-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
"Offices" of the Church
- Thread starter Jim an Apostle
- Start date
Romans 1:13
Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.
Paul hadn't to Rome yet when he wrote an Apostolic letter to them.
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.
2 Cor. 2:9
For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
Looks to me like Paul is exercising authority long after starting the church. even to the 2nd letter.
Now I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that oftentimes I purposed to come unto you, (but was let hitherto,) that I might have some fruit among you also, even as among other Gentiles.
Paul hadn't to Rome yet when he wrote an Apostolic letter to them.
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.
2 Cor. 2:9
For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things.
Looks to me like Paul is exercising authority long after starting the church. even to the 2nd letter.
Is there an assumption that once you have an office calling or gift, you will always have it?
Can I have a gifting removed from me, or disqualify myself?
What If I no longer exercise my gift?...
At what point do I say I was an artist ( I painted twenty years ago)
Vs
I am an artist ( I painted twenty years ago)
Do I have the same authority if nolonger practicing?
Can I have a gifting removed from me, or disqualify myself?
What If I no longer exercise my gift?...
At what point do I say I was an artist ( I painted twenty years ago)
Vs
I am an artist ( I painted twenty years ago)
Do I have the same authority if nolonger practicing?
One of my pet theories, but that's all it is, is that Paul was the rich one ruler who asked Christ what he do to be saved. In that case he did have a direct commission from Christ but obviously that is wild speculation on my part.
I am never comfortable with dispensationalism but I have to say I have never seen modern apostleship work either.
You were winning me over Jim until you implied that Paul's work wasn't done and implied that there was more universal revelation to come and that modern apostles would be delivering it.
That may not have been where you were going but that is the next step. And if that were the case then the Muslims and the LDS and even the much maligned Roman Catholics would agree with you.
Is there more church wide revelation to come?
Ditto
With knowledge and revelation comes responsibility. However, as best I can tell, the responsibility is focused on sharing the new knowledge or revelation or nugget that has been unearthed. No authority is necessary or required to reveal truth or wisdom or hidden knowledge or revelation. What difference does it make if someone else places no value on a "revelation". They must give account for themselves. IF we have knowledge, revelation, wisdom or new understanding, our responsibility is limited to whether or not we shared this with others.
The Apostles all had new information to share with the world, it was the Good News of a Saviour! They had authority to share because they were the authority on the subject. They had a responsibility to share, but had no authority over those they were sharing with unless they chose to follow. If they chose not to follow, the Apostles had no other responsibility than to share the Good News. They were obligated to do so. However, they were not obligated to cast their pearls before swine, so the deeper mysteries were reserved for followers - of Christ.
Though I can see the possibility for the existence of present day Apostles, I question the necessity. If we are truly at the end of an age or era, it would seem that there would be the need rather for a prophet, like Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the sons and the sons to the fathers.
If it's true that knowledge is increasing exponentially (as Daniel was told it would) I don't see how even that necessitates Apostleship. Knowledge revealed and found would not require one to have the office and calling of an Apostle to fulfill their responsibility
The Apostles all had new information to share with the world, it was the Good News of a Saviour! They had authority to share because they were the authority on the subject. They had a responsibility to share, but had no authority over those they were sharing with unless they chose to follow. If they chose not to follow, the Apostles had no other responsibility than to share the Good News. They were obligated to do so. However, they were not obligated to cast their pearls before swine, so the deeper mysteries were reserved for followers - of Christ.
Though I can see the possibility for the existence of present day Apostles, I question the necessity. If we are truly at the end of an age or era, it would seem that there would be the need rather for a prophet, like Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the sons and the sons to the fathers.
If it's true that knowledge is increasing exponentially (as Daniel was told it would) I don't see how even that necessitates Apostleship. Knowledge revealed and found would not require one to have the office and calling of an Apostle to fulfill their responsibility
So now we are back to:
Judges 21:25
In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
And this verse:
Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
So again, are you saying this verse has NO practical application for today?!
The idea of Apostles is viewed with skepticism and almost dismissed out of hand... Prophets, the same. Do we accept there is any validity to the office of a Teacher or a Pastor?
Are we really reduced to Husbands as the only voice of God with authority; and that, only in his own house, and the church is every man for himself?
You and others have placed Paul (a man who killed Christians) now on such a pedestal, that no one today could ever operate as he did. If we cannot attain unto Paul, how will we ever attain unto Christ... and do even “greater works?”
The church has glorified the life of Paul, and distains the life of one who has never rebelled against the Gospel. We love Paul, and like Joseph’s brethren, despise Joseph. Will there never be any form of a Kingdom until Jesus returns? Well maybe, in the form of a family; but certainly not in the form of a ‘Body?’ What do we do with:
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.
Is there such a thing a “new revelation”? Technically, NO! All revelation comes from God. He knew all truth from the beginning. Do we know all truth yet? Can we say all truth is contained in our book? That’s crazy! The question might be, does the “Book” contain all the truth God wants us to know? Or, does God have some truth that is only reserved for certain people? Does not God want us all in (his body) included in:
Ephes. 4:12-13
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:
John 16:12
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
1 Cor. 15:51
Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
Paul is the one who revealed the concept of “rapture” ...the living being changed without death.
Is there more ‘church wide’ revelation to come? I hope so!! So far, most of what I see is disagreement over what has already been revealed. There is probably not one doctrine of the Church that is not contested in some way. We need “revelation” just to understand what has been revealed! I do not believe all of the “Many things” have been revealed yet! Don’t you still have some questions that have not been “revealed?” We say we believe the Scripture. How about:
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Jesus placed His followers under the direction and leadership of Apostles. Why would He now go back to just Prophets, or just Teachers, or just Pastors, or just husbands?
The first Apostles had the ability to give “new??” (actually, just reveal things previously hidden) revelation to the Church.
Can you give Scripture why, or when, that process ceased? You obviously see flaws in the Catholic church. What, or who, gave them the authority to determine the cannon of scripture and to close it?
God’s preferred method of operation is a Kingdom. He can, and sometimes does, give direct instruction. Sometimes, He tests our faith and sends a messenger. Is that process over? Is not the husband still the messenger of God to his wife? Are not Parents supposed to be messengers of God to their children?
The truths of the Scripture are open for all; but are only by choice received. Any ‘new’ revelation, (i.e.: uncovering of truth not previously accepted, or known) might only be accepted by those who accepted the Apostle giving it. Peter indicated that the words of Paul were hard to understand. Peter may have struggled with some of them, himself. Peter did accept Paul’s gift.
When the church and the world went into the “Dark Ages,” it took over 1000 years for Martin Luther and others to make a strong enough case starting with “the just shall live by faith” to begin a movement strong enough to rival the domination of the Roman Church. No doubt, God always had the “7,000” who did not bow to Baal; but they had operated in the shadows, and we know little about them.
Luther received his revelation from the Spirit. It wasn’t being taught in his circles. Was Luther an Apostle? I do not know. He was probably at least called to the office of a Teacher. Was his revelation “new?” No! But it seemed ‘new’ to the established church. Did he challenge the established thinking of the day? Yes! As time progressed, the Protestant viewpoints were expanded and enlarged. Each idea seemed ‘new.’ Some clung to the ‘old’ when every ‘new’ idea was added to this new way of looking at truth. Were some of these reformers Apostles?? Maybe!
How did we of BF come to the understanding of PM? For some, they searched the Scripture and discovered truth! Was it ‘new truth??’ NO! Why was it revealed to them? It was in the realm of their domain as husbands and wives to make determinations concerning these things.
Every truth that has come to light since Luther has also been contaminated along the way, and rejected by some along the way: Baptism, Sanctification, Predestination, Eldership, the Pentecostal experience, the Positive Confession message, Prosperity teaching, Deliverance, Prophecy teachers, Hebrew roots / Messianic movement, the Kingdom message. Most who espouse these ideas have some truth to their message, but also some error. Each of these concepts has seen some rejection. Sometimes, because they saw some errors and chose to ‘play it safe,’ they reject the whole idea! Some have rejected ‘new’ ideas just because they were ‘new’ (actually, just different from what they had been taught.)
Jesus said:
Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
We feel safe in the realm of tradition. They put buggy whips on cars for a while. Silly huh?
We at BF have broke with tradition to return to old truth! We should not be afraid of truth, whether new or old... if it is true. There are no ‘new’ revelations; there are just things, as of yet, we haven’t understood. Should the church at large embrace them? If they are true, they should. What is the source of truth? Jesus! Jesus is building a Kingdom! To honor and embrace that Kingdom is the fastest way to find truth!
We believe the “translation from life to immortality” will occur because Paul taught it. Was it ‘new’ revelation? ...or, just the revealing of something not seen before? The only reason we fear ‘new,’ or ‘more,’ truth is because we become vulnerable in the process.
Ever drive a standard shift car or truck? You start in 1st gear. Wheee! To go faster you must shift to second. That becomes scary, because you have to go to neutral, before you can go to second. Each time you advance in your understanding, you have to be willing to go to neutral. That is scary! What if you end up in neutral? What if you go to reverse by mistake? Better stay in first, or second gear; don’t take a chance... but is that God’s will for us as individuals, or as his Body, the Church?
Hebrews 6:1-3
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, [2] Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. [3] And this will we do, if God permit.
In the concept of ‘new’ revelation, I do not believe it is new to God. I do not believe it will contradict a proper understanding of Scripture. There is a difference between doctrine and conduct. Are there things that are true that we, or the church, have not understood, yet? What we consider ‘new’ will first, eliminate error; second, enlarge our understanding of what we think we know; and at times introduce us... yes... to ideas we had not previously considered.
Zec, you have my book on the Kingdom. I implore you to read it... at least read the beginning sections on the principles of the Kingdom, and the section toward the end on Apostles. You earlier had asked to know more about a church that would accept PM. Because they accept the concepts of the Kingdom and my office as an Apostle, they were able to make the leap out of cultural bias smoothly and easier than otherwise.
Judges 21:25
In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
And this verse:
Matthew 6:33
But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
So again, are you saying this verse has NO practical application for today?!
The idea of Apostles is viewed with skepticism and almost dismissed out of hand... Prophets, the same. Do we accept there is any validity to the office of a Teacher or a Pastor?
Are we really reduced to Husbands as the only voice of God with authority; and that, only in his own house, and the church is every man for himself?
You and others have placed Paul (a man who killed Christians) now on such a pedestal, that no one today could ever operate as he did. If we cannot attain unto Paul, how will we ever attain unto Christ... and do even “greater works?”
The church has glorified the life of Paul, and distains the life of one who has never rebelled against the Gospel. We love Paul, and like Joseph’s brethren, despise Joseph. Will there never be any form of a Kingdom until Jesus returns? Well maybe, in the form of a family; but certainly not in the form of a ‘Body?’ What do we do with:
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.
Is there such a thing a “new revelation”? Technically, NO! All revelation comes from God. He knew all truth from the beginning. Do we know all truth yet? Can we say all truth is contained in our book? That’s crazy! The question might be, does the “Book” contain all the truth God wants us to know? Or, does God have some truth that is only reserved for certain people? Does not God want us all in (his body) included in:
Ephes. 4:12-13
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:
John 16:12
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
1 Cor. 15:51
Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
Paul is the one who revealed the concept of “rapture” ...the living being changed without death.
Is there more ‘church wide’ revelation to come? I hope so!! So far, most of what I see is disagreement over what has already been revealed. There is probably not one doctrine of the Church that is not contested in some way. We need “revelation” just to understand what has been revealed! I do not believe all of the “Many things” have been revealed yet! Don’t you still have some questions that have not been “revealed?” We say we believe the Scripture. How about:
Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
Jesus placed His followers under the direction and leadership of Apostles. Why would He now go back to just Prophets, or just Teachers, or just Pastors, or just husbands?
The first Apostles had the ability to give “new??” (actually, just reveal things previously hidden) revelation to the Church.
Can you give Scripture why, or when, that process ceased? You obviously see flaws in the Catholic church. What, or who, gave them the authority to determine the cannon of scripture and to close it?
God’s preferred method of operation is a Kingdom. He can, and sometimes does, give direct instruction. Sometimes, He tests our faith and sends a messenger. Is that process over? Is not the husband still the messenger of God to his wife? Are not Parents supposed to be messengers of God to their children?
The truths of the Scripture are open for all; but are only by choice received. Any ‘new’ revelation, (i.e.: uncovering of truth not previously accepted, or known) might only be accepted by those who accepted the Apostle giving it. Peter indicated that the words of Paul were hard to understand. Peter may have struggled with some of them, himself. Peter did accept Paul’s gift.
When the church and the world went into the “Dark Ages,” it took over 1000 years for Martin Luther and others to make a strong enough case starting with “the just shall live by faith” to begin a movement strong enough to rival the domination of the Roman Church. No doubt, God always had the “7,000” who did not bow to Baal; but they had operated in the shadows, and we know little about them.
Luther received his revelation from the Spirit. It wasn’t being taught in his circles. Was Luther an Apostle? I do not know. He was probably at least called to the office of a Teacher. Was his revelation “new?” No! But it seemed ‘new’ to the established church. Did he challenge the established thinking of the day? Yes! As time progressed, the Protestant viewpoints were expanded and enlarged. Each idea seemed ‘new.’ Some clung to the ‘old’ when every ‘new’ idea was added to this new way of looking at truth. Were some of these reformers Apostles?? Maybe!
How did we of BF come to the understanding of PM? For some, they searched the Scripture and discovered truth! Was it ‘new truth??’ NO! Why was it revealed to them? It was in the realm of their domain as husbands and wives to make determinations concerning these things.
Every truth that has come to light since Luther has also been contaminated along the way, and rejected by some along the way: Baptism, Sanctification, Predestination, Eldership, the Pentecostal experience, the Positive Confession message, Prosperity teaching, Deliverance, Prophecy teachers, Hebrew roots / Messianic movement, the Kingdom message. Most who espouse these ideas have some truth to their message, but also some error. Each of these concepts has seen some rejection. Sometimes, because they saw some errors and chose to ‘play it safe,’ they reject the whole idea! Some have rejected ‘new’ ideas just because they were ‘new’ (actually, just different from what they had been taught.)
Jesus said:
Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.
We feel safe in the realm of tradition. They put buggy whips on cars for a while. Silly huh?
We at BF have broke with tradition to return to old truth! We should not be afraid of truth, whether new or old... if it is true. There are no ‘new’ revelations; there are just things, as of yet, we haven’t understood. Should the church at large embrace them? If they are true, they should. What is the source of truth? Jesus! Jesus is building a Kingdom! To honor and embrace that Kingdom is the fastest way to find truth!
We believe the “translation from life to immortality” will occur because Paul taught it. Was it ‘new’ revelation? ...or, just the revealing of something not seen before? The only reason we fear ‘new,’ or ‘more,’ truth is because we become vulnerable in the process.
Ever drive a standard shift car or truck? You start in 1st gear. Wheee! To go faster you must shift to second. That becomes scary, because you have to go to neutral, before you can go to second. Each time you advance in your understanding, you have to be willing to go to neutral. That is scary! What if you end up in neutral? What if you go to reverse by mistake? Better stay in first, or second gear; don’t take a chance... but is that God’s will for us as individuals, or as his Body, the Church?
Hebrews 6:1-3
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, [2] Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. [3] And this will we do, if God permit.
In the concept of ‘new’ revelation, I do not believe it is new to God. I do not believe it will contradict a proper understanding of Scripture. There is a difference between doctrine and conduct. Are there things that are true that we, or the church, have not understood, yet? What we consider ‘new’ will first, eliminate error; second, enlarge our understanding of what we think we know; and at times introduce us... yes... to ideas we had not previously considered.
Zec, you have my book on the Kingdom. I implore you to read it... at least read the beginning sections on the principles of the Kingdom, and the section toward the end on Apostles. You earlier had asked to know more about a church that would accept PM. Because they accept the concepts of the Kingdom and my office as an Apostle, they were able to make the leap out of cultural bias smoothly and easier than otherwise.
I judge any and all truths without considering the messenger.
What I am trying to say is that a title or a charismatic figure does not give me a leg up on accepting a truth that is offered me. I see no necessity for the official office, but I definitely see the necessity for truths that have been lost to be revealed.
Quite frankly, it is more YHWH's style to use the more obscure among us to bring these things through.
What I am trying to say is that a title or a charismatic figure does not give me a leg up on accepting a truth that is offered me. I see no necessity for the official office, but I definitely see the necessity for truths that have been lost to be revealed.
Quite frankly, it is more YHWH's style to use the more obscure among us to bring these things through.
Last edited:
I will not ever agree that there is anything to be added to scripture. It's called the last days for a reason. This is the last age. The end times prophecies will become clear when the time comes, there will always be individual words but there are mo more spiritual truths to be revealed. Paul said we should shun anyone that brings any gospel other than the one we've received. I am willing to accept that there is an office of apostle but not that they will add anything to the faith.
Just as pm was lately understood to have been in Scripture the whole time that it was not accepted by the Christian community, I believe that other understandings may be opened to us in these times.
The gospel delivered to me when I was younger was not the complete gospel that Paul was warning them not to add to. All I want is the full gospel that he delivered to them.
The gospel delivered to me when I was younger was not the complete gospel that Paul was warning them not to add to. All I want is the full gospel that he delivered to them.
At its basic level, Elder-ship would be basic spiritual maturity. In this sense, all are called to become Elders. Their purpose as a whole would be to lead others into Elder-ship, i.e., spiritual maturity. In a perfect world, it would be out of the pool of those who have achieved a basic level of spiritual maturity, one would find those who would then be eligible for marriage, or higher levels of ministry. There have been too many "babies having babies" in the world and in the church.
Interesting way of putting it. I like it.
But I might add that I think Eldership is more than just spiritual maturity, but it is the necessary first step.
Same here. I think using 'basic Eldership' to mean 'basic spiritual maturity' muddies the water a bit. Eldership carries a weight of responsibility and authority for which basic maturity is a prerequisite.
The temptation to carry it forward makes it weird, because then we get to the babies making babies bit. On the physical and worldly level, looking for 'eldership qualities' for a mate is cool and all, but wisdom is not so easily purchased for many. Obviously I'M epic and stand head and shoulders above my peers, but those other guys need wives too. The reason for getting married , according to Paul, is having 'inability to exercise self control' , which I take to mean, living a celibate life would cause undue stress to a sexually charged man. There are more men that cannot serve the Lord effectively as a single man then there are men who have attained a level of basic christian maturity that one may comfortably refer to as 'elder-like'.
On the spiritual level, well, when I think of making babies I primarily think of making disciples ; evangelism and teaching. Which once again it would be nice, and even profitable if all evangelists and teachers had spiritual maturity that approached that of an elder, but God doesn't work like that as far as I can see. I've seen him give out the gift of evangelism and teaching to some awful immature people, and even baby christians who haven't had the time to do much more than repent their sins and say the sinner's prayer. I believe He gives gifts to those who will do the work, and the responsibility to mature rests on every disciple without regard to gifting.
Another reason I'm uncomfortable with the verbiage is I don't really see 'basic eldership' equated with an undefined 'basic maturity' in scripture. I see an actual office with a fairly hefty list of requirements, which I would balk at calling 'basic'. I'm all for high standards, but if Titus 1:5-9 is basic, what is advanced?
Or if Titus is about 'full elder maturity', what things are we going to let drop off the list in order to create a 'basic level eldership'?
I think the concept of many are called, but few are chosen, has a place here somewhere. God calls some even from birth, but the maturity should kick in before ministry takes full force. Part of the problem is the church hasn't taught maturity as a prerequisite for ministry!.. at the very least, being submitted to proper spiritual authority. Just as we give beginning drivers a learner's permit, in order to learn to drive a car, the law requires a licensed driver to be on board to supervise. The minister should not just run without proper oversight; yet the church, in some circles, has allowed anyone to preach... regardless of any track record. I think it says something about not being a novice. Just having a gift is not always enough! Paul with all of his training still spent time maturing and confirming his new understanding before he began his ministry.