Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah
This was a response to your post on 1Cor 3 with the conclusion "therefore, no more boasting about leaders" in reference to "some saying they are of Paul and others of Apollos". So clearly the context is about what the "common members did".
I am not denying that your view is a valid view of the LRC, what I am saying is that your view is limited to a minority of saints. I would define "minority" as less than 50%. I would call the ones I am referring to as the "silent majority". No matter where I met (NY, Houston, Irving, West Texas, NH, or Taipei) I was always able to fellowship with them. Get them out of the meeting hall and WL is nothing more than a footnote.
|
Well, this correlates to one of my basic beliefs about this whole situation which I stated earlier.
The whole problem with the LRC movement is the common saints need to speak out and tell the leadership what they believe.
If it is true what you say, that WL is just a footnote to most, then why are they letting a subgroup which believes he was the MOTA lead them around by the nose? Why are they allowing this subgroup to create this reputation for them of abuse, intolerance and exclusivity?
SavedbyGrace came here to tell us the LRC ain't that bad, and that he doesn't buy into the MOTA stuff. In other words, he saying he's a sane and reasonable member. He resents the implications about his group presented here.
But we are not the ones creating this implication! We are just pointing it out. It's the extreme leadership of LSM and the BBs which is creating this image. Just read
www.afaithfulword.org.
As long as LSM and the BBs hold the reins and they do not publicly repent of their abuses this image will persist. As long as the common saints are silent about it, they will have to live with that reputation, and in fact they deserve it.
Tough words, but they are facts.