View Single Post
Old 12-13-2008, 12:13 AM   #90
Gubei's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Posts: 118
Default Re: "Early Nee" vs. "Later Nee"

Originally Posted by Igzy View Post
Since the ground of locality in practice insists on making people agree on things which no reasonable person could expect them to agree on (e.g. just what "locality" means, who are the elders, etc), it therefore invites contention, and so is a problem itself.

with respect,

Once again, you must be thinking that the ground of locality is insisting one set of eldership in a city. However, the ground of locality is pahse 1 + phase 2

phase 1 = accepting other Christians unconditionally as described by your wonderful expressions

phase 2 = one set of eldership (not by insisting but by the Spirit)

Therefore, the ground of locality does not include "insisting one set of eldership", but you are thinking that the ground of locality is insisting one set of eldership. You are thinking the problematic practice of LSM or some local churches in mind whenever you write your posts to me.

And as another practical remedy for phase 2, you gave me your model.
You wrote.
"Eldership is confirmed, therefore, by recognition by followers. I.e. People follow the leader(s) because they are persuaded in their own minds that the Lord wants them to follow those leaders. So although a leader may be the official leader of a church, no one is compelled to meet with that church. They are free to meet where the Lord leads.

Most community churches these days start small. Perhaps a person or group feels called to start a church in a particular part of a city. They begin to meet in a modest setting, like a home. Either the Lord blesses them with growth and confirmation or he doesn't. If the group does flourish, as it does the leadership becomes more solidfied and official.

Since newcomers are not bound to meet with the group by some arbitrary requirement (e.g. one-church-per-city) they have no reason to join unless they feel the Lord is personally leading them to do so, which likely means they like the direction the leadership is taking. If they don't they simply don't join. There is no reason to contend with leadership since they are not compelled to be there anyway."

Your logic is such that if it is the Lord's will, we can freely move to other groups. My question is how do you know that is Lord's will? Don't you think there could be some saints who are divisive and "freely" move here and there on the grounds that that is Lord's will? Your model is also very vulnerable to the divisive saints. And if we follow your model, we have no choice but to confirm their "free moving." However, if we follow the ground of locality, we can condemn them.


Please rethink our whole discussions thus far. I know you are a very considerate fellow Christian. I know no model is perfect. But, at least, any model should be based on the Bible. I cannot find any verse in the Bible which confirms "free moving" of saints.

Less than the least
Gubei is offline   Reply With Quote