Question about Gift of Prophecy

[OzSpen]

Show me anywhere in the NT where the term "the apostles" is referring to anyone other than the 1st century apostles. Show me one respected commentator who says "the apostles" in Eph 4:11 is referring to everyday missionaries.

Are you seeking NT references that refer to apostles other than the 12?

 

[LostMarbels]

I do not view Prophets some mystic being. The all-knowing Oracle of God. No. Not hardly. They are Christians that hear God and speak. Are told to go, and they pick up and leave. They may even screw up and fuss and fight with God, but they go... They might even need to be swallowed by a whale for God's will to be done through them, but God's will is fulfilled as He planned it to be through that individual. They might not even have the faith to speak, but God will put an Aaron in their lives. Prophets speak when they are told. Even if it means ridicule or their lives. And they are usually ill received by people that do not want the truth.

 

[OzSpen]

The problem is that nobody alive today has received a gift of prophecy from God despite many claiming that they have.

Have you spoken to all Christians in the world and visited all churches speaking all languages to conclude that 'nobody alive today has received a gift of prophecy from God'.

Sounds like you are using hyperbole, without comprehensive evidence.

Oz

 

[swordsman1]

That's why a consistent interpretation requires the continuation of all the gifts, including evangelist, pastor-teacher, tongues, prophecy, words of knowledge/wisdom, miracles, healing, etc.

But you agree apostles ceased right? Then why not prophets which are described as being the foundation of the Church along with apostles in Eph 2:20?

 

[GingerBeer]

Have you spoken to all Christians in the world

That is a silly question.

 

[Steve Petersen]

I will believe in the 'gift' of prophecy when ANYONE can predict a specific date and detailed event.

 

[swordsman1]

Are you seeking NT references that refer to apostles other than the 12?

No, we know Paul and probably Barnabas and possibly one or two others were apostles as well as the 12. I am seeking references where the term "the apostles" is referring to someone other the those 1st century apostles, eg missionaries.

 

[Francis Drake]

Show me anywhere in the NT where the term "the apostles" is referring to anyone other than the 1st century apostles.

Your logic is appalling swordsman.
If you insist that the term "apostle" only applies to the first century, then all evangelists, all pastors and all teachers must also have ceased functioning in the first century.

Show me one respected commentator who says "the apostles" in Eph 4:11 is referring to everyday missionaries.

Just as Eph4v11 refers to everyday evangelists, pastors, and teachers, it also refers to everyday apostles and prophets.

 

[swordsman1]

If you insist that the term "apostle" only applies to the first century, then all evangelists, all pastors and all teachers must also have ceased functioning in the first century.

No that is a non-sequitur. If apostles ceased why must all the others? Show me where in the NT the term "the apostles" is referring to anyone other than the 1st century apostles.

Just as Eph4v11 refers to everyday evangelists, pastors, and teachers, it also refers to everyday apostles and prophets.

There are no apostles today. Show me one respected commentator that agrees with you that "the apostles" is referring to everyday missionaries.

 

[JAL]

Yes, it's gone. No prophets speaking "The word of the LORD" in any church now. No new revelations from God. But a lot of people claiming to be prophets and seers and apostles and who knows what else. Just keep in mind that many false prophets are gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1).

I am a Continuationist but have disagreements with both the Continuationists and Cessationists on this thread. I guess I'll start with you.

No new revelations from God.

The term 'new revelation' is mostly a red herring, a loaded term oft-used by cessationists. The term has no meaning (there is no such thing), because all Scripture and all prophecy merely expound further, clarify, and apply words originally spoken to Adam and Eve. You think Paul, for example, saw himself as teaching something new? He's constantly citing the OT to prove that his views were just a reiteration of the old. Until Paul received the prophetic gift, however, he misunderstood those Scriptures. That's why we still need it today. I personally believe that apostles, prophets, miracles - the whole 9 yards - are God's will for today. I also believe that there are likely less than a half-dozen legitimate prophets in the world today, because the church has been off-track for most of the last 2,000 years, for instance she continues to abide in the Galatian error.

 

[GingerBeer]

all Scripture and all prophecy merely expound further, clarify, and apply words originally spoken to Adam and Eve.

Nonsense.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, in order to make known to his servants the things that must soon occur, and which he signified by sending his Angel to his servant John; he has offered testimony to the Word of God, and whatever he saw is the testimony of Jesus Christ. Blessed is he who reads or hears the words of this Prophecy, and who keeps the things that have been written in it. For the time is near. John, to the seven Churches, which are in Asia. Grace and peace to you, from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are in the sight of his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the leader over the kings of the earth, who has loved us and has washed us from our sins with his blood, and who has made us into a kingdom and into priests for God and for his Father. To him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. Behold, he arrives with the clouds, and every eye shall see him, even those who pierced him. And all the tribes of the earth shall lament for themselves over him. Even so. Amen. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord God, who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty. Revelation 1:1-8
​

Adam and Eve never heard that message.

 

[JAL]

In Eph 2:20 it says the Church was "built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone."

Are we still building the “foundation” today? If apostles are no longer around, then neither are prophets.

What is the foundation? I can't debate this passage with a cessationist until he makes up his mind. Let me explain.

The church is a building, right? A building without a foundation will collapse. Even if it originally HAD a foundation, it will still collapse (or at least be unstable) if the foundation is dislodged. Ok so we need a foundation. Is the foundation:
(A) The apostles and prophets themselves OR
(B) Something laid down by them (such as the NT) - and is this once-for-all? Or must it be laid down afresh in every region, whenever a new church is built?
- Anyway cessationists tend to assert both A and B,which makes them a moving target. Also relevant are these questions.
If the foundation is something to be laid down (choice B), WHO is qualified to lay it down? Do you really want to live or work in a building whose foundation was laid down by a novice?

With all that in mind, shall we take a look at what Paul seems to say on this issue? " “As a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation” (1Cor 3:10, KJV). Two things to note here:
(1) The foundation is something LAID DOWN (option B) above.
(2) WHO lays it down? Anyone? At some point one has to ask, "Do Christians view God as negligent, or lacking in professionalism? With billions of souls at stake, would it really be His will that people devoid of prophecy (infallible revelation) be charged with overseeing His church?" "As a wise masterbuilder, I have laid down the foundation." Apostles and prophets had the needed expertise.

Next issue. In Paul's view, is the foundation laid down only ONCE? Or is it regional, that is, wherever new church is spawned? Paul “strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was [already] named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation” (Rom 15:20, KJV). It is regional.

What is the foundation? It is Christ (1Cor 3:11), most likely in the form of a reviving outpouring of the Holy Spirit. Laying down the foundation means to apply the power strategically. For example Paul wouldn't lay hands on just ANYONE but rather as directed by God, as to pass on a gift or appoint someone to ministry.

 

[JAL]

Nonsense.

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, in order to make known to his servants the things that must soon occur, and which he signified by sending his Angel to his servant John; he has offered testimony to the Word of God, and whatever he saw is the testimony of Jesus Christ. Blessed is he who reads or hears the words of this Prophecy, and who keeps the things that have been written in it. For the time is near. John, to the seven Churches, which are in Asia. Grace and peace to you, from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who are in the sight of his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the leader over the kings of the earth, who has loved us and has washed us from our sins with his blood, and who has made us into a kingdom and into priests for God and for his Father. To him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. Behold, he arrives with the clouds, and every eye shall see him, even those who pierced him. And all the tribes of the earth shall lament for themselves over him. Even so. Amen. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord God, who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty. Revelation 1:1-8
​

Adam and Eve never heard that message.

Jesus Christ is the Seed promised to Adam and Eve. The Book of Revelation expounds and clarifies that promise. As my words already implied.

 

[JAL]

I will believe in the 'gift' of prophecy when ANYONE can predict a specific date and detailed event.

Are you saying that you would regard such a person as a true prophet and thus follow him? If so, that's very dangerous thinking. The reality is that, after 2,000 years, few Christians have given a reasonable answer - typically not even any serious thought - to the epistemology of prophecy, that is, how can we KNOW a true prophet or prophecy?And yet the answer has always seemed to me self-evident and tautological.

100% certainty is the answer. Only when you're 100% certain of something are you FULLY justified/blameless in claiming, "I know it to be true." Therefore it is God's responsibility to both:
(A) Confer 100% certainty to the prophet
(B) Transmit 100% certainty to his audience when the prophet gets around to speaking his message.

And that's why Luke-Acts (25% of the NT) was so intent on conveying that evengelism is prophetic utterance (as an ever-increasing number of scholars now acknowledge, although for a different reason than 100% certainty). Meaning, if you go stand out on a crowded street corner right now to preach, you'll likely be ineffective, but if you go out there with a gift of prophecy - transmitting 100% certainty that God is speaking - then you could easily convert thousands in a matter of MINUTES.

 

[JAL]

1 Corinthians 13:8-10

"that which is perfect" refers to the completion of the bible. Some people will say it speaks of Jesus, but this is false and wrong. Jesus is not a "that" or an "it". It is talking about the gospel, "that which is perfect", then all those miracle gifts will cease.

Actually it's not talking about a cessation at all. The Corinthians were immature. Main intent of this epistle is to DEFINE spiritual maturity as mature prophethood. (Historically the most mature saints were prophets). Let's take a look at 1Cor 13:8-10, but the argument begins in chapter 2.

"We [mature apostles and prophets] speak wisdom among the perfect [MATURE]' (2:6). That word 'mature' is the same Greek word used at 13:10. He then characterizes their immaturity as being 'unspiritual' 'babes' (3:1-3). That word 'babes' ALSO appears in 13:8-12 BECAUSE PAUL IS STILL DEALING WITH THEIR IMMATURITY. "I spoke like babe, thought like a babe, reasoned like a babe' (13:11). So what we have here are three baby activities coming to a cease in parallel to three charismatic activities coming to a cease (prophecy, knowledge, and tongues). Now for the million-dollar question. Did the babe actually CEASE from those three activities? By no means. He merely ceased from his IMMATURE EXECUTIONS OF THEM. In a word he MATURED. This passage isn't propelling the Corinthians to a CESSATION of prophecy but rather to a MATURATION of it.

Fascinatingly enough, Paul couches his formula (mature prophethood as spiritual maturity) in a concept known even among cessationist scholars as "relative maturity." Was Paul a mature prophet? Yes and No. Relative to the Corinthian babes, he was a mature man. And thus, "When I became a man, I put away baby things" (13:11). But relative to Christ he was still an immature prophet, still a babe. Thus having affirmed his maturity, he must also affirm his IMMATURITY, "We [immature apostles and prophets] know in part and we prophesy in part. But when the mature comes, what is in part will cease (13:10). This is an endless cycle. Meaning, he is still a babe relative to Christ. Thus even the next time he matures in prophecy, he will STILL be a babe relative to Christ and thus will need to grow even MORE in prophecy as to become mature. Even some of the most influential cessationist scholars back this analysis, although they try to avoid its devasting implications for cessationism.

This argument is more convincing if I show how Paul builds it starting at chapter 2 but I'm trying to keep this post short.

 

[LostMarbels]

What is the Gift of Prophecy, and has it ceased?

Is it to be used in churches today?

I think there is a difference between being a Prophet of God, and having a prophetic gift. I do not believe there are Prophets among us, here on earth, at this moment. Yet there are those who can speak into your lives even tho you do not know them. What I mean by this is the bible is already written, the laws are established, and Christ has already come. No need to prophecies those issues anymore. A true old school prophet was used to:

call the people back to obedience to God’s laws.

To foretell future events which God had willed.

To foretell the coming of the Messiah, the Savior.

All of which is already completed.

And if you were to tell me the Jesus was returning next Tuesday at 8 pm, you're a false one. I'm not believing a thing you say even if it's praise Jesus. But there are those who are attentive to the spirit of God and may walk over to you, unannounced, and you never seen them before, and completely be used in such a way that they bring glory to God in an unseen way. They might come over to you and say: "God really put this on my heart to show you...." and it's a scripture that hits a topic right on its head concerning something you prayed about. These individuals can read your mail, and you feel the spirit's confirmation as they talk. You can duck and dodge all you want but you know exactly what issue they are addressing as they confront you. It's almost as if they have some kind of inside info on you.

The gift of prophecy edifies, exhorts, and comforts (I Corinthians 14:3); helps us build up or strengthen, and should lead us to the Word of God.

There are those who will speak into a pastors life or a congregation's about a backslidden stance for example. No differently than in the past when someone would walk right into a kings chamber and declare God's will. It is the ministry of the Holy Spirit to convict of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment to come (John 16:8-11).

The gift of prophecy (I Corinthians 12) and the office of the prophet (Ephesians 4:11) are not the same things.

People sometimes think that "prophecy" means to predict (foretell) what will happen in the future. Actually, the simple gift of prophecy is essentially forthtelling; it is a ministry to make people better and more useful Christians now. Prophecy in the New Testament church carries no prediction with it whatsoever, for (as I explained above)" he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (I Corinthians 14:3). Notice that there is no mention of the word prediction here. Modern 'prophets' exhort, warn, admonish the body of Christ for their edification. They build-up, reprove and comfort as directed by the holy spirit. They do not predict events as in old school prophets.

 

[JAL]

1 Corinthians 13:8-10

"that which is perfect" refers to the completion of the bible. Some people will say it speaks of Jesus, but this is false and wrong. Jesus is not a "that" or an "it". It is talking about the gospel, "that which is perfect", then all those miracle gifts will cease.

Are you aware that this position verges on heresy? The passage is contrasting two states.
(1) The babe's state. "I thought like a babe, talked like a babe, reasoned like a babe" (13:11)
(2) The mature state.

Your view depicts the Gift of Prophecy as the babe state (a state of immaturity and ignorance) anticipating the mature state (the NT as a source of mature knowledge). This implies that the Prophet Himself - or at least Christ's prophetic anointing - embodies immaturity and ignorance relative to us. In fact one cessationist scholar baldy claimed that Christ and Paul knew less than we! That's not heresy?

A related issue. The babe is supposed to discard childish things of the past. If the NT is the 'mature knowledge', shouldn't we discard the OT?

A third problem. If babe-knowledge (such as prophecy) ceased early, say 300 A.D. when the NT canon appeared, what replaced it for the next 1200 years? The printing press didn't appear until 1500 A.D. after all. Is God really so incompetent that His great master plan was to replace prophecy with NOTHING for the next 1200 years?

 

[JAL]

Wayne Grudem thinks that you can give a false prophecy without being a false prophet. That makes no sense to me at all.

I haven't read Grudem's book but can make some suggestions.
(1) Sharing an opinion is often okay. It is immoral to feign 100% certainty (insisting a message is the Word of the Lord) when one is only 99% certain. That's my big complaint with today's 'prophecies'.
(2) Fallible revelation SOUNDS like a contradiction but isn't so. Few of us, including myself, are very close to God, that is, close enough to hear Him loud and clear like Moses or Paul did, so we generally can't make out what He's saying. The dynamics of this gets into metaphysics/ontology, in my view, but I'm trying to stay on-topic.

 

[GingerBeer]

As my words already implied.

There's the problem.

 

[JAL]

GRUDEM STATES HIS POSITION

In his first major summary statement, Grudem concludes:
...Paul thought of prophecy at Corinth as something different than the prophecy we see, for instance, in Revelation or in many parts of the OT. There, a divine authority of actual words is claimed by or on behalf of the prophets. But the prophecy we find in 1 Corinthians is more like the phenomena we saw in extra-Biblical Jewish literature: it is based on some type of supernatural “revelation,” but that revelation only gives it a kind of divine authority of general content. The prophet could err, could misinterpret, and could be questioned or challenged at any point. He had a minor kind of “divine” authority, but it certainly was not absolute.[2]

An Evaluation of Wayne Grudem's View of NT Prophecy

Thanks for the summary of Grudem's view. I must say I disagree with him. I don't accept any distinctions between OT and NT prophets and prophecy. Here's why. Consider the Greek word pneuma. It appears in passages quoting from the OT and thus as a TRANSLATION of an OT word (ruach). This is hermeneutically significant. It means that today's pneuma is yesterday's ruach (for both the Holy Spirit, angelic spirits, and the human spirit). No changes.

Likewise, in Acts 2, the Greek term for prophecy functions as a TRANSLATION of Joel's Hebrew word for the term, as Grudem's opponents are quick to point out. Hermeneutically this puts a gi-normous burden of proof on Grudem's dichotomy. I don't believe he can meet that burden.

Had God wanted to introduce a different gift, He could have coined a different term. Take for instance the 'gift of tongues' and 'word of knowledge' - such terms are somewhat new and thus potentially introduce us to a different gift-concept. But the term 'prophecy' is an old term, not a new one, and should therefore be understood accordingly. To abandon this hermenutical guideline could lead to exegetical chaos.