[Drake]

Unreg,

Oh my. There are so many bad assumptions, misunderstandings, and erroneous teachings in your post that it is cumbersome to unpack. I'm talking layers.

But, before you go, I'll give it a try.

unreg>"Claiming to be an apostle opens the door to adding to scripture! Let's just be frank, that's what it means."

Yes, let's be frank. This is just a construct in your mind. This is no evidence whatsoever that the motive behind claiming to be an apostle is so that having appropriated the title one can then "write scripture". There is a biblical definition of apostle and we can use it heartily in practice as defined. Second, the canon of the Bible is set to most people (some still want to change some verses to fit their private interpretations but that is a discussion for another thread). If Witness Lee said " I am your apostle", for the purpose of being able to write scripture then he failed miserably. In fact, he is one of the few ministers that so loved the Bible and protected it that he went through chapter by chapter in Life-studies and then again to cover the main points in a second series. He also covered various topics in depth and expounded teachings from different angles such as the meaning, the practice, and the experience. And nowhere during that time, including the Life Study of Thessalonians Training or a conference, did he ever intend to "write scripture". Even if he said "I am your apostle", which you have yet to provide the actual quote in context, it in no way suggests he said it to be able to then "write scripture".

unreg> "I did not say that they [apostles] accompanied him in the flesh. Those are your words. "

What you said was "they were those who accompanied and knew Christ firsthand and we're instructed by Him to write/send their message.."

I do not think anyone would take your "accompanied and knew Christ firsthand" comment to mean they met Him on an occasion or two, however significant that might have been. In any case, you are missing the glaring truth that there were NT apostles who did not write a single sentence of scripture. Either way, your narrow definition of apostle has no merit. The biblical and greek definition is "one who is sent away" as in an ambassador. Apostles may or may not have written scripture but they are always ambassadors.

unreg>"You continue to ask for a reference and no reference can be given. Those old videos of the Thessalonians conference that were created back in the seventies may have already been destroyed."

No reference can be given so we need to take your word for it. And we also need to take your word for it that if he did say it he meant that he wanted to write scripture. Thanks, but I'll pass on your recollection because I was there too. I think I would have remembered that. And if WL intended, as you allege, to claim the title of apostle so he could write scripture then that would be important enough to document so everyone knew! You can't really change anything if no one knows what you're thinking. Don't you think?

unreg>"I have been in church all of my life under some extremely good ministers and not a one of them has claimed to be an apostle even though they were able to expound the word far better than WL."

Here you are ranking ability to expound the word as some sort of index for apostleship. This is meaningless because you lack the proper understanding of the NT definition of an apostle and their function and purpose in the Body. You should not be so quick to dismiss or redefine the class of gifts God has given to the Body. Besides, I too have heard many a preacher, stood behind a pulpit myself and I rather liked his ability, style, and the light and life I personally received.

unreg>"Ask yourself if you think that all of us who are sharing these things are liars. Do we seem to be Liars to you? I think you know better. This has been our experience and we are not lying."

No, I don't think all sharing these things are liars. Perhaps once or twice I suspected someone knowingly gave a false account with malice of forethought. I think most are relating their experience as they remembered it. However, you are conflating opinion with fact. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. If you have facts put them on the table and let's read them for ourselves in context.

unreg>" I urge you to find and enjoy other biblical authorities. It is a lie that WL is the culmination of all biblical truth and teaching. It is a damnable lie. Why don't you read some other sources? What have you to lose? Think about that. What do you have to lose and why won't you do it? Perhaps you already do, and if you do, I salute you."

That is an example of rushing headlong without any knowledge and making demands on others to comply with your view. First, without asking you presume that I don't read other "biblical authorities" or sources. Second, this "WL is the culmination of all biblical truth and teaching" is a straw man of your own design that you set fire to it immediately to with " It is a damnable lie". The crowd roars in approval! Then you ask me what do I have to lose and why I won't do it.... I mean seriously Unreg, you get on your soapbox and preach down to someone about what they should and should not do and then salute them if they already do what you said they should? I don't think you need to go very far to find the source of the problem you are having with WL.

But look, thanks for stopping by. I appreciate the opportunity to address your comments.

Drake