Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
I was not really thinking of a propriety definition of the word practical. You seemed to confuse the difference between the universal and the local churches so I was addressing that.
|
Your definition of local church is proprietary as well. You define it so that only groups in your movement qualify.
There are many groups meeting "as the church in the city." The International Church of Christ meets as one church per city. And there are others. But the LCM always manages to find a reason to invalidate them all and not recognize them as churches. The only local churches it recognizes are those loyal to LSM. Very convenient.
This is strong evidence that the locality doctrine does not produce oneness. It only produces an environment where groups fight over the "prize" of getting to be the "one church in the city." In other words it produces more division, while each presumptively "genuine local church" turn its nose up at the other "pretenders."
So it's really nothing more than another "our doctrines are better than yours" battle, just like with.... you guessed it.... "the denominations."
So the LCM really exists in a bubble of denial. They believe there must be a "practical church in the city" and they want to be it (understandably). But in order to achieve this status in their minds they must block out all the contradictions, absurdities and hypocrisies such a state creates, which again accounts for their being unable to debate with full rationality on boards like this or to honestly and openly defend themselves in the public arena. It also explains why they resort to lawsuits to shut people up, because they simply cannot defend their ideas in an open forum.