Tongues and Prophecies in Church Meetings

© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003

-An excerpt from his (soon to be released) book on House Church

 

Chapter 18

 

We have already considered the importance of mutually-edifying meetings in which regular members of the congregation speak as it relates to the ability of the apostles to plant churches rapidly.  Since regular believers could speak in meetings, it was not necessary for the apostles to ordain elders in a church to lead the meetings before leaving it behind to start another work.  This resulted in quicker church planting.

 

We also know that elders and other ministers in the early church rose up from among the regular believers.  They grew in the faith in the local church community.  Some young men with ministry gifts received training from older, itinerant ministers, following them from place to place.  The meetings of the early church were a good training ground for emerging teachers, prophets, and evangelists.   By speaking in the meetings they gained experience and practice.  As they were faithful with the gifts they had been given, they could expect God to give them more.^[1] 

 

There are many benefits to the regular believers in a congregation faithfully using their gifts in church gatherings, as opposed to the traditional system of having meetings where the congregation members are primarily spectators.  Churches that function in this way are able to produce new leaders and ministers, which is essential for a rapidly expanding church planting movement.  The church meeting is essential to church planting from the perspective of evangelistic or missions strategy.  But aside from the practical and strategic benefits, church planters should teach churches to have Biblical meetings out of obedience to the Lord.  A church planter should teach new churches to observe the commandments of Christ and to hold to the doctrine of the apostles.  Even if we cannot see the immediate pragmatic benefits to obeying the apostolic commandments and traditions related to church meetings in scripture, we must still teach people to obey and follow these commandments and traditions, because this is what the Lord desires. 

 

The scriptures contain instructions, and even commands, concerning what to do in church meetings.  It would be unwise for a church planter to work hard at coming up with ideas of things to do in church meetings, while ignoring the teaching of scripture on the matter.  As Samuel said to Saul, “To obey is better than sacrifice.”^[2]

 

The Importance of I Corinthians 14 and Mutually Edifying Meetings

A natural place in the scriptures to learn about church meetings is I Corinthians 14.  This passage is the longest passage that gives instructions regarding what to do in church meetings.  Paul identified the instructions he gave as the commandments of the Lord, so we must take them very seriously.^[3]  The arguments Paul made to the Corinthians indicate that he was giving them instructions that applied to all churches, and not merely for the Corinthian church only.^[4]  These facts should serve as a warning for those who would want to disregard the commandments of the Lord in I Corinthians as something that applied only to Corinth, and has no bearing on the church today.

 

This chapter is difficult for many Christians to understand.  So many modern believers try to interpret the passage through their own church experience.  One who does this might imagine that all the instructions Paul gave concerning church meetings should be carried out in the context of a traditional meeting, complete with a pulpit and a lengthy Sunday morning sermon.

 

One of the most striking aspects of the chapter is that it does not mention many of the aspects of a modern Sunday morning meeting.  There is no mention in the passage of a pendeta leading the meeting and giving a long address.  There is no mention of three songs before the pendeta speaks, and three songs after.  There is no mention of a pulpit and pews.  The Corinthians met in homes.  We must not interpret the passage through our own church experience, but rather evaluate the validity of our own church practices in light of the scriptures. 

 

In I Corinthians 14:26, Paul points out that every one of the Corinthians “hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.”  A modern Christian accustomed to traditional meetings might give the Corinthians the following advice, “Sit down, be quiet, and listen to the preacher.”  But these are not the instructions that Paul gave.  He wrote, “Let all things be done unto edifying.”  The Corinthians were allowed to speak, but in an orderly, edifying manner.

 

Many in the Charismatic movement have heard a lot of teaching about the spiritual gifts listed in I Corinthians 12, which are given to profit the whole body.  As we can see in I Corinthians 14, the primarily place to use these spiritual gifts is in church gathering.  This makes perfect sense.  The gifts are given to edify the body of Christ, so naturally we should use them in gatherings of the body of Christ. 

 

Paul instructed the Corinthians to “Let all things be done decently and in order.”^[5]  Some who read this verse bring their own ideas of order with them.  Many Christians think that an orderly church meeting is one in which there is no surprises and everything follows the order written down in the bulletin.  But this is not the idea of order Paul presents here in this chapter.  The first part of this verse tells us to “let everything be done….”  Paul’s idea of order allows for those who had teachings to share to teach the congregation.  It allowed for all to prophesy in the meeting.^[6]  The divine order requires a prophet to yield the floor to allow another sitting by to share a revelation.^[7]  The rules for order in this chapter are quite foreign to many of us who grew up in more traditional church meetings.  We should read them with careful and prayerful consideration. 

 

Problems with Speaking in Tongues

Though Paul’s teaching to the Corinthians has universal application, he did address certain problems with the way the Corinthians were conducting their meetings.  Much of the chapter deals with this issue.  The Corinthians were apparently using the gift of tongues in an inappropriate manner by speaking in tongues in the assembly without an interpretation.

 

Paul explained to the Corinthians that speaking in tongues had a positive effect, even without interpretation.  It built up the one who did it.^[8]  By praying in tongues, one’s spirit is able to pray.^[9]  But without an interpretation, speaking in tongues in a church gathering does not build up others present.^[10]  Speaking in tongues without interpretation is inappropriate for group prayer in a church gathering.  If someone stands and speaks in tongues to give thanks, how can others say ‘amen’ to agree with the prayer if they don’t know what he is saying?^[11]  Paul warned that if the whole Corinthian church came together and all spoke in tongues, an unbeliever or unlearned person present in the gathering might think that they were all mad.  This principle of the effect of tongues to produce unbelief could be seen in a prophecy concerning speaking in tongues in the Old Testament.^[12]  Paul explained that, in the church gathering, it was better to speak five words with the understanding than 10,000 with an unknown tongue.^[13]  He instructed the one who would speak in tongues without an interpreter present to refrain from speaking out in the church, and instead speak to himself and to God.^[14]

 

Some think the Corinthian problem with tongues was that all were standing and speaking in tongues at the same time.  This is a possible interpretation, but it is also possible that the Corinthians might have taken turns speaking out in tongues without interpretation, one by one, before Paul wrote this epistle.  After, Paul does give an example of an individual praying in tongues in the assembly without interpretation.^[15]  The principles Paul taught in the passage would certainly argue against the practice of all praying in tongues or singing in tongues at the same time in a church meeting. 

 

The Charismatic and Pentecostal movements tend to emphasize the importance of speaking in tongues.  There are churches in these movements that try to follow Paul’s directive for people in the congregation not to speak out in tongues unless there is an interpreter present.  Unfortunately, other churches encourage the congregation to all speak out in tongues at the same time, or to sing in tongues at the same time.  Those who do this may only be familiar with certain verses they have been taught about the importance of speaking in tongues, for example I Corinthians 14:14, which teaches that when one prays in tongues his spirit prays.  They may not have read the entire chapter carefully, particularly the teachings against speaking in tongues without interpretation.   If you look on the faces of unbelievers or those unfamiliar with speaking in tongues who come to such meetings, you can see that many of them seem to think that the people in the church are crazy, just as Paul predicted.

 

 Like so many other Christians who do not apply the commandments of the Lord in our meetings, those who practice group speaking in tongues in meetings without interpretation are often just imitating the church practices they have seen in their experience without questioning them.  It is essential that Christians study what the Bible has to say about church meetings in order to know what to do in them.  If we know what to do in church meetings, then we should be responsible to obey the Lord and do it.

 

Practical Application for Speaking in Tongues in House Churches

Some Pentecostal and Charismatic churches allow for members to speak out messages in tongues, and for other members of the body to speak out interpretations.  In many churches, this may occur during the music time.  These types of churches often have long periods of singing.  Sometimes, one song will end, and before a song leader begins another one, there is a moment of silence, or a musical interlude with no singing.  In many churches, members of the congregation may speak out messages in tongues and interpretations, during this time.  Some who interpret tongues in this type of situation find that sometimes they will have an interpretation to a tongue spoken out in a meeting, but someone else will give the same interpretation before they have a chance to speak.

 

The Bible requires the one to speak in tongues to keep quiet unless there is an interpretation.  I Corinthians 14:28 requires that the speaker in tongues be silent if there is no interpreter in the congregation.  In the Pentecostal or Charismatic format for prophecy just described, it may be difficult for the speaker in tongues to know if someone is present who can interpret. He feels moved to speak out a message in tongues, and just waits for someone else to interpret.  This format requires that the speaker in tongues not only receive a message in tongues, but also receive a revelation concerning whether or not an interpreter is present.

 

In an interactive house church format where there is more freedom to speak, a speaker in tongues who doesn’t know for sure if another will be able to interpret might even want to ask if someone who can interpret is in the meeting.  If interpreters find that sometimes they are given an interpretation, and other times they are not, the one who wishes to speak in tongues may ask a potential interpreter beforehand if he senses whether or not the Spirit will give the interpretation. 

 

We must keep in mind that Paul does not have a negative attitude toward speaking in tongues in this passage.  In fact, Paul points out that he spoke in tongues more than all the Corinthians, though in the church he would rather speak five words with his understanding than 10,000 words with an unknown tongues.^[16]  Paul thought of prophesying in the church as superior to speaking in tongues without interpretation.^[17]  With all of Paul’s instructions limiting the use of tongues, it is possible that some of the Corinthians might have been tempted to have a negative attitude toward tongues or to forbid them altogether.  Paul included the commandment we find in verse 39 to “forbid not to speak with tongues.”  Modern believers must realize that we must abide by the limitations for tongues and the provisions for tongues in our meetings.  We err if we disobey the commandments of the Lord by willfully speaking in tongues in the meeting without interpretation.  But it is also wrong to disobey the commandments of the Lord by forbidding speaking in tongues done properly according to the instructions of scripture.  The commandments of the Lord concerning tongues are given to us in the scriptures for our own good.  We must obey them.

 

The Superiority of Prophesying to Speaking in Tongues without Interpretation

 

One of the main points Paul makes in I Corinthians 14 is that prophesying in the meeting is superior to speaking in tongues without interpretation.  Paul even says that the one who prophesies is greater than the one who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, that the church might be edified.^[18]  It may seem strange to us that Paul says the person who prophesies is greater than the person who speaks in tongues.  But we must remember that some are greater than others in the kingdom.  Jesus taught that the greatest in the kingdom is the servant of all.  The greatest among us is the one who is the lowest and humblest servant.  The one who prophesies in the congregation is serving the congregation.  His prophecy edifies the church.^[19]  The one who prophesies is serving the church, while the one who speaks in tongues without an interpretation is only serving his own spiritual interests.  The one who prophesies is therefore greater because he is functioning as a greater servant.

 

The importance of edifying others is an important theme in I Corinthians 14.  As verse 12 says, “Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church.”  It is clear from the passage that prophesying is one of the gifts that is good at edifying the church.  Paul’s attitude toward prophecy in the passage is extremely positive.  He presents a positive scenario of church meeting in which all prophesy, and an unbeliever falling down and confessing ‘God is in you of a truth.’^[20]  Paul taught that ‘ye may all prophesy’^[21], and gave instructions on how to do so in an orderly fashion.  Toward the end of his instructions on church meetings, he urges the Corinthians.  Paul’s instructions on church meetings in this chapter start and end with strongly urging the saints to seek to prophesy.

 

I Corinthians 14:1  Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

 

I Corinthians 14:39   Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

 

Just imagine the reaction of many modern Christians if you were to tell them, “I know of a church where the congregation does not have one preacher who preaches a sermon every week.  Instead, the members of the congregation take turns standing up and prophesying to the whole congregation.”  Some Christians might think the church you speak of is heretical or strange.  This is ironic, since this describes the type of church meeting Paul would have loved to be a part of.

 

If the Lord, speaking through Paul, commanded us to desire to prophesy, we should take His commandment seriously.  If there is a lack of the gift of prophecy in our church meetings, we can pray for the Lord to gift members of the body with prophesying.  Each of us individual can pray that the Lord would move us to prophesy.  Just as one can pray to be able to interpret tongues, one can pray to be able to prophesy.^[22]

 

What is Prophesying?

In I Corinthians 14, Paul encourages the saints to prophesy.  But what does it mean to prophesy?  Some modern Bible commentators consider prophesying to be teaching and explaining the scriptures.  But is this what the word means in scripture?

Paul makes a distinction between the gifts prophecy and the gift of teaching.^[23]  He lists prophets and teachers as different categories of ministers in the body, ranking prophets before teachers.^[24]  From Paul’s usage, it is clear that he sees a difference between prophesying and teaching. 

 

Paul’s understanding of prophecy is consistent with the Old Testament.  In the Old Testament scriptures, we read that the Levites were to teach the people.^[25]  But the Lord also raised up prophets among the people to prophesy His will. 

 

Jesus told the scribes and Pharisees that He was sending prophets, wise men, and scribes to them.^[26]  The scribes and Pharisees were familiar with the prophets mentioned in the Old Testament scriptures.  When we read about the prophets the Lord established in the church after the resurrection, we need to keep in mind what a prophet is all throughout scripture. The Old Testament ‘naviy’ are referred to in the New Testament as ‘prophetes.’  It stands to reason that ‘prophets’ in the church are more or less the same type of minister as prophets in the Old Testament.  Peter gives us a valuable insight into the nature of Old Testament prophecy when he says that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”^[27]

 

Generally, prophesying is speaking as carried along by the Holy Ghost.   It is possible to prophesy on a musical instrument.^[28]  A prophet might also communicate his message partly through physical actions, like burning his hair, or wearing an yoke, or tying up someone’s hands with a belt.^[29]

 

Many of the Old Testament prophets would begin their prophecies with statements like “Thus saith the LORD.”  In the New Testament book of Acts, we read that a prophet started a prophecy in a very similar way, “Thus saith the Holy Ghost.”^[30]  As in Old Testament times, New Testament prophets speak as moved by the Holy Ghost.  In addition, we see that some Old Testament prophesying consisted of retelling visions or dreams.^[31]

 

Prophecy can be about many things.  Some of Moses’ prophesying looks very much like teaching.  Other Old Testament prophetic books retell visions that are full of metaphors.  Some prophecies sound very much like words of encouragement.  Not all prophecies predict the future, but some may.  What kind of  prophecy is given depends on what the Lord wants to say.

 

The Lord is able to speak through men in sin, like Balaam and Caiaphas.  He even spoke through the soothsayer Balaam, who was a type of the ministry of false teachers that deceive the people of God^[32].  Caiaphas, the high priest, prophesied about the death of Jesus while he was plotting with other leaders to kill the Lord.  He probably didn’t even realize that he was prophesying.^[33]

 

In a church meeting, prophets can prophesy.  But we also see that ‘…ye may all prophesy….”^[34] The passage even gives instructions about how the prophecies are to be given. 

 

Instructions for Tongues and Prophesying

Paul was in favor of all believers prophesying in a church meeting, and also saw a place for tongues accompanied by interpretation.  In fact, he gives instructions for how prophecies and tongues are to be shared in the assembly.

 

Unfortunately, many participants in modern churches are so caught up with their own traditional order of service that they do not pay attention to the instructions given in this chapter.  Some Pentecostal and Charismatic churches make an attempt to incorporate principles from this passage in their church meetings, though some ignore the passage altogether. 

 

Let us consider Paul’s instructions concerning tongues:

 

I Corinthians 14:27-28

27  If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.

28  But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

 

Bill Thurman, a retired professor of Classics, a scholar of Latin and Greek, serves as an elder and teaches in a Messianic meeting in Asheville, North Carolina in the United States of America.  He is a proponent of following New Testament instructions for meetings.  The following is a quote from an email he sent to participants on his email discussion list.

 

“Contrary to almost all English translations I think 'two or three' does not refer to those who speak in tongues or to prophets, but to statements (logoi).”

 

Dr. Thurman proceeded to explain in detail the reasoning behind his opinion.  Please see endnotes for a detailed explanation.^[35]  Bill Thurman’s argument is based on the fact that verse 27 speaks of ‘one’ [seorang] speaking in tongues.  Even the verb for ‘speak’ is in the singular.  Therefore, ‘two, or at the most three’ cannot refer to the number of speakers, but rather refers to the number of things spoken by the speaker in tongues.  Verse 28 specifies that one person must interpret, and in verse 29, we see that if there is no interpreter, the speaker in tongues must not speak in the church.

 

Paul’s instructions on prophesying seem parallel to his instructions on speaking in tongues.  Paul specifies that ‘one’ speak in tongues (v. 26), though he mentions ‘prophets’ (plural) speaking in verse 29.  Maybe this is because he emphasized the importance of prophecy over tongues.  Paul stipulates that tongues be spoke two or three (v. 27), and he specifies that prophets speak two or three (v.31).  Tongues must be interpreted (v. 28), and prophecies must be weighed.  Verse 28 tells circumstances under which the speaker in tongues must be silent, while verse 30 specifies that a prophet should hold his peace if another sitting by receives a revelation.

 

Now let us consider the instructions to prophets. 

 

I Corinthians 14:29  Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

 

According to Bill Thurman, unlike in verse 26, it is possible, according to Greek grammar, that ‘two or three’ refers to the number of prophets who speak.  But considering the parallel nature of Paul’s instructions concerning tongues and prophecy, it is possible that Paul has in mind prophets speaking two or three prophetic utterances, which are then judged.

 

To summarize, verse 27 may be saying that if anyone speak in tongues, let him speak two or three messages in tongues, one after another, and one person should interpret.  Verse 29 may be saying to let the prophets speak two or three prophetic messages, and to let the other weigh the messages.

 

Order for Prophecies

Let us take a closer look at the instructions for the gift of prophecy.

 

I Corinthians 14:29-31

29  Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

30  If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.

31  For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.

 

Some Pentecostals and Charismatics interpret verse 29 to say that there can only be a maximum of two or three prophecies per church meeting.  However, this interpretation contradicts verse 31, which says that all may prophesy one by one.  The Corinthian church clearly had more than three members, so if all prophesied, how could there be only two or three prophecies per meeting?  In verses 23-25, Paul already presented the idea of all prophesying in a meeting of the whole church to be a good thing. 

 

If one interprets ‘two or three’ here to refer to the number of prophets, as many translators do, it is clear from the passage that Paul does not limit the number of prophetic speakers who can speak to two or three, because he says ‘ye may all prophesy’ in verse 31.  It might be helpful to think of  “Let the prophets speak two or three and let the other judge” as a process that can be repeated over and over again in a certain meeting, as long as the Holy Spirit is providing the church with prophecies.

 

One possible interpretation of verse 29 is that the prophets should present two or three prophetic words, and then there should be a time of weighing the words.  Another interpretation, predicated on the idea that ‘two or three’ refers to the prophets, rather than to the words they speak, is that two or three prophets can be given an opportunity to speak in a church meeting, but that others be allowed to prophesy in the meeting as well.

 

Verse 30 shows us that a prophet should be silent if another sitting by receives a revelation.  By following this rule, all may prophesy one by one.  (v. 31.)  Unfortunately, even among churches that believe in prophecy and have the gift in operation, it is rare to find churches that follow these commands of scripture in many parts of the world. 

 

Let us consider what a church meeting might look like, that followed these commands for church meetings.  To help us imagine it, let us consider the following hypothetical scenario mentioned in the chapter.

 

I Corinthians 14:23-25

23  If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?

24  But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:

25  And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.

 

Let us imagine a pagan who has heard the Gospel from a Christian neighbor and who is under conviction.  He feels guilty about worshipping idols, and always has his guilt before God on his mind.   As he asks his neighbor more about the Gospel, he is invited to attend a Christian meeting.  He comes into the meeting, where the whole assembly is prophesying.  It is as though God has one really long message He wants to say, but He gives pieces of it to the different believers in the assembly.  One young prophet stands and prophesies.  An older gentleman receives a revelation.  He stands to indicate he has a revelation, and the prophet becomes silent and sits down.  The older gentleman continues the same prophetic message.  This long message goes from person to message.  The pagan guest is amazed because the message is about him!  The Lord speaks to him about the secrets of his own heart through a congregation of saints who speak as they are moved by the Spirit.   Naturally, he falls down and says, “God is truly in you.” and falls on his face to worship the true God who just spoke through the saints.  The man is impressed that God is not merely in one individual, but in a whole congregation of people who take turns serving as the Lord’s mouthpiece.

 

Judging Prophecies.

 

I Corinthians 14:29

29  Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

 

Tongues must be interpreted, but prophecies must be weighed carefully.  There are many interpretations of who ‘the other’ refers to in this verse.  Some believe’ the other’ refers to other prophets.  One interpretation the author has read is that ‘the other’ in verse 29 and ‘another’ in verse 30 refer to an overseer seated in the congregation.  A third view is that ‘the other’ refers to the saints in the congregation.  Other scripture indicates that it is the responsibility of the church to evaluate prophecies and teachings spoken in the assembly.  This third view is will be discussed in this section.

 

If one interprets verses I Corinthians 14: 29 to refer to the prophets, or even a specific leader, judging prophecies, this should not prevent gifted brethren in the assembly from evaluating prophets and teachings.  In addition to prophesying, brethren should be allowed to use their gifts.  If the flow of prophecy stops in the assembly, there may be an opportunity for teachers or those gifted to discern between Spirits to share something related to the prophecies the church has heard.  It might be appropriate to discuss how to apply what a prophet has shared.  In Acts 11:27-30, one of the prophets from Jerusalem stood and gave a prophecy about a coming famine.  The disciples determined to send relief to the brethren in Jerusalem.  It is possible that after Agabus made this prophecy, that the brethren discussed what they should do, and made a decision as a church to send relief.  Some prophecies call for the church to make decisions, and some decisions require discussion and prayer. 

 

Some believe that weighing a genuine prophecy can be done in the form of a congregational discussion about the prophecy—what it means, how it helped us, how we can apply it.  In discussing a prophecy, teachers may want to use their gifts to relate the prophecy to teachings of scripture.

 

Having a time to weigh prophecies after every two or three prophetic words (or after two or three prophets have spoken) can also protect the flock against false prophecy.   Unfortunately, in some churches that regularly allow prophesying, there is no forum in which to challenge damaging false prophecies.  One reason for the lack of testing of prophecies is the culture and traditions related to church meetings.  Many of us were raised to think of church meetings as a venue where only a specifically designated speaker can speak.  If we realize that the Bible teaches us to have church meetings in which the congregation uses its gifts to build one another up, then we can understand how the congregation can test prophecies in a meeting. 

 

If a false prophecy is spoken out in the congregation, a prophet may receive a revelation that the other prophecy is false, and share this with the congregation.  Someone with the gift of discerning of spirits may share his input based on his gift.  Teachers may challenge prophecies that contradict the doctrine of Christ.

 

Testing prophecies needs to be done with great care.  Sometimes, the Holy Spirit says things that we do not understand.  A brash person who thinks he knows the Bible well could presumptuously speak against a genuine prophecy that is actually in line with scripture.  A genuine prophecy can go totally against the beliefs of a sincere Christian. 

 

If someone disagrees with a prophecy, he should be careful what he says.  One should be especially careful of saying that a prophecy came from a demon.  Jesus warned the Pharisees about the unforgivable sin of speaking against the Holy Spirit after they said that He cast out demons by the prince of Devils.  He was actually casting out demons by the Holy Spirit.  So if the Pharisees were guilty of or in danger of committing the sin of blaspheming the Holy Spirit by accusing the Spirit Jesus ministered by of being an evil spirit, shouldn’t Christians be careful not to accuse those who speak by the Holy Spirit of speaking by demons?  The author of the Didache, a document from the late first or early second century, believed that one could commit the unpardonable sin by trying or discerning a prophet speaking in the Spirit.^[36] 

 

False Criteria for Rejecting Prophecies.

In assemblies that believe that the brethren in the church should judge prophecies, one problem that may arise is thus:

 

If one is unsure about a prophecy he has heard, and feels compelled to share it with the assembly, he can share his concerns about the prophecy with the assembly in a very careful manner.  Some are so proud and confident of their knowledge of the Bible that they assume that their opinions are gospel truth.  It is dangerous to have this attitude when the assembly is evaluating a true prophecy.  Those who are bold enough to declare a prophecy false or accuse the spirit behind a prophecy must have good grounds to do so.  One must be very certain of a revelation that the prophecy is false, or the prophecy must clearly violate an important teaching of the faith.  For example, a prophecy that curses Christ, and says that He did not come in the flesh or rise from the dead is a false prophecy.  A prophecy to worship Hindu idols, for example, is a false prophecy that must be rejected.  But boldly rejecting a prophecy because it hints at a slightly different view of predestination than your own is not good grounds for rejecting a prophecy.

 

Some reject prophecies that do not make them feel good.  Many people use the following verse to argue their point.

 

I Corinthians 14:3  But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort.

 

For example, some Christians think that a prophetic word of judgment does not fit the description of I Corinthians 14:3, and should therefore be disregarded.  This is neither logical nor scriptural.  Exhortations are not always happy.   A prophecy can be painful to hear, and still edify us in the Lord.  Just imagine how the churches in Asia must have felt to hear the letters John sent them that contained prophetic messages from the Lord Jesus Christ.  These letters exposed the sins and shortcomings of some of the seven churches.  Some of those Christians might have shed tears of sorrow as they heard their church’s letter read.  But does that mean that the letters, designed to lead them to repentance, did not edify or exhort them?   Of course not.  Prophecies can be genuine even if they don’t make you feel all happy inside.  Not all exhortations are happy.  There are plenty of genuine prophecies in the Old Testament scriptures that warn of God’s judgment on His people.

 

Other Christians think that all prophecies given by the Lord must be harsh rebukes, or demands that God’s people repent.  The Old Testament has plenty of prophecies like this.  But that doesn’t mean that all prophecies must be harsh.  The content and tone of a prophecy depends on what the Lord wants to say.  Not all prophecies in the Bible, even in the Old Testament, are harsh rebukes.  If the brethren in a church are redeemed by Christ’s blood and walking in holiness, then why should we surprised if a prophecy to them is not a harsh rebuke? 

 

The fact that prophecies need to be tested is taught in other books besides I Corinthians.  Paul wrote to the Thessalonians, who may have faced a lot of difficulty with false prophecies and predictions:

 

I Thessalonians 5:19-21

19  Quench not the Spirit.

20  Despise not prophesyings.

21  Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

 

The Thessalonians were not to go to the extreme of not allowing the gifts of the Spirit to operate, and therefore quench the Spirit.  They were not to despise prophesyings, even if they had heard many false prophecies in the past.  But even so, they weren’t to accept all prophecies without testing them.  They were to prove all things.

 

I John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

 

Here we see that John tells believers to try the spirits.  We as believers are obligated to test prophecies.  It is not right to allow false prophecies to be spoken out in assemblies without any correction if we know they are false.  Leaders should lead in dealing with false prophecies.

 

A community that tests prophecies is an intimidating place for false prophets and teachers.  False prophets  and teachers who can deceive people without having to deal with the judgment of the church have an easy time.  But in a church that is diligent to obey the teachings of Christ and the apostles, they have more difficulty deceiving the saints.  

 

The principle of scripture to ‘prove all things’ applies to various aspects of church life.  It applies to teaching as well as prophesying.  While leaders have an obligation to lead the church in holding fast to the truth, the whole church has a responsibility to prove, test, and judge.

 

It is possible to have far too critical of an attitude toward prophecies.  Some Christians are looking for any opportunity they can get to discredit anyone who claims to prophecy.  Sometimes, this is borne out of the false belief that gifts like prophecy are not for today.  People who have taught this, or who have spent many years associating with those who believed this way and had a very negative attitude toward prophecy, might be inclined to be overly critical when faced with a genuine prophecy from the Lord.  There are some Christians who believe in genuine prophecy, but who have hurt by false prophecies in the past or by disagreements with genuine prophets.  There are even some Pentecostals and Charismatics who have a skeptical attitude toward prophecy because they have little experience with it, and it seems unnatural to them for there to be a lot of prophesying in a church meeting.  Some unscriptural teachings about prophecy have gained popularity in some Pentecostal and Charismatic circles.  For example, some teach that God cannot lead others through prophecy, or that true prophecies to an individual are always confirmations of something the Lord has already spoken to that individual, or that God does not give personal prophecies.  Some of these teachings, though they have basis in scripture, are probably a reaction against abuses of prophetic ministry and false prophecy of past generations.

 

Some believers think that any prediction of the future made by a Christian religious leader is a prophecy, and if it doesn’t come to pass, that leader is a false prophet.  For example, Bible prophecy teachers who misunderstand the Bible and predict the future wrongly are sometimes accused of being false prophets.  We need to keep in mind that there is a difference between predicting the future based on intellectual understanding of the Bible, and claiming that God gave oneself a prophetic message that predicts the future.  It is a bad thing when sensationalist Bible prophecy teachers predict the future wrongly by misusing the Bible, particularly if they set a date for Christ’s return.  A Bible prophecy teacher who does this is not necessarily a false prophet, even if he does wrongly predict the future.  This can hurt people in the body of Christ, but there is a difference between this and giving a false prophecy that pretends to be a quote from God Himself given under the moving of the Holy Spirit.

 

Some people are overly critical of prophets.  If a Christian who is not a prophet says “It will rain tomorrow” and it does not rain, no one criticizes him.  But if a prophet makes a human prediction, like anyone else, “It will rain tomorrow” and it does not, some might accuse him of being a false prophet.  Prophets can predict the future wrongly without prophesying falsely.  If a prophet makes a prediction like anyone else, and it doesn’t come to pass, that doesn’t make him a false prophet.  There is a difference between saying, “It will rain tomorrow” and saying, “The Lord says it will rain tomorrow.”  We should not accuse a man of being a false prophet if he makes a prediction without making any kind of claim that he is speaking a prophecy.

 

Encouraging True Prophecy

In recent decades, some church leaders, in an attempt to encourage people to prophesy have taught that it is okay to make mistakes while prophesying.  The idea is that babies mess their diapers, and that we should expect baby believers to make similar messes in the church with prophecy and other gifts.

 

Is the idea that false prophecy from sincere believers nothing serious Biblical?  Let us consider what the Old Testament has to say on this issue.

 

Deuteronomy 18:18-22

18  I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

19  And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

20  But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

21  And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken?

22  When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

 

Here we see that Israel was required to listen to what a true prophet said, but were to ignore false prophets.  Prophets who spoke in the names of other gods, or who spoke a word in the name of the Lord that did not come to pass were to be stoned.

 

Those who believe that false prophecies from sincere believers are not a big problem are quick to point out that these scriptures are from the Old Testament.  Some think that now that we are under grace, that prophets are free to make mistakes.  But does it make sense to say, “Under the old covenant, prophecies had to be error free, but under the better covenant, prophecy can be full of mistakes and it is okay.”^[37]  It does not make sense that prophecy under a better covenant would be of a lower standard than under the old covenant.

 

In the Old Testament, speaking a prophecy falsely in the name of the Lord was a death penalty crime.  So was adultery, murder, and many other crimes.  The New Testament does not teach the church to stone adulterers or members who prophesy falsely.  But shouldn’t an adultery, or one who prophecies falsely be cut off from fellowship if they refuse to repent?  The man in Corinth should have stopped sleeping with his father’s wife and repented from his sin.  He didn’t and so he was kicked out.  Shouldn’t someone who prophesies falsely in the name of the Lord confess his sin to those he has hurt, and repent?

 

Those who argue that it is normative for Christian prophets to make mistakes often use the scripture:  “for we know in part and we prophesy in part”^[38] to justify their claims.  We need to keep in mind that Old Testament prophets knew in part as well, but they were still to be held to a high standard of accuracy. Old Testament prophecies that predicted Christ, for example, were very accurate.  But they were also difficult to understand.  These prophecies did not clearly explain every detail of Christ’s life.  If a prophecy is ‘in part’, that does not mean that it is in error. 

 

A map of Indonesia that has holes it where Bandung and Medan are supposed to be is ‘in part.’  But a map of Indonesia that has Bali where Sumatra is supposed to be is in error.  We may prophesy in part, but we are not to prophesy in error.

 

When discerning prophecies, we need to be careful not to be more critical of prophets among us than we are of Biblical prophets.  For example, Jeremiah prophesied that if a nation that God had made a pronouncement against repented to pull it down and destroy it, would repent, God would repent of His plan for that city.  If God made a declaration to build and to plant a nation or kingdom, and that nation or kingdom turns to evil that God would repent of the good planned for that nation.^[39]  Jonah prophesied to Nineveh that God would destroy it.  But Nineveh repented, and God did not destroy it.  We can’t blame Jonah if God decided not to destroy Nineveh.  We need to take the nature of prophecy into account when we judge prophecies. Isaiah prophesied to King Hezekiah that he would die and not live.  But Hezekiah prayed and the Lord answered his prayer.  He sent Isaiah back to King Hezekiah with a prophecy concerning his recovery. ^[40]  We should take these things into account when evaluating modern prophecies.  If we do not accuse Jonah or Isaiah of being false prophets, we should not accuse modern prophets of being false prophets when situations occur that are similar to these events recorded in scripture.

 

Prophesying According to the Proportion of Faith

Paul wrote to Romans who had the gift of prophecy to “prophesy according to the proportion of faith.”^[41]  Those with the gift of prophecy should be obedient to this teaching and prophesy.  But this verse also puts a limitation on prophecy.  It must be done according to faith. 

 

Romans 14:23 teaches us that ‘whatsoever is not of faith is sin.”  The issue in that chapter was that of Christians not being able to eat meat with a clean conscience.  Perhaps they thought that meat sold in the markets might have been offered to an idol, and therefore could not eat in faith.  Prophesying must be done in faith.  If “whatsoever is not of faith is sin”, then prophesying should be done in faith.  If someone who wants to prophesy doesn’t have any faith that the message is from the Lord, he shouldn’t speak in the name of the Lord.

 

Saying “Thus Saith the LORD”

Some teachers who teach on the gift of prophecy discourage Christians from saying, “Thus saith the Lord” before a prophecy.  Some teachers encourage people to introduce a prophecy with little confidence, as follows, “I think, maybe, the Lord might possibly be saying to me…”  [“saya memikir bahwa mungkin bisa jadi Allah bilang ini kepada saya…”]

 

Some of those who teach Christians to introduce their prophecies with a great deal of uncertainty do so with good motivations.  They have seen believers who have been manipulated or abused by someone posing as a prophet who gave authoritative words that hurt other people.  But is the solution to this problem teaching people to sound unconfident when introducing a prophecy?  Is there a single example of a prophet in the Bible who gave such a weak sounding introduction to his prophecy?  Many Old Testament prophets repeatedly introduced their prophecies with “Thus saith the LORD.”  On one occasion, Moses even said that if his prediction of the future did not come to pass that the LORD had not sent him.^[42]  Other prophets like Elijah and Elisha had a lot of faith in God, and believed that they had real gifts from God.  If prophets are genuinely prophesying according to the proportion of faith, they should have some faith in the words they are sharing.

 

If a man gives a false prophecy introduced with, “I think God might possibly saying something to me…maybe” will he be any less guilty of prophesying falsely in the name of the LORD than a man who says, “Thus saith the Lord”?  Both wrongly attribute a prophecy to the Lord.  The less confident introduction of a false prophecy might be less deceiving and less harmful to a believer or church that hears it.

 

But think about the effect a weak introduction to a prophecy might have if the prophecy is true.  Can you imagine John the Baptist saying “I’m not sure, but think God might possibly saying…maybe…uh….well….uh…Repent.”  Couldn’t teaching prophets to introduce prophecies in a weak manner have the effect of undermining the authority of true words from God?  Introducing true messages from God in an unconfident manner is not humility.  If a prophet is confident about his prophecy, naturally

He will want to speak it boldly.  Since there is no scriptural precedent for teaching prophets to give prophecies in an unconfident manner, and plenty of scripture in favor of giving prophecies boldly, we shouldn’t try to inhibit the legitimate boldness of faith-filled prophets.

 

Of course, prophecy does require a lot of faith, especially for those who realize that false prophecy is a serious matter.  Any believer taking first steps in ministry may have fears to overcome, as he learns to walk in faith.  Even the prophet Samuel needed to learn to recognize the word of the Lord when he first started out.^[43]  Some people who prophesy might feel more comfortable not saying, “Thus saith the Lord” or attributing their words to the Lord.  Depending on the content of the word, this is sometimes possible.  Sometimes, people prophesy without realizing it, as Caiaphas probably did when he prophesied the death of Christ.^[44]

 

But at other times, prophets should say “Thus saith the Lord.”  How can a prophet know when to say “Thus saith the Lord’ and when not to say it?

 

One approach to this issue is for the prophet to say what the Lord tells him to say.  Consider this verse from the book of Ezekiel.

 

Ezekiel 11:5  And the Spirit of the Lord fell upon me, and said unto me, Speak; Thus saith the Lord; Thus have ye said, O house of Israel: for I know the things that come into your mind, every one of them.

 

This is only one of many examples in the book of Ezekiel in which God gave the prophet a message in which “Thus saith the Lord” as a part of the prophecy.  God told Ezekiel to say “Thus saith the Lord” and he said it.  It was a part of the prophecy.  A prophet is not required to say “Thus saith the Lord” if the Lord does not give that to him as a part of the message he is to say.

 

 

The Spirits of the Prophets are Subject to the Prophets

 

After giving the Corinthians instructions regarding prophesying recorded in I Corinthians 14, Paul wrote in verse 32, “And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.” 

 

The pagan Greek prophets, who prophesied in the name of the false gods, were believed to lose control of themselves, overwhelmed by the spirit prophesying through them.  Since some pagans who prophesied may have been kerasukan setan [demonized] this should not be surprising.

 

But Christian prophets are not like those who are controlled by demons.  The prophets are in control of the gifts the Lord has entrusted to them.  Some people may think that prophets cannot stop prophesying if the ‘anointing’ is on them.  People who hold to this view might be inclined not to obey Paul’s instruction in verse that a prophet hold his peace when another receive a revelation.  But prophets need to know when to stop prophesying so that the Lord can use others in the assembly to prophesy as well.  Since the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, prophets can follow the instructions concerning prophesying in this passage.

 

If prophets are able to stop prophesying so that they can obey the commandments of the Lord concerning prophesying, then it stands to reason that those who speak in tongues by the Spirit can also stop speaking in tongues to obey the commandments of the Lord for church meetings. 

 

© Paul L. Hudson, Jr. 2003