Quote:
Originally Posted by Gubei
Igzy,
I'm really shocked how you use the freedom that we have in Christ Jesus that way. Gal 2:4 is not about confirming "free moving of saints." PLEASE rethink your position. It is very dangerous to resort to the freedom that we have in Christ Jesus to advocate your model. My understanding of Gal 2:4 is such that we do not need to be controled by such Mosaic Laws as circumcision.
The ground of locality is not for taking your freedom. You are over and over again equate (the wrong, tyrannical eldership) with (the ground of locality itself.)
My point about the divisive ones is that once you reject those, that is nothing other than division. So every division should not be evaluated as same thing.
Gubei
|
Gubei,
I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm still not at all clear how you think the local ground should be practiced or how in effect your practice is any different than many assemblies per city like we have now. I don't understand what one church per city with many sets of elders means as practically. What's the point of arguing about it?
Your whole argument that I'm prescribing something restrictive is very weak. You keep screaming to be fair, but the fact is you are wrong. I'm not prescribing anything other than being silent where the Bible is silent.
As to the free movement of saints, I never
prescribed it. I said the Bible doesn't restrict it, so we should allow it. Please show me the verses that show saints cannot move from church to church. I don't think the local ground should be taught, but I wouldn't restrict it until it starts becoming divisive, and it usually does. It's hard for someone to practice the local ground (at least in a way that means anything) without drawing lines that cut off fellowship.
Gubei, Either you don't understand what the word
prescribe means or you are not correctly reading the posts by OBW and me. So I would say we've reached a semantical impasse. I suggest we move on.