LSM's Sacrament - the "Ground of the Local Church" NIGEL TOMES

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by UntoHim

8. Non-LSM Local Churches in the Great Lakes Area

Another category of local churches emerged after LSM’s latest turmoil in 2006/7--non-LSM churches in the Great Lakes Area (GLA) of North America. How are they faring? On one hand they’ve severed ties with LSM’s “blended brothers;” they don’t attend LSM’s “seven annual feasts” or use LSM’s HWMR and they no longer “prophesy” (recite) W. Lee’s messages in their gatherings. But, for many scattered GLA churches, little has changed. Witness Lee’s name may not be mentioned; LSM’s Recovery Version footnotes are seldom read as defining statements. Nevertheless, the “default setting” for Bible teaching and interpretation remains Witness Lee’s teachings. In most places, local church practices remain largely unchanged, except regional activities have replaced LSM’s global gatherings. Most GLA non-LSM local churches can be characterized as “LSM lite.”

I find this very interesting. These churches have taken very definite steps to break away from a lot that binds. To sever ties with the Blendeds and not attend the conferences, stop using HWMR, stop regurgitating WL's messages, these are all very significant steps. You still have to meet, so the meetings will continue to fellowship the Bible, by not using WL's messages you open the door for the saints to read and fellowship the Bible without fear. In this environment of "LSM lite" it is possible for someone like Nigel to publish a word this radical. That is a very big step, very encouraging.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

A burst of GLA creative activity following the 2006/7 “turmoil,” called for a thorough re-examination of Local Church teachings and practices, in the light of Scripture.58 But it soon withered under the weight of benign neglect. As a result, 6-years after parting ways with LSM, the GLA churches have yet to provide a statement of their theological differences with LSM. Was it just a personality contest--“we refer Titus Chu to LSM’s ‘blended brothers’”? Or a drive for regional autonomy—“we reject LSM’s leadership; we’ll do it ourselves”? Recently there’s a move in the GLA to restore traditional “local church values” in the name of “preserving our distinct identity,” “not losing our vision & commitment,” and “honoring our unique heritage.” Extra-biblical teachings could be endorsed under such labels, even though they fail to match the “gold standard” of Scripture. Phrases like “our distinct identity” and “our heritage & commitment” can mask mere local church tradition. Yet, the local churches have long proclaimed59 “we don’t follow human tradition; we follow the Bible.” One candidate for this category is LSM’s “local ground” doctrine; already we’ve heard claims “it’s not an essential truth, but it’s an ‘essential practice’.” Yet, evangelical believers acknowledge only two ‘essential practices’ (ordinances)—baptism and Lord’s Table--both were ordained by the Lord (Matt. 28:19; Luke 22:19). Neither the Lord Jesus, nor the New Testament prescribes the “local ground.” Putting the local ground on par with baptism and the Lord’s Table elevates it beyond Scripture; it repeats LSM’s error of making the local ground into a sacrament.

He is calling for a "thorough reexamination of LRC teachings and practices" and begins by taking a direct shot at the most important teaching of the LRC. If the saints in the GLA can read this short article thoughtfully and without fear, then I think that will be the death knell for the LRC in this region.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

A forthcoming US Midwest conference60 promises to address this topic. It remains to be seen, however, if the doctrine will merely be “tweaked,” with minor “cosmetic surgery”—e.g. “let’s not say all other Christians are not on the local ground (even though we still believe it).” To seriously grapple with this topic the major points enumerated here ought to be addressed, employing Watchman Nee’s (oft-quoted, seldom applied) dictum, “the Bible is our only standard.” Plus long-standing attitudes of sectarianism and elitism should be addressed. Minor “cosmetic surgery” won’t accomplish much; more radical measures, akin to a major operation, are required. Moreover, LSM’s “local ground” doctrine is a “tangled web of interwoven elements,” so individual aspects can’t simply be accepted or rejected independently.

Look at the environment where a conference like this results in all of this push back. This was unthinkable back in 1979. To me this is a dramatic change.

Originally Posted by UntoHim

In conclusion we inquire: Is the mission to preserve “our unique identity” misguided? It assumes the local church ought to differ significantly from other Christian congregations. We ask: what’s wrong with being a “normal Christian church” among other “normal Christian churches” in our city or community? Doesn’t history show that the drive for a “distinct identity” is a road littered with “cults,” sects or other aberrant expressions of the Christian faith. Haven’t we ventured down that road before? By seeking to re-create our former local church-life--in the name of “preserving our distinct identity” or “maintaining our particular vision and commitment”--don’t we risk repeating our sad history? Haven’t we “been there, done that” before?

Nigel Tomes,
Toronto, CANADA
April, 2013

[SIZE="1"]NOTES:

As always the views expressed here are those of the author alone. They should not be attributed to the believers, elders or churches with whom he is associated. Thanks are extended to those who commented on earlier drafts.

A word like this in 1980 would have surely gotten you excommunicated. I think this little caveat at the end is just to keep the hounds away from the elders in Toronto and protect them from any liability. I doubt if there were much dissension over this that he would be able to publish it. Obviously this is a very controversial paper. If the LSM doesn't fire back with some serious heat then the only real explanation is that they can't. This word undermines everything the LSM publishes.

If "one city one church" doctrine falls, then the ministry of WL falls with it. How can you say he is the MOTA? How could they say they are the "One true church"? If they are no better than any other Christian group then think of the shame over all the nasty things said concerning other Christian groups. This would demand a reassessment of their practices and teachings.

Luke
14:8 When you are bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room; lest a more honorable man than you be bidden of him;
14:9 And he that bade you and him come and say to you, Give this man place; and you begin with shame to take the lowest room.

It is one thing if a few people on a forum like this share these things, but if Nigel Tomes and others start picking this up as well, then this demands that LSM respond. This is far more serious than accusations of being a cult.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

A word like this in 1980 would have surely gotten you excommunicated.

Things haven't changed much. Anaheim has quarantined Tomes and Cleveland has effectively done the same.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Things haven't changed much. Anaheim has quarantined Tomes and Cleveland has effectively done the same.

If he has been quarantined should he still be speaking and teaching? Isn't the biggest fear of those in authority that no one listens when they make judgments?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

If he has been quarantined should he still be speaking and teaching?

Take John Ingalls' quarantine for example. You could say that was God's provision to open up another door for John to speak, teach, and simply minister Christ to another part of the Body of Christ. Listening to messages of Art Katz, he had a similar experience. When one door closes, another door opens.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Terry

Take John Ingalls' quarantine for example. You could say that was God's provision to open up another door for John to speak, teach, and simply minister Christ to another part of the Body of Christ. Listening to messages of Art Katz, he had a similar experience. When one door closes, another door opens.

My point is that everyone in authority is always scared of what happens if no one listens to them. Clearly Nigel is not listening to them, the whole world can see this, now what are they going to do about it. If the answer is nothing then it demonstrates for the whole world to see that they have no authority.

Did TC stop doing what he was doing when he was quarantined?

This is humiliating to the Blendeds, their word is meaningless, no one cares what they think or say.

The only way the Blendeds could have any authority is if they can claim to be "the keepers of the vision". If it turns out though that this "vision" is a sham, then poof, there goes the authority. That is why this thread is so important. Demonstrate that their venerated teaching of "the Ground of the Local Church" is a sham, then poof, there is no "vision" to be the keeper of.

Either WN is a "genius" for discovering and then recovering this "hidden truth" or he is an idiot for elevating a bogus teaching to the level of "the faith". As far as I can tell the entire "Recovery" hinges in the balance based on what happens in this thread. It is quite obvious based on this forum and Nigel's writing that this teaching is under serious attack. If the Blendeds do not respond then they are clearly completely powerless and are ceding that the teaching is a sham.

Respond and defend your teaching or admit through their silence that it is indefensible.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

My point is that everyone in authority is always scared of what happens if no one listens to them. Clearly Nigel is not listening to them, the whole world can see this, now what are they going to do about it. If the answer is nothing then it demonstrates for the whole world to see that they have no authority.

Using the past to predict the future, the next step is to find some brothers in Toronto who are willing to side with them against the eldership in Toronto, which Nigel is a part of. If you remember after the quarantine, LSM successfully garnered two Toronto elders DW and RM in an attempt to seize control of the entire church, with her assets. Eventually they left with a number of pro-LSM saints. Note that the original elders in Toronto from decades ago BB, PO, and GS? all came back to Toronto in order to assist in that coup d'etat.

Ironically both Anaheim and Cleveland are both using the ground of locality doctrine to undermine the very local administration which that teaching guarantees and protects. It's not that I still support that doctrine, but it is of utmost hypocrisy for any ministry to attempt to use the very teaching which supposedly preserves local churches from outside interferences. How in the world can they call this a "vision" of oneness, when they are using extra-Biblical doctrines in an attempt to divide the church in Toronto. Shame on all of them.

It's helpful to note that the GLA basically has three main "camps," for lack of a better word. First is pro-Anaheim, second is pro-Cleveland, and the third is pro-local. During the first round of splits (circa 2007) in the GLA, the 2nd and 3rd camps united in an attempt to protect their saints from LSM operatives, "brought in secretly to spy out our freedom, in order to bring us into bondage," by instigating the 1st camp. At that time TC's supporters continually spread the word that "TC had changed," hoping to keep the 3rd group intact under TC. Soon after the dust settled, TC proved that he had never really changed after all, and dumped John Myer. This sent a message loud and clear to the 3rd camp that their recent freedoms were now in jeopardy.

A city like Columbus now has 3 churches where one formerly existed. LSM came in and took their spoils, including the meeting hall. Then Cleveland came in and took theirs. Likewise, the church in Toronto is just to fair a prize to let fall into camp 3, a true local church. Even though most of those favorable to LSM have now been long gone, there still exists an element of Cleveland supporters. That is who was targeted for this weekend's conference. Most of these ones, of course, will be Chinese, and Toronto has lots of Chinese people.

[countmeworthy]

This is all so sad and disheartening. By now, every God filled person in Christ who was/is in the LC from back in the day should be mature enough to lead people to Christ and disciple the young ones in the Word of God.

Christ is our Head..not the ground of locality. We ought to be encouraging and lifting up the saints in the Word, by the Word. The local "ground" should not be the focus of our Faith.

Every religious group has a "ground of locality": the Catholic church, the Baptist church, the Pentecostal church

I recently attended a service where the visiting leading brother/pastor lavished his praises on the pastor of that church group. Wow!!! There is no pastor like that pastor!!!

:/

Haven't we all heard that same story???

So how different is the LSM from the rest of the bunch?

The real difference I see between the LCR/LSM is the LCR / LSM does not call or refer to the blended men and the leading men of their respective local churches, pastors/ministers/bishops/apostles/prophets/evangelists or "doctors" to their credit.

To my knowledge, they do not mandate "Tithes and offerings" also to their credit.
(Let the Holy Spirit direct the hearts).

Thirdly, they do not emphasize and/or mandate "praying/speaking in tongues"..also to their credit.

Unfortunately, Lee stifled the saints from growing in Christ by mandating the LR bible, the "life studies", the "HWMR", the ground of "locality" under Lee's umbrella, not Christ's and distancing themselves from other Christians (though they might deny this as many are tuning in to Christian radio and possibly Christian TV).

The bottom line is we all ought to be focused on God's heart..not on Lee's heart "the local ground". That is not our crown of Glory!!!

May God have exceedingly mercy on us all for judgment (rewards) first comes to the house of God. If He is not Numero Uno in our lives, our crowns could very well be taken from us (Revelation 3:11) (not the loss of our salvation).

Blessings everyone! And may the Lord Jesus and His Spirit of Truth and Love be everything to us.

Carol Garza

Originally Posted by Ohio

It's helpful to note that the GLA basically has three main "camps," for lack of a better word. First is pro-Anaheim, second is pro-Cleveland, and the third is pro-local.

What about the Brazilians? The Dong Yu Lan group seems to be quite aggressive about spreading their "kingdom". They are quite active in the North-east, including Canada (also Florida). What camp are they with? Cleveland?