Quote Originally Posted by woobadooba
So what you are really saying here is that one is only an apostle because the Spirit has gifted that person in this way; and if that person does not exercise that gift, or even if 'she' does exercise that gift, and it isn't received by men, then Jesus won't return.
No. There is no gifting involved, none whatsoever. An apostle is chosen directly by God not through any gifting at all. This is important to realize. Whereas other workers in the church do the work based on their gifts, the office of an apostle does not, nor does an Elder (it too is an office). This does not mean an apostle does not have gifts or does not use them, but those gifts are not the basis for his or her commission.
Also notice how I used the words "Spirit has gifted", not merely 'gifted' alone as you are assuming.
The gifts of the Spirits are not gifted alone, but are gifts from the Spirit of God. I am not aware of anywhere in the Bible where the gifting is merely alone as you are again misrepresenting: "you are assuming".
Look closely at what he had said, and take note of what I put in bold font:
"I handed on to you as of first importance what I in turn had received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have died. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. For I am the least of the apostles, unfit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace toward me has not been in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them—though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me."(1Co 15:1-10 NRSV)
Now then, look carefully how "the twelve" apostles were overlooked in 1 Cor. 15:5. That seemed convenient to do so.
Now then, it is quite obvious that the gift of apostleship ended with Paul, the last of the apostles. Moreover, these were apostles because Jesus appeared before them after having died for our sins.
It is quite evident that merely self-declaring the apostleship ended with Paul, is not sound reason or valid basis. Apostles are not Apostles Merle because they saw Jesus in the flesh. Many Apostles did not see Jesus in the flesh or resurrected (I for one), yet were still commissioned by God for the Work. Did Apollos ever see Jesus in Person? Suffice it to say, after Jesus died and was resurrected and raised, the Apostles continue to do the work of selecting elders and training them for the various places such as Ephesus, Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Philippi and on and on. Apostle means missionary, and so where God raised Apostles, He is was free to do so.
In fact, this idea is touched on in Acts:
"For it is written in the Book of Psalms: Let his dwelling become desolate; let no one live in it; and Let someone else take his position."Therefore, from among the men who have accompanied us during the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us-- beginning from the baptism of John until the day He was taken up from us--from among these, it is necessary that one become a witness with us of His resurrection."(Act 1:20-22 HCSB)
This is referring to the twelfth apostle that was replaced, not "all the apostles" (1 Cor. 15:7) thereafter. And this would disqualify Paul according to your theory since Paul was not "with the Lord Jesus-from the time he was baptized by John until the day he was taken from us into heaven" (Acts 1:21-22). Jesus was taken up to heaven long before Paul saw Jesus in Person. Your theory just does not hold water. And so you sin by rejecting those commissioned by God as is more than obvious. You reject all the missions of Apostles through the centuries. You reject "all the apostles" (1 Cor. 15:7) after "the twelve apostles" (v.5 NLT) which technically speaking includes Paul and Apollos and all the others we can name by name.
So according to this passage in order for a person to be appointed as an apostle, that person had to be a witness to the Crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. By the way, this happened during the 40 days in which Jesus appeared before them.
They did not have to witness His crucifixion. Almost nobody actually witnessed His crucifixion. The disciples had fled.
"After He had suffered, He also presented Himself alive to them by many convincing proofs, appearing to them during 40 days and speaking about the kingdom of God."(Act 1:3 HCSB) Paul was the last to receive this call to office. That is why he spoke thus: "Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me."(1Co 15:8 NRSV)
Paul was not the last since there were "all the apostles" (1 Cor. 15:7) in addition to "the twelve apostles" (v.5), and all those apostles were more than just Paul, subsequent to Paul. This verse says Paul was the last to see Jesus in Person, for Jesus had to have returned to show Himself to Paul on the road to Damascus, like an exception to the rule. Acts 9 says, "So Ananias went and found Saul. He laid his hands on him and said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road..." (v.17). All those apostles in the first century and subsequent centuries are missionaries and perform the regional work of setting up the churches. Your reasoning is rejected and refused in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Who are you really defending?
I've already shown you that the office of the apostle ended with Paul. So where in the Holy Scriptures do you find such a teaching?
I have already shown you how you misunderstood 1 Cor. 15 and Acts 1. So you are free to take an account of your error and respond specifically to how you have been shown in error.
This does not answer the question. Your view that the church is male-centric is merely an opinion, not a fact. Show us facts. Don't assume mere opinions to be factual unless you can substantiate them as such.
I don't view the church as male centric, so why misrepresent? Rather, the church is not male centric. Thus, women can be apostles and elders. Junia (some manuscripts say Julia) was an apostle, and there was no indication she saw Jesus in Person. The same with many other names of Apostles who had never seen Jesus in Person.

Your opinion that of rejecting women apostles and women elders. This is male-centric. Why be so unreasonable?

Next time you reject the apostles and women apostles, don't do so without just cause. Therein lies your problem, and it remains. Think about it, but not to rationalize yourself further, but come to repentance.