Featured Apostles, prophets and manifestations of the Holy Spirit

On the thread created to express contempt for Russ Moore, Yeshua1 made a vague accusation against Moore about his trying to find "a modern day Prophet(sic)." Yeshua1 was politely asked to clarify and back up his allegation. Yeshua1 tried to turn the conversation in other directions, and eventually admitted that he MIGHT have misattributed his incoherent claim.

That led to the following series of exchanges:

IN ORDER NOT TO COMPLETELY TAKE THE PREVIOUS THREAD OFF TOPIC, I WILL CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION IN THE NEXT POST.

 

Anyone who has even casually read the Gospels and Acts knows this is false.

While the sign gifts did function through apostles, they also functioned through others. Why would Paul give instructions to the Corinthian congregation about the manifestations of the Spirit (aka “sign gifts”) if they should not expect to see them manifested amongst themselves and in the congregation (see the entire argument in 1 Corinthians 12)? Paul explicitly ties the usage of those gifts to the interconnectedness of the body of Christ, showing the Corinthians that they must function together. If we assert that the manifestations are only for apostles, Paul’s teaching makes no sense.

Regarding persons other than apostles who manifest the “sign gifts,” let me give some examples:

The Seventy-Two:

Luke 10:1, 8-9 - Now after this the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come. ...Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is served to you; and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’...​

Deacons:

Stephen and Phillip (among others) were selected as the first deacons:

Acts 6:5 - The announcement found approval with the whole congregation; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte from Antioch.​

-- Stephen the Deacon Manifested Holy Spirit Power

Acts 6:8 - And Stephen, full of grace and power, was performing great wonders and signs among the people.​

-- Philip the Deacon Manifested Holy Spirit Power

Acts 8:6 - The crowds were paying attention with one mind to what was being said by Philip, as they heard and saw the signs which he was performing.

Acts 8:13 - Now even Simon himself believed; and after being baptized, he continued on with Philip, and as he observed signs and great miracles taking place, he was repeatedly amazed.

Acts 8:39-40 - When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord snatched Philip away; and the eunuch no longer saw him, but went on his way rejoicing. But Philip found himself at Azotus, and as he passed through he kept preaching the gospel to all the cities, until he came to Caesarea.​

This seems to be the real issue. You are confusing manifestations (“sign gifts”) of the Holy Spirit with an office. Gifts are given to all, while some are called into special roles (“offices”). In regard to the manifestations of the Holy Spirit, I believe these are different from “spiritual gifts” given elsewhere as a mode of service. Manifestations are enablings given, as needed, to believers in ministry activities.

I also think you are confusing the gift of an apostle with The Twelve whom Jesus selected to represent the 12 tribes of Israel. He led them as God led the 12 tribes in the wilderness. While there were 12 close disciples, many other disciples were usually with Jesus, including women, many of them from the very beginning in Galilee (see Luke 8:1-3; Matthew 27:55). Moreover, the category of apostles includes more than just The Twelve original persons directly selected by Jesus. It also includes Matthias (replacement for Judas Iscariot), Paul, Barnabas (Acts 14:3-4, 14), Andronicus, Junia (Romans 16:7), and probably a number of others in the first century of the church.

So when someone says they are “called” to ministry, they are lying? When a church prays for guidance, and guidance comes, we can’t trust it? Of course not. God is still giving revelation.

What you are probably obsessing over is that I allow for the theoretical possibility that additional scripture might be written. It seems you have taken that to mean that I’m open to anything anyone claims is scripture, which is simply false. The reality is that I am unwilling to make a claim that the Bible does not make, namely, that new scripture is not possible. Since we have not seen any new scripture in 2,000 years, I do not expect anything to turn up now or in the future. In a practical sense, God gave us a written biblical foundation and He still speaks regarding specific things for His people as He desires. There is no one functioning as part of The Twelve anymore, and we don’t need a vicar for Christ (like a pope), since God speaks to groups and individuals.

 

On the other thread, Logos1560 posted this:

 

PART 1 of 2

You made two assertions:

(1) Apostles must have “seen Christ.”
While we know that the original Twelve and Matthias saw Jesus (among many other men and women) were disciples of Jesus from the beginning in Galilee, we also know that Paul was not a disciple of Jesus until after the Ascension and the martyrdom of Stephen. Moreover, Paul saw Jesus in a vision, not in a “natural” way like the previous persons I mentioned. So “seeing” Christ could conceivably extend to anyone who has seen Christ in a vision.

(2) Apostles must have been eyewitnesses of what they testified.
While the original Twelve (perhaps not Matthias) could tell all sorts of details from the teaching and activities of the inner circle of disciples, Paul did not hesitate to teach about events he DID NOT witness, such as the Last Supper (see 1 Corinthians 11:23-26).​

Let’s look at the scripture you cited for these assertions:

John 15:27 - …and you are testifying as well, because you have been with Me from the beginning.​

Speaking to the original Twelve (actually only eleven, since Judas had already left to betray Jesus), Jesus is simply stating what the eleven will be doing in the future. It does not exclude anyone from testifying about Jesus, since we are all called to do that.

Acts 1:21-22 - Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us— beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us—one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.”​

Peter wants to replace Judas with another, so they set some standards as to who can be one of The Twelve. Lots of people make the mistake of confusing The Twelve with all of the apostles. All of The Twelve are apostles, but not all of the apostles are part of the Twelve. For instance, Barnabas was an apostle (Acts 14:3-4, 14) and signs and wonders were manifested through him (Acts 14:3-4, 15:12). Andronicus and Junia were also apostles (see Romans 16:7).

The Twelve were a symbolic number of close disciples/apostles whom Jesus selected to represent the 12 tribes of Israel. He led them as God led the 12 tribes in the wilderness. While there were 12 close disciples, many other disciples were usually with Jesus, including women, many of them from the very beginning in Galilee (see Luke 8:1-3; Matthew 27:55). The Twelve was such a fixed image that Paul referred to The Twelve when there were actually only 11 present (1 Corinthians 15:4-6), since Judas was already dead and Matthias was not selected until after the Ascension:

...and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep.

It’s not an error, simply a reference to the particular office that The Twelve possessed. And don’t miss that Paul was an apostle without being part of The Twelve!

Other scripture you cited:

1 Corinthians 9:1 - Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?​

These rhetorical questions are intended for Paul’s audience to answer “yes.” However, these rhetorical questions do not establish the assertion that someone must have seen the Christ in the flesh (since Paul did not) to be an apostle. He’s simply not attempting to teach such a thing with these questions.

1 John 1:1 - What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life...​

Yes, John was an eyewitness. That does not restrict apostleship to seeing Jesus in the flesh.

Galatians 1:11-12 - For I would have you know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel which was preached by me is not of human invention. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.​

This cuts against your assertion that one has to have seen Christ, unless you grant that anyone who has a valid vision is an apostle.

Acts 10:39-43 - We are witnesses of all the things that He did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They also put Him to death by hanging Him on a cross. God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He be revealed, not to all the people, but to witnesses who had been chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He ordered us to preach to the people, and to testify solemnly that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. All the prophets testify of Him, that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”​

Peter uses the collective “we” (since he was the only disciple of Christ present in the home of Cornelius) to speak of either “The Twelve” or all of the disciples of Jesus. Certainly he is an eyewitness, but this does not establish your assertion that only eyewitnesses to Jesus in the flesh can testify of Him.

2 Peter 1:16-19 - For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such a declaration as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory: “This is My beloved Son with whom I am well pleased”— and we ourselves heard this declaration made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain. And so we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.​

Peter again uses the collective “we” to speak of the three disciples (Peter, James, and John) who were witnesses of the transfiguration of Jesus. Again, he is an eyewitness, but this does not establish your assertion that only eyewitnesses to Jesus in the flesh can testify of Him.

Your first two assertions are not nearly as definitive as they initially appear. In fact, your scripture references undermine them.

CONTINUED

 

PART 2 of 2

I agree completely. Your citations for this are valid.

I just need to note that Paul, when writing 2 Corinthians 12:12, is NOT saying that ONLY apostles perform signs, wonders, and miracles. Deacons like Stephen and Philip also performed miracles, not to mention the 72 disciples Jesus sent out during His ministry.

I agree completely. Your citations for this are valid.

 

Almost certainly Matthias, since he was elected to The Twelve to replace Judas. Paul was an apostle, but not part of The Twelve. The same with Barnabas, Andronicus, Junia, and probably others.

Remember, Revelation is using lots of symbols, and The Twelve that Jesus selected were symbolic of the 12 tribes of Israel (although there were actually 13 tribes).

 

PART 2 of 2

I agree. Your citations for this are valid.

I just want to note that Paul, when writing 2 Corinthians 12:12, is NOT saying that ONLY apostles perform signs, wonders, and miracles.

Yes, I agree. Your citations for this are valid.

NOPE.

You cited:

Revelation 22:18 - I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book...​

You need to remember, (a) “this book” is the Book of Revelation, not the Bible; (b) the New Testament writings were not collected for many years after Revelation was written, so it was not written to “close” the Bible; (c) and the Gospel of John and the three Johannine epistles (1 John, 2 John, and 3 John) were not written until after Revelation. If you make the claim that the last chapter of Revelation closes out the New Testament when it was written, then you must reject four beloved books of the New Testament, two of which you have already cited in defense of your views.

I tend to agree, but not because of these scriptures you cited:

Revelation 22:18 - I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book...​

I just covered this one.

Romans 15:4 - For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.​

Paul is making reference to the Old Testament, not the New Testament. He has just quoted from Psalm 69. It makes me wonder if you have actually read these passages or you have just cut and pasted from somewhere.

John 20:31 - ...but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name...​

This does not support your assertion. Beyond that, this was almost certainly written after Revelation, so if you hold your previous assertion to be true, this isn’t scripture.

Revelation 22:18 - I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book...​

This does not support your assertion.

1 Corinthians 13:10 - ...but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away with.​

You make a huge assumption that the “perfect” is referring to the canon of scripture. Most likely, in its context, it is referring to the fullness of the Kingdom of God, when all things are restored.

Ephesians 2:20 - ...having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone...​

Certainly the apostles and prophets are foundational, but that does not mean that they don’t exist now. I think there is some confusion about “apostles” and “prophets” with detractors assuming that these present gifts to the church have some sort of ecclesiastical authority as vicars of Christ (like a pope), but I am not arguing that at all. Again, this seems to be part of confusing apostles with “The Twelve.”

Ephesians 3:5 - ...which in other generations was not made known to mankind, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit...​

This simply does not support your assertion.

 

You are confusing "forthtelling" with "foretelling."

In my understanding of the manifestation gifts (aka "sign gifts"), they are acts of God working through whoever is available for whoever has a need -- based on the will of God for that situation. Therefore, all Christians potentially can be a vessel to heal others, but no one has "the gift of healing." A person cannot choose to make healing happen outside of the will of God for the moment.

Do you think Jesus did this? I am unaware of this kind of healing taking place in the Gospels. Are you demanding evidence beyond what Jesus gave?

Again, no one has "the gift of miracles," but miracles may occur through any Christian. But even so, why are you demanding such foolish displays of God's power? Jesus did nothing like that. He explicitly rejected Satan's temptation to turn stones to bread and cast himself from the pinnacle of the Temple, acts significantly less foolish and selfish than your mountain-moving exercise.

 

I'm not sure who is being asked this question, but I'll go ahead and answer.

No, not at all. Logos1560 made a claim that there could be no additional scripture written citing Revelation 22, completely forgetting that the Gospel of John and 1 John, 2 John, and 3 John, were written after Revelation.

I'm not completely sure I understand your question, but I think your question has something to do with the fact that there were/are more than 12 apostles, and you find that to somehow conflict with the symbolic representation in Revelation 21:14.

We can be absolutely sure that there were more than 12 apostles (see previous posts for documentation), but I believe the passage in Revelation 21:14 is referring to The Twelve, which is a distinct group of apostles -- the original surviving eleven picked by Jesus early in His ministry, and Matthias, selected after the Ascension of Christ and before Pentecost.

I agree completely.