Comments on: Infallible prophets

By: bryan

bryan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Yeah, funny thing that. If most of the people who call themselves “prophets” took on the full biblical role, they wouldn’t want the job. Most of the true prophets were outcasts, shunned by society and those in power, except when they were currying favor with God. The prophets were led to act out prophecies, utter strange visions, and forecast doom for those who beheld them. They seemed to verge on the insane (thing Elijah running in fear from jezebel or Jeremiah, the weeping prophet).

No, today’s “prophets” are wont to lead a far different life, more like the professional “prophets” of Micaiah’s day, who prophesied whatever the king wanted to hear.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

given that the N/T gives us no understanding what a prophet is except they are edifying for a church and the only examples are prophets who saw the future I am sceptical about any prophets.

It seems to me that the hypothesis that prophets are a purely N/T phenonem
has a lot to it.
Bear in mind O/T prphets are enritely difeent to N/T prophets.

By: nigel

nigel — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Bear in mind OT prophets are entirely different to NT prophets”

Ummmm - how so? why?
I assume the opposite - that the meaning of the word hadn’t radically changed from one testament to another. In fact now I think about it I can think of times the NT uses the word prophet to specifically refer to exactly the same thing as the OT: eg Luke 24:27.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Nigel, O/T prophets were telling their people about the word of God and dare I say it to repent.
This is not the case in the N/T. We are unclear what exactly prophets do.It is clear they are not doinf the same thing as Jesus has come and the message is somewaht different.
As I said the only examples of prophets inthe N/T is that of foretelling history whther it be of a lack of food in Jerusalem or of timothy’s future.

By: Justin Baeder

Justin Baeder — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Homer-
I can think of lots of instances of OT prophecy where prediction was the dominant thread more than repentence. Usually repentence had a role in it somewhere, but often the prophets would predict the downfall of a nation, much as Agabus predicted a famine in the NT.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Justin,
I am not denying that however what was their main job?

The entrance of Jesus changes the dynamic.
We do not know what prophets do in the N/T.
We do know it is not a leadership position but they edify a church.
I suspect it is a position which was purely for N/T times just like the speaking of tongues.

By: maggi

maggi — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

a more dominant thread in OT prophecy than either repentance OR prediction was the capacity of the prophet to see the truth of a situation clearly and articulate the reality. Even some of the ‘prediction’ was only seeing what the inevitable outcome would be, given the present reality.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Homer - you think that speaking in tounges was purely a first century thing?

What do you dothen with churches that do use tounges, or with Christians that use tongues inprivate prayer/exhortation?

Steve

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

That makes sense to me maggie.

While i’m uncertain about calling anoyone ‘a prophet’, I know people who seem to have prophetic tendancies to speak God’s truth clearly into a situation - whether that message is liked or not. Havign said that they and everyone else would take their words and test them and give them a different weight to that whic the OT prophets seemed to have to their words. I believe it’s because of the way God speaks to us now, as opposed to how he spoke to the prophets of the OT.

By: Homer Paxton

Homer Paxton — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Maggi, look at the bible.

speaking in tongues is very important in three events.
Pentecost, the realisation that samaratans can be part of the church and then gentiles can be too.

After that Paul says that speaking in tongues is silly because it does not edify.

O/T prophets were needed inthose times to tell the people of what God wanted.We have the bible.