Local Church Discussions - View Single Post - If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table..

Evangelical · 07-10-2018, 04:27 PM

I don't think Nee had in mind the teaching about "the ground of oneness causing division". Afterall it was Nee who gave us that teaching, so why would he? The passages by Nee have been misinterpreted by some here and applied to the local churches.

If we could consider these parts which seems to have been deliberately ignored:

A local church is undenominational, and it is positive and inclusive; but an undenominational church is not a local church, and it is negative and exclusive.

To say this another way:

Local churches (on the ground of oneness) are, by definition, positive and inclusive. .

The context is clearly non-denominational churches, not the local churches. Nee is saying that a nondenominational church, a church which stands apart from all others and is for "Jesus only", is still negative and exclusive if it does not have the locality as the ground of oneness.

Nee also says:

It is not wrong to consider oneself as belonging only to Christ; it is right and even essential. Nor is it wrong to repudiate all schism among the children of God;

It is not wrong for the local churches to stand upon the locality, nor is it wrong to repudiate all schisms.

People on this forum many times have not merely disagreed with the teachings of Nee/Lee , they have disagreed when local church members attempt to point out the schisms and divisions, by claiming that it does not matter and it is a trivial thing.

07-10-2018, 04:27 PM	#93
Evangelical Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 3,965	Re: If you were in Scottsdale would you take the Table with us? I don't think Nee had in mind the teaching about "the ground of oneness causing division". Afterall it was Nee who gave us that teaching, so why would he? The passages by Nee have been misinterpreted by some here and applied to the local churches. If we could consider these parts which seems to have been deliberately ignored: A local church is undenominational, and it is positive and inclusive; but an undenominational church is not a local church, and it is negative and exclusive. To say this another way: Local churches (on the ground of oneness) are, by definition, positive and inclusive. . The context is clearly non-denominational churches, not the local churches. Nee is saying that a nondenominational church, a church which stands apart from all others and is for "Jesus only", is still negative and exclusive if it does not have the locality as the ground of oneness. Nee also says: It is not wrong to consider oneself as belonging only to Christ; it is right and even essential. Nor is it wrong to repudiate all schism among the children of God; It is not wrong for the local churches to stand upon the locality, nor is it wrong to repudiate all schisms. People on this forum many times have not merely disagreed with the teachings of Nee/Lee , they have disagreed when local church members attempt to point out the schisms and divisions, by claiming that it does not matter and it is a trivial thing.