A Thought About New Testament Prophecy

[Presbyterian Continuist]

After thinking carefully about prophecy and comparing Old Testament and New Testament prophecy, I see that Old Testament prophecy came through direct inspiration and revelation from God in order to preach truth to Israel. Those prophecies were not to be judged, but to be accepted if it showed clearly that the prophet was genuinely inspired by God. If a prophet was false, he faced the death penalty. Old Testament prophecy passed into history with the death of John the Baptizer.

New Testament prophecy is quite different. From what I see that New Testament prophets were not anointed for the role as Old Testament prophets were. Anyone can prophesy in the New Testament context. The Prophet role in the five fold ministries must be formally appointed by the whole church. This is not possible in these days because the church is divided into many different denominations.

But if we look at Paul's teaching about prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to cover anyone who stands in front of the people and gives them an encouraging, comforting or an exhortation. It was in the context where anyone from the congregation could give a psalm, a spiritual song, a revelation (not a new one but a new insight from the Scripture), a teaching, or an exposition of Scripture, or even basic spiritual advice. The "thus says the Lord" prophecy belonged to the Old Testament, and is not supported in the New Testament.

This means that our Sunday morning sermon, or teaching at a Bible study could be as much New Testament prophecy as any other. New Testament prophecy needs to be judged by the others, and this happens when anyone gets up and gives teaching, exhortation, words of comfort and encouragement without giving a "prophecy" as such. Everything that is said in a meeting should be judged to determine whether it is consistent with the written Scriptures.

This means that someone giving a "prophecy for the nation" may not be giving it by the Holy Spirit at all. There are no examples of this in the New Testament. Someone getting up and giving an Old Testament style prophecy in King James English would not be by the Holy Spirit also, because this type of prophecy passed into history with the death of John the Baptizer.

This means that any edifying teaching, sermon, word of encouragement, comfort and exhortation can very well be prophetic and the Holy Spirit can use it to build up believers in special ways. I have experienced this from Sunday sermons when it seemed that the preacher was preaching straight to me, yet he didn't know me from a bar of soap. The Holy Spirit can use any edifying word and make it prophetic for people without the person saying it giving a "prophecy".

 

[timothyu]

No need to call saying the world/nation/person is doomed if it continues to follow the will of man. That would be more a proven fact.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No need to call saying the world/nation/person is doomed if it continues to follow the will of man. That would be more a proven fact.

The point I am making is that anyone, no matter how good their reputation is, who gives a "prophecy for the nation" should not be listened to at all, because they are not speaking from the Holy Spirit.

 

[timothyu]

The point I am making is that anyone, no matter how good their reputation is, who gives a "prophecy for the nation" should not be listened to at all, because they are not speaking from the Holy Spirit.

I will agree in that the HS only keeps us on the path to the Kingdom and is not concerned about the world of man.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I will agree in that the HS only keeps us on the path to the Kingdom and is not concerned about the world of man.

In my years of association with Pentecostal, Charismatic churches and organisations, I have seen "prophecies" given where the person has said, "This is what the Lord is saying" giving the impression that the Lord is speaking directly through them. It is very hard for many to respond by saying, "I don't believe this is from the Lord." It worries me that this type of prophecy can be used to manipulate people into accepting the will of the person saying it, by tacking the authority of God onto it. Paul never taught about prophecy this way at all.

I don't see anything wrong with giving an encouraging, comforting, or exhorting word to a person or a group and trusting that the Holy Spirit will make it prophetic for them - as long as the person giving the word does not say that the Lord is definitely speaking through them to the recipient.

 

[timothyu]

I agree. It gets feral once politics get involved also.

 

[Carl Emerson]

The Prophet role in the five fold ministries must be formally appointed by the whole church. This is not possible in these days because the church is divided into many different denominations.

Depends on how you define Church. Fellowship with Him starts with two of three. It can build in unity and become a church. Being a Church it can appoint a prophet. This is perfectly biblical.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Depends on how you define Church. Fellowship with Him starts with two of three. It can build in unity and become a church. Being a Church it can appoint a prophet. This is perfectly biblical.

I'll take your last point first. A church appointed prophet cannot be the role of the Five Fold ministry of Prophet, because as such it has to be recognised across the whole body of Christ, which, in our present divided denominational environment, is impossible.

It is true that a church can appoint a prophet, but there is no precedent in the New Testament for a regional prophet. There is no record of a prophet of the church of Ephesus, another one of Laodecia, or of Corinth. The New Testament prophet Agabus was recognised by all the churches as such. Therefore, there is no absolute guarantee that such a prophet will be speaking by the Holy Spirit.

Prophecy in the New Testament churches is open to any believer who has the faith, as in Romans, "Let each prophesy according to his faith".

I am also saying that prophecy is not limited to people getting up and giving "prophetic words" to the group, but extends to any type of verbal ministry that the Holy Spirit can apply prophetically to anyone at any time.

Also, in saying this, there are those who are regularly used in the gift of prophecy to the degree that they are seen to be prophets in their area of ministry. There is nothing amiss with this, because the group acknowledge the prophetic nature of the words that he gives.

Philip's daughters were recognised in this in that they are referred to by Paul as "Philip's daughters who prophesy".

 

[Carl Emerson]

The point I am making is that anyone, no matter how good their reputation is, who gives a "prophecy for the nation" should not be listened to at all, because they are not speaking from the Holy Spirit.

What is your biblical justification for this claim?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

What is your biblical justification for this claim?

There is no mention of New Testament Prophets for the Nation. There is no reference to any prophecies given to the Romans. Prophets for the Nation are those appointed by God and anointed for the ministry to Israel and Judah. That role ceased when Jesus arrived.

 

[Guojing]

After thinking carefully about prophecy and comparing Old Testament and New Testament prophecy, I see that Old Testament prophecy came through direct inspiration and revelation from God in order to preach truth to Israel. Those prophecies were not to be judged, but to be accepted if it showed clearly that the prophet was genuinely inspired by God. If a prophet was false, he faced the death penalty. Old Testament prophecy passed into history with the death of John the Baptizer.

New Testament prophecy is quite different. From what I see that New Testament prophets were not anointed for the role as Old Testament prophets were. Anyone can prophesy in the New Testament context. The Prophet role in the five fold ministries must be formally appointed by the whole church. This is not possible in these days because the church is divided into many different denominations.

But if we look at Paul's teaching about prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14, it seems to cover anyone who stands in front of the people and gives them an encouraging, comforting or an exhortation. It was in the context where anyone from the congregation could give a psalm, a spiritual song, a revelation (not a new one but a new insight from the Scripture), a teaching, or an exposition of Scripture, or even basic spiritual advice. The "thus says the Lord" prophecy belonged to the Old Testament, and is not supported in the New Testament.

This means that our Sunday morning sermon, or teaching at a Bible study could be as much New Testament prophecy as any other. New Testament prophecy needs to be judged by the others, and this happens when anyone gets up and gives teaching, exhortation, words of comfort and encouragement without giving a "prophecy" as such. Everything that is said in a meeting should be judged to determine whether it is consistent with the written Scriptures.

This means that someone giving a "prophecy for the nation" may not be giving it by the Holy Spirit at all. There are no examples of this in the New Testament. Someone getting up and giving an Old Testament style prophecy in King James English would not be by the Holy Spirit also, because this type of prophecy passed into history with the death of John the Baptizer.

This means that any edifying teaching, sermon, word of encouragement, comfort and exhortation can very well be prophetic and the Holy Spirit can use it to build up believers in special ways. I have experienced this from Sunday sermons when it seemed that the preacher was preaching straight to me, yet he didn't know me from a bar of soap. The Holy Spirit can use any edifying word and make it prophetic for people without the person saying it giving a "prophecy".

I think Paul's point in Corinthians is that, since the scripture has been completed by the time he wrote his letters, prophecy as a gift has faded away.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I think Paul's point in Corinthians is that, since the scripture has been completed by the time he wrote his letters, prophecy as a gift has faded away.

The Scripture is silent about that. The gifts faded away because the church environment changed to where prophecy was replaced by the authoritative teaching of the bishops and the institution of a professionally trained clergy who were given the role of giving God's Word to the people. There is no mention of any intention by God to cause the gifts to fade away. The real reason was that the church environment became such that the Holy Spirit could no longer work in or with it.

 

[Guojing]

The Scripture is silent about that. The gifts faded away because the church environment changed to where prophecy was replaced by the authoritative teaching of the bishops and the institution of a professionally trained clergy who were given the role of giving God's Word to the people. There is no mention of any intention by God to cause the gifts to fade away. The real reason was that the church environment became such that the Holy Spirit could no longer work in or with it.

Its in 1 Cor 13

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Its in 1 Cor 13

8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.

10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.

Yep. That's right. Everything will remain imperfect and partial until Jesus comes again. Then that which in part shall be done away, because we will see Jesus face to face and have direct fellowship with Him. This means we won't need prophecy any longer.

 

[Guojing]

Yep. That's right. Everything will remain imperfect and partial until Jesus comes again. Then that which in part shall be done away, because we will see Jesus face to face and have direct fellowship with Him. This means we won't need prophecy any longer.

Okay, there are 2 main ways to interpret the term "perfect". One is where the Scripture is completed, the other is when Christ return again.

I guess only in heaven will we know which is the correct interpretation.

 

[Carl Emerson]

There is no mention of New Testament Prophets for the Nation. There is no reference to any prophecies given to the Romans. Prophets for the Nation are those appointed by God and anointed for the ministry to Israel and Judah. That role ceased when Jesus arrived.

Any theology based on what the Bible does not say is by definition not biblical...

 

[CharismaticLady]

The Prophet role in the five fold ministries must be formally appointed by the whole church.

It is NOT the Church that appoints prophets; it is Jesus Christ. And He still does today, as we are still in the New Covenant. Nothing ceases inside a Covenant. Thus Cessationists are all false teachers.

Ephesians 4:11
9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

Jesus

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,

Yes, Peter, on the Day of Pentecost said that this was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel. But was John a false prophet to write Revelation? There were things in it that were the history of the Church until Christ comes, the letters to the seven churches, were seven church ages, not that the Church was divided into seven pieces.

And it is Jesus, not the Church, that appoints prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors and teachers today.

I agree. It gets feral once politics get involved also.

Even Old Testament prophets, such as Daniel, got involved in politics, so don't be completely closed-minded to such prophets today such as Jonathan Cahn.

I even received a personal prophecy from the Lord, and it came to pass 15 mo. later exactly on the day He said it would. That is not a false prophecy.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Any theology based on what the Bible does not say is by definition not biblical...

I watched a Youtube video of a guy putting a case for Cessationism. He said that the Scripture does not say that the gifts were meant to cease, and that the Scripture does not say that they were meant to continue. Then he went on to say that they were meant to cease once the Apostolic period was over and that the canon of Scripture was complete. I found that quite intriguing because he was teaching important doctrine where the Scripture was silent. I felt that I could preach Continuation and be just as correct as he is! Therefore, according to Scripture (or the lack of it, both Cessationism and Continuation could be entirely correct! In other words, black is white!

Reminds me of the poem:
"One fine day in the middle of the night
Two dead men got up to fight.
Back to back they faced each other,
Drew their knives and shot each other!"

This is the problem when subscribing to doctrine where the Bible is silent. Because one person can say that it is, and another can say that it isn't. How can we know which one is correct without guidelines to give us some indication either way?

Because many have established doctrine without referring to the Bible, they have strayed into error. We have pseudo-Christian cults all around us that have been formed because someone had a "vision" or heard a "voice" but did not check to see if it was really of God.

My view is that the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible and it is God's communication with mankind, and contains the complete manual of the ways of God, and the principles under which we can know that we are on the foundation of sound doctrine.

Applying that to prophecy, we see that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy; therefore sound prophecy has to glorify Jesus and show that He is all in all. Prophecy that exalts man cannot be of God because it exalts man instead of Jesus. A prophecy that says that a person has to be healed cannot be of God because God does not guarantee healing. If He did, everyone who asked Him for healing would be healed. The reality is that people are not healed every time. A prophecy that says that being financially prosperous shows the blessing of God cannot be correct, because there have been many examples in Scripture where godly saints have been in poverty. Jesus was never prosperous, and so prosperity as a sign of being right with God and blessed by him should have been exemplified by Jesus, which was not the case.

We see in Scripture that a New Testament prophecy needs to be encouraging, comforting, and exhorting. But we have many prophecies for the nation that are judgmental, depressing, discouraging, and giving people a spirit of fear about the future. Quite opposite to what Paul taught about prophecy.

Paul also taught that believers should judge prophecy. What guidelines are there for a believer to make a sound judgment about whether a prophecy is of God or not. There is a guy who says that God is telling him what to say and if I don't accept what he is saying as directly from God, then I am a Pharisee and will come off second best in the judgment! On what basis can I determine whether he is correct or not?

If we don't have the Bible as our foundation document to moderate, then there are no other guidelines. I could wait on God and hear a voice speaking to me, but how do I know that is not the flesh or the devil? I might have a sense or feeling about it, but how do I know whether that is correct or not?

I'll tell you this. No way will I be getting into an aircraft to fly anywhere if I know that the pilots don't have an instruction manual to show them what to do if problems occur!

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Who in the world taught you this farce. It is NOT the Church that appoints prophets; it is Jesus Christ. And He still does today, as we are still in the New Covenant.

Ephesians 4:11
9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

Jesus

11 And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers,

Yes, Peter, on the Day of Pentecost said that this was a fulfillment of the prophecy of Joel. But was John a false prophet to write Revelation? There were things in it that were the history of the Church until Christ comes, the letters to the seven churches, were seven church ages, not that the Church was divided into seven pieces.

And it is Jesus, not the Church, that appoints prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors and teachers today.

Even Old Testament prophets, such as Daniel, got involved in politics, so don't be completely closed-minded to such prophets today such as Jonathan Cahn.

I knew you'd pop up and give me a run for my money!

I have no argument with what you are saying - in principle.

I firmly agree with the present function of the gift of prophecy, as Paul taught it in 1 Corinthians 14. I don't see anywhere in the New Testament where prophecy was practiced or taught in any way other than the guidelines that Paul set out under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So, Paul's guidelines are the Holy Spirit's guidelines. Therefore, anything outside of those guidelines cannot be guaranteed as being of the Holy Spirit.

Also, it seems to me that Paul's view of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14, includes everything that is spoken and sung in Christian meetings, and not limited to someone getting up and "giving a prophecy". That is the point of my OP.

Old Testament judgmental type prophecies are not supported in the New Testament. I have already made that point quite clearly. Also, prophecies to the nation are also not supported.

The problem with someone being appointed as a Prophet to the church is that the church is so divided into hundreds of denominations, the "Prophet" would not be recognised or accepted by most churches outside of the small minority of denominations that might know and recognise him. Therefore he cannot be a Prophet to the body of Christ, because the large proportion of the body of Christ would not recognise him as such. That ministry faded away when the bishops and clergy took over that role in the church, and has never been reinstated because there is not the unified church environment to allow the ministry to function.

The big question is, in the face of the New Testament being silent concerning the prophetic outside of normal Christian meetings, how can we really know if a person calling himself a "prophet" has truly been appointed by Christ? What guidelines do we have?

In my view, if I view a good Bible teacher or preacher on Youtube, and the Holy Spirit speaks to me through that person, that person is being totally prophetic for me. He is actually prophesying to me because the Holy Spirit is using his words to make an impact on my heart and spirit to strengthen my faith in Christ.

John's prophecy in Revelation is true because it exalts Christ as being the final victor over the world, flesh and the devil. That is the central message of Revelation. It is the testimony of the final victory of Christ, therefore it is in total compliance with the Scripture that says that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Jesus has warned us that there will be many who have prophesied in His Name, and He will tell them that He never knew them. Many will say they are doing things in the Name of Jesus, but He won't recognise them, therefore they are taking His Name in vain. When a person gets up and says, "This is what the Lord is saying", could very well be taking the Lord's Name in vain if what he is giving is an Old Testament style, prophecy to the nation, showing how God is going to judge them for their wickedness and sin.

The Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is there to provide a foundation and guidelines so we maintain sound doctrine, and not stay into error. And the Holy Spirit will not say to or through a person anything He has not already said or shown in the written Scriptures.

So the question remains: Who, in our divisive and divided denominations, has Christ's delegated authority to appoint apostles and prophets to the body of Christ?

If a person rises up and says that Christ has appointed him to be a prophet, how do we know that is true? "Oh", he might say," the eldership of my [particular Charismatic church] have commissioned me in the Name of the Lord to the minstry". Is that so? How do we know whether it was Christ, or that board of elders who commissioned him? And how do we know whether or not the elders were commissioned by Christ to appoint the prophet?

These would be interesting questions to try and answer!

 

[CharismaticLady]

I knew you'd pop up and give me a run for my money!

I have no argument with what you are saying - in principle.

I firmly agree with the present function of the gift of prophecy, as Paul taught it in 1 Corinthians 14. I don't see anywhere in the New Testament where prophecy was practiced or taught in any way other than the guidelines that Paul set out under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. So, Paul's guidelines are the Holy Spirit's guidelines. Therefore, anything outside of those guidelines cannot be guaranteed as being of the Holy Spirit.

Also, it seems to me that Paul's view of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14, includes everything that is spoken and sung in Christian meetings, and not limited to someone getting up and "giving a prophecy". That is the point of my OP.

Old Testament judgmental type prophecies are not supported in the New Testament. I have already made that point quite clearly. Also, prophecies to the nation are also not supported.

The problem with someone being appointed as a Prophet to the church is that the church is so divided into hundreds of denominations, the "Prophet" would not be recognised or accepted by most churches outside of the small minority of denominations that might know and recognise him. Therefore he cannot be a Prophet to the body of Christ, because the large proportion of the body of Christ would not recognise him as such. That ministry faded away when the bishops and clergy took over that role in the church, and has never been reinstated because there is not the unified church environment to allow the ministry to function.

The big question is, in the face of the New Testament being silent concerning the prophetic outside of normal Christian meetings, how can we really know if a person calling himself a "prophet" has truly been appointed by Christ? What guidelines do we have?

In my view, if I view a good Bible teacher or preacher on Youtube, and the Holy Spirit speaks to me through that person, that person is being totally prophetic for me. He is actually prophesying to me because the Holy Spirit is using his words to make an impact on my heart and spirit to strengthen my faith in Christ.

John's prophecy in Revelation is true because it exalts Christ as being the final victor over the world, flesh and the devil. That is the central message of Revelation. It is the testimony of the final victory of Christ, therefore it is in total compliance with the Scripture that says that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Jesus has warned us that there will be many who have prophesied in His Name, and He will tell them that He never knew them. Many will say they are doing things in the Name of Jesus, but He won't recognise them, therefore they are taking His Name in vain. When a person gets up and says, "This is what the Lord is saying", could very well be taking the Lord's Name in vain if what he is giving is an Old Testament style, prophecy to the nation, showing how God is going to judge them for their wickedness and sin.

The Scripture, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is there to provide a foundation and guidelines so we maintain sound doctrine, and not stay into error. And the Holy Spirit will not say to or through a person anything He has not already said or shown in the written Scriptures.

So the question remains: Who, in our divisive and divided denominations, has Christ's delegated authority to appoint apostles and prophets to the body of Christ?

If a person rises up and says that Christ has appointed him to be a prophet, how do we know that is true? "Oh", he might say," the eldership of my [particular Charismatic church] have commissioned me in the Name of the Lord to the minstry". Is that so? How do we know whether it was Christ, or that board of elders who commissioned him? And how do we know whether or not the elders were commissioned by Christ to appoint the prophet?

These would be interesting questions to try and answer!

I'm going back to bed, but before I do, be careful that you are not quoting Cessationists about Matthew 7:21-23. It is not that prophecy or casting out devils has ceased, but if the one casting out demons or prophesying has willful sin in their life, THAT is what Jesus means by He never knew them.

23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ 1 John 3:4