It is almost 100 years since Roland Allen published his at the time intensely controversial book, Missionary Methods, ours or St Pauls?  It is a book that has been strikingly influential with today both those from the “missional” wing of the church and is still cited and read both by those who advocate a return to the “New Testament Model of the Church” and modern day apostles.  It is a book that is well worth reading, but it is one that even if you have not read it, the chances are high that you have been influenced by ideas made popular by it:

More than likely, you have been influenced by Roland Allen if you:

have ever talked about church planting movements

have pondered church multiplication

believe churches can be indigenous from the moment of their birth

have considered the role of the Holy Spirit in new churches and in missionaries

have despised the thought of supporting paternalism

have realized that church leaders can be both thoroughly biblical and effective without lengthy periods of training (divorced from their people) and without financial support from sources beyond their churches

have advocated that Spirit-empowered national believers generally are able to carry the gospel farther and faster than missionaries can among those nationals

have believed the missionary practices of the New Testament Church reveal principles that are applicable today, and not simply a description of an Age long gone

READ MORE at Missiologically Thinking » Roland Allen: Part 1, The Man.

I had a fantastic weekend listening to the man I am officially nicknaming “the Gentle Prophet.” If you are intrigued as to what a non-freaky modern day prophetic ministry could look like, this video sermon is well worth a watch:

Download options at Hearing the Holy Spirit for Yourself – Keith Hazel.

Yesterday I promised to blog about the two other speakers at the next 300 Leaders conference. Dave Devenish should be no stranger to regular readers of this blog, as I have serialised a chapter of his outstanding book Fathering Leaders, Motivating Mission, and interviewed him. His is a remarkable man who gave up a successful career in international banking to serve Jesus. Content to minister alongside Terry Virgo, he has been a massive part of what God has been doing through Newfrontiers for decades. He has seen churches planted in many nations. His recent book, based on teaching he has been developing for years, has helped bring definition to church oversight. If you have ever heard people speak about apostles today and wondered what they mean by that, coming to 300 leaders to hear Dave preach will massively benefit you. If you are already part of an apostolic movement (which Stetzer has observed are growing in influence globally) you will learn how this gift can help you connect with the global mission God has called his church to. Whatever your church background, this next 300 leaders will be a great benefit to you.

Those who have wondered what the future holds for Newfrontiers now that Terry Virgo has laid down his day-to-day leadership of our movement will do well to hear from Mike Betts. Mike is one of a significant number of apostolic figures that were recognised at our final conference in Brighton. Over the last few years Mike has established a group of churches that relate together, and reach out on mission. It is this gathering together of churches to serve the mission of God that is a key gift that we need to see released more and more. The future of Newfrontiers is secure because God is raising up many like Mike who will care for the established churches, and drive missional expansion. Mike has also developed a real strength in working closely with prophetic ministry and will be sharing about how this partnership can propel us into mission.

The need of our nation is urgent. The call for churches to grow and plant other churches is strong. I am convinced that this day conference will help us. I hope to see you there!

The following post is from Fathering Leaders, Motivating Mission by David Devenish, copyright 2011 reproduced with permission from Authentic Media.

Those who are recognized as apostles by particular church networks are sometimes accused of making themselves equivalent to Paul or Peter, but this is not the case. In the similar context of prophets today, Jack Deere says:

It is simply not reasonable to insist that all miraculous spiritual gifts equal those of the apostles in their intensity or strength in order to be perceived as legitimate gifts of the Holy Spirit. No one would insist on this for the non-miraculous gifts like teaching or evangelism. For example, what person in the history of the church since Paul has been as gifted a teacher to the body of Christ? Luther? Calvin? Who today would claim to be Paul’s equal as a teacher? I do not know of anyone who would make such a claim for the past or the present. Therefore, since no one has arisen with the gift of teaching that is equal to the apostle Paul’s, should we conclude that the gift of teaching was withdrawn from the church? Likewise, should we assume that everyone who has a gift of evangelism is going to evangelize like the apostle Paul? Who has planted as many churches or started as many new works with the depth and the authority that the apostle Paul did? We can admit to varying degrees of intensity and quality in gifts of evangelism, in gifts of teaching, and in other gifts. Why can’t we do that with the gift of healing? Or the gift of miracles? Or the gift of prophecy?37

To be fair, Jack Deere does not make the connection, but surely we could add ‘or the gift of an apostle?’.

Another factor to consider is that the New Testament warns against receiving ‘false apostles’. If it was known and accepted that there was a fixed group of apostles, then this warning would hardly have been necessary.

Clearly there were more apostles and prophets than just the twelve and Paul, and so churches needed to be able to distinguish between genuine and false ones. This was also the case a little later in church history, as the Didache (dating from the end of the first century or beginning of the second) records:

‘Concerning apostles and prophets, act thus according to the ordinance of the gospel. Let every apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord . . . But let him not stay more than one day, or if need be a second as well; but if he stay three days he is a false prophet.’38

I do not know why length of stay was taken as a measure of an apostle or prophet’s genuineness, and I am not suggesting that in a relational context such guests should only stay for two days! This quotation, however, does indicate that the ministries of apostles and prophets continued after the completion of the New Testament, and that there was an ongoing need to discern between the false and the genuine.

Needed for the Church Today

Pragmatically, there is an evident need for the continuation of many of the functions of the original apostles. This would include church planting, laying good foundations in churches, continuing to oversee those churches, appointing the leaders, giving ongoing fatherly care to leaders, and handling difficult questions that may arise from those churches. There are really only three ways for churches to carry out these functions:

1. Each church is free to act totally independently and to seek God’s mind for its own government and pastoral wisdom, without any help from outside, unless the church may choose to seek it at any particular time.

When we started the church which I am still a part of, for example, we were so concerned to be ‘independent’ that we would not even join the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches, although we adopted their trust deed and constitution because that would prevent us being purely independent. We were at that time very proud of our ‘independence’!

2. Churches operate under some sort of structured and formal oversight, as in many denominations today, where local church leaders are appointed by and accountable to regional leadership, whether ‘bishops’, ‘superintendents’ or ‘overseers’. It is hard to justify this model from the pages of the New Testament, though we recognize that it developed very early in church history. Even the word episkopos, translated ‘bishop’ or ‘overseer’, which came to be used of those having wider authority and oversight over other leaders and churches, was used in the New Testament as a synonym for the local leaders or elders of a particular church.

The three main forms of church government current in the institutional church are Episcopalianism (government by bishops), Presbyterianism (government by local elders) and Congregationalism (government by the church meeting). Each of these is only a partial reflection of the New Testament. Commenting on these forms of government without apostolic ministry, Phil Greenslade says,

‘We assert as our starting point what the other three viewpoints deny: that the apostolic role is as valid and vital today as ever before. This is to agree with the German charismatic theologian, Arnold Bittlinger, when he says “the New Testament nowhere suggests that the apostolic ministry was intended only for first-century Christians”.’39

3. We aim to imitate the New Testament practice of travelling ministries of apostles and prophets, with apostles having their own spheres of responsibility as a result of having planted and laid the foundations in the churches they oversee. Such ministries continue the connection with local churches as a result of fatherly relationships and not denominational election or appointment, recognizing that there will need to be new charismatically gifted and friendship-based relationships continuing into later generations.

This is the model that the ‘New Apostolic Reformation’ (to use Peter Wagner’s phrase) is attempting to follow. Though mistakes have been made, including some quite serious ones involving controlling authority, and though those of us involved are still seeking to find our way with the Holy Spirit’s help, it seems to reflect more accurately the New Testament pattern and a present-day outworking of scriptures such as 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4.

‘Is the building finished? Is the Bride ready? Is the Body full-grown, are the saints completely equipped? Has the church attained its ordained unity and maturity? Only if the answer to these questions is “yes” can we dispense with apostolic ministry. But as long as the church is still growing up into Christ, who is its head, this ministry is needed. If the church of Jesus Christ is to grow faster than the twentieth century population explosion, which I assume to be God’s intention, then we will need to produce, recognize and use Pauline apostles.’40

In summary, I believe that a strong case can be made for apostolic ministry continuing today, while also recognizing the unique role of the original apostles who witnessed the resurrection, and while thoroughly submitting to the truth revealed in the pages of the New Testament and seeing that truth as God’s final revelation. There is surely more support in the pages of the New Testament for relational oversight of churches than for denominational structures, and it seems to me preferable to use the Ephesians 4 terminology of the fivefold ministries equipping the churches, rather than to resort to Episcopal designations or their equivalents in other denominations.

If, however, my thesis has not yet convinced the reader, please read on. Even if some of my readers cannot share my convictions about the continuing relevance of apostolic ministry gifts, I believe that the principles contained in this book for the planting and oversight of churches are very important for the future of the church and of world mission.

Footnotes

37   Jack Deere, Surprised by the Power of the Spirit (Kingsway, 1994), p. 67.

38 Quoted in Michael Green, I Believe in the Holy Spirit (Hodder & Stoughton, 1978), p. 190.

39  Philip Greenslade, Leadership (Marshalls, 1984), pp. 142–3.

40 Greenslade, Leadership, p. 143.

The following post is from Fathering Leaders, Motivating Mission by David Devenish, copyright 2011 reproduced with permission from Authentic Media.

Witnesses of the Resurrection?

What then about the claim that to be an apostle someone must have seen Jesus in his resurrection? This assertion is based on 1 Corinthians 9, where Paul is justifying his apostleship to a church that was beginning to question it. Paul there makes a series of four assertions of his apostleship to the Corinthian church: ‘Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not the result of my work in the Lord?’

Firstly, ‘Am I not free?’ is a reference not just to his apostleship but to his freedom from the Jewish law and also a freedom to conform to aspects of the Jewish law in order to win Jewish people. Secondly, ‘Am I not an apostle?’ must refer to the commissioning that he had asserted on several occasions. He then says, thirdly, ‘Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?’ It is hard to argue from this that this is the necessary proof for all time of somebody having the gift and ministry of an apostle. There were others who also saw Jesus’ resurrection but were not called apostles, for example, ‘five hundred brethren at once’. His last statement refers to the fruit of his apostleship. In this context he states that even though he may not be an apostle to others, he must be an apostle to the Corinthians because he founded their church. Surely if the main qualification was that he had seen the resurrected Jesus then he would be an apostle to all. As Gordon Fee points out,

‘Since others who saw the Risen Lord did not become apostles, what most likely legitimized his apostleship was the accompanying commissioning. Although he does not say so here, in Galatians 1:16 the revelation of the Son of God is accompanied by its purpose, “that I might preach him among the Gentiles”.’27

Gordon Fee goes on to add:

Can anything be said in our day about ‘apostles’? Given the two criteria expressed here [seeing the risen Christ and having effectively planted churches], one would have to allow that apostles do not exist in the sense that Paul defines his own ministry. But it should also be noted that this might be too narrow a view, based strictly on Paul’s own personal experience. His more functional understanding of apostleship would certainly have its modern counterpart in those who found and lead churches in unevangelized areas. Only when ‘apostle’ is used in a non-Pauline sense of ‘guarantors of the traditions’ would usage be narrowed to the first century.28

This is really the point. Evangelicals who believe, as I do, that apostles exist today, strongly affirm that the canon of Scripture is complete and establishes the full truth that God has revealed to us, but are also convinced that the ministry of church planting and laying good foundations in churches and the authority (as we will see later) to oversee those churches needs to continue – subject, of course, to the overriding authority of Scripture.

Furthermore, Ephesians 4 is not the only scripture which speaks of the apostle alongside other gifts in relation to the life of the church. Paul gives several lists of spiritual gifts. Sometimes these are the gifts to the church of a person or ministry or office, as in Ephesians 4; sometimes they are charismatic gifts of particular supernatural abilities, as in 1 Corinthians 12:8–10 – ‘To one there is given through the Spirit the message of wisdom . . .’ etc. In some cases, however, Paul mixes the two. For example, after he has explained the charismatic gifts in the context of the one body of Christ, he goes on to say that God has appointed certain people as gifts to the church: apostles, prophets, teachers, workers of miracles, etc. He then raises a question in relation to both categories of gift: Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all work miracles? It would be strange if Paul listed apostles alongside all the other gifts in this context, if it was clearly understood that the only apostles were those who had witnessed the resurrection. Gordon Fee comments:

For Paul this is both a ‘functional’ and ‘positional/official’ term. In keeping with the other members on this list, it is primarily ‘functional’ here, probably anticipating the concern for the ‘building up’ of the body that is already hinted at in verse 7 and was stressed in chapter 14. Most likely with this word he is reflecting on his own ministry in the church; the plural is in deference to others who would have the same ministry in other churches.29

Flexible Usage in the New Testament

Another basis for my belief in the continuing ministry of apostles is that the term ‘apostle’ is used more flexibly in the New Testament than is sometimes taken into account. Those who justify the continuation of apostles today often see three different ways in which the term is used in the New Testament – three categories of apostle, if you like:

1. Jesus Christ himself is described as ‘the apostle and high priest whom we confess’.30 He was the Messiah, the One supremely sent to accomplish our redemption from sin and the restoration of everything lost through the fall and its effect on the whole of creation.

2. The twelve – the apostles of the resurrection and foundational to the whole church throughout history, whose names are symbolically on the foundations of the eschatological New Jerusalem.

3. The apostles of the ascended Christ, according to Ephesians 4:11, given (alongside other leadership gifts) to equip the church until it comes to maturity and unity. Terry Virgo helpfully clarifies the distinction from category 2 above: ‘They were not witnesses of His resurrection but gifts of His ascension.’31

C.K. Barrett extends this concept to ‘at least eight persons or groups of persons denoted with varying degrees of propriety, by the term “apostles” and probably all giving it somewhat different meaning’.32 Barrett’s categories include:

• the original group called the ‘twelve’ founder members of the church in Jerusalem
• the ‘pillars’ Peter, John and James (not one of the twelve)
• Peter’s work away from Jerusalem – moving an understanding of apostleship for Peter in a Pauline direction
• John similarly
• those sent out by the Jerusalem leaders (the equivalent of the ‘agents’ of non-Christian Jewish leaders), with whom Paul had some problems 33
• Paul himself
• those in the Pauline circle, e.g. Barnabas, Apollos, Andronicus, Junias
• the ‘apostles’ of the churches34

Of these categories, the penultimate one is of particular importance in our argument, as it includes Apollos and Barnabas, both of whom are described as ‘apostles’, but neither of whom is recorded as having seen the risen Lord; indeed it would have been impossible in the case of Apollos, who was in Corinth and Asia Minor, and most unlikely in the case of Barnabas. So there were apostles that we know about in Scripture who were neither part of the twelve nor a special addition with special qualifications, like Paul.

Furthermore, the fact that the word ‘apostle’ was used in Judaism and more widely in Greek (as we will see in the next chapter) can take away the ‘mystique’ of the word as applied to only a few. If, for example, we translated the term by the modern words ‘envoy’ or ‘messenger’, would that not help us? Sometimes the word apostolos is translated ‘messenger’ or ‘representative’. This is often explained as being a totally different category, but I would argue that it illustrates the flexibility with which the word is used to describe an office which is very important for the church – in all ages. Although I think his use of the term ‘prophetic’ is confusing, I believe Herbert Lockyer gives the correct slant on this when he says,

‘The apostolate, then, was not a limited circle of officials holding a well-defined position of authority in the church, but a large class of men who discharged one – and that the highest – of the functions of the prophetic ministry (1 Corinthians 12:28, Ephesians 4:11).’35

Given all these varied references to apostles in the New Testament churches, it is not justifiable, in my view, to deny the validity of apostolic ministry today. As Dave Harvey of Sovereign Grace Ministries, an apostolic network in the USA, expresses it:

Many evangelicals today resonate with the conviction and logic of O. Palmer Robertson, who said, ‘Nothing in scripture explicitly indicates that the apostolate ever would come to an end. Yet it is generally recognized that no one in the church today functions with the authority of the original apostles . . .’ To paraphrase this common perspective, present-day apostles may be unpopular, but they are not unscriptural. While Sovereign Grace Ministries heartily agrees that ‘no one in the church today functions with the authority of the original apostles,’ let us not hastily extrapolate on Dr Robertson’s phrase to conclude that no one today functions as an apostle of any kind. Such a conclusion inflicts considerable harm on attempts to build the church and preach the gospel.36

Footnotes

27 Gordon Fee, NICNT: The First Epistle to the Corinthians (W.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1987), p. 395.

28  Fee, Corinthians, NICNT, p. 397.

29  Fee, Corinthians, p. 620.

30    Heb. 3:1.

31 Newfrontiers Magazine, Issue 04: September–November 2003, p. 8.

32  Barrett, Signs, p. 72.

33   Gal. 2:12.

34   2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25.

35    Herbert Lockyer, All the Apostles of the Bible (Zondervan, 1972), p. 183.

36    Dave Harvey, Polity – Serving and Leading the Local Church (Sovereign Grace Ministries, 2004), pp. 17–18.

The following post is from Fathering Leaders, Motivating Mission by David Devenish, copyright 2011 reproduced with permission from Authentic Media.

Only Some of the Ministries Continue Today?

We now turn to the third view: that the gifts of the Holy Spirit still continue today, but not the gift of the apostle. This view acknowledges that all five ministry gifts of Ephesians 4:11 were given by the ascended Lord Jesus to the church at the beginning, but contends that not all of those gifts continue today. Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones, for example, taught that only the pastor/teacher continues today. He argued that not only did the apostle and prophet disappear after the first century, but so did the evangelist. The evangelist, he said,

‘supplemented the work of the apostles and extended it and caused it to spread and become established. Thus the evangelist was a man whose office was temporary, and as the churches were established and became more settled, this office likewise disappeared.’22

Those given a special call to preach the gospel today were not, in his view, ‘evangelists’ in the New Testament sense of the word but rather ‘exhorters’, as apparently they were known in the UK in the eighteenth century. It was necessary, he maintained, for an apostle to have witnessed Christ’s resurrection, to have been commissioned to his work by the risen Lord himself in person, and to be a man with supernatural revelation of the truth, so that he could speak not only with authority but also infallibly.

Wayne Grudem, in his book Systematic Theology, argues for the continuation of prophet, evangelist, pastor and teacher, but not apostle. He says:

‘The two qualifications for being an apostle were: (1) having seen Jesus after His resurrection with one’s own eyes (thus, being an “eyewitness of the resurrection”), and (2) having been specifically commissioned by Christ as His apostle.’23

J.B. Lightfoot, in his classic essay to which I have already referred, argues the same case. Wayne Grudem does point out:

‘Today some people use the word apostle in a very broad sense to refer to an effective church planter, or to a significant missionary pioneer (“William Carey was an apostle to India,” for example). If we use the word apostle in this broad sense everyone would agree that there are still apostles today – for there are certainly effective missionaries and church planters today.’

He proposes, however, that it is inappropriate and unhelpful to use the word, because it causes confusion between the roles of New Testament apostles and contemporary church planters and evangelists, and implies a desire for ‘more authority in the church than any one person should rightfully have’.24

So in the face of these strong arguments, why do I believe that the gift of the apostle continues today?

Given to the Church in Each Generation?

One of the key passages to be debated is Ephesians 4:11–13:

It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

This chapter seems to speak to the continuing needs of the church throughout its history, and not just its initial first-century foundations. The five-fold ministries were given by the ascended Christ as love gifts to the church for a particular purpose, namely that God’s people would be equipped or prepared for works of service, so that the body of Christ might be built up. This need continues until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. The chapter defines maturity as not being like children (i.e. immature), tossed about by every strange doctrine, and it notes that the body of the church learns to build itself up in love as each member of the body functions as it should.

This equipping ministry is surely needed in every generation, and it is not a natural reading of the passage to assume that there is a distinction between gifts that should continue to perform this equipping function and gifts that should not. The differing views of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones and Wayne Grudem on this point illustrate the unsatisfactory results of attempting to make such a distinction. It is true, as Wayne Grudem emphasizes, that the word ‘gave’ in relation to the ascended Christ is past tense and refers to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit with his gifts when Christ ascended on high; but surely all gifts continue to come from the ascended Christ to his church and his ministers. It seems to me a more natural reading of Ephesians 4 to assume that the church in each generation needs the gifts of the ascended Christ, just as it needs and is promised the power of the Holy Spirit, similarly given from the ascended Christ. Though the day of Pentecost was the first pouring out of the Holy Spirit, it was not one single event for all time, as the verse ‘The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off – for all whom the Lord our God will call’25 makes clear, but an ongoing promise of forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

The whole tone of Ephesians 4 seems to suggest something both dynamic and normative for the church at all times. As Markus Barth writes:

In 4:11 it is assumed that the church at all times needs the witness of ‘apostles’ and ‘prophets’. The author of this epistle did not anticipate that the inspired and enthusiastic ministry was to be absorbed by, and ‘disappear’ into, offices and officers bare of the Holy Spirit and resentful of any reference to spiritual things. Ephesians 4 does not contain the faintest hint that the charismatic character of all church ministries was restricted to a certain period of church history and was later to die out.26

Footnotes

22 Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Christian Unity and Exposition of Ephesians 4:1–16 (Baker Publishing Group, 1981) p. 192.

23  Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (IVP and Zondervan, 1994), p. 906.

24  Grudem, Systematic Theology, p. 911.

25    Acts 2:39.

26   Markus Barth, Ephesians 4–6 (Doubleday 1974), p. 437.

The following post is from Fathering Leaders, Motivating Mission by David Devenish, copyright 2011 reproduced with permission from Authentic Media.

Many years ago, my wife and I were leading a walking holiday in the Lake District (a beautiful region of northern England) with the youth group in our church. We had been joined by a lad, a friend of one of our young people, who had no previous knowledge of Christianity and certainly not of Christian jargon.

We held Bible studies each evening and had been looking at one of Paul’s letters. On one of the walks, this young lad asked to speak privately to me. We walked ahead of the others and I was excited by the prospect of him perhaps asking important questions about the Christian faith or even of my being able to lead him to the Lord. He said he had been trying to follow our Bible studies but had one major question: ‘What is the difference between an epistle and an apostle?’ He said he had become quite confused on this subject! Of course, I hid my disappointment and answered the question. (Praise God – a few weeks later he committed his life to the Lord and is still walking with God today.)

This teenager’s question is akin to one of the explanations often given of why we no longer have apostles today: ‘We have the Epistles, so we do not need Apostles.’ The argument is that one of the prime reasons for Christ appointing the apostles was so that the New Testament could be written, and once it was complete there was no further need for apostolic ministry. Obviously it is true that the final truths of Scripture were committed to the first-generation church and have been preserved for us in what we know as the New Testament. Jesus said to his twelve apostles, ‘When he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth.’1 While that Scripture by extension means that we can all know the help of the Holy Spirit to understand the truths of Scripture, nevertheless its primary meaning was that the Holy Spirit would lead those original apostles into all truth – all the truth we need now for our instruction, correction and training, and which is contained in the New Testament. However, it must be pointed out that most of the apostles did not contribute to the writing of the New Testament and that a significant part of it was written by Luke, who, although for a time part of Paul’s apostolic team, was never described as an apostle himself. Thus we can see from the outset that being an apostle is not synonymous with being a writer of Scripture.

Different Views

There are four views of apostles that I want to examine in this chapter. They are as follows:

1. Most of the gifts of the Holy Spirit described in the New Testament ceased after the first century, including the gift of the apostle.

2. The apostles were a very small group of people, comprising the twelve and the apostle Paul. (Some have even argued that the original eleven got it wrong in Acts 1 when they appointed Matthias, and should have waited for Paul.)

3. There were many more apostles in the time of the New Testament, and most spiritual gifts continue today, but not the gift or office of the apostle.

4. All the gifts of the Holy Spirit in New Testament times continue today, including the gift of the apostle.

No Longer Needed?

The first view, that the revelatory and sign gifts have ceased, is based on a particular interpretation of Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians: ‘But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.’2 The Greek phrase translated ‘perfection’ (or ‘the perfect’ in some translations) is to teleion, which is an adjective related to the verb teleioo, meaning ‘to bring to an end, to complete’. It also carries the additional meaning ‘to make perfect’ or ‘to be perfect’. God is so described in Matthew 5:48, where it can only mean ‘perfect’. The same word, however, is used in Ephesians 4:13 in the context of the role of the leadership gifts to equip the church, where it is translated ‘mature’. This first view suggests that ‘the perfect’ in 1 Corinthians 13 refers to the full revelation given in the New Testament, and that once this was complete, there was no further need for the partial forms of charismatic revelation manifested in particular revelatory gifts such as prophecy. The classic exposition of this view was made by B.B. Warfield3 and is reflected in much contemporary reformed and dispensationalist theology.

The problem with this view is that it could not have been understood in this way by those to whom Paul was originally writing. Gordon Fee puts it this way: ‘Paul’s distinctions are between “now” and “then”, between what is incomplete (though perfectly appropriate to the church’s present existence) and what is complete (when its final destiny in Christ has been reached and “we see face to face” and “know as we are known”).’4 In other words, ‘the perfect’ is an eschatological reference to the time when Jesus returns and the final purposes of God’s saving work in Christ will have been accomplished. Spiritual gifts will then no longer be necessary for the building up of the church.

Another variant of this first view is that ‘the perfect’ does not refer to the completion of the New Testament but to the maturity of the church which occurred when more regular clergy had arisen and became the norm for established church life. Fee comments very astutely:

It is perhaps an indictment of Western Christianity that we should consider ‘mature’ our rather cerebral and domesticated – but bland – brand of faith, with the concomitant absence of the Spirit in terms of his supernatural gifts! The Spirit, not Western rationalism, marks the turning of the ages, after all; and to deny the Spirit’s manifestations is to deny our present existence to be eschatological, as belonging to the beginning of the time of the End.5

Maturity certainly implies not just ‘regular clergy’ etc. having been established, but the bringing to maturity of the church in every generation as a result of the equipping work of leadership gifts described in Ephesians 4.

A Limited Number of Apostles?

The second view confines the use of the term ‘apostle’ to the twelve and Paul, and regards the appointment of Matthias6 to replace Judas Iscariot as a mistake on the part of the eleven remaining apostles. However, the New Testament nowhere teaches that the eleven were wrong to appoint Matthias and should have waited for Paul. Although the casting of lots was not a normal means of obtaining guidance in the church after the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (though it has been employed by some, for example, John Wesley), it could nevertheless be followed in faith at that time, on the basis of scriptures such as Proverbs 16:33. Furthermore, the qualification for being one of the twelve was not only having witnessed Christ’s resurrection, but also having been with Jesus from the beginning of his earthly ministry at the baptism of John until his ascension. It was important that there should be witnesses to Jesus’ life and ministry, as well as to his death and resurrection, all of which are now recorded for us in the four gospels. There is no evidence at all that Paul would have qualified for this. All we know of him at this time is that he was being taught at the feet of Gamaliel.7

The New Testament text itself refers to several others as apostles, and for some of these, too, there is no evidence that they witnessed Jesus’ ministry, death and resurrection. They are as follows:

• Andronicus and Junias.8 ␣
• Apollos.9 ␣
• Barnabas.10
• Epaphroditus (though this reference is usually translated ‘messenger’, a point that we will examine later).11
• James – the half-brother of Jesus.12 ␣
• Silas.13 ␣
• Timothy (though some would argue that Paul specifically excludes Timothy from this role by his reference to him as a brother, but that is a moot point).14

‘All the apostles’ who received a resurrection appearance from Jesus are distinguished from the twelve and Paul.15 The fact that the church had to be on the lookout for false apostles would not have been an issue if the apostolate was restricted to the twelve and Paul.16 The visiting preachers who caused such problems to Paul in Corinth are described somewhat ironically as ‘super-apostles’,17 so it seems that they were taking the title of ‘apostle’ on themselves, relying on self-advertising oratory rather than the humility demonstrated by genuine apostles.18

Some would suggest that the seventy (or seventy two) sent out by Jesus were also apostles. Certainly the Greek verb apostello is used of the commission that Jesus gave the seventy, and there are considerable similarities in the mandates he gave to the twelve and the seventy. Of course, both were also symbolic numbers which would have been clearly understood as such by the people of that time. ‘The twelve’ recalled the twelve sons of Jacob, the forefathers of the twelve tribes of Israel, and were symbolic of Jesus’ formation of a renewed Israel. ‘The seventy’ is doubly symbolic: it was the familiar way in which the Jews of the time referred to the nations of the world, based on the seventy nations of Genesis 10; it would also have reminded them of the occasion in Moses’ time when the Lord put the Spirit on the seventy elders,19 which enabled a wider distribution of responsibility so that Moses would not have to carry it alone. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s commentary notes in relation to ‘all the apostles’ in 1 Corinthians 15 explain that ‘the term here includes many others besides “the Twelve” already enumerated (v5): perhaps the seventy disciples of Luke 10’.20 I am not fully convinced about this argument, but it helpfully illustrates the diversity of views concerning the number of apostles.

Again there is some excellent material available for further study on this point, in particular Herbert Lockyer’s book All the Apostles of the Bible and an excellent essay on the subject by J.B. Lightfoot.21

Footnotes:

1   John 16:13.

2   1 Cor. 13:8–10.

3  B.B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles (Cornell University Library, 1918).

4 Gordon Fee, God’s Empowering Presence (Hendrickson,1994), p. 208.

5   Fee, Presence, p. 207. See also Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (IVP and Zondervan, 1994), Chapter 30.

6     Acts 1:21–26.

7  Acts 22:3.

8     Rom. 16:7.

9    1 Cor. 4:6–9.

10    Acts 14:14.

11    Phil. 2:25.

12   Gal. 1:18–19.

13   1 Thess. 1:1; 2:6 (apostles – plural).

14    1 Thess. 1:1; 2:6; 2 Cor. 1:1.

15   1 Cor. 15:7.

16      Rev. 2:2; 2 Cor. 11:13.

17 2 Cor. 11:5.

18    Barrett takes the view that ‘super-apostles’ was actually a reference to those described in Galatians 2:9 as ‘pillars’. C.K. Barrett, The Signs of an Apostle (Paternoster Press, 1996), pp. 37–8. Chrysostom, Calvin and Hodge also took this view. In this case the above comments would of course not apply!

19    Num. 11:25.

20 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, quoting Chrysostom, Commentary (Zondervan, 1870 and 1999).

21    J.B. Lightfoot, Epistle of St Paul to the Galatians (Zondervan,1978), pp. 92–101.

This is the second part of a set of notes on Terry Virgo’s first session at 300 Leaders.  I have previously shared the video and downloads for the whole talk.

3. There was Barnabus. He had been sent. The Apostles were staying in Jerusalem. People have written about whether that was right or wrong. But they heard about another church coming to birth. Barnabas was sent as an apostolic delegate. He was known by the Apostles, and he represented them. It was rather like Timothy later on. Receive him, like you would receive me.

So this church is touched by apostolic ministry. It is in touch with apostolic revelation and gifting. There is a big debate about whether apostles continue today. Some say there were 12. There were several catagories: Hebrews 3 speaks of Jesus the Apostle. He was the one and only. He was sent with authority which is the root of the meaning. In John’s gospel Jesus keeps saying he was sent. Then there are the 12 who Jesus chose. They are unique. A band of apostles that the church is built on. But there are other apostles. Paul, James, Barnabus, (Acts 14:14 doesnt distinguish between Barnabus and Saul). In Acts 13 they were prophets and teachers, now they are apostles. They were sent by God. Some have argued that Paul should have been one of the 12 but Paul doesn’t say that.

Ephesians 4 says Jesus ascended and gave. From heaven. Barnabus gets called. We don’t know for sure that Barnabus ever saw Jesus after the resurrection. Apostles don’t just write epistles so we don’t need them any more. Only a handful of them wrote Scriptures. Some who weren’t apostles wrote Scripture eg Luke. Apostles were not Bible writers only.

There is a job that apostles do. It is to do with foundations. Paul is a wise master builder (architect). He laid a foundation in a local church. It is not just that philosophically we are all built on a foundation. Rather, each local church has a time when that foundation was laid. The universal church was built on the foundation of the initial apostles. The local church is also built on the foundation laid by the apostles. Sometimes a church came to birth like this one in Antioch, getting before the apostles. The apostles then quickly send either an apostle or a delegate of an apostle to make sure the church is being built correctly.

We are looking for a rainbow of ministries as seen in Ephesians 4. Lloyd-Jones believed that only Pastors and Teachers continued and that evangelists had ceased. Some people will allow for evangelists to continue, or perhaps prophets. Some will refer to people who have died as an apostle or a prophet. I believe God has given a blueprint for the church, why should we reinvent another one. We have tried democracy, we have tried ecclesiastical heirachy, why not use the Bible model we see in Ephesians 4?

4. The list of names continues. Barnabaus was a Cypriot, Simeon was a black African, Lucius is also black, Manian was brought up with Herod. He was raised with the kings son. Like he went to school with Harry or William! He mingled with some pretty high people. And Saul who is a Hebrew of Hebrews. A pretty mixed leadership team. What a strange group. What is this? It is the Antioch church getting away from Jerusalem into a gentile world and saying “What kind of house will you build?”

It is a house that is so different than what had come before. There is continuity: we are Abraham’s children. We feel a sense of unity. But we are something fresh and new. God is creating one new man out of Jew and gentile. It is energised by the Holy Sprit. Very different in education, social background. What gives them unity? It is because they are first called Christians there. What do they have in common? It is Jesus. Not just a definition of doctrine, or an agreement of creeds.

When Peter goes to Cornelius and the pagan Roman starts to speak in tongues, the fire had lept across the chasm. It is only that experience of the Spirit that joined them together. The unity of the Spirit is not just a catchphrase. He has got the same as us. The Spirit-filled church is a phenomenon. It is different to what was before. In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek. We are allowed to eat Pork and still get to heaven! The restrictions are lifted. There is liberty. We are in Israel’s messiah. We are one. Jesus let women listen to his teaching which was outrageous. Neither male nor female, neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free. The early church would have had many slaves in it. Paul tells his friend to receive his runaway slave back as his brother. The twelve were all Jews, but he had a zealot who’s goal was to kill Romans, and a tax collector who collaborated with them to raise money. They sold their souls and were hated. What did they have in common? Only that they loved Jesus. He is the cornerstone where we find one another. The church is a phenomenal manifestation to the world of the way to break through racial hatred, sexual discrimination, social class war.

5. They were worshipping the Lord. Leaders together. Elders come together with a long agenda. Here is a leadership that said “lets worship.” God does stuff. They are ministering to the Lord. Bathed in worship. Not a business meeting. We are besotted with God. Lets raise churches that are besotted with God. We must model prayer and worship as leadership teams to our churches.

6. The Spirit said set apart. A house which is pre-occupied with world mission. A house that doesn’t think it strange that two of its key leaders go off to do something else. It is a global commission. Jesus said go and make disciples. The disciples went and planted churches. That is how people are discipled. A church is a group of disciples. We are called to world mission. Sometimes leaders will go and start again. Church is not a static thing. We are joined in mission. It is not that someone in our ranks goes to a mission society. The Bible doesn’t say they went and set up mission centres. They went to plant churches. Roland Allen urged us to found churches. His book was a radical call that came out more than a hundred years ago. We need churches that are in partnership with each other. Churches that extend God’s mission together. Fellowship is not a religious word, it is partnership in a shared purpose and action.

What kind of house will you build for him? The church at Antioch is a wonderful model. Came away from the Jerusalem base to start over again. Prophets were there, but tested by the Word, Apostolic involvement, great diversity. God’s church is a breathtaking phenomenon. They were worshippers, they fasted and prayed. They were involved in world mission. They saw the church as God’s agent in making Jesus famous throughout the world.

We do not want to just talk about the Spirit-filled church, we cry to God to multiply many of them.

I have met and respect greatly Sam Poe, Keith Hazel and Brian Mowrey. This Q and A on prophecy will be of much interest to many of my readers. The full video is here:

The following specific questions are asked.  Watch the Confluence Blog for the specific videos
What is prophecy?
What’s the difference between OT and NT prophecy?
Did spiritual gifts end (cessationism)?
How do we hear God?
Does fasting and prayer affect prophetic ability?
How do we weigh prophecy?
Prophecies that don’t come true?
Living in light of prophecy?
Is it wrong not to prophesy when you feel like you should?
Difference between prophecy and discernment?
Importance of public prophecy?
Why value prophecy?

Today’s video may challenge some of your preconceptions. In it Terry Virgo is asked if there is a difference between being apostolic and missional. In it he argues that the main task of apostles was not to write Scripture, and says that most Evangelicals today have only been taught to obey the Bible as individuals and not to obey what it says about the church.

from Jubilee Church on Vimeo.

On my recent visit to northern England, I was able to interview the leader of the Newfrontiers North team. I was deeply impressed with what I saw and heard during the day as his team of around 100 people gathered. God is doing a great work in the North of England and many healthy growing churches have been planted. There was also an amazing sense of community and true friendship in the room. It was wonderful to see a group of leaders with very different gifts and personalities fused together into a team. The team laughed, but clearly also had a serious edge as they work hard together to continue the wonderful mission of seeing people meet with Jesus and be transformed by joining Christ’s church.   It was at the end of a day which excited me about what God is doing that I was delighted to film the following interview:

Driscoll had a fascinating and substantial video interview with the Sydney Anglicans which I just had to draw to your attention.

Intriguingly they are happy to describe him as “Apostle to the generation wired“!

The fact that he can be well received by both Newfrontiers and the Sydney Anglicans says a lot about the ministry of this man.

Ed Stetzer has a great post discussing the concept of apostolic work today. He has some great links many of which would on first glance describe a view very similar to that which I hold. There almost seems to be a consensus emerging that recognises the need for some kind of apostolic role today (though many would disagree with the use of the actual word). I have a lot more posts on apostles today here on my blog.

This morning I attended the last session of the Leaders’ training track, Prophetic Encounter, led by Sam Poe and Phil Wilthew. Today’s session looked at “Pastors and Prophets Together Building the Church.” I also was able to get to the two previous sessions, which I summarized at these pages:

• Apostles and Prophets Together on a Mission

• Prophets and Prophets Together Giving a Fuller Picture

Sam serves on John Lanferman’s apostolic team in the USA. He and his wife, Marlene, have travelled widely, serving churches in the USA and other nations. In recent years they have been particularly involved in working together with churches in Russia and the Ukraine. Sam and Marlene are presently based in Tacoma, Washington, where they are part of a new church. Sam is also serving other churches related to Newfrontiers in that region.

Phil is married to Carole, has two children, and is an elder in City Church, Newcastle, UK. He serves churches prophetically, particularly in the north of the UK, and has a passion to develop prophetic teams.

More posts from this conference can be found on my TOAM08 label page. You can download the mp3s of this week’s talks by subscribing to the new Newfrontiers podcast, which will be an easy way for you to get access to the mp3s for free.

A prophet working in isolation can cause mayhem! But working with the local pastor produces both security and expansion in the people for whom he has responsibility.

Sam Poe began by turning to 1 Thessalonians 5. “Test everything. Hold on to the good, avoid every kind of evil.”

The focal point of prophetic ministry should be the local church. The application and expression of that ministry is in building up the church. What Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5 will require not just the prophets, but those in authority—teachers and pastors working together to ensure that prophecy is tested, weighed, and applied.

Prophecy can bring encouragement, direction, and prediction of the future, as well as warnings and correction. Mandates of this text are about prophecy.

SOME IMPERATIVES IN THIS PASSAGE

Don’t quench the fire by disdaining or despising prophecy.
Because of the excesses, errors, and eccentricities, we can reject it because of this. Root the pictures in sound theology. We need elders who will pastor as leaders the prophetic. The central purpose of prophecy is to build up. They also have a foundational effort. Encouragement or exhortation—it’s about helping someone reach for a positive future. Don’t ever use prophecy to try to get somebody to do something you want them to do. Life is full of trouble; prophecy brings comfort, which is more of a prod to get you going forward and to strengthen you in the battle.

TEST them all.
All prophecy needs to be tested. Not to judge with a scowl on the face. The word in Greek is to examine something and evaluate it with the attitude or expectation of approving it, i.e. our attitude should not be cynical.

Maintain what is good — hold on to it.
This is good and we want to take it on board and take some steps. Otherwise it could be frustrating. Apostolic ministry and pastoral ministry are critical. Fan the flames.

Abstain from whatever is evil.
Sometimes something comes in the name of prophecy that’s not helpful. Sometimes there is no real weight in the prophecy.

HOW TO RECEIVE PROPHETS INTO THE LOCAL CHURCH

If you don’t have a well-established mature prophet in the life of the church, sometimes you may need to receive one of them. Ephesians 4:11 type prophets can help us lay firm foundations in the church. It’s the same foundation that they lay.

As the question, “Are they accountable to a local church and its leadership?” Don’t invite them if they aren’t! Every leader and ministry must be rooted into the life of a local church. Some are very trans-local and mobile, but where is home? Where do they come back to? Are they related to and working in a team with an apostolic ministry? They are meant to be working together. Find each other and be related to each other.

It’s important that the congregation has a clear biblical understanding of the place and value of prophetic ministry in the local church.

Phil Wilthew then added to this. Pastors and prophets are very different people. Pastors and prophets have the same job description –—i.e. to reveal Jesus. There are five ways this can work well.

Recognize differences.
God designed us to be different and complementary. Don’t be too quick to compartmentalize. We are a blend of gifts. Gifts are colors and shades, but not boxes. Pastors tend to be warm, loving, create unity, security, strength, consolidate, provide strong foundations, are measured and well rounded, not given to extremes, cautious of change, patient, good for the long haul with no short sharp fixes. They are amazing gifts to the church. Prophets are the perfect foil for all those characteristics, — they are direct, love change, can get frustrated with the status quo, look at what’s ahead, find it hard to live in the hear and now as they are looking ahead, don’t like maintaining and consolidating; they are impulsive, defensive, attacking, not measured, and dislike caution. Again an amazing gift to the church. There is a great potential for synergy, and also for challenge between them. Self-awareness is a great gift.

Practice love.
It’s simple, but worth saying again. Neither circumcision or uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. If you don’t have love, you are a painful cymbal. It’s not emotional, it’s something we do. Chemistry is important, but express faith and practice love. Don’t be right all the time.

Love enables honest communication.
Love enables you to talk honestly with each other. But can rebuke, spell out what’s what. Too many people have high honesty, but shallow relationships. Paul opposed Peter face-to-face. Don’t send an e-mail! Look in the whites of their eyes and realize I “need to talk to you honestly.” Gather pastors with prophetically gifted guys in the church into groups, teams. In times of frustration, don’t be impulsive in your communication. Utilize communication, especially with prophetic people who have gone silent and found a cave to hide in!

Develop proper teams.
The first is a mixed-gift team. Be with guys who are not like you. Cover weaknesses. Also need same-gift teams, too. So we need to mix it up and have different combinations.

Play to your strengths.
We need to look to change the areas where we are lacking. But, we will be most effective by getting better at what we are already good at. Get better at your gift.

Give good feedback to good prophetic people in your church. The worst thing for most prophetic people is silence. Do it in the meeting. “I just want to say thank you so much to the prophetic people who shared this morning. I was particularly blessed by this …” Also, provide personal feedback, e.g. “Thank you so much for sharing. Next time something that might really help you would be if you would talk slower and more clearly.”

Don’t always translate frustration as rebellion, or that they are out of kilter. It’s their job to plow things up. He hears God and mercilessly questions everything. A prophet is therefore seen as a threat and wants movement now. He is not a troubler. Ask prophetic folk what they are hearing. Work on the character of prophetic people in your church. Character training is of highest value. Rigorously challenge prophetic people on their time with God. Understand that accuracy is learned and developed over time. Need very positive encouragement and help.

This morning I attended the second session of the training track, Prophetic Encounter. This session was entitled “Prophets and Prophets Together Giving a Fuller Picture.” The New Testament refers to prophetic bands. Prophets working together often results in releasing the prophetic gift in greater measure, to the enhancement and greater health of the local church. The session was led by Keith Hazell, a visiting speaker from outside Newfrontiers.

Keith and his wife, Nova, live in Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada, and are based in Mosaic Church. Keith has been in the prophetic ministry for more than forty years and ministers extensively at home and abroad. He has a growing relationship with Newfrontiers churches, and has served some in East Anglia for more than twenty years. He and his wife are British-born and have strong roots in eastern England. They are blessed to serve in the body of Christ, along with their family, teaching and demonstrating the prophetic ministry.

More posts from this conference can be found on my TOAM08 label page. You can download the mp3s of this week’s talks by subscribing to the new Newfrontiers podcast, which will be an easy way for you to get access to the mp3s for free

In the book of Acts, prophets do work in teams. Some people think prophets are all about tearing down. But the building-up bit is important. Prophets work as part of the leadership of a church, with different gifts.

Acts 13:1-3
“Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers . . .”

Prophets need to be comfortable with others; they are not individual players. We see them being sent in teams. They are under authority. Judas and Silas were sent together as a team and said much to encourage the Church.

1 Corinthians 14:29
Two or three should speak and others weigh carefully. It is a team package. Get confirmation from one another when a team is involved. Learn to hear the voice of God with other people.

Prophets Working Together in Unity
Whenever prophets are mentioned in the book of Acts, they are always mentioned in the context of the Church. There are no “Lone Rangers” in Acts. Identify who are prophets and who are not, and then use them to build the Church. God appoints them, the church recognizes them. As Ephesians 4 says, “God gives the Church prophets.” The place for building the body is in the Church.

The Purpose of Prophets Working Together
This is good for their humility. Prophets should not think more of themselves than they ought. Like obscurity, hide as much as you can. When they work together they build. Prophecy is not just about blessing people as individuals.

Protection for the Church
One man prophetic ministry can be very dangerous for a church. One prophet doesn’t see everything there is to see.

Prophets Train Others
Prophets need to reproduce other prophets—train people, help to stretch their horizons.

There is Power in Working Together
It is like an exponential increase of anointing. In 1 Samuel 10:5-6, Saul is told by Samuel that he will see a “procession of prophets coming down from the high place … and they will be prophesying.” As a result of him being near that group, the Spirit came on him. Iron sharpens iron. Get near people who are prophets and you may “catch” something, almost as if it’s contagious.

Problems Do Arise Sometimes When Working Together
We all have human frailties that can interfere with our ability to work together. We can feel jealous sometimes. Some prophetic people take pride in being weird and eccentric. In a team that can get ironed out. Some become insecure and depressed. Apostolic covering brings security. It makes all the difference. Accountability is crucial for prophets.

Promises Are Given by God
Ecclesiastes 4:9 — “Two are better than one …” Because we only know in part and prophesy in part, you get a bigger picture.

Deuteronomy 32:30 — “How can one man chase a thousand, or two put ten thousand to flight?” Two people can put 10,000 to flight, but one only 1,000.

Julian Adams then added some additional thoughts. Prophets are intercessors. There is something about connecting to the heart of God and his affection, being carried into the heart of God together. Developing a sensitivity to the emotions of God for the people you are about to prophesy over. Get God’s heart. Pray together as prophetic people.

We are in Christ so there will never be a closed heaven. When Jesus was baptized heaven was opened, and now he has risen to heaven.

Prophets can also come together for the sake of evangelism. Start with an encouraging word. Encouragement is the simplest form of prophecy. When unbelievers come in, they should say God is in this place. The worship team and prophecy can go together also. Stop, pause, and meditate.

This morning I attended the first segment of the training track, Prophetic Encounter. Today’s session, “Apostles and Prophets Together on a Mission,” emphasized that there is great strength in apostles and prophets working together. They are often seen as complementary gifts in the early church as they help to lay foundations and bring adjustment to erroneous practices in church life. Today’s session was led by Guy Miller and Julian Adams.

Guy is based in Bournemouth, UK and heads up the team that oversees the Wessex region. Guy also leads the eldership team at Citygate Church, Bournemouth, and has responsibilities in India and Portugal. He is married to Heather and they have four children.

Julian Adams is originally from The Bay Community Church, Cape Town, South Africa, where he was an elder. He moved to the UK in August 2006 in response to God’s leading for him to be with Terry Virgo for a season and become part of Church of Christ the King, Brighton. In August 2007, he returned to South Africa for a few months before returning to Teesside in the north of England. Julian has traveled widely, serving Newfrontiers churches in the UK and elsewhere.

More posts from this conference can be found on my TOAM08 label page. You can download the mp3s of this week’s talks by subscribing to the new Newfrontiers podcast, which will be an easy way for you to get access to the mp3s for free.

In introducing the seminar, Guy reminded us of the similar seminar from last year. I was there myself and can testify to the life-changing nature of the time. The prophecies given to me last year were very important and influential on my life. There are some implications of that which I will be sharing on my blog at some point in the coming weeks.

As for two specific things that happened last year in this seminar— one guy was singled out and prophesied over in a highly specific way, and a church plant in Paris was the result. There was also a barren woman who now has a baby.

Prophets do sometimes disrupt nice tidy churches. But people sometimes take a prophetic word out of context and turn it into individualism. Actually, it should build the local church, not send people into isolation.

Ephesians 2 and other places speak of apostles and prophets working together. We believe the gifts in Ephesians 4 are intended for today.

How do apostles and prophets work together? Not everyone is a prophet or apostle. Apostles equip, build, and plant churches and help them to be healthy. Apostles know how to build the church with Jesus as the foundation. They are given by the ascended Christ. They draw all the other gifts back to building the local church. Apostles lay the hidden foundations. No one ever says you have lovely foundations in your house! If apostolic ministry is working, then people see a glorious church, although they might not always realize what the foundations are.

The Church is built on apostles and prophets who work together. A prophet is not someone who sometimes prophesies. They are big picture men. People who catch the Church up to the bigger framework of God’s unfolding plans in history.

Jesus is the cornerstone; everything else fits to him. Jesus is the center. Apostolic ministry sniffs out legalism and teaches grace. Apostolic ministry is missional. The great days of mission are before us as a movement. Apostolic ministry is concerned about the poor.

Two reasons why apostles work with prophets. One is for accountability. Are you going beyond what God said? Has it come true? Are you ministering out of pride or hurt? Prophetic ministry can break the status quo. But we can treat prophecy with contempt. The second is authority. Without authority, prophecy is dangerous. Prophetic can lead to “I am doing what I want to do.” The other thing is that we have to interpret how to respond. Agabus predicted a famine and a response was needed. Later on, when he predicted the imprisonment of Paul, the correct response was for Paul to do nothing and keep going. Apostles will know how to respond to the word of prophecy.

Julian Adams then came up and spoke about his experiences of working in partnership with apostles. He explained that he worked alongside Simon Petit, who valued the prophetic highly and then applied it radically. For Simon, prophetic encounters drove much of the shape of ministry. Traveling with Simon opened a bigger picture of what the Church was. It made him want to give the rest of his life to building the local church. We must see something of the mystery of Christ and his Church. They want to see the Church become all that she should become.

He then turned to Matthew 16 and began reading at verse 30. It is ongoing revelation of the resurrected Christ that is the foundation of the Church. We don’t add things to the Bible, as the Bible is enough. But there is a living, speaking, talking, caring, loving Jesus who wants to reveal himself to you in order to shape your destiny and direct the Church, which is still His.

Prophets flow from a place of encountering Jesus in order to receive blueprints and revelation so that the Church can be built. Each church has a location, a personality, a blueprint. The prophet recalls the blueprint for that locality.

Someone who prophesies is not necessarily a prophet. The first way you know someone is not a prophet is when they call themselves a prophet! There is a “spirit of prophecy” which can affect people in the room when a group of prophetic individuals are together. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is often the gateway gift, allowing things to flow together. Hang out with other prophets. But not ones who are too weird.

Ask God for words of knowledge and prophecy. Ask also him for an impartation from other prophets. You can flow in the gift of prophecy much more. It is our inheritance to move in prophecy. All of God’s servants are now able to hear his voice (see Acts 2 where Joel is quoted). We didn’t get saved just because of a good preacher—the Spirit of God spoke to our spirit and caused it to become alive so we could respond to him.

Don’t follow after prophetic words, follow after intimate communion with the Father. We have access. The big difference between Old and New Testament prophets is that everyone under the new covenant can hear from God, not just the prophet. The prophet is given to the Church.

Prophets speak with a different authority. The reason for prophecy is not that people can be individually blessed. Instead, it is to set the individual into a place where they can function best to help people. The prophetic carried weight in the early Church. “There is going to be a drought,” said Agabus, and they immediately made provision. They weighed prophecy. We must not take them flippantly. Get the Church ready for Christ’s return. Add weight to the Word.

Faith is the activating ingredient to see the Word of God come to pass. Ministry that apostles and prophets have in common is that they come into a context to break legalism, control, and the spirit of Jezebel. No word is too big for your local church. Prophets and apostles will do a consultation with them. Prophets feel things, sense things. It’s like an antenna—it can get crossed sometimes. Sometimes the prophets don’t even realize what they are doing. A wise apostolic man will pick up on what is being said and apply it. Prophetic people get rejected. Prophets are in the pit. They get frustrated. Sometimes that frustration leads to rejection of the Church. But you can’t love Christ without loving his bride. You cannot carry the head around without his body.
Apostolic ministry is not management speak. The point is that we need revelation by the Spirit. We need signs and wonders. Fall in love with Jesus. He is empowering you to live a resurrected life! Let’s love him a little bit! God wants to hear your voice. Lift him up. God is not deaf, but he’s not scared either!

As we continue, I cheekily asked Ed if he thinks missional and apostolic are synonymous. Interestingly, the word missionary is the Latin word used in the vulgate Bible to translate apostle from the Greek.

UPDATE
The written transcript of this segment of my interview is now available to read here.

Yesterday I began an interview with Terry and Wendy Virgo. We talked a little about what they do and how Terry came to speak at New Word Alive.

Wendy begins this section of our interview talking about sharing in Terry’s travels, and what it was like to be left behind with five children. Terry also explains briefly what he means by modern day apostles.

More than once I have been accused of appropriating Lloyd-Jones to my charismatic cause. Today I want to restart my MLJ Monday tradition by sharing a quote which comes from a context where the Doctor is strongly disagreeing with one of my positions. He is talking about the so-called Ephesians 4 ministries. The Doctor divides these into two groups, believing that all but pastors and teachers are temporary. I believe that they all continue, although I think of modern-day apostles as being, in some important ways, different to the original. Anyway, the Doctor then goes on to speak into what is perhaps a less interesting discussion, but one that is worth opening up nonetheless. Does Paul have in mind two distinct groups, the pastors and the teachers, or one group of people who are both pastors and teachers? Let’s see what he has to say:

The permanent offices are described as those of ‘pastors and teachers.’ This group is much simpler to understand, although there has been much dispute as to whether pastors and teachers are two different offices. I agree with those who say that they are one. Were they two separate offices we would expect to read, ‘He gave some, apostles; some, prophets; some, evangelists; some, pastors; some, teachers’; but the apostle writes, ‘some, pastors and teachers,’ linking the two together; and generally speaking, these two offices are found in the same man. They apply to a more settled state of the Church, and have persisted throughout the centuries. The office of a pastor is generally concerned about government and instruction and rule and direction. It is borrowed, of course, from the picture of a shepherd. The shepherd shepherds his flock, keeps the sheep in order, directs them where to go and where to feed, brings them back to the fold, looks after their safety and guards them against enemies liable to attack them. It is a great office, but unfortunately it is a term which has become debased. A pastor is a man who is given charge of souls. He is not merely a nice, pleasant man who visits people and has an afternoon cup of tea with them, or passes the time of day with them. He is the guardian, the custodian, the protector, the organizer, the director, the ruler of the flock. The teacher gives instruction in doctrine, in truth. The Apostle proceeds to elaborate this, showing that we need to be built up, and that we must not remain ‘babes.’ We must be protected against ‘every wind of doctrine,’ and the way to do so is to give instruction and teaching.

Although I say that these two offices generally go together and have done so throughout the long history of the Church, sometimes one man has had more of a pastoral gift than a teaching or preaching gift; at other times a man has more of a teaching and preaching gift than a pastoral gift. This is a matter of individual variation according to the gift of the Spirit. But in the Church you have these offices, these men who teach and preach and care for the souls of the members of the church.”

— David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Christian Unity, Studies in Ephesians (Chapter 4, verses 1 through 16), Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1972, p. 192.

For more information on Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, see this summary post or the MLJ Recording Trust.

UPDATE
I have had an e-mail from a correspondent who strongly believes that Lloyd-Jones was wrong about pastors and teachers being one office. My correspondent cited the grammatical work of Dan Wallace (see p. 284 of his Greek Grammar—Beyond the Basics) and an article on the evangelist, which discusses this point (p. 30ff).

I also have had another e-mail on the subject which said, “We actually had to study a full-length technical paper on this verse by Dan Wallace as part of our second-year Greek course. He does not argue that they must be two separate offices—he does not go that far. What he says is that the Greek language does not demand that they be one office. We should determine the answer from the context. Personally I go with theoretically separate giftings which are very commonly held by the same person. (Apostles can also be teachers, etc.)”

I had planned on an early night tonight! However, despite my best intentions, this session looks like it will keep me up late once more tonight. I may duck out half way through if I can’t keep my eyes open.

Driscoll began by claiming that, statistically, the only variable that makes a difference to the life or death of a new church plant is the gifting and qualifications of its leader. Driscoll will be bringing a book out on church leadership this summer.

The first and most important officer in the church is God—Jesus is the Senior Pastor of your church. Jesus should be on the organizational chart! He is the Chief Shepherd. Don’t assume ANYTHING. Under Jesus are qualified men, both pastors and elders. The words “pastor” and “elder” can be used interchangeably.

To be qualified, you must be called by God. Driscoll confessed to being functionally charismatic “with a seatbelt.” God calls people today. Acts 20—“Shepherd the flock over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you.”

There has to be a sense of call or desire—it’s not just a matter of being nominated and voted on. There must be a desire to be an elder. God has to clearly call you. Not in an arrogant, proud, or controlling way. If you don’t have that sense of call, you will end up quitting the ministry. You must not limit the ways that God can call you. There needs to be a strong desire to care for God’s people.

1 Timothy 5. The ministry can be described as “ox-like” in the sense of carrying a load, grinding it out, staying faithful.

1 Timothy 2:12 ff—gives the qualifications of an elder. Once you sense a call, then look at the qualifications.

Don’t call the trained. TRAIN THE CALLED.

Driscoll strongly supports the complementarian position. He was very clear that anyone wanting to plant an Acts 29 church needs to agree with the teaching that eldership is male. The government of home is the foundation on which eldership is built. In the family the woman is the helper, the man is the head.

Driscoll made the point that you have to get to know someone over a period of time to see if they are qualified to be an elder. There are lots of character issues. “Beyond reproach” is a catch-all. Must be able to teach in some context or another, and it doesn’t necessarily have to be preaching. This could be in smaller groups—one-on-one or in a discussion group. All your elders do not need to be preachers.

You have to take care of your family first. God takes care of your family THROUGH YOU. God first, family second, ministry third. Be a one-woman man. Ministry will magnify and expose holes in your character. Do you help your wife? Do you care for her? Do you pay attention? Do you train her? Are you alive in conversation with her? Paul and Jesus were single. But in our culture it is very hard for an elder to be single. Most of what you learn about being a pastor will be by being a daddy. Pastors are fathers. Don’t let your children think that the church stole their father. Let your kids love what you love—the church, etc. Take kids whenever possible. Seeing your kids love Jesus is so much more important than church leadership.

Must be emotionally stable. Eldership is a front row seat for sin and depravity. Must be able to live there. Must have self-control. An elder needs to be disciplined in every area of life. Think through every decision and make a plan. No addictions. It is not biblical that alcohol is a sin in and of itself. Jesus took it, and gave it to others. Basically elders should be examples such that others are able to point to them and say, for example, to their daughter, “I want you to marry a man like that.”

Hospitality is crucial. Elders should be welcoming to strangers, new people, non-Christians, etc. Pastors need to be evangelistic. BUT, be discerning and guard your home and family. Don’t close your home.

Anger is more of a challenge to the average pastor than many people realize.

Also, you will need a gift of apostleship—a church planting/missionary gift. Someone who pastors a church that is an existing body is a different guy from one who starts something new. In planting a church, you need to be entrepreneurial and have the ability to attract people to follow you.

You will also need to have the ability to preach and defend the gospel. You will need to refute false doctrine. You can’t be frightened by wolves! Too many shepherds are just sheep. You don’t know if you have a sheep or a shepherd until a wolf turns up!

You must also be an equipper of others. (Ephesians 4:13)

Define the role of your wife. Don’t make her sit in the front row or be present at every event. It’s not a two-for-one deal. You want her to be a mature Christian who is serving in the church as appropriate. She must love you and care for your children. The pastor needs emotional support and sexual companionship. Marriages in the church will imitate the leaders.

Some elders are like prophets, some like priests, some like kings. As a prophet, Jesus proclaimed the truth—corrected elders. Some elders are like that. Can call to repentance. The priest loves people. They do hospital visits and weddings. They are compassionate. They like to encourage people and shepherd them. The prophet yells over them at the crowd. Kings like systems, teams, measurable results, leadership.

Most of the prophets are reformed. Most of the priests are doing the whole emerging thing. Most of the kings are in the mega-churches. Some will be both. Need an eldership that has each of these aspects and learn. Read outside of your tribe. For example, learn to get organized by reading a book and get some systems together. Be humble enough to learn from all of them! And be discerning enough to know what not to agree with.

We want to build biblical, loving, effective churches.

Well, I kept my eyes open, but am off to bed. If you want to follow other sessions, you can do it live online at http://www.theresurgence.org/live.