Quote:
Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah
Here is what I found:
On the one hand, we are an army, and with the army there should be a commander in chief. In the New Testament you cannot find the term “commander in chief.” We can realize this matter, though, by inference from Paul's mentioning of the uncertain sound of the trumpet for the battle (1 Cor. 14:8). Surely the battle implies an army, and in an army there is the need of a general to command the army, to direct the army to fight.. (Elders' Training, Book 07: One Accord for the Lord's Move, Chapter 7, Section 2)
|
1Cor 14:8 For if the trumpet give an uncertain voice, who shall prepare himself for war?
As best I can tell this is the New Testament basis for the elders and leaders of the LSM to issue a ban on all Christian publications other than their publishing arm. The violation of this rule was used to support the excommunication of Titus Chu.
Now the context of this is the speaking of tongues in a church meeting. It seems to me that Paul is concerned with "distinct sound", "understanding what is said".
Verse 9 continues and explains this saying "So also ye, unless ye utter by the tongue speech easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye will be speaking into the air."
So there is no inference at all that this implies only one speaker, but rather that when you speak you must speak in a clear language that everyone can understand. How do you spin a doctrine of only one publisher out of this?
As for "commander in chief" it seems that is based on Joshua in the OT being the captain of the Lord's army. Since Joshua was a type of Christ it would be appropriate to refer to Jesus as "commander in chief" however, I think "Lord" would be much clearer and more Biblical.
Witness Lee clearly stated that there were some in the elders training who referred to Witness Lee as the commander in chief. That should have been rebuked and repudiated.