Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
The general consensus of the church is that apostles of the rank of Peter, Paul and Luke can no longer exist because the ability to write scripture no longer exists. Apostles of that type were special. They had an authority which is no longer given, which is to directly define divine truth. Their words could become scripture. That doesn't mean they necessarily did become scripture just that they could. That authority no longer exists.
Since the canon is closed, no apostle of the type Paul and Peter and Luke were cannot exist now. By definition this is true. That is a big distinction. Lee's band wanted people to believe that Lee was of that rank. But he wasn't. They for all intents and purposes believe his words are as good as scripture BECAUSE they believe he was one of those types of apostles.
Given the confusion that such a belief can and has caused, that is reason enough to reject it, especially since there is no compelling scriptural command to accept it.
|
This is a distortion of the apostleship. Paul never says that, "the signs of the apostleship are writing scripture." Instead he points to many other descriptors. Your argument here is circular: since apostles wrote scripture, and scripture is written, then the apostleship is also over.
Forget what WL said. That is a red herring.
You have addressed none of my facts. Here is another -- if the initial apostles were supposed to write scripture, then why did only Peter, Matthew and John write? The other nine of the twelve were failures, by your theory. There are more non-apostle writers of the N.T. than there are apostle writers.
There is no "compelling scriptural command" to accept your theory.