Search This Blog

Translate

Showing posts with label Pentecostalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pentecostalism. Show all posts

Saturday, October 05, 2013

Holiness: what is it?

It has been said that we should, “Never ask a saintly man whether or not he is holy and get an honest answer.”

I’ll take it a step further and say that if we should ask the average church goer to define holiness and chances are 9 out of 10 you’ll get a blank stare, or at best some canned response like don’t wear this, or paint yourself of like some Jezebel or watch porno flicks. Never—or should I say, very seldom, do you hear anything positive like sanctify yourself.

Sanctify? What in the name of common sense has that got to do with holiness anyway? Well, the answer is everything. Yet, I dare say that the average parishioner has never heard a sermon on good old fashioned sanctification. Amazingly, however, Christ prayed for our sanctification—that is, our holiness.
"My prayer,” he said, “is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified. My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. “(John: 17: 15-21)

What then is sanctification, we may ask?

The simply answer, just happens to be the correct answer and can best be illustrated by saying that a pen is "sanctified" when used to write. Eyeglasses are "sanctified" when used to improve sight. So, in a Biblical sense, things are sanctified—that is set aside for an exclusive purpose—when they are used for the purpose God intends. A basin in the Temple to hold water, tongs to arrange hot coals on altar, and so-forth. A human being is sanctified, therefore, when he or she serves the purposes of God's intentions. Romans: 8:28-29 makes that very clear:
“We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose, because those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that his Son would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.” 

So, we are truly holy when we are doing precisely what God intended for us to do. Firstly, we obey Him by becoming like Him. That means primarily that we deny ourselves, take up our cross and follow Him—yes, and when necessary, even to our cross. This will most certainly kill us; but then, that was His intention for us in the first place. No one ever truly become a servant—which is part of the journey—unless they are willing to die to self and live for others.

Impossible, you say. No, not really, for Scripture tells us that,
[It] is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.” [Philippians 2:13]
“It’s all about me,” may work as a slogan in a dog eat dog world of high finance, or entrepreneurship but in the Kingdom of God it is a sure path to failure. This great truth should serve as a reminder once again that as the old camp meeting songs says that,
“This world is not my home I'm just a passing through.
My treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue.
The angels beckon me from heaven's open door.
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore.
Oh Lord you know I have no friend like you.
If heaven's not my home then Lord what will I do?
The angels beckon me from heaven's open door.
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore.”

And, the rest of the verses for those of us who are strangers here on earth, it goes:
“I have a loving mother just over in Glory land.
And I don't expect to stop until I shake her hand.
She's waiting now for me in heaven's open door.
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore.”


Now, to realize that dream, we must walk softly in our Master’s footprints along the path of our earthly journey.

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

What's all this hoopla about that is going on in the church?

Interestingly enough, I hardly remember a word of most sermons I hear. Last Sunday, however, Bonnie and I were fortunate to attend Northplace Church in Sachse, Texas and listen to a masterpiece by Pastor Bryan Jarrett. He and Chuck Swindoll in my books are the best. Naturally, being Pentecostal I tilt towards Bryan; although, both in my opinion are two of God’s great gifts to the church.

Now, I don’t want to pick on anyone, but hey, isn’t it nice to hear someone break the bread of life and feed you from God’s holy word?

God forgive us for allowing our pastors, yes, our pastors—not all, but far too many—to lapse into the entertainment and feel good mode which they add to what little charisma they have and pass it off as preaching. Preaching is all about the good news that Jesus died, rose from the dead, and is coming back to receive a spotless bride. Now, I know that sounds old fashioned, but pray tell me can you envision one of the Apostles of Christ every preaching a feel good sermon based on the latest book that they have just read?

The problem with this craze—that is, these charisma driven motivational sermons that lay out the current me generation “how-to-become-successful” fad in 10 Easy Steps is that they work! Yeah, you read that right. They work. They succeed in making people even more of a bunch of narcissists than they were previously. Nothing like appealing to ones self-centeredness to draw a crowd.

I can just hear someone say, “All right, now that you have got that off your chest, Jim, what’s the point?”
The point is simple. Church services in many of our churches have morphed into little more than a pep rally crowd pumped up by a team of cheerleaders (aka, worship leaders) jumping around to the drum beat of a marching band. May God forgive us.

And the results?

Well, the results are that this crazy stuff is contagious. It spreads. Oceans know no distance. Mission fields are created everywhere it spreads, too. Because, I am convinced, that just a whole lot of these otherwise fine people eventually lose out on God. I say this because there is absolutely no substitute for His Spirit to fill the void in our life and shallow sermons and whipped up emotions will not satisfy a thirsty soul. Only God can do that.

Friends, we need to pray for a real revival. That’s for sure. 

En agape Christou,




Tuesday, November 06, 2012

The Gospel According To Ringling Brothers Circus


The longer I live the more I am aware that religious enthusiasm in general is cyclical. 



Ron Sellers, president of Ellison Research, has noted that,

“In the typical Protestant church, about one out of every eight people in the congregation has been attending that church for less than a year.”

Sellers then asked:

“What should this mean for the typical church? Does the church have a strategic plan for involving newcomers in the life of the congregation? Does the church leadership make the assumption that everyone in the church knows how the church works and what it believes? These things are very important when so many relatively new people are in the typical congregation.”

Sellers also noted that it would be a mistake for individual churches or denominations to assume a level of loyalty among attendees that may not exist.

“What should this mean for the typical church? Does the church have a strategic plan for involving newcomers in the life of the congregation? Does the church leadership make the assumption that everyone in the church knows how the church works and what it believes? These things are very important when so many relatively new people are in the typical congregation.”

According to statistics, Pentecostal and Charismatics churches are no exception, either. Polls indicate that although we experience the greatest growth, we also have some of the largest turn over. Why is that?

In general, it has been my observation that seeker friendly churches are among the highest in the rapid turnover category. Could this also explain why we have trouble keeping our people?

I think, perhaps, so.

Denominational loyalty is highest among mainline and evangelical churches; and for a reason, I believe. Primarily, I think because of structure and polity—in a word, their ecclesiology. To cut a long story short, they can be depended upon for stability.

Now, hear me out on this one.

People embrace stability, particularly in an institution (fellowship, if you please) that claims to hold fast to eternal values.

Flippant choruses, accompanied by high strung guitars lead by barely converted punk rockers may attract youth, but it will not keep them. They will eventually be lost to the next high, and unfortunately left with very little, if any doctrinal content in their high decibel numbed brains.

Sometimes, quite honestly, I feel as if I have been to a circus; and a loud one at that, where you have to stand up all the time to see the action. The gospel according to Ringling Brothers may appeal to some, but it certainly is not my cup of tea.

Fun is fun. But that kind of fun is not church.

Sermons to entertain rather than inform are also a cause. Cute little thematic, catching titles upon which a feel good sermon structure is a disgrace to the ministry. People may not want the word of God—although, I think they really do, deep down inside—but the certainly need the Word.

Show me a church with stability, and I will show you a church whose pastor is a man or woman of the word of God. God forbid that we should ever use His word as a springboard to propagate our silly agenda for a seeker friendly atmosphere.

I am reminded of an observation that Christ made after watch some children playing on the streets of Jerusalem, he asked,
“To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces . . . .” Matt. 11:16

Use all the  gimmicks available, or imaginable and this will not produce one iota of spiritual substance that has the power to sustain lasting loyality to Christ or the church. Christ in his High Priestly prayer as recorded in John 17 prays,
[Father], sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. John 17:17

Anything less is spiritual malpractice, in my opinion.

Thank you for taking time out from your schedule to read this, and may God give you wisdom, understanding and courage to walk righeously before our God.

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Quench Not The Spirit


I am always amazed at how un-Pentecostal we Pentecostals have become.

Take for example the fixation on the 10/40 Window approach to missions by some pastors and missions committees.

But, let's not get ahead of the story here. In case you are not familiar with the 10/40 Window craze, let me explain.

According to the Joshua Project who are leading authorities on the subject,

The 10/40 Window is the rectangular area of North Africa, the Middle East and Asia approximately between 10 degrees north and 40 degrees north latitude. The 10/40 Window is often called "The Resistant Belt" and includes the majority of the world's Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists. The original 10/40 Window included only countries with at least 50% of their land mass within 10 and 40 degrees north latitude. The revised 10/40 Window includes several additional countries, such as Indonesia, that are close to 10 or 40 degrees north latitude and have high concentrations of unreached peoples. See the original and revised country lists to the right. An estimated 4.57 billion individuals residing in approximately 8,622 distinct people groups are in the revised 10/40 Window. The 10/40 Window is home to some of the largest unreached people groups in the world such as the Shaikh, Yadava, Turks, Moroccan Arabs, Pushtun, Jat and Burmese.

The 10/40 Window has several important considerations: first, the historical and Biblical significance; second, the least evangelized countries; third, the unreached people groups and cities; fourth, the dominance of three religious blocs; fifth, the preponderance of the poor; sixth, the strongholds of Satan within the 10/40 Window.

Therefore, the argument follows, this is where sensible people put their missions' dollar. The problem with putting all of missions' dollars into this basket is that historically it is not Biblical. True, much of early Christianity focused in that area ~ that is, the original, not the revised 10/20 window. However, the command was to go into all the world, not just that little pocket of people who just happened to be occupying the towns and cities along convenient trade routes that fit into the then undefined 10/40 window.

Now, just stop and think a minute with me. This approach excludes all of Latin America (pop. 572,039,894), but includes The Maldive Islands (pop. 328,536). It by passes the poor United States of America (pop. 314,362,000) in favor of Djibouti (pop. 923,000) a thinly populated stretch of stony semi-desert land, with scattered plateaus and highlands on the Horn of Africa.

So, pray tell me how any of this makes sense, unless a missionary is sensitive to the urging of the Spirit? Paul wanted to go to Asia, but was prompted in God's timing to first go to Macedonia instead. Think of Philip basking in the success of a rip-roaring revival in Samaria ~ demons cast out, people speaking in tongues, hobnobbing with Apostles Peter and John, and by all accounts well on his way to becoming a legend in his own time. But, then, out of the clear blue an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Get up and go south down the road which runs from Jerusalem to Gaza, out in the desert.” (Acts 16:6)

And whom did he meet? An Ethiopian eunuch of all people. This poor fellow couldn't even reproduce himself. Not much logic here. Well, perhaps not, but it may account for the fact that 2/3rds of the country considers themselves Christians. Historically, Coptic orthodoxy has stood the test of time. Not my brand of Christianity, however what a fertile land for missions activity.

One other thing, before someone gets into a hissy and hits the "unsubscribe button," I have nothing but the utmost respect for missionaries who answer the call to places like Djibouti (where I have never been but do know someone appointed there) and the Maldive Islands (where I have been and wish we had a permanent presence there). I respect their choice not because they are ministering in the 10/40 Window, necessarily, but because they heard the call and responded, regardless of where the country was located.

My basic contention is that, we as Spirit filled Christians, should remain sensitive to the promptings of the Spirit even when our decision seems to contradict all logic for we as children of God are led by the Spirit. (Rom. 8:14) We walk by faith, not by sight.

Again, standing with you for what is right, 

 

 P.S. Please continue to pray with us as we trust God for our travel expenses to minister in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and the Urkraine.

Wednesday, August 01, 2012

What ever happened to the old fashioned altar?


WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE OLD FASHION ALTAR CALL?

"Okay, enough, already," as they say in New York. Enough of this user friendly approach to comfortable settling people in our churches as if the haute culture dictates how we do church.

The Bible is clear, when the Holy Spirit comes,

He will come to convict the world of sin, to show the world what has God's approval, and to convince the world that God judges it. (John 16:8 GWT)

Which leads me to the question, “How can we not bring offence to an ungodly public, if we allow the Holy Spirit to do His work?”

Is it an embarrassment for someone to run to our altars weeping and repent of their sins? Of course, one way to avoid that embarrassment is to take the altar out of the church and to make the church more “user friendly.”

Come on now, isn’t that what church is about? Is it not a refuge for the weary, the sick, the confused? Sure it is. I am not advocating whipping of the emotions of the congregation to the atmosphere of a 3 Ring Circus into a kind of sideshow to entertain the curious. But, I will say this, when the wind of the Spirit blows across a congregation, strange events sometimes accompany it.

Take the Day of Pentecost. The crowd poked fun, they said the disciples were drunk! Nothing “user friendly” about that! So, my point is, why sacrifice an old fashion mourners bench just to keep up with the latest “user friendly” trend?

An altar call can be a place of dignity, too. I have seen the Holy Spirit gently move up and down communicants kneeling at the altar rail with tears in their eyes as pastors in clerical robes served them the Lord’s Supper.

Further, I will say that dismissing a crowd with a kind of spiritual parting shot of “Now, take this home and think about it!” will not get the job done, either. People need an altar. They need a place. They need the comforting embrace of a deacon or deaconess, or just an ordinary layperson. They need such in the here and now, not tomorrow or at some psychiatrist’s couch, either.

My great-grandmother, I am told was a shouting Methodist, and one day her Presbyterian husband had to take her home from the church on the bed of the wagon because she had “fallen under a swoon.”

Oh to God that more of us would fall under a swoon. I think that would remove some of the petty ~ and some not so petty ~ theological nuances that separate us as Christians. Modes of baptism, Communion Ordinances, the time of the Rapture or even at what point the Second Coming dissects God’s calendar of events. These points of division among us would pale in light of the overwhelming joy that would flood our souls.

There would be no confusion in the church as to what constitutes a marriage, that’s for sure!

Speaking of gay marriages, I found the following excerpt interesting:

CNN-Atlanta Ordering lunch just got a lot more complicated than deciding how to answer, "Do you want fries with that?"

Chick-fil-A President Dan Cathy sparked reactions that were swift and strong after he weighed in on same-sex marriage by saying his company backs the traditional family unit.

Politicians from Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum spoke up. Supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage protested. And suddenly, the type of fast-food bag you carry could reveal your views on a hot-button social issue that has split the country.

Some proponents of same-sex marriage have decried Cathy's comments and called for a boycott of the chain, which had annual sales of more than $4.1 billion last year and has more than 1,615 locations in 39 states and Washington, D.C., with the strongest concentration in the Southeast.

"How backward and ignorant ... how sad," CNN reader Joe Brown said. "No more Chick-fil-A for me. I am not in the stone-casting business as a Christian."

The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), meanwhile, is promoting a National Same-Sex Kiss Day to be held at Chick-fil-A restaurants across the country on August 3.

The Atlanta-based Chick-fil-A, for its part, has gained the support of such high-profile leaders as the Rev. Billy Graham.

Graham has praised restaurant founder S. Truett Cathy and son Don Cathy "for their strong stand for the Christian faith."

"I've known their family for many years and have watched them grow Chick-fil-A into one of the best businesses in America while never compromising their values," Graham said, breaking his usual silence on hot-button issues.

Well, I say hurray for Billy Graham, nothing “user friendly” about that stance.

So, what’s the point? The point is simply this, the Bible reports that Christ, our Lord and Savior, uncompromisingly said,

"Don't think that I came to bring peace to earth. I didn't come to bring peace but conflict." (Matthew 10:34 GWT)

And, His intentions were clear when he said,

"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled!" (Luke 12:49 NIV )

Nothing “user friendly” about that!

Some have tried to read into these passages that Christ promoted violence; however, that’s taking his whole character out of context. No, He did not advocate violence, or hatred, or any other vile act or attitude. Just the contrary. He was and is the Prince of Peace. However, in His wisdom, He knew that sin and unrighteousness has no part in the Kingdom of God.

Now, fast forward to the 21st Century. Do we expect to placate and ungodly generation into righteousness by ignoring the convicting intentions of the Holy Spirit and soft peddling our way into spiritual utopia by making discipleship easy or “user friendly”?

I think not.


Saturday, July 07, 2012

Need Healing? Read This!



We, as Pentecostals, in my opinion, have neglected some of the cardinal doctrines that made us great. Divine healing, I believe, is one of them. My desire is for you know the joy of God's great love for you. I don't want to hold out false hope, but I do want to encourage you not only to continue to seek His blessing and but also healing for your body when needed.



May, I give you a personal testimony, and then share some Scripture verses with you?



For sometime I was the director of one of the largest drug and substance abuse programs in the United States. Many who take drugs contract AIDS. One young man came to us and had been diagnosed with AIDS on at least 3 different occasions. We prayed for him, and he was tested 5 times after that and there was no sign of AIDS. There are other similar stories. Some people were not healed, however. And, I can not explain that, other than God knows why.



I do know, however, that God still heals! If you are sick, let's believe He will heal you.



Jesus is the Great Physician. His knowledge of the human mind and body is complete. He can do more for the sick and diseased that can all earthly doctors and surgeons combined. He created us: is it not reasonable, then, to believe that He can heal us when we are sick?



The provision of healing is found in Scripture. Christ's suffering and death purchased healing for us-physically, mentally, and spiritually. "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows…With his stripes we are healed" (Isaiah 53:4-5). This promise definitely includes physical healing, for the Gospel of Matthew says this passage was fulfilled by Christ's healing of people who were sick: "He cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknessess" (Matthew 8:16-17). (See also I Peter 2:24).



The healing ministry of Christ did not end with His earthly life; it is part of His work in the church today. He promised, "These signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils… they shall pay hands on the sick, and they shall recover" (Mark 16:17-18). Listed among the gifts of the Spirit for the present-day church are "the gifts of healing" (I Corinthians 12:9).



James 5:14-15 presents God's plan for divine healing: "Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up." Laying on of hands and anointing with oil usually accompany prayer for healing, in accordance with God's Word and to focus faith.



Faith in the Lord is the key to receiving healing. The Gospels record that Jesus healed people according to their faith. (See Matthew 9:29; 13:58; Mark 2:5; 5:34, 36; 9:23-24; 10:52.) By the power of God the Apostle Paul was able to raise up a lame man at Lystra because he perceived that the man had faith to be healed (Acts 14:8-10).



Prayer for healing, like all prayer, must be offered by faith in the name of Jesus, with proper motives, from a repentant heart, and in submission to the will of God (Acts 3:16; James 4:3, I John 3:21-22; 5:14-15). God does not always answer in the manner and time that we expect, but we must always keep our trusts in Him, even when we do not understand circumstances. Moreover, whatever healing or release from handicaps and weaknesses that Christians to not receive in this life, they will obtain in the resurrection, for their mortal bodies will be glorified and given immortality, and death itself shall be destroyed (I Corinthians 15:26, 49-57).



Healing in Bible Times is abundant. God gave the first recorded promise of divine healing soon after He brought the Israelites out of Egypt. He told them, "I am the LORD that healeth thee" (Exodus 15:26). Psalm 103:3 describes God as the One "who healeth all thy diseases."



The Old Testament records a number of miracles of healing and even raising of the dead. For example, God used the prophet Elijah to restore a dead child to life (I Kings 17:22). Through the prophet Elisha He raised a child to life and brought cleansing to Naaman the leper (II Kings 4:32-35; 5:1-14). God healed King Hezekiah in response to his prayer and added fifteen years to his life (II Kings 20:5).



The New Testament records many healings in the earthly ministry of Jesus, and He performed many that are not individually recorded. "Jesus went about all Galilee….healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people" (Matthew 4:23). He gave sight to the blind, unstopped deaf ears, cleansed lepers, made the lame to walk, and raised the dead (Matthew 11:4-5).



After Christ's ascension, He continued His ministry of healing through His apostles and other disciples. Working through Peter and John, He healed a lame man who had never walked (Acts 3:6-8). Many miracles occurred in Stephen's ministry, and many people were healed during Philip's revival in Samaria (Acts 6:8; 8-7). Through God's power, Peter raised Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:36_42). And God worked special miracles of healing in the ministry of Paul (Acts 19:11-12).



Comparatively few healings of that time were recorded, for Acts 5:16 states, "There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed wit unclean spirits: and they were healed every one."



God still heals today. Many contemporary instances are documented in two books published by Word Aflame Press: Miracles in Our Day and God Answers Prayer.

These examples demonstrate that God's promise of healing is still being fulfilled.


The good that medical doctors and medicines do is to be appreciated, for God is the ultimate source of all healing. It is He who has given doctors skill and intelligence, and it is He who created the substances from which medicines are extracted or manufactured.



Doctors and medicines, however, can only assist the human body in renewing the natural healing power invested in it by the Creator. Even when a person receives medical assistance, he can still look to God for divine healing. God can heal with medical help, but He also can and often does heal miraculously without any human assistance.



Many people can testify to being miraculously healed by God. And what God has done for others, He will do for you. Whatever your sickness or disease. He can make you whole. Look to Him today for your healing.



So, I am going to pray for you, believing that God will heal you. Please contact me and give me the results.



PRAYER

Father, in the mighty name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior, I pray that according to your word, you will completely heal our dear friend and deliver them from this terrible disease as a testimony of your love for them. In the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. AMEN

P. S. Now, on a personal note: I must tell you that I have seen more people brought to Christ among non-Christians as a results of Divine healing than I have through any other method. Healing is an expression of His great love for us and as such an integral part of God's eternal purpose.

Saturday, June 23, 2012

So, you want the Baptism of The Holy Spirit? Are you ready?

So, you want to receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit? Are you ready to receive it? Are you sure? If so, then be prepared to surrender your will to His.


For instance, the Bible tells us that Jesus said,



“I have much more to tell you but you cannot bear it now. Yet when that one I have spoken to you about comes—the Spirit of truth—he will guide you into everything that is true." (John 13: 16 EVB)



Therefore, let me ask you, are you willing to give up your pet theology if His Spirit prompts you? What if God's Spirit prompts you to reexamine your stance on say, end time events, or human sexuality, or water baptism, or divorce and remarriage? Or the evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?



Please understand that a 'what if' is not an endorsement, or even a suggestion that some of these issues should be reexamined. In my case, however, I must admit that I have always found it a little daunting that most denominations require their ministers to sign a pledge each year that their theology has remained unchanged. Which, in fact, boxes them into a kind of doctrinal straight jacket.

Personally, I have always appreciated the fact that my denomination has given us the privilege to privately work our way though on these things as long as we don’t preach some of our sincere doubts from the pulpit. Goodness knows that I didn’t have all the answers to all the complexities of our faith when I was ordained. O, I could answer the questions. Sure, I could dot all the theological I's and cross all the doctrinal t’s; but much of what I knew was still in my head and had not filtered its way down to my heart.



Many of my friends, however, have been hesitant to objectively consider the possibility that God may have more for them, or a desire to lead them into a deeper understanding of His Word, simply because they are committed to some pet theology.



Poor William Carey, the father of the modern Protestant missions got a deaf ear turned to him by the church leaders of his Baptist church because they were committed to hyper-Calvinism and felt that God summarily promoted select individuals to Heaven and sentenced others to a Lake of Fire and Brimstone for all eternity. Mind you, all were sinners, but some were selected on a Godly whim, I suppose. So, they reasoned why bother to reach Muslims or Buddhists, or even the drunk down the street? In their eyes they were all going to Hell anyway, hence why bother?



Now, allow me to pause long enough to ask, how many people do you know that in essence feel the same way? Maybe not to that extent, but to the extent that missions is a bother. So, they treat prayer and giving to missions lightly. At best each prayer is just a token like their giving. It’s something the church must do, but missionaries are nuisances. So, why answer their phone calls? Or go out on a limb with a monthly pledge? Never mind that all it is, is a commitment to trust God for the money. Please don’t think I am being facetious. I am really not.



Case in point. One missionary I know personally, made 72 phone calls with only 3 answered or returned. How sad. What a waste of time and money.



Take it from a veteran. I would rather have a returned phone call and get a flat no answer, than to grow weary trying to drum up enthusiasm for missions from someone who is apparently already dead to missions anyway..



My prayer is that the Holy Spirit—that most, if not all of these individuals claim to have—will fill their hearts with compassion and they eyes with tears, as they cry over the lost like Jesus did over Jerusalem.



Is that too much to ask? Is that too much to expect?



I think not.


Now in closing, if you wish to contribute to towards our overseas ministry expenses to help "Others" reach their generation, please click onto the donate button and when prompted clearly designate all gifts in the comment section to: Class (40) Ministry Trip. Or, for those of you who have asked how to contribute to our personal expenses, just enter Class (09) Personal Expenses in the comments section.



If you are not on line and wish to mail your contributions in, send them to that address below and I will see that you get AGWM and IRS credit:



Missionaries Jim & Bonnie Roane
1013 Madera Court, Allen, TX 75013-3639




Thank for making all of this possible!





http://ag.org/top/missionary_directory/world/world.cfm?Display=Yes&churchdetail=AGFM3205

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

5 Fold Ministry Gifts

APOSTLES AND PROPHETS[1]



This statement on apostles and prophets was approved as the official statement by the General Presbytery of the Assemblies of God on August 6, 2001



Apostles and Prophets



Modern church statisticians cite the phenomenal growth of the Pentecostal movement and report that Pentecostals and charismatics now make up the second largest Christian group in the world. Pentecostals stand in awe of what God has done and attribute such amazing expansion to their simple trust in the supernatural power of the Holy Spirit, which continues to be at work in the church today.



The rapid advance of the Pentecostal revival has also been accompanied by a new openness to the gifts of the Spirit. The evangelical world increasingly has turned from Cessationism, the belief gifts of the Spirit ceased at the end of the New Testament era, to an understanding that New Testament gifts of the Holy Spirit are vital for ministry today.



With the restoration of the miraculous gifts to the Church has also come the question of whether God is restoring the five-fold ministry of Ephesians 4:11: “It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers’ Bible scholars differ on whether the gifts of pastor and teacher are separate in Ephesians 4 (yielding a total of five), or whether a better translation might be “ . . . and some to be pastor-teachers” (yielding a total of four). Greek grammar would seem to dictate four, but the New Testament often discusses pastoral and teaching roles separately. However, the best designation for ministry is neither fivefold nor fourfold but manifold. Ephesians 4:12 gives to all saints the work of ministry, while 1 Corinthians 12:28–30 and Romans 12:6–8 provide aspects of ministry beyond the designations in Ephesians 4:11,12.



Relatively few questions are raised about the validity of contemporary evangelists, pastors, and teachers. However, there are a number of voices in the church today calling for the restoration of apostles and prophets, thinking these offices are the key to continued growth and vitality. The issue is important, and this paper is an effort to seek scriptural guidance.



The Apostolic Church



Some advocate the recognition of contemporary apostles and use the term apostolic. They believe church bodies that do so have moved closer to the New Testament ideal of ministry.



Historically, the adjective apostolic has been used to signify (1) church bodies that attempt to trace a succession of their clergy back to the original 12 apostles, as do the Catholic and Episcopal churches; (2)Oneness, or Jesus-Only, Pentecostal churches, who since the early 20th century have used the description” Apostolic Faith” (previously used by Trinitarian Pentecostals such as Charles F. Parham and William J. Seymour) to designate their distinctive doctrines; (3) churches that claim God has raised up present-day apostles in their midst (“New Apostolic” and “Fivefold” churches); or (4) churches, including most Protestant groups, that claim to be apostolic because they teach what the apostles taught; that is, New Testament doctrine. Therefore, most Christian denominations think of themselves, in one sense or another, as apostolic.



Pentecostal churches believe they are apostolic because (1) they teach what the apostles taught, and (2) they  share in the power of the apostles through the baptism in and fullness of the Holy Spirit, who empowers  their lives and ministries. They believe what matters is not a contemporary apostolic office but apostolic  doctrine and power.  The



New Testament Apostles



The origin of the apostolic office is traced in the Gospels to Jesus. The Gospel of Mark reads, “[Jesus]  appointed twelve—designating them apostles—that they might be with him and that he might send them  out to preach and to have authority to drive out demons” (Mark 3:14,15). Matthew and Luke contain  similar attributions (cf. Matthew 10:2; Luke 6:13). The number 12 seems to have had significance, so the  most common title for this group in the Gospels is “the Twelve” rather than “the Apostles” (cf. Matthew  26:14,20,47; Mark 4:10; 6:7; 9:35; Luke 8:1; 9:1; 18:31; John 6:67; 20:24). The designation “the Twelve”  also continued in the life of the Early Church through the writings of Luke (Acts 6:2) and the apostle Paul  (1 Corinthians 15:5). In addition, Jesus himself is called by the writer to the Hebrews “the apostle and high  priest whom we confess,” (Hebrews 3:1). 



The word apostle comes from the Greek apostolos 2 and may be translated by such terms as delegate, envoy,  messenger, or agent. 3 Since Jesus probably spoke Hebrew or Aramaic rather than Greek, it is possible the  Hebrew/Aramaic shaliach also means much the same as apostolos. This is the actual word used by Jesus  and His earliest followers and provides much of the conceptual background. The rabbis of Jesus’ day  regarded it as an important legal principle: “A man’s agent (shaliach) is like unto himself.” 4 This meant if a  man’s agent made a deal, it was the same as the man himself making the deal. The modern concept of  power of attorney is very similar.  When it comes to apostles or other kinds of agents, it is of crucial importance whom the agent represents.  The Gospels make it clear the apostles were appointed by Jesus to act on His behalf. Mark’s tersely stated  record of their initial commission is “that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach  and to have authority to drive out demons” (Mark 3:14,15). It has to do with personal fellowship with  Jesus, preaching the good news of the kingdom of God on Jesus’ behalf, and participation in the power of  Jesus to cast out demons. Jesus apparently sent them out early in the Galilean ministry with instructions to  preach and heal the sick (cf. Matthew 10:5–14; Mark 6:7–11; Luke 9:1–5). Like the Seventy dispatched  later, their immediate scope of ministry was to “the lost sheep of Israel” (Matthew 10:6).



The Apostles and Pentecost



The commission of the Twelve was dramatically expanded following the death and resurrection of Jesus. In  John’s Gospel, Jesus anticipated that those who had faith in Him would do “greater things” than He had  done by asking in His name (John 14:12–14). The Counselor, identified as the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of  truth, who was “with” them during the time of His earthly ministry, would soon be “in” them (14:16,17).  The Spirit would also teach them all things and remind them of everything He had said to them (14:26).  John noted that Jesus appeared to the “disciples” after His resurrection and said, “‘As the Father has sent  me, I am sending you.’ And with that he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you  forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven’” (John  20:21–23). Luke makes it clear Jesus “opened” the minds of “the Eleven and those with them” (24:33) to  “understand the Scriptures” to the end that “the Christ [would] suffer and rise from the dead on the third  day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins [would] be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at  Jerusalem” (Luke 24:45–47). Jesus then reminded the disciples they were “to stay in the city [i.e.,  Jerusalem] until [they had] been clothed with power from on high” (24:49).



This promise was so important that Luke recorded it again in Acts 1:4 with an explanatory word from  Jesus: “For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit” (1:5).  The reason for the promise is couched in Jesus’ words, “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit  comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of  the earth” (Acts 1:8). The promise was fulfilled in the descent of the Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:4) and  identified in Peter’s prophetic message as the “last days” gift of God’s Spirit enabling all his “sons,”  “daughters,” and “servants, both men and women” to “prophesy” (Acts 2:14–17).       



Apostles and Prophets 



Although earlier trained, called, and commissioned by the Lord Jesus, the apostles needed the baptism in  the Holy Spirit as the final preparation for their mission. They were granted spiritual giftings and  empowerment required for the apostolic office. Previously anxious and insecure, they were transformed  and energized by the Holy Spirit. 5



The apostles began to speak as those who were “filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 4:8) and were  instrumental in others receiving the gift of the Spirit (8:14–17; 10:44–46; 19:6). When Paul was converted  and called to apostolic ministry, he also received the gift of the Spirit and was similarly transformed (9:17).  Barnabas was said to be “full of the Holy Spirit and faith” (11:24). The Holy Spirit guided the mission  activities of the apostles, sovereignly selecting Paul and Barnabas (13:2) and sending them on their way  (13:4). Later the Spirit prevented Paul and his companions from entering the province of Asia and Bythinia  but directed them toward Troas and Macedonia (16:6–10). Paul was the recipient of prophetic guidance by  Spirit-directed prophets as to his fate upon his return to Jerusalem (20:22,23). Whatever the natural ability  of these early apostles, the genius of their ministry is found in the power and wisdom of the Spirit given to  them. 



The Place of the Twelve 



The opening chapter of Acts reflects a concern to maintain the number of the Twelve. Peter and the other  members of the original Twelve, with the 120, looked to the Scriptures and determined that the vacancy  created by the defection and death of Judas should be filled. It was important that the full complement of 12  be maintained for the effusion of the Spirit. Luke had previously recorded the promise of Jesus to the  Twelve: “I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink  at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Luke 22:29,30). The  importance of maintaining 12 apostles as a symbol of the 12 tribes of Israel is unmistakable. The apostolate  was to be intact for the coming of the Spirit and the launching of a fully equipped church on its worldwide  mission. 



The way the vacancy was filled is highly instructive. Jesus had personally appeared and given “instructions  through the Holy Spirit to the apostles he had chosen” (Acts 1:2). Two qualifying issues stand out:

(1)  personal commissioning by the Lord, and

(2) thorough familiarity with the teachings of Jesus. Careful  attention was given to both in Peter’s proposal. Any candidate had to have been with them for Jesus’ entire  ministry, “beginning from John’s baptism” (Acts 1:22).



Two qualified candidates, “Joseph called  Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias,” were presented and prayer was offered. “Then they cast  lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles” (Acts 1:26).6 After Pentecost,  however, there was no effort to replace any of the original 12 apostles nor to perpetuate the number 12 (cf.  Acts 12:2). 



The Special Case of the Apostle Paul 



Paul’s status as an apostle is unique. He was neither a member of the Twelve nor present for Christ’s post-Resurrection appearances; his calling as an apostle came in a later and separate vision of the risen Lord.  Recorded three times in Acts (9:1–19; 22:4–16; 26:9–18) and often intimated in his letters (Galatians 1:12),  the account of Paul’s conversion demonstrates the authenticity and power of his call to be an apostle of  Jesus Christ. Like the Twelve, he recognized the apostolic office was conferred in the personal call of  Christ through post-Resurrection appearances (1 Corinthians 15:5–7). Paul acknowledged he was “as . . .  one abnormally born [ektroma7]” (1 Corinthians 15:8). The word is usually used for miscarriages. But  rather than Paul saying he was “born” unnaturally early, he is saying that as a witness to the Resurrection  and as an apostle he was “born” unnaturally late. His apostolic calling was thus without parallel and made  his credentials vulnerable to attack from enemies who sought to discredit him (1 Corinthians 9:1,2;  2 Corinthians 12:11,12). 



Despite the unusual nature of his encounter with Christ, Paul did not consider his apostolic status to be less  than that of the other apostles. They had seen the resurrected Lord; so had he. He regularly appealed to his  having seen “Jesus our Lord” (1 Corinthians 9:1). While he referred to himself as “the least of the  apostles,” apparently because of his earlier persecution of the Church, he “worked harder than all of them” (1 Corinthians 15:9,10). Though insisting on a continuity of the message (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:3), he  nonetheless distinguished his apostolic authority from the other apostles, even to the point of a public  rebuke to Peter (Galatians 1:11–2:21). To his critics at Corinth he pointed out, “I do not think I am in the  least inferior to those ‘super-apostles’”8 (2 Corinthians 11:5; 12:11) and rehearsed his Jewish heritage  (11:22), hardships (11:23–33), and his “surpassingly great revelations” (12:1–7). He reminded the  Corinthians, “[T]he things that mark an apostle—signs, wonders and miracles—were done among you with  great perseverance” (2 Corinthians 12:12). 



Apostles of Christ 



Paul’s sense of his own calling is reflected in the introduction to most of his letters: “Paul . . . an apostle of  Christ Jesus” (1 Corinthians 1:1; cf. 2 Corinthians 1:1; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:1, et al.).  The letters of Peter begin similarly: “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:1; cf. 2 Peter 1:1). Paul  used this designation in the text of 1 Thessalonians: “As apostles of Christ we could have been a burden to  you . . . ” (2:6). Jude 17 refers to what “the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold.” These references  make it appear that the title “apostle of Christ (Jesus Christ/Lord Jesus Christ/Christ Jesus)” was standard  nomenclature for all the apostles Christ had personally appeared to and appointed. It is almost always this  group to whom the title “apostle” is applied in the New Testament. 



Apostles of the Churches 



Scholars occasionally point out a distinction between the “Apostles of Christ” and the “Apostles of the  Churches.”9 Paul spoke of unnamed “brothers” who are “representatives [apostoloi] of the churches and an  honor to Christ” (2 Corinthians 8:23). He also wrote to the Philippians about “Epaphroditus . . . who is also  your messenger [apostolon], whom you sent to take care of my needs” (2:25). These references provide  ample evidence the early churches did use the word apostle from time to time for other than those who had  witnessed the Resurrection. However, the term is used in these cases in its generic sense of dispatching  representatives on an official mission on behalf of the senders. For that reason, English translations of the  Bible normally render the word apostolos in the two instances above as “messenger” or “representative.”10 



False Apostles 



Not all persons in the New Testament era who called themselves apostles or were accorded that status by  star-struck followers were, in fact, apostles. Just as the Old Testament had its false prophets, so the New  Testament had its false apostles. Much of Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians reflects this very issue.  Teachers, possibly itinerant Hellenistic Jews from the church at Jerusalem, had come to Corinth apparently  with letters of commendation. They seem to have boasted of equality with, or even superiority to, Paul in  an effort to wrest the leadership of the church away from him. Thus his references to such issues as “letters  of recommendation” (2 Corinthians 3:1), his appearance and speech (10:10), “the one who commends  himself” (10:18), his Jewish heritage (11:22), his extensive suffering on behalf of the church (11:23–33),  and his visions and revelations (12:7)—all seem to have been an effort to deal with the threat.  Paul identified such people as “false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ” (2  Corinthians 11:13). Jesus himself commended the church in Ephesus because they “tested those who claim  to be apostles but are not, and have found them false” (Revelation 2:2). These references and others make it  clear that many who either claimed for themselves the title of “apostle” or had the title wrongly conferred  upon them by others were circulating among the early Christian churches. Discernment was necessary. Paul  called for careful evaluation of spiritual phenomena: “Do not put out the Spirit’s fire; do not treat  prophecies with contempt. Test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:19–21). 



Apostolic Succession 



A crucial issue is whether the apostolic office is to be passed on as an institutionalized office of the church.  It is clear from both Acts and the letters of the New Testament that certain offices were instituted and  maintained. For example, the apostles led the church in the selection of seven men, often called “deacons”    



Apostles and Prophets  though that noun is not in the text, to administer the charitable ministries of the church (Acts 6:3). Early in  the Acts record the Church, probably operating with familiar Jewish models, is observed to have elders  who are functioning in leadership roles along with the apostles (Acts 11:30; 15:2; 16:4). As Paul and Silas  established missionary churches, they were careful to appoint “elders” (presbyteros) for the leadership of  those churches (Acts 14:23). Paul also summoned “elders” (presbyteros) of the church at Ephesus and then  addressed them as “overseers” (episkopos) who were also to be “shepherds” (poimaino), or “pastors,” of  the church of God (Acts 20:17,28). 



The letter to the church at Philippi indicates the presence of “overseers” (episkopos) and “deacons”  (diakonos) among them. The pastoral letters, usually assumed to have been written somewhat later, reveal  great concern for the appointment of carefully qualified elders/overseers and deacons (1 Timothy 3:1–12;  Titus 1:3–9). As can be seen, the names for the office are somewhat flexible and interchangeable.  Nevertheless, it is certainly accurate to say the New Testament provides—by such names, qualifications,  and selection—for the careful appointment and continuation in office of such leaders as overseers, elders,  and deacons. 



It is also clear that while the apostles (with the elders) were established leaders in the Early Church, there  was no provision for their replacement or continuation. To be sure, with the defection of Judas from his  apostolic office, the Eleven sought divine guidance to fill the gap. Other apostles also emerged, including  Paul who in his first letter to the Corinthians gave insight into their selection. After Christ’s resurrection He  appeared to the Twelve and later appeared to more than “five hundred of the brothers at the same time. . . .  Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one  abnormally born” (1 Corinthians 15:6–8, emphasis added). Thus Paul seems to limit the office of apostle to  those who had actually seen the risen Lord in the 40 days after His resurrection and to himself as having  seen Him in a dramatic vision on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1–9). There is some uncertainty about the  exact number and identity of the apostles. However, besides the Twelve, the New Testament text appears to  clearly designate such persons as Paul, James the brother of Jesus (1 Corinthians 15:7; Galatians 1:19),  Barnabas (Acts 14:14), Andronicus and Junias (probably a woman) who were “outstanding among the  apostles” (Romans 16:7). 



It is instructive, however, that nowhere in the New Testament after the replacement of Judas is any  attention given to a so-called apostolic succession. No attempt was made to replace James son of Zebedee  (John’s brother), executed by Herod (Acts 12:2). Other than the original appointments by Christ himself,  there is nothing concerning the appointment of apostles. And apart from the criteria set for the selection of  Matthias (Acts 1:21–26) and the criteria implied in the actions of Jesus and the account of Paul (1  Corinthians 15:3–11), there are no directions for making such an appointment. By contrast, there are clear  qualifications and instructions for the appointment of elders/overseers and deacons (1 Timothy 3:1–13;  Titus 1:5–9). It seems strange that apostles of Jesus Christ, concerned about faithful preservation of their  message (cf. 2 Timothy 2:2), would provide for the appointment of overseers/elders while ignoring their  own succession if such were indeed to be maintained. 



In fact, there are certain exegetical hints the apostles of Jesus Christ are not to have successors. In 1  Corinthians 15:8, Paul listed all the Resurrection and post-Resurrection appearances of Christ and noted  “last of all he appeared to me.” While some disagree, the statement is most commonly understood to mean  Paul looked upon himself as the last apostle to whom Christ appeared.11 If this is the correct understanding,  only the Twelve whom Jesus personally called and those He commissioned in His post-Resurrection  appearances made up His original apostles. Apostles are named first among the offices of the church (1  Corinthians 12:28) and the ministry gifts of Ephesians 4:11 because they are foundational, not necessarily  because they are continuous leaders in the church. The Ephesians 4:11 passage must be interpreted in the  context of the Ephesians letter itself, wherein Paul had already described the church as “built on the  foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians  2:20), and the form of leadership instituted by Paul in the Ephesian church itself and the other churches he  founded (Acts 14:23). Writing to Timothy at Ephesus, Paul entrusts the oversight of the church to “elders”  (synonymous with bishop or pastor or overseer) and deacons, not apostles and prophets. When he bids an  emotional farewell to the leaders of the Ephesian church, which he himself had established, his meeting is with the elders (not apostles or prophets), to whom he entrusts the responsibility of bishop (or overseer) and  pastor (or shepherd) (Acts 20:28). 



It is difficult to escape the conclusion of Dietrich Müller: “One thing is certain. The New Testament  never betrays any understanding of the apostolate as an institutionalized church office, capable of being  passed on.”12 



The Authority of the Apostles 



The authority of the apostles was modeled by the chief Apostle, the Lord Jesus Christ, who taught them  that “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve,” (Mark 10:45). Jesus, on occasion, acted  sharply and decisively against certain sins, such as the desecration of His Father’s house (Mark 11:15–17;  John 2:13–16) and the exploitative hypocrisy of the teachers of the Law and Pharisees (Matthew 23).  However, He carefully avoided the trappings of political and institutional power and modeled extraordinary  humility and patience for His apostles. His divine attributes were cloaked in human flesh and He was the  exposition and example of His Father’s word and work. 



Even a cursory reading of the New Testament demonstrates the apostles of Christ possessed authority. The  Early Church was formed around their teaching, which was in turn confirmed by the “wonders and  miraculous signs” they did (Acts 2:42,43). They were the recognized spokesmen before the rulers (Acts  4:8ff.), and their authority was demonstrated in such events as the death of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts  5:1–11). In writing to the Corinthians, a church he founded, Paul threatened to come to them “with a whip”  (1 Corinthians 4:21) and did not hesitate to give stern directions for discipline in a case of incest (1  Corinthians 5:1–5). Writing to the church in Rome, which he did not found, he stated his apostolic  credentials (Romans 1:1), assumed the prerogative of imparting to them spiritual gifts (1:11), and planned  to “come in the full measure of the blessing of Christ” (15:29). He laid out for their belief and practice the  most systematic exposition of doctrinal and ethical truth in all of Scripture. He did not hesitate to give  directions for their local ethical dilemmas such as relations between the weak and the strong (chapters  14,15). Peter also, claiming apostolic standing, wrote authoritatively to apparently Gentile churches that he  did not pioneer (1 Peter 1:1). 



Some modern interpreters insist apostolic authority was merely local, not universal, and exercised only in  churches the apostles founded. 13 To be sure, apostles seem to have been aware of certain protocol in  churches they did not pioneer (Romans 15:20; 1 Corinthians 3:10). However, they did cross geographical  boundaries. The pattern of evidence throughout the New Testament indicates their authority was universal  in doctrinal and ethical matters, binding in some sense upon all the churches. However, that authority must  not be construed in political or bureaucratic terms. There is little evidence of their involvement in local  administrative matters. 



When they worked together, one of the apostles usually took the lead, as in Peter’s early activity in  Jerusalem and Paul’s direction of his missionary teams. However, in dealing with the practical and  doctrinal problems of the churches, the apostles often exercised a shared leadership among themselves and  with the elders, a group that appears to have been added quickly to the leadership rolls. For example, the  Twelve called upon the church of Jerusalem to select the Seven (Acts 6). When the Jerusalem Council  resolved the schismatic debate over whether the Gentiles should keep the Jewish law, the issue was decided  by “the apostles and elders” (Acts 15:4,6,22). On this or some similar issue, even the two apostles Paul and  Peter initially came to conflicting opinions (Galatians 2:11–14). James Dunn aptly observes, “Apostolic  authority is exercised not over the Christian community, but within it; and the authority is exercised . . . ‘to  equip the saints for the work of their ministry, for the building up of Christ’s body’” (Ephesians 4:12).14 



Since apostles were frequently mobile, local rule in the maturing churches seems to have been exercised  largely by elders. In the Jerusalem church, the apostles were the sole authority figures early on (Acts 2:42;  4:37); but perhaps because of persecution and travel, they appear to have been less prominent over time.  Peter reported the conversion of Cornelius and his household to the “apostles and the brothers” (11:1). The  “apostles and elders” made up the Jerusalem council (15:6). When Paul returned to Jerusalem after his third  journey, he called on “James, and all the elders” (21:18). Elders were certainly key authority figures in     7 Apostles and Prophets  Jerusalem, as seen in Acts, and elsewhere as seen in New Testament letters. The absence of apostles on  Paul’s last visit to Jerusalem (Acts 21:18) is further evidence that as the Twelve dispersed, the Jerusalem  church did not provide for further apostolic replacement as they had at the defection of Judas (Acts  1:12–26). 



None of the New Testament letters are addressed to an apostle, as would be expected if each city had its  own ruling apostle. One of the few letters that includes church officers in the title, Philippians, is addressed  to “overseers [episkopos] and deacons [diakonos]” (1:1)—not to a local or city apostle. There seems to be  no concern to place recognized apostles in residence in the various churches or regions. 



The Marks of an Apostle 



Striving to protect the Corinthians from the seduction of “false apostles,” Paul pointed out characteristics  (semeion, “sign,” 2 Corinthians 12:12) that identified a genuine apostle. From that context and the larger  New Testament background, the following are apparent: 



1. The first and most important mark of true apostles of Christ was that they had seen the risen Lord  and been personally commissioned by Him as witnesses to His resurrection (Acts 1:21,22; 1  Corinthians 9:1; 15:7,8). They were thus appropriately called “apostles of Christ.” 



2. The personal call and commission of the risen Christ had to be consummated in the baptism in the  Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1–4 [for Paul, see Acts 9:1–17]), at which time the spiritual gift, or charisma,  of apostleship was granted. This understanding is reflected, for example, in Paul’s statements: “It  was he who gave some to be apostles . . . ” (Ephesians 4:11) and “I became a servant of this gospel  by the gift of God’s grace given me through the working of his power” (Ephesians 3:7). The Spirit  with His power and anointing set apostles first among the leaders of the church (1 Corinthians  12:28). 



3. Apostles were supernaturally equipped for prophetic preaching and teaching. To illustrate, when  the Spirit fell at Pentecost, the disciples spoke “in other tongues as the Spirit enabled  [apophthengomai] them” (Acts 2:4). Confronted with the confused and contradictory opinions of  the watching crowd, Peter “stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice and addressed”  (apophthengomai) them (2:14) in a masterful explanation resulting in 3,000 conversions. The  Greek verb apophthengomai is used to denote prophetic inspiration, which in this context is the  immediate result of the Spirit’s enablement. 15 Paul reflected much of the same awareness: “My  message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of  the Spirit’s power” (1 Corinthians 2:4). 



4. With the apostolic gift came miraculous spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:8–10). “The things that  mark [semeia, “signs”] an apostle[16]—signs, wonders and miracles—were done among you with  great perseverance” (2 Corinthians 12:12). The Book of Acts attributes numerous miracles to  Peter, Paul, and the other apostles (Acts 5:12; 9:32–43; 13:6–12; 14:3; 16:16–18; 19:11; 28:7–9).  Paul evidently regarded such miraculous ministry as an essential mark of a true apostle. He also  taught and preached among them “with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power” so their “faith  might not rest on men’s wisdom, but on God’s power” (1 Corinthians 2:4,5). 



5. The apostles were the authoritative teachers of the Early Church in both belief and practice. They  were charged above all with the accuracy and purity of the gospel of Jesus Christ. As Paul wrote,  “For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins  according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the  Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3,4; cf. Acts 2:42; Romans 16:17; Galatians 1:8; Titus 1:9). The  intent of their preaching and teaching is expressed in Ephesians 4:12,13: “so that the body of  Christ may be built up . . . and become mature.” The apostolic doctrine became the content of the  New Testament canon. The apostles were understood either to have written the canonical books or  to have been the primary sources and guarantors of their inspired character.     8



6. Apostles were commissioned as missionaries and church builders. Those the New Testament  speaks about did this successfully. The Great Commission (Matthew 28:16–20) was given  specifically to the Eleven, perhaps in the company of the “more than five hundred” (1 Corinthians  15:6). The missionary impulse breathes through the accounts of apostolic commissioning (cf.  Luke 24:47; John 20:21; Acts 1:8; 9:15; 22:15; 26:17,18; Galatians 1:15–17; et al.). 



7. Suffering for Christ’s sake seems to have been a major mark of the apostolic office. Paul validated  his ministry and armed the Corinthian church against the seduction of false apostles with a lengthy  personal history of sufferings on behalf of the gospel. “That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in  weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am  strong” (2 Corinthians 12:10). “Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my  flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body which is the  church” (Colossians 1:24). 



8. Apostles were pastoral and relational. Paul’s love for his parishioners and his ministry associates  flows through his letters. The warm and extended greetings at the conclusion of Romans are  striking (16:1–16). He repeatedly uses parenting language (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians  12:14,15). On behalf of the Corinthians, he is “jealous . . . with a godly jealousy” (2 Corinthians  11:2). To the Thessalonians, Paul wrote that he loved and cared for them gently as “a mother  caring for her little children” (1 Thessalonians 2:7). The language in the letters of Peter (1 Peter  4:12; 2 Peter 3:1, NRSV) and John (1 John 2:7, NRSV, et al.) emphasizes the same pastoral  instincts. 



The New Testament Prophets 



“Prophets” are found immediately after “apostles” in one list of ministry gifts (Ephesians 4:11). and their  activity is closely linked to that of apostles throughout the New Testament. Paul had a high view of their  role: “And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets . . . ” (1 Corinthians  12:28). Further, the church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus  himself as the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). Along with the apostles, prophets were complementary  gifts to the foundational era of the church. 



The historical accounts in the New Testament affirm these complementary roles. New Testament prophets  first appeared by name in Acts when a group, apparently residing in Jerusalem, went to Antioch and one of  their number, Agabus, accurately predicted the coming great famine (Acts 11:27–30). Antioch soon had its  own group of resident prophets—Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, Manaen, and Saul (Paul) (Acts 13:1). Two  other Jerusalem leaders and prophets were chosen to bear the council letter to Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia,  and along the way “said much to encourage and strengthen the brothers” (Acts 15:22,32). On Paul’s return  to Jerusalem after the third missionary journey, he stayed at the house of Philip the evangelist, who “had  four unmarried daughters who prophesied,” and we learn women were active and recognized as prophets.  At that time Agabus made his way down from Jerusalem to Caesarea and prophesied that the Jews of  Jerusalem would bind Paul and hand him over to the Gentiles (Acts 21:10,11). 



Paul’s letters, written earlier than the Book of Acts, indicate the presence of prophets in the churches he  had established as well as those he did not (e.g., the church at Rome). For example, he provided instruction  on their activities in Corinth (1 Corinthians 14:29–32), saying their prophecies were to be tested by  apostolic doctrine (1 Corinthians 14:37). Women prophets were active in the church at Corinth (1  Corinthians 11:5,6). The Romans were to exercise the gift of prophecy “in proportion” to their faith  (Romans 12:6). The Thessalonians were cautioned not to “treat prophecies with contempt” (1  Thessalonians 5:20). The Ephesians letter stated Paul’s understanding that, with the apostles, the prophets  were foundational to the church (Ephesians 2:20). In that capacity they were, with the apostles, recipients  of divinely given revelation (Ephesians 3:5) and a ministry gift to the church (Ephesians 4:11). To  Timothy, Paul noted a prophetic message had accompanied the laying on of hands by the elders (1 Timothy  4:14). 



Book of Revelation is apparently to be understood as a prophecy, thus according John prophetic status  (Revelation 1:3). Revelation also says the church was to be on guard against false prophets, in this case  “Jezebel,” who by their teaching and conduct perverted the apostolic gospel (Revelation 2:20). 



These accounts make clear that (1) there were recognized groups of prophets in the early churches often  closely associated with the apostles; (2) the apostles themselves (as Barnabas, Silas [both of whom on  occasion appear to be recognized as apostles], Saul [Paul], and John) also functioned as prophets (Acts  13:1; 15:32; Revelation 1:3); (3) these prophets did travel on occasion from church to church; (4) both men  and women were recognized as prophets; (5) prophets, while never appointed to ruling functions in their  capacity as prophets like overseers/elders did exercise spiritual influence with the apostles and elders in the  belief and practice of the Early Church; (6) the integrity of the prophet was maintained by authentic  inspired utterance that was true to the Scriptures and apostolic doctrine; and (7) there is no provision for  qualifying or appointing prophets as a part of a church leadership hierarchy for succeeding generations. 



The Gift of Prophecy 



While there were recognized prophets in the New Testament era, even more pervasive was the gift of  prophecy that energized the apostolic church. The Old Testament prophet Joel, moved by God, prophesied,  “I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your old men will dream  dreams, your young men will see visions. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my  Spirit in those days” (Joel 2:28,29). Significantly, Peter, when explaining the Pentecost event and its  evidential tongues, identified them with Joel’s prediction of the outpouring of the Spirit and twice repeated  that both sons and daughters, men and women, would prophesy (Acts 2:17,18). Peter’s sermon was clearly  a prophecy immediately inspired by the Spirit, as the verb “addressed [apophthengomai]” (Acts 2:14),  which means “to speak as a prophet,”17 denotes. When one examines closely the witness to Christ given by  the early Christian leaders in Acts, the prophetic impulse is apparent—and doubtlessly intended by Luke.  Peter’s words to the crippled beggar (Acts 3:6), the temple crowds (Acts 3:12ff.), the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:8),  and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1–11), to list a few, are filled with prophetic import. Stephen’s  eloquence and power are prophetic (Acts 7). The impact of the preaching of Philip (Acts 8:4–8) and other  unnamed believers (Acts 11:19–21) was likewise Spirit-enabled. And so it is throughout the Acts account. 



While it is too much to say every utterance of a believer is a prophecy, nonetheless, the theme of Acts is  that every believer receives the power of the Holy Spirit to be a prophetic witness to the risen Lord Jesus  Christ (Acts 1:8). Interestingly, John noted, “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy” (Revelation  19:10). All believers are inducted into a universal “prophethood”18 and are endowed with one or more  spiritual gifts, many of which have directly to do with wise, instructive, and edifying utterances (Romans  12:6–8; 1 Corinthians 12:8–10; Ephesians 4:7–13; 1 Peter 4:10). 



Paul makes it clear not every believer will be a prophet in terms of filling a recognized “office,” or,  perhaps, even being regularly used by the Spirit in that way (1 Corinthians 12:28,29). The very  identification of a separate gift of prophecy implies that. However, at the same time, he encourages all  believers to “desire . . . especially the gift of prophecy” (1 Corinthians 14:1), for the person who prophesies  does so for the “strengthening, encouragement and comfort” (1 Corinthians 14:3) of others. There is no  statute of limitations on the Spirit of prophecy. In the words of Peter’s prophetic sermon, “The promise is  for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call” (Acts 2:39). 



Conclusions 



The purpose of this paper has been to study the roles of apostles and prophets within the Ephesians 4:11,12  ministry context and present findings both consistent with Scripture and relevant for this strategic time in  the growth of the Pentecostal movement. The intent is not to be argumentative or polemical but to “make  every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace” (Ephesians 4:3). With these  considerations in mind, the following conclusions are offered: 



1. The apostolic nature of the church is to be found in adherence to the Word of God, which has been  faithfully transmitted by the apostles of Jesus Christ in their foundational role, and in vital     10 Apostles and Prophets  participation in the life and ministry of the Holy Spirit, who baptized, gifted, and led the first  apostles. 

2. Since the New Testament does not provide guidance for the appointment of future apostles, such  contemporary offices are not essential to the health and growth of the church, nor its apostolic  nature. 

3. While we do not understand it to be necessary, some church bodies may in good faith and careful  biblical definition choose to name certain leaders apostles. The word “apostle” (apostolos) is used  in different ways in the New Testament: (1) for the Twelve disciples originally appointed by Jesus  (and later Matthias); (2) for the Twelve plus Paul and a larger group (1 Corinthians 15:3–8) whose  exact numbers are somewhat uncertain; and (3) for others such as Epaphroditus (Philippians 2:25)  and the unnamed “brothers” Paul wrote about (2 Corinthians 8:23). Groups one and two,  personally called and commissioned by the risen Lord, are often referred to in Scripture as  “apostles of Jesus Christ” and are foundational apostles (Ephesians 2:20) with unique revelatory  and authoritative roles in establishing the church and producing the New Testament. The third  group, the “apostles of the churches,” were assigned specific roles and responsibilities as needed  by the early churches. 



Contemporary apostles, of course, will not have seen or been commissioned by the risen Lord in  the manner of the “apostles of Jesus Christ,” nor will they be adding their teachings to the canon  of Scripture. Presumably they will demonstrate the other marks of an apostle taught in the New  Testament.



4. The title of apostle should not be lightly granted or assumed. Historically, apostles have been  persons of recognized spiritual stature, stalwart character, and great effectiveness in the work of  the church. Paul’s warnings about “those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us  in the things they boast about,” his assertion that “such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen,  masquerading as apostles of Christ,” and his further association of them with “Satan [who] himself  masquerades as an angel of light,” (2 Corinthians 11:12–14) are sobering—reminders that  unfettered human pride in seeking church leadership can blind one to the machinations of the  devil. Persons lacking character may attach the title of apostle to themselves in order to assert  dominance and control over other believers, while leaving themselves unaccountable to the  members in their care or the spiritual eldership of their own fellowship. 



5. The function of apostle occurs whenever the church of Jesus Christ is being established among the  unevangelized. As Pentecostals, we fervently desire a generation of men and women who will  function apostolically: to take the gospel with signs following to people at home and abroad who  have not yet heard or understood that “God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,  that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16). 



6. Prophecy is an ongoing gift of the Holy Spirit that will always be broadly distributed throughout a  holy and responsive church until Jesus comes. The Spirit sovereignly chooses and directs persons  who are open and sensitive to His gifts and promptings and endows them variously with an array  of verbal gifts. Paul admonished, “Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual gifts,  especially the gift of prophecy” (1 Corinthians 14:1). Many persons of both sexes may be  expected to exercise the gift of prophecy in various ways, as seen in the New Testament.  The New Testament does not make provisions for establishing the prophet in a hierarchical governing  structure of the church; in fact, the content of prophecy itself should always be tested by and responsible to  the superior authority of Scripture. However, the church should long for authentic prophecy with a  message, which is relevant to contemporary needs and subject to the authority of Scripture. 



Finally, the Ephesians 4:11,12 gifts are both the historical and contemporary heritage of the Church. Some  apostolic and prophetic functions flowing from persons directly commissioned by the risen Lord and acting  in revelatory capacities seem clearly to belong to the foundational era of the Church. At the same time, some of those functions having to do with the revitalization, expansion, and nurture of the church ought to  be present in every generation. We encourage all believers, led and filled by the Spirit, to allow themselves  to be fully utilized as servants of the Lord, since all gifts are needed to edify and complete the body as well  as to mobilize the body to reach the world. Then the purpose of all ministry gifts will be realized: “To  prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach  unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole  measure of the fullness of Christ” (Ephesians 4:12,13). 



Practical Questions Regarding Apostles And Prophets 



Question: Does the Assemblies of God recognize present-day apostles and prophets? 



Answer: The Assemblies of God recognizes ministers as certified, licensed, or ordained. The work of district  councils and the General Council is overseen by presbyters and superintendents. Local churches appoint  deacons. The Assemblies of God believes this practice is consistent with apostolic practice provided in the  pastoral letters of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. The pastoral letters do not make provision for the  appointment of apostles or prophets, nor does the Book of Acts indicate that provision for such was given  in the churches established on the missionary journeys. The apostles appointed not apostles or prophets but  elders (Acts 14:23). At the conclusion of the missionary journeys, Paul met with the elders of the Ephesian  church (Acts 20:17–38). Clearly, elders are also given the functions of bishop (“overseer”) and shepherd  (“pastor”) (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2). 



Thus, within the Assemblies of God, persons are not recognized by the title of apostle or prophet. However,  many within the church exercise the ministry function of apostles and prophets. Apostolic functions usually  occur within the context of breaking new ground in un-evangelized areas or among unreached people. The  planting of over 225,000 churches worldwide since 1914 in the Assemblies of God could not have been  accomplished unless apostolic functions had been present. In the Early Church, false apostles did not  pioneer ministries; they preyed on ministries established by others. Prophetic functions occur when  believers speak under the anointing of the Spirit to strengthen, encourage, or comfort (1 Corinthians 14:3).  All prophecies are to be weighed carefully (1 Corinthians 14:29). A predictive prophecy may be true, but  the prophet whose doctrine departs from biblical truth is false. A predictive prophecy that proves false leads  to the conclusion that the person is a false prophet (Deuteronomy 18:19–22). 



Finally, it must be noted that titles are not as important as ministry itself. Too often a title is worn in an  attitude of carnal pride. The title does not make the person or the ministry. The person with ministry makes  the title meaningful. Jesus explicitly warned His disciples against engaging in the quest for titles (Matthew  23:8–12). He tells us, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials  exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be  your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be  served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:25–28). 



Question: What is the implication for the local church in the current emphasis on apostles and prophets? 



Answer: The Pentecostal and charismatic movements have witnessed various excessive or misplaced theological  emphases over the years. We look with grave concern on those who do not believe in congregational  church government, who do not trust the maturity of local church bodies to govern themselves under  Scripture and the Spirit. Such leaders prefer more authoritarian structures where their own word or decrees  are unchallenged. 



In the current emphasis on Ephesians 4:11, verse 12 is being neglected: “ … to prepare God’s people for  works of service [i.e. ministry], so that the body of Christ may be built up.” The stress of the New  Testament lies with every-believer ministry. The Protestant Reformation recaptured the biblical truth of the  priesthood of all believers. The Pentecostal movement has spread like a fast-moving fire through the world  because of the Spirit-gifted ministry of the entire body. The church must always remember that leadership  gifts are not given for the exaltation of a few but for the equipping of all God’s people for ministry.



Question: Should Assemblies of God churches welcome the ministries of apostles and prophets? 



Answer: We encourage our churches to give close heed to the following provision of the General Council Bylaws:  Pastors and leaders of assemblies should make proper investigation of persons who seek to gain entrance to  teach, minister, or pastor. Use of the platform should be denied until spiritual integrity and reliability have  been determined. Since the use of non-Assemblies of God ministers may bring confusion and problems  detrimental to the Fellowship, it is recommended that Assemblies of God churches use Assemblies of God  ministers (Article VI, Section 3).  This bylaw provision is consistent with the oversight responsibility given to pastors (Acts 20:28–31) and  leaders in the body of Christ (1 Timothy 5:22,  2 Timothy 4:3–5). 







[1] Notes  1 Biblical citations are from the New International Version unless otherwise indicated. 
2 For simplicity, when Greek nouns and verbs are included they will usually be in the nominative  singular and first person singular indicative. 
3 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd edition, rev.  and ed., Frederick William Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 122. 
4 Tractate Berakoth 5.5 and several other places in the Mishnah, the oldest portion of the Talmud. While  the earliest rabbinical references date from the second century, it seems likely that the institution was much  earlier. However, some scholars trace the concept to the “to send” language both of the Old Testament  itself and secular Greek. See Colin Brown, gen. ed., The New International Dictionary of New Testament  Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975), “Apostle,” 1:126–136. 
5 See the insightful study of C.G. Kruse in Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids, eds., Dictionary of the  Later New Testament & Its Developments (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 76–82. 
6 It is frequently suggested that the Eleven erred in their selection of Matthias because Judas’ place was  reserved for Paul. Matthias, it is noted, immediately passes into oblivion. However, there is no hint of  criticism in the text and few of the Twelve are mentioned after chapter 1. Paul’s apostolic credentials are  established independently of the Twelve by both Luke and Paul himself (cf. Acts 9:1–30, especially vv.  26–28; Gal. 1:15–24). 
7 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 311.  
8 Some commentators identify the “super-apostles” with the Twelve; however, others suggest that the  context more readily supports an identification with Jewish-Hellenistic teachers who came to Corinth with  letters of introduction, perhaps from Jerusalem. 
9 See the discussion in E. Earle Ellis, Pauline Theology: Ministry and Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,  1989), 38. 
10 “[M]essengers without extraordinary status.” A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and  Other Early Christian Literature, 122. 
11 Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 732. 
12 Colin Brown, gen. ed., The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 1975), 1:135.    
13 See, for example, James D.G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,  1998), 578–579. 
14 The Theology of Paul the Apostle, 574. 
15 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd edition rev.  and ed. Frederick William Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1:44. See also Gerhard  Kittel, ed., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, trans. and ed. by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand  Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1964), 1:447. 
16 New American Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version, “signs of a true apostle.” 
17 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 125. 
18 Roger Stronstad, The Prophethood of All Believers (Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999),  71–84.  All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from the HOLY BIBLE: NEW  INTERNATIONAL VERSION®; NIV®.

Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society.  Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved.  ©General Council of the Assemblies of God  1445 North Booneville Avenue  Springfield, Missouri 65802-1894  (417) 862-2781  www.ag.org  Quantities of this position paper can be ordered in booklet format by calling  1-800-641-4310 Item #34-4195