Apostles and Prophets in the OT Economy

Dr. Couch, it seems to me the "apostles and prophets" in Ephesians 2:20 has to do with the apostles and prophets in the OT economy. How would you answer? ANSWER:  Remember we determine doctrine by "observation" of the context, and by the Greek grammar of the sentence. This issue is settled by the grammar of the passage. In the commentary written by Dr. John Witmer and myself, we point out (p. 150) that prophets are listed following apostles, church prophets are in view (cf. 3:5; 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28-29). Verses 19-20 say "We no longer are strangers (the church saints) and aliens, but you are fellow citizens ... having been built UPON the foundation of the apostles and prophets, ..." The same is repeated in 3:5. "What was (in the past) not made known to the sons of men, revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit." And, to the church He had given "some as apostles, and some as prophets, ..." (4:11). And to the church "God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets ..." (1 Cor. 12:28).    It is important to note that in 2:19-20 we have one proposition: "foundation OF the apostles and [EVEN] prophets." This virtually makes the two offices equal, that is, the same thing. So also in 3:5: "His HOLY apostles and [even] prophets." Though the offices are separated in 1 Corinthians 12:28 and in Ephesians 4:11.    The greatest commentary on Ephesians ever written is by Dr. Harold Hoehner (he took 20 years to finish it). He taught Greek that long at Dallas Seminary. He writes: "First, there is only one article for both nouns. ... The one article may indicate that 'groups more or less distinct are treated as one for the purpose in hand.'"    The old Greek scholar Armitage Robinson writes: "Paul is not taking us back from the New Covenant (which he is writing about here in Ephesians 2) to the Old—not speaking of Old Testament prophets in the past—when he says that the apostles and prophets are the foundation of the new House of God."    Even amillennialist Charles Hodge gets it right. He writes: "The prophets here mentioned are those of the new dispensation [of the church], is evident—first from the position of the terms. It would more naturally be prophets and apostles if the Old Testament prophets had been intended. ... The statement here made that the apostles and prophets are, or have laid, the foundation of that house of which the Gentiles are a part, is more obviously true of the New (Covenant), than of the Old Testament prophets. ... The apostle-prophets—or apostles who are prophets. ... Both apostles and prophets belong to the class of Christian teachers [not of the Old Testament]."    Finally, the Bible Knowledge Commentary (BKC) (old Dallas Seminary) says "The 'prophets' are of the New Testament era, not the Old Testament. 'Prophets' follows the word 'apostles' here and in 3:5 and 4:11. These men received the revelation of the mystery of the church in the present Age, which had been hidden in days past, that is, in Old Testament times (3:5)."    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (7-10)