“Surely the Lord God will do nothing, But he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.”— Amos 3:7
Why do Christians no longer have prophets like Israel did in the Old Testament or why don’t we have apostles like the Church did in the New Testament? In my interaction with Latter Day Saints (LDS) it has been incredibly clear the centrality of the prophet and apostles in Mormonism. The reasoning, as far as I can see, behind having a living prophet is that God has called prophets “since the days of Adam” to lead his people. It was through the prophet Joseph Smith, according to the LDS, that God re-established his Church on the earth and through a living a prophet and 12 apostles he lead his church today.
Then why for nearly 2,000 years has Christianity functioned without prophets or apostles? This is a two-part answer because prophets and apostles are different offices, but for nearly 2,000 years Christianity has believed these offices to have ceased. To a Mormon this may not make any sense, but it was not a decision made arbitrarily, it was actually taught to us by Jesus and the Apostles. Jesus says in Luke 16:16 ““The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it.” John the Baptist was the last prophet. Additionally, the author of Hebrews says “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world” (Hebrews 1:1-2). In short, God use to speak through prophets, but in these last days he has spoken through his Son. For the same reason we don’t have a king leading God’s people or a priest providing sacrifice is the same reason we don’t have prophets today. Jesus is our living prophet, priest, and king.
Additionally, Christianity has not had apostles like the LDS do today. We could make the historical argument (a valid one indeed) that I think clearly shows the apostles did not try and appoint new apostles as the others died out. We see in the writings of the Apostolic Father’s (who even new the apostles themselves) that they are clear they are not writing like apostles. Even the leaders of the church immediately following the apostles did not claim this title for themselves. However, I think the Biblical argument is a more persuasive one. The key criteria for being an apostle is that one has seen Jesus with his own eyes and heard him with his own ears. Time and space permits me from delving deeper into this topic, however an essential function and criteria of being an apostle is being a witness of Christ. Mark 3:14 shows us that being a witness is both a function and a requirement. Furthermore in Acts 1 when the apostles are looking for someone to “take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside” they look for only one quality. The man must have been with them (Christ and the apostles) from the baptism of Jesus to his ascension. While it is clear that the office of apostle is being discussed, the reason the man must have been with them from the beginning is because “one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection” (Acts 1:22). His job is to be a witness. Since no man today has seen Jesus, we can say that this foundation-laying ministry (Ephesians 2:20) has ended.
Since the first century, Christians have not had prophets or apostles leading their people. My hope is that I have shown this view is not a mere tradition or a decision made frivolously, but based on the teaching of Christ and the apostles themselves. I don’t pretend to have completely debunked the LDS view, I know there are verses I have not looked at it in this post. Also, I in no way meant to question the moral character of LDS prophets and apostles, but my intention is to promote understanding and conversation between LDS and Evangelicals!
Leave a Reply
Your email is safe with us.