It wasn’t only apostles who were itinerant: evangelists and prophets were (are) as well. Titling all this “Apostolic” invites overlooking the full spectrum of the work done by itinerants in the scriptures, the types of teaming and focus that was (is) in play, and it leaves most people with the traditional misconceptions of evangelists and prophets.
Also important, to limit the itinerant work to the role of apostles usually invites keeping the general misconception of itinerant work as being primarily church planting and leaves church care in the background of the itinerant work (at best). Listen to Paul, “Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches” (see II Cor 11:23-29). Church care was actually the thing Paul and others invested most heavily in—where those churches were embroiled in troubles. Church planting per se, where churches are planted in areas where none previously existed was the smaller part in terms of time and manpower in the records of the NT.
The term “itinerants” in general may help the church reconsider the missing function properly without being burdened and distorted by the faulty traditions we’ve built around each of the three itinerant biblical roles. The term “Itinerants” lacks the baggage of “apostolic” while emphasizing their non-permanent role in activities regarding any one church.
It is important to note that not all who were itinerant were apostles. Nor that the delineations were all that distinct or permanent. I think it might be a ton easier to determine if you have an itinerant calling/design, than to determine which itinerant label you might use. At some point, your itinerant experience might allow you to use the term slave or prisoner as a functional title.
The only named apostles in the NT, besides the twelve, are Paul, James (Gal 1:19; 2:9), Silvanus (Silas) (I Thess 1:1; 2:6; 2:2 cp Acts 16:22,25), Barnabas (Acts 13:2-4; 14:14; I Cor 9:6), and Apollos (I Cor 4:6,9; cp I Cor 3:1-8, 22). Note that while the twelve took their itinerant focus as being to the scattered Jewish nation (Gal 2:7-9; Jas 1:1; I Pet 1:1), we see Paul, Barnabas, Silas, and Apollos focused on gentiles (while also first proclaiming the Kingdom message and Messiah to the growing rejection of the Jews throughout Acts).
But even the original twelve remaining in Jerusalem spent time functioning itinerantly:
- “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas?” I Cor 9:5
- ” When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them.” Acts 8:14
- ” Lydda was near Joppa; so when the disciples heard that Peter was in Lydda, they sent two men to him and urged him, “Please come at once!” Acts 9:38
- ” Peter stayed in Joppa for some time with a tanner named Simon” Acts 9:43
- ” While Peter was wondering about the meaning of the vision, the men sent by Cornelius found out where Simon’s house was and stopped at the gate.” Acts 10:17
- ” So when Peter went up to Jerusalem,” Acts 11:2 “Now as soon as it was day, there was no small stir among the soldiers, what was become of Peter. And when Herod had sought for him, and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death. And he went down from Judaea to Caesarea, and there abode…” Acts 12:18,19
The Evangelists Timothy and Titus
Pastor Timothy. Timothy the Apostle. These are two common views of Timothy. But let’s look more closely.
My understanding is that both Timothy and Titus were evangelists, not apostles, based on Paul’s exclusion of using the term “apostle” regarding Timothy in Col 1:1, their instructions (II Tim 4:5 taken in its plainest meaning along with II Tim 2:2, Titus 1:5, etc.) and the itinerant work of Philip before and after the conversion of the eunuch. Note their traveling itinerary:
Timothy:
- Acts 16:1-4 Paul finds Timothy in Lystra, and Timothy begins teaching believers with Paul there. (52AD?)
- Acts 17:14 Timothy in Berea (53AD?)
- Acts 17:15 (see I Thess 3:1,2) Timothy in Athens, establishing believers (54AD?)
- I Cor 16:10 Timothy in Corinth teaching (59AD?)
- Phil 2:19 Timothy in Philippi serving believers (64AD?)
- I Thess 3:2 Timothy in Thessalonica, establishing believers
- I Tim 1:3 Ephesus (65AD?) teaching elders
Titus:
- II Cor 7:6,7 In Macedonia, comforting Paul
- II Cor 7:13,14 in Corinth, comforting and carrying a message from Paul
- Gal 2:1 in Jerusalem
- II Tim 4:10 in Dalmatia
- Titus 1:4,5 in Crete setting the church in order where it was lacking and ordaining elders
- Titus’ “job” in Titus 1:5 is temporary—see Titus 3:12
Leadership Development
Timothy is supposed to teach the “teachers”- the elders (II Tim 2:2 commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also). Their work included recognizing, along with the community, those desiring to serve and extend themselves in equipping others. Coming alongside, living and working together, the evangelists developed the emerging elders, so that they would expend themselves in the work of building up the saints.
Biblically, we see shepherds developed by evangelists (Timothy and Titus) within the setting of a local body. One to few discipleship (apprenticeship, OJT learning), spending lives together while undertaking actual responsibility and work within a body, appears to be more effective and efficient than our seminary method, and a biblical pattern worth reconsidering. Note that biblically, you cannot fulfill the qualifications of an elder (pastor, bishop, overseer) without being well known by the local faith community and the local secular community.
Church Restoration
In Titus 1:5, they also set in order the things that are wanting (as in I Tim 3:15), somewhat similar to modern church consultants and interims, minus the long fees and the brief engagement schedule. Paul’s letters to Timothy and Titus provide instructions on what evangelists were to do in restoring troubled churches, and how they were to go about doing so.
Philip the Evangelist (Acts 21:8) – defined by the eunuch episode or the pattern of his life?
Our mistaken view of evangelists may come from the dramatic episode recorded about Philip with the Ethiopian Eunuch. There, he was called away from his work described in Acts 8:5-13, where he was ministering to the scattered believers (see Acts 8:4), and to which ministry he continued throughout the northern region of Israel subsequent to the eunuch’s conversion (see Acts 8:39,40). A closer look at the scriptures shows that Philip was involved in an itinerant ministry to the scattered saints and churches before and after the dramatic conversion of the eunuch. This itinerancy, and not the singular conversion of the eunuch, describes the work of evangelists.
Thankfully, Peter the apostle does not suffer from this “evangelist” confusion in a similar event in his life with Cornelius (see Acts 11:5-14).
The Prophets
Let’s look at those who are identified as Prophets in the NT church. Note that Paul, Barnabas, and Silas, later called Apostles, and early on called Prophets:
- Agabus and others from Jerusalem (Acts 11:26-28; 21:10)
- Paul and Barnabas, along with Simeon, Lucius, and Manaen (Acts 13:1,2)
- Silas and Judas from Jerusalem (Acts 15:22-35)
What can we learn from the NT about prophets in the church:
- Some travel; some seem to be stationary; some are both at different times (follow the folks identified above)
- Prophets are also “sent ones” (Acts 11:22,27; 13:1-3; 15:25-27)
- They, along with apostles, build foundations on the corner stone of Jesus Christ (I take this as church planting being a part of their focus)
- They, along with apostles, have an exceptional understanding of the church and seek to make these truths known (Eph 3:1-10)
- They tend to function by speaking publicly in the local assembly, but not dominating the time or being received without discernment (Acts 15:35; I Cor 14:26,29,31; I Jn 4:1-3)
- Prophesy is not the sole perogative of prophets, but they exemplify the work of prophesying (Acts 15:32; I Cor 14:1,3)
- They stand out publicly for their service (Acts 15:22,26)
- They are in control of themselves (I Cor 14:32)
T. Austin Sparks, in his book, “Prophetic Ministry,” writes:
“Perhaps it would be better if we said that the prophetic function, going far beyond mere events, happenings and dates, is the ministry of spiritual interpretation. That phrase will cover the whole ground of that with which we are now concerned. Prophecy is spiritual interpretation. If you think about it for a moment, in the light of prophetic ministry in the Word of God, I am quite sure you will see how true this is. It is the interpretation of everything from a spiritual standpoint; the bringing of the spiritual implications of things, past, present and future, before the people of God, and giving them to understand the significance of things in their spiritual value and meaning. That was and is the essence of prophetic ministry.”
Dennis Bratcher at the Christian Resource Institute has ably described the ministry of prophets today (excerpts used by permission):
“A prophetic voice is one who calls God’s people to return to their calling as His people. A prophetic voice is one that will not settle for the status quo, not for the sake of stability, or security, or comfort, or even for the sake of conserving the tradition. A truly prophetic voice is a radical voice…”
“So the prophets stood as a counter voice to those who would allow the allure of power, ambition, and self-serving self-righteousness to blind them to the things of God: doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with God. They were, in the best sense of the term, “counter-culture” Israelites. As Walt Brueggemann writes, they called the people to live in an alternate reality not governed by the rules of power and success. They called them rather to live out Torah as a faithful response to God. They called the people to abandon the status quo shaped by those who benefited from it the most, to embrace a new future shaped, empowered, and energized by God.”
“So, as Abraham Heschel writes, the prophets always sang one octave too high. They were empowered by a vision of how things could be, a future in which the people and their leaders would live out their calling to be the people of God as a channel of blessing to the world. And the prophets had the courage to call into question any preoccupation with the status quo on any level that interfered with that future. As a result, they were often in trouble with those who stood to lose the most if the status quo were changed and that “could be” future became a reality.”
“And so, I think, there needs to be people today, Christians today, who will dare to stand and speak the truth in love, who will dare to stand before the king and say, “You are the man!” Here it is easy, especially in more conservative traditions of Christianity to assent rather quickly to the idea that we should “take a stand” against all the sin in the world. We easily assume that the enemy is external, a force of evil that threatens to overcome all of us righteous people. There is a truth there. But it is not the whole truth. The voice that decries sin in the world is not a prophetic voice.”
“A truly prophetic voice is one who has the courage, perhaps even in some sense the calling of God, to look around at the community of faith in its status quo and say, “Not everyone who says ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven.” A prophetic voice is one who calls God’s people to return to their calling as His people. A prophetic voice is one that will not settle for the status quo, not for the sake of stability, or security, or comfort, or even for the sake of conserving the tradition. A truly prophetic voice is a radical voice, a liberal voice that calls for change, even if that change is a return to a vital tradition long obscured by false piety and self-righteousness.”
“In our culture, and with our history, it is easy to claim the role of a prophet. But it is also easy to claim that role as its own form of ambition and power. It is perhaps too easy to claim to speak prophetically, but to do so with arrogance, anger, and bombast as David Koresh well demonstrated. A truly prophetic voice speaks in love, not anger, even when it cries “Woe to you hypocrites!” Jeremiah spent 40 years of his prophetic ministry telling the people, sometimes in the harshest and coarsest language possible, that they were sinners and were going to die. But he took no joy in that message. At the same time that he stood firm as the lone prophetic voice against the tyranny, injustice, and idolatry of God’s people, he was weeping. He told them they were going to die for their sins, but he did so with tears in his eyes (e.g., Jer 8:22-9:1)! “
“Prophetic voices just aren’t “team players.” They just don’t understand that you can’t say certain things or make certain people mad. They just don’t understand that bills have to be paid and buildings have to be built. They just don’t understand how the system works and how things get done.”
-Dennis Bratcher
Christian Resource Institute
Among the important reasons for restoring the itinerant function to a normative place in the church, is that we be more intentional and effective in our deployment of these folks–apostles, prophets and evangelists–so that they can be active in providing the help to new or struggling churches as they were designed to do by our Lord. Today we have these people in all kinds of positions, diffusing their capabilities by trying to make them fit in the neatly and narrowly defined roles suggested to us by the traditional church structure of the modernist era. I am suggesting instead that we recognize these services and roles, and assist them, encourage them, and receive their greatly needed capabilities among us.
Recent Comments