Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry
Toldeo, I see a vast difference between "ground of locality" versus "ground of oneness".
Through the ground of locality there are no barriers in following the Lord and whom we recieve through the Lord.
Through the ground of oneness, it is defined by a select group and subject to change at any given moment. Consider the history of the local churches. The 'ground of oneness" changed through the decades.
Problem is when you endorse both teachings, there is an inherrent conflict of interest.
Terry
|
Amen, dear brother Terry and all you dear brothers and sisters. I am very thankful to Bill W for starting this thread and for all the fellowship thus far in this thread.
The "ground of locality" really is so simple and so beautiful! How precious it is: Focus and center on Christ, be open to receive all genuine believers, be open to receive help from all genuine believers, do not participate in any divisions, and do not become a division. This view of "the ground" was taught and practiced (at great cost) by dear ones in the 20th century like Simon Meek, Faithful Luke, and Stephen Kaung (co-workers of Watchman Nee), along with dear ones like TAS and Bakht Singh.
This view of the "ground of locality" is very healthy and serves as a real safeguard, since violating any one of the above points means forfeiting the ground of locality. The version of "the ground" taught in the LC, sad to say, has not kept the LC from becoming narrow and exclusive, just as it did not keep the various branches of the Closed Brethren who taught a similar version of "the ground" from becoming narrow and exclusive.
May our dear Lord keep our eyes focused on Him alone and may He keep our hearts enlarged to receive all those whom He has received.