[Jo S]

Originally Posted by Ohio

E) Jo S is trolling us

F) Jo S is drinking and posting

F) Jo S password has been hacked by DCP

G) Jo S is reincarnation of Bilbo

I only drink of the living water Ohio, and regular water. At this moment it's coffee.

Speaking of DCP, if Cleveland doesn't already have their own version of it, I elect Ohio as head director.

Originally Posted by awareness

I may be out of touch, but I don't think Jo S is any of these things. I just feel he's not been clear. Cuz of that I can't quite nail down where he stands. Particularly his claim of imbalance on the forum. I might be unbalanced, some might say, but I don't see all the other members being that way.

If I can reduce it all into one word it's discrimination. And I'm not referring to race, religion, or personal traits. It's this; why would you focus on only one of the heads of a seven-headed monster? You cut that off and you'll only make the monster angry.

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Wow! You think a lack of concentration on Titus Chu and Watchman Nee on a forum trying to make sense of the Local church movement is a conspiracy to get Drake back? I think Ohio's E, F, F, or G make a whole lot more sense.

For some, absolutely. For others, it's politics, and yet still for others it's fear of touching "God's anointed".

I refer you to the 3 stages of truth, ZNP.

BTW Ohio, Drake knew what he was doing by shunning you and he knows what he's doing now by staying off the forum. Don't let all that keep you in a state of unrest.

Originally Posted by Igzy

Because people are held in the LR by fear, and that is really not true of the Catholic Church. I was raised a Catholic. Yes, we were taught that it is the "one true church" and all that, but the mindset is very different than that in the LR. There is no real fear of leaving the CC now. If people sweat leaving the CC now it's usually for familial/cultural reasons, not spiritual ones.

So, yes, the organization might continue. I don't really care about that. My goal is to break the stronghold of fear and bondage, so people can make their own choices.

Of course. Love, repentance and salvation are right in line with what we are doing here.

I'm about people being saved, not organizations being destroyed. But I am for taking down spiritual strongholds that keep people from God. We are fighting a spiritual stronghold here, not people.

It's true there once was a fear of leaving the one true Catholic Church but I was under the impression that today it's fear that leads people into the Catholic Church, fear of God's judgment and wrath that is (Matthew 3:7). Could it be one of the things that leads many into the Local Churches today?

As far as strongholds, I agree we should bring lies into the light of scripture. However I have issue when people makes "strongholds" objects, whether people or organizations. It's the love of God that draws people out of the darkness and sets them free. If you only supply information that merely reveals the darkness, then what's left for those people that leave those organizations because of those efforts? Are they still not left in bondage?

I agree that the lies embedded in Local Church doctrine are strongholds and go even further and say they are cancerous. And just like cancer, the goal is to destroy the tumors without destroying the person even if that person is our enemy. Easy to say, hard to do, but it's commanded and expected of us.

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

For Titus Chu or Nee, l myself rarely have direct fellowship with them because I never spend my time with them and their flock. That's why I have no enough database to criticize. I have no intention to play politics here.

I completely understand that. From a mainly unbiased point of view, when criticizing doctrine, it's intuitive for me to not stop mid-track but go to the root of the teachings. If my search ends at a person, I'll call them out but it's not personal. I feel many can get a little bit too personal in their responses and stop short because of that. In saying that, things seem so personal here that the term "Lee" has become a synonym for LSM, DCP, Drake, ect.

I too haven't had direct contact or fellowship with Nee or Lee but in reading Nee's own words I do get a clear sense of who he was as a person of faith and see mostly him in LC members, that includes Lee and Chu. If I ever get caught up in anger it's toward Watchman Nee and the naivety he had that led him to mix all the eastern mystic and new age thought into Christian doctrine. I then remember how that was once me and so I allow empathy to take over.

Weren't most all of you once just like a young Nee and a young Lee, naive and idealistic? They too got caught up and ensnared in lies just like we all did. Even those in leadership today. Let's pray for them and hope the Lord breaks their chains.

Thanks for putting up with me Truthseeker, didn't mean to take over your thread with my conspiracy theories.