Quote:
Originally Posted by A little brother
May be because if Jesus did, some people would jump up and say, "See? Paul got this from Peter or John, so Peter or John must be the MOTA!"
Seems you are still in the mindset of "who is greater". I think Drake got the word right, they are "peers" (Have to admit I am quoting his word out of context though).
Seriously, there really isn't much value in the MOTA idea. There are many ministers we should respect and learn from, but upholding anyone as the MOTA diverts our focus - those One Flow, One Ministry stuff ain't true if someone stands in between us and our beloved Lord.
Dear brother,
Turn your eyes upon Jesus,
Look full in His wonderful face,
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim,
In the light of His glory and grace.
I believe this is what Paul did. Even though it blinded him initially, he was a different man since then. But that didn't make him the MOTA, neither did he care about such idea.
|
I think it is a mistake to assume that all books in the bible are of equal value to each other just because they are in the bible. We have to consider the authorship and the relative merits. This is also why we consider major prophets and minor prophets. What Elijah and Isaiah have to say is more significant than what Solomon has to say, for example. I mean, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes is good, but to elevate these to the status of Isaiah would be a mistake and lead astray.
For example, genuine Christianity holds Paul's teaching above all the rest. But suppose some come along and say the 4 gospels are the most important (the anti-Pauline movement), or that James is the most important book of the bible (the pro-James /salvation by works movement). We can say sorry, but Paul was the MOTA and his teaching that salvation is by faith trumps the gospels or James that indicates salvation is by works.
The MOTA is indicated by whoever's writings were in most circulation at the time, and by all accounts we can see that this was the apostle Paul, not Peter, James ,John etc.