Quote:
Originally Posted by NewManLiving
With all this talk about ‘The Age’. What exactly is the definition or length of an age and how does this apply to the one unique minister of this so-called age?
|
We should take a step back in church history and observe how others have fallen for this same heresy.
The Catholics have for two millennia believed wholeheartedly that there was always a "minister of the age" in their succession of popes. Different names, same reality.
The Reformers (
remember Martin Luther supposedly the first MOTA?) totally rejected the notion that any one man on earth can be elevated to this position in the church. Read those 95 Theses.
Couple centuries later, John Darby was elevated once again as the first post-reformation MOTA. It took some quarantines to arrive at this stage. (Remember George Muller and Benjamin Newton?) Some historians have claimed that JND became a far worse pope than the one in Rome he protested his whole life. Today we should note that the Exclusive Brethren to this day still adhere to this MOTA heresy. Of all ironies, James Taylor Jr. (their 4th or 5th MOTA on record) was no less degenerate than Philip Lee himself -- amazing how history repeats itself for those who refuse to learn from it.
Both Nee and Lee have repeated the Exclusive heresy. Each time it has introduced untold corruption to their ministries. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The teaching and practice of a MOTA just opens the gates of Hades.