Chapter 9.4

More Precisely Defining Biblical Prophets

NT Prophets are the Same as OT Prophets & the NT Gift of Prophecy

Table of Topics

A) NT Prophets are Synonymous With OT Prophets

B) The Gift of Prophecy & the Ministry of Prophet Are Synonymous

B.1) Prophecy equals Prophets

B.2) Prophecy is not viral: 1 Cor 14:1, 31 & Acts 19:6

B.3) Prophecy is not learned

Extras & Endnotes

 

Primary Points

• Prophetists must claim two things: 1) NT Christian Prophets were different in function and authority than OT Jewish Prophets, and 2) NT Christian Prophets were different than those with the gift of prophecy.
• For over 1900 years virtually no one in the Christian Church distinguished between the attributes of OT and NT Prophets.
• There is no biblical distinction between the divine authority and authentication of OT and NT Prophets. The Prophet Agabus is an example.
• The gift of prophecy was an abiding gift of God, resulting in a ministry such that you were recognized as a Prophet.
• There is no biblical evidence that the gift of prophecy was intended to flit around such that no one really knew at any one moment who was going to be a Prophet.
• Like any true spiritual gift, prophecy cannot be learned, but is sovereignly granted by the Holy Spirit.

A) NT Prophets are Synonymous With OT Prophets

Unfortunately, as we have pointed out elsewhere in KOG, charismaticism ^[1] attempts to separate what God has joined together. The errors in prophetism are no exception. In order to support their position regarding the NT gift of prophecy, prophetists must claim two things: 1) NT Christian Prophets were rather completely different in function and authority than OT Jewish Prophets, and 2) NT Christian Prophets were different from those who had the gift of NT prophecy.

All of this is in an effort to water down the real biblical gift of prophecy to match the rather pathetic modern version being practiced in which “prophets” neither authoritatively speak divine revelation, nor accurately predict the future. On the contrary, NT Christian Prophets had the same attributes and authority as OT Jewish Prophets, and NT Christian Prophets alone possessed the NT gift to prophecy.

Did the early Church make a distinction between OT and NT Prophets? We would not expect such a thing, particularly when the same word “Prophet” is used in both testaments. Nevertheless, this is a foundational and necessary claim of prophetism in order that they may redefine the NT gift of prophecy from the divinely authoritative and supernaturally authenticated version in the OT.

Accordingly, Wayne Grudem, former long-time Professor of Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and the foremost proponent of prophetism today, writes:

Now if New Testament congregational prophecy was like Old Testament prophecy . . . then the [historicist’s ^[2]] objection would indeed be true. ^[3]

And modern prophetism would indeed be wrong.

There is good reason that for over 1900 years virtually no one in the Christian Church distinguished between the authority and attributes of OT and NT Prophets. First, as already noted, one might expect a different word to be used for these ministries if they were as different as modern prophetism claims. However, the same Greek word (prophētēs) is used to refer to Prophets in the Greek OT (Septuagint), and refers to both OT and NT Prophets in the NT.

For example, Luke writes, “In the church at Antioch there were [Christian] Prophets [prophētai] and Teachers” (Acts 13:1), and a few verses later he quotes the Apostle as saying, “The people of Jerusalem and their rulers did not recognize Jesus, yet in condemning Him they fulfilled the words of the [OT] Prophets [prophētōn] that are read every Sabbath (Acts 13:27). If the great distinction between OT and NT Prophets existed, as claimed by modern prophetism, we might expect a different word group being used, but there is no hint of such a distinction. Consequently, the same words are used to refer to NT and OT Prophets (cf. OT Prophets and prophecy at Acts 2:16; 3:24, 25; 10:43; 13:20, 27, 40; 15:15; 24:14; 26:22, 27; 28:23 and NT Prophets and prophecy at Acts 7:37; 11:27; 13:1; 15:32; 21:9-10; cf. Rom 1:2; 12:6).

Accordingly, we read in the ISBE:

The NT’s use of prophētēs to refer to contemporary [NT] Prophets as well as OT Prophets demonstrates that the NT authors saw a continuity between these two era of prophecy. ^[4]

Along the same lines, the NIDNTT records:

Certain functions of NT Prophets are reminiscent of the OT Prophet: prediction of future events (Acts 11:28; 20:23, 25; 27:22), the declaration of divine judgments (Acts 13:11; 28:25-28), and the employment of symbolic actions (Acts 21:11). ^[5]

Therefore, the common sense conclusion is that the early Church never desired to distinguish between OT and NT gifts of prophecy in any way.

Further evidence for this is found in the post-apostolic Church. For example, the apologist Justin Martyr (c. 150) wrote to a Jew:

[T]he prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time. And hence you ought to understand that [the gifts] formerly among your nation [Israel] have been transferred to us [the Church]. ^[6]

Justin understood that the gift of prophecy operating in the early Church was identical to that which operated in the OT.

Likewise, c. 200 when the early Church was battling the claim of the Montanists to the NT gift of prophecy, the Church’s leaders clearly used the attributes of OT Prophets to condemn the Montanists’ version of the gift of prophecy as a dangerous and heretical fraud. ^[7] For example, one early Church leader pointed out that a prediction given by one of the Montanist “prophetesses” had not come true, therefore exposing her as a fake (cf. Deut 18:21-22). ^[8] Accordingly, Dr. Farnell writes concerning the Montanist controversy in the early Church:

[T]he Old Testament Prophets were a basis for understanding what constituted genuine New Testament Prophets. If a self-acclaimed Prophet did not conform to the Old Testament standards of a Prophet, he was to be rejected. Here again the early church saw a direct continuity between Old Testament and New Testament Prophets. ^[9]

In an effort to reinterpret this consistent use of the word group prophētēs, proponents of prophetism have suggested that the Apostle Paul, a “Hebrew of Hebrews” (Phil 3:5), actually gained his understanding of biblical prophecy from the pagan Greeks, rather than his OT Jewish heritage. Accordingly, Sinclair B. Ferguson, Professor of Systematic Theology at Westminster (Dallas) relates:

[Dr. Wayne] Grudem notes that in the Hellenistic world the semantic range of the term ‘Prophet’ [prophētēs] was very wide indeed, and he argues that we should recognize a similar range in the New Testament. While a distinction was made in Hellenistic religion between the different ‘levels’ of prophecy involved in inspiration and interpretation, however, the controlling background to the New Testament’s thinking is not Hellenistic but Hebraic prophecy, with its implicit, and at times explicit, claim to divine inspiration, not least when it reflected on future events. ^[10]

Accordingly, even the Pentecostal NT scholar Gordon Fee writes:

Although it [prophecy] was a widespread phenomenon in the Greek world, Paul’s understanding is thoroughly conditioned by his own history in Judaism. The Prophet spoke to God’s people under the inspiration of the Spirit. . . . That also means that he undoubtedly saw the “New Testament Prophets” as in the succession of the “legitimate” Prophets of the Old Testament. ^[11]

Likewise, the rather liberal NT scholar J. D. G. Dunn, who is also sympathetic to prophetism, nonetheless writes that NT Prophets “were no doubt acting out of a consciousness of continuity of inspiration with these OT Prophets and Jesus [because] it was the same Spirit, the Spirit of Christ who inspired them all.” ^[12]

Accordingly, while the trend today is to claim the gift of prophecy is something less than the forthtelling of a word from God or foretelling an act of God, many biblical scholars of the previous generation had a clearer understanding of the biblical view. ^[13] NT scholar C. K. Barrett wrote of the NT gift of prophecy:

[I]t was expressed in inspired but intelligible speech, and sometimes though not always included prediction of future events (e.g. Acts xi. 27 f.). Like Old Testament prophecy it was primarily an immediate communication of God’s word to his people, through human lips. ^[14]

Likewise, Christian philosopher and theologian Norman Geisler has written, “There is no reason to believe that New Testament Prophets exercised their gifts any differently than Prophets in the Old Testament.” ^[15]

Contrary to the claims of modern prophetism then, there is no biblical distinction between the divine authority and authentication of OT and NT Prophets. Accordingly, the NT Prophet Agabus spoke divinely authoritative extra-biblical revelation, prefacing his statement with “This is what [God] the Holy Spirit says . . .” (Acts 21:11), an utterance very reminiscent of his OT counterparts. Agabus also miraculously authenticated himself by accurately predicting the future twice (cf. Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11, 27-33), just as prescribed for OT Prophets (cf. Deut 18:21-22). ^[16]

B) The Gift of Prophecy & the Ministry of the Prophet Are Synonymous

B.1) Prophecy equals Prophets

In the early Church, the gift of prophecy was synonymous with being a Christian Prophet, and being a Christian Prophet was synonymous with having the gift of prophecy. Accordingly, the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 12 that, “the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good. To one there is given through the Spirit . . . prophecy” (vs. 7-8, 10), clearly a reference to the NT gift of prophecy. Then a few verses later, the Apostle refers to these very same people when he writes, “in the church God . . . appointed . . . Prophets” (v. 28), and asks the question, “are all Prophets?” (v. 29). Clearly, the Apostle does not distinguish between those with the spiritual gift of “prophecy” (v. 10) and the ministry of Christian “Prophets” all because the gift and ministry were synonymous.

The Apostle has the same in 1 Corinthians 14 which begins with, “eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy” (v. 1). Then the Apostle repeatedly equates one “who prophesies” (vs. 3, 4, 5) as possessing the gift of prophecy. In verse 22 he says the gift of “prophecy . . . is for believers.” Then in verse 29, no doubt referring to those with the gift of prophecy mentioned in vs. 1 and 22, and those who would prophesy in vs. 3, 4, and 5, the Apostle states:

Two or three Prophets should speak . . . For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. The spirits of Prophets are subject to the control of Prophets. For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. (vs. 29, 31-33)

Again, those with the gift of prophecy, who prophesy, are referred to as those having the ministry of a Prophet.

Accordingly, spiritual gifts are tied to ministries. For example, no one doubts that in the early Church, the people with the spiritual gift of “teaching” listed in Romans 12:7, were synonymous with those having the recognized ministry of “Teachers” mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:28, 29 and Ephesians 4:11. The NT Church simply did not make a distinction between someone having the gift of teaching and the ministry of a Teacher.

Accordingly, the Apostle ties the giving of spiritual gifts to specific ministries when he writes the Ephesians:

But to each one of us grace [i.e. a spiritual gift] has been given as Christ apportioned it. ⁸ This is why it says: “When He ascended on high, He led captives in His train and gave [spiritual] gifts to men.” . . . ¹¹ It was He who gave some to be [and have the corresponding spiritual gifts of] Apostles, some to be Prophets, some to be Evangelists, and some to be Pastors and Teachers . . . (Eph 4:7-8, 11)

The context of the Apostle’s statement is clearly spiritual gifts. Accordingly, the “grace . . . given” (v. 7) and the “gifts” Christ “gave . . . to men” (v. 8) refers to a spiritual gift for ministry (cf. Rom 12:6 where Paul writes, “We have different [spiritual] gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it . . .”). And in this context of spiritual gifts given to men, the Apostle speaks seamlessly about the resulting ministries given to the Church. Accordingly, there is no distinction here between the gifts of prophecy, evangelism, pastoring, and teaching “gifts” that Christ “gave to men” and the corresponding ministries of Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers.

In the early Church then, it was common sense to understand that a person with the ministry of Teacher, had the spiritual gift of teaching. There is no reason to believe that the opposite was true as well, in that, those with the gift of teaching could be referred to as having the ministry of Teacher. The same was true for the gifts of prophecy, evangelism, and pastoring.

Therefore, some things become clear about the NT gift of prophecy. First, it was synonymous with being a Christian Prophet. Accordingly, the NIDNTT notes:

In the NT prophētēs is found 144 times. . . The noun means a Prophet, one who proclaims and expounds divine revelation. In most cases it refers to OT Prophets, but it is also applied to John the Baptist, Jesus, and others who proclaim the Kingdom of God of Christ, and to the believer who possesses the gift of prophecy. ^[17]

The same Greek word is used for both the gift and office because they were synonymous. Consequently, the attributes of a Christian Prophet such as Agabus, who clearly spoke new, extra-biblical, but divinely authoritative revelation, and perfectly predicted the future, are to be expected of anyone claiming the gift of NT prophecy, and vice versa.

It is important in the modern debate concerning the gift of prophecy to demonstrate, that from a biblical perspective, it was tied to being a Christian Prophet. This is because like several other things, what God has joined together, charismaticism is attempting to tear apart.

For example, teachers of prophetism insist that a Christian Prophet such as Agabus did not have the NT gift of prophecy. Their reason for imposing this artificial distinction is to redefine the latter as something less than what the Church has normally believed about God’s Prophets. For example, Dr. Fee writes regarding the Apostle Paul’s statement that, “in the church God has appointed . . . Prophets . . .” (1 Cor 12:28):

The question is whether Paul is here thinking of a specific group of people known as “Prophets” vis-a-vis “Apostles” and other members of the community, or whether this is a purely functional term for him, referring to any and all who would exercise the gift of prophecy. ^[18]

On the contrary, there is no question at all whether those with the gift of prophecy were called Prophets, and there had never been such a question for over 1900 years of Church history until the advent of modern prophetism.

Likewise, regarding the Apostle Paul’s claim that Christ “gave . . . Prophets” (Eph 4:11) to the NT Church, Dr. Fee writes:

As with 1 Cor 12:28 and Eph 2:20, the more difficult term is “Prophet,” since [the NT gift of] prophecy is more clearly a church-wide phenomenon and not at all limited to leadership or to itinerants [Prophets] who prophesied. . . . If so, then “Prophet” in this listing may refer not to the congregational [gift of] prophesying like that in I Thes 5:19-22, I Cor 14:1-40, or Rom 12:6, but to people [i.e. Prophets] like Paul and his co-workers who also functioned in this way among the churches. ^[19]

In essence, prophetism is asking us to believe that the ministries listed in Ephesians 4:11 are not attached to spiritual gifts. If so, then modern prophetists need to be consistent and claim as well that there were those in the early Church with the gift of “teaching” and who were to “teach” (cf. Rom 12:8), but did not have the ministry or office of “Teachers” (cf. Eph 4:11; 1 Cor 12:28). We doubt most will be willing to claim this, and such inconsistency is a foremost characteristic of a lie. The “congregational prophesying” occurring in the passages Dr. Fee cites was, no doubt, occurring through those authenticated and recognized as having the ministry of Prophets.

Unfortunately, this unbiblical distinction between NT Prophets and the gift of prophecy is found outside of prophetism as well. Accordingly, the rightly respected Bible teacher John MacArthur comments on 1 Corinthians 14:29-31:

The text here affirms that Prophets were also appointed by God as specially gifted men, and differ from those believers who have the gift of prophecy (cf. 12:10). ^[20]

On the contrary, and as demonstrated above, a common sense interpretation of the Apostle’s words would not seem to mean this. In the text that Dr. MacArthur refers to, the Apostle wrote:

Two or three Prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone [a Prophet] who is sitting down, the first speaker [a Prophet] should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. (1 Cor 14:29-31)

Unfortunately, Dr. MacArthur is in agreement with modern prophetism in distinguishing between a special office of NT Prophet and the gift of NT prophecy by which anyone could “prophesy.” The Bible simply does not make such a distinction and accordingly in this passage the Apostle Paul synonymously speaks of the ministry of “Prophets” (v. 29) and a person who would “prophesy” (v. 31) with the gift of prophecy (v. 1, 22).

B.2) Prophecy is not viral: 1 Cor 14:1, 31 & Acts 19:6

The second conclusion drawn from the verses above is the gift of prophecy was an abiding gift of God, resulting in a ministry such that you were recognized as a Prophet. Spiritual gifts in the NT are not generally perceived as one-time endowments that spontaneously visit a person temporarily like some virus, leave them, and jump from person to person. This is especially true of such ministry gifts a apostleship, prophecy, teaching, etc.

One reason for this is that such authoritative gifts needed to be authenticated and recognized. No one could just stand up in a congregation and “prophesy” without first being accepted as a Prophet. If anyone in the early Church had the gift of prophecy, then they miraculously authenticated themselves by predicting the future or otherwise, as Agabus did.

All of this is why the early Church consistently referred to people with the gift of prophecy as authenticated and recognized Prophets. Accordingly, Luke refers to “the Prophet Joel” (Acts 2:16), or the “Prophet Isaiah” (Acts 8:28), and then using the same Greek word speaks of “some Prophets [who obviously had the gift of prophecy] came down from Jerusalem to Antioch” and “a Prophet named Agabus” (Acts 21:10), “Judas and Silas, who themselves were Prophets” (Acts 15:32), “Prophets and Teachers: Barnabas, Simeon . . . Lucius . . . Manaen . . . and Saul” (Acts 13:1), and “the Prophetess Anna” (Luke 2:36). Likewise, the Apostle could say, “in the church God has appointed first of all Apostles, second Prophets, third Teachers” (1 Cor 12:28), and those divine appointments and their accompanying gifts did not flit around such that no one really knew at any one moment who was going to be an Apostle, Prophet, or Teacher. ^[21]

Therefore, while God could give anyone, at anytime, the gift of prophecy if He chose to, it would not follow the biblical pattern of being attached to an abiding, authenticated ministry. Accordingly, Dr. Aune likewise concludes:

Some, but not all, early Christians acted as inspired mediums of divine revelation and . . . these individuals alone received the label “Prophet.” To regard all Christians as potential Prophets is a theological dictum which cannot be confirmed . . . by historical or literary criticism. ^[22]

Likewise, Dr. Forbes writes:

It cannot be the case that all Christians were “potentially Prophets.” No positive evidence suggests such a position, and the designation of certain individuals as Prophets, as well as Paul’s rhetorical question in I Corinthians 12:29, is against it. ^[23]

 

Because prophetists believe in a second-rate gift of prophecy, distinguished from the biblical attributes of a biblical Prophet, and that could be spontaneously possessed by anyone, at any time, they promote something that could be called “viral prophecy.” Accordingly, the gift of prophecy might flit about a room of people, visiting one person and then another, and perhaps never endowing them again.

Dr. Grudem, for instance, writes:

Another great benefit of prophecy is that it provides opportunity for participation by everyone in the congregation, not just those who are skilled speakers or who have gifts of teaching. Paul says that he wants “all” the Corinthians to prophesy (I Cor. 14:5), and he says, “You can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged (1 Cor. 14:31). [This] mean[s] that anyone who receives a “revelation” from God has permission to prophesy (within Paul’s guidelines), and it suggests that many will. ^[24]

Dr. Fee likewise writes:

Although some people are called “Prophets,” probably because they were frequent speakers of “prophecies,” in [1 Cor 14] the implication is that it is a gift widely available-at least potentially-to all. . . . See on 11:4-5; 14:1-5, 23-24, 29-31. This does not mean that all do (cf. 12:29), but that it is not limited strictly to “Prophets,” as is so often suggested in the literature. ^[25]

There simply is no clear biblical evidence for such a thing. Accordingly, we quoted Dr. Aune above that, “To regard all Christians as potential Prophets is a theological dictum which cannot be confirmed,” and Dr. Forbes has written, “It cannot be the case that all Christians were ‘potentially Prophets.’”

There are three primary verses in the NT used by prophetists to claim the gift of prophecy is “viral.” First we will address, 1 Corinthians 14:1. In the Apostle’s effort to battle another error of the charismaticism in his day, he was attempting to put spiritual gifts in perspective for the tongues-hungry Corinthians. Therefore, he wrote them, “eagerly desire spiritual gifts, especially the gift of prophecy” (1 Cor 14:1). This has been construed by some as a modern day encouragement for every Christian individually to be seeking to possess the gift.

First, this is just one more example of the unbiblical independence and egotism in American Christianity, and especially in charismaticism. ^[26] The Apostle was not telling individual Christians to seek the gift. That would be fruitless because the Holy Spirit grants spiritual gifts “to each one, just as He determines,” (1 Cor. 12:11), not as we wish. The Apostle’s exhortation only makes sense if we understand it to mean that the Corinthian congregation as a whole were to be seeking God to bless their congregation with this gift, but they understood that only the Spirit would decide who might possess it.

Secondly, prophetism ignores the real and special purpose of the gift of prophecy as a “foundation” building gift along with “the Apostles” (Eph 2:20; cf. 3:4-5), and which ceased to be given in the early Church after it had accomplished this special purpose, which no longer exists today unless God wishes to add to Scripture. It should be noticed that this instruction for the Corinthians to “eagerly desire . . . the gift of prophecy” was initially to a church in the first century, and as we have repeatedly pointed out, we need to be careful in applying every instruction in the NT to our own day (e.g. Christ telling the disciples only to preach the Gospel to the Jews, Matt 10:5-6).

When we recognize the historical context of this statement, we can understand the Apostle’s exhortation to this church. The Corinthians were living in an age when God was revealing revolutionary new truth apart from established Scripture. The only sources of these new truths in the early Church were the Apostles and Prophets (cf. Eph 2:20; 3:5). Therefore, it becomes abundantly clear why this was such a valuable gift to a local congregation. If you had NT Prophets in your church, you had the NT revelation! 1 Corinthians is one of the very earliest NT documents and at this time a church without an Apostle or NT Prophet, was probably without the NT revelation. It would seem that because the NT gift of Apostleship could only be bestowed personally by Christ, it was the more commonly available NT gift of prophecy that the Apostle encouraged.

Those who so desire the gift of prophecy and claim it, forget how easy and “evil” (Matt 7:23) it is to be lying Prophets, who prophesy the delusions of their own minds” (Jer 23:26).

The second verse used to suggest the gift of prophecy was “viral” is 1 Corinthians 14:31 where Paul instructs: “You can all prophesy one by one.” Taken out of context with what the rest of Scripture teaches about the gift of prophecy, this could appear to imply a viral nature for the gift. However, let us look at Paul’s complete statement:

Two or three Prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. ³⁰ And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. ³¹ For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. ³² The spirits of Prophets are subject to the control of Prophets. ³³ For God is not a God of disorder but of peace.

As in all the congregations of the saints, ³⁴ women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. ³⁵ If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church. (1 Cor 14:29-35)

First, Dr. Grudem conveniently leaves out the Apostle’s prohibition against women speaking in the public church assembly at all. Evidently, then, it is not at all true, as Dr. Grudem claims, that a “great benefit of prophecy is that it provides opportunity for participation by everyone in the congregation . . . anyone who receives a ‘revelation’ from God has permission to prophesy.” ^[27] This prohibition of at least female prophesying of any kind in the congregational meeting will be discussed further elsewhere. ^[28]

Secondly, the Apostle says those who were to “prophesy” (v. 31; cf. vs. 5, 25) in the congregation were called the “Prophets,” (v. 29, 32), and they were the same “Prophets” “God has appointed” “in the church” “second” only to “Apostles” (1 Cor 12:28), and who had, “insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God’s holy Apostles and Prophets” (Eph 3:4-5), and were among “the Apostles and Prophets” who were “the foundation” on which “God’s household” had been “built.” (Eph 2:19-20). The “congregational Prophets” in Corinth were not the kind of “ordinary” Prophets prevalent and promoted in prophetism, but rather, peers of those who had laid the revelational foundation of the New Covenant Church with the Apostles.

Thirdly, then, we see that what Dr. Grudem suggests is a literal command, the Apostle intended as hyperbole. Not everyone really could prophesy because the Apostle himself had limited it to “two or three Prophets” (v. 29), not “all” would ever be Prophets (cf. 12:29), and “all” certainly didn’t include the women.

Finally, some see support for “viral” prophecy apart from an authenticated ministry as a Prophet in Acts 19:6 ^[29] where Luke records:

While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples ² and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”

They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.”

So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John’s baptism,” they replied.

Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the One coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” ⁵ On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. ⁶ When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied. ⁷ There were about twelve men in all. (Acts 19:1-7)

The instance of these men “prophesying” is taken to be a normative event for the life of the Church for all time. Actually, neither “prophesying” at conversion nor many other events in this passage were even norms in the first century, let alone all of Church history. What prophetists (and Pentecostals for that matter) fail to see here is the monumental, unique event that is taking place here. Dr. MacArthur correctly summarizes this when he comments here:

These twelve men, like Paul and Apollos before them, illustrate the transitional nature of Acts. The church, which had embraced Jews, Gentiles, and Samaritans, now gathered in the last group: Old Testament saints. And the same miraculous gifts were present, so that all would know what was said of the Gentiles in Acts 11:17-18:

“If God therefore gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way? And when they heard this, they quieted down, and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”

So all the groups were gathered in. And in each case apostles were present to verify that all received the same Holy Spirit in the same way. That having been completed, Paul could write to the Ephesians, “There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Eph. 4:4-5). From then on, the Holy Spirit would come to every heart at salvation, as the epistles teach. ^[30]

B.3) Prophecy is not learned

Because of charismaticism’s fundamental misunderstandings of biblical spiritual gifts, they believe they can teach someone to possess them. This is yet additional evidence that they have abandoned the supernatural attributes of the biblical gifts, and have accepted mere human, second-rate versions of them. We have discussed elsewhere charismaticism’s claim to be able to teach people how to learn the gift of tongues. ^[31] It should not surprise us that the same error has occurred among them with the gift of prophecy.

Therefore, one can now find an abundance of “Prophet schools” teaching people how to prophesy, usually for a fee, of course. One wonders how in the world Samuel, Jeremiah, or Agabus possibly fulfilled their prophetic ministries without the benefits of such a thing. If one looks back at the biblical record to study a Prophet’s calling, it was God Who picked them, and they are often found reluctant to have the office. In contrast, there are now schools to train new Prophets because so many want the office.

The truth is that a spiritual gift cannot be taught, but rather, as the Apostle wrote, they, “are the work of one and the same Spirit, and He gives them to each one, just as He determines” (1 Cor 12:11), not as we will or work. Nor is it up to us to choose what gift we have, as in the context of the distribution of spiritual gifts, the Apostle says, “God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as He wanted them to be” (12:18). Accordingly, what Drs. Keil and Delitzsch have written regarding OT prophecy is certainly true of NT prophecy as well:

Prophesying could neither be taught nor communicated by instruction, but was a gift of God which He communicated according to His free will to whomsoever He would. ^[32]

The modern idea in prophetism that someone can teach you how to have the biblical gift of prophecy is eerily familiar to something the Church Father Irenaeus (c. 170) wrote of in his book Against Heresies concerning a false Apostle named Markus who deceived people into receiving spiritual gifts in much the same way. Irenaeus wrote:

It appears probable enough that this man possesses a demon as his familiar spirit, by means of whom he seems able to prophesy, and also enables as many as he counts worthy to be partakers of his Charis [gift] themselves to prophesy. He devotes himself especially to women, and those such as are well-bred, and elegantly attired, and of great wealth, whom he frequently seeks to draw after him, by addressing them in such seductive words as these:

“I am eager to make thee a partaker of my Charis . . . Receive first from me and by me [the gift of] Charis. . . . Behold Charis has descended upon thee; open thy mouth and prophesy.”

On the woman replying, “I have never at any time prophesied, nor do I know how to prophesy;” then engaging, for the second time, in certain invocations, so as to astound his deluded victim, he says to her, “Open thy mouth, speak whatsoever occurs to thee, and thou shalt prophesy.” She then, vainly puffed up and elated by these words, and greatly excited in soul by the expectation that it is herself who is to prophesy, her heart beating violently, reaches the requisite pitch of audacity, and idly as well as impudently utters some nonsense as it happens to occur to her, such as might be expected from one heated by an empty spirit.

Henceforth she reckons herself a Prophetess, and expresses her thanks to Marcus for having imparted to her of his own Charis. She then makes the effort to reward him, not only by the gift of her possessions (in which way he has collected a very large fortune), but also by yielding up to him her person, desiring in every way to be united to him, that she may become altogether one with him. ^[33]

The parallels to what occurs in many “Christian” settings today is obvious, and it is just as obvious that the early Christians condemned such a practice.

Extras & Endnotes

Gauging Your Grasp

1. What are the two main arguments that prophetists use to accommodate the existence of the gift of prophecy today?
2. What biblical data demonstrates that Christian Prophets and the gift of prophecy were synonymous?
3. What biblical data demonstrates that the attributes and authority of NT Prophets was the same as their OT counterparts?
4. What is the significance of the attributes of Agabus?
5. What do we mean by “viral prophecy”? Why do we claim this is unbiblical? Do you agree or disagree and why?
6. Why is the idea in prophetism that people can be taught the gift of prophecy unbiblical?

Recommended Reading

F. David Farnell, “Fallible New Testament Prophecy/Prophets? A Critique of Wayne Grudem’s Hypothesis,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 2 (1991) 157-79.

Publications & Particulars

1. For a definition of charismaticism see endnote in chapter 8.2. ↑

2. By historicists we refer to those who adhere to the historical position of the Church that the gift of prophecy ceased shortly after the Apostles were extinct. Accordingly, the practice was universally rejected by the Christian Church for at least 1600 years since the days of the Montanists (c. 200), and as demonstrated throughout this section of Volume II, there is no biblical support for claiming that the gift of prophecy has been restored to the Church. ↑

3. Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), 1039. ↑

4. G. V. Smith, “Prophets” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE), Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., 4 vols., (Eerdmans, 1988), III:987-88, 1003-4. ↑

5. Colin Brown, “Prophet” New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (NIDNTT), Colin Brown, ed., 4 vols., (Zondervan, 1986), III:81-87. ↑

6. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 82; online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑

7. See further below and Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, V. 14-18; online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑

8. Eusebius, 5.16.18-19. ↑

9. F. David Farnell, “Fallible New Testament Prophecy/Prophets? A Critique of Wayne Grudem’s Hypothesis,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 2 (1991) 294 ↑

10. Sinclair B. Ferguson, The Holy Spirit (Intervarsity, 1996), 214-15. ↑

11. Gordon Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Hendrickson, 1994), 891-2; cf. 169. ↑

12. James D. G. Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament (Westminster Press, 1975), 172. ↑

13. Again, David Aune shares our view when he writes:

    In early Christianity the exclusive use of the term prophētēs as a designation for a human medium of divine revelation is consciously borrowed from the widely accepted equation in Judaism of the Greek word prophētēs with the Hebrew term nabi’ (reflected in the LXX). The term prophētēs occurs 144 times in the NT, 86 of which refer to OT Prophets. Similarly, in the Apostolic Fathers the word occurs 58 times, 37 of which refer to OT Prophets.

    The early Christian application of the designation prophētēs to individual Christians, then, was originally determined by the prevalent conception of the prophetic role in the OT. In [intertestamental] Judaism the term “Prophet” was rarely applied to those who were not [biblical] OT Prophets . . . . In early Christianity this reluctance to apply the designation to contemporary figures was completely overcome, and the term prophētēs was freely applied to those who were regarded as inspired spokesmen of God. (Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Mediterranean World [Eerdmans, 1983], 19)

    Likewise, David Farnell, Chairman of the Department of Ministerial Studies, Southeastern Bible College writes:

    The Old Testament predicted the Prophet John the Baptist (Malachi 3:5). Jesus declared that John was the greatest of the Prophets (Matt 11:11), thus placing him in line with the Old Testament Prophets. John the Apostle spoke of “the prophecy of this book [of Revelation]” that he wrote (Revelation 22:7). And the angel from God that spoke to him placed him among “the Prophets” such as the other “servants” God used in the Old Testament (22:6). And John said of himself, “I am a fellow servant with . . . the Prophets” (22:9). So from John the Baptist to John the Apostle, New Testament Prophets stood in continuity with Old Testament Prophets. And their revelations from God were both authoritative and infallible (see Revelation 22:18–19).

    Old Testament Prophets pronounced prophecies that were sometimes more enduring (e.g., Isa 7:14; 11:6–10 ) in nature than many Christian Prophets who may have given temporal or localized Prophetic advice to Christian communities. Such issues as these are separate from questions of authority or accuracy and do not in any way lessen the authority or accuracy of Christian Prophets and their prophecies. When the great Prophet Isaiah spoke, he may have been more prestigious (much of such prestige is by hindsight, e.g., Dan 9:6; Neh 9:26) than an anonymous Christian Prophet, but since both had the source of their prophetic utterance in the Holy Spirit, their prophetic pronouncements were equally authoritative and accurate (if a genuine New Testament Prophet was speaking). The authority of the genuine Prophet rests in God as the source of the prophecy and not in the Prophet himself. (Bsac, part 2, 388, endnote 3, 149:596 (Oct 92) p. 394) ↑

14. C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (BNTC) (Hendrickson, 2000), 219. ↑

15. Norman L. Geisler, Signs and Wonders (Tyndale, 1988), 159. ↑

16. Anglican Bishop Michael Green comments:

    The Old Testament Prophet, however, was more of a national leader, reformer, and patriot, and his message usually was to Israel alone. In the New Testament the Prophet principally ministered to the church and did not have national characteristics. (I Believe in the Holy Spirit [Eerdmans, 2004], 109 ↑

17. Brown, “Prophet” in NIDNTT, III:81-87. ↑

18. Fee, Presence, 170. Unfortunately, Leon Morris reflects the same error, writing: “Prophecy might be occasional (Acts 19:6), or a settled office (1 Cor 12:28ff.). (1 Corinthians [Eerdmans, 1999], 168). For comments on Acts 19:6 see section ? below.

    C. K. Barrett however comments on Paul’s designation of the ministry of “Prophets”: “We must suppose that they were men who exercised the gift of prophecy described at length in chapter xiv.” (295). ↑

19. Fee, 708. ↑

20. John MacArthur, MacArthur’s New Testament Commentary, Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM (Parsons Technology, 1997) ↑

21. Dr. Aune writes:

    Several times in the Apocalypse of John the author uses the term prophētēs in the plural; he refers to “thy servants the Prophets and saints” (11:18), “the blood of the saints and Prophets” (16:6), “saints, Apostles, and Prophets” (18:20), “the blood of Prophets and of saints” (18:24.), “the Lord, the God of the spirits of the Prophets” (22:6), and “your brethren the Prophets” (22:9). These references all indicate that the Prophets were an identifiable group, distinguishable from saints and Apostles. While there is no indication that they prophesied in groups, either within or apart from the setting of Christian worship, they appear to have constituted a “school” or . . . “order” within the churches of western Asia Minor. . . .

    In sum, it appears that those designated “Prophet” in early Christianity were specialists in mediating divine revelation, not simply those who occasionally prophesied. The image of the OT Prophet and the term used to designate such Prophets was the primary source of this conception. In the middle of the first century A.D. in Corinth, Prophets constituted a recognizable group within the Christian community that specialized in mediating a particular form of divine revelation within the setting of congregational worship. . . .

    [T]he certification process was not formalized but consisted of the reputation which the Prophet had built up over an undetermined period of time. Prophets who settled in the community were undoubtedly those who had been certified by the community. (197-98, 226) ↑

22. Ibid., 6, 220-21. ↑

23. Christopher Forbes, Prophecy and Inspired Speech in Early Christianity And Its Hellenistic Environment (J. C. B. Mohr, 1995), 245. ↑

24. Grudem, 1060. ↑

25. Fee, Presence, 170. ↑

26. For further discussion of the egotism evident in charismaticism see section 10.16.G. ↑

27. Grudem, 1060. While Dr. Grudem adds “within Paul’s guidelines” one of those guidelines for him is not the prohibition of women speaking in the church. ↑

28. Regarding the prohibition of female prophets in the congregation see section 9.7.F. ↑

29. Unfortunately, Leon Morris reflects the same error, writing: “Prophecy might be occasional (Acts 19:6), or a settled office (1 Cor 12:28ff.). (1 Corinthians [Eerdmans, 1999], 168). ↑

30. MacArthur, in loc. Barnes has no comment on this. The following commentators agree: F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (NICNT) (Eerdmans, 1988), 364; I. H. Marshall, Acts (Eerdmans, 1999), 308; and John Stott, the Message of Acts (Intervarsity, 1990); and Calvin, Commentaries, online at http://www.ccel.org. The latter writes concerning the laying on of hands for the baptism of the Spirit, and which obviously applies to prophesying:

    Furthermore, as I confess that this laying on of hands was a sacrament, so I say that those fell through ignorance who did continually imitate the same. For seeing that all men agree in this, that it was a grace which was to last only for a time, which was showed by that sign, it is a perverse and ridiculous thing to retain the sign since the truth is taken away.

    Likewise, Dr. Stott writes:

    [T]hose twelve ‘disciples’ cannot possibly be regarded as providing a norm for a two-stage initiation. . . . The norm of Christian experience, then, is a cluster of four things: repentance, faith in Jesus, water baptism and the gift of the Spirit. Though the perceived order may vary a little, the four belong together and are universal in Christian initiation. The laying-on of apostolic hands, however, together with tongue-speaking and prophesying, were special to Ephesus, as to Samaria, in order to demonstrate visibly and publicly that particular groups were incorporated into Christ by the Spirit; the New Testament does not universalize them. There are no Samaritans or disciples of John the Baptist left in the world today. (in loc.) ↑

31. For discussion regarding charismaticism’s claim to be able to teach people how to learn the gift of tongues see section 12.4.C. ↑

32. C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM (Findex.com, 2000), 1 Sam 19:22-24. ↑

33. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, I.13.3; online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑