PDA

View Full Version : Apostles



ChangedByHim
Mar 3rd 2014, 08:46 PM
Anyone interested in the subject of apostles? I'm currently finishing a book on the ministry of apostles and would be happy to send you an e-version if interested...

As for this thread... I will skip the BF-obligatory "do you believe that there are still apostles?" question and just ask you, have you (personally) or your church (collectively) ever been ministered to and influenced by a post-ascension apostle (Eph. 4:11)?

To clarify, there are no further foundational apostles other than the ones in Scripture. However, there are "body building" apostles that are given in the Body in accordance with Eph. 4:7-16.

7 But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. 8 Therefore He says:

“When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men.”
9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

The_highwayman
Mar 3rd 2014, 09:40 PM
Anyone interested in the subject of apostles? I'm currently finishing a book on the ministry of apostles and would be happy to send you an e-version if interested...

As for this thread... I will skip the BF-obligatory "do you believe that there are still apostles?" question and just ask you, have you (personally) or your church (collectively) ever been ministered to and influenced by a post-ascension apostle (Eph. 4:11)?

To clarify, there are no further foundational apostles other than the ones in Scripture. However, there are "body building" apostles that are given in the Body in accordance with Eph. 4:7-16.

7 But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. 8 Therefore He says:

“When He ascended on high,
He led captivity captive,
And gave gifts to men.”
9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, 12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 13 till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; 14 that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, 15 but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— 16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.

My current Pastor came of the mission field after 28 years, 4 years ago. In that time he planted 4 Bible schools and over 102 churches, and oversaw all of them, including their Pastors.

These were churches in villages where the Gospel had not been preached or taught.

He was an Apostle during that Season and assignment, now he carries the anointing of local Pastor, but as soon as we step onto the mission field, his anointing changes.

This is my definition of a modern day Apostle, I am not convinced that anybody that self proclaims or self titles themselves "Apostle" here in the US is one.

Any person claiming to be an "Apostle" that comes into a church, invited or uninvited and proclaims the church should listen to them over their Pastor is not an Apostle. Such people bring disorder, confusion and division to the Body. Most of these Type of "apostles" get down right stupid and claim they have authority over Pastors and suggest that their Authority comes from 1 Cor 12.28 & Eph 4.11, because Apostle is listed first.

God is a God of order and values authority and there is no greater Authority in his Church than Jesus Christ, then the appointed Pastor. Anyone claiming to bean "Apostle" called by God to come into a church and force the Pastor to remove himself from his God given authority and place of position are frauds.

The church leader is the Pastor, period.

Slug1
Mar 3rd 2014, 09:43 PM
Anyone interested in the subject of apostles? I'm currently finishing a book on the ministry of apostles and would be happy to send you an e-version if interested...Do you still have my email addy?

Slug1
Mar 3rd 2014, 09:45 PM
My current Pastor came of the mission field after 28 years, 4 years ago. In that time he planted 4 Bible schools and over 102 churches, and oversaw all of them, including their Pastors.

These were churches in villages where the Gospel had not been preached or taught.

He was an Apostle during that Season and assignment, now he carries the anointing of local Pastor, but as soon as we step onto the mission field, his anointing changes.

This is my definition of a modern day Apostle, I am not convinced that anybody that self proclaims or self titles themselves "Apostle" here in the US is one.

Any person claiming to be an "Apostle" that comes into a church, invited or uninvited and proclaims the church should listen to them over their Pastor is not an Apostle. Such people bring disorder, confusion and division to the Body. Most of these Type of "apostles" get down right stupid and claim they have authority over Pastors and suggest that their Authority comes from 1 Cor 12.28 & Eph 4.11, because Apostle is listed first.

God is a God of order and values authority and there is no greater Authority in his Church than Jesus Christ, then the appointed Pastor. Anyone claiming to bean "Apostle" called by God to come into a church and force the Pastor to remove himself from his God given authority and place of position are frauds.

The church leader is the Pastor, period.Amen.... you will know the fruit of true servants and the understanding of authority, when a person who is used by God as an apostle but is visiting a church, humbles them self to the man who God has placed in charge of the church that is visited.

ChangedByHim
Mar 3rd 2014, 10:19 PM
Do you still have my email addy?

Yep .

Slug1
Mar 3rd 2014, 10:34 PM
Yep .I'm always interested in what you're inspired to write :)

ChangedByHim
Mar 3rd 2014, 10:43 PM
I'm always interested in what you're inspired to write :)

You have an amazon account! If so, I will probably do a free promo for a couple days later this week.

Slug1
Mar 3rd 2014, 10:51 PM
You have an amazon account! If so, I will probably do a free promo for a couple days later this week.About 10 minutes ago on Amazon, I ordered a new lens hood for one of my lenses :)

ChangedByHim
Mar 3rd 2014, 11:06 PM
What is your new avi???

Slug1
Mar 3rd 2014, 11:09 PM
What is your new avi???Those are my journals that are handwritten. Many a "Zebra" pens used up in all that writing.

ChangedByHim
Mar 3rd 2014, 11:13 PM
Those are my journals that are handwritten. Many a "Zebra" pens used up in all that writing.

Priceless treasures.

Francis Drake
Mar 3rd 2014, 11:19 PM
Anyone interested in the subject of apostles?[/B]

Aren't you punch drunk yet CBH, cos I just about am!

Going to bed now maybe recover some strength.
G'night all.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 12:52 AM
While I'm not sure if there are any apostles today, there would, however, be disciples if there are any who have forsaken all they have, and walk as Jesus and the apostles did, who depended solely on God in providing all their needs.

Then again, if you consider the John who scribed the book of Revelation an apostle; and John is supposed to prophesy again (Rev 10:11), and his prophesying again is soon; then yes there would be an apostle in our future.

ChangedByHim
Mar 4th 2014, 12:56 AM
While I'm not sure if there are any apostles today, there would be disciples if there are any who have forsaken all they have, and walk as Jesus and the apostles did, who depended solely on God in providing all their needs.

Then again, if you consider the John who scribed the book of Revelation an apostle; and John is supposed to prophesy again (Rev 10:11), and his prophesying again is soon; then yes there would be an apostle in our future.

What??




.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 01:25 AM
What??




.
I thought my response was fairly strait forward, so I'm not sure what you are vague about.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 01:41 AM
I thought my response was fairly strait forward, so I'm not sure what you are vague about.

A disciple is a student, that is what the word means. We are called to make disciples, students, pupils. Blessings.

divaD
Mar 4th 2014, 01:48 AM
Sometimes in order to try and understand something a bit clearer, one can get a pretty good understanding of what something is supposed to mean by studying the enemy.

2 Corinthians 11:12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.


If there are false apostles, meaning ministers of satan, then it only stands to reason that there would also be legit apostles, ministers of God and Christ.

According to verse 13, a false apostle is a deceitful worker, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. I wouldn't think in this context that it is simply only meaning the main apostles we're all familiar with, but is meaning apostleship in general. And besides, if there were only the main apostles we're all familiar with, where would there be room for false apostles?

The question then is, is 2 Corinthians 11:13 only applicable to the time when the main apostles were still alive, or is this still applicable even now? And if the answer is the latter, what then would be the purpose of only having false apostles in the world, and not legit ones too?

Also if we look a bit further in 2 Corinthians 11 we see this.

2 Corinthians 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.


Let's try and put 2 and 2 together here. In verse 13 we're told..For such are false apostles...transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

And in verse 15 we're told...Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness

What does that add up to then? A legit apostle would then be a minister of righteousness if a false apostle also is transformed as the ministers of righteousness. Except in the latter, they really aren't, the fact we're told they are deceitful workers instead.

And then we have this as well.

Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted

Again we see false apostles. If there were only the main apostles we're all familiar with, what then was the point in even trying these which say they are apostles, and are not?

The way I look at it then, depending on context, sometimes when apostles are mentioned it is then meaning the main ones we're all familiar with. Other times it using the term in a more general sense.

Are there then apostles today? I would say yes, yet I would not foolishly conclude that everyone who claims this title is exactly deserving of it, the fact we're told satan's ministers transform themselves into the apostles of Christ. So then, no doubt, spiritual discernment would be needed to discern the legit from the false. But if one isn't willing to attempt any spiritual discernment at all, but just accept anyone's word for it if they claim this title, then IMO if they end up being deceived by them, it's not like Scriptures never gave a warning of any kind to try prevent this from happening.

ChangedByHim
Mar 4th 2014, 01:57 AM
A disciple is a student, that is what the word means. We are called to make disciples, students, pupils. Blessings.

^^^ This. And I have no idea where you were going with the apostle John.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 02:53 AM
Sometimes in order to try and understand something a bit clearer, one can get a pretty good understanding of what something is supposed to mean by studying the enemy.

2 Corinthians 11:12 But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.


If there are false apostles, meaning ministers of satan, then it only stands to reason that there would also be legit apostles, ministers of God and Christ.

According to verse 13, a false apostle is a deceitful worker, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. I wouldn't think in this context that it is simply only meaning the main apostles we're all familiar with, but is meaning apostleship in general. And besides, if there were only the main apostles we're all familiar with, where would there be room for false apostles?

The question then is, is 2 Corinthians 11:13 only applicable to the time when the main apostles were still alive, or is this still applicable even now? And if the answer is the latter, what then would be the purpose of only having false apostles in the world, and not legit ones too?

Also if we look a bit further in 2 Corinthians 11 we see this.

2 Corinthians 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.


Let's try and put 2 and 2 together here. In verse 13 we're told..For such are false apostles...transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

And in verse 15 we're told...Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness

What does that add up to then? A legit apostle would then be a minister of righteousness if a false apostle also is transformed as the ministers of righteousness. Except in the latter, they really aren't, the fact we're told they are deceitful workers instead.

And then we have this as well.

Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted

Again we see false apostles. If there were only the main apostles we're all familiar with, what then was the point in even trying these which say they are apostles, and are not?

The way I look at it then, depending on context, sometimes when apostles are mentioned it is then meaning the main ones we're all familiar with. Other times it using the term in a more general sense.

Are there then apostles today? I would say yes, yet I would not foolishly conclude that everyone who claims this title is exactly deserving of it, the fact we're told satan's ministers transform themselves into the apostles of Christ. So then, no doubt, spiritual discernment would be needed to discern the legit from the false. But if one isn't willing to attempt any spiritual discernment at all, but just accept anyone's word for it if they claim this title, then IMO if they end up being deceived by them, it's not like Scriptures never gave a warning of any kind to try prevent this from happening.Also consider this... as with false signs/wonders/miracles, they get broadcasted frequently by the world. But the humble servants of God doing true glorifying of God signs/wonders/miracles out there in the world, not much is broadcast at all.

So it is as your line of thought is going... there are false apostles out there, and they make sure they are broadcasted... but the REAL, of God and doing His good works that glorify Him, due to their humbleness, they care less about being broadcasted. They just do the work as they are led to do, where they are led to do work, how they are led to do the work and when done, they THANK God for trusting them and using them... and they move on to the next place to do good works of God. The lives God touch through such servants... that is what matters to them, not what the world knows about them or the work.

awestruckchild
Mar 4th 2014, 03:11 AM
^^^ This. And I have no idea where you were going with the apostle John.

You have confused two different posters - luigi and landshark.
I wanted to hear what luigi meant too.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 03:12 AM
A disciple is a student, that is what the word means. We are called to make disciples, students, pupils. Blessings.
In various fields, a disciple may very well represent nothing more than a student, but according to the criteria of becoming a disciple of Christ, one must hate his current life, along with his family, along with giving up everything to become a disciple of Christ (Luke 14:26-27 & 33).

With these criteria for being a disciple of Christ, I can say that I don't qualify. I'm also fairly confident in assuming that over 99% of all professing Christians do not qualify as disciples either.

ChangedByHim
Mar 4th 2014, 03:13 AM
You have confused two different posters - luigi and landshark.
I wanted to hear what luigi meant too.

No. I agreed with LS about the first item and added a second.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 03:15 AM
In various fields, a disciple may very well represent nothing more than a student, but according to the criteria of becoming a disciple of Christ, one must hate his current life, along with his family, along with giving up everything to become a disciple of Christ (Luke 14:26-27 & 33).

With these criteria for being a disciple of Christ, I can say that I don't qualify. I'm also fairly confident in assuming that over 99% of all professing Christians do not qualify as disciples either.The way I understand what it is to be a "disciple" is about following Christ. Take the 70 when Jesus sent them out... they had no clue HOW to do what they were told to do, but in faith they were obedient and came back loudly expressing all they did in Christ's name. Sure, we are students of the Word of God but it's in the APPLYING of that Word that transforms us through the power of the Holy Spirit and this enables us to follow Christ.

awestruckchild
Mar 4th 2014, 03:16 AM
No. I agreed with LS about the first item and added a second.

Ohhhhh....you kilt 2 birds with one stone.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 03:18 AM
^^^ This. And I have no idea where you were going with the apostle John.
I was under the impression that you were asking if there were any apostles out there today, to which I responded that I wasn't sure if there were any.
However, should John who penned the book of Revelation be considered an apostle, then seeing how He (John) must prophesy again (Rev 10:11); and if Johns prophesying again before many nations and peoples has yet to occur, then we have Him (John an apostle) to look forward to in the future.
I hope this clarified things.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 03:22 AM
The way I understand what it is to be a "disciple" is about following Christ. Take the 70 when Jesus sent them out... they had no clue HOW to do what they were told to do, but in faith they were obedient and came back loudly expressing all they did in Christ's name. Sure, we are students of the Word of God but it's in the APPLYING of that Word that transforms us through the power of the Holy Spirit and this enables us to follow Christ.
What you say may be true, but it does not negate any item of criteria for discipleship in Luke 14:26-27 & 33.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 03:36 AM
What you say may be true, but it does not negate any item of criteria for discipleship in Luke 14:26-27 & 33.Hooah, to truly "follow" Jesus means that a person MUST put Him first, above even loved ones, above all possessions.

The scripture doesn't mean "hate" the loved ones... the verses are about putting God first.

In several words, you can do a sermon on those scriptures... "Be committed to Christ above all else" and this short sermon explains it all simply but effectively concerning those scriptures.

By the way, "hate" is a Semitic term that means, "love or loving less".

That second condition, is enabled by the other two conditions. By loving Christ more, this enables a disciple to "follow" or come after, Christ while bearing their cross.

v33 is what it's all about... following Christ and to do this, ALL else must be second to Christ as a disciple renounces pretty much "the world". All that THEY ARE (their cross v27), not what they have (which must be renounced as per v33)... comes after Christ.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 03:51 AM
Hooah, to truly "follow" Jesus means that a person MUST put Him first, above even loved ones, above all possessions.

The scripture doesn't mean "hate" the loved ones... the verses are about putting God first.

In several words, you can do a sermon on those scriptures... "Be committed to Christ above all else" and this short sermon explains it all simply but effectively concerning those scriptures.

By the way, "hate" is a Semitic term that means, "love or loving less".

That second condition, is enabled by the other two conditions. By loving Christ more, this enables a disciple to "follow" or come after, Christ while bearing their cross.

v27 is what it's all about... following Christ and to do this, ALL else must be second to Christ as a disciple renounces pretty much "the world".
I don't know what version of Bible you use, but according to the King James Version, Luke 14:26 states: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."

While "hate" as you state may also be a Semitic term that means, "love or loving less"; rather than accept this spin on what clearly appears to me a despising of ones life and family, I will then not delude myself with something that makes me believe that I meet the criteria in Luke 14:26.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 03:55 AM
I don't know what version of Bible you use, but according to the King James Version, Luke 14:26 states: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple."

While "hate" as you state may also be a Semitic term that means, "love or loving less"; rather than accept this spin on what clearly appears to me a despising of ones life and family, I will then not delude myself with something that makes me believe that I meet the criteria in Luke 14:26.I suggest that you do a study of the verses then. Has nothing to do with "hating"... all the terms of "hate" in the Bible are about loving less. Jesus is exhorting that He is to be held above even family, love Him MORE which means a disciple must love family less.

Who in their right mind will accept any scriptures that teaches or means, TO HATE as in what the "English" term means??!! This alone makes ALL the love your enemy scriptures meaningless and confusing.

PROPER understanding is a need in the Body of Christ so verses like this one are taught properly.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 04:13 AM
I suggest that you do a study of the verses then. Has nothing to do with "hating"... all the terms of "hate" in the Bible are about loving less. Jesus is exhorting that He is to be held above even family, love Him MORE which means a disciple must love family less.

Who in their right mind will accept any scriptures that teaches or means, TO HATE as in what the "English" term means??!! This alone makes ALL the love your enemy scriptures meaningless and confusing.

PROPER understanding is a need in the Body of Christ so verses like this one are taught properly.

If you love your family less, and if you love your life less, would you after going out after Christ and finding yourself at times destitute, hungry, and cold, then not look back at your former life and desire to return, thereby making you not worthy of Christ? The answer is yes, and therefore you would have to hate your family and life.

"For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he hath sufficient to finish it?
Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him.
Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish." (Luke 14:28-30)

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 04:17 AM
If you love your family less, and if you love your life less, would you after going out after Christ and finding yourself at times destitute, hungry, and cold, then not look back at your former life and desire to return, thereby making you not worthy of Christ? The answer is yes, and therefore you would have to hate your family and life.

"For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he hath sufficient to finish it?
Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him.
Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish." (Luke 14:28-30)I'm sorry, but the term "hate" means what it means and Jesus used a Semitic term so we'd understand Him. We love Him more and ALL else (v33), LESS than Him because we renounce all else and put Him first. Can't "follow" Him 100% unless this is done by any who will be a disciple of Christ.

Boo
Mar 4th 2014, 09:57 AM
Hate, Hateful, Hater, Hatred [ A-1,Verb,G3404, miseo ]


to hate," is used especially

(a) of malicious and unjustifiable feelings towards others, whether towards the innocent or by mutual animosity, e.g., Matthew 10:22; Matthew 24:10; Luke 6:22, Luke 6:27; Luke 19:14; John 3:20, of "hating" the light (metaphorically); John 7:7; John 15:18-John 15:19, John 15:23-John 15:25; Titus 3:3; 1 John 2:9, 1 John 2:11; 1 John 3:13, 1 John 3:15; 1 John 4:20; Revelation 18:2, where "hateful" translates the perfect participle Passive Voice of the verb, lit., "hated," or "having been hated;"

(b) of a right feeling of aversion from what is evil; said of wrongdoing, Romans 7:15; iniquity, Hebrews 1:9; "the garment (figurative) spotted by the flesh," Jude 1:23; "the works of the Nicolaitans," Revelation 2:6 (and Revelation 2:15, in some mss.; See the AV);

(c) of relative preference for one thing over another, by way of expressing either aversion from, or disregard for, the claims of one person or thing relatively to those of another, Matthew 6:24; and Luke 16:13, as to the impossibility of serving two masters; Luke 14:26, as to the claims of parents relatively to those of Christ; John 12:25, of disregard for one's life relatively to the claims of Christ; Ephesians 5:29, negatively, of one's flesh, i.e. of one's own, and therefore a man's wife as one with him.

Note: In 1 John 3:15, he who "hates" his brother is called a murderer; for the sin lies in the inward disposition, of which the act is only the outward expression.

[ B-1,Adjective,G4767, stugetos ]
"hateful" (from stugeo, "to hate," not found in the NT), is used in Titus 3:3.

[ C-1,Noun,G2189, echthra ]
"hatred:" See ENMITY.

[ C-2,Noun,G2319, theostuges ]
from theos, "God," and stugeo (See B), is used in Romans 1:30, AV, and RV, marg., "haters of God," RV, "hateful to God;" the former rendering is appropriate to what is expressed by the next words, "insolent," "haughty," but the RV text seems to give the true meaning. Lightfoot quotes from the Epistle of Clement of Rome, in confirmation of this, "those who practice these things are hateful to God."

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 11:54 AM
Hate, Hateful, Hater, Hatred [ A-1,Verb,G3404, miseo ]Which resource did you use?


Strong's Concordance

miseó: to hate
Original Word: μισέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: miseó
Phonetic Spelling: (mis-eh'-o)
Short Definition: I hate, detest
Definition: I hate, detest, love less, esteem less.
HELPS Word-studies

3404 miséō – properly, to detest (on a comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.

Lk 14:26: "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate (3404 /miséō, 'love less' than the Lord) his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple" (NASU).

[Note the comparative meaning of 3404 (miséō) which centers in moral choice, elevating one value over another.]

copyright © 1987, 2011 by Helps Ministries, Inc.
For complete text and additional resources visit:

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 3404: μισέω

μισέω, μισῶ; imperfect ἐμίσουν; future μισήσω; 1 aorist ἐμίσησα; perfect μεμίσηκα; passive, present participle μισουμενος; perfect participle μεμισημενος (Revelation 18:2); the Sept. for שָׂנֵא; (from Homer down); to hate, pursue with hatred, detest; passive to be hated, detested: τινα, Matthew 5:43 and Rec. in ; ; Luke 1:71; Luke 6:22, 27; Luke 19:14; John 7:7; John 15:18ff, ; ; Titus 3:3; 1 John 2:9 (); ; Revelation 17:16; passive, Matthew 10:22; Matthew 24:9; (Mark 13:13); Luke 21:17; τί: John 3:20; Revelation 7:15; Ephesians 5:29; Hebrews 1:9; Jude 1:23; Revelation 2:6 and Rec. in 15; passive Revelation 18:2. Not a few interpreters have attributed to μισεῖν in Genesis 29:31 (cf. Genesis 29:30); Deuteronomy 21:15; Matthew 6:24; Luke 14:26; Luke 16:13; (John 12:25); Romans 9:13, the signification to love less, to postpone in love or esteem, to slight, through oversight of the circumstance that 'the Orientals, in accordance with their greater excitability, are accustomed both to feel and to profess love and hate where we Occidentals, with our cooler temperament, feel and express nothing more than interest in, or disregard and indifference to a thing'; Fritzsche, Commentary on Romans, ii., p. 304; cf. Rückert, Magazin f. Exegese u. Theologie des N. T., p. 27ff

THAYER'S GREEK LEXICON, Electronic Database.
Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2006, 2011 by Biblesoft, Inc.
All rights reserved. Used by permission. BibleSoft.com

awestruckchild
Mar 4th 2014, 01:31 PM
I think boo was just giving the varied meanings of the word. Part "C" of what he posted goes with what you have said, slug.

It is interesting to me that I came across this conversation because I have been in some struggle lately regarding my feelings toward family. There is a pull in me that wants to esteem them above other people, and a pull in me that tells me I am doing a bad thing when I don't. I know we all have this pull in us.
And even among my true brothers and sisters I have a pull that wants to esteem some of them over others.
I read something by Teresa of Avila a long time ago where she said we could not do this with our brothers and sisters and it seemed so cold to me, but I am coming to understand it more....just having a struggle as I do.

Francis Drake
Mar 4th 2014, 01:45 PM
I'm sorry, but the term "hate" means what it means and Jesus used a Semitic term so we'd understand Him. We love Him more and ALL else (v33), LESS than Him because we renounce all else and put Him first. Can't "follow" Him 100% unless this is done by any who will be a disciple of Christ.





I agree with what you are saying Slug.

You cannot interpret that "hating your family" carries the common English meaning of hate, whilst also agreeing with the following scripture.

…1Tim5v8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. 9A widow is to be put on the list only if she is not less than sixty years old, having been the wife of one man,…

By this scripture, hating you family, in the common English sense, seems to deny the faith!

ChangedByHim
Mar 4th 2014, 02:18 PM
I agree with what you are saying Slug.

You cannot interpret that "hating your family" carries the common English meaning of hate, whilst also agreeing with the following scripture.

…1Tim5v8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever. 9A widow is to be put on the list only if she is not less than sixty years old, having been the wife of one man,…

By this scripture, hating you family, in the common English sense, seems to deny the faith!

Spiritual life is a paradox my brother.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 02:58 PM
In various fields, a disciple may very well represent nothing more than a student, but according to the criteria of becoming a disciple of Christ, one must hate his current life, along with his family, along with giving up everything to become a disciple of Christ (Luke 14:26-27 & 33).

With these criteria for being a disciple of Christ, I can say that I don't qualify. I'm also fairly confident in assuming that over 99% of all professing Christians do not qualify as disciples either.

No, the disciples were his students and he was their rabbi, their teacher. Yes they were given special tasks once they were discipled, taught... but to add anything more to the concept behind that word in this sense is to take it beyond the understanding they would have used concerning the word in the first century.

And one must not HATE oneself to be a disciple, the use of HATE is part of an exegetical tool known as Kal Vahomer, or "light and heavy." If God gives you a command to HONOR your mother and father He isn't going to give you a conflicting command to hate them. Hate, in that sense, is metaphoric and meant to draw a distinction between how much we love God and how much we love everything else in our lives. In fact, another way of using Kal Vahomer which makes the same point would be, "If we are to love and honor our earthly parents, HOW MUCH MORE should we love the God who created them?" This is the same as Esau... it says God HATED Esau but God also made a covenant with Esau, protected him, prospered him. Again, the use of HATE in that sense is designed to draw a distinction, not make a God of love into a hateful tyrant! Blessings.

ChangedByHim
Mar 4th 2014, 03:21 PM
An excerpt from the book:



This call to apostleship was made known to the brethren, not by Paul and Barnabas (who inwardly knew), but the Holy Spirit as they waited on the Lord (v 2). Proverbs 18:16 says, “A man's gift maketh room for him, and brings him before great men.” It does not say for a man to make room for his gift, but that a man's gift will make room for him. This is important to know for the separation unto any five-fold ministry.

Lastly, we see Paul and Barnabas' new ministry being received by the local presbytery and blessed by the Antioch church. The five-fold brethren of the church laid hands on them and sent them forth (w. 3-4). No claim to apostolic calling should be acknowledged from anyone without the blessing of other proven leaders of integrity. Even apostles must be accountable.

As could be seen from the Acts chapter 13 passage, an individual can stand in one of the other four ministry offices for a period of years before being separated to the office of apostle. Why is this and what happens to the previous ministry office that the individual was operating in? It takes years of service in another office many times because one must be trained in a number of areas:

a. Leadership skills
b. Trustworthiness
c. Faithfulness
d. Depth of Word and prayer
e. Fruit of the Spirit
f. Gifts of the Spirit
g. Many other areas

These qualities cannot be taught in a book; they must be learned from experience.

As to what happens to the previous ministry office: the minister continues with the gift, but may cease to stand in that office. A good example of this would be a pastor who is separated to the higher calling of apostle. That minister would retain the gift of pastor, but cease to function exclusively and sometimes altogether, in that local church. The gift of pastor would become secondary to the apostolic gift; the primary function would be the office of apostle.

It is not without exception that the ministry offices are ranked totally on order of importance. The order of revelation is also relevant. If a servant standing in the office of apostle receives revelation from God to function as an evangelist; then the apostolic gift becomes secondary and the evangelistic gift primary. This is not based on importance of rank as man sees it, but importance of obedience, as God sees it. The apostolic does not cease, but becomes “shelved” until further direction. It is important to remember that the five-fold ministry offices are not titles but job descriptions.

A divine calling is definite and inward, not uncertain and outward. So-called “prophecies” and “fleeces” are not acceptable in these matters of eternal importance. To presume upon a ministry office under the Old Covenant (e.g., prophet or priest) meant certain death. The consequences under the New Covenant are not as outwardly severe, but death is still the result – a lifeless, fruitless ministry – spiritual death.

Much preparation must precede a divine calling. Many are called, but few are chosen. Sadly, I have met many believers who profess a calling to a five-fold Word ministry, but remain stagnant and unfruitful in their preparation of that call. Of many, their call itself can be brought into question, but for others, they simply do not obey the call of the Master

For others it is possible that they will get ahead of God. Going out before the Lord has worked in them sufficiently the depth and character of their call. Consider the call of Moses. Moses presumed that because he was God's chosen deliverer that he could initiate the fulfillment of that call.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 03:26 PM
No, the disciples were his students and he was their rabbi, their teacher. Yes they were given special tasks once they were discipled, taught... but to add anything more to the concept behind that word in this sense is to take it beyond the understanding they would have used concerning the word in the first century.

And one must not HATE oneself to be a disciple, the use of HATE is part of an exegetical tool known as Kal Vahomer, or "light and heavy." If God gives you a command to HONOR your mother and father He isn't going to give you a conflicting command to hate them. Hate, in that sense, is metaphoric and meant to draw a distinction between how much we love God and how much we love everything else in our lives. In fact, another way of using Kal Vahomer which makes the same point would be, "If we are to love and honor our earthly parents, HOW MUCH MORE should we love the God who created them?" This is the same as Esau... it says God HATED Esau but God also made a covenant with Esau, protected him, prospered him. Again, the use of HATE in that sense is designed to draw a distinction, not make a God of love into a hateful tyrant! Blessings.Hooah!! There is much misunderstanding of the term "hate" because many do not look at the context of other scriptures in relation to the term and as we see, the meaning of the use of the term "hate" in English is FAR different than the meaning intended by Jesus and all the Word of God.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 04:19 PM
Hooah!! There is much misunderstanding of the term "hate" because many do not look at the context of other scriptures in relation to the term and as we see, the meaning of the use of the term "hate" in English is FAR different than the meaning intended by Jesus and all the Word of God.

Exactly, a God of love whose character attributes are love, peace and joy... who sent His son to die for ALL the world, doesn't HATE somebody who exists in a fallen nature and makes bad choices, Jesus died for them. The idea is we are to get to a point where God is so important, so weighty, so loved by us that it is AS IF we hate ourselves, hate our parents. We don't really hate them, He does not expect us to, in fact, He COMMANDED US to love them. The whole point is simply to draw a distinction, to reveal the full weight of something greater. Blessings.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 06:52 PM
I think boo was just giving the varied meanings of the word. Part "C" of what he posted goes with what you have said, slug.

It is interesting to me that I came across this conversation because I have been in some struggle lately regarding my feelings toward family. There is a pull in me that wants to esteem them above other people, and a pull in me that tells me I am doing a bad thing when I don't. I know we all have this pull in us.
And even among my true brothers and sisters I have a pull that wants to esteem some of them over others.
I read something by Teresa of Avila a long time ago where she said we could not do this with our brothers and sisters and it seemed so cold to me, but I am coming to understand it more....just having a struggle as I do.

Hi awestruckchild,
I think the struggle with some of our adverse feelings towards physical family members may be due to a conflict of interest, where those who are growing spiritually are finding their physical brethren who remain in a carnal status, becoming less tolerable to love and admire.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 06:59 PM
No, the disciples were his students and he was their rabbi, their teacher. Yes they were given special tasks once they were discipled, taught... but to add anything more to the concept behind that word in this sense is to take it beyond the understanding they would have used concerning the word in the first century.

And one must not HATE oneself to be a disciple, the use of HATE is part of an exegetical tool known as Kal Vahomer, or "light and heavy." If God gives you a command to HONOR your mother and father He isn't going to give you a conflicting command to hate them. Hate, in that sense, is metaphoric and meant to draw a distinction between how much we love God and how much we love everything else in our lives. In fact, another way of using Kal Vahomer which makes the same point would be, "If we are to love and honor our earthly parents, HOW MUCH MORE should we love the God who created them?" This is the same as Esau... it says God HATED Esau but God also made a covenant with Esau, protected him, prospered him. Again, the use of HATE in that sense is designed to draw a distinction, not make a God of love into a hateful tyrant! Blessings.
I will agree with the first part of your statement that the twelve disciples were students of the Lord.
However, the criteria for being a disciple of Christ in Luke 14:26-27 & 33, is clear in my view, especially when accompanied with the explanations in Luke 14:28-32 as to why one needs to hate (not love less), their own lives as well as their families, so that they will not turn back when things get hard.

Slug1
Mar 4th 2014, 07:29 PM
I will agree with the first part of your statement that the twelve disciples were students of the Lord.
However, the criteria for being a disciple of Christ in Luke 14:26-27 & 33, is clear in my view, especially when accompanied with the explanations in Luke 14:28-32 as to why one needs to hate (not love less), their own lives as well as their families, so that they will not turn back when things get hard.Since the Bible teaches to "love less" which in this context means to put God first and to renounce all else as second to God, including oneself... who or what (possibly a church?) is teaching to actually hate those who other scriptures say to love and honor? We are to even love our enemies and not hate them.

Somewhere context of scripture isn't being accepted in accordance with what the Bible is contextually teaching.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 08:23 PM
as to why one needs to hate (not love less), their own lives as well as their families, so that they will not turn back when things get hard.

Look, you are welcome to believe whatever you want, ok? That is between you and God, not you and I. So what I am about to share you can ignore or weigh in... again, no matter.

The command and idea behind "honor your mother and father" means to place GREAT WEIGHT on, considering them VERY VALUABLE. It is a command to LOVE THEM, RESPECT THEM, put them on a level ABOVE yourself! That is God's will... the God who does not change, that is what He said concerning how we all are to treat our parents. Your interpretation has pitted Scripture against Scripture because you are taking "hate your mother" literally, which has God CHANGING His position which makes Him a God of chaos, not order. He doesn't change His mind, if He does, you can't sit here and say with any certainty that Jesus will always be the "WAY," He might change His mind!

The comment to hate family to become a disciple is a known Hebraic rule of exegesis. It is doing a comparative between two things so as to make it understood what the intent is. For example, "If God feeds the sparrows, how much more will He take care of you?" That is an example of that rule of exegesis, and Jesus used it a number of times. He can't come in changing commandments Luigi without ADDING or TAKING FROM the commandments... which contain a commandment not to add or take from. Do you understand that? If he changed a commandment he added or took from which is a sin, disqualifying him as Messiah. That is where your position ultimately leads... I humbly and respectfully suggest taking some time to work it out that far because that is where it leads. We are called to LOVE as He loved! Even our ENEMIES are to be loved by us!!!!

Blessings!

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 09:21 PM
Look, you are welcome to believe whatever you want, ok? That is between you and God, not you and I. So what I am about to share you can ignore or weigh in... again, no matter.

The command and idea behind "honor your mother and father" means to place GREAT WEIGHT on, considering them VERY VALUABLE. It is a command to LOVE THEM, RESPECT THEM, put them on a level ABOVE yourself! That is God's will... the God who does not change, that is what He said concerning how we all are to treat our parents. Your interpretation has pitted Scripture against Scripture because you are taking "hate your mother" literally, which has God CHANGING His position which makes Him a God of chaos, not order. He doesn't change His mind, if He does, you can't sit here and say with any certainty that Jesus will always be the "WAY," He might change His mind!

The comment to hate family to become a disciple is a known Hebraic rule of exegesis. It is doing a comparative between two things so as to make it understood what the intent is. For example, "If God feeds the sparrows, how much more will He take care of you?" That is an example of that rule of exegesis, and Jesus used it a number of times. He can't come in changing commandments Luigi without ADDING or TAKING FROM the commandments... which contain a commandment not to add or take from. Do you understand that? If he changed a commandment he added or took from which is a sin, disqualifying him as Messiah. That is where your position ultimately leads... I humbly and respectfully suggest taking some time to work it out that far because that is where it leads. We are called to LOVE as He loved! Even our ENEMIES are to be loved by us!!!!

Blessings!
The command to honor your father and mother is as you put it, to place great weight on esteeming your parents above yourself.
Nevertheless, if ones parents have a carnal nature, and you have a spiritual nature, would there not be a conflict of interest?
I therefore perceive that hating ones family members (while still honoring them) having to do with our nature, character, personality, or however else it may be described, being contrary to other family members nature.
Hating ones self could also be seen as hating ones life in the carnal world which sows greatly, if not solely for the carnal side of ones life.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 10:05 PM
The command to honor your father and mother is as you put it, to place great weight on esteeming your parents above yourself.
Nevertheless, if ones parents have a carnal nature, and you have a spiritual nature, would there not be a conflict of interest?
I therefore perceive that hating ones family members (while still honoring them) having to do with our nature, character, personality, or however else it may be described, being contrary to other family members nature.
Hating ones self could also be seen as hating ones life in the carnal world which sows greatly, if not solely for the carnal side of ones life.

I don't disagree with that, there would be a measure of truth there. However, BECAUSE we are told to LOVE our enemies, LOVE our neighbor AS OURSELVES, we can't also HATE them in the sense of it being a literal application because that places Scripture against Scripture. Therefore, knowing that Kal Vahomer (light and heavy) was a comparative method of exegesis used in the first century by Jewish students of Scripture, that gives us an answer without allowing Scripture to be pitted against itself. It isn't that we are to hate anyone, it is that BY COMPARISON to how much we love God it is as if we hate ourselves or others. Gosh, the big two commands are love God and neighbor... you can't hate something you love. Love isn't just a word we use, it is an ACTION that reveals a heart condition! Blessings.

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 10:42 PM
I don't disagree with that, there would be a measure of truth there. However, BECAUSE we are told to LOVE our enemies, LOVE our neighbor AS OURSELVES, we can't also HATE them in the sense of it being a literal application because that places Scripture against Scripture. Therefore, knowing that Kal Vahomer (light and heavy) was a comparative method of exegesis used in the first century by Jewish students of Scripture, that gives us an answer without allowing Scripture to be pitted against itself. It isn't that we are to hate anyone, it is that BY COMPARISON to how much we love God it is as if we hate ourselves or others. Gosh, the big two commands are love God and neighbor... you can't hate something you love. Love isn't just a word we use, it is an ACTION that reveals a heart condition! Blessings.
True, to love God and neighbor.
But can you love the ones you leave (including your life), then find yourself in hardship and not look back on your former comfortable carnal life with desire (Luke 9:62), thereby resulting in your disqualification from being a disciple?

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 11:04 PM
True, to love God and neighbor.
But can you love the ones you leave (including your life), then find yourself in hardship and not look back on your former comfortable carnal life with desire (Luke 9:62), thereby resulting in your disqualification from being a disciple?

You're making this more than it is brother. :) To be a disciple means to sell out to Jesus, submit to him as "Lord" which means ceasing to live according to our understanding of righteousness, and instead living according to his. The first command is written in two ways, love God in one sense, and worship Him only in another. The latter is not standing with hands in praise. That is part of it, but not all of it. Worship is submitting, bowing before, bending the knee, prostrating oneself before one GREATER than oneself. That is all Romans 10:9 is saying, to "confess Jesus as Lord" is bending the knee before HIM, bowing before HIM, prostrating ourselves before HIM and allowing HIM to dictate the direction of our lives. HE is Lord... we are servants. And as such, there is a time of learning, a maturation period we all must go through, and that is being a disciple. The word literally means student... mathetes (G3101) is defined by Strong's and Thayer as a pupil, a student, a learner. In Hebrew it is talmid (or plural talmidim) and it means the same thing, a student. Being a student of his is required for all who submit to him as Lord. No need to add to that, it really is that simple, respectfully. Blessings Luigi!

luigi
Mar 4th 2014, 11:27 PM
You're making this more than it is brother. :) To be a disciple means to sell out to Jesus, submit to him as "Lord" which means ceasing to live according to our understanding of righteousness, and instead living according to his. The first command is written in two ways, love God in one sense, and worship Him only in another. The latter is not standing with hands in praise. That is part of it, but not all of it. Worship is submitting, bowing before, bending the knee, prostrating oneself before one GREATER than oneself. That is all Romans 10:9 is saying, to "confess Jesus as Lord" is bending the knee before HIM, bowing before HIM, prostrating ourselves before HIM and allowing HIM to dictate the direction of our lives. HE is Lord... we are servants. And as such, there is a time of learning, a maturation period we all must go through, and that is being a disciple. The word literally means student... mathetes (G3101) is defined by Strong's and Thayer as a pupil, a student, a learner. In Hebrew it is talmid (or plural talmidim) and it means the same thing, a student. Being a student of his is required for all who submit to him as Lord. No need to add to that, it really is that simple, respectfully. Blessings Luigi!

The true definition of worship is adoration/love, which is a deep heart felt emotion. It is where your treasure is.
The Lord wants those who worship Him in truth (their heart); not them that make a show by bowing before, bending the knee, or prostrating themselves, if that persons heart is far from God and instead worship/love mammon.

Yes, there is a time of learning, a maturation period we must all go through.
This would be the preliminary first step in becoming a disciple, but it does not mean everyone going through this learning process will become a disciple.

I understand the basic definition of the word disciple is student.
Nevertheless, the Lord adds to its definition in regards to becoming a disciple of His, which I will not disregard because the basic definition of disciple states I qualify as a disciple.

LandShark
Mar 4th 2014, 11:55 PM
Just to add to this as I think we both (Luigi) have taken this rabbit trail as far as we can go. ;) The Hebrew word for worship is shachah, it is defined as "to bow before; to bend the knee; to prostrate oneself." You don't bend before anyone, bow before anyone, or prostrate yourself before anyone unless you are submitted to them and/or under their authority. If the definition of shachah was "love" it would be translated as love, but it isn't. There is a word for love (ahav) and there is a word for worship (shachah). They are related as we only submit BECAUSE we love, but they are unique words. Peace!

luigi
Mar 5th 2014, 01:23 PM
Just to add to this as I think we both (Luigi) have taken this rabbit trail as far as we can go. ;) The Hebrew word for worship is shachah, it is defined as "to bow before; to bend the knee; to prostrate oneself." You don't bend before anyone, bow before anyone, or prostrate yourself before anyone unless you are submitted to them and/or under their authority. If the definition of shachah was "love" it would be translated as love, but it isn't. There is a word for love (ahav) and there is a word for worship (shachah). They are related as we only submit BECAUSE we love, but they are unique words. Peace!
One definition of unique in Websters Encyclopedic dictionary is: without a like or equal.
There are, however, synonyms for both love and worship, with both words corresponding to each other.

Slug1
Mar 5th 2014, 01:32 PM
One definition of unique in Websters Encyclopedic dictionary is: without a like or equal.
There are, however, synonyms for both love and worship, with both words corresponding to each other.Use theological dictionaries... will help you out more.

Vakeros
Mar 5th 2014, 01:56 PM
Back to Apostles - this is simply the Greek word or another well known Roman word - Missionary. It simply means "one who is sent."
So in one respect we are ALL sent and thus should ALL be apostles however in terms of appointing by the church, it is someone whom the church sends elsewhere. Every church SHOULD be sending apostles out. They are listed first, because this is a prime role and responsibility of a church - but how many churches put sending their people out as a priority?

ChangedByHim
Mar 5th 2014, 01:59 PM
Thanks for bringing this back vakeros!

Yes. Apostolos means "sent one." And we are all sent. But to say that this is all that it means is grossly oversimplifying the gift.

LandShark
Mar 5th 2014, 02:46 PM
Thanks for bringing this back vakeros!

Yes. Apostolos means "sent one." And we are all sent. But to say that this is all that it means is grossly oversimplifying the gift.

Where do you get the idea that we are ALL sent? The Great Commission in Greek does not say what we teach it as today brother. The "Go" in English is a command, but in the Greek it is translated from, it is not, it is passive. It is, "As you go." The part of the sentence that is in command form is the "Make disciples." So, "As you go, TEACH!" In other words, live your life in such a way that the dark world around us sees the light of God in us, and when they are drawn to that and begin to ask questions, we have a willing ear that will hear so we teach. Some are "sent" but not all are sent in the manner in which the apostles were sent. That is why Paul phrased a somewhat rhetorical question like this: "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" The obvious answer to each is NO, which means not all are sent. Blessings.

Boo
Mar 5th 2014, 02:48 PM
We are all sent? That is a view that some have taken, but it is not explicit in the bible. The gifts that some are given are for their immediate areas and are not sent anywhere else to serve. They are not sent. It, of course, becomes a word game after that depending on what view one favors.

ChangedByHim
Mar 5th 2014, 03:13 PM
Where do you get the idea that we are ALL sent? The Great Commission in Greek does not say what we teach it as today brother. The "Go" in English is a command, but in the Greek it is translated from, it is not, it is passive. It is, "As you go." The part of the sentence that is in command form is the "Make disciples." So, "As you go, TEACH!" In other words, live your life in such a way that the dark world around us sees the light of God in us, and when they are drawn to that and begin to ask questions, we have a willing ear that will hear so we teach. Some are "sent" but not all are sent in the manner in which the apostles were sent. That is why Paul phrased a somewhat rhetorical question like this: "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" The obvious answer to each is NO, which means not all are sent. Blessings.


Matt 10:16, John 17:18, John 20:21

God sends all of us somewhere... that does not mean that we are all apostles!

Boo
Mar 5th 2014, 03:24 PM
Matt 10:16, John 17:18, John 20:21

God sends all of us somewhere... that does not mean that we are all apostles!

All three of those verses were addressed to the twelve. Applying it to yourself can be an error.

If someone who is not spiritual is told that it is his job to be an apostle because of those verses, whose mistake is it? The person that tells him that those verses apply to everyone?

It is a popular thing to claim that those verses apply to oneself. However, that is not true. God will let us know when it is our time to"go."

ChangedByHim
Mar 5th 2014, 03:38 PM
All three of those verses were addressed to the twelve. Applying it to yourself can be an error.

If someone who is not spiritual is told that it is his job to be an apostle because of those verses, whose mistake is it? The person that tells him that those verses apply to everyone?

It is a popular thing to claim that those verses apply to oneself. However, that is not true. God will let us know when it is our time to"go."

Almost everything Jesus said in the gospels was to the apostles (or the Pharisees)... who gets to decide what should be applied in our lives?

Vakeros
Mar 5th 2014, 04:25 PM
Where do you get the idea that we are ALL sent? The Great Commission in Greek does not say what we teach it as today brother. The "Go" in English is a command, but in the Greek it is translated from, it is not, it is passive. It is, "As you go." The part of the sentence that is in command form is the "Make disciples." So, "As you go, TEACH!" In other words, live your life in such a way that the dark world around us sees the light of God in us, and when they are drawn to that and begin to ask questions, we have a willing ear that will hear so we teach. Some are "sent" but not all are sent in the manner in which the apostles were sent. That is why Paul phrased a somewhat rhetorical question like this: "Are all apostles? are all prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?" The obvious answer to each is NO, which means not all are sent. Blessings.
We are ALL sent into the world to be salt and light etc. However I did make the point that this isn't the same as being "sent" by the church, which is a specific conscious sending out as led by the Spirit. So not all are sent by the church, but we are all going as aliens and strangers.

LandShark
Mar 5th 2014, 06:03 PM
Matt 10:16, John 17:18, John 20:21

God sends all of us somewhere... that does not mean that we are all apostles!

You have to be more careful of your words. You defined an Apostle as a "sent one" and then said "we are all sent." Now we are not all apostles but still all sent??? :)

LandShark
Mar 5th 2014, 06:06 PM
We are ALL sent into the world to be salt and light etc.

But it is our LIVES, our WALK that reflects His light. We are said to, "do all things in the name of Jesus." That part about "doing it in the name of" means BOTH doing it according to His authority AND doing it in a manner that reflects His character attributes to the world around us. Some are SENT to be missionaries, but by in large the mission of MOST is now be that light and when folks see God in you and are drawn by the Spirit in you, we teach. We are not all apostles.

keck553
Mar 5th 2014, 06:08 PM
Not sure why people get all excited over a title. Moses was a servant.

Slug1
Mar 5th 2014, 06:18 PM
Not sure why people get all excited over a title. Moses was a servant.Somewhere in this thread I made comment about how those who are actual apostles never say much about themselves as an apostle... they're too busy doing God's good work to sling the title around and quite frankly, probably don't even consider themselves an apostle because in humbleness, they are just a servant.

Vakeros
Mar 5th 2014, 06:33 PM
But it is our LIVES, our WALK that reflects His light. We are said to, "do all things in the name of Jesus." That part about "doing it in the name of" means BOTH doing it according to His authority AND doing it in a manner that reflects His character attributes to the world around us. Some are SENT to be missionaries, but by in large the mission of MOST is now be that light and when folks see God in you and are drawn by the Spirit in you, we teach. We are not all apostles.
I agree that not all are apostles in the strict sense - only those called and set apart and sent are. Yet we are all called by God, we are set apart (made holy) and we are told that as we go we take Him as a witness.

ChangedByHim
Mar 5th 2014, 06:52 PM
You have to be more careful of your words. You defined an Apostle as a "sent one" and then said "we are all sent." Now we are not all apostles but still all sent??? :)
I was very careful with my words.

All apostles are sent ones but not all sent ones are not apostles. Not difficult.

keck553
Mar 5th 2014, 10:46 PM
Somewhere in this thread I made comment about how those who are actual apostles never say much about themselves as an apostle... they're too busy doing God's good work to sling the title around and quite frankly, probably don't even consider themselves an apostle because in humbleness, they are just a servant.

Amen and amen

"I must decrease so He can increase"

ChangedByHim
Mar 7th 2014, 09:44 PM
I'm always interested in what you're inspired to write :)

I'm going to be running a 2-day free promo this Saturday and Sunday. If you have a tablet or smart phone with the kindle app, you can download it for free this weekend. The link is below.

Modern Day Apostles (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ISDSZM6)

Slug1
Mar 8th 2014, 03:07 AM
I'm going to be running a 2-day free promo this Saturday and Sunday. If you have a tablet or smart phone with the kindle app, you can download it for free this weekend. The link is below.

Modern Day Apostles (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ISDSZM6)Hooah, I just check on the site. I have the kindle app on my phone so I will use that route :)

Boo
Mar 8th 2014, 09:43 AM
Almost everything Jesus said in the gospels was to the apostles (or the Pharisees)... who gets to decide what should be applied in our lives?

I get to decide - with God's help - what God wants me to understand and apply. Jesus spoke to His disciples, but he provided instructions on how to live, how to become righteous, how to please God. It is not rocket surgery to know which words are for us even though they were not spoken to us. It is also not difficult to see which words were instructions for those disciples. We can set ourselves apart from this world and do good works for our loving father without having to think that Jesus commanded us to do these things through scriptures. We can do them because God speaks to our hearts and guides us that way.

We can also refuse - and miss out on the many great blessings that are in store for us.

Our blessings come from doing what we do out of love for God and our neighbor - and not because someone teaches that God said we have to.

If God sends me - then I am the only one who may know that God sent me. If he does not start a burning bush for the whole neighborhood to see, then the message is for me and to me. I claim no title because of it other than a child of God - and a servant. Hopefully, I will garner support when I need it from those who can see that God is using me to do His will. It surely is not because I claim to be an apostle.

Title are for man and they please man. Sometimes, there is a legal requirement by our government for one to hold a title, but that is merely for government paperwork. Other than that, the only title I really want is "good and faithful servant" from God and "brother" from everyone else.

ChangedByHim
Mar 8th 2014, 12:32 PM
I get to decide - with God's help - what God wants me to understand and apply.

That's my point. But you don't get to decide for me :)

Slug1
Mar 8th 2014, 07:51 PM
Downloaded..............

Balabusha
Mar 9th 2014, 05:14 AM
Very interesting book CBH, that must have taken some time to write. I have never heard of a 5 fold ministry

ChangedByHim
Mar 9th 2014, 09:46 PM
Very interesting book CBH, that must have taken some time to write. I have never heard of a 5 fold ministry
Hi Karaite. It's a book that has been borne with some experience and not just study. That was the longest part.

Boo
Mar 10th 2014, 10:10 AM
That's my point. But you don't get to decide for me :)

Absolutely. God gave us text to teach us about Him and about history. We will be judged for what we do with it.

Do we teach others accurately from that text, or do we wing it with what feels good and profitable?

Man tends to make it into a rule book. Even when there were only the books from Moses, that is what man did. After we were given the new covenant and read in it where Jesus chastised the Pharisees, we do it all over again. Only this time, we use the New Testament to make a list of rules that we teach man that he should live by. In so doing, we again remove God out of the equation and teach things that are incorrect.

Churches seem to teach man how to "act like a Christian" rather than lead people to become one by teaching them how to follow the Holy Spirit along the way.

We also do not let people read the bible and discuss it with us. Those who claim to be teachers - how many actually hold discussion sessions that go into any depth? I have yet to see a church that does that. They buy preprinted books that use up a whole 1-hour period which leaves no room for any discussion. People are simply told that "The right answer is....." That does not teach one who reads the bible and has questions. That simply teaches sheep who do not read and leaves the true seeker empty.