ApOstoLicAlieNs? Part 1
OK. Here’s the reason Part 1 of the reason for the groovy blog title.1 Peter 1:1a:
Peter refers to himself as an apostle of Jesus Christ. The word apostle basically translates the NT Greek noun apostolos meaning “sent one”, which is in turn derived from the Greek verb apostello (RELAX! it’s not hard to grasp), meaning “to send with a message”. You can go ahead and meditate on the undeniably close link between apostles and prophets as “ones essentially sent with a message”). This apostle is designated as “of Jesus Christ”. Mmmmm. An apostle of Jesus Christ.
Basically, the way I see it, this statement implies a number of things, at least:
- CALLING:
Peter is called by the Master. How else would he receive a message?
- BELONGING:
Peter belongs to Jesus. (apostle of Jesus)
- IDENTITY:
Peter’s identity is defined in relation to his Owner and Master, not based on his gift.
(apostle of Jesus )
- MISSION:
Peter is sent by Jesus with a message. (apostle of Jesus)
- MESSAGE:
Peter has no message of his own. (apostle of Jesus)
- SUBMISSION:
Peter’s mission is subject to Jesus’ mission and authority, hence SUB-mission
(apostle of Jesus)
7. AUTHORITY:
Peter has apostolic authority as long as he is sent (apostle of Jesus)
- JESUS:
Peter’s message content is Jesus – it’s who he represents. (apostle of Jesus)
I’ll be using Peter’s official apostolic call and mandate as a metaphor for our own general apostolic call and mandate. How can I do that? Are all Christians apostles? No and Yes. Huh?
NO – not in an official, “gift to the church” sense. (1 Cor 12:29a, Eph 4;11 – some).
YES – in a general sense. Jesus said so. (Jn 20:21 – “send” translates the Greek apostello)
Good. Go over my list again. Add some more implications of the phrase “an apostle of Jesus Christ”.
For now, this should cover the apostolic bit. Next time, the alien stuff.
JK




