Are prophets in the New Testament different from prophets in the Old Testament?

In the OT we find that prophets were held to a standard of 100% accuracy. This is quite remarkable seeing that what a prophet speaks, although it is the anointed word of God, is filtered through a fallible mind before it is spoken out of a fallible mouth. Obviously the function of the OT prophet was different, and maybe this accounts for the standard of 100% accuracy. OT prophets primarily foretold future events. What they had to speak was extremely important as it established OT scripture. Perhaps there was a miraculous undergirding of their minds and mouths by God to assure that they spoke with 100% accuracy.

I find some interesting things in the NT that seem to lead to the idea that this standard of 100% infallibility does not exist under the new covenant. Here are some scriptures to consider.

Act 20:22
(22) And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there:

Paul was bound in the Spirit to go to Jerusalem. God spoke specifically to him to go there.

Act 21:4
(4) And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

Act 21:10-14
(10) And as we tarried there many days, there came down from Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
(11) And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.
(12) And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.
(13) Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.
(14) And when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done.

The believers at Tyre prophesied by the Spirit that Paul should not go to Jerusalem. Agabus the prophet also prophesied that Paul should not go.

Yet, Paul went. The thing to consider is this. Who missed it? Did Paul, did the disciples at Tyre, did Agabus? No one was denounced in scripture as being a false prophet. Paul, the disciples at Tyre, as well as Agabus are portrayed as legitimate, but the word God spoke to Paul and the words that came through the others seem to conflict.

In these same scriptures notice that Agabus said that the Jews would arrest Paul, bind him, and then deliver him to the Romans. This is not how it happened. Look at Act 21:30-35

(30) And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.
(31) And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
(32) Who immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down unto them: and when they saw the chief captain and the soldiers, they left beating of Paul.
(33) Then the chief captain came near, and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and demanded who he was, and what he had done.
(34) And some cried one thing, some another, among the multitude: and when he could not know the certainty for the tumult, he commanded him to be carried into the castle.
(35) And when he came upon the stairs, so it was, that he was borne of the soldiers for the violence of the people.

Paul was not bound and delivered by the Jews. He was rescued by the Romans as the Jews were wanting to kill him.

So, Agabus' prophecy was less than 100% accurate. However, we never see Agabus denounced as a false prophet. We do see other's in the NT denounced as false, but not him.

In 1 Corinthians 14:29 Paul tells us to judge words of prophecy. What are we judging, the prophet, or the prophecy? If a prophecy comes forth that is not 100% accurate we are not told to cast the speaker out as false. Just to judge the words.

1Th 5:19-21
(19) Quench not the Spirit.
(20) Despise not prophesyings.
(21) Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

These verses suggest again that prophesying is to be active in the modern church, and that we are to judge and hold fast to the good.

So, do you think that NT prophecy is held to the same standard as OT prophecy? Is there grace for the prophet who speaks a word that does not have 100% accuracy? Remember that under the law one infraction was damning and according to strict interpretation often resulted in immediate physical death. Remember the first guy who made the mistake of picking up sticks for a fire on the sabbath? They enforced the law by stoning him to death. The standard under the law was perfection or nothing. But under the new covenant? 1 John 1:9 was written to believers, not unbelievers. God knew we could not keep the standard of perfection demanded by the law which, by the way, was only a shadow of the TRUE standard of Holiness that God IS. He offered to us reconciliation through His Son Jesus Christ. WHEN we do blow it, we have an advocate, we can confess our sins, and we continue to walk in His forgiveness and grace, cleansed of that sin. Is a prophetic word of less than 100% accuracy any different under the NT?

Interested in what you all think.

An excellent answer Jesus-is-GOD, but to clarify the accuracy of Agabus’ prophecy a little further for the first post: if you read the whole context, you find that his prophecy was precisely on. Acts 21:27-28 (NKJV)
27 Now when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews from Asia, seeing him in the temple, stirred up the whole crowd and [b]laid hands on him[/b], 28 crying out, "Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place." The word in question here is “bind” from the Greek δέω a primary verb; to bind (in various applications, literal or figurative) : bind, be in bonds, knit, tie, wind… 44 times in NT with various translations. The bottom line is that they bound him whether with ropes, chains or their bare hands until he reached the place where he was received/rescued by the Romans, and led away bound in chains. Whether it was what they intended or not, is coincidental, the prophecy is 100% accurate because that is precisely the result of their action, i.e. He was turned over to the Romans.
As for the 100% accuracy of Old Testament prophecies, we have faith that they will all be fulfilled with that accuracy (some are waiting that fulfillment) but that does not imply at all that all of them are to be taken literally, because there is much symbolism and allusions, alliteration and so forth that will prove 100% accurate when properly translated and interpreted. If it were left up to many, there would be multiple “less than 100%” accuracies there, but only because of our ignorance, and not because of the failure of the Spirit of Truth to convey precisely what He intended whether plainly or shrouded in mystery according to His Will and purpose.

As for either party in the Acts account “missing it”, neither did. Paul heard their accurate prophecy, just as the Lord gave the accurate prophecy regarding His own arrest and crucifixion and being handed over to the hands of sinners, but Peter protested that arrest, but the Lord set His face steadfastly toward Jerusalem determined to suffer for our sake.
Paul being told what was going to happen was not by any means a prohibition from the Spirit of God to go, but rather a warning regarding what would happen. I could illustrate that in many ways, but I do not believe it is necessary.

What these texts should demonstrate to us all is the precious love of Christ that was in the heart of Paul, that knowing the truth of what he would suffer, was determined to suffer whatever, even to being accursed if it meant the salvation of his brethren the Jews. That certainly was in no way wrong, nor missing the will of God… it was as Luke and the rest said when they reluctantly saw that he was determined, “the will of God be done”… and it was.

Respectfully,

Clint

In the OT, prophets were literally speaking forth scripture, the Word of God. You might say they were responsible for establishing canon. In the NT, prophets are definitely NOT speaking any addition to canon. In fact, the established and finished written Word of God is the thing that all prophecy is to be compared to to judge its validity. Prophets today serve in a servant leadership role in the body just as pastors, teachers, apostles, and evangelists do. Prophets serve the body by teaching them how to properly relate the the voice of the Holy Spirit, as well as providing direction and leadership to the body. I would give people like Art Katz as examples of NT prophets. If a called and fully functioning teacher in the body, for example, missed it in some area of scripture, thinking he was accurate, we would have grace for that teacher. We would pray for him, we would possibly bring his error before him in an attitude of humility, but we would not summarily dismiss him as a false teacher. Is the NT attitude toward a prophet the same or do we still hold the OT attitude that one instance of missing it makes the person worthy of dismissal as a false prophet? In the OT, God also used prophets as His chosen mouthpiece because of the people's inability to hear His voice for themselves. I also note there was no indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit. We as NT believers all have the responsibility and ability through the Holy Spirit to judge and discern. I too have seen men who claim to speak for God that were, well, flakes! I have also seen genuine men of God who are given a prophetic word, speak the word, but freely acknowledge that there is a possibility that they have missed something due to being human, and encourage the person for whom they have the word to hold it loosely, search the word, and judge it. My question is, do we have the different attitude toward prophets or words of prophecy now than under the law? Do we hold the prophets to a different standard than we hold apostles, evangelists, pastors, teachers, elders, deacons, or members of the body of Christ who operate in the spiritual gift of prophecy?

I am presupposing that it is clear that I am not implying we take any kind of flippant attitude toward prophets or accept whatever comes down the pike. Nor am I implying that we chase after the latest prophets or prophecy. Nor am I implying that we set some arbitrary level of accuracy (say 73.67%) as the threshold of Godly prophecy. And, I am not going anywhere near false prophets which will come in the end drawing men away from God with this question. We are to know those that labor among us, on a very intimate level. I judge all words of prophecy, even by those I know and trust, but I will exercise an extra level of caution if I do not know the person who is giving the prophecy.

Hope that came out right. I am not in any way wanting to debate, just to make sure that you understand what I am asking.

By the way, the attitude toward prophets and those who claim to be in Deut. 13 and 18 is interesting.

Hello...

Jesus-is-GOD wrote:

How do we judge any ministry? By the Word of GOD and the truth that comes out from them.

Anyone calling themselves a prophet [or any of the other 4 callings] is up to scrutiny by other prophets and the Body.
How do we "test all things" - as we're told to do, right after we're told to 'despise not prophecying'?

I agree. I think that any real prophet would welcome anyone who would try to "test" his words (I Thessalonians 5:21). The Bereans, if we remember, were "more noble" because they searched the Scriptures to see if what Paul (who wrote 2/3 of the New Testament) said was true (Acts 17:11).

Unfortunately, I think that there are many more "FALSE" prophets than "REAL" prophets in the "Church" today. Many of those false prophets are quick to share their "words" (and share them often)...and they are often quite demanding in regard to those who would question the validity of their "words."

It would be great to have prophets like Samuel, whose words "never fell to the ground" (I Samuel 3:19). This world desperately needs truth. In this great plethora of "words" that are spoken by men who would like to be considered "men of God," pure truth is an extremely rare commodity.

:-(

An interesting note from the old testament. I was a bit off in what I remembered. If a prophet spoke in God's name when the message is not from God, or if a prophet spoke in the name of other god's, that prophet was to be put to death. However, if a prophet's words do not come to pass as spoken then the people are to understand that the prophet has spoken out of his own self (Deut. calls it pride or presumption) and the people are not to fear those words. So even in the OT, there seems to be a distinction between false prophets and prophets who missed it.

Deu 18:20-22
(20) But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, that which I have not commanded him to speak, and who speaks in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
(21) And if you say in your heart, How shall we know the word which Jehovah has not spoken?
(22) When a prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah, if the thing does not happen or come about, that is the thing which Jehovah has not spoken; that prophet has spoken it proudly; you shall not be afraid of him.

Frank: All equipping ministries being equal (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher), did not Paul disqualify himself from his own apostolic office every time he wrote, "Paul an apostle unto the churches at..."? Is is really evil to acknowledge the gifts and callings that God has given you?

I guess I also define the 9 gifts of the Spirit listed in 1 Cor. 2 a bit differently. Word of knowledge is a supernatural knowing of information that you could not have known without the quickening of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10:37-38 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; (38) How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.

Although He was fully God and did not lose that identity, Jesus did all that He did on this earth as a man, having emptied himself of the divine ability and having been filled with the Holy Spirit. Jesus operated in the word of knowledge when He supernaturally knew the woman at the well had five husbands previously and the man she was with now was not her husband. Some would disagree, probably vehemently, with this and say that Jesus retained all divine ability. I guess I take the scripture literally. When the woman with the issue of blood touched Jesus and he asked, "who touched me?", it was because HE felt virtue go out of Himself, but legitimately did not know who touched Him. i.e., it was not a rhetorical question.

Word of wisdom is a supernatural knowing of what to do in a situation. Prophecy is a supernatural speaking forth of the Word of God in due season. This can take the form of the Holy Spirit quickening to us scripture that needs to be publicly shared, or a word of exhortation, edification, or comfort in due season. This word is always supernatural in timing and in prompting if it is truly prophecy.

The ministry gift of a prophet is a bit different. All prophets prophecy, but operating in prophecy does not make one a prophet. Prophet is a life calling and it is not up to the prophet to decide if he or she is one or isn't. The only role the five fold plays in the thing is in surrendering to the Lord and choosing to walk in the calling already on their life.

So I see a huge distinction between 1 Cor. 12 prophecy and Ephesians 4 prophets. The bulk of an OT prophet's ministry was the foretelling of future events. That can happen with NT prophets, but is the exception, not the rule. The bulk of a NT prophets ministry deals teaching the body of Christ to properly relate to the prophetic moving of the Holy Spirit among the body. Since the coming of the Holy Spirit at pentecost, believers can now hear God directly themselves. We have access to God directly through the atonement of the blood of Jesus Christ that OT people did not have. One would expect the prophetic gifts (word of knowledge...) to operate in the NT church quite often as a result. If I, as a believer, am given a word of prophecy for the body and if I, in zeal, go beyond what God has given me, what is to be done with me?

Now, I also understand that those whom God has placed in leadership are held to a much higher standard. If a NT prophet speaks a word from God but in zeal goes a bit beyond, how are we now to relate to that prophet?

I can think of four things to add to know if someone is a prophet...

James 5.12, "Let your yea be yea and your nay be nay."

Paul spoke of in 1 Cor 14.24-25; "the secrets of their heart would be made manifest."

Matthew 7.16 & 7.20, Jesus stated, "By their fruits you shall know them."

Finally, in John 1.45-51 Philip told Nathanael, "We have found him..." Jesus said to Nanthanael, "Behold an Israelite in whom there is no guile" and Nathanael said back to him, "How do you know me?" (He didn't act all humble and argue with him, "No, I have no guile" and expect Jesus to argue back and say, "Oh yes, you do!" No, he said, "How do you know me?")

That was Jesus' #1 truth that he spoke to Nathanael and the 2nd was, "Before Philip called to you, I saw you under the fig tree." It doesn't say where Philip found Nathanael, but Nathanael knew that he was under a fig tree BEFORE Philip called to him.

Two simple truths Jesus spoke to Nathanael and [b]he knew[/b] that Jesus was the Son of God. Yet people who believe they're prophets go around trying to convince others of their calling. "[i]It's not he who man recommends himself but it's who GOD recommends[/i]", (?).

According to this standard of Jesus' above, I dare say out of ALL the prophets (self-appointed and otherwise), that only about [b]1/10th[/b] are actually true prophets today.

I must agree that this is an important topic and one of very few that have piqued my interest of late.

Jesus-is-GOD wrote: I agree with the opening post that Art Katz was one of the few. I held back saying that for a reason.

If you have not read Art Katz’ book The Spirit of Truth, I highly recommend it, if for no other reason than the emphasis that he puts upon the necessity for the “prophet” to be his message. Anyone can speak words of “truth”, but just as surely as the Old Testament prophets were themselves the message, I believe that requirement has certainly not lessened under the New Covenant, especially in view of the fact that we claim to have with us/in us the Holy Spirit (1 John 5:6b το πνευμα εστιν η αληθεια “the Spirit is the Truth”).

Being the truth of the message weeds out a lot of speakers, and not just those who claim to be prophets. It requires being pliable in the hands of God and willingly suffering whatever has to be suffered in order for the life testimony to verify the words of the mouth, but being as adamant as flint in the face of the criticism of men. That was the test for Elijah, and Micaiah, and Jeremiah, and Hosea, and so many more. They “became” the emblem of their prophetic word. And that was certainly true of Paul and of Peter, and no doubt many more in the New Testament.

How do we know? The Spirit bears witness, no doubt, but there is implied in the quotes from Deuteronomy that there has to be credibility over time also. If a deacon had to be given time to prove himself, how much more these other roles? And if in Old Testament times, the prophet was not recognized as a prophet until it was time to garnish his tomb, I believe many or most times, that same is true today… hence Sermon Index!

1 Kings 17:23-24 (NKJV)
23 And Elijah took the child and brought him down from the upper room into the house, and gave him to his mother. And Elijah said, "See, your son lives!" 24 Then the woman said to Elijah, "Now by this I know that you are a man of God, and that the word of the Lord in your mouth is the truth."

Clint

A prophet is also called a "seer" - one who sees clearly the message and the will of God in His Word and through His Spirit. Although all believers are expected to find God's will in scripture and through prayer, prophets are specially enabled by God to do this much more effectively than others. Prophecy is a gift of God to be practiced for the benefit of mankind, both believers and unbelievers.

As for expectations, we should expect prophets, like all true believers, to be faithful in their walk, beyond reproach in their lives, and to be holy just as God is holy; and through their faithfulness, we expect their prophecies to be true. Can they be mistaken? Yes, just as all believers can be mistaken.

How then will we recognize them as true prophets of God? By their fruit, and through the truth in Scripture. Unfortunately, only true believers will have the spiritual guidance needed to discern the truth. So we can expect that true prophets will have a fewer followers (narrow gate) than false prophets (wide gate).

[i]2Pe 1:20-21 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.[/i]

If I were asked to identify a modern day prophet, I would point to Paul Washer. He sees clearly and speaks truth. And many in the established "Christian" religions hate him for it.

With all that's been said so far - I am still asking - How does one know if a person is a prophet?

Calling is by God and on a person's life from birth. I believe that if I am following God, He will eventually reveal that calling to me. There is a preparation time that follows, often a great number of years, before I am ready to step into the fullness of that calling. In the NT, existing leadership (Apostles, prophets, etc.) recognized what God was doing in a person's life, saw the fruit and maturity of the calling coming, and then ordained (set apart for that ministry) the person that was called.

I believe we can see the calling on those we are intimately connected with in the body. Hence the necessity of knowing those who labor among us. Ordination is no light thing to be doled out upon completion of a course of study at a Bible college or upon the earning of a degree. The Bible says to lay hands suddenly on no man (speaking of ordination and the activation of ministry by the laying on of hands).

I am still not real clear on the consensus about there being any difference between OT prophets and NT prophets. An ancillary question that seems to have arisen is this. Are NT prophets held to any different level of accountability than NT pastors, teachers, apostles, and prophets? Any thoughts?

From what I've been taught, Paul listed these in the order that he did in Eph 4 as sort of a chain of command, for a lack of a better term - so I think the answer would be yes. I'm not one for heiracrchy, but there is some sense in this being so.

I am not totally sure I see that. If that truly were the case, surely we would have this hierarchical relationship demonstrated at other places in scripture. The only thing I can think of to support that would be the fact that the church was built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets listed later in Eph. 4.

If scripturally the NT prophet is held to a different level of accountability (or perhaps accuracy) than the other four equipping ministries, what does this difference look like? What prompted my initial question is that I can see substantial differences in the way the office (I use that term loosely, but don't have a better one) functions under the old and new covenants.