Quote:
Originally Posted by ACuriousFellow
This is interesting food for thought to me.
|
CuriousFellow, thanks for the willingness to consider such topics. Many of us are "hard wired" in
Ohio's term to accept what we're told is true, and to reflexively recoil from anything not according to the wiring. Witness Lee's trick was to re-wire us, where everything he gave us was "new" and we "simply" or "just" did what we were taught. "It's so simple, and easy, our worries flee away" - remember that? (from the Grey Song Book, a principal indoctrination tool.
https://www.hymnal.net/en/hymn/ns/98)
The NT gospels show Jesus the Nazarene as the promised Messiah, aka Son of David/Son of Man, whose claim is proved by personal righteousness and obedience to the Father as manifested by good works and miraculous signs, and by fulfilled scriptural prophecy, especially the suffering atonement, and subsequent resurrection and glory. Now, in ascension, he's to rule both Israel and the nations. Then, the Acts and Epistles detail where and how the nations fit into this: the glorified Messiah is to be King of Kings, and all nations will walk in his light.
This was presaged or typified by a son of David named Solomon, who received foreign tribute, and whose reign was a light to the world. The penultimate fulfillment would be in the kngdom of the risen Messiah. The last 2 chapters of John's Revelation point to this (some think the 'nations' of Rev 21:24 aren't Christian, but unbelievers who help Christians [and Jews] in tribulation. But why would 'good works' suffice during a 3 year period, when they don't at any other time?)
My point is that in both OT and NT, the distinction between 'Israel' and 'the nations' is never effaced. They remain distinct, but in the NT are joined in Christ. See Paul's word in Ephesians 2:11-22. The two have become one: one shared belief set, one new man, one spiritual household, one body in Christ, composed of both 'nations' and 'Israel'. It's like I have 2 distinct legs, a right leg and a left leg, but they're joined in cooperation for balance and locomotion. The enmity is gone, and they function together. The nations and Israel are no longer antagonistically separate, but joined together in Christ Jesus.
(Paul's role in this organic structure was 'apostle to the nations', just like Peter was to the Jews [see, e. g., Gal 2:2-8]. Any concept of chains of sequential apostleship continuing ad infinitum has no scriptural basis. When Judas left another was chosen, to complete the number. But when James the brother of John died, no additional apostle was chosen. And in the introductions to James' and Jude's epistles, they were termed "brother" and/or "slave of God" and not apostle. All subsequent and/or current claims of apostleship have been and are fraudulent.)
In this conceptual structure, there's room for an 'Asian mind' and a 'Western mind', as well as a 'Sub-Saharan Mind', an 'Arab/Semitic mind', a 'Native American mind', and so forth. Each nation or tribe or tongue has its own peculiarities, which can be freely expressed in constituent local assemblies. The common denominator is the belief in God's Lord and Christ, resurrected from the dead, and now ruling our hearts from his throne in glory (or similar terms - I'm expressing what seems common).
In Acts 1:6 they asked, if the resurrected Messiah were now restoring the kingdom to Israel? If God had effaced the distinctiveness of the Jewish nation from His plan, Jesus would have refuted this reference in his reply. But rather, he said the times weren't presently evident, but first the Paraclete must come, and good news (Gk: 'gospel') must go to the uttermost part of the earth, i.e. the nations. That was where Paul came into God's plan, as the book of Acts unfolded.
The irony of what's happened in the local church/Lord's recovery/little flock movements of Nee and Lee, is that as the gospel of Jesus Christ reached China, it did so hand-in-glove with western imperialism. So the Boxer Rebellion and the indigenous Christian work of Watchman Nee were reactions to that imposition of foreign values. But 20th century local churches affiliated with Witness Lee were subject to a form of imposition of Asian values. I cannot overstress that Chinese cultural values aren't inferior to any other, but that they shouldn't be imposed as the new standard on non-Asians. That's also cultural imperialism, and is a perversion of the gospel, just as surely as a Roman Catholic cathedral rising in Peking in the 17th century.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathed...ption,_Beijing