[aron]

The Little Flock of Nee began as an indigenous reaction to to imposition of Western culture on the Chinese, including particularly the RCC and Protestant ecclesiastical models. The LF was effectively a post-protestant model, embracing that one's history and ideas but attempting to go further.

But I notice that, like the Lutherans and Anglicans before, it shows its originating culture. Lee told us that China was "virgin soil"; my reply, there ain't no such thing. For example, the Acts 15 conference has repeated reference to "much discussion" as the Jewish participants tried to collectively assess God's will concerning their relations with the believing gentiles coming into their midst.

But to Nee in the Little Flock, that wasn't "normal", or normative. It was culturally uncomfortable - what if someone said something 'toxic'? The Western model is willing to risk that in its search for truth.

We don't know the details of the discussion in Acts 15. Probably some of them were racist, or at least culturally biased, and said some things that were better not printed. But they were allowed to discuss, as peers. They were allowed to reason with one another. I don't see anyone telling the other, "Get out of your mind".

"If David then calls him 'Lord', how can he be his son?" Matt 22:45. Jesus taught his disciples to think, to reason, and to discuss. A discussion is a mutual learning experience; it is not a lecture by one expert to a group of acolytes. The 'expert' is Jesus - he knows the Father's house. He has left us his holy spirit, and expects us to follow. I suggest that the "much discussion" model of Acts is worth remembering, here.