[Gubei]

Dear brother Igzy,

I’m very sorry that I have to say that you once again are getting around the issue.

You wrote. (#269)
“Rather than address the real problems with how I view the church (which is based on the bible and history), you have chosen to take the ploy of saying I contradict myself by saying I prescribe something and yet say you should not. This is a clever ploy but it is simply a diversion.”

But, please re-read what you wrote in your post in # 267.

“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.”

Please pay attention to “As to the free movement of saints, I never prescribed it. I said the Bible doesn't restrict it, so we should allow it.”

It is very easy to prove that you did prescribe something by showing you what you have really said in the previous posts. So, I proved it in post #268. (BTW, I do not understand why the quotation of Webster’s Dictionary on the word “prescribe” is deleted? Who deleted that part?) Now you are not dealing with that issue. Instead, you are resort to other issue by saying that “This is a clever ploy but it is simply a diversion.”

Igzy, I know the nuance of the word “clever,” “ploy” are not so good in English. But I do not think I deserve to hear those words applied to me. I’m just saying the FACTS. As contrary to your repeated claming that “I said the Bible doesn't restrict it, so we should allow it”, you said a lot of detailed processes and procedures in your model as evidenced in post #268. Furthermore, you mentioned “freedom in Christ” as a biblical ground for your model. The freedom that we have in Christ Jesus is the freedom from the bondage of the Mosaic Law, as evidenced from my former quotations of other famous expositors. Even if I accept your interpretation (i.e. freedom from religionists who would impose their interpretation of law on believers (see 2:4, 3:1, 5:7) ), anyway the freedom means “the freedom from something negative.” With this understanding of “the freedom from something negative”, please re-read what you said -“I said the Bible doesn't restrict it, so we should allow it” Here, “it” means your model – free movement of saints. And which kind of negative things are there for saints to freely move? Let’s once again look at your model from what you actually said.

“The Bible indicates that the official leader(s) is/are appointed by the Lord. This appointment is recognized by consensus, which the Bible also indicates. If one doesn't agree with the consensus, one is free to meet elsewhere. (Let each be fully persuaded in his own mind.) This is my model.”

Surprising is the fact that there is no negative thing! According to your model, “If one doesn’t agree with the consensus one is free to meet elsewhere” The only necessary condition for free moving is not something negative, but disagreement of the mover! My conclusion is that your model and your biblical ground do not match even if I accept your interpretation of “the freedom that we have in Christ Jesus.”

You wrote.
“You also use the ploy of saying I do not provide Biblical support for my model, but this is not accurate. I said the Bible shows city churches and house churches and does not prescribe either. Therefore there is freedom implied in the Bible on how to meet.”

Igzy, please re-read what you said. Are there any clear and strong inferences to support your model? Yes, there are “city churches” and “house churches” in the NT, if you will. And then, how come you jump to “free movement between churches” from that fact? As contrary to your very weak argument, Paul said that

Phi 4:2 I exhort Euodia, and I exhort Syntyche, to be of the same mind in the Lord. (ASV)

(1Tim 5:19) 『Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.』(KJV)

These two verses strongly means that we should have one mind in a church, and if there is conflicts with elders, we should settled down those conflicts, rather than “free moving” to other churches.

You wrote.
“Further, you have not even defined locality plainly. Just what is a locality? How can you prescribe something that you can't even define clearly?”

Did I not define locality? Please re-read what I have written in this thread, including the matter of apostles. It’s you who did not carefully read other’s posts. Otherwise, you are getting around the issue by pretending you did not read. And if you are not familiar with “locality”, please go to the classic – “Rethinking our work” by WN. Now I’m really curious whether you did read that book. Also I’m very curious how you have criticized the ground of locality without reading the explanations of the truth.

You wrote.
“Freedom in Galatians is not simply freedom from Mosaic law. In context it includes freedom from religionists who would impose their interpretation of law on believers (see 2:4, 3:1, 5:7). This includes by implication those who would seek to impose a Christian law, e.g. a standard of "locality," on everyone, such as yourself or anyone else. Or do you think it is okay for Christians to impose their law on each other? If Galatians doesn't speak to that, what does?”

First and foremost, please quote the verses at least for the convenience’ sake of reading you posted.

(Gal 2:4) 『This matter arose because some false brothers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves.』
(Gal 3:1) 『You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.』
(Gal 5:7) 『You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?』

You are trying to give impression to readers that I’m INSISTING something by saying that
“This includes by implication those who would seek to impose a Christian law, e.g. a standard of "locality," on everyone, such as yourself or anyone else. Or do you think it is okay for Christians to impose their law on each other?”

Igzy, do you not remember how many times I said that I did not insist? Do you not remember how many times I said phase 2 is not essential? And why did you introduce new expression – a Christian law? Did I ever use that expression? Are you trying to put the ground of locality parallel to the Mosaic Law? Do not go too far from what I actually said. Do you think Paul was establishing a Christian law which should be regarded as the NEW Mosaic Law, when he said about the head covering of sisters?

You wrote.
“You've said you don't insist on multiple elders and continue to say that I say you do, when I never did. I never said you insisted on multiple elders. I said I don't understand any definition of the city church which does not eventually want one eldership. As implied by your Phase 2 phase, you do seem to eventually want to see one eldership? Right? So isn't there ultimately the thought that one eldership is the best? But over what? The city? The burrough?”

Please re-read what I have written in this thread and what WN said. And please “quote” what I said without change (adding or deleting).

You wrote.
“Where you are going wrong, dear Gubei, is that you say the Bible teaches the ground of locality, yet you can't even define a locality. So how can I be against what you are for if you can't even really define what you are for?”

Igzy, you have been against my model. Now you are saying that “So how can I be against what you are for if you can't even really define what you are for?”

You wrote.
“What is a locality? How many localities are there in Bejing? Taipei? New York City? Houston? And who decides? If you think there are 10 localities in Bejing but there are 15 assemblies there, does that mean the optimum has not been met? And who is the arbitrator of all this? The apostle? And how do we decide who he is?”

All answers you want to hear are already there in my previous posts and WN’s book. Please re-read those and “quote” those. That’s a BASIC.

You wrote.
“In short, the model of locality you seem to be offering is like a plane with no landing gear. You want us all to get on and fly in it, but you don't have any provision for landing. I want to know what you plan to tell saints in cities like Mansfield and Toronto et al to do when their elders tell them they are divisive if they don't follow LSM, or give them some other ridiculous commandment. What is your provision for them?”

Igzy, you are simultaneously saying “So how can I be against what you are for if you can't even really define what you are for?” while rejecting my model. This is what is called “being inconsistent,” “being illogical.”

You wrote.
“These are not trick questions. They are plain and should be easy to answer in a few words if you know what you are talking about. And you either have concrete answers for them or you don't. If you don't you can say you are according to the Bible all you want but you still don't have anything practical to offer anyone, and so are just kind of blowing smoke.

My assertion to you in short, dear Gubei, is that you have some very lofty ideals, but no practical way of working them out, at least none you seem to be able to articulate. I would suggest instead of continually trying to show your ideal is the right one, spend some time thinking and praying about how these practical problems are to be worked out. Don't expect me to board your plane until you install some landing gear.
This opens up another issue for grounders. Have any of you spent any time praying about this matter? Or did you just take WL's model and run with it because he said so? I have prayed about it. A lot. I ask because when I was in the LC, I just took it as truth and never prayed about it. I suggest try praying to the Lord about some of these problems I've identified. See what he says.”

Igzy, in addition to your prayers, please read the NT.

Gubei