You probably are not an apostle if......

[Elden1971]

You probably are not an apostle if:

1. You charge for your trainings

2. Sell unregistered securities

3. Engage in Money Laundering

4. Smuggle gold

5. Take your brother to court

6. Slander your co-workers

7. ad infinitum ad nauseum

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Elden1971

You probably are not an apostle if:

1. You charge for your trainings

2. Sell unregistered securities

3. Engage in Money Laundering

4. Smuggle gold

5. Take your brother to court

6. Slander your co-workers

7. ad infinitum ad nauseum

2Co 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Did Lee ever raise the dead?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

2Co 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.

Did Lee ever raise the dead?

Years ago, his ministry made me alive more than once.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Years ago, his ministry made me alive more than once.

Only Christ made you alive. Lee's ministry may have made you lively, but only Christ makes alive.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

Only Christ made you alive. Lee's ministry may have made you lively, but only Christ makes alive.

A technicality perhaps, but if you insist ...

But not too dissimilar than Paul's comment to the Corinthians, "For in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."

[awareness]

But y'all got my point, right? Lee never did signs and wonders and mighty deeds. He never raised the dead. He wasn't an apostle.

We were wrong to believe he was hearing from God. He wasn't.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by awareness

But y'all got my point, right? Lee never did signs and wonders and mighty deeds. He never raised the dead. He wasn't an apostle.

We were wrong to believe he was hearing from God. He wasn't.

I think you are over-thinking the apostle thing. That doesn't mean that I necessarily consider an apostle and easy title get through an online university. But there is some indication that apostles ultimately were not simply the 11 plus Matthias plus Paul, but that there was a need to carefully consider those who came along saying they were apostles. If it was as simple as signs and wonders, then it wasn't so difficult. So surely there is something more to it than signs and wonders.

But one of the things that generally spoke against Lee would be the personal declaration of getting private words from God that seemed contradictory to what we otherwise were able to know or come to know. Besides, the OT had already said that those who came declaring their own credentials had none.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by OBW

I think you are over-thinking the apostle thing. That doesn't mean that I necessarily consider an apostle and easy title get through an online university. But there is some indication that apostles ultimately were not simply the 11 plus Matthias plus Paul, but that there was a need to carefully consider those who came along saying they were apostles. If it was as simple as signs and wonders, then it wasn't so difficult. So surely there is something more to it than signs and wonders.

But one of the things that generally spoke against Lee would be the personal declaration of getting private words from God that seemed contradictory to what we otherwise were able to know or come to know. Besides, the OT had already said that those who came declaring their own credentials had none.

I have concluded that the apostles were of two types or levels. First was the twelve plus Paul, ones with Jesus from the beginning and the special case of Paul. Most Christians probably would only consider these ones as "true" apostles, and for the most part I would agree.

But the scriptures also opens the door for others like Timothy, Silvanus, etc. The Bible never says He stopped sending apostles, prophets, evangelists, etc. Ephesus, years later, was applauded for trying the apostles. Based on the meaning of the word, today's missionaries could be considered apostles, sent as ambassadors to new places.

The first set alone could use "apostle" as a title, the second set should not.

[OBW]

I'm fairly on-board with the idea of two tiers of apostles — the original named apostles and then the others that, as Ohio indicates, scripture opens the door for.

But I have a hard time with the notion that everyone can be an apostle at the lowest levels. Not saying that there is no way to understand the simply notion of being sent and that potentially including us all to the extent that we are "sent" even to our workplaces.

But I think that when the word apostle was used in the NT, it was something more than just being a good Christian and preaching the gospel to a coworker or something like that. Maybe missionaries qualify. But even that is not exactly the same kind of thinking as how the word was ever used in the NT.

So I find myself unsettled as to how far to take the broadening of the term and stay in reasonable connection with what is spoken in the scripture.