The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Reformed Charismatics and Revelation

Joe,

Too many! To begin with, he equivocates on the difference between an Old Testament prophet and a New Testament apostle by defining these terms as "one having the authority to compose Scripture." Is this how Scripture defines these offices? No. Scripture treats a true prophet as one who speaks the word of God given to him by God through the Holy Spirit (it matters not whether he composes Scripture). The apostles were a much smaller group of men, appointed directly by the incarnate Christ Himself as His special representatives in the church (whether or not they composed Scripture).

He then argues for a different meaning of "prophet" in the NT versus in the OT, based on variant uses of the Greek term in the time of the NT. But Jesus and the Apostles all referred to both the OT and NT prophets as prophetês, so they themselves regarded the OT and NT offices of prophet as continuous. In that light, it is special pleading to regard most instances of "prophet" in the NT as referring to something other than an office equivalent to the OT office.

He next does some marvellous eisegeting of relevant NT texts, assuming prophetic fallibility in order to prove it. Especially objectionable is his treatment of commands to "test/weigh" prophecy—he says this indicates that NT prophecy has good and bad in it, and we are to find the good and discard the bad. However, it is evident that what the apostles have in mind is not mixed prophecy, but determining whether a prophet is true or false!