Be blessed

(MN: But the trouble is, the wrong view can easily send others to hell. And that is the real issue. That is the reason we are told to contend for the faith. Doctrine matters. The essentials matter even more. Me believing Jesus suffered in hell for my sins isn’t going to send you to hell. But if I am trusting in the work Jesus did in hell to pay for my sins, I haven’t acted on the Gospel. And when I die, I will die as an unregenerted sinner, lifting my eyes up in hell. Doctrine is important. It is what guides the church. Kill doctrine and you disable the church. )

I suggest you meditate on Gary V’s post as it is to the point and ACCURATE!

Blessings!

BT

The Capital “A” verses small case “a” was my own way of distinguishing between the 2 classes of men we were talking about. It had nothing to do with how the word was actually written in Scripture.

The fact remains………..the characteristics that delineate the 12 from all others referred to as apostles (and thereby set them apart as a separate and FINISHED class) are the ones BT posted.

In order for ANYONE claiming the mantle of Apostle today (in the sense of the 12), they MUST meet the criteria that CONCLUSIVELY defined the 12.

I will cede the point to you that this class of Apostles is still open today (with its attendant powers, influence, and authority) if you can find me someone today who was there when Jesus started His ministry………or saw Him post resurrection………or has verifiably miraculous powers.

Unless you can do so, the class of Apostle is closed by Biblical definition. You can still have “sent ones” today, but there are NONE who operate in the same Apostolic Office as the 12. Scripture specifically closes that option by insisting that the criteria above MUST be met.

The Book of Acts being closed or open doesn’t eliminate the the fact that no one today can meet those requirements.

2. Someone tell me why the book of Acts never concludes?

(1)”Thanks for your post. Timothy and Titus were not “Apostles” of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

(2) “Others who were called by the name “apostles” are simply messengers sent by the church and did not have to have the same qualifications as the Apostles.”

To argue a small “a” and capital “A” is weak. If that were the case in the epistles of Romans, 1st and 2nd Corinthians,Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1st and 2nd Timothy, and the Epistles of Peter, all the words “apostles are in small letters. As a matter of fact all of the words “apostle” is in lower case “a” except when referring to Jesus in the 3rd chapter of Hebrews.

When one often refers to themselves as being a “messenger” from the Lord….usually (from what I have witnessed, and experienced) they are referring to themselves as a “prophet” of a sort. So with regard to the simplicity of a “messenger’ as an apostle (in short) is….then is it logical to call oneself an “apostle” because they feel they are “bringing” a message from the Lord?

Though the true meaning of the term is biblical, I wonder if that is a term to be used for an individual today ….(that may be a “dumb” question being that anything in the Word is applicable…but I feel I must address this for complete clarity.)

But I am definetly scouring the Word for myself on this.

I understand the original Apostles mission, but I had no idea (or immediate recollection) that the term (as a simple identifier) was used upon anyone else, though just a messenger and not of only the chosen 12, such as Titus, Timothy, etc….

I thought I would give just a bit more clarity on my previous post. It is important to note that the Apostles actually were used to “lay” down the foundation of the church; they were not the foundation.

According to Paul in 1 Corinthians 3, he says, “no other foundation can be laid other than Jesus Christ.” In other words, Paul is making the point that while he “built on the foundation” (Christ), the Lord Jesus Himself is the foundation on which he and everybody since him has built on….if they are true servants of Christ!

Blessings!

BT

Thanks. Much appreciated.

Thanks for your post. Timothy and Titus were not “Apostles” of the Lord Jesus Christ. As already have been stated, the Greek word is used in certain contexts to make a point.

The Apostles such as Peter, James, and John were all personally called by the Lord Himself and commissioned as the “Foundational” characters of the early/infant church.

Others who were called by the name “apostles” are simply messengers sent by the church and did not have to have the same qualifications as the Apostles.

This is a simple reply and I hope it at least cause you to do more research.

Blessings!

BT

I understand the office and purpose of one, I just did not know that Timothy, Titus, etc were “apostles”. Yes they were messengers, but were they ever referred to as “apostles” in the word? The term alone can cause confusion as to the original 12 and the church leaders.

Was this the term used for them? Help me out on this one, because it is totally foreign, appointment as an “Apostle” must have been personally chosen by the Lord, as well as miraculous signs, speacial seats in heaven, etc, etc….so the lowercase with reference to just “apostles” I need a bit of clarity upon.

I knew of someone whom referred to himself as an “Apostle”, and not “apostle” (which I cannot agree with after various indications otherwise) but from what I have learned that this specific office was defunct after the original church as referred to in the Book of Acts.

probably both.

thank you

I will agree with one of Juanita’s statements……….you’re certainly NOT going to get any Scriptural meat at her table. Just “Mystery Meat”……….and we all know about “Mystery Meat”.

Anything she serves will likely give you Spiritual Mad Cow Disease.

I share your concern for the confusion due the use of the term “apostle”. Indeed, it has a history of causing confusion, and maybe never more so than today.

However, God saw fit to use it in Scripture as applicable to those outside the 12 (though in a different scope, of course).

He relies upon teachers to make the distinction I suppose……….I imagine even if another term were used, those bent upon twisting Scripture would still do so anyway.

Ah well……..

Bynumm got stumped she didnt know what to say. She replied “In reflection to what?”

From the bible GOD doesnt give a revelation to His prophets and then not tell them what to do. GOD’s message is simple and always almost the same

Repent form your sins (WARNING)

and turn to me GOD and I will forgive you (INSTRUCTION)

J.Bynum-Weaks never gave any practical instruction on all babbling AND so called revelation she was wasting time with. She just told the man that the Holy Spirit will reveal to every woman what they should do.

This makes me sick.

Another point. she said her conference are not for people who are looking for the meat of the word but the Mysteries OF THE WORD

IS THIS WOMAN A JOKE OR A DEVIL

Yes, I would say that for “me” I possibly would give concession to the idea of a pastor or other spiritual leader having the “function” of a “apostle” as a messenger.

However, I”m not comfortable with the title apostle as it can lead to many false ideas that can misrepresent the “scope” of their mission.

And yes, I’m definitely with you when we say that there are no longer “Apostles” in the sense of Paul, Peter, James, and John, etc.

So, maybe brother Al can live with that I suppose. At any rate, thanks for all your thoughtful and educational posts.

Blessings!

BT

Blessings!!