Are there modern day prophets and Apostle then today?

[Josheb]

The so called prophets and Apostles of today are all teaching false doctrines and theology, as all one had to do is to check an see what they say, as one of the leaders Kenneth Copeland has stated biggest failure in the bible is God, and that Jesus had to get born again in hell, and that he never claimed to be God, just the son of God

Why did Oral Roberts Hospital still have cancer and all other diseases were curing still then?

Arguments from extreme examples prove nothing, logically speaking. Besides, who here believes anything those two fools say?

Biblical prophets and Apostles spoke and wrote divine revelation from God, none of those claiming it for today can claim such

That is true. However, did you not previously post the prophets and apostles in the Bible added nothing to the Bible? I'm not seeing a response to Post 32.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

The so called prophets and Apostles of today are all teaching false doctrines and theology, as all one had to do is to check an see what they say, as one of the leaders Kenneth Copeland has stated biggest failure in the bible is God, and that Jesus had to get born again in hell, and that he never claimed to be God, just the son of God

Copeland like that crazy myers woman also said we are little "gods" just like God.

I have been in the trenches with these peopl who believe all of the nonsense that is taught.

It is quite shameful.

I was a target of a charissmaniac preacher because I was showing others what the bibl;e\e really said about his nonsesne.

That man did not like me.

 

[JesusFan]

Copeland like that crazy myers woman also said we are little "gods" just like God.

I have been in the trenches with these peopl who believe all of the nonsense that is taught.

It is quite shameful.

I was a target of a charissmaniac preacher because I was showing others what the bibl;e\e really said about his nonsesne.

That man did not like me.

Those into word of faith especially are to be pitied, as they are spiritual just as bad off as those in cults like JW and Mormon

 

[JesusFan]

Arguments from extreme examples prove nothing, logically speaking. Besides, who here believes anything those two fools say?

That is true. However, did you not previously post the prophets and apostles in the Bible added nothing to the Bible? I'm not seeing a response to Post 32.

many within Christianity buy into the heresies espoused by WOF though, and those 2 are not extreme examples, but mainstream for those views

 

[mikewringer]

Those into word of faith especially are to be pitied, as they are spiritual just as bad off as those in cults like JW and Mormon

I was in these cults for 6 yrs. Followed Copeland, Sevelle, Tilton and many others. Traveled long distance to see them. I have many experiences with their fake ministries. It was all about power and money. I am grateful God brought me out and to a Reformed Church.

 

[Josheb]

many within Christianity buy into the heresies espoused by WOF though, and those 2 are not extreme examples, but mainstream for those views

I completely agree with Post 44. However, that has nothing to do with my point. The point is that, logically speaking, answering the question asked in this op using statistical and normative (doctrinal) outliers is irrational. Logically speaking, a term like "prophet," or "apostle" must be defined by normal, healthy, rational, scriptural orthodoxy, not crazy people. If this op was a set up intended solely to rag on false-Christian nut cases, then that should have been stated in the opening post. Since most of us here in this forum aren't doctrinal extremists the WOF definitions of prophet and apostle aren't just inane, they simply do not apply.

Now..... two people saw fit to ask you to define your terms. This is necessary for multiple reasons.

• There are many definitions of the terms, even within orthodox Christianit.
• Some consensus must be established so we're all talking about the same thing.
• You might be a doctrinal outsider and not know it. Whatever definition you intend may be viable for discussion but not a correct definition.
• A shared or mutually agreed upon definition serves as a device for restoring discussion when digressions occur and you, personally, have difficulty in that regard.
• A shared definition also aids in avoiding problems of ambiguity, construction, and other logical fallacies.
• A shared definition, especially if it is an accurate one, aids when all the members of a discussion read and apply scripture to the discussion.
• Unscriptural and/or irrational definitions tells the participants NOT using the unscriptural definition something about the one who employs unorthodox definitions.
• Consensus with each other is not likely when using disparate or unscriptural definitions and agreement with scripture will prove impossible.

Therefore, while the observations about WOFs, JWs, and LDSes may be true and correct, their examples are not applicable to us except in antithesis.

Are there modern-day prophets? Maybe, maybe not, but answering that question will require a scripturally viable definition we can all abide. For example, there were scores of prophets throughout the OT times but most of them never made it into what we now consider the canon of scripture. The prophets who have books names after them were not the only prophets God sent to Israel. Those were the prophets God sent to Israel to be recorded for the record, those God sent for the Christians' later benefit. At its most basic, foundational meaning, a prophet is simply someone inspired by God to announce certain aspect about the future relevant to the audience. Prophets also provided guidance and correction; their existence was not all about the future, especially not the far, far distant future. And not always about an inevitable future (Ninevah was spared). These commonalities do not mean all prophets are alike, though, because method is nearly as important as content. Only one prophet was asked to marry a harlot. Only one person chosen to be a prophet was a blatantly rebellious contrarian. The same thing holds true for the apostles. They ALL taught, preached, and prophesied but they were known and apostles, not prophets, and Paul's methodology was different than that of Peter's or James.

 

[Josheb]

@JesusFan,

When I was brought to salvation in Christ, I happened to be in a Sunday worship service. I was raised in a family that regularly attended church, but I do not ever recall hearing the gospel, definitely did not understand it and many, many, many years later after I stopped attending weekly services and then returned, I had, at best, a factual knowledge of the gospel's message. There was absolutely zero experiential understanding. I was out Friday and Saturday nights doing things no Christian should do. God had brought me to a point where I knew and understood a need for change, but I hadn't a clue what that meant in any substantive or practical sense. To this day, the craziest part about it all is that I found myself in a conservative, evangelical, charismatic Episcopal congregation led by a serial adulterer. One of the assistant ministers preached the morning I was converted from life to death. At the end of his message he asked a fairly innocuous question, "How many of you have had a difficult week?" He said a little more than that, but I raised my hand, along with many others. He said some words about slavery and bondage, citing the Hebrew experiences in Egypt and Babylon, and then he invited everyone whose hand was raised to stand up and have people around them pray for them. I immediately thought, "Oh cr@p! This is an alter call. That sneak snuck an altar call in!" But I also thought, "Look, you've been farting around here for a while. Maybe it's time to give this Jesus thing some serious attention." So, I decided to come clean, repent, ask Jesus to be my Lord and Saviour, and do Christianity.

A number of people gathered around, placing their hands on me, while I started verbally disclosing as much of my wrongdoing as I could recall in the moment (without taking up the entire service to do so). I was serious. I confessed all the drug use and drug dealing I'd been doing, the sexual gratification and avarice, the theft, the violence, and more. Then I shut up and silently prayed to God, "Okay, God. If this is for real, then I want to be changed. I don't want to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking my head on the floor or banging my shins on the seats. I want to know I am a different person today, before I walk out the doors today." And then something very unusual happened, something I cannot explain except it be God.

One of the men standing next to me, said exactly what I was silently praying. He said, "Heavenly Father, let [Josh] know this is for real, that he has been changed. Let him know he does not have to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking his head on the floor or banging his shins on the seats. Let him know he is a different person right now, and when he walks out the door this morning, he has been changed."

Heard it with my own ears. Experienced it. Witnessed it.

That was over 40 years ago, and the change has held true. I was changed that day and remain changed to this day.

So, what would you call that guy? Prophet? If not a prophet, then what? Lucky guesser? Oh, wait, that's not in the Bible . A mind-reader?



The rector's adultery was eventually discovered and was replaced by a more trustworthy steward. The congregation divided over it, with half wanting the congregation to remain charismatic and the other half wanting more traditional Episcopalianism. I grew and grew but eventually left to worship and fellowship elsewhere, traversing much of the Chirstian spectrum of doctrine and practice before eventually settling within what is commonly known as Reformed Theology (but even here I do not fit into the prescribed viewpoints neatly). I have seen a LOT of scriptural eisegetes and doctrinal inbreds, both on the stage and sitting next to me in the pew or at a meal. Christians can be very wack. The wack can be very visible when the existence of modern-day prophets and apostles is the topic of discussion. Many here may consider themselves cessationists (of one degree or another) but I believe God spoke to that man and the words I heard were inspired by God not that man's flesh or fleshly faculties.


What title would you give the man whose supplication mirrored my own verbatim?

 

[makesends]

Those into word of faith especially are to be pitied, as they are spiritual just as bad off as those in cults like JW and Mormon

But the mental framework from which those into Word of Faith suppose their teaching to be valid, is the same as those self-determinists and synergists who suppose themselves moral agents on God's level, (but fallen). I.e. they think THEY have something to contribute, something to add to, God's purposes. I see the same thing with Idolatry, and the stories of angels assisting God in creating the universe. The Children of Israel who want to stand back away from God.

 

[makesends]

@JesusFan,

When I was brought to salvation in Christ, I happened to be in a Sunday worship service. I was raised in a family that regularly attended church, but I do not ever recall hearing the gospel, definitely did not understand it and many, many, many years later after I stopped attending weekly services and then returned, I had, at best, a factual knowledge of the gospel's message. There was absolutely zero experiential understanding. I was out Friday and Saturday nights doing things no Christian should do. God had brought me to a point where I knew and understood a need for change, but I hadn't a clue what that meant in any substantive or practical sense. To this day, the craziest part about it all is that I found myself in a conservative, evangelical, charismatic Episcopal congregation led by a serial adulterer. One of the assistant ministers preached the morning I was converted from life to death. At the end of his message he asked a fairly innocuous question, "How many of you have had a difficult week?" He said a little more than that, but I raised my hand, along with many others. He said some words about slavery and bondage, citing the Hebrew experiences in Egypt and Babylon, and then he invited everyone whose hand was raised to stand up and have people around them pray for them. I immediately thought, "Oh cr@p! This is an alter call. That sneak snuck an altar call in!" But I also thought, "Look, you've been farting around here for a while. Maybe it's time to give this Jesus thing some serious attention." So, I decided to come clean, repent, ask Jesus to be my Lord and Saviour, and do Christianity.

A number of people gathered around, placing their hands on me, while I started verbally disclosing as much of my wrongdoing as I could recall in the moment (without taking up the entire service to do so). I was serious. I confessed all the drug use and drug dealing I'd been doing, the sexual gratification and avarice, the theft, the violence, and more. Then I shut up and silently prayed to God, "Okay, God. If this is for real, then I want to be changed. I don't want to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking my head on the floor or banging my shins on the seats. I want to know I am a different person today, before I walk out the doors today." And then something very unusual happened, something I cannot explain except it be God.

One of the men standing next to me, said exactly what I was silently praying. He said, "Heavenly Father, let [Josh] know this is for real, that he has been changed. Let him know he does not have to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking his head on the floor or banging his shins on the seats. Let him know he is a different person right now, and when he walks out the door this morning, he has been changed."

Heard it with my own ears. Experienced it. Witnessed it.

That was over 40 years ago, and the change has held true. I was changed that day and remain changed to this day.

So, what would you call that guy? Prophet? If not a prophet, then what? Lucky guesser? Oh, wait, that's not in the Bible . A mind-reader?



The rector's adultery was eventually discovered and was replaced by a more trustworthy steward. The congregation divided over it, with half wanting the congregation to remain charismatic and the other half wanting more traditional Episcopalianism. I grew and grew but eventually left to worship and fellowship elsewhere, traversing much of the Chirstian spectrum of doctrine and practice before eventually settling within what is commonly known as Reformed Theology (but even here I do not fit into the prescribed viewpoints neatly). I have seen a LOT of scriptural eisegetes and doctrinal inbreds, both on the stage and sitting next to me in the pew or at a meal. Christians can be very wack. The wack can be very visible when the existence of modern-day prophets and apostles is the topic of discussion. Many here may consider themselves cessationists (of one degree or another) but I believe God spoke to that man and the words I heard were inspired by God not that man's flesh or fleshly faculties.


What title would you give the man whose supplication mirrored my own verbatim?

And what office, and what purpose, and how universal? It may be in effect prophecy, but not according to the capacity of those who dealt the word of God against rulers and countries. He was not writing scripture, nor officiating.

That's why this weakness of definition is particularly pernicious. The same vagueness this thread fights has made all sorts of inroads into Christendom. They get the following but not the responsibility. They get man-made authority and its benefits, but not God-made authority.

 

[JesusFan]

I completely agree with Post 44. However, that has nothing to do with my point. The point is that, logically speaking, answering the question asked in this op using statistical and normative (doctrinal) outliers is irrational. Logically speaking, a term like "prophet," or "apostle" must be defined by normal, healthy, rational, scriptural orthodoxy, not crazy people. If this op was a set up intended solely to rag on false-Christian nut cases, then that should have been stated in the opening post. Since most of us here in this forum aren't doctrinal extremists the WOF definitions of prophet and apostle aren't just inane, they simply do not apply.

Now..... two people saw fit to ask you to define your terms. This is necessary for multiple reasons.

• There are many definitions of the terms, even within orthodox Christianit.
• Some consensus must be established so we're all talking about the same thing.
• You might be a doctrinal outsider and not know it. Whatever definition you intend may be viable for discussion but not a correct definition.
• A shared or mutually agreed upon definition serves as a device for restoring discussion when digressions occur and you, personally, have difficulty in that regard.
• A shared definition also aids in avoiding problems of ambiguity, construction, and other logical fallacies.
• A shared definition, especially if it is an accurate one, aids when all the members of a discussion read and apply scripture to the discussion.
• Unscriptural and/or irrational definitions tells the participants NOT using the unscriptural definition something about the one who employs unorthodox definitions.
• Consensus with each other is not likely when using disparate or unscriptural definitions and agreement with scripture will prove impossible.

Therefore, while the observations about WOFs, JWs, and LDSes may be true and correct, their examples are not applicable to us except in antithesis.

Are there modern-day prophets? Maybe, maybe not, but answering that question will require a scripturally viable definition we can all abide. For example, there were scores of prophets throughout the OT times but most of them never made it into what we now consider the canon of scripture. The prophets who have books names after them were not the only prophets God sent to Israel. Those were the prophets God sent to Israel to be recorded for the record, those God sent for the Christians' later benefit. At its most basic, foundational meaning, a prophet is simply someone inspired by God to announce certain aspect about the future relevant to the audience. Prophets also provided guidance and correction; their existence was not all about the future, especially not the far, far distant future. And not always about an inevitable future (Ninevah was spared). These commonalities do not mean all prophets are alike, though, because method is nearly as important as content. Only one prophet was asked to marry a harlot. Only one person chosen to be a prophet was a blatantly rebellious contrarian. The same thing holds true for the apostles. They ALL taught, preached, and prophesied but they were known and apostles, not prophets, and Paul's methodology was different than that of Peter's or James.

I would define prophets and apostles in the biblical sense as those who hold the office of such, and would have the authority to speak forth, or write don to us, doctrines and theology by divine revelation from the Holy Spirit

 

[JesusFan]

@JesusFan,

When I was brought to salvation in Christ, I happened to be in a Sunday worship service. I was raised in a family that regularly attended church, but I do not ever recall hearing the gospel, definitely did not understand it and many, many, many years later after I stopped attending weekly services and then returned, I had, at best, a factual knowledge of the gospel's message. There was absolutely zero experiential understanding. I was out Friday and Saturday nights doing things no Christian should do. God had brought me to a point where I knew and understood a need for change, but I hadn't a clue what that meant in any substantive or practical sense. To this day, the craziest part about it all is that I found myself in a conservative, evangelical, charismatic Episcopal congregation led by a serial adulterer. One of the assistant ministers preached the morning I was converted from life to death. At the end of his message he asked a fairly innocuous question, "How many of you have had a difficult week?" He said a little more than that, but I raised my hand, along with many others. He said some words about slavery and bondage, citing the Hebrew experiences in Egypt and Babylon, and then he invited everyone whose hand was raised to stand up and have people around them pray for them. I immediately thought, "Oh cr@p! This is an alter call. That sneak snuck an altar call in!" But I also thought, "Look, you've been farting around here for a while. Maybe it's time to give this Jesus thing some serious attention." So, I decided to come clean, repent, ask Jesus to be my Lord and Saviour, and do Christianity.

A number of people gathered around, placing their hands on me, while I started verbally disclosing as much of my wrongdoing as I could recall in the moment (without taking up the entire service to do so). I was serious. I confessed all the drug use and drug dealing I'd been doing, the sexual gratification and avarice, the theft, the violence, and more. Then I shut up and silently prayed to God, "Okay, God. If this is for real, then I want to be changed. I don't want to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking my head on the floor or banging my shins on the seats. I want to know I am a different person today, before I walk out the doors today." And then something very unusual happened, something I cannot explain except it be God.

One of the men standing next to me, said exactly what I was silently praying. He said, "Heavenly Father, let [Josh] know this is for real, that he has been changed. Let him know he does not have to be slain in the Spirit flailing on the floor doing the alligator, no foaming at the mouth, knocking his head on the floor or banging his shins on the seats. Let him know he is a different person right now, and when he walks out the door this morning, he has been changed."

Heard it with my own ears. Experienced it. Witnessed it.

That was over 40 years ago, and the change has held true. I was changed that day and remain changed to this day.

So, what would you call that guy? Prophet? If not a prophet, then what? Lucky guesser? Oh, wait, that's not in the Bible . A mind-reader?



The rector's adultery was eventually discovered and was replaced by a more trustworthy steward. The congregation divided over it, with half wanting the congregation to remain charismatic and the other half wanting more traditional Episcopalianism. I grew and grew but eventually left to worship and fellowship elsewhere, traversing much of the Chirstian spectrum of doctrine and practice before eventually settling within what is commonly known as Reformed Theology (but even here I do not fit into the prescribed viewpoints neatly). I have seen a LOT of scriptural eisegetes and doctrinal inbreds, both on the stage and sitting next to me in the pew or at a meal. Christians can be very wack. The wack can be very visible when the existence of modern-day prophets and apostles is the topic of discussion. Many here may consider themselves cessationists (of one degree or another) but I believe God spoke to that man and the words I heard were inspired by God not that man's flesh or fleshly faculties.


What title would you give the man whose supplication mirrored my own verbatim?

Think that the Holy Spirit can give one right words to say, or advise to give, but none of that would be acting as a prophet or apostle

 

[JesusFan]

But the mental framework from which those into Word of Faith suppose their teaching to be valid, is the same as those self-determinists and synergists who suppose themselves moral agents on God's level, (but fallen). I.e. they think THEY have something to contribute, something to add to, God's purposes. I see the same thing with Idolatry, and the stories of angels assisting God in creating the universe. The Children of Israel who want to stand back away from God.

Think many of them are shallow in their own beliefs, and are being swayed by satanic influences that operate when one is being exposed to :doctrines of demons"

 

[JesusFan]

And what office, and what purpose, and how universal? It may be in effect prophecy, but not according to the capacity of those who dealt the word of God against rulers and countries. He was not writing scripture, nor officiating.

That's why this weakness of definition is particularly pernicious. The same vagueness this thread fights has made all sorts of inroads into Christendom. They get the following but not the responsibility. They get man-made authority and its benefits, but not God-made authority.

I was taught in AOG, was a teaching Elder i n it for a decade, and while many are sincere and want to hold to miracles and healings and prophets and apostles it wishing and grabbing hold of someone who is very persuasive and charismatic in wrong sense of that term

 

[makesends]

I was taught in AOG, was a teaching Elder i n it for a decade, and while many are sincere and want to hold to miracles and healings and prophets and apostles it wishing and grabbing hold of someone who is very persuasive and charismatic in wrong sense of that term

Yeah. It was talking to a new (3 yr(?)) believer from an AOG that I first heard the notion of Apostolic Succession, some 25 years ago. (That was the direction he was heading his life, or at least, his training, per him).

 

[Josheb]

I would define prophets and apostles in the biblical sense as those who hold the office of such, and would have the authority to speak forth, or write don to us, doctrines and theology by divine revelation from the Holy Spirit

Yet not all prophets did so.

 

[Josheb]

Think that the Holy Spirit can give one right words to say, or advise to give, but none of that would be acting as a prophet or apostle

You'll have to define the terms before being able to make that appraisal. I will readily agree the praying man may not have predicted the future and was certainly not adding to scripture. He did not have a title at all, as far as I can recall. Many evangelicals and most charismatics would qualify what he said as a "word of knowledge" but I am not sure that clears up anything. The basic definition of prophet and apostle in their original languages are very similar. Both words mean messengers and connotatively mean messengers inspired by God. given the fact mind-readers do not exist, it would appear that man was bearing a message from inspired by God. A definition of the term provides an objective basis for inclusion and exclusion.

 

[JesusFan]

You'll have to define the terms before being able to make that appraisal. I will readily agree the praying man may not have predicted the future and was certainly not adding to scripture. He did not have a title at all, as far as I can recall. Many evangelicals and most charismatics would qualify what he said as a "word of knowledge" but I am not sure that clears up anything. The basic definition of prophet and apostle in their original languages are very similar. Both words mean messengers and connotatively mean messengers inspired by God. given the fact mind-readers do not exist, it would appear that man was bearing a message from inspired by God. A definition of the term provides an objective basis for inclusion and exclusion.

They were able to give forth in either written words or verbal words divine revelation from God in Doctrines and Theology, and none have been able to do any of that since John died

 

[JesusFan]

Yeah. It was talking to a new (3 yr(?)) believer from an AOG that I first heard the notion of Apostolic Succession, some 25 years ago. (That was the direction he was heading his life, or at least, his training, per him).

Those holding to modern day prophets and Apostle do subscribe to canon did not reallycerae and was already completed as still getting revelations from God for today per them, mainly they are rehasing the heresy of latter day rain sons of God theology

 

[Josheb]

They were able to give forth in either written words or verbal words divine revelation from God in Doctrines and Theology, and none have been able to do any of that since John died

Agreed. Is that all that defines an apostle or prophet. If that is the sole definition then there definitely neither inmodernity.

Those holding to modern day prophets and Apostle do subscribe to canon did not reallycerae and was already completed as still getting revelations from God for today per them, mainly they are rehasing the heresy of latter day rain sons of God theology

Would you please correct mistakes in that post and clarify the point.