Is Prophesy for Today - a New Testament Perspective

In answer to a common question:
Now, if I look at what the Bible says: I was under the impression the gift of prophesy is the ONE gift we are no longer privy to - until the very, very last of days. Am I wrong?

In answer to your question concerning prophecy...

First, I have NEVER said that prophecy is not for today, or only for the "last days", if by that you mean the days just before the coming of the Lord as opposed to what the Word says they are.

First, please understand that "prophesy" in the Old Covenant came by Holy Spirit coming upon an anointed King, Prophet or Priest of God. Until after the resurrection of Jesus, and until after He had "breathed' on the disciples late on the same day as He rose from the dead, NOBODY had ever had the Holy Spirit living inside them.

Under the New Covenant, this has all changed, - people who have been "born-again" through believing and confessing Jesus as Lord (Romans 10:9-10) have the Holy Spirit dwelling inside of them, in union with that person's recreated spirit man - the "new creation" the Bible talks about. When we subsequently receive the baptism of Holy Spirit, and become "endued with power from on high", then according the accounts in Acts, we should then, as evidence, manifest speaking in other tongues, as the Holy Spirit gives us the utterances (words to say) (Acts 2:1-4).

N.B. this is NOT the same "gift" as that mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:10, simply because this latter "gift" (more correctly "manifestation") of speaking in "diverse tongues" (along with the "gift" of interpretation) are manifestations that Holy Spirit gives, as He wills, NOT as we will. The tongue language you are given when you receive the baptism of Holy Spirit is different - you have complete control over when and where you pray in tongues.

Now, according to the Word of God - in the NT - (NOT my opinions), there is a "manifestation" of the Holy Spirit called "prophecy". (There are also the "Word of Knowledge" and the Word of Wisdom" - both of these operate through the manifestation of prophecy, under the direction of the Holy Spirit). Holy Spirit can choose to give such utterances to anyone who is willing and available to be used to operate in the manifestation of gift of prophecy, as defined according to the New Testament form of prophecy. The only qualifications are that they are "born-again" and have received the baptism of Holy Spirit, with the evidence of speaking in other tongues.

The Word of God also says that Jesus appoints "prophets" who are to operate within the framework of the local Church. If prophecy is not for today, then why would Jesus appoint prophets. This role is a "gift" to His Body.

This means that we should EXPECT, if our church is operating according to the method and prescription described in the NT (apparently problematic), to see/hear prophets giving prophetic words in our local churches. Paul also explains the purpose of this type of prophecy (including the manifestation of the gift of tongues and interpretation, which according to Paul (NOT my opinion) is the same as prophecy) - it is for edification and exhortation and comfort of the church, and is intended to give us revelation, knowledge, prophesying, and teaching. (Again NOT my opinion -
this is what the Word SAYS - I have deliberately not quoted chapter and verse, so that you can go and study and prove these things for your selves).

Therefore, from these statements alone (made in the NT, NOT my opinion), prophecy is very much "for today" - since the Church is still around. (If not, we are all in big trouble!)

The NT also tells us that the "spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets", meaning he/she has a CHOICE as to whether they SPEAK the prophetic words Holy Spirit gives them.

Now,
according to Joel 2, God will pour out His Spirit upon all flesh, and "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy".

This will occur during the "last days".

According to Acts 2, if we are to believe this account (it is in the Word of God!!), then according to Peter, what happened on, and subsequent to, the outpouring of Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost (BTW this is a Jewish feast day - not something invented by Christian tradition), when the disciples (all of them) spoke with other tongues, was a (beginning) fulfillment of Joel's prophesy.

Now, logically (not based on "opinions", "hearsay", or "I think this", or "it's my impression"):

1) If Joel was correct, and this was to be a major sign of the "Last Days";

and 2) Peter confirms this in his first "sermon";

and 3) the Book of Acts indicates that this was not a one, two or even three time occurrence;

and 4) we believe that we are in the "Last Days" now; (this is an opinion)

THEN

1) we should EXPECT to see similar things happening to day,

2) we should EXPECT to see people receiving the baptism of Holy Spirit, with the evidence (as per
Acts) of speaking in tongues

4) we should EXPECT to see people doing the same miracles and greater ones than Jesus did (not my opinion - Jesus said this)

5) we should EXPECT more and more angelic involvement in the spread of the Gospel, helping believers in their every day lives

6) we should EXPECT (according to Joel - who I hope you agree has been accurate so far) to see major supernatural events taking place in the Church - since Joel said that just during the "last days", i.e. in the days (months, years) leading up to the "Day of the Lord", God would pour our a double portion of His Spirit - Joel speaks of this as "the former and later rains together".

Now, basing our understanding on what we KNOW has already happened, and upon the belief (which I believe can be fully justified by Scripture) that we ARE in the last of the "Last Days", we should be able to correctly determine what we should be seeing now.

We have seen the "latter rain" (see Joel) outpouring of Holy Spirit(BTW this falls naturally in spring in Israel) at Pentecost - as per Peter's "sermon" (you cannot surely disagree with me on this - it's in the Word), we have seen the "former rain" outpouring - this was the outpouring of Holy Spirit at Azusa Street and the Welsh Revival, and at Pensacola more recently (you might disagree with me on this, but if so, we have still to see this part of the prophecy fulfilled), so, according to Joel (NOT my opinion), if we truly are in the last of the "Last Days", we should EXPECT the outpouring of Holy Spirit in a way the world has never yet seen - the "the former and later rains together", in its season, at the time of the harvest (Jeremiah 5:24) - i.e. in "a" September (early Fall) around the time of the Feast of Tabernacles.

We cannot KNOW the actual year, but I think we can have a pretty good idea, especially if, as in our church, God is continually speaking to us about it happening "very soon".

Now, if you want to argue that "tongues" and the manifestations of Holy Spirit are not for today, then logically, you are saying:

EITHER
1) the Word of God is unreliable, or worse, is lying

OR
2) that the "Last Days" were in fact 2000 years ago, and ended when the first apostles died, and we have gone beyond the "Last Days" that Scripture talks of.

OR (even more serious)

3) that God is both a respecter of persons, giving to one person something He will not give to another, and

4)that He changes His mind, and is no longer the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Logically you have to make a choice, because to not do so is to be unwilling or unable to rightly divide the Word, which means you can also wrongly divide it.

Now, either we are serious in our desire to really study the Word, and discover what it really says, or we just want to discuss our "opinions", what we "feel", what we may "believe", what we "think", what our "impressions" are, without reference to what the Scriptures actually say.

You CANNOT, logically (not opinion), have it both ways.

EITHER
we rely on our "feelings", thinking", "beliefs", "impressions", "traditions", other peoples "teachings" (including any I might have tried to present previously) as a means to judge what we see and hear in the Word

OR
we should be obedient to the Word, and study to make ourselves, individually, trusting that Jesus was telling us the Truth when he said that Holy Spirit would lead us into all Truth (which means you need to be able to hear Him clearly when He says "come this way"), approved of by God (not man), becoming perfect (mature) believers, no longer swayed or blown around by every wind of doctrine, not able to endure sound doctrine, turned aside to
fables, but rather we should be endeavoring to come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, attaining to all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Furthermore, Jesus clearly said that the arrival of Holy Spirit, as described in Acts 2, has great advantages to us. Jesus said that it was only if Holy Spirit came "in power" upon us, would He be able to "lead us into all truth" and "tell us of things to come". Jesus also said that we needed this "power from on high" in order to be witnesses for Him to the ends of the earth.

In my understanding of the above, if that means that the Baptism of Holy Spirit is not an optional extra to put on and taken off like a rain coat on a rainy day, has a specific, evidential, visible result when I receive it (according to Acts), and enables me to operate in the supernatural - a prerequisite for the Great Commission (see Mark 16), AND, according to Jesus, I NEED it to be an effective witness - if so, then I want it - NOW!

Now, the real questions are:
Are you going to honest about what you believe, and whether or not it truthfully lines up with the Word, and act on it?

Are you going to study the Word, and believe it unreservedly and completely (which is a definition of faith, and remember, without faith it is impossible to please God?

OR, alternatively (and there really is no other logical alternative):
Are you going to continue to rely on your "traditions", religion, opinions, beliefs, thoughts, ideas, impressions and whatever, in spite of, or in contradiction to what the Word of God actually says?

It really is your choice. No one can make you decide, least of all God!

My main concern is that if you do NOT know what the Word says, and you are not learning to walk "in the Spirit" (the place, not the state), as we are COMMANDED to do by God himself, than when disaster strikes, be that from natural causes or terrorists, it will be too late to learn - you just won't have the time.

It is my belief that we are about to enter a time of great trouble and danger (just look to what has happened already in the US this year - tornadoes, extreme weather, flooding, mudslides, earthquakes and fires), which will make even the events in Burma and China pale in comparison.

If you are not able to totally put your trust in God, when all around you may be, literally, slipping away, and when getting even fresh water and basic food becomes next to impossible, when the basic necessities of life are not available to you, do you KNOW that you KNOW that your God will supply all of your need, do you KNOW how to get what you need from your storehouse in Heaven, and have it manifest here in the natural for you to use it now, or will you, like many Christians, suddenly find that your faith is like that of the man who built his house on the sand?

Remember, Jesus said that when we see such things as nations rising against nations, kingdoms against kingdoms, famines, pestilences, and earthquakes in various places, that this is only the beginning of birth pangs.

I've no experience of childbirth, except vicariously through my wife's experiences, but if the analogy of birth pangs is anything to go by, boy, we are in for a roller coaster of a ride, maybe literally.

Anyway,I'm not trying, in any way to say that any of us here are not "good" Christians, or that any of us are "better" than the others, because of our "knowledge" or "gifts", I am merely trying to show you what the Bible says, in the hope it might just help you, and in the worst case scenario, may literally save your life.

John

Is the Baptism of Holy Spirit a separate experience form the New Birth?

This post is concerning the topic of the baptism of Holy Spirit and "tongues". I feel strongly that it is incumbent upon us all to discover what the Word says on the topic, and not rely on experience, or well meaning teachers who have no practical knowledge of the subject, or religious traditions that deny these things ar for today.

Note: apologies to all, this is a bit long, but please take the time to read it all - thanks

I commend you readers sincerely for your desire to study and understand the Word of
God.

However, I am confused by some people's logic concerning the Baptism of Holy Spirit (complete with speaking in tongues) and the New Birth being one and the same.

Let me try to explain.

If, as some say, the event in Acts 2, when the Holy Spirit was poured out on the first disciples,
and they spoke with tongues, also corresponds with being "born again", then, because God is not a respecter of persons (i.e. what He does for one, He must do for all), and if this account is supposed to show us, today, that this is what should happen when we too are "born again", then by that definition, most people who call themselves Christian are not!! Before you get all upset, please bear with my continuing argument.

The account in Acts 10, when the Gentiles first received the Gospel, also explicitly says that when they had received the gospel from Peter, they all believed and were then filled with Holy Spirit and spoke in other tongues. The account here is VERY clear that Peter and his 6 companions knew that the Gentiles had received the baptism of Holy Spirit because they spoke in tongues.

Again, making the assumption that being "born-again" and receiving the Baptism of Holy Spirit are one and the same, the pattern clearly would be that if we were "born again" by and through what the Bible terms the Baptism of Holy Spirit, this should be evident to anyone watching, because we too would speak in tongues.

On this basis, these two accounts clearly would seem, based on the above assumption, to
establish the biblical pattern for what to expect when we are "born again".

However, since in our experiences today, and I believe you would at least agree with me on this, it does not usually happen like this, our understanding and interpretation of what the Word says MUST be incomplete... or even incorrect.

Romans 10:9-10 says that in order to be saved = "born-again", ALL that is required of us is that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

This is simple, very straightforward, and easily understood. There is no mention of "speaking in tongues". So, either our understanding is incomplete concerning what the Baptism of Holy Spirit actually means, or we are all not "born-again" if we do not "speak in other tongues", as
some would (and do) actually teach (I AM NOT ADVOCATING THIS POSITION - I am
playing devil's advocate).

Since this is obviously the NOT the case, we must dig deeper.

We need to see where the first disciples became "born again". This must have happened at some prior time to the events in Acts 2.

Fortunately, the Bible tells us.

On the day that Jesus rose from the dead, after He had ascended to His Father, he returned to earth and met with the disciples, who at that time were in hiding in the Upper Room.

You will find, upon studying the scriptures, that in spite of the women (Mary Magdalene in particular, Salome, and Mary the mother of James/Joses - I personally think that this other "Mary" mentioned in the Gospel accounts was in fact Jesus' birth mother, since He had brothers named James and Joses) telling the disciples that Jesus was risen from the dead, they refused to
believe their eye witness account of the Resurrection, for which Jesus subsequently rebuked them for their lack of faith and unbelief.

John's account clearly says that at this time, in actuality at the end of that very same day, Jesus came amongst them and "breathed" on them and said to them "Receive the Holy Spirit". [John 20:22] At this point in time, the disciple MUST have been "born-again", since Jesus had clearly told them that no one could enter the Kingdom of God unless they had been "born again" of the Spirit. This event mirrors what happened in the Garden of Eden, when God "breathed" His
Spirit into Adam, and he became a speaking, living, spirit being.

(Side note: when Adam sinned, his spirit died; therefore, Jesus had to breath on the disciples to impart new life to their dead spirits, so that they could become part of God's family again - i.e. they were, at this moment, "born again" into the Kingdom of Heaven, just as Jesus had said would have to happen in John 3, during His conversation with Nicodemus).

Going back to the Gospel accounts, it is recorded that some 40 days later, just before Jesus' ascension, He instructs the disciples to remain in Jerusalem until they receive "power from on high", or as Luke puts it, until they had received the "promise of the Father and had been "endured with power from on high. [Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4]. Since the disciples had already "received the Holy Spirit" the same day that Jesus rose from the dead, you have to ask what is this "promise of the Father" that results in being "endued with power from on high". Given the time frame, they obviously cannot be the same.

Let us see what Scripture has to say about this "promise of the Father". In Acts 1:5 Jesus calls this the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and said it would come UPON them. Now, since they were already "born-again", since Jesus had "breathed" Holy Spirit INTO them some 40 days before, these are clearly NOT the same event. It is important to note the distinction between INTO and UPON to fully grasp what is actually happening.

Furthermore, in Acts 3:33, Peter confirms that the "promise of the Father' is the outpouring of Holy Spirit in power with the evidence of speaking in tongues, upon the believers, since that is what everyone in Jerusalem saw and heard (according to Acts 2:5-13):

33 “Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the
promise of the Holy Spirit, He [Jesus] poured out this [the Holy Spirit] which you now see and hear.

If you look at what John has to say about the coming of the Holy Spirit, you see that:

(1) Holy Spirit was going to be sent by the Father,
(2) He could only be sent AFTER Jesus had returned to Heaven, to sit at God's right hand,
(3) It would be to our advantage that Holy Spirit came,
(4) He would testify of Jesus, along with us,
(5) He would be our Helper, Comforter, Advocate, Counselor, Intercessor, Strengthener,
Standby who comes along side of us
(6) He would lead us into all Truth,
(7) He will tell us of things to come

Now, according to Genesis 1:1-2, the Holy Spirit has been here on earth since the world was created. So, He was already on here earth during Jesus' ministry, so obviously, Jesus is talking about a different manifestation of Holy Spirit's work and ministry, that relates specifically to the ongoing work and ministry of His Body the Church, once He had gone away to Heaven.

Just to make sure we get this, Luke records that the command to remain in Jerusalem until they received the Promise is given to the disciples more than 40 days AFTER they had already received Holy Spirit WITHIN themselves, just before Jesus ascended again to Heaven, to sit at the right hand of the Father - Acts 1:8.

Then, in Acts 2:1-4, we see the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit, with power, on the disciples - all 120 of them, together with the manifestation of the gift of tongues, as the Spirit gave then utterance (i.e. the Holy Spirit gave them the words - utterances - to say, and the disciples spoke them out, using their tongues and mouths - in other words they exercised their ability to speak, and spoke out the words that Holy Spirit placed in their spirits - Holy Spirit did not, as some teach, take them over, override their free wills, and cause them to speak in ecstatic
languages).

Clearly, Scripture identifies the process of being "born again" as a separate experience from receiving the "Baptism of Holy Spirit".

I have given two examples from the Scriptures where a group of people were first "born again", and then subsequently received the "Baptism of Holy Spirit", in both cases with the evidence of speaking in other tongues. Now, Scripture says that we need two or more witnesses to confirm something in the Word. In order to ensure we have received a proper understanding of these
matters, let us look at one more, specific example, where a person was "born again" and then, a few days later received the Holy Spirit, with the evidence of speaking in tongues (although in the account this latter fact is not specifically mentioned, but the person involved makes a statement later on that he had received the gift of speaking in tongues).

Go with me to Acts 9:1-19. Here is the account of Saul/Paul's conversion and subsequent receiving (infilling) of the Holy Spirit. Now, in v5, you see Saul already acknowledging that the person speaking to him was worthy of obedience and submission, because he called what at this point in time is just an unknown voice, "Lord". Then Jesus reveals to Saul that He is Jesus, and that Saul's activities against the Church are a direct persecution of Jesus. In v6 Saul acknowledges that what Jesus is saying is Truth, thereby admitting that Jesus had been raised from the dead, since He is obviously now very alive, and immediately submits himself to the Lordship of Jesus, asking what he should do next. Now, according to Romans 10:9-10, if you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, you will be saved.

It is obvious from this account so far that Saul not only recognized that Jesus had been raised from the dead, but that he was also worthy to be called "Lord", and more than that, he confessed this out aloud. In doing so he fulfilled the requirements for being saved.

So, Saul is now a "born again" member of the Church - he then continues on to Damascus. As we continue to read through the account, we see Ananias, an ordinary follower of Jesus (not an apostle or elder, just a believer like one of us) calling Saul his brother (v17), meaning that Ananias understood from his conversation with Jesus that Saul was now a "born again" member of the body of Christ, and should be treated as such - much to Ananias' initial discomfort and
misgivings.

Ananias then explains to Saul that he has been instructed personally by Jesus to come and lay hands on Saul for him to receive his sight, and to receive the Holy Spirit. Since Saul is already "born again" - which had happened 3 days previously, Ananias is about to used to do something
more - Saul is to "be filled with the Holy Spirit" (v17). So now Saul has been "born again" and has received or has been "filled" with the Holy Spirit. You could argue that what Saul/Paul experienced was not the same experience as the first disciples experienced on the day of Pentecost, but then you have to explain at what point when Saul/Paul received the gift of tongues that he claims in his letter to the Corinthian church "to speak more than any of you" (1 Cor. 14:18). You would also have to explain why Saul/Paul's experience is materially different from the other disciples experiences.

Now, and this is key to understanding the experience of the "baptism of Holy Spirit" as being distinct from the need to be "born-again" in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus, following his water baptism by John also received the "baptism of Holy Spirit". It says in Luke 4:1 that Jesus, being filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. Jesus had to be "filled with the Holy Spirit" before he could commence his ministry. Jesus confirms this in Luke 4:18-19, when he declares that

"“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”"

Jesus, because He was "without sin", did not need to be "born again" of the Spirit, because His spirit was never dead in the first place (until He died on the Cross - but that's another teaching for another day). He had the Holy Spirit living in Him from the moment He was conceived. He did however need to have Holy Spirit come UPON Him to anoint Him for His supernatural ministry. Remember, Jesus laid aside His power and glory and became a Man when He was born, so He no longer had access to the omnipotent and omnipresent power and knowledge of God whilst he walked the earth as a man. As He said Himself, He could only do what the Father told Him to do, and what Holy Spirit empowered him to do.

We, as sinful humans, all need to be "born again" because we need our spirit man to be given life - every person born into the world since Adam has a "dead" spirit - i.e. a spirit that is not alive to God. That's why we need to be saved, and our spirit man made a "new creation" - when the Holy Spirit comes to live on the inside of us.

So likewise for Saul/Paul (and according to Jesus' own words and the accounts in Acts, for everyone else in the Church) - he too needed the "enduing with power from on high" - the baptism of Holy Spirit so he could start his ministry, with the Holy Spirit coming UPON him.

If Jesus, the first disciples and the Apostles, the first Gentiles in the Church, Saul/Paul needed this "infilling", "baptism", which ever you call it, of "power from on high", when the Holy Spirit comes UPON a believer - who by definition already has the Holy Spirit WITHIN them, why should we nowadays be any different or have no need of it? Are we, in effect, by saying we do not need the baptism of Holy Spirit, in fact guilty of telling God we don't need such supernatural gifts and power in our lives - in reality telling God we don't need such things nowadays?

In order to help clarify what the Word says, let me quote someone who presents the following argument against separate experiences of the New Birth and the baptism of Holy Spirit. They made the statement:

That clearly means that all believers have the Holy Spirit. If all are baptized into one body by the Holy Spirit but not all speak in tongues, it makes much more sense to me that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is an event that occurs when the Holy Spirit initiates faith at the time of the believer’s
salvation.

If this statement is true, then, according to the biblical accounts I have discussed, we should all speak in tongues when we get born again, since that is what happened in every case when believers received the baptism of Holy Spirit. Since it is clear from your own admission that you do not speak in tongues, by your own statements you are also implying that you are not born again, which statement is obviously, to all of us, not true.

Every believer receives the presence of the Holy Spirit WITHIN them at the new birth. But the Bible clearly teaches that there is also the experience of the Holy Spirit coming UPON a believer and "enduing them with power from on high". All the accounts in Acts indicate that this second experience is accompanied in every case by the believer being able to speak with other tongues.

I have tried to present a reasoned argument from Scripture as to why being "born-again" and receiving the "baptism of Holy Spirit" are two distinct and separate experiences for every believer. So, if you have not asked God to baptize you with Holy Spirit, so that you might receive "power from on high", I cannot more strongly recommend that you ask Him, and in faith receive, and open your mouth and allow Holy Spirit to give you your own supernatural prayer language. It will, I guarantee, revolutionize your walk with God.

John