Talking to Believers in the Local Chuch

[jesusislord]

After a while I left the lc and meet somewhere, I try to talk to them because I still believe we have the same Lord. But they can't seems to understand why they're in where they are, they literally think they're following God, they nullify who lead and influence them, they think they got the bible 100%, they hardly can appreciate the good works of other groups, they ignore the contradiction btw leaders from other groups and their leaders, they doesn't seem to want to admit there's an issue.

I think how a person think is heavy influenced by what they read, what's your experience talking to the believer in lc after you left?

[Trapped]

Originally Posted by jesusislord

what's your experience talking to the believer in lc after you left?

Defensiveness. Logic and plain words don't mean anything. As an example, one saint could not wrap their head around the fact that Satan's nature and will are different things from our nature and will. Another could not entertain the thought that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil might not be "the tree of death" because there wasn't actually any poison in it, and kept insisting that poison is still "good for food" because it's edible.

Why? Because to entertain these thoughts mean they have to assume, even hypothetically just for a second, that Witness Lee's interpretations are up for questioning.

They get agitated when presented with plain facts. It's just strange.

[jesusislord]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Defensiveness. Logic and plain words don't mean anything. As an example, one saint could not wrap their head around the fact that Satan's nature and will are different things from our nature and will. Another could not entertain the thought that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil might not be "the tree of death" because there wasn't actually any poison in it, and kept insisting that poison is still "good for food" because it's edible.

Why? Because to entertain these thoughts mean they have to assume, even hypothetically just for a second, that Witness Lee's interpretations are up for questioning.

They get agitated when presented with plain facts. It's just strange.

There's no witness lee interpretation for them, because they never read other interpretation or refer to other scholars outside of their group. When they join a training held by lsm they won't say it is a training held by the leaders of lsm, they'll call it the training by the Lord.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Defensiveness. Logic and plain words don't mean anything. As an example, one saint could not wrap their head around the fact that Satan's nature and will are different things from our nature and will. Another could not entertain the thought that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil might not be "the tree of death" because there wasn't actually any poison in it, and kept insisting that poison is still "good for food" because it's edible.

Why? Because to entertain these thoughts mean they have to assume, even hypothetically just for a second, that Witness Lee's interpretations are up for questioning.

They get agitated when presented with plain facts. It's just strange.

After leaving, it didn't take me long to realize that there was just no point in maintaining contact with any of them. I wouldn't have minded so much if there was the opportunity for any real discussions to take place, but there just wasn't.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Trapped

Defensiveness. ...They get agitated when presented with plain facts. It's just strange.

Originally Posted by Freedom

After leaving, it didn't take me long to realize that there was just no point in maintaining contact with any of them. I wouldn't have minded so much if there was the opportunity for any real discussions to take place, but there just wasn't.

There's a story somewhere that I haven't bothered to look up, but I remember it, because it made sense (as good stories do). It was about a person having knowledge of something dangerous, and warning the other. The moral of the story was, If you know about something and don't warn the next person, and they get hurt, the onus is now on you. But if you warn them, and they heed you, and turn back, then you've saved their life. But if you warn them, and they go on anyway, and get hurt, the onus is on them. You're discharged of your burden. Their blood is not on your hands.

That reminds me of another story... (sorry...) the prophet Amos comes down out of the hills, crying out for repentance. The townspeople laugh. "Amos! Get back up there with your sheep!!" Amos says, "I'd love to go back up there with my sheep. But God told me to come down here and warn you."

My point is, the conversation may not always be pleasant, but it's necessary. Try to make it simple and concise. They may accept it or reject it. They may bury it under layers of deflection and obfuscation. But you've discharged your duty. For example, the website by Jacob Howard is simple and direct, a good conversation starter, that is, if someone wants to have a conversation. If not, well okay. He did his part.

https://thelordsrecovery.org/blog/

[Sons to Glory!]

I think we have to take our direction directly from the Lord regarding approaching LC members. If we don't have His leading, it would come to exactly nothing and is a waste of time. But if you sense His leading, life and peace, then it will be something of Spirit and will be fruitful, regardless of how it seems to be received.

[byHismercy]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

I think we have to take our direction directly from the Lord regarding approaching LC members. If we don't have His leading, it would come to exactly nothing and is a waste of time. But if you sense His leading, life and peace, then it will be something of Spirit and will be fruitful, regardless of how it seems to be received.

I really wonder if this is true. I am not saying it is not, it is just that I recognize this to be LC think. So I really wonder at the veracity of it. Gods' word charges us to speak the truth in love, yes? And He calls the feet of those bringing and bearing the gospel of truth, the gospel of Christ, beautiful. Beautiful feet. So from what I see in scripture, we have a preordained calling to do both these things. Do we really need to 'sense the leading' or 'sense life and peace'.....before we walk in faith in what scripture teaches us?

Isn't it just ok to speak the truth, call out the error, preach the gospel, being as much in obedience to His word as we know it? If I sit around and wait for some sense of peace and life, deeply known in my being, I would never do anything. Just saying.

I have experienced the Lord in that way, StG. But it has only ever been personal to me, in my own deep need for clarity in a personal situation. So I know the Lord is well able to lead me in that sure, KNOWING kind of way, complete with absolute peace. But to have a conversation with someone about the truth vs. a lie, or truth vs. doctrinal error, I am usually on my own as far as 'sensing life' goes. But I still believe we are called to speak the truth in love, no matter our sense. And even if I have zero sense (most of the time)....God is faithful to His word, it cannot return void. I feel like we should just honor the word, irregardless of how we feel.

Today the Lord told me (over a sinkful of dirty dishes, in a quiet moment) that I was unfaithful to Him in a matter in my living. I have to acknowledge, He was right. He was telling me the truth. I repent, and His forgiveness and mercy are faithful to me, in spite of my infidelity. So I know He is still speaking to me, and still leading me, and that He DOES give us this 'sense' in our hearts and minds. So just to clarify, I am not mocking this thought at all. I do trust Him to lead me. I guess I am just not so clear in a moment to moment way. Or conversation by conversation. Usually I just try to obey the word and wing it. I think the concept of waiting on a particular sense is one of the ways that the LC paralyzes its congregants.