[ZNPaaneah]

For me this discussion has gone from something trivial to something important. I don't mean to demean any posts, only that my initial reading was superficial.

To me the real issue is this, we are charged to examine if these things are so. Whether the person speaking it, as in WL's case, is considered "the apostle" or not. But the reality is, the more highly regarded some minister of the word is, the more important this becomes. I feel that is what we are doing (as I write this it occurs to me that a good name for an internet forum to do this would be "the Bereans").

The idea that someone is referred to as "The Apostle" would on the surface appear to be proof that they are in fact a liar. Yet I feel that is far too simplistic and ineffectual an argument.

What has hit me most is the fact that at the end of the age we will have two genuine witnesses, sent by God, to share a message with the entire earth. By every definition presented so far on this thread these two will be considered "apostles". They will have the sign of the apostles. At the same time that they are ministering we will also have two frauds: the antichrist and the false prophet. These two will also perform signs and wonders. So it is very clear to me that at the end of the age this discussion will come to a point and the salvation of many will be determined by how they treat this.

To me this proves beyond any reasonable doubt that we will have apostles on par with those at the beginning of this age. Arguing about whether there are any apostles on par with the 12 apostles is to me a non essential argument. What I do find compelling is to know how to discern the fraud from the genuine article.

That to me gives a much greater purpose to this forum than merely discussing WL. Was WL a fraud? If so, how do we know, if not how do know that?