'The Hope of His Calling'

The Matthew 19:28 verse caught my eye. At the time Judas Iscariot was still in the 12. I often wondered why they needed to fill his spot after Jesus ascended. This would be one very good reason.
This makes me wonder why Jesus didn't fill the 12th spot Himself after resurrection. I would think they were all too busy learning what they needed to continue the work of the Gospel. I would think there was much supernatural growth in the disciples at that time.

As I understand it the number 12 has to do with government (?)
There are also 12 GATES into the new Jerusalem.
and im sure there are many other examples of scripture concernign the number.
Even as 40 and its multiplications are mentioned a lot.
What is suprising is that the Lord needed only 12 apostles as a foundation to turnign the world upside down.
Today we have a myriad number of 'apsostles' that do not turn the world upside down but rather the church .Who are being" made merchandise of "
in Christ
gerald
 
As I understand it the number 12 has to do with government (?)
There are also 12 GATES into the new Jerusalem.
and im sure there are many other examples of scripture concernign the number.
Even as 40 and its multiplications are mentioned a lot.
What is suprising is that the Lord needed only 12 apostles as a foundation to turnign the world upside down.
Today we have a myriad number of 'apsostles' that do not turn the world upside down but rather the church .Who are being" made merchandise of "
in Christ
gerald

Yes. One of the best studies you will ever do is one dealing with the meaning of numbers as they relate to the Scriptures. Take the #12 you listed.

The meaning of 12, is that it symbolizes God's power and authority, as well as your comment as serving as a perfect governmental foundation. It can also symbolize completeness or the nation of Israel as a whole. For example, Jacob (Israel) had twelve sons, each of which represented a tribe begun by a prince, for 12 princes total. Ishmael, who was born to Abraham through Hagar, also had twelve princes.

God specified that twelve unleavened cakes of bread be placed every week in the temple with frankincense next to each of the two piles that were to be made. The priests were commanded to change the bread every Sabbath day (Leviticus 24).

Christ called and choose twelve men to bear witness to what he did and to spread the good news of the gospel to the entire world. After he was raised from the dead, Jesus told the eleven disciples (Judas had killed himself) that God had given him ALL power and authority in both earth and heaven (God's divine authority - Matthew 28:18).
 
Hi Marylin
A very reasonable objection save for two points .
EVERY true BORN child of God is a witness to the resurection .Though not all are Apostles .Though some assert it as if they could be .
and are you not quoting Peters reasoning as to why he should cast lots?
An argument based upon a false premise no matter how logical will arrive at a false conclusion.
It is no use praying to God for him to choose out of the ones you have already chosen.
A lot of modern praying is like that .
as also a lot of 'choosing' Not only in Rome.
Peter was indeed choosing a well worn path, but the ways of Israel were passign away .
But he as was often the case spoke to quickly .

in Christ
gerald

Hi gerald,

Yes we are all witnesses in a general sense but if you read God`s word carefully you will see that the 12 disciples had to have actually walked with the Lord throughout His ministry & to have actually witnessed, actually seen Christ, resurrected from the dead.

Now as to the `lots,` that was instigated by God as they did not have the Holy Spirit within them. God used that method when they relied on Him. It is not something people can just do now. If Matthias was not the one to replace Judas, God would have said so.

Marilyn.
 
Hi gerald,

Yes we are all witnesses in a general sense but if you read God`s word carefully you will see that the 12 disciples had to have actually walked with the Lord throughout His ministry & to have actually witnessed, actually seen Christ, resurrected from the dead.

Now as to the `lots,` that was instigated by God as they did not have the Holy Spirit within them. God used that method when they relied on Him. It is not something people can just do now. If Matthias was not the one to replace Judas, God would have said so.

Marilyn.

As I said that argument is Peters. and one he based his decision on.
It is also the argument then which justifies the idea that the day of miracles is past and there are no more Apostles.
and while I readily acknowldge there are many false prophets and apostles about .That does not mean that the church does not need true Apsotles for its perfection as with all the other ministries of God as listed in Ephesians. As for miracles that too is a false assertion that they are passed.
"Blessed are they who have not seen but still believe " Thomas saw as you put it but was not as blessed as those who did not see but still believe .
yet we know and understand and therefore 'see' with the eyes of our understanding beign opened.
What difference then is there between seeign with the natural eye? and seeign with the eyes of faith?
Paul sattes very clearly he is an Apostle called of God . and manifested not only the power that comes with that calling but more importantly the life of that calling .
By your argument as to what can only be an apostle .He was not one .
I say this not to be argumentative . But in the true sense of an 'argument' to show how to hold to your argument as to what is an Apsotle and the only qualification for one .You deny that Paul was one.
This is impossible as im sure you will also realise .For Paul was indeed an Apostle .
To be honest ,I have yet to fully understand what an Apostle is in very truth. I have heard the definition of a special sent one , but I find that as yet unsatisfactory . perhaps because of my lack of understanding .
I have met and heard of only one man who in my thinking might fit the pattern of an Apostle . But they have publicly denied it.
I have heard of others who self proclaim they are but who do not fit the pattern.
I have read books by Tozer who some say was an Apsotle and by his books they might be right.
be that as it may . Paul says of the Apsotles in his day "added nothing to him" He even gave them no credit of being "somebody"
But I suppose a post about Apostles is for another post . Though it is interesting that the Lord is spoken of as the "Apsotle of our faith."(?)
You argue that if it was not so then "God would have said so"
God does not lay everything down for us . But he desires we discover for ourselves soem things .
Not only is it not wise to say everything . It is wiser still for our understandign to grow and in this case to see how wrong some peoples claims as to Peter beign the rock upon which the church is built is.
In the negative but also in the positive that despite our failures all things work togther for good to them that love God.
Peter was a great man and one who took a long time to learn not to 'jump the gun' He was also a very humble man and always was so from the moment he said " depart from me for I am a sinful man " to Jesus .
He took that most severe rebuke from the Lord "get behind me satan" He took even that open rebuke from Paul over his hipocracy despite hsi 'position' something the Popes of Rome never have despite the fact they say they honour him and are heirs .Be that as it may .
One reason or rather another reason why I love God is that not only did eh give me my mind back but expectss me to use it and while I do not nor cannot understand all. I am thankful that God does not deal with me accordign to my 'ignorance' but accordign to his great mercy .
What more then can I do? But as the Lord has led me in my thinking I can do no other than show my thinking fro your consideration.
That if Paul IS an Apostle then he by your criteria or rather Peters is not.

in Christ
gerald
 
Hi Gerald,

I`m glad for you that the Lord is renewing your mind. I so agree concerning His great mercy. Now concerning `apostles` it seems you have misunderstood me. I do agree that Paul is an apostle along with many others whom the Lord gave when He ascended to the Father`s right hand. If you`ll look at a post I wrote to Major a while back you`ll see what I mean. (#74)

Also it was not Peter`s criteria but actually the Lord`s requirement for the 12 to have walked with Him.

`So Jesus said to them, "Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed me will also sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel.` (Matt. 19: 28)

As to what an apostle is like, it would be a good topic to discuss. I was brought up with apostles & prophets in the Apostolic denomination & know they are godly men but not CEO`s as some today try to make out they are.

Blessings, Marilyn.
 
Hi Gerald,

I`m glad for you that the Lord is renewing your mind. I so agree concerning His great mercy. Now concerning `apostles` it seems you have misunderstood me. I do agree that Paul is an apostle along with many others whom the Lord gave when He ascended to the Father`s right hand. If you`ll look at a post I wrote to Major a while back you`ll see what I mean. (#74)

Also it was not Peter`s criteria but actually the Lord`s requirement for the 12 to have walked with Him.

`So Jesus said to them, "Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed me will also sit on 12 thrones, judging the 12 tribes of Israel.` (Matt. 19: 28)

As to what an apostle is like, it would be a good topic to discuss. I was brought up with apostles & prophets in the Apostolic denomination & know they are godly men but not CEO`s as some today try to make out they are.

Blessings, Marilyn.

Thanks Marlyn,

I was using that as an argument . To show that Paul did not fit into the 'qualification' of Peter .
Did not Paul say "be ye followers of me as I am also of Christ"?
They followed him after the flesh ,he after the Spirit.
If then they 12 judge the 12 tribes of Israel .
Then will not they after the true tabernacle and of the Spirit "will judge angels"?
But in truth as with a jigsaw puzzle the heavenly parts are the hardest to put togther .
So I will not go beyond what I understand so far.
Only insofar that Peter chose w rongly as it was Paul an Apostle out of time that replaced Judas .
and that Romes assertions are only that assertions .

in Christ
gerald
 
Hi Gerald,

Yes we agree that God`s word tells us that the 12 disciples, apostles who walked with the Lord during His manifestation, will be the 12 judges over the 12 tribes of Israel. And it is good you have brought up `judging angels,` as God`s word tells us that it is the Body of Christ who will do this. The apostles that were given of the Lord after His ascension into glory are for the building up of the Body of Christ.

I`m sorry but you have not shown that God wanted Paul to be with the other 11. Remember also there were other apostles given after Christ`s ascension to the Body of Christ - Timothy, Silas etc.

The 2 groups of apostles are for 2 different purposes. ( pre-ascension apostles & post ascension apostles) Once you understand that, then God`s purposes start to become clearer for - the Body of Christ, for Israel & for the nations.

Marilyn.
 
Because even as the 4 apostles and one other wrote scripture . Paul did more than them all .
That even Peter had to acknowldge (again) was "hard to understand"
Paul was the one who most perfectly fullfilled the great commission.

All the other Apsotles or most of them includign Peter stayed in Jerusalem. Till persecution came.

in Christ
gerald
 
Hi gerald,

That`s correct, that the 12 pre-ascension apostles, those who walked with Jesus while He was on earth, & will rule over the 12 tribes of Israel, they all stayed in Jerusalem. We are told that they had been given the task of taking the good news of Christ`s resurrection to the Jews.

`...when they (the 12) saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised (Gentiles) has been committed to me (Paul), as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter.` (Gal. 2: 7)

All organised by the Lord.

` ...for He (Jesus) who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me (Paul) towards the Gentiles.` (Gal. 2: 8)

Thus pre-ascension 12 apostles for a specific purpose & post-ascension apostles for a specific purpose.

Marilyn.
 
Hi gerald,

That`s correct, that the 12 pre-ascension apostles, those who walked with Jesus while He was on earth, & will rule over the 12 tribes of Israel, they all stayed in Jerusalem. We are told that they had been given the task of taking the good news of Christ`s resurrection to the Jews.

`...when they (the 12) saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised (Gentiles) has been committed to me (Paul), as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter.` (Gal. 2: 7)

All organised by the Lord.

` ...for He (Jesus) who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me (Paul) towards the Gentiles.` (Gal. 2: 8)

Thus pre-ascension 12 apostles for a specific purpose & post-ascension apostles for a specific purpose.

Marilyn.

I would suggest that by Ephesians all Apostles had the same purpose and still do if they are today.
be they to the Gentiles or to the Jews.
For the Lord did not say to the Apsotles or disciples stay in Jerusalem or indeed preach only to the Jews .
But starting at Jerusalem ........... to the uttermost parts of the earth .
But it is a matter of not such import unless we give weight to the spurious claims of the Roman church.

In Christ
gerald
 
Back
Top