Being a Prophet
Friends,
One of the truths that occurred to me as a result of putting into words the "The Greatest Danger of Pastor-Led Ministry" post is how much at odds the 'Pastor as Priest' and APEST leadership models are.
They are polar opposites. They represent views of leadership that stand in precise opposition to each other. They can not be combined, though that's what we're trying to do with them. Either you are a Pastor/Priest who envisions yourself as a mediator between the Lord and His people or you live in an APEST calling and see your role as foundational and your function as one of equipping saints to live as ministering priests in the world. You must employ one model or the other. You cannot position yourself in relation to the saints in two different places at the same time.
I have spent countless hours meditating on the following statement: "I believe that I am a prophet."
I have wondered what it must have been like for the biblical prophets to live in very religious, yet profoundly disobedient, cultures and to stand up before the priests and boldly proclaim, "Thus saith the Lord." What audacity it must have taken to say that for the first time. I myself feel that audacity when I function in what I believe to be my gift and calling.
And, I want you to know what I believe Scripture teaches that you owe the Lord and me because I claim with conviction to be a prophet. I believe that you have four choices. I don't believe that any of you ever chooses one of them. Here are the four choices I believe I give you:
1. Determine that the gift of prophecy died out as some point in the past and that I can't be a prophet because there are no longer prophets.
Many people believe that. If you are one of them, you are not alone. If you do believe that, I'd love to know what you do with Ephesians 4:13 but, if that's what you believe, it's what you believe.
2. Conclude that APEST giftings are relevant in the church today but that I am not a prophet.
I acknowledge that to be a possibility. I pray about my calling daily and I am convinced of it, but I also know that I'm fallible and that, as Paul says, "I see but a poor reflection as in a mirror." If this is your opinion, you absolutely owe it to me as your brother in Jesus, to communicate with me as of yesterday. I believe that it is a sin for you not to have already done that.
Here's where the choices begin to scare me:
3. Conclude that I am a false prophet.
The reality that false prophets will be common in the church is indisputable. That reality was so crucial to Jesus that His saying, "Watch out for false prophets" is included in the Sermon on the Mount. How much time do you spend in a typical week obeying Jesus and being on alert for false prophets? That reality was so compelling near the end of the New Testament era John said, "Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world."
I take it that some false prophets know that they are false and purposely deceive people but I'm not certain that all false prophets know that they are false. It seems that many false prophets will find out on 'that day' that they are false prophets. (Mt. 7:22)
I assure you that I believe that I am a prophet of the Lord. If you are convinced that I'm a false prophet, I believe you will be judged on that day if you don't confront me.
4. Conclude that I am a prophet.
If that's what you think, then you can never take something I say any more lightly than a contemporary of Isaiah or Jeremiah or John the Baptist or Agabus took what they said.
It seems to me that if a person is gifted by the Lord to be a prophet, there are two possibilities connected to his words.
One is that they will be prophetic words, i.e., they will be the fruit of one wired in the way the Lord wires prophets. Prophets are always concerned about truth more than anything else. At every time and in every issue, a prophet will elevate the truth component above everything else. When the Body acts, it will be the duty of apostles to see that their issues, mission and discipleship, are elevated and it will be, for instance, the duty of shepherds to stand up for their issue--community.
The other possibility connected to a prophet's words is that the words are an actual prophecy--a word from the Lord passed on the one or more people in the Body of Christ. (If you really believe in APEST, you believe in present-day prophecy. If you don't believe in present-day prophecy, you don't believe in APEST.)
Looking back on the things that I've written here, I will confess that I've not been as self-aware about where the boundary between being prophetic and speaking prophecy has been. I think I'm achieving awareness now regarding that distinction.
There are now things that I have to say that I believe are genuine prophecies. When I speak them, I will speak them humbly and with conviction. When I do, and if you believe that I am a prophet, I will be giving you two choices that I can see. One choice is to believe that my word has all the authority of a passage from a prophetic book in Scripture. If you make that choice to act in a way contrary to that word will be sin. Period. The second choice is to ask me if I'm certain that I've transmitted the Lord's word accurately. (I promise you, though, that if you hear it from me or read it from me, I will already be certain.) If you question, the word, though, please feel free to inquire of me.
I say this at this point in time because, as I have lived in my belief that I am a prophet, I believe that I've matured in my calling. When I embraced APEST I started out being more prophetic than ever and less ashamed of not thinking like a Pastor/Priest. In time, I began to believe that thoughts I have are His thoughts, not my thoughts. Recently, and I know how insane this will sound to some of you, I have begun to believe that I can see narrow glimpses of the future.
If you believe that APEST is true, then all of these things I've said about prophets in general and about myself specifically are also potentially true.
If APEST is true, this is not a game. If it's true, we will be judged for your stewardship of our gifts and callings.
This is the most serious thread I've even entered on this blog. In fact, it's the most serious thing I've ever communicated.
Please take it to heart.
posted by bill Sloat at 10:03 AM
41 Comments:
As soon as I started reading this post an hour or so ago, I felt the weight of it. It is heavy.
As we all know, I have been one to wrestle with you fairly consistently, though I take no joy in arguing a counter perspective.
I will continue to weigh this before the Lord and will respond as you have asked.
I want to be able to accept what you say.
My own struggle is that the points I have disagreed with you on I feel conviction on that I cannot dismiss before the Lord.
I have and will continue to pray that God will make the truth evident to me on this matter.
Perhaps a promised distinction of word from the rest will be instructive.
bill,
thank you for being frank and serious about this. this is a serious thing. on the whole, i agree with you, that you have, in at least some sense, the gift of prophecy, and convey words from the Spirit. i take your angst about many of the things you say on here, particularly with faithfulness to the Scriptures (which the Spirit wrote) and the Church (which the Spirit founded) as evidence of these things.
however, i think you're understanding of that calling is a bit off. admittedly, i haven't done a very thorough study of this, but here's what i've gathered:
- i think you're right in that we need to take what you say seriously. however, i don't think that everything you say necessarily fits into the categories of words of prophecy/knowledge/etc. i do think that what you say, particularly on the matters we discuss here, will at the least be in line with the words that you have received to give, insomuch as you are capable.
- even the words that you have as "revelation" are not infallible. i'm glad you mentioned agabus, because though his prophecy in Acts 21 was correct in general (paul was arrested in jerusalem), he was incorrect with the details (the jews neither bound him nor handed him over to the romans, but he was seized from the jews by the cohort).
- for the above reason, and based on the implications of things like 1 Cor. 14 (where paul elevates his teaching as the test for truth of prophecy), any words that you speak are not to be held on the same level as Scripture, though they are to be taken with a seriousness only a step below.
if you feel that these observations are not in line with God's Word, please correct me.
Part 1:
walt,
- even the words that you have as "revelation" are not infallible. i'm glad you mentioned agabus, because though his prophecy in Acts 21 was correct in general (paul was arrested in jerusalem), he was incorrect with the details (the jews neither bound him nor handed him over to the romans, but he was seized from the jews by the cohort).
It is because the spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets that I welcomed people to inquire about my certainty in posting a prophecy. I can tell you that I am taking great care in putting into words the words I believe to be genuine prophecy because it is hard for me, at least at this point, to separate my human self from the prophetic message.
As far as the Agabus story in Acts 21 is concerned, I've spent a lot of time reflecting on the content of what he prophesied and how his prediction came to reality. I have come to the tentative conclusion that prophecies are often parabolic and that when you see his prophecy in metaphorical terms it may be that it was accurately fulfilled. Living in an age of what Hirsch calls 'The Forgotten Ways,' it's important not to read biblical prophecy with the lenses of Western modernity.
walt,
- for the above reason, and based on the implications of things like 1 Cor. 14 (where paul elevates his teaching as the test for truth of prophecy), any words that you speak are not to be held on the same level as Scripture, though they are to be taken with a seriousness only a step below.
Much of what Paul taught, he 'received from the Lord.' Much of what he taught, I believe, came to him in words of revelation, knowledge and prophecy. If that's the case, he's claiming that any prophecy inconsistent with words he'd received from the Lord could not be from the Lord.
I believe that the content of what I, or any other prophet, says must be examined to determine that it is consist with revealed truth. I also think that if it passes that test, that word needs to be taken as seriously as any other truth.
bill,
i appreciate your care in dealing with my comments. perhaps i can put it another way.
i agree with you that all truth is truth, and needs to be treated with appropriate seriousness as such. i can see how agabus's prophecy may have been more metaphoric, and therefore correct, being interpreted.
i suppose what i mean falls in two categories:
first, a prophecy must be tested by the filter of Scripture and held to the standard of agreement and faithfulness to God's Word. i don't think there's any argument here, especially in light of things like the passage you quoted from 1 John, or what peter says of paul's writings in 2 Peter 3.
and second, i am hesitant to grant the words of a prophet the same authority as the Scriptures have, because history is riddled with guys like montanus and joseph smith. so, in a sense, i don't think i could (at this point) hold any modern-day revelation as anything higher than deutrocanon. maybe i'm just too skeptical still, and too worried about abuse, but that's where i'm at right now.
walt,
first, a prophecy must be tested by the filter of Scripture and held to the standard of agreement and faithfulness to God's Word. i don't think there's any argument here, especially in light of things like the passage you quoted from 1 John, or what peter says of paul's writings in 2 Peter 3.
You are correct. There is no argument here. Or, at least, not much of one.
When I suspect that a thought that I have is His, not mine, that it is a prophecy, the first thing I do with it is to test it against Scripture. I think that anyone who is genuinely a prophet of the Lord will do this without thinking.
My only concern with the way you are thinking, walt, is that you may be a little too tied to Reformed theology and, perhaps, that you may be minimizing the powerful role that the Spirit plays in our lives--if we do not quench Him.
In fact, Jesus, doesn't teach us to judge a prophet on the standard of Scripture. He certainly might have. He fought the devil in the wilderness with the standard of Scripture. No, Jesus says, 'by their fruit you will know them.'
Certainly, judge a prophet by Scripture. But, don't stop there.
and second, i am hesitant to grant the words of a prophet the same authority as the Scriptures have, because history is riddled with guys like montanus and joseph smith. so, in a sense, i don't think i could (at this point) hold any modern-day revelation as anything higher than deutrocanon. maybe i'm just too skeptical still, and too worried about abuse, but that's where i'm at right now.
'Many false prophets have gone out into the world,' indeed. The great sin of the Christendomists is that they reject the whole gift of prophecy and all the blessings that Lord has for us through it by pretending prophecy away through a corrupted theology, that actually rejects much of what Scripture itself teaches.
I'm trying to be courageously loyal to Scripture--even to the parts the priestly culture has abandoned.
Bill,
I am hesitant to comment on most of your threads because, honestly, I usually have a hard time connecting with what you're saying. But this seems like a pretty serious issue, and, in my limited understanding, it seems to contradict things you have been passionate about in the past.
For one thing, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that what you say is equal to Scripture(?). This is surprising given your stance on the importance of Scripture - especially in the CGGC. Wasn't it you who argued that We Believe should list Scripture first, and then God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit? So, are you saying We Believe should start with Scripture and Bill Sloat, and then go to God, Jesus, and HS? (I'm not being facetious, I'm honestly just saying that's what it sounds like to me).
Also, given things you've said in the past about the organic (flat) nature of leadership using the APEST model, it seems rather contradictory that you would tell us we needed to 'choose' one of four ways (or is it 2 ways) to accept your leadership... that seems a little... forced. And doesn't really fit how you previously used to refer to leadership in the church.
So, I don't really know what to make of this. Just giving you some feedback from my end.
Blessings.
H,
For one thing, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that what you say is equal to Scripture(?). This is surprising given your stance on the importance of Scripture - especially in the CGGC.
I believe I offended you last time that I said that, with my theology, I speak from a different lexicon than others here do. There is no condescension in my saying that. Yet, it is true. I think that part of your issue here is that I have trouble saying what I believe without saying from my own lexicon. That's my failing, for sure.
My point here is similar to the point I made in about authority in Presbyterial polity. When the apostles and elders made their declaration about ministry to the Gentiles, that declaration surpassed the authority of the teaching of Jesus in the area of the ministry of the church that it addressed.
All I'm saying is that if a prophet speaks into your life, through the Holy Spirit, a word that either informs your life or directs your behavior and you disobey it, you are being disobedient to the Lord, not to the prophet.
How would the authority of Scripture over your life be any greater?
I'll reply to other parts of your post later on. You raise good issues.
H,
Wasn't it you who argued that We Believe should list Scripture first, and then God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit? So, are you saying We Believe should start with Scripture and Bill Sloat, and then go to God, Jesus, and HS? (I'm not being facetious, I'm honestly just saying that's what it sounds like to me).
I believe I argued that the Doctrine of Revelation would more appropriately precede the Doctrine of God. If we described a 'New Testament plan' doctrine of revelation, that article would look quite a bit different than a Christendom/Reformation article.
I'm not saying that a WE BELIEVE should start with a bill Sloat article. If we have a Creed/Statement of Faith, it should, in my opinion, list first a New Testament plan oriented article of the various ways that the Lord reveals Himself to His people.
(I took your question as valid and serious, not facetious.)
H,
Also, given things you've said in the past about the organic (flat) nature of leadership using the APEST model, it seems rather contradictory that you would tell us we needed to 'choose' one of four ways (or is it 2 ways) to accept your leadership... that seems a little... forced. And doesn't really fit how you previously used to refer to leadership in the church.
I'm not sure I get the connection.
What I meant to say is that my claim to be a prophet doesn't constrain your conscience. You don't have to accept my claim to be a prophet of the Lord simply because I claim to be one. In fact, you are commanded by Jesus not to accept my claim simply because I make it.
You have the choice of rejecting APEST.
You have the choice of thinking that I am insane.
You have the choice of concluding that I am one of the many false prophets spoken of in the Word.
And, you can believe that I am a prophet of the Lord and take seriously, as from the Lord, prophecies that claim to speak on His behalf.
I think that you MUST reach one of those conclusions. I don't see any other possibility.
bill,
i think you may have those options a little too strongly defined on this one. the first two (rejecting the gifts or thinking that you are mistaken/insane) seem correct.
the line between the last two seems more blurred to me. specifically, if you are truly a prophet, may it not be that you are incorrect on occasion? now, i don't think this would earn you the label of false prophet, but it would mean that you are fallible.
now, just because something is fallible doesn't mean it's incorrect. it does mean that discernment is needed, something which is desperately lacking in much of the Church. and in such, i agree with you, that that discernment must take on a very serious weight.
walt,
the line between the last two seems more blurred to me. specifically, if you are truly a prophet, may it not be that you are incorrect on occasion? now, i don't think this would earn you the label of false prophet, but it would mean that you are fallible.
If one is a true prophet, then s/he may inaccurately transmit a word from the Lord. That is true.
The fact is, however, that Jesus and John both are very specific in commanding us to watch out for false prophets.
I think you are in a pretty serious error to think that the line between a true prophet and a false prophets is blurred. False prophets, as I read the Word, are real and they are a serious threat to the Body.
It is, I believe, often difficult to tell a false prophet as a false prophet. I will grant you that. And, it is often the case that a genuine prophet fails to transmit a word accurately. Paul builds in an important safe guard to deal with that reality.
But, a false prophet is a false prophet. There is no blur.
...discernment is needed, something which is desperately lacking in much of the Church. and in such, i agree with you, that that discernment must take on a very serious weight.
Amen.
bill,
forgive me for not speaking more precisely. i was mistaken to say that the line is blurred. more that, a false prophet may, at times and in various ways, say things that are true; likewise, a true prophet may at times be inaccurate in transmitting truth. sorry for the confusion.
So what do you do with something like 1 Cor. 13:8-12?
"Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophecy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
Sorry, I was directing that question to Bill.
H,
Could you be more specific in asking what I do with the last half of 1 Corinthians 13?
You are right to ask.
These verses are among the most important relating to the function of prophets in the entire Bible. You have no idea how many hours I have spent meditating on them.
I could, very literally, write a book.
So, to spare us all from my book-length rantings, could you narrow your question down?
walt,
... a false prophet may, at times and in various ways, say things that are true; likewise, a true prophet may at times be inaccurate in transmitting truth. sorry for the confusion.
That is why, I believe, Jesus said, '...by their fruit you will know them.' We are children of the sixteenth century when we are satisfied to evaluate any sort of word spoken in the name of the Lord, even a sermon, merely against the standard of the Word. John Winebrenner called for another great reformation. That's what I'm for.
Life according to the New Testament plan will inevitably be messier than priest/pastor dominated Christendom-ity where nearly all church members are lay people shoved into the position of being consumers of the religious products and services developed by the priestly class. Now, that is what's neat and clean. But, it's also not what's modeled in the Word.
Remember that Paul, to introduce his treatment of spiritual gifts, alludes to the possibility that one might say, in the context of Christian community, "Jesus be cursed." He seems to accept that sort of thing as something that will happen when saints actually live vitally in the Spirit and when their vibrant discipleship threatens the devil.
I'm not saying that this is easy stuff. Clearly in isn't. It IS New Testament stuff, though.
It is with good reason that when Paul COMMANDS that two or three prophets speak when saints come together that he immediately adds, 'the others should weigh carefully what is said.' (1 Cor. 14:29)
Bill,
As APEST must function together, I don't see the prophet standing so far out alone unless all have turned their back on God. Not all have turned their back on God. Yet you are standing nearly alone.
I agree that we are so clouded by Christendom that we don't know where Christianity starts and stops. People call me Pastor Brian after years of me fighting it. It is not because I am a priest or a shepherd. It is because Christendom demands it.
I accept you as a prophet and when you speak, I listen much more carefully. But I do not accept that unless I start having tongues in our services that I am going against God Himself.
The role of prophet is likely the most difficult role when one realizes they are a prophet and few are heeding the warning calls.
You have shown us a prophet wrapped in humanity, as all prophets must be.
Brian,
I accept you as a prophet...
Finally someone made a choice.
I agree that we are so clouded by Christendom that we don't know where Christianity starts and stops.
Right on.
It was clearly messy in the New Testament when all the church knew was the New Testament plan. Even then, sorting out who the Lord gifted from false apostles, false prophets and false teachers was a serious issue.
Now, with priest/laity corruptions of what the Spirit empowers and our own struggles to remember the 'forgotten ways' and to live them out, we are absolutely coated in messiness. Still, truth is truth and what the Spirit empowers He empowers and quenching that, if it is not sin, weakens us.
The next step for us as a group, I believe because I am a prophet, is to come together begging Him to teach us what we need to repent of as a body and as individuals.
We then need to repent, i.e., we need to change the way we think AND the way we act.
We need to, then, confess our sins to the Lord and to each other.
We need to hold ourselves accountable when we fall back into old patterns.
And, we need to empower a balanced APEST community with apostles and prophets as the foundation, to create a new way.
If we don't repent, I think two things will soon happen. On a human level, we'll simply move on to the next fad which will be destined to fail.
And, on a spiritual level, He will remove our lampstand/spew us from His mouth. Then all will be lost.
bill,
I believe in gifts and callings yet today. Knowing at least a little of the depth of your integrity, I believe you.
I don't think you're crazy. I believe that whatever a prophet is (given N.T. description), you are it.
The nature and scope of what that means still seems to be a valid point of discussion here.
I share Brian's concern that you are so often 'alone' amongst a group desiring to be faithful to God and His desires for us.
Honestly, I don't know how far this conversation can move forward until we are able to know what you sense the Lord speaking to and/or through you from your own thoughts about issues or even your own thoughts about the application of the word you might receive.
I am willing to commit to the best of my ability to most carefully weigh and seek to faithfully respond to those things which God would seek to communicate through you.
If God is speaking, I want to hear.
And ultimately, I think it will only be once we are able to collectively and biblically weigh your words of prophecy will I or anyone else be able to be more fully confident.
One question that I'm curious about is the scope of prophecy.
in the O.T. there were prophets to kings and many others were prophets to Isread and/or Judah - to the whole of God's people. God sent Jonah to Nineveh.
In the N.T., John the Baptist is called a prophet and called the 'masses' to repentance. Jesus was the ultimate prophet with no 'middleman.' Is prophecy in the 'New Testament Plan.' generally more local or sometimes even personal? I have heard people (who I believe) claim that God revealed to them truths about people they hadn't met that were true...
My question for bill is, what do you percieve to be the scope of your calling as a prophet and the words that you feel God is giving you? Are you a prophet to your local body, churches in your area, the entire cggc, the whole country, the entire worldwide church? This is a serious question and not intended to be accusatory or anything else. It just seems that the kind of things that you are most concerned about are wide scale stuff, not local stuff.
More on this later. I just think that it's an important question.
M,
Honestly, I don't know how far this conversation can move forward until we are able to know what you sense the Lord speaking to and/or through you from your own thoughts about issues or even your own thoughts about the application of the word you might receive.
First of all, from my reading of Scripture and my own struggles to 'see but a poor reflection as in a mirror' (1 Cor 13), prophets rarely have much to say about application. Read up on John the Baptist and Agabus in Acts 11 and 21. It is for apostles to put prophecy into reality, I believe.
Second, the purpose of this thread is not to ask you to buy the Brooklyn Bridge unseen.
The purpose of this thread is to challenge people to take the prophecy part of APEST seriously. APEST is fun as a cute and novel idea. It's very attractive as a 'next fad of the moment.' But, if it's truth, it has revolutionary implications that should, in the end, destroy Christendom's stranglehold on the ministry of the church. It could be foundational to the bringing about of what Winebrenner called, 'another great reformation.' I'm asking you to think seriously about APEST and to understand that, if it is truth, what that truth would mean to the Body as I live it out.
I have spoken an actual prophecy to someone in the CGGC one-on-one. That's person's response was simply to pretend that I'd not prophesied and I began to wonder what that response signifies. That's how I concluded that my assertions about my gift and calling create four possible responses.
I can only guess that that person's response is that s/he doesn't really believe in APEST and sports it as nothing more than today's fad. I implored him/her to call me to account if s/he thinks I'm a false prophet. Nothing. S/he hasn't suggested that I am deranged and s/he shows no fruit of repentance.
My claims about my calling demand something.
Bill,
fair enough. I think the purpose of your post is being strongly considered at least by.
Again, if God had sonething to say, I want to hear it. Even knowing that it will likely be hard to hear and repent of.
Hesitant to jump in, but here are a few thoughts I have...
First, we need to be honest that across the breadth of Scripture, prophecy takes different forms. It is not always the same thing. What we know is that the prophet is one through whom God says something very important he wants his people to hear.
Some prophecy, indeed, is a call to repentance, and it seems that God raises up prophets to call people to repentance when they are in grave error or have, as Brian said, turned their backs on God.
I believe, Bill, that you are a prophet. I also believe that God's call through you to reject harmful Christendom motifs is valid, and I receive it.
You are, however, still a human being, and as such your thought has nuances, and you ponder its implications, and the line between the word God has given you, and the implications you suggest it has, seems fuzzy (at least to me). For example, I agree with the call to everyone using their gifts, but you have inferred very specific pictures of what it looks like for a church to live out that call. You want to get rid of sermons, but I think a church can still have sermons, and in that worship gathering, or other smaller gatherings, still have everyone use their gifts.
By taking that position, am I rejecting the word you bring, or the implications Bill the man, as he ponders that word, thinks it has? It puts your fellow APESTS in an awkward position when you lay out a fairly detailed picture (as opposed to simple and clear word) and say "Take it or leave it". I accept the word you've been trying to get across; I do not necessarily accept some of the ways you think it has to be fleshed out in a local body.
My real point here is simply that accepting the Word you bring does not mean concluding that everything you say on that topic is God's Word and must be accepted without testing or question.
So maybe you should clarify for us what the word is, specifically, that you are bringing in this case.
M,
My question for bill is, what do you percieve to be the scope of your calling as a prophet and the words that you feel God is giving you?
Are you a prophet to your local body, churches in your area, the entire cggc, the whole country, the entire worldwide church? This is a serious question and not intended to be accusatory or anything else. It just seems that the kind of things that you are most concerned about are wide scale stuff, not local stuff.
Awesome. I do not feel accused and wouldn't be phased if I did.
I have said, in other conversations, the things your questions lead me to say again. I'm glad to say them directly in response to a direct question.
About six months after discovering APEST in a Word of Wisdom/Kinowledge, I came to an understanding of what my precise calling is. I have prayed about my calling every day since then without fail. Since then I have come to only a very minor tweaking of what my calling is.
This is what the Lord has told me as a result of much prayer and meditation. My precise is based on Jeremiah 1:10. It is:
to uproot and tear down the pastor-dominated leadership culture, to destroy and overthrow that culture and to build and to plant a leadership community in which apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers are all empowered to live within their callings.
That's what I do every day. It is the center of everything I do. I continue to feel led to carry out that calling in the context of the
CGGC.
Fran, excellent thoughts. Yes. You said it extremely well and it's what I'm trying to get at.
Bill, you have indeed brought to us (at least to me) a word that I had not really even given thought to - that 'pastor' as THE leader of a church is just the way it always seems to be now and it is not the biblical way. We can sometimes act as priests in function even when we (rightly) deny it theologically I would not have had that thought without you or the Lord putting that on you. I have not really done much to repent of it and need to.
This is not necessarily a new word as it is, as you have been saying, not reflective of the biblical pattern and in that way the Scripture shows as authentication. And like the O.T. prophets called God's people back to the Covenant, the Torah, you are calling us back the the N.T. ways with a word for our time. Thank you.
And yet you have provided much of the application yourself, namely as it relates to public prayer, gatherings and sermons. Are these applications that as you study the Scripture and church history fall right into line with what your calling is? Or has God given you a word regarding the sermon? And is it all proclaimation or the type normally practiced in Evangelical churches and taught in seminary?
Again, where is the line of disctinction if theire is one? In seems that, given your just (re)stated prophetic calling, our collective response ought to be to 'test/weigh' that word and then once we accept it work through the repentance process together...as in the 'now what?' Let's look at everything that we do...ministry, discipleship, prayer, proclaimation, etc. with bill as one voice in the discussion. Do certain practices need to be changed or abolished? I think all of that is for us to discuss together in light of that word.
Instead you have told us how we need to apply it - at least in several areas. Maybe that was a word you could not avoid. But I think that if we explored it together we might come to the same or similar conclusions in light of the word you brought but instead we are left somewhat confused as to what is from the Lord vs. your own study of scripture and personal experienes with church practice.
Does all of that make sense? There are some questions in there and some assertions that you may want to disagree (or agree :-) with.
Part 1
----------------
Fran,
You are, however, still a human being, and as such your thought has nuances, and you ponder its implications, and the line between the word God has given you, and the implications you suggest it has, seems fuzzy (at least to me).
Indeed.
I have embraced what I am convinced is my gift and calling. I am committed to remembering the forgotten ways and I believe that I am growing in my desire to be effective in my calling. Still, as I see it, even in the early church, prophecy was a messy thing. Of prophets and prophecy Paul said,
"We...prophecy in part" and "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror then we shall see face to face" and "The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets."
To this point, I have not been bold enough to enter a word that I believe to be a prophecy on this blog. I have settled for being prophetic, i.e., speaking about truth as someone on whom the Lord has given an insatiable appetite to know and live in truth.
I can say in defense of myself, that I am living in my calling as purely as anyone I know. Do I do it well? I don't think so. Do I do it with all my heart? As much as I can.
You want to get rid of sermons, but I think a church can still have sermons, and in that worship gathering, or other smaller gatherings, still have everyone use their gifts.
One of the reasons I entered this thread was to turn over a new leaf in living out my calling. It is clear to me that, while I have functioned with passion as a novice prophet, I have not been an effective communicator of what I have hoped to convince others of--at least on this blog.
The truth is that I don't really care if we get rid of sermons. My postings about sermons have always been about an issue other than sermons.
Part 2
-----------------
All of those posts have been about the Mission Statement which says,
...we commit ourselves to establishing churches on the New Testament plan.....
Our Mission Statement is based on the founding vision of John Winebrenner who, when he explained what it means to establish churches on the New Testament plan said, "To accomplish all this will require another great reformation."
The most consistent theme in my threads in the past few months has been to call our Body to take truth seriously and to face up to the reality that the Mission Statement is a bold-face lie that mocks us. The truth is that we have no interest in another great reformation. Only a small handful of us are passionately devoted to New Testament Christianity.
I have been pointing out that if the Mission Statement is not a lie, we would gather as early Christians did. If we were committed to New Testament Christianity it would matter that preaching is never mentioned in early Christian gatherings and that the concept of sermon is entirely foreign to worship in that manner. If the New Testament plan mattered to us, we would all pause before we preached in a gathering again and we would think through very carefully how the institution of the sermon fits with the New Testament's model of worship.
And, we convict ourselves of mockery in the Mission Statement because we don't.
So, I give care about sermons. I don't think we need to get rid of them. All I think is that our attitude toward them proves that the Mission Statement is a lie. What I do care about is truth and mission.
I believe that when we create a Mission Statement that we don't really believe or work to put into practice and we build that Statement on assertions of truth that, in practice, we reject, we do two things in the spiritual realm that are potentially catastrophic:
1. We separate ourselves from the Lord's blessing. And,
2. We call curses down on ourselves from the just Lord who is Truth and defined His Body's true mission.
I have been hoping that, in talking about sermons in connection with the outdated Winebrenner term, "New Testament plan" that people would understand that my point is that the CGGC Emperor is stark, raving naked and that that nakedness offends the Lord. So, let me us say that:
My point is that the CGGC Emperor is stark, raving naked and that that nakedness offends the Lord.
He is not pouring His blessing out on us. If anything, He's fighting against us.
And, it's time for us to get serious about truth and repent of our sin of dabbling in it.
M,
...you have provided much of the application yourself, namely as it relates to public prayer, gatherings and sermons...
Let me take this opportunity to try to be more clear. I have never supplied application regarding prayer in the gatherings of disciples, nor the nature of the gatherings themselves, nor the method in which truth is presented.
What I have always done is to assert that if the Mission Statement is not a lie and if, as members of the CGGC we are not liars, we would not pray as we do or hold 'worship services' or preach sermons.
All of my assertions have served the greater message that our Mission Statement is nothing more than a lie. It is sin. It does not connect us to God's blessing. If anything, it calls down curses from a just Lord who says, "Those whom I love I rebuke and chasten."
It simply is not true that we commit ourselves to establishing churches on the New Testament plan. Everything that we do and every value we live out produces fruit that what we say we do we do not do. We are liars. We sin.
...has God given you a word regarding the sermon...?
God has given me a word about the essential importance of truth in the things that His people say about themselves.
Let's look at everything that we do...ministry, discipleship, prayer, proclaimation, etc. with bill as one voice in the discussion.
How about 'with bill as a self-proclaimed prophet whose assertions as a prophet demand a particular sort of response.' Because of what I say about myself, you can't include me as merely one voice. I'm the only person speaking in the CGGC culture claiming to be prophetic. I have forced you to give me a special place. You can't obey the Word a regard me as another voice.
Instead you have told us how we need to apply it - at least in several areas.
No.
I have challenged you either to make the Mission Statement truth or to acknowledge that it is a lie. I am calling you to repent.
-------------
Read over what I believe my calling to be:
to uproot and tear down the pastor-dominated leadership culture, to destroy and overthrow that culture and to build and to plant a leadership community in which apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds and teachers are all empowered to live within their callings.
That is a macro calling.
It is a calling to address cultural values.
I don't care about how you pray or gather or communicate.
What I care about is that the way you live makes both you and the Mission Statement liars. The fruit of our words and actions do not comport with the Mission Statement. In a pastor-dominated leadership culture, misrepresenting mission is no big deal. But, I'm telling you that, to the Lord, it is important. This is something we need to repent of.
The Commandment about bearing false witness is in the Top Ten for a reason.
Bill said: "I'm the only person speaking in the CGGC culture claiming to be prophetic. I have forced you to give me a special place. You can't obey the Word a regard me as another voice."
Bill, perhaps I am misunderstanding, but it's statements like this that make me cringe. I don't doubt that you are gifted as a prophet, but I do doubt that you are the ONLY ONE in the CGGC culture. In fact, I KNOW of other people with the prophetic gift. For various reasons they don't feel it necessary to "force" their leadership onto people though.
I have no problem accepting that you are a prophet, but I think Dan M. is right here. You are only one, and you are only one voice even in the leadership mix. And the fact that this is the 30th comment regarding whether Bill Sloat is a prophet or not, and what that means... yet the post following this one has only received 2 comments (regarding leadership development in the cggc)... probably says as much about our problems as anything. And I am not blaming you, Bill, or anyone, really - but that's the prophet in ME saying we are getting ourselves off track here (not that some of this discussion hasn't been worthwhile).
Just my 2 cents.
H,
Bill, perhaps I am misunderstanding, but it's statements like this that make me cringe. I don't doubt that you are gifted as a prophet, but I do doubt that you are the ONLY ONE in the CGGC culture. In fact, I KNOW of other people with the prophetic gift. For various reasons they don't feel it necessary to "force" their leadership onto people though.
What I said was, "I'm the only person speaking in the CGGC culture claiming to be prophetic."
As far as I know, no one else in the CGGC speaks and says directly, "I am a prophet speaking as a prophet." And, to my knowledge, I am correct. If you know of someone else in the Body who makes that claim and speaks with that authority, please let me know who it is. I yearn to function in a school of prophets. Dan M, definitely bears fruit of being a prophet. So does walt. So do you. But, I'm the only one I know of here or anywhere else who will say, "I think I am a prophet," and "I'm speaking as a prophet."
And the fact that this is the 30th comment regarding whether Bill Sloat is a prophet or not, and what that means... yet the post following this one has only received 2 comments (regarding leadership development in the cggc)... probably says as much about our problems as anything.
I contributed to your thread. I did my part. It is true that almost all of us who post here in MLI contributed is, I think, pretty impressive.
I agree that you are correct in asserting that leadership development is a serious CGGC issue.
Bill said: "I'm the only person speaking in the CGGC culture claiming to be prophetic. I have forced you to give me a special place. You can't obey the Word a regard me as another voice."
I'm still a little confused. I recall you promising earlier (I'll look it up if needed)that you would strive to seperate your own thoughts from what you beleive are 'direct' revelation from the Lord through the Spirit.
Now you 'seem' to be saying that it's all the same authority.
If you say that God has given you something to say to the body, it clearly has authority that our other thoughts do not. God's voice is not another voice at the table.
But is your claim now that every word and thought that you share carries more authority because of the prophetic calling? I don't think you are saying that, but it sounds like it.
Most of what the prophet seems to do (and this seems to bear out in bill's communication) is to call God's people back to God's Word, His Truth, His Way. Bill has shown us that our well-intentioned practices may well be obstacles to faithfulness to God. It seems to me that that is part of the fresh prophetic word - the identification of sin in our own time that goes unseen even by people striving to love the Lord with all their hearts.
That is why we need each other for true vitality and missional ministry.
Bill,
I very much appreciated what you had to say on the MLI thread too. Thanks!
And I suppose you are correct in that "no one else in the CGGC speaks and says directly, 'I am a prophet speaking as a prophet.'"
That has been part of my contention with the whole APEST thing from the beginning. I wholeheartedly agree with the APEST model, but I don't know that it's always beneficial to point out exactly who is what - as though our dominant gift is the ONLY one we have. I think it is necessary to have a mix, but even within each of us there is a mix. To just start labeling ourselves seems to go against the whole organic nature of the thing (imho).
Perhaps it's just me, but it becomes too easy for labels, and pride, and attitude to get in the way of the spirit of true APEST leadership. Then we start arguing about things 'other than' what we should really be dealing with. I think.
peace.
Dan H. "I think it is necessary to have a mix, but even within each of us there is a mix."
This seems to be true of many of us (including myself at times) and seems to be the contention of authors like Hirsh, but when I read Ephesians 4, it seems difficult to me me to interpret that as advocating mixes as the only or normative gifting.
Experientially, I feel like a HUGE mix. I lack the maturity to really know I think.
Personally, I struggle with trying to figure out what God was called me to be and what I want to be that might not be what God has called me to be.
Dan M.,
I can certainly relate. I was thinking more in terms of the fact that, there isn't really just "a prophet", and "an apostle", etc... like, "you will be exactly like this." We are all unique, are we not? So that how you function as, say, a prophet, and how Bill functions, may not look at all alike - but they serve the same purpose.
Of course, I am just speaking off the top of my head. I'm not saying this is what anyone else has said. But it seems to follow the biblical model that we are all unique, yet we are all one in Christ.
I could be totally wrong though.
Yes, we are all unique, there is no doubt.
Bill has said that he's almost all prophet, which (I believe) he admits may not be the norm to be so 'pure' in a calling.
"So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, 12 to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up"
That text seems to set a precedent for a more purely defined role it seems to me. ?
You're probably right. I would think we would have to factor context into the mix though, wouldn't we? Maybe I'm missing the point.
But I always thought the whole 'emerging church' thing was a very prophet-driven movement. The big word was what... "conversation." It was a bunch of prophets saying, "Hey, things are messed up here, and we need to talk about some of this stuff." Some probably would prefer the more biblical language of "call people to repentance." But I think it brought forth (and perhaps still is) a real prophetic voice in the church that took on many forms.
M,
I'm still a little confused. I recall you promising earlier (I'll look it up if needed)that you would strive to seperate your own thoughts from what you beleive are 'direct' revelation from the Lord through the Spirit.
Now you 'seem' to be saying that it's all the same authority.
Good point.
No. What I'm saying is that I am always, by calling and gifting, a prophet and that I am living intentionally in my gift and calling. When I hear someone who bears fruit of the gift of being an apostle talk about mission or disciple making, my ears perk up because I know that that person is gifted in those areas 24/7. I take what an apostle says about that which the Lord has wired him/her to be effective seriously.
I'm saying that if you believe in APEST when a prophet addresses the issue of truth that, I believe, you would be wise always to note what s/he is saying, whether s/he is speaking a word of prophecy or not.
H,
That has been part of my contention with the whole APEST thing from the beginning. I wholeheartedly agree with the APEST model, but I don't know that it's always beneficial to point out exactly who is what - as though our dominant gift is the ONLY one we have. I think it is necessary to have a mix, but even within each of us there is a mix. To just start labeling ourselves seems to go against the whole organic nature of the thing (imho).
I agree that that in most of us there is a mix. I know Grrrrrrrl Prophet very well and, as far as I can tell, she is 100% prophet with no other gifting. I think that I myself am primarily prophet but that I have a secondary gifting of teaching and that that secondary gifting defines the style that an APEST gifted person carries out his/her gift.
In defense of how I do what I do, I will point you to the fact that Paul always makes a point of his call to be an apostle in all of his letters and that there are extensive passages in his letters in which he defends his calling passionately and specifically. I believe that I am a prophet. I also believe that for me not to live as a prophet assertively would be to bury my talent.
Bill - good, but here is the rub still, in my understanding.
Your voice in the conversation will always be a prophetic voice. That is as it should be. It requires of us to take your words very seriously and weigh them out.
But you can be off a bit just as an apostle can be off about the specific way to carry the mission forward even if the apostle cares mainly or only for the mission and the prophet cares only or mainly for truth.
If there is a word of revelation from the Lord, to ignore or disobey would be saying 'no' to God.
In all cases the voice of a prophet must be heard, and in more so than a mere opinion, but it seems to me that there is a difference between a prophet functioning in his/her gifting generally and relaying a specific word.
M,
But you can be off a bit just as an apostle can be off about the specific way to carry the mission forward even if the apostle cares mainly or only for the mission and the prophet cares only or mainly for truth.
In all cases the voice of a prophet must be heard, and in more so than a mere opinion, but it seems to me that there is a difference between a prophet functioning in his/her gifting generally and relaying a specific word.
There is definitely a difference.
To me, this is what 1 Corinthians 12 is all about. I think that we sometimes fail to recognize how much it is about APEST sort of callings. See verses 27-31 and most of 13 and all of 14.
When I tell you that I am prophesying, you need to listen with the utmost care. You owe that to the Lord, to the Body and to me. But, when I address the issue of truth in any way, you should also pay closer attention than you would when a, say, shepherd, addresses the issue of truth because part of the Lord's gift to the Body is that I am always focused on truth. (Trust me, when I'm around a shepherd who is talking about community, it is "E. F. Hutton time" for me. I sit down and I shut my trap.)
What we're discussing now is APEST 101 stuff. It's very important because, as a body, all of us should probably still be taking APEST 011 and doing remedial work. We don't DO diversity of gifts well and we don't set aside Pastor/Priest function for APEST function very well. We talk a substandard talk but we fail to accomplish even that sort of walk.
Post a Comment
<< Home