Featured Apostles, prophets and manifestations of the Holy Spirit

Yes, you understand my perspective correctly. There was a new apostle selected to replace Judas Iscariot (see Acts 1) between the Ascension and Pentecost. And Paul referred to "the twelve" (see 1 Corinthians 15:4-6), after the Resurrection and before the Ascension, even though Judas Iscariot was dead and Matthias had not yet been selected -- we can safely assume that Matthias was among the hundreds of witnesses. So Paul did not consider himself to be part of "the twelve."

I'm certain that is true. When I was growing up, an oft-repeating saying I heard from many preachers and Sunday School teachers was that Peter and the other apostles jumped the gun by electing Matthias, since he hear nothing in scripture specifically about Matthias after his installation as one of "The Twelve." They would claim that Paul was supposed to replace Judas Iscariot. Of course, that is based on the false belief that there could only be 12 apostles. And, moreover, there are quite a few of "The Twelve" selected by Jesus that are also not referenced by name in scripture beyond the Gospels accounts.

 

It is only problematic to you. You are misrepresenting my position, as usual. I try not to speculate where the Bible is silent. The Bible does not refer to a canon of scripture. This is something that was worked out by the early church. There was a strong consensus as to what books were inspired, so those books were included.

After 2,000 years, well after the Incarnation of Jesus, it is highly unlikely we will see additional written scripture.

However, you should already know this if you have been reading my responses. I'm getting the impression that you don't.

Yes. But that is a different thing than "The Twelve." I have previously responded very specifically to this, but you don't seem to have read it.

As I have demonstrated in previous posts, signs and wonders were/are not limited to the apostles.

No.

I don't know what this means.

Thank you for being fair with my words. I do not proclaim the canon 'open' or 'closed' since I don't think the Bible actually addresses the subject. For all practical purposes, I don't expect Christendom to universally agree on any new written revelation, so that settles the issues in my mind.

 

Jesus called me into ministry, although I do not personally have the gift of an apostle. I would hope that everyone who is in active ministry is called my Jesus into it instead of those who decided to become a minister as a career move.

I don't know how things work in your church, but in every Baptist church I have been a part of, the church recognizes and affirms those that the body believes have already been called by Jesus into ministry, and commissions them to go forth with support from that body.

Sure. But that's why we have a written word of God, to have a somewhat objective test and guide for our faith.

Some people think that granting that there is some possibility that the canon of scripture leaves one vulnerable to Mormons. I have found exactly the opposite. Mormon missionaries are quite used to dismantling belief in the closing of the canon of scripture. When I spent five months in conversation with Mormon missionaries, I granted them the possibility that the canon of scripture might still be open (they were surprised, but happy) until I asked them how one could know whether or not additional scripture was inspired. They jumped to the "burning in the bosom" testimony (which is fine if one wants to shut down their minds and be duped), so I showed them the differences between the teachings of the KJV (which they claim to believe) and the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants. They claim the KJV Bible (and all other translations) have been corrupted, so when you press them to their logical conclusions about the KJV Bible being completely unreliable compared to the Book of Mormon, you simply make that point that their faith is exclusively on Joseph Smith, Jr.'s claims and the texts he created.

Once you get there (not that hard to do), you ask them about Joseph Smith, Jr.'s vision again, and they will give you one of the many versions of Smith's vision that claimed that 'no one was preaching the true gospel upon the earth' at the time of Smith's vision.

Then you simply go to 3 Nephi 28:7-12, 18-23 in the Book of Mormon and have them read Smith's pseudo-King James writing (cribbing from many different Bible stories) where it plainly teaches that the Three Nephites were commissioned by Christ to spread the true gospel in the Americas until the Second Coming, never tasting of death. In Mormon culture, they often talk about the Three Nephites and how members might have encountered one of them in everyday life (something like Christians believing they have "entertained angels unawares"), so they should understand this immediately:

Joseph Smith's vision AND the Book of Mormon cannot both be true.​

Either Joseph Smith, Jr., received a lying vision claiming the gospel was not being preached (contradicting the alleged words of Christ in the Book of Mormon), or the Christ of the Book of Mormon is incorrect (throwing the value of the Book of Mormon away) claiming that the gospel would continue to be proclaimed in the Americas.

At that point, point them back to the King James Bible and explain the story of the Bible and the gospel (going beyond just the atonement) and tell them that the Jesus revealed in the KJV (which they claim to believe) is calling them to follow Him, no matter where it leads.

I have used this technique several times with Mormons and it causes a huge uproar. The first time I tried this line of reasoning, it was with two Mormon missionaries I had been dialoging with. One was so shaken he had an emergency transfer home, and I pray he came to faith in Jesus. His former partner was joined by a new missionary for the next visit, and the former partner essentially told me that he only had two months left on his mission and he was going to finish it (with the private implication to me that he didn't believe it anymore), while the replacement missionary looked on in shock. I was invited to the Stake President's home to have a conversation, and I talked with him at length about Mormon doctrine (with the two missionaries present) and discovered he was less informed about Mormon doctrine than I was. He got very upset by our discussion and I was asked to leave. The next day, the two missionaries stopped by my home to inform me that from that moment onward, they were forbidden to talk to me since they had been informed I was a "son of perdition" and would only harm their faith.

That basic pattern has repeated every time I have talked to Mormons about their faith. One has to be careful to lay the groundwork for trusting the Bible first, otherwise you will likely intellectually drive them into atheism.

 

I strongly disagree. The Great Shepherd is still speaking to His sheep.

Yes, but not every believer is called by God to prepare for and work in certain ministry roles.

I agree completely.

 

Yes, but he was not one of The Twelve. Moreover, there were other apostles beyond just The Twelve and Paul.

I have previously addressed this here. Quoting from that previous post:

--

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.​

--

 

I have essentially said that very thing, but -- unlike you -- I am unwilling to make pronouncements about the Bible that the Bible does not make.

 

Demonstrate your assertion using the scriptures or stop making the claim.

What do you mean by "revelation?" Furthermore, demonstrate your assertion using the scriptures.

 

No I don't. Just because you think I'm an idiot doesn't make me one.

I pointed out how my viewpoint works to undermine Mormonism here.

It's becoming quite clear to me that you don't actually read my responses, you just make accusations. That runs contrary to the spirit of a discussion board.

 

Have you actually thought of the implications of your statement?

You have made the claim that since I don't add to biblical claims my own beliefs, the scripture is not powerful enough to deal with cultists. You are saying that the scripture is inadequate to the task of reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness without adding your own viewpoints to it.

 

Clearly, you don't know the Bible, nor could be bothered to look up my citations in previous posts:

Acts 1:15-17, 21-26
At this time Peter stood up among the brothers and sisters (a group of about 120 people was there together), and said, “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was counted among us and received his share in this ministry... 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.” So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias. And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all people, show which one of these two You have chosen to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.​

Paul was explicitly NOT a replacement for Judas Iscariot, nor was he among The Twelve.