the gift of prophecy

[Chip Van Emmerik] JG - it’s great to have you back on SI - seems like you were gone for awhile. I seem to remember having a similar discussion with you on the old SI in a now lost thread. Re the Macedonian call. Can you tell me exactly how the Holy Spirit communicated with Paul? It could have been a dream, or a vision, or a personal visit, or an audible voice. The passage doesn’t explicitly tell us how the communication occurred. However, if we are going to use a consistent hermeneutic, I believe it would have had to have been one of these methods since one rule of hermeneutics is to use the clear, explicit passages of Scripture to understand the unclear. Nowhere is there a scriptural example of someone receiving a word from God explicitly described as some kind of inner feeling, notion or understanding. Perhaps that’s what happened to Paul, but, if so, we cannot know it because we are not told (I would contend because even if it happened that way to Paul it is unimportant to us because we don’t receive the same direct revelation).

You are correct, the Spirit doesn’t tell us. Here’s Anne’s comment:

There was personal communication from the Holy Spirit convicting me about these things in very particular ways.

Obviously, there are Scriptural examples of the Holy Spirit communicating personally in very particular ways. I chose the Macedonian call because of the parallel to Anne’s experience. The call itself was a dream or vision, but we’re not told how the Spirit stopped Paul’s other plans.

It’s a narrow point, really. The much bigger question is not whether apostles or prophets were guided in particular ways — Hebrews 1:1 indicates varied means of communication. The key question is how (or if) we should extrapolate that, and where in the world the Scriptures indicate that we should extrapolate that.

I don’t remember the prior thread. That was actually a factor in reducing my SI time — I found we just rehashed topics over again when someone new came along and posted a question. When time became really short for me, I opted out for a while.

***

Back to the main topic (again).

As to the definition of a prophet, in the OT a prophet is defined as one who gives the exact words of God and only the words of God when speaking as a prophet. I hope we can all agree on that. God used various means to speak to prophets (Heb. 1:1). They did not always understand what was revealed through them (I Peter 1:10-12), which would indicate that they really were simply mouth-pieces. Balaam prophesied. Mike McCubbins (Though I Speak) argues from Romans 3:1-2 and Deut. 18:13 that a prophet must be Jewish, and I find his argument interesting but not necessarily conclusive. Deut. 18:20 indicates that a prophet must speak in the name of the Lord, and only in the name of the Lord. It appears, though it is again not conclusive, that an OT prophet must give a sign, and certainly any sign he would give must come to pass (Deut. 13:1; 18:21-22).

In the NT, we are given no redefinition. Therefore, I believe it is best to assume the same definition applies. Communicating new revelation exactly as God intended it would be NT prophecy. Probably the most well-known NT prophet outside of the apostles is Agabus. A NT prophet is a mouthpiece for the Lord’s words. We might perhaps argue that reading Scriptures, the exact words of God, or singing Psalms or other Scriptures, is a form of prophecy as well, serving as a mouthpiece of the word of the Lord. I would not be too sure about that, however, because generally prophecy appears to be used only of new revelation.

If prophecy has been redefined in the NT, there are problems. As has been mentioned, I Cor. 11 refers to women prophesying, apparently within a local church context and (for that matter) a mixed company of men and women. Yet, women are not to teach or have any position of authority over men (I Tim. 2), so prophesying cannot refer to teaching or what we often call “preaching” in the church. A woman could be a mouth-piece, under authority, and not violate I Timothy 2. It is hard to see how the “redefinition” view to cover what we call preaching in the church can reconcile I Cor. 11 and I Timothy 2. Acts 21:9 tells us of four daughters of Philip who prophesied. We do not know that this took place in the church, however.

In Acts 21:10-11 we have a prophecy from Agabus that he may not have fully understood. It appears (verse 12) that he was among those who were begging Paul not to go to Jerusalem. Yet, the prophecy was not a command not to go, but a statement of what was going to happen. In this respect, it appears that Agabus may have been similar to the OT prophets, in being a mouthpiece without necessarily having a full understanding of the import of what he said.

For the reasons given, I conclude that the NT definition of a prophet will not substantially differ from the OT definition. I would not call it a “sign gift”, but rather a gift that was to be validated by signs.

Women definitely could prophesy, as evidenced by the Scriptures I’ve given.

If there is any particular connection between prophesying and music, it is very, very obscure, although as I have said above, the singing of the Psalms may be a form of prophesying, and other Scripture songs would fit in that category as well. I believe if musical prophesying were something that was to be part of our church life, we would have something a lot more clear than “I will sing with the understanding also” to indicate such. We are specifically told to use singing to teach, but we have no clear statement that it is to be used to prophesy (again, unless singing the Psalms would qualify).

[S_Schmidt] The Strong’s definition is:1) prophecy

a) a discourse emanating from divine inspiration and declaring the purposes of God, whether by reproving and admonishing the wicked, or comforting the afflicted, or revealing things hidden; esp. by foretelling future events

I believe most of this definition covers preaching and proclaiming truth.

Even Dictionary.com defines prophecy as: a. a message of divine truth revealing God’s will

b. the act of uttering such a message

Whether you are in the pulpit preaching or sharing the Gospel you are “declaring the purposes of God”. And these “purposes” are obviously “emanating” from divine inspiration (i.e. the Bible).

Brother Steve, I see a couple of problems with your approach here. First, we’re dealing with human definitions rather than what God actually says in His Word. Second, all you have demonstrated is that prophecy and preaching share some characteristics, not that they are one and the same. I would say, based on Scripture, that prophecy is a specialized form of preaching which is direct revelation from God.

If one defines todays expression of prophecy as “preaching the Word” is one to hold the preacher to the same level of perfection and accuracy that continuationists are subject to when they claim to prophesy from the Lord.

I reckon all preachers have said something wrong at times in their preaching so does that (if we are applying the same standards) mean they are false prophets?

You can, if todays prophet is the preacher,only claim as prophetic the quotations from Scriptures that they may use and the rest of the preaching surely is only the preacher’s ideas which may or may not be right but by the standards of infallibilty that you demand of prophets the preacher will fall short.

The gift of prophecy is either available today or it isn’t. Saying that the NT (that is, in our time) prophet is someone who preaches the Word seems to stray away from the Biblical use of the Word. I can’t see where prophets are equated with preachers in the Scriprture as if they are equivalent,though some preachers may have been used to prophecy. They seem to be presented as two different ministries.

Steve,

It seems I may have offended you. Sorry if that happened, it wasn’t intended. When I came back to the thread, I was responding to the last few posts at that time and had forgotten you had posted earlier. My effort in identifying you was to say I wasn’t speaking of you specifically in my response but to and idea generally. I apologize for not doing a better job communicating that.

Regarding the actual point in my post. Generally, those who self-identify as continuationists tend to define prophecy the way you defined it. Generally, those who self-identify as cessationists define prophecy more along the lines I outlined. All I was trying to say is that these two aspects of spiritual gifts are often tied together in people’s theological construct.

Thanks to all for the answers. There is no doubt the other debates (continue / cease & “inner voice”) are important to this big discussion. These definitions and biblical work give a clearer picture from which to address the other issues. no time to fully comment now.

Thanks again :)

[Richard Pajak] Saying that the NT (that is, in our time) prophet is someone who preaches the Word seems to stray away from the Biblical use of the Word. I can’t see where prophets are equated with preachers in the Scriprture as if they are equivalent,though some preachers may have been used to prophecy. They seem to be presented as two different ministries.

I agree, Richard. My kids can tell lots of funny stories about wrong things I’ve said while preaching, when my brain or tongue gets tangled and I talk about “Samson” when I meant “Samuel”, etc. I don’t speak “in the name of the Lord”, saying, “thus saith the Lord”, when I’m preaching, except when I’m giving the actual Scriptures. If I were to make such claims, I would be claiming to be a prophet, and if I then said anything at all that was not 100% accurate, I would be a false prophet.

I do not claim to be prophesying when I preach. If I did make such a claim, I would be lying, and it would be readily apparent. We diminish the gift when we redefine it.

[JG] We diminish the gift when we redefine it.

Quote of the week. Besides, wouldn’t this mean all moms have the gift of healing when they kiss boo boos?

If you’re interested in an in-depth treatment of NT prophecy, check out the book “The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today” by Wayne Grudem.