Apostolic Uniqueness

[Baptist Believer]

Only the 12 and Paul received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and worked miracles.

Actually, all of the 120 at Pentecost were baptized into the Holy Spirit, as well as conversions since that time. If you have not been baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, you are not in Christ at all (1 Corinthians 12:13).

Moreover, many people like Philip the deacon performed miracles, for instance, see Acts 8:4-8. Miracles were NOT limited to apostles.

Also the few they laid hands on. The gentiles had the baptism some 7 years later in their outpouring in Peter's presence.

The Samaritans did not receive the Spirit until some of the apostles who had previously wanted to cast down fire on them (Luke 9:54) heard that Samaritans had received the gospel. The apostles needed to see for themselves that such a thing was possible. So God waited until they were there to lay hands on the Samaritans to see for themselves that the Spirit validated their true belief. Normally, God does not wait for that, we receive the Spirit when we believe, because He normally doesn't need to convince His missionaries (apostles) that conversions are valid.

But only one of the 12 or Paul is said to pass the baptism and gifts through their hands.

Actually, if you look carefully at Acts 8:17-18, it states that "they" (Peter and John) were laying hands on the Samaritans, and Simon noticed that the giving of the Spirit occurred through the hand of the apostles (plural).

So it wasn't just Peter.

The gifts began dwindling in the epistles where Paul could no longer heal sick comrades.

This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the manifestations ("sign gifts") of the Holy Spirit. The apostles did not have it within themselves to heal anyone. For that matter, neither did Jesus (read John 4:19-21 and then Matthew 13:58 and Mark 6:5). Healings, and all other manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and empowered and channeled through willing people according to the will of God. They are only under the 'control' of the person channeling God's power when, in God's wisdom, it would be helpful to God's work.

So Paul's inability to heal Timothy or other friends/companions says nothing about "gifts dwindling" (really?).

All believers since Pentecost have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and can seek healing through the prayer of faith.

I agree.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Paul was THE Apostle to the Gentiles, and his books are among the greatest in entire canon, see Romans!

Chick-fil-A makes the greatest chicken sandwich!

I like peanuts!

I primarily use the NASB translation, referencing the Hebrew and Greek texts as needed!

 

[1689Dave]

Actually, all of the 120 at Pentecost were baptized into the Holy Spirit, as well as conversions since that time. If you have not been baptized by the Holy Spirit into Christ, you are not in Christ at all (1 Corinthians 12:13).

Moreover, many people like Philip the deacon performed miracles, for instance, see Acts 8:4-8. Miracles were NOT limited to apostles.


The Samaritans did not receive the Spirit until some of the apostles who had previously wanted to cast down fire on them (Luke 9:54) heard that Samaritans had received the gospel. The apostles needed to see for themselves that such a thing was possible. So God waited until they were there to lay hands on the Samaritans to see for themselves that the Spirit validated their true belief. Normally, God does not wait for that, we receive the Spirit when we believe, because He normally doesn't need to convince His missionaries (apostles) that conversions are valid.


Actually, if you look carefully at Acts 8:17-18, it states that "they" (Peter and John) were laying hands on the Samaritans, and Simon noticed that the giving of the Spirit occurred through the hand of the apostles (plural).

So it wasn't just Peter.


This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the manifestations ("sign gifts") of the Holy Spirit. The apostles did not have it within themselves to heal anyone. For that matter, neither did Jesus (read John 4:19-21 and then Matthew 13:58 and Mark 6:5). Healings, and all other manifestations of the Holy Spirit, and empowered and channeled through willing people according to the will of God. They are only under the 'control' of the person channeling God's power when, in God's wisdom, it would be helpful to God's work.

So Paul's inability to heal Timothy or other friends/companions says nothing about "gifts dwindling" (really?).


I agree.

If you shun what you've been taught and make a fresh study. You will find scripture only supports what I've summarized. Most have it completely wrong today.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Paul was THE Apostle to the Gentiles...

False. There were many apostles to the Gentiles, including his pal, Barnabas (see Acts 13:2-3, 14:3-6, 13-14) . To deny that statement is to deny scripture, although that IS your habit.

...and his books are among the greatest in entire canon, see Romans!

So now you are ranking the Holy Spirit's work?

 

[Baptist Believer]

If you shun what you've been taught and make a fresh study. You will find scripture only supports what I've summarized. Most have it completely wrong today.

I "deconverted" in late 1984 and returned to faith in 1985-86 by reading the Bible for myself. I have actually heard very little teaching on spiritual gifts since that time. About 75% of what I believe was developed by actually paying attention when I read the Bible over the last 35 years or so instead of listening to a preacher or reading a book by someone talking about the gifts. Moreover, as I lived my Christian life, I noticed God's power working through me in certain surprising ways, only to realize that the New Testament actually describes many of those experiences and gives me context for them.

I was raised on the view that you expressed in my home church. I was biased toward your view, but it simply does not match the scriptures, so I changed my convictions.

Note that I have cited scripture to support my position. You have not cited scripture, although I am well aware of the allusions you made to passages of scripture in your original post. Have you actually examined the scripture I cited?

Please tell me, using scripture, how I am misinterpreting the passages I cited, and give evidence for your position. I always yield to the scripture, do you?

 

[Yeshua1]

False. There were many apostles to the Gentiles, including his pal, Barnabas (see Acts 13:2-3, 14:3-6, 13-14) . To deny that statement is to deny scripture, although that IS your habit.


So now you are ranking the Holy Spirit's work?

Peter called Paul THE Apostle sent to the Gentiles, just as he was to the Jews!
And Romans is perhaps single greatest book in the Bible....

 

[Baptist Believer]

Peter called Paul THE Apostle sent to the Gentiles, just as he was to the Jews!

(1) I am unaware of a place where Peter called Paul "THE apostle to the Gentiles." Please cite the passage.
(2) Peter was the first to preach to the Gentiles (Acts 10).
(3) If we apply logic to your claim that Paul is THE [singular] apostle to the Gentiles, then using Peter as an example of apostleship to the Jews would mean that only Peter is an apostle and the rest of The Twelve are not. However, I am not foolish enough to expect you to present a logical argument.
(4) Paul states that he is AN apostle to the Gentiles, but he does not claim to be the only one (see Romans 1:5, 11:13; Galatians 2:8).

And Romans is perhaps single greatest book in the Bible....

I like Romans quite a bit, but I have found my appreciation for the scriptures moves from book to book of the Old and New Testaments as the years continue and certain books speak to various contemporary issues.

Asserting one book is the "single greatest" shows a disregard for the Spirit's inspiration of other books. I have noticed that a lot of people who don't want to deal with Christian obligations like to hide out in Romans and ignore the four gospels, the prophetic writings, and the Old Testament in general.

 

[Yeshua1]

(1) I am unaware of a place where Peter called Paul "THE apostle to the Gentiles." Please cite the passage.
(2) Peter was the first to preach to the Gentiles (Acts 10).
(3) If we apply logic to your claim that Paul is THE [singular] apostle to the Gentiles, then using Peter as an example of apostleship to the Jews would mean that only Peter is an apostle and the rest of The Twelve are not. However, I am not foolish enough to expect you to present a logical argument.
(4) Paul states that he is AN apostle to the Gentiles, but he does not claim to be the only one (see Romans 1:5, 11:13; Galatians 2:8).


I like Romans quite a bit, but I have found my appreciation for the scriptures moves from book to book of the Old and New Testaments as the years continue and certain books speak to various contemporary issues.

Asserting one book is the "single greatest" shows a disregard for the Spirit's inspiration of other books. I have noticed that a lot of people who don't want to deal with Christian obligations like to hide out in Romans and ignore the four gospels, the prophetic writings, and the Old Testament in general.

Romans 11:13

 

[Baptist Believer]

Romans 11:13

The King James translation, and a few others, translates the passage with the definite article (the), while most modern translations translate it as “an,” indicating that there may be more. Just a casual reading of Acts shows there is more than one apostle ministering to the Gentiles.

So where did Peter claim Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles? You failed to answer that one, among all of the other questions I have asked.

 

[Iconoclast]

No one has brought this up yet, and our esteemed OP author is not posting, so I thought I'd fire a preemptory shot across the bows concerning apostleship and what I just posted. Some refer to miracles as the sign of apostleship, but this is mistaken. Miracles are only a means to produce the sign of apostleship, which is souls saved. Note what Paul said in 1 Cor. 9:1-2:

"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? 2 If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord."

Paul clearly says that the Corinthians themselves, souls he saw saved as a result of his ministry, are the "seal" of his apostleship.

Someone will then take me to 2 Cor. 12:12, "Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." But the word "in" there is the Greek en (ἐν), which takes the dative case. Even in a prepositional phrase the dative case often is the dative of means. In other words, Paul is saying that the signs of apostleship were produced "by means" of "patience, signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds." Many people were saved in Corinth because of the miracles they saw and the Gospel Paul preached. The miracles were secondary, not primary. So if you are focusing on the miracles of apostles in the Bible you are missing the whole point of apostleship--people getting saved.

I will get back.at it soon,very busy,heading out for Alabama/Ga.
I am enjoying the interaction....more than the tweets....but I will engage and clarify soon.
I was actually fishing yesterday with some Christian brothers;
Missionary – Bob-Selph | Reformed Baptist Network

 

[Iconoclast]

John of Japan,

Until you distinguish between the 12 and the other NT apostles, you do not have a case.

Hello John,

In the OP> I stated the purpose of this thread.

This thread concerns itself with several issues.

1]What is a biblical Apostle as spoken of in Eph2:20?

2]What if anything makes them Unique from other Christians?

3]Can a biblical case be offered to show a difference?

Unique??? Did they receive any special treatment, gifting, and purpose that other Christians and servants did not receive?
I see in scripture they did indeed. i will attempt to clarify verses and interact with what you men are offering.

Now an important topic such as this has issues and questions that arise, and I look forward to try not to miss or avoid any concern.

Now as I have been driving, fishing, visiting the nursing home, and back on the road I have not been able to respond till now....

John, you made the statement above about distinguishing from the other"alleged" apostles, and yet as you offered a few good quotes I noticed they seemed to support the OP, and answer your question to some extent.

As I did on the previous thread, I'll post here what some leading missiologists have said about this issue, adding some I didn't mention previously:

A. “The word missionary comes from the Latin word mitto, which means ‘to send.’ It is the equivalent of the Greek word apostello, which also means ‘to send.’ The root meaning of the two words is identical.”
J. Herbert Kane, The Making of a Missionary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1975), 13.

B. “To whom should the term 'missionary' be applied?
Obviously today's missionary is not in the same class with the twelve apostles, who must forever remain in a class by themselves (Lk 22:30; Re 21:14).

They do, however, have much in common with the 'second-string' apostles who were sent out by the various churches on teaching and preaching missions to all parts of the Roman Empire.”
Ibid, 14.

John, from your own quote here, your" missiologist"..... is saying what the OP. is trying to establish....
The fact that he speaks of...second-string ....sent ones, shows a distinction.

also from post #20...point F-

F. “

In the New Testament there are two kinds of apostles.


[two kinds again shows a distinction]

First, there is the relatively small group of those who were personally chosen and instructed by the Lord. These men held the office of apostle, to which there is no succession.

again....your quote, from a missiologist shows a distinction

Second, there are those men who had the gift of apostleship and were called ‘messengers [apostoloi] of the churches’ (2 Cor. 8:23). In this group were included such men as Barnabas, Silas, Timothy, Epaphroditus, Andronicus, and Junias.”
David Hesselgrave, Planting Churches Cross-Culturally (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), 95

.[/QUOTE]

These men were mentioned in the other article here;R. Carlton Wynne

THE IDENTITY OF THE APOSTLES
The New Testament, and especially Paul, uses the Greek word apostolos (apostle) in at least two senses. Broadly, it means one who is sent on a specific mission as an envoy or representative of the sender. For example, when Titus’ two companions traveled to collect the Corinthian church’s full contribution for the saints in Jerusalem, they arrived as “messengers [apostoloi] of the churches” in Macedonia (2 Cor. 8:23). Likewise, the Philippian church dispatched Epaphroditus as their “messenger [apostolos] and minister to [Paul’s] need” (Phil. 2:25). This broad use of the term apostolos may reflect an older Jewish legal concept that the messenger resembles the sender insofar as his activity reflects the sender’s will and authority. As Jesus observed, “A servant is not greater than his master, nor is a messenger [apostolos] greater than the one who sent him” (John 13:16).

In its more focused and familiar sense, the word apostolos designates one who was uniquely commissioned by Christ to bear authoritative witness to His person and work. Originally, Jesus chose twelve for this role (Luke 6:13). After Judas’ betrayal, Matthias was “numbered with the eleven apostles” (Acts 1:26). After Christ confronted Saul of Tarsus from heaven on the road to Damascus, Saul—later Paul—became “the least of the apostles” (1 Cor. 15:9).

Others, about whom the New Testament describes no specific appointment by Christ like the examples above, were closely associated with the Apostles and were viewed as functioning within their orbit. This category includes James, the Lord’s brother (1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 1:19), Luke the physician (Col. 4:14), Silas and Timothy (1 Cor. 4:17; 2 Cor. 1:19), Barnabas (1 Cor. 9:5–6), Apollos (1 Cor. 4:6), and perhaps Andronicus and Junias or Junia (Rom. 16:7), among others. The flexibility in how the New Testament uses the term apostolos makes it difficult to determine precisely who among this group were emissaries of churches, close associates of Paul, or official “apostles of Christ” (2 Cor. 11:13). Whatever the exact number, Apostles in the sense of the specific Apostolic office were those who had seen the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1) and were appointed by Him to proclaim and to inscribe divinely approved testimony regarding the facts and meaning of His finished work.

You do not like the use of 1cor9:1, however, it does not stand alone, You yourself used Acts one which gave qualifications for Judas replacement; In post 18, you offered this;
Acts 1:21-22 specifically says, "Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,
Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection."


These qualifications seem to be supportive of the OP.

 

[Iconoclast]

Now I like that both you and Baptist Believer are making a case for reaching the lost, the importance of Missionaries, Church planters, and all related persons being used of God to reach the lost.

I in no way want to denigrate such Kingdom work or workers. That is not the purpose of the OP.
I am looking to use scripture and make a biblical case...for example, by using the secondary use of the term Apostles someone can suggest that all Christians are sent ones....are we all apostles?

In first Cor 12: I have been instructed that this list of questions demand a NO ANSWER-

29 Are all apostles?
are all prophets?
are all teachers?
are all workers of miracles?

30 Have all the gifts of healing?
do all speak with tongues?
do all interpret?

No. The answer is NO.

 

[Iconoclast]

John of Japan,

Until you distinguish between the 12 and the other NT apostles, you do not have a case.

Hello John,

In the OP> I stated the purpose of this thread.

This thread concerns itself with several issues.

1]What is a biblical Apostle as spoken of in Eph2:20?

2]What if anything makes them Unique from other Christians?

3]Can a biblical case be offered to show a difference?

Unique??? Did they receive any special treatment, gifting, and purpose that other Christians and servants did not receive?
I see in scripture they did indeed. i will attempt to clarify verses and interact with what you men are offering.

Now an important topic such as this has issues and questions that arise, and I look forward to try not to miss or avoid any concern.

Now as I have been driving, fishing, visiting the nursing home, and back on the road I have not been able to respond till now....

John, you made the statement above about distinguishing from the other"alleged" apostles, and yet as you offered a few good quotes I noticed they seemed to support the OP, and answer your question to some extent.

 

[Iconoclast]

"John of Japan,

What case?

Apostolic Uniqueness, as I go over the verses offered it will show up.

I don't find the article helpful For example, it makes the mistake of saying that, according to 1 Cor. 9:1 an apostle must have seen Jesus

.

Many people did see Jesus, 1cor15 mentions the five hundred.....however, they were not ordained to be with Him from the beginning;mk3;

14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:

Even Paul relates this to us;Gal1;
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.That revelation was not that of the 500,but rather the ascended Lord Jesus.

That is a unique experience not shared by the so called "second string"

That's a pretty basic error for a scholar to make. (And he is a scholar.) However, the four statements in that verse are syntactically parallel, not causative (saying "because") and thus Paul did not say that he was an apostle because he had seen Jesus. The syntax simply does not bear that idea out.

I do not think any of the Commentators suggest 1 cor 9:1 is a stand-alone verse. We know there were false apostles already on the scene and Paul is giving a defense of His apostleship including gospel fruit of saved persons in response to His preaching and teaching.

Also, the author is not a missiologist. You'd be hard put to find a missiologist who agrees with him. The reason is that missiologists study exactly what it means to be a missionary, and guess what--they find that in the NT in the apostles!

Of course, as foundational the Apostles were used to establish a pattern for the means God intended for the carrying out of the great commission, that does not mean we receive the same promises that this thread will make clear.

 

[Iconoclast]

In post#2 I said this;
What I have posted is the promises were unique to the Apostles when after Jn 13 concluded Jesus public ministry.
The promises of John 14, 15, 16 were to those who heard him with whom He promised the Spirit would

1] guide them into all truth, that is how we have a completed canon.

2] bring to their remembrance things they saw and heard having been with him from the beginning

3] show them...things to come

4] they could not bear all He had been teaching them, but He promised the Spirit would help them in particular.

We were not there, we did not audibly hear Jesus...they did. The Spirit can not bring things to our remembrance things we were not there to hear.Those things they recorded for us, at least those we need to know.,

Again, this was unique to them, no one alive had Jesus tell them the Spirit would do any of these things, nobody.

 

[1689Dave]

False. There were many apostles to the Gentiles, including his pal, Barnabas (see Acts 13:2-3, 14:3-6, 13-14) . To deny that statement is to deny scripture, although that IS your habit.


So now you are ranking the Holy Spirit's work?

Only the 12 and Paul had the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Also those they laid hands on. Philip, Stephen, and such. The rest had the Holy Spirit just as all believers do. Where are the signs and wonders of the Apostles today if you are right?

 

[1689Dave]

I "deconverted" in late 1984 and returned to faith in 1985-86 by reading the Bible for myself. I have actually heard very little teaching on spiritual gifts since that time. About 75% of what I believe was developed by actually paying attention when I read the Bible over the last 35 years or so instead of listening to a preacher or reading a book by someone talking about the gifts. Moreover, as I lived my Christian life, I noticed God's power working through me in certain surprising ways, only to realize that the New Testament actually describes many of those experiences and gives me context for them.

I was raised on the view that you expressed in my home church. I was biased toward your view, but it simply does not match the scriptures, so I changed my convictions.

Note that I have cited scripture to support my position. You have not cited scripture, although I am well aware of the allusions you made to passages of scripture in your original post. Have you actually examined the scripture I cited?

Please tell me, using scripture, how I am misinterpreting the passages I cited, and give evidence for your position. I always yield to the scripture, do you?

If you go beyond this, you are adding to scripture.

 

[Baptist Believer]

Only the 12 and Paul had the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

Apparently you mean something very specific by "the Baptist of the Holy Spirit," and I don't know what you are referring to. What is it exactly? What scripture shows this happening or identifies "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit."

Given the way your flowchart is written, you seem to connect "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit" with speaking in tongues, like Pentecostals and other charismatics do. Is that a correct analysis?

Where are the signs and wonders of the Apostles today if you are right?

In another thread, I wrote at some length about my understanding of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit (what many call "sign gifts" or "signs and wonders"):

Regarding sign gifts, they manifest in any believer, as needed, who is open to being used of God and has the ability to handle the implications of that gift being manifested by the nature of their personality or maturity of character. These gifts cannot exercised according to the will of the person of whom God uses, and the manifestation of the gift can be rejected. One or all of these gifts may be manifested in one person, but the gifts that manifest usually fall into the areas that individual disciples can handle, so, often, the same few gifts are frequently manifested, while others rarely, if ever. Paul teaches:

1 Corinthians 12:7-11
Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.

He lists examples such as:

(1) “message of wisdom” - knowledge of what God wants to do in certain human situations. Often this manifests while a group of people are in prayerful discussion of problem and suddenly one or more people, seemingly out of nowhere, bring forward a solution that is perfectly suited to the situation.

(2) “message of knowledge” - specific knowledge of something that a believer would not have any way of knowing, in order to meet the need of someone else.

(3) “faith” - this is a specific, extraordinary, measure of faith to trust God in a trying circumstance.

(4) “gifts of healing” - an ability to know when God intends to divinely heal someone and, if there in person, to be used of God to heal in that moment.

(5) “miraculous powers” - a catch-all term for divine action that cannot be explained by natural forces. Some people put things like exorcism in this category, but I don’t thing Paul necessarily considers the act of exorcism a spiritual gift.

(6) “prophecy” - having a specific word of God for that moment and specific situation — it is usually informed by a message of knowledge or wisdom.

(7) “distinguishing between spirits” - this is what is often called spiritual discernment, knowing the difference between a true and false teacher, or the work of God and the work of the evil one.

(8) “speaking in different kinds of tongues” - the momentary ability to speak in a language unknown to the speaker, whether if be a human language or an “unknown” language.

(9) “interpretation of tongues” - a momentary ability to understand a language unknown to the speaker, whether it be a human language or an “unknown” language.

The gifts most often manifested through me have been, in order of frequency:

• Distinguishing between spirits (common)
• Message of knowledge (every few months, usually related to evangelism or ministry to persons in crisis)
• Prophecy (a few times a year)
• Message of wisdom (perhaps once or twice a year)
• Gifts of healing (on average, about once a year)
• Miraculous powers, if exorcism in included (rare — last time was in 1991)

I have witnessed what appears to be a genuine manifestation of tongues and interpretation of tongues only once (July 4, 1987 - Stewart Beach, Galveston, Texas), although I have been around people speaking in “tongues” far more often than I’d like.

I have not knowingly witnessed “faith” as a manifestation (aka “sign gift”), but that’s probably because I am far too sheltered here in the US. I imagine those facing martyrdom have this manifested in their lives.​

 

[1689Dave]

Apparently you mean something very specific by "the Baptist of the Holy Spirit," and I don't know what you are referring to. What is it exactly? What scripture shows this happening or identifies "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit."

Given the way your flowchart is written, you seem to connect "the Baptism of the Holy Spirit" with speaking in tongues, like Pentecostals and other charismatics do. Is that a correct analysis?


In another thread, I wrote at some length about my understanding of the manifestations of the Holy Spirit (what many call "sign gifts" or "signs and wonders"):

Regarding sign gifts, they manifest in any believer, as needed, who is open to being used of God and has the ability to handle the implications of that gift being manifested by the nature of their personality or maturity of character. These gifts cannot exercised according to the will of the person of whom God uses, and the manifestation of the gift can be rejected. One or all of these gifts may be manifested in one person, but the gifts that manifest usually fall into the areas that individual disciples can handle, so, often, the same few gifts are frequently manifested, while others rarely, if ever. Paul teaches:

1 Corinthians 12:7-11
Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit a message of wisdom, to another a message of knowledge by means of the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by that one Spirit, to another miraculous powers, to another prophecy, to another distinguishing between spirits, to another speaking in different kinds of tongues, and to still another the interpretation of tongues.All these are the work of one and the same Spirit, and he distributes them to each one, just as he determines.

He lists examples such as:
(1) “message of wisdom” - knowledge of what God wants to do in certain human situations. Often this manifests while a group of people are in prayerful discussion of problem and suddenly one or more people, seemingly out of nowhere, bring forward a solution that is perfectly suited to the situation.
(2) “message of knowledge” - specific knowledge of something that a believer would not have any way of knowing, in order to meet the need of someone else.
(3) “faith” - this is a specific, extraordinary, measure of faith to trust God in a trying circumstance.
(4) “gifts of healing” - an ability to know when God intends to divinely heal someone and, if there in person, to be used of God to heal in that moment.
(5) “miraculous powers” - a catch-all term for divine action that cannot be explained by natural forces. Some people put things like exorcism in this category, but I don’t thing Paul necessarily considers the act of exorcism a spiritual gift.
(6) “prophecy” - having a specific word of God for that moment and specific situation — it is usually informed by a message of knowledge or wisdom.
(7) “distinguishing between spirits” - this is what is often called spiritual discernment, knowing the difference between a true and false teacher, or the work of God and the work of the evil one.
(8) “speaking in different kinds of tongues” - the momentary ability to speak in a language unknown to the speaker, whether if be a human language or an “unknown” language.
(9) “interpretation of tongues” - a momentary ability to understand a language unknown to the speaker, whether it be a human language or an “unknown” language.
The gifts most often manifested through me have been, in order of frequency:

• Distinguishing between spirits (common)
• Message of knowledge (every few months, usually related to evangelism or ministry to persons in crisis)
• Prophecy (a few times a year)
• Message of wisdom (perhaps once or twice a year)
• Gifts of healing (on average, about once a year)
• Miraculous powers, if exorcism in included (rare — last time was in 1991)

I have witnessed what appears to be a genuine manifestation of tongues and interpretation of tongues only once (July 4, 1987 - Stewart Beach, Galveston, Texas), although I have been around people speaking in “tongues” far more often than I’d like.

I have not knowingly witnessed “faith” as a manifestation (aka “sign gift”), but that’s probably because I am far too sheltered here in the US. I imagine those facing martyrdom have this manifested in their lives.​

The main point is that Only the 12 and Apostle Paul had the baptism of the Holy Spirit which included the signs and wonders gifts. Also those few they passed it on to through their hands. You'll notice these recipients could not pass it on to others as in the case of Philip and the Samarians.

The gentiles also experienced the same outpouring in Peter's presence nearly 7 years later at Cornelius' house. Scripture does not go beyond this.

The Apostles and the baptism ended when scripture became complete. You can see this after Paul put all of his sick friends on medicine in the epistles.

 

[Baptist Believer]

The main point is that Only the 12 and Apostle Paul had the baptism of the Holy Spirit which included the signs and wonders gifts.

Please post scripture for this assertion.

Moreover, the 120 who were in the Upper Room (both men and women -- see Act 1:13-15) spoke in tongues (Acts 2:1-11). Peter explained why the 120 spoke in tongues (even the women!) when he referenced the prophet Joel, who wrote "your sons and daughters will prophesy" (Acts 2:17).

Also those few they passed it on to through their hands.

Not in all cases. There are reasons the Spirit waited to baptize the Samaritans. It was a witness to The Twelve that the hated Samaritans were part of the family of God.

REMEMBER, the Holy Spirit is not a "force" like in Star Wars or in some charismatic theologies. The Holy Spirit is a Person of the Triune God. The Spirit does not play by rules, but makes supernaturally intelligence choices as to how to best accomplish the purposes of the Godhead.

Going back to your assertion that they "passed [the Holy Spirit baptism] through their hands," look at Acts 10 where Peter is presenting the gospel to the household and friends of Cornelius. Peter was in the midst of his presentation and the Spirit came upon the hearers, with exactly the same evidence that was given at Pentecost, showing Peter that the Gentiles were also part of the family of God, just like those with the blood of Abraham in their veins. Note that Peter DID NOT lay hands on them. He did not even get the chance to finish his presentation before the Spirit acted.

So your claim that the apostles passed it through their hands does not hold in light of scripture.

You'll notice these recipients could not pass it on to others as in the case of Philip and the Samarians.

Do you have a passage of scripture in mind that shows them trying and that they could not?

Beyond that, I have already established that the Spirit baptism does not necessarily get passed in that method, so the presupposition of this assertion is questionable.

The Apostles and the baptism ended when scripture became complete.

What's the scripture for this?

You can see this after Paul put all of his sick friends on medicine in the epistles.

The false presuppositions behind this statement include the belief that:

(1) Paul had the power within himself to heal and make decisions about who was to be healed. He did not. Not even the pre-resurrection Jesus had that power and took the direction of the Father and Spirit to initiate the miraculous works (see John 5:19-20, 20). In the context of this passage, Jesus walked among a large group of "sick, blind, limping, and paralyzed people" and only healed one man (see John 5:3-9). In His hometown of Nazareth, Jesus was not able to do many miracles because of their unbelief (see Matthew 13:58 and Mark 6:5-6). The Father and Spirit were guiding and initiating the miracles that Jesus performed.

(2) Healing is always within the will of God. When, in the Divine wisdom, it would not serve God's greater purposes, Jesus was not empowered for miracles. Neither was Paul or any other apostle/deacon/disciple. Paul could not even get healing for himself, since physical infirmity (in his case) was a way for him to remain humble and reliant upon God (see 2 Corinthians 12:7-10).