purity or unity
Dear scholary comrades,
I am having so much struggle trying to find the right balance between “purity” and “unity” in church. Our modern church history definitely shows much interest on “unity” even to the extent of forsaking few critical doctrinal issues. However there were such a movement called “free church” or more recently Anabaptism in 16 century and on. Have you experienced to be a literalist in some point such as in disputing “woman leadership” in the church, or un-participatory(?) in “charismatic harmony” or even “small fellowship meeting (but you cannot bring your Bible because it’s too offensive)”? I have. And it’s quite surprising how quickly you can be isolated from the crowd. I am looking for good sources; books or journals and anything hardcopy, since I do not rely much on internet on “purity” and “unity” and “free church” and finally your opinioon, encouragement, complaint will be welcomed. Thank you, comrades.
Korean Cowboy Preacher, jason
For His Kingdom come,
I think sometimes people get caught up so much on purity or the opposite unity that they forget the other. I believe that when it comes to the church unity and purity should be viewed as the same thing. We are united in our purity. There comes that thin line that churches walk on by deciding on what they should allow and what they shouldn’t, when we shouldn’t be asking God that question, for it almost seems if we have to prove it acceptable against God’s Word than we’ve already lost in God’s eyes. Just as an example, some teenagers would ask how far can they go with their boyfriend/girlfriend, when the question should really be God what can I do to glorify you in this relationship. The same thing happens in churches we are asking what can we get away with to benefit our churches when we should be asking God what can we do to Glorify Him. Hope that helps some.
you did help, Josh. Thanks for the new fresh perspective and yet wait for my reply.
jason