A Word of Love

[rayliotta]

But Z, this idea that all Christians in a city should meet together all in one room, wasn't this at the heart of Watchman Nee's original teaching? Didn't Nee attempt a "practical working out" of one church / one city in China, before Witness Lee then exported it?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

But Z, this idea that all Christians in a city should meet together all in one room, wasn't this at the heart of Watchman Nee's original teaching? Didn't Nee attempt a "practical working out" of one church / one city in China, before Witness Lee then exported it?

Not even the LRC does that. Go to Taipei. It is very, very rare for everyone to meet in the same room.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Not even the LRC does that. Go to Taipei. It is very, very rare for everyone to meet in the same room.

Actually in most places they do. When they got some really big congregations in really large cities, they had to grant themselves exceptions to their own oh-so-fundamental teachings.

But all I was asking is, you seemed to be drawing a big distinction between Nee's attempt at "working it out practically", and Lee's attempt at "working it out practically". I don't think it was mostly just theoretical with Nee, if that's what you were getting at...but maybe I misunderstood...

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

Actually in most places they do. When they got some really big congregations in really large cities, they had to grant themselves exceptions to their own oh-so-fundamental teachings.

But all I was asking is, you seemed to be drawing a big distinction between Nee's attempt at "working it out practically", and Lee's attempt at "working it out practically". I don't think it was mostly just theoretical with Nee, if that's what you were getting at...but maybe I misunderstood...

There is the teaching based on Bible verses and there is the practice. My original comment was about what I believed concerning the teaching from WN. I don't think the LRC practice is scriptural because it is sectarian. That doesn't mean the LRC experiment is a waste, rather they have shown us the pitfalls. As for WN I don't believe he would have tolerated his teaching to become the cornerstone of a sect.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

There is the teaching based on Bible verses and there is the practice. My original comment was about what I believed concerning the teaching from WN. I don't think the LRC practice is scriptural because it is sectarian. That doesn't mean the LRC experiment is a waste, rather they have shown us the pitfalls. As for WN I don't believe he would have tolerated his teaching to become the cornerstone of a sect.

Probably Nee's motives were a lot purer than Lee's. Probably Nee never would have put up with the MOTA/Apostle of the Age/"Oracle" (!!)/etc/etc teachings that are such a huge part of the sectarian attitude in today's LRC.

But to say that the churches-in-what-what in mainland China, in the 1930's and 40's, were not already their own little sect -- albeit a "milder", more reasonable sect -- I guess this is where I'm skeptical.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

But Z, this idea that all Christians in a city should meet together all in one room, wasn't this at the heart of Watchman Nee's original teaching? Didn't Nee attempt a "practical working out" of one church / one city in China, before Witness Lee then exported it?

I have already said that I felt that part of the teaching was both experimental and did not work. Not working should not be equated with failure. As Thomas Edison said, we have learned several ways that don't work

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by rayliotta

But Z, this idea that all Christians in a city should meet together all in one room, wasn't this at the heart of Watchman Nee's original teaching? Didn't Nee attempt a "practical working out" of one church / one city in China, before Witness Lee then exported it?

What's even more egregious than the demand for a single meeting place is the requirement for one presbytery per city.

Imagine one eldership in NYC. How useless they would be.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

What's even more egregious than the demand for a single meeting place is the requirement for one presbytery per city.

Imagine one eldership in NYC. How useless they would be.

True, but imagine that the presbytery in NYC were one. That is according to the truth. In 2000 and 2001 we organized a memorial for Christians being killed in Sudan as a result of the spread of Sharia law into Sudan. We held it outside of the UN and we coordinated with as many other congregations as possible. Much of our fellowship was on how to organize so that this would be something that all could be one with. So although we donated over $20,000 for the event we went to pains to keep the name of our congregation from ever being mentioned (there were radio and tv interviews). We realized that if it had the appearance of promoting a single congregation that could affect the oneness.

It is completely unworkable and outrageous for the LRC or any other group to say "we are the legitimate eldership in this city, to be a genuine church you have to be one with our elders". That is an affront to the Lord Jesus.

However, it is quite workable to say that the Bible is the legitimate authority in this city. If you are one with the Bible and we are one with the Bible, why can't we both be one?