Quote:
Originally Posted by Igzy
Foolishness or not, Paul still complied, and proved his empowerment.
Lee didn't, most likely because he couldn't.
Either way, case closed as far as I'm concerned.
Jesus proved his empowerment with miracles. So did Peter and Paul. Lee didn't.
So let's break it up and go home. There is nothing you can say that's going to convince me that Lee or any other Johnny-Come-Lately with a fringe sycophantic following is an apostle either, short of miracles.
Personally I think it's foolishness that anyone would NOT ask Lee to prove his apostleship, given his track record.
|
I hope that we can all agree to disagree. I don't think it is useful to use 20/20 hindsight to conclude that WL was not an apostle.
Instead I would argue that Balaam was a real apostle and Judas was a real apostle. The common flaw of Judas and Balaam was that they loved money more than the Lord. (As far as WL is concerned my evidence is circumstantial and I don't think it is profitable for me to judge nor do I think it is my place). I think all apostles, like Peter, had to deal with this and to decide which they loved more, 153 fish, or the Lord Jesus.
I agree with Drake that depending on miracles is a very dangerous and slippery slope. You could easily end up being the Pharisees assuring the rest of us that "nothing good can come out of Nazareth". Just because the miracles are a sign doesn't mean they are a flashing neon sign that everyone will see.