[OBW]

I have only scanned these documents, but note that they are little more than surface observations of the manner in which Jerusalem worked where it was as a church and the way Paul went out to preach as a missionary. Other than that, on what basis do we determine that there is some "way" in these?

I note that one of them almost entirely tells stories about the way the churches started up in China. That is fine. But is not evidence of a superiority of either. Rather studying the scripture would show that there was a lot told about the life of the church in the early chapters of Acts, and the spreading of the church in the latter chapters. Since Paul went out of Antioch and the spread undertaken by Paul is what it recorded there, it gets a label "the way of Antioch." But there is evidence that other apostles went out many places in much the same way. It almost sounds like James is getting close to being alone in Jerusalem by the end of Acts.

So where does Nee/Lee go with these two ways? Do they ultimately prefer one over the other? Or do they recognize that the assembly is the assembly and has needs while the spread is the spread and has other needs, with both being needed when needed?

If so, then what is the point of labeling these two divergent activities as "ways"? Seems to infer that there is something exclusive in them and there must be one superior to the other.