Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo S
Ohio, I haven't read much into this topic here so I wasn't sure if you were in agreement with Titus Chu being Witness Lee's successor as "Apostle" or MOTA but by your reply I can be sure which brings me to my next question;
I see you and others often using the excommunication of Chu as an argument against the ethics of the Blendeds but I hardly ever see arguments against the elevated position Titus Chu willingly fills if you in fact agree he is seen as the "next in line" to Witness Lee.
Why is that?
It's partially rhetorical but also genuine curiousity because I've not been as involved as you guys so I accept I may be missing something.
|
I see these as two distinct and separate questions.
The Blendeds laid out their case, according to scripture, for excommunicating Titus. I felt that case could be viewed, analyzed and judged solely on its merits. I only met Titus once and did not know him, have no idea what "next in line" is supposed to mean as I never subscribed to the MOTA doctrine, and didn't have to know anything more.