Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Gubei,
Thank you for your comments on the matters of oneness and leadership. I agree that striving for oneness is not unimportant.
However, insisting on oneness (particularly of a specific manifestation) can actually be divisive itself. This is almost paradoxical, which is one reason it is so hard to come to grips with. Yet we know God is not the God of confusion.
Either the local ground is a matter of the faith and thus required of everyone, or it is not and should not be required of anyone. The local ground cannot be some special "truth" which is not a matter of the faith but still must be adhered to by everyone as if it were. This is actually the way WL and the LCs treat the teaching, which is doublemindedness, which is confusion, which leads to division.
|
Igzy,
with respect,
Despite your repeated denial, you are using WL's teaching and practice on the ground of locality, over and over again, in order to blur my model. This is only time you look in agreement with me on the issue of one set of elders, but immediately, you are talking about how wrongly "WL and LCs" practice the truth. I already, several times, admitted that. Why do you repeat the same thing to me? What do you think you are talking about - my model or WL's model?
And you did not reply my questions about your assertion that the ground of locality
necessarily leads to conflicts. Do you remember the fact that I asked you how you can deal with the counterexamples where two groups gather together after recognizing their proper ground?
Additionally, you showed me your model by saying
"My model is to meet with believers and receive all Christian believers and groups. Oneness is shown by our willingness to receive others and to acknowledge that the Lord may be working in ways better than our own in a group meeting just a few miles away. In other words, the attitude of oneness is one of receiving, love, graciousness and humility--esteeming others as better than ourselves."
I'd like to ask you this. Do you think this is a model which includes any practical things such as boundary of Christain groups, administration etc?
Whenever you evaluate my model, you just adhere to the matter of "eldership" - the second phase of my model, which I have not even insisted at all, neglecting the first phase of my model in which all saints just confess they are not separated Christians, which is exactly the same as your model.
The reason your model cannot be evaluated in terms of practice is that you did not show us any thing which is related to practices such as the boundary of Christian groups, administration, eldership etc.
So, I hope you clarify your model by answering the following questions.
In your model, there is eldership? If any, how to confirm the eldership? How do we know Brother A is an elder or not?
Gubei