Prophecy for those called by His name
- Thread starter jonathanbchristian
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
Zone...my point is IF the prophets(John) were told there would be 2 prophets in the period revelation is describing
And Amos tells a principle of God for us. That He doesnt do anything unless He gives us a heads up in advance.
.....the point is why tell us in advance we should expect 2 prophets....if there have been prophets throughout the
church age. Do i need to take a vitamin?
And Amos tells a principle of God for us. That He doesnt do anything unless He gives us a heads up in advance.
.....the point is why tell us in advance we should expect 2 prophets....if there have been prophets throughout the
church age. Do i need to take a vitamin?
Zone,
The whole point is from the scriptures themselves:
If you believe 1 Cor. 13 communicates that prophetic revelation is done away with after the scriptures have been complete, and the scriptures are showing that there is at least 3 1/2 years of prophetic revelation to occur from 2 people who have not come yet.....
That can mean a few things:
a. The Bible is not yet complete until the 2 witnesses come and prophesy (unless they prophesy that there will be more prophecy to come)
b. You are wrong about your interpretation of 1 Cor. 13, and prophetic revelation has not ceased
c. The Bible contradicts itself
d. Whatever else you can think up without logical fallacy
So take your pic....which one a. b. c. or d. If I failed to present another logical option.
The whole point is from the scriptures themselves:
If you believe 1 Cor. 13 communicates that prophetic revelation is done away with after the scriptures have been complete, and the scriptures are showing that there is at least 3 1/2 years of prophetic revelation to occur from 2 people who have not come yet.....
That can mean a few things:
a. The Bible is not yet complete until the 2 witnesses come and prophesy (unless they prophesy that there will be more prophecy to come)
b. You are wrong about your interpretation of 1 Cor. 13, and prophetic revelation has not ceased
c. The Bible contradicts itself
d. Whatever else you can think up without logical fallacy
So take your pic....which one a. b. c. or d. If I failed to present another logical option.
S
Well, by "numbers game", I was referring to your saying "depending on how one works the demographics of numbers of christians in the world, there should be MILLIONS of prophets alive right now, and untold hundreds of thousands if not millions more since the first century.", and that reads as if there's some kind of proportion of believers to prophets, as if Yahweh is sitting around in Heaven with a slide rule and abacus saying "Okay, for every 10,000 believers, I need one prophet ... HERE," and then points to Pismo Beach.
Look, here's how I read your position. To me, it seems that you're saying that the prophets were only needed up to the point needed to fully clarify God's new church, and once everything was finalized, that's it, God said "Okay, stop production." Now, my position is that prophets do more than that so they are still needed. How many they are, where they are, what they're saying, I don't know. But just because we don't know who they are doesn't mean they're not out there. They could be out and about quietly doing God's will and directed by His ways, not calling attention to themselves. Now, I can live with the idea that maybe you're right and there haven't been any prophets for about two thousand years now. But I also haven't seen anything that really definitively proves that this is the case, so I remain unconvinced. And that, as far as I can see, is what it boils down to.
Look, here's how I read your position. To me, it seems that you're saying that the prophets were only needed up to the point needed to fully clarify God's new church, and once everything was finalized, that's it, God said "Okay, stop production." Now, my position is that prophets do more than that so they are still needed. How many they are, where they are, what they're saying, I don't know. But just because we don't know who they are doesn't mean they're not out there. They could be out and about quietly doing God's will and directed by His ways, not calling attention to themselves. Now, I can live with the idea that maybe you're right and there haven't been any prophets for about two thousand years now. But I also haven't seen anything that really definitively proves that this is the case, so I remain unconvinced. And that, as far as I can see, is what it boils down to.
Last edited by a moderator:
no, its not MY position that there should be millions of prophets.
its the charismatic/continuationist's position that there should be.
they know they can't prove continuation through history, so it will always come down to "restoration".
just look at this disaster: http://www.fivefold-ministry.com/accurate_definitions.php
if you're allowing for the office of prophet, you've got to accept apostles also, by their own definition.
again, i'll ask: were any of the Biblical Apostles shown off "quietly" doing the Lord's work?
and where are the attending miracles from today apostles?
have they seen the Risen Christ?
no, today THEY GO TO PROPHET AND APOSTLE SCHOOL.
let's add tongues in: are they human languages?
its the charismatic/continuationist's position that there should be.
they know they can't prove continuation through history, so it will always come down to "restoration".
just look at this disaster: http://www.fivefold-ministry.com/accurate_definitions.php
if you're allowing for the office of prophet, you've got to accept apostles also, by their own definition.
again, i'll ask: were any of the Biblical Apostles shown off "quietly" doing the Lord's work?
and where are the attending miracles from today apostles?
have they seen the Risen Christ?
no, today THEY GO TO PROPHET AND APOSTLE SCHOOL.
let's add tongues in: are they human languages?
Last edited:
S
Well, we don't know too much about Matthias. And as far as miracles, again, I don't know. Maybe they're out there healing people. But I seriously doubt they're doing it on TV. And I would assume they must have seen the risen Christ in a vision as Paul did. But again, who and where they are, I don't know. I won't deny that it's possible there aren't any anymore, but again, I don't see any proof that there CAN'T be any.
For instance, Yeshua commended Ephesus for testing false apostles: "You have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars." (Rev 2:2) Okay, He says that they found false apostles, but what He doesn't say is that they all MUST be false because there can't be any more, else He would have said that there are no more apostles (well, besides John) and made it easy on the church. Or Paul saying in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15: "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. " But the problem is, you can't say that there are false apostles unless there are real ones out there, otherwise, wouldn't someone had said "There are no more apostles" or "All who call themselves apostles are false"? Wouldn't that have been the end of it right there? Why didn't they make it the end of it?
I won't deny that those are probably a lot of bunk.
In Acts, they seem to be.
For instance, Yeshua commended Ephesus for testing false apostles: "You have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars." (Rev 2:2) Okay, He says that they found false apostles, but what He doesn't say is that they all MUST be false because there can't be any more, else He would have said that there are no more apostles (well, besides John) and made it easy on the church. Or Paul saying in 2 Corinthians 11:13-15: "For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. " But the problem is, you can't say that there are false apostles unless there are real ones out there, otherwise, wouldn't someone had said "There are no more apostles" or "All who call themselves apostles are false"? Wouldn't that have been the end of it right there? Why didn't they make it the end of it?
I won't deny that those are probably a lot of bunk.
In Acts, they seem to be.