Unfortunately, not every congregation or city has a Paul or a Timothy or a John to apply the test. Those three men were among the initial leaders of this Greek city. We must not call them pastors in the normal sense, for they were by now first and foremost apostolic. Their job was to establish and move on. They taught their people how to discern what was a true and a false apostle as a part of their education.

We have bits and pieces of the information that they were scattering, mainly from Paul, the no-nonsense totally qualified apostle who helped lay the foundation not only at Ephesus but at a series of other churches, and to a greater degree, for the New Testament church as a whole. I would think that his direction can still be followed.

Paul’s word unfortunately has to come up against the word of modern disciples calling themselves apostles. I heard one such man recently saying that apostles are to be followed in every generation because seasons change. Though this particular brother is solid in the Word, his claim would lead one to think that an apostolic teaching in our day might have to be obeyed over a similar teaching from a first century leader.

I know he would deny such a thing. He would say that the cardinal doctrines have been laid down and are unchanging. Not all today’s “apostles” would do so. But it’s not the cardinal doctrines that concern me at the moment. It’s a whole host of lesser issues that seem to be up for grabs. Women in leadership. Holiness (Did I say “lesser”?). Music/worship.

Consider the season, say our apostolic friends. Consider the move throughout the church to this or that position. Move accordingly. Don’t get left behind.

Rome said things like that. Rome allowed pagans to come in with their falseness and corrupt the church of the first centuries. An entire new organization was formed. It took over the political world of its day, but was Christ calling out and sanctifying a people in this way?

The bishops of Rome were now said to be successors to the apostles. The church is a living thing, we were told. Go with the flow. Don’t hang on to first century books when we have right-now apostles.

What happened in Rome is a tragedy.

What is happening among us today? Are there truly apostles we should follow in this new season? Are there apostles at all?

Before we categorically rule them out, we have to deal with missionaries. A totally not-in-the-Bible name if ever there was one. But most groups that send missionaries would fight for their right to be.

Simple solution here. Change the Latin word missionary to the Greek equivalent, apostle, and you see that there truly are apostles in the church. They are sent. They preach the Gospel. They establish churches all over the world. Sounds pretty apostolic to me. But no one wants to use that term because of the implications. If these men are truly apostles, they have authority…

Well, in their countries of service, they do wield this power. But no one claims that they have an authoritative teaching right to the Body at large, as some of the other apostles claim.

Enough. Better now that I simply give the standards Paul gave for all men who would call themselves apostles/missionaries/sent-ones.

Paul’s response to the challenge that even he was not an apostle (!) is recorded in II Corinthians. He intimates the following requirements, though no list is given, as for pastors and deacons. Seems that an apostle is one called directly by Jesus Christ and therefore men cannot make rules for them. Hence no such list for apostolic leaders. Fair enough.

Let’s make that requirement number one: Called by Jesus. Paul did say that a number of times, right? Not an imaginary call to the inner man, mind you, but a clear-to-the-Body calling borne out by miraculous encounter and/or confirmed by gifts of the Spirit, as when the Spirit publicly called Paul and Barnabas at Antioch.

Requirement number two is, without a doubt, signs and wonders. A man who is not working in the miraculous may be a fine saved brother, a teacher, a pastor, but probably not an apostle. Hmmm. That limits the field. I’m talking about persons who literally lay hands on the sick and see them recover. Open blind eyes. Cause the deaf to hear. Cast out demons. Know anyone like this? I mean you have seen the miracles yourself?

3. That’s another thing. An apostle does not, should not, commend himself. The proof is in the power. Not his words.

4. He probably will not be charging money for his services.

5. He will be persecuted, yea hated! Even by much of the church! Condemned to death. The off-scouring of the world. Filth, they will say.

Paul says that’s how it was with the true apostles of the first century. We “ordinary” believers have often thought that all these things apply to the whole Body, when in fact Paul often was talking about himself and the apostles when he mentioned such things. He made a clear difference. Not to say we are not to suffer. But these men, and they were all men, suffered first.

No, second. Jesus suffered first. Then he appointed a group of men to suffer next, as Christ, in leadership. They were to pass the baton on to other leaders who would bear the pain that they did.

Somewhere along the way it became an honor to be an apostle, a privilege for the few. And people began to fight for that honor, and even murder. Obviously these were not true apostles.

Which brings us back to the present moment. Where are these true apostles today? Are they leading us to the cross of Christ, or to some fascinating new teachings about Christ? Are they calling us to die or to live it up? Are they committed first to the original apostles or to their own agenda? Are they supermen in their natural strength, or weak men filled with the power of God? Are they specimens of male humanity, or do they sport a thorn in the flesh at which we cringe when around them?