signs of an Apostle

[traveller]

ok guys what i really wanted to know is just what signs of an apostle was paul talking about in 2Cor12:12

Sorry

I think it's beautifully said by Fausset, Brown:

mighty deeds--palpable works of divine omnipotence. The silence of the apostles in fourteen Epistles, as to miracles, arises from the design of those Epistles being hortatory, not controversial. The passing allusions to miracles in seven Epistles prove that the writers were not enthusiasts to whom miracles seem the most important thing. Doctrines were with them the important matter, save when convincing adversaries. In the seven Epistles the mention of miracles is not obtrusive, but marked by a calm air of assurance, as of facts acknowledged on all hands, and therefore unnecessary to dwell on. This is a much stronger proof of their reality than if they were formally and obtrusively asserted. Signs and wonders is the regular formula of the Old Testament, which New Testament readers would necessarily understand of supernatural works. Again, in the Gospels the miracles are so inseparably and congruously tied up with the history, that you cannot deny the former without denying the latter also. And then you have a greater difficulty than ever, namely, to account for the rise of Christianity; so that the infidel has something infinitely more difficult to believe than that which he rejects, and which the Christian more rationally accepts.

[irishcowboy]

others say that a person becomes a saint when they have accepted Christ...... neither things i have found in the Word either.....

Look up the word 'saints" in the Bible. All Christians were known by this term in the early church. I cannot enumerate how many times it's there.

"To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, the called saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. " (Rom. 1:7)

your right, my bust, that was not even in my thoughts during that post, was thinking of mans qualifications to reach the state of such..... thanks...

mike

[Ovedya]

"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. " (Rev. 21:14)

There are only 12 foundations to the holy city. That is how we can be assured that there were/are only 12 apostles of the Lamb.

What about Paul was/is he not an apostle?

Paul was very much an Apostle !

Perhaps, Ovedya, the key phrase is των δωδεκα αποστολων του αρνιου (the twelve apostles of the lamb). I have not seen this anywhere else in the NT or Septuagint. Surely the twelve names John saw did not include Judas. Judas' name on the faoundation of New Jerusalem? Apostasy! Therefore, it must have been Matthias, the thirteenth Apostle and replacement for Judas. So now our count of Apostles is up to thirteen.

Add Paul and you get 14.

Now we come to Acts 14:14 which identifies Barnabas as an Apostle equal to Paul ("But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this,". That makes 15.

Then in Romans 16:7. Paul identifies two more Apostles, ("Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."). That brings us to as much as 17.

So clearly the phrase "Apostles of the Lamb" refers to specific people because we can count well more than 12 Apostles...

Actually the way that Rom. 16:78 is properly read is that Paul's fellow prisoners were "of note" among the apostles. It is not that they were apostles themselves but that they were considered highly among the apostles. It would be like a person in your company saying that you were "of note among the CEOs."

I get your point, however. I do believe that there are no apostles today. Although there are those that function to plant churches today, as in the first century, a primary function of an apostle was to establish proper church doctrine. In Acts 2:42 it says that the first believers "continued steadfastly in the teaching and the fellowship of the apostles." Then in Titus 1:9 Paul exhorts Titus that an overseer must hold the, "...faithful word, which is according to the teaching of the apostles." (Titus 1:9). The teachings of the apostles comprise the entire New Testament from the four gospels onward. We are instructed to not deviate or add to these words. Therefore, the apostleship of those in the New Testament must have been something different than we have today. They, along with the 12 tribes of Israel, form the foundation of the holy city. That's not at all small.

[kross]

"And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. " (Rev. 21:14)

There are only 12 foundations to the holy city. That is how we can be assured that there were/are only 12 apostles of the Lamb.

What about Paul was/is he not an apostle?

Paul was very much an Apostle !

Perhaps, Ovedya, the key phrase is των δωδεκα αποστολων του αρνιου (the twelve apostles of the lamb). I have not seen this anywhere else in the NT or Septuagint. Surely the twelve names John saw did not include Judas. Judas' name on the faoundation of New Jerusalem? Apostasy! Therefore, it must have been Matthias, the thirteenth Apostle and replacement for Judas. So now our count of Apostles is up to thirteen.

Add Paul and you get 14.

Now we come to Acts 14:14 which identifies Barnabas as an Apostle equal to Paul ("But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of this,". That makes 15.

Then in Romans 16:7. Paul identifies two more Apostles, ("Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."). That brings us to as much as 17.

So clearly the phrase "Apostles of the Lamb" refers to specific people because we can count well more than 12 Apostles...

Matthias was chosen by flawed men using a flawed logic. Paul was chosen by JESUS. As scripture says, "You did not choose ME, I chose you..."

And we never heard from Mattias again.

When casting lots, the men did not give JESUS the choice of Paul, thus they could not come to the right decision.

Apostles are chosen by JESUS.

I think the best statement so far in this thread is that what people are called, their label, is moot. A church planter can be someone who is working in the office of Evangelist and teacher. If they are an apostle, they are an apostle unto JESUS.

[Teach]

Matthias was chosen by flawed men using a flawed logic. Paul was chosen by JESUS. As scripture says, "You did not choose ME, I chose you..."

And we never heard from Mattias again.

When casting lots, the men did not give JESUS the choice of Paul, thus they could not come to the right decision.

Apostles are chosen by JESUS.

I think the best statement so far in this thread is that what people are called, their label, is moot. A church planter can be someone who is working in the office of Evangelist and teacher. If they are an apostle, they are an apostle unto JESUS.

I was going to say the same thing but you have stated it quite well.

I do however agree that the original 12 apostles (12 - 1 Judas + 1 Paul) as stated in Mat. (9:28), will still have an important role to play whether in judging the 12 Tribes of Israel or in the foundations of the new City, however because these 12 have been singled out for these purposes does not mean that the Gift of the Apostle, the calling or administration as such becomes obsolete as per Eph. 4 and 1 Cor. (12: 5)

"There are differences of administrations but the same Lord (Jesus). All five of Offices are important for the perfecting of the Saints.

[matthew4:4]

Yes, it is obvious that Paul was an apostle but do they really exist today? I fear for the man today who claims to be an apostle. That is a very serious manner. When looking at scripture we do see that they were all hand picked by Jesus, even Paul on the road to Damascus. So, I believe we can all agree that they must be chosen by Jesus. Now, tell me. How in the world today are we gonna believe some guy just because he claims Jesus says he is an apostle? hmm. And for another thing the apostles had an authority that I believe none have today. Whatever an apostle wrote down was absolute truth. Anything Paul wrote was true, no questions asked. And even though people didnt necessarily believe in his authority as an apostle Paul was proven to have that authority time and time again. Personally, I believe these men today calling themselves apostles are children playing with the things of God. They want to give themselves that great and honorable title so people will honor them and believe whatever they say. If you take notice most of these men who claim to be apostles today most of them are totally off doctrine wise. Still, God is using people in many miraculous ways and will continue to do so till the end. In Christ, Matthew

[traveller]

Matthias was chosen by God.

Act 1:21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,

Act 1:22 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.

Act 1:23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

Act 1:24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all [men], shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

Act 1:25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

Act 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

[EricH]

Actually the way that Rom. 16:78 is properly read is that Paul's fellow prisoners were "of note" among the apostles. It is not that they were apostles themselves but that they were considered highly among the apostles. It would be like a person in your company saying that you were "of note among the CEOs."

Romans 16:7 is a bit tricky. The question is how does one interpret the phrase "among the apostles". The greek phrase is episemoi en tois apostolois Episemoi is the word we translate as "prominent" or "outstanding". En is a prepostion that can have numerous senses. Tois apostolois are in the dative case (becasue of the prepostion en and are translated "the apostles".

The preposition phrase could be taken in a couple of ways:

1. In the instrumental sense - "by the apostles"

2. With the plural object (the apostles) en frequently takes on the meaning "among". i.e. they were considered to be among that group.

Even if the second option is selected, that does not mean that they were considered to be equal with the initial twelve. Paul requently used the term apostle in a looses sense to mean messenger, emmissary or missionary

But I considered it necessary to send you Epaphroditus-- my brother, co-worker, and fellow soldier, as well as your messenger and minister to my need--

Philippians 2:25 HCSB

[matthew4:4]

Yes, it is obvious that Paul was an apostle but do they really exist today? I fear for the man today who claims to be an apostle. That is a very serious manner. When looking at scripture we do see that they were all hand picked by Jesus, even Paul on the road to Damascus. So, I believe we can all agree that they must be chosen by Jesus. Now, tell me. How in the world today are we gonna believe some guy just because he claims Jesus says he is an apostle? hmm. And for another thing the apostles had an authority that I believe none have today. Whatever an apostle wrote down was absolute truth. Anything Paul wrote was true, no questions asked. And even though people didnt necessarily believe in his authority as an apostle Paul was proven to have that authority time and time again. Personally, I believe these men today calling themselves apostles are children playing with the things of God. They want to give themselves that great and honorable title so people will honor them and believe whatever they say. If you take notice most of these men who claim to be apostles today most of them are totally off doctrine wise. Still, God is using people in many miraculous ways and will continue to do so till the end. In Christ, Matthew

Yes I totally agree we must be careful when anyone is going around claiming to be something or the other. Most if not all that give themselves the title of Apostle are not. Just like people who go around claiming to be prophets of the Lord are many times not. However there are Apostles and prophets still active today, who are going about doing the work of God making no such claims of grander, but simply serving God in humility and modesty trying do complete the work God has placed on their lives to complete

I believe there are prophets around today although very few because of the falling away of the Church. Now in the case of Apostles, I believe that calling was something completely unique and only necessary for the time after the ascension of Christ. It was a calling needed to put the New Testament Scriptures into order and arrange things in the new Church. The apostles were given this unique authority as a almost direct representative of Christ. Like I said before, whatever they wrote down was absolute truth, the Word of God. So, are we to say that people have that same authority today. I would never be able to say that unless Christ came down and told me. I don't think we can assume that special calling exists today. Anyway, this is just my opinion. In Christ, Matthew

[Teach]

Don't ask me why but I was just thinking about this Apostle situation in terms of Hockey.

The NHL is a League with 30 teams however only 6 of those 30 have the distinct honor of being

the forerunners (or foreskaters) of the league and that's the "Original Six".

Montreal Canadians, Boston Bruins, New York Rangers, Detroit Red Wings, Chicago Black Hawks and the Toronto Maple Leafs.

Although there are 30 Official NHL teams only 6 have the dinstinction of being part of the "Original Six". But does that make the other

teams non-NHL teams. Not in the least. They are in the LEague and hold that NHL Official status.

As has been said "Apostle means "Sent one". There have been many who have been sent out to the virgin territories of

this earth to introduce, bridge, establish, proclaim, and convert for the Gospel. Many have lost their lives over the Gospel.

Is their matyrdom any less than the original 12?

If you want to call the original 12 "Apostles" and the others "Sent ones" or missionaries, I say fine. Have at it. Just keep in mind

that the Scriptures use the same greek word for both. And I don't think Paul used the term loosely. He did write under the influence of the Holy Spirit. There were many good christians in Paul's days who he did not characterize as Apostles.

Anyways that's my 2 cents worth.

God Bless.