Stephen and lc dating Live free sex cams no refistration needed


25-Sep-2017 01:28

It is our sincere hope that the response contained in this volume would resonate with the Christian consciences of our readers and with those of the signers themselves.We reiterate our willingness to engage all earnest lovers of the truth in open dialogue and look to our Lord that He would grant us opportunity to enter into more meaningful fellowship with our fellow believers in Christ.While encouraged by these indications, we earnestly desire that those whose names remain as endorsers of the open letter will be persuaded by conscience to weigh the allegations in the open letter in light of our responses and CRI’s in-depth reassessment.It is important that the Christian public be informed concerning the issues raised in the pages of this volume.Throughout the history of the church, many scholars have contributed to our understanding and appreciation of the Bible, the Christian faith, and church history.We are grateful to the Lord for the labors and insights of such faithful stewards of the truth.

In this volume we offer responses to the out-of-context quotations themselves.To those familiar with Witness Lee’s teaching it was evident that the real purpose of the letter was not to induce the leadership of LSM and the local churches to disavow certain teachings of Witness Lee.Rather, its goal was to turn fellow believers away from the ministry of Witness Lee and to dissuade them from having fellowship with the believers meeting in the local churches.In December 2009 the Christian Research Institute (CRI) devoted an issue of its to a reassessment of the teachings and practices of Witness Lee and the local churches.

The cover of the issue declared, “We Were Wrong,” in reference to CRI’s critical stance dating back to the 1970s.Following the publication of the and the radio broadcasts have been positive, one critical response was published in February 2010 by Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes, two signers of the open letter.