Hi From Cincy

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Thanks Trapped.

Make no mistake, they understood what I was saying, but they are trying to score points against me.

Or maybe we were astonished that you would draw comparisons with the Holocaust, and raise the matter of sexual abuse, both of which have nothing to do with the topic.

But since this has become a mini-topic, I will take advantage, and consider, that instead of a lump of leavened bread on the table which *can* represent a body of sin, there was a Nazi symbol on the bread - would we take issue with that? Or we shouldn't, because we have already declared that remembrance of the Lord is everything, and the symbols don't matter so much.

Probably, if Christ had not used "matzah" at the Last Supper, the disciples would have been shocked, even stumbled, as much as any Jew today might be stumbled to see a swastika symbol on their passover bread. Therefore, symbols can matter, and most major denominations take this thing more seriously than the recovery ever has, does or will, and have made it a church regulation.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Or maybe we were astonished that you would draw comparisons with the Holocaust, and raise the matter of sexual abuse, both of which have nothing to do with the topic.

But since this has become a mini-topic, I will take advantage, and consider, that instead of a lump of leavened bread on the table which *can* represent a body of sin, there was a Nazi symbol on the bread - would we take issue with that? Or we shouldn't, because we have already declared that remembrance of the Lord is everything, and the symbols don't matter so much.

Probably, if Christ had not used "matzah" at the Last Supper, the disciples would have been shocked, even stumbled, as much as any Jew today might be stumbled to see a swastika symbol on their passover bread. Therefore, symbols can matter, and most major denominations take this thing more seriously than the recovery ever has, does or will, and have made it a church regulation.

I never drew a comparison with the "holocaust", rather I compared you to a "holocaust denier." Big difference. Maybe I was wrong. Perhaps that was too hard for you to understand. My bad.

I also understand your need for diversionary tactics. Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians concerning unleavened bread, and having a discussion about the symbols of the Lord's Table, you launched into this nonsensical tangent about nazi swastikas. Your bad.

I disagree concerning who had made these symbols into regulations and ordinances. Only the LCM would use the symbols from another church (re: STG posted a pic from his vacation) to condemn all other denominations as you were so quick to do. But that is how Lee taught. His way was the best. Every other way was to be condemned. This practice of his should be considered the unleavened bread of malice and evil.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I never drew a comparison with the "holocaust", rather I compared you to a "holocaust denier." Big difference. Maybe I was wrong. Perhaps that was too hard for you to understand. My bad.

I also understand your need for diversionary tactics. Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians concerning unleavened bread, and having a discussion about the symbols of the Lord's Table, you launched into this nonsensical tangent about nazi swastikas. Your bad.

I disagree concerning who had made these symbols into regulations and ordinances. Only the LCM would use the symbols from another church (re: STG posted a pic from his vacation) to condemn all other denominations as you were so quick to do. But that is how Lee taught. His way was the best. Every other way was to be condemned. This practice of his should be considered the unleavened bread of malice and evil.

We were already in agreement about those Scriptures so I am not sure what you are talking about "Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians".

Taking another look at 1 Cor 5:8 "Let us keep the feast, not with the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

What type of bread is it talking about using in the feast? Leavened or unleavened? Clearly it is unleavened, so my point still stands about the symbols. "Let us not keep the feast with leaven" - literally, or metaphorically. This is obviously a symbolic instruction about malice and evil, but to symbolize this they would have used unleavened bread in the actual feasts. Paul would not have said, as you have, "it does not matter", when he draws such a comparison between feasting and the type of bread.

Lee never condemned anyone for using leavened bread and neither did I. I pointed out the significance of the symbols on the Table and that they are deficient and not representing the "one Body" it is claimed they are. I also pointed out that certain denominations ie Catholic, Lutheran, present the bread in a better way. So the statement "condemn all other denominations" is an exaggeration.

Finally, it does not make sense why I would condemn a denomination for their presentation, when their presentation is of no consequence to whether their Table is valid in my view. If it were my aim to condemn the denomination, I might have said that the table is invalid because it is a sectarian table, and the presentation is of no concern of mine. But that is not a statement I made in my remark about StG's Table presentation.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

We were already in agreement about those Scriptures so I am not sure what you are talking about "Instead of addressing the scriptures I presented from Corinthians".

Taking another look at 1 Cor 5:8 "Let us keep the feast, not with the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

What type of bread is it talking about using in the feast? Leavened or unleavened? Clearly it is unleavened, so my point still stands about the symbols. "Let us not keep the feast with leaven" - literally, or metaphorically. This is obviously a symbolic instruction about malice and evil, but to symbolize this they would have used unleavened bread in the actual feasts. Paul would not have said, as you have, "it does not matter", when he draws such a comparison between feasting and the type of bread.

Lee never condemned anyone for using leavened bread and neither did I. I pointed out the significance of the symbols on the Table and that they are deficient and not representing the "one Body" it is claimed they are. I also pointed out that certain denominations ie Catholic, Lutheran, present the bread in a better way. So the statement "condemn all other denominations" is an exaggeration.

Finally, it does not make sense why I would condemn a denomination for their presentation, when their presentation is of no consequence to whether their Table is valid in my view. If it were my aim to condemn the denomination, I might have said that the table is invalid because it is a sectarian table, and the presentation is of no concern of mine. But that is not a statement I made in my remark about StG's Table presentation.

I am not a mind reader. Please show me a post where you expressed any kind of agreement with me on this topic.

You are focused on what type of bread. Apostle Paul is focused on removing malice and evil from their hearts. This is where LSM has totally misaimed. They came to all the Midwest LC's with bulldozers full of malice and evil, and then they sit down and sing W. Lee songs with their perfect bleached-white Table bread all smug and self-satisfied.

Yes indeed Apostle Paul would say that the type of bread does not matter. Where did he give detailed instructions on the type of bread in order to rescue the church in Corinth? I would say that their bread was "perfect" but their hearts were sick with malice and evil. Read the whole epistle. I served in the LC's for 30 years, and I Corinthians and James were the two books they needed the most.

W. Lee condemned Christianity for every imaginable thing known to man. Are you serious? Did you ever hear him speak? They were condemned for not drinking from one cup. They were condemned for wafers. They were condemned for having pre-broken bread. They were condemned for believing it was the actual body of Christ, etc. W. Lee made a career of condemning "poor, poor, Christianity."

Yes, you did not say "the table is invalid because it is a sectarian table," but what you did say is "I can see that on the table some of the bread is leavened, and some of the bread is unleavened. So this is a symbol of division as the bread is not all the same - even Catholics and Lutherans ensure that the bread is the same."

Pretty pathetic. Pretty judgmental.

Note to readers: Normally I would have walked away from this discussion already, but I decided to press this issue because it strikes at the heart of what makes W. Lee's teachings so errant, so exclusive, so divisive, and so destructive. I lived thru the destruction of numerous Midwest LC's 10 years ago by operatives from LSM indoctrinated with this kind of sick mindset. One such church was Columbus, OH where both SonsToGlory and I were once part of. The conflicts Columbus endured 10 years ago (certain zealous ones "of Lee," filing lawsuits, fighting in the Lord's Table meeting, etc.) were the exact same conflicts in Corinth 2 millennia ago.

[Sons to Glory!]

Until we all arrive Bros... until we all arrive! (We need every portion of the body of Christ.)

Won't that be the most glorious day!?

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I am not a mind reader. Please show me a post where you expressed any kind of agreement with me on this topic.

In post #36 you wrote:

But thanks for finally admitting to the truths I was relating from scripture -- and somewhat refreshing I should add.

Originally Posted by Ohio

You are focused on what type of bread. Apostle Paul is focused on removing malice and evil from their hearts. This is where LSM has totally misaimed. They came to all the Midwest LC's with bulldozers full of malice and evil, and then they sit down and sing W. Lee songs with their perfect bleached-white Table bread all smug and self-satisfied.

Yes indeed Apostle Paul would say that the type of bread does not matter. Where did he give detailed instructions on the type of bread in order to rescue the church in Corinth?

As a Christian why would you or anyone want symbols of malice/evil in the church? Would you not complain if a church was decorated with any other symbol of evil?

You are forgetting or deliberately ignoring that even though it makes no rule about the symbols on the Table, in the verse you quoted Paul uses leavened bread to symbolize malice/evil, and unleavened bread to symbolize sincerity/truth. So I can imagine Paul agreeing with me that we should not use symbols of malice/evil in the Lord's Table.

As an ex-Jew, I cannot imagine Paul approving the use of a symbol which represents malice/evil in the Lord's Table. As a Jew, I cannot imagine Paul approving the use of leavened bread at Passover either.

If any Jewish believers were present in Paul's' church, and if he himself saw no issue with using leavened bread (which I cannot imagine) - I can imagine him forbidding leavened bread so as not to stumble any Jewish believers, according to what he wrote about offending other's conscience.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Yes, you did not say "the table is invalid because it is a sectarian table," but what you did say is "I can see that on the table some of the bread is leavened, and some of the bread is unleavened. So this is a symbol of division as the bread is not all the same - even Catholics and Lutherans ensure that the bread is the same."

Pretty pathetic. Pretty judgmental.

Put simply, I explained what the leavened bread on the table symbolized (division, also sin/malice/evil).

As you can read, I also commended Catholics and Lutherans for their symbols by saying "even Catholics and Lutherans ensure that the bread is the same". Even though Catholicism, as bad as it is, ensures that the symbols of the Lord's body and blood accurately represent the Lord. I note that you overlooked this positive remark about Catholics and Lutherans, and chose to accuse me of "condemning all Christianity" instead.

[JJ]

Interesting how this thread has gotten off on unleavened bread vs. leavened bread.

I agree with Evangelical's citation of 1 Cor 5:8 and the fact Jews served unleavened bread at "the feast" to support a position on this topic.

However, Ohio makes a great point of not missing the real point... not celebrating the Lord's table when our houses (and bread) have the leaven of malice and evil in them. Instead we are charged to purge out malice and evil in our houses and what is served up in the assembly when remembering the Lord.... just as carefully as the Jews were about not having leaven in their houses or bread during the Passover.

Thanks Sons to Glory for citing Ephesians 4:13. It will be a glorious day indeed. Here is the whole verse https://biblehub.com/ephesians/4-13.htm

OK, have we beaten this bread, er topic long enough?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by JJ

Interesting how this thread has gotten off on unleavened bread vs. leavened bread.

I agree with Evangelical's citation of 1 Cor 5:8 and the fact Jews served unleavened bread at "the feast" to support a position on this topic.

However, Ohio makes a great point of not missing the real point... not celebrating the Lord's table when our houses (and bread) have the leaven of malice and evil in them. Instead we are charged to purge out malice and evil in our houses and what is served up in the assembly when remembering the Lord.... just as carefully as the Jews were about not having leaven in their houses or bread during the Passover.

Thanks Sons to Glory for citing Ephesians 4:13. It will be a glorious day indeed. Here is the whole verse https://biblehub.com/ephesians/4-13.htm

OK, have we beaten this bread, er topic long enough?

This is LC "discussions" isn't it? Will you now move on to the Psalms thread? That one has gone on far longer.

Having grown up a serious Catholic altar boy and then later on spent too many years in the LCM, I saw folks who "done their communion all perfect" yet nurtured a massive garden of "malice and evil" towards their fellow man, their neighbor, whom they were instructed by God to "love." Should I not address or "release the burden" on my heart over this conflict?

Perhaps you are right though. Looking back, I don't remember ever discussing the unleavened bread of Communion on this forum. STG then posted a pic from his travels. Evangelical then commented about the divisions in the body of Christ, and I remember the words of our Lord, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees." Now them dumb disciples completely missed His point, thinking He was talking about bread. But Jesus had something important in mind, so I'm only picking up on that.

Then I remembered how I had spent my best 30 years in the LCM "doing church all perfect" only to realize that LSM was coming to Ohio to "tear down our leprous houses and replaster them" at which point I left the LCM. I went to Paul's actual teachings in Corinthians to confirm my suspicions. Apparently he cared little for doing the communion bread all perfect, and cared much about malice and evil. Go read what he said.

So I tried to convey my findings to my brother Evangelical, but with great difficulty, and had already given up on that endeavor when you stopped by. I suppose we could end all discussions with "till we all arrive." Evangelical would agree with you for sure. We can then shut down the forum, waiting until we all arrive?