message mentioned listening to some old tapes of WL speaking on the subject of calling on the Lord, and he was impressed by the way that WL had demonstrated "calling on the Lord." Apparently, the example WL gave was done at the top of his lungs with much more exuberance than it is normally practiced. So the brother was trying to make the point that there was supposedly a minimal level of intensity at which it should be practiced (I guess this might have been what WL taught at some point).

Later that day after getting back, we had a home meeting with a few who had been at the conference. One person in the meeting (who was at that conference) had a history of being a bit mentally unstable. During the meeting, we wanted to try to practice what the brother had talked about at the conference. As we were all shouting "Oh Lord Jesus" the unstable person started shouting louder and louder, and after a minute or so, this person had worked himself into a fit of rage and was yelling at all of us in the room. It took some effort to calm him down and the situation was a bit scary as it was completely unexpected.

Apparently, he had gotten angry that the rest of us weren't calling loud enough, based upon what he heard at the conference. Anyways, my point here is that the whole situation was instigated by a message claiming that the practice of calling on the Lord should have a certain level of 'intensity' to it. The person who was mentally ill took it to the extreme, but the rest of us didn't know any better either. We were just attempting to practice what we had been taught. This is where peculiarity comes into play. At least from what I've seen, what the LC teaches about calling on the Lord has the potential to be (and has been) taken to certain extremes.

I think you are reading too much into what they are saying. I think they are saying it's a type of prayer because it is about contacting the Lord. On the other hand it's not "just prayer", because we cannot do so well just by calling. If we just called on the Lord and did not ask God for anything we would not receive anything.

I think anything in Christianity can be taken to the extreme. I have also observed the extreme angry behavior in churches before but it was to do with the doctrine.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

I think you are reading too much into what they are saying. I think they are saying it's a type of prayer because it is about contacting the Lord. On the other hand it's not "just prayer", because we cannot do so well just by calling. If we just called on the Lord and did not ask God for anything we would not receive anything.

I think anything in Christianity can be taken to the extreme. I have also observed the extreme angry behavior in churches before but it was to do with the doctrine.

It has been my observation and that of many others that the LC has a pattern of taking things to the extreme. Of course, anyone can take something to the extreme if they want to, but when a pattern exists, that's when it raises more difficult questions. At a very general level, the LC practice of calling on the name of the Lord is a 'shock' to newcomers and something that they generally have to acclimate themselves to. My question for you is whether or not this 'hurdle' to newcomers is necessary or not. Unless you can make the compelling argument that it is, then it is an 'extreme' that people must embrace in order to exist in the LC.

Time and time again, I saw people get scared off by practices like calling on the Lord. When people who have a genuine heart to follow the Lord are driven away by practices that they don't feel comfortable with, it raises difficult questions. I'm not talking about people just not liking the environment of a particular church or particular practices. I'm talking about practices that raise genuine and valid questions time and time again. If a Christian group is put in the position of having to constantly defend what they do, then maybe it's time to stop blaming the concerned individuals and instead start putting practices under the microscope.

So it is on this basis that I read things like that site you linked with a grain of salt. When I read that calling must happen 'loudly' or that it must be an "strenuous exercise", that raises a red flag. I've seen firsthand such things taken to an extreme in this way. And this is what is being taught in the LC. There is no way to question it in that environment or to put safety measures in place so that it doesn't get taken the wrong way. They just teach something and let people run with it. If it gets taken too far, they just point fingers.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

It has been my observation and that of many others that the LC has a pattern of taking things to the extreme. Of course, anyone can take something to the extreme if they want to, but when a pattern exists, that's when it raises more difficult questions. At a very general level, the LC practice of calling on the name of the Lord is a 'shock' to newcomers and something that they generally have to acclimate themselves to. My question for you is whether or not this 'hurdle' to newcomers is necessary or not. Unless you can make the compelling argument that it is, then it is an 'extreme' that people must embrace in order to exist in the LC.

To a newcomer anything done in church will seem strange. I would never say contacting the Lord is a hurdle. I would say it is far less extreme and off putting than a room full of people blabbering in tongues.

Originally Posted by Freedom

Time and time again, I saw people get scared off by practices like calling on the Lord. When people who have a genuine heart to follow the Lord are driven away by practices that they don't feel comfortable with, it raises difficult questions. I'm not talking about people just not liking the environment of a particular church or particular practices. I'm talking about practices that raise genuine and valid questions time and time again. If a Christian group is put in the position of having to constantly defend what they do, then maybe it's time to stop blaming the concerned individuals and instead start putting practices under the microscope.

I should think demons and sinners get scared off by calling on the Lord.

Originally Posted by Freedom

So it is on this basis that I read things like that site you linked with a grain of salt. When I read that calling must happen 'loudly' or that it must be an "strenuous exercise", that raises a red flag. I've seen firsthand such things taken to an extreme in this way. And this is what is being taught in the LC. There is no way to question it in that environment or to put safety measures in place so that it doesn't get taken the wrong way. They just teach something and let people run with it. If it gets taken too far, they just point fingers.

Maybe we are just applying/following this Bible verse?:

Isa. 12:4, 6 “Call upon His name!..Cry out and give a ringing shout”

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

To a newcomer anything done in church will seem strange. I would never say contacting the Lord is a hurdle. I would say it is far less extreme and off putting than a room full of people blabbering in tongues.

There’s a big difference between someone feeling apprehensive/confused walking into a church for the first time as opposed to feeling alarmed at what has been encountered. I’m talking about the latter, yet it seems you would like to blur any line of distinction. Lots of Christian groups strive to be welcoming to newcomers, and for good reason. The LC environment requires explanation. Even someone who has been a Christian for many years might be taken aback at the shouting of “Oh Lord Jesus.” It’s not that there’s necessarily anything wrong with what is being practiced, it’s just that the practice is peculiar, because it is unique to the LC.

Peculiar - belonging exclusively to some person, group, or thing

The practice the LC labels calling on the name of the Lord, is unique to their group - and therefore peculiar. Again, I say, there is no evidence to link what the LC practices to any form of Biblical practice. If there were, then it might be justifiable to have something ‘peculiar’ going on. What happened in Acts 2 was considered peculiar to those observing. But that doesn’t mean that we purposely need to act ‘different’ when there is no reason to.

I should think demons and sinners get scared off by calling on the Lord.

Your mention of demons in attempt to rationalize LC practices is getting to be a bit absurd. It’s not a good way to get any of us here to take your positions seriously.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

There’s a big difference between someone feeling apprehensive/confused walking into a church for the first time as opposed to feeling alarmed at what has been encountered. I’m talking about the latter, yet it seems you would like to blur any line of distinction. Lots of Christian groups strive to be welcoming to newcomers, and for good reason. The LC environment requires explanation. Even someone who has been a Christian for many years might be taken aback at the shouting of “Oh Lord Jesus.” It’s not that there’s necessarily anything wrong with what is being practiced, it’s just that the practice is peculiar, because it is unique to the LC.

Peculiar - belonging exclusively to some person, group, or thing

The practice the LC labels calling on the name of the Lord, is unique to their group - and therefore peculiar. Again, I say, there is no evidence to link what the LC practices to any form of Biblical practice. If there were, then it might be justifiable to have something ‘peculiar’ going on. What happened in Acts 2 was considered peculiar to those observing. But that doesn’t mean that we purposely need to act ‘different’ when there is no reason to.


Your mention of demons in attempt to rationalize LC practices is getting to be a bit absurd. It’s not a good way to get any of us here to take your positions seriously.

The church services of the denominations do not encourage the Lord's presence or much zeal for the Lord, so when a person encounters it for the first time they may be taken aback. There can be a similar sort of reaction when people attend Pentecostal churches. The church services of one man speaking and everyone silent is a sign of their degradation.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

The church services of the denominations do not encourage the Lord's presence or much zeal for the Lord, so when a person encounters it for the first time they may be taken aback. There can be a similar sort of reaction when people attend Pentecostal churches. The church services of one man speaking and everyone silent is a sign of their degradation.

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'.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Freedom

When I read that calling must happen 'loudly' or that it must be an "strenuous exercise", that raises a red flag. I've seen firsthand such things taken to an extreme in this way. And this is what is being taught in the LC. There is no way to question it in that environment or to put safety measures in place so that it doesn't get taken the wrong way. They just teach something and let people run with it. If it gets taken too far, they just point fingers.

Too often, the matter of calling on the Lord loudly is for show. To draw attention to one's self. One can easily call on the Lord quietly or silently. Difference is when you call on the Lord loudly it's for others to see. When you do it quietly or silently, it's between you and the Father.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

Too often, the matter of calling on the Lord loudly is for show. To draw attention to one's self. One can easily call on the Lord quietly or silently. Difference is when you call on the Lord loudly it's for others to see. When you do it quietly or silently, it's between you and the Father.

Amen!

When the Pharisees prayed in public for show, then Jesus instructed us to pray in our closets.

When the Blendeds call on the Lord in public for show (like at Whistler), then Jesus instructs us to call on His name in our closets.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Terry

Too often, the matter of calling on the Lord loudly is for show. To draw attention to one's self. One can easily call on the Lord quietly or silently. Difference is when you call on the Lord loudly it's for others to see. When you do it quietly or silently, it's between you and the Father.

I remember a setting where an ex-LC member attend a LC meeting for purposes of visiting family. During the meeting he prayed and called on the Lord in the 'strong' way that they like. Enough so that it impressed all the elders and they were wondering what they could do to get this person to start meeting again.

I already happened to know that this person had no interest in meeting with the LC regularly, so I was a big intrigued that just by a simple performance that everyone would be so easily fooled into thinking that this person was 'positive' towards the LC. But a performance is exactly what people were looking for and using to judge people by.

So in this context, I do not accept the claim others have made that practices like calling on the Lord are anything important. When it's mainly used as some sort of litmus test to see how much with the program someone is, then that calls into question its actual value.