11,141
edits
Prophet: Difference between revisions
→Old Testament prophet = New Testament apostle?
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
=Old Testament prophet = New Testament apostle?= | =Old Testament prophet = New Testament apostle?= | ||
Old Testament prophets had an amazing responsibility—they were able to speak and write words that had absolute divine authority. They could say, “Thus saith the Lord,” and the words that followed were the very words of God. The Old Testament prophets wrote their words as God’s words in Scripture for all time (see Num. 22:38; Deut. 18:18–20; Jer. 1:9; Ezek. 2:7, et al.). Therefore, to disbelieve or disobey a prophet’s words was to disbelieve or disobey God (see Deut. 18:19; 1 Sam. 8:7; 1 Kings 20:36; and many other passages). | |||
In the New Testament there were also people who spoke and wrote God’s very words and had them recorded in Scripture, but we may be surprised to find that Jesus no longer calls them prophets but uses a new term, apostles. The apostles are the New Testament counterpart to the Old Testament prophets (see 1 Cor. 2:13; 2 Cor. 13:3; Gal. 1:8–9, 11–12; 1 Thess. 2:13; 4:8, 15; 2 Peter 3:2). It is the apostles, not the prophets, who have authority to write the words of New Testament Scripture. | |||
'''When the apostles want to establish their unique authority, they never appeal to the title “prophet” but rather call themselves “apostles.”''' For example, “Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus” (1 Cor. 1:1; see also Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 9:1–2; 2 Cor. 1:1; 11:12–13; 12:11–12; Gal. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; 3:2, et al.).<ref>Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 1294.<ref> | |||
==The Meaning of the Word Prophet in the Time of the New Testament== | |||
==What | Why did Jesus choose the new term apostle to designate those who had the authority to write Scripture? It was probably because the Greek word prophētēs (“prophet”) at the time of the New Testament had a very broad range of meanings. It generally did not have the sense “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). Titus 1:12 uses the word in this sense, where Paul quotes the pagan Greek poet Epimenides: “One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’ ” The soldiers who mock Jesus also seem to use the word prophesy in this way, when they blindfold Jesus and cruelly demand, “Prophesy! Who is it that struck you?” (Luke 22:64). They do not mean, “Speak words of absolute divine authority,” but “Tell us something that has been revealed to you” (cf. John 4:19). | ||
Many writings outside the Bible use the word prophet (Gk. prophētēs) in this way without signifying any divine authority in the words of one called a prophet. In fact, by the time of the New Testament the term prophet in everyday use often simply meant “one who has supernatural knowledge” or “one who predicts the future”—or even just “spokesman” (without any connotations of divine authority). Several examples near the time of the New Testament are given in Helmut Krämer’s article in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: | |||
:A philosopher is called “a prophet of immortal nature” (Dio Chrysostom, AD 40–120) | |||
:A teacher (Diogenes) wants to be “a prophet of truth and candor” (Lucian of Samosata, AD 120–180) | |||
:Those who advocate Epicurean philosophy are called “prophets of Epicurus” (Plutarch, AD 50–120) | |||
:Written history is called “the prophetess of truth” (Diodorus Siculus, wrote c. 60–30 BC) | |||
:A “specialist” in botany is called a “prophet” (Dioscurides of Cilicia, first century AD) | |||
:A “quack” in medicine is called a “prophet” (Galen of Pergamum, AD 129–99) | |||
Krämer concludes that the Greek word for “prophet” (prophētēs) “simply expresses the formal function of declaring, proclaiming, making known.” Yet because “every prophet declares something which is not his own,” the Greek word for “herald” (kēryx) “is the closest synonym.” | |||
Just as an apostle could sometimes be called a “teacher” (which Paul calls himself in 1 Timothy 2:7) along with other teachers in the churches, and just as an apostle could sometimes be called an “elder” (Peter calls himself a “fellow elder” in 1 Peter 5:1) along with other elders in the churches, so too the apostles could sometimes be called “prophets” or give a “prophecy,” though there were other prophets in the churches as well (so the book of Revelation, written by John, is called a “prophecy” in Rev. 1:3; 22:7), but there were also many other prophets in the churches. However, the apostles were not often called “teachers” or “elders” or “prophets.” | |||
The important point is that, in first century Greek, the terms prophet and prophecy did not imply divine authority for their speech or writing. Much more commonly, the words prophet and prophecy were used of ordinary Christians who spoke not with absolute divine authority but simply to report something that God had laid on their hearts or brought to their minds. There are many indications in the New Testament that this ordinary gift of prophecy had authority less than that of the Bible, and even less than that of recognized Bible teaching in the early church.<ref>Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 1294–1296. | |||
==Indications That Prophets Did Not Speak with Authority Equal to the Words of Scripture== | |||
In Acts 21:4, we read of the disciples at Tyre: | |||
:''“Through the Spirit they were telling Paul not to go on to Jerusalem.” | |||
Although the word prophecy is not in this verse, it seems to be a reference to prophecy directed towards Paul, but Paul disobeyed it! He never would have done this if this prophecy contained God’s very words and had authority equal to Scripture. | |||
Then in Acts 21:10–11, Agabus prophesied that the Jews at Jerusalem would “bind” Paul and “deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles,” a prediction that was nearly correct but not quite: the Romans, not the Jews, bound Paul (v. 33; also 22:29), and the Jews, rather than delivering him voluntarily, tried to kill him, and he had to be rescued by force (v. 32). The prediction was not far off, but it had inaccuracies in detail that would have called into question the validity of any Old Testament prophet. However, this text could be perfectly well explained by supposing that Agabus had had a vision of Paul as a prisoner of the Romans in Jerusalem, surrounded by an angry mob of Jews. His interpretation of such a “vision” or “revelation” from the Holy Spirit would be that the Jews had bound Paul and handed him over to the Romans, and that is what Agabus would (somewhat erroneously) prophesy. This is exactly the kind of fallible prophecy that would fit the definition of New Testament congregational prophecy proposed above—reporting in one’s own words something that God has spontaneously brought to mind. | |||
One objection to this view is to say that Agabus’ prophecy was in fact fulfilled, and that Paul even reports that in Acts 28:17: “I was delivered as a prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.” | |||
But the verse itself will not support that interpretation. The Greek text of Acts 28:17 explicitly refers to Paul’s transfer out of (Gk. ex) Jerusalem as a prisoner. Paul’s statement describes his transfer out of the Jewish judicial system (the Jews were seeking to bring him again to be examined by the Sanhedrin in Acts 23:15, 20) and into the Roman judicial system at Caesarea (Acts 23:23–35). Paul correctly says in Acts 28:18 that the same Romans into whose hands he had been delivered as a prisoner (v. 17) were the ones who (Gk. hoitines, v. 18), “when they had examined me … wished to set me at liberty, because there was no reason for the death penalty in my case” (Acts 28:18; cf. 23:29; also 25:11, 18–19; 26:31–32). Then Paul adds that when the Jews objected, he was compelled “to appeal to Caesar” (Acts 28:19; cf. 25:11). This whole section of narrative in Acts 28:17–19 refers to Paul’s transfer out of Jerusalem to Caesarea in Acts 23:12–35 and explains to the Jews in Rome why Paul is in Roman custody. This narrative does not refer to Acts 21:27–36 and the mob scene near the Jerusalem temple at all. So this objection is not persuasive. The verse does not point to a fulfillment of either half of Agabus’ prophecy: it does not mention any binding by the Jews, nor does it mention that the Jews handed Paul over to the Romans. In fact, in the scene it refers to (Acts 23:12–35), once again Paul had just been taken from the Jews “by force” (Acts 23:10), and, far from seeking to hand him over to the Romans, they were waiting in an ambush to kill him (Acts 23:13–15). | |||
Another objection to this understanding of Acts 21:10–11 is to say that the Jews did not really have to bind Paul and deliver him into the hands of the gentiles for the prophecy of Agabus to be true because the Jews were responsible for these activities even if they did not carry them out. Robert Thomas says, “It is common to speak of the responsible party or parties as performing an act even though he or they may not have been the immediate agent(s).” Thomas cites similar examples from Acts 2:23 (where Peter says that the Jews crucified Christ, whereas the Romans actually did it) and John 19:1 (we read that Pilate scourged Jesus, whereas his soldiers no doubt carried out the action). Thomas concludes, “The Jews were the ones who put Paul in chains just as Agabus predicted.” | |||
In response, I agree that Scripture can speak of someone as doing an act that is carried out by that person’s agent. But in every case the person who is said to do the action both wills the act to be done and gives directions to others to do it. Pilate directed his soldiers to scourge Jesus. The Jews actively demanded that the Romans would crucify Christ. By contrast, in the situation of Paul’s capture in Jerusalem, there is no such parallel. The Jews did not order him to be bound but the Roman tribune did it: “Then the tribune came up and arrested him and ordered him to be bound with two chains” (Acts 21:33). And in fact the parallel form of speech is found here because although the tribune ordered Paul to be bound, later we read that “the tribune also was afraid, for he realized that Paul was a Roman citizen and that he had bound him” (Acts 22:29). So this narrative does speak of the binding as done either by the responsible agent or by the people who carried it out, but in both cases these are Romans, not Jews. In summary, this objection says that the Jews put Paul in chains. But Acts says twice that the Romans bound him. This objection says that the Jews turned Paul over to the gentiles. But Acts says that they violently refused to turn him over, so that he had to be taken from them by force. The objection does not fit the words of the text. | |||
In 1 Thessalonians 5:19–21, Paul tells the Thessalonians, “Do not quench the Spirit. Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good”. If the Thessalonians had thought that prophecy equaled God’s Word in authority, he would never have had to tell the Thessalonians not to despise it—they “received” and “accepted” God’s Word “with the joy of the Holy Spirit” (1 Thess. 1:6; 2:13; cf. 4:15). But when Paul tells them to “test everything” it must include at least the prophecies he mentioned in the previous phrase. He implies that prophecies contain some things that are good and some things that are not good when he encourages them to “hold fast what is good.” This is something that could never have been said of the words of an Old Testament prophet or the authoritative teachings of a New Testament apostle. Therefore, prophecies that were given by ordinary Christians in the church at Thessalonica did not have the authority of God’s very words. These prophecies must have been ordinary human words reporting something that God had brought to mind. | |||
It is significant that Paul tells the Thessalonians to test the prophecies, not the prophets. “Do not despise prophecies, but test everything; hold fast what is good” (1 Thess. 5:20–21). It is the “prophecies” (plural of Gk. prophēteia, “prophecy”) that are not to be despised but are to be tested. It is the “good” content in prophecies that they are to “hold fast.” | |||
More extensive evidence on New Testament prophecy is found in 1 Corinthians 14. When Paul says, “Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said” (1 Cor. 14:29), he suggests that they should listen carefully and sift the good from the bad, accepting some and rejecting the rest (for this is the implication of the Greek word diakrinō, here translated “weigh what is said”). | |||
We cannot imagine that an Old Testament prophet like Isaiah would have said, “Listen to what I say and weigh what is said—sort the good from the bad, what you accept from what you should not accept”! If prophecy had absolute divine authority, it would be sin to do this. But here Paul commands that it be done, suggesting that New Testament prophecy did not have the authority of God’s very words.15 | |||
In 1 Corinthians 14:30–31, Paul allows one prophet to interrupt another one: “If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent. For you can all prophesy one by one.” Again, if prophets had been speaking God’s very words, equal in value to Scripture, it is hard to imagine that Paul would say they should be interrupted and not be allowed to finish their message. But that is what Paul commands. | |||
Paul suggests that no one at Corinth, a church that had much prophecy, was able to speak God’s very words. He says in 1 Corinthians 14:36, “Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?” Paul expects the answer “no” to both questions. But this means that “the word of God” did not come from the church at Corinth even though there were many people giving prophecies (as Paul’s instructions in chapters 12–14 indicate). | |||
Then in verses 37 and 38, he claims authority far greater than any prophet or any potential prophet at Corinth: “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.” Paul would not allow the possibility that any prophet at Corinth could speak with authority equal to his authority as an apostle. This implies an assumption that no prophets at Corinth were speaking the very words of God. | |||
All of these passages indicate that the idea that prophets spoke “words of the Lord” when the apostles were not present in the early churches is simply incorrect. | |||
In addition to the verses we have considered so far, one other type of evidence suggests that New Testament congregational prophets spoke with less authority than New Testament apostles or Scripture: the problem of successors to the apostles is solved not by encouraging Christians to listen to the prophets (even though there were prophets around) but by pointing to the Scriptures. | |||
So Paul, at the end of his life, emphasizes “rightly handling the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15), and the “God-breathed” character of “Scripture” for “teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Tim. 3:16). Jude urges his readers to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Peter, at the end of his life, encourages his readers to “pay attention” to Scripture, which is like “a lamp shining in a dark place” (2 Peter 1:19–20), and reminds them of the teaching of the apostle Paul “in all his letters” (2 Peter 3:16). In no case do we read exhortations to “give heed to the prophets in your churches” or to “obey the words of the Lord through your prophets.” Yet there certainly were prophets prophesying in many local congregations after the death of the apostles. It seems that they did not have authority equal to the apostles, and the authors of Scripture knew that. The conclusion is that prophecies today are not “the words of God” either. | |||
Paul writes about prophets in Ephesians as follows: | |||
:''“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (Eph. 2:19–20). | |||
A frequent objection to the view that prophets in New Testament churches did not speak the very words of God is based on Ephesians 2:20: if the entire church throughout the world (“the household of God”) is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, then it seems evident that these “prophets,” like the apostles, spoke the very words of God—words that were equal to Scripture in their authority. And therefore, it is argued, since no more words are now being added to Scripture, the gift of prophecy has now ceased. | |||
In response, I agree that the kind of “prophets” mentioned in Ephesians 2:20 ceased in the first century. The “foundation” for the church throughout the world was laid once for all in the first century and will not be laid again. But the question is whether this verse describes all who had the gift of prophecy in the New Testament churches. I see no convincing evidence that it describes all who prophesied in the early church. Rather, the context clearly indicates a very limited group of such prophets. In fact, just a few verses later, Paul gives us more information about these apostles and prophets: | |||
:''When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. (Eph. 3:4–6) | |||
In Paul’s writings, a “mystery” (Gk. mystērion) is often a truth that was only faintly revealed in the Old Testament but now has been clearly revealed in the New Testament age. And in Ephesians 3:6 the specific “mystery” that Paul is talking about is the fact that God wants to include gentiles (!) as well as Jews among God’s people and that these gentiles will have equal standing with Jews before God (they will be “fellow heirs” and “members of the same body” with the Jewish believers in Christ). Paul says that the understanding of this mystery was revealed to “his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.” | |||
Therefore, the “prophets” that Paul is talking about in Ephesians 2:20 and 3:5 are a very limited, very specific group: they were (a) part of the very foundation of the church, (b) closely connected with the apostles, and (c) recipients of the new revelation from God that the gentiles were equal members with Jews in the church. | |||
But surely that group does not include all the Christians with the gift of prophecy in all the New Testament churches at that time. The Ephesian Christians to whom Paul was writing were not pictured by Paul as part of the “foundation” because he says they were “built on” the foundation—they were part of the (metaphorical) building that was continually being built up after the foundation had been laid. | |||
The same can be said for all the “sons” and “daughters” and “male servants and female servants” who prophesied in fulfillment of Peter’s sermon at Pentecost (Acts 2:17–18), the prophets in Jerusalem (Acts 11:27), the prophets at Antioch (Acts 13:1), the brand-new believers who suddenly “began speaking in tongues and prophesying” in Ephesus (Acts 19:6), the Christians with the gift of prophecy in Tyre (Acts 21:4), Phillip’s four daughters who prophesied in Caesarea (Acts 21:9), people with the gift of prophecy in Rome (Rom. 12:6), the men and women who were prophesying during the church services in Corinth (1 Cor. 11:4–5), the Christians in Corinth who were given a gift of prophecy after they followed Paul’s encouragement to “earnestly desire to prophesy” (1 Cor. 14:39), and the ordinary Christians who had a gift of prophecy in the churches of Ephesus (Eph. 4:11) and Thessalonica (1 Thess. 5:20). | |||
Surely not all of these prophets were laying again and again the “foundation” of the church, and receiving again and again the revelation about the gentiles being included with Jews in the church (about which Paul had already written), but they were part of the (metaphorical) church building that was being built on the foundation. And for these ordinary Christian prophets in churches throughout the New Testament world, the passages I have discussed in the previous sections indicate again and again their prophecies were ordinary human words (not God’s words) in which they were reporting things that God spontaneously brought to mind. | |||
This is certainly a different situation from the Old Testament, where there were individual prophets or small groups of prophets from time to time in Israel, but there is no indication that there were prophets in every village and every city. But now in the New Testament our impression (from multiple verses) is that there were people with the gift of prophecy in every church. This is another argument showing that these ordinary prophets in the churches were not speaking the words of God. Or are we prepared to say that thousands of “prophets” in hundreds of churches throughout the Mediterranean world were actually speaking the very words of God? Were God’s people to be expected to go around to the many hundreds or even thousands of churches in the first century world, collect the prophecies given week after week, write them down, and produce hundreds of volumes of “words of the Lord” that they were to obey like Scripture? In fact, we have no record of anything like this happening, nor do we have any record anywhere in the New Testament of churches recording or preserving these prophecies as if they were “words of the Lord” that were foundational for the entire church throughout the world. Rather, they preserve and obey the writings and teachings of the apostles, not of the prophets. | |||
Who then were the small group of “prophets” in Ephesians 2:20 and 3:5 who were part of the foundation of the church? There are two possibilities. The first possibility, and the one on which I have based my argument above, is that they were a small group of individuals who were not actually apostles but who were closely connected to the apostles, and who played a foundational role in the beginning of the church. Perhaps this group even included some of the authors of New Testament books who were not themselves apostles, such as Mark, Luke, Jude, and the (unknown) author of Hebrews. | |||
The second possibility, which I have advocated elsewhere in writing (though it is not at all important to my understanding of the gift of prophecy), is that the expression “the apostles and prophets” is referring to one group of people, “the apostle-prophets,” or, in other words, the apostles functioning in the role of prophets (just as apostles can elsewhere be referred to as teachers or elders or preachers). The grammatical construction in Ephesians 2:20 is the same as the construction in Ephesians 4:11, which speaks about “the shepherds and teachers,” which some commentators understand to be one group, the shepherd-teachers. I have not based my understanding of Ephesians 2:20 on that second possibility.<ref>Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 1296–1303.</ref> | |||
==How Should We Speak about the Authority of Prophecy Today?== | |||
The conclusion is that prophecies in the church today should be considered merely human words, not God’s words, and not equal to God’s words in authority. But does this conclusion conflict with current charismatic teaching or practice? I think it conflicts with much charismatic practice but not with most charismatic teaching. | |||
Most charismatic teachers today would agree that contemporary prophecy is not equal to Scripture in authority. Though some will speak of prophecy as being the “word of God” for today, there is almost uniform testimony from all sections of the charismatic movement that prophecy is imperfect and impure and will contain elements that are not to be obeyed or trusted. For example, Bruce Yocum, the author of a widely used charismatic book on prophecy, writes, “Prophecy can be impure—our own thoughts or ideas can get mixed into the message we receive—whether we receive the words directly or only receive a sense of the message.” | |||
But it must be said that in actual practice much confusion results from the habit of prefacing prophecies with the common Old Testament phrase, “Thus says the Lord” (a phrase nowhere spoken in the New Testament by any prophets in New Testament churches). This habit is unfortunate because it gives the impression that the words that follow are God’s very words, whereas the New Testament does not justify that position, and when pressed, most responsible charismatic spokesmen would not want to claim it for every part of their prophecies anyway. So there would be much gain and no loss if that introductory phrase were dropped. | |||
Now it is true that Agabus uses a similar phrase (“Thus says the Holy Spirit”) in Acts 21:11, but the same words (Gk. tade legei) are used by Christian writers just after the time of the New Testament to introduce very general paraphrases or greatly expanded interpretations of what is being reported (so Ignatius, Epistle to the Philadelphians 7:1–2 [about AD 108] and Epistle of Barnabas 6:8; 9:2, 5 [AD 70–100]). The phrase can apparently mean, “This is generally (or approximately) what the Holy Spirit is saying to us.” | |||
If someone really does think God is bringing something to mind that should be reported in the congregation, there is nothing wrong with saying, “I think the Lord is putting on my mind that …” or “It seems to me that the Lord is showing us …” or some similar expression. Of course that does not sound as authoritative as “Thus says the Lord,” but if the message is really from God, the Holy Spirit will cause it to speak with great power to the hearts of those who need to hear.<ref>Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 1303–1304.</ref> | |||
=What identified an Old Testament prophet?= | |||
God knew that His people would have trouble identifying true and false prophets so the Bible contains some very clear identifications of a true prophet. | God knew that His people would have trouble identifying true and false prophets so the Bible contains some very clear identifications of a true prophet. | ||