Ephesians 4:11-16

[presidente]

Perfect in the bible's context is mostly referring to completion and maturity, rather than sinlessness or perfection in terms of unblemished.

Okay, I think a lot of us recognize that. I use KJV English from time to time.

The understanding isn't perfect understanding on the part of the believer.. but access to the perfect Word of God.. complete and mature.

The knowledge being perfect.. complete.. that is in the scripture.. .. so we have access to perfect knowledge.. and the believer can be complete and mature in applying God's Word to their lives.

So basically, you can just take one verse, use it as a spring board to teach your theory, and ignore the context? Paul's commentary on the coming of the perfect had to do with his own personal maturity-- his being like a child compared to adulthood. Before the perfect came he was like a child.

If perfection here has to do with having access to the canon of scripture, then Paul was like a little child in his understanding because he didn't have the canon of scripture, but you are like an adult. This interpretation still puts you in a superior position to that of the apostles.... unless of course you just disregard the whole part about Paul being like a child and sweep it under the rug, which seems like it might be your approach.

G5046
τέλειος
teleios
tel'-i-os
From G5056; complete (in various applications of labor, growth, mental and moral character, etc.); neuter (as noun, with G3588) completeness: - of full age, man, perfect.

The 'child' thing.. is of having partial revelation.. not as in inferiority of knowledge.

Hmm. If that is the case, why did you pick a gloss from the Strong's concordance that runs contrary to your own interpretation and has to do with an individual's maturity?

Is there any reason to go with your interpretation except that you say so? Btw, are you dispensational in your eschatology? The two witnesses prophesy in the book of Revelation. Would you interpret that to be set before or after the first century?

Another problem with your interpretation is that it is rather alien to the themes of the epistle. Where in the New Testament do we actually get a verse that mentions a completed New Testament canon of scripture. If you were preaching your theory to an audience that heard the importance of the New testament canon of scripture week after week, maybe your interpretation would appeal to them if it fit their preconceived notions.

But what of the actual themes running through this book? Take a look at what he writes here compared to the next two chapters.

I Corinthians 15 I Corinthians 14
tongues, prophecy ---------------> tongues prophecy
coming of the perfect ---------------> the state of the believer in the resurrection, Christ's return,
Christ delivering up the kingdom to God at the end (telos)

The idea that the 'perfect' Paul is referring to in chapter 13 has to do with the eschatological 'end' makes a lot more sense than pulling the idea that he is referring to a completed canon out of thin air with no support from the context.

Also-- seeing in a glass dimly.. but then face to face..

What does the bible refer to itself as?

(James 1:23) For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
(James 1:24) For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
(James 1:25) But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

There are commentators who read the face to face comment and recall the LORD speaking with Moses in Exodus 33:11.

But the verse you quoted makes a very strong argument against your position. James wrote his epistle before the New Testament canon was written. Apparently the law of liberty does not need to be written down to be perfect, since James wrote of the perfect law of liberty.

The law of liberty may be perfect, but the man in this passage is not. Paul's commentary on the coming of the perfect had to do with his own perfection/completion when it came to knowledge, etc.

Lastly--- 1 Corinthians 13 passage does not stand alone in explaining cessation of the sign gifts. This passage on it's own doesn't give the full picture. Christians from the continuation and cessation side can both give convincing arguments just based on this passage. There are other parts of the bible.. and key historical points that support cessationism.

I have spent a great deal of time on this topic due to moderation duties and a variety of other things, and I haven't seen a solid case for cessationism. It always relies on loose human reasoning and strange assumptions. For example, some cessationist seem to reverse the wording of a verse in II Timothy 3 in their minds, as if the passage were saying scripture is all that is given for the man of God is fully equipped, or something along those lines. This passage in I Corinthians is the closest I've seen for a prooftext.

Btw, John Calvin's commentary on the passage was that it was stupid to say that the perfect had already come before the resurrection or death.

peace[/QUOTE]

 

[Pilgrimshope]

This is an important point, because it touches on apostolic authority and the authority of scripture.

Was Peter wrong in Acts 1 when he said that Judas' replacement had to have been with the other apostles from the time of John the Baptist?

Was Paul wrote, when he wrote in inspired scripture in I Corinthians 15 that Jesus appeared to the Twelve before appearing to him. Judas committed suicide, and Matthias was a witness of the resurrection according to Acts 1.



No prophecy is of any private interpretation....how does that apply to coming with a doctrine that Paul replaced Judas, contrary to his own words?

Peter chose Matthias by casting lots , by leaving it to chance this was not what Peter was told to do . Matthia was chosen not by Jesus nor the Holy Ghost

there are twelve men in scripture who share true same experience regarding thier appointment of apostle only twelve men shared Jesus choosing and appointing them in person

Peter disobeyed and acted before he had received the spirit , which even Jesus Christ waited until he was annointed with the spirit he personally chooses his apostles it is not accomplished by a man without the holy spirit casting lots

“until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: to whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: and, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you:

and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judæa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.


this is what Peter did not waiting for the Holy Ghost he decided he would figure out how to fulfill Judas place not waiting for Jesus to give him the power to do so

And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,)

Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭1:2-5, 7-9, 15-17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Peter hasn’t yet received the holy riot Jesus commanded them all to wait for
so he tries to appoint apostle to replace Judas himself thinking it’s the right thing to do not having the Holy Ghost he decides to cast lots because he doesn’t have the judgement be choosing not can be possible appoint an apostle of Jesus Christ who does that himself

Do you have the apostles on Jesus chooses himself and appoints and gives them thy revelation to be his chosen witness

and then you have Matthias chosen th no Holy Ghost choosing him , no Jesus appointing him and enabling him

This way

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

that’s peters plan to appoint a twelfth apostle before he receives the Holy Ghost

this is Jesus plan to appoint a twelfth apostle in the exact same manner he appointed the other eleven , he himself removed Judas by his word , now he would choose me appoint and give the revelation to his twelth apostle

Just as the other eleven Paul met Jesus in person free his resurrection , and Jesus one to him his own words appointing him as his chosen witness along with the other eleven again , only twelve men had that experience in scripture Judas never received the appointment as the other eleven from Jesus after he rose , Paul did receive the wotness from Jesus he’s the only other person other then the eleven to have that apostle experience

Jesus said to the eleven “you shall be my witnesses to all people of all nations to the ends of the earth “

and Jesus said to Paul “ you shall be my witness to the Jews and gentiles to the ends of the earth.”


Matthias had a group without the holy ghost cast lots , the lot randomly fell to him, like when the Roman’s couldn’t decide who got Jesus garments when he was dying , the lot accidentally fell
To One of them

casting lots actually has pagan roots for deciding things by fair chance , in no way is this how God operates his church he fills People with his knowledge and Will through his spirit and leads them through relationship and word in what to do

casting lots , this doesn’t make an apostle twelve we’re chosen by Jesus and eternally there are twelve names recognized as apostles Jesus has to choose one of his apostles Paul is one of the twelve men chosen and appointed by Jesus himself that’s what makes an apostle.

No one else ever saw Jesus appear on earth after he ascended up , no one on earth apart from when he chose and appointed Paul to be an apostle his chi pawn witnesses ( who just sonhappen to have penned the New Testament which witnesses now today to anyone in the world who reads thier written witness accounts of these true events and words

Everyone needs to believe what’s already in there is the idea so we share what’s there the apostles wrote even thier accounts of The gospel itself Matthew walked with Jesus from the start Jesus taught him and appointed him to a special purpose and today 2000 years later we can read Matthews eye witness accounts of walking this earth with the lord what he taught and said and promised how he treated people his love and gentle humble nature ect

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Thier special and honored those specific twelve men who Jesus himself chose to witness the New Testament to the world and will forever be known as his twelve apostles even in eternal Life

We have a record of exactly twelve apostles Jesus chose and appointed , and then have semantics about well paul said “the twelve “ so that’s not possible , it doesn’t mean anything that there was a group of twelve men recognized because of Matthias , it was a fact people recognized Matthias as a member of thier group , the only issue is Jesus never. Hose and appointed Matthias to be part of the group but the lots accidentally fell to him



Paul is part of thier group because Jesus chi owe and appointed him to be and he recognized it as did Peter

“For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15:9-11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

It wouldnt even matter if James Jesus brother preached , he doesn’t claim to be an apostle because Jesus never called him and appointed him to be one , but it does t matter he still
Preached the gospel d if people believed it they would be saved every Christian is a witness

The twelve apostles are why we have the New Testament scriptire y we have this world wide witness of Christ wrotten down they suffered and died and were imprisoned and tortured and slaughtered by Rome in the end thier olaces are of honor above the everyday Christian God appointed thier places these twelve men we see Jesus appointing in scripture

Paul is one of Jesus witnesses who established the gospel and doctrine through the holy ghost

semantics though people
I guess claim Jesus appears to the. And appoint then as apostles these days so who knows and people think apostles don’t have to be pointed by Jesus like the twelve men he appointed , so who knows maybe there’s fofteen names written as apostles and not twelve like the scripture says ….

 

[presidente]

Peter chose Matthias by casting lots , by leaving it to chance this was not what Peter was told to do . Matthia was chosen not by Jesus nor the Holy Ghost

there are twelve men in scripture who share true same experience regarding thier appointment of apostle only twelve men shared Jesus choosing and appointing them in person

Peter disobeyed and acted before he had received the spirit , which even Jesus Christ waited until he was annointed with the spirit he personally chooses his apostles it is not accomplished by a man without the holy spirit casting lots

Proverbs 16:33 says,

The lot is cast into the lap,
But its every decision is from the Lord.
(NKJV)

Joshua cast lots in the case of Achan.

It does not say it's decision is from 'chance.' Jesus opened up the apostles' minds to understand the scriptures (Luke 24:45) before He ascended. Peter argued for the need to replace Judas with scripture.

Btw, your choice of alternating font size is rather distracting and makes it hard to read your post.

this is what Peter did not waiting for the Holy Ghost he decided he would figure out how to fulfill Judas place not waiting for Jesus to give him the power to do so

Show me chapter and verse where it says Jesus did not give Peter or the apostles this power. In John it says that if everything Jesus did, John supposed the world could not contain the books.

Peter hasn’t yet received the holy riot Jesus commanded them all to wait for
so he tries to appoint apostle to replace Judas himself thinking it’s the right thing to do not having the Holy Ghost he decides to cast lots because he doesn’t have the judgement be choosing not can be possible appoint an apostle of Jesus Christ who does that himself

This is your theory, but the Bible doesn't say Peter did this because he did not have the Holy Spirit. That's your idea.

Paul considered another set of Twelve to be the Twelve apostles. He wrote in I Corinthians 15 that Jesus appeared to the Twelve before appearing to Paul. Matthew tells of Judas killing himself after he betrayed Jesus.

Why should I believe that you are right and that Paul and Peter were wrong?

Jesus also said of the twelve that they would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, but Paul called himself the apostle to the Gentiles.

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

how is this an argument for Paul being one of the twelve? Acts 14:4 and 14:14 show that Barnabas was an apostle also. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2. Then Paul referred to 'we' apostles when speaking of himself and Apollos. There were more than twelve apostles, but there is a specific set of twelve apostles of the Lamb mentioned in Revelation 21, like you quoted.

We have a record of exactly twelve apostles Jesus chose and appointed , and then have semantics about well paul said “the twelve “ so that’s not possible , it doesn’t mean anything that there was a group of twelve men recognized because of Matthias ,

Huh? Don't you think Paul knew how to count to twelve?

Paul is part of thier group because Jesus chi owe and appointed him to be and he recognized it as did Peter

There were apostles appointed to be apostles before Jesus rose from the dead. But Ephesians 4 tells of Jesus ascending on high and giving gifts to men. One of those gifts is apostles. Paul and Barnabas were sent as apostles after the ascension. There were other apostles appointed after the twelve were appointed.

It wouldnt even matter if James Jesus brother preached , he doesn’t claim to be an apostle because Jesus never called him and appointed him to be one ,

What about Galatians 1:19?
But I did not see another one of the apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.

I Corinthians 15:7 says Jesus was seen of James, then of all the apostles. It doesn't say which James.

My approach to this is to study out what scripture says and believe it, not get stuck with the idea from Sunday school that there are 12 apostles... and then assume there must be only 12. Paul was an apostle, but he did not replace Judas as one of the Twelve, at least according to Peter and Paul's own words in inspired scripture. You seem to be filling in a lot of doctrine here with your own human reasoning.

 

[TheLearner]

 

[wattie]

Okay, I think a lot of us recognize that. I use KJV English from time to time.



So basically, you can just take one verse, use it as a spring board to teach your theory, and ignore the context? Paul's commentary on the coming of the perfect had to do with his own personal maturity-- his being like a child compared to adulthood. Before the perfect came he was like a child.

If perfection here has to do with having access to the canon of scripture, then Paul was like a little child in his understanding because he didn't have the canon of scripture, but you are like an adult. This interpretation still puts you in a superior position to that of the apostles.... unless of course you just disregard the whole part about Paul being like a child and sweep it under the rug, which seems like it might be your approach.


Hmm. If that is the case, why did you pick a gloss from the Strong's concordance that runs contrary to your own interpretation and has to do with an individual's maturity?

Is there any reason to go with your interpretation except that you say so? Btw, are you dispensational in your eschatology? The two witnesses prophesy in the book of Revelation. Would you interpret that to be set before or after the first century?

Another problem with your interpretation is that it is rather alien to the themes of the epistle. Where in the New Testament do we actually get a verse that mentions a completed New Testament canon of scripture. If you were preaching your theory to an audience that heard the importance of the New testament canon of scripture week after week, maybe your interpretation would appeal to them if it fit their preconceived notions.

But what of the actual themes running through this book? Take a look at what he writes here compared to the next two chapters.

I Corinthians 15 I Corinthians 14
tongues, prophecy ---------------> tongues prophecy
coming of the perfect ---------------> the state of the believer in the resurrection, Christ's return,
Christ delivering up the kingdom to God at the end (telos)

The idea that the 'perfect' Paul is referring to in chapter 13 has to do with the eschatological 'end' makes a lot more sense than pulling the idea that he is referring to a completed canon out of thin air with no support from the context.



There are commentators who read the face to face comment and recall the LORD speaking with Moses in Exodus 33:11.

But the verse you quoted makes a very strong argument against your position. James wrote his epistle before the New Testament canon was written. Apparently the law of liberty does not need to be written down to be perfect, since James wrote of the perfect law of liberty.

The law of liberty may be perfect, but the man in this passage is not. Paul's commentary on the coming of the perfect had to do with his own perfection/completion when it came to knowledge, etc.



I have spent a great deal of time on this topic due to moderation duties and a variety of other things, and I haven't seen a solid case for cessationism. It always relies on loose human reasoning and strange assumptions. For example, some cessationist seem to reverse the wording of a verse in II Timothy 3 in their minds, as if the passage were saying scripture is all that is given for the man of God is fully equipped, or something along those lines. This passage in I Corinthians is the closest I've seen for a prooftext.

Btw, John Calvin's commentary on the passage was that it was stupid to say that the perfect had already come before the resurrection or death.

peace

[/QUOTE]

In regards to the two witnesses, I'm still looking in to that. My first impressions are that rather than operating in the gifts of the Spirit, God is empowering them in His will as He can.

In regards to dispensationalism.. my impression of this is that with the likes or Scofield, they have the church beginning at Pentecost, which I don't see fits with scripture as Jesus and His disciples were the first NT church before Pentecost.

In regards to John Calvin.. I don't follow what he taught. I'm neither Calvinist nor Armenian.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Proverbs 16:33 says,

The lot is cast into the lap,
But its every decision is from the Lord.
(NKJV)

Joshua cast lots in the case of Achan.

It does not say it's decision is from 'chance.' Jesus opened up the apostles' minds to understand the scriptures (Luke 24:45) before He ascended. Peter argued for the need to replace Judas with scripture.

Btw, your choice of alternating font size is rather distracting and makes it hard to read your post.



Show me chapter and verse where it says Jesus did not give Peter or the apostles this power. In John it says that if everything Jesus did, John supposed the world could not contain the books.



This is your theory, but the Bible doesn't say Peter did this because he did not have the Holy Spirit. That's your idea.

Paul considered another set of Twelve to be the Twelve apostles. He wrote in I Corinthians 15 that Jesus appeared to the Twelve before appearing to Paul. Matthew tells of Judas killing himself after he betrayed Jesus.

Why should I believe that you are right and that Paul and Peter were wrong?

Jesus also said of the twelve that they would sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel, but Paul called himself the apostle to the Gentiles.



how is this an argument for Paul being one of the twelve? Acts 14:4 and 14:14 show that Barnabas was an apostle also. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2. Then Paul referred to 'we' apostles when speaking of himself and Apollos. There were more than twelve apostles, but there is a specific set of twelve apostles of the Lamb mentioned in Revelation 21, like you quoted.



Huh? Don't you think Paul knew how to count to twelve?



There were apostles appointed to be apostles before Jesus rose from the dead. But Ephesians 4 tells of Jesus ascending on high and giving gifts to men. One of those gifts is apostles. Paul and Barnabas were sent as apostles after the ascension. There were other apostles appointed after the twelve were appointed.



What about Galatians 1:19?
But I did not see another one of the apostles except James, the Lord’s brother.

I Corinthians 15:7 says Jesus was seen of James, then of all the apostles. It doesn't say which James.

My approach to this is to study out what scripture says and believe it, not get stuck with the idea from Sunday school that there are 12 apostles... and then assume there must be only 12. Paul was an apostle, but he did not replace Judas as one of the Twelve, at least according to Peter and Paul's own words in inspired scripture. .

“You seem to be filling in a lot of doctrine here with your own human reasoning”

yeah because I understand there are twelve apostles who Jesus chose himself paul being the twelth ?

doesn’t it strike you as odd Jesus would chi pose twelve men in the exact same way give them the same pointe ent and mission

and yet Matthias is the odd one out because only he was chosen not by Jesus but by Peter before the hilt spirit was given ?

so you are saying Paul is an apostle but not an apostle of Jesus ?

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭

your telling me eleven of those men are chosen and appointed by Jesus as apostles , and Matthias his name was written in heaven by casting lots and you actually believe that ?

the thkngs wortten in heaven were written by Jesus those twelve names are the twelve names of thy twelve me. He chose and appointed as his apostles paul eas chosen and appointed by Jesus to be his apostle lol but Matthias he is somehow apostle without having the lord choose and appoint him ?


can I ask you how many apostles of the lamb are recognized by God in his kingdom ? And is Paul recognized as an apostle of Jesus the lamb ? If there are twelve parks of the lamb , and it doesn’t include Paul os he an apostle of not Jesus who appointed him ? But Matthias who was chosen by casting lots ? The only one of the t he preen chosen hat way without the Holy Spirit ?

so Paul Must have misunderstood he claimed to be one of the apostles of Jesus I peaches the kingdom in the scripture …… seems like that’s why the apostles are see. Upon the foundations of the kingdoms wall Necause our faith is built entirely on thier witness of Jesus ,Matthias however we’ve never heard from him

Paul the 12th apostle Jesus appointed his witness makes up over half the New Testament

the apostles have to be chosen like the twelve men Jesus chose they have to receive this appointment

“and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:46-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jesus has appointed twelve men to do this he himself in the owe scriptures your talking about there are twelve men Jesus gave that appointment paul is one of those twelve apostles of Jesus

“Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭

you have to receive his calling and appointment to be an apostle or a prophet or teacher or pastor or whatever gift he has for us Matthias eas not called to be an apostle by Jesus that’s an absolute fact in scripture , Paul was called to be an apostle that’s an absolute fact of scripture

Jesus had 12 apostles Thier wotness is wrotten on scripture and their names are written in heaven

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭

how many apostles did Jesus appoint and recognize 12 ?
is Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ hat Jesus recognizes , yes of course he’s the twelth man in scripture Jesus called and appointed to apostleship and his witness with thiers is the foundation of the kingdom we believe in

Paul Is an apostle of Jesus one of ten twelve which he got self chose called and appointed me gave revelation to for the purpose of spreading the gospel it seems simple honestly of one accepts what’s written there

you have twelve names of twelve apostles d you have twelve men that Jesus himself appointed to be apostles 1 plus 1 is 2

how many apostles did Jesus choose ? Can we at least agree there in scriotire how many men did Jesus himself also t to be an apostle d give the same commission ? 12 right ? And who was the twelth that Jesus appointed like he did the eleven ? Paul the apostle .

The things thy at last and Are true brother is what Jesus said and did he chose twelve men and called them to be apostles and Paul is without a doubt the twelth apostle chosen and appointed of Jesus Christ

“Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timotheus our brother,”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭KJV‬‬

this by thy way doesn’t now make Timothy an apostle Paul embraced his calling and mission as one of the group of Jesus apostles

“For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15:9, 11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the apostles are a group of twelve men Jesus had written before the creation Matthias isn’t one of them paul is

 

[Runningman]

Yeah, it's not a good system. But no one has the right system down yet. Every system or denomination is flawed. Catholicism has some good traits that christians can use such as that sense of fear or reverence for God. It might not be real among Catholics or Muslims, but it is there. It is not there among christians. We just wanna have fun and ride the coattails of Grace to Heaven without doing any of the work of working out our salvation "with fear and trembling". What a shame.

Jesus said that light is greater than darkness and that darkness can't overcome light. In our world, the darkness is overcoming the light (ie. there is very little witness of Jesus's resurrection, existence, or influence in the churches which, if they were there, would naturally begin to spill out into the world). This simply means, if we at least claim to believe the Bible, that there is no light in the churches. Generally speaking, there is no light in the churches, therefore, the world has a greater impact on the world... and on the churches.

I’ve been meditating lately about why people are Christians.

How many of us were attracted to the sweet benefits: grace, forgiveness of sins, a ticket to salvation?

How many of us said, “Dear God, while
I appreciate those many blessings, they aren’t necessary. I just love You and want to serve You because that’s what you created me for. Do what You want with me and I graciously accept anything You want to give me if it be Your will. Thank you for everything.”?

 

[SonsOfCaleb]

I’ve been meditating lately about why people are Christians.

How many of us were attracted to the sweet benefits: grace, forgiveness of sins, a ticket to salvation?

How many of us said, “Dear God, while
I appreciate those many blessings, they aren’t necessary. I just love You and want to serve You because that’s what you created me for. Do what You want with me and I graciously accept anything You want to give me if it be Your will. Thank you for everything.”?

Few people ever say those things or want the Giver over the gifts. The people who do say those things and want the Giver over the gift are the branches who abide in the Vine and bear much fruit, and because they bear much fruit they get pruned further. No one likes the pruning process, and those who don't want the Giver as much as they like the gifts are more than happy to dodge the refining process.

 

[presidente]

“You seem to be filling in a lot of doctrine here with your own human reasoning”

yeah because I understand there are twelve apostles who Jesus chose himself paul being the twelth ?

doesn’t it strike you as odd Jesus would chi pose twelve men in the exact same way give them the same pointe ent and mission

and yet Matthias is the odd one out because only he was chosen not by Jesus but by Peter before the hilt spirit was given ?

so you are saying Paul is an apostle but not an apostle of Jesus ?

I did not say the idea that Paul was not an apostle of Jesus. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2. I mentioned that in a previous email.

You can craft a line of argument, a line of reasoning, but if the Bible contradicts your conclusion, what good is the theological argument?

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭

your telling me eleven of those men are chosen and appointed by Jesus as apostles , and Matthias his name was written in heaven by casting lots and you actually believe that ?

I do not worry about it, honestly. The proverbs say the lot falls in the lap, but the decision is from the Lord. Peter and the other disciples may have had some instructions from Christ on this that do not show up in the Gospels or Acts. Christ did open their minds to understand the scriptures, and Peter argued for replacing Judas based on scripture. Paul said that Christ appeared to the Twelve before him.

Jesus also sent out 70 to preach before His crucifixion. There could have been some other post-ascension apostles sent before Paul and Barnabas, also. Or not. The Bible doesn't say. Paul excludes himself from the Twelve by his own words in scripture, so it is a mute point. Why would you think you know Paul's position and calling better than he did?

the thkngs wortten in heaven were written by Jesus those twelve names are the twelve names of thy twelve me. He chose and appointed as his apostles paul eas chosen and appointed by Jesus to be his apostle lol but Matthias he is somehow apostle without having the lord choose and appoint him ?

You assume the Bible tells you all Christ's decisions... except for the part of the Bible you are excluding here based on 'semantics', and a part of the Bible that has some words from Peter that you don't agree with.

can I ask you how many apostles of the lamb are recognized by God in his kingdom ? And is Paul recognized as an apostle of Jesus the lamb ?

There are twelve apostles designated as apostles of the Lamb in Revelation. There were other apostles in Acts and the epistles also who were not part of the twelve. I pointed you to some scripture for that previously. You can look at Acts 14:4;4, and I Corinthians 4 for examples.

If there are twelve parks of the lamb , and it doesn’t include Paul os he an apostle of not Jesus who appointed him ? But Matthias who was chosen by casting lots ? The only one of the t he preen chosen hat way without the Holy Spirit ?

Can you show me chapter and verse where it says that the Holy Spirit has nothing to do with the lot being cast and the decision being from the Lord?

Paul the 12th apostle Jesus appointed his witness makes up over half the New Testament

Paul's writings make up over half of our New Testament scriptures. In one of those books, Paul considers himself to be an apostle, but not one of the Twelve. That may not fit your theology and you may need to process it a bit, but let's stick with what the scriptures say, okay?

the apostles have to be chosen like the twelve men Jesus chose they have to receive this appointment

Jesus makes up the rules. He is not subject to your conjecture or assertions. Can you tell me where Jesus said that? The eleven were chosen by the pre-resurrected Christ. Is that the exact same as how Paul was appointed? The original twelve were apparently appointed at the same time after Jesus spent the night in prayer on the mountain.

“and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:46-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Both Justus called Barsabas and Matthias were witnesses of the resurrection according to Peter and the twelve.

If the apostles being witnesses is part of the kergyma, then notice how Paul handles this in Acts 13;31.
And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

While he does preach about himself being a witness elsewhere, when presenting the Gospel here, he points to other witnesses post resurrection.

Compare to Peter's words in Acts 5.
30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Jesus has appointed twelve men to do this he himself in the owe scriptures your talking about there are twelve men Jesus gave that appointment paul is one of those twelve apostles of Jesus

“Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭

You assert Paul was one of the twelve apostles, then you quote a verse where he says he is called to be an apostle, but the verse does not say he was one of the twelve. We both agree that Paul was an apostle of Jesus. But Paul excludes himself from the twelve by his own words and refers to himself and others who were not part of the twelve as 'apostles of Christ.' Your concept needs to expand here a bit.

Matthias eas not called to be an apostle by Jesus that’s an absolute fact in scripture

Show me chapter and verse where it says that Mattias was not called to be an apostle by Jesus. Do you have some extra books in your canon?

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭

Your font sizes make it hard to read the scriptures you post. This is a short post, so it is legible here. Just sayin'.

The scriptures refer to a number of apostles larger than the twelve, but there are twelve whose names are on the wall of the city in the book of Revelation, designated 'the twelve apostles of the Lamb.' It is not that difficult.

If God wanted to sub out Paul, Barnabas, Silvanus, or whoever, for three of the twelve, I suppose that is up to him. Personally, I consider that unlikely.

how many apostles did Jesus appoint and recognize 12 ?

Clearly the number is higher than 12. Judas was the 12th. What about the 70? What about Barnabas and Silas? it helps to consider the whole Bible. What I did, probably back in the day when people used Strong's instead of online, I looked up every reference to 'apostle' or 'apostles' in scripture. I also looked up the closely related Greek word that means 'sent.' I studied Acts 13 and did some word studies there. It helps to have a theology that takes the whole Bible into consideration on an issue and not fixate on a few verses and build a theory that excludes the other teachings of scripture on agiven topic.

you have twelve names of twelve apostles d you have twelve men that Jesus himself appointed to be apostles 1 plus 1 is 2

Are you using a cell phone? It is hard to follow with the typos. Christ said that the Comforter would "
for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." The Spirit spoke in Acts 13 and sent out Barnabas and Saul, which we know as Paul. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2, around verse 6.

how many apostles did Jesus choose ? Can we at least agree there in scriotire how many men did Jesus himself also t to be an apostle d give the same commission ? 12 right ? And who was the twelth that Jesus appointed like he did the eleven ? Paul the apostle .

Jesus chose twelve men in the gospels. The scriptures do not say how many people he gave the Ephesians 4 gift of apostleship to. We can come up with a minimum number from scripture that may vary by 2 based on ambiguity, but not a maximum.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

I did not say the idea that Paul was not an apostle of Jesus. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2. I mentioned that in a previous email.

You can craft a line of argument, a line of reasoning, but if the Bible contradicts your conclusion, what good is the theological argument?




I do not worry about it, honestly. The proverbs say the lot falls in the lap, but the decision is from the Lord. Peter and the other disciples may have had some instructions from Christ on this that do not show up in the Gospels or Acts. Christ did open their minds to understand the scriptures, and Peter argued for replacing Judas based on scripture. Paul said that Christ appeared to the Twelve before him.

Jesus also sent out 70 to preach before His crucifixion. There could have been some other post-ascension apostles sent before Paul and Barnabas, also. Or not. The Bible doesn't say. Paul excludes himself from the Twelve by his own words in scripture, so it is a mute point. Why would you think you know Paul's position and calling better than he did?



You assume the Bible tells you all Christ's decisions... except for the part of the Bible you are excluding here based on 'semantics', and a part of the Bible that has some words from Peter that you don't agree with.



There are twelve apostles designated as apostles of the Lamb in Revelation. There were other apostles in Acts and the epistles also who were not part of the twelve. I pointed you to some scripture for that previously. You can look at Acts 14:4;4, and I Corinthians 4 for examples.



Can you show me chapter and verse where it says that the Holy Spirit has nothing to do with the lot being cast and the decision being from the Lord?



Paul's writings make up over half of our New Testament scriptures. In one of those books, Paul considers himself to be an apostle, but not one of the Twelve. That may not fit your theology and you may need to process it a bit, but let's stick with what the scriptures say, okay?



Jesus makes up the rules. He is not subject to your conjecture or assertions. Can you tell me where Jesus said that? The eleven were chosen by the pre-resurrected Christ. Is that the exact same as how Paul was appointed? The original twelve were apparently appointed at the same time after Jesus spent the night in prayer on the mountain.



Both Justus called Barsabas and Matthias were witnesses of the resurrection according to Peter and the twelve.

If the apostles being witnesses is part of the kergyma, then notice how Paul handles this in Acts 13;31.
And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

While he does preach about himself being a witness elsewhere, when presenting the Gospel here, he points to other witnesses post resurrection.

Compare to Peter's words in Acts 5.
30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.
31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.



You assert Paul was one of the twelve apostles, then you quote a verse where he says he is called to be an apostle, but the verse does not say he was one of the twelve. We both agree that Paul was an apostle of Jesus. But Paul excludes himself from the twelve by his own words and refers to himself and others who were not part of the twelve as 'apostles of Christ.' Your concept needs to expand here a bit.



Show me chapter and verse where it says that Mattias was not called to be an apostle by Jesus. Do you have some extra books in your canon?



Your font sizes make it hard to read the scriptures you post. This is a short post, so it is legible here. Just sayin'.

The scriptures refer to a number of apostles larger than the twelve, but there are twelve whose names are on the wall of the city in the book of Revelation, designated 'the twelve apostles of the Lamb.' It is not that difficult.

If God wanted to sub out Paul, Barnabas, Silvanus, or whoever, for three of the twelve, I suppose that is up to him. Personally, I consider that unlikely.



Clearly the number is higher than 12. Judas was the 12th. What about the 70? What about Barnabas and Silas? it helps to consider the whole Bible. What I did, probably back in the day when people used Strong's instead of online, I looked up every reference to 'apostle' or 'apostles' in scripture. I also looked up the closely related Greek word that means 'sent.' I studied Acts 13 and did some word studies there. It helps to have a theology that takes the whole Bible into consideration on an issue and not fixate on a few verses and build a theory that excludes the other teachings of scripture on agiven topic.



Are you using a cell phone? It is hard to follow with the typos. Christ said that the Comforter would "
for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." The Spirit spoke in Acts 13 and sent out Barnabas and Saul, which we know as Paul. Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy refer to themselves as 'apostles of Christ' in I Thessalonians 2, around verse 6.



Jesus chose twelve men in the gospels. The scriptures do not say how many people he gave the Ephesians 4 gift of apostleship to. We can come up with a minimum number from scripture that may vary by 2 based on ambiguity, but not a maximum.

I read this far

“I did not say the idea that Paul was not an apostle of Jesus.”

name the 12 apostles in scripture who were chosen and appointed to be an apostle by Jesus in the scriptures can you do that ?

again name the only 12 men ever called and appointed to be an apostle in the scriptire by Jesus , if you can do that you will have the names of the 12 apostles of the lamb.

and if you do that Matthias won’t be among those 12 names , Paul will be with the other eleven

my point is way way more simple than the circles your going in

there are only 12 men who Jesus called and appointed to be his apostles that’s not a complex idea and is 100 percent factual according to what’s written in scripture

can you name those twelve men Jesus called and appointed to be apostles ? In other words can you tell Me the names of the 12 apostles of Jesus Christ ?

“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭21:14‬ ‭KJV‬‬

the Bible says there are twelve ehat are the twelve names of the apostles Jesus called and chose and appointed himself in the scripture ?

you answer that d we will be on the same page but I have a feeling you won’t

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

OP: 'our' "Body Of CHRIST," apostle, Paul?


(BBS)

GRACE And Peace...

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

If God wanted to sub out Paul, Barnabas, Silvanus, or whoever, for three of the twelve, I suppose that is up to him. Personally, I consider that unlikely.

Absolutely unlikely 'substitutions,' since The Word 'Rightly Divided,' Teaches:

God’s Context Of ‘prophecy/law’ program:

• TWELVE Apostles (Mat. 10:2; Luk 6:13, 22:14;
Acts_1:26 = “ALL ‘FILLED With The Holy Ghost’” ch. 2 v. 4!)

• gospel of the kingdom (Mat. 4:23, 9:35, 24:14; Mar 1:14-15)

• Commission (Mat. 28:19-20)

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15) From “Things That Differ” (online)

God’s Context Of GRACE / Mystery Program Has Its Own:

• Apostle (Rom. 11:13; 1 Tim. 2:7)

• Gospel Of GRACE (1 Cor. 15:3-4; Eph. 2:8-9)

• Commission (2 Cor. 5:14-21; Eph. 3:9)

Conclusion: TWO Different programs are Not the same; Never Mix them
up in Confusion (Romans_11:6), Correct?

More study:

God's Approval/TWO Different gospels in prophecy And MYSTERY!
+
Distinctions of prophecy And MYSTERY!



GRACE And Peace...

 

[Nehemiah6]

The scriptures refer to a number of apostles larger than the twelve, but there are twelve whose names are on the wall of the city in the book of Revelation, designated 'the twelve apostles of the Lamb.' It is not that difficult.

If there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb, then that should automatically mean that there are no other apostles.

Now Acts 14:14 calls both Barnabas and Paul "apostles" but that could be more in the generic sense of "sent ones", since Scripture does not contradict Scripture. Christ is also called an "Apostle", being the one sent by God the Father.

 

[presidente]

God's Approval/TWO Different gospels in prophecy And MYSTERY!
+
Distinctionsof prophecy And MYSTERY!
GRACE And Peace...

Yikes! Sounds like that dangerous hyperdispensationalism.

Paul wrote this in Galatians 1:8
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Peter said in Acts 15
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

 

[presidente]

If there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb, then that should automatically mean that there are no other apostles.

Now Acts 14:14 calls both Barnabas and Paul "apostles" but that could be more in the generic sense of "sent ones", since Scripture does not contradict Scripture. Christ is also called an "Apostle", being the one sent by God the Father.

Your the one making scripture out to contradict scripture. According to scripture, there were more than twelve apostles. Twelve of them are designated 'apostles of the Lamb' in Revelation and appear written on the city.

If Barnabas and Saul are apostles in a 'generic sense' then the generic sense apostles are apostles, too. Christ gave apostles __after__ the ascension according to Ephesians 4. He ascended and received gifts for men, and gave the gifts to men. Among the gifts are the apostles. The twelve were appointed before the ascension. Paul and Barnabas and certain others were sent out after the ascension.

 

[SonsOfCaleb]

If Barnabas and Saul are apostles in a 'generic sense' then the generic sense apostles are apostles, too.

Lol. "If Barnabas and Saul are apostles in a 'generic sense' then the generic sense apostles are apostles, too." Well said. If it's bread, the brand doesn't matter. It's still bread.

In Acts 17, Luke said that the Athenians did nothing all day but try to find something new or exciting to talk about. Western christianity is very sedentary and Grecian: almost everything is cerebral. There's no action, and there's no life. There's just a lot of talking, debating, arguing, and theorizing, and philosophizing. Sedentary christianity is not in line or agreed with biblical Christianity, therefore, the two will always be at odds and will constantly disagree.

 

[SonsOfCaleb]

If there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb, then that should automatically mean that there are no other apostles.

Not automatically. God has different types of angels and different orders of heavenly beings (as does satan). The things God does on earth are a reproduction of what is already in Heaven. Ephesians 4:11 says that Jesus gave prophets to the Church. We know that there were OT prophets, and we see here that there were NT prophets. Both classes were vastly different.

It's God's prerogative to make different types of the same thing. Look at people for instance. There are different races that look obviously different on the surface; but within each race most people look totally different. There are pre-ascension apostles (the Twelve), and there are post-ascension apostles (Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, Jesus's brother James, Timothy, Silas, Andronicus and Junia, Titus, etc.).

The number 12 is special to God and spiritually. That's why 12 tribes of Israel were chosen though there are actually 14 or 15 tribes. It's also why 12 patriarchs have been chosen though there were more than 12 men who played an important role in founding and establishing Israel. The number 12 is important (it actually means 'apostolic government' or 'God's government' whereas the number 10 means 'man's government', 11 means 'apostacy', and 13 means 'rebellion', etc.), but the number 12 isn't the only number, important number, or special number in God's economy.

If God chooses 12 people to fit a certain class or group, it doesn't mean those are the only people who are relevant for whatever that group is meant for. An example is that Jesus first sent out His 12 apostles to minister certain works in Israel. After they returned, Jesus then sent 72 other disciples to do the same works.

 

[Evmur]

The accompanying signs, miracles and wonders were for particular purposes in setting up the early churches and communicating Gods Word.

That was completed and fulfilled, so the sign gifts become unnecessary and put away.

That isn't to say God cant heal or do miracles but not thru the gifts.

scriptures please

 

[Evmur]

So if Jesus is the perfect in 1co 13....

The perfect is neuter gender when looking at the Greek.. it is a 'thing' or 'that' .. relating to something inanimate.

Also.. whatever is in part in 1co 13 is completed by the perfect.

So the perfect would be a completion of prophecy, tongues and knowledge..which are all ties to the progressing revelation of scripture at the time.

Now.. following this though is the seeing 'face to face ' .. which can be interpreted either way to be about Jesus or scripture..

So 1 co 13 doesn't stand alone and is supported by the likes of Ephesians 4 and other scripture.

Added to this is the experience of what people are calling tongues and prophecy compared to what the guidelines set down by Paul are and the case for at least sign gifts finished is strong.

The canon of scripture is closed, it says we may all speak in tongues and it exhorts us to earnestly desire the higher gifts especially that we may prophesy. You can't add your own ideas to that.

 

[SonsOfCaleb]

The canon of scripture is closed, it says we may all speak in tongues and it exhorts us to earnestly desire the higher gifts especially that we may prophesy. You can't add your own ideas to that.

I agree. After hearing John MacArthur teach about the apostolic ministry, I was surprised to later discover that he doesn't believe the apostolic ministry is relevant today. You couldn't tell he believed that if you heard his message about it. I believe some people are conflicted on the issue of cessation.

I think some people strongly suspect that everything Jesus gave (eg. the fivefold ministries, the gifts of the Spirit, dreams and visions, the supernatural, etc.) is relevant until Jesus expressly changes that, but they're also in a denomination or situation that forces them to believe and preach otherwise.