PROPHECY DU JOUR

Forward to Counterfeit Revival (by Hank Hanegraaff), published 1997 ^ | 1997 | Tom Stipe

[Buggman]

I hope to comment on the rest later, but just one point. For Cessationists, the issue is not water baptism vs. spirit baptism. The issue is baptism in the Spirit subsequent to and distinct from the new birth. Water baptism does not confer the new birth.

I've never heard either the cessationists nor the charismatics ever argue that particular point as you've outlined it. Rather, my personal experience with cessationists is that they argue against a separate baptism in the Spirit to confer His gifts, or that if there was such a separate baptism, it passed away with the first century.

Based on this recommenation, can anyone name for us the "authentic" prophets in the Church today?

No one whose name you'd recognize. Those I'd personally vouch for don't seek the spotlight.

[topcat54]

they argue against a separate baptism in the Spirit to confer His gifts,

Separate from what? I believe the entire point of contention between cessationists and various charsimatic/pentecostals is the "baptism in the Spirit" subsequent to salvation/the new birth.

"Some of the issues the charismatic movement has brought to congregations include whether the baptism with the Spirit is another name for the new birth, or is a definite experience with the Spirit as a part of conversion, or is an experience subsequent to conversion." (Charismatic Movement)

"Based on this recommenation, can anyone name for us the "authentic" prophets in the Church today?"

No one whose name you'd recognize. Those I'd personally vouch for don't seek the spotlight.

I think that's my point. No one knows these folks because they have not be authenticated by the Church. How can they be a gift to the Church if they are not known by the Church?

Only prophets were gifted to authenticate the prophets (1 Cor. 14:32). The only prophets with objective credentials to judge other prophets were the apostles (1 Cor. 14:37; Eph. 2:20; 2 Peter 1:19). The apostolic office ended with the death of the last of the apostles. Therefore there are no objectively identifiable prophets today to authenticate other prophets.

[Buggman]

I think you're misreading the article's intent. It is the Charismatics who argue that the "baptism of the Spirit" is separate from the "new birth" which occurs at the moment of salvation and is witnessed by water baptism. It is the protestant/evangelical position that the two are the same.

The Bihle seems to argue that they are separate. For example, from Acts 8:12-17:

But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they [their] hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Too, elsewhere we see distinctions made between the water baptism of John, and the baptism "of the Holy Spirit and of fire" of Jesus. Therefore, I have to say that the charismatics are the more Biblically correct to draw the distinction.

Most of the time, this immersion in the Spirit is by the laying on of hands, but there are exceptions where God chooses to send it directly (like in the upper room in Acts 1).

No one knows these folks because they have not be authenticated by the Church. How can they be a gift to the Church if they are not known by the Church?

Who are we defining as "the Church" here? Many of these prophets are known to their home fellowships--the people who I know are definitely known in mine, and one serves on the board of elders.

Only prophets were gifted to authenticate the prophets (1 Cor. 14:32).

With all respect, I again think you're misreading that. Paul is not saying that another prophet is needed to authenticate the first--rather, he is speaking of order in the use of gifts, and pointing out that true gifts of the Spirit do not simply burst out out of the Christian's control. He's contrasting true prophecy, in which God speaks to the prophet, usually through an angelic spirit, and then the prophet turns and relays it, from the "prophecy" practiced by pagan seers, in which the demonic spirit often seizes control of the person and forces them to speak then and there. Ditto true tongues and demonic tongues.

Now it is true that the whole congregation is supposed to carefully consider any prophetic utterance, compare it to Scripture, and take it to the Lord in prayer lest deception come in and run amok. And I agree that the charismatic churches often fail to be critical enough. However, your next statement doesn't even come close to proper exegesis:

The only prophets with objective credentials to judge other prophets were the apostles (1 Cor. 14:37; Eph. 2:20; 2 Peter 1:19).

No. 1 Cor. 14:37 says that any true prophet will confirm what the apostles have said. Eph. 2:20 says that our foundation is the apostles and prophets--in this case, Paul is referring to the apostles in the sense of meaning the New Testament that they wrote down for us, and the prophets as referring to the prophets of the Tanakh who told us of the Messiah in the first place. 2 Pet. 1:19 has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of the relationship between the apostles and prophets at all! None of these three passages say that you can't have prophets without apostles to confirm them--all they say is that both must be of one accord!

There is exactly one requirement for being a prophet: That God calls you to be one. Where people tend to get into trouble is that they will often take a single example of a prophecy that God gave them and from that assume that He is calling them to the office of prophet! From there, they start thinking that all of their imaginations and utterances are therefore of God, pride gets involved, and they go off the deep end from there . . .

However, the fact that someone abuses a gift does not mean that the true gift doesn't exist. Look far and wide through the Scriptures, and you won't find a single place where they say the gifts were only for the days of the apostles.