If, as some linguists suggest, ancient Hebrew verbs did not have tenses as we know them, but described activities as either “done” or “in process,” then the 2 forms of prophecy are one. Both are utterances of the divine sent thru the person, describing –out loud or in writing–what is done and what is in process; no more, no less. Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah–each of them, all the way through to John the Baptist–”sees” and describes what is done and what is in process.

We know from both the epistles and the historical record that participants in the Early Church entered into ecstatic states and prophesied–and that such activities were understood to be gifts of the Holy Spirit to those who had entered into Communion through the re-enactment of the Last Supper.

Yet, since Latin and Greek have verb tenses of past, present, and future. that which is “seen” can be described as having been done, being done, about to be done, or possibly to be done at some distant time. Big difference from the Hebrew tradition. Then we have the further confusion that results from the fact that the Latin 2nd-person plural is written the same way as the imperative, command form–so all kinds of misunderstandings begin to emerge.

Prophecy, then, became a whole new experience, with a very different set of expectations. Now the prophet describes some hitherto unknown “future” as well as the deep-held secrets of hearts and souls. Now the prophet may have said “I command you to…” but be heard (or read) as “You (plural) will…” And if that which was “foretold” doesn’t happen as expected, then the prophecy (and all to often the prophet) is discredited.

What if Paul, speaking to 2 different communities, was addressing 2 different understandings of prophecy? In both cases, it’s a legitimate gift, but in the one that sees it as the same as “soothsaying” it’s not ok, but in the one that honors the divine utterance as a description of what is done and what is unfolding, it is.

Just a thought… and I’m fine if it’s too little too late in this conversation.

Thanks,

David McDowell
Navarre, OH

This is an extremely old post (over two years old, to be exact!) so the conversation is rather dusty in my mind.

However, going back and re-reading what I wrote, and what has been said, I’m not sure I understand what it is you feel I’m “over reaching” on.

The part you quoted was not a position I was advocating, but rather using that logic to say that “prophecy” in the bulk of the New Testament must not be referring to the same thing as Hebrews 1:1-2.

Care to clarify?

Are you certain that you have not over reached a little on this first post? We know that Hebrews 1:1-2 was written well after 1 and 2 Corinthians, as well as 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus and, indeed, all of the Pauline writings. Thus, it would not have rendered 1 Corinthians, chapters 12-14 in particular, un-necessary. Paul is writing to the infant church in his epistles, as they mature and solidify. Thus, he is giving them instruction. Corinth, in particularly, was an unruly and proud church prone to excess. Thus, he regulates their use of the “sign gifts,” going so far as to warn them that tongues are a sign to the unbeliever, rather than for the believers.

Many say that Hebrews two speaks to the miraculous gifts, foretelling included, as belonging to those who sat under Christ’s teachings directly.

Hebrews 2:1-4 For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty, 3 how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, 4 God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.

Thus, some point to “After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, 4 God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will…” as indicating that those who heard Christ preach, or who were among those 70 appointed by Him were those who were the prophets…

I’m not advocating that position. However, when you write:

“If Hebrews 1:1,2 means that prophecy ceased with the coming of Jesus, then we have a bit of a difficulty. 1 Corinthians 14:29-32, which outlines the way in which prophecy should function in the church gathering, would be completely unnecessary if there were no prophecy after Christ. Hebrews 1, itself, would be unnecessary. In fact, most of the New Testament (other than the Gospels and Acts, which are mostly historical records and testimonies) would be unnecessary because we would have everything we needed from the words of Jesus.”

…you may be taking a rather large and in some ways indefensible leap. I write in the spirit of encouragement, not to criticize. This is an important topic and I look forward, as time permits, to reading more of what you have to say.

Seriously, taking the time to think through these posts is really getting me excited about this topic now because it’s firming some ideas up for me.

I hope to be able to post again later today, but it may be tomorrow before I get it together.

Maybe by the time I get around to posting again, Libbie will be back (not sure how many hours ahead of us she is). I know her blog indicates that this topic is important to her with regard to the sufficiency of Scripture (at least I hope I’m paraphrasing that accurately). So, I’m anxious to get to that part of it.

steve