Questions for those who believe in modern day prophecies

[Scoot]

Hi all,

A little while ago I created a thread Genuine Questions for Cessationist's

I'd like to start by saying thanks to all those who are not cessationists that respected my request and allowed me to hear out what cessationists believe and the cessationists that answered the questions I had without it getting into a debate.

I would like to again kindly ask the same now, but in reverse.

This time, I'm chasing answers from continuists who believe in modern day prophecy.

So if I could politely ask those who are cessationists or don't believe in prophecy to not reply on continuists behalf or debate as I did in the other thread - with the exceptions:

- To reply if you have genuine questions or follow up questions like me for those who believe to answer, or

- To post a response with a link to another thread that might be relevant (if posting here would mean starting a debate instead of hearing continuists answer questions), so we can keep this one on track as a Q&A). :)

The questions I have for those who believe the gift of prophecy still exists today are as follows:

1) Do you believe that a modern day prophet should be set to the same standards as biblical prophets, or do you believe that prophecy has changed - and if so can you give biblical references as to why you believe this?


2) Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time, or only most of the time, or only some of the time - and there is room for little or much error and false prophecies with a true ministry? (And again, if so - could you please show scripture that supports this or give reason why you believe)?


3) Do you discern between a true prophet of God, and a false prophet of today? How do you know what to believe and what not? What standard do you use for discerning?


4) What role do you believe the church has (if any) in pointing out false prophets and at what point should this be done - or should it never be done because we risk speaking out against The Holy Spirit if we're wrong with our conviction?


and finally


5) If true prophets today are permitted to get it wrong on numerous occasions - what do you see the benefit of modern day prophecies to be? (If we can't be sure whether or not a prophecy is correct, and we can't rely on it to be true)?


(Again, like the other thread - this is not intended to spark debate - but I'm genuinely interested to hear from those who believe that modern day prophecies still exist and where they stand on these questions).

My questions come from years of hearing failed prophecies in our own church and seeing people dodge and deflect these questions more than address them - and I guess more recently after considering the thread Cindy Jacob prophesies Revival over Australia and New Zealand. .

(Having found out that it appears she's prophesied in the past and gotten things wrong just like the church I have been brought up with - and it seems to be ignored from my perspective... I'm trying to gain a genuine understanding of why people continue to listen to her, and why I should consider what she's saying).

At present I am unsure about modern day prophecies, and I have an open mind on both continuists vs cessationists and am working my way through this - but regardless I currently hold a view that a true prophet will prophecy correctly continually and am trying to gain and understanding of why so many people I respect think differently to this.

Thanks so much!

Scoot.

 

[historyb]

I will watch. I am a continuists in a way but don't believe Bible prophecy is for modern day

 

[Hidden In Him]

1) Do you believe that a modern day prophet should be set to the same standards as biblical prophets, or do you believe that prophecy has changed - and if so can you give biblical references as to why you believe this?

Greetings, Scoot, and good thread. About this first question, establish for me first what standards you believe were set for the Biblical prophets. I men you no offense, of course, but this question in and of itself could be based upon a false premise.

2) Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time, or only most of the time, or only some of the time - and there is room for little or much error and false prophecies with a true ministry? (And again, if so - could you please show scripture that supports this or give reason why you believe)?

Again, Scoot, and I hate to be doing this to you, but you need to specify your terms more acutely. When you say, "Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time," are you asking about only when he utters things by the Spirit of God, or every word he says on Biblical issues? Many confuse the two, and when they read that a prophet teaches something they don't agree with, they label him a "false prophet" based on something he teaches, rather than on what He has uttered under the power of the Spirit.

3) Do you discern between a true prophet of God, and a false prophet of today? How do you know what to believe and what not? What standard do you use for discerning?

Of course. The way you differentiate is two-fold:
1. Does what he or she says come true, and this can also be problematic, because many OT prophesies were not fulfilled within 100 years of being spoken and some have not yet been fulfilled to this day, and the same goes for modern prophets, and
2. Does the Spirit within them testify that Jesus is and has come in the flesh. This was the NT test, and it is still valid today, given that demons can manifest false gifts.

3) Do you discern between a true prophet of God, and a false prophet of today? How do you know what to believe and what not? What standard do you use for discerning?

A. What conforms to and amplifies upon the rest of what the Spirit is saying to the churches,
B. What is in harmony and agrees with scripture itself, and
C. What witnesses to my own spirit within me.

5) If true prophets today are permitted to get it wrong on numerous occasions - what do you see the benefit of modern day prophecies to be? (If we can't be sure whether or not a prophecy is correct, and we can't rely on it to be true)?

I wouldn't say numerous occasions. Someone who gets it wrong on numerous occasions should raise red flags all over the place. But if you are talking about someone who appears to have missed it somewhere (notice I said appears to) once or twice, the benefit of true prophecy is immense. Prophecy exposes the works of the enemy, so that the people of God are warned well in advance of the strategies he will be using against them. As Paul once declared, "We are not ignorant of his devises." The Spirit will also prophesy of things believers must prepare themselves to face - hardships, chastisements, etc. - so that they can brace themselves, and again not be taken by surprise or wonder what is happening. They can know because the Spirit of God has already told them in advance. To be forewarned is to be much more prepared when difficulties come. Lastly (though this is likely not all), the benefit of modern prophecy is that it continues to bear testimony to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and His Presence being alive and well and operating through believers in Him today. It confirms to the world that Christianity is not a religion of the dead word but the living Spirit, and that Christ is indeed risen from the dead and still manifesting Himself supernaturally through His servants.

God bless, and I hope I didn't complicate your thread too much, but this is a complex subject.

 

[Scoot]

Thanks so much @Hidden In Him for replying.

Greetings, Scoot, and good thread. About this first question, establish for me first what standards you believe were set for the Biblical prophets. I men you no offense, of course, but this question in and of itself could be based upon a false premise.

That's a good question. I guess for me - it is that they were truly speaking on behalf of God. Not sometimes hearing God, and then other times it wasn't God - it was just themselves getting it wrong, or they were being deceived by a different spirit. They held an office that was well respected and recognised as being reliable.

The question comes about from me that I've heard people prophecy and then it was proven to be wrong - and it's excused by "Well, that time it was obviously flesh - they get it wrong from time to time but that doesn't mean that they're not a true prophet".

It seems to me that in biblical times - if a true prophet said "Thus says the Lord" - the Lord really did say thus, regardless of whether the prophecy came true then, or down the track as opposed to them "getting it right sometimes, and then hearing a different voice other times (whether that be their own thoughts, or even an evil spirit)".

Again, Scoot, and I hate to be doing this to you, but you need to specify your terms more acutely. When you say, "Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time," are you asking about only when he utters things by the Spirit of God, or every word he says on Biblical issues? Many confuse the two, and when they read that a prophet teaches something they don't agree with, they label him a "false prophet" based on something he teaches, rather than on what He has uttered under the power of the Spirit.

Thanks so much for asking for clarification (and don't apologise). :-) I mean when he utters things by the Spirit of God. I know we all make mistakes - and we all are learning in scripture. Even Peter got things wrong from time to time (such as Paul confronting him). But I don't recall Peter ever saying something on behalf of God that God didn't say. That's where I'm more coming from.

Just before I left the church I was attending for most of my life we had a prophet come to teach others how to be prophets. One of the things mentioned was that you just start prophesying. Say the first thing that comes into your mind. You'll get a lot wrong, but that's OK - just keep at it - it's a "skill" that will grow on you, and before long you'll get some hits - you'll be telling people about something in the past that they never told anyone, etc.

To me - this sounded more like hearing 'familiar spirits' than it did the Holy Spirit - because with my limited understanding - I figure if I was hearing from The Holy Spirit - He would speak truth all the time and there would be no fault with Him - and that it would be Him, and not me needing to learn the "skill".

Of course. The way you differentiate is two-fold:
1. Does what he or she says come true, and this can also be problematic, because many OT prophesies were not fulfilled within 100 years of being spoken and some have not yet been fulfilled to this day, and the same goes for modern prophets, and

True. But if someone says that the Lord told them that "xxx will happen in the year yyyy" - and it doesn't - then to me that's a little more specific. "Open ended" prophecies with no dates are one thing - but where specific events are given, or about people that will live but die, etc... that's another.

Does the Spirit within them testify that Jesus is and has come in the flesh. This was the NT test, and it is still valid today, given that demons can manifest false gifts.

That's a great scripture, and I certainly know that anyone who denies this is automatically ousted. But does that mean that everyone who says Jesus came in the flesh is indeed a true prophet if they claim to be?

A. What conforms to and amplifies upon the rest of what the Spirit is saying to the churches,
B. What is in harmony and agrees with scripture itself, and
C. What witnesses to my own spirit within me.


I wouldn't say numerous occasions. Someone who gets it wrong on numerous occasions should raise red flags all over the place. But if you are talking about someone who appears to have missed it somewhere (notice I said appears to) once or twice, the benefit of true prophecy is immense. Prophecy exposes the works of the enemy, so that the people of God are warned well in advance of the strategies he will be using against them. As Paul once declared, "We are not ignorant of his devises." The Spirit will also prophesy of things believers must prepare themselves to face - hardships, chastisements, etc. - so that they can brace themselves, and again not be taken by surprise or wonder what is happening. They can know because the Spirit of God has already told them in advance. To be forewarned is to be much more prepared when difficulties come. Lastly (though this is likely not all), the benefit of modern prophecy is that it continues to bear testimony to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and His Presence being alive and well and operating through believers in Him today. It confirms to the world that Christianity is not a religion of the dead word but the living Spirit, and that Christ is indeed risen from the dead and still manifesting Himself supernaturally through His servants.

God bless, and I hope I didn't complicate your thread too much, but this is a complex subject.

You're not complicating the thread at all - I really appreciate the response.

So if someone prophesied that Trump would never be POTUS for instance, or someone prophesied that by the year 2010 a certain leader or country would be removed from power, etc - would you still consider them to a true prophet and speaking on behalf of God if they had more that appeared right than wrong?

Thanks. :-)

 

[Keraz]

The Bible tells us that there will be no more Prophets since the OT ones and how the NT Prophets confirmed their prophesies.
Psalms 74:9 We have no prophets now...
Mark 13:22-23 Imposters will come, claiming to be messiahs or prophets......to mislead, if possible; God's people. Be on your guard, for I have forewarned you of it all.

Yes; there will be people with the gift of prophecy, but strictly for individuals, not for cities, nations and the world.
From my intensive study, I see all the end times prophesies as a coherent, logical and fully detailed sequence of things and events, that will in the main; take place literally as written. There is no heavenly or earthly reason why not.

 

[Hidden In Him]

Thanks so much @Hidden In Him for replying.



That's a good question. I guess for me - it is that they were truly speaking on behalf of God. Not sometimes hearing God, and then other times it wasn't God - it was just themselves getting it wrong, or they were being deceived by a different spirit. They held an office that was well respected and recognised as being reliable.

The question comes about from me that I've heard people prophecy and then it was proven to be wrong - and it's excused by "Well, that time it was obviously flesh - they get it wrong from time to time but that doesn't mean that they're not a true prophet".

It seems to me that in biblical times - if a true prophet said "Thus says the Lord" - the Lord really did say thus, regardless of whether the prophecy came true then, or down the track as opposed to them "getting it right sometimes, and then hearing a different voice other times (whether that be their own thoughts, or even an evil spirit)".




Thanks so much for asking for clarification (and don't apologise). :) I mean when he utters things by the Spirit of God. I know we all make mistakes - and we all are learning in scripture. Even Peter got things wrong from time to time (such as Paul confronting him). But I don't recall Peter ever saying something on behalf of God that God didn't say. That's where I'm more coming from.

Just before I left the church I was attending for most of my life we had a prophet come to teach others how to be prophets. One of the things mentioned was that you just start prophesying. Say the first thing that comes into your mind. You'll get a lot wrong, but that's OK - just keep at it - it's a "skill" that will grow on you, and before long you'll get some hits - you'll be telling people about something in the past that they never told anyone, etc.

To me - this sounded more like hearing 'familiar spirits' than it did the Holy Spirit - because with my limited understanding - I figure if I was hearing from The Holy Spirit - He would speak truth all the time and there would be no fault with Him - and that it would be Him, and not me needing to learn the "skill".



True. But if someone says that the Lord told them that "xxx will happen in the year yyyy" - and it doesn't - then to me that's a little more specific. "Open ended" prophecies with no dates are one thing - but where specific events are given, or about people that will live but die, etc... that's another.



That's a great scripture, and I certainly know that anyone who denies this is automatically ousted. But does that mean that everyone who says Jesus came in the flesh is indeed a true prophet if they claim to be?



You're not complicating the thread at all - I really appreciate the response.

So if someone prophesied that Trump would never be POTUS for instance, or someone prophesied that by the year 2010 a certain leader or country would be removed from power, etc - would you still consider them to a true prophet and speaking on behalf of God if they had more that appeared right than wrong?

Thanks. :)

My apologies, Scoot. I got tied up in some other threads for awhile. When I can, I'm gonna try and get back to this today.

God bless!

 

[Bobby Jo]

1) Do you believe that a modern day prophet should be set to the same standards as biblical prophets ...
2) Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time, or only most of the time, or only some of the time

In 2 Sam. 7, Nathan misspoke when he told David to build the temple. And so "prophets" can and do make mistakes.

3) Do you discern between a true prophet of God, and a false prophet of today? How do you know what to believe and what not? What standard do you use for discerning?

We "see through a glass darkly", and most understandings may be perceived as either "prophetic" or simply "teaching".

4) What role do you believe the church has (if any) in pointing out false prophets ...

Organized religion can't tend to their own business, much less ours. WE (individuals) are the ones who must hear and judge. (1 Cor. 14)

5) If true prophets today are permitted to get it wrong on numerous occasions - what do you see the benefit of modern day prophecies to be? (If we can't be sure whether or not a prophecy is correct, and we can't rely on it to be true)?

Because we "see though a glass darkly" each aspect must be weighed against what Scripture actually depicts, and any extrapolations how it will be fulfilled. -- For example we can see a battle at Megiddo and know roughly a timeline, but applying military logistics contributes to a "more accurate" expectation of start/middle/stop and associated durations.

And of course many Modern Prophets "see" events which may not be fulfilled according to the timeline expectations of the audience. For example consider that Trump was born in NYC and became President. -- We didn't have an infant as President, but some might interpret the wording as such.


:)
Bobby Jo

 

[Scoot]

Thanks so much Bobby Jo for your reply. I really appreciate the feedback from a "modern day prophecy believers" perspective.

In 2 Sam. 7, Nathan misspoke when he told David to build the temple. And so "prophets" can and do make mistakes.

Just to confirm - your take on this is that Nathan was speaking on behalf of God, and not his own opinion, and that true prophets made false prophecies in the name of the Lord? (My understanding here was that Nathan didn't say "Thus says the Lord" in this instance - and was speaking on his own opinion. I have no problems saying "I believe God will....", but that's a significant difference to claiming that God told me that Himself - so I just wanted to clarify.

We "see through a glass darkly", and most understandings may be perceived as either "prophetic" or simply "teaching"

.

I fully get that. So again, just to clarify - do you think there is any difference when someone claims that the "Lord God Said", vs giving their own "teaching" on how they understand a particular subject?

Organized religion can't tend to their own business, much less ours. WE (individuals) are the ones who must hear and judge. (1 Cor. 14)

Just to confirm what you're saying again - if the church see's someone being lead astray by a false prophet (extreme example - think Waco Texas) - do you believe the Church should remain silent on it and not warn of false teachers and prophets in those instances, but keep quiet and let those who are weaker in the faith make up their own mind, and potentially be deceived?

Or if I'm misunderstanding - can you please advise where you understand the limits of the church to be (and with that I include individual's that are concerned about someone else being lead astray) in drawing a the line of warning others about false prophets and teachers?

Because we "see though a glass darkly" each aspect must be weighed against what Scripture actually depicts, and any extrapolations how it will be fulfilled. -- For example we can see a battle at Megiddo and know roughly a timeline, but applying military logistics contributes to a "more accurate" expectation of start/middle/stop and associated durations.

And of course many Modern Prophets "see" events which may not be fulfilled according to the timeline expectations of the audience. For example consider that Trump was born in NYC and became President. -- We didn't have an infant as President, but some might interpret the wording as such.

I understand exactly what you're saying and agree. My concern is more when someone actually puts a time line on it - an actual date - where it becomes evident then that the prophecy was false.

Again - not trying to be argumentative - just trying to get a clear understanding on what you're saying. I really appreciate the time you've taken to reply. :)

 

[Hidden In Him]

That's a good question. I guess for me - it is that they were truly speaking on behalf of God.

Ok, good! If you are referring primarily to what they say under Divine unction, you are approaching the question properly, IMO.

Then in answer to #1, I believe the standards are still the same. A true prophet of God can still appear to "miss it" on occasion if it is a conditional prophecy, and the people it was spoken over repent before judgment is executed. This happened in the case of Nineveh.

The question comes about from me that I've heard people prophecy and then it was proven to be wrong - and it's excused by "Well, that time it was obviously flesh - they get it wrong from time to time but that doesn't mean that they're not a true prophet".

Let me explain things from my own perspective here. I do not operate in direct prophetic utterance. I believe that is more strictly the work of someone who operates in the office of prophet. But I do interpret dreams, which is a form of operating in a prophetic gift (I am distinguishing between the office and simply the gift here). As such, I can assure you that I can interpret "in the flesh" or as I would put it "miss it" on occasion. Interpretation is no easy business. It takes a lot of work and prayer, and discernment of what the Spirit is actually saying with every bit of the symbolism. And if you don't take what could be days at analyzing every single stick of it, down to every last word and the slightest symbolism, you can miss it. I once interpreted a dream for a sister and I had every single part of it nailed down, with the exception of neglecting to interpret one little seemingly insignificant symbol in the dream that seemed like an unimportant extra, just placed there for color or to make the narrative more fitting. Turned out, that ONE little insignificant detail was the entire difference between an interpretation that was completely wrong and one that was completely right.

So in terms of interpreting dreams and visions, absolutely someone can have a genuine gift and yet still miss it if they do not put in enough work but instead get careless. As for those who operate in direct utterance, you would have to talk to them. I have no experience with it, although I tend to doubt that the opportunity for making mistakes is as prevalent. I believe the hear the voice of God directly, and/or see images directly on the mind, making errors much harder to come by.

Just before I left the church I was attending for most of my life we had a prophet come to teach others how to be prophets. One of the things mentioned was that you just start prophesying. Say the first thing that comes into your mind. You'll get a lot wrong, but that's OK - just keep at it - it's a "skill" that will grow on you, and before long you'll get some hits - you'll be telling people about something in the past that they never told anyone, etc.

Oh, God Almighty... This sounds like Last Reformation, and I have MASSIVE problems with this business. Even before I read the rest of it, just reading the words, "we had a prophet come to teach others how to be prophets," made my radar go off. You don't "teach" people how to become prophets, and it is not the domain of just any Christian. It is a calling, and if you are not called to it, they can "teach" you until your ears dry up and blow away and it won't do you a lick of good.

This individual, whoever he was, was a snake oil salesman, and tickling your congregation's ears to get people all titillated with the idea that they could all become "prophets." I can't tell you how much problem I have with this. It upsets me, so I will leave it with that. I hope he collected a big offering, because this life may be all he ever has to enjoy.

To me - this sounded more like hearing 'familiar spirits' than it did the Holy Spirit - because with my limited understanding - I figure if I was hearing from The Holy Spirit - He would speak truth all the time and there would be no fault with Him - and that it would be Him, and not me needing to learn the "skill".

In worst case scenarios, yes, it is possible. There were magicians working in the name of Christ during the early church era who were teaching sisters how to "prophesy," when in reality they were being empowered by demonic spirits, not only to deceive but to instill in the naive "the power" to supposedly prophesy in His name.

True. But if someone says that the Lord told them that "xxx will happen in the year yyyy" - and it doesn't - then to me that's a little more specific.

Yes, and date setting is where I have seen people get into trouble. I have seen genuine prophets try "guesstimating" when the things the Spirit led them to speak would actually come to pass and fall flat on their faces; always too soon, because they assume the words spoken must be for their own time when in fact they most often reach fulfillment after they have gone on to be with God.

That's a great scripture, and I certainly know that anyone who denies this is automatically ousted. But does that mean that everyone who says Jesus came in the flesh is indeed a true prophet if they claim to be?

No. You see, this was the test in NT times because there were people circulating about who were possessed by demonic spirits through whom they could prophesy. The oracle at Delphi was located not that far from Thessalonica, to whom Paul said not to despise prophesying but to keep the good and discard the bad, the point being that the region had already had enough of demonic counterfeiters, but that was not a reason to forbid the practice altogether. Today we just have a lot of loud mouths, LoL. Many don't operate in any genuine power one way or another. They are just, like that "prophet" that came to your church, opening their mouths and letting fly, hoping something sticks. You have so many Christians now being encouraged to do this that the best move is simply to separate yourself out to a congregation that truly gives itself to the Presence of God thru incessant prayer and Spirit-filled worship. Then if someone attempts to prophesy the empowerment or lack thereof will be much more obvious to the congregation (since they are in His Presence and will recognize the Spirit when they hear it). The enemy may still try to counterfeit, but then the test will come back into play. But they most certainly will be able to tell when someone is simply babbling in the flesh. That becomes easy to detect in a Spirit-filled congregation.

So if someone prophesied that Trump would never be POTUS for instance, or someone prophesied that by the year 2010 a certain leader or country would be removed from power, etc - would you still consider them to a true prophet and speaking on behalf of God if they had more that appeared right than wrong?

Again, these types of prophecies could be conditional. As Aristotle once said, "A country gets the leaders it deserves." If a prophecy was dependent upon the prayers and repentance of a country and that country did so, things could be altered. About someone saying, "So and so will NEVER be president" and it didn't come to pass (he actually did), that would be a red flag, because he would have insinuated that it was an unconditional prophecy that could not be altered by man.

Hope that helps. That was a lot of work, LoL.

God bless, and hope you get more responses : )
- H

 

[Bobby Jo]

Just to confirm - your take on this is that Nathan was speaking on behalf of God, and not his own opinion, and that true prophets made false prophecies in the name of the Lord?

It seems to me that a "prophet" doesn't have to say "Thus saith the LORD" before he/she takes any action.

...just to clarify - do you think there is any difference when someone claims that the "Lord God Said", vs giving their own "teaching" on how they understand a particular subject?

As suggested, some call teachers "prophets" because they proclaim. Certainly when a "tongues" is interpreted there seems to be some version of "Thus saith the LORD", but I don't know if it's absolute.

... do you believe the Church should remain silent on it and not warn of false teachers and prophets in those instances, but keep quiet and let those who are weaker in the faith make up their own mind, and potentially be deceived? ... Or if I'm misunderstanding - can you please advise where you understand the limits of the church to be (and with that I include individual's that are concerned about someone else being lead astray) in drawing a the line of warning others about false prophets and teachers?

Right now we see churches which don't allow anyone to express their understandings unless the "Pastor" approves that "understanding". And if the "teacher" presents a Scriptural basis and the "Pastor" disagrees without a Scriptural basis, the "teacher" is kicked out the the church for "arguing".
Secondly if a "weaker" person is listening to a fraud, then he/she should find council, which certainly should include their fellow Christians and possibly even the "Pastor".

I understand exactly what you're saying and agree. My concern is more when someone actually puts a time line on it - an actual date - where it becomes evident then that the prophecy was false.

Actually the church has a FALSE teaching regarding a "date". Scripture says "Day or Hour" but the church insists: Week; Month; Season; Year (1); Decade (10); Score (20); Century (100); Daytona (500); and Millennial (1,000). Of course Scripture allows us to know the YEAR, and according to the Feasts -- down to the week.
But as identified, the church has MANY False Teachings, including what you've fallen for.

I really appreciate the time you've taken to reply. :)

My pleasure, and if you want to know the year I'm glad to give you the basis for your own research: J.R. Church, "Hidden Prophecies In The Psalms". All you have to do is find the Shortest Chapter; the Middle Chapter; the Longest Chapter; the Chapter exactly 70 years after the International Recognition of the State of Israel; and the Chapter when the U.S. Recognized Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel: (in chronology) 2017/2017, 2018/2018, & 2019, -- for which the odds are 26 billion to one. Thus it would appear that Jesus returns some 42 months after 2018.

:)
Bobby Jo

 

[Stumpmaster]

At present I am unsure about modern day prophecies, and I have an open mind on both continuists vs cessationists and am working my way through this - but regardless I currently hold a view that a true prophet will prophecy correctly continually and am trying to gain and understanding of why so many people I respect think differently to this.

The proof is in the pudding. I continue to experience all the gifts of the Spirit at various times. Not surprisingly people who object to them also quench them, and hierarchies that forbid their function create a self-fulfilling type of cessation.

 

[David H.]

This time, I'm chasing answers from continuists who believe in modern day prophecy.

First time commenting here, I am a continuationist in the sense that all the gifts of the Spirit are given to the Body of Christ the church through all generations of the church age. The Problem is that THIS church age has not been given one of those gifts, and it is not the gift of prophecy, but the gift of discerning of Spirits. So what we have in the church today is a plethora of prophecy, most false prophecy, and very few true prophets, and a lack of the gift of discerning of the Spirits at work in the church to say which is true and which is false.

It is this gift we need to pray for and seek to attain in this day and age more than anything else and is the final outpouring of this gift that will mark the end times as spoken of By Malachi 3:16-18. A person with the gift of Prophecy is a Prophet, a person with the gift of discerning the spirits is a "seer", when you look up the word for discernment in Mal. 3:18 it is also translated as a "seer", and prophets and seers are different in this regard.

Why was this gift not given to this end time church? Because it has to do with Judgment of the house of God, as many will be given prophecies, and many will use those prophecies to promote their own gain (AKA Gainsaying, biblically) this will be exposed by those who are granted the gift of discernment in the end times who have learned to love the truth, while being denied to those who will fall into the strong delusion. This may sound harsh, but it is God being merciful, in the hopes that "those that fear the LORD will speak to one another" (Mal. 3:14) and come to the Unity of the Spirit as Paul spoke of in Eph. 4.

 

[Berserk]

One aspect of the gift of prophecy is prophetic or spiritual discernment. Throughout my life I have received many prophetic premonitions of imminent death and those premonitions have always come true. When I tried to warn the victims, my warning was not heeded and the death occurred a day or 2 later just as I discerned. I'm beginning to record some examples of this in my thread in the Testimony section. What I share next is not intended to derail this thread, but is a feeler to see how much interest there is for further elaboration in a separate thread.

I did my Harvard doctoral thesis (460 pages) on the gift of prophecy and convinced my professors that my insights were correct. It was recommended for publication, but is far too technical for a popular readership. Among my discoveries were:
(1) A definition of "prophet" based on how this role was explicated in late antiquity: i. e. a prophet is a figure divinely authorized to mediate divine control over the conditions of divine forgiveness and redemptive security.
(2) In the NT and early Christianity up to 300 AD most orthodox churches in the Mediterranean world rejected the notion that prophecy is a gift reserved for a favored few and instead taught the prophethood of all believers. Depending on the geographical region, Joel 2:28 and Numbers 11:29 were widely cited as biblical prooftexts for the democratization of the prophetic charism. Ancient rabbinic Judaism taught that Moses' wish that "all the Lord's people be prophets" (Numbers 11:29) would be fulfilled when the Messiah came. The Christian acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah inspired them to proclaim the fulfillment of Moses' wish.
(3) Around 300 AD the role of prophet was replaced by an increasing system of penance as part of the process of mediating divine forgiveness.

 

[Hidden In Him]

One aspect of the gift of prophecy is prophetic or spiritual discernment. Throughout my life I have received many prophetic premonitions of imminent death and those premonitions have always come true. When I tried to warn the victims, my warning was not heeded and the death occurred a day or 2 later just as I discerned. I'm beginning to record some examples of this in my thread in the Testimony section. What I share next is not intended to derail this thread, but is a feeler to see how much interest there is for further elaboration in a separate thread.

I did my Harvard doctoral thesis (460 pages) on the gift of prophecy and convinced my professors that my insights were correct. It was recommended for publication, but is far too technical for a popular readership. Among my discoveries were:
(1) A definition of "prophet" based on how this role was explicated in late antiquity: i. e. a prophet is a figure divinely authorized to mediate divine control over the conditions of divine forgiveness and redemptive security.
(2) In the NT and early Christianity up to 300 AD most orthodox churches in the Mediterranean world rejected the notion that prophecy is a gift reserved for a favored few and instead taught the prophethood of all believers. Depending on the geographical region, Joel 2:28 and Numbers 11:29 were widely cited as biblical prooftexts for the democratization of the prophetic charism. Ancient rabbinic Judaism taught that Moses' wish that "all the Lord's people be prophets" (Numbers 11:29) would be fulfilled when the Messiah came. The Christian acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah inspired them to proclaim the fulfillment of Moses' wish.
(3) Around 300 AD the role of prophet was replaced by an increasing system of penance as part of the process of mediating divine forgiveness.

I'd like to read it and possibly get back to you on it. Do you have a link you can post for me?

 

[Bobby Jo]

... THIS church age has not been given ... the gift of discerning of Spirits. ...

Hi DH,

Your argument can be applied throughout history, -- not just singling out an era or generation, so it's false.

Bobby Jo

 

[David H.]

Your argument can be applied throughout history, -- not just singling out an era or generation, so it's false.

Not if you understand the church ages the way they are given in revelation. These were in the past, churches found in Asia minor, but also seven corresponding church ages that have spanned 2000 years, Prophetically, we are living in the seventh and final one which began circa 1900 with the Asuza revival and the birth of the postmodern era.

RE: Gifts of the Spirit, versus what all believers have with the Holy Ghost.... All Believers have the ability to heal someone through the Holy Spirit working through them, Not everyone has the gift of healing. All believers can receive a word of Prophecy, but not all have the gift of Prophecy. All believers have Spiritual discernment, not all are given the gift of discerning Spirits. All believers have the ability to speak in tongues, not all have the gift of tongues. The Lack of discernment in this final church age is apparent, with many in the charismatic circles falling into harlotry and being swayed by seducing spirits such as the kundalinni spirits which are manifesting in them and being mistaken for the holy Spirit. Enlightenment being received from astral projection and spirit guides (New age) being mistaken for teaching from the Holy Ghost, Divination from demonic sources being mistaken for prophecy from the Holy Ghost.... There is a total lack of discerning of the spirits found in this Postmodern church age.

This is just observation and fact of what is going on in the churches today, the solution is to pray for an outpouring of the gift of discerning of the Spirits, the eyesalve of God applied to the eyes of the blind leaders of the churches (Blind guides). The Biggest problem in this church age is the denial that there is a problem. They see the prosperity, wealth and numbers in the church and fail to see the harlotry and wretchedness and lukewarmness within the church.

 

[Bobby Jo]

... The Lack of discernment in this final church age is apparent, ...

Hi DH,
You can certainly speak for yourself, but please do not presume for me! :)

Bobby Jo

 

[Scoot]

Thanks so much for joining in David H. I really appreciate your reply (as well as others).

The Biggest problem in this church age is the denial that there is a problem.

I'm still not sure where I stand regarding the sign gifts continuing or ceasing - but you have hit the nail on the head with the exact same problem I have faced.

In my own journey I've spoken to numerous people about the failures of prophecy (among other things that they preach and claim that have then failed), and the complete denial that there's something 'not quite right' going on is all through the church. Very few seem interest in talking about it, but rather shut down any conversations or questions raised - even shouted down by some as though I'm not showing 'faith' if I dare to bring it up.

I'm grateful that I've been able to talk about such issues here with a more gentle response. From reading this thread it seems that those who believe in modern day prophecies accept for the most part that their can be failure or fault in the prophecies. This creates a real problem for me. If I take the view that prophecy has continued, what do I do with modern day prophecy? Either way -alll modern day prophecy to me is still unreliable at best, and as a result useless - because I don't have the gift or understanding on how to discern true prophecy from false, and as you say - I too don't see that being practiced in the church either.

Rather, the opposite is being practiced - accepting almost everything that 'sounds good', and wanting to ignore when things turn out differently. So far I haven't seen any good fruit coming from it at all, but I can see lots of hurt and doubt, not to mention the denial as well.

 

[Bobby Jo]

... -all modern day prophecy to me is still unreliable at best, and as a result useless - because I don't have the gift or understanding on how to discern true prophecy from false, ...

We SHOULD be able to judge prophecies spoken in modern times, against prophecies which are Ancient and are "Shut Up And Sealed Until The Time Of The End", which shouldn't be difficult to understand now that we ARE in the "Time Of The End". And so is seems prudent to weigh any of the former against the latter to evaluate the prospect of fulfillment. -- An EASY task by any measure.

For example, the Dentist office staff were discussing that Jesus was supposed to Return in the Fall of 2017. But OT Scripture points to 2021, so I explained that the 2017 is FALSE, and told them what Scripture said so they could read it for themselves!

So who understands Bible Prophecy? -- Anyone? -- Hello?!?
Bobby Jo

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I missed this when it was first posted. "Continuists" here (that's a funny word, makes tongue tickle)--

Quick aside- I always love your threads Scoot and the generally respectful/Christ-like way you handle things.

Another note-- I'm not a person whom rambles off memorized references. I'll write answers now while I can, then come back pulling up references.

1) Do you believe that a modern day prophet should be set to the same standards as biblical prophets, or do you believe that prophecy has changed - and if so can you give biblical references as to why you believe this?

Yes.
Important note though: I do NOT define "prophet" = "future teller". A prophet is servant of God whom proclaims His words and leads His people. Sometimes that involves foretelling future events, but it's a very small and infrequent portion of the job.

2) Do you believe that a true prophet speaks correctly all the time, or only most of the time, or only some of the time - and there is room for little or much error and false prophecies with a true ministry? (And again, if so - could you please show scripture that supports this or give reason why you believe)?

A man serving God is still a man. The only perfect person is Christ. A prophet is a very important person, and especially should be listened to in certain circumstances, but no where near 24/7 perfection.

3) Do you discern between a true prophet of God, and a false prophet of today? How do you know what to believe and what not? What standard do you use for discerning?

The same standard you use to determine all other Truths: ask God Himself. He is the font of all Truth.

A horrible standard never to be used: "I take what you say about some future event, interpret the way I do, and then check whether I seen future events being played out that way". Such is way too human-centric.

4) What role do you believe the church has (if any) in pointing out false prophets and at what point should this be done - or should it never be done because we risk speaking out against The Holy Spirit if we're wrong with our conviction?

Ideally Christ's True Church is lead by a prophet(s).
However, there will be points where some false teachers crop up and become a large enough wolf that the need to be called out a such.

5) If true prophets today are permitted to get it wrong on numerous occasions - what do you see the benefit of modern day prophecies to be? (If we can't be sure whether or not a prophecy is correct, and we can't rely on it to be true)?

You're not supposed to blindly follow a prophet. You're also supposed to be simultaneous;y checking in with the Lord yourself and receiving that revelation from Him. And that's all super important.

My questions come from years of hearing failed prophecies in our own church and seeing people dodge and deflect these questions more than address them - and I guess more recently after considering the thread Cindy Jacob prophesies Revival over Australia and New Zealand. .

(Having found out that it appears she's prophesied in the past and gotten things wrong just like the church I have been brought up with - and it seems to be ignored from my perspective... I'm trying to gain a genuine understanding of why people continue to listen to her, and why I should consider what she's saying).

I'm not particular familiar with her to comment any way. But first instinct at a glance is major skepticism.