Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
Roger's "little" dissertation made my longer posts seem like limericks...
|
I cheated: I'm never going to be another Nigel Tomes, so I did a cut-and-paste job of someone else's research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OBW
As to how Nee's model did or did not work in China, I wonder if the thing that made it work had nothing to do with ecclesiology outside of the fact that they were not answering to a non-Chinese HQ. Ultimately they all answered to Nee since he was, by default, the only one who had no one who was more spiritual than him. The claim of many cities in China with their separate assemblies was made a lie by the ability of one man to rule them all.
|
Rogers lists the six qualifications for a church to be a local church then says this:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Rogers
Understood from the perspective of these six characteristics, it is easy to understand why the ecclesiology of Nee and Lee has been called impractical by some and sectarian by others. It is hard to imagine a group of Christians anywhere in the world that meets all six of these qualifications outside the specific circle of influence of Nee and Lee...
|
I think his second sentence, here, says it all. And "influence" means control.