Does the gift of prophecy include preaching?

[presidente]

Why are people so rude on social media? Any psychologist around here?

This is not MY interpretation - it's the interpretation of a Bible translator. Of course this is an "interpreted translation" and has its limitations. If J. B. Phillips rendered PROPHET as PREACHER he had a reason for that, and that's what people who desire to know the truth must investigate.

I apologize if J.B. Philips was your dad or grandpa and I offended you or something like that.

Philips no doubt came up with his interpretation here based on the same information we all have access to. And there is a Reformed tradition of wrongly equating preaching and prophesying. This translation perpetuates that tradition. This is no more evidence for the position than quoting certain parts of Calvin's commentary which seem to support the idea, though in other parts of his commentary, his commentary on this idea is a bit more nuanced. (Not that Anglicanism is Calvinist, but there has been a bit of influence.)

 

[birdie]

Paul wanted all Christians to prophesy because the one who prophesies builds up the church. What was he mainly talking about? Prediction of future events; revelation of unknown information; or preaching, teaching and exhorting?

Thanks so much Marcelo, for asking this question as many persons think prophecy means to say something will happen and then to have that thing happen. While this may be a part of the picture, it is not very complete at all. The term prophet is used in the Bible to indicate all those who are true believers. In a sense, everyone who is a true believer in Christ is a prophet because they have believed on Christ unto salvation, and this has a past, present, and future context, as well as does the gospel message they carry. We can see that believers generally are called prophets in the Bible, in places like Rev 11, where the 'two witnesses' prophesy. These two witnesses are not just two persons. They are a picture of the true believers. But, let's examine a little closer what is meant by prophesying:

We read: "I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret, that the church may receive edifying."

A person who 'speaks in tongues' means someone who speaks in a known language generally. If you speak English, you are speaking in a tongue. Same for Spanish or Chinese or whatever language. A person who is unsaved speaks the things on their mind and heart from the old unsaved spirit that they have. They are speaking in an old tongue, in a sense. When a person is born again, they begin to speak in new tongues as the new spirit of Christ gives them a new mind and heart and therefore their utterance is new. They are still speaking English or whatever language they know but they are likely to thank God or praise God or share the gospel. However, a listener who is still unsaved cannot understand their gospel and their praise to God, because the person listening is not saved. The person who is saved is speaking well in their tongue because they are saved but this is not as great as someone sharing the gospel and having someone else turn to Christ because of it. It is also not as great as a person who is already saved receiving new insight from it. So, the Bible instructs us that when we share the gospel or speak in a known language, we should pray that there is interpretation. This does not mean that an unknown bunch of noises that sounds like something akin to Klingon must be interpreted. Rather, interpretation means that we find a person who was not saved or not understanding, suddenly understanding or becoming saved. When a person shares in the language that they know (English or Spanish or whatever) and a person receives their message and becomes saved, or is edified and receives it, the Bible calls this PROPHESYING. We find this definition of the term prophesying in other places in the Bible. For example, Ezekiel (already a true believer) was told to go and PROPHESY to the house of Israel (who were spiritually unsaved and dead - a valley of dry bones) and when Ezekiel did so, then the whole bunch of them became alive in Christ, they became saved. So, he that prophesies is greater than he that speaks in an unknown tongue because in the first case, someone receiving the message unto salvation, or edification, and in the second case this is not happening for the listener.

 

[birdie]

Even a little further clarification of the term 'unknown tongue': The term does not mean a special nonsensical supposedly spirit-inspired bunch of syllables as we find in some 'churches'. Rather, the term means unknown from the perspective of the listener. Example: a saved person shares the gospel in English to an unsaved person that also speaks English. This is an example of an unknown tongue. The gospel that the saved person shared is unknown in the spirit of the unsaved listener. The unsaved listener cannot receive the message spiritually, so it is unknown to them. If the saved person shared the gospel in English to an unsaved person who also speaks English and the unsaved person received the message and became saved, then we could say that the original person sharing the message prophesied.

 

[presidente]

Even a little further clarification of the term 'unknown tongue': The term does not mean a special nonsensical supposedly spirit-inspired bunch of syllables as we find in some 'churches'. Rather, the term means unknown from the perspective of the listener. Example: a saved person shares the gospel in English to an unsaved person that also speaks English. This is an example of an unknown tongue. The gospel that the saved person shared is unknown in the spirit of the unsaved listener. The unsaved listener cannot receive the message spiritually, so it is unknown to them. If the saved person shared the gospel in English to an unsaved person who also speaks English and the unsaved person received the message and became saved, then we could say that the original person sharing the message prophesied.

That doesn't make sense in light of the way the terms are used in I Corinthians 14. If the individual hearing didn't understand English, that would be a better fit.

Speaking in tongues and prophesying are two different gifts in I Corinthians. Speaking in tongues needs to be interpreted... because it means speaking in languages. Prophesying does not need to be interpreted.

 

[birdie]

That doesn't make sense in light of the way the terms are used in I Corinthians 14. If the individual hearing didn't understand English, that would be a better fit.

Speaking in tongues and prophesying are two different gifts in I Corinthians. Speaking in tongues needs to be interpreted... because it means speaking in languages. Prophesying does not need to be interpreted.

Here is 1 Cor 14: "For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

You could call them two different gifts I suppose. Basically there are two different things going on. The second thing is explained by this verse above. An unknown tongue (according to 1 Cor 14 which you cite) is not speaking to men so that they will be converted, but only unto God. They might be praising God in English or thanking God whatever in English, for example. No man understands them because they are not praying for a listener to hear it spiritually. It is a mystery to a listener because the listener is unsaved or not receiving it. It makes sense but you have to think of the terms meaning understanding spiritually, not understanding ordinary language.

 

[presidente]

It is a mystery to a listener because the listener is unsaved or not receiving it. It makes sense but you have to think of the terms meaning understanding spiritually, not understanding ordinary language.

Allegoricalizing straightforward language in the Bible isn't the same thing as understanding spiritually. I suppose you could reinterpret the Bible as a code language such that "He is my brother" means "Do not each chocolate." But that's not spiritual. That's just creating confusion.

At least the type of allegorical interpretation Origen suggested did not do away with the literal layer of meaning.

 

[Stephen63]

Look it comes down to this.....

a. One can preach, state or read a prophecy from the word of God but it does not make one a prophet.
b. The prophets were given divine insight, visons and the very words to pen concerning the prophecy being conveyed.

With the completed word of God, the call to not ADD to the words of "this prophecy" it is highly unlikely that one would fulfill the role of a "Prophet"

Just saying!

There is an unwritten rule somewhere that says "Prophecy given after the completion of the canon is false, for the canon is complete".

It is an unwritten rule because it's not written anywhere. It is incorrect to assume that prophecy MUST be a part of the canon.

John said if the works of Christ were all written down, the books of the could not contain them.

To assume that Jesus never prophesied to anyone OUTSIDE of the canon would be ridiculous. How many others did He called beside the twelve? He DID call the rich young ruler, didn't He? He Prophesied to the woman at the well..... What about the thousands that came because of her message?

To say that prophecy outside the canon is invalid is saying any ministry outside the canon is invalid. All gifts are for ministry, all are for edification. That cannot be changed by the teachings of man.

 

[Stephen63]

The gift of prophesy is nothing to a man and a man with that gift is still nothing.

According to Joel & the book of Acts, sons, daughters, the aged, & bondslaves are to prophesy. That, is something, for God declared it, & God is doing it.

A man with that gift is a minister of righteousness, because God's words comes out of his mouth.

 

[presidente]

There is an unwritten rule somewhere that says "Prophecy given after the completion of the canon is false, for the canon is complete".

It is an unwritten rule because it's not written anywhere. It is incorrect to assume that prophecy MUST be a part of the canon.

John said if the works of Christ were all written down, the books of the could not contain them.

To assume that Jesus never prophesied to anyone OUTSIDE of the canon would be ridiculous. How many others did He called beside the twelve? He DID call the rich young ruler, didn't He? He Prophesied to the woman at the well..... What about the thousands that came because of her message?

To say that prophecy outside the canon is invalid is saying any ministry outside the canon is invalid. All gifts are for ministry, all are for edification. That cannot be changed by the teachings of man.

Some people treat their doctrines about the Bible as more important than the doctrines taught in the Bible.

 

[garee]

Paul wanted all Christians to prophesy because the one who prophesies builds up the church. What was he mainly talking about? Prediction of future events; revelation of unknown information; or preaching, teaching and exhorting?

To prophesy is to declare the word of God .Since he is not longer bringing any new prophecy as a revelation of God we declare the existing prophecy. There are no laws missing by which we could know him more adequately.

This is whether that prophecy(the word of God) points back or ahead or to the current time.

 

[presidente]

To prophesy is to declare the word of God .Since he is not longer bringing any new prophecy as a revelation of God we declare the existing prophecy. There are no laws missing by which we could know him more adequately.

In the example Paul gives of prophesying being an example to them that believe, the secrets of an unbeliever or unlearned man are made manifest, and he declares that God is truly among you. It sounds like you may be against the type of prophesying Paul gave as an example of prophesying being for them that believe.

You have no right to put these limitations on the Spirit of God that you are trying to place on Him. You will not succeed. You may limit yourself.

 

[garee]

Originally Posted by Stephen63

There is an unwritten rule somewhere that says "Prophecy given after the completion of the canon is false, for the canon is complete".

It is an unwritten rule because it's not written anywhere. It is incorrect to assume that prophecy MUST be a part of the canon.

It is written at the end of the book of prophecy, the final warning. before he sealed up the possibility of any new revelations. .

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. Rev 22:17

It becomes ,will a person obey what is written or the skies the limit, just believe.? One brings unity with God the other begs for a strong delusion to believe the lie.

Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie":2Th 2:9

John said if the works of Christ were all written down, the books of the could not contain them.

That is true but if they are not written down there is no authority by which we could believe God who has no form .

That portion of scriptures was because some wanted to add their own kind of prophecy as an oral tradition of men .It was not saying the skies the limit, who needs that which is written, it was Peter the deniers motivation. Context is needed.
Adding a oral tradition of men because of their jealous of another is earthly inspired of the father of lies.

This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.Joh 21:19

To assume that Jesus never prophesied to anyone OUTSIDE of the canon would be ridiculous. How many others did He called beside the twelve? He DID call the rich young ruler, didn't He? He Prophesied to the woman at the well..... What about the thousands that came because of her message?

No one did say Jesus never prophesied to anyone OUTSIDE of the canon.

To say that prophecy outside the canon is invalid is saying any ministry outside the canon is invalid. All gifts are for ministry, all are for edification. That cannot be changed by the teachings of man

Just the ministry that tries to add their oral tradition of men as did Peter, the denier?

The question is why would a person even desire to go above that which is written.? What’s the living hope in doing so?

 

[garee]

In the example Paul gives of prophesying being an example to them that believe, the secrets of an unbeliever or unlearned man are made manifest, and he declares that God is truly among you. It sounds like you may be against the type of prophesying Paul gave as an example of prophesying being for them that believe.

You have no right to put these limitations on the Spirit of God that you are trying to place on Him. You will not succeed. You may limit yourself.

The type of prophesying Paul gave as an example is the same kind of prophecy (the word of God ).Not of Paul or Moses, after no man.We are not to go above that which is written .

Why would you be against what God limits .Are you receiving new prophecy that could be added to the existing?

Why do you feel you need to go above that which is written .Whats your hope in that?

 

[presidente]

The type of prophesying Paul gave as an example is the same kind of prophecy (the word of God ).Not of Paul or Moses, after no man.We are not to go above that which is written .

Paul wrote not to go what is written to the audience that he encouraged to prophecy revelations. So using that verse to argue against the type of prophesying Paul encouraged in the same letter is not a valid argument.

Why would you be against what God limits .Are you receiving new prophecy that could be added to the existing?

Why would you be against what the Bible actually teaches? The Bible says to covet to prophesy, to allow the prophets to speak, and to despise not prophesyings. You have a really weak interpretation of one passage that doesn't even fit, and use that to argue against actual commands of scripture for the churches.

I don't claim to be a prophet. I've gotten a few words of knowledge.

The faith has been delivered to the saints. But God communicating something to a believer about his calling and having someone prophesy a word of encouragement doesn't change Christian doctrine.

Why do you feel you need to go above that which is written .Whats your hope in that?

Why would you want to oppose what the Bible actually says? Again, the warning not to 'go beyond that which is written' is written in an epistle that encourages the exercise of prophecy and other revelatory gifts, making known the secrets of men's hearts, etc.

 

[Stephen63]

To prophesy is to declare the word of God .Since he is not longer bringing any new prophecy as a revelation of God we declare the existing prophecy. There are no laws missing by which we could know him more adequately.

This is whether that prophecy(the word of God) points back or ahead or to the current time.

Where did you get this "rule" about God no longer doing that?

By all means educate us about this wonderful rule of yours..... We're listening(for chapter & verse, that is)

 

[MadebyHim]

Does it seem to anyone else, prophesy seems to repeat itself. Have we been prophesied the same thing over and over. but just have not really grasped it? Hope we all get it together soon. Come quickly Lord Jesus.

 

[Stephen63]

It is written at the end of the book of prophecy, the final warning. before he sealed up the possibility of any new revelations. .

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. Rev 22:17

This is the core of his statement.

Now here's the truth about "Revelation prophecy":

Barnes' Notes on the Bible
For I testify - The writer does not specify who is meant by the word "I" in this place. The most natural construction is to refer it to the writer himself, and not to the angel, or the Saviour. The meaning is, "I bear this solemn witness, or make this solemn affirmation, in conclusion." The object is to guard his book against being corrupted by any interpolation or change. It would seem not improbable, from this, that as early as the time of John, books were liable to be corrupted by additions or omissions, or that at least there was felt to be great danger that mistakes might be made by the carelessness of transcribers. Against this danger, John would guard this book in the most solemn manner. Perhaps he felt, too, that as this book would be necessarily regarded as obscure from the fact that symbols were so much used, there was great danger that changes would be made by well-meaning persons with a view to make it appear more plain.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
The final Testimony of the Seer and his Benediction, Revelation 22:18-2118. For I testify] Omit “for.”

If any man shall add &c.] Deuteronomy 4:2; Deuteronomy 12:32. The parallel of those passages proves, that the curse denounced is on those who interpolate unauthorised doctrines in the prophecy, or who neglect essential ones; not on transcribers who might unadvisedly interpolate or omit something in the true text. The curse, if understood in the latter sense, has been remarkably ineffective, for the common text of this book is more corrupt, and the true text oftener doubtful, than in any other part of the N. T. But it may be feared that additions and omissions in the more serious sense have also been frequently made by rash interpreters. It is certain that the curse is designed to guard the integrity of this Book of the Revelation, not to close the N. T. canon. It is not even certain that this was the last written of the canonical books.

Bengel's Gnomen
Revelation 22:18. [249]ΜΑΡΤΥΡῶ ἘΓῺ) See Appar. on this passage.[250] In Revelation 22:18-19, there is a most severe testimony, a most weighty admonition to all hearers of the Apocalypse. If any man shall add, there shall be added upon him plagues: if any man shall take away, from him shall be taken away blessings. Repayment in kind [talio]. It is more grievous, as it appears from the annexed threatenings, to add, than to take away: though many critics actually show that they entertain a contrary opinion, being more timid in the erasure than in the admission of glosses. To change, is at once both to add and to take away. First, any hearer may offend in this matter, when he endeavours to pass off as Apocalyptic writings which are not such, or suppresses those which are truly Apocalyptic. An unskilful expounder, who is blind and rash, offends, and especially if he deems himself to be endowed with a singular prophetical gift and faculty. An unfaithful translator and copyist, who writes out the text incorrectly, exceedingly offends: for while the text is uncorrupted, especially at the foundation, the offence of the expounder and of the hearer may be corrected; but when the text is corrupted, the injury is much greater.

NONE of these commentaries even hint that other prophecies of any kind add to this book.

This could have been studied on the internet & received the correct answer.

IOW, any armchair theologian could have done it.

But you didn't. You can't even SHOW HOW a individual prophecy somehow adds to this book.

With ALL the sons & daughters, aged men, & bondservants prophesying according to Joel & confirmed in the book of Acts, You'd think Peter, or Paul, or James, John, or Hebrews would have SAID SOMETHING about this to warn the church.

Now, WHY am I being so "in your face" about this? Because you mishandled the Scriptures to your advantage, & never looked before you leaped. He who spreads false teaching shall reap a false teacher's reward.

Don't make such a foolish mistake again.

 

[birdie]

Allegoricalizing straightforward language in the Bible isn't the same thing as understanding spiritually. I suppose you could reinterpret the Bible as a code language such that "He is my brother" means "Do not each chocolate." But that's not spiritual. That's just creating confusion.

At least the type of allegorical interpretation Origen suggested did not do away with the literal layer of meaning.

Thanks for your response presidente. I agree that I am treatiing the Bible as if it is written as a parable rather than surface text. The Bible says that about itself. "Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a parable" and again, "But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples." I am simply saying that to 'prophesy' means to share the gospel and to have the hearer understand and receive it. That is why prophesying is greater than having the hearer not understand (to speak in an unknown tongue). I really don't understand how this means, as you say, to love your brother means to not eat chocolate. I guess you feel I am arbitrarily assigning a meaning to the surface text. However, you can look for 'prophesying' in any Bible verse and find that the meaning is consistent. Consider one that someone above just mentioned: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book". Notice that the term prophecy occurs and it is in relation to hearing it, and that means receiving it spiritually with those kind of spiritual ears.

 

[presidente]

Thanks for your response presidente. I agree that I am treatiing the Bible as if it is written as a parable rather than surface text. The Bible says that about itself. "Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth. I will open my mouth in a parable" and again, "But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples." I am simply saying that to 'prophesy' means to share the gospel and to have the hearer understand and receive it.

I don't see this definition in scripture or examples that support the use of the word to mean this.

Look at this verse
Matthew 13:14
In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: "'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.

We see here that what Isaiah said was a 'prophecy.' What did he prophesy? That his audience would be every hearing, but not understanding, etc. This was a prophecy, but the people did not hear or understand.

Therefore prophesying does not mean that the hearer understands and receives the message. Isaiah and Jeremiah prophesied and the people rejected the message. Isaiah prophesied and the people did not understand or perceive.

That is why prophesying is greater than having the hearer not understand (to speak in an unknown tongue).

Are you saying the word 'tongue' doesn't mean tongue at all? Do you think the Corinthians would have interpreted all of Paul's letters as an allegorical code, where the meanings of the actual words do not correspond with what Paul meant?
The one who prophesies is greater than he who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, because the one who prophesies in the language the people understand edifies them. But the one who speaks in tongues speaks in a tongues they do not understand and they are not edified. If he interprets, they can be edified. There is no need for an elaborate code.

Do you believe the passage is NOT saying what it actually literally says, or that there is another layer of allegory on the literal level.

I really don't understand how this means, as you say, to love your brother means to not eat chocolate.

I could just redefine the words to mean that. For example, I could reinterpret 'I really' in the quote above to mean, "Tomorrow, let's go" and "dont' understand" to mean "to Disneyland." It is a little more extreme than what you are doing, but similar, right?

I guess you feel I am arbitrarily assigning a meaning to the surface text.

Yes. Of course, yours takes something literal and makes it metaphorical, and isn't as extreme as my chocolate or Disney land examples. But it doesn't make sense that the Corinthians would have interpreted the passage metaphorically as you do.

However, you can look for 'prophesying' in any Bible verse and find that the meaning is consistent. Consider one that someone above just mentioned: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book". Notice that the term prophecy occurs and it is in relation to hearing it, and that means receiving it spiritually with those kind of spiritual ears.

But Isaiah prophesied and people did not understand. Peter described the prophesying of prophets in the Old Testament as 'holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.'

 

[fredoheaven]

Biblical preaching is not confine only to the unbelievers. It is needed by believers as well. Paul did it until midnight. Prophesy includes preaching that is forthtelling.

God bless