DECEPTION Chief Apostleship – What saith the scriptures?
Commentary on Amos Omoboriowo’s book RELIGO.
…Of importance to ministers.
Andrew C. Phiri - February 2011
INTRODUCTION It has often been said by many who follow the Endtime
Message that an original creation of God cannot be deceived. Here is a
question: Who deceived Lucifer (an original creation of God) for him to start
entertaining thoughts of exalting himself above the measure God had allotted
him? Remember that there was no devil or demon then to have influenced him
into those thoughts. He himself became the first Devil when he was cast out
from God’s presence. This angel, as Lucifer and a cherub, once used to stand
right in the presence of God; He had an experience of the presence and glory
of God for which a mortal, like you and me, have never had the privilege to
experience. But, with time, he deceived himself into pride and is today the
enemy of the God he once used to worship. Yes, Lucifer deceived himself! This
should warn every child of God that if one is not careful and humble enough
there is always a potential for that person to deceive himself. Following the death of the Elijah of this day to
forerun the second coming of Christ, one spirit has become so prevalent – the
spirit influencing a number of ministers to believe or claim to be a special
or exceptional one with a greater ministry than other ministers. Most of
these special “men of God” believe that they are successors of the
Elijah ministry. This claim is often justified by commendations they believe
to have received from either the prophet or close associates to the prophet.
This is often further substantiated by narrations of certain dreams, visions
or audible voice of God experiences. Each of them believes he is the Elisha
and would attack the others and call them false. Each of them believes he is
the true one. Yet, all of them claim to have had “commendations”, “dreams”
and “visions” of vindication. What is surprising though is that William
Branham, the man that all these super-preachers claim to be successor of, was
so very humble that a number of times he would even deny being the forerunner
of Christ. You can actually discern Bro. Branham’s humility from his voice on
audio tapes and transcribed messages in book form. He never claimed to know
it all. In answering questions during a church service it was not uncommon to
hear him say words after this manner; “And now I want each one of you, my
dear brethren, to know that-that these answers are-are given to the very best
of my knowledge, the very best that I would know how to understand. And these
answers are not infallible, see, because the Scriptures is infallible,
and as far as I know they’re lined with the scriptures. I hope that makes it
plain”. (COD, Vol.II, Pg.513,
para.15-16). He said “I hope that makes it plain”, but
blindness can’t see the plainness and humbleness that was in the prophet.
Many preachers today, after the death of Bro. Branham, have made themselves
infallibles, hitting out against anyone who differs with them using even
“abusive language”. Many believe the unity of Faith will come when all
believers around the world agree with their opinions. But the unity of faith
being referred to in Ephesians chapter 4 is not unity of opinions.
Unfortunately opinions are being churned up as revelations. Sadly, some Endtime Message believers, like
the author of the book which is here mentioned, now believe in the need of a
one man as the head to lead the five-fold ministry and the Bride of Christ.
The author, Amos Omoboriowo, a Nigerian, is an extremist at this doctrine. In
his book, WHEN GOD LIFTS UP A STANDARD (pgs.13-14), he declares
that “headship comes before unity. That is why you cannot even talk of
true unity, if we do not understand headship…The fivefold ministry cannot
speak with one indivisible voice unless and until they recognize and totally
accept revelatory headship…They must see the one bearing Scriptural
revelatory authority! True unity starts here! It takes away arguments! They all
recognize and accept the authority of Jesus Christ invested in the leader…I
would have to ask: How are we to be rallied together if we have no particular
head?” Dearly beloved, this doctrine is rooted in the
Catholic doctrine of visible headship of the Church. Roman Catholics are
deceived to believe the Pope is that visible head. Claims of headship over
the ministries of the five-fold ministry of Ephesians 4:11 are nothing but
manifestations of pride and ego. Let us take heed to this admonishment of apostle
Paul in the scriptures: “For I say, through the grace given unto me, to
every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he
ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to
every man the measure of faith” (Rom.12:3). Ask yourself, “As a
minister, in all that I do, am I sober?” A great miracle that could
happen to a person today is not healing or some physical miracle but is in
having a sober mind in this insane world where right is called wrong and
wrong is right. It is important to know that we shall never reach eligibility
for the rapture until we die to our carnality. We need to die daily to the
flesh and its associated egos and ambitions as we yield to the Spirit of God
in humility. We should also take heed to Philippians 2:2: “That ye be
like minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let
nothing be done through strife or vain glory; but in lowliness of mind let
each esteem other better than themselves”. For some time now, I have seen many ministers who
have deceived themselves into pride. In their preaching one is hardly edified
as they are full of personal testimonies; testimonies that egg on why you
should believe them to be a special or peculiar man of God. I have never
bothered with any of such men. I believe a minister should concentrate on
doing the work the Lord has allotted him; feeding the flock with food of the
season and not wasting time in fighting “goats”. But as I have been seeing
the Nicolaitane spirit take a hold of many ministers and confuse many
believers around the world, my heart is continuously becoming sorrowful at
what the Devil is doing. When Bro. Richard Gan published his message book, RELIGO,
in which he deals with this deception of self-importance and ego, claims of
being a Chief Apostle among other servants of God, I was very happy for the
message, hoping that the truth in the book would help some believers see the
light. The truth contained in the book cannot be any plainer. I trust many
believers have appreciated and were blessed by the book. But against all
odds, within a short space of time, this Nigerian minister came out with a
book of the same title in which he tried to defend the “Chief” and “Lead”
apostolic ministries! His RELIGO message has but a different
message content and objective altogether. Having studied both books I decided
to write my observations with reference to the one authored by Amos
Omoboriowo, a man who firmly believes himself to be the “Lead Apostle” (a
newly conjectured term for “Chief Apostle”) over the five-fold ministry. His
book is a follow-up response to Richard Gan’s message book RELIGO
in which Bro. Gan addresses this false concept of Chief Apostleship. So,
we have two books, both with the same title – RELIGO – but each
with a completely different “reading taste” and language structure: One is
easy to follow and focuses on facts; the other is full of rhetorical tantrums
and congested with “abusive language” in so much that the reader’s mind is
too crowded to see what facts are being dealt with. One author is precise and
concise and the other one takes too much liberty in first alarming the
readers about how the other author is an “idiot, Lucifer, antichrist, mad
person, heretic”, and all sorts of unpleasant names before he presents the
issue he is dealing with. That is Amos Omoboriowo for you! The Lead Apostle
who believes the unity of the Faith will materialize as all ministers in the
Bride of Christ around the world line up their teachings to his. Is this
Truth or Deception? The objective of my observations is to admonish
and caution fellow ministers in the way we handle our ministries. I don’t
intend to provoke this Nigerian preacher or the people who follow him.
Looking at his writings, one can see he is very set in his way. In endeavoring
to bring about the unity of the faith, through what is become known as the “Continuity
Light”, from William Branham to Raymond Jackson (as the so-called Chief
Apostle), a lot of disunity has instead flourished among the very people he
firmly associated with. They once attacked most of Bro. Branham’s followers
who are extremists (Branhamites, as they are called by the denominations).
Now, they are manifesting the same ─ as Jacksonites. It is a cul-de-sac
and comedy of errors! Although, I see Bro. Gan’s RELIGO as a
correct explanation to various issues dealt with in the book, my observations
are not written to defend him but to defend the truth contained in his book.
Defending and making the absolute out of a human being amounts to cultism.
Being a Branhamite, a Jacksonite or a Ganite would not only be just unwise
but very foolish. As ministers, God has called us to handle and protect the
Word not individuals and personalities. It is one thing to respect a man of
God and another to lift him above what he is. Paul in his rebuke to Paulites
and Apollosites, says, “For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is
among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as
men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye
not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye
believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos
watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth
anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase…And
these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to
Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above
that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against
another” (1 Cor.3:3-6, 4:6). Two dangerous things are we never to do - never
undermine a servant of God and, secondly, never lift him above what he is. This message comes to you with deep sadness of
heart for what has become, not just of the followers of the ministry of the
great prophet whom God raised in this age, William Branham, but also the
followers of the late Bro. Raymond Jackson of Jeffersonville, Indiana, USA, a
minister I love and have great respect for, who went to be with the Lord in
December 2004. Going into arguments, debates and calling names is
not my way of doing the work of God. There is no single edification in those
things. They only breed strife, anger, malice and hatred (2Tim.2:16).
God has called his ministers to feed his sheep, not to fight goats. But
when a goat comes and begins to cause trouble the shepherd has to deal with
the goat. This is not to call any individual a goat but to illustrate why
certain times certain extreme issues need to be dealt with. The gravity of
the errors and harm going around this Nigerian’s ministry compels me to pick
on this issue. Read on and see if this issue is a kind that should be
ignored. No minister is perfect: not Bro. Branham, not Bro. Jackson, not Bro.
Gan, not anyone, and myself included. There are certain issues, views and
opinions ministers may disagree on and still move on in harmony. (Take Amos
3:3 in its proper context!) And there are also certain issues we can’t just
get by with. As Bro. Gan in his book RELIGO rightly
puts it: “It is one thing for ministers to
contend for the Truth that was once delivered to the saints but it is another
thing to simply call names of other ministers to run them down over a small
disagreement of views as if they have committed blasphemies. Ministers, who
run down others, think their actions are as righteous as Paul’s (cf.1
Tim.1:18-20; 2 Tim.2:16-18; 4:14-15). Are they really? A quick examination of
their actions would reveal, most of the times, a spirit of self righteousness
and pride. It is not about Truth, its about their teachings – every bit of
them is absolute, and they dislike anyone to be at variance with them, anyone
within their circle or just near their circle. Yes, whenever they would come
across a teaching of someone they know and a teaching that affects their
views, they would call the name of the minister and slight him; sometime even
treat him as a blasphemer…Unless doctrine is detrimental to the Christian’s
faith, such as ‘the resurrection is past already’, or what is being
propagated today, that ‘Christ has come; the millennium is now on…’, calling
names of ministers and running them down is nothing short of self-importance
and arrogance”. (RELIGO,
Pg.8-9) Listen to what Bro. Branham said in his message, HUMBLE
THYSELF (Pg.12, para.94): He begins by telling us that after so many
years of being in ministry he has come to know one important thing that we
must possess – humbleness. Quote: “Now, surely, after all these years
on the field and around the world, and seeing different people, I ought to
know a little bit about the gate to enter in at. And if you want to get
somewhere with God, never let an arrogant spirit ever come around you.
Don’t let no malice come in. No matter what anybody does, if they are wrong,
don’t you never build up a complex against that person. See? You be sweet
and kind. Remember, God loved you when you were in sin. And if the Spirit of
God is in you, you love the other person when he’s in wrong. See, just pray
for them, and love one another… be humble with God and around one another,
and God will bless us...” I don’t want to build a “complexity” against
any person with this commentary. I wish there was a way to have avoided
stating the names of the authors being dealt with but the two books have
already gone public. Even so, in some places, I prefer to use the descriptors
author RG and author AO, for Richard
Gan and Amos Omoboriowo, respectively. I do this to
avoid crowding your mind with the authors’ names which may distract your attention
from the facts being dealt with to personalities behind the facts.
The “Chief Apostle” and/or “Lead Apostle” concept
is my main concern in this admonishment to fellow ministers and brethren.
Space and time do not permit me to detail every argument in this observation.
Also, this message is not to be used as a weapon for attacking anyone who
believes in such erroneous beliefs. We are not called to contend for the
faith by contesting and striving against another. This article is written to
remind each other that we should serve the Lord with humility and work out
our salvation with fear and trembling lest deception befalls us. Him that
will not learn let him be. I first set the background to issues that led to
the writing of the book by author RG, and the subsequent response by author
AO. This is followed by a scriptural analysis of the “Chief Apostleship”
concept. May God’s grace be with you as you earnestly wait
for the coming of the Lord. May He find us with love, meekness and, most
importantly, feeding the flock of God with meat in due season.
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ “Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is
like clouds and wind without rain” Proverbs 25:14 “Pride goeth before destruction, and a
haughty spirit before a fall. Better it is to be of an humble spirit with the
lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud”
Proverbs
16:18 “Now the end of the commandment is charity
out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: from
which some having swerved have turned aside into vain jangling; desiring to
be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they
affirm” 1 Timothy 1:5-7
BACKGROUND
– “He that is to come” Bro. Branham, when asked openly as to whether he
was the Elijah of Malachi 4 and messenger of Revelation 10:7, would often, in
humbleness, decline to say “yes”. He would say that he believed that
someone else may fulfill Malachi 4:5b. But anyone sincere enough knows the
plain truth. Bro. Branham himself knew that he came to fulfill Malachi 4:5b.
God had given the witness in 1933 during a baptismal service when He spoke
out to Bro. Branham, “As John the Baptist forerun the first coming of
Christ, your message will forerun his second coming”. When preaching on the Seals (Revelation chapter
6), Bro. Branham, in humbleness, said this: “It may be the hour now, that this
great person that we’re expecting to rise on the scene may rise on the scene.
May be this ministry that I have tried to take people back to the Word has
laid a foundation; and if it has, I’ll be leaving you for good. There won’t
be two of us here at the same time. See? If it is, he
will increase, I'll decrease. I don't know.”
(THE REVELATION OF SEVEN SEALS, pg.567) These “may be” words have been turned into
“THUS SAITH THE LORD” by many ambitious and egoistic ministers who’ve gone
into a rat-race of fighting for the position of the “great person”
to rise after Bro. Branham! Oh, what deceiving ego! We all know that Bro. Branham is the forerunner of
the second coming of Christ in the rapture, which is yet to be fulfilled.
That’s what God said at the 1933 baptismal service. But author AO, sometime
around 2004 wrote a book entitled: He
That is to Come in which he said that Bro. Branham was sent to
forerun Raymond Jackson. In his book, AO emphatically states that this is a
perfect and infallible revelation. But let me draw your attention to various
statements he made in his book. This is for you to examine and discern the
deceiving spirit of the “Chief Apostleship” fallacy. As you read the
statements, consider this question: Are these statements of any
edification to the Bride of Christ or they are only bringing more damage and
reproach to Raymond Jackson’s ministry. (Read HE THAT IS TO COME,
pg.88): Quote: “Jesus Christ was the complete
embodiment of the fivefold ministry, for all these ministries were in
him…This was the man that John the Baptist introduced. However, notice, when
Christ died and rose again, he divested himself completely of these ministries,
and gave them as office (or ministry) gifts unto men, according to the
scriptures (Eph.4:8-12), constituting the five-fold ministry of his body
(i.e. of Christ’s mystical body on earth today, the bride Church). It is made
up of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, the principle
office of which is the apostolic ministry; chief of the apostles is the
office of the Chief Apostle. [In
referring to the five-fold ministry, the author AO introduces something that
is not found in Eph.4:11 – the office of Chief Apostle. That’s a ‘cooked-up’
term with no scriptural basis just like ‘Cardinal’ or ‘Arch-bishop’
for the Roman Catholics. Now watch how this erroneous concept amounts to.] This
is the office that characterizes and exemplifies the revelatory headship of
Jesus Christ. This is the ministry Bro. Branham introduced! He introduced
Christ in his apostolic body ministry, thereby forerunning Christ in his
mystical second coming, not his physical coming [My, oh my! Bro.
Branham was actually forerunning Christ in his apostolic body ministry, which
is the Chief Apostle! Are you shocked?] …Who was Bro. Branham
introducing? He was introducing Christ in his apostolic body ministry! I DIDN’T SAY THE MAN IS HIMSELF THE CHRIST! I SAID IT IS CHRIST IN HIS
APOSTLE!!! YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE CHIEF APOSTLE!!!...John introduced Christ
in his physical earthly ministry. Brother Branham introduced Christ in his
mystical earthly body ministry. Perfect! Yes sir! His name is Raymond
Jackson! Glory to God! And on the full authority of the scriptures, I can
infallibly say, ‘Greater than Solomon is here’ today. [What?!
Bro. Branham forerun Christ in his mystical earthly body ministry, which is,
Raymond Jackson, and this man Raymond Jackson is the ‘Greater than
Solomon’???]” Dear saints, does not sorrow fill your heart when
you see what has become of the ministry of our precious Bro. Raymond Jackson?
This doctrine of “Chief Apostleship” first began as a simple and seemingly
harmless thought but is today just as harmful and deceptive a doctrine as any
lie would be. Some sincere and sane believers quickly discerned this spirit
and kept themselves away from it, but Faith Assembly Church entertained it
and is today caught in trouble fighting a man that is an extremist in the
doctrine, whom they themselves had projected to the world. This man, author
AO, had become so prominent and respected at Faith Assembly that they took
the liberty to project his ministry to the world. But did they discern
the spirit of the man? He became famous and in his overzealousness stretched
his “revelation” further by teaching that the Elijah of this day was actually
forerunning Christ in Raymond Jackson. Raymond Jackson was, loud and clear,
projected as Christ in this book, HE THAT IS TO COME! AO may
try to twist words here and there, but his language is so plain even to be
understood by a little child. Be warned: most false christs, when
directly challenged to declare who they are, often use innuendoes of saying “It
is simply Christ in me as he is in you”. Does deception go any further
than that? Is this a doctrine to toy with and ignore in the name of “love”
and “unity”? WHAT DO YOU CALL A DOCTRINE THAT CALLS MORTAL MAN GOD OR JESUS
CHRIST? We all know that Bro. Branham was sent to forerun the second coming
of Christ. In the rapture we shall meet Christ in the air. To call any
human being Christ, whether in plain speech or using innuendoes, is getting
pregnant with antichrist doctrines! These are doctrines that have tainted the
Endtime Message to be seen as a cultic movement. It is one
thing to be persecuted for doing right and another for doing something wrong;
the Endtime Message is today seen as a cultic movement because of the
tendency of idolizing God’s servants! Let’s be careful with what we do
with our ministries. One day we shall give an account of what we have done
with the gifts and callings God gave us. What author AO states on page 90 of HE THAT
IS TO COME gives me goose-bump. Quote: “Listen to me: something is about
to happen to the ministry of Raymond Jackson, I almost want to scream!
[Saints, just as everything that glitters is not gold, so everything that
stimulates is not necessary true revelation. Some stimulation actually
results from a concoction of poorly mixed scriptures or overstretching of types
and shadows. Let’s be careful in the way we handle the Word.] Something
serious and wonderful is coming for this ministry. I can’t
wait! But as sure as God divinely intervened, and established the rejected
Moses in his calling, and he brought the Jews out, so is God about to
establish the chief apostolic calling of Raymond Jackson, and don’t fail to
catch this: He [Raymond Jackson] will
take us right through to the rapture! Glory! Wait and see!”
[See, what self-deception can do? Those who believed have waited to see, and
now Bro. Jackson is dead! He died in 2004. But where is the rapture?] I believe AO is so sincere with his convictions.
But sincerity does not define truth. A person can be SINCERELY WRONG! William
Miller was sincere when he said Christ would come in 1844. Charles Russell
(the founder of Jehovah Witnesses) was also sincere with his 1914 prophecy.
But notice how the spirit of arrogance and hypocrisy always manifests after a
prophecy fails. The Seventh Day Adventists spiritualized the 1844
Disappointment by introducing their Sanctuary teaching. The
Jehovah Witnesses also spiritualized the coming of Christ using their Parousia
doctrine. Pride is a terrible spirit. It leads to self deception. We
shall see how author AO now speaks about his failed projection of Bro.
Jackson taking the Bride of Christ through to the rapture. Here is one more
quote of how AO firmly believed his projection (pg.99): Quote: “I am aware there are people
wishing Bro. Jackson were dead. I am aware there are those, supposedly
following his ministry, who have been prophesying his death, for them to take
over. So they wish! Let me tell you now: The sent one; He that is to come, is
here till the rapture. This is one ministry you would have to contend with
till the rapture. We shall see”. He goes further to refer to a number of dreams to
justify why Bro. Jackson will be here till the rapture. In the above quote he
confidently states “we shall see”. Well, we have seen. His inspiration
was absolutely, precisely and exactly WRONG! In response to author RG’s reference to this
failed prophecy, he gets angry and retorts: “Now Mr. RG [He
does not call him brother, that is understandable], please give me just
one place, in any of my oral sermons and publications, where I ever gave such
a prophecy? I never did! You manufactured that lie, and you are only bearing
the attributes of your father, the Devil! I only stated out of a firm
personal conviction, that he would not die before the rapture, honestly
believing he would be on ground, to lead us to the rapture! That is what I
did! And that was a mere statement of my personal conviction, and it
was never given at any time, and in any place, as ‘Thus saith the Lord’! ”.
(AOs RELIGO, pg.19-20) Mere statement?
I wonder; did anger or temper take on AO to such an extent that he completely
forgot his careless statements in his book? In the above statement he
foolishly and without shame challenges RG to give him one “place”
where he ever prophesied about Bro. Jackson being around until the rapture.
Well, I will give him that “place” found in his reply letter to
ministers at Faith Assembly, when they demanded that he retracts his
erroneous book, HE THAT IS TO COME. After reading his letter,
answer this question: Did this man really not believe his projections about
Bro. Jackson being here until the rapture to be a prophecy? I know the
above quotes taken from his book are enough to show that he believed they were
revelations of God, but his letter of defense to Faith Assembly makes it even
much plainer. Let him explain what he stated in this letter that follows. He
now wants to emancipate himself from his prophecy because it embarrassingly
failed. And well, even if it were to be true that he never prophesied but was
merely stating a personal conviction, does not he realize the OVER-EMPHASIS
he gave to his conviction? Without remorse he retorts by saying that it was “a
mere statement”! How preposterous! Whether it was a prophecy or just a personal
conviction, does not he know how much trouble and reproach such a
careless statement could bring? It is one thing to share a thought and
another to emphatically present a thing as a revelation. You cannot, for
example, compare AO’s firm statements about Bro. Jackson taking the Bride
through to the rapture to a statement Bro. Branham made about 1977 and to
which Bro. Branham always emphasized that he was not prophesying or
speaking in the name of the Lord, but merely sharing his thought about the
possibility of the Gentile dispensation ending by the year 1977. In his
defense letter, which follows next, he talks about how God spoke to Bro.
Branham about the tent vision but which was never fulfilled. And then he also
talks about Moses having been promised by God to take the children of Israel
into Canaan but died before he could fulfill the commission, and then he asks
and wonders why the ministers at Faith Assembly should condemn him. Saints does “THUS SAITH THE LORD” ever fail? Is it
true that God said to Moses that he would both take the children of Israel
out of Egypt, and that he would also take them into Canaan? And was there a
“THUS SAITH THE LORD” spoken over the Tent Vision given to Bro. Branham? Many
have taken the Tent Vision that Bro. Branham related to mean that God was to
give him a real big tent ministry. But after he died they had to justify
their “failed” conviction with a teaching that he would resurrect to fulfill
the vision. And why did AO use these points for his defense? Wasn’t he
aligning his projection about Bro. Jackson along those two accounts – of
God’s instructions to Moses and of God’s “Tent Vision” to Branham – that
God’s prophecies could somehow fail or be changed? Read his letter below
and see if it has any suggestion of “personal conviction”. Well, maybe
with time he would come to know that he was in error but as of now he is too
proud to admit the error. To admit one’s mistake has often been taken by
proud people for weakness but the wise and humble find strength in it. Here are the letters (emails) of correspondence
between AO and Faith Assembly following the death of Bro. Jackson, whom he
believed would take us right through to the rapture. After you read his
letter I want you to answer this second question with all sincerity
(especially if you believe and are a follower of AO): Is this the working of
God on the man, or the man motivated by ego and pride? After Bro. Jackson’s death, Faith Assembly (the
church of the deceased which projected AO to the world) had no option
but to call the man (whom they once had respect for) to retract the book he
had written – HE THAT IS TO COME. Here is their correspondence.
Take note of their respectful letter and his arrogant response:
· LETTER FROM FAITH ASSEMBLY CHURCH TO BRO. AO FAITH
ASSEMBLY CHURCH 1715
POTTERS LANE JEFFERSONVILLE,
IN 47129 December
29, 2004 Greetings
Bro. Amos in Jesus Christ;
It is with deep
regret that we have to write this letter. It has been brought to our
attention that there is controversy on your latest book entitled HE THAT IS
TO COME on statements where you have said that Bro. Raymond Jackson would be
here until the rapture. You made a statement on page 3, (quote) "that
God had given you a perfect and infallible revelation of the quotation HE
THAT IS TO COME."
On page 59 you
state, (quote) "that his ministry would be on ground until the
rapture."
On pages 88 and 89
you leave a very confusing thought that Bro. Jackson is the bodily apostolic
ministry of Christ.
On page 90 you say,
(quote) "that Bro. Jackson will take us right through to the rapture,
WAIT AND SEE."
On page 99 you say,
(quote) "Let me tell you now the sent one; he that is to come is here
till the rapture. This is one ministry you would have to contend with till
the rapture. We shall see."
You say on page
103, (quote) "that Bro. Jackson has singularly had to face every devil
in the message following." Bro. Amos: What about those of us who have
stood with Bro. Jackson and supported his ministry these many years?
On page 104 you
say, (quote) "Bro. Jackson is only now about to step into his full
apostolic calling, for that calling has not yet been manifest, and that we
are now looking at the hour of his full placing." Bro. Amos: What have
we been looking at for the last many years of his ministry? You also say,
(quote) "that something wonderful is about to happen to his ministry, IT
HAS TO." How do you explain this?
In conclusion, on
page 107 you say, (quote) "I know that in spite of the fact that the
things that have been projected in this book is the truth, not many would
stand for it." Bro. Jackson told us that he had not read
this book, but had only briefly skimmed through it. If Bro. Jackson had read
this book he would have dealt with this matter himself. Bro. Allen nor
myself, (Bro. Bud) had read the book until after the funeral of Bro. Jackson.
We have both now read the book from cover to cover and find many errors. We
feel it necessary to ask you to write a public letter of retraction as soon
as possible so this matter can be resolved. We feel it is necessary for us to
deal with this matter in an open and public manner due to the fact your books
are open to the public, and your ministry has been projected to the world
from Faith Assembly.
In Christian
love.....Bro. James Allen & Bro. Bud Thompson Comment: Although I
don’t agree with Faith Assembly’s belief of the “Chief Apostleship” doctrine
(which I believe is the root-cause of all the problems the Jackson movement
is experiencing), I feel the above letter was well presented, and if any
humble man was to be found in AO’s situation it would be expected that he
should unreservedly not hesitate to correct the wrong. Harmony would have
obviously continued between AO’s and the ministry at Faith Assembly. But
against all odds he wrote his defense. Here it is: · AO’s DEFENCE
From:
Amos omoboriowo
Sent: Sunday, January
16, 2005 5:25 AM
Subject: RE: HE THAT IS TO
COME - MY DEFENCE
Dear Bro. Allen
& Bro. Bud,
Please find below
the following: 1} Your forwarding letter; 2} Your main letter
controverting my book; and 3} My defence.
{1} YOUR
FORWARDING LETTER
Date - Tue, 11 Jan
2005.
Dear Bro.Amos,
Greetings to you
and your family in the precious name of our Lord Jesus Christ. I hope this
letter finds you all doing well..
Attached is a
letter that I would like for you to read and to please reply back to me in
the next 2 days
In Christian Love,
{2} YOUR
CONTROVERTING LETTER FAITH
ASSEMBLY CHURCH
Greetings
Bro. Amos in Jesus Christ;
It is with deep
regret that we have to write this letter. It has been brought to our
attention that there is controversy on your latest book entitled HE THAT IS
TO COME on statements where you have said that Bro. Raymond Jackson would be
here until the rapture. You made a statement on page 3, (quote) "that
God had given you a perfect and infallible revelation of the quotation HE
THAT IS TO COME."
On page 59 you
state, (quote) "that his ministry would be on ground until the
rapture."
On pages 88 and 89
you leave a very confusing thought that Bro. Jackson is the bodily apostolic
ministry of Christ.
On page 90 you say,
(quote) "that Bro. Jackson will take us right through to the rapture,
WAIT AND SEE."
On page 99 you say,
(quote) "Let me tell you now the sent one; he that is to come is here
till the rapture. This is one ministry you would have to contend with till
the rapture. We shall see."
You say on page
103, (quote) "that Bro. Jackson has singularly had to face every devil
in the message following." Bro. Amos: What about those of us who have
stood with Bro. Jackson and supported his ministry these many years?
On page 104 you
say, (quote) "Bro. Jackson is only now about to step into his full
apostolic calling, for that calling has not yet been manifest, and that we
are now looking at the hour of his full placing." Bro. Amos: What have
we been looking at for the last many years of his ministry? You also say,
(quote) "that something wonderful is about to happen to his ministry, IT
HAS TO." How do you explain this?
In conclusion, on
page 107 you say, (quote) "I know that in spite of the fact that the
things that have been projected in this book is the truth, not many would
stand for it." Bro. Jackson told us that he had not read
this book, but had only briefly skimmed through it. If Bro. Jackson had read
this book he would have dealt with this matter himself. Bro. Allen nor
myself, (Bro. Bud) had read the book until after the funeral of Bro. Jackson.
We have both now read the book from cover to cover and find many errors. We
feel it necessary to ask you to write a public letter of retraction as soon
as possible so this matter can be resolved. We feel it is necessary for us to
deal with this matter in an open and public manner due to the fact your books
are open to the public, and your ministry has been projected to the world
from Faith Assembly.
In Christian
love.....Bro. James Allen & Bro. Bud Thompson
{3} MY DEFENCE Dear
Brothers Allen & Bud, RE:
“HE THAT IS TO COME”: MY DEFENCE
Greetings to you
and your families in the most precious name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus the
Christ. On behalf of myself and my family, I wish you a most blessed
and prosperous new year, 2005, in the Lord.
Your e-mail to me
dated Tuesday, 11th January, 2005, with the attachment thereof, I received
only yesterday, Friday, 14th January, 2005. The attachment however was
dated 29th December, 2004, presumably the date you wrote the main letter (the
attachment), but hadn’t sent it. Due to the fact that since I moved
house, I have not been able to set up my internet system at home as yet, it
is a little difficult for me to check my e-mails, as I have to go to an
internet cafe to do so, and it is not always convenient. However, I
endeavour to check my mail box at least once a week, except when I
travel. This explains why your mail had been sitting in my box for
about 3 days now. Sorry for this short delay.
Incidentally,
whilst I was at the internet cafe yesterday to check my mail, you (Bro. Bud)
called me up on my mobile, precisely at 2:43pm, Nigerian time. You
informed me you had a matter you would be dealing with on Sunday evening
Church service, the 16th January, 2005, and further that you had sent me an
e-mail concerning it, which I should get. I confirmed to you that I had
only just received it, and that I was at the Internet cafe. I further
told you I would reply you latest by next week, if I am not able to do so by
this week end, yesterday already being Friday. But I further stated
that you could go ahead with whatever you wanted to deal with, as I would not
want to hold you up. We ended the phone conversation with “God bless
you” to one another.
My dear fellow
ministering brothers, if I had been asked by somebody outside the bride camp,
someone outside the following of our precious Bro. Jackson [So, does
the Bride of Christ only constitute those believers who follow Bro. Jackson?], someone from the
opposition, to recant the book I wrote on Bro. Jackson’s role, as being the
one that fulfilled Bro. Branham’s prophecy on page 567, paragraph 4, of the
Seven Seals book, I may not have counted it anything worthy of reply, because
I know where I stand. And it is by the grace of God, for I am simply
nothing. But seeing that it comes from you, the two closest men in the
ministry to our precious Bro. Jackson, men that stood and shared intimacy
with him for decades in the ministry, makes me sad. I say this with
respect, and in love, because I expect that you would be the ones to watch my
back, having stood together for truth, and fed under the same ministry of the
Chief Apostle to this age, Bro. Jackson [he says he expected Bros. Allen
and Bud to watch his back? What is that suppose to mean – to justify his
errors or just bury them and never address the issue? Ministers of God watch
over the Word of God. When a brother errs in a way that may destabilize the
public it goes without saying that the issue may also need to be dealt with
publicly].
My brothers, in my
attitude to you, in my sermons, as well as in my writings, I have always
presented you in a good light, and have always shown both of you much love,
respect, and consideration. My dear brothers, is it too much to expect
the same treatment from you? Is it not an elementary principle of our faith
that “as ye would that men should do unto you, do ye also to them
likewise”? Luke 6:31. Are we not fellow labourers striving for the same
faith? Do we not believe in the same ministry of Bro. Jackson? Why
would you want to tear down a book written to put Bro. Jackson in his
rightful position in the bride, as vindicated by that prophecy of Bro.
Branham? Does his death take away from the fact that he was the one
that fulfilled that prophecy in the seals book I referred to? Does his
death change that fact? Does his death make him not to be the one? [The issue
being addressed by Bros. Allen and Bud is about Bro. Jackson being alive
until the rapture, not disbelief in their “Chief Apostle” doctrine. Side
tracking the issue is a tactic of an arrogant man when he knows he is wrong
to avoid shame.]
As fellow ministers
truly believing in unity as our visionary goal, should you not be the one to
stand for this book, as ministers of Faith Assembly, the Church Bro. Jackson
founded? Am I now an enemy on account of this book? [See? That’s
where the problem is. Did you see anything suggesting enmity in the above
letter from Faith Assembly? AO seems to be a man who takes correction as
enmity, even correction for an obvious error like the one being brought to
his attention here.]
Or are there other reasons to it? And even if you do not know how to
defend certain projections in the book, in view of Bro. Jackson’s death,
should you not simply have informed me that there are people having problems
with my last book, and further that it would be good if I could write
something in defense, or in clarification, in view of the opposition to Bro.
Jackson’s ministry? Why do you give me two days ultimatum? Why go
to such an extent? Is Bro. Jackson not he that was to come? Has
he not come and gone? Is that fact an error? Was he not the one that
fulfilled that prophecy? What am I to recant? Have you now been
made overseers over the 5-fold ministry? Do you have the authority from
God to do what only the Apostolic ministry can do? Is my pastoral
ministry subject to your pastoral ministry? Are we not fellow pastors,
standing in defense of the same truth, and in defense of the same ministry of
Bro. Jackson? Why can you not wait till God Himself establishes that
head (the apostles - plural), Bro. Jackson often preached about? Does
the establishment of the apostles not come first? 1Cor. 12: 28.Can you change
the order God has set in the scriptures, in order to project all the folds of
the Ephesian ministry? And would we have more than one apostle, and not have
a chief spokesman among them? Why not rather lay this scriptural
picture before the saints, for the saints to have a true expectation, and in
the divine order God has set it in the scriptures, for the projection of the
5-fold ministry? Is truth not supposed to be spoken in love, and with respect
for a fellow ministering brother, standing for the same faith? Should
we not consider our course of action, and the effect it may have on Bro.
Jackson’s ministry? Do we not care for his ministry anymore, simply because
he is no longer around? [What’s going on please? In the name of common
sense, are not both Bros. Allen and Bud desiring to address the issue so as
to deal with the embarrassment that the book would bring on Bro. Jackson and
his followers? Did arrogance blind author AO to such an extent as not to see
this simple reality in this plain letter?] Why are you in such a rush?
If I had projected in my book that Bro. Jackson would not be on ground till
rapture (i.e. that he would die), would you not have crucified me before his
death? [See
how he brings in something so irrelevant to simple questions? That’s the
spirit of a lawyer.]
My dear brothers,
please, I do not write these things to be offensive, but I ask these
questions to make you consider the gravity of what you want to do. After
all, are we not one? This book has been out for almost a year now.
It was out just before Bro. Jackson’s 80th birthday, in March 2004. Was
I to project his death whilst he was still alive? Why would I expect
him to die? But does his death nullify the prophecy he
fulfilled? Why take offense? Yes, it is true my ministry was
projected from Faith Assembly, but was it not God that engineered it?
Did Bro. Jackson give any of us our ability? Is it not God that gives
it? Is it not the gift of a man that makes way for him according to
God’s sovereign will, and divine leadership? You know I wrote that book
in Nigeria, and brought it by myself and my wife to Faith Assembly. And
for the records, I have to let you know that my local assembly is the one
that paid for the publication of all of my books, not Faith
Assembly. Neither has Faith Assembly ever paid for my air travel
tickets. And I have no problem with that! Faith Assembly is not under
obligation to do so. Faith Assembly has shown me enough love, and spiritual
and moral support, and for which I am eternally grateful. So, why would Faith
Assembly now be the platform for the book? Rather, should I not be the
one to set things straight, if problems arise on account of my book?
Who is confused? And what is the confusion about?
For your
information, and by the grace of God, I am already writing a book, and it
holds in part, my defense of this book, amongst other material
issues. And Bro. Jackson was aware of the book before he died. I do
not know when I would be finished with the book. [Now watch
the following text that I have put in bold.] But until I finish,
I have no apologies for anyone concerning the book, “HE THAT IS TO COME”,
and there is nothing I am going to retract in that book. Nothing! [He could
not even retract the failed projection of Bro. Jackson being around until the
rapture!]
Moreover, you misquoted me in some parts, in your letter, and it makes a lot
of difference. But for the sake of innocent precious souls, I would
just ask two questions in defense, to open the eyes of the saints to certain
realities facing projections of truth. After all, Christ said, “My sheep
hear my voice”. Who can deceive the very elect? Who? None!
Why? Because the bride have been well taught their Bible. Bro. Branham, and
now Bro. Jackson, did not labour in vain.
1. When God
called Moses, God told him he would deliver Israel and take them into the
promised land. But as it turned out, Moses never got to the promised
land. The question is this: If there was a Bro. Amos at that hour
of time, and he wrote that Moses would be on ground till the children of
Israel got to the promised land, would that have been a false projection?
Please answer me. Would the brother have needed to retract anything?
Definitely not! It would still have been a true projection which God
cut short, out of His own sovereign will. You would have had no basis to
condemn such a book, if it was written. No! [Does “THUS SAITH THE LORD”
ever fail? Is it true that God said to Moses that he (Moses) would be the
one to both take the children of Israel out of Egypt and also, take them into
the Promised Land? Search the scriptures!]
2. When Bro.
Branham was on ground, the prophet to this age, we know his visions never
failed, because it was “Thus saith the Lord”. Later in his ministry,
God gave him a “tent vision”, a prophetic promise, whereby he would go to a
certain city, under divine leadership, acquire a public ground to set up a
tent, and hold meetings, for as long as God would lead, without having to
depend on organisational ministers, who sometimes forced him to go contrary
to God’s leading, as it happened in South Africa. Bro. Jackson often
referred to this tent ministry, and how that within the Branham movement, it
has generated the erroneous “Return ministry”. However, the prophet
passed away, and never fulfilled the tent vision. I ask: Was the
tent vision a lie? Was it a false projection? Does the death of
the prophet make it an erroneous projection? [Please
don’t make God a liar. “THUS SAITH THE LORD” never fails! Has Bro. Branham’s
tent vision failed? Your misunderstanding of what God promised doesn’t make
him a liar. Did God really tell Bro. Branham that he would have a literal
tent and all that which many believers interpreted out of his testimony
related to the tent vision?] You know it does not, for God is
sovereign! Would you tear down the prophet’s ministry, because he stated
many times he would have a tent ministry, which he never had? Think
about it! Why would you then kill me for projecting something that Bro.
Jackson had all the potentials to fulfill, as chief apostle, simply because
of his death? The God of truth would be the judge of this matter. I rest
my case on Him.
Please, my
brothers, Bro. Jackson has only just passed away. Let us not do anything
that would further destabilize the bride. Let the sanity, and the unity,
and the progress of the bride, be our principal goal. God alone rules
this ministry; and God alone rules the bride. He is sovereign.
Here I stand by
God’s grace: I stand with all my life for that book: HE THAT IS
TO COME. I re-affirm that Bro. Jackson was he that was to come. If
you cannot see that, please pray for revelation. I say this in love, and with
respect.
May God bless and
be with you all. And may God have His way in the bride. Your
brother in the faith of Christ,
P.S.: Please note that I
am forwarding this mail to the saints as well, to settle this issue of faith,
as we don’t want to stumble any seed of God. Have
you answered the two questions I said you should answer after reading the
above letters? Have you examined AO’s two points of defense? I ask again:
Isn’t he identifying his projection about Bro. Jackson being around until the
rapture along those two accounts – of God’s instructions to Moses and of
God’s “Tent Vision” to Branham – that God’s prophecies could somehow fail or
be changed? Isn’t he qualifying his projection as a revelation from God?
· BREAK UP WITH FAITH ASSEMBLY What followed after, between the relationship of
AO and Faith Assembly, better be left unmentioned. He has called the
ministers at Faith Assembly everything from serpents to devils. You can read
his book, THE THIRD DAY. He has now also extended his attacks
on Bro. Jackson’s family for their support to James Allen, the current
pastor. I don’t know if Faith Assembly has also been carnal enough to react
with the same abusive language he uses. The Branhamites are now
watching and laughing at the Jacksonites as they see them doing the
same things they were being condemned of. Ministers, be advised that there is
no edification in tantrums of anger. Sheep can never feed on arguments. If
all you have to tell your flock is how wrong a certain brother is and how
right you are; do you think that is what will make them grow in grace until
we reach perfection for the rapture? We better take serious heed to the words
of our Lord Jesus Christ found in Matthew 24:45-51. AO has now come up with a strange claim believing
that he is the new person to take on where the “Chief Apostle” left. He has
coined another term – “Lead Apostle” (in place of “Chief Apostle”). He
believes that he is the new head to lead the five-fold ministry. As though
that is not wrong enough, he also not only believes that he will be one of
the Seven Thunders but a Lead Thunder! Quote: “John is the lead apostle of this
hour, no matter where you turn in the Word of God! Deny it whoever will!...And
as to John being the lead thunder in that future hour of time, let me say
this, to settle the issue, because of the opposition: Since every verse of
written truth of the New Testament came strictly by one fold of ministry,
which is apostles, the unwritten truths of the seven thunders cannot come by
a lesser fold of ministry. It has to also come strictly by apostles: seven
apostles known only unto the Lord. That is settled! However, if the Lord
would anoint seven apostles as seven thunders, commonsense will tell you He
cannot anoint seven apostles, and leave John out, being the man who is
bearing the standard of truth for this hour…John must therefore be a thunder,
and he will be a thunder! And as a matter of fact, knowing God does not
bypass headship, John will be the lead thunder, being the one the Lord is
using to show the way for the universal bride” (THE
PROMISE OF JOHN, The Scribe periodical, Part 2, Pg.11). Saints, beware of spiritual megalomania!
When a man errs and later realizes his error and repents, he is wise. If he
turns around, realizes his error but then tries to justify the wrong, and,
with time end up believing his own lie, he is deceived. But to further breed
more deceptive errors spells DELUSION! Deception and delusion breed bizarre revelations!
Believe it or not, there could already be people believing this man to be a
lead thunder! (As if there is such a one.) AO also believes that God has now put his focus on
the blacks in Africa. He refers to the way blacks are now rising up on the
world scene as he cites Barack Obama for an example. He believes Obama is the
most powerful man on earth today being a president of the USA. And so, it
goes without saying that even in the Bride of Christ God has put a black man
to lead the Church Universal. He believes himself to be that leader. Wherever
he gets these inspirations, I don’t know. Let me refer to his book, THIRD
DAY, and bring out his claims (my worry is, he is so bold in
making these claims which are clearly erroneous):
“With
the passing away of the chief apostle, there is only one way forward,
spiritually, for the bride of Christ Universal, whether people see it or not,
and whether people accept it or not: There is only one exclusive way that is
God’s way, at this very junction of time, following the passing away of
Brother Jackson, for the true bride of Christ….that way is strictly the way
of the Continuity light of Christ which John the Lead Apostle of the end time
is bearing, for and on behalf of the Universal bride of Christ, under God. [Watch his
language. He likes to use the words “Universal Bride”, “Continuity Light”,
and in other places, “head” of the five-fold ministry for the Bride
Universal. These are the very words that the Catholic Church uses for their
core beliefs. Catholic means “universal” and they believe in apostolic
succession through the visible heads of the Church which they call Popes. To
them, this is necessary so as to have continuity light. Behold, we have a
“Pope” in the Endtime Message! Is he a hired Jesuit? Let us beware of
doctrines we create out of our heads. Don’t you know that false
doctrines are inspired by false spirits? Is this man having a Catholic
spirit? I don’t mean to ridicule the Catholics, but we have no such doctrine!
All those who desire to be “visible heads” should join the Catholic Church.
Let’s read on what he says in THIRD DAY.] No white man from
any part of this globe will bear any further light, for the bride of Christ
to follow, for this is the last move! This is the end move! Every true bride
seed will have to look to Africa! Thus saith the Lord! [Is
that truly “THUS SAITH THE LORD” or “Thus saith AO”? May I humbly say this:
We should never play with “THUS SAITH THE LORD”. Let us serve God with
reverence. It is one thing to be under the anointing of God and prophesy, and
another thing to be just emotionally excited at certain things we feel could
be divine inspirations.] No
wonder God placed Barack Obama as head, over the nation of America, the
greatest nation on this planet, and the only remaining superpower! A black
man, whose father is from Kenya, in Africa, is the 44th President
of the United States of America! The first black President in the White
House! A president whom every President is looking up to!...The most powerful
man on planet earth today! [Well, he seems to
be a fan of Obama.] And before Obama became the president, God had
already placed the end time John, a Hamite, at the pinnacle of the bride
ministry, as the lead apostle, over the nation of the bride!” (THIRD
DAY, Pages 223 to 227).
Euphoria has built around the “Lead Apostle’s”
ministry with all sorts of testimonies. See pictures of the “pillar of
fire” on his website http://www.bftchurch.org/supernatural.html. When you see
these pictures, does not sorrow fill your heart to see how people can easily
be deceived and also deceive others? STRONG DELUSION is what it is! – “And
with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they
received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this
cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie”
(2 Thess.2:10-11). When author RG wrote his book RELIGO
(“to bind back”), in which he explains how some preachers always want
to create a religion to bind people to themselves by claiming to have some
revelation to which every man should agree or they are not believers, I was
very happy with the book as I believed that it would open many people’s eyes
and that they be able to discern the Nicolaitan spirit that is flowing
about in many churches. The book tears to pieces the foolish notion of the
unscriptural “Chief Apostle” concept. It is this concept that has brought
troubles in the Jackson movement. They came out of Branhamism
believing God’s word is the absolute and not a man but only to turn back to
their vomit to make the absolute out of Bro. Jackson. I call it a cul-de-sac
of errors. History will always repeat itself! Now let me briefly discuss the “Chief Apostleship”
fallacy.
CHIEF
APOSTLESHIP – what saith the scriptures? The doctrine of “Chief Apostleship” feeds on the
concept that there can never be unity unless one person is identified as the leader
of all the apostles and ministers of the fivefold ministry. By subjecting and
aligning all our teachings to that “Chief”, unity will gradually materialize.
I have one simple question:
There are thousands and thousands of people who
have come to acknowledge Bro. Branham as THE SOLE ABSOLUTE of Truth around
the world. They quote and listen to tapes during their church services. Tell
me, are they all in UNITY? If they are not in unity, then be informed that
unity will never materialize through the so-called Chief Apostle! Look at the
many people who followed Bro. Jackson as the Chief Apostle. They all sat
under his teachings and sincerely believed him to be the Absolute for the
Bride of Christ. But, what has happened after his death? They are now calling
each other names over differences in doctrine CONTRARY to what AO believes
and wrote in his book that when a standard bearer is identified “It
takes away arguments!” (WHEN GOD LIFTS UP A STANDARD,
pgs.13-14). I ask: didn’t AO and ministers and believers at Faith Assembly
believe in the one man, Bro. Jackson, as the standard bearer? Let him explain
why there are now arguments! Was there such a thing as a Chief Apostle being
the head of all apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers in the
early church? Was there such a thing as a Chief Apostle to whom all the other
apostles had to align their teachings in order to maintain unity in the
Church? Is it true that Paul was this man? This matter of Chief Apostleship has been well
addressed by author RG on pages 3 to 7 (RELIGO), and so I will
straight away go to the main points of defense that the “Lead Apostle” uses. Four main scriptures are used to defend the “Chief
Apostle” doctrine – 1 Cor.3:10, Gal.2:6-9, Acts 14:8-12 and
Rom.11:13. Take your Bible and read these scriptures and examine them if
they give any suggestion of a “Chief Apostle” doctrine. Beware of yourself;
when you have an ego and want to achieve a certain ambition, you can take any
scripture, pull it out of context and make it satisfy your appetite. Let us look first look at 1 Cor.3:10, and
ask ourselves this question:
·
WAS THE EARLY CHURCH BUILT ON PAUL’S FOUNDATION? 1 Corinthians 3:10 is usually cited to prove that
Paul was The Chief Apostle that laid the foundation of the Church of Christ.
Plausibly true but NOT TRUE. Let’s see: “According to the grace of God
which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation
and another buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that
is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” Does this scripture teach that Paul was the
masterbuilder of the foundation of the Church, and that the other apostles
built on top of the foundation that Paul laid? Here is what the “Lead
Apostle” says: “What we must realize, as bride saints,
is that that Chief Builder Office of Jesus Christ, was expressed IN Apostle
Paul’s ministry, for he occupied the office of THE APOSTLE! What is difficult
to see in that?” (RELIGO,
Pg.41) Well, everything is difficult to see in that. What
is the meaning of this scripture in its proper context? It is important first
to understand that the scriptures usually type the body of Christ or family
of believers as a building or a tabernacle of God. This true church of Jesus
Christ is shown as the Holy City New Jerusalem in Revelation chapter 21.
God’s Word tells us that this City is built on twelve foundations of the
apostles. Verse14 says that “the wall of the city had twelve
foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb”.
Paul was one of the twelve foundations’ builders. If you think that it was
Matthias then you still have a lot to learn. Nonetheless, understand that
Paul’s ministry was one among the other apostles which contributed to the
other foundation stones. Now, it is important to understand the difference
between “Jesus Christ, the foundation of the Church” and “the
apostles, the foundations of the church”. It is a simple fact to
understand but which, if misunderstood, will have you constructing a confused
picture of the building of God; having Paul as the foundation on which more
foundations (of the other apostles) are laid upon it. Listen, when the Lord Jesus Christ came and
started healing the people, preaching and teaching the Word, he was that
sower who went out to sow seed (Mark 4:1-20). The seed was the Word he
proclaimed. During that time the disciples (who were yet to be sent forth as
apostles) were not filled with the Holy Ghost but sat under the ministry of
the Lord for more than three years. The Lord Jesus was the Chief
Prophet and when the Church came into existence, He was called “the
Apostle of our profession” and “the Chief Shepherd” (Heb.3:1,
1Pet.5:4). He alone then can be called the Chief Apostle! He was the
Foundation for the Church that God laid. “For other foundation can no
man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1Cor.3:11). After
Christ’s death, resurrection and ascension, the Holy Ghost was poured out and
the apostles being anointed with the revelation of the Word for the Church
became supports or footings to the foundation of Christ. Hence, the Church
can be said to have been built on the foundations of the apostles. Whatever
the apostles, including Paul (as one “born out of due season”) taught
were fastened to the ONE FOUNDATION of Jesus Christ. Read Paul’s epistles and
see if what he teaches is not rooted in the gospel of Jesus Christ as penned
in the four gospels. John’s epistle is so full of exact same words you will
find in his gospel of Jesus Christ. All the apostles were simply building on
the foundation of Christ. Now, each of the apostles had his responsibility
and calling from the Lord. Each of them was called to be a builder of the
city of God. Inside this city of God, there was actually serious construction
work going on. Here is an illustration: There are different
construction companies handling the building of different areas of
construction. There is company SP Ltd, company PM Ltd, JM
Ltd, etc. Each of these companies has a building manager with workers
under his supervision. Some companies are bigger than others, and hence have
a greater capacity than others. But each company’s tasks are limited to the
project assigned to it. All the companies report to the CEO of the City
Building Project. He is the Master Building Manager who inspects
and supervises all building (construction) work. Now, this illustrates the Holy City, New
Jerusalem, which is the Bride (Church) of Jesus Christ. Different ministries
(“companies”) have been called for the construction of the different areas of
the City (cf. John 14:1). All companies can only build on the foundation
which was already laid, “for other foundation can no man lay than that
is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1Cor.3:11). God is the Master
(Chief) Builder who laid the cornerstone which is Christ and which is the
foundation. In the early church there was Simon Peter’s
Ministry, Paul’s Ministry, John’s
Ministry, and etc. Each of these ministries had allotted tasks,
given by the Lord Jesus Christ. Some ministries were bigger in capacity than
other ministries but each ministry was limited to its allotted tasks. It is
for this reason that apostle Paul said, “I have strived to preach the
gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s
foundation” (Rom.15:20). This is simple enough to understand that
Paul had a portion of a foundation to lay and he never wanted to intrude into
other people’s “building” works! Each of these ministries had other
committed servants of God under their care. For example Paul planted a church
at Corinth. (He also had other ministers whom he groomed. Timothy, for
example, pastored the church at Ephesus). Although Paul planted the
Corinthian church, other visiting ministers would pass through and minister
at Corinth. Among the ministers who spent a lot of time teaching there, while
Paul was not there, was a brother who was very good and eloquent at
expounding scriptures, the man Apollos (cf.Acts 18:24-25). But with time,
divisions started at the Corinthian church. Some believers began to see
Apollos as a better teacher than Paul and others saw it otherwise. With time
they started discriminating each other as a result of comparing the teachings
of Paul with Apollos’. Instead of comparing the teachings with scriptures
they were comparing teachings with teachings! Some brothers
then began to send reports to Paul over what was happening. Paul decided to
deal with the confusion and wrote a letter, in which he stated in 1
Corinthians 3: “For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you
envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?”
(v3). Why did he say they were carnal? Here it is: “For while
one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?”
(v.4). This is exactly what is happening today? Some believers say, “We
follow Ewald Frank”, others say, “Raymond Jackson”, others, “Joseph
Coleman”. This is carnality as it amounts to adoring a man of God and not
the God of the man! Consider this; how many preachers can sincerely rebuke
their followers in such a manner as Paul did. Many would not because they
enjoy honor. Now watch the humbleness of Paul: “Who then is Paul, and
who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to
every man. I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase”
(vv.5-6). See, it is not about Paul or Apollos but God! “According to
the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder [‘building
manager’ for his ‘company’!], I have laid the foundation, and another
[i.e. Apollos] buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he
buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
which is Jesus Christ” (vv.10-11). Paul is here not
writing an epistle to address his fellow apostles! If you think Paul was the
masterbuilder who laid the foundation of the Church of Jesus Christ on which
all the other apostles had to build on, please explain Romans 15:20,
and also, I have a question for you for which I need a clear
unambiguous answer: when did the building of the church of Jesus Christ
begin? Didn’t it begin way before Paul was converted? Peter, the man with the
keys to the kingdom opened the way before an apostle called Paul came around.
In Acts chapter 2 we read of how Peter preached and baptized new converts in
the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, if Paul is the man that laid the
foundation for the Church of Christ, how could the early apostles have
started building the Church of Christ when the foundation had not yet
been laid by Paul, a man who became converted later on? Can anyone answer the
question? Listen; Paul only laid one of the twelve supporting
foundational stones on the already-laid foundation of Jesus Christ –
Rev.21:14, Rom.15:20. “…Therefore let no man glory in
men: for all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas…”
(vv.21). “And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to
myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to
think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for
one against another” (1Cor.4:6).
·
GALATIANS 2:6-9: TWO CHIEF APOSTLES? AO’s
RELIGO, pgs. 36-37 How about
Galatians 2:6-9? This is another scripture commonly misinterpreted. It reads; “But of those who seemed to be
somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no
man’s person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing
to me: but contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision
was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; (for
he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the
circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles;).” The Lead Apostle takes the underlined words above,
“the apostleship”, to explain that there was the office of THE
APOSTLE. That is over-stretching a scripture in order to force-fit a private
interpretation. He says; “Paul went to those who were apostles,
ever before the Lord Jesus Christ called him into the apostolic ministry. He
went with Barnabas, a fellow Gentile apostle, and the twelve apostles sat in
conference, with the other folds of ministry based in Jerusalem, to consider
the teaching. Looking at the wide array of men in the various folds of the
ministry, who sat there that day, which takes in the twelve apostles, and
even prophets, like ‘Judas surnamed Barsabus, and Silas’, he declared openly
and plainly, in the inspired written Word of God, that Peter is THE APOSTLE
OF THE CIRCUMCISION! [Now watch the following words I
have underlined…] And he did not stop there. He also proudly
proclaimed that he (Paul), was THE APOSTLE OF THE GENTILES…” (RELIGO,
pg.36-37). My, oh my! So, we see how simple scriptures are
taken and stretched to teach that there were two Chief Apostles – Peter THE
apostle to the Jews, and Paul who, according to him, proudly proclaimed to be
the THE apostle to the Gentiles. There is another American minister
who believes himself as being Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles and Bro.
Jackson as being Peter, the Apostle to the Jews; when the spirit of humility
and meekness leaves a minister, he can create all sorts of bizarre
revelations. And believe it or not, there will always be a group of followers
no matter how ridiculous a teaching may be. Now, what does it mean when the scriptures say, “For
he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the
circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles”? Is
“THE apostleship” equal to “THE apostle”? If you are not well
acquainted with the English in the King James Version of the Bible,
let me paraphrase it for you: Paul is simply saying that he (God) that
wrought effectually in Peter in his apostolic ministry to the Jews is the
same one that used him (Paul), in a mighty way among the Gentiles. Don’t
stumble at the definite article “THE”, it is not even there in the original
Greek text. Here is a simpler version of the same scripture: “For who wrought for Peter unto
apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the nations”
(Numeric English New Testament). Dearly beloved, yes, among the twelve disciples,
each of them had different capacities of ministry; some had more and others
lesser measure. It can’t be disputed that Peter was a prominent apostle. But
do you picture Peter acting like a chief among the disciples to whom all the
apostles had to align their teachings to? Is it true that Peter was regarded
as the visible head of the apostles? If it is, can you explain why the
council at Jerusalem had such a heated debate over a doctrinal issue (read
Acts 15:1-22)? Why didn’t the believers and all the other apostles simply ask
Peter for “his revelation” on the issue and agree to whatever he had to say,
as he was THE apostle? When you visualize the event does it, in any
way, portray Peter as the “greater than Solomon” being there? Doesn’t
it present him to be among the apostles who only rose up to speak after the
issue was heavily debated? In verse 7 we read that when there had been much
disputing, Peter rose up and gave his view of the issue. After that, Paul and
Barnabus spoke something, and then the final man to speak was James. James,
in addition to what Peter spoke, didn’t speak just to “parrot” the voice of
Peter. In verse 19 he said “Wherefore my sentence is that…”.
His “sentence” actually had many other things which Peter never even referred
to. Even the letter that resulted from the council had much to do with what
James said. When writing the letter they didn’t even mention the name of
Peter – “they wrote letters by them after this manner; the apostles and
elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren” (v23).These men
were humble men. They had already been warned by the Lord Jesus Christ over
the “Chief Apostleship” fallacy, when on one occasion there arose a
dispute and argument among them, which of them should be the greatest. The
Lord Jesus answered by getting a little child and said, “Verily I say
unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not
enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as
this little child, the same is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven”
(Matt.18:1-5, Luke 9:46-48; 22:24-30). Listen brothers: each time when egos arise
as to who is chief and great, there will always be divisions because pride
never edifies. Even if the office of Chief or Lead Apostle were there, the
bearers of the ministries would have been humble and not going round
campaigning and alarming people that they are the head of the Five-fold
ministry. You can discern a true ministry by the humbleness that surrounds
that ministry. On another occasion two disciples, James and John,
approached the Lord Jesus asking for a favour for them to sit on his right and
left when he comes in power of his kingdom. “And when the ten heard it,
they were moved with indignation against the two brethren” (Matt.20:24).
Can’t we see from these scriptures that whenever a man (or his followers)
begins to behave in such a way as to gain recognition to be chief among other
children of God, it always results in indignation and strife? Consider this:
Before there was such a thing as Bro. Jackson being the Chief Apostle, was
there harmony among his followers and other ministers who associated with
him? YES, there was. But what changed the picture? What caused his ministry
to tear apart from certain ministries? Wasn’t it men who began to push the
agenda of unity by putting him on a pedestal as THE standard? One thing is
sure, many ministers had great respects for Bro.Jackson for his calling and
for the fact that he was among the first (if not the very first one) to take
a firm sober stand for the Word of God and against extreme Branhamism.
It was sometime in 2004, when I was with Bro. Gan
in a hotel room and, with sadness, he said to me, “I love and respect
Bro. Jackson. He has publicly attacked me for no reason but unfounded
rumours. But I will never attack him or call his name out publicly because of
the respect I have for him”. That was the first time I knew that
certain things he dealt with in his book “Discrepancies” actually concerned
Bro. Jackson. This was because he never mentioned names but dealt with the
issues at hand. When Bro. Jackson died, it was Bro. Gan who informed me and
other believers about the sad development and the need to pray for Faith
Assembly for God to help them through the trying moment. I will never forget,
one evening while eating supper at home with Bro. Gan when a ministering
brother came into the room and wanted to appreciate Bro. Gan. He said, “Bro.
Gan, in as much as other people try to burn your books you should know that
we appreciate them”. Bro. Gan then responded (with literally no show
of ‘thank you’) by saying, “Well, never be quoting me or saying ‘Bro.
Gan said…’ when preaching. Just preach the Word as the Holy Spirit gives you
inspiration.” However, to a man like Amos, all this I am speaking
amounts to foolishness. Dear saints, why do you think many people felt good
being with Bro. Branham? The man was humble. Many have testified that he was
such a simple and humble man. Even when he would declare that he was a sent
one of God to this age with a ministry to turn people’s hearts to the Word,
his followers could see the sincerity and humbleness in the man. When a man begins to feel he is THE ABSOLUTE it
will always create disharmony. That’s what happened among the disciples when
James and John desired a greater position than the rest of the twelve
disciples. Let me make it clear to you – there is no edification that comes
from pride. It creates contentions and disharmony. If you believe unity will
come by projecting a certain man as a “Chief Apostle”, please go
ahead, time will tell if any unity will result from that. But be assured of
one thing; only your ardent followers will be following you. Other believers
who have come to the Lord Jesus Christ through other ministries will have
nothing to do with your camp. And if you are in your right sober mind you
should know that the Bride of Christ is not limited to the perimeters of your
group. There are many other believers in different parts of the world that
have no knowledge of your camp, but God is in their midst. To think, or even
entertain a thought that ONLY people who know you and have a connection with
you around the world are the “bride universal” is pure deception and a lack
of simple reasoning. Watch: “But Jesus called them unto him, and
said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them,
and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so
among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your
minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your
servant:” (Matt.20:25-27). Notice the underlined words. The Lead Apostle
obviously reads them as “whosoever will be the Chief Apostle among
you”. The word “chief” is here not being used as a
TITLE, no more than the preceding word “great” is. It is used as a
description of notability among the other apostles. Here is what author RG
said in response to a question a Nigerian man asked him – Who is the Chief
Apostle today?: “To teach that Paul had clarity of
revelations given him is true but to teach that he had revelations in all aspects
of the Word of God is a lie. But to teach that Paul was entrusted with a
greater amount of talents, a greater responsibility, a greater portion of the
apostolic ministry, and a greater amount of truth would scripturally be
correct.”
Can
this be any plainer?
(Find
the article on
http://www.propheticrevelation.net/questions/chief_apostle.htm
).
Read
Acts 15:22 and notice the word “chief”:
“Then pleased it the apostles and
elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to
Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas,
chief men among the brethren”. The Bible here says that after the Jerusalem
Council, some men from Jerusalem were sent to accompany Paul. These men were
Judas and Silas and are being described as “chief among the brethren”
in Jerusalem. What does that mean? Where they Chief Apostle Silas and Chief
Apostle Judas? Ridiculous, isn’t it? Let’s read our scriptures right! The
statement simply means Silas and Judas were among prominent men among
brethren in Jerusalem. Among a gathering of believers there will always be
some prominent brothers who will be quite notable. Some may not even be
ministers but are always there as pillars to attend to different needs of the
church, encouraging believers, evangelizing, etc. You would describe such a
brother as being notable or chief. But creating a special title for such a
brother as THE CHIEF BROTHER or THE PROMINENT ONE is another thing.
·
WAS PAUL THE CHIEF APOSTLE? AO’s
RELIGO, Pgs.28-67 If he was, why did he say: “For I suppose I was not a whit
behind the very chiefest apostles. But though I be rude in speech, yet not in
knowledge; but we have been thoroughly made manifest among you in all things.
Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be
exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?”
(2 Cor.11:5-7)? Paul is here saying that he was not inferior to
any of the very chiefest of the apostles; clearly implying that he was equal
to all the other apostles and not inferior! How could a man who was regarded
as the Chief Apostle have complained like this? You don’t need a theological
degree to know that Paul had problems in being recognized as an apostle of
God. Many carnal believers preferred apostles like Peter, John and James, and
other apostles who had been with the Lord Jesus Christ. Just read Paul’s
epistles and you will easily spot a number of places where Paul complains of
this. Take 2 Cor.12:11-12 for example: “I am become a fool in glorying
[any spiritual mind will know that Paul’s glorying was certainly not as
the one for the “Lead Apostle”. Compare this also with Rom.11:13] ye
have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing
am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing. Truly the signs
of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders,
and mighty deeds.” He is here again simply saying that he was
not in any way inferior to those other apostles who were regarded to be much
exceeding; he had miracles and other vindications of God just like the other
notable apostles. If you want to take “chiefest” as a title of one particular
individual and not merely a grammatical descriptive word then you shall have 12
Chief Apostles. Then you will have to coin another term for the chief
above them all – “Chiefest of The Chiefs”? Ridiculous, isn’t it?
·
“SILLY DREAM” AO’s
RELIGO, Pg.45 On page 45 the “Lead Apostle” presents an
extremely contradictory statement: After having vigorously attacked RG
for his unbelief in a “Lead Apostle” doctrine, he now suddenly says “He
(RG) had a silly dream, which he relayed in one of his books, to
support the notion that he is also bearing a Lead Ministry role.”
Well, everyone knows (including Amos himself) that this is not true, and so,
we won’t waste time in that. I will just comment on something that I feel we
should be careful of. God has called us to the ministry and we shall be
accountable to how we perform our work. Among ministers there are those who
are “faithful and wise” and those who do things outside of what
God requires. “Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord
hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
[a faithful and wise servant is he who is feeding his flock meat in due
season] Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall
find so doing” (Matt.24:45-46). [In other
words, some will lose focus and stop feeding the flock, and start doing
something else they are not commissioned to do. What is this something else?]
“… [The] evil servant shall say in his heart, My Lord delayeth
his coming; and shall begin to smite his fellow servants…”
(Matt.24:48). It is important to ask ourselves this question: “Am I
feeding the flock with meat in due season or am I busy wasting my energies in
smiting other fellow servants of God?” Now, it is so surprising that some people would
have the guts not just to slam other ministers but take the liberty to speak
of things they are not suppose to. Be reminded that we shall be judged for
every idle word we speak. I am here referring to the careless statements
author AO writes on author RG’s dream of his calling. It’s so easy to take a
dream and make foolishness out of it. I am not a stranger to spiritual
dreams; many times dreams will come in many ways and forms. Some are direct,
but many times they could be so illustrative with a lot of symbols. Your
misunderstanding of a dream doesn’t mean it is false. Let’s know our limits
when discussing or arguing scriptures (if that is your hobby) lest we find
ourselves treading on dangerous grounds. Do you know that some learned men
have called the Holy Bible “hogwash” because of certain things which could
not make sense to their carnal mind. Let these few words on this suffice. If
this dream be of God, one day the folly of Amos Omoboriowo will be manifest.
Likewise, if it be false and is of an egoistic nature, Richard Gan is also
marked for folly. ·
DISTINCTION BETWEEN “CHIEF APOSTLE” AND “LEAD APOSTLE” AO’s RELIGO, Pg.58 If there is no “Chief Apostle” then there
is no “Lead Apostle”. The term Lead Apostle is just a newly
conjectured word for Chief Apostle. But both terms are actually a mask for
the term “Eighth Messenger”. We won’t waste time playing around these
words. Let’s leave them where they belong – nowhere. We proceed. ·
ONE MAN MINISTRY AO’s RELIGO, Pg.61 On page 61 of his RELIGO, the
“Lead Apostle” presents his firm belief in a one-man ministry today. He
believes himself to be the man. Well, if all what has been discussed in this
observation is foolishness to him, maybe he can take on these words of Bro.
Branham, since he claims to believe the prophet. Bro. Branham said that the
guy that wants to do a certain ministry is usually the guy that
can’t do it. If he can’t even move himself to the right
attitude, he would never move mountains for God. (COD. Vol.II,
pg.517). On the argument of a ONE MAN MINISTRY in the Old
and New Testament I would give this assignment to AO to find out what the
“Chief Apostle” commented on the book of one of his one-time follower and
associate minister. The book is titled, AN OLD TESTAMENT PROPHET COMES
TO THE NEW. I should think AO doesn’t communicate with the
author of this book as he had disassociated with Faith Assembly and later on
began projected himself as to being Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles and
Bro. Jackson as being the Apostle to the Jews. But AO can still request the
letter of compliment that his “Chief Apostle” wrote him regarding the book. I
had a chance to see and read the letter myself when he visited my country.
But make sure, you first read his book before you read the “Chief Apostle’s”
letter. Along with that book, read SPEAK THE WORD by RG. May I ask this question with regards to “John”:
since your projection of Bro. Jackson being alive until the rapture failed,
and you are the one who has stepped in his shoes, ARE YOU THE ONE to lead the
Bride of Christ up to the rapture? I ask this on the basis of one statement
you have stated in your RELIGO book, page 65:
Quote: “Following Bro. Jackson’s ministry,
came John, still in this very same dispensation, a ministry the prophet
also testified of, declaring it a ‘great thing’, which ‘will carry over’, to
connect with the two Jewish prophets, ‘IN THIS OUR DAY’, and that the
rapture will then come?” In case you die (I don’t wish you to die), what
will be the “name” of the next “Chief Apostle”? We’ve had Bro. Jackson as
“Paul” (or “Peter”, as believed by his once associate), and now “John”
(that’s you). What character in the Bible shall be next to represent whoever
is to come? OR maybe you are so sure, as you stated above, that with you (as
“John”), the saints shall finally go up to the rapture? ·
UNITY OF FAITH AO’s RELIGO, Pg. 67-96 Is it true that the unity of Faith will come when
we see Bible truth through the eyes of one man? Here is a question for
thought: There are thousands and thousands of believers of the message of the
prophet William Branham. They believe he was the prophet to this age. They
all hear his sermons on tapes. Some churches even play audio tapes during
services, yet I don’t think there is any movement as divided as the Endtime
Message movement! Are they not all trying to see through the eyes of the
prophet? If we can’t be united by seeing through the messages of the prophet,
shall we be united by listening to the messages of the “Chief Apostle”? If it
is so, let the “Lead Apostle” please explain to us why he has broken up with
Bro. Allen since both of them sat under the Chief Apostle’s ministry.
However, today you will feel sorry at the way they relate to each other.
·
AND WHAT IF THE “CHIEF APOSTLESHIP” MINISTRY IS TRUE? Now suppose this commentary is wrong, and there is
such an office of a “Chief Apostle” today? Listen, if there was such a
ministry, the holder of the office would be humble and you will see the
richness of the life of Christ in that person. Check it out in history and
also today; many times preachers who are so arrogant, campaigning and
speaking out loud in claiming a certain great ministry are the ones who don’t
have it. As mentioned earlier, Bro. Branham once said that often the
fellow who wants to do it is the fellow who doesn’t have it. Gifts are
given for edification. Try to get around a person with a true gift; you will
feel admonished and uplifted in spirit. When he speaks you will feel it deep
within you that you have been fed. On the contrary a proud person is always
full of himself. He loves to hear his own voice speaking to the people. When
he is in a meeting, he is always waiting to speak and not to be spoken to. He
wants recognition and honor. If you have this spirit you better surrender
your life to God. No pride will ever be crowned by God. He hates pride!
(Prov.6:16-17). IN CONCLUSION, Let us be humble in whatever ministries God has
allotted us. The unity of faith will be the work of God which He will bring
about as we humbly yield and walk in the Spirit. All carnality and self must
die and give way to the complete infilling of the Holy Ghost in our souls.
Let everything be done in humility and love, as we work out our salvation
with fear and trembling. When the time is full, His bride will be ready for
the translation. But watch; there is a spirit of fanaticism and
charismaticism which is on the loose and many are falling for it. False pillars
of fire and charismaticised services are on the rampage. The
genuine and true is out there but in very few places. “And he gave some, apostles; and some,
prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the
perfecting of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the
knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the
stature of the fulness of Christ: that we hence forth be no more children,
tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the
sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
but speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is
the head, even Christ [not
the “Lead apostle” but Christ is the head!]: from whom the whole
body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth,
according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh
increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love” (Eph.4:11-16). May God’s grace ever lead us. Amen.
Andrew
C. Phiri
Voice
of The Word Ministry
Email:
voiceoftheword@live.com |