"Offices" of the Church

[Jim an Apostle]

In order to give proper attention to this topic, this post was split from the "Authority, Submission, and Chain of Command" thread.

___________________________________________________________________

1 Cor. 12:27-31

Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular. [28] And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. [29] Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? [30] Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? [31] But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

Most want to skip this step and go to the more excellent way. In so doing, they bypass:

Matthew 6:33

But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.


This kingdom is not to be just a theory! I have said, “It is all theory until you put names and faces on it.” I often talk of gifts and callings, and even current apostleship; and as long as it is left in the realm of theory, I can get many to agree with me. It is when the shift comes from theory to implementation that I lose them. . . . Kinda like PM.

I hope we would all like to see the ‘church’ perfected in love. According to:

Ephes. 4:11-13

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] 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:

Many of us have missed the true meaning of the term, Kingdom. This authority structure established by God Himself is God’s Kingdom. He gave gifts to men and women, and called them to be His agents to care for all the needs of the church; then implemented this authority structure and expects us to operate in it.

If teachers, pastors, and evangelists are still viable, then so are apostles and prophets. If we have not 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: then we need all of God’s gifts to be part of that perfecting process.

“But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness;...” The first step in a working Kingdom is the home. The parents are the first voice of God to the children. The rest of the Kingdom is for the support of the home (family) that the children are raised in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. It should be the focus of the church to build and strengthen the family, not just to build a bigger ministry.

The concept of elders has validity, but as long as all voices are equal, the Kingdom is not established. The Kingdom requires “Kings.” The blanket term ‘elders’ is a start, but the recognition of all of the gifts and callings along with their proper role must come to the forefront for the Kingdom to function.

The Kingdom is to perfect us in love. Love is not supposed to bypass His Kingdom! Elders should guide others to the recognition of, and help implement the teachings and directives of, the higher gifts and callings. All have a domain. All become King in their realm. All are to submit to the higher realms. The ‘higher’ realms are to support and recognize the rightful domain of others, even though they are under their authority.

The children are taught submission by the example of the wife. The wife is taught submission by the example of submission of the husband to the gifts and callings of the Kingdom. There is an accountability of the husband to follow God, yes. But there is also a responsibility to establish the Kingdom by recognizing the gifts and callings in others. Only as the gifts and callings are recognized and followed, will the Kingdom be established beyond theory. It is not the man or woman that matters, rather it is the gift they walk in that comes from God that matters. (For example: To hear and obey the voice of the Prophet of God is to hear and obey the voice of God Himself.)

It is more important to know “who the voice is” than to judge the voice. Satan could tell you to sell all you have and give it away, and obeying that voice would be wrong! God could tell you to offer your son as a sacrifice, and obeying it would be right!

The whole church thought Paul was wrong to go to Jerusalem when warned by Agabus, but it was not up for a vote! Paul stood alone and because he had a gift and office of an apostle, his opinion trumped everyone else’s opinion combined. This is where it gets scary. Could Paul be right, and everyone else be wrong? When Paul died, he said he had finished his course. Paul was not in error. The “voice” did not say, “Do not go,” It just warned of the consequences of going. Could Paul be in error? He said he was not perfect! But by virtue of his gift and calling, he maintained that his revelation was superior to those over which he presided.

Much of the teaching of the New Testament is based upon Paul’s revelation. Yes, God can speak to anyone, but God honors His own Kingdom and speaks according to our gifts and callings. Some things He does not tell the child, He expects the mother to do it. Some things He does not tell the wife, He expects the husband to do it. Some things He does not tell the church except through Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers. There are still some God-called and gifted Prophets, (if we would only recognize them); and yet, some things require the gifting working in an Apostle for proper revelation and clarification. Each gift and calling has its own realm and expertise of ministry and authority. Elders have their place, but proper doctrine usually comes through an Apostle. Doctrine should always have Apostolic approval and verification.

You may say the original apostles were enough. The problem is you can interpret Paul or Peter’s words to suit yourself. You may say the Holy Spirit will keep the doctrine straight! So... Is that why there are so many divisions among us? God established this authority system called the Kingdom as a gift to us... and wishes us to respect it.

The church began under the direction and administration of Apostles. Satan sought to kill them a quickly as possible. The call of Matthias and Paul is enough to prove the office was to continue. After the first Apostles died, the remaining church held them in such esteem that men did not have faith enough to operate in the office, and the church did not have faith enough to receive them, if they would have tried. The control of the church fell into the hands of the pastors and some teachers, and now it is in the hands of the deacons, by and large. It was actually the loss of true Apostles in the church that led the church and the world into the “Dark Ages.”

If Paul came to earth, and to you directly, would you argue with him? Could God still gift and call men as he did Paul? Could you recognize such a one, and have enough faith to receive him? And what would you do if or when he went against or beyond your understanding? True Apostles are rare; and since the church has lost the understanding of them, it is hard for most to believe they could exist... and even harder to recognize them.

Following is a basic Biblical structure for Kingdom positions and authority:

The “offices” are permanent positions. The “gifts of the Spirit” gives one a priority and authority when the gift is in manifestation. The gifts and callings are without repentance.

The ‘callings’ are not promotions; they too, are gifts. One does not get called to be a Pastor, and if he does a good job, gets promoted to be a Prophet. One does not serve as a Prophet, then gets promoted to be an Apostle. Paul seems to say he was called from birth.

Galatians 1:15

But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

1 Cor. 7:24
Brethren, let every man, wherein he is called, therein abide with God.


We tend to think that proper structure alone will guide us correctly. Many assume the structure of the Government of the United States is enough to protect us. The structure is no better than the men who operate it. We must have men who are truly called and gifted and mature enough to function in their God-called position to have success.

A proper understanding of authority in the home is good, but being a wise father is still needed to be able to properly lead.

God desires a Kingdom. A Kingdom operates by delegated authority. Each level and position has a realm an authority and responsibility in that realm. Each is accountable to the higher authorities, but each authority should understand where their authority ends going up the chain, as well as going down the chain. Some things are your responsibility to hear from God for yourself, and some things are another’s responsibility to help you in. If God would tell us everything directly, then you wouldn’t need me... and I wouldn’t need you! We could just pass out Bibles and go home.

My search of the Scripture and understanding from the Spirit gives the following order to the Kingdom of God according to ministry. I have another chart that interlaces the nine gifts of the Spirit into this chart.

GOD THE FATHER
JESUS
MANIFESTATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT
APOSTLES
PROPHETS
TEACHERS
PASTORS
EVANGELISTS
MINISTRY OF MUSIC
MINISTRY OF HELPS
DEACONS
ELDERS
HUSBANDS
WIVES
CHILDREN

You have a gift and calling, and I have a gift and calling. It is only together that we make a body and a Kingdom.

Some insist that everyone should be “submitted” to someone. The truth is that all Apostles stand equal before Jesus. Paul did not yield to Peter, even though Peter was one of the ‘original twelve.’ Peter even acknowledged that Paul had some teachings that were hard to understand. The Elders submitted to Moses. Moses did not submit to the Elders. Moses submitted to God. Did Moses ever make a mistake? Yup! Did the Elders “ take care of it?” Nope! But God did.

The worry is ultimately, “What if an Apostle goes off the rails?” What if a mother goes off the rails? What if a husband goes off the rails?

It all comes down to ‘faith’ in the end. The better we submit to God and His Kingdom, the better our chances are! The first thing is to have an understanding of the difference between a King and a Dictator. Ruler-ship for the benefit of those under your authority is something a child can understand. Also, the Kingdom operates by submission, and as Andrew said. the door does not lock you in. Just be sure your leaving the house is in obedience to God. There are ‘houses’ and ‘churches’ and ‘fellowships’ that God does want you to oversee... or submit to.

Even an Apostle entering your home has to submit to your rules of your house. An Apostle should even respect the domain of a child over his own toys. If you follow a Pastor, or even an Apostle, it is by choice not by force. In a perfect world, every child would have a mother, every mother and woman would have a husband, every man would have Elders he could trust, every community would have assemblies with loving Pastors, every Pastor would have access to and follow a God-called Teacher, and would have access to Prophets. Every Teacher would have access to Prophets, and would follow an Apostle; and every Prophet would have Apostolic oversight. All ministries would be following Christ. All ministries would work together to build a legacy and heritage for the children to have a right path to follow. The church as a whole would be open to, and able to receive, proper restoration of proper doctrine and even new revelation as the Holy Spirit wills.

A strange thought: in a way Paul had an advantage over the ‘original twelve.’ I can see where their personal experience with Jesus, in the flesh, could in a way hinder them from developing a full dependence on the Holy Spirit, and making it more difficult for them than it was for Paul to receive ‘new,’ or further, revelation.

Principle: all authority is demonstrated by the parent/child relationship. When a child comes of age, he gets to choose whether to follow the teachings of the father, or not. We hope they choose wisely.

 

[Mojo]

This was a long post, so I just want to establish something first. You advocate for "offices" or "callings", of which you say apostle and prophet are fully functional today.

Maybe I am just spouting something I was taught, and don't truly understand, but I need you to define apostle and prophet to me in how you see their qualification or function.

In Acts 1, we are told that Apostles needed to have seen the risen Christ and been witness to his life. Is that possible today? If you mean apostle as "messenger" in a general sense, how does that designation differ from say, teacher?

In regards to Prophets, in Romans 3, we are told that the "oracles" or "word of God" were entrusted to the Jews (Hebrews/Israel, whatever you want to call it). Barring some of the more exotic understanding of who the Jews are, is that possible today? I subscribe to sola scriptura in the sense that what God had to say, he preserved in canon. The warning in Revelation about not adding or taking away is pretty serious to me. If you are saying the "office" of prophet can add revelation not is scripture is troubling to me. If you mean general prophet as in one who proclaims the Word of God (scripture) then I can agree.

Can you help me with your definition of apostle and prophet before I delve further into your post?

THANKS!

 

[Jim an Apostle]

Thanks for your interest in this post.

Malachi 3:6
For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Most would accept this as a principle of the nature of God. However:

Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

There are some things subject to change in God's dealings with man. During the time of the priesthood,
Prophets were there from beginning to end, and even continued in the New Testament.

Acts 21:10
And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.

According to:

Ephes. 4:11-13
And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; [12] For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: [13] 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:

I believe the church has not come to the 'perfecting' nor to the 'unity' spoken here. Therefore, all of these ministries are still valid and needed.

A Prophet is primarily a position of authority. It is usually accompanied with a special ability to perceive the voice and will of the Spirit. Joseph had dreams. Moses had 'direct conversations.' Elijah had the 'still small voice.' Isaiah and Daniel had visions and angelic visitations. Just because one had some of these experiences, that would not automatically qualify them, or mean they were called to the authority of a Prophet. David was a Prophet, yet he inquired of the Priest and Ephod, often.

1 Peter 1:10
Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

Prophets did not always understand the things of which they spoke. There is a difference from the 'gift of prophecy' which is one of the nine gifts of the Spirit:'

1 Cor. 14:3
But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

This is different from the office of a Prophet. A Prophet may speak in judgment or predict something in the future. Within the gifts of the Spirit, the 'word of knowledge' or 'discerning of spirits' or 'miracles' may lead one to think they are encountering a Prophet. This may, or may not, be the case. Ultimately, the office of the Prophet rests upon a calling of authority within the church body, coupled with a special ability to perceive the mind of the Spirit.

Apostles

Leaders of the Kingdom of God. Those delegated and chosen by Jesus Christ and empowered by the Holy Spirit to walk in understanding the mind of God. They establish doctrine and may give new revelation. They are the final earthly arbitrators of disputes, responsible to develop unity of the faith with other apostles. The word spoken in apostolic authority is of greater authority than a word from an angel of God.

The primary function of an Apostle is to establish the doctrine. It is needed in every generation for men to confirm by the Spirit, and by special gifting from God for this office, the proper understanding of doctrine for the church. This is a Gift! Of course one must apply themselves to study, but study alone does not guarantee the right answer. Paul did not rely on the teaching of the other Apostles to establish his understanding; he got it directly for himself, first.

Galatians 1:11-18
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. [12] For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. [13] For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: [14] And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. [15] But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, [16] To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: [17] Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. [18] Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

A true Biblical Apostle has an ability to establish the truth of doctrine by the Spirit not based upon the teachings of men; and can establish the truth of the doctrines of Scripture, that study alone by pastors, elders, and teachers, only produce more questions and divisions. Paul revealed truth and understanding not previously taught. Jesus said:

John 16:12
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

Do we really believe the God who increased and communicated a revelation under the administration of Prophets in writing for 2500 + years said all there was to say under the administration of the Apostles in only 60 years? Even after 2000 years of study, the church is more divided than ever. The voice of Apostles, who have the gift of understanding, is needed now more than ever.

Mark 12:27
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

2 Tim. 2:2
And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

Even Paul understood that committing the truth to books was not enough! There must be living men who can communicate the revelation to each generation. I know the concept of 'Sola Scriptura' is greatly honored here. I hold the Scripture in the highest regard. However, the scripture says:

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

When handling the Scripture all voices are not equal! For example, a wife's voice is not ultimately equal with that of her husband's... Paul said:

1 Cor. 14:37
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

"Of course! that was Paul!" Without current men of Apostolic gifting, the words of Paul now bring as much confusion as understanding to the body as a whole. Yes, it will take relationship and faith, but only a return to the way it was done in the "first century" church will restore unity of the faith. Apostles are not to be exalted above Christ, but if a husband following God is to be followed, and we believe it to be so, then the gifts and callings of the church should be followed as well.

As to "having to have seen Jesus" to be an Apostle, Paul was called to be an Apostle from his mother's womb; had not seen Jesus; even when knocked off the horse, he was struck blind and did not 'see' Jesus at that time. Many claim to have 'seen' Jesus, but they were not called to hold the office of an Apostle. Many "see, yet do not see..." It is the call and choice of God that trumps all!

To sum it up, I believe that God can and does still call and gift men as Prophets and Apostles just as he did in the Bible. Most have no trouble accepting a claim of the calling on an individual as a Pastor, or Evangelist, or Teacher. Yet, they cringe at the idea that an individual may be called to be a Prophet or Apostle. Many today are claiming the title of Apostle as an office of administration, or a title of honor, but the gifting of understanding and revelation is not present; this is error! I repeat: The office of an Apostle is not a promotion, or something earned. It is a calling... and gifted by God with certain attributes just like all the other gifts and callings within the church.

Luke 11:49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:

I may lose some here, but there were women who were Prophets and Judges. How can we rightfully 'draw the line' for women in ministry? A woman may hold any office, and have any gift or calling EXCEPT THAT of a HUSBAND / FATHER, or an APOSTLE; and then she may operate only under the approval and supervision of her husband, and a 'higher' spiritual authority who is male.


1Cor. 11:1-10 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. 2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. 3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

1Tim 2:11-14 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.


Many accuse Paul of contradiction here, in the least; and of woman-hating, in the extreme. For it was also Paul who wrote Gal. 3: 28, “There is neither Jew not Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Can these seemingly contradictory statements harmonize?

First, in regards to there being “neither male nor female” in Christ, we must distinguish between benefits of the Kingdom of God, and authority in the Kingdom of God. The benefits of the Kingdom are for all! Eternal life, healing, daily provision, deliverance, etc., are for all to share by faith! Just as in a home, the children and parents partake of the comforts of the home. In the Kingdom, the benefits are for all to share according to faith; but the authority is by the will of God. In the home, the children should enjoy the same food and shelter the parents do; but not the same authority. It is a principle of God that:

“the head of the woman is the man"

"For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

"he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man."

"nor to usurp authority over the man,”


It has been noted that although the head of every man is Christ, every man is not the head of every woman! Each woman should be subject to her own husband. The Kingdom of God is to be established for the purpose of helping the home be established in the things of God, to raise Godly seed (children)! Each household is a miniature Kingdom of God in itself. The Kingdom of God should be a household on a larger scale!

The phrase “ought the woman to have power on her head” means to be under authority. God said from the fall in the garden, that her desire would be to her husband, and he would rule over her. (Gen. 3:16) Satan deceived Eve, but not Adam. Adam, not Eve, was responsible for sin passing to all men. Authority carries with it responsibility! Even if you renounce or delegate your authority, you cannot renounce your responsibility! In the Kingdom of God, as in the home, God holds the man responsible, and to him is given the final authority. Of course, responsibility for those under your charge is limited to their submission to your authority and instruction. (A husband can only be responsible if the wife and children will follow his instruction. A Pastor is worthless if the congregation does not accept that his message is given from God. )

Matthew 10:41
He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward;


Spiritually and physically the man is made different than the woman. “he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.” You could say that, in a sense, the man was made in God's image; and the woman was made in man's image. It is not proper for the woman to be the final authority!

The key phrase is “nor to usurp authority over the man.” Some have erroneously placed the emphasis on “I suffer not a woman to teach.” This had more of a local application than the underlying PRINCIPLE that a woman must not usurp authority over the man . In the Garden of Eden, Eve acted without her husband’s authority in partaking of the fruit! This is why a woman must be under higher spiritual authority at all times in the Kingdom of God! Yes, Adam sinned also; but he was not deceived, she was. For “this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.” It was an angel (Lucifer) that deceived Eve; but he did not deceive Adam! This is why: There cannot be a woman apostle.

In the Old Testament, Deborah was a Prophet and a judge of Israel; but I am confident that she needed, and had, her husband’s consent; and that was a different dispensation, the Apostolic ministry had not yet been given. Pricilla, with her husband Aquila, spent time with Paul, and took part in the teaching of Apollos. (Acts 18: 26) Philip, one of the original deacons, “had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy.” (Acts 21: 9)

Most churches make one of two decisions: either they allow women to participate in the pulpit ministries, or they don't. Both views are incorrect. Properly a woman may hold any office in the Kingdom of God (with her husbands permission, if she is married) except two, i.e.: that of a husband/father (in the home)... or that of his spiritual counterpart in the church... an Apostle.

1Cor. 4:14-15 I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you. 15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers:

 

[Quartus]

In Acts 1, we are told that Apostles needed to have seen the risen Christ and been witness to his life.

There is much debate about whether the appointment of Matthias as recorded in Acts 1 was correct.
Why did the apostles feel it was essential to choose someone to replace Judas, and why were they so keen to only appoint one and only one? Acts 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.
The psalm quoted two verses earlier might have been enough, but perhaps it was also because Jesus had said Mat 19:28 Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Some say the casting of lots (Acts 1:26) to appoint Matthias was evidence of how the early ecclesia operated.
Others that they gave the Lord (v24) a choice, but only a choice of two options that they had already selected themselves, which was not valid. Nothing else is heard of Matthias, and later Christ elected Saul (Paul) as his chosen vessel (Acts 9:15). The conclusion of that line of reasoning is that Paul, and not Matthias, was the twelfth apostle. Jesus had pointed out that he chose all his apostles personally (John 6:70).

It seems to me that considering Acts 1 raises for our consideration that there never were, are or ever will be, more than 12 tribes of Israel, twelve thrones from which they will be judged, or twelve apostles who will judge them.

In any event, nothing in the formative years of the early church (recorded or not) appears to have changed the mind of the Lord since the days of the Gospels: Rev 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

 

[Jim an Apostle]

There is never an indication in Scripture that the appointment of Matthias was not accepted, or ordained by the Spirit. The Scripture (inspired by the Holy Spirit) recorded the failure of Peter in eating with the Jews after walking in the freedom of eating with the gentiles. You would think that if all the Apostles messed up in the appointment of Matthias, that such error might be important enough to record?

Little beyond legend is known of most of the Apostles. Even what the Scripture records is very minuscule in information. We don't know much about them at all. Paul did not indicate he was to be the last Apostle ever. Back to Ephesians, he asserts the need for all the ministry Gifts to continue till the church is perfected.

As long as new souls are added to the church, there will always be a need for all the offices of the church to function. The words even of Jesus are often twisted to wrong meanings. The church at large cannot agree on Paul’s teaching about the “husband of one wife.” If Paul were here, he could tell us what he meant. This comment is just one of many. Really almost every point of doctrine is contested in someway by those of great scholarship and good will. Education alone is not enough to find truth. God speaks to us according to our 'gift and calling.'

I think most men on this website would accept that premise in the leadership of their home. They would claim, and rightfully so, a 'revelation' greater than the wife they are to lead. Why would the household of faith and the assembly of the church be any different? In the body of Christ at large, and in each local body, there are different 'gifts and callings' that should be recognized and followed. If we stop at the Elder level we do not complete the body, or the Kingdom. A husband does not make a family alone. Paul said, “1st Apostles, 2nd Prophets, thirdly Teachers. “Why does the church run on Pastors? A Teacher could explain it better than a Pastor, but an Apostle would even be better! God called Prophets from the beginning; then Jesus added the Apostles. The Apostles could not have been just a temporary and short-term office. Yes, the 12 tribes will have Apostolic leadership, but I believe so will all other peoples and nations. So it would follow that there will be more than just 12. The reward of ruling the 12 tribes and having the foundation stones named after them is the result of being the first.

Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 

[Mojo]

Well, I do agree that there was no judgment on the decision to appoint Matthias, so we can't necessarily say it was wrong.

I am not even arguing for Paul to be the 12th Apostle. I think Paul knew the significance of having to be involved with, at the very least, the risen Christ. He makes a point to reference to it, and it the whole affair was written about in detail.

Could there have been 100 anointed Apostles at that time? Maybe. There were a lot of people who had seen the risen Christ. I just think we need to be careful how we use the term apostle and presume it means what we think it means.

 

[Quartus]

Well seems to me that there were
12 for most of the Gospels
12 "apostles of the Lamb" when Revelation was given
12 "apostles of the Lamb" in the future that Revelation refers to.
So we need to establish that there would be more "apostles of the Lamb" at any other time.

Jesus is called an apostle in Heb 3:1 but its meaning is one sent, just as Malak is the Hebrew word for angel and Malak means messenger.
So John the Baptist was "sent" (apostellō) John 1:6 and he was a malak (messenger, or "angel") as was Jesus
Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

So admittedly we could get to more than 12 "apostles" but not really in the sense that we are expecting when we make reference to the NT apostles "of the Lamb".

Paul is very sparing with his use of the "apostle" - if there were 100 and if it mattered why didn't he use one of them?
1Co_1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,
2Co_1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,
Gal 1:1-2 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead And all the brethren which are with me
Col_1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother,

I think Rev 21:14 is more useful than trying to prove that Paul is the 12th apostle, though personally I've never thought it might be anyone else.

 

[Quartus]

The Scripture (inspired by the Holy Spirit) recorded the failure of Peter in eating with the Jews after walking in the freedom of eating with the gentiles. You would think that if all the Apostles messed up in the appointment of Matthias, that such error might be important enough to record?

Jim, we know lots of things are not recorded, and also that there are lots of things that are not recorded plainly but left for us to think about and work out ourselves.
Pro 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

I am afraid I would use the failure of Peter the Apostle in another way: if Peter, who was an Apostle, could fail, what exactly is the advantage in being an Apostle anyway?

I regard the NT as primarily written, and even in some cases primarily spoken, to the first century brethren and sisters before the NT scriptures were completed. This needed special "gifts" for a limited period. But even so the apostle Paul who was able to claim to be amongst the "chiefest" of the apostles (2Co 12:11) only appealed to the scriptures that they had
Act 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:

So I would say that being an "apostle" in NT terms is no guarantee of infallibility, nor did it permit any divergence from the law and the prophets.
The apostles were, like John the Baptist, and even Jesus, messengers, and ones sent.
There is nothing to stop an ordinary brother or sister fulfilling those roles, just as an ordinary Israelite (male or female) could take the Nazarite vow and voluntarily become like the High Priest (though obviously not performing the priestly duties).
But everybody, whoever they are and whatever their office, even the chiefest of the apostles, has to speak according
Isa_8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Sola scripture, and scripture sola.

 

[Quartus]

I think most men on this website would accept that premise in the leadership of their home. They would claim, and rightfully so, a 'revelation' greater than the wife they are to lead.

Well there is an awful lot on this web site about marriage! The main marriage in scripture (by miles) is Abraham and Sarah. Chapter after chapter records how a couple grew together in faith.

Abraham was not always in the lead.
He was ahead of Sarah over the birth of the promised seed. Sarah gave Abraham Hagar. Later when the promise of a seed through her was confirmed she laughed.
But at other times, Abraham put Sarah in danger and God had to intervene to rescue her, yet Sarah was faithful and manifested her faith in going along with Abraham's idea as her head. (1Pet3:5).

We know Sarah's advice to Abraham on at least one occasion was scripture:
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
The scripture was the record of the words spoken by Sarah. (Gen 21:10)

So it isn't just a question of brethren pulling rank but rather of leading by example, and showing that example is from the scriptures, and maybe listening when it is not.

So no, I claim only the same scriptures as my wife, and not any special revelation.
Equality of opportunity and responsibility, inequality of type.

 

[Jim an Apostle]

The scripture was the record of the words spoken by Sarah. (Gen 21:10)

Abraham did not do this because Sarah thought it a good idea. Abraham only acted after God intervened and told him to. Sarah did not have a revelation of the 'Plan of God' she was just jealous of Hagar. God incorporated this into His plan, but not as an example of following the lead of the wife. The example was about Isaac and Ishmael not about Abraham and Sarah.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

I truly believe the Church is lacking in apostolic leadership, and more so I believe that the authority of an apostle is greater than that of an elder. If Paul may appoint elders, and even delegate others to appoint elders, well, is it not the greater that appoints the lesser? Especially while among the Churches that he planted and nurtured, Paul seems to take on the role of an 'humble authoritarian'. I call to mind his tone with the Ephesians in acts 20 and his directives in Philemon.

I'm not too concerned with the number of Apostles present in the world at one time. I have no idea how God metes out these things as it seems the 12 were mostly concerned with those who were Jews and only Paul identified himself as 'apostle to the gentiles', but also 'one abnormally born'. I wonder just how many apostles Jesus would allocate for Gentiles in this age? Just an idle thought.

My main concern would be, when is a man an apostle? Once again, taking Paul at his word there are 'signs of an apostle' which he lists as "in all patience, in signs and wonders and miracles"

I have heard it said that an apostle is simply 'he who is sent out' and that any man sent out to preaching the gospel is therefore an apostle. In the same vein, I have heard that a prophet is merely 'he who proclaims the word of the Lord" and therefore anyone who boldly speaks the word of God is operating as a prophet. Obviously I have been in some fundamentalist churches. They don't outright 'deny' the gifts of God in the modern world all the time, but there's an awful lot of shrugging and gesturing when these topics come up.

But when we leave out the miraculous and the power of God from our definitions, the whole thing becomes squiffy. Really? REALLY? I didn't know squiffy was a real word. Spellchecker has no problem with it. huh.

Anyhow the squiffiness (hah! take THAT spell check!) comes in because an operative with the gift of evangelism can comfortably claim to be a prophet for boldly proclaiming the Kingdom. And if he TRAVELS at all to do it, voila!, he has become an apostle! By virtue of being diligent about his calling, his authority supersedes the elders!

I don't trust the idea of it. Everyone with any spiritual gift should be diligent about using it. The only spiritual gifts that I feel I could safely recognize as evidence of an apostle are signs, miracles and wonders.

Soooo.... I suppose my definition, such as it is would be 'A man sent to do the work of an apostle (which truthfully is much more than evangelism alone) whom God is endorsing with the authority to work signs, miracles and wonders"

 

[Jim an Apostle]

if Peter, who was an Apostle, could fail, what exactly is the advantage in being an Apostle anyway?

Parents, Pastors, Husbands, Elders, Prophets, Teachers, and on and on, are also not infallible; so I guess we don't need any of them, either. We are down to passing out Bibles and going home. Oh! That would be forsaking the assembly though, wouldn't it? Paul could not show a more excellent way and how can we then trust any of the Scripture? It was all written by fallible men and translated by more fallible men.

You wouldn't recommend for a mother to raise her children without giving them the advantage of her experience and wisdom, would you? (She is fallible you know.) Should fathers not teach to the best of their ability?

Proverbs 22:6
Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

So, we are commanded to teach and train our children, in spite of our fallibility. Authority and responsibility is not evaded due to fallibility. God placed His Kingdom in the hands of fallible men!

John 17:18
As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.

John 13:20
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

1 Cor. 12:28
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.

Matthew 10:40-41
He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. [41] He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward.

Matthew 10:40-41
He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. [41] He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophet's reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a righteous man shall receive a righteous man's reward.

The Prophet's reward here is the benefit one receives from the Prophet's ministry. This principle applies to all levels of ministry. To receive the benefit a ministry has to offer, one must accept the person and the gift that the person carries. You asked what is the benefit of an Apostle's ministry. It is better understanding, clearer instruction, and more accurate doctrine (in spite of fallibility). It is Spiritual covering on the same order as is provided by parents to children, or a husband to a wife.

 

[Quartus]

Abraham did not do this because Sarah thought it a good idea. Abraham only acted after God intervened and told him to. Sarah did not have a revelation of the 'Plan of God' she was just jealous of Hagar. God incorporated this into His plan, but not as an example of following the lead of the wife.

The inspired apostle tells us in writing it was scripture.
Gal 4:30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.
Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Gen 21:10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.

The inspired apostle tells us how God intervened and told Abraham to do so - through scripture, through Sarah.

We can listen to the scripture prophesied by Caiaphas, hopefully without being "led" by him in his efforts to destroy the Christ (John 11:49-52). Otherwise, why is his prophecy preserved for us to read?

 

[Quartus]

The example was about Isaac and Ishmael not about Abraham and Sarah

If we accept that it is about Isaac and Ishmael then however can we claim it is not about their mothers?
Gal 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

The Jewish slur on Jesus was Who is your father? Abraham was our father, who is yours?
Joh 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Joh 8:41 We be not born of fornication;
The NT retort, properly is expressed by the inspired apostle for us in Gal 4:21-31, is along the lines: Don't bother about who your father is, the real issue is "Who is your mother?"

In being led by Caiaphas &Co to reject Christ, the son of the promise, as Isaac was (v28), the Jews who were actually so proud of being the descendants of Sarah, behaved not like the seed of Sarah but like the seed of Hagar.

Abraham did not want to divorce Hagar, but when Ismael as a youth mocked the true heir (and one can only wonder who had taught him to do that if not his mother Hagar) he lost his inheritance, or at least that part of it that would have fully included him in the promises to Abraham. We like Ismael have to acknowledge the true son of promise, the Lord Jesus Christ before we can be saved by being fully included in the promise. If we reject the true son of promise, then he will reject us.

Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
Joh 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

But let the inspired apostle finish the argument for us where the scripture finishes it, with a reference to Sarah:
Gal 4:31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

 

[Quartus]

Parents, Pastors, Husbands, Elders, Prophets, Teachers, and on and on, are also not infallible; so I guess we don't need any of them, either. We are down to passing out Bibles and going home. Oh! That would be forsaking the assembly though, wouldn't it?

Jim you are saying that NT times are replicated today. Would you therefore also agree then that it would have been better if some had just handed out Bibles and gone home instead of teaching error?
For would it then not follow that there would also be some today that fall into the following condemnation:
Mat_23:15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

or from Paul
Act 20:29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
Act 20:30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Act 20:31 Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.
Act 20:32 And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.

The antidote to this situation is the sola scripture and scripture sola.

We are warned to beware of false teachers and false prophets
2Pe_2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

We are warned to beware even of "miracles"
Rev_13:14 And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
Rev_16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.
Rev_19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

The antidote to deceivers is always scripture,
2Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
2Ti 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

You argue for the times of the New Testament before the scriptures were completed by the LAST message of the Apostle and High Priest of our profession Christ Jesus (Heb 3:1).
But Jesus clearly told us at the end of the New Testament when he himself was bringing it to its conclusion:
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

 

[Jim an Apostle]

If we accept that it is about Isaac and Ishmael then however can we claim it is not about their mothers?

I get the analogy and your explanation of it is good. However the point is that the example is not about Abraham following Sarah as an authority or as an equal. He only acted when God directed him to.

 

[Jim an Apostle]

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

According to my red letter edition, these words are not the words of Jesus. However, if they were, they specifically refer to the words of the book of this prophecy; this warning applies to the book of Revelation, not to the other books of the Bible. Technically, according to this instruction, wouldn’t it be wrong to add the other books of the Bible to this one?

I guess you feel that the compilation of the Scriptures in the fourth century was completely inspired. How about:

Apocrypha
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

. . . significant scholarly doubts and disagreements about the nature of the Apocrypha continued for centuries and even into Trent,[35][36][37] which provided the first infallible definition of the Catholic canon in 1546.[38][39] This canon came to see appropriately 1,000 years of nearly uniform use by the majority, even after the 11th-century schism that separated the church into the branches known as the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.


In the 16th century, the Protestant reformers challenged the canonicity of the books and partial-books found in the surviving Septuagint but not in the Masoretic Text. In response to this challenge, after the death of Martin Luther (February 8, 1546) the ecumenical Council of Trent officially ("infallibly") declared these books (called "deuterocanonical" by Catholics) to be part of the canon in April, 1546 A.D. While the Protestant Reformers rejected the parts of the canon that were not part of the Hebrew Bible, they included the four New Testament books Luther held as doubtful canonicity along with the Apocrypha in his non-binding canon (though most were separately included in his bible,[4] as they were in some editions of the KJV bible until 1947).[40] Protestantism therefore established a 66 book canon with the 39 books based on the ancient Hebrew canon, along with the traditional 27 books of the New Testament. Protestants also rejected the Catholic term "deuterocanonical" for these writings, preferring to apply the term "apocryphal" which was already in use for other early and disputed writings.

Was the council of Trent the proper cannon of Scripture? Maybe it was Luther who was right? ...or later Protestants? Or what about the Rabbis who consider the oral traditions as in inspired; are they right? Should the Mishna and the Talmud be included? Ah! It was the King James translators who were right?

Are we to worship the writings? Are we to worship the book? God’s authority is not in books, but rather in men of faith. The ‘book’ will not heal you, or cast out a demon, or save you. If so, which version should we use? Must we learn Hebrew and Greek to ‘know’ the word of God? Then, we must decide which version of the Hebrew or Greek to use. When the Ethiopian Eunuch who had ‘the book’ was searching for truth, God sent him Philip! Philip, who saw him with a ‘book’ ... Scripture ... did not ignore him, did not tell him to study harder. Did not argue the point that all he need was the book. No, the Scripture is plain! He needed someone to explain it to him. He was not a stupid man. Phillip did not rebuke him for laziness. Phillip simply explained Christ to him, and he was saved. The Scripture says:

Romans 10:14-15
How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? [15] And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

1 Cor. 1:21
For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

The Scripture does not say, “Just pass out books.” We are commanded:

Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

The Kingdom is not just a book, no more than the United States is just the Constitution. The United States constitution is only as good as the men and women who follow it. The Scripture alone (Sola Scriptura) is only as good and the people who use it... in a right way.

Hebrews 4:2
For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

As great as the Scripture is, it is not enough alone. You may say:

Isaiah 55:11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Guess what:

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

People perish every day. A good car mechanic can take a manual and probably fix your car. Some people could not! If all voices are equal, then there are no callings. Then:

1 Cor. 12:28-30
And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. [29] Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles? [30] Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?

...is now meaningless. Will you also do away with healings, and governments, and tongues?

The question is then, what is the Kingdom? Is it a book? We are commanded to seek it first! Like with the Ethiopian Eunuch, the book is of little value without someone to teach it! Ah! The Holy Spirit will teach it! No, the Holy Spirit sent Phillip.

John 6:28-29
Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? [29] Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

Is this talking about Jesus alone?

John 20:21
Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

Matthew 10:40
He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Yes! It is faith in Jesus that saves, but the only way to receive Jesus is to receive the testimony of those who proclaim Him. Can it be done through a book? Yes! If one accepts the testimony of the author as valid. However, part of God’s plan is to establish a Kingdom. He is King of Kings... but not the ‘only’ king... we also, are “Kings and Priests.”

Luke 10:16
He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

To reject one sent of God in the capacity of their gift and calling (if they have one) is akin to rejecting Christ, Himself. If Scripture alone was ‘the Answer,’ Jesus would have hand-written a book for us. Instead, He used fallible men to give testimony, and doctrine. And He calls all to witness... and some he calls to give leadership and instruction to the living Church. You obviously already believe this... you sound like a Teacher to me; otherwise for a man who is so set on 'sola Scriptura,' you are sure spending a lot of time trying to give instruction to people who already have a book. However, I welcome the conversation. I am a man who has studied the Scriptures from childhood, pastor a church full-time, and have, and do still, continue to search Scripture for truth.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

This thread has taken some interesting turns. I am very curious to see where it goes.

One of the thoughts that come to mind is that Paul in 1 Cor 9 gives several things that he considers criteria for apostleship.

• That he is free. (Standing on his own? Directly under authority from Christ?)
• That he has seen the Lord.
• That the Church at Corinth was the fruit of his work.
• The church was a seal or proof of apostleship.

Romans 1 gives us a couple of other criteria

• A servant of Jesus Christ
• Called to be an apostle
• Separated to this ministry

There were also

• Visions and revelations 2 Cor 12:1
• Ministers of God &
• Stewards of the mysteries of God 1 Cor 4:1
• The possibility that he was only the Apostle to some 1 Cor 9:2
• The signs of an apostle was noted as patience, signs, wonders and mighty deeds (dynamis = Spiritual Power, ability not authority) 2 Cor 12:12
• Revelations by the Spirit of things not known or at least not understood previously from scripture. Eph 3:5

My main concern would be, when is a man an apostle? Once again, taking Paul at his word there are 'signs of an apostle' which he lists as "in all patience, in signs and wonders and miracles"
The only spiritual gifts that I feel I could safely recognize as evidence of an apostle are signs, miracles and wonders.

I think this is the main question. Until you know who an apostle is, what difference does it make how you respond to them.

The inspired apostle tells us how God intervened and told Abraham to do so - through scripture, through Sarah

.
The question for this is, was it scripture when she said it, or did it become a part of Scripture because it was germane to the story. If it only became part of Scripture because of the story, centuries later, Sarah's authority becomes a mute point. This argument becomes circular reasoning. Abraham didnt listen and follow because it was written. As Jim pointed out, he obeyed God because God told him directly, not because the word came through Sarah or Scripture.


@Quartus, I'm not sure that I agree with the typical interpretation of Rev 22:18 & 19 as given above. Typically it is used to justify Revelation as the last message to man from God, when in reality, the message is limited to the book of this prophecy, Revelation of John. The only thing that can be inferred from this passage, is don't add to this book, written by John, about his revelation, not that God is silent to His people and has nothing more to say or reveal. This instance does not stand alone in Scripture. Moses states the same thing in Deuteronomy as many on the site have shown, however, if Moses is interpreted in the same way, we would only have 5 books in our "Scripture". The rest of them must obviously be uninspired. Definitely not from God. This would also mean that John is disobeying Moses.
Before everybody beats me up, OBVIOUSLY, this understanding has no basis.

Also of note is that Barnabas is listed as an Apostle in Acts 14:14. This, along with the mention of Matthias as being listed with the apostles, is two witnesses that there were more than just 12, (though personally, I'm not sure that Matthias counts). Any way you look at it, there are at least 13 (12 - Judas = 11 + Paul + Barnabas = 13). It is also interesting that when you look at 1 Cor 4:6-9, it appears that Paul is defining "myself and Apollos" as the "us" and "we" of verse 8. In verse 9, Paul continues the thought using "us". "For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles". Does this make Apollos the 14th? Maybe, maybe not. I'm just saying that the case for there to be no apostles after Christ has big holes in it.
Romans 16:7 also has another apparent instance. Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. This word "note" is the Strongs #1978 episemos which means to be eminent or notable, causing the passage to read, Salute Andronicus and Junia, . . . .who are eminent and notable among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. The alternate interpretation, that they were simply known or had a reputation that was known to the apostles, seems to simply fall flat once you understand that the Greek word used means that they were "super"(epi) "marked" or "distinguished" among the apostles, not to the apostles.

Also interesting is that the city "Mystery Babylon" of Rev 18:20 was a city in the future at the point that John wrote Revelation. This city is noted as persecuting apostles and prophets and the destruction is Gods vengeance on the city for this persecution. If John is the last apostle, and the city is future, how could it persecute someone that doesnt exist?

All of this being said, I am still very skeptical of claims of Apostleship. I can easily see the case for the possibility, but have yet to see the signs, wonders and "dynamis" except as a means of monetizing Christ or seeking authority over an existing assembly. The letter from Barnabas characterizes these men as Christ mongers. Salesmen who use Christ as their stock in trade.

 

[Quartus]

re my use of
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

According to my red letter edition, these words are not the words of Jesus. However, if they were, they specifically refer to the words of the book of this prophecy; this warning applies to the book of Revelation, not to the other books of the Bible.

OK I will concede that it might have better to use
Act 20:27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you ALL the counsel of God.

So my understanding is still that we have everything we need for doctrine and prophecy complete in our Bible, and that the scriptures we have are alone sufficient to
- to make us wise unto salvation and to perfect us (2Tim 3:15-17)

and particularly since Revelation teaches us that Rev_19:10 the testimony of Jesus IS the spirit of prophecy.

Some may help us, but some may hinder us in our understanding, and we are warned
1Jn_4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
Act 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

So if I am reading it correctly, this tells us the Bereans believed because they checked the scriptures to make sure the apostle had got it right, not because they heard if from an apostle.

 

[Quartus]

Also interesting is that the city "Mystery Babylon" of Rev 18:20 was a city in the future at the point that John wrote Revelation. This city is noted as persecuting apostles and prophets and the destruction is Gods vengeance on the city for this persecution. If John is the last apostle, and the city is future, how could it persecute someone that doesnt exist?

I'm afraid I don't have much time as I am out this evening but I think this theme starts here
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
the seed of the woman is the chaste virgin bride of Christ Rev_1:9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
The seed of the serpent is the line of Cain-Nimrod-Shinar-Babylon. the woman with cup
Jer_51:7 Babylon hath been a golden cup in the LORD'S hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunken of her wine; therefore the nations are mad.
the symbol of the mother of harlots is the continuation of the seed of the serpent from Genesis doing the same things as the Babylon of old
Rev_17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication

The apostacy in the church was already at work in the NT times 1Jn_2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
It is both a collective term for individuals but later this would be a system with a figurehead, a leader, and would continue until destroyed by Christ (2Thess 2:1-12)

And it is very much part of this argument, because it is a religious system 2Th 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

And we are warned both to try the spirits and to search the scriptures
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The battle between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent made it through to Revelation and will still be raging when Christ returns.

Rev_19:20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

If we can identify the miracle working false prophet, we will know whose false prophecy we need to avoid! but I think it would be best if this was developed forwards from Genesis, rather than backwards from Revelation.