¶1[music] Hello and welcome to the Ask Anti Wright Anything program. This is the show where we try to answer your questions about Jesus, the Bible, and the life of faith. I'm Mike Bird from Ridley College in Melbourne, Australia. And joining us from the edge of the world in the Hebdine Islands of Scotland is none other than Tom Wright. um officially from Witcher fall in Oxford, but yes, at the moment in the glorious outer airb >> sounds like it's lovely under there this time of year, Tom.
¶2>> Actually, it is. I'm looking out at at Blue Sky at ripples of waves in the sea and it's this is a good place to be. >> Now, Tom, did you ever see that movie starring Robert Duval called The Apostle? Did you ever see that? >> No.
¶3Alas, I didn't. I'm not a great movie goer and I certainly didn't get that one. >> Uh well, it's a pretty old movie now, but it actually was a very good movie I found. But it's about a guy who is very Christian, very religious, has a lot of problems going on in his life and in the midst of it, he baptizes himself as an apostle and he goes off and founds a church. It's it's it's a very dramatic story.
¶4Uh, I enjoy I think it's probably Robert Deval's best movie. But it does bring us to a question about apostles and prophets today. And our first question is from Charlotte Milbour from Strathton in the United Kingdom. And this is what Charlotte asks. She says, "Good morning both.
¶5Raised an Anglican and then attended charismatic churches since my early 20s. I'm now in my 50s and re-evaluating everything. I have taken all the teachings I have listened to off the table and just left Jesus there while I wrestle with some key questions. The charismatic movement is big on modern-day apostles and prophets and uh there are many prominent ministers who use those titles. They claim to have a mandate to speak over nations with words and revelations directly from the Lord.
¶6My question is whether the Bible supports the idea of modern-day apostles and prophets being appointed by God as opposed to simply the gift of prophecy being used in church settings. Thank you for any wisdom and insight into this area. I find your podcast helpful and challenging in equal measure. Please keep them coming. Well, thanks for those encouraging words, Charlotte.
¶7Uh Tom, do we have apostles and prophets today? I mean, you know, in in Anglicanism, we ordain people to the diiacinate. We have priests, we have bishops. Should we be ordaining apostles and a prophets as well? What are your thoughts here, Tom?
¶8>> Yeah, I think we should start with the New Testament as we normally would. um where the word apostle is used in at least two different ways. Uh it's got a restricted sense [clears throat] in which uh the apostles are the people who saw the risen Jesus in the flesh. Um and Paul is very clear in 1 Corinthians 9 and elsewhere that he is an apostle. He has seen the risen Lord Jesus.
¶9He knows that the Corinthians haven't and that that's one of the differences between him and them. Um, but elsewhere in the New Testament, sometimes we find the word apostles used just for the early leaders in general. And one could spell that out a bit more. But so it looks to me as though right from the start um that there isn't any sort of fixed order so that by say the year 55 AD everybody knows here are the apostles and those people aren't apostles etc. Ditto with prophets that prophecy is is a strange thing.
¶10It's it's been around in the church from the beginning. Um, Philip the evangelist has daughters who prophesy and they are known about and they they're sort of respected as such and mentioned as such. Um, but when you get lists of the different gifts and callings that God gives to the church so that the church can be the church. For instance, in Ephesians chapter 3 or in uh 1 Corinthians chapter 12 and in some other lists as well, the lists never come out the same. There there's some that that are in this one and not that one and they're in a different order, etc., which strongly suggests to me that the early church was not bothered about a definite hierarchy or there's A and B and C and that's your lot.
¶11Um I mean yes in the Anglican formula it does rather say that from the beginning there were bishops, priests and deacons, bishop, presbytors and deacons. But actually in the Bible it's not quite so clear and it's not clear particularly [clears throat] whether the deacons in the New Testament are doing the same thing as deacons in the Anglican tradition which you and I share. And I the great thing is I don't think that matters. I think as the church has gone on, it's been clear that different jobs have to be done and that different uh different gifts have to be sought from the Lord to perform those jobs. Now, I'm I'm struck as well by the way in which in charismatic circles things often begin very free and easy.
¶12People come out of traditional denominations, whether Catholic or Anglican or Methodist or whatever, and they say, "We're not having any of that hierarchy of ministers and bishops and arch deacons and so on." And so almost at once they start reinventing a hierarchy, whether it's apostles, prophets, evangelists, whatever it is. And sometimes this is more rigid and more structured than the traditional churches that they've left. Now not all charismatic and free church circles go that route but some do and where you get then explicit claims by leaders especially if they are smallc charismatic leaders that is to say um leaders who've got a big personality and can say okay guys this is it this is the way we have to be then when such a person declares I am an apostle and you got to treat me as such and respect me as such then I start to get really quite worried because Paul's picture of apostilhip in 2 Corinthians uh which is the paradigm text on genuine Christshaped apostilhip is not about big characters coming and storming their way through the room and saying I'm an apostle so you got to do what I say indeed it's the very opposite of that Paul's opponents in second Corinthians were people whose motto seems to have been dare I say make apostilhip great again and Paul says Absolutely not. We're just not going there. The signs of an apostle are the signs of the suffering Christ.
¶13And it's when I am weak that then I am strong. So beware of the big characters who think that they can give themselves or claim titles etc. At the same time, some people in church history have gone into new territories and have preached the gospel and been the real church planters. And if you want to refer to them as the apostle, you know, somebody who might be the apostle to Nigeria or the apostle to um Japan or wherever it is, then okay. But this is a loose way of saying they are the ones who announced the risen Jesus for the first time in this territory.
¶14Not a way of saying that they had a special authority or office which then um set them apart from everybody else. A genuine apostle, read 2 Corinthians again. Genuine apostle would not be set apart from anybody else except by their humility and their suffering and their bearing in the body the the marks of the woundedness of Jesus. And and likewise with prophecy. I know many people who have had and still have a gift of prophecy.
¶15That is to say that sometimes in prayer they discern that something needs to be done here or someone perhaps this person needs to go and do that. And when they say that then it seems as though a spiritual energy is released which enables that situation or that person to do what is being spoken of. I've had experience of that myself. people who said things to me where I think where did that come from and then prayerfully reflecting and thinking actually that may well be right I have to take that very seriously but that doesn't mean that I then put such a person on a pedestal and say this is now a prophet and so they are to hold the office of prophet in the local church because after all we find in 1 Corinthians 14 um the spirit of prophets prophecy is subject to prophets so we've got to be very careful And the gift of discernment is always the vital one. After all, in the Old Testament, there are some genuine prophets who get it wrong.
¶16Um like the the the old boy who comes along and says, "Um I the Lord has told me you're ought to come back and have dinner with me today when in fact that's not true." And so the the poor man is deceived and does so and gets killed by a lion. And you know there's all sorts of odd stories. We can in other words we can't control this. Beware of making a new cast iron system out of categories like this. Having said that, God does all sorts of things in all sorts of ways through all sorts of people.
¶17And don't try to restrict that or limit it. and particularly don't use it to set up structures of authority where you and others like you will be able to tell other people what they must and mustn't do. I mean, I've heard horror stories of churches where somebody who's called themselves an apostle actually tells members of the church who they can and can't get married to and that sort of thing. Now there might be pastoral wisdom sometimes in saying please in the name of God watch out in your dealings with this person but that's very different from saying I'm going to tell you to do this and you to do that. So beware of a false authoritarianism and a false reconstruction of the kind of uh structures from which traditionally the charismatic movement has sought to escape.
¶18So that that's that's where I would go. And maybe this is a typical sort of loose Anglican position, but I think it makes sense biblically. >> Yeah, Tom, I tend to think of apostles and prophets as the foundation of the church. I mean, that's what Paul says in Ephesians 2:20. You know, you are built on the foundation of the apostles >> and the prophets with the Messiah, Jesus himself as the cornerstone.
¶19So I tend to think of of them as foundational ministries which which whereby the office was there for the building of the church but does not necessarily continue. I would contend then that the prophetic element continues because the Holy Spirit is the spirit of prophecy and the prophetic gifting or the prophetic power of the spirit makes itself expressed in the way that I think you've described and I would say the apostolicity of the church >> is not by people calling themselves apostles >> uh nor is it the apostolic succession that you get in the Catholic Church where they lay hands on people and that's the apostolic succession. I think the apostolicity of the church is when we preach and proclaim the apostolic gospel. >> So I'm a little bit hesitant to see people as apostles and prophets today even though I believe in the apostolic gospel and I believe the Holy Spirit is the spirit of prophecy. >> Yep.
¶20Fair enough with you all the way. >> Great. Great. Well, we've got a second question, Tom. This is from Jod Root in the USA.
¶21And this is about, you know, what do we call baptism, the Lord's supper? Do we think of them as sacraments or as ordinances? And this is what Jod writes. She says, "My husband and I love listening to these episodes and have really benefited from the bonus episodes. I mean, there you go, friends.
¶22You know, subscribe to these bonus episodes. The satisfaction levels are off the chart." Uh now Jody also says, "Thank you for your time and energy put into answering our questions. We have attended services in a variety of denominations and have recently been wondering about baptism and communion. Some call them sacraments and others call them ordinances. How would you describe the difference between a sacrament and an ordinance?
¶23Do you feel the word chosen by denomination describe these special events is significant? So Tom, I guess it's a question of saying, you know, does it matter whether you call them sacraments or ordinances? >> Is there much at stake here? Because my understanding of it is a sacrament which is you know based on the Latin word sacramentum means like an oath or a pledge. Okay.
¶24And historically uh the church both Catholic and certain elements of the Protestant church consider them to be a means of grace by which you know God's grace is communicated to us either union with Christ, fellowship with the spirit and baptism and you know feeding on Christ by faith in our hearts when we take the Lord's supper. But other denominations, and I think here particularly of some of our Baptist friends and churches of Christ and Pentecostals and free church traditions, they might think of them not as sacraments because they're a little bit worried it's getting a little bit too physical and a little bit too mystical for some people's tastes and they call them an ordinance, which would say it is a symbol or sign of God's grace. Now, Tom, do you have strong feelings about sacrament versus ordinance? >> It's it's interesting. I'm looking out of this window at a little cabin which my neighbor has to keep stuff in, and I'm thinking, how would you describe the thing which is on the top of it?
¶25Now, you could describe it as a roof. You could describe it as a covering. A roof would be a kind of a technical term. That's what you have on the top of a house. But when you're building something in a a part of the country where it rains and snows and so on, what you need is a covering.
¶26And if somebody says, "No, we want a covering, not a roof." Then I want to say, "Actually, they're the same thing, but it's just a different kind of word to describe it." And the word sacrament is a way of I mean has turned into a a way of talking about what's going on theologically. Whereas the word ordinance is simply a way of saying we were told to do this. Jesus told us to do this. I mean ordinance is a way of saying it's a command of the Lord. Do this in remembrance of me.
¶27Go into all the world. Make disciples. Baptize them. So Jesus told us to go and baptize people. He told us to do this the breadbreaking and the pouring of wine in in in his memory um to recall him in memory of him etc.
¶28Um, so that's what the ordinance means. And I think you're absolutely right in what you just hinted there that the reason some free churches prefer to call them ordinances is because the word sacrament has acquired uh the various associations of a perceived Catholic theology in which there's all sorts of um mysterious and wrong impressions to be honest which have been created down the years because people who've imagined from the middle middle ages at least onwards that when a priest at an altar does and says certain things, then some kind of magical change happens with the bread and the wine. That that's never what was officially taught, but many people seem to have believed it, including sadly some uh some clergy in some at some times. And likewise with baptism, we are told to do it. Um and clearly I think in throughout church history baptism has marked out the people of God in an extraordinary way.
¶29Not just functionally but actually as a conveyor of um the the the the grace which causes us to become part of a new family as witnesses to the kingdom. We have difficulty. I have difficulty describing that. But I don't want to go all the way down to ordinances only because I do think that the sacraments are a sign within the biblical gospel of one of the key elements of the whole biblical story, which is that God's plan was for heaven and earth to come together. for heaven and earth to overlap, interlock, and ultimately to be joined forever.
¶30And the sacraments are ways in the present time in which we anticipate that extraordinary ultimate fulfillment. So that when people then try to get too much of that too soon, the sacraments become simply magic stuff we do which somehow magically forces God to do this and that and the other. That would be an abuse. But to run the other way and to say no, no, no, we heaven and earth are totally separate. It's just that we were told to do it, so we do it.
¶31then that misses out on this extraordinary New Testament theology of the new heavens and new earth and the fact that with Jesus and with his baptism and with his last supper, heaven and earth really do come together and we by being commanded in the ordinances to do these things, we are invited to experience them as sacrament as moments when God's space and our space come together as moments when God's time and our time come together. The past and the future coming together in the present and dare I say as moments when the material of God's creation comes together that bread and wine and water are somehow in the act not magically but they're somehow suffused with the stuff of new creation. Um, and we shouldn't be too ready to dismiss these as just silly old mumbo jumbo and so go back to ordinances. We need both. But actually, the real answer is the word sacrament of the word ordinance are just different sorts of words.
¶32They're doing different jobs about the same thing. And when you tease out what that means, I think yes, ordinances fine, but the reason we're told to do them is because they are signs of heaven and earth coming together. Yeah, that's a good way to put it. And I think it's good proof that Baptists, Presbyterians, Anglicans can >> partake of the same table because ultimately it's the Lord's table. >> Absolutely.
¶33>> Not the Anglican table, not the Baptist table, not the penis Pentecostal table. It's the Lord's table. Those who Yeah. Those who confess Jesus as Lord, they're welcome to that table. We can use ordinance.
¶34Many of my Roman Catholic many of my Roman Catholic friends would say that actually they believe that as well. It's just that their own church rules at the moment don't officially permit that to be done. Although I have on many occasions seen Roman Catholics um sharing in Anglican and other worship and vice versa. >> Yeah, I've seen that when I worked with various chaplain in the army sort of you know that was one of the things that came up. Yeah.
¶35particularly with with Catholic and Protestant >> chaplain. >> Well, we're going to take a break, >> but when we come back, we're going to get into a great topic. Should we try to change people's minds on the rapture? If you want to hear Tom's thoughts on that, come back after the break and to hear what Tom has got to say. I'm looking forward to it.
¶36[music] pretty much universally social science suggests that many of the institutions that we hold dear that shape us that provide us social support a huge amount of this used to happen anyway inside of these traditional religious structures and there really has been nothing to replace it >> it's amazing how quickly ostensible deontologists transform before our very eyes into utilitarians [music] on this question we're talking about what the self is here I mean atheists believe in the self everybody believes in the self >> well no that's I mean that that I I find difficult to believe why why would an atheist believe in the self the self is a series of non-deciding mechanisms. The arguments against God are are fairly compelling and I think the arguments against atheism are fairly compelling. The difference is that most people who believe in God have expressed doubts and a lot of people who are atheists tend to be more religious in this way than many of the people who are God believers. If people listening agree with me that free will in fact doesn't exist and simultaneously agree with you that free will is somehow necessary for the upkeep of civilization, then I would simply ask them to consider who's relying on the delusion here. This show does seem to have an extraordinary capacity for putting me face to face with people that I've been talking smack about online.
¶37So, [laughter] thanks again. [music] Okay, welcome back everyone. Our last question for today comes from Derek Mabberry of Huntsville, Arizona. And this is what Derek has [music] to say. He says, "I have been reading your books for 15 years." Well, well done, Derek.
¶38You've got a loyal reader there, Tom. He says, "I know your thoughts on the rapture, and I agree. I have family members that deeply believe in the rapture, though. And if you dispute that notion, well, the fight is on. My response has been lately to avoid that fight and it's to tell them that we both believe that Jesus is coming back.
¶39So why do we fight over it? My question is is this the correct way to handle this situation or should I continue to press them? They believe that Jesus is the son of God. He died on the cross. He was raised from the dead.
¶40Is this really a salvation issue or or should we care how he comes back in the way that he does? Uh Tom, I think this is a good question because we've done a lot >> about I mean to be fair, let's call it debunking rapture theology. >> It's a very particular bespoke way of understanding the end times or esquetology. It's neither biblical nor accurate. We've got a lot of concerns about it, but is this something we should spend effort into trying to convert people out of, you know, and is it worth potentially for fraying some relationships uh over it?
¶41Uh Tom, what's your response to Derek? Yeah, the the the question about where you push an issue with different relationships comes and goes in families and among groups of friends and fellow students and so on. And I think always the wise Christian uh prays for discernment about which points you can press at which moment in time. And there are many moments and many situations where I wouldn't cross the street to try to argue somebody out of rapture theology. Um because it it just wouldn't work.
¶42I mean I'm thinking of a of a bizarre parallel when I was a school boy. I heard a splendid lecture once by a maverick um English literature scholar on how the works of William Shakespeare were actually written by Francis Bacon. And there were all sorts of fascinating arguments. And I'd never met arguments like this before. And I was completely swept away.
¶43I thought it's absolutely terrific. And wow. And and then the next holiday back home, I was sitting at the dinner table with my family, including one aunt who was very learned herself. And I started expounding this theory about it was actually Bacon who who wrote um the plays of Shakespeare. And that my family didn't try to argue against me.
¶44They dismissed it. They just said, "Oh, no, that's all rubbish. That's all been disproved." Nobody believes that these days. And I wanted to say, but there are people. I just heard a great lecture and here are the arguments that and I realized this is not going to go well at the lunch table with these particular people.
¶45It's just not going to work. So I backed off and zipped my lip and felt frustrated about it for a long time. And now I would say that was probably the right reaction. Now, in exactly the same way, there are some questions which are so crucial for some people's worldview and culture that depending on your relationship with them, it may be impossible simply to say, uh, you're wrong and here's why. um they just aren't going to be able to hear it because the and here's the thing that the rapture theology the classic dispensational rapture theology such as you find in the left behind series and so on one aspect of an entire picture of what is sometimes called the end times where if [clears throat] you take that out you've still got all the rest left about Armageddon and goodness knows what um and not to mention views of the present state of Israel and all that whole paniply of of issues um and a a kind of ecclesiology which says that that that uh the true church is getting smaller and smaller and smaller and it's the the final lot who are going to be raptured.
¶46Um there's a lot of model about that within dispensationalist circles themselves. But in other words, you can't just take the rapture out of the middle of that and expect everything to sort itself out. Ultimately, you need to do a job on the whole end times um view as a whole because that whole end times view um is is what's the real problem. But the rapture of course has um one particular problem which is that it's about Jesus coming and taking people away from this earth and and taking them off to a place called heaven. Now, in some versions, Jesus will then come back again and will rule over a new heaven and new earth.
¶47But you don't actually need a rapture for that to happen. [laughter] According to 1 Corinthians 15, according to Philippians 3, when Jesus comes back, he comes to rescue, to rule, to reign. Um, from heaven we await the savior, the Lord Jesus, who will change our lowly body to be like our his glorious body by the power which enables him to subject all things to himself. Philippians 3:es 19, 20 and 21 are in a sense all you need to know and there's no rapture there. There is the return of Jesus, the transformation of of the whole of creation, the transformation of Jesus' people so that we get resurrection bodies like his resurrection body and you do not need to have a rapture in the middle of that.
¶48But within America, and I noticed this question comes from Arizona. I I understand the particularly in the the southern states of America, the end times theories have been so dominant in so many churches that trying to pick out one little bit of it simply isn't going to work. You have to prayerfully look at how to argue the case for an entirely different view of the end times. in the middle of that to make the point that first Thessalonians 4 which is where the rapture idea comes from simply doesn't mean what rapture theology has traditionally said and our correspondent will know only too well that I and others have argued that in surprised by hope and elsewhere. Now, I was going to say, Tom, probably the best thing you could do for someone is challenge them to read your book, Surprise by Hope, because I think that will open up whole new vistas, a whole galaxy of theological learning.
¶49And so many people I know have had aha moments or oh my goodness, >> why did no one explain it to me like this before? So rather than corner your relatives at the kitchen table and hold them down as you try to cast out the rapture theology from them. um challenge them to say if they're so confident in their view, have a read of Surprised by Hope and maybe follow it up with God's Homecoming as a convenient sequel and ask them, you know, after reading these books about a completely different way of envisaging, you know, biblical esquetology, >> do they still have confidence in that doctrine? If you if you show them, you know, a a different perspective that's got more explanatory power that seems to touch more sweetly and neatly the fabric and storyline of scripture. I think it's that rather than slamming down your fist, uh, you know, over coffee that I think is going to get people, uh, you know, convinced or challenged or at least >> sew some seeds of doubt that will hopefully yield a more fruitful biblical esquetology of God's promises for the future.
¶50>> Amen. Amen. wound. >> Uh, now Tom, that was a great question from our friend, but if is there some website people can go to to send us more questions. >> Well, if anyone wants to send in questions, the website is ask.com.
¶51>> And Tom and I are very eager to hear your questions. Whether it's about ethics, Jesus, tricky parts of the Bible, we're just dying to hear the questions you've got and we will do our best to answer them. But if you want to get a little bit more on Ask Ant Wright Anything, then go to the Ask Anti Wright YouTube channel page where you can find some great short clips and short one minute videos summarizing some of these very points. In fact, if you go to the YouTube page, you can find a number of videos that Tom and I have made about the rapture. Well, I think that's all we have time for today.
¶52Uh, it's goodbye from me, Mike Bird, >> and goodbye from me, Tom Wright, >> and we look forward to joining you again on the next episode of Ask ENT Wright Anything. Until then, God bless and take care. [music]