Why today’s “prophets” aren’t prophets - posted by Amy Spreeman

Found here. Our comments in bold.

--------------------

The author purports to be a Bible teacher, a discerner of truth. It therefore surprises us as to how superficial is this explanation. In fact, she manages to quote only a single Scripture. How does one teach the Bible while barely quoting the Bible?

Ultimately, we are not terribly interested in what she has to say about contemporary prophets and their shortcomings. Even if there wasn't a single person on earth correctly expressing the prophetic gift, this does not tell us anything about what the Bible teaches. 

--------------------

The best definition of the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR)­ movement is:

A fast-growing Dominionist movement of new Apostles and Prophets who will lead God’s end-times army in establishing His kingdom on earth, by taking authority over earthly and spiritual realms.

Let’s talk about the word Prophet. How do we define it? How does the NAR define it? More importantly, how does God define Prophet?

The real prophets that we read about in Scripture actually spoke for God. He would tell them to speak an oracle to a certain people group, and it was always God’s words, not the prophet’s.

One of the challenges we run into with the word Prophet is that Evangelicals have redefined it to mean something other than how the Bible describes prophets.

Today you may hear that a prophet is one has the gift of being able to recall just the right Scripture verse for a particular situation. Does the Holy Spirit help our minds recall Scripture verses that we’ve learned? Absolutely! This is Wisdom as we grow in maturity in the Word of God. But is that really the “gift of Prophecy?” (The author will never explain why having an appropriate Scripture come to mind is not hearing from God.)

Not the way the Bible defines prophets. (Term-switching. The author went from "prophets to "the gift of prophecy," but now she returns to using the term "prophets." These are not the same thing. In fact, she will never again mention the gift of prophecy.) 

What does the Bible say about prophets? In the Old Testament there were more than 133 named prophets, and there were prophets in the early church as well. But remember, the early Christians did not have the complete Bible. (Did the OT prophets have the completed Bible? 

This is important, because there are many prophecies mentioned in the Bible that were not included in the Bible. Many prophets are mentioned, but none of their prophecies are recorded. This of course means that prophetic utterance is not automatically Scripture, which means that prophecies can be spoken whether or not there's the completed Bible.

Further, if not having the completed Bible is a prerequisite for there being prophets, the author will need to explain where in the Bible we find this criteria.)

The last book of the New Testament (Revelation) was not completed until late in the first century. So, the Lord sent prophets to proclaim God’s Word to His people. (This is a different statement than Him sending prophets to proclaim Scripture to His people.)

On the other hand, The NAR has its own description of Prophet. These prophets make predictions based on the visions they say they download from God. They claim to receive direct instructions for the church, to build and advance the kingdom. (Unreferenced claim. Who in the "NAR" has said that prophecy is to build and advance the kingdom?)

You might think we can build the Kingdom by leading people to Christ. Yes, Christ does grow His kingdom with every saint He regenerates, but His Kingdom is already built, (More unreferenced claims. The author asserted what the NAR supposedly says about prophets then mocks what she says they say. We have no context for understanding her characterization of this idea, we don't know what the NAR actually teaches about the Kingdom, and we don't even know if the author is accurately conveying what they believe. 

And by the way, how can this kingdom be fully built if newly-saved people are being added to it?

Further, what about this: 

Mt. 11:12 From the days of John the Baptist until now, the kingdom of heaven has been forcefully advancing, and forceful men lay hold of it.

This kingdom is advancing, a word the author says the NAR uses. 

And, a kingdom already fully built does not advance.)

and it is not of this world. (Another unreferenced claim. Yes, it is a true claim, but the author needs to explain. She needs to tell us her version of the Kingdom, and she needs to account for how the Kingdom connects to earth. For example, Jesus taught us to pray, 

Mt. 6:10 your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.

This suggests that His kingdom has not fully come, since His will is not being fully done on earth. And, it also means that His Kingdom does express itself on earth. We are to pray that the earth comes into conformance with His kingdom in heaven.

Again, the author needs to explain.)

But unlike the prophets in the Bible, NAR prophets: RARELY warn you of the coming judgment for unrepentant sinners. (Certainly repentance is important, but we would ask the author to provide a verse uttered by a NT prophet which articulates repentance. Yes, John the Baptist commanded repentance [Mt. 3:2], but most scholars include him in the OT prophets. 

Jesus spoke about repentance a lot [Mt. 4:17], but He isn't exactly a prophet in the strict sense.

Peter [Ac. 2:38] and Paul [Ac. 17:30] commanded repentance, but they were apostles. So where are the NT prophets warning of coming judgment for unrepentant sinners?)

RARELY point you to repentance and reconciliation with God.
RARELY ever tell you to test the spirits. In fact the prophetic predictions are so vague that there is really no way to test them. ("Rarely." This means that they sometimes do these things.

The author has yet to explain NT prophecy or the gift of prophecy.)

Are there true prophets today? If the purpose of a prophet was to reveal truth from God, why would we need prophets if we have the completed revelation from God in the Bible? (Um, yeah, no. "Truth" isn't the same thing as "Scripture." "Completed revelation" does not preclude prophecy. As we mentioned, there are lots of prophecies that did not get included in the Bible. Definitionally this means that revelation is not automatically Scripture.

And why did the early church have prophets? It had the apostles speaking revelation. If the purpose of NT prophets really was to "reveal truth," Then NT prophets were redundant. 

Further, what Scriptures were being written here: 

1Co. 14:26 What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation. All of these must be done for the strengthening of the church.

The author needs to explain her pronouncements, utilizing the whole counsel of Scripture.)

If prophets were the “foundation” of the early church, are we still building the “foundation” today? (No. The gift of prophecy does not build foundations.)

In the book of Hebrews, God makes it quite clear that He no longer requires prophets to speak for Him:

Hebrews 1:1-3


(Sigh. This is simply bad Bible teaching. There's no other way to describe it. In this passage the writer of Hebrews was telling his Jewish audience about the supremacy of the Son, which includes the supremacy of His words. Previously God spoke to their fathers [the patriarchs and other OT characters] via the OT prophets. Now He speaks directly to His people [we who are saved]. And He still speaks to sustain the universe.

If God no longer requires any sort of prophets, then how did the writer of Hebrews provide the inspired Scripture that follows this statement? How did every other NT writer, writing after this statement, provide inspired Scripture? Why did Paul describe the gift of prophecy? Why did he tell the Ephesian church about apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers?

And finally, where does the Bible tell us that the purpose of prophets was to write Scripture? That's what she means when she says that prophets reveal truth from God. But we can't find this concept in the NT either.

The author is simply making things up.)

If indeed the self-titled prophets of today are as valid as the ones God anointed in the Old Testament, then Deuteronomy 18:22 and Jeremiah 28:9 both say that the prophets in the Bible had to be 100 percent accurate, or they were put to death. That’s how seriously God takes anyone claiming to speak for Him, claiming “thus sayeth the Lord.” (So is the author saying she wants to obey Scripture and put these false prophets to death? If not, why not? She cannot pick and choose what she wants to apply. If contemporary prophets are required to be 100% correct, then if they are not they must be put to death.)

NAR prophecies are often unfulfilled or false. But yet they continue to be upheld as prophetic authorities. Many of them contradict each other – there is no unity. (This is certainly true. But it does not speak to the biblical case for or against present day prophecy.)

Prophetess Jennifer Leclaire, former editor of Charisma Magazine and inventor of the Sneaky Squid spirit says that when prophecy doesn’t come true, it’s because you didn’t engage in intercessory prayer enough to make it come to be. They will blame it on the people for failing to do something. (Sometimes this could be true. Perhaps certain utterances should indeed be be prayed in.)

Mike Bickle says that the majority – 80 percent – of all of the dreams, visions and manifestations at these services, seminars and conferences are FAKE. But it’s okay, because 20 percent are true, and we need to hold on to the true, he says. (Bickel is correct. This is exactly what is conveyed here: 

1Co. 14:29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.

"Weigh" is diakrinó, which means 'to separate throughout or wholly' (dia, 'asunder,' krinō, 'to judge,' from a root kri, meaning 'separation'), then, to distinguish, decide..." This is the active discerning of prophecy, separating out the true from the false, the good from the bad. 

It's what Paul commanded. 

Therefore, the act of weighing acknowledges that contemporary prophecy is not 100% correct. That's why Paul wrote this: 

1Co. 13:9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part...

Clearly Paul was not talking about prophecy that articulated Scripture. The prophetic gift is only partial, a poor reflection in a mirror. We only see some of the picture, not entirely clear. 

This is why contemporary prophecy is to be weighed.)

Prophetess Wendy Alec has a very popular book: Journal of the Unknown Prophet, and she claims that she’s received this word directly from Jesus: “For the Word alone is yesterday’s manna, and it is no longer enough to feed my people.”

The Bible tells us that yesterday’s manna bred worms and it stunk. How is that for trashing the word of God? (Um, no. She said "the word alone." We're sure the author can read.)

Help fill in the blanks – two words – we know from Scripture that if a prophet prophesies falsely, he or she is a _____ _______.