Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Predictable ploy. Can't answer questions so you throw some back at me. 
Wish I had more time to talk. Later ... |
Ohio I'm not "ploying" with you, okay? I'm just having a discussion. Show me a little more respect, okay, and please stop being rude. I thought you and I were friends.
What questions do you want me to answer? The reasons I skipped some was because I felt they missed the point I was making. I tried to clarify that point, but let me spell it out simply below, and then fire your questions if you still have them.
1. Apostles of the first century type cannot exist today because those established the faith and faith is already established.
2. Apostles can exist today (missionaries, church planters, major visionaries), but not of the rank of the first century.
3. We need to be careful when we designate someone an "apostle" and not by title association endow them with the same authority of the first century apostles, that is, give them some grey area to further establish the faith (read "redefine) and/or command too much authority in controlling churches, as this is the error of Lee and the LRC.
Does that make sense? Thoughts? Where am I going wrong?