Does the gift of prophecy exist today?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лип 2024
- Get your free language starterpack at www.biblicalmastery.academy/b...
Check out what our courses offer at www.biblicalmastery.academy/m...
Want a tour of my library? • Books that shaped my t...
Follow me:
Twitter: / darrylb
00:00 Intro
00:49 Do prophets have to be accurate?
07:53 Are New Testament and Old Testament prophets DIFFERENT?
16:17 Is prophesy just encouragement?
20:00 What about in the future?
The problem with spiritual gifts listed in 1 Cor. 12-14 (unlike those of Rom. 12) are these:
PROBLEM #1
• Paul says in two places, "don't despise prophecy" and "do not forbid speaking in tongues"
Pretty simple actually: you can't forbid either gift being "unbiblical now."
• 1 Cor. 13 says they will cease when "the perfect has come." As vague as this may be to
try and decide, it seems most likely that it refers to Christ's return. The attempt by some
cessationists (i.e., John MacArthur) to interpret the "middle voice in Greek" regarding the
verb of tongues "ceasing" at the end of the apostolic age is suspect by other theologians as
not supportive enough.
PROBLEM #2
• There are only a few references to NT prophets: Philip the evangelist's seven daughters;
the prophet Agabus who predicted Paul would be bound by the Romans; mentioning "prophets"
as an office/role in New Testament leadership.
• There is no mentioning of qualifications for being a prophet, no modeling of correct and
incorrect prophetic activity of NT prophets, and no history given of how the prophets
functioned, except for Agabus.
So……the NT teaches prophets are proper roles/offices in the church, and there termination seems
only clearly defined by Christ's return. And………we have no descriptions of qualifications, ministry
or history of prophets save Agabus's one prediction and the seven daughters of Philip as prophetesses.
I don't think the cessationists have a leg to stand on, but continuationists have to develop everthing
from scratch, which is ripe for criticism and abuse.
Small wonder there's confusion.
The problems with your problems….
Yes. Ignoring context, grammar, and the Old Testament is pretty simple.
Gifts have purposes. The Holy Spirit distributes gift in accordance with roles and needs. For example, if you trace Paul’s definition of the purpose of tongues to its Old Testament context, the sign warned the Jews of approaching destruction. This judgment came a decade or two after the epistle was written, when Rome destroyed the Temple and began the diaspora.
With the purpose of a sign fulfilled, why continue the sign? But the Corinthians tended to overcorrect, it was necessary to warn them not to suppress legitimate tongues.
The decontextualizion of “despise not prophecy” is analogous. When Paul wrote it, the completion of the canon was still 40-50 years in the future, and its distribution and compilation, centuries away. Prophecy served a vital purpose in that period.
The point that Paul defended tongues and prophecy in ~54 AD is a big “duh.” The Holy Spirit would not distribute gifts beyond their need, for us to treat like playthings.
Despise not grammar. The gender of ‘perfect’ is wrong for it to refer to Christ. Despise note syntax. The KJV word means mature or complete. What was incomplete in ~54 AD? And the verb tenses indicate that prophecy and knowledge would end with a different cause than the cause of tongues ceasing.
Despise not context, either. Every element of the context is about verbal revelation. Even the reference to seeing in a glass. It’s the same word used by James to describe the Word of God that shows us our sins: a mirror.
So, there’s no evidence that the expiration date is in our future, and many clues that it passed long ago. Boiling it down to one verb tense is “simple.” But is “simple” right, or is it simple-minded?
Your “seems clearly defined by Christ’s return” is a giant leap from the poorly supported, highly debated, and easily refuted argument, as I showed above.
That “cessationists have to develop everything from scratch” is laughable. What are you using in your study? A Gideon’s pocket New Testament?
Continuationists love to twist “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today, forever,” which is about the immutability of God, to show that God must deal with the church in a static way. Yet they ignore the massive differences between how God dealt with man in different ages (irony) and refuse to apply Old Testament definitions to New Testament times (hypocrisy).
It’s ironic to see a continuationist say cessationists don’t have a leg to stand on while sitting in a hermeneutical crib.
Excellent comment.
@@ricksonora6656 Couldn’t have said it any better. Literally.
@@ricksonora6656 why are you bringing in the KJV? Shouldn't you be looking at the Greek?
Agree. There is no biblical defense for cessationism. It is usually a logical deduction from someone's theological assumptions (E.g. covenant theology or dispensationalism). I've never once had any kind of "experience" that I would say was a spiritual gift, but I was a cessationist until I set aside what I was taught and just read the scriptures. Then looking at church history you see that both Chrysostom and John Wesley both commented that they believed the gifts faded away because of sin and worldliness in the church and a degrading of sound doctrine.
That being said, much of the critiques of those who are continuationist from those who are cessationism are accurate. About 98% percent of it (in my opinion) is false or from the flesh. There are too many people reading their experience (from both sides) into the text. I have heard both Tom Schreiner (cessationism) and Gordon Fee (continuationist) do it.
At the end of the day, there were prophets in the OT who did not write scripture. The same for the NT. So scriptural authority is not under threat at all. The written word is the objective truth that is the final authority for sure, but that doesn't mean there is not subjective experience also. The two are not at odds. Much like prayer, there are things I don't need to ask God about: murder, adultery, theft, etc., Are always sin. But there are things that the scriptures do not address that are personal: where to work, who to marry specifically, etc., God can choose to speak if He desires. I don't think it would necessitate prophecy for Him to answer those things though, but He certainly can. In the book of Acts, the churches were warned about things to come so that they could prepare (the famine that was coming). The point that many people miss is that prophecy was not some thing you needed everyday for every time you needed to decide something. God spoke when it was necessary and for a purpose. Undoubtedly, because the canon of scripture is closed doctrinal issues are settled and we don't have apostles like the 12 or Paul anymore, but to say by extension that therefore somehow the need for prophecy is gone is unfounded I believe. That idea seems to stem from an unwarranted redefining or limiting of what prophesying actually was.
But some people want to keep faith cerebral and not ever get into anything that could ever be considered "experiential". Even Sam Storms said in an article that the reason he resisted changing positions on the issue (to become a continuationist openly) was because he knew he would be thought less of in academic circles. If you are continuationist then you are accused of being "one of those charismatics", and if you're considered more "intellectual". My experience has born that out personally and I've been on both sides. I have never spoke in tongues or rolled on a floor or anything like it, but that's who I get lumped in with by default.
To be sure though, there is an anti-study mentality that many get if they feel they have an "experience". They then many times feel like they have no need to ever examine themselves. It is foolish and terribly contradictory to scripture. In the end, personally, I get shot at by both sides. I have had conversations with cessationists who have literally said they don't need to worry about examining themselves because they got all A's and one B in seminary (true story and they have a national ministry), and I've had the normal conversation trying to get a pentecostal to question their experience because it was not scriptural.
Martyn Lloyd-jones also was courageous to disagree with another highly respected teacher - for he said that Calvin was not the pope and was wrong in some areas.
You are not alone. Grudem's explanations are absolutely incomprehensible.
The "clothing of power" was specific to the 12 Apostles Luke 12:49. It gave the Apostles the ability to lay hands on people pray for the disciples so that those they laid hands upon could prophesy, heal, speak in tongues (languages). This is why the Apostles were waiting in Jerusalem in an inner room (Acts 2) when the day of Pentecost came, note that only the Apostles were clothed in power not the Jews who came from all around the known world and were baptized. This is what Simon saw that only Apostles had the ability (Acts 8:18-20). It was a gift from God given only to the Apostles. After the Apostles died, those gifts started dying off too as the generation passed away.
Smart christians channel said something I find very biblical: I am a biblical continuist. No need to erase gifts of the spirit from scripture but we see that gifts like tongues and prophecy are more often used unbiblically than biblically. So being sceptical is never wrong.
Great video Darryl. I appreciate how you are bold enough to tackle this topic with truth even though it could affect your channel. The Lord is faithful !
Thanks Robert!
Excellent presentation. Since The Lord Jesus Christ is THE revealer, once those who were commissioned to write about Him finished writing, what more is there to say or reveal - nothing.
I totally agree, that Prophecy didn’t change in the way it works and I also see that there are many today who call themselves prophets who are clearly not prophets (especially in charismatic circles)
But then I would define infallible a little different. They all should be clear, that they only tell what God said them and do not err in that, but that does not mean that the words must fulfill itself. I see something like conditional prophecy in the Bible (the easiest example in Jonah, but there are lots more) where God prophecies what he would do when the people fill specific criteria’s, even though it never happens because men decide differently…
But still all prophecy then is what God wants it to be and theologically sound…
About prophet’s today:
I don’t see a biblical reason prophecy should have ceased, but I have not met anyone alive I would see fitting the category of a prophet…
But then in Israel there where also long times where no prophet is mentioned, so I believe prophets could be there today (so we have to test the spirits) but it is not necessary that there is always a prophet alive and we definitely have to test the spirits since there are huge amounts of false prophets out there…
But I didn’t hear a biblical reason why prophecies should have ceased in your video, only lots of proof that what most call prophecy today is clearly not biblical prophecy… but I don’t want to habe my biblical understanding formed as a reaction of false teachings today…
Excellent discussion.
Thanks for sharing this biblical teaching. Splendid!
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the video. I disagree, however. Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12-14 deal with this topic conclusively in the affirmative .
It almost sounds like you're saying because Paul said they existed in his time they still do today... I'm not sure I'd call that an argument. Feel free to elaborate. :)
I think the claim of clay is making is that he gives clear instruction for them in those text, and then nowhere rescinds those teachings. @@bma
Sure, but instructions to a 1st-century group about a gift that was present then does not guarantee that the gift will continue, even if the instructions are never rescinded. You can tell a child not to touch a pot because it is hot, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't touch it when it has cooled down. The original instruction no longer applies once the pot is cold. This is not a perfect example, but hopefully you get my point. :)
@@bma Not just that it existed during his time, but also that it continues "until that which is perfect is come" and until we all come to "the unity of the faith". Jesus, that One who is Perfect, has not yet arrived. Additionally, God's people are not one. But Jesus says that there will be ONE flock with one shepherd (John 20; Ezekiel 34). This is why the Gospel Commission is important and it is also why God is calling for "My people" to come out. Prophecy is one of his appointed means to accomplish that unity in the faith.
Just to be sure, those who are "prophesying" prosperity (your breakthrough is coming) are prophesying "smooth things" and are NOT prophets. The fact that we must test the spirits and are called to watch out for false prophets indicates that true ones will exists.
There is no point in giving a warning to watch out for fake 4 dollar bills if 4 dollar bills do not exist.
If Bible teachings on the existence of the prophetic gift no longer apply today, simply because of the passage of time, then all of the Bible’s teachings about morality and history might no longer apply today simply because of the passage of time. You have just operated the door to every immoral, post-modernist and meta-modernist heresy that attacks the Bible as “behind the times” and “a product of ancient ignorance and bigotry.” God has not foreclosed the possibility that He can send many modern prophets: “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come.” The Bible, Joel 2. Those verses clearly describe widespread use of the prophetic gift in the end-times by people of diverse economic backgrounds, ages and sexes. But all such prophets will have to be tested by the Biblical criteria in the Old and New Testaments. Anyone who makes inaccurate predictions, anyone who promotes a God other than Yahweh, anyone who denies the divine/human nature of Jesus Christ, anyone inconsistent with the Bible, or anyone who attempts to “supersede” the Bible is a false prophet.
24 But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or an uninformed person comes in, he is convinced by all, he is convicted by all.
25 And thus the secrets of his heart are revealed; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God and report that God is truly among you. (1 Cor 14)
The argument about whether a NT apostle functions like an OT prophet is still based on opinions and an attempt to extrapolate some conclusion based on subjective interpretations of biblical text. The fact is, the Bible doesn't present answers to the specific questions we have. So Wayne Grudem has one opinion, and Darryl Burling finds it unconvincing. So what? They're both guessing, making the best guess they can, and since their opinions are filling in the spaces lacking in the biblical text, there's plenty of room for them to disagree with each other. Burling says he finds Grudem's argument "logically inconsistent." It would be interesting to find out what Grudem thinks of Burling's remark.
As for the early church fathers saying spiritual (sign) gifts ceased, Burling's quote of Chrysostom saying he didn't know of any gifts being used, along with Augustine and Theodore, is cherry-picking.
Iranaeus, Novation, Tertullian and Bishop Hillary all attested to spiritual gifts used in their day. And Augustine, who initially said spiritual gifts had stopped, later on in his life said this, "But what I said is not to be interpreted that no miracles are believed to be performed in the name of Christ at the present
time. For when I wrote that book, I myself had recently learned that a blind man had been restored to sight . . . and I
know about some others, so numerous even in these times, that we cannot know about all of them or enumerate those
who know."
Your arguments stand on equivocation. The first argument fails to distinguish between gifts and the subset of gifts known as revelatory and sign gifts. The second argument confuses a gift of being able to heal with one-off miracles.
There’s an implied straw man. Cessationists do not say all spiritual gifts have ceased, just the revelatory and sign gifts. Neither do they deny that God still performs miracles.
Others have made these arguments against Grudem's position, and I think he has responded. The early church tended to have a far more spiritualized worldview than we do today and accounted for things differently to us who live in a scientific age. But @ricksonora6656 is right, we are not saying miracles stopped per se, nor gifts wholesale, only sign gifts - gifts necessary prior to and for the delivering of the canon.
Darryl,
I appreciate the video. I am also interested in your belief in the return of prophecy (The Return of the Prophets sounds like it should be a book title!). I have not heard someone holding this perspective before, but I'm glad that you take Revelation 11 seriously.
As a practicing continuationist myself, I do disagree with you, but I'm glad that we discuss things civilly. 🙂
I believe that sometimes continuationists can be so zealous for wonders and the things of the Holy Spirit that they neglect the written canonical Word. That being said, I believe that likewise cessationists often so emphasize the written Word (not that emphasis of the Word is a bad thing) that they miss what the Holy Spirit is doing and saying. A balance seems to be lacking.
God, bring us to the fullness of all that You desire for us, in the Word and in the Spirit!
Peace be with you, brother Darryl. Keep serving our loving and almighty King!
I am an oddity I suppose, as I am a Calvinist Continuationist, who holds to a literal future fulfillment of Revelation, yet who believes in the importance of the covenants. Does that make me a Calvinistic, progressively dispensational Continuationist?
You are great darryl- admire you. I am in grudem camp.
I have not heard before the teaching that prophecy will return in the two witnesses. Is this a common view in futurist or dispensational thought? Has John MacArthur or any similarly aligned thinkers written on this?
I don't think it is particularly novel, but I didn't go looking at commentaries first. R L Thomas's commentary on Revelation would be a great starting point. 😀
@@bma It's probably novel to me because the environment I am in is heavily a/post mil. Thanks, Darryl!
How were those in old testament to understand transgenerational fulfillment of prophecy? Consider e.g., Luke 4: 21, Acts 2:16, etc. Would the original audience seen this as false? Or is it double- fulfilled, i.e., having both an immediate fulfillment in the generation and a later one, in a generation many years later? Consider Abraham. How did/do people of faith understand prophecy not filled in their own lifetime? Blessings!
I think there are a few important problems with your arguments. Here are some thoughts (forgive my voluminousness):
1. Your assumptions about what prophecy is and what its purpose is I think focuses too much on "disclosure of new information that we previously did not have access to". If prophecy was all about God disclosing previously unknown and inaccessible information to his people, then of course having a closed canon of scripture would render prophecy redundant. But I think we see very clearly in both the OT and NT that this is not the purpose of prophecy. To take the OT, while there are of course some points at which God uses prophets to reveal new things to Israel, particularly regarding developments in the trajectory of redemption history. But the vast majority of OT prophetic material consists of prophets calling Israel to obedience to the Torah and the covenant. It is remarkable how little new theological material is contained within the Prophets and Writings after the establishment of the Torah. The prophets told Israel to do what the Torah told them to do, and threatened them with what the Torah threatened would be a consequence of infidelity to Yahweh. This is precisely why Deut 18's qualifications for a genuine prophet are entirely centred around the question of "which God" they are calling Israel to follow. It really wasn't rocket science. In the same way the NT's simple test for a spirit or teacher is whether they acknowledge Jesus as Lord - once again not rocket science. I think modern prophecy's relationship to the whole of scripture is analogous to Old Covenant prophets' relationship to the Pentateuch - calling the people of God to trust in and obedience to the God revealed in those scriptures. We also see in NT characters like Agabus *no* theological material in his prophetic utterances. His prophecies were given in the edification and service of the people of God.
2. I think you are right to say that arguments that the nature of prophecy has changed between testaments are deeply flawed. I find it frustrating when Christians wear the continuationist badge, but strip prophecy of its meaning and of its explicitly supernatural element and reduce it to essentially the same thing as preaching. There is no reason to think that the word prophecy would have been used in the NT to refer to something completely different to what it referred to in the OT.
3. Given this, I think the question of whether prophets need to be 100% accurate is interesting. I have come to view this in the same way the church has generally viewed rules/standards regarding false teaching, or regarding moral failing: not absolutist. We do not excommunicate someone from the church the moment they teach something that is theologically erroneous. If something is deeply heretical we give them a chance to clarify and, if necessary, recant. And we approach this with a level of seriousness and strictness proportionate to their level of authority. Are they a Bible study leader or a megachurch pastor? The latter is held to a stricter standard. Same with moral failing. We don't expel someone from the ministry if they get drunk one time, or if they buy a very expensive jacket. We expel them if they are found to be living a life that would warrant them being described as a drunkard, or greedy, or prone to anger. And all of this is done in proportion to their degree of responsibility and authority. Are they a deacon or are they an archbishop? We'll hold the archbishop to a more strict standard partly because the impact of their actions are more severe. I also don't know anybody who thinks that anyone who has ever failed to forgive someone that God won't forgive them - a lifestyle of unforgiveness, however, is indicative of a wrong heart before God.
All this to say, I do not think either Old Covenant Israel nor the modern church need(ed) to be absolutist about inaccurate prophetic predictions, particularly if those prophets are ultimately calling people to trust in Yahweh/Jesus. Here we need to note that not every prophetic utterance in the life of ancient Israel made it into the Bible. We read about people like King Saul prophesying (what did he say??), and we read of many prophets who clearly lived as prophets for a long time but we only read one line they ever said. The point is, the prophets we read about in the Bible, and especially those whose utterances were preserved as entire books, were the absolute big guns on the prophetic scene. There were clearly degrees of authority and responsibility between different prophets. The difference between someone in a position like that of Isaiah getting it wrong compared to uncle Joe predicting the date of your baby's birth wrong is enormous. This is especially clear because *presumption* is such a key aspect to the wrongness of false prophecy in Dt 18. Prophets like Isaiah spoke with utter conviction and certainty to millions of people regarding centuries-long timelines (he happened to be right). It is possible to be entrusted over far fewer people and to also speak with more humility regarding whether what you are saying is from the Lord. And so I think if a modern Christian says with absolute boldness and certainty, "The Lord says there is going to be a tsunami that destroys San Francisco on 25th September 2017", if that doesn't happen, he should face significant consequences. And I do think there are many career prophets who are making a habit of making bold predictions about the political landscape and they are in severe danger of the presumption Dt 18 condemns. But this is very, very different to "I'm not sure but I feel like the God is saying he wants you to discover what it means for him to be your father in the coming season," or "I think the Holy Spirit is saying he wants you to be particularly steadfast in prayer in this season." With the appropriate humility, I think a person can possibly even say something like "I feel like there's someone in this room with a broken finger God wants to heal. Anyone? Anyone? Oh okay I guess I misheard that one," without warranting death or excommunication.
Darryl, My comment would be this. What do you make of the until μέχρι of verse 13? Do you believe that the church has attained the unity of the faith, the knowledge of the Son of God, maturity, the measure of the fullness of Christ, no longer children being tossed to and fro by every wave of doctrine? You must be part of a deferent church than me (tongue in cheek comment of course). If there is still a need for pastors, teachers, evangelists, why not apostles (sent church planters) and prophets.
Good question. Ephesians 2:20 puts Apostles and prophets together as foundational roles for the church. Thus I would see there being a distinction in Eph 4:13 so that while all four are gifts to the church, not all four necessarily continue throughout the entire church age. I hope that helps!
I would highly recommend you read Dr. Wayne Grudem's book on the "gift of prophecy" I think it can be defended pretty well from that perspective that it is still around.
I've been through that book too. 😀
So I guess everyone except you has the wrong idea. Please quote the specific chapter that says now that we have a completed Canon of scripture we don't need prophecy. The specific scriptural cite Please.
I tell you what, how about you show me one piece of inspired scripture that has been accepted by the church and written after 100AD, and I'll show you a verse saying the canon has closed. :)
@@bmathat's changing the subject. The daughters of Philip are called prophets in the Book of Acts, yet not one word of theirs was recorded anywhere.
Not really. My question was intended to make a point. I recognize there were writing and non-writing prophets. The question was, show me a verse that says prophecy has ceased. There isn't one. But neither has the church recognized any writing as authoritative that was written since the first century. So, in answering whether prophecy has ceased, I'd argue the lack of accepted revelation is a strong argument that it has. Sure, there were non-writing prophets, but the absence of writing prophets also implies the absence of non-writing prophets. Certainly it's a stretch to say that non-writing prophecy continues but not writing prophets. If we go to the OT we don't see periods without prophets that last even a quarter of the time we have had silence during the church age. So you're left with either there are prophets but there is no written evidence they left that has been accepted, or there are no prophets, which explains the silence. I hope that explains further my reasoning.
@@bma "Changing the subject" wasn't the right way to put it. Perhaps "confusing the issue" would be a better way to express my thought. Let me put it this way: I think it's a mistake to equate prophecy with writing inspired, canonical scripture. It's a false assumption. I think it's important to distinguish between public revelation and private revelation. By public, I mean revelation that is intended for everyone. By private, I mean a messages that are intended for a limited number of people often just one peryySuch prophecy must
It does. Read 1 corithians 14. Bye love you. Know the Word and read it and you won't be decieved. amen!
So women should be silent? Bye love you. Know the word and you won’t be deceived.
Sir, prophesy exists till now. Gifts of the Spirit are for today. If we have the same Holy Spirit as the early apostles; if the same Holy Spirit has worked our conviction and has partaken in our new birth,
Then His gifts should be able available to us, except your own Holy Spirit is different.
If we have the same Holy Spirit as the early apostles, then Christ continues to give gifts to the church through His Spirit. I agree with you. However, I also will argue that the gifts will be the same as the early church. But the modern gift of "prophecy" is not the same as the gift the early church received (so it is argued). Therefore, either the gift of prophecy is no longer in effect (which is my argument) or the gift changed at some point without written testimony from the Holy Spirit that it would.
@@bma I don't quite understand the point that the modern gift of prophecy is not the same as that of the early church.
I am happy we have a common ground, we have received the same Holy Spirit as Peter received on the day of the pentecost.
However I don't agree that the gift of prophecy is not the same. You argument may be true because you haven't seen true gift of prophecy in modern times.
My father was a prophet before he departed into glory, I am also a prophet. I wouldn't tell a lie about this, at I have had this gift operated today in my church.
I have given words on my nation, people and it came out as said!
My brother, you will believe, if you see its true operation.
If you don't see its operation around, it's time to seek God and pray for it as He said through Paul to desire spiritual gifts.
Excellent presentation. Many solid points. I especially appreciate that, at the end, he describes how today’s false prophets despise prophecy by saying it can be wrong.
I would add that attributing hit-or-miss prophecy to God blasphemes the Holy Spirit. In the Arminian mind, that is literally damning.
The question is not whether the gift exists, but rather, whether it is given.
Easily passed over: The prophet in Deuteronomy 18:19 is Christ.
"I will put words in his mouth" sounds like an idiom for "I will tell him what to say." I think you are taking it too literally.
"I will tell him what to say" may be a little loose for the idiom too, if we take it as an idiom. Even if it is an idiom (which it could be) the point of it is not just to "tell" the prophet what to say, but to ensure that his words (that come from the prophet's mouth) are the Words of the Lord. Thanks for watching and your comment!
@@bma I hope we can agree that both your interpretation on this and mine are reasonable interpretations. I hope you'll also agree that God doesn't have to speak to or through every prophet in the same way.
No, I continually prophecy about WW1 and WW2 outcome just like those Bible "prophets" did.
I'm even better than Jesus who was wrong about the final judgment and Jeremiah 70 years captivity. Would that make those two false prophets?
You saying Jesus is wrong
I would be ashamed to say that in front of him on Judgement Day
You need to be careful
@@SheepofTheShepherd-nu3lz It looks to me that whoever wrote that piece was wrong.
I have no idea what Jesus was teaching but it's possible that he had some kind of apocalyptic message as that was common in Judaism at that time.
As far as Jesus or anybody else coming back it's a tall story. Resurrection, just as stories about Jesus in the Gospels, are human inventions.
Resurrection in 2nd century BC and Gospels 2nd century AD.
@@theuntouchable7277 I see you are clueless to who or what Jesus really is
Wait until Judgement Day
@@SheepofTheShepherd-nu3lzWell, I don't know which Jesus you're talking about?
There could be one, historical Jesus, who could have been walking the earth 2k years ago. It's possible that such a Jesus was even preaching some apocalyptic message. It's even possible that Pontius Pilate crucified such a Jesus. This is in the realm of probability because there were a lot of Jews at that time named Jehoshua.
Another Jesus it that of the New Testament. This is mostly work of fiction written few generations after presupposed coming of the messiah took place. There are some 7 genuine letters of Paul but he encountered only some kind of hallucination and not real human Jesus.
Then we have Jesus invented by the church officials. Jesus superman or a god or even One-In-Three God - depending on particular christian sect involved in Jesus myth creation.
Why then did the disciples who wrote those eyewitness accounts go to their deaths for telling their testimony of Jesus? If they had known it to be a lie would they not have ceased or recanted?
Many have tried to disprove the resurrection but facts are hard to get rid of.
Stick to teaching Greek. Even the Greek disagree with you.
All good. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. 😀
What a usefull comment with a lot of explanation
Which part does the Greek not agree with Darryl, about stoning false prophets if their words didn't come true? Jesus abolished stoning when he met the woman caught in adultery, but there is a fate far worse for people who claim to be God's mouthpiece he didn't send.
Galatians 1:8 (NIV 1984) But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!
I would also add that Prophecy was about writing down the words of Scripture.
2 Peter 1:20 (NIV 1984) Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
Do you know anyone who's words come true that can be written down into the bible? Because there are only 2 prophets according to the scriptures we are waiting for.
God is very forgiving, but he takes misleading his people very seriously and will judge teachers more strictly.
James 3:1 (NIV 1984) Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.
Why while he Judge teachers more strictly? Because of the words coming from their mouths.