SermonIndex Audio Sermons
SermonIndex - Promoting Revival to this Generation
Give To SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : One Biblical Qualification For An Apostle

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
PosterThread
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1839
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote: What is Paul the last of?

He wasn't the last Apostle thats for sure, because Timothy comes alongs as Pauls protege, who is called a Apostle by Paul himself in 1 Thess

So this is Paul putting himself last, not seeking pre-eminence and humbling himself as the last or least of the Apostle.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2022/5/3 17:41Profile
Platy
Member



Joined: 2019/10/5
Posts: 293


 Re: Colin

This is the verse you are using to prove Timothy is an apostle:

1 Thessalonians 2:6 - 6Nor of men sought we glory, neither of you, nor yet of others, when we might have been burdensome, as the apostles of Christ.

Back up to beginning of the chapter:

1 Thessalonians 2:1-2 - 1For yourselves, brethren, know our entrance in unto you, that it was not in vain: 2But even after that we had suffered before, and were shamefully entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention.

If you remember in Acts 16 it was Paul and Silas who were jailed in Philippi.

Go to the next chapter:

1 Thessalonians 3:1-2 - 1Wherefore when we could no longer forbear, we thought it good to be left at Athens alone; 2And sent Timotheus, our brother, and minister of God, and our fellowlabourer in the gospel of Christ, to establish you, and to comfort you concerning your faith:

Who are the "we" in verse 1 above keeping in mind it was the "we" that sent out Timotheus in verse 2?

 2022/5/4 18:37Profile
drifter
Member



Joined: 2005/6/6
Posts: 1025
Campbell River, B.C.

 Re:

In my opinion, God chose twelve apostles to represent the twelve tribes of Israel, and Paul to represent the Gentiles. The twelve had a special role to fulfill; being eyewitnesses of Jesus' ministry and resurrection from the dead. Jesus also said they would sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19:28.)

I personally don't believe there have been any apostles since the first century, after John's death. It seems to me that anyone that lays claim to the title seems to have dubious credentials. Even men like Wesley, Finney, Moody etc did not say they were apostles.

Can anyone show me a modern day apostle?

I realize Barnabas, Andronicus, Junia etc were called "apostles" but I don't think it carries the same meaning as the twelve plus Paul. Albert Barnes said: "Barnabas is called an apostle because he was sent forth by the church on a particular message (Acts 13:3; compare Acts 14:26), not because he had been chosen to the special work of the apostleship."


_________________
Nigel Holland

 2022/5/5 14:38Profile
staff
Member



Joined: 2007/2/8
Posts: 2227


 Re:

Hi Drifter,
How does Albert Barnes show this?
"Albert Barnes said: "Barnabas is called an apostle because he was sent forth by the church on a particular message (Acts 13:3; compare Acts 14:26), not because he had been chosen to the special work of the apostleship."
urs staff

 2022/5/5 17:11Profile
staff
Member



Joined: 2007/2/8
Posts: 2227


 Re:

Hi All
The qualification for being one of the Twelve Apostles is listed in Acts 1

21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.

1 He had to have been baptised by John
2 Had to be with them when Jesus was taken up.
3 Had to be able to be a witness of his resurrection

Now I know this does not answer the broader question but it clearly shows that Paul could not be one of the Twelve as he didnt qualify but we also know from Paul himself that he considered that his Apostleship was equal to that of the Twelve.So their were Apostles after the Twelve at the very least Paul .It also shows that the qualification to be an Apostle is of Gods choosing and that qualifying to be one of the Twelve is different to qualifying to an Apostle after the Twelve.
More importantly the person nominated to take Judas place were not qualified because of their deeds or because they were special only because they qualified to the above guidelines.In reading the passage it appears that their were more than just the two men nominated who would qualify but why they werent brought to the front it doesnt say.
urs staff

 2022/5/5 17:30Profile
drifter
Member



Joined: 2005/6/6
Posts: 1025
Campbell River, B.C.

 Re:

In regards to Andronicus and Junia (or Junias, an alternate spelling), the best current Greek rendering of the text would be something like "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and fellow prisoners, who are well known to the apostles." There is no consensus of opinion as to what gender Junias was, among church fathers or even scholars today. In my opinion, it would be irrelevant as it does not follow from the text that he (or she) was an apostle. This single verse is often touted by proponents of the continued office if apostleship. The term "apostle" can be used in a wider sense, e.g. as one "sent out," where Christ was not preached before, the proper use of the term would apply in the modern era to someone like C.T. Studd or Hudson Taylor. However neither of these men, nor anyone else, would have the "office of an apostle."

In Ephesians 2:20 Paul says that we "are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone." How many times do you lay a foundation when you build a building? It's pretty clear that when he refers to the prophets he means the Old Testament prophets; they were used of God to write sacred scripture. I believe there are prophets today, but they do not operate in the same capacity as the OT prophets in establishing canon; they would be analogous to "apostles" today. Their role was finished with the death of John the Baptist.

I think the term "apostle" should not be used as it is confusing, and no one today has the authority of Paul or the rest of the apostles. Remember one of their functions, like the OT prophets, was to write or oversee the writing of scripture.

I reiterate my question: can anyone show me a modern day apostle, and his credentials to back up his claim?


_________________
Nigel Holland

 2022/5/5 18:43Profile
staff
Member



Joined: 2007/2/8
Posts: 2227


 Re:

Hi Drifter
This is an important point .Their is no reason why we cant have Apostles today like in Acts but we just dont have them.
The main thing Apostles bring to the table is Authority and it is clear that we dont have anyone with Apostolic Authority in the Church today.Its just not there.

However you miss the point of the Twelve Apostles.Without the full Twelve Apostles Pentecoste could not happen.Their had to be Twelve and they had to be baptised by John and they had to have witnessed the ressurection and Jesus leaving the Earth.So nobody could be the Twelve after the Twelve ,that was it they were a one off deal ,the foundation as you said but Paul was on top of the foundation ,not part of the foundation.Paul was part of the building not the foundation.
So the point of being built on the foundations is null and void as it concerns whether we can have Apostles after the Twelve.Paul was not part of the foundation but he did have the Authority "we are built",Paul is including himself.

"I think the term "apostle" should not be used as it is confusing, and no one today has the authority of Paul or the rest of the apostles"
urs staff

 2022/5/5 19:43Profile
drifter
Member



Joined: 2005/6/6
Posts: 1025
Campbell River, B.C.

 Re:

I think you may have misunderstood my post. The Greek word for apostle in the New Testament is "apostolos", literally meaning "one who is sent." In a broader sense, a person can "be sent" by God to go, for example, into a foreign land where Christ has not been preached before. I believe calling that person an apostle would be erroneous. In the strict, specific sense, an apostle is someone who knew Jesus personally when He was on the earth (the exception being Paul), was specifically chosen by Him for that office (only twelve spots were available; again, with the exception, or inclusion, of Paul), witnessed His death and resurrection, and was commissioned to preach the gospel, heal the sick, raise the dead, cast out devils, and write scripture.

It isn't just that there are not modern day apostles, or that we don't know of any; it's that no one today could possibly meet those standards.

To my point earlier about the twelve apostles being analogous to the twelve patriarchs, the tribe of Joseph was split into two, Ephraim and Manasseh, thus making thirteen. Interesting, no?

It's interesting that anyone calling himself (or herself!) an apostle nowadays tends to come from one heretical, cult like sect which is spreading like a virus throughout christendom. (Naming names is redundant; you probably know who I am referring to.)


_________________
Nigel Holland

 2022/5/5 20:18Profile
staff
Member



Joined: 2007/2/8
Posts: 2227


 Re:

Hi Drifter,
If the qualification is that an Apostle is "one who is sent" then we can have the term Apostle but we dont have the Twelve Apostles or Pauls type of Apostle.We dont have the Twelve Apostles because they are the foundation.We dont have the Paul type either but not because its not possible to have the Paul type .
Their are no standards to meet to be an Apostle except that God sent you as an Apostle,you have the gift is the only qualification.Its not that it couldnt exist or that their is a theological reason why it couldnt exist ,their is not ,we just dont have them.We would function correctly if we did have them but its clear we dont have them and we dont function correctly or in order because of their absence ,
urs staff

 2022/5/5 20:31Profile
drifter
Member



Joined: 2005/6/6
Posts: 1025
Campbell River, B.C.

 Re:

Brother, this is where I respectfully disagree. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I see the office of an apostle as being restricted to the first century, under a very specific set of parameters.

As you may know, the New Apostolic Reformation (a name which they vehemently deny, even though it was coined by one of the pioneers of that movement, C. Peter Wagner) claims they have hundreds of apostles in their ranks. They claim that every church must be under the authority of one of their "apostles", or it cannot function properly. They claim new revelation and also hold to many heresies, such as the prosperity gospel, the "born again Jesus", guaranteed healing no matter what etc.

They sound like many heretical sects that came before them, like the Irvingites, the Mormons, the followers of William Branham (who the NAR claims to hold in high esteem). They all sound the same: you can't be saved (they say) unless you follow our denomination, don't criticize the leaders or you are standing against God, etc. They are using the reasoning that God is restoring apostles to cow people into submission and to spread their message.


_________________
Nigel Holland

 2022/5/5 20:53Profile





©2002-2024 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Revival to this Generation.
Privacy Policy