Earlier this week I finished my series on the “Gift of Prophecy.”  Below is a link to every post from beginning to end:

Prophetic Paranoia: 5 Things Prophecy is Not

The Gift of Prophecy Today

The Gift of Prophecy Today: What is Prophecy?

The Gift of Prophecy Today: Authority of Revelations

Gift of Prophecy: Ordering its Use in the Church

Gift of Prophecy: How to Evaluate a Prophetic Message

The Gift of Prophecy Today: A Response to Dr. Sam Storms

If you like this, you may also be interested in Reformed Continuationism where I tackle the continuation of the gifts of the Spirit by positively contending for them, as well as providing responses to common rebuttals.

The following are recommended resources on the gift of prophecy in particular and the Gifts of the Spirit in general:

 Showing the Spirit: A Theological Exposition of 1 Corinthians 12-14 by D.A. Carson

The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Gordon Fee

God’s Empowering Presence, Gordon Fee

Are Miraculous Gifts for Today: 4 Views ed. Wayne Grudem

Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem

The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today by Wayne Grudem

The Sovereign Spirit: Discerning His Gifts by Martyn Llyod-Jones

Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogousto Apostolic Gifts: Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit within Cessationist Theology by Vern Poythress

Convergence: Spiritual Journeys of a Charismatic Calvinist by Sam Storms

The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts by Sam Storms

The Case for Continuationism by Sam Storms

Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Part 1 by Sam Storms

Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? Part 2 by Sam Storms

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Reformed and Reforming by E-mail or RSS.

Today there is much conflict and confusion that surrounds the meaning of “revelation,” and rightfully so.  It is true that contemporary prophecies are based upon a revelation from God (1 Cor. 14.30).   With this being the case, are we to attribute infallibility to modern day prophecies and other revelatory gifts, such as tongues, and words of knowledge and wisdom?  Is not the authority and sufficiency of Scripture undermined?  In short, no.

Based upon my experience, this topic is arguably the most important one when contending for the crosspollination of continuationism with the Reformed Tradition.

In order to further define how I use continuationism, as well as to differentiate myself from others who use this label, I would like to answer this topic by responding to the position of Dr. Sam Storms.

In answering this question, Dr. Sam Storms, author, pastor, and president of Enjoying God Ministries, had the following to say in his book, The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts:

Whatever he [referring to God] discloses to the human mind is wholly free from error.  It is as infallible as God is. It is true in all its parts, completely devoid of falsehood. Indeed, the revelation, which is the root of every genuine prophetic utterance, is as inerrant and infallible as the written Word of God itself (the Bible) (pgs. 91-92)

In another place, Dr. Storms commented, “In terms of revelation alone, the New Testament prophetic gift does not differ from the Old Testament prophetic gift.”  Not only is this the case, but he continued saying, “They [those who receive a revelation] may interpret and apply, without error, what God has revealed” (Wayne Grudem ed., Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? 4 Views, pg. 207.)

Even though Dr. Storms has devoted many years to studying this topic, I do not believe that we can attribute such a level of authority to modern day prophecy.  I believe if we follow the “logical context” (Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation,pg. 21) of “revelation” (apo-kaluptw) from 1 Cor. 14.30, to the immediate and larger context, that we cannot attribute infallibility to revelations given outside of the inspired authors of the Bible.

The meaning of Revelation (apo-kaluptw)

The meaning of revelation (apo-kaluptw) alone does not allow us to deduce a level of inerrancy or infallibility in modern day prophetic messages.

Wayne Grudem relates how several instances of “to reveal” (apo-kaluptw) and “revelation” (apo-kaluyiς) can often be thought to have authority similar to advice and a sermon (Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, pg. 64).  Just because revelations are attributed to prophecies does necessitate that they carry infallible verbal authority.

Besides, if we were to parallel the usage of apo-kaluptw, namely Matt. 11.25-27; Rom. 1.18; Eph. 1.17; Phil. 3.15, we would observe that this word is not solely carry the notion of infallibility (Houston, pgs. 87-92)

Since the definition of “revelation” does not denote infallibility alone, we cannot press such a meaning from it.

The Immediate Context

The immediate context, namely, 1 Corinthians 14.36-40, does not allow for us to press a definition of infallibility.

Beginning with v. 36, Paul asks two rhetorical questions that imply a negative response,

“Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?”

Here it is implied that the divinely authoritative word of God was not being spoken by the Corinthian prophets and that God’s infallible word did not originate with them (Grudem, pg. 66)

Moreover, we read in verses 37-38,

“If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.”

From these verses we observe that Paul was exercising his apostolic authority over the Corinthian prophets with this letter.  Consequently, the immediate context does not allow for us to infer infallibility in modern day revelations.

The Larger Context

Finally, the larger context of 1 Corinthians 12-14 does not allow for us to conclude divine infallibility in revelations outside of apostolic authority.

In the midst of Paul’s excursion on the Excellency of love, we read in 1 Corinthians 13.9-10, 12,

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away…For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

What we observe within these verses is the imperfection of prophecy in three ways:

1. Limited revelation (“We prophecy in part,” v. 9; “when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away,” v. 10; “but then face to face,” v. 12),
2. Indirect revelation (“For now we see in a mirror,” v. 12); and
3. Weak revelation (“For now we see…dimly,” v. 12) (Grudem, pgs 101-102)

When reading of prophecy in chapters 12 and 14, we cannot do so apart from what Paul wrote in chapter 13 which lends further evidence that not all prophecy is infallible.

If revelations given outside of the apostles and apostolic men are not infallible, then we need to determine what level of authority we actually attribute to them.

What is the Authority of Revelations and Prophecy?

Revelations given by God today are done so under the authority of Scripture, not on par or above it.  These revelations are not infallible, yet fallible (i.e. liable to error) and lead to prophetic messages of the same quality.

If anything, a prophetic message has authority comparable to counsel given by others.  This is why every prophetic message – as well as advice we receive and messages we hear preached – must be filtered through the general and particular teachings of the Bible (1 Thess. 5.19-22).  For everything that we need to know about salvation, faith, and life is found in the Scriptures.

In clarifying this point, the authors of the Westminster Confession of Faith rightfully concluded,

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testament…All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life…The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men (Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.2).

Being inspired by God (2 Samuel 23.2; Matthew 15.6; Romans 3.2; 2 Timothy 3.16-17; 1 Peter 1.23; and 2 Peter 1.20-21) the Bible serves as the infallible rule in all matters pertaining to life and faith. Every revelation, prophecy, hunch, feeling, impression, and dream is to bow to the authority of God as expressed in the Scriptures.  This means that everything we believe to be a revelation or the leading of God is to be tested as to whether or not it conforms to the actual message of the Bible.

It is by looking to the general (i.e. Overall teaching of the Bible) and particular (i.e. Individual passages, paragraphs, chapters, etc…) that we find all that we need for salvation, faith, and life.

Even though revelations are imparted by God and are brought about by intuitive means, such as hunches and feelings, we are given no Scriptural or practical reason why we should attribute divine inerrancy or any other special status.  Just as information received through a logical process, such as studying, is authoritative insofar as it is conformed to Scriptures, so too are revelations purportedly received from God.

In the end, it is more about the content of a message than the means by which it is received.

[Updated: February 3, 2010]

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Reformed and Reforming by E-mail or RSS.

Consider sharing this post:

In 1 Corinthians 14.29 we read “Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.”  From this verse there are three different questions that need to be considered in creating an atmosphere of order: (1) Who are the “others?” (2) What does it mean to “weigh?” and (3) How are prophetic messages weighed?

Who are the others?

After allowing two or three prophets the opportunity to speak, Paul says that the Corinthians are to “let the others weight what is said.” (Italics mine).  Some have suggested that “the others” refers to those with the gift of distinguishing spirits from 1 Corinthians 12.10 or to the other prophets in 14.29.  However, for various reasons these positions are found deficient and we are left to conclude that “the others” refers to the entire congregation.[1]  Not only is this found to be the case here, but other New Testament evidence indicates the same, such as 1 Thessalonians 5.21 and 1 John 4.1-6.[2]  Since we have determined who “the others” are, we now turn our attention to their responsibility, “weigh what is said.”    

What does it mean to weigh?

The English verb “weigh” is derived from the Greek verb “διακριντωσαν,” which is the Present Active Imperative of “διακρiνω,” which means to “separate throughout, discriminate, discern, and hence, to decide, to judge.” (Vine’s Expository Dictionary of the New Testament).  In other words, to weigh a prophetic message means to “evaluate carefully” (David Garland, 1 Corinthians, pg. 662). 

As Wayne Grudem makes clear, this sense of weighing is an appropriate fit for 1 Corinthians 14.29, for it speaks “of a process whereby every member of the congregation would listen carefully and evaluate each statement, distinguishing what he or she felt to be good from the less good, what was thought to be helpful from the unhelpful, what was perceived to be true from the false”(Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament, pg. 60)

How are Prophetic Messages weighed?

Since the responsibility of weighing prophetic messages does not reside with a select group of people, the entire congregation has the personal responsibility of juxtaposing a prophetic message with the authority of Scripture.  The Scripture’s, observed Wayne Grudem, have always served as,

The criterion for evaluation of public speech in the churches seems always to have been conformity to Scripture or received teaching (Acts 17.11; 1 Cor. 14.37-38; Gal. 1.8; 1 John 4.2-3, 6), and we may expect that that would be the standard used here as well (ibid., pg. 61).

Consequently, regardless if public speech is derived from intuition or sound reason, the content of the message is to be weighed by the authority of the Scriptures.  This is simply done by comparing and contrasting what is said with what is written.  We would do well to follow the example set by the Berean Jews who painstakingly searched the Scriptures to see if what was said by the Apostle Paul was true (Acts 17.11). 

Conclusion

Regardless how a revelation is received, it must be filtered through the general and particular teachings of Scripture.  By adhering to such practices, individuals and groups will protect themselves from holding fast to false prophetic messages.  Consequently, revelations – or any public message spoken in a gathered assembly – are more about the content than the means by which it was received.  It is for this reason that Jack Deere suggests a high-level of humility when testing revelations through the Bible, its character, its fruit, and it’s content.

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Pre-em-i-nence by E-mail or RSS.

After Paul concluded his extensive discourse on prophecy and tongues in 1 Corinthians 14.1-25, he goes on to provide instructions for the Corinthians in how to regulate the usage of prophecy and tongues in a gathered assembly.  We see this in 1 Cor. 14.26, 29-33, 40:

What then, brothers?  When you come together, each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.  Let all things be done for building up…Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others weigh what is said.  If a revelation is made to another sitting there, let the first be silent.  For you can all prophesy one by one, so that all may learn and all be encouraged, and the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets.  For God is not a God of confusion but of peace…But all things should be done decently and in order (italics mine).

From this passage there are three themes that emerge: (1) There is to be order in a gathered assembly and amongst those prophesying; (2) Things are to be done for building up the gathered assembly; and (3) Prophetic messages are to be weighed by others.  

There is to be order in the when the church meets for worship 

From 1 Corinthians 14.26-40 we observe that the Corinthians gathered assemblies contained improprieties, disorder, and confusion (Gordon Fee, 1 Corinthians, pg. 712).  In light of these errors Paul does not provide an “order” of worship per se, but rather guiding principles in how they can best create an atmosphere of order. 

In creating order within a gathered assembly, the expression of just one spiritual gift is not to dominate (Wayne Grudem, Gift of Prophecy, pg. 223).  That is, the expression of just one spiritual gift – rather it is prophecy, teaching, or speaking in tongues – during times of corporate worship should not be sought.  This observation is based upon 1 Corinthians 14.26 where Paul relates that when the Corinthians gather together, “each one has a hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation.”  What we see here is that a diversity of gifts are shared during gathered assemblies.  Gordon Fee said of this verse that it “echoes the concerns of chap. 12, that each one has opportunity to participate in the corporate ministry of the body” (Fee, pg. 690).  Therefore, gathered assemblies should both encourage and allow the orderly expression of a diversity of gifts, especially among the more timid congregants. 

Corporate worship should not revolve around just one person 

In addition to a diversity of gifts being encouraged during times of worship, the gathered assembly should not revolve around just one person.  This is observed to be the case in Paul’s limitation on how many can speak in tongues and prophecy in verses 27 and 29.  Wayne Grudem believes that these two verses insinuate more than a limitation on how many can speak, but for how long they can speak as well (Grudem, 223-224).  By encouraging the expression of a diversity of gifts through a diversity of people, “Paul’s guidelines are for good order; he may wish to check any selfish monopoly of prophecy by those who may esteem themselves as belonging to a select circle of prophets taking center stage” (David Garland, 1 Corinthians, pg. 660).  It is for this reason that corporate worship should encourage and allow for times of sharing a myriad of gifts through a diversity of people in an orderly way.        

The sharing of gifts should be done with the intent of building up others

The expression of all spiritual gifts through a diversity of people is to be done with the intent of building up the gathered assembly.  This observation is based upon 1 Corinthians 14.26, “Let all things be done for building up” (italics mine).  Since spiritual gifts are intended for the edification of the body during a gathered assembly, John Calvin said that “the Church must not be taken up to no purpose with unprofitable exercises, but must, in whatever is done, have an eye to edification” (John Calvin, 1 Corinthians, pg. 458).  Therefore, order and purpose must be maintained during the time of a gathered assembly to ensure that the body is being edified and that people are sharing their gifts to this end (1 Peter 4.10). 

Creating order

Keeping in mind that God desires the expression of a diversity of gifts through various people with the intent of building up His body, we are not to forget that this is to be done in an orderly way.  While this is the case, I believe there should be an additional level of weighing and order included, namely, that the sharing of prophetic messagess, words of knowledge, wisdom, tongues, etc…, should be approved by the authority figure(s) of a congregation prior to its proclamation in times of gathe.  Principally this is not deduced from this passage; however, I believe this added element of order allows authority figures within the church, who are presumably wiser and well trained in the Scriptures, the opportunity to discern rather or not a prophetic message is valid and appropriate to share at that given time.  Furthermore, this additional level provides good order and ensures that congregants are not speaking out of line or even drawing undue attention to themselves.  Therefore, gathered assemblies should consider incorporating designated elders with the responsibility of weighing prophetic messages and maintaining order.

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Pre-em-i-nence by E-mail or RSS.

In 1 Corinthians 14.1, Paul encouraged his readers to “Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.”  To protect ourselves from reading this passage through a 21st Century lens, we need to ask the question, “What did Paul mean by prophesy?”  Did he desire for the Corinthians to practice fortune telling?  Palm readings?  Astrology?  Psychic predictions?

Based upon the historical usage of the word at that time, prophesy to Paul would have meant, “to speak forth by divine inspirations, to predict” (William F. Arndt, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Literature, pg. 92). Although prophecy may contain elements of prediction (Acts 21.4; 16.6-10), the content of 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that prophesy is much more.  For instance,

…prophecy is primarily based upon a spontaneous revelation (1 Cor. 14.29-30),

…delivered to a gathered assembly (1 Cor. 14. 3, 5, 6-25, 29-33),

…with the intent to build-up, encourage, or console Christians (1 Cor. 14.3),

…or to even bring conviction of sin and the consequent conversion of non-Christians (1 Cor. 14.24-25) (Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, pg. 595).

In simpler terms, prophecy is comprised of a revelation (what is revealed by God), an interpretation (how the person who received the revelation interprets its meaning), and application (what the person/people on the receiving end of the interpreted revelation do with it) (Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today, pg. 76) Read the rest of this entry »

Today there is much conflict and confusion that surrounds the meaning of “revelation,” and rightfully so.  It is true that contemporary prophecies are based upon a revelation from God (1 Cor. 14.30).   With this being the case, are we to attribute infallibility to modern day prophecies and other revelatory gifts, such as tongues, and words of knowledge and wisdom?  Is not the authority of Scripture diminished if revelations continue today?

Based upon my experience, this topic is arguably the most important one when contending for the crosspollination of continuationism with the Reformed Tradition.

In order to further define how I use continuationism, as well as to differentiate myself from others who use this label, I would like to answer this topic by responding to the position of Dr. Sam Storms.

In answering this question, Dr. Sam Storms, author, pastor, and president of Enjoying God Ministries, had the following to say in his book, The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts:

Whatever he [referring to God] discloses to the human mind is wholly free from error.  It is as infallible as God is. It is true in all its parts, completely devoid of falsehood. Indeed, the revelation, which is the root of every genuine prophetic utterance, is as inerrant and infallible as the written Word of God itself (the Bible).[1]

In another place, Dr. Storms commented, “In terms of revelation alone, the New Testament prophetic gift does not differ from the Old Testament prophetic gift.”  Not only is this the case, but he continued saying, “They [those who receive a revelation] may interpret and apply, without error, what God has revealed.”[2]

Even though Dr. Storms has devoted many years to studying this topic, I do not believe that we can attribute such a level of authority to modern day prophecy.  I believe if we follow the “logical context”[3] of “revelation” (apo-kaluptw) from 1 Cor. 14.30, to the immediate and larger context, that we cannot attribute infallibility to revelations given outside of the inspired authors of the Bible.

The meaning of Revelation (apo-kaluptw)

The meaning of revelation (apo-kaluptw) alone does not allow us to deduce a level of inerrancy or infallibility in modern day prophetic messages.

Wayne Grudem relates how several instances of “to reveal” (apo-kaluptw) and “revelation” (apo-kaluyiς) can often be thought to have authority similar to advice and a sermon.[4] Just because revelations are attributed to prophecies does necessitate that they carry infallible verbal authority.[5]

Besides, if we were to parallel the usage of apo-kaluptw, namely Matt. 11.25-27; Rom. 1.18; Eph. 1.17; Phil. 3.15, we would observe that this word is not solely carry the notion of infallibility.[6]

Since the definition of “revelation” does not denote infallibility alone, we cannot press such a meaning from it.

The Immediate Context

The immediate context, namely, 1 Corinthians 14.36-40, does not allow for us to press a definition of infallibility.

Beginning with v. 36, Paul asks two rhetorical questions that imply a negative response,

“Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached?”

Here it is implied that the divinely authoritative word of God was not being spoken by the Corinthian prophets and that God’s infallible word did not originate with them.[7]

Moreover, we read in verses 37-38,

“If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized.”

From these verses we observe that Paul was exercising his apostolic authority over the Corinthian prophets with this letter.[8] Consequently, the immediate context does not allow for us to infer infallibility in modern day revelations.

The Larger Context

Finally, the larger context of 1 Corinthians 12-14 does not allow for us to conclude divine infallibility in revelations outside of apostolic authority.

In the midst of Paul’s excursion on the Excellency of love, we read in 1 Corinthians 13.9-10, 12,

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away…For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

What we observe within these verses is the imperfection of prophecy in three ways:

1. Limited revelation (“We prophecy in part,” v. 9; “when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away,” v. 10; “but then face to face,” v. 12),
2. Indirect revelation (“For now we see in a mirror,” v. 12); and
3. Weak revelation (“For now we see…dimly,” v. 12).[9]

When reading of prophecy in chapters 12 and 14, we cannot do so apart from what Paul wrote in chapter 13 which lends further evidence that not all prophecy is infallible.

If revelations given outside of the apostles and apostolic men are not infallible, then we need to determine what level of authority we actually attribute to them.

What is the Authority of Revelations and Prophecy?

Revelations given by God today are done so under the authority of Scripture, not on par or above it.  These revelations are not infallible, yet fallible (i.e. liable to error) and lead to prophetic messages of the same quality.

If anything, a prophetic message has authority comparable to counsel given by others.  This is why every prophetic message – as well as advice we receive and messages we hear preached – must be filtered through the general and particular teachings of the Bible (1 Thess. 5.19-22).  For everything that we need to know about salvation, faith, and life is found in the Scriptures.

In clarifying this point, the authors of the Westminster Confession of Faith rightfully concluded,

Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testament…All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life…The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.[10]

Being inspired by God (2 Samuel 23.2; Matthew 15.6; Romans 3.2; 2 Timothy 3.16-17; 1 Peter 1.23; and 2 Peter 1.20-21) the Bible serves as the infallible rule in all matters pertaining to life and faith. Every revelation, prophecy, hunch, feeling, impression, and dream is to bow to the authority of God as expressed in the Scriptures.  This means that everything we believe to be a revelation or the leading of God is to be tested as to whether or not it conforms to the actual message of the Bible.

It is by looking to the general (i.e. Overall teaching of the Bible) and particular (i.e. Individual passages, paragraphs, chapters, etc…) that we find all that we need for salvation, faith, and life.

Even though revelations are imparted by God and are brought about by intuitive means, such as hunches and feelings, we are given no Scriptural or practical reason why we should attribute divine inerrancy or any other special status.  Just as information received through a logical process, such as studying, is authoritative insofar as it is conformed to Scriptures, so too are revelations purportedly received from God.

In the end, it is more about the content of a message than the means by which it is received.

[Updated: January 9, 2010]

[1] Sam Storms, The Beginners Guide to Spiritual Gifts (Ventura, CA: Regal, 2002), 91-92

[2] Wayne Grudem ed., Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? 4 Views (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1996), 207.

[3] Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1991).  Dr. Osborne describes the “logical context” as “a series of concentric circles moving outward from the passage itself” (21).  In other words, the semantic range of a word is first derived from a word study.  The meaning of any given word in context is understood by it’s usage in the immediate context, major section, book, writer, testament, Bible, and genre.  Dr. Grant reminds us that “as we move nearer the center [the immediate context], the influence upon the meaning of the passage increases” (21).

[4] Wayne Grudem, The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1988), 64.  Also see William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker, eds., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 2d ed., (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 92.

[5] Houston, 87-92.

[6] Ibid., 87-92.

[7] Grudem, 66.

[8] Ibid., 67-68.

[9] Ibid., 101-102.

[10] Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 1.2.

Enjoy this post?  Get more like them by subscribing to Reformed and Reforming by E-mail or RSS.

Consider sharing this post:

The continuation of the gifts of the Spirit is as hotly debated today as it ever was.  Why not?

From parading like drunkards, laughing uncontrollably, barking like dogs, oinking like pigs, to living extravagant lifestyles on the financial “seeds” of their followers, there have been countless documented abuses within groups associated with the “charismatic movement” (D.A. Carson, Showing the Spirit and John MacArthur, Charismatic Chaos).  In light of such recklessness, many may believe this is reason enough to reject the practice of spiritual gifts.  I assert that it is not.

Getting Started

For those of you unfamiliar with who I am, I do consider myself to be a Christian that adheres to Orthodox Christianity, the Reformed Tradition, a Missional lifestyle, Presbyterianism, and the continuation of the spiritual gifts.  Today many contend that the gifts of the Spirit have ceased and are no longer active within the church today.

These gifts under consideration are particularly outlined in 1 Corinthians 12.4-11, and some of Romans 12.9-13 and Ephesians 4.11.

Over the next several weeks I will not so much argue for the continuation of the spiritual gifts, but rather what I hope to be a Reformed perspective on the continuation of the gift of prophecy. Read the rest of this entry »

Since I’ll be contending for the continuation of prophecy over the next several weeks, I figured it would be fitting to relate what modern prophecy is not.  The following list is not exhaustive, but a brief and simple guide into the “5 Things Prophecy is Not.”

Fortune telling, magic eight-ball, palm reading, astrology, ESP, etc…

The gift of prophecy within the New Testament is not to be mistaken for fortune telling, magic eight-balls, psychic predictions, palm readings, astrology, genies in bottles, ESP, etc…   The gift of prophecy cannot be turned-on by anyone’s whimsical desires, or even by a person’s one-time donation or monthly contribution.

On one hand, prophecy may contain elements of direction and foretelling (Acts 21.4; 16.6-10); however, this is not its primary purpose.  Prophecy is best clarified in 1 Corinthians 14, which indicates that prophecy is:

primarily based upon a spontaneous revelation from God (1 Corinthians 14.29-30),

delivered to a gathered assembly (1 Corinthians 14.3, 5, 6-25, 29-33),

with the intent to build-up, encourage, or console Christians (1 Corinthians 14.3), or

to even bring conviction of sin and the consequent conversion of non-Christians (1 Corinthians 14.24-25) (Gordon Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, pg. 595).

On the other hand, if a prophetic message contains an element of foretelling, this does not mean that the message carries an infallible weight similar to the Scriptures (see below).  If anything, a prophetic message has authority comparable to counsel that we receive from friends.  This is why every prophetic message must be filtered through the general and particular teachings of the Bible.  By looking to the general (i.e. overall teaching of the Bible) and particular (i.e. individual passages, paragraphs, chapters, etc…) we can protect ourselves from falling victim to “proof texting” revelatory messages with passages taken out of their immediate context as well as the meta-narrative of the Scriptures.  In the end, seeking out prophetic messages for direction is misguided and wrong.

Moreover, the gift of prophecy – or any other gift of the Spirit – is not even brought on by the creation of the perfect environment or a person’s will alone.  For instance, just because someone has a stage, great lighting, a choir, TV cameras rolling and a large crowd present does not guarantee that a person will be capable of delivering a prophetic message.

You see, prophecy is solely founded upon a revelation from a sovereign God (1 Corinthians 14.30-31; see also 1 Corinthians 12.11; Hebrews 2.4; and 1 Peter 4.10); therefore, prophecies cannot be given apart from one.  We are to seek the spiritual gifts, especially that we may prophecy (1 Corinthians 14.1), but in doing so we cannot overlook the reality that it is God who sovereignly gives revelation and reserves the right not to impart one.

Uncontrollable

Prophecy is not uncontrollable by the person delivering the message.  When a revelation is given by God to a person, it is not done by God placing the person in a trance or by Him taking control the individual.  From 1 Corinthians 14.30-31 we can readily see that those who received a revelation did not lose self-control and convulse wildly on the floor.  We observe that they were able to receive a message and deliver it in a time and manner fitting to the situation.  Moreover, Paul explicitly says that “the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets.  For God is not a God of confusion but of peace” (1 Corinthians 14.32-33). Read the rest of this entry »