ARE THERE APOSTLES OF CHRIST TODAY?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Feb 1, 2014
733
33
0
#1
Here's an article by Cripplegate concerning whether there are still apostles.

As a young man, I belonged to a cult whose leader CLAIMED to be an Apostle of Christ AND a prophet (the Elijah to come). What were his personality traits? A conceited, self-important, donkey's behind..just like every other person I've met who has claimed to be an apostle or prophet for that matter.

I was brought up by a parent who was involved in the cult, and unfortunately I wasn't aware of sounder churches in the area (this was 1985, before the Internet was commonly available). Most of my relatives were Free Will Baptists and Pentecostals (similar in many ways) so I wasn't aware of sound teaching churches such as Grace Brethren or other Baptist churches. Compared to the Free Will Baptists or Pentecostals I was exposed to, the cult seemed more reasonable (although perhaps there are sound Free Will Baptist or Pentecostal pastors who don't practice the "gasping for breath" preaching style, and whose members didn't run up and down the aisle "shouting" when they supposedly "got the Holy Spirit").

I find this article to be compelling on this topic.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are There Still Apostles Today?

by Nathan Busenitz

Are there apostles in the church today?

Just ask your average fan of TBN, many of whom consider popular televangelists like Benny Hinn, Rod Parsley, and Joel Osteen to be apostles.

Or, you could ask folks like Ron, Dennis, Gerald, Arsenio, Oscar, or Joanne. They not only believe in modern-day apostleship, they assert themselves to be apostles.

A quick Google search reveals that self-proclaimed apostles abound online. Armed with a charismatic pneumatology and often an air of spiritual ambition, they put themselves on par with the earliest leaders of the church.

So what are Bible-believing Christians to think about all of this?

Well, that brings us back to the title of our post:
Are there still apostles in the church today?

At the outset, we should note that by “apostles” we do not simply mean “sent ones” in the general sense. Rather, we are speaking of those select individuals directly appointed and authorized by Jesus Christ to be His immediate representatives on earth. In this sense, we are speaking of “capital A” apostles – such as the Twelve and the apostle Paul.

It is these type of “apostles” that Paul speaks of in Ephesians 2:20; 3:5; 4:11 and in 1 Corinthians 12:29–30. This is important because, especially in Ephesians 4 and in 1 Corinthians 12–14, Paul references apostleship within the context of the charismatic gifts. If “apostleship” has ceased, it gives us grounds to consider the possibility that other offices/gifts have ceased as well. If the apostles were unique, and the period in which they ministered was unique, then it follows that the gifts that characterized the apostolic age were also unique.

The question then is an important one, underscoring the basic principle of the cessationist paradigm – namely, the uniqueness of the apostolic age and the subsequent cessation of certain aspects of that age.
There are at least five reasons why we believe there are no longer any apostles in the church today (and in fact have not been since the death of the apostle John).

* * *

1. The Qualifications Necessary for Apostleship

First, and perhaps most basically, the qualifications necessary for apostleship preclude contemporary Christians from filling the apostolic office.

In order to be an apostle, one had to meet at least three necessary qualifications: (1) an apostle had to be an eyewitness of the resurrected Christ (Acts 1:22; 10:39–41; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:7–8); (2) an apostle had to be directly appointed by Jesus Christ (Mark 3:14; Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2, 24; 10:41; Gal. 1:1); and (3) an apostle had to be able to confirm his mission and message with miraculous signs (Matt. 10:1–2; Acts 1:5–8; 2:43; 4:33; 5:12; 8:14; 2 Cor. 12:12; Heb. 2:3–4). We might also note that, in choosing Matthias as a replacement for Judas, the eleven also looked for someone who had accompanied Jesus throughout His entire earthly ministry (Acts 1:21–22; 10:39–41).

Based on these qualifications alone, many continuationists agree that there are no apostles in the church today. Thus, Wayne Grudem (a continuationist) notes in his Systematic Theology, “It seems that no apostles were appointed after Paul, and certainly, since no one today can meet the qualification of having seen the risen Christ with his own eyes, there are no apostles today” (p. 911).

* * *
2. The Uniqueness of Paul’s Apostleship

But what about the apostle Paul?

Some have contended that, in the same way that Paul was an apostle, there might still be apostles in the church today. But this ignores the uniqueness with which Paul viewed his own apostleship. Paul’s situation was not the norm, as he himself explains in 1 Corinthians 15:8-9. He saw himself as a one-of-a-kind anomaly, openly calling himself “the last” and “the least” of the apostles. To cite from Grudem again:

It seems quite certain that there were none appointed after Paul. When Paul lists the resurrection appearances of Christ, he emphasizes the unusual way in which Christ appeared to him, and connects that with the statement that this was the “last” appearance of all, and that he himself is indeed “the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle” (Grudem, Systematic Theology, 910).

He later adds:
Someone may object that Christ could appear to someone today and appoint that person as an apostle. But the foundational nature of the office of apostle (Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:14) and the fact that Paul views himself as the last one whom Christ appeared to and appointed as an apostle (“last of all, as to one untimely born,” 1 Cor. 15:8), indicate that this will not happen.

Because Paul’s apostleship was unique, it is not a pattern that we should expect to see replicated in the church today.



* * *

3. Apostolic Authority and the Closing of the Canon

It is our belief that, if we hold to a closed canon, we must also hold to the cessation of the apostolic office.

We turn again to Dr. Grudem for an explanation of the close connection between the apostles and the writing of Scripture:
The New Testament apostles had a unique kind of authority in the early church: authority to speak and write words which were “words of God” in an absolute sense. To disbelieve or disobey them was to disbelieve or disobey God. The apostles, therefore, had the authority to write words which became words of Scripture. This fact in itself should suggest to us that there was something unique about the office of apostle, and that we would not expect it to continue today, for no one today can add words to the Bible and have them be counted as God’s very words or as part of Scripture. (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 905–906).

Hebrews 1:1–2 indicates that what God first revealed through the Old Testament, He later and more fully revealed through His Son. The New Testament, then, is Christ’s revelation to His church. It begins with His earthly ministry (in the four gospels), and continues through the epistles – letters that were written by His authorized representatives.

Thus, in John 14:26, Christ authorized His apostles to lead the church, promising them that the Helper would come and bring to their remembrance all that Jesus had taught them. The instruction they gave the church, then, was really an extension of Jesus’ ministry, as enabled by the Holy Spirit (cf. Eph. 3:5–6; 2 Pet. 1:20–21). Those in the early church generally understood apostolic instruction as authoritative and as being on par with the OT Scriptures (cf. 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Cor. 14:37; Gal. 1:9; 2 Pet. 3:16).

To cite from Grudem again, “In place of living apostles present in the church to teach and govern it, we have instead the writings of the apostles in the books of the New Testament. Those New Testament Scriptures fulfill for the church today the absolutely authoritative teaching and governing functions which were fulfilled by the apostles themselves during the early years of the church” (Ibid., 911).

The doctrine of a closed canon is, therefore, largely predicated on the fact that the apostles were unique and are no longer here. After all, if there were still apostles in the church today, with the same authority as the New Testament apostles, how could we definitively claim that the canon is closed?

But since there are no longer apostles in the church today, and since new inscripurated revelation must be accompanied by apostolic authority and approval, it is not possible to have new inscripturated revelation today.
The closing of the canon and the non-continuation of apostles are two concepts that necessarily go hand-in-hand.

* * *
 
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2014
733
33
0
#2
4. The Foundational Role of the Apostles

Closely related to the above is the fact that the apostles were part of the foundation period of the church (Eph. 2:20). Since (following the construction metaphor) the foundation stage precedes the superstructure, it is appropriate to infer that the apostles were given to the church for its beginning stages. As Grudem writes, “God’s purpose in the history of redemption seems to have been to give apostles only at the beginning of the church age (see Eph. 2:20)” (Ibid., 911, n. 9).

Our interpretation of “foundation” (as a reference to past period within the church’s history) is strengthened by the evidence from the earliest church fathers. The foundation stage was something the fathers referred to in the past tense, indicating that they understood it as past.

Thus, Ignatius (c. 35–115) in his Epistle to the Magnesians, wrote (speaking in the past tense):
“The people shall be called by a new name, which the Lord shall name them, and shall be a holy people.” This was first fulfilled in Syria; for “the disciples were called Christians at Antioch,” when Paul and Peter were laying the foundations of the Church.

Irenaeus (c. 130–202) in Against Heresies, echoes the past tense understanding that Peter and Paul laid the foundations of the Church (in 3.1.1) and later refers to the twelve apostles as “the twelve-pillared foundation of the church” (in 4.21.3).
Tertullian (c. 155–230), in The Five Books Against Marcion (chapter 21), notes the importance of holding to apostolic doctrine, even in a post-apostolic age:

No doubt, after the time of the apostles, the truth respecting the belief of God suffered corruption, but it is equally certain that during the life of the apostles their teaching on this great article did not suffer at all; so that no other teaching will have the right of being received as apostolic than that which is at the present day proclaimed in the churches of apostolic foundation.

Lactantius (c. 240–320), also, in The Divine Institutes (4.21) refers to a past time in which the foundations of the church were laid:

But the disciples, being dispersed through the provinces, everywhere laid the foundations of the Church, themselves also in the name of their divine Master doing many and almost incredible miracles; for at His departure He had endowed them with power and strength, by which the system of their new announcement might be founded and confirmed.
Other examples could also be added from the later Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers. Chrysostom, for instance, would be another such source (from his Homilies on Ephesians).

The earliest church fathers, from just after the apostolic era, understood the work of the apostles to constitute a unique, “foundational” stage of the church. The fact that they reference this in the past tense, as something distinct from their own ministries, indicates that they understood that the apostolic age had passed, and thus the foundation stage was over.

While the cessation of the apostolic gift/office does not ultimately prove the cessationist case, it does strengthen the overall position – especially in passages like 1 Corinthians 12:28–30, Ephesians 2:20 and 4:11, where apostleship is listed in direct connection with the other charismatic gifts and offices.

* * *
5. The Historical Testimony of Those Following the Apostles
In our previous point, we contended that the apostles were given for the foundation stage of the church (Eph. 2:20), and that the early church recognized this foundation stage as a specific time-period that did not continue past the first century.
But it is important to go one step further, and note that the earliest church fathers saw the apostles as a unique group of men, distinct from all who would follow after them.

(A) Those who came after the apostles did not view themselves or their contemporaries as apostles.
According to their own self-testimony, the Christian leaders who followed the apostles were not apostles themselves, but were the “disciples of the apostles” (The Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, 11; Fragments of Papias, 5; cf. The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, 6; Ignatius, Against Heresies, 1.10), the elders and deacons of the churches.
Thus, Clement (late first century) in his First Epistle to the Corinthians, 42, notes that:

The apostles have preached the Gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ [has done so] from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ. Both these appointments, then, were made in an orderly way, according to the will of God. Having therefore received their orders, and being fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and established in the word of God, with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth proclaiming that the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits [of their labors], having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe.

Ignatius, for instance, purposely avoided equating himself with the apostles. Thus, he wrote, “I do not issue commands on these points as if I were an apostle; but, as your fellow-servant, I put you in mind of them” (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Antiochians, 11).

(B) Those who followed the apostles viewed apostolic writings as both unique and authoritative.

Moreover, in keeping with our third point (above), it was “the doctrine of the apostles” (cf. The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians, 13; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Antiochians, 1) that was to be guarded, taught, and heeded. Thus, the “memoirs of the apostles” were held as canonical and authoritative within the early church (cf. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2.2.5; Victorinus, Commentary on the Apocalypse, 10.9).
Along these lines, Justin writes:


And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things (The First Apology of Justin, 67).
The doctrine and writing of the apostles was unique, having been written by the authoritative representatives of Christ Himself.

(C) Those who followed the apostles saw the apostolic age as a unique and unrepeated period of church history.
The fathers saw the “times of the apostles” as a distinct, non-repeateable period of church history (cf. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 3.36.54; Reply to Faustus, 32.13; On Baptism, 14.16; et al). Thus, Chrysostom wrote on the uniqueness of fellowship during the apostolic age:

I wish to give you an example of friendship. Friends, that is, friends according to Christ, surpass fathers and sons. For tell me not of friends of the present day, since this good thing also has past away with others. But consider, in the time of the Apostles, I speak not of the chief men, but of the believers themselves generally; “all,” he says, “were of one heart and soul. and not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own… and distribution was made unto each, according as any one had need.” (Acts 4:32, 35.) There were then no such words as “mine” and “thine.” This is friendship, that a man should not consider his goods his own, but his neighbor’s, that his possessions belong to another; that he should be as careful of his friend’s soul, as of his own; and the friend likewise. (Homily on 1 Thess. 1:8-10).

Chrysostom looked back to the deep affection that characterized the apostolic era to provide a contrast to the relative lovelessness of the church in his day. In so doing, he underscores the fact that he understood the apostolic age to be long past. One additional passage might be cited in this regard:

I know that ye open wide your mouths and are amazed, at being to hear that it is in your power to have a greater gift than raising the dead, and giving eyes to the blind, doing the same things which were done in the time of the Apostles. And it seems to you past belief. What then is this gift? charity. (Homily on Heb. 1:6-8)

Many more examples from church history could be given. Eusebius’s whole history is based on the progression of church history from the “times of the apostles” (Ecclesiastical History, Book 8, introduction). Basil, in his work On the Spirit, points to previous leaders from church history (specifically Irenaeus) as those “who lived near the times of the Apostles” (29.72). Tertullian spoke of events that occurred “after the times of the apostles” (The Five Books Against Marcion, 21).

Historical Conclusions

Consistently, the fathers (from the earliest times) mark the apostolic age (and the apostles themselves) as unique. Their writings were regarded as unique and authoritative. Those that followed them were not considered to be apostles. Nor were the times that followed seen as equivalent to the times of the apostles.

Thus we conclude, once again, with Grudem:

It is noteworthy that no major leader in the history of the church – not Athanasius or Augustine, not Luther or Calvin, not Wesley or Whitefield – has taken to himself the title of “apostle” or let himself be called an apostle. If any in modern times want to take the title “apostle” to themselves, the immediately raise the suspicion that they may be motivated by inappropriate pride and desires for self-exaltation, along with excessive ambition and a desire for much more authority in the church than any one person should rightfully have. (Systematic Theology, 911)

* * *
A Final Note
Throughout today’s post we have leaned heavily on the work of Wayne Grudem (specifically, his Systematic Theology). This has been intentional for two reasons: (1) he makes excellent, biblically-sound arguments (and we appreciate everything he writes, even if we don’t always agree with his conclusions); and (2) he is a well-known and respected continuationist.
It is significant, in our opinion, that (as a continuationist) he argues so convincingly for the cessation of the apostolic office and the uniqueness of the apostolic age – since this is the very premise upon which the cessationist paradigm is built.

While the cessation of the apostolic gift/office does not ultimately prove the cessationist case, it does strengthen the overall position – especially in passages like 1 Corinthians 12:28–30, Ephesians 2:20 and 4:11, where apostleship is listed in direct connection with the other charismatic gifts and offices.
 
Last edited:
Feb 1, 2014
733
33
0
#4
Note that I'm not real fond of referring to the early church fathers, but in this case, the author is using them for ADDITIONAL support, and not a primary support.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
#5
Am not reading your post sparkman.

Just a comment on the topic.

There are apostles today, and prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers, the same as in the beginning.

But, the offices are determined by the Lord, and men will know this by the Spirit. Unity.

The problem is that many that have had the gift of the prophetic has erred in thinking that they are prophets. Moreso than apostles, but some there too.

An apostle starts churches. And should be powerful in miracles. That's how you know them.
 
Feb 1, 2014
733
33
0
#6
I should add this:

I believe in the continuing ministry of the apostles and prophets THROUGH THE SCRIPTURES.

But, there are no living apostles in the sense of Apostles of Christ.

I acknowledge that a church planter or a missionary might use the label "apostle" with a small "a" but if they are claiming to be an apostle of Christ, and that Christ personally appointed them to be an apostle, they are in error.

Ephesians 2:20 [SUP]20 [/SUP]built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.

The foundation is the foundation...stones have been added to God's temple. We don't go back and build the foundation.

As I have said, every alleged apostle and prophet I've seen has been full of vanity and self-importance, including the cult leader. One even calls his wife an Apostle, and we know there are no female Apostles.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,012
12,707
113
#7
[h=2]ARE THERE APOSTLES OF CHRIST TODAY?[/h]Short Answer: No. As you stated above the apostles ad prophets minister to us through the written Word of God. And evangelists, pastors, and teachers must simply preach and teach what was revealed by Christ, the apostles, and the prophets. No extra-biblical revelations.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
41,234
16,243
113
69
Tennessee
#8
Can't really say that I have ever met one.
 
Dec 28, 2016
9,171
2,718
113
#9
Can't really say that I have ever met one.
There is a church here in town, and I knew the late Pastor personally. During a service several men came down the aisle while he was preaching, dressed in NT garb. The leader got down there in front of the lectern and stated:"The LORD would like to speak to his church." Well, they all got escorted out without little incident.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,665
1,829
113
#10
There is a church here in town, and I knew the late Pastor personally. During a service several men came down the aisle while he was preaching, dressed in NT garb. The leader got down there in front of the lectern and stated:"The LORD would like to speak to his church." Well, they all got escorted out without little incident.

And this mystical thinker would agree wirh your church. The Lord doesn't move that way. That's presumption, and a bit of ego thrown in.

A lot of nuts that need cracking. :)
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
#11
Rome claims the pope is such an apostle.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

MichaelOwen

Senior Member
Nov 6, 2017
909
252
63
#13
Because they completely misunderstood the meaning of Peter being the rock.
One side note on Peter, you know it is amazing how when Christ was alive, and Christ plainly told Peter and the other disciples that whosoever shall deny me before Men, I shall deny him before my Father. And even Christ warned Peter that before the cock crew, he would have denied Him thrice. And when it came time, Peter not only denied Christ three different times, but he cursed doing it, and it amazes me how Christ turned at looked at Peter dead in the eye, and Peter knew it immediately. But I don't think Christ looked on him with anger, I believe He looked on him with love and forgiveness, and as it turns out, the foundation of Christ was still founded on Peter as the rock :)
 
7

7seasrekeyed

Guest
#14
well there absolutely is a move towards this belief of Apostles and it is tied in with the New Apostolic Reformation

one of their main beliefs is that they are ushering in a 'NEW APOSTOLIC AGE' where these 'new apostles' have the same authority as the original apostles.

this move started with C Peter Wagner, now in his 80's and so called 'prophet' Bill Hamon but there are many new members of this movement now who refer to themselves of Apostles, prophets and teachers
 
Jun 1, 2016
5,032
121
0
#15
One side note on Peter, you know it is amazing how when Christ was alive, and Christ plainly told Peter and the other disciples that whosoever shall deny me before Men, I shall deny him before my Father. And even Christ warned Peter that before the cock crew, he would have denied Him thrice. And when it came time, Peter not only denied Christ three different times, but he cursed doing it, and it amazes me how Christ turned at looked at Peter dead in the eye, and Peter knew it immediately. But I don't think Christ looked on him with anger, I believe He looked on him with love and forgiveness, and as it turns out, the foundation of Christ was still founded on Peter as the rock :)

Just a side note on that...

peter denied Jesus 3 times, and three times afterthe resurrection Jesus asks peter " do you Love me simon" do you truly Love me more than these? do you truly Love me".....peter confirms His Love for the messiah 3 times after dening Himk three times. even morethan this.....Peter was bound to deny Him the moment Jesus spoke it to Peter, if peter hadnt denied Him, Jesus would have been wrong to tell Him " I tell you the truth before the cock crow....." Gods Word will always come to pass because His words are the source opf creation. he creates through what He speaks. Let there be Light...and light shines from darkness"

peter could not have gone with Jesus this was His Mission alone, and He gave peter His mission afterwards on the beach, and that too came to pass regarding peters death. everything is always spoken forth...and then it comes to pass. Jesus told peter he would deny him, then peter denies Him. Jesus tells Judas he will betray Him, then Judas betrays Him. Jesus says many times " it will be done as you have believed or " your faith has made you well" and then we see in scripture the fulfillment " at that moment the men received thier sight.

Gods Word is the power to bring light from darkness in us, it is the power to put the sinner to death, and bring to life the child of God, it has the power to give us eternal Life, His word is what offers eternal Life. God speaks and it becomes. even death came from His word " for when you do this you will surely die" and later you see adam dying and being buried. if Gods word is taken in order it doesnt mattrwhich apostle wrote it, or to who they wrote it, because the church is the church Jew or gentile and he has made clear he will never change His word. the person speaking it, even the apostles are only vessels for the word to come to man. Gods Word is Life it has and wil always be,
 

Prov910

Senior Member
Jan 10, 2017
880
47
0
#16
Interesting article. I always thought that Apostle (capital "A") referred to the 12, 13 including Judas, and maybe Paul too. If anyone today claimed to be a modern day Apostle I would be mighty skeptical.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,012
12,707
113
#17
Rome claims the pope is such an apostle.
And more. That he stands in the place of Christ Himself, as Vicar of Christ:

The word vicar comes from the Latin word vicarius meaning substitution. The on-line version of the Pocket Catholic Dictionary by John A. Hardon, S.J. defines the Vicar of Christ as, “The Pope, visible head of the Church on earth, acting for and in the place of Christ. He possesses supreme ecclesiastical authority in the Catholic Church...”


[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]The Catechism Says:
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[TD="width: 1, bgcolor: #FFFFFF"][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="bgcolor: #FFFFFF"][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]#882 “For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered.”[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Vicar of Christ
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,012
12,707
113
#18
Interesting article. I always thought that Apostle (capital "A") referred to the 12, 13 including Judas, and maybe Paul too. If anyone today claimed to be a modern day Apostle I would be mighty skeptical.
Twelve, with Judas excluded and Paul included. There are only 12 apostles of the Lamb, who will sit on 12 thrones, ruling the 12 tribes of Israel.

BTW the number 13 has evil connotations in Scripture. See Bullinger's book on numbers in the Bible.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#19
Be reasonable. If there were apostles today of the sort that is spoken of in the New Testament do you really think we would be pondering the question?
 
Feb 28, 2016
11,311
2,972
113
#20
if we're truly 'blessed', then we really know how to discern whom our Father
has sent in the flesh to 'help and succor' us along and along in our journey
to our ultimate 'home'...this is our confidence and assurance,..

but!

we've already, almost daily witnessed those who profane the Word and Words of our Saviour///
have been allowed to 'buy-up' our land/dictate the schools...and take authority in our government,
for $$$...filthy lucre!

be brave Brothers and Sisters of Christ, for the wars are coming right into our backyards,
and have now been allowed to usurp and take away our heritage. with each claiming
that it belongs, no holds barred, to them...

oh yes, 'civil war' is turning the corners at a very rapid pace,,.