Apostles, Prophets and prophecy

[T-Bone]

Here's another thread inspired by the discussions on CES, concerning apostles, prophets and prophecy. I just thought I'd start with offering some excerpts from a theological dictionary – and see if anyone is interested in the topic. The following excerpts are from the New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, editors: T. Desmond Alexander, Brian S. Rosner, D. A. Carson and Graeme Goldsworthy, Inter-Varsity Press, 2000, pages 707, 708 of Prophets/Prophecy:

…The NT apostles are the counterparts to OT prophets

Many OT prophets were able to speak and write words which had absolute divine authority…and which were recorded in canonical Scripture. In NT times also there were people who spoke and wrote God's very words and had them recorded in Scripture; however, Jesus does not call them 'prophets' but uses a new term, 'apostles'. The apostles are the NT counterpart to the primary, established prophets in the OT [see Galatians 1:8,9,11-12; I Corinthians 2:13; II Corinthians 13:3; I Thessalonians 2:13; 4:8,15; II Peter 3:2]. It is apostles, not prophets, who have authority to write the words of NT Scripture.

When the apostles want to establish their unique authority they never appeal to the title 'prophet' but rather call themselves apostles [Romans 1:1; I Corinthians 1:1; 9:1-2; II Corinthians 1:1; 11:12-13; 12:11-12; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:1; I Peter 1:1; II Peter 1:1; 3:2, etc.]…

The meaning of 'prophet' in the NT times

Why did Jesus choose the new term apostle to designate those who had the authority to write Scripture? One reason is that the gift of prophecy was going to be widely distributed to God's people at Pentecost, and it was appropriate to use another term to refer to the small group who would have authority to write NT Scripture. Another reason is that in NT times the Greek word prophetes ['prophet'] generally did not mean 'one who speaks God's very words' but rather 'one who speaks on the basis of some external influence' [often a spiritual influence of some kind], or even just 'spokesperson'. Titus 1:12 uses the word in this sense; Paul quotes the pagan Greek poet Epimenides: 'One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons."' [page 707]

The apostles as 'prophets'

Of course, the words 'prophet' and 'prophecy' were sometimes used of the apostles when they were giving a 'prophecy', emphasizing that a special revelation from the Holy Spirit was the basis of what they said [Revelation 1:3; 22:7; Ephesians 2:20; 3:5]. But this was not the terminology ordinarily used for the apostles, nor did the terms 'prophet' and 'prophecy' in themselves imply that their speech or writing had divine authority, any more than Paul's calling himself a 'teacher' [iI Timothy 1:11] implied that all 'teachers' in NT times had authority equal to Paul's. With respect to the apostles functioning as 'prophets', Ephesians 2:20 and 3:5 speak of the 'foundational' role of a unique group of apostles [and perhaps also a limited group of prophets] who received the special revelation concerning the inclusion of Gentiles in the church [3:5]. However, these verses have no direct relevance to the gift of prophecy as it functioned not in the 'foundation', but in the rest of the church, i.e. in thousands of ordinary Christians in hundreds of local churches in NT times. In other NT passages, the words 'prophet' and 'prophecy' are used more commonly with reference to ordinary Christians who spoke not with absolute divine authority, but simply to report something that God had brought to their minds…[page 708]

End of excerpts

I found this to be an interesting article – and have never given it much thought of the difference between apostle and prophet in the New Testament.

Edited March 8, 2007 by T-Bone

[Ham]

In other NT passages, the words 'prophet' and 'prophecy' are used more commonly with reference to ordinary Christians who spoke not with absolute divine authority, but simply to report something that God had brought to their minds…

Very interesting. And it makes more sense than what I learned in der vey.

Just a thought.. Corinthians is supposed to be a reproof epistle..

I wonder why they had to be told that "prophecy" was to edify, exhort, comfort.. I wonder if they even then were mutating prophecy into some kind of intrusive "conditional" "personal prophecy" kind of concept.

Edited March 8, 2007 by Mr. Hammeroni

[Twinky]

Didn’t the TWI definition include something about being a spokeman for God? Bringing forth a message from or for (=on behalf of) God?

Seems to me that if a person is walking with his heart close to God, eg, in a teaching or perhaps counselling someone, then the words spoken then are just as much “prophecy” as “the manifestation of prophecy” (as taught by TWI and splinters). That person would be speaking out the words that God would have those people hear.

The person might become very adept at saying “just the right thing” to a group or to an individual that that group or individual needed to help them (if they listened) in their walk with God. Wouldn’t that be prophecy? Wouldn’t that person then be a prophet? Perhaps a (gift ministry) prophet?

Is the distinction between one who exercises the manifestation of prophesy (= a prophet, at that time) and a gift-ministry prophet even valid, or is one just very expert at it (we can all teach, but some are expert at it; we can all pastor/care for, but some are expert at it).

Just exploring ideas here. Surely prophecy isn’t limited to a few minutes in a fellowship? Or unusual visions? (Both or either of which could be right on or right off).

[T-Bone]

...Just a thought.. Corinthians is supposed to be a reproof epistle..

I wonder why they had to be told that "prophecy" was to edify, exhort, comfort.. I wonder if they even then were mutating prophecy into some kind of intrusive "conditional" "personal prophecy" kind of concept.

Good point, Hamm. I think you might have something there. I found this the other night while doing some research for my first post. It's from New Dictionary of Theology, edited by Sinclair B. Ferguson, David F. Wright, J. I. Packer, Inter-Varsity Press, 1988, page 538, under Prophecy, Theology of:

…The prophet was not the final judge of the validity of his message. As the conflict between prophets in both the OT and the NT [iI Corinthians 11:4, 13; I John 4:1-3] shows, his word was 'tested,' for example, for its prophetic character and for its agreement with the teaching of Moses [Deuteronomy 13:1-5] or of Jesus [Matthew 7:15; 24:11; II Peter 2:1].It was given unquestioned authority only after it was vetted [cf. I Thessalonians 5:19-21]. Even when it was recognized to be a divine word, it did not necessarily become canonical word. Prophecy had [and has] important uses for its immediate recipients, but it was given canonical status only when it was recognized also to be normative revelation for future generations and a touchstone by which future prophecies might be tested.

End of excerpt

Webster's defines "vetted" used in the above article as meaning: to subject to usual expert appraisal or correction, to evaluate for possible approval or acceptance…And in looking up all the scriptural references given in this above article something stood out on a passage - I didn't realize how much two directives were linked together:

I Thessalonians 5:19-21 NASB

19 Do not quench the Spirit;

20 do not despise prophetic utterances.

21 But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good;

They were instructed not to despise prophecies…and notice following right on the heels of that is another directive - to examine everything – carefully.

Edited March 10, 2007 by T-Bone

[T-Bone]

Twinky, those are great points you bring up…I understand what you mean – of prophecy as TWI taught it [being for edification] akin to the words spoken in a counseling session or teaching if the person was walking with their heart close to God. What I’m hearing on CES threads is some of the prophecy being used as guidance.

What bothers me with personal-prophecy-and-a-dash-of-guidance thrown-in is just what you pointed out – the possibility of it being right or wrong. I don’t see personal prophecy as a legitimate form of guidance mentioned in Scripture…Another thing your post made me think of is the responsibility that comes with our words. How much do we realize the importance of saying the right thing to someone at the right time? When I offer someone Christian counsel – is it doctrinally correct? Is it the right application of a passage? Not only that – but I think the recipient of our words should listen responsibly. Engage their brain too! Don’t take my words as gospel truth. Search the Scriptures to see whether those things are so. There’s a danger in mindlessly accepting advice from anyone. They could be whacked out on some doctrinal issues.

[Ham]

They were instructed not to despise prophecies…and notice following right on the heels of that is another directive - to examine everything – carefully.

Yeah. Too bad some people give us a good reason to despise "prophecies", sorting through spiders and such, trying to make some kind of meaning out of it.

[RottieGrrrl]

Yeah. Too bad some people give us a good reason to despise "prophecies", sorting through spiders and such, trying to make some kind of meaning out of it.

Yeah, that's how I feel. I don't know (honestly, I just don't!) if I've ever heard a real prophecy in my life. The manifistations I see in the wayfer offshoots are really quite dry and meaningless to me. If others get something out of it, that's great, but I could get more uplifting passages from the Bible itself or a book like Chicken Soup for the soul or what have you.

[T-Bone]

I feel the same way, RottieGrrrl. Reading a good book is enjoyable because the author took some time, effort and energy to craft something thoughtful and meaningful. The stuff I heard in TWI [palmed off as prophecy] sounded like a bunch of stock phrases strung together…A “spiritual” placebo – and if you didn’t get blessed by an interpretation of tongues or prophecy – then there’s something wrong with you!

[RottieGrrrl]

T-bone Agreed! What really gets me is every now and again someone will do "prophecy" or what have you in Old English!

Come on, if God is supposed to be speaking through us, I would guess He would be using our language and culture. You're telling me their "prophecy" isn't inspired by the KJ version of passages they have memorized?

Edited March 18, 2007 by RottieGrrrl

[T-Bone]

Yeah on the King James Old English thing! And that reminds me of another oddity – sometimes the message started out mid-sentence, “…and know my children that I am always with you.” Like they were searching the radio waves and happened upon that signal.

[RottieGrrrl]

Yeah on the King James Old English thing! And that reminds me of another oddity – sometimes the message started out mid-sentence, “…and know my children that I am always with you.” Like they were searching the radio waves and happened upon that signal.

You just made me laugh so hard my dog looked at me funny. I think it was Oakspear? Who did a fantastic parody of a typical way man-i-fuh-stay-shun. I mean it was absolutely hystercial. He may not even remember it. If he reads this maybe he can bless us with another one. ;)

[Through the Looking Glass]

I'm new here and this may already be in another thread.... (sorry if so)

Does anyone know what the Way's reasoning for prophecy and tongues with interpretation being done in the first person is? For example: "I the Lord thy God..."

I was born into TWI, began speaking in tongues when I was three, and started "manifesting" in children's fellowship when I was probably five or six. I'm almost 30 now and have finally left. Anyway, manifesting always filled me with a lot of anxiety. When I was a kid I would think stuff up ahead of time and then always felt so guilty. I was also in constant fear that God would tell my dad, who was the HFC, that I had been faking it. I think this really distanced me from God. Once I came up with this very poetic "prophecy" about shining as lights to the world like the fireflies in a dark field at night, etc. Everyone told me how much it blessed them and how wonderful it was, I was about 8. This was very confusing and stressful because now I had just set a new bar for myself, and my made up "prophecy" had just blessed people a lot more than when I did try not to think something up beforehand (you know "real words from God"). I was an extremely performance driven kid and I can remember the constant inner struggle with this issue.

So back to my question...

One of the first things in my adult life that started to clue me into the fact that maybe TWI didn't have more of the Word than anyone else out there is their ambiguity in this category. I had gotten honest with myself and realized that I had no desire to witness to anyone and bring them into TWI. In an effort to understand why, I began to look at things from the perspective of a new person. One thing I saw as a "new person" was that the manifestations in fellowship just weirded me out. Why would people be speaking like they were God or were possessed by God? If it's inspiration then why is it in the first person as if God is directly speaking as Himself through a person? It seemed so egotistical. So I decided to retake the Intermediate Class to get some answers. As I sat through the class I realized there was nothing scriptural they used backing up their definitions of just exactly what the believer's meeting manifestations entailed and why they were first person. They also took out the "Words for or from God" part. Now it's strictly "from". I can remember one believer who always manifested in the third person. I hadn't been in the same fellowship as her for awhile, but when I was placed in the same fellowship I noticed that she now used the first person just like everyone else. Interesting...

It also seems like the same phrases are just recycled for the most part. I can remember one anniversary hook-up from HQ. Every single person who manifested started out with, "I have chosen you from before the foundations of the world...". I can remember as a cover-up the HFC saying that God must really be trying to emphasis that point. I think it wasn't long after that it became the new standard for during hookups that we turn the volume down and have manifestations in our own fellowships. I was so saddened by this. I loved going to phone hookups (no matter how long, boring, and confrontational they may be) because at least I didn't have the pressure of knowing I would probably be having to manifest! Wow, I am so thankful to be set free from the performance based standards of the Way!

So does anyone know how they came up with all this? Was it some divine revelation God gave VPW?

[T-Bone]

Welcome to GSC, TTL Glass !!!!!! Thanks for sharing all that stuff!!!!!!!!!!! And I admire the thinking process you reveal in your narrative. A few things you said really impressed me. I am always amazed at the intelligence and social skills of kids. It's terrible the amount of pressure TWI folks put on the young ones to conform – as you so aptly described…Looking at the manifestations as an outsider would - and picking up on TWI dropping the "for God" aspect of messages – very sharp on your part.

As far as your question "So does anyone know how they came up with all this? Was it some divine revelation God gave VPW?" – I'm sure there's others at GSC who could give you a detailed response. All I've got to say is that VPW plagiarized a lot of his PFAL material – which includes the Holy Spirit/manifestations stuff. May I suggest you use the Search feature at the top right of the GSC page and then click on More Search Options - and you'll find lots of threads that address your questions. You can search by word or phrase like: plagiarism, utterance manifestations, etc.

Something that I have always wondered about over the years since I left TWI – is how VPW could come up with such detailed/technical instructions for operating the manifestations – when there is not anything definitive in the Bible.

I would think if an ability is God-given, supernatural – then the technical details are His problem. I Corinthians has the most concentration of data on these supernatural abilities and absent are any "nuts and bolts" talk on how to "operate" anything - and don't see anything about having "practice sessions" either. What I do notice is emphasis on having the right attitude and keeping in mind things should be done to edify the church.

Edited April 2, 2007 by T-Bone