[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by OBW

If we need to discuss them in the context in which they are described in the book, then either the topic requires the reading of the book, or you should put them in context (short of quoting the entire book)

I think “Toxic Faith”, in almost any context, will be worth discussing on our forum. 10-15 years ago I probably would have told you that there is no such thing. I believe the great majority of the current participants (and lurkers) here would now confirm that, not only does toxic faith exist, the Local Church is probably to be considered the poster child for this phenomenon in the modern Christian church. Nell will correct me if I’m wrong, but I think she only posted the individual books here as jumping off points for discussions, and not necessarily as a “set in granite” guideline to be followed to a tee.

OK, add to what I said that these items, by existing in society and culture at large, also exist in the church. I'm not saying "so what?" but instead saying that we can't just run off and say that the LC is there. We have to do the work of establishing that they have crossed some line that goes from some innocuous level to that of being truly abusive.

Points well taken. Nevertheless, I would think that the vast majority of ex long-time members would have no problem in saying that the Local Church has, to some degree, “crossed some line” over into being truly abusive in many different ways. These abuses have been well documented and chronicled over on the BARM forum over a period of many years across thousands of posts.

My point is that a list is just a list. We can say that some/all of them can be found somewhere on the list. But that is not proof of anything. It is in a pattern of actual abuse that is linked to the list. We can say that they are deep into the list, but if we cannot substantiate our claims, we are no better as we point at them than they are when they point at Christianity.

Again, I think the list was not posted here as a be-all-end-all, but rather just a primer to get us going. Not exactly sure what you mean by “substantiate our claims” (especially since no claims have even been made yet on this thread)…but I would remind us all that “Christianity” was not the one to claim that they, and they alone are “The Lord’s Recovery”. Christianity was not the one who claimed that their apostle was the One Apostle with the One Ministry for the Age, and so on and so forth. If there are burdens of proof, they fall on the ones who have made these outrageous and ridiculous claims, and not on the shoulders of those of us who spent years finding out the hard way that these claims were patently false.

The statements did not provide a basis or linkage to anything.

I think the basis and linkage to the toxic faith many experienced in the Local Church will be forthcoming very soon. Hang on to yur hat…it’s a comin…I guaraaannnnteee.

Can someone provide ground rules for the discussion? Can we agree that simply saying “it is so” is not worthy of the bandwidth required to transmit the bytes through the internet? Can someone with knowledge of the books provide context?

I think so long as everybody keeps within the general theme of “toxic faith” then we should be ok. Now apparently some of these authors have related this notion to us in black and white. This does not mean that every little jot and tittle is going to match the abuses and excesses that we see in the Local Church, but from what I read in Nell’s openings post it looks like the shoe fits rather well. Just my opinion of course. I can’t recall if this is the book that is published in full on line or its one of the others, but there are probably enough significant quotes available on line to get us going.