----------------------
Oddly, he never quotes more than a couple of snippets from it, and in fact, never quotes any more than a phrase from any Bible verse. It is astonishing to us that a supposed Bible teacher cannot quote the Bible.
Before we begin, we shall quote the whole passage to which Dr. MacArthur will frequently refer:
Lk. 2:36-38 There was also a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher. She was very old; she had lived with her husband seven years after her marriage, 37 and then was a widow until she was eighty-four. She never left the temple but worshipped night and day, fasting and praying. 38 Coming up to them at that very moment, she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.
Lastly, we wonder about the purpose of this article. It is ostensibly intended to teach about Anna, but there seems to be an underlying agenda to diminish her and every woman in the Bible, especially those who prophesied. We don't know what that agenda is, but we will be on the lookout for clues.
-------------------
This post was first published in December, 2015. —ed.
(...)
A Surprising Job Description
What did Luke mean by prophetess? He was not suggesting that Anna predicted the future. She was not a fortune-teller. He didn’t necessarily even suggest that she received special revelation from God. The word prophetess simply designated a woman who spoke the Word of God. (Dr. MacArthur makes several proclamations about Anna that contradict the biblical record. Perhaps that is why he only quoted snippets of the passage. Luke writes,
In all the Old Testament, only five women are ever referred to as “prophetess.” The first was Miriam, Moses’ sister, identified as a prophetess in Exodus 15:20, where she led the women of Israel in a psalm of praise to God about the drowning of Pharaoh and his army. The simple one-stanza psalm Miriam sang was the substance of her only recorded prophecy (v. 21). The fact that God had once spoken through her, unfortunately, later became an occasion for pride and rebellion (Numbers 12:1–2), (Miriam may have spoken many prophecies. We don't know, because the Bible doesn't record them.)
In Judges 4:4, we are introduced to the second woman in the Old Testament designated as a prophetess: “Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth” (Judges 4:4 NKJV). She was the only female among the varied assortment of judges who led the Jewish people before the monarchy was established in Israel. In fact, she was the only woman in all of Scripture who ever held that kind of leadership position and was blessed for it. (No, she is the only one mentioned in Scripture. There may have been many others not mentioned.)
In 2 Kings 22:14, Scripture mentions Huldah as a prophetess. In verses 15–20, she had a word from the Lord for Hilkiah the priest and others. Nothing about her, or her background, is known. In fact, she is mentioned only here and in a parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 34:22–28.
The only two other women called prophetesses in the Old Testament were an otherwise unknown woman named Noadiah (Nehemiah 6:14), who was classified among the false prophets; and Isaiah’s wife (Isaiah 8:3), who was called a prophetess only because she was married to Isaiah, not because she herself prophesied (Again Dr. MacArthur argues from what isn't written. This woman may have spoke many prophecies. We simply don't know.)
Rarely did God speak to his people through women, (That we know of.)
This post was first published in December, 2015. —ed.
(...)
A Surprising Job Description
What did Luke mean by prophetess? He was not suggesting that Anna predicted the future. She was not a fortune-teller. He didn’t necessarily even suggest that she received special revelation from God. The word prophetess simply designated a woman who spoke the Word of God. (Dr. MacArthur makes several proclamations about Anna that contradict the biblical record. Perhaps that is why he only quoted snippets of the passage. Luke writes,
...she gave thanks to God and spoke about the child to all who were looking forward to the redemption of Jerusalem.
What could Anna have spoken about the child? Did she remark about his wavy hair, or how he looks like his mother? Of course not. Anna was a prophetess. She spoke about the child, and she spoke to all. Even men. She proclaimed Jesus' ministry and destiny as the savior of the world, the lamb of God.
Further, she was clearly designated a woman prophet, not merely one who spoke the generic Word of God:
prophétis a woman to whom future events or things hidden from others are at times revealed...
There was also a prophetess, Anna... There is no doubt about her status. Dr. MacArthur wants to lower Anna's status for some reason. He has an agenda. Perhaps as we continue we will be able to discern what it is.)
Anna may have been a teacher of the Old Testament to other women. Or she may have simply had a private ministry there in the temple offering words of encouragement and instruction from the Hebrew Scriptures to other women who came to worship. (Speculation.)
Anna may have been a teacher of the Old Testament to other women. Or she may have simply had a private ministry there in the temple offering words of encouragement and instruction from the Hebrew Scriptures to other women who came to worship. (Speculation.)
Nothing suggests that she was a source of revelation, or that any special revelation ever came to her directly. (This prophetess spoke about the child...)
Even her realization that Jesus was the Messiah seemed to have come from the revelation given to Simeon and subsequently overheard by her. (Whaaaat? Again Dr. MacArthur speculates, and this time reduces Anna to parroting Simeon's prophecy! If this is indeed true, then Anna's presence in the narrative is meaningless. Why would Luke take pains to mention a "prophetess" whose best work was to simply copy what Simeon had just said?
This is just dumb. Dr. MacArthur very badly wants Anna to not be a real prophetess. Again, we are on the lookout for clues as to why he wants to defrock her.)
She is nonetheless called a prophetess because it was her habit to declare the truth of God’s Word to others. (Again he speculates, based on absolutely no evidence. The biblical record makes no mention of such a ministry.
But as an aside, we should mention that Dr. MacArthur opposes women teachers in church. If Anna was indeed teaching men in the temple, he needs to explain himself.)
This gift for proclaiming God’s truth ultimately played a major role in the ministry she is still best remembered for.
In all the Old Testament, only five women are ever referred to as “prophetess.” The first was Miriam, Moses’ sister, identified as a prophetess in Exodus 15:20, where she led the women of Israel in a psalm of praise to God about the drowning of Pharaoh and his army. The simple one-stanza psalm Miriam sang was the substance of her only recorded prophecy (v. 21). The fact that God had once spoken through her, unfortunately, later became an occasion for pride and rebellion (Numbers 12:1–2), (Miriam may have spoken many prophecies. We don't know, because the Bible doesn't record them.)
and the Lord disciplined her for that sin by temporarily smiting her with leprosy (vv. 9–15). (Why does Dr. MacArthur take special pains to mention Miriam's leprosy? And why does he omit the fact that she and Aaron conspired together against Moses? He is certainly intent on bringing Miriam down a notch or two. Again, we wonder why.)
In Judges 4:4, we are introduced to the second woman in the Old Testament designated as a prophetess: “Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth” (Judges 4:4 NKJV). She was the only female among the varied assortment of judges who led the Jewish people before the monarchy was established in Israel. In fact, she was the only woman in all of Scripture who ever held that kind of leadership position and was blessed for it. (No, she is the only one mentioned in Scripture. There may have been many others not mentioned.)
The Lord seemed to raise her up as a rebuke to the men of her generation who were paralyzed by fear. (Speculation.)
She saw herself not as a usurper of men, but as a woman who functioned in a maternal capacity, (Dr. MacArthur's claims are getting more and more egregious. There is no mention of this "maternal capacity." There isn't even mention of some sort of femininity coming to bear in the entire account. We read this:
Ju. 4:5 She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites came to her to have their disputes decided.
So she was fully a judge. And, she gave the Word of the Lord in military strategy [Ju. 4:6]. She was a leader of part of the attack [Ju. 4:7]. When Barak wanted her to go with him, she consented, but then prophesied the Word of the Lord in judgment against him [Ju. 4:9].
She then prophesied the Word of the Lord regarding the promised victory [Ju. 4:14]. This is similar to Joshua's prophetic proclamation in Jo. 10:19.
Then comes her long prophetic song of victory in Judges chapter 5. This is similar to the song of victory sung by Moses in Exodus 15.
In other words, there is no discernable difference between Deborah's leadership and prophetic ministry and other Bible characters who were in similar roles.
But Dr. MacArthur wants to reduce her down to a "maternal capacity," without evidence. Why?)
while men like Barak were being raised up to step into their proper roles of leadership (Judges 5:12). (Wow. It keeps getting worse. Let's quote the verse:
Ju. 5:12 `Wake up, wake up, Deborah! Wake up, wake up, break out in song! Arise, O Barak! Take captive your captives, O son of Abinoam.’
Does this in any way sound like the installation of a man into his proper role? Both Deborah and Barak were commanded to awake and arise.
In fact, it was Deborah who was in authority over Barak:
Ju. 4:6 She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: `Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead the way to Mount Tabor."
There is nothing in the biblical record that suggests that Deborah is anything but the proper leader and prophetic voice for Israel at this time.)
That’s why she referred to herself as “a mother in Israel” (v. 7 NKJV). She gave instructions to Barak from the Lord (Judges 4:6), so it seems she received revelation from God, at least on that one occasion. (Yet another diminutive comment. This is getting concerning to us.)
In 2 Kings 22:14, Scripture mentions Huldah as a prophetess. In verses 15–20, she had a word from the Lord for Hilkiah the priest and others. Nothing about her, or her background, is known. In fact, she is mentioned only here and in a parallel passage in 2 Chronicles 34:22–28.
The only two other women called prophetesses in the Old Testament were an otherwise unknown woman named Noadiah (Nehemiah 6:14), who was classified among the false prophets; and Isaiah’s wife (Isaiah 8:3), who was called a prophetess only because she was married to Isaiah, not because she herself prophesied (Again Dr. MacArthur argues from what isn't written. This woman may have spoke many prophecies. We simply don't know.)
(unless her decision to name her son “Maher-Shalal-Hash-Baz” could be counted as a prophecy).
(Having completed his chronicle of women who spoke prophetically, we find that Dr. MacArthur omitted the Queen of Sheba [2Ch. 9:5-8] and Philip's four daughters [Ac. 21:9]. He doesn't mention Elizabeth's prophecy [Lk. 1:41-45] or Mary's prophecy [Luke 1:46-55]. And of course, the Word of the Lord delivered to Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome [Mk. 16:6-7].)
Rarely did God speak to his people through women, (That we know of.)
and never did any woman have an ongoing prophetic ministry similar to that of Elijah, Isaiah, or any of the other key Old Testament prophets. (That we know of.)
In other words, there is nothing anywhere in Scripture to indicate that any women ever held a prophetic office. (Well, Dr. MacArthur just chronicled the prophetic ministry of several women. Did he even read his own writing?)
The idea that “prophetess” was a technical term for an official position or an ongoing ministry of direct revelation is simply nowhere to be found in Scripture. (Again, did he even read what he wrote? Doesn't calling a woman a prophetess necessarily mean she is a prophetess?)
Luke’s identification of Anna as a “prophetess,” therefore, did not necessarily mean that she personally received divine revelation. (Actually, it most definitely does.)
Luke’s identification of Anna as a “prophetess,” therefore, did not necessarily mean that she personally received divine revelation. (Actually, it most definitely does.)
When Luke called her a “prophetess,” we are not to imagine that this was an office she filled. (Yes, we should. We should accept the plain testimony of Scripture, and not try to explain it away.)
Most likely, it meant that she had a reputation as a gifted teacher of other women and a faithful encourager of her fellow worshipers in the temple. (Speculation.)
When she spoke, it was about the Word of God. She had evidently spent a lifetime hiding God’s Word in her heart. Naturally, that was the substance of what she usually had to say. So when Luke called her a “prophetess,” he gave insight into her character and a clue about what occupied her mind and her conversation. (This is simply egregious. Negating the plain words of Scripture for a speculative theory based on, well, nothing.
Bottom line: Receiving and delivering a Word from the Lord makes one a prophet or a prophetess. No amount of clever maneuvering can change this obvious fact.
Having arrived at the end, we still don't know Dr. MacArthur's underlying agenda against women prophets.)
(...)
No comments:
Post a Comment