Many Christians believe that the Church has no
need of apostles today. They believe that ever
since the original Twelve began the first
century Church in power, the Church simply
needs no further apostolic ministry. Because of this, the
subject of 'apostle' has often been consigned
to the halls of history and distant past--- and
left there.
It is not an exaggeration though to say
that some of the same Protestants who consigned
'apostles' to the distant past also ended up assigning the same
roles and duties the apostle of the New
Testament had to other people. They usually called these people
evangelists or missionaries. Prior to this, Catholics long ago assigned the word
'Pope' as a title for their modern apostolic
successor of the Church. The Pope, they
believe, has inherited his authority from the
original Apostle Peter.
At least the Catholic Church is perfectly clear about what it expects
of both their Pope and their members. In contrast, when many groups use titles such as Senior Pastor or Deacon or Minister,
they may not be entirely forthcoming as to what is expected of their
members. Their members are sometimes told that support of the
leadership means a very high level of honor and respect must be shown -
at all costs. In return, the Leader begins to expect an almost
cult-like adoration. So in the end, certain sects or groups of
Protestantism became no different in spirit than their Catholic
counterparts, whom they often criticize.
Whenever anyone makes a Senior Pastor or any other Leader into a 'mini-pope,' they are going around the block in order to arrive at the same destination. In other words, a rose by any other name is still a rose.
Or a thorn.
Substituting various and sundry manmade words in order to appear as
though a fellowship or organization has distanced themselves from a
high handed leadership style, when in fact they haven't, is a
magician's 'shell game'. What I am
saying here is that even though many sincere religious groups or
movements use different labels or titles for certain leadership
ministries, absence of humility and Biblical integrity cause the same
problems they are trying to avoid. When people end up
teaching that there should
be more reverence or submission given to this new titled leader
than even the apostles of the New Testament expected, we are all in
trouble (Luke 22:25-27;1 Pet. 5:1-3) After that, it's all downhill from there.
What's wrong with this picture? Is it the fault of the title or the
fault of the definition behind the title? In some cases both.
I believe that when we depart from the Bibical language it does not
solve the problem of departing from the Biblical definition. So,
instead of using different titles in order to end up with the
same sort of errors, it may be better to just take the 'equippers' of
the Church in Ephesians 4:11-12 as they are called, at face value. It is important to teach the
correct definitions. In this short text we will explore a little bit of
what the word 'apostle' actually means, and consider the practical
aspects of what it means for us today.
The apostles of the early church carried out a vital ministry
for the early church. One of the things they did, even though this
function was mostly unplanned by themselves, was to leave the Church of
today their letters (or epistles) and testimonies (such as the
Gospels). Because
of the dedication of many scholars, monks, and others who copied and
re-copied the early texts, and also translated them, we still have
their writings today. These were canonized into an official Bible. With
the invention of the printing press, the availability of the original
apostle's writings and testimony is certainly widespread now. But is it
any more understood?
Scripture states that the equippers of Eph.
4:11-13 are given to the Church "until we all
attain to the unity of the faith, and of the
knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man,
to the measure of the stature which belongs to
the fulness of Christ." (vs. 13). This list of
equippers includes the apostle, prophet,
evangelist, and teacher/pastor. Some
say that since the apostles and prophets are
the "foundation" (Eph. 2:20), and since they
believe the foundation is the Bible and the
beginning of the Church, we have no need for
the apostle or the prophet anymore. Yet nowhere
in Eph. 2:20 does it state that the Bible is
the "foundation." In fact, the Bible was not
even known at the time of the writing.
Furthermore, the apostle Paul -- the very same
author of Ephesians-- indicates elsewhere that the
only foundation is Jesus Christ (1 Corinth. 3:11).
In addition, the Apostle Paul stated that the "equippers" (which include both the apostle and prophet) are given by God, "until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fulness of Christ." Certainly no one can say that we have achieved this ideal state yet. Many of us are still "little children," tossed to and fro by winds of doctrine (Eph. 4:14). The Biblical Canon was completed many centuries ago, and yet our many denominations and sects certainly prove we have not all attained "the unity of faith" because of it.
Since the Ephesians scripture is essentially a promise that God provides what is necessary for the ongoing evangelism and maturity of the Church, and since that task has not yet been completed, dividing up the scripture artificially is not going to solve the problem. Paul never indicated that it was okay to chop off some of his words from a sentence, and pretend that he never wrote them. It is not wise to read the scripture with black marker in hand, marking out certain words, like this: "And he gave some, XXXXX; and some, XXXXX; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ... (vs.11, KJV). It is unnecessary and prejudicial.
What I am saying is that if we are going to mark out part of Eph.
4:11 as void for today, then by logical extension we must mark out the
whole verse. So, if we say that there is no longer any need for the
'prophet' or 'apostle' because the Biblical Canon is enough, then by
logical extention, we are
also saying that there is no longer any need for
the pastor, teacher, or evangelist either. The truth is that we
cannot just drop
Bibles from the airplane on the unsaved nations and peoples and be done
with it. If we cannot say that we need no pastors, teachers, or
evangelists, then we cannot say that we need no prophets or
apostles. Whatever we end up calling them or however much we
deny them honor, we need all the 'sent ones' or 'special messengers' or
'representatives' that we can get. And thankfully, the Lord says He is
pleased to provide whatever is needed.
So, on one end of
the scale there are those believers who hold to the 'apostles' or
'prophets' as belonging to the distant past, and on the other end of
the scale there are those who not only embrace the ministry of the
apostle, but also put them on a pedastal. look forward to 'apostles'
rising up again for the sake of today's Church. They often
recognize the Church is not in an ideal state, and respond to this
by saying that new 'apostles' need to come again, or be raised up
again, be 'established' or be 'restored' again, so that the Church can
attain the ideal state before Christ's return. These folks define
'apostles' as being very close to being just like the original Twelve,
or maybe even better. They teach His People to look expectantly forward
to this day in the future when the 'apostles' will arrive. Or worse--
that these 'super apostles' have already come and that
they themselves.
I would urge you to take care my friends that you are not
be deceived by theories that are really are not justified by the
Word of God. If we take Eph. 4:11-14
at face value, we need no promises of any far
off or up and coming apostles. We need not be told that
God was a miser all along, holding back certain
leadership skills or gifts until the Last
and Final Days. Paul gave no such picture of God's intent. He wrote the
promise for his day and all the days in the
future, until the end of days.
If we think we are concerned
for the lost and hurting, God is even more
concerned! It is simply not within His
character or good purposes to leave prior
generation(s) destitute of His special
equippers. Therefore, we need not exalt
ourselves or anyone else as the Special Ones
for this Special End Time-- people who are
priviledged enough to finally arrive at being
the best and the brightest and the most gifted
of all generations before. Jesus warned that
there would be false Christs, so let us not be
easily carried away from humility or realism by any
Great Promises of the (Special) Apostles for our
(Special) Generation.
In truth, every generation is a Special
Generation to the Lord, because every
generation has unbelievers to be evangelized,
fellowships to be labored over, and believers
to lead toward maturity in Christ. So, no
matter how you want to define the workers
(equippers), or who you want to depend upon or exalt,
the work of the Lord still stays the same.
Ask yourself, if there were no money or power or prestige in it, or if they suffered bonafide persecution for the Gospel, how many of today's exalted leaders would stick around? If the answer is, "Probably not many" then you have just ripped off the mask of the super apostle and found their lack.
Lofty boasts, promises, or presumptions are a poor substitute for the Spirit of Christ. The thought that anyone
has more spiritual power or knowledge than
those before them simply make up for
a healthy beginning of a fellowship or ministry. A foundation of fleshly
ambitions or needy insecurities is simply not the foundation of Christ. Starting
something in the Spirit and then continueing
the work in the flesh (Gal. 3:3) is no good either, since it becomes
an invalid work too.
If you want to play it safe and
demote these workers to non-existence, the work
of Today must still be done. That work of
course does not include completing the Biblical
Canon, yet that is not all the 'apostles' did!
They suffered and prayed, evangelized new or
neglected populations, taught and demonstrated
the power of the Gospel, warned, admonished,
encouraged, healed, and blessed--among many other
activities. Therefore, even if you are so wary
of definitions that you just assume never hear
about it again, I hope you will acknowledge
that the work of Today, in this generation,
must be done, by someone. Maybe even you.
What kind of work of today do you think God might send someone for? Would a 'sent one' provide drinking water to an underpriviledged community while representing Christ to them? Might it be disaster relief? What about the brave souls who rescue women and children from slavery? Would an 'apostle' of today stand up for the oppressed, at the risk of his own life or reputation? Does he get his hands dirty, and eat with the sinners? Does he work at making tents, so as not to burden the Church? Does he preach the gospel to the poor, or sit behind a desk and collect money?
How far have men fallen from the actual work?
Unlike many today who claim for themselves various positions in the Church, the Twelve Apostles spent no time promoting themselves and all their time simply doing the work. Yes, the Apostle Paul occasionally said he was a 'sent one' (apostle) in the introductions of their letters, (2 Cor. 1:1) but he also said he was called to be an apostle, or a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 1:1). He also said he was the least of the apostles (1 Corinth 15:9) and had once been the chief of sinners (1 Tim. 1:15). All of these things were said after he had done the work of an apostle! Was he confused? Doubtful. It is more likely that he knew all of these things to be true.
Many people focus on the "signs and wonders" that the Apostle Paul had in his ministry (2 Corinth 12:12), yet they forget Paul's humility, bravery, and passion. They forget his other types of ministry, his earlier ministry, and the many facets of Jesus' ministry too (Luke 14:18). The ministry of Jesus certainly did not favor the rich or priviledged above the poor. He took unpopular stands and rebuked the religious. Similarly, Paul, in his earlier ministry, challenged an established Apostle (Acts 15:1-12 and Galatians 2: 1-14) He also taught against and challenged false apostles. He was not the only one to do these sorts of things. The Apostle John named a false minister and was determined to expose his false works (3 John 1:9-10). The Apostle Peter railed against "brute beasts" who "followed the way of Balaam" (2 Peter chapter 2) Although these incidences were NOT the entire ministry of Jesus or the Apostles by any means, my question is this: Where are these brave, offended, sarcastic, passionate, sacrificial people today?
Brothers and sisters, where are the 'fathers' in the Lord, the true apostles? Who is willing to be judged, despised by all (even Christians), and made "last" and "a spectacle unto the world" (1 Corinth. 4:9-15)? If men have not answered His call, then whom does God have to 'send out' with a message that no one else is willing to deliver? Perhaps someone who people consider an unlikely vessel. For instance, many say that a women cannot be a preacher, and will not give them any position at all in their churches, yet these same people will cheerfully send women into foreign lands as missionaries. They'll gladly take the volunteers and yet deny the volunteer their due support! Many will also watch God call upon a woman to speak in passion against evil or error, and not even wonder whether He must do so because many men before her were silent!
I believe God is mindful enough of gender, but He looks at the heart too. He wants the willing, and not those who will shirk away. Too many conduct their ministries in a bubble of safety, careful not to offend co-ministers, afraid of the anger or disapproval of men or women, yet not afraid of the disapproval of God. Too many desire the approval of their religious peers or the religious members of the flock they serve! Too many will not live near the poor and work beside them in virtual obscurity. They are not willing to be as despised as Paul was.
Do not follow their examples my friends, or you will never be trusted by the Lord for greater works than these.
Brothers and sisters, are we too often focused on power (even spiritual power) or prestige. Too often, we depend upon worldly wisdom and worldly methods. Too often, we do not trust Christ to make us adequate for the calling He places upon us. In contrast, the apostles of the New Testament trusted our Lord Jesus completely. They did not consider themselves on par with Christ or the Holy Spirit, and they did not demand unconditional loyalty. They did not manipulate their followers, because they did not even WANT followers of themselves: They wanted followers of Christ. They knew, as we all should know, that Jesus is the only man who can be counted on for all things. He is the only One Who could be considered without sin or error, and He is the only One to follow.
Whatever we choose to call them, may the Lord Jesus send more workers into the field!
"For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which
is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When
I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought
as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For
now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know
in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. " (the Apostle
Paul in 1 Corinth 13: 9-12 KJV)
| To HarvestNET Teachings page | To HarvestNET Apostles page |