Indiana,
How do you know the Lord was not simply blessing a desire to achieve oneness, rather than the means they chose (locality)?
It seems to me that your conclusion is too speculative. The Lord clearly commanded oneness, he did not command locality. The ground of locality has shown itself to be a self-destructive doctrine. Attempts to enforce it lead to oppression and divisiveness. How is that a blessing?
If you are going to endorse the ground of locality doctrine then it is incumbent upon you to spell out how it is to be practiced and how it is to overcome the problems manifestly inherent in it. You shouldn't just keep repeating that "Oh, the Lord blessed this wonderful stand." That is not fair to those here seeking to know how to go forward. If you can't provide a way to practice this locality model, then you need to stop endorsing it.
I wish you could understand this. The more you wear rose-colored glasses about the ground of locality, while ignoring it's problems, the more you discourage others from moving onto a church model that works and does not result in the abuse seen in the LC movement. Your stand encourages guilt in ex-LCers without providing a way for them to go on.
Quote:
|
I believe their positioning was proper and right with God's heart; but it can only be carried out if in attitude they remain inclusive of others.
|
The problem is this can't be done. If you say that the proper stand of oneness is locality, then you are saying that those who do not practice it are divisive. How are you going to truly be inclusive of those you by definition see as divisive?
This is what I mean when I say you cannot truly tell us how to practice this doctrine.
See, here's the thing. If you hold to the locality model, then you have to believe that anyone who doesn't practice it is divisive. And the Bible tells us to shun divisive people.* So how are you going to be inclusive of people the Bible tells us to shun? The only way is to consider them not divisive. But if you do that you've basically said locality doesn't matter. This is just another example of the contradictions in this doctrine.
My point is you cannot practice the doctrine without at some level believing that everyone needs to meet with you. That's not inclusiveness, that's presumed ownership.
See, it's not about locality, it's about oneness.
*This is how LCers can rationalize ignoring other Christians.