Apostles and Prophets?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

But Paul speaks of a knowledge others did not have in the past and is JUST NOW being revealed by the Apostles and prophets

I think it is best to see the "NOW" as being during the first century - that's when Paul was saying "NOW" and so that's when the "NOW" was happening.

The phrase "apostles and prophets" as used by Paul may even indicate something behind the way the New Testament books were written, compiled and the canon was formed. A lot of NT scholars will point out to differences in style in the writings of even just Paul himself.

A few will attempt to assert that there may have been several "pseudo-Pauls" based upon these changes in style and language in the body of writings traditionally attributed to Paul. The Book of Hebrews is a classic example and much of the writing is markedly different from the style and language used by Paul elsewhere.

Personally, I think much of the textual criticism of the last 100 years has been something of a fad, one that is wearing out now. However, it is hard to look past some of the salient points the "critics" have brought up. I have come to wonder, for example, if it might not be a good idea to sometimes refer to a "School of Paul" as being responsible for much of the writings attributed to the Apostle Paul himself.

The Acts of the Apostles makes it plain that Paul never travelled alone even when in chains! Also, there are several instances referred to in Acts and the epistles where "prophets" contribute to the ministry of the apostle. These individuals included Silas, Barnabas, Timothy, Apollos, Priscilla, Aquila, Tychicus, Onesimus and others.

In Galatians 6:11 we read: "See what big letters I make as I write to you with my own hand!" (NET Bible). It is interesting that Paul points out what his own handwriting looks like.

It may be that "the prophets" under discussion here in the NT are those who contributed to the writing and formation of the NT itself, working along side "the apostles."

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I think it is best to see the "NOW" as being during the first century - that's when Paul was saying "NOW" and so that's when the "NOW" was happening.

The phrase "apostles and prophets" as used by Paul may even indicate something behind the way the New Testament books were written, compiled and the canon was formed. A lot of NT scholars will point out to differences in style in the writings of even just Paul himself.

A few will attempt to assert that there may have been several "pseudo-Pauls" based upon these changes in style and language in the body of writings traditionally attributed to Paul. The Book of Hebrews is a classic example and much of the writing is markedly different from the style and language used by Paul elsewhere.

Personally, I think much of the textual criticism of the last 100 years has been something of a fad, one that is wearing out now. However, it is hard to look past some of the salient points the "critics" have brought up. I have come to wonder, for example, if it might not be a good idea to sometimes refer to a "School of Paul" as being responsible for much of the writings attributed to the Apostle Paul himself.

The Acts of the Apostles makes it plain that Paul never travelled alone even when in chains! Also, there are several instances referred to in Acts and the epistles where "prophets" contribute to the ministry of the apostle. These individuals included Silas, Barnabas, Timothy, Apollos, Priscilla, Aquila, Tychicus, Onesimus and others.

In Galatians 6:11 we read: "See what big letters I make as I write to you with my own hand!" (NET Bible). It is interesting that Paul points out what his own handwriting looks like.

It may be that "the prophets" under discussion here in the NT are those who contributed to the writing and formation of the NT itself, working along side "the apostles."

Seeing the "now" that way is how I intend it...but that still presents some of us with the same conundrum

Eph 3:5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.

There was a hidden truth Paul is speaking of never before revealed to sons of men in OTHER generations as it has NOW been revealed TO His Holy Apostles AND Prophets.

The foundation that the church is built on are the NOW (their day) Apostles and Prophets. This can not be referring to OT prophets

The part in bold is exactly what I am getting at.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Seeing the "now" that way is how I intend it...but that still presents some of us with the same conundrum

Eph 3:5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.

There was a hidden truth Paul is speaking of never before revealed to sons of men in OTHER generations as it has NOW been revealed TO His Holy Apostles AND Prophets.

The foundation that the church is built on are the NOW (their day) Apostles and Prophets. This can not be referring to OT prophets

The part in bold is exactly what I am getting at.

The phrase "apostles and prophets" is found only three times in the NT and two of those times in Ephesians. Does the phrase have to necessarily mean the same thing each time....the NT apostles and the NT prophets? or can it mean in one place the NT apostles and the OT prophets and in another place the NT apostles and the OT prophets? I agree with you on Eph 3:5 that for two reasons, 1) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men and 2) the word, NOW, is speaking of the NT apostles and the NT prophets.

I'm still not convinced that because this Eph 3:5 uses the word, prophets, to speak of the present day prophets that Eph 2:20 is doing the same thing. What do you think of this verse below if we add it into the mix?


2 Peter 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

Prax, I'm not totally ruling out your claim that "the prophets" is speaking of the NT prophets in both places in Ephesians BUT I'm not convinced of it. I'll have to do some more searching in the word.

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Seeing the "now" that way is how I intend it...but that still presents some of us with the same conundrum

Eph 3:5 which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.

There was a hidden truth Paul is speaking of never before revealed to sons of men in OTHER generations as it has NOW been revealed TO His Holy Apostles AND Prophets.

The foundation that the church is built on are the NOW (their day) Apostles and Prophets. This can not be referring to OT prophets

The part in bold is exactly what I am getting at.

Prax, your adding the word, now, to Ephesians 2:20.

I think you should search more to be absolutely sure Ephesians 2:20 is not referring to the OT prophets. I agree Ephesians 3:5 is referring to the prophets at that time.

If the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets of that day, does that mean the apostles and prophets of our day can add to that foundation in building the walls, rooms, roof, etc of the body of Christ? And would this imply a "progressive understanding" of the word of God, such as the doctrine of the Trinity?

[Michael The Disciple]

So do most Oneness Pentecostals deny there are modern day Prophets? I admit to not knowing the vast majority of them but those I have associated with did not.

[OneAccord]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So do most Oneness Pentecostals deny there are modern day Prophets? I admit to not knowing the vast majority of them but those I have associated with did not.

Its unconcievable to me to think there are ANY Oneness folks who do not believe there are modern day prophets.

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Eph 4:14 That we [henceforth] be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;

The question is, are we there yet? Are the saints perfected? Is the Body edified? Are we all in the unity of the faith? And so on. As long as their are imperfections in the church, until we are truly united in the faith, until we are spiritually matured and no longer children, there will be a need for the 5 fold ministry. There are still Apostles, there are still prophets. And so on. In regards to the ministry of the prophet, we often fail to recognize what their calling is. Look at John the Baptist, called by Jesus one of the greatest prophets. We think prophets just rise up and say "Thus saith the Lord..." and speak of some future event. But, that is just one small part of what a prophet does. In fact, I am not convinced that this is what a prophet does at all- this is what one does when he or she operates in the gift of prophecy. A prophet brings a message. What was John's message? Mar 1:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. His was a message of Prepartion: Preparing people for the coming of Jesus. Elijahs message was of Restoration. He set the stage for a restoration in Israel which was carried out under the ministry of Elisha. Every prophet from Moses, to Jeremiah to Argabus, to present day prophets and all in between, had a special message for the church of their time. Personally, I believe William Branham was sent with a special message for his day, but, like so many others, Bro. Branham departed from his true calling and, subsequently went into error.

Jesus said this: Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.

We often hear a preachers speech (5 fold ministry), but we don't grasp his speech because we don't hear his word (message). People heard Jesus speaking, but, because they didn't recognize His message, they couldn't quite grasp what He was trying to convey to them.

Yes, I believe there are prophets yet among us. I believe AFF has been visited by at least one. But few recognized him as such. All but a few heard his "speech" but many didn't recognize his message.

I believe there are Apostles among us, but we call them something else: We call them Overseers, or General Superintendents, or Board of Bishops, or whatever title we assign to those in a position of governing the Body of Christ.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So do most Oneness Pentecostals deny there are modern day Prophets? I admit to not knowing the vast majority of them but those I have associated with did not.

No. And, I think Prax was just ruminating upon a particular application in a particular passage.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by Sam

When I was attending the Apostolic Bible Institute in St. Paul, MN in 1956-1957, Bro. S.G. Norris taught us plainly that the apostles and prophets were foundational in the church (based on Ephesians 2:20 and Revelation 21:14) and that these offices ceased in the first century. He taught that there were only 12 apostles, that the choosing of Matthias was an error and Paul was the 12th and last apostle. I was a new Christian but I found several more men in the NT who were called apostles so I knew that what he was teaching was not true. Looking back, I think he was still reacting to the "Latter Rain" movement which had caused some problems in the UPC a few years previously.

As far as prophets in the NT church, we don't read of many mentioned by name. Ones I can think of right now are:

--Agabus and some others who are not named, Acts 11:27-28; 21:10
--Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, Manaen, Saul Acts 13:1, these are listed as prophets and teachers so I don't know if they all fulfilled both offices or if some were prophets and others were teachers
--Judas and Silas, Acts 15:32
perhaps someone can think of more

In 1 Corinthians 12 where some of the gifts of the Spirit are listed, one of them is the office of prophet, ref 1 Corinthians 12:28-29

And in 1 Corinthians 14 where the protocol for operating spiritual gifts is set up, we are told to let 2 or 3 prophets speak. We are also told that we can all prophesy (hopefully not all in the same service) so that indicates to me that the gift of prophecy (which we are all told to covet) and the office/gift of a prophet are two separate things. Ref 1 Corinthians 14:29-33

Now that is just plain ignorant, in my opinion, to say only those two offices ended in the first century, yet while in the SAME verse the pastors are also listed but they haven't cease to exist. Convient wouldn't you say?

[Michael The Disciple]

I say a Prophet is a seer. He "sees" in the Spirit. He may certainly preach but he is certainly not just a Preacher.

[shag]

This is slightly off your opening post, but it has to do with subject. Hope thats Ok Prax.

I believe that part of what "prophets" do in this day, is not ever add to the foundation that was laid 2000 yr.'s ago. But rather to keep believers at a sincere loyalness to scripture and its correct original intent and interpretation. Absolute #1 priority ABOVE ALL ELSE, no matter what the cost. The word pastor or pastors is mentioned 1 time total in the new testament. (cause elders are the pastors (plural) that should oversee per N.T. scripture-IMHO). Yet it seems to me theres a whole lot more "1 fold" (pastors trying to be the prophets etc.) going on than there is "5 fold." I do not believe that prophets are "allowed" to speak and push saints concerning loyalty to God's word above loyalty to man. Matter of fact, the "manuals" I recall reading put a whole lot of emphasis on "loyalty to "the fellowship" but I can't remember reading anything about "loyalty to Gods word"(tho I coulve missed it). If a prophet sees that we're out of line with God's word, how often will they be allowed the opertunity to speak it and let us know, if in doing so it might cause disunity in the "fellowship"? And if they (prophets)speak it to anyone in privacy concerning scripture that goes against fellowship beliefs or rules, and it gets out, they will be marked with the scripture of :

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

I speak primarily from a "my local assembly" point of view, and what I'm used to.

And if they try to talk to the pastor about it, and he don't wanna hear it.

Thats part of the reason (IMHO) that we don't hear a lot from "prophets", we ofttimes have pastors trying to fill their duties. I relize that "overseers can't let just anybody speak to the saints because they could be mislead. But at the same time, I don't know that they ever get the chance, because what they say will often go against man's religion thats rapped up in in organization. Not to mention the prophet might get more "glory" or "reverence" from the saints, than the pastors want them to have.(yikes!)

Also, I always hear a lot of optomistic messages on the big revival coming upon us quickly. But I personally, never hear any messages about how we need to totally allign ourselves with the word of God, and total loyalty to it above all else, and that mindset is preeminence to revival, signs and wonders". Yes, I want to always be optomistic, but I believe that prophets in the bible did not always speak optomistic news, but rather kept men in line with God's Spirit and his word. Not to mention "futuristic happenings".

I speak primarily from a "local assembly" perspective, which is mostly what I'm use to.