You're not a prophet? Then you're not mature!

topher694

Go Turtle!
Jan 29, 2019
3,828
3,038
St. Cloud, MN
✟186,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I think epistemology is probably better reserved for the other thread. But you don't seem to be discussing/debating. You seem to be asserting without evidence.
I tried, you dismissed or twisted what I said, badly.

I could go deeper into it, but you've shown you're not able to receive of meat.

My advice if you are truly interested in the prophetic and maturity, would be to throw all of this convoluted, inconsistent, unfounded stuff out completely. Start with a blank slate on this topic and find someone prophetic to follow who has good fruit and let them guide you for awhile.
 
Upvote 0

LightLoveHope

Jesus leads us to life
Oct 6, 2018
1,473
458
London
✟79,581.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
This is just all off... Way off.

I was going to ask how experienced in the prophetic you are, but I think you answered it. By your own admission and standard you are not mature, so why would we listen to you about what maturity is?

I have a great deal of experience in the prophetic. I know several prophets. Some of my very best friends in the world in fact. I've trained several prophets personally. Every single one of them would agree with me because they've all preached the very same thing.

I am experienced enough in the prophetic to say most of the prophetic is false prophets talking rubbish, nothing from God.

Anyone who claims to have a word from God, ought to realise this is a capital offence to be lying from God. If one is putting ones life on the line, how many "prophets" would actually speak. Very few because most aspire to grand stand while actually not knowing the God who they are claiming to speak on behalf of. God bless you
 
Upvote 0

topher694

Go Turtle!
Jan 29, 2019
3,828
3,038
St. Cloud, MN
✟186,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I am experienced enough in the prophetic to say most of the prophetic is false prophets talking rubbish, nothing from God.

Anyone who claims to have a word from God, ought to realise this is a capital offence to be lying from God. If one is putting ones life on the line, how many "prophets" would actually speak. Very few because most aspire to grand stand while actually not knowing the God who they are claiming to speak on behalf of. God bless you
Disagree. Abuses happen, sure, but this is a narrow and inaccurate application of scriptures on prophesy.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I tried, you dismissed or twisted what I said, badly.

I could go deeper into it, but you've shown you're not able to receive of meat.

My advice if you are truly interested in the prophetic and maturity, would be to throw all of this convoluted, inconsistent, unfounded stuff out completely. Start with a blank slate on this topic and find someone prophetic to follow who has good fruit and let them guide you for awhile.
Don't just assert your conclusions. Argue them.
 
Upvote 0

topher694

Go Turtle!
Jan 29, 2019
3,828
3,038
St. Cloud, MN
✟186,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Don't just assert your conclusions. Argue them.
Why? When I do it's completely twisted, dismissed and disrespected:

I wouldn't be too quick to classify Jonah as immature. I have no idea, haven't given it much thought. It's a moot point
So you don't give points I made much thought, but just assume that they are moot... which they are not: Dismissive and disrespectful

But it's always easier to misrepresent what is said when trying to refute it, isn't it?
Misrepresent what I say then accuse me of misrepresenting. Isn't the whole point to debate the topic? That is impossible when your default position is to label understanding that is different than your own misrepresenting: Twisting and dismissing

Mostly you're arguing facts not in dispute. Not sure of the relevance.
*I* am disputing *your* interpretation of those facts but that is apparently not permissible or something: twisting, dismissive and disrespectful
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have a great deal of experience in the prophetic. I know several prophets. Some of my very best friends in the world in fact. I've trained several prophets personally. Every single one of them would agree with me because they've all preached the very same thing.
Again, a person who experiences some degree of fallible revelation isn't necessarily a prophet. But even if you and your friends are prophets in a fallible sense, the only thing it would refute is either (A) the strictness of the term prophecy as I have defined it or (B) my opinion as to the number of prophets existing today.

But it wouldn't put a dent in my reading of 1Corinthians as coinciding spiritual maturity with prophetic maturity.

And I stand my ground. A low standard/criterion of prophecy is dangerous and doesn't glorify God. Dangerous because it leads people to believe that it is wise to take chances on possible prophecies. And it doesn't glorify God because it leads to a lot of seeming foolishness. When a leader stands up in a church saying, "God just spoke to me. He told me that someone in this audience has stomach problems and should come down to the altar for healing" - how does that glorify God? That statement would be true for any audience at any time anywhere in the world. It's nonsense.

Most so-called prophets in the church today are probably somewhat well-intentioned. They are prayerful and studious in the Word and, as a result, godly thoughts come to their minds continually. But they tend to presume these thoughts to be the voice of God. Why not? Everybody's doing it! As long as it doesn't contradict Scripture, we can assume it to be the voice of God, right? Wrong. In effect, prophecy has for them become a man-made tradition/practice almost universally accepted in charismatic churches. This is the sad state of affairs - and precisely why a cogent epistemology is in order, as I have discussed on another thread.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Why? When I do it's completely twisted, dismissed and disrespected:


So you don't give points I made much thought, but just assume that they are moot... which they are not: Dismissive and disrespectful


Misrepresent what I say then accuse me of misrepresenting. Isn't the whole point to debate the topic? That is impossible when your default position is to label understanding that is different than your own misrepresenting: Twisting and dismissing


*I* am disputing *your* interpretation of those facts but that is apparently not permissible or something: twisting, dismissive and disrespectful
I didn't intentionally misrepresent you. Feel free to correct me.
 
Upvote 0

HatGuy

Some guy in a hat
Jun 9, 2014
1,008
786
Visit site
✟123,338.00
Country
South Africa
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Anyone's list of mature saints would rightly include Abraham, Isaiah, Elijah, Moses, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Paul, David, Joshua, Samuel, the author of Hebrews, the apostles, and Christ Himself. In the OT such men were variously called "a man of God", "a seer", or "a prophet". In fact the prophet Abraham is taken in Romans 4, Galatian 3, and Hebrews 11 as an exemplar par excellence of the Christian walk - a paradigm for ALL of us to follow.

Is anyone seeing a pattern emerging here? I mostly certainly am.

While exegesis is fallible, we favor the interpretations seemingly most harmonious with the author's words. This thread will expose evidence in 1Corinthians strongly favoring mature prophethood as the definition of spiritual maturity climaxed at 14:1, "Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual things, especially the gift of prophecy."

The original Greek at 14:1 - and 12:1 as well - says not spiritual gifts but spiritual things because Paul's obsession isn't with a set of superfluous gifts (understood as merely an optional bonus to spirituality) but with spirituality/maturity itself. After all, the Corinthians were unspiritual (i.e.impoverished in spiritual things). For such 'mere babes in Christ' (1Cor 3), the obvious remedy is to 'eagerly pursue spiritual things, especially the gift of prophecy'. It is in fact only tautological - and thus irrefutable - to point out that a spiritually mature man is a man mature in spiritual things - and topping Paul's list of spiritual things is 'especially the gift of prophecy' (14:1).

In a nutshell, 1Corinthians doesn't value gifts for gifts' sake but for maturity's sake. This is the epistle's most distinctive emphasis and yet it is still overlooked by the entire church even today, some 2000 years later.

As we shall see, this thesis surfaces most strongly in chapters 2 and 3, but is powerfully reiterated at chapter 13 as well.
Elitism is probably the most immature thing of all.
 
Upvote 0

topher694

Go Turtle!
Jan 29, 2019
3,828
3,038
St. Cloud, MN
✟186,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I didn't intentionally misrepresent you. Feel free to correct me.
It's clear to me you aren't looking for a debate, but to demonstrate you are right. I have no interest in that.

Your definition
Your opinion
You know what glorifies God in services you're not at
You know what other's standards of prophesy are
You know their intentions
You know what others are presuming
You know who is hearing God's voice and who isn't
You know what their traditions are

None of this is language consistent with debate.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

S.O.J.I.A.

Dynamic UNO
Nov 6, 2016
4,280
2,641
Michigan
✟98,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
1 Corinthians 14's reference to prophesying isn't speaking on one's maturity or standing with God. Paul is merely saying that prophesying is more beneficial to the body as a whole than speaking in tongues as prophesy can be understood without interpretation while tongues cannot.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
@EVERYONE.

Continuing my exposition of 1Corinthians 2...

At post 8, I exposed seeds of evidence in 1Corinthians 2 for this thread’s thesis. Based on that analysis, verse 6 reads like this: “We [mature apostles and prophets”] speak wisdom among the mature (2:6)." We speak. This is Spirit-inspired speech, as the subsequent verses indicate. This is prophetic utterance – in fact it’s a high grade of revelation, a relatively esoteric class of prophecies reserved for the mature, thus vividly calling to mind the distinction between Moses, who received high-grade revelation, versus ordinary prophets (Num 12). According to Paul, this sort of revelation is reserved for men who are spiritual. Did you catch that? Paul is closely associating the following three concepts:

(1) Spiritual

(2) Mature

(3) Spirit-inspired speech.

Since the Corinthians were unspiritual/immature babes, they were not qualified/entrusted with these esoteric revelations. They were not ready for this kind of speech. Look at chapter 3:

“And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ” (3:1). Does this mean he couldn’t tell them anything? He could not speak to them at all? He couldn’t give them any kind of revelation?


No! He couldn’t give them solid food but did give them babes milk. Meaning what? He gave them this epistle! He gave them Scripture! Scripture is not solid food! It’s babes milk! The clear implication is that a spiritual man – a mature man – is privy to elite revelations not available even in Scripture!


Similarly the writer of Hebrews provided his epistle INSTEAD of solid food (see Heb 5:11-14), as did Peter (1Pet 2:2). Chrysostom remarked on solid food that not even “Scripture hath anywhere discoursed to us of these things" (NPNF, Part 1, Vol 12, Homily 34). Solid food is not Scripture but rather an elite class of prophetic revelations reserved for the mature.

I’m not quite finished with 1Corinthians 2…I’ll see you soon.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
It's clear to me you aren't looking for a debate, but to demonstrate you are right. I have no interest in that.

Your definition
Your opinion
You know what glorifies God in services you're not at
You know what other's standards of prophesy are
You know their intentions
You know what others are presuming
You know who is hearing God's voice and who isn't
You know what their traditions are

None of this is language consistent with debate.
So my goal should be to demonstrate that I'm wrong? Is that how you post, and how everyone else posts, as you see it?
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
1 Corinthians 14's reference to prophesying isn't speaking on one's maturity or standing with God. Paul is merely saying that prophesying is more beneficial to the body as a whole than speaking in tongues as prophesy can be understood without interpretation while tongues cannot.
Whoa slow down a bit. You're jumping ahead several verses deep into chapter 14. And yes at some point down that road, Paul makes comparisons between tongues and prophecy. I agree with you on that point.

But let's not jump over the first 13 chapters of the epistle! Chapters where Paul had some OTHER claims to make about prophecy, as I've been demonstrating (see posts 8 and 34). Starting in chapter 2, Paul labored to provide us a criterion of what it means to be spiritual (mature) and his definition involved inspired speech.

And we'll see later that chapter 13 reiterates the same argument.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
@EVERYONE,
For those suggesting I'm just airing my own opinions, I have a treat up ahead. Later I'm going to cite some examples where even cessationist scholars (yes you read that correctly) found themselves forced to admit that chapter 13 defines maturity in terms of mature prophecy. Of course they quickly backpedal to avoid the implications, as I will discuss, but their concessions are clear enough.
 
Upvote 0

S.O.J.I.A.

Dynamic UNO
Nov 6, 2016
4,280
2,641
Michigan
✟98,714.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Whoa slow down a bit. You're jumping ahead several verses deep into chapter 14.
actually it starts in verse 1 and ends at verse 25

But let's not jump over the first 13 chapters of the epistle! Chapters where Paul had some OTHER claims to make about prophecy, as I've been demonstrating (see posts 8 and 34). Starting in chapter 2, Paul labored to provide us a criterion of what it means to be spiritual (mature) and his definition involved inspired speech.

chapter 2 merely states that those without the Spirit cannot properly discern the things of the Spirit. Paul was speaking of himself and his apostolic contemporaries that they didn't speak according to the wisdom of men but by the Spirit of God leading them(same thing said in 2 peter 1:20-21).

nothing about prophesy, which is simply speaking accurately of events that have yet to take place. the way the LORD told us to discern a false prophet is if the things they proclaim don't happen(Deuteronomy 18:21-22).
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
actually it starts in verse 1 and ends at verse 25
If you say so. But tongues isn't mentioned in verse 14:1 and I'm mostly focusing on chapters 2, 3 and 13 where the words 'babes' and 'mature' and 'spiritual' are compared and contrasted.

chapter 2 merely states that those without the Spirit cannot properly discern the things of the Spirit.
That was one of his points. And?

Paul was speaking of himself and his apostolic contemporaries that they didn't speak according to the wisdom of men but by the Spirit of God leading them(same thing said in 2 peter 1:20-21).
At least you confirmed a crucial contrast thematic to my thesis. You just hinted at the very things I claimed:
(1) Chapter 2 is contrasting "We mature apostles" who, as spiritual men, DO speak all this Spirit-inspired speech
(2) Versus you immature Corinthian babes who, as immature/unspiritual men, are NOT privy to all this Spirit-inspired speech.

nothing about prophesy, which is simply speaking accurately of events that have yet to take place. the way the LORD told us to discern a false prophet is if the things they proclaim don't happen(Deuteronomy 18:21-22).
We can certainly debate terminology here, if you really want to argue that most Spirit-inspired speech isn't prophecy. But regardless of any semantic nitpicking, chapter 2 is clear enough that inspiration largely defines maturity. More on this point shortly.

Finally, to limit prophecy to foretelling flies in the face of the entire OT it seems to me. And I think most scholars would agree, unless perhaps you want to broaden the word 'foretelling' to the extent of obsoletion (e.g. Jesus will take us to heaven someday).
 
Upvote 0

topher694

Go Turtle!
Jan 29, 2019
3,828
3,038
St. Cloud, MN
✟186,760.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So my goal should be to demonstrate that I'm wrong? Is that how you post, and how everyone else posts, as you see it?
Now your twisting my words again. I said nothing of the sort. I am saying they way you are presenting, and responding is not at all condusive to debate.

For example what prophets or anyone "presume" to know of or hear from God is not something that any of us can know. You present it as a fact. It is not a debatable fact. Ironically it is itself a presumption. Therefore trying to argue the point becomes circular. Now, presenting what one might "hear" that would or would not constitute a valid prophetic utterance is something that could be debated.

As I stated before, I presented scripture, direct and indirect and it was dismissed out of had... not debate.

You are the one that brings up epistemology, and I respond with epistemology examples and I'm considered off topic... not debate.

If you want an example of a mostly healthy debate on a sensitive topic, look at Endeavourer's thread on abuse in church.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JAL

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Now your twisting my words again. I said nothing of the sort. I am saying they way you are presenting, and responding is not at all condusive to debate.

For example what prophets or anyone "presume" to know of or hear from God is not something that any of us can know. You present it as a fact.
I think you're harping on irrelevant points. Virtually every opinion posted by any poster on this forum is presented as a fact. Some opinions are asserted more or less vigorously/apodictically depending on the poster's degree of felt certainty. I'm not sure whether we need to dwell on this point any further.

Ultimately I don't really assert anything as fact (see my signature). Even when I CALL it fact - which i do when I am vigorously defending my position and I feel very certain of my stance - my signature is always present as a disclaimer. By my own epistemology, one is fully warranted in asserting a 'fact' only if he has 100% certainty - at which point he would be warranted in asserting himself infallible on said 'fact'.

It is not a debatable fact. Ironically it is itself a presumption. Therefore trying to argue the point becomes circular.
See above. Opining is not inherently a circularity. All proofs are ultimately circular in the sense of relying on foundational axioms to avoid infinite regress, but if we at least agree on the axioms (e.g. Scripture is inspired) we can proceed from there.
As I stated before, I presented scripture, direct and indirect and it was dismissed out of had... not debate.
I don't recall dismissing it out of hand. I recall promising to demonstrate the correct reading of the passage, which I subsequently attempted as promised.
You are the one that brings up epistemology, and I respond with epistemology examples and I'm considered off topic... not debate.
No as I recall, you raised an inherently epistemological issue. And I didn't shut you down, I merely expressed a preference to discuss it on another thread. I never said I would ignore you on this thread.
 
Upvote 0