No Prophets!

[tturt]

I haven't studied church history but looking at the apostles' responsibilities:
1. preach the gospel (Rom. 15:20),
2. plant churches (1Co 3:10),
3. prayed, fasted, and selected church officials (Acts 14:21-23),
4. clarified foundation (Gal 1:7),
5. promoted unity (Eph. 4:1-16), &
6. signs and wonders (2 Cor. 12:12).

Isn't this what the top church officials do today - no matter what their "title?"

 

[JDIBe]

I haven't studied church history but looking at the apostles' responsibilities:
1. preach the gospel (Rom. 15:20),
2. plant churches (1Co 3:10),
3. prayed, fasted, and selected church officials (Acts 14:21-23),
4. clarified foundation (Gal 1:7),
5. promoted unity (Eph. 4:1-16), &
6. signs and wonders (2 Cor. 12:12).

Isn't this what the top church officials do today - no matter what their "title?"

But to that list you also have to add the qualification found in Acts 1:15-22....

15 And in these days Peter stood up in the midst of the brethren, and said (and there was a multitude of persons gathered together, about a hundred and twenty),
16 Brethren, it was needful that the Scripture should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was guide to them that took Jesus.
17 For he was numbered among us, and received his portion in this ministry.
18 (Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
19 And it became known to all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch that in their language that field was called Akeldama, that is, The field of blood.)
20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take.
21 Of the men therefore that have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and went out among us,
22 beginning from the baptism of John, unto the day that he was received up from us, of these must one become a witness with us of his resurrection.

....and I Cor 9:1

1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord?

Apparently, one of the requirements was you had to be an eye-witness to Jesus and His Minstry. I don't think there are any left alive that fulfill this qualification.

So although the men you describe would be doing great and valuable things, I don't think you could call them Apostles.

 

[tturt]

Paul in Romans 1:1 declared that he was an apostle yet he did not see Jesus when he was in human form.

Also, from all the items listed as responsibilities, there is nothing to indicate that those were to stop when the original apostles died so therefore, there has to be church leadership regardless of the title. So based on those scriptures the office isn't man-made.

This has been discussed since the very beginning so I'm sure it will be discussed til the end of time.

Whenever someone is ready, let's discuss prophets and prophecy.

 

[JDIBe]

[F Antiqua]Paul in Romans 1:1 declared that he was an apostle yet he did not see Jesus when he was in human form.[/FONT]

[F Antiqua]Also, from all the items listed as responsibilities, there is nothing to indicate that those were to stop when the original apostles died so therefore, there has to be church leadership regardless of the title. So based on those scriptures the office isn't man-made.[/FONT]

[F Antiqua]This has been discussed since the very beginning so I'm sure it will be discussed til the end of time. [/FONT]

[F Antiqua] Whenever someone is ready, let's discuss prophets and prophecy.[/FONT]

But he did see Him and was chosen specifically by Him.

I Cor 9:1

1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord?

I agree there has to be church leadership. That is what Elders and Deacons are for. Qualifications for those are clearly laid out in the NT. No such list for the continuation of apostles. As for your statement that this has been discussed from the very beginning, this is what I have been looking for. It HASN'T been discussed from the very beginning. That's one of my difficulties with this. Don't you think it would have? The thread on the Anabaptist forum seems to indicate it originated in the mid 1990's (or at the earliest, 1940's). Anybody, give me something (anything) that shows me any sort of succession of Apostles in early church history or beyond I could look at. Anything.

But I don't wish to hold the discussion up. Feel free to PM me anything else relevant to my concerns.

 

[noholdsbarred]

My mom has been prophessied to in the past, both were the same prophesy, and now it is starting to come true. On two separate occassions she was told she and my father would preach around the world, and now my parents are getting involved with a missions group and in Feb my dad is going to Etheopia.

lol i like your avatar!

The Five Fold Ministry lives in the true believer in Christ. These particular disciples/believers will teach the true doctrines of the Living God to all persons, for it will be Christ himself who speaks.

Thank you for your question.

nhb

 

[Flame]

Well, I would have to say at this point...

I definately don't believe Apostles exist and...
The gift of prophesy still exists, but not in the overt, miraculous way it did in the 1st century.

Evangelists, pastors, and teachers definately are with us today and have been continuously from the 1st Century to today.

So I guess that's a 3.5 out of 5.

O.K., as to Apostles, I think they still exist. Granted, they can not travel with Jesus as the 12 did. But, i do know people who are in my opinion Apotles. They follow and live by his every word. I consider myself to be a follower of Christ. I however am no where near these individuals. The other thing to consider is this. We see things in our own line of vision. What we see around us and in the news. Most of what we see and hear takes place in our own country. We MUST consider, the Scriptures are all encompassing. Meaning the lessons and stories contained within came from varying countries and locations and compiled in a registry of events if you will. How do we know in fact what is going on in remote areas of the Earth? Example: There is a small country in Africa, the name slips my mind right now however, A man claiming to be a profit of God in the late 80's, prophisied to the King that IF the King and his people would give their hearts to God, God would end the drought in this country. The King agreed, and decreed that this was now a nation of and under God. The drought ended. Surrounding countries are to this day still in drought. I would say that a true prophet was on earth in the 80's!

 

[JDIBe]

O.K., as to Apostles, I think they still exist. Granted, they can not travel with Jesus as the 12 did. But, i do know people who are in my opinion Apotles. They follow and live by his every word. I consider myself to be a follower of Christ. I however am no where near these individuals. The other thing to consider is this. We see things in our own line of vision. What we see around us and in the news. Most of what we see and hear takes place in our own country. We MUST consider, the Scriptures are all encompassing. Meaning the lessons and stories contained within came from varying countries and locations and compiled in a registry of events if you will. How do we know in fact what is going on in remote areas of the Earth? Example: There is a small country in Africa, the name slips my mind right now however, A man claiming to be a profit of God in the late 80's, prophisied to the King that IF the King and his people would give their hearts to God, God would end the drought in this country. The King agreed, and decreed that this was now a nation of and under God. The drought ended. Surrounding countries are to this day still in drought. I would say that a true prophet was on earth in the 80's!

I know some people like you describe. They are wonderful people, but that doesn't make them Apostles. Apostle is not an honorary title. It is a description of people in the past. So far I still haven't got a clear list of qualifications as to what makes an Apostle an Apostle or any historical evidence of them. I know there are people out there that we are all in awe of. To give them the honor we wish to bestow we might call them an Apostle because it is the highest honor we can think of. But that doesn't make them an Apostle. It just makes them really good people. They aren't any less great without the title.

 

[tturt]

When Matthias was selected to be the 13th apostle, this indicates that apostles were to continue. He was a discipline then became an apostle. This indicates that apostles were the church leadership. Act 1:26 "And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." Why do that if apostles weren't suppose to continue after the original ones died?

When the church became the Catholic church -

This isn't meant to be a dissertion on the Catholic church nor is this meant as a slam against any group of believers.

After reviewing Roman Catholic history and what various popes did while they were in office wasn't Christ-like:
1. In relationship to Wycliffe, “ The Pope was so infuriated by his teachings and his translation of the Bible into English, that 44 years after Wycliffe had died, he ordered the bones to be dug-up, crushed, and scattered in the river!” http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/john-wycliffe.html
2. John Huss: “One of his pamphlets stated, “…that no pope or bishop had the right to take up the sword in the name of the Church; he should pray for his enemies and bless those that curse him; man obtains forgiveness of sins by real repentance, not through money.”
3. The custom had arisen, at celebrations of the Lord's Supper, of distributing the consecrated bread to all Christians in good standing who desired to receive it, but restricting the chalice to the celebrant alone. Huss denounced this restriction as contrary to Holy Scripture and to the ancient tradition of the Church.
4. He also held that Church officials ought to exercise spiritual powers only, and not be earthly governors.
5. Matters came to a head when one claimant (later declared unfit) proclaimed a sale of indulgences to raise money for a war against his rivals. Huss was horrified at the idea of selling spiritual benefits to finance a war between two claimants to the title "Servant of the Servants of God," and said so. http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/7.html

I can see why the title "apostle" was dropped.

Additionally, why hold apostles and prophets in suspect and then accept teachers, pastors and evangelists? The basic responsibilities haven't changed. Plenty of teachers, pastors, and evangelists have made mistakes as well AS have we ALL.

Also, whether church leadership is called "apostle" or not, whether the five fold ministry has been observed through the centuries or not, does not relieve us of the responsibility today.

 

[tturt]

These are the Apostles' responsibilities – may be more but at least these:
1. preach the gospel such as Rom 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.
2. plant churches such as 1Co 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
3. prayed, fasted, and selected church officials such as Act 14:23 And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed.
4. clarified foundation such as Gal 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
5. promoted unity such as Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, Eph 4:6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. Eph 4:7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Eph 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
6. signs and wonders 2Co 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

 

[JDIBe]

When Matthias was selected to be the 13th apostle, this indicates that apostles were to continue. He was a discipline then became an apostle. This indicates that apostles were the church leadership. Act 1:26 "And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." Why do that if apostles weren't suppose to continue after the original ones died?

I believe the answer can be found in the underlined portion of the passage I posted in post #64, Acts 1:15-22

1. To fulfill the prophesy of David in the book of Psalms.
2. To join in being an eye-witness of the resurrection of Jesus.

Two questions naturally arise from reading the passage:

1. Are there any other Apostles that David was refering to when he said, "Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take."?
2. Are there any candidates today that you can think of that walked the earth with and are an eye-witness to the resurrection of Jesus?

If you can honestly answer "yes" to both of these questions, then ok, I'm with you. Otherwise, I don't think you can make a case for apostolic succession from this passage.

[F New Roman]Additionally, w[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR]hy hold apostles and prophets in suspect and then accept teachers, pastors and evangelists? The basic responsibilities haven't changed. Plenty of teachers, pastors, and evangelists have made mistakes as well AS have we ALL.

Also, whether church leadership is called "apostle" or not, whether the five fold ministry has been observed through the centuries or not, does not relieve us of the responsibility today.

BTW, to your list of qualifications/ responsibilities of Apostles, you might add specifically "casting out demons" and "miraculously healing the sick"

Matt 10:1-4

1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.


Why hold Apostles and Prophets in suspect? There are some that would argue miraculous signs are not needed anymore now that we have the Perfect Word of God. There will always be a need for teachers, evangelists, and overseers in the church. I feel all of the responsibilities, except (and some would say including...) the miraculous gifts given to the Apostles and early Christians, can be carried on by the other three.

I guess what really worries me about the whole apostle thing, the thing that really jumps out at me off your qualification list is nos. 3&4...

3. prayed, fasted, and selected church officials (Acts 14:21-23),
4. clarified foundation (Gal 1:7),

It seems to me from looking at the thread on the Anabaptist forum and study on my own, that there is the distinct possibility that there are some who are trying to elevate themselves to a higher position than they ought to have in the Church. By creating this new office, they now claim the authority to "select church officials", and "clarify foundation" (translation: say things equal in authority to Scripture) instead of being subject to them.

Where I perceive the road ends that you have begun to travel is here...

1. "apostles" will claim authority equal to the original ones.
2. What they say is infallible and equal in authority to Scripture. (I would submit this is already beginning among some in the Pentecostal Movement)

As long as what the "apostles" say is in accordance with the Word of God, then I don't really have a problem and I'm not worried about you. HOWEVER, I am concerned there will come a day when an "apostle" will tell you to do something in direct violation of the Scriptures. What will you do then? This is a question you need to consider now before you go any further.

Perhaps none of this will happen. Please don't take this as disparaging your beliefs. Rather take it as a genuine concern for your spiritual well-being. If it comes across any other way, please know it is because of my poor choice of words in expressing myself rather than what is in my heart.

 

[tturt]

I don't take your input as disparing at all. If an apostle says something that opposes scripture, then they've made a mistake. Is it a different interpretation of scripture than the norm? Sometimes I think our negative experiences cause us to question other things.

Posted: "of that walked the earth with and are an eye-witness to the resurrection of Jesus" Then Paul would not have been an apostle as he stated in Romans 1:1.

posted: "the miraculous gifts given to the Apostles and early Christians, can be carried on by the other three." That's not the order established in God's Word.

The apostles I know do deliverance and pray for healing.

In other discusses, I've ask - What if the Lord audibly spoke and said to you that was His plan for your life?

Of course, you don't have to respond. It is a question I ask myself. Could I faithfully waited 25 years for a baby like Sarah and Abraham was expected to do? Could I have allowed myself to be thrown into a fire like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego? etc.

In fact, spending time this weekend researching this, I'm more convinced than ever that apostles and prophets are for today.

 

[Flame]

I believe the answer can be found in the underlined portion of the passage I posted in post #64, Acts 1:15-22

1. To fulfill the prophesy of David in the book of Psalms.
2. To join in being an eye-witness of the resurrection of Jesus.

Two questions naturally arise from reading the passage:

1. Are there any other Apostles that David was refering to when he said, "Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take."?
2. Are there any candidates today that you can think of that walked the earth with and are an eye-witness to the resurrection of Jesus?

If you can honestly answer "yes" to both of these questions, then ok, I'm with you. Otherwise, I don't think you can make a case for apostolic succession from this passage.





BTW, to your list of qualifications/ responsibilities of Apostles, you might add specifically "casting out demons" and "miraculously healing the sick"

Matt 10:1-4

1 And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease.
2 Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother;
3 Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus;
4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.


Why hold Apostles and Prophets in suspect? There are some that would argue miraculous signs are not needed anymore now that we have the Perfect Word of God. There will always be a need for teachers, evangelists, and overseers in the church. I feel all of the responsibilities, except (and some would say including...) the miraculous gifts given to the Apostles and early Christians, can be carried on by the other three.

I guess what really worries me about the whole apostle thing, the thing that really jumps out at me off your qualification list is nos. 3&4...

3. prayed, fasted, and selected church officials (Acts 14:21-23),
4. clarified foundation (Gal 1:7),

It seems to me from looking at the thread on the Anabaptist forum and study on my own, that there is the distinct possibility that there are some who are trying to elevate themselves to a higher position than they ought to have in the Church. By creating this new office, they now claim the authority to "select church officials", and "clarify foundation" (translation: say things equal in authority to Scripture) instead of being subject to them.

Where I perceive the road ends that you have begun to travel is here...

1. "apostles" will claim authority equal to the original ones.
2. What they say is infallible and equal in authority to Scripture. (I would submit this is already beginning among some in the Pentecostal Movement)

As long as what the "apostles" say is in accordance with the Word of God, then I don't really have a problem and I'm not worried about you. HOWEVER, I am concerned there will come a day when an "apostle" will tell you to do something in direct violation of the Scriptures. What will you do then? This is a question you need to consider now before you go any further.

Perhaps none of this will happen. Please don't take this as disparaging your beliefs. Rather take it as a genuine concern for your spiritual well-being. If it comes across any other way, please know it is because of my poor choice of words in expressing myself rather than what is in my heart.

HOWEVER, I am concerned there will come a day when an "apostle" will tell you to do something in direct violation of the Scriptures.

That would be a false Prophet.

 

[JDIBe]

HOWEVER, I am concerned there will come a day when an "apostle" will tell you to do something in direct violation of the Scriptures.

That would be a false Prophet.

Then if your source of guidance is the Scriptures, why would you need an apostle? Why not go directly to the Scriptures?


It seems to me an Apostle is today redundant, and if subordinate to the Scriptures, not necessary. Back in the 1st century, that was not the case.

 

[tturt]

posted: "Then if your source of guidance is the Scriptures, why would you need an apostle? Why not go directly to the Scriptures?"

The same could said regarding pastors, teachers and evangelists.

JDIBe, sorry you had such a negative experience with an apostle.

 

[ChangedHeart]

Well... the biblical viewpoint is this... the gifts of the spirit including the office and ministry of a prophet is still in action for the church today...

The last I checked, the period of the church is still here... so therefore the Holy Ghost is still moving the same today as in the days of the apostles.

All Christians may prophesy... to prophesy is to exhort and edify... whoever does that prophesies. There are still messages to be given to the church... therefore we need prophets who will step up into that ministry or who will let the Holy Ghost lead them to give a message, even if it is only one time.

I am called as a prophet to speak when the Lord tells me, and to be silent when the Lord tells me. That doesn't mean I'm assuming the office of a prophet in the church, but I am willing to say what needs to be said.

But like every gift, some are given to some and some are given to others... and some may have more than one, some may have only one.

 

[jratter]

We do not have any prophets in the church today because we do not need any. We have the complete scripture.

 

[Telrunya]

Then if your source of guidance is the Scriptures, why would you need an apostle? Why not go directly to the Scriptures?


It seems to me an Apostle is today redundant, and if subordinate to the Scriptures, not necessary. Back in the 1st century, that was not the case.

How did we get the NT? The teachings in it were checked against the OT. The Apostle Paul commended the Bereans for checking what he said against scripture. The arguement that we dont need Apostles because we have scripture doesn't hold up to scripture.