Are there prophets today, or just profits?

[Deade]

Well Katy-follower, I don't know how this thread evolved into an Apostle thread, but getting back to prophets: You said:

I honestly don't know whether to believe there are true prophets around today. Obviously there are lots of false ones as on judgment day we read that many of them will be saying "Lord, Lord... did we not prophesy in your name" which suggests these will be false prophets from the protestant world.

I don't know either, but those that insist there can't be according to Rev. 22:18,19: what are you going to say to the two witnesses in Rev. 11? The point being, God can do anything He wants.

 

[stonesoffire]

Except that there cannot be a "point" since there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb, not thirteen (a number which has negative connotations in Scripture as well as in general).

I don't see Paul as an apostle of the Lamb, but of the body of Christ. Nothing was ever on earth like His body of members all made up of believers before on earth.

What flying dove says makes great sense.

 

[Katy-follower]

Well Katy-follower, I don't know how this thread evolved into an Apostle thread, but getting back to prophets: You said:


I don't know either, but those that insist there can't be according to Rev. 22:18,19: what are you going to say to the two witnesses in Rev. 11? The point being, God can do anything He wants.

It happens a lot on these forums

Exactly. I think the problem is that counterfeits drive fear into a lot of people and lead them to reject most things as a whole, when we should recognize satan is a serial counterfeiter so we can expect to see counterfeits in the churches. But aside from the two witnesses you mentioned (I actually forgot about them, lol), I really don't know concerning anyone else.

As per the Deuteronomy scripture, what is there to fear. Obviously if someone preaches against the gospel then you reject them, and they should not go against the scriptures. I don't agree either that one should attach themselves to a person they believe to be a "prophet" as if this person has authority in place of the scriptures.

There was a false "prophesy" that Jesus would appear physically on a preacher's stage. Obviously that was a lie, and amazed that so many believed that would happen. But as for David Wilkerson with his vision of NYC.... who knows. If it happens it happens and if it doesn't it doesn't, but it does not affect us either way. He also apparently had a dream/vision about the rapture too.

 

[preacher4truth]

Acts 2:17) And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

And it did came to pass just as God said.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

I'm giddy with the truthful error being presented

really

Cracked me up too. Wondered if anyone else would catch it.

 

[10-four]

What about those people who lay hands on you in church or tent revivals who can tell you almost everything that you've ever done?
Are they operating under a spirit of divination or what?
This is all very confusing to new believers who might think that someone is a "prophet" because that person can read them or seem to know secret things about them.Most of the time that "prophet" would begin his reading by saying "The Holy Spirit has shown me this or that about you".
Then usually comes the "laying on of hands".
I've been healed through the laying on of hands and have been "prophesied to about a lot of secret things that all turned out to be true.
All in all this is an interesting thread and I hope to learn something from you all.
Peace.

 

[Bladerunner]

Jesus tells us in Luke that the Law and the Prophets ended with John. That is John the Baptist as Jesus's ministry was immediately after John's ministry.

Luke 16:16.."The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."

 

[Nehemiah6]

I don't see Paul as an apostle of the Lamb, but of the body of Christ. Nothing was ever on earth like His body of members all made up of believers before on earth.

What flying dove says makes great sense.

What Flying Dove says is nonsense. Matthias is never mentioned after Acts 1, but Paul dominates the Acts of the Apostles and wrote over half the New Testament. Only someone lacking spiritual discernment can continue to push for the idea that Matthias was actually commissioned by Christ. The apostles cast lots for him as a "fill-in" is the best interpretation of his brief mention.

On the other hand I have shown the exact Scripture in Acts 26 where the Lord commissioned Paul and gave him a very wide ministry. So please go back to Acts 26 and discover why Paul is the 12th apostle. Since there are ONLY twelve apostles of the Lamb, there can be absolutely no question as to who replaced Judas. Indeed Paul was taken up to Heaven and shown and heard things which could not be revealed. He was personally taught by the Lord, and also given personal revelations which were not disclosed to the other apostles (e.g. the mystery of the Church).

 

[MarcR]

The answer to your question depends on how prophet is defined.

I believe that prophesy is nothing more or less than proclamation of God's Word.

I believe that prayerfully composed preaching is prophesy; though I realize many might disagree.

I don't believe that anyone today has Apostolic gifting or authority.

If one defines apostles simply as ones sent out; then missionaries might fit that limited definition.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The answer to your question depends on how prophet is defined.

I believe that prophesy is nothing more or less than proclamation of God's Word.

I believe that prayerfully composed preaching is prophesy; though I realize many might disagree.

I don't believe that anyone today has Apostolic gifting or authority.

If one defines apostles simply as ones sent out; then missionaries might fit that limited definition.

When discussing apostles and prophets, we should always keep this passage before us:

EPHESIANS 2

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

We see here that the Church is depicted as the Building of God -- a Holy Temple, a Habitation of God -- and that the apostles and prophets were foundational -- they laid the foundation of the Church. While the Lord Jesus Christ is the bedrock of that foundation, He is depicted here as the Chief Cornerstone. This immediately tells us that those terms cannot be used loosely. When the New Testament churches were being established then the apostles and prophets were foundational. Today, their writings as found in the Holy Scriptures continue to be foundational.

As to prophets, Scripture clearly tells us that they are distinct from evangelists, pastors, and teachers, since they speak or write by Divine revelation. Which means that their words are the words of God. ​ We do not accept extra-biblical revelations (which have generally been very faulty).

 

[MarcR]

When discussing apostles and prophets, we should always keep this passage before us:

EPHESIANS 2

19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;

21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

We see here that the Church is depicted as the Building of God -- a Holy Temple, a Habitation of God -- and that the apostles and prophets were foundational -- they laid the foundation of the Church. While the Lord Jesus Christ is the bedrock of that foundation, He is depicted here as the Chief Cornerstone. This immediately tells us that those terms cannot be used loosely. When the New Testament churches were being established then the apostles and prophets were foundational. Today, their writings as found in the Holy Scriptures continue to be foundational.

As to prophets, Scripture clearly tells us that they are distinct from evangelists, pastors, and teachers, since they speak or write by Divine revelation. Which means that their words are the words of God. ​ We do not accept extra-biblical revelations (which have generally been very faulty).

If your definition of prophesy demands new revelation from God then, by that definition, there are no prophets around in our time.

 

[Lancelot]

What Flying Dove says is nonsense. Matthias is never mentioned after Acts 1, but Paul dominates the Acts of the Apostles and wrote over half the New Testament. Only someone lacking spiritual discernment can continue to push for the idea that Matthias was actually commissioned by Christ. The apostles cast lots for him as a "fill-in" is the best interpretation of his brief mention.

On the other hand I have shown the exact Scripture in Acts 26 where the Lord commissioned Paul and gave him a very wide ministry. So please go back to Acts 26 and discover why Paul is the 12th apostle. Since there are ONLY twelve apostles of the Lamb, there can be absolutely no question as to who replaced Judas. Indeed Paul was taken up to Heaven and shown and heard things which could not be revealed. He was personally taught by the Lord, and also given personal revelations which were not disclosed to the other apostles (e.g. the mystery of the Church).

In Acts 13:2 God told them to separate Paul and Barnabas, so God specifically called Barnabas too. Why wasn't he the replacement for Judas? The apostles nominated two men, and then prayed for divine guidance. One was Joseph Barsabas and the other was Matthias. Saul wasn't even a believer at the time. In Acts 2:14 it says that Peter stood up with the eleven, so that means that Matthias was there on the Day of Pentecost and was participating as an apostle. In I Corinthians 15:5 Paul also refers to "the twelve", so it looks to me like Matthias was the man. The "Paul replaced Judas" theory has been floating around out there for a long time, but it's just a theory. I don't know how anybody could be so dogmatic about this.

 

[Magenta]

In Acts 13:2 God told them to separate Paul and Barnabas, so God specifically called Barnabas too. Why wasn't he the replacement for Judas? The apostles nominated two men, and then prayed for divine guidance. One was Joseph Barsabas and the other was Matthias. Saul wasn't even a believer at the time. In Acts 2:14 it says that Peter stood up with the eleven, so that means that Matthias was there on the Day of Pentecost and was participating as an apostle. In I Corinthians 15:5 Paul also refers to "the twelve", so it looks to me like Matthias was the man. The "Paul replaced Judas" theory has been floating around out there for a long time, but it's just a theory. I don't know how anybody could be so dogmatic about this.

You seem to be being dogmatic about it Hey, if I stood up with my family of thirteen, it does not mean there are fourteen people counting me in my family of thirteen. So you are making an assumption. If the text had said the "other" eleven, you might have a case. Question for you: do you reject Paul's testimony that he was chosen to be an apostle by Jesus Christ Himself?

 

[Lancelot]

No I don't, magenta. But that's not the issue. There were more than the original twelve apostles listed in the NT. Barnabas, Epaphroditus, and James were also listed as apostles. Nehemiah6's claim is that Paul replaced Judas, and the bible doesn't say that. It's not a big deal, really because it's a non-essential issue. I just don't see how a person could be so dogmatic about something that is clearly nothing more than speculation.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I don't know how anybody could be so dogmatic about this.

I can be dogmatic about it because Scripture is dogmatic about it. I will provide a more detailed response later to establish that Paul is indeed the one who replaced Judas. As to "the twelve" mentioned in 1 Cor 15:5, that is more of a loose reference to the surviving apostles than an inclusion of Matthias or an exclusion of Judas. You will note that it is speaking about the Risen Christ's appearances. That was long before (almost 50 days before) the Day of Pentecost and the selection of Matthias by lot.

 

[Nehemiah6]

If your definition of prophesy demands new revelation from God then, by that definition, there are no prophets around in our time.

Well that is the definition we have in 2 Peter 1:19-21. And the record shows that ever since the book of Revelation was completed there have been no true prophets. Mohammad, Joseph Smith, Bahaullah, Ellen G. White, etc. have all been contrary to Scripture.

 

[Speak2Me]

FlyingDove cannot abide the fact that I am presenting Bible truth as opposed to this poster's lies (about me and about what I post). So once again we have biblical evidence that Paul replaced Judas:

ACTS 26

14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;

17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,

18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

19 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:

20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

21 For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me.

22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:

23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Are you one of those who believes there's only 12 apostles in the entire church?

 

[louis]

Profit is the god/love for many of these false prophets.

 

[garee]

Scripture makes it perfectly clear that those twelve foundational apostles were the only apostles so-named by God and Christ (Judas replaced by Paul).

And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.(Rev 21:14).

And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Mt 19:28)

it would seem you are simply adding another meaning to the word apostle (sent one)other that that which intended. Moses was a apostle. Abel was a apostle that his brother killed. Whosoever God sends with his word of prophecy is a apostle.

 

[Speak2Me]

What Flying Dove says is nonsense.1 Matthias is never mentioned after Acts 1, but Paul dominates the Acts of the Apostles and wrote over half the New Testament. 2 Only someone lacking spiritual discernment can continue to push for the idea that Matthias was actually commissioned by Christ. The apostles cast lots for him as a "fill-in" is the best interpretation of his brief mention.

1. There's a few apostles never mentioned after the gospels, but so what?

2. You can't prove Matthias wasn't chosen by God. If they had made a mistake, don't you think after Pentecost the Holy Spirit would have cleared that up?

Your statement gives the impression that God can't fix problems made by man, when the exact opposite is true.