Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
In the LC, they like to talk about what the church isn't, and say things such as "the church isn't a building", "we don't go to church", etc. It seems that Nee/Lee developed a lot of ideas about what the church is by approaching the subject from the view of what the church is not. That is the wrong approach and it leads to the wrong conclusions.
|
Great points here.
Before I left the LC's, the Lord led me to study the Brethren and their early splits. I studied their early principles, and how they diverged over time. I found one of John Darby's earliest writings to be very significant. I have posted this before.
Darby felt that their unity was based upon a common judgment of evil.
This has become the basis for all exclusivism. Both Nee and Lee followed Darby in this line of reasoning concerning the uniting bonds of the church. History tells us that years after their initial split, inclusion in exclusive Brethren circles required the judgment of George Muller. If new congregants or assemblies refused to condemn Muller, they could not receive the "right hand of fellowship" from Darby and the exclusives.
Thus the oneness of the LC's has little to do with the seven "one's" in Ephesians 4. Ask Titus Chu, he got quarantined for allowing drums and guitars, asking for clean sheets, and publishing his own books. Same thing happened to Dong in Brazil. This is why the Blendeds will never work with outside churches; sue them yes, but never work with them, because they were trained by Lee that oneness is not what we have in common, but how we judge others.
And remember ... only the headquarters in Anaheim can decide what we are to judge. And when convenient, the "victims" may change from from time to time. I understand this month they like the Catholics for teaching deification.