|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 6, 2017 18:15:12 GMT -5
nathan, your assertions raise some interesting questions. IF apostles still exist, in the same form as the New Testament, through the calling of the Holy Spirit; then - this is a direct calling, not contingent upon any particular group or ministry, therefore making the Two-by-Two ministry invalid as the "only right way"; and - you would have to agree that ANY (regardless of their denominational affiliation) who so claim could also be called to be apostles. (If not, why not? ) I believe your assertions therefore invalidate any claim that workers have prerogative to be called "apostles". In addition: one of the main reasons that Ed Cooney was forced to part ways with the Two-by-Twos was HIS assertion that he was led by the Holy Spirit, and refused to be limited as to where he could preach according to the overseers. This was apparently unacceptable. Furthermore, today's workers can still only go where they are sent by other existing workers/overseers. This again seems at direct odds with your assertion that workers are called and led by the Holy Spirit. It is of God, or of men? Workers decide and approve who will be workers, yes? Workers tell workers where to go and preach, yes? Where is the calling and leading of the Holy Spirit as per in Jesus' day for the apostles, within the Two-by-Two ministry?
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Nov 6, 2017 18:24:58 GMT -5
Odd to find a 3 year old post resurrected. Once a worker is always a worker. I am NOT active in the work, but my calling as a worker/apostle of God is still the same. My heart still caring for the lambs and sheep of God, love helping people.. You might feel that way but senior workers in your region over the years have directly contradicted your position. In your 2x2 region - or any other region in the world - you are NOT welcome to take the microphone on the platform at convention or special meetings and begin preaching and you are NOT welcome to preach at gospel meetings and you are NOT welcome to claim yourself to be an apostle. Leaving the work is a special case of 'losing out' and I've been told that you and other lapsed workers are regarded as never having been a true apostle - the verse given was ' No man having put his hand to the plough and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God.' and not you or any other former worker is accepted as being an apostle - thats why they are called 'former workers' and 'ex-workers' by the friends. Your posts sound like you are trying to start a new church - which is what you'd be doing if you started preaching on your own or holding gospel meetings or holding bible studies or any other prerogative reserved only to workers in good standing with the overseer. Where does it say these 2 were apostles? Many people have been commissioned by the Holy Spirit to go out preaching over the last 2,000 years but they are not the apostles. Acts 14:14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out...
~~ The Holy Spirit is still active on the earth since Acts of the apostles, He has been sending forth laborers/workers or apostles in every generation until Jesus Christ returns to reign as King of kings and LORD of lords on the earth with His people, where they will Reign with Him.
Nathan you are right that workers are not commissioned by jesus but are wrong to say that the bible says that apostles are sent by the holy spirit - that isn't said in the bible at all - and using Acts 13 is an invalid argument to raise against the article Cherie posted because just like in english there are words for different types of 'sending' in koine greek and just one of those words - apostolos - is used for someone appointing and sending another person as an apostle and nowhere in that chapter is that word used and it most definitely doesn't indicate that the holy spirit was commissioning/sending out apostles - the articles right about that and that the workers are really apostles of the overseers because it is only the overseers who is are control who is sent out and where they can preach and of sometimes terminating them as workers/apostles and ordaining them and everything else involved in creating and sending an apostle forth from them.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 6, 2017 18:47:14 GMT -5
nathan , your assertions raise some interesting questions. IF apostles still exist, in the same form as the New Testament, through the calling of the Holy Spirit; then - this is a direct calling, not contingent upon any particular group or ministry, therefore making the Two-by-Two ministry invalid as the "only right way"; and - you would have to agree that ANY (regardless of their denominational affiliation) who so claim could also be called to be apostles. (If not, why not? ) I believe your assertions therefore invalidate any claim that workers have prerogative to be called "apostles". In addition: one of the main reasons that Ed Cooney was forced to part ways with the Two-by-Twos was HIS assertion that he was led by the Holy Spirit, and refused to be limited as to where he could preach according to the overseers. This was apparently unacceptable. Furthermore, today's workers can still only go where they are sent by other existing workers/overseers. This again seems at direct odds with your assertion that workers are called and led by the Holy Spirit. It is of God, or of men? Workers decide and approve who will be workers, yes? Workers tell workers where to go and preach, yes? Where is the calling and leading of the Holy Spirit as per in Jesus' day for the apostles, within the Two-by-Two ministry? OK... here are my experiences and understanding.... The overseers make the list each year and assign which worker goes with so and so worker for the year.... The Holy Spirit is in charge, and He moves the workers around during the year to different fields and states to meet the needs as problems and different situations arise... that sometimes the overseers had little control of.
1) My first year I had 3 different companions and was in two different fields. 2) My second year I had 3 different companions and was in two different fields. 3) My third year I had 3 different companions and was in two different fields and states.
4) My fourth year I had 2 different companions and was in two different fields and states. 5) My fifth year I had 1 companion and one field.
6) My sixth year I had two companions and one field. 7) My seventh year I had two companions and one field.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 6, 2017 19:02:41 GMT -5
Odd to find a 3 year old post resurrected. Once a worker is always a worker. I am NOT active in the work, but my calling as a worker/apostle of God is still the same. My heart still caring for the lambs and sheep of God, love helping people.. You might feel that way but senior workers in your region over the years have directly contradicted your position. In your 2x2 region - or any other region in the world - you are NOT welcome to take the microphone on the platform at convention or special meetings and begin preaching and you are NOT welcome to preach at gospel meetings and you are NOT welcome to claim yourself to be an apostle. Leaving the work is a special case of 'losing out' and I've been told that you and other lapsed workers are regarded as never having been a true apostle - the verse given was ' No man having put his hand to the plough and looking back is fit for the kingdom of God.' and not you or any other former worker is accepted as being an apostle - thats why they are called 'former workers' and 'ex-workers' by the friends. Your posts sound like you are trying to start a new church - which is what you'd be doing if you started preaching on your own or holding gospel meetings or holding bible studies or any other prerogative reserved only to workers in good standing with the overseer. Acts 14:14 Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out...
~~ The Holy Spirit is still active on the earth since Acts of the apostles, He has been sending forth laborers/workers or apostles in every generation until Jesus Christ returns to reign as King of kings and LORD of lords on the earth with His people, where they will Reign with Him.
Nathan you are right that workers are not commissioned by jesus but are wrong to say that the bible says that apostles are sent by the holy spirit - that isn't said in the bible at all - and using Acts 13 is an invalid argument to raise against the article Cherie posted because just like in english there are words for different types of 'sending' in koine greek and just one of those words - apostolos - is used for someone appointing and sending another person as an apostle and nowhere in that chapter is that word used and it most definitely doesn't indicate that the holy spirit was commissioning/sending out apostles - the articles right about that and that the workers are really apostles of the overseers because it is only the overseers who is are control who is sent out and where they can preach and of sometimes terminating them as workers/apostles and ordaining them and everything else involved in creating and sending an apostle forth from them. ~~ #1) The workers and the friends can call whatever names they want with ex-workers... I know my calling is from God and that is ALL I need to KNOW and continue to fulfill and finish what He has laid upon my heart.
I am NOT looking for approval of men or worrying about their names callings "ex-workers as losers" men look on the outward appearances but God looks on the hearts.
~~ #2) The overseer in Washington state Tharold S. told me I could start in the work in 1984 at Miltown convention but because of misunderstanding he told me to wait 1 more year, which I did and he never call or contact me. I knew God had called me to go in the work, I prayed and asked Him, what should I do?
In my dream God told me " Go to Oregon! and offer there." I left Washington State and came to Oregon and offered for the work to Howard Mooney, and I had told him what happened in Washington State with Tharold. Howard M. said, "Well, my boy there is a place for you in the work, and I can start you out next week. " He arraigned a place for me to stay and work in Portland. I started in the work 6 months later, at Boring convention from 1986-93.
From my own experience teaches me the Holy Spirit is in charge and NOT overseers... The Holy Spirit is sending out the apostles, the overseers are just figure heads. The Holy Spirit opens doors no man can shut it, and he shuts doors no man can open it.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 7, 2017 13:25:17 GMT -5
nathan , your assertions raise some interesting questions. IF apostles still exist, in the same form as the New Testament, through the calling of the Holy Spirit; then - this is a direct calling, not contingent upon any particular group or ministry, therefore making the Two-by-Two ministry invalid as the "only right way"; and That argument is invalid because it ignores the possibility of the Holy Spirit leading people in cooperation with one another (as we can see happened in the times recorded in the book of Acts). This argument can also be written as "you must treat all claims as equivalent". In this wording it should be obvious that the argument is invalid. Can any of us directly answer the question of whether Cooney was led by the Holy Spirit in those travel decisions? Or the question of whether the others who disassociated from him were led by the Holy Spirit in that decision? Paul asked specific workers to come to him, or to go one place or another, yes? He called at least some of those workers apostles, yes? The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth...
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 7, 2017 17:27:16 GMT -5
nathan , your assertions raise some interesting questions. IF apostles still exist, in the same form as the New Testament, through the calling of the Holy Spirit; then - this is a direct calling, not contingent upon any particular group or ministry, therefore making the Two-by-Two ministry invalid as the "only right way"; and That argument is invalid because it ignores the possibility of the Holy Spirit leading people in cooperation with one another (as we can see happened in the times recorded in the book of Acts). My argument is primarily devil's advocate, because I don't believe in modern day apostles as the equivalent of those called directly by Jesus. I believe the original apostles were called directly, and only, by Jesus, and attested to their calling by signs and wonders. (Acts 2:43; 2 Corinthians 12:12).
Of course the Holy Spirit leads people in cooperation with one another. But I dispute that this is how Jesus' original apostles were called. They were not called by existing members of a ministry, but by Jesus himself. My point was based on Nathan's claim of a Holy Spirit calling, and his continuing assertion that the Two-by-Twos are the only right way. This argument can also be written as "you must treat all claims as equivalent". In this wording it should be obvious that the argument is invalid. No, I said COULD, not MUST. My argument (again, devil's advocate), says that IF modern day apostles were to exist, what gives the Two-by-Twos prerogative to claim that they are the only ones called/led by the Holy Spirit? Can any of us directly answer the question of whether Cooney was led by the Holy Spirit in those travel decisions? Or the question of whether the others who disassociated from him were led by the Holy Spirit in that decision? No, and I won't even try. But Nathan's belief in the Holy Spirit leading, and Cooney's conviction, are far more in accord with each other, than with the current practices of the Two-by-Two ministry. The ministry seems to claim apostolic authority, but then deny workers the ability to act on any perceived leading of the Holy Spirit. Paul asked specific workers to come to him, or to go one place or another, yes? He called at least some of those workers apostles, yes? Yes. I'm only arguing here that workers often make the claim that "it all just happens", and they are "led to their fields", when in reality it is based on human decision. Again, the contradiction between claim (belief) and actual practice in the current ministry. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth... Absolutely. Which is why it's pretty dangerous to assert that those in the Two-by-Two ministry are called as apostles, and no one else outside of the group can, or does, have this calling.
It is particularly arrogant (at best) and blasphemous (at worst) to claim that workers of the Two-by-Two ministry rival the authority - in any way - of the original twelve apostles who proved their credentials with signs and wonders and were called directly by Jesus.
But even if we're referring to apostles in a broader, non-authoritative missionary sense, as those called by God to preach the gospel, it is still extremely blasphemous to claim that only those in the Two-by-Two ministry can have this calling from the Holy Spirit, yes?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 7, 2017 18:35:49 GMT -5
My argument is primarily devil's advocate, because I don't believe in modern day apostles as the equivalent of those called directly by Jesus. I believe the original apostles were called directly, and only, by Jesus, and attested to their calling by signs and wonders. (Acts 2:43; 2 Corinthians 12:12). Now it seems to me that you're changing the scope of the question, aren't you? "The workers are apostles" does not mean that they are "equivalent" to those called directly by Jesus (whichever ones you meant to include by that - the 12?, the 70?, the 12 + 1?, the 70 + 1?, the 12 + 70 + 1?). Saying that the present-day workers are apostles (or that some of them are, allowing that some may be false apostles as foretold by some of the first-century apostles) is not making them the equivalent of the apostles that were sent out by Jesus before His ascension. It is saying that they serve in an apostolic role, as being 'sent'. That raises another question for you: were the 70 -- that Jesus directly sent out while He was on earth -- apostles? If so, are they the equivalent of the 12? Do you consider that Barnabas, Epaphras, Timothy, Titus -- any or all of those men -- were apostles? You said "would have to", which I interpreted in the usual way as roughly equivalent to "must". I don't believe in "Two-by-Twos". Look at their fruits, not merely group association. Ye shall know them by their fruits. I can say that they should go where the Holy Spirit leads them. But the claim of liberty should not be used to neglect fellowship and cooperation. A worker should consider it possible that another person might be led of the Holy Spirit to ask something of him. He should not reject the possibility outright without consideration. He should seek to humble himself and serve others. Nor should divisions of 'fields' be considered as absolute. Neither "it all just happens" nor that they are "led to their fields" contradicts that some small group of workers (e.g. overseer) makes up a list and distributes it. I've never seen any suppression of the fact that lists are made and distributed. Where is the contradiction? I would not make that claim. But that's not to say that the way different ones go about exercising spiritual gifts and callings is unimportant and that we can just go about it any way we want (such as copying what is popular around us) and that will be right. As a corollary, the fact that someone is called by God to preach His word or to exercise pastoral gifts or some other form of gift does not in itself validate every one of the particular details of how he goes about his service.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 7, 2017 21:54:26 GMT -5
No, the seventy were not the equivalent of the 12, but were given a very similar commission (including the ability to heal diseases, etc).
Yes, I have broadened the scope of the question, to make this distinction (of what constitutes an apostle), and to think further upon what Nathan is claiming.
Let's step back to the original points made.
If I am correct, Nathan is disputing the article referenced by Cherie, in which the workers are disqualified from calling themselves "apostles", because they were not directly commissioned by Christ. Nathan argues that the workers ARE apostles, because they are still commissioned directly by the Holy Spirit, as per some in the NT.
The Two-by-Twos have often cited the 12 being sent out (more than the ~70), as being their pattern, and many, over the years, have taught themselves as being the equivalent of those 12. It's primarily where they get their itinerant ministry pattern idea. I would agree with the posted article, and vehemently reject this.
I think Nathan has been more cautious, and is more willing to equate the workers' apostleship with the 70, or with others who may be referred to in scripture as "apostles", citing commissioning by the Holy Spirit, rather than directly by Jesus himself.
Bearing in mind that being an apostle is simply to be "sent out" by someone, as their messenger, the article makes the very relevant point that if today's workers are "apostles", they are in fact, apostles of the overseers. Sent out, in effect and in reality, by the Two-by-Two overseers, according to THEIR instructions. They do take a bag and extra clothes. They don't heal diseases and perform miracles.
So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands.
I'd say the same to anyone, from any denomination, who claimed to be a Biblical apostle.
Two stories for you in relation to other points you raised.
Some years ago a worker was seeking to evangelise a friend of mind, and telling this friend about his own calling and life as a worker. He claimed that "We [he and his companion] just go wherever we are lead". He was trying to minimise the idea that this was an organisation with such mundane, earthly things as organised fields, and trying to give the impression that it "all just happens by the Holy Spirit". My friend saw straight through this, and wanted to know why he would lie about such an obvious thing.
Also some years ago, I was having an interesting discussion with two workers on their exclusiveness. Obviously they stress "the pattern" of the ministry, and being homeless, and meetings in the home, etc. etc. as being what validates them as truly following Jesus. I asked if others were to do exactly the same form of ministry, in all earnestness, would they be truly following Jesus? I think you can guess the answer .... "No, because they wouldn't be part of this fold".
My bottom line - if the workers believe they are apostles, in any sense, they have no prerogative - or any more spiritual authority - over any other disciple of Jesus who would wish to claim the same title.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Nov 7, 2017 22:34:35 GMT -5
No, the seventy were not the equivalent of the 12, but were given a very similar commission (including the ability to heal diseases, etc). Yes, I have broadened the scope of the question, to make this distinction (of what constitutes an apostle), and to think further upon what Nathan is claiming. Let's step back to the original points made. If I am correct, Nathan is disputing the article referenced by Cherie, in which the workers are disqualified from calling themselves "apostles", because they were not directly commissioned by Christ. Nathan argues that the workers ARE apostles, because they are still commissioned directly by the Holy Spirit, as per some in the NT. The Two-by-Twos have often cited the 12 being sent out (more than the ~70), as being their pattern, and many, over the years, have taught themselves as being the equivalent of those 12. It's primarily where they get their itinerant ministry pattern idea. I would agree with the posted article, and vehemently reject this. I think Nathan has been more cautious, and is more willing to equate the workers' apostleship with the 70, or with others who may be referred to in scripture as "apostles", citing commissioning by the Holy Spirit, rather than directly by Jesus himself. Bearing in mind that being an apostle is simply to be "sent out" by someone, as their messenger, the article makes the very relevant point that if today's workers are "apostles", they are in fact, apostles of the overseers. Sent out, in effect and in reality, by the Two-by-Two overseers, according to THEIR instructions. They do take a bag and extra clothes. They don't heal diseases and perform miracles. So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands. I'd say the same to anyone, from any denomination, who claimed to be a Biblical apostle. Two stories for you in relation to other points you raised. Some years ago a worker was seeking to evangelise a friend of mind, and telling this friend about his own calling and life as a worker. He claimed that "We [he and his companion] just go wherever we are lead". He was trying to minimise the idea that this was an organisation with such mundane, earthly things as organised fields, and trying to give the impression that it "all just happens by the Holy Spirit". My friend saw straight through this, and wanted to know why he would lie about such an obvious thing. Also some years ago, I was having an interesting discussion with two workers on their exclusiveness. Obviously they stress "the pattern" of the ministry, and being homeless, and meetings in the home, etc. etc. as being what validates them as truly following Jesus. I asked if others were to do exactly the same form of ministry, in all earnestness, would they be truly following Jesus? I think you can guess the answer .... "No, because they wouldn't be part of this fold". My bottom line - if the workers believe they are apostles, in any sense, they have no prerogative - or any more spiritual authority - over any other disciple of Jesus who would wish to claim the same title. Thank you elizabethcoleman for an excellent post !
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 7, 2017 23:05:28 GMT -5
No, the seventy were not the equivalent of the 12, but were given a very similar commission (including the ability to heal diseases, etc). Yes, I have broadened the scope of the question, to make this distinction (of what constitutes an apostle), and to think further upon what Nathan is claiming. Let's step back to the original points made. If I am correct, Nathan is disputing the article referenced by Cherie, in which the workers are disqualified from calling themselves "apostles", because they were not directly commissioned by Christ. Nathan argues that the workers ARE apostles, because they are still commissioned directly by the Holy Spirit, as per some in the NT. The Two-by-Twos have often cited the 12 being sent out (more than the ~70), as being their pattern, and many, over the years, have taught themselves as being the equivalent of those 12. It's primarily where they get their itinerant ministry pattern idea. I would agree with the posted article, and vehemently reject this. I think Nathan has been more cautious, and is more willing to equate the workers' apostleship with the 70, or with others who may be referred to in scripture as "apostles", citing commissioning by the Holy Spirit, rather than directly by Jesus himself. Bearing in mind that being an apostle is simply to be "sent out" by someone, as their messenger, the article makes the very relevant point that if today's workers are "apostles", they are in fact, apostles of the overseers. Sent out, in effect and in reality, by the Two-by-Two overseers, according to THEIR instructions. They do take a bag and extra clothes. They don't heal diseases and perform miracles. So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands. I'd say the same to anyone, from any denomination, who claimed to be a Biblical apostle. Two stories for you in relation to other points you raised. Some years ago a worker was seeking to evangelise a friend of mind, and telling this friend about his own calling and life as a worker. He claimed that "We [he and his companion] just go wherever we are lead". He was trying to minimise the idea that this was an organisation with such mundane, earthly things as organised fields, and trying to give the impression that it "all just happens by the Holy Spirit". My friend saw straight through this, and wanted to know why he would lie about such an obvious thing. Also some years ago, I was having an interesting discussion with two workers on their exclusiveness. Obviously they stress "the pattern" of the ministry, and being homeless, and meetings in the home, etc. etc. as being what validates them as truly following Jesus. I asked if others were to do exactly the same form of ministry, in all earnestness, would they be truly following Jesus? I think you can guess the answer .... "No, because they wouldn't be part of this fold". My bottom line - if the workers believe they are apostles, in any sense, they have no prerogative - or any more spiritual authority - over any other disciple of Jesus who would wish to claim the same title. The 12, 70 and Paul were commission by Jesus while he was alive on earth. After Jesus went back to heaven, then the Holy Spirit commissioned or sent Barnabas, Paul, Silas, John Mark, Luke, Titus and others like them throughout the centuries....
Many workers do NOT need whether you or anyone believes them are apostles or NOT.... I know and they KNOW God has called and chosen us... The workers have their callings, so are the friends... Both callings are important in the fellowship of God. We respect each other callings.
NOT every one can be the head/workers, the body needs the eyes, the arms, the legs, and toes and so on to function properly. Bloom wherever God has planted each believer to be His Living Witness as salt and light in this dark world.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 7, 2017 23:46:06 GMT -5
From Frank Viola. So You Want To Start a House Church?, chapter 3, page 99.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 8, 2017 0:11:35 GMT -5
So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus?
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 8, 2017 0:21:40 GMT -5
So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus? Even Paul and Barnabas had to consult and give an account with the 12 apostles in Jerusalem Acts 15. Paul and Barnabas could NOT go wherever they want, or do, and teach just whatever doctrine they like.
The 12 apostles decided they were to preach as Jesus had commanded them, mostly among the Jews in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Jews scattered all over the world. Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Luke, John Mark, and those whom the Holy Spirit has chosen through the centuries to preach and labor among the Gentiles nations until Jesus returns.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 8, 2017 0:26:38 GMT -5
Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus? Even Paul and Barnabas had to consult and give an account with the 12 apostles in Jerusalem Acts 15. Paul and Barnabas could NOT go wherever they want, or do, and teach just whatever doctrine they like.
The 12 apostles decided they were to preach as Jesus had commanded them, mostly among the Jews in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Jews scattered all over the world. Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Luke, John Mark, and those whom the Holy Spirit has chosen through the centuries to preach and labor among the Gentiles nations until Jesus returns.How often did Paul and those with him preach in synagogues?
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 8, 2017 0:31:05 GMT -5
Even Paul and Barnabas had to consult and give an account with the 12 apostles in Jerusalem Acts 15. Paul and Barnabas could NOT go wherever they want, or do, and teach just whatever doctrine they like.
The 12 apostles decided they were to preach as Jesus had commanded them, mostly among the Jews in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Jews scattered all over the world. Paul, Barnabas, Timothy, Luke, John Mark, and those whom the Holy Spirit has chosen through the centuries to preach and labor among the Gentiles nations until Jesus returns. How often did Paul and those with him preach in synagogues? Every opportunity they could. It was Paul's custom like Jesus had done when he was alive on the earth. They took every opportunity to preach/teach in the synagogues to enlighten the fellow-Jews that He/Jesus is the Christ/anointed Messiah. They had good results many men and women became followers of Jesus. Apollo, became an apostle of Christ through the Synagogue missions.
My companions and I attended different churches, fellowships just like Paul and Jesus had done.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 8, 2017 0:55:35 GMT -5
From Frank Viola. So You Want To Start a House Church?, chapter 3, page 99. Very good principles for anybody undertaking Christian mission work, being sent out as representative members of the Body of Christ.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 8, 2017 1:01:27 GMT -5
So, I take issue with Nathan's assertion that he is an apostle, called by the Holy Spirit in equivalence with ANYONE in the NT called an apostle by scripture. I'm not going to call him a biblical apostle purely on his say-so, or on his dream, or in any sense. In reality he was apostled by the Overseers, because he only went out on their instructions, and in line with their commands. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus? Yes. Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached the gospel.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on Nov 8, 2017 1:19:00 GMT -5
Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus? Yes. Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached the gospel. They did preach the gospel with Paul. They were Paul's Co-workers. Read epistle to Titus. Here are names co-workers with Paul that many people have not read about in the epistles.
Apollo, an apostle like Paul. Tychicus a faithful minister, a servant of God. Aristacus, a fellow prisoner.
Justus, a fellow worker with Paul. Ephaphas, a servant of God. Archipus, take heed to the ministry thou has received.
Aphraroditus, a brother, a companion, messenger. Jason, Sosipter.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Nov 8, 2017 3:25:04 GMT -5
How often did Paul and those with him preach in synagogues? Every opportunity they could. It was Paul's custom like Jesus had done when he was alive on the earth. They took every opportunity to preach/teach in the synagogues to enlighten the fellow-Jews that He/Jesus is the Christ/anointed Messiah. They had good results many men and women became followers of Jesus. Apollo, became an apostle of Christ through the Synagogue missions.
My companions and I attended different churches, fellowships just like Paul and Jesus had done.
Do you mean you went to a church instead of meeting? Or do you mean Sunday morning meetings by different church fellowships? If you mean Jesus visited different denominations then that couldn't have been as Christianity was only just beginning so there was only one called, by others, The Sect of the Nazarens or something. I'm sure Jesus would not be preaching to draw people away from the the Christian Church, His church and Body of Christ. Synagogues are Jewish, not Christians or believers in Jesus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 8:13:13 GMT -5
Once, I WAS an apostle of 2&2ism. No doubt in my mind about that. Chosen and accepted by them in several countries, directed by them, teaching their doctrine sadly which I believed true without doubt. Like the FAA, my ticket was pulled by them when I left that “work” and I was no longer one of their “apostles.” The debate over whether or not I was one of them, is moot. Has no bearing in 2017 whatsoever. The same is true for many others.
Today, in 2017, I am NOT one of their “Apostles.” I have neither desire nor any inclination at all to promote them nor their “doctrine.” I simply am no longer one of their “apostles.”
Now then, if the God I worship, and believe in absolutely, views me as one if His “apostles,” surely that is up to Him, and what I or anyone else might think about it, is without bearing. In my mind, thought, whatever, He is Supreme! If He views me worthy enough to die for Him and His cause, then, that is my desire also. At age 75, crippled, unable for what I would long to be, I am simply not much of an offering! Undeniable, unworthy of anyone’s note, here nor anywhere!
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 8, 2017 9:56:34 GMT -5
Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers and men such as Epaphroditus and Titus? Yes. Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached the gospel. You've evaded the question in order to make an implied slur. Let's get past that. Please note that I said in principle. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers (note that I make no reference to any group association here) who preach the same gospel that Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 13:19:16 GMT -5
Once, I WAS an apostle of 2&2ism. No doubt in my mind about that. Chosen and accepted by them in several countries, directed by them, teaching their doctrine sadly which I believed true without doubt. Like the FAA, my ticket was pulled by them when I left that “work” and I was no longer one of their “apostles.” The debate over whether or not I was one of them, is moot. Has no bearing in 2017 whatsoever. The same is true for many others.
Today, in 2017, I am NOT one of their “Apostles.” I have neither desire nor any inclination at all to promote them nor their “doctrine.” I simply am no longer one of their “apostles.”
Now then, if the God I worship, and believe in absolutely, views me as one if His “apostles,” surely that is up to Him, and what I or anyone else might think about it, is without bearing. In my mind, thought, whatever, He is Supreme! If He views me worthy enough to die for Him and His cause, then, that is my desire also. At age 75, crippled, unable for what I would long to be, I am simply not much of an offering! Undeniable, unworthy of anyone’s note, here nor anywhere!
Take heart, I have no doubt with the little reading I have done of your posts you have a good heart. Your relationship with your God is your personal experience. Hold onto it with peace in your heart. Nothing greater than that peace & love, kindness and care to others. cheers.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Nov 8, 2017 13:52:24 GMT -5
At age 75, crippled, unable for what I would long to be, I am simply not much of an offering! Undeniable, unworthy of anyone’s note, here nor anywhere!IMO, this spoiled the rest of your post, Dennis. Dear Lord, an off'ring I would bring to Thee my Prophet, Priest and King; Though small and mean the gift may be, 'tis all I have to give to Thee. 'Tis all I have to give to Thee. Much like you said... but still willingly, cheerfully giving.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 8, 2017 17:31:18 GMT -5
Yes. Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached the gospel. You've evaded the question in order to make an implied slur. Let's get past that. Please note that I said in principle. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers (note that I make no reference to any group association here) who preach the same gospel that Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached? In principle any present day missionaries are doing the same work as Epaphroditus and Titus - being sent out to preach the Gospel of Christ. But you know that. What is your point?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Nov 8, 2017 18:46:43 GMT -5
You've evaded the question in order to make an implied slur. Let's get past that. Please note that I said in principle. Do you see a difference, in principle, between present-day workers (note that I make no reference to any group association here) who preach the same gospel that Epaphroditus and Titus would have preached? In principle any present day missionaries are doing the same work as Epaphroditus and Titus - being sent out to preach the Gospel of Christ. But you know that. What is your point? Epaphroditus is called an apostle. Doesn't it follow that the same word can apply to a present-day worker that is sent out to preach the gospel?
|
|
|
Post by joanna on Nov 8, 2017 18:52:21 GMT -5
elizabethcoleman How do you discern who has responded to a direct calling of the Holy Spirit?
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Nov 8, 2017 21:30:54 GMT -5
In principle any present day missionaries are doing the same work as Epaphroditus and Titus - being sent out to preach the Gospel of Christ. But you know that. What is your point? Epaphroditus is called an apostle. Doesn't it follow that the same word can apply to a present-day worker that is sent out to preach the gospel? Obviously this was going to be your next move on the chess board. But you already know what I think. I've made my position pretty plain.You haven't. Just be brave enough to state what you believe, and we can disagree if necessary. What do YOU believe an apostle is? Are the current day Two-by-Two workers apostles, and by what definition? Are Christians from other ministries also apostles, by your definition?
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Nov 8, 2017 22:20:29 GMT -5
Epaphroditus is called an apostle. Doesn't it follow that the same word can apply to a present-day worker that is sent out to preach the gospel? Same word can apply to anyone who has been formally sent out on a mission and even king herod and the pharisees sent out apostles and it makes a big difference who did the official sending and epaphroditus wasn't said to be an apostle of jesus and we are told different - the bible says he was commissioned/sent as an apostle by philemon the church at philippi.
|
|