Quote:
|
I'd like to. Well, sin is a pretty black and white issue, wouldn't you agree? As such, that which is sourced in the flesh of man should also be a black and white issue. Therefore, if a person perceives something to be sourced in the flesh (ie. divisions), then it pretty much would amount to a black and white issue with them. The problem, then, may not necessarily be that such a vision is sectarian - different from the norm so as to be strange - but that an established acceptable paradigm is offended. See, Watchman Nee claimed that denominations were essentially of the flesh and soul, and that offended some. Witness Lee claimed that the local ground is the ground upon which Christ affirms the church, and that offended many.
|
You continue to talk about "denominations" as if everyone outside of the LC is in one. But the fastest growing segment of Christianity for a long time is the community church movement, which cannot, generally, be included as another denomination. I know it helps you case superficially to continue to use the term "denominations" in a broader way than you should. But it's unfair to do so.
I would agree that setting oneself apart from others based upon doctrine is of the flesh. That's what some denominations do wrong. But simply forming a church is not wrong. Forming one which basically says all are wrong except people which think like us is the problem.
The problem is not holding certain doctrines as important. We all do that. The problem is how we use them to view others. Do we view those doctrines as "for man" (as the Lord viewed the most important Jewish doctrine, the Sabbath), or do we view man as for them (as the Jews viewed "man for the Sabbath.") Local churchers manifestly believe man is for the local ground, rather than the correct way, if there is any way, which is the other way around. So in essense, the local church is doing exactly what denominations are doing wrong, just with a unique and different doctrine.
The LC claimed to have the best collection of doctrines ever. They claimed to have a treasure comparable to no other. So what did they do with this "treasure?" Did they try to bless others with it? No, they used it to prop up their identity as "God's best." Rather than condescend and try to minister to a world which they must have thought dearly needed what they had, they became self-enclosed and self-serving, and still are.
Why couldn't the LC try to share the truth of oneness in locality with the rest of Christians? Firstly, I honestly I don't believe they ever really wanted to. I think they more wanted to maintain control of the movement and define it under their terms. They didn't want to lose their culture. They liked their identity as a remnant, as something special. If everyone joined them they would lose control and they wouldn't be special anymore.
Secondly, I think they knew the doctrine of the local ground could never hold up under wide public scrutiny, as it requires a tightly spun web of required arbitrary presumptions to operate. You first have to accept someone as the apostle, and few believe in apostles anymore. You secondly have to get people to accept an arbitrary set of elders in each city. This is relatively easy to do when you've got a small, isolated and tightly controlled group of people believing in some heirarchy of authority which comes down from the "apostle." In other words, an enclosed, inbred group operating under fear of excommunication. But it's not going to work with a huge number of people who sooner or later are going to wonder and ask why the emperors are wearing no clothes.