Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
So true.
Brother Titus Chu, whom we all considered to be one of the greatest free thinkers in the LC, chided John Ingalls for speaking his conscience on behalf of the Anaheim saints saying, "you owe brother Lee even your own life."
Who would say such a thing? Where and when did we in the LC's make such a horrible transition? How did we morph from owing the Lord everything for His great salvation to owing Lee everything for his "great" ministry? At what point did our ascended Head stop being the Minister of the age, and Lee take over His duties?
|
The quote is from Philemon. Which is why if you want to run with this definition then you are going to define the early church as a cult. If someone had told me when I was meeting the LRC that you considered both the LRC and early church as a cult, I would have taken that as a badge of honor and considered you fallen Christianity. This is why I think these definitions are bogus. It also raises serious questions with me as to why someone would fabricate their own definition of a cult when the NT is very clear on what constitutes a false prophet and what constitutes the fruit of a false prophet. Why is it that they avoid the NT definition to create their own definition which would also classify the early church as a false church?
According to this verses that apply to Paul cannot apply to Witness Lee. Awareness takes this one step further and says that because they cannot apply to Witness Lee they can't apply to Paul, hence the NT is full of error.
The obvious error to me is that the same document that defines what a church is also defines what a false church is, and yet no one is taking that definition. Why not?