Is Paul a Genuine Apostle of Jesus Christ?

[kennethcadwell]

I could not care less what the number of the apostolic band is. All I am trying to point out is that there is a great deal of difference between one "sent out" by the Church and those who occupy the office of an apostle by divine appointment.

Judas is no longer an apostle. Peter says that Judas abandoned his office and that his office was given to another.

Yes, Mathias was appointed to take to place of Judas, not in addition to Judas. You also have to understand that Peter is not the one who appointed Matthias nor did he have the authority to appoint apostles. The Holy Spirit selected Matthias, not Peter. Peter never appointed anyone to the office of an apostle.

The Holy Spirit may have been the driving force behind it, but the bible makes it clear that they cast lots to choose who would replace Judas. And in that Matthias was chosen.

Acts 1:26
And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

I understand you want to make a differentiation between those chosen directly from the Lord, and those appointed by the church.
The fact is they were still named and called apostles non the less, and a bible study along with a early church history study will show that the number of apostles were many.....

 

[oldhermit]

Jesus is considered an Apostle too, does he count?

Heb 3:1Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Yes, Jesus stands in a unique apostleship as the only one "sent" - apostled by the Father.

 

[Hizikyah]

Yes, Jesus stands in a unique apostleship as the only one "sent" - apostled by the Father.

John 10:16, "And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd (4166. poimén)."

John 12:48, "He who rejects Me, and does not follow My words has One Who judges him. The word that I have spoken, the same will be used to judge him in the last day."

Deuteronomy 18:18-19, "I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brothers, and I will put My words in His mouth, and He will tell them everything I command Him. Whoever will not listen to My words, which He speaks in My Name, I will judge him for it"

"listen" is word #8085 שָׁמַע shama` {shaw-mah'}

Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)
A primitive root; to hear intelligently (often with implication of attention, obedience, etc.; causatively to tell, etc.)

Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar) - 1) to hear, listen to, obey

 

[john832]

To answer the thread title...

Yes.

 

[oldhermit]

The Holy Spirit may have been the driving force behind it, but the bible makes it clear that they cast lots to choose who would replace Judas. And in that Matthias was chosen.

Acts 1:26
And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

I understand you want to make a differentiation between those chosen directly from the Lord, and those appointed by the church.
The fact is they were still named and called apostles non the less, and a bible study along with a early church history study will show that the number of apostles were many.....

Kenneth, Peter is not the one who did the choosing. Neither he nor the other apostles know which of the two to choose. "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen" v. 24

 

[Sophia]

I wonder what God's real definition of Apostle is. The Greek work is simply "sent out ones (as with an authoritative command", which logically would deem any missionary called to the field an "apostle". But we also see the Word set this as a more specific office.

Is there a passage in the Word that makes a more clear distinction between those being sent out, and those being called "apostles"?

(This is a real question, not a leading one, as I don't have an opinion on modern day apostles as of yet, which I am assuming is one of the main biases leading the debate)

 

[The_highwayman]

I do not refute the word, and I do not know where you get that from.
The bible shows that Timothy was an understudy or disciple of Paul, and commissioned by him to go out to others.
Then Paul gives him the same authority to be able to appoint others, as Paul tells him in 1 Timothy 5:22. But he tells Timothy be careful who he appoints, because if they come in and have a sinful nature, then he would be just as guilty for their sins for appointing them.
If you go and do an early church history study you will find out that he was given the title of an apostle.

So who was the Evangelist at Ephesus?

 

[secularhermit]

Let´s say he was because he wanted to be so but, was he the only one sent for a worldwide misinistry?

what concerns me more, about Paul, was his boasting, his show as a center where the gospel seems to spin around him and that I believe no man can have more light than the Lord Jesus and, in Paul case, there´s a lack of additional "Scriptural" sources and Peter, the one Paul rebuked, lightly mentioned him as part of the ministry of such apostleship.

The more I see Jesus´ teachings the less I need another teacher.

 

[oldhermit]

John 10:16, "And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd (4166. poimén)."

John 12:48, "He who rejects Me, and does not follow My words has One Who judges him. The word that I have spoken, the same will be used to judge him in the last day."

Deuteronomy 18:18-19, "I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brothers, and I will put My words in His mouth, and He will tell them everything I command Him. Whoever will not listen to My words, which He speaks in My Name, I will judge him for it"

"listen" is word #8085 שָׁמַע shama` {shaw-mah'}

Brown-Driver-Briggs (Old Testament Hebrew-English Lexicon)
A primitive root; to hear intelligently (often with implication of attention, obedience, etc.; causatively to tell, etc.)

Hebrew Word Study (Transliteration-Pronunciation Etymology & Grammar) - 1) to hear, listen to, obey

Perhaps I missed something. I was talking about Heb. 3:1 where the word used is Ἀπόστολον

 

[oldhermit]

I wonder what God's real definition of Apostle is. The Greek work is simply "sent out ones (as with an authoritative command", which logically would deem any missionary called to the field an "apostle". But we also see the Word set this as a more specific office.

Is there a passage in the Word that makes a more clear distinction between those being sent out, and those being called "apostles"?

(This is a real question, not a leading one, as I don't have an opinion on modern day apostles as of yet, which I am assuming is one of the main biases leading the debate)

There are no modern day apostles, at least not like those of Paul and the 12. Those who claim to be so are liars.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Kenneth, Peter is not the one who did the choosing. Neither he nor the other apostles know which of the two to choose. "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen" v. 24

So that cast their lots (votes) and the lot fell on Mathias.
The Holy Spirit guided them to vote in Mathias to replace Judas. I know where you are coming from on this because I agree that the Lord through the Holy Spirit guides who he wants where. But you can not avoid verse 26 where it shows exactly how that was done, and that was working through the other Apostles.

It would be the same if when you go to the next presidential election, and pray to God to guide you on who you are to vote for. He will then guide you to choose who He wants in power to fulfill His will.

 

[kennethcadwell]

There are no modern day apostles, at least not like those of Paul and the 12. Those who claim to be so are liars.

What gives you the right to say that ???

How do you know who the Lord our God personally chooses or not, you do not speak for Him.
For we are all personally called by Him to do His will still, those positions He calls us for vary as Paul showed. It is not man's right to say who and who can't be chosen....

 

[ChristIsGod]

Matthias was just a filler to keep the number straight until PAUL was appointed directly by Christ Jesus.

That should be obvious by the weight of the amount of Scripture from Paul and the amount of Churches he over-saw and the amount of SUFFERING that Apostle to the Gentiles endured.

If you think that Paul is not one of the 12 whose name will be one of the names found in the Foundation [Rev 21:14] - but Matthias instead - I'd believe the Scriptures by and about Paul could change one's mind. jmo.

 

[oldhermit]

So that cast their lots (votes) and the lot fell on Mathias.
The Holy Spirit guided them to vote in Mathias to replace Judas. I know where you are coming from on this because I agree that the Lord through the Holy Spirit guides who he wants where. But you can not avoid verse 26 where it shows exactly how that was done, and that was working through the other Apostles.

It would be the same if when you go to the next presidential election, and pray to God to guide you on who you are to vote for. He will then guide you to choose who He wants in power to fulfill His will.

No Kenneth, this was not a vote among the apostle. This selection was determined by what was in the heart of each of the two men and this was not something that could be discerned but apostles. This was a divine selection. Remember, "The lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord." Proverbs 16:33.

 

[crossnote]

I wonder what God's real definition of Apostle is. The Greek work is simply "sent out ones (as with an authoritative command", which logically would deem any missionary called to the field an "apostle". But we also see the Word set this as a more specific office.

Is there a passage in the Word that makes a more clear distinction between those being sent out, and those being called "apostles"?

(This is a real question, not a leading one, as I don't have an opinion on modern day apostles as of yet, which I am assuming is one of the main biases leading the debate)

Here are some guidelines...

Act 1:21-22 So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, (22) beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us—one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection."

They must have been with Jesus during His earthly ministry, and a witness to the resurrection. Paul being one born out of due time was the exception...

1Co 15:7-8 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. (8) Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

 

[Hizikyah]

Perhaps I missed something. I was talking about Heb. 3:1 where the word used is Ἀπόστολον

I was trying to support you statement from a different angle, unless I misunderstood you.

 

[secularhermit]

There are no modern day apostles, at least not like those of Paul and the 12. Those who claim to be so are liars.

Let´s say there are some, sent by their churches (same way paul and Barnabas were sent, in the beginning).

I have seen that many believe in Paul´s, instead of Jesus´s teaching, instead of THOSE HE APPOINTED during HIS lifetime.

I will not put my life for Paul´s teaching, by the way. And that reminded me when Jewish leaders asked the apostles NOT TO TEACHING in Jesus´ name. They said something like: "It´s better to pay attention to God´s, rather to men´s commands"

 

[Sophia]

So that cast their lots (votes) and the lot fell on Mathias.
The Holy Spirit guided them to vote in Mathias to replace Judas. I know where you are coming from on this because I agree that the Lord through the Holy Spirit guides who he wants where. But you can not avoid verse 26 where it shows exactly how that was done, and that was working through the other Apostles.

It would be the same if when you go to the next presidential election, and pray to God to guide you on who you are to vote for. He will then guide you to choose who He wants in power to fulfill His will.

It is important to note that the lots weren't cast to select one out of many, but that it was down to 2 men, both of whom were qualified to fill the role by the sight of the Apostles. They were unified in the selection of these two men out of the many many disciples.
It wasn't a gamble, but nor was it a vote. Think about it. When faced with 2 great options, they left the decision up to the One who invented physics, and who sustains the laws of physics, and is in sovereign control of all the variables.

Perhaps when our churches cannot make unified decisions, there is a better way than a 51%>49% vote, or even just leaving the decision up to the whim of the pastor (head elder).

 

[oldhermit]

What gives you the right to say that ???

How do you know who the Lord our God personally chooses or not, you do not speak for Him.
For we are all personally called by Him to do His will still, those positions He calls us for vary as Paul showed. It is not man's right to say who and who can't be chosen....

It is a simple matter of biblical evidence. The office of an apostle was neither transferable not successive. I will personally challenge ANY so called, self-appointed apostle to prove his claims in public forum. If he is an apostle on the same par with Paul and the 12 then he will be able to exhibit the signs of an apostle.

 

[secularhermit]

Good invitation to show those credits publicly!