The Fivefold Ministry

NOTE:
It is not feasible to fully cover such a vast topic in such a brief format. However, this teaching aims to provide an initial framework, a summary of a more comprehensive study on the fivefold ministry. It is drawn primarily from an oral presentation on the topic that I gave in Virginia in 2022, now edited for clarity and supplemented with some additional material. The hope is that this summary will offer the first building blocks for a more complete understanding of God’s plan for the church. I explicitly honor my dad, Brother Blair, for his profound searching and insights into Scripture, which form the entire framework and perspective of everything I will share. On the other hand, any misrepresentations or inaccuracies in my summary are solely my responsibility. The comprehensive study on this topic can be found in a series of books titled Forming Christ’s Body, Books One, Two and Three, authored by Blair Adams. Please refer to that source material to explicate the information I will attempt to paraphrase here.

Three Common Forms of Church Government

To begin, let’s briefly review the three most common forms of church government and then present the New Testament model as utterly distinct from all three ecclesial systems typical today.

1. Episcopal

This form of church government involves bishops who have authority over multiple congregations. The Episcopal system is characterized by a hierarchical structure, where bishops hold authority and provide oversight over the clergy and laity in their diocese. This system is found in the Catholic church and is also common in mainline Protestant denominations, such as the Anglican and Methodist churches.

Problems: The Episcopal system, with its hierarchical structure, raises significant concerns about the concentration of ecclesiastical power in the hands of a few. This model creates a substantial disconnect between the laity and church leadership, as responsibility is centralized in the hands of figures akin to ‘lords’ rather than being shared relationally among the congregation. The New Testament suggests a more familial and organic approach to leadership within the early Christian communities. For example, Paul often referred to himself and his fellow leaders as leading with the love of a father or mother towards a congregation (1 Cor. 4:14-15; 1 Thess. 2:7-8). Yet, from the second century onward, the church, growing increasingly distant from its original foundations, adopted the Roman Empire’s model of governance as a template for its ecclesiastical structure, particularly in the organization of “bishops.” These bishops, mirroring Roman governors, were appointed by existing senior leadership (such as the pope or the college of cardinals) to oversee specific geographical regions, exercising authority over both clergy and laity. This organizational strategy facilitated a uniformity of doctrine across vast distances but did so at the expense of the Spirit’s direct guidance in the church. Authority is derived solely from one’s position in the organizational hierarchy, totally displacing the authority of the Spirit. This shift towards a Roman-inspired ecclesiastical hierarchy marked a departure from the New Testament model of leadership, which had emphasized direct, relational and Spirit-led guidance within the community of believers.

2. Presbyterian

In this system, churches are governed by elected presbyters who represent the congregation in a representative, elder-led structure. There are ascending councils or courts, including the session (local church level), presbytery (regional level), synod (broader regional level) and general assembly (national level).

Problems: The Presbyterian model, with its system of elected presbyters and ascending councils, is essentially a bureaucracy that relies on an organizational authority at the expense of spiritual vitality and flexibility. While it is designed to ensure representation and accountability, it attempts to employ natural-minded solutions as safeguards against natural-minded authority—an exercise in futility. This council system is notoriously slow in decision-making and distances the congregation from meaningful participation. This structure invariably prioritizes institutional conformity over the dynamic and responsive ministry of the Holy Spirit to immediate community needs. Few could claim that this extensive organizational bureaucracy remotely mirrors the early church’s more relational and dynamic leadership structures. The emphasis on elected representatives is a departure from the Spirit’s leading and a lapse into democracy—the rule of the people, not the rule of God.

3. Congregational

In this model, each local church is independent, autonomous and self-governing, with decisions being made collectively by the congregation without external oversight. Leadership roles are democratically elected by the majority and are accountable to the congregation. Many Baptist, Congregationalist and some non-denominational churches adopt this model.

Problems: This approach is merely democracy where the “voice of the people is the voice of God.” However, no scriptural precedent supports the practice of congregations electing officers of the fivefold ministry. This would be like children electing their parents. In Acts, the congregation only nominated deacons (Acts 6:1-6), while the apostles appointed them and vested them with authority. Scripture repeatedly emphasizes that ministerial offices are established through the laying on of the apostles’ or presbyters’ hands. For example, Paul instructs Titus to “appoint elders in every town” (Titus 1:5, NIV), indicating a “top-down” approach to establishing church leadership. Of course, these leaders all derive their own authority from the Spirit that has placed them in their offices and upon whose continual guidance they depend. Similarly, in 1 Timothy 4:14 and 2 Timothy 1:6, Paul reminds Timothy of his ministerial gift, which was given to him through prophecy and the laying on of hands by the council of elders, not a congregational election. These passages show authority in ministerial roles conferred through senior church leadership, not through a democratic process.

The concept of completely “autonomous congregations” is also unbiblical, as Paul explicitly appeals to universal patterns when he tells the Corinthian church, “We have no other practice —nor do the churches of God” (1 Cor. 11:16, NIV). Similarly, he writes, “But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches” (1 Cor. 7:17). And again: “For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints” (1 Cor. 14:31-33).

These statements directly challenge the notion of autonomous congregations operating only under varying locally determined practices. Furthermore, the resolution of the circumcision debate in Acts 15 wasn’t a matter for individual congregations; it required a council involving all apostles and elders, whose verdict was binding on all churches. This event exemplifies a centralized and authoritative approach to critical doctrinal decisions, an approach fundamentally at odds with the independent decision-making process celebrated in the Congregational model. Diotrephes, who was in charge of a local congregation, committed the sin of opposing the apostolic oversight of those sent by John (3 John 9-10).

Is There an Alternative?

The Fivefold Ministry

The fivefold ministry is a church governance model that oversees the church through the five primary gifts of ministry designated in Ephesians 4: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. This model determines leadership roles based on the nature of one’s gifting.

Apostles and prophets tend to be mobile ministries. Apostles often oversee multiple congregations, with their efforts supported and confirmed by prophets. Evangelists also tend to have mobile ministries focused on spreading the gospel but do not typically found churches or establish patterns.

In contrast, pastors and teachers primarily focus on the specific needs of individual local congregations, which have been founded on the teachings and patterns established by apostles and prophets. These teachings serve as a definitive guide for local churches, shaping their doctrine and practice as they are implemented by pastors and teachers. Their roles are integral and vital to the development and nurturing of these local expressions of the Body of Christ. Acts 2:42 states, “They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer” (NIV).

What sets the fivefold ministry apart from other models of church governance is its unique perspective on authority. Authority is seen not as political or corporate power but as inherently familial, effective only within loving, nurturing relationships—ordered and arranged under the direct spiritual guidance of the heavenly Father (Eph. 3:14-15). Authority is not solely tied to one’s ministerial office. Instead, it is contextualized within the encompassing Body of Christ. This provides a framework that supersedes any individual’s gift or function. Ministers in this system are part of a multifaceted plexus of submission, where authority manifests through gifting, anointing, maturity and familial order.

An apostle, for example, while holding presiding authority, practices complex submission. He honors his father in accordance with Biblical mandates, respects older men regardless of their spiritual gifting, accepts correction in the mouth of two or three witnesses, and demonstrates submission to the congregation. This approach ensures a balanced and relational leadership style deeply rooted in mutual respect and submission within the Christian community.

Problems: Critics of the fivefold ministry model argue that its implementation can lead to a lack of clear leadership hierarchy and organizational structure, potentially resulting in confusion and inconsistency in decision making and governance. The model relies heavily on the recognition and affirmation of these ministry gifts, which can seem subjective and so lead to disputes over authority and legitimacy. Additionally, without a formalized structure like those found in Episcopal and Presbyterian systems, the fivefold ministry model may struggle to maintain doctrinal unity and effective church administration, especially in larger congregations or denominations.

God’s Power—A Mighty Name and Strong Right Hand

Before delving into the intricacies of the fivefold ministry, it’s essential to understand how Scripture consistently portrays God’s power through His name figuratively as His mighty arm or right hand in action. This concept is deeply rooted in the Old Testament and finds its fulfillment in the New Testament. The right hand represents the authority of the human body—used to protect, cleanse, connect in fellowship and work. Although God, as a spiritual being, does not possess a physical right hand, the instruments of His divine activity symbolize His authority in these capacities. In Scripture, God’s metaphorical mighty right hand is the primary instrument of His power unto salvation.

“Remember that you were slaves in Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out of there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm” (Deut. 5:15, NIV). This theme of God’s powerful intervention is evident throughout the Old Testament, where His right hand also symbolizes the authority to convey inheritance. For example, the patriarchs placed their right hand on an heir’s head to confer power and authority, as in the story of Jacob blessing Joseph’s sons (Gen. 48:13-19).

God’s mighty hand is intimately connected with His name, the key expression of His revealed character. The significance of names in Scripture is emphasized through instances of name changes that correspond to personal transformation, as seen with Abraham, Sarah, Jacob and Joshua. To know God’s name in a relational way, such as when He reveals Himself as “Yahweh” to Moses in Exodus 3:13-15, equates to accessing His essence and authority through that name. This connection between God’s right hand and His name is evident throughout the Old Testament:

Jeremiah 16:21: Therefore behold, I am going to make them know—this time I will make them know My power and My might; and they shall know that My name is the Lord. (NASB)

Exodus 15:3: The Lord is a warrior; the Lord is His name. (NASB)

Exodus 15:6: Your right hand, O Lord, is majestic in power; Your right hand, O Lord, shatters the enemy. (NASB)

Psalm 44:3: For by their own sword they did not possess the land, and their own arm did not save them, but Your right hand and Your arm and the light of Your presence, for You favored them. (NASB)

Psalm 48:10: As is Your name, O God, so is Your praise to the ends of the earth; Your right hand is full of righteousness. (NASB)

Jeremiah 32:20-21: You brought Your people . . . out of Egypt with signs . . . with a strong hand . . . . You have made a name for Yourself. (NASB)

Isaiah 63:11-12: . . . who caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses . . . to make for Himself an everlasting name. (NASB)

Daniel 9:15: [You] have brought Your people out of the land of Egypt with a mighty hand and have made a name for Yourself. (NASB)

So, Isaiah 63 mentions God’s “glorious arm” alongside Moses, foreshadowing the New Testament fulfillment in Jesus Christ, the prophet “like unto” Moses (Acts 3:22, KJV): “Who caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, who divided the waters before them to make for Himself an everlasting name” (Isa. 63:12, NASB). Jesus inherits the superior name of His Father and assumes the throne of all power and glory (Matt. 22:18; Acts 2:30-36; Phil. 3:9-11; Heb. 1:4-8, 13; Eph. 1:20-23). As Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt, so does Jesus lead His followers from worldly kingdoms through the “Red Sea” of baptism by the power of His holy name (1 Pet. 3:21-22; Col. 1:13).

This divine power of the name continues in the New Testament through the fivefold ministry (Eph. 4:11-12), with each role serving as an expression of God’s hand to equip and empower believers. The early church, recognizing this power, prayed, “And now, Lord, take note of their threats, and grant that Your bond-servants may speak Your word with all confidence, while You extend Your hand to heal, and signs and wonders take place through the name of Your holy servant Jesus” (Acts 4:29-30, NASB).

Today, the church, united with Christ, shares in the power of His inheritance and His divine authority (Rom. 8:16-17). The church extends His hands to others, ministering in His name and power, embodying the authority and essence of God Himself, just as the right hand serves the natural body.

God’s Eternal Purpose—Glory through the Church

Let’s delve into Paul’s exhortation to the Ephesian church. In chapter 3, he reveals the church’s seminal, highest purpose and mission on earth: “to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things; so that the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known through the church to the rulers and the authorities in the heavenly places” (Eph. 3:9-10, NASB). The church is God’s final project and vehicle for confounding and defeating the spiritual powers arrayed against Him since the fall of Lucifer. It stands to become God’s ultimate demonstration and proof of a different kind of power and authority in the face of all powers reliant on brute force. At the conclusion of Ephesians 3, Paul proclaims, “Now to Him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to His power that is at work within us, to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever. Amen” (Eph. 3:20-21, NIV).

Paul earnestly seeks for God’s glory to be revealed in the church—an enduring presence with a specifically designed administration, an “administration suitable to the fullness of the times” (Eph. 1:10, NASB)—throughout all generations. This glory, as Paul envisions, surpasses all we can ask, think or imagine (Eph. 3:20-21). His subsequent words in Ephesians 4 directly relate to his prayer and belief in God’s glory being manifested through the church. He outlines the attitude and order of relationships necessary for producing and sustaining this glory in the church.

Ephesians 4:1-8 presents this vision: “Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. Therefore it says, ‘When He ascended on high, He led captives in His train and gave gifts to men’” (NASB, NIV).

It’s critical to note that Paul begins his chapter 4 discourse on unity and the fivefold ministry with the word “therefore.” This explicitly connects everything in chapter 4 to his prayer in chapter 3—that God’s glory would be revealed through the church, fulfilling His eternal purpose. He then outlines the attitudes of heart we must maintain in order for this to be accomplished: humility, gentleness, patience, tolerance, love and diligence in preserving unity.

Thus, these six key attitudes are essential for maintaining the unity of the Spirit and fostering the unity of the faith, which alone can manifest the glory—the outshining of God’s presence—through the church. But it is critical to understand that the “unity of the Spirit” is not Paul’s ultimate goal—it merely describes the necessary environment for discovering the unity of the faith and, ultimately, the glory of God on a whole new level. Lest we might be tempted to interpret Paul’s use of words like “gentleness,” “patience” and “tolerance” as promoting relativism and compromise within the church, he doubles down on the fact that God has only one Spirit, one hope, one calling, one faith and one baptism because He is one God and Father of all who is over all and desires to be in all. So, the unity of the Spirit in humility, love and patience describes the means to an end—the attainment of a greater unity of faith and a revelation of the full measure of the stature of the three-dimensional, corporate Body of Christ, a “perfect man.”

After Paul stresses that there is one, one, one way, he then introduces the chief obstacle to our pursuit of unity as a church: that each of us only has a measure of the Spirit. In other words, if our deposit of the Spirit were not so small, we would see better, feel better, trust better and come to unity more swiftly. The main hindrance to unity is tied, then, to the smallness of our Spirit deposit. So Paul follows the call to complete oneness and singularity on all essential points with the qualifier “but.” This indicates that the thought which follows represents the primary challenge in the pursuit of unity: “But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift” (Eph. 4:7, NASB).

Being born of the Spirit endows us with a measure of the Spirit’s power, essential for our spiritual maturation and the edification of our brothers and sisters in the Body. However, our receipt of the Spirit falls short of the fullness that Jesus Christ possessed (John 3:34; Rom.12:3). We’ve been granted just enough to be born into God’s family, but not enough to become a mature expression of His Body. In Romans 8, Paul states that we have received the “firstfruits of the Spirit” (Rom. 8:23), and the first harvest, though greatly anticipated, is actually the smallest picking. We have received the Holy Spirit as a seal—“God set His seal of ownership on us and put His Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come” (2 Cor. 1:22, NIV). The fullness of our spiritual desires won’t be realized until we reach heaven.

The mission of the church is to bring all things under subjection to Christ’s feet here on earth (Eph. 1:22). When “all things are subjected to Him”—when our “obedience is complete” (1 Cor. 15:28; 2 Cor. 10:6, NASB)—then He, who was the founding cornerstone (Eph. 2:20), will become the crowning capstone and return to bring His Bride to that great wedding feast of the Lamb (Zech. 4:7; Rev. 19:7-9). That’s when the earthly project will be complete: He will put an end to all rule, power, authority and dominion—the “administration” through which He brought all things under subjection to His feet. “Then the end will come when He hands over the kingdom to God the Father . . . that God may be all in all” (1 Cor. 15:24, 28, NIV). Ephesians 4:9-10 states that Christ ascended and poured out His Spirit and gifts to the church “that He might fill all things.” Yet the writer of Hebrews tells us that, “at present, we do not see everything subject to Him” (Heb. 2:8, NIV)—this is an ongoing process.

If we possessed as much of the Holy Spirit as we desired, there would be no need for this teaching, no need for the fivefold ministry or the church; we would already be living in a perfect, harmonious, heavenly state. But let’s face it: our current reality falls far short of this perfection. So, the scripture says, “But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it” (Eph. 4:7, NIV). Therefore—because of our small portion of the Spirit—God gave the gifts of ministry to the church.

This is precisely why Paul introduces the next verse with the word “therefore,” indicating that what follows answers the dilemma of our partial Spirit deposit: “Therefore it says, ‘When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, and He gave gifts to men’” (Eph. 4:8, NASB). And what specific gifts does Paul indicate have been given to counterbalance the smallness of our Spirit deposit? He names them explicitly in verse 11: “And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints, for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-13, NASB). This describes God’s plan “to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God . . . that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to His eternal purpose” (Eph. 3:9-11, NIV).

Paul says that the fivefold ministry will serve “until we all attain to the unity of the faith.” But this “unity” does not describe mere doctrinal conformity. He envisions that we will attain “to a mature man, to the measure of the stature, which belongs to the fullness of Christ.” He does not remotely suggest that any individual will attain to this full measure of Christ. Instead, he says that “we” will attain to a “mature man”—speaking of many individuals becoming part of one corporate man, the Body of Messiah upon the earth (Eph. 4:13, NASB). As Paul bluntly states elsewhere, “In fact the body is not one member but many” (1 Cor. 12:14).

We can summarize all of this by saying that, so long as we view God’s “plan of salvation” individualistically, no need emerges for the fivefold ministry. Only when we glimpse God’s eternal purpose of revealing His glory to principalities and powers through this corporate project called the church do we view the unity of the faith as paramount, requiring the unity of the Spirit to realize it. Yet, we don’t have enough of the Spirit on our own. We need the grace given to us directly from Christ, but also the grace coming to us through the design and “administration” of His corporate Body, “grace ministered in its various forms” (1 Pet. 4:10, NIV).

Paul introduces the fivefold ministry so that Christ may more fully “fill all,” leading to the final revelation of His glory in His unified, mature church. Jesus prayed that the church would “be brought to complete unity” so that the world would know He was truly sent by God (John 17:23, NIV). These ministries—apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers—equip the saints and thus protect and build up the Body of Christ until it reaches its full measure and corporate stature as the final witness and revelation to principalities and powers.

After Paul says that the five ministerial gifts must equip the Body until it reaches its maturity, he adds another dimension of what this corporate leadership structure protects us from. He says: “Then we will no longer be infants, tossed about by the waves and carried around by every wind of teaching and by the clever cunning of men in their deceitful scheming. Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into Christ Himself, who is the head. From Him the whole body, fitted and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love through the work of each individual part”(Eph. 4:14-16, BSB).

So Paul offers the five-point ministry team to protect us from being misled by men and their various teachings, deceitful schemes and trickery. This indicates that the church is more susceptible to deception and instability when led by individual “super gifts” rather than a counterbalancing team. Does not experience prove that many aberrant expressions of leadership, often by charismatic personalities, could have been avoided if the gifted individual had been part of a team and not the lone “hero” of his flock? Yet the scheming and trickery of carnal men tries to persuade modern Christians to fear the fivefold ministry as some kind of risky scheme instead of recognizing it as the stabilizing answer to the chronic instability rampant throughout the church today.

A Polity or a Family?

To summarize, the apostle Paul distinctly outlines the fivefold ministry in Ephesians 4:11-16 as God’s instrument for achieving the unity of faith. The balance of the five primary ministerial offices serves to eliminate the chaos caused by deceitful schemers, thus bringing unity and allowing God’s glory to shine forth. This vision portrays the eventual fulfillment of the church’s mission on earth, culminating in Christ’s second coming. If the church has yet to attain unity of faith, then the fivefold ministry must continue its work. If the church has not reached the full measure of Christ’s stature, the fivefold ministry remains crucial. Yet, wherever the supernatural work of unity in the Body is evident—even in regional fellowships—it testifies to the coordination of the fivefold ministry. Conversely, where factions, divisions, false doctrines and disunity undermine the Messiah’s witness through His people, it indicates a deviation from the intended design and coordination of the fivefold ministry. So, again, the coordinated function of the five ministerial gifts is necessary to realize Jesus’ seminal prayer for His church: “May they experience such perfect unity that the world will know that You sent Me and that You love them as much as You love Me” (John 17:23, NLT).

Three Kinds of Ministerial Submission

As our discussion proceeds, I would like to focus on three types of submission that occur within church ministry: submission to personal character discipleship, submission of one gift to another, and submission to maturity within a ministerial office. First, it’s important to note that all members should have personal accountability and discipleship of their character, regardless of their gift. This is fundamental to our spiritual growth and integrity. Second, I intend to illustrate how the offices of the fivefold ministries submit to each other—for example, pastors submitting to apostles. This linear order is crucial for maintaining cohesion and effectiveness within the church. Finally, I will explore seniority within each office of ministry, progressing through levels of maturity, which we refer to as “associate,” “commissioned” and “ordained.” All submission has the common purpose of furthering the goal of “by the Spirit… [putting] to death the deeds of the body” as all are increasingly “led by the Spirit of God” to fulfill their places as “sons of God” and “joint heirs with Christ” (Rom. 8:13-17).

With these points in mind, let’s consider a preliminary overview of the gifts represented in the fivefold ministry.

The Five Gifts of Ministry of the Word

Apostles—Founders and Master Builders

Apostles, literally meaning those “sent forth” (from the Greek word apostello), shoulder the significant responsibility of founding churches, molding congregational patterns, and establishing and coordinating leadership within these churches. As “master builders,” they possess a supernatural gift of wisdom and are able to operate, at least situationally, in each of the other four ministerial gifts. The apostolic ministry is foundational. Paul said, “As a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation” (1 Cor. 3:10). The church is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). So an apostle lays a foundation and gives the pattern, the “blueprint,” for the temple. He’s analogous to the thumb in his unique ability to touch the heads of all the other fingers. The “thumb’s” opposable nature allows for both power grip and precision work. And as said, apostolic ministry is characterized by mobility, often spanning across multiple congregations.

Disambiguation—Scripture seems to delineate three categories of apostles:

Apostles of the Lamb: This group is comprised exclusively of the twelve original apostles, distinguished by their direct participation in Christ’s earthly ministry and their role as eyewitnesses to His teachings and resurrection. They were uniquely foundational to the church, the spiritual New Jerusalem, as described in Revelation 21:14: “The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” Their teachings and experiences set the final standard for subsequent ministries to follow. (See also Matt. 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19.)

Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ: These apostles receive revelation directly from God, bypassing human intermediaries. They must never, however, receive or propagate “revelations” that exceed or differ from the apostles of the Lamb. In fact, God merely reveals to them what has already been given to the original apostles. In the age after the scriptural canon was completed in the first century, this revelation is strictly restorative, bringing back spiritual truths in a way that can be relationally applied for the building up of the church toward the fulfillment of its God-ordained goals, as already discussed concerning Ephesians 4. (When Luther rediscovered that salvation is dependent on faith, or when the first Anabaptists asserted that baptism must follow genuine faith, they were, insofar as their revelations were consistent with Scripture, fulfilling an apostolic function.) This divine commissioning is characterized by direct communication from the Lord, as Paul articulates in Galatians 1:12, stating, “I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ” (NIV). Still, even the apostle Paul submitted his revelations to Cephas, James and John, apostles of the Lamb, to learn whether or not he had run in vain (Gal. 2:1-9), and his New Testament writings are authenticated as Scripture by the direct endorsement of Peter (2 Pet. 3:15-16). This shows that apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ must remain utterly true to and accountable to the foundations already given through the Apostles of the Lamb. (See also Acts 2:14; Gal. 1:1.) Their revelation must be perfectly consistent with the complete and unalterable Scripture.

Apostles of the Church: These play a pivotal role in founding churches and establishing congregational patterns. Their ministry is guided by and rooted in the teachings received from apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ, akin to Timothy’s relationship with Paul (2 Tim. 1:13-14). Their responsibilities include leading and stewarding the revelations from higher apostolic authority, as well as providing oversight to the other four gifts. As the thumb touches the heads of the other four fingers, the apostolic gift, in any form, ministers constitutionally to the other leaders. (See also Acts 15:25, 27; Rom. 16:7; 2 Cor. 8:19, 23; Phil 2:25; 1 Thess. 1:1; 3:2.)

Apostles’ Accountability

Gifting Accountability: In the functioning of their spiritual gifts, apostles are answerable to fellow apostles and the collective body of elders. This dynamic is akin to an executive who, despite having considerable functional authority, remains accountable to a group of officers or an executive board, who may remove him or situationally assume his executive function, depending on health or character or doctrinal breakdowns. Similarly, apostles, while granted latitude in their function, are held accountable by the aggregate of their peers in the ministerial body. This reflects the Biblical principle of mutual accountability within the church’s leadership, as emphasized in 1 Peter 5:5: “All of you, be submissive to one another and clothe yourselves with humility” (NKJV, NIV).

Personal Character Accountability: In their personal lives, distinct from their ministerial roles, apostles are held to the same standards of accountability as any church member. This includes being answerable to pastors or other leaders, often those who are more experienced or considered “older brothers” in faith. One’s spiritual gift does not exempt his life from scrutiny. To reiterate, one’s character is never pastored by their own gifting. Even apostles, whose gifts may functionally supersede those of pastors, should nonetheless be answerable in their personal lives to a pastor or minister assuming that role. For example, David, gifted as both prophet and king, surpassed Nathan’s gifts. Yet, in matters of personal character, David submitted to Nathan, demonstrating that individual submission—whether as an apostle or any other minister—is multifaceted. Every leader is triangulated by Biblical mandates to honor those senior in age (“fathers in the Lord”), the plural council of elders and the voice of the Spirit when He speaks situationally through any member.

Congregational Accountability: Furthermore, apostles are answerable to the evaluation, approval or rejection of the congregation as a whole. This congregational authority is depicted and endorsed in Revelation 2:2, where it is written to the church, “I know your deeds, your hard work, and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false” (NIV). This verse underscores the congregation’s role in discerning and validating the authenticity and character of those who claim apostolic authority. It cannot be overemphasized that the nature of all legitimate authority in the church is noncoercive, meaning that it only has sway over those who voluntarily recognize and submit to it. Therefore, though Biblical church authority is never democratically appointed, nonetheless, in one sense, any individual—and even the congregation as a whole—gives their “vote of confidence” as to the authenticity of an apostle (or any other church leader) simply by virtue of the fact that they voluntarily choose to follow and obey them.

Prophets—Keepers of the Vision and Guiding Ministry

Prophets serve as God’s visionary ministry, akin to the index finger of His right hand of power, directing the Body where the “eyes of the Lord” (symbolized by angels) are looking. Like apostles, the prophetic ministry is also foundational, preparing the way for, confirming and supporting the apostolic ministry, as shown in Ephesians 2:20, where the church is said to be “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ Himself as the chief cornerstone” (NIV).

Prophets are essential in both foretelling (seeing into the future) and “forth-telling”—proclaiming God’s directional truth in the present. They are “keepers of the vision,” aligning the congregation with the mission and ethos that God has set forth. This role is exemplified in prophets such as Haggai and Zechariah, who prophesied to the Jews in Jerusalem, supporting the work of Zerubbabel and Joshua (who served as prototypical apostles) as they rebuilt the house of God (Ezra 5:1-2; 6:14). Similarly, as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 14:3, those who prophesy speak to men for upbuilding, exhortation and consolation.

Directive prophecy confirms and provides guidance to believers both individually and corporately. Predictive prophecy, as demonstrated by Agabus in Acts 11:28, foretells future events as revealed by the Holy Spirit. Corrective prophecy, on the other hand, points toward sin in either the church or the world in an effort to bring about repentance and healing, as the whole body of prophetic accounts throughout Scripture consistently demonstrates.

In practical terms, an example of this synergistic relationship between apostolic and prophetic ministries is seen in our own congregation. A group of ministers gathered in 1980 in San Antonio, Texas, when God spoke through one of them, who had the gift of prophecy: “I will raise up a work in this state that no man will stop.” About six months later, one of the ministers with apostolic gifting started a house church in that same region of San Antonio. After a few months, he invited the person who had prophesied, as well as others from Colorado, to visit the budding work and help discern and confirm what God was unfolding there. This demonstrates how apostolic and prophetic ministries collaborate to confirm and establish new works and provide members with multiple witnesses, strengthening the congregation to move forward.

Finally, the prophetic ministry also encompasses gifts of insight, such as tongues and interpretations, words of knowledge, words of wisdom and the distinguishing of spirits. These gifts further enable prophets to fulfill their role in guiding, confirming and strengthening the Body of Christ.

Accountability: Paul explicitly acknowledges a linear order within the fivefold ministry: “God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers” (1 Cor. 12:28). The prophetic gift, in other words, is to primarily operate in submission to the wisdom of the apostle, or “master builder,” along with training and accountability from senior prophetic elders (although the prophet may also function situationally to expose, rebuke or guide an apostle to whose gift he typically submits). Like all other members of the Body, a prophet should be accountable and submit in his personal life to someone filling a fathering, pastoral role, even if that minister’s gift typically and functionally submits to his.

Evangelists—Reaching the Lost through the Gospel

Evangelists, symbolized by the middle finger—the longest and most visible appendage—play a pivotal role in the church’s outreach. Their ministry involves vividly depicting the life and glory of God’s kingdom, inspiring unbelievers to seek the “pearl of great price.” Evangelists are tasked with leading these kingdom seekers through the early and essential stages of the gospel: repentance from the tyranny of self-will, commitment to the Body of Christ through baptism, and the empowerment that comes from the immersion and infilling of the Holy Spirit.

As spiritual “midwives,” evangelists are instrumental in bringing new converts to birth in water and Spirit, in spreading the gospel worldwide, carrying the revelation brought by God through the apostles and prophets to those called out from the world. As said, they herald and offer a vision of kingdom life, emphasizing the gospel’s prerequisites for entering the kingdom—repentance, baptism and Spirit immersion. This mission must operate within established churches as well, reaching not just for the lost sheep of the world, but for those yet-to-be-converted youth within each congregation.

So, the “middle finger” of evangelism represents the center of God’s purpose—“to seek and save the lost.” But to operate productively and safely, this central function must situate itself within a larger context—the circumference of those other ministries that frame and govern the church as a whole. Thus, the evangelistic ministry has significant and inherent challenges. When evangelists operate independently (as is often their natural tendency, by nature of their gift to reach out beyond the confines of the established body), they risk creating spiritual “orphans” rather than integrating new believers into healthy local congregations. To mitigate this, it is crucial that evangelists collaborate with pastors and teachers, who play complementary roles in nurturing and developing new believers into responsible members of the kingdom of God.

Accountability: In their evangelistic work, they primarily learn from senior evangelistic elders and are accountable to apostles, ensuring their teachings and outreach align with the church’s spiritual truths, patterns and vision. In their personal lives, they must have a spiritual father/pastoral covering—either by an apostle or a pastor.

Pastors—Personal Discipleship

Pastors, as overseers and shepherds of the flock, are called to “shepherd the church of God, which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). They provide fatherly care, strengthening, healing and binding up the wounds of the saints. This ministry of personal discipleship involves building deep and abiding connections and accountability among the saints. Pastors, akin to watchmen in Jerusalem who are vigilant day and night (Isa. 62:6), must guide the flock to green pastures and the fresh springs of timely truth and spiritual water. Being oriented toward close, personal counseling, pastors primarily function in local ministry (though any member of the Body may, of course, travel to other congregations to assist in ministry upon occasion).

Pastors are charged with conforming church members to the message, teachings and patterns given through those proclaiming the Word without resorting to harassment or control. They should form respectful, constructive connections with evangelists, ensuring that the new believers are loved and nurtured with the same tenderness that brought them to life through evangelism. Not all pastors are called to preach. They primarily engage in personal ministry to facilitate spiritual growth, also partnering closely with teachers, who simplify and articulate apostolic patterns to clarify the vision for the saints.

Moreover, pastors must have a protective, nurturing spirit towards the saints, backed by a gift of discernment that enables spiritual insight and grace. This approach allows them to watch out for the souls of their flock, as those who must give account (Heb. 13:7, 17), and to steer clear of smothering micromanagement that engenders fear and passive irresponsibility. Their goal is to bring everyone under their care to spiritual maturity and responsibility in fulfilling their place in the Body, which requires allowing disciples the room to make mistakes and encouraging them to take responsibility before the Lord to discern the roots of their own character flaws, while at the same time providing the needed covering and guidance. In this way, pastors fulfill their role as spiritual fathers to individuals, guiding and nurturing the flock in accordance with God’s Word and the teachings of apostles. The goal must always be to bring those under their care to a walk of conviction and to discern whether their obedience is merely mechanical, unto man, rather than as it must be, from the heart, unto God.

Accountability: Pastors should receive pastoral patterns from senior pastors who explicitly exemplify the discipleship practices given by the apostolic ministry. In the regular functioning of their gift, they should partner closely with teachers and evangelists, allowing their protective instincts to be counterbalanced by gifts of mercy and faith, as they all recognize the need for those complementary ministries in bringing believers to full spiritual maturity in character, discernment, relational knowledge of God’s truth and their place of ministry. Like every other leader, the pastor’s personal life should be open and accountable to someone serving as a pastor to them.

Teachers—Making the Patterns Plain

Teachers are called to educate the saints, oversee schooling, and interface dialectically with the outside world. They are not called to bring new revelation. Instead, they are to receive truth from the apostolic ministry and accurately break it down, making it digestible to the saints on the level they can handle. They are not permitted to neglect the requirement to bring only anointed, inspired, powerful utterances to the church just because they are called “teachers.” Instead, they are tasked with retaining the Word’s weight, conviction and anointing, even while breaking the bread into bite-sized pieces.

While pastors are a “conforming” ministry, helping individuals align their personal lives to the truth of God’s Word, teachers are an “informing” ministry, called to make that Word plain through a proclaiming ministry (whether spoken or written). Therefore these two gifts are particularly symbiotic, especially on a local level, typified by the ring finger and the pinky of the hand, which rarely function independently from each other. While apostles, prophets and evangelists may fulfill their ministries in an itinerant fashion, pastors and teachers need to be permanently represented in every local congregation if it is to flourish as a healthy expression of the Body.

In Paul’s accounting of God’s appointed order “in the church,” he places teachers third, following apostles and prophets (1 Cor. 12:28). Evangelists and pastors are not even mentioned in this list. This is because both of these ministries reach primarily to individuals to, respectively, first bring them into the Body and then to personally counsel them to maturity. Apostles, prophets and teachers, on the other hand, are primarily concerned with ministry to the church as a whole. Teachers should work closely with pastors and evangelists, holding the plumb line that ensures the Body remains true to the patterns for the temple’s restoration.

Teachers must always seek to bring forth their instruction in an anointed, life-imparting way, remaining aware of the relational purpose of the message they are imparting—to present teaching that will help those to whom they minister come into closer relationship with God, His purpose and His people. They must see themselves as serving in an essential function for laying the groundwork for the work of the pastor. They must always guard against falling into mechanical instruction, by the letter apart from the Spirit. Teachers must also guard their hearts to always remember that the basis of everything they teach derives from apostolic ministries, through whom the understanding of the Word that the teacher conveys to the people has come to the teacher.

Accountability: In the function of their gift, teachers are guided by senior teachers and apostles. In their personal life, they require openness and accountability to a father figure who fulfills a pastoral role, with insight and access into their character.

Gift of Government

Paul emphasized the importance of “gifts of government” or “administration” in the church, which are manifested through an elder overseeing the diakonate, which is appointed by the eldership (1 Cor. 12:28; 1 Tim. 3:8-13). What we might call the “presiding administrator” fills this overseeing role, guiding the board of deacons and ensuring efficient management of practical church operations like healthcare, school administration, construction projects, public event coordination and finances. Paul’s teachings stress the importance of leadership in the church, as highlighted in Romans 12:6-8. Qualifications for bishops and deacons are provided in 1 Timothy 3:1-13, emphasizing integrity and the capacity to lead.

The gift of governance is essential to focus leadership on practical matters while being guided and supported by apostolic ministry. This creates a collaborative synergy with apostolic and prophetic ministries. The presiding administrator, who is usually an elder, takes charge of overseeing and empowering those who are involved in the church’s practical and financial needs, particularly the deacons. This enables the deacons to lead these efforts effectively and take initiative while being accountable to the eldership.

The Diakonate

Every member of the Body of Christ participates in a grand diakonate of love-service, extending from Jesus Christ and His angels to all believers. However, there is a specific ministry of serving, embodied by the office of the deacon, which coordinates human relationships and activities to achieve practical, material and spiritual goals. This ministry encompasses other gifts, such as leadership and administration. Deacons are the physical manifestation of service gifts, serving as supportive feet that bring the Body of Christ down to earth.

Individuals appointed as diakonate ministers have proven submission to the Spirit and to the divine order of the Body, wisdom in relationships, and a grace of leadership that qualifies them to a higher level of responsibility and reliability. This model is illustrated in Acts 6, where seven deacons were appointed to address relational conflicts and meet material needs within the church community (Acts 6:1-7). Qualifications for their appointment emphasized being “of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom,” highlighting the discernment needed to align practical matters with spiritual priorities and goals.

The deacon’s function parallels, in practical spheres, the work of eldership in spiritual matters. Further qualifications for deacons are found in 1 Timothy 3:8-13. Like other ministers, we perceive deacons as serving on three levels—“associate,” “commissioned,” and “ordained”—corresponding to ascending degrees of seniority that represent both maturity and the breadth of authority over spheres within the church.

Apostolic Ordering of Truth

To be called by God and ordained by the church to serve as an apostle—a wise master builder—entails not just knowledge about the constituent elements of righteousness but, rather, knowing how to assemble the pieces of God’s building. This involves possessing the wisdom from God to understand which truths come first, which come second, and the progression of how we live out and grow in God’s patterns. Apostolic authority is expressed in Paul’s words: “I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received” (1 Cor. 15:3, NASB). Apostolic authority outlines the sequence of maturity, the unfolding understanding of truth, distinguishing what is “foundational” from that which concerns “going on to perfection” (Heb. 6:1).

The central importance of building upon the proper foundation is underscored by Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 3:10-11: “According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it” (ESV).¹ This emphasizes the critical role of apostolic authority in laying and maintaining the foundational truths of the church, ensuring that subsequent teachings and practices align. The apostolic ministry remains responsible for ensuring that the churches under their oversight are following the direction and priorities set by God. This is to ensure that each fellowship is moving towards fulfilling its ultimate calling, which is for all members to come “to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,” as He gathers “together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth—in Him” (Eph. 4:13; 1:10).

Any minister presuming to change the church’s foundational beliefs, or even to retain them but rearrange their given priority, or to establish the overall direction and vision for the church generally, is assuming an apostolic calling, necessitating confirmation by the church. This is the case even if such a leader doesn’t claim to bring new revelation but only purports to bring “reforms” that restore the church back to the priorities of Scripture or the teachings or vision of a previous apostle with oversight authority in the church, even if it be the founding apostle. Such a role of “rediscovery” or “reformation” is by nature an apostolic function that must be given by God and established by the ordained eldership. If someone assumes this apostolic role without the proven calling from God and ordination from the church, they are creating chaos and taking authority not rightfully theirs. This usurpation is similar to King Uzziah’s, who took on a ministry that he was not sanctioned to express and consequently faced divine retribution (2 Chron. 26:18-21).

It is possible that an entire church may fall from its previous levels of revelation and practice, therefore needing reform and restoration. It is also increasingly common that congregations would discover that, despite their best efforts and sincere faith, they never were rightly established on the foundational truths of Scripture and, thus, stand in need of apostolic authority to lay the missing foundation. Yet, who is qualified to serve in this apostolic capacity? Certainly not one who has appointed himself to the office or merely received verbal “confirmation” from immature members who are not fully established in the Lord.

Scripture reveals that apostolic calling is confirmed by the power of the Holy Spirit, manifesting in miracles and signs. As Paul wrote, “The signs of a true apostle were performed among you, . . . signs and wonders and mighty works” (2 Cor. 12:12, ESV). It is further distinguished by a faithfulness to endure adversity and hardship and a resolute steadfastness in the face of persecution, as Paul attested: “In great endurance; in troubles, hardships and distresses . . . I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again” (2 Cor. 6:4; 11:23-28, NIV). Most importantly, apostolic calling is clearly evidenced by the fruit of flourishing, well-ordered, harmonious and spiritually vibrant church communities: as Paul states, “Even though I may not be an apostle to others, surely I am to you! For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord” (1 Cor. 9:2, NIV).

Because of its unique authority and influence, apostolic gifting must be confirmed according to the highest standards of integrity and transparency by church elders whose ministry has been tested and proven.

In our own experience, the person whom God chose as the foundational apostolic minister was explicitly and repeatedly confirmed in this calling by senior ministers within the organization he was a part of at the time of his calling. It is noteworthy that this organization did not officially recognize the apostolic office, and yet the calling was confirmed by God through church leadership nonetheless. This authority was not assumed unilaterally by the brother in question. Subsequently, this apostolic brother, who faithfully fulfilled his ministry—attested by undeniable, enduring fruits of maturity, unity and stability within the church—was then also able to identify and commission the following generation’s apostolic ministry. Some would see this as fulfilling Roger Williams’s prayer that God would restore “apostolic succession” to His church.²

So, apostles purporting to bring foundational revelation or reformation to a church must be called and confirmed by the established eldership functioning faithfully within the Body of Christ, backed by undeniable evidence of their uniquely apostolic ministry. Suppose they possess an apostolic gift but lack maturity or fruit in their expression of such a gift? In that case, since they are not and cannot yet function in an apostolic ministry, they should submit their proposals to plural leadership—not as an apostle but as any other leader, allowing the fruit of their reforms to either bear witness to or disprove their calling.

But suppose actions of reform or foundational alteration are undertaken by someone legitimately functioning in an apostolic office in opposition to existing apostolic leadership previously confirmed by the church and by legitimate fruit? In that case, a dispute has occurred between two divinely called, confirmed and fruitful apostolic ministries. This requires a broader council of plural leadership, as demonstrated in Acts 15, to seek God together as one ministerial body until He sheds needed light on the matters in dispute. The apostle Paul did not act on the prerogative of his gifting alone—going into churches he did not found to alter their view of circumcision—even though God had given him this revelation. Instead, he submitted to the broader governing council of presbyters, knowing that “in the multitude of counselors, there is victory” (Proverbs 11:14, NKJV, NASB).

If Paul had found a deaf ear among the other apostles, an unwillingness to open the Scriptures, their hearts, minds or churches to greater light—then he would’ve been forced to act on his own, consistent with his conscience. Such an unwillingness to hear on the part of other leaders after repeated appeals, according to Matthew 18, would’ve constituted grounds for a devastating parting of ways. In such a case, the fruit of the two conflicting visions for the church would have manifested in time, with God Himself as the ultimate judge of the matter. If, however, Paul had only confirmed the validity of his revelation about the law and circumcision among his own congregations but failed to seek out Cephas, James and John, or bring the matter before the council of elders, or humble himself by exposing his ideas to examination and testing, or seek the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace, but instead had simply dismissed the leadership for their “lack of wisdom” and spirituality (as demonstrated by their rejection of his teaching), he would have proven himself a charlatan. He would have used the ruse of “needed reforms” to advance only his own independent ambitions for a personal kingdom of self-supremacy. And if Paul had acted with such presumption apart from being ordained at all by the eldership to apostleship, his sin would have been all the more egregious. (Of course, no ministry today could ever bring forth any “revelation” that was not clearly consonant with Scripture, whereas the dispute in Acts, also recorded in Galatians, was part of the work of God in laying out the teaching that the closed canon of Holy Scripture would contain.)

We know of a congregation overseas that sought apostolic help in recovering God’s plan and patterns for their fellowship. From start to finish, God attested to this apostolic ministry with unparalleled supernatural signs and confirmations from many witnesses, even within the congregation. Furthermore, the visiting apostolic ministry sat for eight days straight, teaching the leaders of the host fellowship all the foundational truths in question. These were discussed, examined and welcomed (in theory) by the leaders. The leaders celebrated the revival sweeping throughout their congregation, announcing in writing these welcomed reforms as coming from “apostles” whom the Lord had sent.

But then, at a pivotal juncture, when the truth agreed upon was to be put into practice, the leaders, who had themselves invited the apostolic help, suddenly slammed on the brakes, backpedaled and refused to walk in the light they had initially received and celebrated. This was in spite of the fact that they claimed no apostolic authority among their own numbers. They testified that what was coming to them was an apostolic ministry, and yet they refused it without a single explanation from Scripture. At this point, it was incumbent upon those who feared God to walk in the truth that had been given, and an unfortunate divide became inevitable. But this demonstrates how apostolic authority may serve even an outside congregation in a gracious capacity of humility and fruitfulness.

Undertaking an action of categorical reform should only be done with utmost humility and a deep reverence for God. It must also be accompanied by supernatural confirmation of the Spirit and faithful witnesses within the congregation. The action must ultimately be confirmed not only by a group of people holding together for a time but by the fruit of a mature body of believers growing toward the fullness of God’s vision for His people.

Serving as an Apostle Situationally

Whenever an elder assumes presiding authority to guide a regional fellowship, he is serving in an apostolic capacity, whether legitimately or not. Therefore, this should only occur if (1) God has called him to be an apostle—explicitly confirmed by corporate eldership and declared to the church; or (2) he acknowledges that he is not called to this office (or at least not yet qualified for it) but maintains a close relationship of submission to someone who is. Thus, he may situationally extend apostolic ministry to a congregation, albeit dependent on his own submission to those possessing confirmed apostolic gifting directly from the Lord.

In the latter arrangement, there is always the poignant danger that such trust between elders could be betrayed. The elder operating on the authority of another might misrepresent himself to the congregation, insinuating a level of gifting or an office that God has not given him but which he bears only by the extension of another. Because of this danger, it is critical that both the plural eldership of the larger church and the regional congregants have clarity about the definition of gifting and calling exercised by a regional leader.

To guard his own soul, the regional leader must also take care to consistently give honor where it is due. For example, if the regional leader is gaining counsel and insight from an apostle in another place, he should guard against the temptation to present to the congregation as his own such derivative insights and direction. He should be careful, rather, to remind the congregation of his dependence upon the gifts of others and to always give credit where it is due. This is not for the sake of unduly exalting another leader, and certainly not to become a sycophant, but rather to give honor to God and to the truth of the extent of one’s calling and ministry by walking humbly and assessing oneself with sober judgment. (Of course, this is something that all in leadership in the Body should be conscious of—for example, teachers presenting instruction deriving from apostolic ministry.)

My following interpretive paraphrase of Paul’s admonition in Romans 12:3-7 may illuminate this perspective: “Through the divine grace given to me—not my own opinion or authority—I say to everyone among you not to think of themselves more highly and gifted for ministry than they should, but to think soberly, as God has given each person a specific and limited measure of faith. Just as our physical body has many parts, each with a different function, we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually, we are members of and interdependent on one another—we’re given differing functions in the church. Since we have ministry gifts that differ in kind and magnitude, let us only minister according to the grace the Holy Spirit has given us. Each person should only presume to exercise authority in ministry that is commensurate with what has truly been given by God and not appropriated through human will.”

We are asserting that no matter their innate gifts and callings, apostles can assume their role in the church only after God has explicitly confirmed and sent them to accomplish this task. This limitation is distinct from the other four gifts in the fivefold ministry. All ministries go through stages of development: situational, transitional and constitutional. This means that a brother who is called to be a pastor will engage in “pastoring” before he is formally established in this ministry. The same is true for prophets, evangelists and teachers. The leadership of the church only confirms—makes firm—a ministry that is already operating in the Body at some level. However, a brother called to be an apostle would not first “experiment” with “apostling” and then get confirmed in this capacity later on. Instead, he would serve the church in one or more of the other four capacities or as a situational extension of existing, ordained apostolic ministry until the church sends him with the commission to found and establish as a master builder. This distinction from the other four gifts is contained in the very name itself: “sent.” This title does not intrinsically define a particular manifestation of the Word—it instead denotes a particular level of vested authority given for the ordering of the church.

Some will argue that apostles of the Lord are not sent by the church, as they receive revelation directly from the Lord. We would agree but stress that they are nonetheless confirmed by the church before they assume such a role. Even a vitiated, confused church will nonetheless be used by God to confirm such unprecedented authority. Caiaphas, the high priest—rejected by God and contemptuous of His work—nonetheless, as one who “sat in the seat of Moses” (Matt. 23:2), confirmed Jesus’s ministry and sacrifice (John 11:49-52). So even with apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ, sent by God Himself to restore truths hitherto lost to the church, it is still true that “no man takes this honor unto himself” (Heb. 5:4). All the more so when it comes to apostles of the church: there can certainly be no instance of someone legitimately fulfilling this role without being expressly “sent” by the church to do so.

In summary, the role of an apostle, when ordained by God and confirmed by the church, carries the responsibility of correctly establishing and maintaining the foundational truths of the faith, guided by wisdom and revelation from God.

Answering Objections to Apostolic Ministry Today

In the larger discussion about the role of apostles in the contemporary church, several objections often arise. We will address these objections here in brief.

Objection 1: Apostolic ministry was only for the church’s beginning.

Counterpoint: Nowhere does the Bible state that the apostolic ministry will cease before the ultimate perfection of Christ’s Body and His return. While some believe that apostles operated solely for the church’s initial foundation during the time of the New Testament, Ephesians 4:11-13 shows that their role must be ongoing, emphasizing the apostolic ministry’s importance “for the equipping of the saints . . . till we all come to the unity of the faith . . . to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” This indicates that apostles are crucial for establishing foundational patterns and for equipping saints until the return of Christ.

Objection 2: Apostles must be eyewitnesses of Christ’s resurrection.

Counterpoint: While witnessing Christ’s resurrection is often associated with apostleship, the New Testament includes apostles like Paul, who described his encounter as a “vision from heaven” (Acts 26:19, NIV). Additionally, ministers such as Sylvanus, Epaphroditus and Timothy, who are not recorded as eyewitnesses, were explicitly acknowledged as apostles of the church (Phil. 2:25; 1 Thess. 1:1-3; 2:6).

Objection 3: Apostles are personally selected by the Lord.

Counterpoint: The claim that apostles must be personally chosen by Jesus in His physical form overlooks the fact that “now the Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17). This perspective often stems from a cessationist viewpoint, which negates the ongoing spiritual involvement of Jesus in the church.

Note: All of these first three objections point to the legitimate distinctions for what Scripture calls the “apostles of the Lamb,” which we outlined above (Rev. 21:14). These eyewitnesses, selected personally by the Lord, did indeed fill a unique, unrepeatable role in initially establishing the first church. But this unique role of the twelve by no means negates an ongoing place for the function of apostolic ministry in the church today.

Objection 4: Dubious authenticity of self-proclaimed modern-day apostles.

Counterpoint: The legitimacy of an individual claiming to be an apostle shouldn’t hinge on the title alone. True apostolic ministry is identified by its fruit and impact on the church. Revelation 2:2 highlights the importance of discernment, stating, “You have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars.” A genuine apostolic ministry results in a healthy church marked by unity, peace, individual growth and collaborative functioning.

Objection 5: Only those who write Scripture can be apostles. Since the Scriptures are finished, the office has ceased.

Counterpoint: Most apostles in the Bible actually wrote no Scripture. Even of the apostles of the Lamb, only Matthew, John and Peter wrote any portion of Scripture. And much Scripture was written by men never acknowledged as apostles, such as Luke and Mark.

Multifaceted Authority

As briefly mentioned earlier, the fivefold ministry is more complex than other forms of church government because of the multifaceted way in which leaders exercise authority. In contrast to other forms of church governance that make no distinction between kinds of ministerial gifting but assess authority simply according to ranking—clergy to bishop and so on—the fivefold model sees a linear authority of submission between the offices of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. In other words, this model posits a hierarchy inherent to these primary spiritual gifts (1 Cor. 12:28).

Furthermore, within each office, there exists a progression representing ascending levels of maturity or calling, ascending levels which we will here distinguish as an “associate” minister, then a “commissioned” minister, and then an “elder.” This progression is not a simple ladder that all should assume to climb to the top of, as many are only called and gifted by God to serve on an “associate” or “commissioned” level of ministry. In such cases, “failing” to move to the next level does not indicate immaturity or failure at all but rather a humble willingness to serve only “in accordance with the grace that is given to us” (Rom. 12:6-8).

Let’s further explore leadership and submission between the five ministerial offices.

An apostle’s ability to serve effectively depends upon his relinquishing other ministry functions to those especially gifted in them. Apostles are proficient in the four other offices but cannot perform their unique apostolic function while also serving full time in one or more of the other gifts. To effectively fulfill their apostolic role—founding churches, establishing patterns, counseling elders and bringing forth ministers—they must delegate pastoral, evangelistic, prophetic and teaching functions to those more explicitly called to these offices. So, actually fulfilling an apostolic role requires submission to teamwork that prevents self-sufficiency or self-exaltation of the apostle. Apostles bring the architectural design and pattern, but the entire Body, especially the other four ministries, must work together harmoniously for effective building to occur.

Ideally, ministers who are called and ordained at the eldership level should assume primary responsibility for the main scopes of leadership within the church, scopes corresponding to their office. These scopes include pastoral discipleship, teaching, evangelism, vision and prophetic ministry, diakonate governance and apostolic leadership. Scripture delineates that apostles and prophets are foundational ministries (Eph. 2:20), thus overseeing the rest. However, within these foundational ministries, Paul clarifies that apostolic authority takes precedence.

Therefore, when discussing submission within an office, it is highly appropriate for “associate” and “commissioned” leaders to submit to an elder (presbyter) within their same gifting—pastors to pastoral elders, evangelists to evangelistic elders, teachers to teaching elders, and so on. Yet this refers to the order of submission within an office of ministry. However, God has also ordained an order of submission between the different offices of ministry (1 Cor. 12:28). Elders, overseeing their respective spheres of ministry, should submit to apostolic patterns and guidance, confirmed and supported by the prophetic ministry.

Apostles, because of their God-given proficiency across the four main offices, are uniquely positioned to disciple “associate” or “commissioned” leaders within the other categories of ministry. This is typically not so with other elders, who should disciple leaders only within their same sphere of ministry. Evangelistic elders should not typically disciple pastors, nor pastoral elders disciple evangelists, and so on. (When we use the term “discipling” here, we are referring to developing a leader into their ministerial function rather than personal ministry to a leader’s character, which may occur across offices.)

Multifaceted Submission

Given their considerable influence in the church, the question again arises as to how apostles submit. Submission forms the cornerstone of any minister’s life, especially an apostle’s, manifested in various ways that underscore the interplay between ministerial authority and personal humility. An apostle must willingly place himself under discipling accountability for his personal character, even when his ministerial gifts might typically exceed those ministering to his personal life. Additionally, an apostle must show the required honor to parents, those older in the Lord, any individual moving under a special anointing, and the church body as a whole (that retains even the power to remove him). An apostle’s character and conduct should not be self-governed by his spiritual gifts but rather should be subject to the broader accountability within the Body of Christ.

So, the apostle submits his life to God through regular and triangulating ways. However, God also supernaturally oversees His church and sets our personal limits and the bounds of our habitation. Sometimes, God allows circumstances—illness, persecution, hardship—to foster the apostle’s humility and reliance both on the Holy Spirit and the grace of the church body. Paul spoke of this divine orchestration in 2 Corinthians 12:7: “A thorn was given me in the flesh . . . to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations” (ESV). This physical affliction reminded him of his need for humility and reliance on God.

Furthermore, God permits the world to play a significant role in humbling apostolic authority. Unlike worldly principalities relying on coercion, Christ’s noncompulsory fatherhood authority is under constant attack because it is the sole alternative to satan’s authority. Paul describes apostles as “the scum of the earth, the refuse of the world” in 1 Corinthians 4:9-13, highlighting the scrutiny and abuse they endure from secular authorities, opposing religions and the popular viewpoint of the world (and, at times, most painfully, from other professing Christian ministries), keeping them humble and reliant on Jesus and the church. It is in this sense that God has “displayed . . . apostles last” (NIV).

Unity in the Body of Christ is achieved when each member embraces their own limited role, allowing others to do the same. The church is called to work together selflessly for the common purpose of rebuilding the temple, the Body of Christ. Let us put our trust in God’s plan and let go of any feelings of envy, ambition or self-interest. Instead, let us focus on His purpose for His church. Let us acknowledge His chosen pattern of administration as suitable for the fullness of times and His ultimate plan to unite everything in Christ, both in heaven and on earth (Eph. 1:10, NASB).

Closing Considerations

No ministerial gift is strictly binary—either only this or only that. There is a sense in which all ministers may situationally function in any or all the gifts. There is a sense in which we are all called to be shepherds—pastors. Paul says we all must be able to teach. We all are proclaimers—prophets of the Word. And that Word is essentially the gospel, making us all evangelists. From time to time, various ones in the fivefold ministry will serve situationally as apostles of the church, representing the aggregate of eldership for a season or a specific need. Yet, God has called us with a primary gift to fill an office that represents a sphere of oversight within the church. We, together with the Body, must discern what we are primarily called to so that we might stand in our constituted places doing what we do best, what is truly graced by God. When we temporarily serve as an apostle of the church without possessing the constitutional calling from God ourselves, we must maintain a direct connection and submission to those in the fivefold ministry who have been thus called. Our situational function is derived from and dependent upon our relationship with those called and confirmed to be apostles.

Two Ways of Being Sent by God for Ministry

In ministry, there are two distinct ways in which individuals can be “sent” by God. The first way involves forming a close connection with a God-gifted individual. This approach requires a direct, personal relationship with someone who possesses a gift and ministerial office from God. By relying on this relational bond, one can effectively extend the reach of another’s gift to others, serving as a conduit for the grace and capabilities of the gifted individual, even if they themselves do not inherently possess the same gift.

The second way is through possessing the gift within oneself. In this case, the individual is endowed by God with a specific gift, carrying with it the responsibility, initiative and power to express and convey God’s heart and will directly to others. The apostle Paul teaches in Romans 12:6-8 that we must operate in our gifts only according to the grace that is given to us. Thus, it is incumbent upon ministers to discern whether God is extending this grace through another or giving it directly to them. Of course, this in no way diminishes the absolute necessity of this individual moving in his gift totally under the direct guidance of the Spirit and accountable to and under the oversight of the other members of the fivefold ministry to whom God has ordained him to be in submission.

The beauty of this arrangement is that, as the members of the fivefold ministry trust and connect with each other, we can all increasingly fill each other’s roles, albeit situationally. This is achievable because, as we converse over specific needs and situations, the diverse gifts are directly shared with us, empowering us to transfer them to others.

However, there is a danger in this trust among leaders: a delusion might set in, leading the “extension” brother to mistakenly believe he is the source of wisdom that was actually imparted by God through another. But “pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Prov. 16:18). Then, individuals like Diotrephes, who “love to have the first place” (3 John 9, HCSB), may start to deceive the Body by plagiarizing the gifts of those who trusted them. This deceit may lead the Body to believe God gave them those gifts directly, thus rearranging the order of authority and marching the church toward a perilous precipice.

To avoid this pitfall, we must remain humble, understanding the difference between being a fountain and a conduit. It’s crucial not to mislead others into believing that water originates at the faucet. If we maintain humility and discernment, God will enable us to transcend even the limits of our gifts, contingent upon our relational submission and willingness to give honor where it is due, as Romans 13:7 advises: “Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor” (NIV).

Otherwise, we risk falling under the judgment of usurpers like Uzziah, who was struck with leprosy for overstepping his boundaries (2 Chron. 26:16-21). Similarly, those who do not maintain their proper place, like Lucifer, transgress the very order of God, the design that alone permits peace and life to thrive within the living organism of the Body of Christ. Jude 1:6 warns of this, stating, “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these He has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day” (NIV). It is, therefore, essential to recognize and respect God’s divine order to ensure harmony and growth within the Body of Christ without destroying our souls.

A Question and Answer Session on the Fivefold Ministry

Rory Groves: My experience with the fivefold ministry has revealed a couple of key problems. One issue is the office of the apostle, where there seems to be an automatic submission to the apostle, often leading to an exalted position. Rarely does anyone dare to correct the apostle unless there are other apostles outside of the church congregation. In practical terms, this often results in the apostle becoming a de facto “head honcho.” Another issue is the self-appointment of roles like prophet or shepherd without any confirmation or ordination. This raises questions about accountability in a congregation, especially if it’s not starting from a mature situation.

Asahel Adams: I would assume that few things could prove more damaging to the church’s unity than a bunch of individuals attempting, without any fathering guidance, to sort out their own private definitions of the five offices and how they work together. In short, I believe God must (and has) supernaturally and graciously reveal these patterns from Scripture to apostles of the Lord, who can then faithfully steward them into a body without causing the chaos often synonymous with modern “fivefold ministry” efforts. Furthermore, it seems highly unlikely to have only one apostle in a healthy church that spans multiple congregations.

Apostles taking preeminence: One man lording it over the rest might indicate that a congregation is borrowing a corporate model rather than embracing a familial model, which is more nuanced, with different spheres of authority. And, of course, one commonly sees the same problem in congregations with one pastor in charge. As I have already mentioned, I believe that the mark of a true apostle is to sponsor other gifts as a kind of “facilitator in chief.” And though he may retain the title of “apostle” while taking the preeminence and serving as the de facto head honcho, he cannot practically fulfill apostolic responsibilities while also occupying the four other offices—at least not beyond the smallest beginning stages of a congregation. In short, God has arranged it so that apostles must submit to teamwork if they would be freed to do the specific service unique to their office. Yet, we also need to define from Scripture the legitimate limits and extents of apostolic authority so that we don’t inadvertently label as an “exalted position” what God has actually called them to fulfill. Certainly, an imbalance arises when an apostle confuses serving his gifts to the Body versus pastoring his own character in matters of attitude and behavior.

About self-promotion: In our church context, you’ll never hear someone claim, “I’m an apostle” or, “I’m a prophet.” It’s deemed irresponsible and immature to brandish such titles, as they are actually functions and responsibilities, not merely titles for self-aggrandizement. Hebrews reminds us, “No man takes this honor to himself” (Heb. 5:4), suggesting that the true hallmark of a calling is not in loudly proclaimed titles but in the evident fruit of ministry. Jesus stated, “By their fruit, you will recognize them,” indicating that the authenticity of one’s ministry is verified by its outcome rather than by self-asserted claims (Matt. 7:16, NIV). Proverbs 18:16 asserts, “A man’s gift makes room for him.” Paul underscores the church’s authority to recognize and confirm leaders, stating in 1 Timothy 4:14, “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery” (KJV).

Self-promotion or eliciting “confirmation” from the immature under our care would reflect only reverting to the “wisdom from below”—an inversion of true spiritual fatherhood. In contrast, genuine spiritual authority and gifting descend from the “Father of lights,” from whom every good and perfect gift originates, embodying the “wisdom from above” (James 1:17; 3:13-17, NKJV, NLT).

An apostle doesn’t have carte blanche authority to assume the role of everyone else’s function. And the church has the recourse to challenge its leaders and should test those who claim to be apostles, as Revelation 2:2 demonstrates.

Grady Phelan: May I ask a follow-up question? I think you started to address it, but immediately after that section in Corinthians, it states, “But earnestly desire the greater gifts” (1 Cor. 12:31, NASB). The question is, these gifts appear to be something that men of God should strive for, knowing the gifting we feel we have. How does someone, especially someone new to the church, faith, or everything, begin to discern their gifting and then progress in it? It’s like a person learning to play the piano who can’t just wait and say, “God, anoint me as a worship leader,” but instead works towards that goal.

Asahel: There seems to be two ways to discover our gift. The first way is by earnestly desiring it, as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:31. The second way is by “loving beyond our means,” as seen in 1 Corinthians 13. Living beyond our means entails buying things we can’t afford. However, loving beyond our means involves caring for needs and people beyond our fleshly capacity to do so. This creates an avenue for God to work—for the gifts of the Spirit to be activated in us.

As we begin to love and serve the Body of Christ, it often becomes evident that a specific gifting is at work through us. For example, four people may perceive the same need. One with a heart for evangelism might say, “Oh, Lord, I wish I could share so that they could repent, receive baptism, and be filled with the Spirit.” Someone with a heart for pastoral care might see the same need and think, “If I could establish trust with that brother, I could help him overcome.” A teacher might identify a teaching that addresses a specific confusion or stronghold. A prophet will be moved to proclaim a Word of faith and deliverance. We realize our gifts as we love through them, often without noticing at first.

In selflessly loving and serving with no thought to our gifting, we start to find a rhythm in our ministry, and we discover—“Oh, I think this is a teaching ministry,” and so forth. The Lord will eventually confirm this through the mature saints or leaders in the Body. We don’t decide ahead of time which gift we really want and then try to arrange the circumstances and connections of our lives to foster our ambition. We choose the more excellent way of love and discover that God gave us a particular grace or facility whereby we love and serve with some aptitude that came from Him, not ourselves.

As we recognize our primary gifting—as a pastor, evangelist, deacon, and so forth—it’s critical at that point to express this discernment with an overseer who can bring us under his wing and specifically disciple us into our function. By nature, this father figure must possess the gift we want to grow in because a “student is not above his teacher . . . it is enough for the student to be like his teacher.”  (Matt. 10:24-25, NIV). For instance, Elisha was mentored by Elijah, and Timothy by Paul (2 Kings 2:9; 2 Tim. 1:2).

My father often said that the evidence of mature gifting is its ability to reproduce itself in others. So, a mature teaching ministry will nurture other teachers, and a pastoral ministry will inspire and bring forth other pastors, and so forth.

Howard Wheeler: There’s widespread discussion in the church today, especially among Charismatic circles, about the fivefold ministry. This is often a primary topic, but we’re not referring here to what the New Apostolic Reformation advocates, or any other various self-certifying versions of what is claimed as a fivefold ministry. We must discern based on the fruits produced. A true apostle working with genuine prophetic ministries results in more than just transient, scattered efforts. The wake of a true apostle reveals a Body unified in love and mutual submission, reflecting the apostle’s humility and submission. If anyone has never encountered the false “fivefold ministry” teachings, consider yourself blessed. However, false teachings are causing disruption globally, particularly among those claiming to be Spirit-filled. They’re looking for fireworks instead of the fruit.

Asahel: We “shall know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:16, KJV). Whether someone has the gift or not is irrelevant if the fruit is missing. The presence of fruit indicates that the character and submission are also present. On the other hand, if there is no fruit, we need to look elsewhere. It’s important to note that the fruit is not numbers, nor is it works. Rather, it’s a fitly framed Body of unity, love and life. How many have ever built a house or entertained building a house? I want you to picture going out to find an architect, because an architect is like an apostle. So, you go by a house and say, “Honey, I like that one. Well, what about this one over here? This guy’s built several just like that. I like that.” And then, finally, you pull up and see this rickety thing, rusty tin over here, cardboard over there, an old pallet or two over on this side. But he’s got a megaphone declaring, “I am the best architect that anybody has ever found.”

He says he’s an architect. “Could you build something similar to the White House?”

“Absolutely!” You’d laugh him out of town. It would just be a joke. Now, we should probably do a cartoon to help illustrate this, but the question of submitting to an apostolic ministry doesn’t even begin until you encounter a congregation that you feel mirrors what the Bible promised. Then you ask, “Is this possible without the fivefold ministry?”

Jerry Lancaster: Would it be helpful to mention, and I think it can be brief, the difference between personality and gifting?

Asahel: Amen. This is probably tying into what Brother Rory was suggesting. Brother Howard, you probably could do this better than I can.

Howard: Your dad got the revelation of the fivefold ministry because of a particular personality that had become a huge star among many churches back in the ’70’s. And there really had to be a distinction. He was a gifted individual, but his personality was what was drawing everyone to him. This guy turned out to be homosexual, by the way. Your dad never felt the go-ahead, even though everyone around him, all these ministers, was saying, “We’ve got to go there. We’ve got to come under this gift.” But the very fact that there is a fivefold ministry, if it operates, is what will preclude personality from coming to the forefront. It’s what keeps it in check. This is the check against personality.

Asahel: My dad made a distinction between charismatic gifting and charismatic personalities. The evidence, again, is the only thing that matters. The loudest architect is not the best architect. The best building shows us the best architect. The loudest architect may attract the largest following because he has a charismatic personality, but he may not have charismatic gifting in the anointing of the Spirit (the literal meaning of charismatic—the gifting of the Spirit). Apostles are not super people. They’re not supermen. They can be very meek. Paul was unimpressive in person. Yet again, the evidence, the proof, is in the pudding. And if the pudding isn’t good, let’s not even talk about the apostle. It’s irrelevant to our purpose.

Speaker in the audience: I wasted eighteen years in an organization that focused a lot on leadership. And when you talk about not having any exposure to the fivefold ministry, like my wife and me, where we came from, we knew plural ministry. That’s what we would call it. But in a military organization, the fivefold structure is where it needs to be. It’s all designed off of that. So when you’re talking about it tonight, it’s like, “Whoa.” When a unit functions and can do what it’s supposed to do, it has those five elements that match exactly what you’re talking about. So, that other kingdom, every time we see it functioning, it’s functioning in that other kingdom. And if it’s not functioning in ours, I think we need to look at it and ask, “Well, where is it?” That’s all I had to say.

Asahel: The world is often much more adept at organizing themselves for their purpose, but the church is too afraid to submit.

In the discussion about evolution, intelligent design and creation, we sometimes argue that discovering a smartphone while walking in the Virginia hills would not lead us to assume it resulted from a tree mutation. This argument illustrates the concept of “irreducible complexity,” which states that life comprises numerous essential systems, and if it lacks even one, life itself is impossible. Therefore, gradual evolutionary improvement over time is not possible. The human body had to have all eleven essential life systems fully functional for life to exist. There was no room for gradual improvement as we mutated from three basic systems to four and so on. If you remove a component of a mouse trap, such as the spring, you do not have a less functional mouse trap; you do not have a mouse trap at all. That’s irreducible complexity. The same applies to the human body and the universe as a whole. A smartphone is much simpler than the most basic living organism regarding what is required for life. I relate this to what God may be doing on the earth today and what He is communicating to us. Some people prefer to believe that life came about through random mutations and accidents, but there may be a reason for this.

Why might people choose to believe that the beauty and complexity of life result from accidents and chaos? It may be because they wish to avoid the idea of a higher authority. If there is design in the universe, it suggests the existence of a Designer. And if there is a Creator, it’s possible that we are accountable to Him. In order to live in harmony with the life that He designed, we may need to become humble, obey His Word, and submit to His authority. Christians often criticize those who view the complexity of nature through the lens of chaos and accident. However, when they witness a well-organized expression of Christ’s Body, such as families holding together, ministries collaborating, and a corporate unified witness of Jesus going forth on the earth, they are unwilling to acknowledge the work of the supernatural Designer behind it, who alone could bring forth such harmony, especially in our fragmented modern world.

As we discuss the Lord’s design and come across successful instances of life in the church, families and relationships sustained through generations, we mustn’t succumb to the temptation of thinking that it was a one-off freak occurrence. Instead, let us consider the possibility that someone received further revelation from the Designer about how this works. This also gives us hope because if we see it as just a freak accident of nature and remain unaware of how to duplicate it, we don’t know if it will keep working. However, if we see it as evidence that there is a design and a Creator, then we have hope that it can spread, grow and reproduce.