Apostles, prophets and manifestations of the Holy Spirit

[John of Japan]

Could be semantics on how we are defining Apostles, as my understanding would be those who were eyewitnesses to Jesus while living, or he appeared to them after he arose, and had the sign gifts and were able to write down inspired words to us...

The idea that an apostle must be an eyewitness to Christ comes from a misinterpretation of 1 Cor. 9:1, "Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?" These are not statements of qualifications to be an apostle, but grammatically parallel statements of Paul's ministry and situation. Otherwise it would say, "Am I not an apostle because I have seen Jesus?"

Also, if having seen Jesus was a qualification, then being free would be one, but Paul was often imprisoned.

IF we broaden that out to say do not have sign gifts nor inspired teachings, can agree with that use for missionaries for today!

That's kind of what I've been saying all along. But I say it's not simply to "use" for missionaries today, but that missionaries can look to the NT for a description of their tasks: soul winning and church planting. The miracles were incidental to those tasks, and as for the inspired revelation, I've been saying that Luke and Mark were not listed as apostles, so that's a dead end.

 

[Yeshua1]

The idea that an apostle must be an eyewitness to Christ comes from a misinterpretation of 1 Cor. 9:1, "Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?" These are not statements of qualifications to be an apostle, but grammatically parallel statements of Paul's ministry and situation. Otherwise it would say, "Am I not an apostle because I have seen Jesus?"

Also, if having seen Jesus was a qualification, then being free would be one, but Paul was often imprisoned.


That's kind of what I've been saying all along. But I say it's not simply to "use" for missionaries today, but that missionaries can look to the NT for a description of their tasks: soul winning and church planting. The miracles were incidental to those tasks, and as for the inspired revelation, I've been saying that Luke and Mark were not listed as apostles, so that's a dead end.

They wrote inspired texts.... None today can do that!

 

[John of Japan]

They wrote inspired texts.... None today can do that!

Correct. But Barnabas wrote no inspired texts, yet was clearly called an apostle in the inspired book of Acts. Therefore, writing an inspired text does not make you an apostle, nor does not writing one.

 

[Yeshua1]

Correct. But Barnabas wrote no inspired texts, yet was clearly called an apostle in the inspired book of Acts. Therefore, writing an inspired text does not make you an apostle, nor does not writing one.

There does seem to be some kind of a difference though between those who wrote inspired NT books and those who did not?

 

[John of Japan]

There does seem to be some kind of a difference though between those who wrote inspired NT books and those who did not?

Sorry, the only difference I see is that some were lead and empowered to write inspired Scripture and some were not. The Bible itself does not make any other distinction that I know of.

 

[Yeshua1]

Sorry, the only difference I see is that some were lead and empowered to write inspired Scripture and some were not. The Bible itself does not make any other distinction that I know of.

It seems to with Paul though, as he was the Apostle unto the gentiles , and he was revealed the Pauline Justification!

 

[John of Japan]

It seems to with Paul though, as he was the Apostle unto the gentiles , and he was revealed the Pauline Justification!

No offense, but you are starting to repeat yourself. I feel we've discussed this pretty thoroughly.

 

[Yeshua1]

No offense, but you are starting to repeat yourself. I feel we've discussed this pretty thoroughly.

Thanks for your input, as just want to discourage any for thinking that God still is giving forth additional revelations today, and that we have modern day Apostles and Prophets today operating same way as ikn the Bible!

 

[John of Japan]

Thanks for your input, as just want to discourage any for thinking that God still is giving forth additional revelations today, and that we have modern day Apostles and Prophets today operating same way as ikn the Bible!

Got it!

 

[Baptist Believer]

No, I could be wrong about paul, but others have held the same!

Lots of people are wrong about lots of things. The point should be that we don't just go with what our heroes and peers say, but we must determine for ourselves whether or not things are true.

 

[Baptist Believer]

I actually agree with Apostles for today as missionaries, and Prophets for today can be pastors gifted to apply the scriptures into setting...

THEN WHY IN THE WORLD HAVE WE GONE SIX PAGES OVER THIS?

This is essentially what I said in the other thread where this began, yet you refused to concede this point.

...but the Office of both are closed, as see no additional revelations coming forth from God to us thru them.

I have been writing from the beginning that I am talking about sign gifts and giftedness for ministry, not "offices." I specifically mentioned this in post #2 of this thread:

"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."​

The NAR apostles and prophets not that, but in the same sense as were in scriptures to them

Why are you talking about the NAR movement? I haven't even mentioned them, nor have I even referenced their theology except, perhaps, in your imagination.

It's rather clear you either don't read what I write, or you are just so convinced I am wrong about everything you must always oppose me.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Could be semantics on how we are defining Apostles, as my understanding would be those who were eyewitnesses to Jesus while living, or he appeared to them after he arose, and had the sign gifts and were able to write down inspired words to us...

I believe you have been heavily influenced (and misled) by John Macarthur on this point. You have tied the sign gifts to apostles, when the biblical witness do NOT tie them to apostles. For MacArthur, it helps to do this so he can discredit so he can discredit the entire charismatic movement by claiming that God could only use the original Apostles as conduits of sign gifts.

IF we broaden that out to say do not have sign gifts nor inspired teachings, can agree with that use for missionaries for today!

Sign gifts (manifestations of the Holy Spirit) and biblical authorship are two completely different things.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Correct. But Barnabas wrote no inspired texts, yet was clearly called an apostle in the inspired book of Acts. Therefore, writing an inspired text does not make you an apostle, nor does not writing one.

Regarding Barnabas, some people (not me) believe that he wrote Hebrews, so we can't completely rule out Barnabas. Hebrews seems to be written by a Jewish person from Paul's circle, so Barnaba, Apollos, and Priscilla (my opinion), are the most popular contenders.

 

[Baptist Believer]

It seems to with Paul though, as he was the Apostle unto the gentiles , and he was revealed the Pauline Justification!

Paul did not "reveal" anything that was not based on the teachings of Jesus.

Paul was a disciple of Jesus, and his teachings must necessarily be read in light of the teachings of Jesus. Paul did not contradict Jesus, but fleshed out the implications of the teaching of Jesus for the churches, as well as help the early church understand Jesus in light of the Old Testament revelation.

Justification in Paul's gospel is exactly the same as it was in the message of Jesus. There is only one Gospel message, both for the Jew and the Greek. Everyone comes to God through Jesus, whether they knew His name or not. Abraham is saved on the basis of Christ and His redemption. As Paul noted, Abraham was saved through faith (Genesis 15:6 -- cited in Paul's teaching in Galatians 3 and Romans 4).

 

[John of Japan]

Regarding Barnabas, some people (not me) believe that he wrote Hebrews, so we can't completely rule out Barnabas. Hebrews seems to be written by a Jewish person from Paul's circle, so Barnaba, Apollos, and Priscilla (my opinion), are the most popular contenders.

Hard to take a stand on any of the possibilities.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Thanks for your input, as just want to discourage any for thinking that God still is giving forth additional revelations today, and that we have modern day Apostles and Prophets today operating same way as ikn the Bible!

These assertions are completely wrong, yet you STILL don't get it.

God is still speaking today, but it is highly unlikely that there will be any additional scripture given today that all of Christendom will recognize and affirm. If that happens, we can reopen the discussion.

The apostolic and prophetic manifestations of the Spirit still occur today in the same way as in the Bible. I do not see any biblical evidence that there was ever a prophetic "office" in the church, and an apostle is what we call a missionary today. For that matter, I don't think there was an office of "evangelist" in the New Testament, although there were people then and now who were noted for their giftedness in this area -- "Philip the evangelist," referenced in Acts 21:8, actually held the office of deacon (as noted in that same verse) and had four daughters who were prophets. The four unmarried daughters didn't seem to hold an office, but they were well known for their giftedness.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Hard to take a stand on any of the possibilities.

Whoever wrote Hebrews was quite gifted in the natural sense as well as in inspiration. It has become one of my favorite New Testament books because of its richness.

 

[Yeshua1]

THEN WHY IN THE WORLD HAVE WE GONE SIX PAGES OVER THIS?

This is essentially what I said in the other thread where this began, yet you refused to concede this point.


I have been writing from the beginning that I am talking about sign gifts and giftedness for ministry, not "offices." I specifically mentioned this in post #2 of this thread:

"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."​

Why are you talking about the NAR movement? I haven't even mentioned them, nor have I even referenced their theology except, perhaps, in your imagination.

It's rather clear you either don't read what I write, or you are just so convinced I am wrong about everything you must always oppose me.

Do you see the Lord gifting today those with same sign gifts as Apostles were?

 

[Baptist Believer]

Do you see the Lord gifting today those with same sign gifts as Apostles were?

Yes, as needed and according to the will of God.

The sign gifts are active today and are manifested as needed. Regarding "revelations," God still speaks to His people. I know there is a thread of Christendom who is fiercely opposed to that idea, but that does not change the reality of it.
​

The "sign gifts" (aka, manifestations of the Holy Spirit) were never restricted to apostles of any age. The second post in this thread demonstrates this.

 

[Iconoclast]

There are no sign gifts today. There are no Apostles today.