PDA

View Full Version : Do we have Apostles today?



steelcurtain76
Feb 21st 2011, 05:08 PM
"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 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" (Acts 1:22-23).

From what I read, there are two requirements:


1) company with Christ during His earthly ministry until His ascension, and

2) witness of the resurrected Lord. These were the qualifications which had to be met by the new twelfth apostle, who, as it turned out, was Matthias. Clearly, this eliminates any present day apostleship.
Even though Paul was not in the original 12, or probably not even present when they chose Matthias, Paul cited it in defense of his own apostleship: "Have I not seen Jesus Christ?" (I Corinthians 9:1).

My understanding from these verses is that no man can be an apostle who has not been a witness to the risen Lord.

I have met people who claim that they are Apostles. If you go according to the greek word (apostolos), with the word meaning.."an ambassador; one who is sent;." I can see where a person can claim they are "sent out", but I don't see where anyone in the present day church can fulfill any of the other qualifications of being an apostle.

I realize that others than the 12, such as Barnabas in Acts 14 were referred to Apostles, but even then, it may be possible/probable that he was a witness of the risen Lord.

Additionally, I had an interesting discussion with someone I met yesterday. She indicated that she has a friend, who is a woman, who is an Apostle. I have some serious questions about this. She referenced Junia in Romans 16:7, but from researching this verse, that seems to be a serious and unreasonable stretch of scripture.

RabbiKnife
Feb 21st 2011, 05:13 PM
Junia was certainly an apostle. Nothing in the text would hold otherwise.

Why would we believe there are no longer apostles? We still have pastors, teachers, evangelists....We still have prophets. Why would one gift that Christ said was necessary be eliminated from the mix?

There is nothing special or better about being an apostle than having the gift of helps, if that is what God called you to have or be.

True apostles never brag about their apostleship or their office. They never use it from a position of superiority or for monetary gain. The only time you will ever hear a true apostle even admit that they are one is when the establishment of the Gospel or a church is needed.

steelcurtain76
Feb 21st 2011, 06:00 PM
Junia was certainly an apostle. Nothing in the text would hold otherwise.

Why would we believe there are no longer apostles? We still have pastors, teachers, evangelists....We still have prophets. Why would one gift that Christ said was necessary be eliminated from the mix?

There is nothing special or better about being an apostle than having the gift of helps, if that is what God called you to have or be.

True apostles never brag about their apostleship or their office. They never use it from a position of superiority or for monetary gain. The only time you will ever hear a true apostle even admit that they are one is when the establishment of the Gospel or a church is needed.

I'm curious of your reasoning on Junia.

From what I read in Romans 16:7, does not imply at all that she was an Apostle. The words "of note" denotes those who are marked, designated, or distiniguished in any way...and in this case, among the apostles. All this expression implies is that Junia was known to the other apostles and that they were regarded by them as worthy of their affection and confidence.

There is no record of her appointment as an Apostle, the language itself does not lend itself to her being an apostle (see Romans 1:1, 1 Cor 1:1, 2 Cor 1:1, Col 1:1), the design of the office of Apostle was to bear witness to the life, death, resurrection, doctrine, and miracles of Christ (Acts 1:21-22, Acts 22:15).

Perhaps there is a difference in the sense of being an Apostle as the 12 were in comparison to someone who is merely "sent out".

RollTide21
Feb 21st 2011, 06:21 PM
I'm curious of your reasoning on Junia.

From what I read in Romans 16:7, does not imply at all that she was an Apostle. The words "of note" denotes those who are marked, designated, or distiniguished in any way...and in this case, among the apostles. All this expression implies is that Junia was known to the other apostles and that they were regarded by them as worthy of their affection and confidence.

There is no record of her appointment as an Apostle, the language itself does not lend itself to her being an apostle (see Romans 1:1, 1 Cor 1:1, 2 Cor 1:1, Col 1:1), the design of the office of Apostle was to bear witness to the life, death, resurrection, doctrine, and miracles of Christ (Acts 1:21-22, Acts 22:15).

Perhaps there is a difference in the sense of being an Apostle as the 12 were in comparison to someone who is merely "sent out".My NIV says:

7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among[d] the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

dan p
Feb 21st 2011, 06:29 PM
Hi steelcurtain76 , and Paul in Eph 4:11 , Pau; writing through the Holy Spirit , reveals that even today there are only the following callings , and they are , Apostles , some Prophets , some Evangelists , and some Pastors and teachers .

Jesus appointed the first 12 and the 11 , filled by the Holy Spirit picked the twelveth ,

Paul was Picked by Christ Himself in Acts 9:6 .

1 Tim 2:7 , " Wherefore I am ordained a Preacher , and an Apostle , ( I speak the truth in Christ and lie not ) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity ."

And there are more verses than this ,

But the question now is , are the Apostles in the Old Testament the same as in Eph 4:11 and what are there duties ? dan p

BroRog
Feb 21st 2011, 06:37 PM
"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 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" (Acts 1:22-23).

From what I read, there are two requirements:


1) company with Christ during His earthly ministry until His ascension, and

2) witness of the resurrected Lord. These were the qualifications which had to be met by the new twelfth apostle, who, as it turned out, was Matthias. Clearly, this eliminates any present day apostleship.
Even though Paul was not in the original 12, or probably not even present when they chose Matthias, Paul cited it in defense of his own apostleship: "Have I not seen Jesus Christ?" (I Corinthians 9:1).

My understanding from these verses is that no man can be an apostle who has not been a witness to the risen Lord.

I have met people who claim that they are Apostles. If you go according to the greek word (apostolos), with the word meaning.."an ambassador; one who is sent;." I can see where a person can claim they are "sent out", but I don't see where anyone in the present day church can fulfill any of the other qualifications of being an apostle.

I realize that others than the 12, such as Barnabas in Acts 14 were referred to Apostles, but even then, it may be possible/probable that he was a witness of the risen Lord.

Additionally, I had an interesting discussion with someone I met yesterday. She indicated that she has a friend, who is a woman, who is an Apostle. I have some serious questions about this. She referenced Junia in Romans 16:7, but from researching this verse, that seems to be a serious and unreasonable stretch of scripture.

There are no apostles of Jesus Christ today. While Apostle means "one who is sent" an apostle of Jesus Christ is one whom Jesus Christ sent out. We have scriptural support that Jesus sent out 11 men and Paul.

BroRog
Feb 21st 2011, 06:44 PM
My NIV says:

7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among[d] the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

The term "outstanding" is actually "well known". Paul isn't saying that Andronicus and Junia were distinguished apostles, he is saying that they were well known among the apostles. He is trying to say that all the apostles knew about Andronicus and Junia and held them in high regard.

RollTide21
Feb 21st 2011, 06:47 PM
The term "outstanding" is actually "well known". Paul isn't saying that Andronicus and Junia were distinguished apostles, he is saying that they were well known among the apostles. He is trying to say that all the apostles knew about Andronicus and Junia and held them in high regard.Ah.
*****************

dan p
Feb 21st 2011, 07:03 PM
Hi BroRog , and in Acts 13:2 , Christ Himself says , Separate me Baranbas and Saul and after this many more also were sent " ones " .

BroRog
Feb 21st 2011, 07:14 PM
Hi BroRog , and in Acts 13:2 , Christ Himself says , Separate me Baranbas and Saul and after this many more also were sent " ones " .

Yes, these men were sent on a missionary journey. Does being sent on a missionary journey make one an apostle?

RabbiKnife
Feb 21st 2011, 07:18 PM
So now we are up to what, 14?

Paul did not meet the criteria proposed in the OP.

Neither did Barnabas.

There's an argument that Silas, Timothy, and Apollos were counted as apostles.

RabbiKnife
Feb 21st 2011, 07:19 PM
Paul's only criteria was "Jesus called me."

With that as the criteria, how can anyone dispute whether God has called a modern day apostle?

And are we ready to cast away all the prophets, evangelists, and pastors/teachers?

Br. Barnabas
Feb 21st 2011, 07:29 PM
I would say there are apostles today because we can clearly see from Scripture there were more than 12 or the 11 who were left. Also that the gift of the Spirit of apostleship was mentioned by Paul.

And I know some Protestants hate to hear this, but the Apostles did have people who traveled with them and ones that they passed on their teachings and mantles to, the early church called them bishops. In the Anglican, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic churches we can trace a line from the bishops of today to the Apostles of the NT. The early church deemed the bishops the sucessors of the apostles and leaders of the church. So yes we still have them today and then there are those who are not bishops but yet have the gift of apostleship.

So yes they are still around today. The Holy Spirit is not going to let a gift die out. It makes no sense especailly a leadership gift.

Phish
Feb 21st 2011, 07:33 PM
I'm not going to say that there arn't any modern day apostles, but is it nessessary?

If God is going to use you and you let him there really isn't anything anyone could can say or do otherwise.

When you are called, you are called. There have been many great Men and Women through the ages. Not going to call them apostles, but cerrtainly recognize the hand of God upon them. If these men or women were supposed to be called apostles, is thier work any more or less significant?

notuptome
Feb 21st 2011, 08:33 PM
The roman pontiff claims to be an apostle in an unbroken line from Peter to this day. Of course the pontiff also claims to be the vicar of Christ.

I'm not certain how many denoms within the church hold to apostles and prophets in the modern church. I find the argument far less than compeling. If one defines the terms broadly then apostles as special messengers and prophets as forth tellers has some merit. Apostles and prophets in the sense of Paul and John the Baptist in modern times not so much. Those who might be bold enough to claim the office probably automatically disqualify themselves.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Phish
Feb 21st 2011, 08:42 PM
The roman pontiff claims to be an apostle in an unbroken line from Peter to this day. Of course the pontiff also claims to be the vicar of Christ.

I'm not certain how many denoms within the church hold to apostles and prophets in the modern church. I find the argument far less than compeling. If one defines the terms broadly then apostles as special messengers and prophets as forth tellers has some merit. Apostles and prophets in the sense of Paul and John the Baptist in modern times not so much. Those who might be bold enough to claim the office probably automatically disqualify themselves.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

To me anyone who claims a any title is suspect. To me the ones who just "do the will of the Father" are the most effective and have no need to promote why they should be listened to, especially if it is because of some title that has been bestowed upon them.

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 08:47 PM
"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 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" (Acts 1:22-23).

From what I read, there are two requirements:


1) company with Christ during His earthly ministry until His ascension, and

2) witness of the resurrected Lord. These were the qualifications which had to be met by the new twelfth apostle, who, as it turned out, was Matthias. Clearly, this eliminates any present day apostleship.
Even though Paul was not in the original 12, or probably not even present when they chose Matthias, Paul cited it in defense of his own apostleship: "Have I not seen Jesus Christ?" (I Corinthians 9:1).

My understanding from these verses is that no man can be an apostle who has not been a witness to the risen Lord.

I have met people who claim that they are Apostles. If you go according to the greek word (apostolos), with the word meaning.."an ambassador; one who is sent;." I can see where a person can claim they are "sent out", but I don't see where anyone in the present day church can fulfill any of the other qualifications of being an apostle.

I realize that others than the 12, such as Barnabas in Acts 14 were referred to Apostles, but even then, it may be possible/probable that he was a witness of the risen Lord.

Additionally, I had an interesting discussion with someone I met yesterday. She indicated that she has a friend, who is a woman, who is an Apostle. I have some serious questions about this. She referenced Junia in Romans 16:7, but from researching this verse, that seems to be a serious and unreasonable stretch of scripture.

Paul never knew Jesus except in a vision and a voice from heaven.

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 08:48 PM
There are no apostles of Jesus Christ today. While Apostle means "one who is sent" an apostle of Jesus Christ is one whom Jesus Christ sent out. We have scriptural support that Jesus sent out 11 men and Paul.

Not Barnabas??????

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 08:51 PM
Yes, these men were sent on a missionary journey. Does being sent on a missionary journey make one an apostle?

If they are sent directly by the Holy Spirit it fulfills the association with the word "sent one" and easily overcomes any previously held prejudice against that possibility. ;)

Phish
Feb 21st 2011, 09:13 PM
Paul never knew Jesus except in a vision and a voice from heaven.

I would disagree with you

Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

It seems in Correlation with Acts 9:26 Paul was instructed in Arabia for three years bu Christ himself

Gal 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.


Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

Amos_with_goats
Feb 21st 2011, 09:24 PM
To me anyone who claims a any title is suspect. To me the ones who just "do the will of the Father" are the most effective and have no need to promote why they should be listened to, especially if it is because of some title that has been bestowed upon them.

True of most titles...

steelcurtain76
Feb 21st 2011, 09:45 PM
Paul never knew Jesus except in a vision and a voice from heaven.

That may not be true. There were always Pharisees lingering around everywhere Jesus was doing miracles. Who's to say that Saul was not one of them. Paul, as we know, was very aggressive in pursuing and killing Christians from Acts 7 and Acts 9.

I know that's it's an assumption, but I also believe to say that he never knew Jesus is an assumption as well.

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 10:10 PM
That may not be true. There were always Pharisees lingering around everywhere Jesus was doing miracles. Who's to say that Saul was not one of them. Paul, as we know, was very aggressive in pursuing and killing Christians from Acts 7 and Acts 9.

I know that's it's an assumption, but I also believe to say that he never knew Jesus is an assumption as well.


It's a far more accurate assumption to say that Paul did not know Jesus according to the flesh. That would have been noted in the bible. Instead Paul asks...who are you Lord?

Knowing according to the flesh goes exactly against the nature of spiritual gifts in any regard. Paul received His vision and commissioning through the Spirit. The same way that God does it today.

BroRog
Feb 21st 2011, 10:17 PM
If they are sent directly by the Holy Spirit it fulfills the association with the word "sent one" and easily overcomes any previously held prejudice against that possibility. ;)An Apostle is more than someone who was sent.

BroRog
Feb 21st 2011, 10:18 PM
Paul never knew Jesus except in a vision and a voice from heaven.Paul claims to have been taught by Jesus.

Beckrl
Feb 21st 2011, 11:16 PM
Wasn't there seventy that were 'sent out' but never called Apostles? (Luke 10). Likewise Paul wasn't among the 12 disicples which later became the Apostles. Paul said he was called to be an apostle of Christ unto the gentiles. That is the foundation of the church. So I see no need for another foundation, but there remains evanglists, pastors and teacher for the building of the church of God

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 11:18 PM
Paul claims to have been taught by Jesus.

He was! And so can we be!


An Apostle is more than someone who was sent.

What power above the Holy Spirit is required to send someone out?

episkopos
Feb 21st 2011, 11:21 PM
Wasn't there seventy that were 'sent out' but never called Apostles? (Luke 10). Likewise Paul wasn't among the 12 disicples which later became the Apostles. Paul said he was called to be an apostle of Christ unto the gentiles. That is the foundation of the church. So I see no need for another foundation, but there remains evanglists, pastors and teacher in the church.

So you are saying that Paul's writings on the order of the meeting is obsolete? Where one prophet speaks and the others judge. The bible is after all an old book. Perhaps we should look to more modern sources? ;)

dan p
Feb 22nd 2011, 02:08 AM
Hi episkopos , amd I will have to disagree and here is why .

In 1 Cor 9:1 , " Am I not an apostle ? am I not free ? have I not SEEN Jesus Christ our lORD ? are ye not my work in the Lord ?

#1 , The Greek word " SEEN " is in the Greek Perfect Tense , which means Past Action with Continuing Present Results .

An good example of the perfecr Tense is founf in John 19:30 , where Jesus says " it is finished " is also in the Perfect Tense .

The Past action was Jesus dying on the Cross .

The Continuing and Present results are that Christ KEEPS saving people in the Present .

Without having to go back on the Cross to die for anyone else .

By the way , that means OSAS .

The word seen is also in the Active Voice and it is Jesus doing it for Himself .

It is also in the Indicative Mood , which means what Christ said , He did .

The Greek word "seen " means to see with the eyes , by experience , or appreared to Paul , dan p

episkopos
Feb 22nd 2011, 03:35 AM
I would disagree with you

Gal 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

It seems in Correlation with Acts 9:26 Paul was instructed in Arabia for three years bu Christ himself

Gal 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.


Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

This training is still available today. Behold He is with us, even to the end of the age!

episkopos
Feb 22nd 2011, 03:37 AM
Hi episkopos , amd I will have to disagree and here is why .

In 1 Cor 9:1 , " Am I not an apostle ? am I not free ? have I not SEEN Jesus Christ our lORD ? are ye not my work in the Lord ?

#1 , The Greek word " SEEN " is in the Greek Perfect Tense , which means Past Action with Continuing Present Results .

An good example of the perfecr Tense is founf in John 19:30 , where Jesus says " it is finished " is also in the Perfect Tense .

The Past action was Jesus dying on the Cross .

The Continuing and Present results are that Christ KEEPS saving people in the Present .

Without having to go back on the Cross to die for anyone else .

By the way , that means OSAS .

The word seen is also in the Active Voice and it is Jesus doing it for Himself .

It is also in the Indicative Mood , which means what Christ said , He did .

The Greek word "seen " means to see with the eyes , by experience , or appreared to Paul , dan p

I have also seen the Lord. Is this not a common occurence? We hear of Muslims seeing Jesus as well. This leads to their comversion. Why not Christians?

PneumaPsucheSoma
Feb 22nd 2011, 03:54 AM
This, of course begs the question of whether Jesus can/does/has appear(ed) to someone and personally commission(ed) them.