ARE THERE APOSTLES OF CHRIST TODAY?

[DJ2]

Calling you on this nonsense! In fact there are NO demonstrative pronouns in what garee wrote! Do you even know what a demonstrative pronoun is? Of course you don’t! You are a poser, and this (demonstrative pronoun) is just more evidence!

Here is a definition! You could have easily googled this before you made a fool of yourself!

“A demonstrative pronoun is a pronounthat is used to point to something specific within a sentence. These pronouns can indicate items in space or time, and they can be either singular or plural.
When used to represent a thing or things, demonstrative pronouns can be either near or far in distance or time:

• Near in time or distance: this, these
• Far in time or distance: that, those”

That’s it! Four words!

Wow! This is what you are calling me on? I am a fool and a poser? The seven pronouns were not demonstrative pronouns but some other type of pronoun? Okay but that many pronouns in such a short passage was rather confusing.

The excessive use of pronouns can cause the reader to lose track of the message. That was all I was attempting to convey to garee. There was no malice in my request for clarity, I just wanted my response to be accurate.

A fool and a poser? I think you are overreacting.

 

[jb]

ARE THERE APOSTLES OF CHRIST TODAY?

I did a bit of blog on this subject, for those interested you can find it Here

 

[JairCrawford]

Paul was an apostle, and he was not one of the twelve.

There were twelve disciples​. But not just twelve apostles.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Paul was an apostle, and he was not one of the twelve.

There were twelve disciples​. But not just twelve apostles.

oh good catch

so?

 

[Nehemiah6]

it is amazing! can you tell me why it is given in exactly this context in exactly this order with exactly these 12?

While only God could give you the proper answers to these questions, the only thing which concerns us here is whether the number is 12, 13, or 14. And since you say it is exactly 12, it proves our point.

Twelve apostles will sit on 12 thrones ruling the 12 tribes of Israel, and God has carved this in "stone" by putting their names in the 12 foundations of the wall of the heavenly city New Jerusalem. Which means it is FINAL -- "carved in stone".

Why 12? Because in the Bible the number 12 represents Divine government, and the 24 elders seen around the throne of God are 12 x 2, which means that within the Church, Divine government is even more significant than in Israel.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Paul was an apostle, and he was not one of the twelve.

Not originally. But after the removal of Judas, and the express commissioning of Paul, he became the 12th.

There were twelve disciples​. But not just twelve apostles.

This statement should be reversed to read "There were twelve apostles, but not just twelve disciples. I hope that is what you meant, but that is what the Bible reveals.

 

[JairCrawford]

Not originally. But after the removal of Judas, and the express commissioning of Paul, he became the 12th.

This statement should be reversed to read "There were twelve apostles, but not just twelve disciples. I hope that is what you meant, but that is what the Bible reveals.

I probably need to go back and reread. It is true we are all disciples of Christ. It's just I remember Jesus referring to the twelve as his disciples more than anything else, and I remember reading that Paul was given the title of Apostle.

Also, I don't remember Paul replacing Judas as the twelfth. Wasn't that Matthias? I can't remember exactly but someone else was chosen to become the twelfth disciple. And Paul is very clearly referred to as an apostle, meaning still, that there are more than twelve apostles even in the Bible.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I probably need to go back and reread. It is true we are all disciples of Christ. It's just I remember Jesus referring to the twelve as his disciples more than anything else, and I remember reading that Paul was given the title of Apostle.

The twelve started out as disciples, but there came a point when they were made apostles (Matthew 10:1,2).

Also, I don't remember Paul replacing Judas as the twelfth. Wasn't that Matthias?

Matthias was a temporary fill-in for Judas until the apostle Paul began his ministry. Thus the spotlight falls on Paul, and Matthias is not mentioned again. It is evident from reading the New Testament that Paul became the 12th apostle.

 

[sparkman]

I indicated earlier in the thread that I believe those who consider themselves Apostles of Christ (in the capital "A" sense) are egotistical and full of pride and vanity.

However, vanity, pride and self importance are not the only causes. Many of claimants are mentally ill.

I did a few searches for diagnoses concerning this sort of affliction but didn't find anything.

Several diagnosed cases claiming to be Jesus, but not apostles and prophets...wonder why. Maybe it's because there are mentally ill people who make such claims, but they are readily accepted in the church, to the point where it is "normal" and accepted in some circles. They can't pull off the "Jesus" claim but they can pull off the apostle or prophet claim.

 

[oldethennew]

of course there are apostles, disciples for our Saviour, actually, there are a few
in here right now...PG...

 

[RexCA]

Yes and the early Christians as well as the scriptures themselves seem to agree granted there were only 12 disciples one of whom betrayed Christ. However the words disciple and apostle do not mean the same thing a disciple is a personal student of someone even St. Paul himself was not a disciple. However the fact that St. Paul was made an apostle and that St. Matthias was made one as well as a means to succeed Judas indicates that apostleship is an eternal means of teaching Christian truth. The early Christians seemed to agree with this namely St. Ignatius of Antioch(35 AD-108 AD) who himself was a personal disciple of St. John as well as the third bishop of Antioch succeeding St. Peter and St. Evodius. So who are the modern apostles and what is apostolic succession essentially Christianity was always meant to be run on the episcopal polity with a 3 level means of clergy the deacon, the priest, and the bishop. The bishops being the fullness of the priesthood are the successors to the apostles through a historic chain of other bishops up until the modern day the deacons and priests are also successors of the apostles however they do not experience the fullness of the priesthood and are not part of the "line of successors of the apostles" in the same sense that the bishop is. Even if a specific "see, diocese, eparchy, or patriarchate" does not historically go back to 30 AD and a specific apostle by name they still experience apostleship do to previous bishops creating new "sees" to help govern the church in the same manner that St. Paul was accepted as an apostle.

However there are also historic "apostolic sees" that do indeed trace their lineage to the apostles with their first bishops being one of the apostles for example
the church in Rome: St. Peter
the church in Constantinople(now Istanbul and originally Byzantium): St. Andrew
the church in Alexandria: St. Mark
the church in Antioch: St. Peter
the church in Jerusalem: St. James
the church in Cyprus: St. Barnabas
the church in Athens: St. Paul
the church in Ephesus: St. John and St. Timothy
the church in Santiago de Compostela(Spain): St. James the Greater(however this was not an official diocese until 1095)
the church in Babylon: St. Jude
the church in Aquileia(Italy): St. Mark
the church in Milan: St. Barnabas
the church in Syracuse(Italy): St. Peter
the church in Philippi: St. Paul
the church in Thessaloniki: St. Paul
the church in Corinth: St. Paul
the church in Malta: St. Paul
the church in Russia/Ukraine: St. Andrew
the church in Armenia: St. Jude and St. Bartholomew
the church in Ethiopia: St. Philip the Evangelist
the church in Georgia: St. Andrew
the church in India: St. Thomas