Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
I never drew a comparison with the "holocaust", rather I compared you to a "holocaust denier." Big difference. Maybe I was wrong. Perhaps that was too hard for you to understand. My bad.
I also understand your need for diversionary tactics. Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians concerning unleavened bread, and having a discussion about the symbols of the Lord's Table, you launched into this nonsensical tangent about nazi swastikas. Your bad.
I disagree concerning who had made these symbols into regulations and ordinances. Only the LCM would use the symbols from another church (re: STG posted a pic from his vacation) to condemn all other denominations as you were so quick to do. But that is how Lee taught. His way was the best. Every other way was to be condemned. This practice of his should be considered the unleavened bread of malice and evil.
|
We were already in agreement about those Scriptures so I am not sure what you are talking about "Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians".
Taking another look at 1 Cor 5:8 "Let us keep the feast, not with the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."
What type of bread is it talking about using in the feast? Leavened or unleavened? Clearly it is unleavened, so my point still stands about the symbols. "Let us not keep the feast with leaven" - literally, or metaphorically. This is obviously a symbolic instruction about malice and evil, but to symbolize this they would have used unleavened bread in the actual feasts. Paul would not have said, as you have, "it does not matter", when he draws such a comparison between feasting and the type of bread.
Lee never condemned anyone for using leavened bread and neither did I. I pointed out the significance of the symbols on the Table and that they are deficient and not representing the "one Body" it is claimed they are. I also pointed out that certain denominations ie Catholic, Lutheran, present the bread in a better way. So the statement "condemn all other denominations" is an exaggeration.
Finally, it does not make sense why I would condemn a denomination for their presentation, when their presentation is of no consequence to whether their Table is valid in my view. If it were my aim to condemn the denomination, I might have said that the table is invalid because it is a sectarian table, and the presentation is of no concern of mine. But that is not a statement I made in my remark about StG's Table presentation.