Are there apostles today?
Some years ago I attended an informal gathering of Christian leaders in the UK when, to my surprise, they began to discuss among themselves whether perhaps some of them were apostles. I think that if they had raised the possibility that some of them might be Martians I would have been only slightly more surprised.
Apostles? Who did they think they were?
Imagine my shock a few years later, therefore, when I turned up at a similar meeting and, upon entering the room, was introduced as Terry Virgo, closely followed by the comment, ‘He’s doing an apostolic work in the South of England.’
I was doing what?
Well, what was I doing? I had helped to establish a new church in my home town on the south coast and, since then, had spent the following few years helping to start churches in several other nearby towns, until there were a growing number of churches looking to me for guidance and oversight.
It had never occurred to me that I was doing an apostolic work or was an apostle, but, as time went by, I began to open my mind to the possibility.
In my next few blog entries I’d like to open this up with you, not simply from a personal viewpoint, but from a consideration of Scriptures.
A decade ago I knew of only one or two books covering the subject but now I have thirteen. Most of them make no attempt to approach the theme from a Biblical perspective but simply embrace the word ‘apostle’ very vaguely or call a ministry ‘apostolic’ because it seems to be successful.
What is an Apostle?
Clearly the Scriptures imply that there are a number of different categories of apostle. Jesus is the apostle of our confession (Heb. 3:1). The word means ‘sent one’ (Greek – apostolos) and Jesus repeatedly referred to His unique awareness of being sent by the Father. He is the apostle par excellence.
Next come the Twelve, again unique in their calling and role. Jesus, during His earthly ministry, personally called and commissioned them naming them apostles.
Third, we are told that after His ascension Jesus gave the gifts of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers to His church (Eph. 4:11).
Some have insisted that apostles must have been witnesses to the resurrection and clearly Matthias, in replacing Judas and recovering and completing the Twelve, was.
However, the apostles of the ascended Christ represent a different category since their appointment follows not the resurrection but the ascension! Barnabas, for instance, is called an apostle in Acts 14:14, though there is no reference to his having seen the Lord following His resurrection, nor does his call to apostleship have any reference to a resurrection appearance and occurred several years after the ascension.
There were also ‘apostles (or messengers – Greek apostolos) of the churches’ – see Philippians 2:25 and 2 Corinthians 8:23, but to quote Rengsdorf in his authoritative work ‘Paul and Barnabas are obviously apostles of Christ, not of the Christians at Antioch’ (TDNT).
Our first step is to recognise, therefore, that there were apostles beyond the Twelve commissioned by the ascended Christ. Established teachers such as Campbell Morgan have argued that Paul simply replaced Judas and thereby preserved the Twelve. This, of course, does not bear close scrutiny and raises the question not only of Barnabas but also of James and others.
Prior to the Reformation the Church was perceived as priest and people, clergy and laity. Since the Reformation we believe in the priesthood of all believers. If we take Ephesians 4:11 seriously, we consider not simply a minister who is Jack of all trades but the possibility of diverse gifts and ministries serving the church.
Those who express their misgivings about the possibility of there being apostles today often do so on the basis that we now have the completed canon. The Scripture gives us a complete revelation of apostolic doctrine. Therefore it follows, ‘We have epistles, who needs apostles?’
But this is to view the role of the apostle from a very limited perspective and to regard apostles as essentially Bible writers, whereas the Bible itself does not give us that same emphasis. Of the Twelve, how many wrote Scripture? Also, Luke wrote more than any other New Testament writer and he never claimed to be an apostle.
No one is arguing against the Scripture being a complete revelation. And in arguing for the ongoing role of all those gifts listed in Ephesians 4:11, namely apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher, I am not even considering the possibility of more Scripture-writing.
Standing on the Reformers’ shoulders
Historically the early Reformers, who wrote their commentaries on the Scriptures, were correctly hostile to the Roman Catholic doctrine of apostolic succession with the concept of infallible authority usually associated with that claim.
Subsequently, commentators have usually written their commentaries and made their observations while standing on the shoulders of those writers and have taken that same stance, so that even the wonderful and rightfully respected and honoured John Stott states unequivocally in his most recent book The Living Church, ‘…we must insist that there are no apostles in the church today’ (page 24). He then goes on to argue, ‘If there were, we would have to add their teaching to that of the New Testament’ (page 25). This perspective draws attention to the fact that apostles are seen essentially as Scripture-writers, whereas manifestly several apostles mentioned in the New Testament were not, as indeed several prophets in the Old Testament were not.
Also, there is no Biblical argument that apostles were themselves always infallible. Peter had to be corrected by Paul regarding his inconsistency because in Paul’s view he “stood condemned” (Gal. 2:11) regarding his practice in connection with the place of the law in the New Testament church. Also, the apostle Barnabas ‘was carried away by their hypocrisy’ (Gal. 2:13).
So, in arguing for the role of the apostle today, I am not arguing for more Scripture-writing or that any one should be regarded as an infallible leader who cannot himself be withstood or corrected, as indeed Peter was by Paul.
What about world mission?
In consigning the role of the apostle exclusively to the early church, we are left without one of the key factors in world mission, the vital function that apostles fulfilled.
Some argue today that we don’t have apostles we have ‘missionaries’ but the word ‘missionary’ obscures rather than clarifies, since it does not honour Biblical definitions or categories. A modern missionary may be an agricultural worker, a nurse, a school teacher, a Bible translator, or a literature distributor (all very worthwhile and wonderful ministries). Some missionaries may, in reality, be evangelists or apostles but the term is vague and unhelpful since it has come to indicate any one who works overseas.
Historically some have established ‘mission stations’ rather than churches. We need Biblical definitions and Biblical practices. It is vital that these categories are clarified for the sake of world mission. It is not merely an academic matter. |
Permalink
|
|
| |
