Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Nee raised an important issue-because he was a young idealist-a monumental issue: why do we have so many divisions in Christianity ad infinitum? Is there really a solution? In essence, Nee was asking a question but Lee tried to provide an answer which was really not an answer. It degenerated into something worse than what exists in Evangelical churches today.
|
I am not sure that "divisions", as we understand them, is entirely accurate. Jesus said, "In my Father's house are many abodes". There are multiple abodes, and multiple gatherings can be seen as multiplication of the Father's house, rather than division. In John 12 Jesus talked about many grains of wheat. In Revelations, John heard the sound of many waters.
The assessment of "divisions" is subjective, based on how you want to see things, and how you want to interpret the words of someone writng 2,000 years ago. I have mentioned already that 'ecclesia' had meanings different from what we call 'church' today. Today we massage our terminology, and we can have multiple 'meetings' of 'one church'. But we're just re-arranging words according to preference. So we end up condemning others, and congratulate ourselves for doing the same thing. And how is the unification of the church under Nee and then Lee any better than revived popery?