Prophecy??

Part 8 of 11

As I said, if Cessationism cannot Scripturally prove its position in general terms, then it will turn to individual and focused attacks of the gifts themselves, and their use. They will even go so far as to attack Christians who utilize these gifts.

The second gift that is so often attacked by Cessationist adherents is the gift of prophecy. Cessationists refute the use of New Testament prophecy probably because of a Scriptural misunderstanding, or because of the potential perverted use of the gift that they may have witnessed.

The foremost Scripture Cessationism uses to refute the idea of New Testament prophetic utterance is Revelation 22:18. It says, “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book.” As is clear, Cessationism mistakenly equates prophetic utterance with “adding” to the Word of God and the foundation that has already been laid: “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone” (Eph 2:19-20). This mindset is of course is error. We all should know that prophetic utterance is likened to chaff among wheat, when compared to the written Word of God. Jeremiah 23:28-29 says, “The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD. Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?” No word of prophesy ever takes preeminence over God’s written Word. If Cessationists understood the role and purpose of prophetic utterance in the New Testament church, surely their fears and woes would disappear.

New Testament prophecy is for the edification, exhortation and comfort of the hearers. Paul says, “But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort” (1 Cor 14:3). According to the New Testament pattern, most prophetic utterances are not necessarily doomsday foretelling or cries of harsh judgment, though it can indeed be personally predictive (Acts 21:10-11) and foretelling in nature (Acts 11:27-28). Primarily, such a ministry is to edify, not to condemn: “For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted” (1 Cor 14:31). In fact, there has been much scholarship regarding the notion of "multi-use prophecy".. One noted scholar testifies to this principle: He states that there are in fact three levels of New Testament prophecy: The office of a prophet, the gift of prophecy, and the spirit of prophecy. The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus (Rev 19:10). I believe this level of prophetic utterance is the majority of what regularly occurred at Corinth. This is why Paul said “For ye may all prophesy…” (1 Cor 14:31), and “Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy…” (1 Cor 14:39), yet he simultaneously distinguishes this concept from the office of a prophet, and the gift of prophecy: “And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets… Are all apostles? are all prophets?” (1 Cor 12:28a-29a). We cannot confuse that which is for edification with that which is for canonization. Certainly the early church did not confuse these things (1 Cor 14:26). The Corinthians were evidently operating in some level of prophecy, yet we do not see any of their prophetic utterances recorded in Scripture! We can easily conclude, therefore, that incidental and applicatory revelation poses no threat to the canon. It makes perfect sense that God would desire to continue to speak to His people in a relational way and guide them in the circumstantial details of their lives directly, via prophetic utterances, and according to the written Word of God. Apparently, such revelation was going on in both the Old and New Testament eras without any contribution to the canon at all. We simply must not confuse that which is for edification with that which is for canonization.

To be continued...