Unregistered

I'll just add this. There is an expression in textual interpretation:

expresio unius est exlusivo alterius

I may have the grammatical endings wrong on that: "the expression of one is the exclusion of another."

That is, if God gave us no prescriptions on how to interact with (or stand with) one another as Christians, then I might be inclined to take a "pattern" more in the way of a prescription. But, when God makes a specific point of making prescriptions about how to interact with one another within Christianity, but leaves out other prescriptions - I take those other prescriptions as LEFT OUT for a reason.

God used specific precepts in regards to how we interact with one another regarding differing beliefs within Christianity. See Romans 14. I would need more convincing that there is an additional category of "commands" that come to us as a group that don't take that form.

This speaks to ONENESS and how to preserve it. I am not sure how "locality" adds to that.

If I meet down the street from you and it is simply because I like folk music and the particular paster and you don't meet with me because you like the writings of your group's founder and like the conferences in Anaheim, yet neither one of us would exlude the other from our meetings.... then I think we have a lot to discuss, but neither one of us is violating any "ground." We're still "one" - there's just way more of us then there were in any of the localities in the first generation of Christians...