Do we have Apostles in the Church Today?

DO WE HAVE APOSTLES IN THE CHURCH TODAY?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

In contemporary Christianity, some Pentecostal and charismatic church preachers refer to themselves as apostles. Evangelical traditions however insist that there is no living apostles in the church today and that apostolic office ceased after the New Testament church period. Which position represents the biblical standing on this issue? Do we have living apostles today?

My view is that there are no apostles in the church today. I will proceed to outline my theological argument in support of this conclusion.

First, the total number of apostles called by Christ was initially 12 in number. Mathias was appointed by the Jerusalem Church to replace Judas Iscariot. This replacement was predicted by Psalm 65:25; 109:8. The two Scriptures were cited by Peter as an authority for the replacement of Judas.

Secondly, Paul was later called by Christ in person in as an apostle to the Gentiles (Acts 9:1-19). This brought the number of persons appointed to apostolic office to 13. This number however declined to 12 following the martyrdom of apostle James (Acts 12:2). Did Paul perhaps replace apostle James?

Thirdly, Apostle Peter was the head of the Jerusalem church under an apostolic council consisting of himself, Apostle John, and James the half brother of Jesus who was not originally ranked among the apostles of Jesus. There is no biblical or historical evidence that this apostolic council was perpetually maintained beyond the New Testament church period. 

Fourthly, during the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15, James the half brother of our Lord Jesus Christ had risen to ecclesial prominence and was tasked with presenting the resolutions of the Council. Despite his overarching influence, James was nowhere described or introduced in Scripture as an apostle of Jesus Christ.

Fifthly, James the half brother of Jesus later wrote the Epistle of James in which he never laid any claim to apostolic stature. Besides, none of the early church fathers considered James as an apostle of Jesus. He was therefore not an apostle of Jesus Christ within the meaning of Acts 1:21-22.

QUALIFICATIONS FOR APOSTOLIC OFFICE

Now let us return to the passage of context of Acts 1:1-23. This text outlines the circumstances under which Mathias was appointed by the Jerusalem church to replace Judas. The rules for the appointment of an apostle are spelt by Peter in Acts 1:21-22 where Scripture teaches that a person who qualifies for appointment to apostolic office must satisfy the following requirements:

A) The candidate must be "one who accompanied us". This implies that the candidate should have been a member of the Jerusalem Christian community during the New Testament church age. He should have been identified with the disciples from the commencement of Jesus' earthly ministry, starting with the baptism of John until the ascension of Jesus Christ.

B) He must have witnessed the Risen Christ in person. Justus and Mathias met these requirements and Matthias was picked through the casting of lots. Several other disciples could have satisfied the requirements as well but only one was required to replace Judas. Little is heard of Matthias beyond his appointment as an apostle in Acts. What became of him? Some early church sources suggest that he may have been martyred shortly after his appointment. Scripture is however silent on his fate. 

Unfortunately, none of the present day claimants to the title and office of apostle can meet the strict requirements set out in the above passage! At best, they may perhaps qualify as bishops.

Should church missionaries and church planters be considered as apostles? 

Some have argued that Christian missionaries and church founders should be recognized as apostles sent by Jesus and that they should fall into the stature of the New Testament apostles. They insist that since these "missionary apostles" were appointed and sent by the Holy Spirit, they should be recognized as legitimate holders of the apostolic mantle.

Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Tychicus, Priscilla, Aquila Apollos and several other Christian missionaries and disciples mentioned in the New Testament Scripture were led by the Holy Spirit in their missionary journeys. There is however no reference to their apostolic stature in Scripture, not even in Romans 16. None of the prominent ministers listed in that passage such as Phoebe, Priscilla and Aquila, Epaenetus, Mary, Andronicus and Junias are introduced as apostles. One rule of biblical interpretation is that Scripture should not be compelled to speak out of silence!

Paul was careful in his letters to reveal his apostolic stature in the salutation sections. He however used other references to introduce his fellow ministers such as Timothy or Titus that he fondly referred to as "faithful minister", "beloved brother" or "yokefellow". This distinction was significant. These ministry companions of Paul were not called by Christ into apostolic office and could therefore not be identified as apostles of Jesus Christ within the context of Acts 1:1-23 or Acts 9.

Only four of these non apostolic ministers wrote New Testament Scriptures. These are Mark, Luke, James and Jude. The latter two respectively introduce themselves as "a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ" (James 1:1, NKJV) and "a bondservant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James" (Jude 1:1, NKJV). Some scholars attribute the authorship of  the Letter of Hebrews to Barnabas but this claim cannot be conclusively verified from Scripture. 

CONCLUSION

It appears from our analysis that church ministers who today adorn apostolic titles may have misread the Scriptures. They have watered down the distinction between those sent into church missionary service, including evangelists, and those specifically called into apostolic office by Jesus Christ in person in accordance with the rule set out in Acts 1:21-22. Only Paul's case was exceptional as can be identified in Acts 9:1-19. Paul was called by the Risen Christ in person and his apostolic stature is affirmed in Scripture. No other person was appointed in this manner. 

There is also no evidence in Scripture to suggest that the Holy Spirit calls leaders into apostolic office. The Holy Spirit simply leads us in our walk with God and in our ministry service. The fact that the Holy Spirit spoke concerning the setting apart of Paul and Barnabas for a specific ministry assignment in Acts 13:1-3 does not constitute an apostolic recognition for the two. If this were the case, why was Barnabas not henceforth referred to as an apostle alongside Paul?

If we ignore the rules outlined in Scripture, we shall end up distorting biblical truth. My humble submission is that there are no living apostles in the church today in so far the revelation of New Testament Scripture is concerned. Accordingly therefore, I submit that the office of apostle ceased after the New Testament period. There is no historical evidence of apostolic succession after the New Testament Church period. None of the church fathers in the Patristic, Medieval, or Reformation church ages made any mention of an Apostle serving in their time.

The requirements for persons to be appointed to the office of Bishop/Overseer and Deacon are distinctly outlined in 1Timothy 3:1-13 and in Titus 1:6-7. Even under these passages, no mention is made of the appointment of apostles in New Testament church. The mention of the office of apostle in Ephesians 4:11 along with other church ministry offices cannot be a justification for continued apostolic office. This would violate the authority of Acts 1 and Acts 9. It is instructive that Letter to the Letter to the Ephesians was written in the early period of the New Testament church [circa 60-62 AD] when most of the New Testament apostles were still alive and were rightfully part of the New Testament Church officers.

It is my hope that this article has attempted to address the apostolic question from a faithful interpretation of Scripture. 

Shalom 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2019