My understanding is that prophecy are God's words being spoken by a man. There are numerous scriptures in the Bible against adding to God's word (Proverbs 30:6 being one of them). Since the Bible/canon/scriptures are now complete, is it wrong to assume then that by this definition of prophecy there can be no new prophecy since that would be adding to God's word? So in that sense, to be true prophesy, it has to be something God has already spoken and committed to in writing. And if the words cannot be new, the only purpose then would be to apply the existing word to new situations.
Does that make sense?
Words of wisdom and knowledge, however, are not under the same constriction. Their purposes are for guidance and direction as opposed to speaking for God. But, as I've pointed out several times Lauren, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established" (2 Cor 13:1). So no, every fleeting thought does not qualify. But a fleeting thought that comes back around from another source and does not conflict with scripture - that's a good sign.
Again, maybe it's just semantics. In the details, prophecy is different from wisdom and knowledge, but hey we didn't get to President Trump by paying attention to the details, did we. Most will lump the three into one pile. And in this day and age 'close' is close enough. Technically, no it's not, but perhaps that's just straining at gnats.
Does that make sense?
Words of wisdom and knowledge, however, are not under the same constriction. Their purposes are for guidance and direction as opposed to speaking for God. But, as I've pointed out several times Lauren, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established" (2 Cor 13:1). So no, every fleeting thought does not qualify. But a fleeting thought that comes back around from another source and does not conflict with scripture - that's a good sign.
Again, maybe it's just semantics. In the details, prophecy is different from wisdom and knowledge, but hey we didn't get to President Trump by paying attention to the details, did we. Most will lump the three into one pile. And in this day and age 'close' is close enough. Technically, no it's not, but perhaps that's just straining at gnats.
I don't see any sense in Paul exhorting all to desire to prophesy if this is what he meant. I don't see the point of his directions to the Corinthians regarding the judging of prophecy if no prophecy was ever truly given in (as opposed to 'to') the Corinthian church. If these things were not for the whole Church for all time, then why did the Holy Spirit have them recorded? It would make sense that they be in the 'lost letters' of Paul but not in Scripture.