What are the biblical qualifications for apostleship?

The gifts for edification were apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers. Elsewhere it is said that "God has set some in the Church, first, apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers;" after which the sign gifts are named. (1 Cor. 12:28.) The chief gift, then, was that of apostles. They were to testify of Christ's resurrection and to lay the foundation of the Church. It seems to have been an essential qualification, therefore, that they should have seen Jesus after He rose from the dead. Thus, Peter, speaking of the appointment of another apostle in Judas's room, says that he "must be ordained to be a witness with us of His resurrection" (Acts 1:22). Accordingly on the day of Pentecost, "Peter, standing up with the eleven," declares to the Jews that "this Jesus has God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses" (Acts 2:32). We read afterwards that "with power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 4:33). And still later, speaking to Cornelius, Peter says that God raised Jesus up "the third day, and showed Him openly, not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead" (Acts 10:40-41). The only persons who ate and drank with Jesus after His resurrection were the apostles. Though others saw Him, therefore, these were the chosen witnesses of the resurrection. Paul, himself, though not one of these, owns the same thing, declaring that Jesus had been raised up "from the dead, and He was seen many days of them which came with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses unto the people" (Acts 13:30-31). Paul's own apostleship is connected with the same evidence, and required the same qualification, though the place where he saw the risen Christ was not on earth, but in glory. Thus Ananias says to him, "The God of our fathers has chosen thee, that thou shouldest know His will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of His mouth; for thou shalt be His witness unto all men, of what thou hast seen and heard" (Acts 22:14-15). Accordingly Paul, when asserting his apostleship, asks — "Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" (1 Cor. 9:1). And afterwards, speaking of the witnesses of His resurrection, he says — "And last of all, He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time; for I am the least of the apostles" (1 Cor. 15:8-9). The apostles, then, were to be eye-witnesses of Christ's resurrection, an important fact, inasmuch as it shows the office to be temporary in its character, and incapable of revival in after times.

An essential feature of apostleship was first-hand knowledge of the risen Saviour. The apostle must be able to testify of Him as having personally seen Him in His risen estate: hence Paul's third question in 1 Corinthians 9:1. Paul saw Him, not during the forty days but later in the full blaze of His glory. However, from the outset there must be the twelve apostolic witnesses, and Matthias was chosen. They had recourse to the Old Testament practice of casting lots: guidance, such as we read of in Acts 13:2, could not be known until the Holy Ghost had been given.

Nothing is said about the continuance of these gifts, and we must look at them separately to see how far they were meant to be permanent or only temporary. As to the apostle, the distinguishing feature was his ability to bear testimony to Christ's resurrection. Thus in the case of the new apostle chosen by lot, the object, as explained by Peter, was that he might "be a witness with us of His resurrection." (Acts 1: 22.) And even Paul, who had never seen Jesus either during His life or in the forty days before His ascension, rests his apostleship on the same ground. "Am I not an apostle?" he asks. "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" (1 Cor. 9:1.) And afterwards, speaking of Christ's resurrection, he says, "Last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle" (1 Cor. 15:8-9), thus again associating his apostleship with his having seen the risen Christ. Since this, then, was a condition of apostleship, it is clear that no one who has not seen Christ risen could be an apostle; or, in other words, that apostles were only temporary gifts. But again, apostles and prophets were, so to speak, the foundation course of the Church; for we are "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone." No doubt the foundation is permanent, and in this sense the gift is permanent. But this very fact precludes the thought of a succession of apostles; for how could there be a succession of foundations to the same building? The idea of a succession or revival of apostles is therefore a mere fancy of the mind of man, entirely opposed to Scripture, and subversive of all that is there taught concerning apostolic qualifications and functions.

Nothing is said about the continuance of these gifts, and we must look at them separately to see how far they were meant to be permanent or only temporary. As to the apostle, the distinguishing feature was his ability to bear testimony to Christ's resurrection. Thus in the case of the new apostle chosen by lot, the object, as explained by Peter, was that he might "be a witness with us of His resurrection." (Acts 1:22.) And even Paul, who had never seen Jesus either during His life or in the forty days before His ascension, rests his apostleship on the same ground. "Am I not an apostle?" he asks. "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" (1 Cor. 9:1.) And afterwards, speaking of Christ's resurrection, he says, "Last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle" (1 Cor. 15:8-9), thus again associating his apostleship with his having seen the risen Christ. Since this, then, was a condition of apostleship, it is clear that no one who has not seen Christ risen could be an apostle; or, in other words, that apostles were only temporary gifts. But again, apostles and prophets were, so to speak, the foundation course of the Church; for we are "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone." No doubt the foundation is permanent, and in this sense the gift is permanent. But this very fact precludes the thought of a succession of apostles; for how could there be a succession of foundations to the same building? The idea of a succession or revival of apostles is therefore a mere fancy of the mind of man, entirely opposed to Scripture, and subversive of all that is there taught concerning apostolic qualifications and functions.

Nothing is said about the continuance of these gifts, and we must look at them separately to see how far they were meant to be permanent or only temporary. As to the apostle, the distinguishing feature was his ability to bear testimony to Christ's resurrection. Thus in the case of the new apostle chosen by lot, the object, as explained by Peter, was that he might "be a witness with us of His resurrection." (Acts 1:22.) And even Paul, who had never seen Jesus either during His life or in the forty days before His ascension, rests his apostleship on the same ground. "Am I not an apostle?" he asks. "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" (1 Cor. 9:1.) And afterwards, speakiug of Christ's resurrection, he says, "Last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle" (1 Cor. 15:8-9), thus again associating his apostleship with his having seen the risen Christ. Since this, then, was a condition of apostleship, it is clear that no one who has not seen Christ risen could be an apostle; or, in other words, that apostles were only temporary gifts. But again, apostles and prophets were, so to speak, the foundation course of the Church; for we are "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone." No doubt the foundation is permanent, and in this sense the gift is permanent. But this very fact precludes the thought of a succession of apostles; for how could there be a succession of foundations to the same building? The idea of a succession or revival of apostles is therefore a mere fancy of the mind of man, entirely opposed to Scripture, and subversive of all that is there taught concerning apostolic qualifications and functions.

The apostles occupied a unique position in the establishment of the Church which could not be transmitted to others. They were special witnesses of our Lord's resurrection. See Acts 1:22, I Corinthians 9:1 and 15:5-8. Therefore there can be no "apostolic succession" such as various church groups claim today. Only one appointed such by the Lord, and a witness of His resurrection could be an apostle in the full sense of the word.

There were no successors to the apostles: to be apostles they must have 'seen the Lord.' Acts 1:21-22; 1 Cor. 9:1; Rev. 2:2. The foundation of the church was laid, and apostolic work being complete the apostles passed away, there remain however, in the goodness of God, such gifts as are needed "till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." Eph. 4:12-13.

In the New Testament we have seen the principle: no ordination without apostles or their delegates. What should happen then in the time when the apostles would no longer be on earth? Do the Scriptures contain a procedure to choose or to ordain new apostles? It will be clear that this is not the case. God Himself was the giver of the apostles whose main characteristic was that they had seen the risen Christ (1 Corinthians 9: 1) and whose service was connected with signs and wonders and works of power (2 Corinthians 12: 12). They had laid, together with the New Testament prophets, the foundation (Ephesians 2: 20) and in their teaching the saints persevered (Acts 2: 42). For the future the assemblies were not to be dependent on successors of the apostles. The apostles themselves pointed another way: the Word of God. When Paul left the elders of Ephesus he committed them to God and to the Word of His grace and not to a new apostle (Acts 20: 32). Peter did the same: the believers should, after his departure, "call to mind these things" (2 Peter 1: 15). With an eye on a dark future he tells them "to be mindful to the words spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of the Lord and Saviour by your apostles" (2 Peter 3: 2). Also John said similar things: "As for you let that which ye have heard from the beginning abide in you" (1 John 2: 24).

In the New Testament we have seen the principle: no ordination without apostles or their delegates. What should happen then in the time when the apostles would no longer be on earth? Do the Scriptures contain a procedure to choose or to ordain new apostles? It will be clear that this is not the case. God Himself was the giver of the apostles whose main characteristic was that they had seen the risen Christ (1 Corinthians 9:1) and whose service was connected with signs and wonders and works of power (2 Corinthians 12:12). They had laid, together with the New Testament prophets, the foundation (Ephesians 2:20) and in their teaching the saints persevered (Acts 2:42). For the future the assemblies were not to be dependent on successors of the apostles. The apostles themselves pointed another way: the Word of God. When Paul left the elders of Ephesus he committed them to God and to the Word of His grace and not to a new apostle (Acts 20:32). Peter did the same: the believers should, after his departure, "call to mind these things" (2 Peter 1:15). With an eye on a dark future he tells them "to be mindful to the words spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of the Lord and Saviour by your apostles" (2 Peter 3:2). Also John said similar things: "As for you let that which ye have heard from the beginning abide in you" (1 John 2:24).

In follows too from 2 Corinthians 12:12 that the signs were an evidence of apostleship. And an apostle had to have seen the Lord (Acts 1:21-26; 1 Cor. 9:1; 15:8, 9).