• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured I've Seen John MacArthur In A New Light

Discussion in 'General Theology' started by Oscarr, Jun 9, 2019.

  1. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    It is quite true that the tongues spoken on the Day of Pentecost were the sign spoken of by Paul in 1 Corinthians 14, when he says that tongues are a sign to unbelievers. These signs were in the form of understandable languages. This has happened in our day when someone has spoken in tongues and what has been spoken has been in an understandable language speaking praise to God and His great works. I know of two occasions when this happened in my own church - through me speaking the New Zealand Maori language which I have never learned, but understood by a Maori lady who did understand the language. And the other time when a friend in a prayer meeting spoke in the village dialect of a visiting brother from Ghana, and language which my friend could never have known. These are examples of tongues being the sign that Jesus is real, alive, and the gospel is true.

    But this is not the gift of tongues as described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 12 and 14. These tongues were for the local church and were accompanied by interpretation of tongues. These tongues were spoken to God and the interpretation had to be directed to God as well. This is different to the Day of Pentecost tongues which spoke of the great works of God to the crowd who understood the languages.

    But also in 1 Corinthians 14, Paul draws a distinction between the gift of tongues that is in tandem with the gift of interpretation of tongues, and tongues spoken personally and not for interpretation. Paul say that this type of speaking should be to himself and to God. Paul says that he thanks God that he prays in tongues more than them all, yet in the church he would rather prophesy. So, taking the text literally, we see that Paul makes a distinction between praying in tongues for himself, and speaking in church. In 1 Corinthians 14:2, Paul says that the person who prays in tongues, prays to God, because no one understands him, and that he speaks mysteries in the Spirit. Those who say that the tongues is an understandable language but no one in the church knows the language, and that is why no one can understand it. But, wouldn't a person, praying in tongues pray privately in his own room and not in the church? If he is praying to God, and no one else understands him, then God is the only one who understands, and therefore that is why the tongues are directed to Him.

    All I am doing is looking at what the text actually says without making any suppositions except using grade 5 comprehension which makes it clear that Paul is making a distinction between personal prayer in tongues, and prophecy in church, and if a person wants to speak out in tongues at church then there needs to be an interpreter present, otherwise it is better for him to pray to himself and to God, and that could be quietly in church with no one hearing him, or at home during his private prayer time.

    I know that there are many who believe that tongues ceased at the end of the Apostolic Age, and that colours their thinking about it. But when we look at the bare text of the Scripture, we don't find anything to say that it was meant to cease. Some have said that the text doesn't say it has to continue either; but there is a flaw in that argument because there are many other important components of the gospel where the Scripture does not actually say are meant to continue after the Apostolic Age, such as church elders, adult baptism, holy living, churches in homes, gifts of helps, administrations, evangelists, pastors and teachers, and yet we assume that these things are valid today. Yet we extract just two of the gifts mentioned and say they are not valid today. Even the great commission itself could be deemed as not being valid today and just limited to the 12 Apostles and then ceased after the last one died.

    So, my view is that if all the ministries and non supernatural gifts listed are valid in our churches today, then the supernatural gifts must be, because as with all giftings, the Scripture doesn't say that these are just temporary. Therefore they must be valid for the whole church age.

    Now, having said that, the genuine manifestation of the gifts is suppressed in most cases because of the false teaching and kundalini manifestations that are posing as the gifts, and the great number of false prophecies given that overshadow the genuine.

    The point is, that the genuine gifts, including tongues, prophecy and healing are not advertised on Youtube, because they are linked with the preaching of the gospel (the sinfulness of mankind, Jesus Christ crucified, risen again and the absolute need for living a holy life, such preaching that drives the crowds who are just there for the "lollies".).

    God has not taken the gifts away. The church did by allowing paganism and the occult, and its failure to maintain standards of holiness. The Scripture says, "The gifts and calling of God are without repentance". They are still available to those who love the Lord, know they are sinners saved by grace, live in the shadow of the finished work of Christ on the cross, and who love God's law, and desire with all their hearts to live holy lives. But you won't find them in mega-conferences and mega-churches where the crowds come for the hallelujah hootenannies, claims of healing, theatrical performances, gold dust and feathers raining down from the ventilation system, and sensory, out of control experiences.

    You will find them in small housegroups and churches, looked down on by the popular religious community, with members who just love God's Word in the Bible and just seek to fellowship with the real Jesus of the Bible. You have to look hard to find them, because you won't find big advertisements of the Sunday services in the newspaper or Christian magazines.
     
  2. corinth77777

    corinth77777 learner

    +328
    Christian
    Private
    I believe it is possible that the reference to speaking in the air [spirit] or to God can be referring to "The word of God"...[it is a tongue]
    A language which need revelation...to understand and also and interpreter if there are those foreign.

    However Mc Author mentions that Paul's use of sarcasm ...is through out his writing...
    Not only taking that into account but must take in the time of their Day.....with all of those Mystery religions embedded into their thinking...If they were carnal as He says, He must speak to them where they are at....
    He does mention that speaking to God...can refer to a "god" ......as we know words were not capitalized....yet as has been said He seems to force his "suppositions" into his belief.....Yet so do those on the left. In the end Gifts were given to edify the church not oneselves. We are told to encourage one another and to build each other up in Love..
    Hypothetically, If one has a gift that builds up themselves would not that be contrary to that teaching? And to maybe see this point can be the reason for sarcasm....Does Paul really speak in the tongues of Angels or does He use it hypothetically to make a point on where their hearts and purpose should really be on.....
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2019
  3. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    They might have been spoken in different environments but the tongues of Acts and 1 Corinthian were still foreign human languages. There is nothing to suggest otherwise.

    When Paul said he spoke in tongues outside of the church that doesn't mean that he spoke in tongues privately. That would be an abuse of a spiritual gift, which are only to be used for the benefit of others...

    1 Cor 13:7 To each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.

    1 Pet 4:10 As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God's varied grace

    So Paul must have spoke in tongues in other public environments where others would benefit eg. as an authenticating sign in the presence of foreigners as they were in Acts 2. Nowhere in 1 Corinthians does it suggest praying in tongues privately in your own room.

    1 Cor 13:8

    What about apostles - the miracle working, scripture writing, authoritative, eye-witness apostles of Christ we read about in the NT - do they continue as well? If you agree that particular gift has ceased, then you must also allow for other foundational gifts such as tongues to cease as well. And cease they did, as history proves.

    If the gifts ceased due to paganism and sin in the church then how come there were supernatural gifts in the Corinthian church? They were influenced by paganism (1 Cor 8:1-11, 1 Cor 10:14-22). As well as unholiness (getting drunk at the Lord's table, incest within the congregation, etc). Yet they had the gifts in abundance.
     
  4. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    The text is what it is. Anyone can build theories about of what they think the text might be saying to them, but that does not mean that their theories are true and correct.
     
  5. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    As I said in my previous post. The text is what it is. Right at the start of 1 Corinthians Paul intends the letter to be read in all the churches, and it is intended for every Christian everywhere, including, by inference, us. If the inference that 1 Corinthians 12 and 14 are not for today, neither is 1 Corinthians 13, because it is included in Paul's one statement about the gifts of the Spirit. In fact, because the inference that is being made that the letter was written to a church influenced by paganism, then the letter is only for churches influenced by paganism, so, if your church is not so influenced, then none of 1 Corinthians applies to your church so you and I might as well ignore the whole letter because it was not written for any church or person not influenced by paganism. Therefore, it could be argued that nothing in 1 Corinthians is for today, and it was only for that church and when the Corinthian church corrected the problems, the letter should have been filed away and consigned to history.
     
  6. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    Actually the letter is addressed to the Corinthians only, not other churches let alone the universal church.

    "To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ"
    The letter addresses issues that were very specific to the Corinthian church. Eg, their divisions, taking each other to court, the immorality in their congregation, their abuse of the Lord's supper, and of course their problem with tongues etc. Other churches do not suffer those problems. There were also specific instructions for slaves etc. So clearly it wasn't addressed to churches today. That doesn't mean churches today cannot make an application from the lessons Paul taught the Corinthians.
     
  7. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    But if the letter to the Corinthians is just for that church, then applying it to us today is optional. We can take out of it whatever we like to apply to ourselves. But the problem is which parts do we apply and which do we ignore?

    There are parts of the world that still have slaves, so the reference may apply to them, and there are many churches that have immorality issues in them, as well as Christians taking other Christians to court, and many take the Lord's supper without giving a thought to what it means. Yet, we don't see all the Youtube videos, books, and sermons giving attention to these things, as much as we have over tongues. And yet the Corinthians' use of tongues was just one problem that they had among many, and Paul said, "You have a problem about how you are using tongues in services, now, here is the way you should approach the gift of tongues." So, if Paul gives a list of instructions of how Christians should behave toward each other in 1 Corinthians 13, which, by the way, is in context with their use of the gifts (which many choose to ignore), and this is part of the one statement that goes from 1 Corinthians 12 to 14. Therefore, the question is, perhaps if the gifts are no longer for today, then Paul's instruction in 1 Corinthians 13 about how believers in Corinth should be conducting themselves in the use of the gifts is also redundant because it was directly allied to the gifts of the Spirit and how the believers should be manifesting them.

    If the gifts of the Spirit are not for today, then Paul's instruction on love in 1 Corinthians 13 is neither for today.
     
  8. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    In those days slavery was legal and commonplace. Nowadays it can only occur if someone is illegally held captive. Surely you are not saying if a Christian is being illegally kept as a slave today they should follow Paul's instructions and happily accept their situation and willingly obey their captors?

    If slavery no longer exists then Paul's instructions to slaves are now redundant. But we can still learn from them and apply them maybe in the workplace.

    Likewise if tongues no longer exists then Paul's instructions regarding tongues are also redundant today. But we can still learn from them and make an application eg by making sure our services are intelligible.

    There is no mention of gifts in Paul's famous poem on love in 1 Cor 13:4-7 and it is regularly applied outside of the context of gifts. Even if you were to include v1-3 the gifts mentioned there were only extreme hypothetical examples to make a point, not examples of gifts people were expected to have (and most of those were non-supernatural).

    If tongues must exist today because Paul makes mention of them in his epistle, that means apostles must also exist today. Apostles too is listed as a spiritual gift.
     
  9. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    I maintain that if the gifts are not for today, then we cannot apply 1 Corinthians 13 either because it is included with 12 and 14, and if Paul did not mention the gifts at all and 12 and 14 were not in the letter, neither, then, would 13 be in it.

    I will agree with you that Apostles and Prophets do not exist today. They are gifts to the church alright, but not continuing gifts like evangelist, pastor and teacher. The Prophet was the OT Prophet who gave us the OT prophetic books which are a gift to our church. Also, when the OT Prophet role ceased at the institution of the New Covenant, it was taken over by the Apostles who gave added inspired Scripture to the church. But once the last Apostle of Christ died, that role ceased, and we have the canon of Scripture. There is no further directly inspired revelation. This is the sense that the Prophet and Apostle are a gift to the church in that they gave us the Scriptures. We could say that Moses was also a gift to the church because he gave us, under inspiration, the first five book of the Bible.

    Therefore, any person who pops up claiming to be a Prophet, is false and his prophecies are also false. But the gift of prophecy as described in 1 Corinthians 14 is quite different, because those prophecies have to be examined and evaluated because they are from the believer's own spirit to encourage, exhort, and build up the believers in the local church. They are specific encouraging words for a specific situations, but must comply with the teaching and spirit of Scripture. Anyone who gets up in a church saying "The Lord says". or "The Lord declares" is false because that is equivalent to giving new Scripture, and because the canon is closed, it would be adding to Scripture which brings a judgment from Proverbs 30:6, and exposes to the Holy Spirit clearly declaring that such a person is a liar.
     
  10. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    Just because Paul's discourse on love is sandwiched between passages about gifts doesn't mean love must be inextricably linked to gifts. Virtually all preaching on that passage makes no reference to gifts.

    Paul's instructions to women learning from their husbands etc in 1 Cor 14:34-36 is also sandwiched between passages about gifts, does that mean it also only applies in the context of gifts?


    If you agree the gift of apostle has ceased even though Paul talks about it, then you cannot say tongues must exist simply because it mentioned by Paul. That would be inconsistent.

    But Paul describes those with the gift of prophecy as "prophets" (eg 1 Cor 12:28; 14:29,32,37). It's the same word (prophētēs) that Paul uses for OT prophets (eg Rom 1:2, Rom 16:26, 1 Thes 2:15). Paul makes is no distinction between OT and NT prophets. OT prophecies too had to be evaluated to determine whether the prophet was true or false.

    I would agree. That makes the vast majority of today's charismatic 'prophets' false, as they say things like "The Lord says..." or "the Lord has told me..." or "I have a word from the Lord..." when all they've had is a strong feeling or a thought. But if they say "I feel the Lord is saying" or "I think the Lord is saying" then they are not prophets. No prophet, OT or NT, said words along those lines. Even the NT prophet Agabus said "Thus says the Holy Spirit...."
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2019
  11. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Reading the whole of 12, 13, and 14 as one instruction (because the chapter division were added much later), then it is quite easily seen that Paul was speaking about how believers conducted themselves in their services, that there are different gifts given to different believers, that not everyone had the same role in the body of Christ, and that there is a better way of manifesting ministries and gifts than the way they were doing it, and that is with the attitude of love, which he describes in 13. Then, straight away, he says pursue love and desire the greater gifts, especially that they prophesy. Then he goes into the right way of using tongues.

    Some have said that the verse "women keep silence in church" was added later because seemed out of context with the rest of what Paul was saying, but we won't go there because of the many debates about that one.

    There is the difference between the office of Prophet, which ceased at the end of the OT. There are no more Prophets in the OT style any longer, because those ones wrote Scripture. In the New Covenant, the role of writing Scripture was taken over by the Apostles. Once John died, the canon was closed.

    Agabus was recognised as a prophet, and so his prophecies went into the Book of Acts. In the same way John the Baptiser was the last OT Prophet, and so what he said was included in the gospels. But none of the prophecies given in the churches, including the Corinthian church were included in the Scripture because they were not prophets in the same sense of the word, because they did not speak through direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

    This is where I believe that Pentecostals and Charismatics were in error in the way that people gave prophecies with began with "This says the Lord", or spoke prophecies to "My children", implying that the Lord was speaking directly to the people. But I believe that when the Lord speaks directly to people like that, He is speaking Scripture. This is why I don't pay any attention to "voices" that purport to be God speaking directly to people. The canon of Scripture is closed, so any voice or prophecy that implies that God is speaking directly, has to be false, because God is not speaking added Scripture to anyone today. I think that much error and misleading happened over the years in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches with "this is what the Lord is saying" type prophecies which people have believed have come directly from the Lord.

    How can believers in a church evaluate a prophecy and conclude it to be false when the person has maintained that the Lord is speaking? This is why prophecy is judged, because the Lord is not speaking directly through it. It comes from the heart and spirit of the person giving the word of encouragement, exhortation, or comfort. If the person or persons receiving the word determine it is prophetic for them, that is their choice, and not because the person giving the word is saying it is from God. I can say to a person, "I think the Lord might want you to know that He loves you", a word that is given from my own spirit and not given as definitely the Lord saying it. If the person is encouraged and receives it as from the Lord, then the word has served its purpose. Others hearing a word can examine it to see if it is consistent with Scripture or not. If it didn't line up with Scripture then they are free to say, "Brother, I don't think the Lord would really say that" and the person giving it would have to accept that.

    We often say encouraging and comforting words to others, and we exhort others at times. We don't advertise these as "prophecies", but I think they are consistent with Paul's teaching on prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14. But elevating these words as formal "prophecies" that carry some sort of godly authority is somehow taking things out of the context in which Paul intended.

    I think that those who are identified as "prophets" were ones who were recognised as giving regular words of encouragement, exhortation and comfort to believers and were prophetic to the persons receiving those words, like a word "in season" for them. None of these "prophets" had a ministry role of Prophet because their prophecies were not added to the Scriptures.

    This is where Pentecostals and Charismatics go wrong. They mix up the OT type of prophecy with the NT "word in season" type of encouragement, comfort, and exhortation that is given out of a spirit of love from one believer to another, which we all do from time to time - yet we don't call it "prophecy" as such.




    If you agree the gift of apostle has ceased even though Paul talks about it, then you cannot say tongues must exist simply because it mentioned by Paul. That would be inconsistent.



    But Paul describes those with the gift of prophecy as "prophets" (1 Cor 14:29,32,37). It's the same word (prophētēs) that Paul uses for OT prophets (Rom 1:2, Rom 16:26, 1 Thes 2:15). Paul makes is no distinction between OT and NT prophets. OT prophecies too had to be evaluated to determine whether the prophet was true or false.



    I would agree. That makes the vast majority of today's charismatic 'prophets' false, as they say things like "The Lord says..." or "the Lord has told me..." or "I have a word from the Lord..." when all they've had is a strong feeling or a thought. But if they say "I feel the Lord is saying" or "I think the Lord is saying" then they are not prophets. No prophet, OT or NT, said words along those lines. Even the NT prophet Agabus said "Thus says the Holy Spirit...."[/QUOTE]
     
  12. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    So Paul's discourse on love in 1 Cor 13 only applies to church services?

    Luke, Mark, and Jude were not apostles. But they wrote scripture. Scripture is described as prophecy so they must have been prophets....
    2 Peter 1:19-21.But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.
    So Luke and Mark were prophets writing scripture under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Just as the apostles and OT prophets did.

    NT prophets were just as highly regarded as OT prophets. They were 2nd only to apostles (1 Cor 12:28, Eph 4:11). They were the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). Paul told the Corinthian church to desire prophecy more than any other gift.

    In Acts 2:18 Peter quotes Joel as the announcement that Christians would have the gift of prophecy, "Your sons and daughters shall prophesy". Yet the only prophecy that Joel knew of was OT prophecy. It must therefore be the same kind.

    Paul uses the same word (prophétés) to describe NT prophets (eg 1 Cor 14:29) as he does OT prophets (eg Rom 3:21).

    Luke also uses the same word without distinction for both NT and OT prophets (eg Acts 7:37 and Acts 15:32)

    If there was a distinction between OT and NT prophets then we would be clearly told about it in scripture, rather than the same terminology being used for both.

    Even the Pentecostal scholar Gordon Fee agrees that NT prophets were on a par with OT prophets.
    Gordon Fee - God's Empowering Presence p892
    "he [Paul] undoubtedly saw 'the New Testament prophets' as in the succession of the 'legitimate' prophets of the Old Testament....and the only 'prophets' Paul ever refers to, who are not part of the present Spirit-inspiration, are the prophets whose oracles become part of his Bible (Rom 1:2; 3:21)."

    So if Agabus was a NT prophet then we can use him as an example of NT prophecy. He made predictions with a 100% track record of fulfilled prophecies and used the terminology "Thus says the Lord..." (the Lord literally spoke to him rather than him having a feeling) - just like an OT prophet. I see no distinction there.

    That is not how Paul describes the gift of prophecy. Paul says the prophets are given a "revelation" (1 Cor 14:29-30). The word "revelation" is the same Greek word used for OT prophecies (1 Pet 1:12). In Eph 3:5 he says that mysteries were now revealed to apostles and prophets by the Holy Spirit.

    I do not see anywhere in scripture where prophecy is described as coming from the heart or spirit of the prophet. Nor do I see NT prophecy being introduced by words such as "I think the Lord might want you to know....". But I do see NT prophecy being introduced with "Thus says the Holy Spirit..." (Acts 21:11, Acts 11:1-2).
     
  13. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    That's the context of all three chapters.



    I already said that.

    [/quote]NT prophets were just as highly regarded as OT prophets. They were 2nd only to apostles (1 Cor 12:28, Eph 4:11). They were the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). Paul told the Corinthian church to desire prophecy more than any other gift.[/quote]
    OT prophecy was directly from the Lord. so it was not judged by ordinary people. Of course, if the prophecy was false, the prophet was to be put to death according the the Law. but the NT prophet was not. His prophecy was to be compared to what was already inspired in the Scriptures, so, in contrast to OT prophecy being new revelation, NT was not. That is the difference.

    Also, you said yourself that the 1 Corinthians 14 prophecy is a gift, but the OT prophet was an office, not a gift. There is a major difference. NT prophecy, according to Paul could be spoken by anyone, but the OT prophet was not for all, only for those who were appointed to the office of prophet.

    Not necessarily. Joel was prophesying as dictated by the Lord, and not from his own prior knowledge of OT prophecy. He said exactly what the Lord told him to say, and so Joel would not be equating the type of prophecy that he knew in his time, with the type of prophecy that was to come with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

    There are many times when the same word is used to have different meanings in different context. We also find a lot of that in English. Take the word "go". I go to town. The car goes now after being repaired. The fellow is going mad. The wheels of the bus go round and round. The word has a different meaning in each sentence. 5th Grade English.

    The context, use, and environment for OT prophecy was different than NT prophecy. NT prophecy is for the context of the local church meeting for exhortation, comfort and encouragement. OT prophecy was for the whole nation of Israel and Judah, and it was not for those purposes, but to turn the nation back to God from its idolatry.


    I have that book, so I will check it out to view the quote in context.​



    But not the same. He was not a prophet to the nation of Israel and therefore did not have the same office. Luke does not say anything other about him than he gave a prophecy that came to pass. We can't use Acts as the basic for a theological doctrine about NT prophets. It was a narrative concerning the history of the formation of the early church.



    If they were revelations from God, then they would have been recorded in the Scriptures, because any revelation that comes directly from God has to be Scripture. I can say that I have had a revelation, which would merely be a new insight into a passage of Scripture. It is not a new revelation in the sense of God inspired Scripture. So, as I said before, just because the same word is used, doesn't show that it has the exact meaning in both contexts. The context can change the meaning of a word.

    If the Holy Spirit is directly inspiring the exact words of the prophecy, then it has to be Scripture and recorded as such. Both prophecies of Agabus were recorded in Scripture and it was only Agabus who used the "Thus says the Holy Spirit" in prophecy. There is no record of any other prophecy given that way.

    But there were other occasions where believers gave prophecies but were not recorded in Scripture, and Paul instructed that such prophecies were to be evaluated by consulting the Scriptures to ensure that the prophecies complied with what was already inspired by the Holy Spirit in the Scripture.
     
  14. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    Church services are not mentioned until Chapter 14. So that is not the context of Paul's discourse on love at the beginning of Chapter 13.

    You said that NT scripture writing was done by apostles as they were the natural successors to OT prophets. But the fact is that non-apostles also wrote NT scripture.

    And NT prophecy is also a revelation directly from the Lord (Acts 21:10, Acts 11:1-2). Nowhere in the NT does it say the words of a prophecy originated in the prophet's mind.

    Both OT and NT prophets were to be judged by the people. Deut. 13: 1-5, 18:20-22. If their prophecies did not come true or were contrary to scripture they were declared to be false prophets.

    That doesn't mean OT and NT prophecy were 2 different phenomena. Old Testament laws were given to the nation of Israel who were living under a theocracy, unlike Christians in the NT era who were under Roman law. Christians are instructed to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13) so they couldn't just go around executing people. Anyway when Jesus died on the cross, He put an end to the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23–25; Ephesians 2:15).

    An OT prophet could not operate as a prophet unless he had been given that ability by the Lord. So in that sense there is no difference, they are both gifts.

    Where does Paul say that any Christian can prophesy? Prophecy was a spiritual gift given to selected believers by the determination of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:7-11) and Paul makes it absolutely clear that not everyone has the same gift (1 Cor 12:29-30, Rom 12:4-6)

    The Hebrew word that God spoke to Joel was נָבָא (to prophesy). The word means to speak under the influence of a divine spirit (the Holy Spirit in this case). There is no other meaning.

    Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon
    1. Prophesy under influence of divine spirit:

    a. in the ecstatic state Numbers 11:25,26,27 (J), with music 1 Samuel 10:5,6,10,13, in frenzy 1 Samuel 19:20,21 (twice in verse); 1 Samuel 19:23,24; excited to violence 1 Samuel 18:10 (= מְשֻׁגָּע mad 2 Kings 9:11); Jeremiah 29:26.

    b. apart from ecstatic state, absolute Ezekiel 37:10, with לְ 1 Kings 22:8; Jeremiah 29:27; על 1 Kings 22:18 2Chronicles 18:17,7; 20:37; ׳בְּשֵׁם י Jeremiah 26:20.
    2. of heathen prophets of Baal in ecstatic state 1 Kings 18:29; בַּבַּעַל Jeremiah 23:13.

    3. of false prophets 1 Kings 22:10 2Chronicles 18:9; Jeremiah 14:14; Ezekiel 13:17.​
    There are only 2 possible meanings of the Greek word 'prophet', prophétés - a person inspired to proclaim a divine message, or the writings of the Prophets (eg "All the Law and the Prophets..."). It never means someone speaking from their own mind.

    BDAG Greek Lexicon
    ① a person inspired to proclaim or reveal divine will or purpose, prophet
    ⓐ of prophetic personalities in the OT who bear a message ...
    ⓑ John the Baptist ...
    ⓒ Jesus appears as a prophet ...
    ⓓ also of other pers., without excluding the actual prophets, who proclaim the divine message w. special preparation and w. a special mission ...
    ⓔ Christians, who are endowed w. the gift of προφητεία ...
    ⓕ Only in one place in our lit. is a polytheist called a ‘prophet’, ...​
    ② by metonymy, the writings of prophets. ...​


    That is not true. There are numerous examples in scripture of NT prophecy given outside of church meetings (eg Agabus). Even in church meetings prophecy was not always for "exhortation, comfort and encouragement", it could also directed at unbelievers by revealing "the secrets of their hearts" and causing them to "declare that God is certainly among you" (1 Cor 14:24-25). That is something that could only be accomplished by direct revelation from the Holy Spirit to the prophet. The 1 Corinthians gift of prophecy therefore was always a divine revelation given by God - just like OT prophecy.

    Here is Gordon Fee's notes on 1 Cor 12:10 and the gift of prophecy...

    The First Epistle to the Corinthians - Gordon Fee
    Several things need to be noted: First, although prophecy was an especially widespread phenomenon in the religions of antiquity, Paul's understanding-as well as that of the other NT writers-was thoroughly conditioned by his own history in Judaism. The prophet was a person who spoke to God's people under the inspiration of the Spirit. The "inspired utterance" came by revelation and announced judgment (usually) or salvation.​


    All Scripture (including Acts) is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness. If Acts describes how NT prophets received their revelations then of course we can draw a theological conclusion about the gift. Acts says they spoke in the exact same way as OT prophets, "Thus says the Lord...".

    Not so. In both Testaments there is are records of God-given prophecies which are not recorded in scripture. Eg Num 11:25, 1 Sam 10:10, 1 Sam 19:23-24, 1 Kings 22:7-9, Ezra 5:1-3, Jer 26:20, etc, etc. And the four daughters of Philip who prophesied - none of their prophecies were recorded.

    That example of yours is given the active voice. But in 1 Cor 14:30 the word is in the passive voice. It says "But if a revelation is made to another..." meaning the revelation was something imposed upon them by an external actor. Who made them have the revelation?

    In the context of prophecy the word 'revelation' means one thing - the words which are divinely given to the prophet.

    BDAG Lexicon
    ⓐ in a gener. sense . be revealed (opp. καλύπτω) Mt 10:26; Lk 12:2; J 12:38 (in act. sense) and 1 Cl 16:3 (Is 53:1); Ro 1:17 (cp. Ps 97:2), 18; Lk 2:35 (cp. Josh 2:20; Sir 27:16f; Ezk 16:57; 1 Macc 7:31; AcPlCor 1:8).
    ⓑ esp. of divine revelation of certain transcendent secrets (Ps 97:2; Da 2:19, 22 [both Theod.], 28; 1 Km 2:27; 3:21; Is 56:1) ἀ. τινί τι reveal someth. to someone (TestJos 6:6; Just., D. 100, 2) Mt 11:25; 16:17; Lk 10:21; Phil 3:15; IEph 20:1; w. ὅτι foll. (TestLevi 1:2) 1 Pt 1:12. The revealers are Christ Mt 11:27; Lk 10:22, and the Holy Spirit 1 Cor 2:10; 14:30; Eph 3:5. For Gal 1:16 s. ἐν 9 and s. ADenis, RB 64, ’57, 335–62; 481–515. Abs. (w. φανεροῦν) ἀ. διά τινος Dg 8:11. τὰ ἀποκαλυφθέντα ἡμῖν the revelations that have come to us 11:8.
    ⓒ of the interpr. of prophetic visions
    ⓓ of the revelation of certain pers. and circumstances in the endtime​

    The word revelation in 1 Cor 14:30 (NT prophecy) and 1 Peter 1:12 (OT prophecy) means the exact same thing.

    That is a circular argument. Of course scripture would only say "Thus says the Holy Spirit.." in instances where the words are then quoted immediately after. But as I have shown there are plenty of examples of God given prophecies that are not recorded in scripture.
     
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  15. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    We are never going to agree on all this, and we have been down this same road in many threads about tongues and prophecy over a number of years. The sticking point that stops just a straight literal interpretation of 1 Corinthians 14 is 1 Corinthians 13:8-10:
    Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be restrained; where there is knowledge, it will be dismissed. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial passes away.

    As long as you and I have a different interpretation of those verses, we will never agree.
     
  16. swordsman1

    swordsman1 Well-Known Member

    +646
    Christian
    Well there is that passage (which both cessationists and continuists use to argue their case), but the verses that describe the nature of prophecy and tongues give a more clear cut argument. Today's practice of 'gifts' which are claimed to have been restored do not match the biblical descriptions of those gifts. Something that John Macarthur has also noted.
     
  17. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    That is something we can agree on. All we have to do is to view Youtube and see the misuse quite clearly.
     
  18. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    I have been viewing John MacArthur's teaching on the ministry of the Holy Spirit. He says that the Corinthians were speaking in demonic pagan tongues and were actually blaspheming Christ. But I don't see anything in 1 Corinthians where Paul actually said anything like that about the tongues the Corinthians were speaking. Mr MacArthur is adding his suppositions to the text of the book. Paul says that the Corinthians who are speaking in tongues are "giving thanks to God well." If those tongues were pagan and demonic, Paul would never have approved of the tongues they were speaking and would never have called them "giving thanks well". So, Mr MacArthur is contradicting Paul. He is saying that the tongues were demonic, and Paul is saying they are thanking God in a way that he approves of.

    Paul's correction was in the way they were speaking in tongues in church, not the nature of the tongues they were speaking. Mr MacArthur is giving a non-Scriptural opinion about the Corinthian tongues. Therefore his teaching about tongues is false.

    This is not to say that all speaking in tongues in modern Charismatic churches is genuine and is of the Holy Spirit, given the general invasion of paganism and the occult in these churches in this day.
     
  19. GTW27

    GTW27 Junior Member

    716
    +787
    United States
    Christian
    Single
    And how is it even possible that a man would call that which is Holy, demonic. Does not The Spirit bare witness to The Spirit? Does not The Spirit bare witness to the things of God? It is not possible that The Holy Spirit within a True believer would call a gift of The Holy Spirit demonic. It is not a supposition and it is not to be taken lightly.
     
  20. Oscarr

    Oscarr Senior Veteran Supporter

    +6,496
    New Zealand
    Pentecostal
    Married
    I asked the Lord about that and He replied that we have the treasure in earthen vessels. Mr MacArthur has the Holy Spirit in him. He is not the Holy Spirit. He would himself admit quite freely that he is a fallible human being like all the rest of us. I think that he has the opinion that he has through his observation of the excesses, fleshly, and possible pagan and demonic manifestations that seem to pervade many areas of the Charismatic movement.
     
Loading...