Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
I guess no matter how you might "learn and try again," the "practical oneness" will always be relative to a minority of believers and subject to preconcieved doctrines that they may have.
|
Not all. The New Testament requirement is that we must receive all whom the Lord has received. His requirement seems simple as well: whoever calls upon the Lord shall be saved, or as many as received Him, to them gave He the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on His name.
Pretty much it would seem that you believe on Jesus and after that the sky is the limit. The Lord loves crazy people, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
By defining "the ground of the church" in any way simply creates a denomination.
|
Nonsense. The principle of denomination is that you set yourself apart from all other believers. The principle of the church is that you are one with all other believers.
Everybody draws some kind of circle around their little group. Whether it is a doctrine or teaching or practice or leader, whether it is overt or subtle, every group draws a circle and has a boundary. The principle of the church is simply to draw a bigger circle -- even reaching as far as the boundary of the locality in order to include every believer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
However, an understanding and agreement of doctrines is needed for the church to go forward in any shape form or fashion.
|
I don't think so. This was the error of the Roman Catholics. It was followed as well by the Protestants. Who says the church has to have teachings and doctrines? The church only needs believers.
Witness the success of the current praise and worship meetings. They are for the most part utterly devoid of teaching, yet Christians gather to sing, praise, and worship God.
It is the workers who come with their doctrines and their teachings. The church has the right either to receive or reject their ministries. But the church itself can have no teachings. We cannot reject anyone because of a doctrinal disagreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
Otherwise, we are left with a bunch of lone-ranger individual Christians who will spend their lives chasing the ghost of "oneness."
|
In my experience, the lone-ranger individual Christians aren't that way because they care about oneness, but because they care for their own personal "spirituality" and because they are not willing to give up anything in order to fellowship with others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
So I guess the answer to your question could be yes! You do need to give up striving for "practical oneness" because at the end of the day that is all it becomes: striving.
|
Yes, thank you. At last someone comes right out and says it. Forget the prayer of the Lord Jesus in John 17. Forget the command to maintain the oneness in Ephesians 4. Because the LSM is wrong in so many ways, we have an excuse to ignore the scripture...
You would seem to despise striving. Yet striving is a significant part of the New Testament: "striving to maintain the oneness of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Eph 4:3). And desiring to match the Lord's heart is hardly "chasing ghosts".
Quote:
Originally Posted by cityonahill
There are many denominations and "free groups." I'm sure at least one of them suits your preconcieved doctrines and desired church practices. As long as you can have that local fellowship, assemble with other believers, and go after God together in one accord, you can't go wrong!
|
I can only assume you are being sarcastic here, but it is out of the abundance of the heart that the mouth speaks. Your last paragraph echoes so many of the posts on this site. The LSM messed up, therefore we are free to do what is right in our own eyes...
I don't buy it. The failure of the LSM denominational churches does not imply that practical oneness cannot be attained in this age.