[Gubei]

Dear OBW,

You wrote.
"I disagree. Actually, the local churches were, by definition, divisive from the beginning. But that division was not as willful or organized in the early days and was therefore somewhat benign. But any time you come into a divided situation and claim to have the answer and that those who follow you are not divided, there is a problem."

I already asked you this question, but you did not answer. According to Igzy's definition, "being divisive" means

"Being divisive is a matter of heart and attitude" - Igzy

And then, how can you just assume that the local churches were divisive from the beginning? Now by what definition are you saying? Please elaborate on it.

And you wrote.
"There are not multiple sets of elder sin Toronto because of the so-called “Work.” There were multiple sets of elders in Toronto long before Witness Lee was born. And if those multiple assemblies with multiple elders can become more one with each other in Christian fellowship, it will not matter that they hold some few preferences differently and continue to meet as separate assemblies. Without even going to Toronto to see for myself, I bet there is a trend in that direction."

Now you are talking about an early stage of the phase 2 of my model. Yes, this is what I want to see. Obviously, this is a part of my model on the ground of locality. So, why do you reject my model?

BYW, still I have one question. You used the word "assemblies." It's okay to me. But, what if those assemblies have such names as "Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian etc?" Do you think they can go on with those names? The NT is obviously against denominations.

Gubei