Local Church Discussions - View Single Post - LSM's Sacrament - the "Ground of the Local Church" NIGEL TOMES

alwayslearning · 04-30-2013, 07:23 AM

Nigel has finally addressed the "sacred cow" of the LC system and as Ohio has pointed out I'm sure Titus Chu will not be a happy camper! (Smart move adding the disclaimer Nigel!)

This is a fundamental doctrine that makes the LC system tick. It grips people as a stronghold in their minds because it has a certain superficial logic to it: the NT says "The Church in Jerusalem", "The Church in Antioch" etc therefore we must do the same thing to to be a true NT church. And each church must have elders appointed by apostles like in the NT. So if we simply call ourselves the church in a city and have an apostle appoint elders it's the same as in the NT. Yippee! We'll be the only legitimate church in a city. But although it seems logical it ignores a basic tenet of exposition work i.e. application. It takes a historical description and turns it into dogma with no real practical application in 2013.

For this kind of thing to work today you need at least 2 things: cities with no Christians and apostles with apostolic authority to appoint elders. Where do these conditions exist? Where are these cities and where are these apostles?

And as some have already pointed out what is the history of the LC system in practicing their own ground of locality doctrine? If you disagree with the apostle they'll go down the street and start another church in that city which is why in Toronto for example there's about 4 variations of "The Church in Toronto." ( But before going down the street they'll probably try to sue you so you can go down the street instead of them!) So what is the true ground of oneness for the LC system? The LSM version is the ministry of Witness Lee. The Cleveland version is the ministry of Titus Chu. In promoting such a doctrine they are not only ignoring 2000 years of church history they are ignoring their own history as well. Why don't they just be honest and admit what they actually are: The Church of Witness Lee and The Church of Titus Chu?

04-30-2013, 07:23 AM	#38
alwayslearning Member Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 360	Re: LSM's Sacrament - the "Ground of the Local Church" NIGEL TOMES Nigel has finally addressed the "sacred cow" of the LC system and as Ohio has pointed out I'm sure Titus Chu will not be a happy camper! (Smart move adding the disclaimer Nigel!) This is a fundamental doctrine that makes the LC system tick. It grips people as a stronghold in their minds because it has a certain superficial logic to it: the NT says "The Church in Jerusalem", "The Church in Antioch" etc therefore we must do the same thing to to be a true NT church. And each church must have elders appointed by apostles like in the NT. So if we simply call ourselves the church in a city and have an apostle appoint elders it's the same as in the NT. Yippee! We'll be the only legitimate church in a city. But although it seems logical it ignores a basic tenet of exposition work i.e. application. It takes a historical description and turns it into dogma with no real practical application in 2013. For this kind of thing to work today you need at least 2 things: cities with no Christians and apostles with apostolic authority to appoint elders. Where do these conditions exist? Where are these cities and where are these apostles? And as some have already pointed out what is the history of the LC system in practicing their own ground of locality doctrine? If you disagree with the apostle they'll go down the street and start another church in that city which is why in Toronto for example there's about 4 variations of "The Church in Toronto." ( But before going down the street they'll probably try to sue you so you can go down the street instead of them!) So what is the true ground of oneness for the LC system? The LSM version is the ministry of Witness Lee. The Cleveland version is the ministry of Titus Chu. In promoting such a doctrine they are not only ignoring 2000 years of church history they are ignoring their own history as well. Why don't they just be honest and admit what they actually are: The Church of Witness Lee and The Church of Titus Chu?