|
|
|
06-09-2018, 01:26 PM
|
#1 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table..
This is more of a hypothetical question I'm posing, because I wonder if some on here would not perhaps take the table with us and/or meet with us.
I'm supposing that believers that wouldn't enjoy the Lord's table with us might have two reasons: 1. They might not want to have anything to do with a group who has some "background" or any vague resemblance to the LC 2. They might say we were just another division because we are not on the genuine ground of oneness So here's a brief history and description - at least what I know of it - regarding the "Scottsdale Church" (that's what's on the sign out front. Not sure, but the official legal name may still be "The Church in Scottsdale" if that makes any difference). The group formed up in the Seattle area in (I believe) the early 1980s and Bill Freeman was a key person. In the mid to late 1980s the group broke from the central control of the Church in Anaheim and many felt of the Lord to move down to Scottsdale, AZ. There was a robust number of around 200 saints (a rough guess, maybe more with the campus fellowship) in Scottsdale until 1998, when Bill & Patsy Freeman left the group. A number left with the Freemans. I started meeting regularly here about that time. For me these have been the very best two decades of my Christian life by far! The group here is very open to all other believers. There is no official affiliation with any group, yet we enjoy fellowship with everyone. There is no one person we look to for ministry and a wide variety of authors (including Nee and on occasion even WL), speakers, song writers, etc. that are shared between us - if there is something genuinely of Christ, we want it! The meetings have an open format similar to the LC, but no restrictions are placed on what can be shared whatsoever. If someone has a fresh experience of Christ, an insight or even a problem they need prayer for, they are free to share. (The singing and expression of the love of Christ is awesome!) Legalism is very actively suppressed (since many have felt its sting over the years) - I marvel at the freedom in Christ that we have. Personally, I see this group as having all the upside of things that were promoted by "The Recovery" and none of the downsides! So again, if you were in the area, would you come and enjoy the Lord with us and take the Lord's table with us? (all are certainly welcome) And please, I would also appreciate an explanation of why or why not. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
06-09-2018, 03:47 PM
|
#2 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 510
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Quote:
__________________
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-09-2018, 04:02 PM
|
#3 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-09-2018, 07:04 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 174
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
I surely will. (if am in the area)
Because you welcome me. I go as a believer in Jesus. I am saved and baptised. Born again child of God. I am a member of the body of Christ. And because of what you describe of yourself and and your gathering (church). You are also saved in Jesus Christ and are members of the body of Christ. Your two reasons for believers who wouldn't join you are the same for ppl who distant me. God bless. - |
|
|
|
|
06-10-2018, 02:32 PM
|
#5 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-10-2018, 05:58 AM
|
#6 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 510
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Quote:
__________________
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-10-2018, 02:35 PM
|
#7 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-12-2018, 04:44 PM
|
#8 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re: practicing the early church life
Quote:
This sounds like what Brother Lee described in 1963 in messages he gave in the church in Los Angeles when the brothers were encouraged to visit other places and join them in practice of the oneness in the Body of Christ. Also, in Texas Don Rutledge and Benson Phillips practiced this way, with no expectation to get others to meet with them. Witness Lee 1963: "I believe in unity, but I do not believe in uniformity. Perhaps the saints in the church in Los Angeles meet in one way, and the saints in other localities meet in other ways. Do not try to make every place the same in everything. One local church may practice in one way, and another may practice in another way, yet they are still one. They are in the oneness, the unity. All these things seem complicated, but actually it is quite simple. In the early days, the Christians were very simple. They had no forms, no organization, no division, no regulations, etc. But they had the living Spirit within them. Wherever they went, they just gathered together to worship the Lord according to the leading of the Holy Spirit within them. "Today we should also make everything simple. Wherever we go and wherever we are, we have to be one with the other saints. In any place you should not separate yourself from other saints. As long as they are not divisive, you have to join them and be one with them. We may say that we are free, that we are not denominational, and that we are not sectarian, yet we are separated and would not come together as the one expression of the Body of Christ in this one city. This shows that we are wrong, and this is a real test to us, proving that we still have something that is not of the Lord. If we are really for the Lord and are absolutely of the Lord, we will come together in our locality as the one expression of the one Body of Christ. There is no reason and no right for anyone to keep his group separated from others. This is the test. (The Life and Way to Practice the Church Life,p.105-107) |
|
|
|
|
|
06-13-2018, 09:43 AM
|
#9 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: practicing the early church life
Quote:
Now that I think about it, I can't recall anyone speaking a message here - in 20 years - regarding the so-called "ground of locality." As I think I said, the sign out front says "Scottsdale Church," but there is very little attention paid to that - the issue just doesn't come up! And because the issue never comes up, that never becomes a point of potential divisiveness. (It actually used to say "A meeting place for the Scottsdale Church," but a leading brother was inspired one night about 10 years ago to tear off everything accept "Scottsdale Church" . . . I'm not sure exactly why. Maybe he thought the extra words sounded a little divisive.) |
|
|
|
|
|
06-24-2018, 05:37 PM
|
#10 |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
I was hoping for more answers to this thread (thanks to those who did answer), so I want to direct this question to current LC saints: Would you take the table with us here in Scottsdale, since our legal name is "The Church in Scottsdale" and why or why not?
FYI - I know of a brother who gathers with us here in Scottsdale, whose father routinely meets with the LC in another state. When his father visits here he will come to gatherings, but he will not take the table with us. I think the reason he stated was something about "violating the oneness." I'm hoping someone could explain further what this means, as it doesn't make sense to me . . . 
|
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 11:37 AM
|
#11 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
Excerpt from Speaking the Truth in Love by J. Ingalls "...Brother Lee heard me out, but it seemed that he was merely tolerating me and what I had to say. He had little to say in response. It was not encouraging. At the end of the time I remarked that unless he would have some change it would be difficult for the churches to go on. This was now the twelfth session that I had with Brother Lee since December 12th, 1987, either individually or with others. It was about this time that Brother Lee notified us that he had discharged Philip Lee from the management of the Living Stream Office, stating that it was a very hard step for him to take. Summer Training and Elders’ Meetings in Anaheim July 1988 The summer training began in Anaheim on June 29th and covered the first part of Leviticus. Godfred had no heart to attend the training, I attended part time mornings, and Al Knoch attended full time. We were troubled by the way Brother Lee used some of the messages to deal with the present situation. He was obviously preoccupied by it. This was the last training of Brother Lee’s that I ever was to attend. Following the training Brother Lee called for two elders’ meetings to be held on Saturday morning, July 9th. There were approximately four hundred elders and learning elders present. Brother Lee gave two messages: in the first he spoke on God’s administration and addressed the matters of "autonomy" and "federation". This was a very clear reference to the things I had spoken regarding the local administration of the churches, warning against the dangers of church affiliation or federation, which lead to central control and denominationalism. Brother Lee believed strongly that my stress on local administration would lead to the independence of all the local churches. As a matter of fact, I never once in all my speaking used the word "autonomy." But in Brother Lee’s own publication, The Beliefs and Practices of the Local Churches, the word "autonomy" is used positively two times. I believe Brother Lee felt that, by my speaking, his concept of all the local churches moving and acting as one body under his leadership was threatened. Therefore, he fought against the imagined devil, autonomy, in every conference of his for months to come, referring to it as a wind of teaching brought in by the sleight of men to fabricate a system of error. The word "federation," which I did indeed use, offended him greatly. He believed I was classifying all the local churches under his leadership as a federation, whereas he insisted they were the "organic Body of Christ." He began to use the word "organic" frequently. I wish the churches were so organic. We were witnessing so much that was absolutely inorganic among the churches, things that were rather organizational and exhibiting signs of a hierarchy, for example in the FTTT. Therefore, I warned the saints against a kind of federation. Actually, I used the word "affiliation" much more, which is a milder form of federation, but nonetheless fraught with perils. The local churches had surely become an affiliation. We had seen that in church history, whenever the Lord had raised up groups of His people for His testimony, they had persistently degraded into denominations; and the first two signs of this degradation were unfailingly: 1) the affiliating of the groups under a central leadership; 2) the establishing of a central training center, where their full-time workers could be educated and equipped to serve in their sphere of fellowship. When these two steps had eventualized, they were well on their way to becoming just another denomination, however advanced in the knowledge of truth they were. It was more than obvious that we in the local churches had taken those identical steps and were going down the same road. Should we remain silent? In his second message of the elders’ meetings, Brother Lee spoke concerning our going on. After all our sessions and hours of fellowship with Brother Lee, we had hoped that he would take steps to clear up a number of things publicly. This was surely an excellent opportunity, a perfect forum, and an appropriate time. He did give a few principles for our going on which would be helpful if practiced. He did say, "It is altogether wise and profitable that we do not expect all the churches to be the same," and, "Do not talk about who is for this or who is for that…We should not label ourselves or label others." We were thankful to hear these comments and urgings. But we were deeply disappointed that he did not go much further. What he should have cleared up he covered up, e.g., problems regarding the LSM office and the FTTT training in Taipei. We hoped he would have repented for some things that had caused many problems, not just for allowing saints from the U.S. to attend the training in Taiwan. We surely would have respected him had he done this, and the situation could have been altogether different than it turned out. At the close of Brother Lee’s second message, Dick Taylor (of Long Beach) and Frank Scavo (of Irvine) asked questions which Brother Lee attempted to answer. Dick’s question was quite appropriate and fit our situation. It was as follows: "Many times you reach a point in your experience where you have genuine concerns. How can you fellowship about these concerns without being considered as negative and thereby causing another problem? This is a concern to me and this is related to the freedom of seeking the Lord and the truth." In Brother Lee’s response he said that if you have a genuine concern for anyone in regard to the Lord’s recovery you should go to him alone without talking to anyone else. Any "pre-talk", he said, opens the door for the devil to come in. Now this may be true in many cases, but in our history of contacting Brother Lee over our concerns we felt we could not and should not do that. Since the issues were so momentous we needed fellowship for a clearer understanding and preparation for visiting him. In fact, Brother Lee and brothers around him have also had a lot of consultation among themselves regarding concerns for other brothers before going to them. I know because I myself participated in such discussions. Brother Lee’s attitude while speaking was gentle and persuasive; he was seeking in this way to reconcile all the brothers and to set a course that would calm any fears or anxieties and eliminate any problems. Many were very happy with his fellowship; I was not at all happy or at peace. During these elders’ meetings I sat next to an elder who had spoken with me a few times previously and was very sympathetic with our concerns, having much the same concerns himself. We agreed to meet together for some fellowship that evening over dinner. This we did, and as we ate we conversed about Brother Lee’s messages that day and their impact on the situation in general. The brother felt happy and said to me, "John , I think this is the best we can expect from Brother Lee. Be thankful." I tried to be; I tried to take his view. But in the depths of my being there was a nagging disappointment. Nothing had been dealt with. No wrongs had been righted. The root was not touched. The question loomed before us, What shall we do now? I knew I had to be true to my conscience and the truth I had seen. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 12:25 PM
|
#12 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
I am thankful to the Lord on a personal note as well, and a little amazed at His timing concerning our family. That summer was the exact same time the Lord gave me a job in the middle of the California desert, and we moved away from the Columbus fellowship. It is yet another example of Him preserving me in an outward way! (arranging situations so we didn't get sucked in to harmful things) As things in TLR were quickly sliding toward denominationalism, He simultaneously got us the heck out of "Dodge." My my my. This occurred at exactly the same time as this huge elders meeting, in the summer of 1988. My spirit is amazed at His timing! This may be about the same time the saints, who would eventually move to Scottsdale, parted with the central authority. I will have to ask. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 01:45 PM
|
#13 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,075
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
If you were truly meeting on the ground of oneness then I would. However, taking the name of the church in ..... alone is not meaningful as there is more to oneness than the name. Not taking the name is meaningful as it indicates meeting on a different ground. Yet, I have not followed Brother Bill since he left the Lord's recovery so frankly I do not know on what ground he established the churches under his direction. However, I do remember his hearty laugh and I enjoyed that he ministered Christ to me. (I also got a kick that he like to mention (hint hint) that his favorite ice cream was Pralines n Cream.) Anyway, the table is a serious matter so I would not find fault with anyone who was not willing to take it. It is a matter of conscience. Drake |
|
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 03:41 PM
|
#14 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 510
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
__________________
Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-27-2018, 10:53 AM
|
#15 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re: Elders Resign after facing the division
Quote:
Describing Division Albert Knoch and John Ingalls Resign From Eldership March 19, 1989 On Tuesday, March 14, 1989, Godfred, Al, and I had fellowship and prayer during the morning and then lunch together. It was a memorable time, a decisive time. I expressed strongly to the brothers my feeling concerning the futility and dishonesty of playing the role of elder in Anaheim any longer. It was hypocritical to go on in that status feeling as we did with strong conviction that we were in a system. [/B]Moreover, we were totally incapable of changing the course of the church or of practicing a generality with the saints where all were free to follow their own conscience. These considerations dictated that we should resign. Both Godfred and Al agreed. Of course, Godfred had already resigned and withdrawn from the eldership on November 13, 1988, about four months earlier, but he was still concerned for Al and me. We fellowshipped about this matter and felt very clear that we should take the step and resign. I proposed that we wait to announce this to the saints until I would return from a trip to Europe planned for the end of March, but both Godfred and Al urged that we should do it immediately. We decided then to make a statement to this effect in the coming Lord’s Day morning meeting, giving the reasons for it. This was a critical and momentous decision for us. I had been an elder in the church in Los Angeles for twelve years and in the church in Anaheim for fifteen years, during all this time closely associated with Brother Witness Lee. This decision would change the course of our lives and of the church, but we believed it was of the Lord. On Friday evening, March 17th, Al and I met with the other elders, Minoru Chen and Philip Lin, and announced to them our intention to withdraw from the eldership, giving them some explanation. They received it and urged us to notify Brother Lee immediately. This we intended to do, and did so by letter the next day. Thus on the Lord’s Day morning, March 19th, I rose at the close of the meeting and announced our decision to withdraw from the eldership of the church. I made a few introductory remarks, saying that "I began to realize that our practices have differed and deviated from our vision. Our vision was the same, our teaching was mostly the same, the truth is always the same, but our practice has really differed." I included a statement that the nature of what we called the Lord’s recovery had changed, and then spoke in a number of points the reasons and basis for our decision to withdraw. I did this briefly without much elaboration, speaking for twenty-two minutes. I record here in abridged form the salient points. 1. There has been a change in emphasis to the building up of the work or the ministry more than the local churches. The ministry has been promoted, exalted, and built up, and the churches have suffered greatly in the process. 2. There had been a great effort and promotion to unite the saints and the churches around a certain leader and organization. 3. There has been much pressure with full expectation that all the saints and the churches will conform to the burden of the ministry and be identical with one another in full uniformity of practice to carry it out. 4. In February 1986 we had signed a letter along with 417 other elders agreeing that we would be identical with all the churches, that we would follow the ministry absolutely, and that we realized Brother Lee’s leading was indispensable to our oneness. Since these matters were not in agreement with the Word of God, we greatly regretted that we had subscribed to them, and I stated publicly that I would retract my signature. 5. There has been an emphasis, at least in practice, on a centralization of the churches and the work. 6. There has been a pervasive control exercised over the church, not so much directly, but very much indirectly, which makes it difficult to go on by getting our leading directly from the Lord. 7. Church history reveals that denominations have begun with the affiliation of groups of saints under one leadership followed by the commencement of a training center. We were also going that way. 8. I greatly appreciate Brother Lee’s portion, but he has been exalted and honored above what is written, according to 1 Corinthians 4:6. 9. Brother Lee and his ministry have been made a great issue and factor of division among us. 10. Our going on and our relationship with the saints and with the church is made to depend on our relationship with Brother Lee. When this is done the ground of oneness is replaced with something else. 11. We have applied the teaching concerning the ground of oneness in a divisive and sectarian way, so that we divide ourselves from other Christians. This is due to an improper attitude and application of the truth. In the local churches we have become narrow and small as manifested in our attitude toward other Christians and in our reception of other saints. 12. Our attitude toward other Christians is one of belittling them and thinking we’re superior. What we need is the reality of oneness, not just the teaching or slogan. 13. The Lord told us in His Word to go forth to Him outside the camp. The Lord is still calling His sheep out of every fold and every camp so that there can be one flock with one shepherd. 14. Our oneness should be as large as the whole Body of Christ. Any oneness that is smaller than this we should leave and not keep. 15. We should all go directly to the Lord for His leading in the church in order to have a local administration, at the same time maintaining a proper fellowship with other saints and other churches. At this point I quoted some sentences from a pamphlet entitled The Beliefs and Practices of the Local Church, published by the Living Stream Ministry. One sentence reads: "In all administrative affairs, the local churches are autonomous and locally governed." 16. There has been an over-stressing and distortion of the teaching concerning deputy authority, which has caused the saints to be fearful to follow their conscience, to be one with their spirit, and sometimes to speak their genuine concerns. 17. There has been too much emphasizing of methods more than the inner anointing, and external big success more than the experience of the inner life. 18. We have no problem with the matters of the "new way". We wanted to make that clear. Actually these things are not new. In conclusion I said, "Based on the above points, we feel we must withdraw from the eldership. We are not able to lead you in this way, nor are we able to lead you out of this way. Many of you feel strongly that you would like to take a certain direction, and as elders we cannot lead you in that direction…. We really love you in the Lord. The Lord knows that. We care for you, and we wish you all the very best in the Lord. You are in our prayers. You will always be in our prayers. We ask you to pray for us too. Pray for Brother Al and me. If we’ve offended any of you saints, we ask you to please forgive us. We surely never intended to offend any one of you. We still like to keep our fellowship with you all as fellow-members of the Body of Christ." Al Knoch then rose and spoke for eleven minutes, giving a very genuine and touching statement regarding his inner feeling about the eldership. I will just quote briefly here. He began: "I am so thankful that John could share those points, because I could not do it so clearly. I hold the same concerns…. These were the same concerns we presented to Brother Lee in all our times with him. So he knows all of these things already, and he has considered them….As elders in the recovery we do have a problem with many of our practices, and there’s no way we could in a good conscience continue on in the position without the reality. How can we lead you? We can’t lead in that way, and yet the recovery is going that way. "So we brothers feel…it’s good for us, it’s good for you, and it’s good for the Lord that we withdraw at this time. The reason we didn’t withdraw sooner, though we were clear to withdraw last December, is that we felt the need to stand here for these very concerns for a while longer to see what could be done, and to see how the saints would respond to this kind of stand. But the more we have done this, the more clear we have become that there will not be any change at this time in the way the recovery is going." The saints, generally speaking, listened well, only interrupting once. The Lord’s presence and strengthening were with us. Minoru Chen closed the meeting, saying that we all must realize that the points I had made were an expression of my own personal view. He made a special point of controverting my assertion that the nature of the recovery had changed. He said that the nature of the recovery had indeed not changed. That was his view. I also resigned by letter from the board of directors and the presidency of the corporation. A great step had been taken and a turn made. The next day I left with my wife for Europe, where I rested, while visiting and fellowshipping with a number of churches. Upon returning to Anaheim on May 2nd I was not led of the Lord to return to the meetings on Ball Road, where I had met with the saints for fifteen years, and where I had resigned from the eldership on March 19th. I continued to gather with saints for the Lord’s Table in one of the couple’s homes, where I had been meeting for some time prior to resigning. New Elders Appointed To Replace Knoch and Ingalls April 2, 1989 On the Lord’s Day, April 2nd, at the end of the meeting, Minoru Chen stood and read a letter addressed to the saints from Brother Lee in Taiwan, appointing two brothers to replace Al and me in the eldership. They were Eugene Gruhler, who was brought from Denver, and Francis Ball, who was transferred from San Gabriel. These brothers had been elders in Anaheim some years previously. They were both present in the meeting as Minoru read Brother Lee’s letter. In the letter Brother Lee acknowledged that he had received our letter notifying him of our resignation, and had also heard of its accomplishment. He remarked, "I am very sorry for the two brothers that their course in following the Lord would have such an issue." He went on to say that he was very much concerned for the eldership in the church in Anaheim, and that he had felt led of the Lord to ask Eugene Gruhler and Francis Ball to "reassume their eldership in Anaheim in meeting the urgent need there…." Later in the year we heard that six more elders had been appointed by Brother Lee to the eldership in Anaheim, making a total of ten. Thus our eldership had been replaced, revised, and greatly enlarged in number. |
|
|
|
|
|
06-27-2018, 02:55 PM
|
#16 |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us?
Indiana - that was an interesting read from bro Ingalls! Reminds me of the proverbial thesis posting by Luther . . . What is your point with it? That is, how does it address taking the table in Scottsdale?
|
|
|
|
|
06-27-2018, 08:19 PM
|
#17 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
Agreement to follow Witness Lee in the New Way "Dear Brother Lee. After hearing your fellowship in this elders’ training, we all agree to have a new start in the Lord’s recovery. For this, we all agree to be in one accord and to carry out this new move of the Lord solely through prayer, the Spirit, and the Word. We further agree to practice the recovery one in: teaching, practice, thinking, speaking, essence, appearance, and expression. We repudiate all differences among the churches, and all indifference toward the ministry office, and the other churches. We agree that the church in our place be identical with all the local churches throughout the earth. We also agree to follow your leading as the one who has brought us God’s New Testament economy and has led us into its practice. We agree that this leading is indispensable to our oneness and acknowledge the one trumpet in the Lord’s ministry and the one wise master builder among us...." (1986 letter from 417 elders, intl elders' conf.) |
|
|
|
|
|
06-28-2018, 09:58 AM
|
#18 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
The coordination of man often just kills the Spirit's moving!! I've seen this in various ways big and small. One little instance that brought this home to me, and I truly marveled at it: A brother and I were asked to share a summary of a NT book, after the ekklesia here had spent several weeks going through it. I kept trying to get with the other brother to coordinate our messages, but it just never happened over the course of a couple weeks. He was busy or I was . . . this thing would pop up or some other thing . . . we just couldn't seem to coordinate. So the Sunday we were supposed to share I just have to give it to Him (what a concept, right?!). We both had our time sharing, not having much of a clue what the other one would discuss. And guess what? IT WAS GLORIOUS! The Spirit spoke through both of us in the most remarkable way, which was PERFECTLY coordinated. It was really edifying to the body. We never could have orchestrated that, and I was convinced - He knows far, far better how to do things. (FYI - I do a fair amount of public speaking for a living, and know the importance of being prepared, so this lesson was something of a tough one for me - i.e., not preparing so much and letting Him do it!) But He won't force us. If we say, "We've got this and can coordinate blah blah blah," He will simply let us as if to say, "It's your decision to handle it yourself and I will honor that. Let's see how it all works out." That applies to the small things and the big things. He will let us do it if we insist. |
|
|
|
|
|
07-04-2018, 07:20 AM
|
#19 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Renton, Washington
Posts: 3,508
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
__________________
"Even a neutral has a right to take account of facts, even a neutral cannot be asked to close his mind or close his conscience."- Franklin D. Roosevelt |
|
|
|
|
|
07-04-2018, 09:41 AM
|
#20 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 2,614
|
Re: Would a LC saint take the Table with us?
Quote:
__________________
LC Berkeley 70s; LC Columbus OH 80s; An Ekklesia in Scottsdale 98-now Praise the Lord - HE'S GOT THIS! |
|
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 04:54 PM
|
#21 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re: practicing the early church life - Nee - Further talks
In Watchman Nee’s Further Talks on the Church Life (1948-1951), he shares at the end of his ministry, and according to experience and observation,
“We must realize that where there is not the Holy Spirit, there is not the church. The church is absolutely not Witness Lee, Chang Yu-zhi, nor Yu Cheng-hwa; the church must only be the Holy Spirit. In other words, the church from beginning to end can only have one authority, one power, and one life, which is the Holy Spirit.” (p. 11, soft cover) “Regardless of what kind of position a brother may have, whether he be an overseer, an apostle or a deacon, whenever he establishes or manifests his own authority, he loses and ruins the whole ground of the church. The whole ground of the church is established upon the authority of the Holy Spirit. Whenever His authority is offended, the authority of the church is gone.” P. 14, soft cover) “Whenever the Holy Spirit cannot move, whenever the individuals stand out, it means there is some problem and the church is damaged so that it can no longer be called a church. “Today there is so much of man’s opinion, man’s decision, man’s methods, man’s organization, man’s name, and man’s tradition in the groups that call upon the name of the Lord. I do not wish to say more about this. From the beginning to the end since we were called out by the Lord, there is a fundamental ground – that is we must obey and establish the authority of the Holy Spirit in the church and destroy our own authority. (P. 16-17) |
|
|
|
|
06-25-2018, 05:11 PM
|
#22 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 707
|
Re:Ministry Churches
http://lordsrecovery.us/uploads/3/4/...rychurches.pdf
"In conjunction with their concept that they are the true church on a proper ground of oneness, possessing and ministering the “up-to-date speaking” of the Lord, the blended co-workers (Brother We) assert that they are the global authority over “the local churches”, having received the mantle personally from Brother Lee. However, when the blending brothers took the unprecedented step in “the Lord’s recovery” to draw a line in the sand with the One Publication Proclamation, the Body of Christ reacted and a big turmoil ensued. |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
