Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Absolutely we should consider God's perspective on practicality and not man's. I totally agree with this. What I don't agree with is your conclusion that God's practicality demands churches be organized by us on the city level. You are jumping to big conclusions when you think this. The Bible doesn't not make this clear...
|
Your understanding of my conclusion is incorrect. There have been denominations or movements which attempt to create a one city per church model.
But Nee did not have this intention, in his book Normal church life, he says he did not want this to be used as a "manual for service"0
In the preface
"One of the prayers I have offered in connection with this book is that the Lord should keep it from those who oppose and would use it as a chart for attack and also from those who agree and would use it as a manual for service. I dread the latter far more than the former."
I am not arguing for an organized city church. I am arguing for no organization, and locality and Christ is its only identification and name. I am arguing, against division and denominationalism as being the only alternative.
In the LC there is no organization. Please see:
http://www.ministrybooks.org/books.c...=IGAJA34GX9UY9
So I would say that the LC is an attempt to do church without any organization at all, recognizing that the identity is per city.
A house church is an organized church, a global or regional church is an organized church, but if every believer practiced "no organization", then we would be "the local church", "the church in ... " .
I would agree that a teaching that says "you must join my city church" would be a disaster. What would not be a disaster, however, is if everyone left their denominations willingly, and met together on the basis of Christ and locality alone, that would be a return to a "normal church life" and New Testament Christianity.