|
FurGodWurLivin -> RE: five fold ministry! (4/24/2008 6:00:08 PM)
|
quote:
Actually it says "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, " (ESV)
It's just a further description. The point there is still the foundation is established. We don't need an "Apostle Johnny" to go shine it up. The problem is that your argument now has two foundations for the church. You say that there can be no foundation except that which is already laid (meaning Christ) and that the church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. The point is that these premises are mutually exclusive.quote:
Since Mark is understood to be associated with Peter, and Luke with Paul, I don't see how you're implying that the foundation was laid by others? I'm saying that the four Gospels were not all penned by Apostles. Luke takes credit for his own work (as mentioned in Luke 1 and Acts 1), and it is only supposed that Mark learned his writings from Peter. I've heard several different theories about who Mark was and they all had convincing arguments.quote:
If you read about the deaths of the Apostles you will find some downtrodden peoples were pretty good with swords, arrows and skinning knives. Who knows where we'd all be if they hadn't rejected the Gospel? Reeeeeed herriiiiiiiiiiiing........................ The Apostles were fishermen, not scholars (excluding Paul). The hope of the second coming speaks the greatest comfort to the poor and oppressed because of Christ coming to bring justice. My point is that the Bible was written in common Greek (many scholars say that it was the common language of the everyday people) and not Aristocratic Greek. It is written specifically for the common people.quote:
No, but it goes to the motivations of those who would rule over the people. Not universally. That is a judgement call nobody is qualified to make. I have known several people who were in leadership in a church who were not specifically seeking to be in charge.quote:
I'm sure I'll be impressed when I meet some. The prophets I've heard leave me mostly unconvinced, while the one apostle I've heard about put me to sleep in my pew. Once again, this does not necessitate the idea that the Apostolic and Prophetic have stopped. All it means is that you have seen some fakers.quote:
Yeah in a city of two hundred, maybe. Hardly. Ephesus and Corinth were two of the biggest seaports in the ancient world. The point is that the Bible makes the argument that the congregations in a city count as "the church" in that city.quote:
Yeah since the 1940's they have. Who ordained Peter, Paul, John, James, or Matthew as Apostles? Isaiah had to make the claim that he was a prophet based on a "subjective prophetic experience", as did Jeremiah, Joel, and several other OT prophets.quote:
Bonke and Baker are apostles? I would believe that they are. That is my personal opinion, and I'm not crushed if I'm wrong... frankly, I really don't care about titles.quote:
I think the difference in what we're posting is that mostly you're presenting a conceptual arguement for the (modern) offices of apostle and prophet and I'm trying to point out how badly modern apostles and prophets turn out. So we aren't even having an argument. I'm trying to answer the topic raised by the OP... so why are you arguing with me, then? I agree, there are a lot of people bearing the title of Apostle like it's a merit badge that are completely off the road. However, that fact does not shake the biblical foundation of the Apostolic ministry.
Adam
|
|
|
|