Was Philip still a Deacon then? How about in Acts 21?As an evangelist, Deacon Philip conducted a mass evangelism meeting in Samaria (Acts 8), with many saved and baptized.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Was Philip still a Deacon then? How about in Acts 21?As an evangelist, Deacon Philip conducted a mass evangelism meeting in Samaria (Acts 8), with many saved and baptized.
There is a controversy about that going back to the early church. I believe that there were two Philips, an apostle and a deacon, and that the deacon Philip was the evangelist Philip mentioned in Acts 21, but Apostle Philip is the one said to have become a cross-cultural missionary in the ancient sources. Some believe there was only one Philip who was both the evangelist and the apostle, or that it was the deacon who became the missionary.Was Philip still a Deacon then? How about in Acts 21?
That is clear, the Philip in Matthew was numbered with the Apostles, one of the twelve, in Acts that Philip is Philip the Deacon/Evangelist, one of the seven.There is a controversy about that going back to the early church. I believe that there were two Philips, an apostle and a deacon, and that the deacon Philip was the evangelist Philip mentioned in Acts 21, but Apostle Philip is the one said to have become a cross-cultural missionary in the ancient sources. Some believe there was only one Philip who was both the evangelist and the apostle, or that it was the deacon who became the missionary.
Ephesians 4I believe there are only three God ordained offices in the New Testament era thus maintaining the trinitarian fingerprint of God on the church. They are apostles, prophets, and pastors.
I am making my conclusions on the basis that apostles and prophets and pastor teachers had particular ministry credentials. The evangelist had none. Philip was definitely not the apostle Philip, otherwise it would render as insane the reasoning for appointing him as a helper with the widows when you compare the following two verses.Ephesians 4
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
I am not discussing Phillip, I am listing all 5 gift ministries set in the church.I am making my conclusions on the basis that apostles and prophets and pastor teachers had particular ministry credentials. The evangelist had none. Philip was definitely not the apostle Philip, otherwise it would render as insane the reasoning for appointing him as a helper with the widows when you compare the following two verses.
Acts 6:2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.
Acts 5 .......and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch:
6 Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.
What Israel needed at this critical time was men who had seen Jesus after he was raised from the dead. This fact would, it seems to me, make the prospect of him being a prophet much less likely. However, he was an evangelist by deed in that he evangelized Samaria and baptized them. However he could not perform that which the apostles had been commissioned to do and he left without them having received the Holy Ghost. What is the significance of this? well, I will let you read what authority the apostles had been given on resurrection Sunday in John 20.
21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:
23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
Read Acts 8. Those whose sins were remitted by Peter and John received the Holy Ghost having already been baptized, so we can see that baptism is not in the equation of salvation. Peter also retained the sins of a man named Simon saying this to him.
23 For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.
The things that are written in scripture are not given to fill up a page. They have meaning and God illustrates his truths.
So I do not consider Philip to be commissioned as either an apostle or a prophet. Later, he did not impart the Holy Spirit to the Ethiopian when he believed but he did baptize him in water. Those who were receiving the Holy Spirit at that time were those who were of the stock of Abraham through Jacob. This Ethiopian was not baptized in the name of Jesus Christ but he said plainly that he believed Jesus is the Son of God. That is what believers in the gospels before the crucifixion of Jesus believed for heir justification. But no one is "saved" until they receive the Holy Ghost through faith in the name of the crucified and resurrected Jesus Christ. Peter had not opened the door of faith to gentiles until Acts 10 with Cornelius. This is Acts 8.
Acts 14:27
And when they were come (to Antioch), and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.
He is speaking about the events in Acts 10 with the conversion of the first gentile.
Follow the narrative closely and believe the words because the Acts is a book of transition history and it has structure.