Ron Kangas Message

[Drake]

Alb>"Were John and Peter following Paul as the leading minister?"

This is obvious from the account in the NT... Paul had a special ministry and they recognized and honored it. Peter referred to Paul's writings as "scripture".

You are trying to polarize the biblical narrative, like it's all this way or that way. The biblical account is balanced but will always be twisted by those who do not understand spiritual authority.

Drake

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Drake

Alb>"Were John and Peter following Paul as the leading minister?"

This is obvious from the account in the NT... Paul had a special ministry and they recognized and honored it. Peter referred to Paul's writings as "scripture".

You are trying to polarize the biblical narrative, like it's all this way or that way. The biblical account is balanced but will always be twisted by those who do not understand spiritual authority.

Drake

What I see from John, Peter and also Paul is the humbleness of true ministers who respect and love each other. This is something difficult to understand and follow for people so addicted to their own "high peak truth".

[Drake]

Originally Posted by A little brother

What I see from John, Peter and also Paul is the humbleness of true ministers who respect and love each other. This is something difficult to understand and follow for people so addicted to their own "high peak truth".

alb,

You are conflating "respect and love" with authority and commission.

Galatians 2:11-13

11 And when Peter came to Antioch, to the face I stood up against him, because he was blameworthy,
12 for before the coming of certain from James, with the nations he was eating, and when they came, he was withdrawing and separating himself, fearing those of the circumcision,
13 and dissemble with him also did the other Jews, so that also Barnabas was carried away by their dissimulation.

Your denial of the existence of spiritual authority will prevent you from making distinctions in the characteristics of the divine attributes.

Drake

[Evangelical]

Acts 26.19...Paul had the heavenly vision and therefore was the minister of the age. Its quite clear that Peter and John had not this vision.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Acts 26.19...Paul had the heavenly vision and therefore was the minister of the age. Its quite clear that Peter and John had not this vision.

Its clear.

And it was clear to Peter.. just not clear to some in this forum:

2 Peter 3:15-16 "And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Acts 26.19...Paul had the heavenly vision and therefore was the minister of the age. Its quite clear that Peter and John had not this vision.

Peter, James, and John saw the heavenly vision of Christ on the mountain. (Matt 16.2-5)

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Acts 26.19...Paul had the heavenly vision and therefore was the minister of the age. Its quite clear that Peter and John had not this vision.

Are you saying Peter and John didn't receive any heavenly vision? Please go revisit the bible.

[Evangelical]

I am saying they did not receive any heavenly vision about the gospel or high-calling like Paul did. I wasn't meaning that Paul was the only person ever ever who had a vision. Just having a vision, is not what is meant by "heavenly vision".

The "heavenly vision" refers to Acts 26:13 - 18

In verse 17-18 we see God gave Paul a specific mission:

I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'

The transfiguration of Christ, as miraculous as it was, did not give Peter and John any mission/purpose. Not long after Peter was denying Christ three times. There is also no indication that Peter received subsequent vision like Paul received.

Consider this: Gal 1:11-12

I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin.

I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Barne's notes on this says:

But by the revelation of Jesus Christ - On his way to Damascus, and subsequently in the temple, Acts 22:17-21. Doubtless, he received communications at various times from the Lord Jesus with regard to the nature of the gospel and his duty. The sense here is, that he was not indebted to people for his knowledge of the gospel, but had derived it entirely from the Saviour.



Paul's heavenly vision was not only his conversion experience but also gave Paul his purpose and mission.

We can see that this mission that God gave Paul, was unlike any given to the 12 disciples. For that reason, Paul's writings comprise much of the New Testament, and as Drake mentioned before, even Peter considered Paul's writings as Scripture.

So God gave Paul the Vision, and that makes Paul the Minister of the Age.

If anyone wants to contend that Peter, James or John were also Ministers of the Age, then please present your case from the Bible where they received a heavenly vision like Paul received.

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Paul's heavenly vision was not only his conversion experience but also gave Paul his purpose and mission.

We can see that this mission that God gave Paul, was unlike any given to the 12 disciples. For that reason, Paul's writings comprise much of the New Testament, and as Drake mentioned before, even Peter considered Paul's writings as Scripture.

So God gave Paul the Vision, and that makes Paul the Minister of the Age.

If anyone wants to contend that Peter, James or John were also Ministers of the Age, then please present your case from the Bible where they received a heavenly vision like Paul received.

If you are referring to mission and purpose, how about the Great Commission personally delivered by Jesus to the eleven disciples? After what was said and done, should they still need another vision?

Mat 28 19-20 Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you all the days until the consummation of the age.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

So God gave Paul the Vision, and that makes Paul the Minister of the Age.

Well for whatever it counts, in you minister of the age paradigm, didn't Paul say he was the least of the apostles? What's that make all the others? Mincemeat? The way you are speaking Paul was greater than Jesus.

And speaking of that, I've determined that the minister of the age is short lived. Jesus as the MOTA was 3 years. Then Peter was the MOTA, for a short while, until Paul came along. And Paul's was short lived from between the 50s and 60s. Then who?

But back to Paul's conversion into the MOTA. So is the qualification of the minister of the age having a vision brighter than the sun and getting knocked to the ground, while a unidentified Jesus speaks in a voice "all heard"?

Well maybe "all heard." The three accounts of Paul's conversion contradict each other, and don't make sense if read side by side.

That aside, I wonder if something like Paul's experience happened to Nee and Lee ... and was Lee speaking from a continual revelation from Jesus Christ? That's all necessary for him to be the MOTA. Right?

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Drake

alb,

You are conflating "respect and love" with authority and commission.

Galatians 2:11-13

11 And when Peter came to Antioch, to the face I stood up against him, because he was blameworthy,
12 for before the coming of certain from James, with the nations he was eating, and when they came, he was withdrawing and separating himself, fearing those of the circumcision,
13 and dissemble with him also did the other Jews, so that also Barnabas was carried away by their dissimulation.

Your denial of the existence of spiritual authority will prevent you from making distinctions in the characteristics of the divine attributes.

Drake

It is interesting to see you referred to these verses as well as the follow up posts from you and Evangelical. It was quite like the disciples arguing who was greater in Mark 9.

When I look at Galatians 2:11-13 and 2 Peter 3:15-16, I see the attributes of true ministers:
(1) Paul was not afraid to challenge Peter, probably not because Paul thought he had the spiritual authority but he cared about what God truly wants.
(2) Peter was not offended and still loved Paul as mentioned in 2 Peter.

I try to imagine what would happen if someone challenges WL/LSM in the way Paul did. Probably we will see "passing gas" and "poisonous" in the response.

I don't know much about spirtual authority. But I am quite certain that it goes together with truth and humility.

[Drake]

alb<"I don't know much about spirtual authority. But I am quite certain that it goes together with truth and humility"

I don't really perceive any humility in your posts brother. But maybe you are a really humble guy in real life.

Knowing spiritual authority is a non-starter if you don't know it exists.

Drake

[A little brother]

Originally Posted by Drake

alb<"I don't know much about spirtual authority. But I am quite certain that it goes together with truth and humility"

I don't really perceive any humility in your posts brother. But maybe you are a really humble guy in real life.

Knowing spiritual authority is a non-starter if you don't know it exists.

Drake

Wow, it's getting personal, isn't it?

And you are right, I am not humble as I'd like to be. Still work in progress.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by A little brother

Wow, it's getting personal, isn't it?

And yes you are right, I am not humble as I'd like to be. Still work in progress.

Personal? Heavens no.

However, this is personal: alb>"Please go revisit the bible. "

Is Evangelical like some student of yours? Seriously alb, lets disagree without becoming disagreeable. okay?

Thanks
Drake

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Drake

Alb>"Were John and Peter following Paul as the leading minister?"

This is obvious from the account in the NT... Paul had a special ministry and they recognized and honored it. Peter referred to Paul's writings as "scripture".

You are trying to polarize the biblical narrative, like it's all this way or that way. The biblical account is balanced but will always be twisted by those who do not understand spiritual authority.

Drake

I used to "understand" spiritual authority. Titus Chu would say, "the mistakes of my spiritual father are none of my business."

In other words, as long as Witness Lee was the MOTA, he could place his reprobate son Philip over all the churches and molest all the pretty office staff, but no one can say a thing since we don't want to be twisted like all those who do not understand spiritual authority.

Sorry, I just don't get it anymore.