[ZNPaaneah]

So then, it seems to me the burden that Jesus had was that we could keep this oneness, and the burden Paul had was that we could keep this oneness.

I don't see John having a different burden in Rev 2&3. Jesus was Lord and was speaking to all of his believers in each city. The word was for all of them. (In 1Corinthians we learn that christians were already grouping themselves by claiming they are of Peter, Paul, Apollos, Christ, etc. It is reasonable to think this included the cities referred to Revelation, yet the way it was written it was written to all of them regardless of which apostle they preferred). If you were to fast forward to the year 2017 and John was writing to all the believers in Houston would he address the letter to a small percentage of them meeting on Windswept lane? It seems to me the lesson from Revelation is not that "the church in Houston" is the proper name, but rather the burden to include all the believers is the burden.

If the name points to the fact that this group is very concerned with the Lord's burden in Jn 17, Paul's burden in Eph 4 and is aligned with Rev 2&3 that suggests to me they would completely deemphasize their name and focus instead on what unites them with all the christians in their city, the name of Jesus. However, this doctrine on "the ground of oneness" has been used instead to emphasize the importance of not taking a name, which ironically has emphasized that their formula for a generic name is the one true name. For example, look at Evangelical's posts. His understanding of this doctrine demonstrates the apparent two faced aspect of this doctrine. When confronted with the reality that emphasizing any name other than Jesus is sectarian and divisive those who "stand on this ground" will agree and say that is what they teach. Yet when listening to those who have been discipled with this teaching their understanding is that the name determines if your standing is right or wrong, and they aren't talking about the name of Jesus. They will even go so far as to imply the name of Jesus is also divisive.