The Wild, Wild MidWest - All things Great Lakes Area and Canada

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm actually a different unregistered. Anyhow, it all sounds so wonderful, doesn't it. Unregistered alpha, you make good point about it being an infomercial for Titus Chu, there was some serious gushing going on there. If only the saints could gush about our Lord in that way after conferences & trainings instead of: "Titus said..." or "I like what Titus brought out..." or the classic "I really appreciated what Titus shared about..."

The referenced Fellowship Journal had an article from the recent Elders/Workers Conference, and this segment is what was shared by TC concerning Laodicea --

What is Laodicea? When the brothers overly try to love one another, there is the danger that the leaders will allow the opinions of the saints to prevail over the Spirit as to how the church life is practiced. One saint can influence the leading of a church simply by having an opinion and then insisting upon it. When that happens, the Spirit can no longer lead.

This is the most absurd interpretation I have ever heard. What about "the opinions of the leaders prevailing over the Spirit?" This interpretation is based upon WL's teaching that the word "Laodicea" is based upon the "opinion of the people."

Laodicea is actually produced by the proud and arrogant presumption by the leadership that what we got is better than all other Christians. Further to this is the condemnation passed to the rest of the body of Christ by the ministry. Laodicea has nothing to do with the saints loving each other too much. That is just ridiculous. The real problem has its roots in the ministry. But TC never would acknowledge that, instead he uses the age-old WL strategy of blaming the saints for the failed works of evil workers.

Then, after the message is given, his loyal lackeys must stand up and pay the homage of: "Titus said..." or "I like what Titus brought out..." or the classic "I really appreciated what Titus shared about...," or else face a rebuke at the next gathering.

So it's no wonder that the LC church history tends to repeat itself! Their leaders never accept any responsibility for their failures!

[Cal]

What is Laodicea? When the brothers overly try to love one another,

Just when you think it can't get any weirder....

[UntoHim]

Come on Igzy, haven't you ever read that verse: "by this shall all men know you are my disciples, if you have love one for another...but not too much love"

[Cal]

When the LRC says they have teachings you just won't get anywhere else, well, I guess this proves it.

[UntoHim]

What is Laodicea? When the brothers overly try to love one another, there is the danger that the leaders will allow the opinions of the saints to prevail over the Spirit as to how the church life is practiced. One saint can influence the leading of a church simply by having an opinion and then insisting upon it. When that happens, the Spirit can no longer lead.

This is the kind of nonsense you get from people who have insulated and isolated themselves from the balance that comes from the Body of Christ. It's also the kind of talk that can get your group labeled as a cult.

Besides, if leaders are so weak that one person's "opinion" is that big of a deal then they should not be leaders.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

This is the kind of nonsense you get from people who have insulated and isolated themselves from the balance that comes from the Body of Christ. It's also the kind of talk that can get your group labeled as a cult.Besides, if leaders are so weak that one person's "opinion" is that big of a deal then they should not be leaders.

It all depends what the "opinion" is, doesn't it?

If the "opinion" exposes leadership unrighteousness and abuse, then the leaders have cause to be concerned, don't they?

This is where LC leadership plays word games with the flock of God. They take certain serious concerns among the saints and then call them "opinions." Then they begin to tell the saints how dangerous it is to be an opinionated person, giving examples from the Bible like those "gossips and busybodies, going house to house, speaking things they ought not." This is manipulative and deceitful.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Igzy

When the LRC says they have teachings you just won't get anywhere else, well, I guess this proves it.

What is so disturbing to me is that these kinds of rotten teachings are used by LC leadership to coverup their own evil works, and at the same time blame the saints for something the Lord has frankly commanded them to do. Where is the scriptural precedence for this teaching? The results, however, are just as planned -- it is safer to love the ministry, than the brother or sister next to you. Loving your own wife and kids is somewhat risky, but loving TC is always "safe."

Couple this with all the gaga's over TC in the "history class," and the impact is overwhelming. I know, I was there for years. Now it seems even worse than before, since those who might not entirely agree (John Myer, Chuck Debelak, and others) have vanished from the scene.

Wonder what Speaker's Corner and other GLA posters are thinking?

[OBW]

I really miss SpeakersCorner.

[UntoHim]

Originally Posted by OBW

I really miss SpeakersCorner.

I second that.
Oh, Speaker, where art thou?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

I second that.
Oh, Speaker, where art thou?

I miss ZNPaaneah. His posts on the Shroud of Turin, as proof of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, were some of the most fascinating things I have ever read.

I can't figure out why that thread was restructured and then closed down.

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by Ohio

This is the most absurd interpretation I have ever heard. What about "the opinions of the leaders prevailing over the Spirit?" This interpretation is based upon WL's teaching that the word "Laodicea" is based upon the "opinion of the people."

Then, after the message is given, his loyal lackeys must stand up and pay the homage of: "Titus said..." or "I like what Titus brought out..." or the classic "I really appreciated what Titus shared about...," or else face a rebuke at the next gathering.

First part of your quoted post:
In general how can a brother speak such a word? Just because a brother or sister is not in some teaching or minister capacity, they're still members of the Body. As members of the Body, they have direct access to the Father just as any leading brother does. In a roundabout way Ohio, my suggestion is the "opinion of the people" could very well be less of an opinion, but the pulse of the Body.
Why those in leadership past and present reject such a feeling, it is because those in leadership feel they alone know "the feeling of the Body". Leadership want to take a certain direction, and when the congregation are resistant to the direction, it's the congregation's shortcomings.

Second part of your quoted post:
All I can say is how disappointing. I realize there is a fine line between appreciating a brother's speaking and uplifting a brother. What you've paraphrased Ohio, you can change the brother's name but the tone is always the same inflection in lifiting up a brother up. Apart from Titus, you could insert Witness Lee or any of the blended brothers, and the result is the same. Problem I see is a culture exists where the primary speaker needs to be exalted. The unregistered poster described it accurately with the word "gush". In the past whenever saints would return from a training or conference, gush is the decriptive word in their uplifiting of the primary speaker. My point is when you gush over a brother like this, you have redirected the focus from Christ to the speaking brother.
How hard is it to speak to the content delivered instead of saying, "Titus said" or "Ron said"?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Terry

First part of your quoted post:
In general how can a brother speak such a word? Just because a brother or sister is not in some teaching or minister capacity, they're still members of the Body. As members of the Body, they have direct access to the Father just as any leading brother does. In a roundabout way Ohio, my suggestion is the "opinion of the people" could very well be less of an opinion, but the pulse of the Body.

Why those in leadership past and present reject such a feeling, it is because those in leadership feel they alone know "the feeling of the Body". Leadership want to take a certain direction, and when the congregation are resistant to the direction, it's the congregation's shortcomings.

Terry, you hit the home run! (Go Rangers!)

How in the world could LSM know "the feeling of the Body" when the body of Christ is not allowed to express an opinion?

Just another hypocrisy flowing out from the cesspool in Anaheim ...