NO CONTINUATION OF PROPHETS IN TODAY'S CHURCH AGE
By: Victor T. Stephens
"People often claim to hunger for truth, but seldom like the taste when it's served up."
~ George R.R. Martin
REFUTING TODAY’S NEW PROPHECY (continued)
The assumptive case by non-cessationists that there is prophetic termination between Old Testament and New Testament prophets has no biblical basis. Just as there were false prophets in the Old Testament, there were false prophets in the New Testament (1 John 4:1). Thus, the early church needed to exercise discernment in determining who was a true or false prophet. Prophets and their prophecies had to be tested.
First Thessalonians 5:20-21 states:
"Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all; hold on to what is good ..." (1 Thess. 5:20-21)
Let's now ask the following questions: "How did the early church exercise discernment in testing New Testament prophets? What did they employ as their model of comparison?"
Since New Testament prophecy was simply a continuation of Old Testament prophecy, the early church tested New Testament prophets based on the criteria established for Old Testament prophets. New Testament prophets who spoke false prophecy were regarded as false prophets based on Old Testament criteria of evaluation. Likened to Old Testament prophets, New Testament prophets were required to be 100% accurate. Therefore, the idea of a non-authoritative "congregational prophecy" that may contain errors is an anti-biblical concept.
To prove that New Testament prophecy was a continuation of Old Testament prophecy, let's take a look at what Peter stated in Acts 2:17:
"'In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams."' (Acts 2:17)
As I pointed out previously, Peter quoted Joel 2:28-32 only in the sense of illustrating the semblance of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit during Pentecost with that same outpouring of the Holy Spirit during the seven-year Tribulation period. Again, Joel 2 is the continuity between Old Testament and New Testament prophecy.
Take note that Peter uses the same type of prophecy found in the Old Testament (Joel 2) and relates it to the prophetic gifts that were given at Pentecost in the New Testament. Further evidence of this fact is seen by the use of the words "visions" and "dreams" in Acts 2:17, which are also used in the following Old Testament passages:
He said, "Listen to my words: When there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, reveal myself to them in visions, I speak to them in dreams." (Num. 12:6)
"Let the prophet who has a dream recount the dream, but let the one who has my word speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?" declares the LORD. (Jer. 23:28)
"In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream, and visions passed through his mind as he was lying in bed. He wrote down the substance of his dream." (Daniel 7:1)
"The words of Amos, one of the shepherds of Tekoa --- the vision he saw concerning Israel two years before the earthquake, when Uzziah was king of Judah and Jeroboam son of Jehoash was king of Israel." (Amos 1:1)
"The word of the LORD that came to Micah of Moresheth during the reigns of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah, kings of Judah --- the vision he saw concerning Samaria and Jerusalem." (Micah 1:1)
It should now be abundantly clear that the gift of prophecy in the Old Testament is the same gift that was given at Pentecost. Thus, the same standards for judging prophets in the Old Testament apply to prophets in the New Testament. This fact refutes the notion that there was a second type of prophecy in the early church known as fallible "congregation prophecy." The only type of prophecy found in the Old and New Testaments was authoritative, and it came from the Holy Spirit with faultless accuracy.
To challenge this fact, non-cessationists contend that Acts 21:4; 1 Corinthians 14:29; and 1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 are examples of inaccurate and non-authoritative prophecy. Let's now examine these accounts in their proper context.
1) “We sought out the disciples there and stayed with them seven days. Through the Spirit they urged Paul not to go on to Jerusalem.” (Acts 21:4)
In this account, the assumption is that the expression "Through the Spirit" is indicative of prophetic speech. Thus, the fact that Paul ignored this allegedly prophetic forewarning is assumed to be proof of fallible prophecy.
What non-cessationists fail to realize is that the warning given by the disciples cannot be classified as prophetic speech. The Spirit of God is not cautioning Paul through the disciples not to go to Jerusalem; rather the Spirit informed the disciples of the tribulations that were anticipated upon Paul's arrival. As a result, out of love and concern for Paul's safety, it was the disciples' will that Paul not go to Jerusalem. Their pleadings with Paul should not be attributed to the Spirit of God.
To fully understand the exegetical context of Acts 21:4, other passages need to be factored in. Thus, let's begin by taking a look at Acts 20:22-24:
"And now, compelled by the Spirit, I am going to Jerusalem, not knowing what will happen to me there. I only know that in every city the Holy Spirit warns me that prison and hardships are facing me. However, I consider my life worth nothing to me; my only aim is to finish the race and complete the task the Lord Jesus has given me -- the task of testifying to the good news of God’s grace." (Acts 20:22-24)
Here, we see that Paul is "compelled by the Spirit" to go to Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit cautions Paul that hardships will face him as they have in the past. It was this warning that the Holy Spirit conveyed to the disciples at Tyre (Acts 21:4). Consequently, as aforementioned, out of regard for Paul's welfare, the disciples urged Paul not to go to Jerusalem.
The message that was given by the Holy Spirit to the disciples in Tyre was also given to the people in Caesarea. Acts 21:10-11 says:
After we had been there a number of days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. Coming over to us, he took Paul’s belt, tied his own hands and feet with it and said, "The Holy Spirit says, 'In this way the Jewish leaders in Jerusalem will bind the owner of this belt and will hand him over to the Gentiles.'" (Acts 21:11)
What were the people's and Paul's responses? Acts 21:12-13 says:
When we heard this, we and the people there pleaded with Paul not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, "Why are you weeping and breaking my heart? I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 21:12-13)
Take note that the prophet Agabus did not tell Paul not to go to Jerusalem. Rather, he expanded the warning that the Holy Spirit revealed to Paul in Acts 20:22-23. As a result, likened to the disciples in Tyre, the people in Caesarea urged Paul not to go on account of their love and concern for Paul's welfare (v. 13). Thus, as pointed out previously, Acts 21:4 is not an example of prophetic speech. Let's now examine the next account that non-cessationists use in their efforts to prove fallible "congregational prophecy."
