Truth Magazine

By Gary Wilemon

I read something in a recent issue of Reader’s Digest that I think really deserves a wider audience. It’s a short anecdote written by Vidal Clay, and here it is in its entirety:

In December 1997 Elizabeth Clay was driving home from Boston University to spend the holiday break with her parents in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. An hour South of Boston, her old Toyota got a flat. The 22-year-old senior pulled off I-95 in the winter twilight and opened the trunk. No spare.

Meantime, a car had stopped. Paul and Diane Woodcock told Clay to follow them to a service station near their house. They arrived to see that it had closed. “Follow us home,” said Paul.

The couple called around to find a tire. No luck. They decided to make their own luck. “Here,” Paul said, handing Clay a set of keys, “take our Ford Escort. We won’t be using it over the holidays.”

Clay was dumbfounded. “But I’m going all the way to South Carolina, and I’ll be gone for two weeks,” she reminded them.

“We know,” Paul said. “We’ll be here when you get back. Here’s our number if you need to contact us.”
Incredulous, Clay watched as the couple put her bags into the car and then sent her off. Two weeks later she returned to find the old Toyota cleaned inside and-out, with three new tires and the radio fixed.

When I first read this, it made me think of those folks in Jerusalem that we read about in Acts 4:32-35: “And the congregation of those who believed were of one heart and soul; and not one of them claimed that anything belonging to him was his own; but all things were common property to them. And with great power the apostles were giving witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and abundant grace was upon them all. For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales, and lay them at the apostles’ feet; and they would be distributed to each, as any had need.”

Now it is probably true that the situation in Acts 4 was somewhat unique because of the large number of Jews in Jerusalem for the feast days of Passover and Pentecost. And I don’t think the Lord Jesus necessarily expects us all to sell our houses and lands today and give to the poor. But I do think he expects us to share what we have with others. Paul says in Ephesians 4:28, “Let him who steals steal no longer; but rather let him labor, performing with his own hands what is good, in order that he may have something to share with him who has need.” Dorcas is a wonderful example of someone who did that. The Scripture says in Acts 9:36 that she used her substance to abound in “. . . deeds of kindness and charity, which she continually did” (Acts 9:36).

And I think it is important for us to realize that the ones who benefit when we share with others is not just those who need what we provide — we benefit as well, for God provides a blessing. Remember what Jesus said in Luke 14:12-14? “When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return, and repayment come to you. But when you give a reception, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, since they do not have the means to repay you; for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.” The Lord also said in Matthew 6:3-4, “. . . when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will repay you.” It is not uncommon today for folks to share with and do good for those who are their friends, those with whom they are comfortable. It is less common for folks to share with those who are not  in their own socio-economic circle. And yet, I suspect that we deprive ourselves of blessings when we fail to seek out ways to share with those who cannot give back.

Perhaps, during the holiday season, it is easy for us to get carried away with the process of giving and getting. But remember, when the apostle Paul spoke to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20, one of the things of which he reminded them was that the Lord Jesus had once said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (v. 35). In the Reader’s Digest article, the couple who helped the traveling college student seemed to have a good understanding of that. And it is inspiring to find that there are still folks in the world who have that kind of attitude. May we be like them.

From the Sun Valley Illuminator, January 2, 2000

By Walton Weaver

The Hebrew custom of providing a burial place for the dead is first introduced in Scripture with Abraham’s purchase of a cave in the land of Canaan for the burial of Sarah (Gen. 23:1ff.). Although Joseph was first embalmed and put in a “coffin” in Egypt (Gen. 50:26), because of his own request before his death his bones later were returned to Canaan for burial (Gen. 49:29; Exod. 13:19). According to history many Jews of the dispersion of the Roman period also preferred to be buried in Canaan, their homeland. Some were buried in the ground (Gen. 35:8, 19). It was generally viewed as a dishonor to leave a body unburied (Deut. 21:23; 2 Sam. 21:12-14; 2 Kings 9:10), and whenever possible the preference would be to place one in a family burial place. Note, for example, the request of Joseph (Gen. 49:29), and that of Barzillai, the servant of Joab (2 Sam. 19:37). See also 2 Chronicles 21:20.

The Tomb Where Jesus Was Buried

Tombs in New Testament Times. In New Testament times tombs had come to be a common place for burial. Even today in the city of Jerusalem one can visit the Tomb of Absalom (so-called) which dates from around the first century. This tomb is a building which served as a monument and it exhibits both Greek and Nabatean influence. Other tombs from the same period might be either a single connected cluster of underground tombs with niches for the various individuals and would serve the purpose of an entire family, or perhaps even an extended family or families. Some tombs however were simply an individual rock-cut tomb for one person. “The bodies generally were not enclosed in coffins ; after decomposition the remaining bones were then removed to a bone chamber in the floor or at the side of the burial ledge and the space reused” (Kenneth E. Bailey, “Burial Customs,” The Oxford Companion to the Bible 95-96).

Some have thought that Jesus’ reference to “whited sepulchres,” or “whitewashed tombs” (NRSV), implies buildings like those mentioned in the above paragraph, but there does not appear to be any good reason why these terms could not include the other type of tombs (those hewn out of rock) as well. The stones used to close the tombs were probably whitewashed in the same way that the buildings were that were built for tombs.

A New And Expensive Tomb. The place where Jesus was buried was a new tomb which had been hewn out of rock by Joseph of Arimathea (Matt. 27:60), a town some 25 miles from Jerusalem. This was “his own new tomb,” meaning that he had just purchased the place and had the rock hewn out. It may very well be that these plans had been made in advance by Jesus. Why would Joseph have just recently purchased this burial place and have it all ready for use if it had not been planned in advance to serve as the burial place of Jesus?

Tombs hewn out of rock were expensive and were therefore purchased only by wealthy families. Joseph is described as “a rich man of Arimathea,” and a disciple of Jesus (Matt. 27:57). He was therefore able to purchase such an expensive place, and being not only a disciple, but also a member of the Sanhedrin (“a prominent member of  the Council,” Mark 15:43, NIV), he was given a favorable hearing by Pilate when he approached him to make request for the body of Jesus. We are told, “then Pilate commanded (the centurion in charge of the crucifixion, Mark 15:44-45, ww) the body to be delivered” (Matt. 27:58).

But more was probably involved in Pilate’s decision than the fact that Joseph was a prominent member of the Council. Pilate’s granting the body of Jesus to Joseph was actually against normal Roman practice. Erich H. Kiehl points out that “according to law the body of someone executed on a charge of high treason could not be given to relatives or friends for burial; the idea was to prevent the burial site from becoming a shrine and focal point for any followers” (The Passion of Our Lord 149). Kiehl’s own view is that the greatest motivating factor on Pilate’s part in giving the body of Jesus over to Joseph was his own conviction of Jesus’ innocence, which he had acknowledged more that once. Only this, he thinks, will explain Pilate’s willingness to ignore Roman law on this matter as he did.

The Tomb Was Closed and Sealed. After the body of Jesus had been prepared for burial (see the next section) it was placed in the tomb that had been prepared to receive it and a large stone was rolled to the door of the tomb (Matt. 27:60). The next day, the day of the Sabbath, the chief priests and Pharisees came to Pilate and asked that the tomb be “made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead . . . ” (Matt. 27:62-63). Pilate granted their request: “You have a watch,” he said to them, “go your way, make it as sure as you can.” “So they went,” we are told, “and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch” (Matt. 27:66). It is uncertain whether Pilate gave them permission to use a temple guard, or whether he told them they could station Roman soldiers at the tomb.

This sealing of the tomb and the posting of a guard to make sure no one stole the body would prove to be strong evidences that the missing body of Jesus on the third day means he had been resurrected from the dead. Isn’t it amazing that what the disciples had not remembered — that Jesus had promised he would be raised from the dead on the third day — “the chief priests and Pharisees understood and remembered, and were determined that no apparent fulfillment of such predictions should be accomplished by the disciples” (Alfred Plummer, Matthew 408).

The Location of the Tomb. The exact location of the tomb where Jesus was placed cannot be identified with certainty. We know that it was in a garden because Scripture states that as a matter of fact (John 19:41). There is also a reference to a gardener in John 20:15. It was close to the place of crucifixion, and probably in the area of the traditional cite of Aceldama (“the field of blood” Acts 1:19), near the junction of the Hinnom and Kidron valleys.

Preparation of Jesus’ Body For Burial

Joseph of Arimathaea, along with Nicodemus, the one who at first had come to Jesus by night, and also a member of the Sanhedrin (John 3:1ff.), prepared the body of Jesus for burial. The body would have first been washed (see Acts 9:37). They then wrapped it in a linen cloth (“fine linen,” or “the linen,” Mark 15:46) and took it to the tomb where “the two men wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen” (John 19:40, NIV). They probably tore the linen they had first used to wrap the body into these “strips” (NIV) or “cloths” (KJV) and with these they individually wrapped each limb of his body, and in this way “bound” it, “no doubt, between layers of myrrh and aloes, the head being wrapped in a napkin (see John 20:7, ww). And so they laid him to rest in the niche of the rock-hewn new tomb” (Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah II:618).

Lazarus, when he was raised from the dead by Jesus, you will remember, “came forth, bound head and foot with wrappings, and his face was wrapped around with a cloth” (John 11:44). The large mixture of myrrhs and aloes that were used to prepare Jesus’ body for burial (and no doubt the same would have been done for Lazarus and others) had been brought by Nicodemus (John 19:39). These would serve to counteract the odor of death. Neither embalming (an Egyptian custom) nor cremation (called idolatry in certain Jewish writings) was permitted. The amount of the myrrh and aloes brought would be about seventy-five pounds in our weight. Kiehl gives the following description of these two substances:

Myrrh comes from a species of thorny-branched shrubs or trees that grow in Arabia, Ethiopia, and Somaliland on rocky ground. The stems and branches exude drops of oily resin. When they are cut, the resin flows freely, eventually solidifying. Aloes is a perfumed oil that comes from the tall and somewhat broad leaves of a species known as Aloe vera.  Probably cultivated in Jesus’ time, Aloe vera is found today in Arab countries and in Palestine.

Because it was only a short time before the beginning of the Sabbath day which would begin at 6:00 p.m. that evening, the day of preparation was almost over when Joseph came to Pilate to make request for the body of Jesus (Mark 15:42). No doubt the disciples were in a hurry to make sure everything had been taken care of before the day of the Sabbath began.

The Women From Galilee

Mark says that there were some women from Galilee, among whom were “Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jose” (Mark 15:47), who followed Joseph and Nico- demus and observed the preparation of Jesus’ body for burial (Luke 23:55). Evidently this means that they did not help with the burial, but they did watch and pay careful attention as the work was being done and saw exactly how the body was laid in the tomb. They had planned at a later time to visit the tomb, and as proof of their love for Jesus they hoped to further apply “spices and ointments” (“ointment” is from the word also rendered “myrrh” used by Joseph and Nicodemus) to his body. Evidently the custom was that this was usually done over a period of several days. But they had to hurry to make careful preparation before the beginning of the Sabbath day. So they must have secured the needed materials, the spices and the ointment, immediately upon returning to their place of lodging (Luke 23:56). The earliest opportunity they would have would be on the first day of the week. Luke says that they “rested the sabbath day according to the commandment.”

When the women returned to the tomb early on Sunday morning they found the huge stone rolled away . . . and you know the rest of the story! The empty tomb, the grave clothes undisturbed, the angels, etc.

Conclusion

What does the burial of Jesus mean to us? What is its significance? It means that Jesus was dead when they placed him in the tomb, contrary to some theories that would explain away the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Its significance is seen in the fact that Paul names it as one of the three cardinal facts of the gospel (1 Cor. 15:1-3). We also see its significance in our own conversion and the new life that we now have as Christians. Paul tells us that not only were we baptized into Christ’s death, but that in our baptism we were also buried with him in baptism (Rom. 6:3-4). As a matter of fact, the way he words it, we died to sin when we were buried with him in baptism!

By Clarence R. Johnson

Over the past five decades we’ve heard a lot about rights  — human rights, civil rights, states rights, in alienable rights, the right to keep and bear arms, women’s rights, a woman’s “right” to an abortion — and now “animal rights.”

This is a complicated subject and maybe not as “black and white, cut and dried” as some imagine it to be. It involves, among other things, the use and abuse of natural resources.

And though the Bible has little or nothing to say about animals rights per se, it does have quite a bit to say about human wrongs. And it does say a number of things that have bearing on our subject.

God Created All “Natural Resources” 

God created all “natural resources,” including all forms of life: plant, animal, and human. (See Gen. 1:1, 11-12, 20-25.) Man is the crowning glory of the creation. He did not evolve from lower forms of life. His body was formed from the elements of the earth and his soul or spirit was specially created in the image of God himself (Gen. 2:7; 1:26-27).

Man, made in God’s image, possesses intellect, emotions, and will. Though man’s body is subject to deterioration and decay, his spirit survives death to live on in another realm (Eccl. 12:7; 3:18-21).

God’s Place in the Universe Is That of Sovereign Ownership
Though we hear of human rights, civil rights, states rights, and even animal rights, the rights that should concern us most are God’s rights. “For every beast of the forest is Mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the mountains, and the wild beasts of the field are Mine. If I were hungry, I would not tell you; for the world is Mine, and all its fullness” (Ps. 50:10-12). “The earth is the Lord’s, and all its fullness, the world and those who dwell therein. For He has founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the waters” (Ps. 4:1-2).

Man’s Place in the Universe Is That Which Has Been Assigned Him by the Creator
Our relationship to God is that of stewardship and we must someday give account for our uses and abuses of the things put within our power. (See Luke 12:42-43, 48.) Man has been given the responsibility of subduing and exercising dominion over the animal creation (Gen. 1:26-27).

Verses That Might Be Used to Teach Animal Rights

Let’s take a look at some verses that might be used to teach animal rights. 

Deuteronomy 25:4: “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Note first that this statement is proverbial in its nature. Though it may legitimately have a literal application, it is in a context of discussing human rights (vv. 2-5). Paul’s application of this text in 1 Corinthians 9:9 shows that we are on the right track. Though I certainly would not deny that it would be wrong for a man to mistreat his ox, wrong for him to muzzle it so that it cannot eat as it works, the proverbial statement of Deuteronomy 25:4 was meant to have a higher, human, application (see 1 Cor. 9:7-14).

Exodus 23:19; 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21: These passages forbade the Israelites from boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk. Older commentators saw no significance in these verses beyond that of showing pity, and avoiding cruelty. Though that may make sense of a sort, keep in mind that it did not keep the Israelites from cooking and eating a young goat — they just couldn’t boil it in its mother’s milk. (I understand that Jewish traditions regarding kosher foods does not allow meat to be cooked in milk, or even milk to be served along with meat, to avoid violating these verses.)

In 1930 archaeologists discovered the Ugarit literature, in which “it was learned that boiling a kid in its mother’s milk was a Canaanite [religious] practice used in connection with [pagan] fertility rites” (Wycliffe Commentary).

Again, a look at the context of this command bears out what we have already considered. All the passages that forbade boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk are in a context dealing with worship or sacrifice to Deity. The Israelites were not to mix Canaanitish religious practices with their worship to God. These verses are not really dealing with animal rights, but with human wrongs.

Proverbs 12:10: “A righteous man regards the life of his animal, but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.” Indeed, this verse, along with general principles suggested in other passages, indicates that it is wrong to practice animal cruelty. In fact, it has been generally observed that those who practice animal cruelty usually graduate to human cruelty. It should be noted, however, that raising and killing animals for food, clothing, and other legitimate purposes, using them as beasts of burden, etc., are not viewed in the Bible as acts of cruelty.

Animal Rights Extremists Protest the Legitimate Use of Animals

Readers Digest, June 1990, had an article detailing vandalism on the part of “animal rights” extremists. And make no mistake about it, when a person refers to killing animals for food or medical research as “murder,” that person is an extremist.

Perhaps the real culprit here is the atheistic doctrine of general evolution. General evolution theorizes that humans are basically no different from the rest of the so-called “animal kingdom” — that we have developed from ape-like ancestors, and someday will be developed out of existence, giving way to some higher form of life — that we as individuals have no greater destiny than the grave.

The Bible repeatedly emphasizes the distinction between human and other life forms and indicates that humans are of much greater value than animals. See Matthew 6:26; 8:31-32; 12:11-12. Jesus said, “And I say to you, ‘My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will show you whom you should fear; Fear Him who, after He has killed, has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, fear Him! Are not five sparrows sold for two copper coins? And not one of them is forgotten before God. But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows’” (Luke 12:4-7).

The following uses of animals are in harmony with the revealed will of God, to whom all the animals belong:

• Animals, both wild and domestic, can be killed and eaten. In fact, under the Old Testament system, eating of certain meats was required in Passover observances, etc. (Gen. 9:3; Exod. 12:1-11; 1 Tim. 4:1-4). 
• Animals, both wild and domestic, may be killed to provide clothing and/or shelter for man. For Adam and Eve, “the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them” (Gen. 3:21). John the Baptist wore a leather belt (Mark 1:6). The tabernacle that Moses built, by God’s command, was completely covered with both ram’s skins and badger skins (Exod. 26:14).
• Animals may be used as beasts of burden. One can ride them, pull chariots with them, pull plows, thresh grain, etc. Even Jesus rode a donkey (Matt. 21:7).
• There is a Scriptural precedent for penning animals in a stall and fattening them for the precise purpose of slaughter as food. They killed the fatted calf (Luke 15:23).
• Wild animals were slain for the protection of domestic animals and men (1 Sam. 17:34-37).
• Dogs were used in guarding and or guiding sheep (Job 30:1).
• Animals were kept as pets for companionship (2 Sam. 12:1-6; Matt. 15:27).
• The principles involved in hunting, fishing, and trapping harmonizes with the Scriptures (see Lev. 17:13; Amos 3:5; Matt. 17:27; John 21:6).
• Though I know of no specific example, it is in harmony with every Bible principle to use animals in research and development of medicines and safety devices. After all, man was told to “have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth” (Gen. 1:28).
• Again, though there is no Bible example of such that I can think of, “game management” falls within the scope of subduing and exercising dominion over the animal creation. This is a difficult and complex problem. Use of a resource might be expedient in one area, circumstance, or time, and inexpedient in another. “To everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven: a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck what is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up   . . .” (Eccl. 3:1ff).

Conclusion

I am persuaded that it is wrong for us to wastefully abuse and destroy animal life — not so much because animals have rights, but because they belong to God, and we must honor Divine rights. I believe it is sinful for us to be cruel to any creature God has made but this does not preclude our using the things God has put under our dominion to serve and fulfill our needs and legitimate desires.

P.O. Box 463, Marietta, Pennsylvania
Truth Magazine Vol. XLIV: 4 p20 February 17, 2000

By Mike Willis

On more than one occasion, I have used apostolic example to authorize conduct that I was engaged in only to have the one who objected to the conduct to respond, “But, you’re not an apostle.” On one occasion, I was refuting false doctrine and referred to a religious group by name and a denominational friend objected. On another occasion, I referred to the unscriptural practices of a local church and a Christian used the same objection. Perhaps you have had someone object to conduct that is clearly identical with that of an apostle to which someone objected, saying, “You’re not an apostle.” 

One recently wrote an article in a bulletin mailed all over the United States and posted on the World Wide Web (I say this to indicate that its influence is not confined to the local church of which he is a member) condemning his brethren saying that they were “some new sort of apostle that a local church is supposed to support while he trots around the country taking care of everyone else’s business! Some may think that such activity is preaching but it does not meet the criteria the New Testament gives for a genuine evangelist.” Mailing a paper all over the United States in which preaching is done condemning activities of brethren outside the local church seems to violate the very rules of autonomy the author condemns others for violating. Is this author “taking care of everyone else’s business”? Is he some “new sort of apostle” that a local church should support while he sends out bulletins all over the country taking care of everyone else’s business? I have purposely withheld the name of the brother to focus our attention of the issue before us. We want to know just what kind of work the apostles were allowed to do that ordinary preachers cannot perform.

In this study, we intend to establish what the biblical role of an apostle was, what his qualifications were, and what role was exclusively given to the apostles.

The Word Apostle

The word “apostle” is used 83 times in 80 verses of Scripture in the New Testament. The word is translated from apostolos which is defined as “a delegate, messenger, one sent forth with orders” (Thayer 68). The word is derived from the verb apostello which has the entymological  meaning of “to send.” The noun is used especially of “persons sent with commission” and reflects the Hebrew usage of shaluach that is used to describe someone who is sent with a commission. There are several uses of the word “apostle” in the New Testament that reflects this etymological sense, rather than its technical sense, as mentioned below. Barnabas is designated an apostle (Acts 14:4), some think that Andronicus and Junia are described as apostles (Rom. 16:7; a better explanation is that they are known and honored by the Twelve), and the word apostolos is used to describe “messengers” of churches (2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25).

The term apostolos is used in a specific, technical definition to refer to “the twelve disciples whom Christ selected, out of the multitude of his adherents, to be his constant companions and the heralds to proclaim to men the kingdom of God” (Thayer 68).

The list of the apostles is given in four places: Matthew 10:1-4; Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:13. From this comparison of the lists, we can identify the Twelve.
That Jesus chose Twelve is no accident. This corresponds to the Twelve Tribes of Israel and is so used in the book of Revelation (21:14).

The Qualifications of the Apostles

The qualifications of the Apostles demonstrates that this office was not a perpetual office to be filled in each succeeding generation of the church. Here are the qualifications given in Scripture:

1. The apostles were hand chosen by the Lord Jesus. Jesus spent the night in prayer before selecting the Twelve (Luke 6:12). The next morning he personally chose from among the thousands of his disciples, these Twelve who became known as his apostles. When Paul defended his apostleship, he specifically argued that he also was hand-picked by Christ saying, “Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)” (Gal. 1:1). He stated that he was “called to be an apostle” (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:7; 2 Tim. 1:1). The record in Acts 1 of the selection of Matthias emphasizes God’s choice of Matthias through the lot.

2. The apostles companied with Jesus during his earthly ministry. When the Twelve were originally selected, they were selected from among Jesus’ disciples and forsook all to follow Jesus (see Matt. 4:19-20; Mark 2:14). When Judas was replaced, one of the qualifications given for those to be considered as an apostle was this: “Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:21-22).
3. The apostles were eyewitnesses of the resurrection. The second qualification given for an apostle was that he be a “witness with us of his resurrection” (Acts 1:22). 

The qualifications of the apostles makes evident that the office of the apostle was not a perpetual office in the church. The concept that the apostles had powers that were passed down from one generation to another via an unbroken chain of succession is shown to be false. There are no living apostles today, the concepts of Pentecostals, Catholics, Mormons, and any other religious group to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Function of the Twelve

What was the function of the Twelve? That they had a fundamental role in the early church is evident from several Scriptures. The church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). In listing the various roles that men have in the church, Paul began with the apostles (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11). The New Jerusalem of Revelation is described as having twelve foundations on which are inscribed the names of the apostles (Rev. 21:14). What was their unique role and function:

1. They were eyewitnesses of the resurrection. Jesus spoke to the Apostles just before his ascension saying, “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). No one could be considered as a replacement for Judas unless he had witnessed the resurrection (Acts 1:22). The Apostles gave witness to the resurrection (Acts 4:33). To be qualified to be an apostle, one had to be an eyewitness of the resurrection; one of the functions of the apostle was to give his eyewitness testimony.

2. They were the mouthpiece of the Lord to reveal his new will. In Jesus’ final evening with the Twelve, he expressed his intention to send to them the Holy Spirit who would reveal to them God’s divine will:

But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you (John 14:26).

But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning (John 15:26-27).
I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come,  he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come (John 16:12-13).

In their role as spokesmen for God, they were placed beside the prophets of the Old Testament (2 Pet. 3:2, 15-16; Eph. 3:3-5). What was revealed through them became known as the “apostles’ doctrine” and was the revelation given for the church (Acts 2:42). What they revealed was the Lord’s commandments (1 Cor. 14:37). Jesus said, “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me” (Luke 10:16). As agents of the Lord, his ambassadors (2 Cor. 5:20), what they spoke had all of the legislative, binding authority of the Lord himself. They were his ambassadors in the same sense as were the prophets of the Old Testament. One who resisted their inspired teaching resisted the teaching of the Lord.

This revelation was given “once for all” (Jude 3). The revelation given to mankind through the Apostles is not on-going. It is complete and final. There are no living Apostles revealing new revelation for this age, the claims of modern Roman Catholics and Mormons to the contrary notwithstanding.

3. They were men qualified to confirm their newly revealed message with miracles. Luke records that “many wonders and signs were done by the apostles” (Acts 2:43; 5:12). This is the “great power” alluded to with which the Apostles gave their witness to the resurrection of Jesus (Acts 4:33). These were the “signs of an apostle” that Paul spoke of (2 Cor. 12:12; cf. Rom. 15:18-19). The miracles that the Apostles performed were God’s verification that their message was true. Mark said, “And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following” (Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:3-4).

4. The Apostles were uniquely endowed with power to transfer miraculous gifts to other disciples through the laying on of their hands. Luke’s record of the conversion of the Samaritans proves this. The evangelist Philip left Jerusalem to go to Samaria where he performed miracles, confirming the message of his gospel. After several were converted, the Apostles sent Peter and John to check on the work at Samaria. The Scriptures record: 

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money . . . (Acts 8:14-18).

Simon the sorcerer saw what many people never see: “that through laying on of the apostles’ hands, the Holy Ghost was given.” This is confirmed by other Scriptures. Paul longed to travel to Rome “that I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be established” (Rom. 1:11). Timothy’s gift was imparted to him by the laying on of Paul’s hands (2 Tim. 1:6); the Ephesians received gifts through the laying on of Paul’s hands (Acts 19:6).

The Apostles’ Role in the Church at Jerusalem

The role of the apostles in the local church at Jerusalem is not spelled out in explicit detail. That they had a prominent role is indicated by several things: (a) the benevolent funds were laid at the apostles’ feet (Acts 4:35, 37; 5:2; 6:6); (b) Barnabas’ bringing Saul to the apostles when he wished to identify with the Jerusalem church (Acts 9:27); (c) the leadership role the apostles had in the selection of the seven to serve tables (Acts 6:1-6); (d) the prominence of the apostles in the Jerusalem conference, even though elders were in place (Acts 15:2, 4, 6, 22, 23, 33; 16:4). Because of their role in revealing divine truth and their activity in the local church, they naturally had a leading role in the church at Jerusalem. As soon as elders were appointed, the role of oversight of the local congregation at Jerusalem would have shifted to them (Heb. 13:17; Acts 20:28).

Misunderstanding the Apostles’ Role

Through the centuries of church history, various religious groups have misunderstood the role of the Apostles in one way or another. The Roman Catholics have taught that Peter was the head of the apostles in asserting their claims about the papacy, but what is perhaps more important is their belief that some special spiritual powers were conveyed from one person to another through a chain of apostolic succession. The priest can administer baptism, the mass, and excommunication because of the power conveyed to him that ordinary men do not have.

Because of the misunderstandings that men have about the role of the Apostles, we need to continue this study to see some things that the Apostles did that were not unique to Apostles.

6567 Kings Ct., Avon, Indiana 46123 mikewillis1@compuserve.com
Truth Magazine Vol. XLIV: 5 p1 March 2, 2000