Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
... it is clear that the LRC claims the right to cloak their assemblies with the nomenclature of "lampstand" and to exclude all others from it. If they aren't there, then there is no lampstand. If they are there, then there is a lampstand. And if they move away, the lampstand goes with them.
But it is not so in the NT, especially in the one place the term is used — Revelation. The lampstand is there in the city that was declared to have lost its first love. It was there where that woman, Jezebel, taught despicable things. It was there where everyone was lukewarm.
The lampstand is everywhere that there are people shining as the image of God in their lives among the darkness that is the world. The LRC's interest is not its testimony to the world. Only to the principalities and powers. And they don't even know how little that testimony means when their lack of shining to the living humans demonstrates that they are not having any impact on the world. At least not as a single group.
|
Here is an interesting thought: if LC nomenclature of "lampstand" accepts the scriptural presentation of each church having a lampstand, as in the seven churches in Asia, then how is it that LC assemblies only are designated as lampstands in the world today? How does the thought of each LSM-affiliated assembly having the unique lampstand square with the scriptures showing that each fellowship, no matter how degraded or what the situation (Balaam, Jezebel, Nicolaitans, etc) had a lampstand?
Did WL dance around this disparity, I wonder? Or did he just ignore it?