Thread: Apostles
View Single Post
Old 09-15-2011, 01:20 PM   #1
Ohio
Member
 
Ohio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Greater Ohio
Posts: 13,693
Default Re: The definition of Apostle

Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy View Post
I meant that in order to have the kind of order and conformity to the apostle the LRC envisioned there would have to be much more agreement on who the apostle is and therefore much more reasonable evidence.

That is, to expect everyone to follow one man the evidence has to be there that would reasonably compel everyone to do so. The LRC never had that for Lee.

They just convinced themselves they did and expected everyone to join in their decision. That works for a handful of fanatics, but to reasonably expect the entire Body of Christ to even consider following one man you have to have a whole lot more evidence than even we gave Lee credit for having.
This became a major flaw in the MOTA paradigm. Since Paul never had universal agreement concerning his singular apostleship as some MOTA, how in the world could we expect to have others believe WL was that.

To be honest, starting in the mid-70's, I did believe that WL would be recognized as a universal MOTA once the litigation on the books G-M and MB was completed. After the books were dealt with in the mid 80's, I went thru a period of time waiting on the Lord to fulfill my expectations. I assumed the "new way" would expedite the Lord's anointing.

I guess i was wrong about that one. :frown:
__________________
Ohio's motto is: With God all things are possible!.
Keeping all my posts short, quick, living, and to the point!
Ohio is offline   Reply With Quote