Ephesian Church Left Their First Love for What or Whom?
01-01-2011, 11:04 PM
RE: Ephesian Church Left Their First Love for What or Whom?
I was just saying that since there are no longer any Apostles there is no need to try any spirits, is there? Anyone calling themselves an Apostle is wrong from the get go. I am sure the Ephesian church had a list of names of the 12 Apostles so it kind of escapes me why they were spending any time "trying" those who said they were Apostles when all they had to do was ask the person their name and check it against their list. I mean, 12 names are not hard to keep up with.
Today, the definition of Apostle has been changed and that is why many are accepting others as Apostles. Probably the same thing goes for Prophets.
If Prophets ended just like the Apostles did, then all we need to do is reject anyone that calls themselves Apostles and Prophets, right? Do you follow my logic? Why wouldn't Jesus just tell us to reject anyone that calls themself a Prophet rather than say "many false prophets shall arise" (Matt 24)?
I definitely recognize the increase of all the False Prophets and False Apostles. If Apostles are suppose to be exactly like the original 12, then I agree that ministry has ended and it seems that the Word teaches this. At least from the Scriptures that you provided and I cannot find any that say the contrary. So, I don't believe there are any Scriptures that support Apostles for today.
I know some people like to say that Watchman Nee was an Apostle in China, and I just wonder if they are just using that term for someone that started many churches. Does the NT have a term for a church planter (for lack of a better term). When the Mao Tse Tung purge came, Watchman and other elders laid hands on Witness Lee and a Sister (I don't know her name) and sent them to Taiwan to continue the church in China that had come to be known as the Little Flock. Unfortunately, Witness Lee went way off, started the Local Church cult and pretty much gathered people unto himself instead of pointing people to Jesus.
What I see today is that people use the term Apostle for a person that is a prolific church planter. I think this is a poor choice of words.
The conservative end of this is people calling themselves Apostles if they plant churches and the extreme end is people calling themselves Apostles if they do everything that the original 12 did (at least they think so), except write inspired scriptures.
At one time I used the word Apostle for someone that was used of God mightily to raise up churches in Nepal, but I don't do that anymore. I just think it is confusing, draws attention to man and does not agree with the Scriptures.
People use giftings today as titles and they do this to gain preeminence over other men and women.
I see two places in the NT where Preeminence is used and the contrast is very revealing.
Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.
3Jn 1:9 I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not.
Diotrephes reminds me of the times we live in today. He would not even receive the Apostle John and I believe many so-called leaders today would not receive Jesus, let alone John.
Why can't we all just be brothers and sisters?
Well thanks for listening and your feedback.
Jer 12:5 If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, then how canst thou contend with horses? and if in the land of peace, wherein thou trustedst, they wearied thee, then how wilt thou do in the swelling of Jordan?
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)