Local Church Discussions - View Single Post

InOmnibusCaritas · 04-14-2015, 02:40 AM

I find no evidence that Lee taught a gospel that is different from the one taught in Galatians.

The "high gospel" vs "low gospel" seems to, despite unusual lingo, fits very well into Paul's presentation of the gospel in Romans which climates in Rom. 8 (esp. v. 29 -- being conformed to the image of the Firstborn Son of God).

The 1,000 years outer darkness, which admittedly is thinly supported but arguably admissible soterio-eschatology, has nothing to do with Lee's presentation of the gospel. People are generally quite charitable on what is acceptable eschatology.

If there is one problem with Lee's presentation of the gospel, it is what is known as "easy-believism". In my locality, the baptism candidates are not asked to renounce their sins nor profess Jesus as Lord and Saviour. They were only tested on whether they call, "O Lord Jesus".

The other things that are brought up in this thread e.g., localism, is irrelevant to Lee's presentation of the gospel. Even LSM has to agree that Titus Chu is a regenerated child of God and will end up in the New Jerusalem.

Interpretations on rewards and punishments and their gradations that don't tantamount to eternal perdition are fair game in all evangelical factions of Christianity.

04-14-2015, 02:40 AM	#6
InOmnibusCaritas Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 56	Re: Does The Local Church Teach/Preach Another Gospel and Another Jesus? I find no evidence that Lee taught a gospel that is different from the one taught in Galatians. The "high gospel" vs "low gospel" seems to, despite unusual lingo, fits very well into Paul's presentation of the gospel in Romans which climates in Rom. 8 (esp. v. 29 -- being conformed to the image of the Firstborn Son of God). The 1,000 years outer darkness, which admittedly is thinly supported but arguably admissible soterio-eschatology, has nothing to do with Lee's presentation of the gospel. People are generally quite charitable on what is acceptable eschatology. If there is one problem with Lee's presentation of the gospel, it is what is known as "easy-believism". In my locality, the baptism candidates are not asked to renounce their sins nor profess Jesus as Lord and Saviour. They were only tested on whether they call, "O Lord Jesus". The other things that are brought up in this thread e.g., localism, is irrelevant to Lee's presentation of the gospel. Even LSM has to agree that Titus Chu is a regenerated child of God and will end up in the New Jerusalem. Interpretations on rewards and punishments and their gradations that don't tantamount to eternal perdition are fair game in all evangelical factions of Christianity.