Three questions for Local Church Christians

[aron]

Long-time poster here. Appreciate that local church members have come on to defend teachings and practices. Three things have bothered me, wanted to raise them and give defenders a chance to clarify.

1. Minister/ministry of the age. The apostle John clearly wasn't indicating Paul as MOTA. Either John was the new MOTA, post-Paul, or Paul never had been. But John was not building on Paul, but on Jesus Christ. John clearly never was a disciple of Paul.

John took pains to show at the beginning of the fourth gospel that he was there with Jesus before anyone else. And he's there at the end, on Patmos, not as a continuation of Paul, but as a continuation of the original revelation: "Rabbi, you are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel". And Paul likewise said that he received his revelation "not from those who apostles were before me". Yet neither ever discredited the other. They were peers. There was mutuality in the NT.

So where was precedent established for supreme mastership aka MOTA in the NT? Rather, in the gospels when they argued for primacy Jesus rebuked them.

Related, Wesley never discipled himself to Jonathan Edwards or vice versa. Yet they both had inspired ministries. Or was one an illegitimate deviation? A rebellion against God's established authority on earth? Why didn't the Methodists go after the Congregationalists or vice versa?

Related, Watchman Nee read some 3,000 spiritual classics, so-called. Clearly these were from disparate sources, not all from MOTAs. Why can't we also read disparate sources and create our own synthesis? If there is a ministry of the age for every generation, why did WN draw on other, non-MOTA sources? If he did, why can't we? Clearly WN violated the "One Publication" policy in his spiritual path of development. Why can't we?

Related, why did "the age turn" when WL passed? Suddenly no more revelation, just curating the oracle's revelations?

Related, why didn't WL's admittedly "unspiritual" son Philip disqualify WL from local church eldership, much less being sole apostle of the age? Paul's advice to Titus (1:6) is straightforward. Why did WL seemingly get a separate set of rules? Why the "respecting of persons" with the case of WL & family? Another son, Timothy, was apparently as bad or even worse, but had a less prominent or public role in the ministry/church/family business. Either one of them should have disqualified WL from church leadership and/or responsibility.

2. Watchman Nee received prominent help from women. WL's biography makes this explicit and detailed. Why did women have prominent roles in the early recovery but cannot today? Either women had an illegitimate role in the early 20th century or they are illegitimately suppressed today. How can you have it both ways?

3. Why was David wrong to wish his enemies harm in Psalm 3, and yet in Psalm 68 wishing enemies harm was a type of Christ's victory over his enemies? The RecV footnotes are not consistent.