# How many apostles?



## VanVos (Jun 1, 2004)

Does anyone believe that the was only 12 foundational Apostles as stated in Rev 21? If so, was Paul the 12th? Did God approve of their choice of Matthias in Acts 1. Or do we have the 12 Foundational Apostles plus other apostles who had seen the raisen Lord. I Cor 15:5-10 Act 14:14?

VanVos

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by VanVos]


----------



## cupotea (Jun 1, 2004)

Is there any historical or traditional writings from church history that mention Matthias after his mention in Acts? 

I've often wondered about that because it looked like Peter took it upon himself to call another apostle to replace Judas. 

I would shudder to think that Judas would be included in the foundational apostles.


----------



## blhowes (Jun 1, 2004)

Act 14:14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, 

Was Barnabas also considered an apostle?


----------



## JohnV (Jun 1, 2004)

I'll step into this one. At least I'll try. The following is off the top of my head. It represents notions that seem to have tken root in my thinking. It is not the result of careful research. 

There were twelve foundational apostles. Matthias was the twelfth. Paul was considered an apostle too, as was Barnabas, since they were commissioned by the church to go on their mission work. 

However, there is a distinction between the apostleship of Paul and that of Barnabas. Paul, like the twelve, received his commissin directly from God, and the gospel message was taught him by our Lord's own hand. 

Apostleship is an office, ordained by Jesus Christ Himself. It is called an &quot;extraordinary&quot; office because it is especially meant for a limited time. It seems that there were different degrees of apostleship, but yet the office was temporary, confined to the establishing of the foundations of the church. The two types of apostleship would be that the one is authoritative in matters of establishing doctrine, and the other in establishing leadership. The former included the latter, but the latter did not include the former. 

So it is not necessarily a problem that Matthias was deemed an apostle, and yet Paul was the one wh was given the special commission by Christ Himself to be authoritative in Scriptural doctrine. Which one is the reputed twelfth apostle? I think Matthias is. This takes nothing away from Paul's special office. Paul himself asserts that they are all servants of God's purposes, and that one plants and another waters; the important thing is the work of God through the Spirit, not the men or their offices. 

That's my 'shot in the dark' at it. I may not be right, but it is at least a ground for discussion.


----------



## blhowes (Jun 1, 2004)

John,
Thanks for your good response. Do you have any thoughts about the qualifications for being an apostle?

Act 1:21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 
Act 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. 

This passage is sometimes used against those who claim to be apostles today. The argument is made that they can't be apostles because they don't fit the given criteria. They didn't live with and learn from Jesus from the time of John's baptism to the resurrection of Jesus.

Is it necessary for Paul (or Barnabas or whoever else back then was considered an apostle) to have fufilled this criteria? In what way did Paul fit this criteria? If Paul and any of the others didn't fit this criteria, how can we answer those today who claim to be apostles?

Bob


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 1, 2004)

Bob, with regard to Paul fitting the criteria, the verses you cited are usually taken to mean that in order to be an apostle, one must have actually seen Jesus personally, and thus been a witness of His resurrection. Paul [i:b1606b159a]did[/i:b1606b159a] see Jesus in His resurrected form - when He appeared to Paul on the road to Damascus. Paul already knew that this Jesus of Nazareth had been crucified, but he then saw Him in a divine vision, which then resulted in his regeneration and conversion.

This is another classic case demonstrating how Scripture is its own best interpreter: In 1 Corinthians 9:1 (ESV, emphasis mine), Paul states, &quot;Am I not free? [i:b1606b159a]Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?[/i:b1606b159a] Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?&quot; This clearly shows that Paul's having seen Jesus in the divine vision on the road to Damascus fulfilled the criteria of witnessing Christ's resurrection as mentioned in Acts 1.

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 1, 2004)

(edited out because I accidentally clicked the &quot;Send Post&quot; button twice when posting my above post)

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## blhowes (Jun 1, 2004)

[b:1a20388227]Chris wrote:[/b:1a20388227]
This is another classic case demonstrating how Scripture is its own best interpreter: In 1 Corinthians 9:1 (ESV, emphasis mine), Paul states, &quot;Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?&quot; This clearly shows that Paul's having seen Jesus in the divine vision on the road to Damascus fulfilled the criteria of witnessing Christ's resurrection as mentioned in Acts 1. 

Since this is true of Paul, how can we then exclude others who lay the same claim to apostleship today. They may not have lived with Jesus, but they claim to have seen Jesus in a divine vision, similar to Paul? (nobody comes to mind off the top of my head, but I've heard there are those who make that claim)

Bob

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by blhowes]


----------



## rembrandt (Jun 1, 2004)

There were many more than just 12 people who were called &quot;apostles&quot; in the early Church. [b:a7156ee73e]I'd say there was close to 20.[/b:a7156ee73e] To be one of the original 12 the criteria was to see the risen Lord. These were apostles of Christ. There were also apostles of the Church, who the apostles commissioned and the Church commissioned. 

I don't see anything prohibiting &quot;lesser apostles&quot; to still be in the Church today. This is only under abnormal circumstances where God may raise them up (Luther etc.). It is only the criteria for Apostles sent by Jesus Christ, to have actually seen him and been commissioned by him. This gives him authority to act on behalf of Christ. Whereas, in a sence, the apostles of the Church are acting on behalf of the other apostles.

Paul


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 1, 2004)

Bob,

For one thing, all Christians are automatically obligated to accept Paul's having seen Christ in vision as true, since it was asserted in Scripture. But we are [i:2fd29d7946]not[/i:2fd29d7946] automatically obligated by default to accept any such claim [i:2fd29d7946]today[/i:2fd29d7946] as valid. You ask, &quot;how can we then exclude others who lay the same claim to apostleship today?&quot; I would venture to say, the same way we can exclude those who lay claim to being given a prophecy or another tongue today - if someone is convinced that NT tongues and prophecy are still given today, we can do nothing but try to show them through exegesis that they are interpreting the Scriptures incorrectly.

So it is with any claim today to having seen Christ personally in a vision. Unless we're always prepared to demonstrate the cessation of all extrabiblical revelation since the apostolic age, we really [i:2fd29d7946]don't[/i:2fd29d7946] have an answer for such claims as seeing Christ in vision, and being commissioned by Him in that vision to be an apostle. Once the existence of [i:2fd29d7946]any[/i:2fd29d7946] extrabiblical revelation today is allowed, people can then take that revelation as far as they please. So all in all, demonstrating the biblical veracity of cessationism is our only bet in combatting such heresies as modern-day apostleship.

In Christ,

Chris

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## JohnV (Jun 1, 2004)

[quote:d63578609b][i:d63578609b]Originally posted by blhowes[/i:d63578609b]
John,
Thanks for your good response. Do you have any thoughts about the qualifications for being an apostle?

Act 1:21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 
Act 1:22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection. 

This passage is sometimes used against those who claim to be apostles today. The argument is made that they can't be apostles because they don't fit the given criteria. They didn't live with and learn from Jesus from the time of John's baptism to the resurrection of Jesus.

Is it necessary for Paul (or Barnabas or whoever else back then was considered an apostle) to have fufilled this criteria? In what way did Paul fit this criteria? If Paul and any of the others didn't fit this criteria, how can we answer those today who claim to be apostles?

Bob [/quote:d63578609b]

It seems to me that Chris' answer is right. The Apostles had to have been direct witnessess of Christ's ministry and resurrection. This makes Paul qualify, since Christ ministered His gospel to him directly. We don't know whether Barnabas qualifies under these, but we do know that he accompanied Paul personally, and that he too was commissioned under the authority of the the Apostles. Just like Paul, he went to Jerusalem to report his mission activities. He would fall under the leadership apostleship, since he was directly under the primary apostleship of the Apostles. Apollos would be one of those too: not quite an Apostle, but yet under direct Apostlic commission. In other words, Barnabas and Apollos weren't Apostles per se, but were called that sometimes because of the office they represented in some circumstances. They were ambassadors of the Apostles, so to speak; speaking for the Apostles, just like the Apostles were speaking for Christ Himself. 

That is why it is also a temporary office. Those who may think of themselves as Apostles in our day are actually showing themselves to be counterfeit by using that term. For they are taking upon themselves what rightfully belongs to no other but Christ alone. They freely put their own marks on the gospel, asserting things that are not found in the original Apostolic foundation. They freely emphaisize what the Apostles did not; and they make themselves more important than that which Christ has given them to be. 

I think that this is so even for some who do not call themselves Apostles, but yet make determinations on matters that denominations dare not assert. They proclaim thier views as truly Biblical, and disparage the views of other true believers, when it is clearly not their office to do so. Teaching elders, or ministers, are licenced by the denomination or churches to proclaim the one true gospel, not their own minds. They have no right to single-handedly proclaim things on their own. I hold such activities to be the mark of a false teacher, no matter how orthodox he may sound. You may have noted that Calvin or Spurgeon never took such things upon themselves, but always put themselves under the authority of the Session, so as not to discredit either the truth of the gospel or the office they held. 

Again, this is just my opinion. It does not represent a studied synopsis.

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by JohnV]


----------



## Ianterrell (Jun 1, 2004)

I think that its safe to say that all the Apostles received a divine commision from Christ himself, there seem to have been other apostles outside of the twelve. Those who perhaps were not part of the twelve but had been witnesses to Christ just the same, and given a mandate.


----------



## dswatts (Jun 1, 2004)

But in specific reference to the question of Rev 21, I personally include Paul, not Matthias, in the 'foundational' 12. Paul received his apostleship directly from Christ, Matthias was 'voted' in.

Just my :wr50:

Grace,
Dwayne


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 1, 2004)

Dwayne, actually they cast lots for Matthias, rather than voting. In light of God's providence and direct revelation during the biblical era, casting lots was a commonly accepted form of determining God's will at certain times in the biblical years. Proverbs 16:33 (ESV) states, &quot;The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.&quot; Thus, Matthias' apostleship can be reasonably presumed to be as valid as any of them.

In Christ,

Chris


----------



## VanVos (Jun 1, 2004)

Interesting replies, all of which I agree with in the main. I to believe that apostleship was a tempoary office for the laying of the Foundation of the Church Eph 2:20 I also believe that the criteria and qualification for apostleship was to have seen the raisen Lord. But was the another qualification?, did one have to be anointed or commissioned by Christ. Allow me to explain...I don't know if anyone noticed but James the brother of Jesus does not call himself an apostle even though he saw the risen Lord (See James 1:1 and I Cor 15:7). But I noticed the 11 apostles were given a special anointing, pre-pentecost, inorder to lay the foundation of the church (see John 20:20-23, Matt 16:18 etc) Now who else is recorded to have received this same anointing?. I would say the only other is Paul after the Damascus experience by the laying on of hands of Ananias (Acts 9:10-18), who was directly sent from God. Also this was the Spirit coming on Paul as an individual as apposed to the other accounts in Acts where it is corporate. Would this explain why Paul said in 1 Cor 15:8 that he was born out of season. 

So what I'm saying is, was the only officially 12 Apostles, including Paul, which were the nucleus of the sign and wonders ministry, and were the others apostles in more general sense, in that they worked with them i.e. Matthias, Barnabas. ?

VanVos

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by VanVos]


----------



## pastorway (Jun 1, 2004)

The term &quot;apostle&quot; means literally a &quot;sent one.&quot; It was those who had seen Christ and were sent by Him that we consider apostles.

The Bible tells us who the apostles were:

[i:a5cb95da83]The Twelve Sent[/i:a5cb95da83]
[b:a5cb95da83]Matthew 10[/b:a5cb95da83]
1 And when He had called His twelve disciples to Him, He gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease. 2[u:a5cb95da83]Now the names of the twelve apostles[/u:a5cb95da83] are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4Simon the Cananite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him. 5 [u:a5cb95da83]These twelve Jesus sent out[/u:a5cb95da83] ...


[i:a5cb95da83]Judas fell from apostleship[/i:a5cb95da83]
[i:a5cb95da83]Matthais named to replace Judas[/i:a5cb95da83]
[b:a5cb95da83]Acts 1[/b:a5cb95da83]
21&quot;Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.&quot; 23And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24And they prayed and said, &quot;You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25[u:a5cb95da83]to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell[/u:a5cb95da83], that he might go to his own place.&quot; 26And they cast their lots, [u:a5cb95da83]and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles[/u:a5cb95da83].

[i:a5cb95da83]Barnabas was not an Apostle[/i:a5cb95da83]
[b:a5cb95da83]Acts 4[/b:a5cb95da83]
36And Joses, who was also named Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement), a Levite of the country of Cyprus, 37having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

[b:a5cb95da83]Acts 9:27[/b:a5cb95da83]
27But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles.

[b:a5cb95da83]Acts 14[/b:a5cb95da83]
14But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard this, they tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude...

While Acts 14:14 identifies Barnabas as an &quot;apostle&quot; with Paul, I think we can take it in the context of the Book of Acts as one sent on a mission by the church, and not as one of THE Apostles. Here it seems more an adjective than a title.

[i:a5cb95da83]Paul was an Apostle[/i:a5cb95da83]
[b:a5cb95da83]1 Corinthians 9[/b:a5cb95da83]
1 [u:a5cb95da83]Am I not an apostle[/u:a5cb95da83]? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. [u:a5cb95da83]For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord[/u:a5cb95da83]. 

etc etc for Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ....

[i:a5cb95da83]But there are only Twelve![/i:a5cb95da83]
[b:a5cb95da83]Revelation 21[/b:a5cb95da83]
14Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were [u:a5cb95da83]the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb[/u:a5cb95da83]. 

SO, while Matthais was &quot;numbered with the Eleven&quot; to replace Judas, he is never referred to directly as an Apostle. Paul is obviously an Apostle. So I think that while Matthais was chosen by lots, he was not God's chosen man for the position. Paul was.

The Twelve Apostles then are:

1. Simon, who is called Peter, 2. Andrew, 
3. James and 4. John, the sons of Zebedee, 5. Philip, 6. Bartholomew, 7. Thomas, 8. Matthew, 9. James the son of Alphaeus, 10. Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus, 11. Simon the Cananite, and 12. Paul.

Phillip


----------



## JohnV (Jun 1, 2004)

Jonathan:
Acts 1 recounts for us the replacement of Judas by Matthias. There is no indication of either a positive or negative attitude, of whether the Spirit approved or not. The assumption is that the Spirit approved. This makes Matthias the twelfth. 

We don't know whether Matthias (and Joseph) were breathed on by Christ in the upper room, along with the eleven. We suppose that he wasn't there because only the eleven were mentioned in the text. But that doesn't mean that others weren't there. From the context it is clear that the community of believers were well aware of the whereabouts of the eleven Apostles at the time of the resurrection of Christ, and thereafter. So attendance at that one particular meeting could have been criteria for the Acts 1 decision. 

I think that Paul's primary commission was to write the epistles. This puts him on par with the eleven. So there may be something to what you say. But I still think that Paul could have received the commissin he did without any taking away from Matthias the office he held. With what we have from Scripture, Matthias is the twelfth, it seems to me. 

I'm not saying this to dispute about it, or to be dogmatic. I'm stating my views as a pretext for showing how I understand the texts.


----------



## cupotea (Jun 1, 2004)

[quote:02bbbabee8][i:02bbbabee8]Originally posted by pastorway[/i:02bbbabee8]
The term &quot;apostle&quot; means literally a &quot;sent one.&quot; It was those who had seen Christ and were sent by Him that we consider apostles.

The Bible tells us who the apostles were:

[i:02bbbabee8]The Twelve Sent[/i:02bbbabee8]
[b:02bbbabee8]Matthew 10[/b:02bbbabee8]
1 And when He had called His twelve disciples to Him, He gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease. 2[u:02bbbabee8]Now the names of the twelve apostles[/u:02bbbabee8] are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; 3Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew the tax collector; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; 4Simon the Cananite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed Him. 5 [u:02bbbabee8]These twelve Jesus sent out[/u:02bbbabee8] ...


[i:02bbbabee8]Judas fell from apostleship[/i:02bbbabee8]
[i:02bbbabee8]Matthais named to replace Judas[/i:02bbbabee8]
[b:02bbbabee8]Acts 1[/b:02bbbabee8]
21&quot;Therefore, of these men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22beginning from the baptism of John to that day when He was taken up from us, one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection.&quot; 23And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. 24And they prayed and said, &quot;You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen 25[u:02bbbabee8]to take part in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell[/u:02bbbabee8], that he might go to his own place.&quot; 26And they cast their lots, [u:02bbbabee8]and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles[/u:02bbbabee8].

[i:02bbbabee8]Barnabas was not an Apostle[/i:02bbbabee8]
[b:02bbbabee8]Acts 4[/b:02bbbabee8]
36And Joses, who was also named Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement), a Levite of the country of Cyprus, 37having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

[b:02bbbabee8]Acts 9:27[/b:02bbbabee8]
27But Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles.

[b:02bbbabee8]Acts 14[/b:02bbbabee8]
14But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard this, they tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude...

While Acts 14:14 identifies Barnabas as an &quot;apostle&quot; with Paul, I think we can take it in the context of the Book of Acts as one sent on a mission by the church, and not as one of THE Apostles. Here it seems more an adjective than a title.

[i:02bbbabee8]Paul was an Apostle[/i:02bbbabee8]
[b:02bbbabee8]1 Corinthians 9[/b:02bbbabee8]
1 [u:02bbbabee8]Am I not an apostle[/u:02bbbabee8]? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. [u:02bbbabee8]For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord[/u:02bbbabee8]. 

etc etc for Paul, the Apostle of Jesus Christ....

[i:02bbbabee8]But there are only Twelve![/i:02bbbabee8]
[b:02bbbabee8]Revelation 21[/b:02bbbabee8]
14Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were [u:02bbbabee8]the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb[/u:02bbbabee8]. 

SO, while Matthais was &quot;numbered with the Eleven&quot; to replace Judas, he is never referred to directly as an Apostle. Paul is obviously an Apostle. So I think that while Matthais was chosen by lots, he was not God's chosen man for the position. Paul was.

The Twelve Apostles then are:

1. Simon, who is called Peter, 2. Andrew, 
3. James and 4. John, the sons of Zebedee, 5. Philip, 6. Bartholomew, 7. Thomas, 8. Matthew, 9. James the son of Alphaeus, 10. Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus, 11. Simon the Cananite, and 12. Paul.

Phillip [/quote:02bbbabee8]

 brother. Phillip's post


----------



## rembrandt (Jun 1, 2004)

Perhaps this is pointless of me to say, but there are millions and even billions of apostles in the world, if apostle only means &quot;sent one&quot; (lawyers, government officials, whoever is sent by someone else, etc.). What we are trying to do is figure out who was sent specifically by Jesus Christ. Other people are given the name &quot;apostle&quot; in the Bible, but that dosen't break the concept of their being a specified orignial group of 12 which carry unique functions as governers of the Church.

Paul

[Edited on 6-1-2004 by rembrandt]


----------

