Apostles

[Cal]

Jesus either worked miracles to help people or to show he was capable working them, or both. I fully believe Jesus cared about people. But if he only cared about people he could have worked miracles secretly and/or from a distance. He didn't have to let on that he was involved at all. But he worked miracles in a way that there was no doubt that he was the one doing them. He clearly wanted to express and testify of both his care and his power.

Jesus didn't have to work miracles at all. He could have just preached the kingdom and let his character do all the testifying for him. But it strongly appears God felt there needed to be an unavoidable testimony that he was more than just a man. Thus the miracles. So they most likely were performed not just to show care, but to testify of who Jesus was.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Jesus didn't have to work miracles at all. He could have just preached the kingdom and let his character do all the testifying for him. But it strongly appears God felt there needed to be an unavoidable testimony that he was more than just a man. Thus the miracles. So they most likely were performed not just to show care, but to testify of who Jesus was.

Acts 17:31 says, "For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him [Jesus] from the dead."

God proved his desgination of Jesus as Lord and Christ by raising Him from the dead. In His life, God also proved/confirmed Jesus by the mighty works which He did through Him(Luke 7:22,23). Likewise, Hebrews 2:4 says "those who heard Him" were also confirmed/proved/affirmed by works of power. Paul said (2 Cor 12:12) the marks of an apostle are evident in signs and wonders and miracles.

Now, 2,000 years have passed. We have the "clear word". My sense is that the need for confirming signs has passed. I was asking for signs and miracles and wonders semi-facetiously, because I think the need for apostles is also past. We have the Bible; we also have the fellowship of the believers, to sort our way, collectively as God's flock, to see God's revealed will in His word.

So when someone comes along and says how Ephesians 4 or some other scripture shows the continual necessity of apostles, my reply is, doesn't the same scripture show the confirming works of the apostles? Why keep one and toss the other? 2 Timothy 4:20b does not clearly demonstrate the turning of an age.

[ZNPaaneah]

2Cor 12:11 I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing.
12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

To me, verse 12 is saying that the sings and wonders and mighty deeds were wrought among the saints in Corinth. This was their personal experience. Verse 11 seems to me to be saying that Paul did not want to mention or refer to this, he felt that it was the Corinthians that should have "commended" him. And, I think this word commended does not necessarily infer a reference to the miracles. No doubt, someone's testimony might include this, so you can take that either way.

So yes, I agree with the idea that any true apostle will also have the accompanying signs and wonders. However, I don't agree that it is the Apostle who publishes, promotes or publicizes this. Also, I don't think that it is always profitable to discuss miracles you have experienced with those that haven't. Rather, I think that when you have a genuine experience it confirms the fact that this person is a coworker with God. You would / should then be more assured to commend this one's ministry to others, though you might feel it is best to not mention the signs and wonders.

Finally, this is really up to God. Surely we are all still "coworkers with God". We do our part, He does ours. How could someone in this ministry not come across those who are dead and dying. No doubt you pray and if the Lord chooses to raise the dead, that is His option. But remember, the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

[aron]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Finally, this is really up to God. ...we are all still "coworkers with God". We do our part, He does ours. How could someone in this ministry not come across those who are dead and dying. ...you pray and if the Lord chooses to raise the dead, that is His option. But remember, the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Amen; we are one. Probably much more than we realize. My sense of it increases all the time. Surely the Lord's return draws nigh.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

To me, verse 12 is saying that the signs and wonders and mighty deeds were wrought among the saints in Corinth. This was their personal experience. Verse 11 seems to me to be saying that Paul did not want to mention or refer to this, he felt that it was the Corinthians that should have "commended" him. And, I think this word commended does not necessarily infer a reference to the miracles. No doubt, someone's testimony might include this, so you can take that either way.

So yes, I agree with the idea that any true apostle will also have the accompanying signs and wonders. However, I don't agree that it is the Apostle who publishes, promotes or publicizes this. Also, I don't think that it is always profitable to discuss miracles you have experienced with those that haven't. Rather, I think that when you have a genuine experience it confirms the fact that this person is a coworker with God. You would / should then be more assured to commend this one's ministry to others, though you might feel it is best to not mention the signs and wonders.

Finally, this is really up to God. Surely we are all still "coworkers with God". We do our part, He does ours. How could someone in this ministry not come across those who are dead and dying. No doubt you pray and if the Lord chooses to raise the dead, that is His option. But remember, the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

These are all great points hitherto unmentioned.

[Cal]

Lots of good points made in this thread. I've learned some things and my views have been sharpened.

Here the picture of the spared house.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Acts 17:31 says, "For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him [Jesus] from the dead."

God proved his designation of Jesus as Lord and Christ by raising Him from the dead. In His life, God also proved/confirmed Jesus by the mighty works which He did through Him(Luke 7:22,23). Likewise, Hebrews 2:4 says "those who heard Him" were also confirmed/proved/affirmed by works of power. Paul said (2 Cor 12:12) the marks of an apostle are evident in signs and wonders and miracles.

Now, 2,000 years have passed. We have the "clear word". My sense is that the need for confirming signs has passed. I was asking for signs and miracles and wonders semi-facetiously, because I think the need for apostles is also past. We have the Bible; we also have the fellowship of the believers, to sort our way, collectively as God's flock, to see God's revealed will in His word.

Abraham told the rich man in Luke 16 that, "they have Moses and the prophets,let them hear them," when the rich man begged for someone to "rise from the dead." Abraham felt that people already had enough "proof." Yet God went further to "prove his designation," by many signs and wonders testifying who Jesus was. God then went further to raise Him from the dead. Nor God didn't stop there. He wrought many works of power through the Apostles. Their teachings have also been added to scripture.

Church history is filled with many more works of power, and while their writings have not been added to scripture, they have added to a tremendous resource of biographies, histories, commentaries, tracts, etc. The Head of the body has been giving "gifts" to man for 2,000 years. He has never stopped. Church history also records that many "confirming signs" have accompanied the gospel pioneers to new lands. The Bible tells us that the only hindrance to "confirming signs" is unbelief. For example, the city of Nazareth witnessed no "confirming signs" because of their unbelief.

So when someone comes along and says how Ephesians 4 or some other scripture shows the continual necessity of apostles, my reply is, doesn't the same scripture show the confirming works of the apostles? Why keep one and toss the other? 2 Timothy 4:20b does not clearly demonstrate the turning of an age.

I guess this someone refers to me. But ... I used Ephesians 4 to say that the Head never stopped giving "gifts" to men. Whether the body requires the continual necessity of apostles is not my responsibility, it is His. He has never told us that we don't need them.

Nor did I use 2 Tim 4:20b to say there was a turning of an age. It was cited to address the circus-carnival-wonder-working-demonstrations-of-power that were being demanded of the apostles for verification. If Paul to be such a on-demand-faith-healer, why would he leave a brother sick somewhere? For that matter, why would anyone ever be sick around the early Apostles? Why didn't Paul just send him a clean hanky?

[aron]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Abraham told the rich man in Luke 16 that, "they have Moses and the prophets,let them hear them," when the rich man begged for someone to "rise from the dead." Abraham felt that people already had enough "proof." Yet God went further to "prove his designation," by many signs and wonders testifying who Jesus was. God then went further to raise Him from the dead. Nor God didn't stop there. He wrought many works of power through the Apostles. Their teachings have also been added to scripture.

Church history is filled with many more works of power ... The Head of the body has been giving "gifts" to man for 2,000 years. He has never stopped. Church history also records that many "confirming signs" have accompanied the gospel pioneers to new lands. The Bible tells us that the only hindrance to "confirming signs" is unbelief. For example, the city of Nazareth witnessed no "confirming signs" because of their unbelief.?

Good words, all.

Originally Posted by Ohio

I used Ephesians 4 to say that the Head never stopped giving "gifts" to men. Whether the body requires the continual necessity of apostles is not my responsibility, it is His. He has never told us that we don't need them.

I may have mischaracterized your argument to make mine. I believe I've done that once or twice before.

Originally Posted by Ohio

Nor did I use 2 Tim 4:20b to say there was a turning of an age. It was cited to address the circus-carnival-wonder-working-demonstrations-of-power that were being demanded of the apostles for verification. If Paul to be such a on-demand-faith-healer, why would he leave a brother sick somewhere? For that matter, why would anyone ever be sick around the early Apostles? Why didn't Paul just send him a clean hanky?

Interesting questions. I have my own theories. I think the organization of the "church" co-opted the Spirit. Instead of feeding the thousands, they organized deacons.

Now, having said that, I immediately place myself waaaaaay at the bottom. Whatever "works of power" were evinced in the scripture, and in the record of history, I should tremble even to tap at a keyboard, if my "works" were to be set up next and compared. So I certainly don't write as "one who has laid hold".

But I am indignant when I see people set themselves up as something, when they clearly are not validated by God, to draw away the foolish and the simple (nor, conversely, do I yearn for the circus-like "power... and authority ... and signs" seen in Revelation 13 by the false prophet and the beast).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

Interesting questions. I have my own theories. I think the organization of the "church" co-opted the Spirit. Instead of feeding the thousands, they organized deacons.

But I am indignant when I see people set themselves up as something, when they clearly are not validated by God, to draw away the foolish and the simple (nor, conversely, do I yearn for the circus-like "power... and authority ... and signs" seen in Revelation 13 by the false prophet and the beast).

Not quite sure about your theory, since the initial deacons' first responsibility was to "feed thousands," or maybe just a few Greek widows.

I share the same indignation, and that's why I seem to have objections to only using "signs and wonders" to confirm apostles. The Bible does it, so I have little choice, but it's not without a few reservations.

[aron]

Originally Posted by Igzy

God felt there needed to be an unavoidable testimony that he was more than just a man. The miracles... were performed ...to testify of who Jesus was.

A la Peter in Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know"

In contrast, thus far I have seen people like Todd Bentley who don't impress me, to say the least. There is power there, but I am not convinced it is of God. Swapping his wife for a newer model seems to be a confirmation of other forces at work.

Then I have seen over-reaching Bible teachers like Lee who somehow need to be "apostles" to maintain sway over the flock. Not impressed at all.

Not to mention all the false apostles and prophets and christs out there. Practically too numerous to name.

But, I have indeed seen power exhibited, and occasionally felt it myself. God has, thus, proven, or confirmed, or attested, His Son Jesus to us, again and again and again. Some of these manifestations may indeed have been through apostles. I am not going to name names, because I don't want to mar the point (okay, one: Billy Graham. I saw Graham deal with a very determined and intelligent and well-prepared opposer in a hostile setting, and Graham had the man purring like a kitty-cat in about 2 minutes. The hair stood right up on my arms).

But my witness to power does not confirm some need to have a delineated set of roles a la Ephesians 4:11 "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers," or 1 Corinthians 12:28 "And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues."

The idea that formal, clearly delineated and universally-recognized positions are continually supported by these verses, to me, is to put God in a box. Watchman Nee's box labeled "The Normal Christian Church" is still a box.

[Cal]

Originally Posted by aron

A la Peter in Acts 2:22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know"

In contrast, thus far I have seen people like Todd Bentley who don't impress me, to say the least. There is power there, but I am not convinced it is of God. Swapping his wife for a newer model seems to be a confirmation of other forces at work.

Then I have seen over-reaching Bible teachers like Lee who somehow need to be "apostles" to maintain sway over the flock. Not impressed at all.

Not to mention all the false apostles and prophets and christs out there. Practically too numerous to name.

But, I have indeed seen power exhibited, and occasionally felt it myself. God has, thus, proven, or confirmed, or attested, His Son Jesus to us, again and again and again. Some of these manifestations may indeed have been through apostles. I am not going to name names, because I don't want to mar the point (okay, one: Billy Graham. I saw Graham deal with a very determined and intelligent and well-prepared opposer in a hostile setting, and Graham had the man purring like a kitty-cat in about 2 minutes. The hair stood right up on my arms).

But my witness to power does not confirm some need to have a delineated set of roles a la Ephesians 4:11 "And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers," or 1 Corinthians 12:28 "And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues."

The idea that formal, clearly delineated and universally-recognized positions are continually supported by these verses, to me, is to put God in a box. Watchman Nee's box labeled "The Normal Christian Church" is still a box.

Great post, aron. I agree with this one and your one before.

[Cal]

If signs and wonders are indeed meant to attest to apostleship, then there needs to be some way of knowing the alleged apostles have done them. The issue of boasting or being modest is really a side issue. Making modesty the main point would be like a policeman not wearing his uniform because he didn't want people to think he boasted about being a policeman. That's very noble, but how are people to be know he's really a policeman?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

If signs and wonders are indeed meant to attest to apostleship, then there needs to be some way of knowing the alleged apostles have done them. The issue of boasting or being modest is really a side issue. Making modesty the main point would be like a policeman not wearing his uniform because he didn't want people to think he boasted about being a policeman. That's very noble, but how are people to be know he's really a policeman?

You are saying that miracles are like a uniform that a policeman wears so that everyone can see he is a policeman.

That is not my experience at all.

Perhaps in my experience miracles are the Policeman's gun that shoots the bad guy right before he kills you. Or it might be the hypodermic needle the doctor uses to save the dying man. Do we really want to determine who the real police are by the way they shoot guns? Or who the real doctors are by the drugs they inject into people?

[Cal]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

You are saying that miracles are like a uniform that a policeman wears so that everyone can see he is a policeman.

That is not my experience at all.

Really? What experience have you had of apostles? Recall we are talking about apostles, not miracles in general.

Perhaps in my experience miracles are the Policeman's gun that shoots the bad guy right before he kills you. Or it might be the hypodermic needle the doctor uses to save the dying man. Do we really want to determine who the real police are by the way they shoot guns? Or who the real doctors are by the drugs they inject into people?

I think you are totally missing my point.

I simply said, if signs are a required indication of apostles then by definition we need to have some way of knowing about an alleged apostles signs.

Why is that statement so hard to follow?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Igzy

Really? What experience have you had of apostles? Recall we are talking about apostles, not miracles in general.



I think you are totally missing my point.

I simply said, if signs are a required indication of apostles then by definition we need to have some way of knowing about an alleged apostles signs.

Why is that statement so hard to follow?

No, my post was referring to your analogy of miracles being a uniform, and in my experience miracles are not at all like a uniform.

1. "Signs are a required indication of an apostle." [I can accept that, even I can say Amen to that. I would say that a true Apostle is a coworker of God, and at some point that should be made clear through a sign or a miracle].

2. "Then by definition we need to have some way of knowing about an alleged apostles signs." [I can also agree with this statement once we clarify who the term "we" refers to].

My issue is this. An apostle, if he is a "missionary" will be preaching the gospel to hundreds of people, perhaps thousands. These people may have not had any prior experience of Christians, or else a very limited experience. So this is really something they are brand new to. How does this person learn of the miracles? If you are talking about a coworker, I would expect they would see the miracles take place first hand. For the gospel contacts I also hope it would be first hand experience. It is not something that the servant needs to discuss, your focus should be on ministering and serving. When the Lord chooses He may provide a sign or a miracle.

For example, I read a story about George Mueller. He had said if they ever were unable to feed the kids at the orphanage he would close it down because it was evidence that God was no longer a coworker. One Sunday they came to him, said they didn't have any food, it was in the afternoon, dinner was a few hours away, they had nothing to cook, and the stores were closed. So he gathered all the serving ones together to pray. A few minutes later someone came and said there was a truck outside full of meat. The driver said that he had come to deliver it and the store was closed and the meat would go bad so the people in the town had directed him to the orphanage.

So surely, all the coworkers and serving ones were well aware of God's hand in the ministry. But do you now broadcast this? Do you send out a letter to donors? Mueller refused to do so and waited about 6 months to send out his next letter. His reason was based on a principle, he decided it would be insulting to God to ever send out letters to the supporters when they were low on funds. So, there was no way to "trumpet" this miracle, or "parade around wearing this miracle" without also revealing that they were low on funds. The story showed up in the biography years later, but far too late for anyone to decide they want to contribute to this ministry or participate in it. Let people come to the ministry out of a burden to serve, not out of the hope to see Jesus walk across their swimming pool.

The road that leads to life is a narrow way and few there be that find it. If you put miracles on the servant like a purple robe you make it too easy for the unbelievers and fleshly to find this way. When they were deciding to crucify Jesus they said that there was no prophecy of any prophet coming out of Nazareth. Even these learned Bible scholars were unaware that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, they were unaware that wise men from the East had come giving him gifts after seeing his star, they were unaware that as a result of this thousands of kids were killed. No doubt these events were part of their relatively recent history, yet Jesus never went around saying that He was that kid. He never told anyone that Herod himself had wanted to kill Jesus as a baby.

This is why I do not like the analogy of a policeman's uniform.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by aron

In contrast, thus far I have seen people like Todd Bentley who don't impress me, to say the least. There is power there, but I am not convinced it is of God. Swapping his wife for a newer model seems to be a confirmation of other forces at work.

Recently an older couple told me of the Lakeland blessing with all the wonders and healings. He said, "people were getting out of their wheel chairs and walking ... perhaps a little wobbly at first." He said this as evidence of the Spirit's move there.

Granted I am a "recovering" skeptic who does believe the Lord can heal any man, but perhaps those folks were "wobbly" before they got the wheel chair. Perhaps their "healing" was only wishful thinking. For sure Bentley's assistants claimed a "healing" without verification.

Todd Bentley, at least for me, is one such case where signs and wonders appear to prove his "anointing." Verification is very difficult. Even aron says "there is power there." How can one have signs and wonders, yet be filled with unrighteousness. How can the Lord use a man who dumps his wife for an intern. This is why signs and wonders cannot be the only test for apostleship.

Reminds me of Benny Hinn and Paula White strolling arm-in-arm in Rome "comforting one another." First adultery, then lies to cover it up, yet both of them still have the "power" of the Holy Ghost. Paula recently preached to other leaders ...

"The enemy strategically plotted against you, hunted you like prey, set out to destroy you, tried to wreck your mind, destroy your heart, jack up your family, take your ministry, ruin your reputation ... and he thought that he had you. He set you up and thought this is what will kill them.

"I came to put every devil on notice ... I'm getting my dream back, I'm getting my prophesy back, I'm getting my vision back, I'm getting my anointing back, I'm getting my strength back."

Before walking back through her tumultuous past few years, she told them, "I think it's time we stop being hypocrites in the pulpit. I think ... it's time that we take the mask off to this generation and show them that we have the same issues and the same struggles."

"We're going public with all our stuff. Somebody's got to get real in the church now."

Sounds to me like the nasty "side-effects" of her conscience are wearing off.