Quote:
Originally Posted by Evangelical
You are trying to say that the view of locality contradicts John 4:24 but this is not so.
|
Locality is extraneous to John 4:24. Locality itself doesn't contradict 4:24, insisting on meeting based on locality does. When asked specifically about the proper place of worship Jesus had the opportunity to mention locality, but he did not.
He said specifically that the only requirement is in spirit and in truth (ISIT). Since ISIT has replaced the temple as the proper place of worship, and since the church is the NT temple (1 Tim 3:15), ISIT implies the church is present. There is no requirement for locality.
Locality is a natural consequence of meeting in Spirit. Believers tend to meet with other believers who live near them. Most people don't tend to travel 30 miles across town to meet, ironically unless they are in the LCM. But meeting based on locality, let alone based on city boundaries, is not a NT requirement. When two or three meet together in spirit and truth, the church is there.
Insisting otherwise is to say the church barely exists on earth today. If the church doesn't exist between believers in spirit, what does, and where has the church gone? Is it suspended somewhere? I remember Lee mocking Christian teachers who claimed that the kingdom was suspended. But his doctrine of no locality/no church results in an even more ridiculous doctrine of a suspended church.
Again, Lee's doctrine of locality is simply a means to validate his churches and discredit all others. It's just a ploy to keep members in his movement. The NT does not require it. It goes beyond what is written, including in John 4:24.