Apostles

• “The term ‘apostle’ was originally used as an adjective, describing a dispatch that was usually made by sea. It could also designate the thing that was sent out.” (Lexham Bible Dictionary)
• In the New Testament the term “apostle” refers to an authorized person sent on a special mission. He is a messenger, envoy, ambassador, or an emissary. He is an official delegate of Jesus Christ.
• The 1st category of apostles: The Twelve. Called, authorized, and sent (Matthew 10:1-4). Mission extended (Matthew 28:18–20).
• Matthias replaced Judas. The candidates considered had to fit a special criteria: they had been with Christ from the beginning of his ministry and they were eye-witnesses of the risen Christ (Acts 1:21–26).
• This replacement was unique.
  • “Peter explained that the reason for a new apostle was that Judas had apostatized and abandoned his office (Acts 1:16-17, 20, cf. 1:25), not that Judas had merely died (52, 179). The prayer of the disciples in Acts 1:24-25 “is not a set prayer such as the Lord’s Prayer or prayers in a liturgical setting, but a unique prayer on a specific and unrepeatable occasion” (75). “In the immediate context in the Book of Acts, the appointment of Matthias as the twelfth apostle prepares the way for the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. Zwiep argues (172–73), correctly I think, that in this context the appointment of Matthias was necessary so that Israel’s believing community could be fully represented by twelve men corresponding to the twelve tribes of Israel (Luke 22:28-30). “There is more, but Zwiep’s thorough monograph on the Matthias passage—one of the very few such monographs ever published—confirms that Luke did not view Matthias’s appointment as [precedent] for an ongoing institutional office of apostle. To the contrary, the twelve apostles were a unique group of men whom Christ had chosen to fulfill a unique, eschatological role in redemptive history.” (Robert Bowman’s review of a book by Arie W Zwiep)
• The 2nd category of apostle: The one untimely born, Paul. He is a literal eyewitness of the risen Christ, and considered himself the last in an exclusive group (1 Corinthians 15:4–11). Paul is very clear that he did not receive his apostolic authority or commission from another apostle (Galatians 1:1, 2:1-10).
• The 3rd category of apostle: A broader, more generic sense of messenger.
  • “As for Titus, he is my partner and fellow worker for your benefit. And as for our brothers, they are messengers [Greek: apostles] of the churches, the glory of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 8:23) These were part of a church-endorsed, church-sent effort to establish other churches in areas that had not been reached. Today we have a similar category: missionaries. “There were Barnabas (Acts 14:4, 14; 1 Cor 9:5–7), James, the Lord’s brother (1 Cor 15:7; Gal 1:19), and Apollos (1 Cor 4:6, 9), probably Silvanus (1 Thess 1:1; 2:6 [GT 2:7]), Titus (2 Cor 8:23), Epaphroditus (Phil 2:25), and possibly Andronicus and Junia(s) (Rom 16:7). Paul mentions James and all the apostles (1 Cor 15:7) as distinct from Peter and the Twelve (15:5). In Gal 1:18–19 Paul states that when he went up to Jerusalem he visited Peter and he did not visit other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. Hence, Paul recognized apostles beyond the Twelve.” (Hoehner, 135)
• The apostles were church planters.
  • “It seems then that the main function of an apostle is to establish churches in areas that have not been reached by others (Rom 15:20). They are God’s messengers to open up new territories for Christ.” (Hoehner, 542)
• The apostles and prophets were the pioneers to initially reveal the mystery of the gospel, “that the Gentiles are fellow heirs.” (Ephesians 3:4-6)
• The the message and authority of the apostles (particularly the Twelve and Paul) was validated by significant miracles.
  • “The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works.” (2 Corinthians 12:12)
• The apostles and prophets laid an initial foundation that the rest of the household of God would build on / grow into (Ephesians 2:19-21).
• Paul, Peter, and Jude exhort their readers to remember, teach, and contend for the apostolic deposit of teaching definitively delivered to the saints (2 Timothy 2:2, 2 Peter 3:2, Jude 3).

Prophets

• They stimulated the church by telling the future (Acts 11:27-30).
• They spoke clear words of instruction from God (Acts 13:1–3).
• They encouraged and strengthened believers (Acts 15:30–35; 1 Corinthians 14:3).
• They disclosed the secrets of the heart (1 Corinthians 14:24-25).
• They were to prophesy in an orderly manner, and to be weighed by others (1 Corinthians 14:29–33; cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:21).
• They were secondary to the apostles and were to submit to the teaching of the apostles (Ephesians 4:11; 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Corinthians 14:37–38).
• They helped lay an initial foundation upon which the household of God could grow into and build upon (Ephesians 2:20).

Building on their foundation

How do we today build on and grow into the foundation of the apostles and prophets? Consider what Paul, Peter, and Jude exhort toward the end of their lives:

• “What you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men, who will be able to teach others also.” (2 Timothy 2:2)
• “Remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles.” (2 Peter 3:2)
• “Contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 3) Later Jude writes, “remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (Jude 17)

Summary: Entrust, teach, remember, contend for the foundational apostolic deposit definitively delivered to the saints.

(Addendum: “And now I commend you to God and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified.” (Acts 20:32) He doesn’t tell them to pay attention to a succession of future prophets or apostles. He commends them to God’s word.)

Evangelists

• A basic definition: Evangelists preach the good news to those who have not heard it.
• Compare these two words:
  • εὐαγγελιστής (evangelist)
  • εὐαγγέλιον (gospel)
  • See the overlap?
• Philip was called an evangelist (Acts 21:8).
• Philip preached to crowds (Acts 8:4-8). God used miracles to help him draw a crowd!
• Philip practiced Spirit-led individual stranger-evangelism (Acts 8:26-40).
• Paul tells Timothy, a younger man left behind to help stabilize churches with church leadership, to do the work of an evangelist: “As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.” (2 Timothy 4:5)
• Paul tells this same Timothy to avoid quarreling, but yet to persist in teaching and correct his opponents, and to do so kindly and patiently (2 Timothy 2:22–26).
• Evangelists preach with clarity what Old Testament prophets inquired about and what angels longed to look at. What they anticipated we evangelists get to announce (1 Peter 1:10–12).

The Jesus-movement was otherwise (more internally?) simply called “the Way” (Acts 9:2, 19:9, 19:23, 24:14, 24:22).

1. He already had a good reputation before he was chosen to assist the apostles. He was “of good repute, full of the Spirit and of wisdom.” (Acts 6:3)

2. Saul may have attended or visited a synagogue where Stephen attended. Among the synagogues that disputed with Stephen was the synagogue of the Cilicians. Saul was from Tarsus of Cilicia.

3. Stephen did a lot of teaching. “He won’t… shut… up!”

“This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law, for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.”

Acts 6:13–14

4. Stephen, a Hellenistic Jew, was considered an outsider to the Hebrew community. This made his teaching that the Law and temple were fulfilled in Jesus (presumably what he taught given the allegations against him) especially scandalous.

5. Stephen responds to the accusations in a high-stakes juridical setting. But what initially looks like his defense is turned around: Stephen goes on the offensive. He puts his audience on trial.

6. In his speech Stephen gives an overview of Jewish history, but he doesn’t highlight established Jews settled in the Promised Land. Instead, he highlights mistreated and oppressed strangers rescued by God.

7. Stephen mentions the *portable* tabernacle and the *inadequacy* of Solomon’s temple to contain God.

8. Stephen also mentions agents of rescue sent by God but rejected by Israel.

9. Having primed his audience, Stephen climaxes with his own accusation against the council: They follow in this ancestral tradition of murdering God’s agents of rescue. “As your fathers did, so do you.” (7:51)

10. Paul was almost certainly present for this speech. He guarded the coats of those who, immediately after, stoned Stephen. But Paul’s life ended up being a continuation of Stephen’s ministry. Echoes of the theology of Stephen’s speech are later found in Paul’s own teaching. And Paul’s own salvation is an answer to Stephen’s prayer, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” (7:60)

“Various elements in Stephen’s teaching arguably laid a foundation for Saul’s later theological views as a Christian. Stephen’s dramatic declaration of his preference for the diaspora Jews over the people of the land may well have prepared the way for Saul’s vision of ministry to the Gentiles. Stephen’s view of Moses as a type of the One who was to come perhaps laid the groundwork for Paul’s view of the law of Moses as fulfilled in the person, death and resurrection of Christ Jesus (Rom 10:4). Stephen’s rejection of the centrality of the temple may have diminished the significance of the holy place in the mind of Paul, who would see the new covenant people as the “temple of the living God” (1 Cor 3:16-17; 2 Cor 6:16). Henceforth Saul’s view of these various elements — the land of Israel, the Gentiles, the law and the temple — would each undergo radical change.

“Much of Saul’s dramatic reinterpretation of these elements is attributable to Stephen’s words heard in the Hellenistic synagogues, although Saul radically disagreed with them at the time. However, it was Saul’s acknowledgment of Jesus as *the Christ* on the road to Damascus that transformed his comprehension of Stephen’s words and inspired a radical new worldview.”

Paul Barnett, Jesus and the Rise of Early Christianity, 226

The apostle Paul paces back and forth, closes his pitiful eyes, smiles, looks up, sees his audience, and then gushes his heart out to a scribe:

“[Paul] wears his heart on his sleeve. This spontaneity was no doubt facilitated by Paul’s practice of dictating his letters instead of writing them out himself. As he dictates, he sees in his mind’s eye those whom he is addressing and speaks as he would if he were face to face with them.” (“Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free”, F. F. Bruce, 16)

I think that we men especially (at least me) have a tendency to say something important and sincere but then quickly clothe it with a humorous joke or roast or light-hearted misdirection.

This too often detracts from the boldness, directness, and felt sincerity of what we genuinely think. It lessens the force of our compliments, criticisms, and encouragements. It makes our relationships thinner than they have to be.

There is no Love, the mother cried
As she rocked her baby side to side
With lullaby sweet
And melodies soft

There is no Right, the justice penned
As he meted sentence strong
For lawless wrongs
Called sin

There is no Meaning, the author wrote
With words to demonstrate his point
Trusting readers
To understand

There is no God, the hiker said
As he watched the sky wash over red
With hues and radiant beams
Of beauty

I started this poem in 2018 thinking about my dear atheist friend Braden.

Braden was convinced that there was no objective right, wrong, beauty, meaning, true rationality, or God.

And yet he was always so kind and courteous, admiring goodness around him, and reflecting on things far beyond him.

If you want to be clean from all the disappointment and foolishness and alarmism and resentment in Trump-news, then take a bath in the word of God.

If you don’t have Jesus, then Trump is your highest political leader.

Jesus rules with perfect wisdom and purity and righteousness and compassion and holiness. Anything good from Trump comes from Jesus. And anything bad from Trump will be judged by Jesus. Trump will be gone someday and you’ll still have Jesus to reckon with.

Heaven and Earth will pass away, but the words of Jesus will never pass away.

Countercult parachurch ministry serves the body of Christ when it emphasizes the importance of belonging to, quietly serving at, being invested in, and incubating under a healthy local church with multiple qualified elders and Biblically faithful preaching and discipleship.

We show the broader unity of the real Christian big-C Church by being committed to such local churches as our primary spiritual community.

And we honor Christ in not letting false religion dominate exit-narratives, preaching, apologetics, and gospel conversation. Rather, we let Christ dominate, be Lord of, and reign over all such activity.

“We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” (2 Corinthians 10:5)

In thousands of years false temples will be in ragged ruins, toppled, forgotten, much like ancient ruins of Greece. But the words of Christ will stand.

Michael Gungor and Derek Webb and Jennifer Knapp and Jars of Clay — these fallen musicians were squatters and thieves.

They were borrowing God’s glory. They were producing beautiful things that did not come from themselves.

They never owned it. It flows from God.

They benefitted from what they now rebel against.

Why I sometimes still listen to them: What they once enjoyed has been taken away from them and given to me.

By analogy, they forfeited the kingdom-copyright to their own works.

Being an adopted child of the Most High is infinitely more dignifying and significant than being a “literal” spirit child of a regional cosmic patriarch and one of his wives.

Luke Wayne replies,

“The children I adopted are literally my children. I am not a figurative or symbolic dad. I am literally their dad. Adoption makes one a literal child.

“What would NOT make me a literal child of God would be to say that I am an eternal, uncreated intelligence which was used as raw material by a pair of highly developed humans to assemble a spirit body and then later allowed me to acquire a physical body that was birthed by a completely different set of human parents who were not yet as advanced as the first. I don’t quite know what THAT would make me, but ‘literal child of God’ is certainly not it.” (Luke Wayne, May 22, 2018)