Quote:
Originally Posted by jesusislord
It's ridiculous they still hold the false view of one church one city. They are dividing themselves from 99% of the member of the body practically. When they talk about the feelings of the members and the reality of the body of Christ, why they don't see the rest 99% of the member?
Is the Lord happy of this stand? Will they go back to the bible and look at others theologian view regarding this matter? All the negative things could have been avoided if they have fellowship more with other groups. Now they're even more closed to themselves with one stream of divine flow. It is so hard to make sense of it, why the Lc people don't see the problem with that. I remember brother Nee recognize the breathens as the pararrel work of God back in the days, but why it has became one divine stream and the stream have to be with the Lc? (less than one percent of the entire Christian in the world)
|
Two points can be made here, one's a bit of a larger issue but still relevant, and the second's more specific to the LC as I experienced it.
First, any fellowship that bases itself on dividing from others will again be divided as its members eventually follow suit. Each fresh "revelation" or "truth" leads to a fresh division, or multiple divisions. It goes all the way back, that I can see. There was the "robber council" of Chalcedon where several church polities split off (Syrian, Armenian, Egyptian, Ethiopian etc), then the "Great Schism" of the East/West split, then the Anglicans, Protestants, Wesleyans, Baptists, Congregationalists etc etc. We've all read the histories, I'm sure. Each group finds some reason to leave the others, only to find their own members use the same reasoning to leave them. So it has been with The Little Flock/Lord's recovery, then with the splits of Titus Chu, Dong Yu Lan, who themselves get defections, etc.
In this, I see the "Lord's recovery" as merely a continuation of a long process of alienation and separation, often with acrimony (churches in the GLA area suing each other for possession of the physical assets, broadsides sent out by each party [DYL v/v LSM] charging the other with nefarious and egregious spiritual sins). So, nothing new under the sun, there.
The second thing, more to the point of the post quoted above, is "taking the stand" or "taking the ground" for all the members of the faith in that particular city, whilst not having anything to do with any of them! Does anyone recall this? I remember it slowly dawning on me that our "taking the ground" meant to be cloistered off in one building, putting our chairs in a circle and reading the writings of one ministry in Anaheim California. Everyone else in our town was off limits. No Christian was worthy of our time. If they had a "name" they were Babylon and to be shunned. If they didn't have a name they were a "free group" and needed to get on board with the One Body of Christ (us). Nobody, and I mean nobody, out there in our city got fellowship from us. You had to come in our circle and sit in our chairs in our building, and say, "Amen" when we read a footnote from the RecV.
Any attempt to reach out and acknowledge other believers was condemned by RK as "Building bridges to Babylon". I don't remember the date of that speech but I heard it, once. Of all the divisions, or sects, that have arisen over the past 2,000 years, the Local Church is one of the most divisive, adversarial, and sectarian that I can think of. Certainly in the top 10%. A "narrow view" indeed.