Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
aron, I'm not following why each spin-off is "less legit" than its "parent." Perhaps you can explain this.
|
I was kind of arguing the option #2 of
Igzy to its extreme.
Igzy's #2 says:
Work within the Church, doing your best to contribute and be a positive influence in whatever flavor of the Church you find yourself.
So I was proposing that whomever doesn't "work within the Church" that they find themselves, a la 1 Corinthians 7:17, and starts something "new and better" is arguably creating a division. Including, the patron saint of the Protestants, Martin Luther, and the patron saint of the Lord's Recovery Church, Watchman Nee. With the East-West schism even the RCC isn't sacrosanct. My point was using Option #2 as the measuring stick, Christian history is full of "illegitimate" movements and spin-offs. Maybe it is nothing but.
Then, I tried to make the point that if you find yourself in "an illegitimate spin-off" (which is arguably everyone), just stay. Don't create yet another schism.
Two problems with my thinking are: that it was probably not presented clearly, so
Ohio and others didn't get what, if any, point I was making; and also that it is just a hypothetical statement. I am just taking a point which seems reasonable
prima facie to the extreme that it maybe creates uncomfortable tension. If looking at the historical record through Option #2 creates cognitive discomfort, how to reconcile with that?
Often I present a hypothetical or provisional statement as if it were "real" or "true" just to see what it looks like. Will everyone explode in derisive laughter? Or just shrug, or.... anyway, thanks for trying to follow along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
If what you say has merit, then we must all consider a return to the Messianic movement, because they are convinced that only they are the true church of Jesus, and every Gentile church is just another division of the one body of Christ.
|
Exactly. Try to see where a train of thought leads you. If you accept a premise, at what point does it lead to illogical, impractical, or absurd consequences. That was kind of my point in presenting "General Deborah Green" of the Shim Ra Na Nation, whose arguments had some merit. But look at their website (extremechristianity dot net) and see where their arguments have taken them -- to La-la land. And it's relevant to the Local Churches of Lee because I think the "ground of oneness" has also lead to quite a bit of cognitive tension which is not easy to resolve without getting even more extreme. It's like the poem: "I know an old lady who swallowed a fly. I think she'll die". Her solution to the problem is to continue the behavior which created the problem. Absurdity inevitably ensues.