Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
The 6 year CRI study shows many of those things you claim are simply untrue. We do not go around pointing out the flaws of every group other than ourselves. We say good things about the work of the denominations as well.
|
Well, then you have at least cleaned up your act when in the presence of people doing a paid-for study to declare you "OK."
And some of the written material has been cleaned-up over time. But not all. It is still there. Go back and look at the things in the various "life" studies.
And it was evident that being a church defined solely by the "ground" of the city was not sufficient. Your group's HQ has spend significant time and money suing to declare existing groups which were deemed fully qualified to be the "right" group "one the ground" until some other criteria was violated. And the most common criteria seems to have been the unwillingness of the particular assembly to simply do exactly what the LSM dictated for their meetings. And the allowance of materials written by others, including others from within the group. There were deemed sufficient for the LSM-affiliated group to declare the others unfit to retain their lampstand. So a second church on the ground was established.
Dance around that one all you want. The "ground" is just an outward ruse to hide a series of "you have to do this and that" details to be qualified.
Do you really treat other Christian groups the same as they treat each other? They mostly treat each other pretty well. Even when they don't agree on everything. And they don't insist that meeting with them is required. Of course every group thinks that they have the best collection of teachings and practices. But they don't chastise everyone that is not them.
And I don't care what CRI said. The so-called local churches do chastise everyone else.
And they teach errors that are more than benign.