The Apostles: The Biblical Pattern

[Jerome]

Google would tell you:

"In the Dutch Reformed tradition, 'choosing lots' (or lotige) is a historic church polity method used to select office bearers, like elders and deacons. After the congregation nominates qualified candidates, church leadership uses the casting of lots to make the final selection. This practice draws inspiration from the biblical method of seeking God's will to replace Judas Iscariot in Acts 1:23-26."

"In classical Dutch Reformed church orders, such as the Church Order of Dort, it was believed that election by lot prevents electioneering, eliminates political favoritism, and acknowledges Christ as the true head of the church who makes the ultimate selection of his leaders."

"The typical process unfolds as follows. Nomination: The reigning church council creates a list of candidates from the congregation. Sometimes, male communicant members may also submit names. Approval: The council assesses nominees based on biblical qualifications (like those in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1) and presents the list to the congregation for approval. Selection by Lot: From those approved, the council or congregation draws lots (e.g., drawing names out of a hat, golden urn, or using marked and blank papers) to finalize who takes the open seats."

"While modern, mainstream Dutch Reformed denominations have largely moved toward democratic voting or congregational ratification, highly conservative and orthodox factions within the tradition maintain the practice."

 

[Jerome]

What I've witnessed is a ceremony where strips of paper with nominees' names are sticking out from among the pages of a Bible. A certain number of these are pulled, and that's who get to be Elders!

 

[Jerome]

Earliest instance if this I've found among the Reformed, was by the Hussites in the 15th century:

History of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren by A. Bost, Geneva, translated from the French [London: Religious Tract Society, 1834] pp. 48-49

"The meeting was preceded by a fast, and opened with prayer and reading the scriptures. They then proceeded to choose twenty men from among the brethren present: from them they selected nine of unblemished character, and held in general repute for wisdom and experience in divine things. To the other eleven was entrusted the further management of the business. They then prayed fervently for the nine they had chosen, intreating that God would signify his will, whether they should be appointed preachers of his word; and the brethren resolved, after the example of the apostles in the nomination of Matthias, to abide by the decision of the lot.
They went even farther, submitting to the same decision not only their choice of the nine, but the question whether they should appoint one, two, three, or even make no appointment at all. For this purpose they prepared twelve papers, nine of which were blank and three inscribed with the word est, (appointed,) and placed them in an urn, so that the whole nine they had chosen might possibly have been rejected. After that,Gregory, who had been one of the provisional elders up to that time, prayed, and exhorted the brethren to place entire confidence in the decision of their heavenly Father. Nine of the lots were then drawn successively from the urn, and one of them presented to each of the nine brethren, when it was found that three of the brethren, Matthias Kunewald, a young man 25 years of age, Thomas Pryclaucius, and Elias Krenovius were appointed. These men were received by the assembly with great joy and thanksgiving, as from the hand of God, and all the brethren promised them obedience, by giving them the right hand of fellowship. These three brethren being thus appointed elders, or pastors, it remained that they should be ordained..."

 

[Jerome]

Pastor Jim Samra (PhD. Oxford) on casting lots to select Elders, he mentions others churches doing the same or similar such as some contregations of the 'Christian Reformed' denomination, and Bethlehem Baptist Minneapolis which John Piper pastored.

from 18m45s

 

[Jerome]

"...The Clerk and at least one other Elder will place stones or other objects corresponding to each of the approved names in a container that allows for suitable randomization. A congregational member selected by the Chairman will draw out of each container the number of stones or other objects corresponding to the number of open positions. The candidates, whose names correspond to the stones or other objects chosen through this process, will constitute the newly selected Elders."

https://calvarygr.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/CalvaryChurchConstitution-Rev2019-web.pdf

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

No, I never heard of the practice in modern times. I'm not aware that it goes on in Britain. Perhaps it does across the Pond.

The practice is seldom used in Europe, but it isn’t something pulled from thin air. It’s actually documented in several Reformed circles, though almost entirely in the United States, which may explain why you haven’t encountered it in England.

A few examples:

• Reformed Worship (RCA tradition) describes congregations that moved from elections to casting lots for selecting elders and deacons, even developing a liturgy for the process.
• The Outlook Magazine, a conservative Reformed publication, notes that some Reformed churches today cast lots when choosing office‑bearers, following their reading of Acts 1.
• A Reformed pastor writing for Clearly Reformed reports having served in two congregations that used lots as part of their elder‑selection process.

These aren’t fringe groups, they’re mainstream American Reformed contexts (RCA, CRC‑adjacent, URCNA/PCA‑adjacent). The practice isn’t widespread, but it is real enough that Reformed writers discuss it, defend it, and critique it.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The practice is seldom used in Europe, but it isn’t something pulled from thin air. It’s actually documented in several Reformed circles, though almost entirely in the United States, which may explain why you haven’t encountered it in England.

A few examples:

• Reformed Worship (RCA tradition) describes congregations that moved from elections to casting lots for selecting elders and deacons, even developing a liturgy for the process.
• The Outlook Magazine, a conservative Reformed publication, notes that some Reformed churches today cast lots when choosing office‑bearers, following their reading of Acts 1.
• A Reformed pastor writing for Clearly Reformed reports having served in two congregations that used lots as part of their elder‑selection process.

These aren’t fringe groups, they’re mainstream American Reformed contexts (RCA, CRC‑adjacent, URCNA/PCA‑adjacent). The practice isn’t widespread, but it is real enough that Reformed writers discuss it, defend it, and critique it.

As I say, I've never come across it, and hope I never do. I don't think the practice occurs in the N.T. post-Pentecost, which is pehaps an indication that it shouldn't have occurred pre-Pentecost. Would you use lots to vote in elders in your congregation?

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

As I say, I've never come across it, and hope I never do. I don't think the practice occurs in the N.T. post-Pentecost, which is pehaps an indication that it shouldn't have occurred pre-Pentecost. Would you use lots to vote in elders in your congregation?

I understand your concern. I would not use lots to select elders in my own congregation. My only point was that the practice does exist today in certain Reformed circles, and that it is documented. The fact that it does not appear post‑Pentecost is precisely why most churches do not adopt it

 

[Ascetic X]

Looking at the meaning of the word, and the actual ministry of Paul and his team, here is my position. In my missiology the term "apostle" simply means "one sent forth," and looking at the ministry of the apostles in Acts, they were simply cross cultural, church-planting missionaries.

I first began to consider this interpretation when I became a missionary to Japan many years ago. I learned that many missionaries go through this process: "Where is my calling in the Bible?" And they then conclude that their ministry is in the book of Acts, not as evangelists, but as apostles.

An evangelist is a zealous advocate or dedicated proclaimer of a joyous message, typically someone who spreads the Christian gospel. The term comes from the Greek euangelion, meaning "bearer of good news".

Modern understanding of evangelist points to a preacher who specializes in hellfire, personal salvation, repentance, and eternal destination topics.

So do not missionaries fulfill the role of an evangelist?

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

These men held the office of apostle, to which there is no succession.

Exactly.

 

[Ascetic X]

Why would pastor, teacher, and evangelist continue, but not apostle or prophet?

Why has the pastor usurped the other gift ministries?

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

An evangelist is a zealous advocate or dedicated proclaimer of a joyous message, typically someone who spreads the Christian gospel. The term comes from the Greek euangelion, meaning "bearer of good news".

Modern understanding of evangelist points to a preacher who specializes in hellfire, personal salvation, repentance, and eternal destination topics.

So do not missionaries fulfill the role of an evangelist?

I have no problem with itinerant preaching, revival meetings, or traveling exhorters. Those have their place. But the moment someone inserts that modern practice as the definition of the biblical office of Evangelist, they’ve left Scripture and entered tradition.

The NT office of evangelist is defined by Scripture, not by modern revivalism. The word “missionary” has replaced “evangelist” in common usage, and then a modern meaning is inserted back into the biblical office of Evangelist, one that is unknown to Scripture.

Philip is the only named evangelist, and his ministry does not match the modern definition. Missionaries may evangelize, biblical term is evangelist. We must not insert modern functions into biblical offices.

Why would pastor, teacher, and evangelist continue, but not apostle or prophet?

Why has the pastor usurped the other gift ministries?

Great question!

Brother, Scripture itself divides these ministries into two different categories.

1. Apostles and prophets were foundational.

Paul says the church is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). A foundation is laid once, not repeatedly.

Apostles were eyewitnesses of the risen Christ, personally commissioned by Him, and entrusted with revelation and sign‑gifts.

Prophets were inspired revealers of new doctrine, only while the canon was being given.

Once the foundation was laid and Scripture completed, those offices ceased by design.

2. Evangelists, pastors, and teachers are ongoing ministries.

These are not foundational offices.
They do not reveal new doctrine or write Scripture.
They are functional ministries for the continuing life of the church.

Evangelists proclaim the gospel.
Pastors shepherd.
Teachers instruct.

These continue because the church still needs them.

3. The distinction is simple: foundational offices ceased; functional ministries continue.

Scripture itself draws the line.

 

[John of Japan]

An evangelist is a zealous advocate or dedicated proclaimer of a joyous message, typically someone who spreads the Christian gospel. The term comes from the Greek euangelion, meaning "bearer of good news".

Correct about the Greek, but then you have to research the usage. Only one man was called an evangelist in Scripture, and he did not do cross-cultural evangelism or church planting.

Modern understanding of evangelist points to a preacher who specializes in hellfire, personal salvation, repentance, and eternal destination topics.

This is a general statement. It could describe a pastor, missionary, or vocational evangelist.

Modern understanding in the circles I minister in says that the evangelist is a specialist in revival and evangelism. He is given to the local church (Eph. 4:11-12) to encourage revival and evangelism. I believe this is biblical. The usage in Scripture is limited to one man, Philip. This evangelist conducted an evangelistic crusade (mass evangelism) in Samaria, and reached the Ethiopian eunuch through personal evangelism. Therefore it is perfectly proper and Biblical for a modern evangelist to specialize in mass evangelism and personal evangelism, and build up the local church in this way.

So do not missionaries fulfill the role of an evangelist?

My answer is "No", not usually.

Study the 3 "Missionary Journeys" of the Apostle Paul. He preached the Gospel cross-culturally, being the "apostle to the Gentiles," and planted many churches. Later he worked on developing those churches theologically and spiritually, since all of his epistles are to local churches (unless you believe he wrote Hebrews). He was not used by the Lord in the same way that Philip was.

As a missionary to Japan for 33 years, I started churches, taught in a Japanese Bible school, etc. My pattern was the Apostle Paul, who was a cross cultural missionary, not really an evangelist like Philip in the Biblical sense. (Though of course I wasn't used in nearly as mighty a way as Paul was, he being the foundation builder.) As a missionary, I did sometimes conduct local church evangelistic meetings, but that was not my forte. I was a church planter and Bible teacher. This closely parallels what the missionary teams in Acts did.

Having said this, there is cross-ministry between the ministers listed in Eph. 4:11. Simply being a vocational evangelist doesn't mean a man can't plant churches, and being a missionary does not mean one cannot conduct evangelistic meetings. I've known pastors to become evangelists and vice versa, but in doing so they keep their original gifting, meaning that, for example, as a pastor the gifted evangelist will probably major on evangelism.

My grandfather was a vocational evangelist who also started churches. He pastored his last church plant for 7 years, then simply couldn't wait any longer, so he reentered the field of mass evangelism. I had the privilege of preaching at that church for its 90th anniversary.

 

[John of Japan]

Exactly.

Please note that I was referring to the original twelve, who were special in that they were chosen directly by Christ, will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes, and will have their names written in the foundation of the New Jerusalem.

I was not referring to the secondary apostles listed above, who were church planting cross-cultural missionaries. Caveat: Paul was special in that he was the "Apostle to the Gentiles," and thus opened the door for the Gospel to us Gentiles. Other than that, he was simply a cross-cultural church planting missionary. That is why we refer to his evangelistic trips as "missionary journeys." Thus my pattern as a missionary to Japan was Pauline: to win souls to Christ and to disciple them in new churches.

 

[John of Japan]

As a former missionary striving to be biblical, I reject several traditional views: institutionalism (my mission board did not start institutions, only churches), education (missionaries can be teachers, but a person who only teaches is not a missionary), etc. A biblical missionary, based on the ministry of the men in Acts, does cross-cultural evangelism and forms the converts into a biblical local church. To be clear, this does not rule out medical missions if they are evangelistic church planters. My friend Dr. T. in a Muslim majority country started a hospital and churches and schools. (The country was largely illiterate.)

Why do we not use the term "apostle" for modern missionaries? It's because the term has lost its original meaning, so that many think calling a modern missionary an "apostle" is heresy! Most modern Baptist churches are institutions rather than the body of Christ, and are not based on the NT church model. Modern Baptists have theologized the office of apostle into the past.

In missions history, 19th century missions had stagnated: living in beautiful "compounds," starting institutions rather than churches, paternalism toward the nationals, etc. Several missiologists began to turn things around. Henry Venn (1796-1873) based his "three self" movement on the Bible: we are to start self-propagating, self-governing, and self-supporting national churches. The missionary is temporary, only there until a national pastor can take over. China missionary Roland Allen (1868–1947) then succeeded in advancing Venn's vision with his ground-breaking book Missionary Methods: St. Paul or Ours? (1912). This lead to great revivals in China and Korea.

P.S. It is also relevant to point out that except for James, the first martyr, all of the original twelve apostles were soul-winning, church planting missionaries. One book that is excellent on this history: The Apostles After Jesus, by David Criswell.