A Different Perspective

A friend of mine and I were discussing Pat Robertson’s latest prophecy (a huge terrorist attack after September this year, sometime in the fall, I guess), when he made a comment I’ve heard time and time again.

The standard for prophecy is 100% accuracy.

After I got home from that discussion, I read a post on the A-Team blog which made comments similar to my friend’s sentiment:

What seriously disturbs me the most about what Robertson said in relation to his prior failed prophecies according to the FoxNews article: “”I have a relatively good track record,” he said. “Sometimes I miss.”" Apparently he skipped the passages (e.g. Deut. 18:22) of the Bible that speak of determining a true prophet by ALL of their prophecies coming true. God doesn’t “miss.” By claiming to speak for God with falsehoods, Robertson makes God out to be a liar. Robertson is a false prophet plain and simple.

The discussion reminded me of a book I read, thoroughly enjoyed, and enthusiastically recommend, Wayne Grudem’s The Gift of Prophecy in the New Testament and Today.

I’m not defending Pat Robertson, not directly any way, but I take issue with the assertion that in order to prophesy, you must be 100% right all the time. Before you break out with the OT Scriptures, take a moment and ask yourself if the nature of prophecy in the Old Testament is the same as in the New Testament? Now go a little further and ask yourself if the New Testament has anything to say about it.

Grudem’s book does a lot better than my little blog post can at showing God uses prophetic utterance in a very different way in the New Testament. In the age of the Church, we are not to stone prophets who get one wrong. There’s a much greater human element in the prophetic utterances of the “gift” of prophecy compared to the “office” of prophet in the Old Testament. And I agree with Grudem that there is an office pointed to in Ephesians (the five-fold ministry passage…), but that is not the same role as the OT prophet, either.

One example of how prophecy is different comes from the only time we see a NT prophet using similar wordage to the OT prophet’s, “thus says the Lord.” Let’s look at that passage for a moment.

Acts 21:10 As we were staying there for some days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea.

11 And coming to us, he took Paul’s belt and bound his own feet and hands, and said, “This is what the Holy Spirit says: ‘In this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”

12 When we had heard this, we as well as the local residents began begging him not to go up to Jerusalem.

13 Then Paul answered, “What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but even to die at Jerusalem for (Z)the name of the Lord Jesus.”

14 And since he would not be persuaded, we fell silent, remarking, “The will of the Lord be done!”

Acts 22:22-30 show the fulfillment of this prophecy… or does it? Well, if you have to be 100% accurate in all of your details, then absolutely not!

The latter passage shows us that Paul was not bound by the Jews and handed over to the Romans. The Romans bound Paul and arrested him, most likely saving his life (especially after Paul mentioned that he was a Roman citizen).

It’s the details which concern me here. Agabus even said, “This is what the Holy Spirit says…” But if the Holy Spirit had given Agabus a word for word prophecy, surely the Spirit would not have been wrong!

For a full and better treatment of the issue, check out Grudem’s book.

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 4th, 2007 at 11:05 pm and is filed under Emerging Church, Faith, Theology. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.