Men and women: prophets and prophetesses

(This article also appears under the title: Principle and Practice, Prophets and Deacons)

Much of the discussion concerning prophets and deacons is often framed by gender and exclusivity. It is assumed that these offices are the sole domain of males and they exclude females. This is much the same as to advocate for the presence and ministry of women in the church, but with a lack of understanding of the scriptures. This is equally true of those who oppose the presence and ministry of these women in the church, but who lack an understanding of the scriptures. Generally, what is purported or touted as understanding is not much more than a couple of verses in isolation and the testimony of various writings of men. The inability of the former and the latter to present a consistent understanding and explanation for the edification of the saints is uncannily similar.

Often, the refusal to accept what is revealed through an examination of the scriptures is deep-rooted. The pressure of the fear of men is nothing new, both in those who advocate and in those who oppose the ministry of sisters in Christ. The exchanges between them of endless single word definitions, an endless barrage of questions and negative assertions create the intended desire. The impression is created that there is an understanding, but often this is not much more than a cover up of a lack of understanding. These are not crimes. These are not sins. However, neither one does much to increase the knowledge, understanding and edification of the saints in Christ in the assembly.

The principle and the practice involving prophets and deacons is revealed in, both the Old Testament and the New Testament. It puts to the test the popular understanding Romans 15:4 which the saints have learned to parrot from those who lead, teach and preach. Coincidentally, often it is those who lead, teach and preach who are the ones who feel most threatened by these same principles and practices involving prophets and deacons and the things which they have professed and proclaimed for years during their own ministries. The discussion in this article is brief, but the reader is encouraged to open the links to my blog articles which cover portions of the content in this article more fully.

God never called prophetesses in the Old Testament

Beware of negative statements which may sound imposing, truthful and full of understanding, but which are none of these. God did define, specifically in Numbers 12, what constitutes a prophet as being one to whom God reveals Himself through visions and dreams. Incidentally, take note of how loosely some teachers and preachers refer to Jesus as a prophet, or the prophet.

The test of that mistaken notion of Jesus as a prophet is to ask: when did the Father make His will known to the Son through visions and dreams? Jesus was no more a prophet than Moses with whom God spoke face to face. I can understand Muslims claiming Jesus as a prophet because there's nothing better than to to have a prophet of their own associated with Jesus, but there's a greater expectation of the saints in Christ. The Father never made Himself known to Jesus through visions and dreams anymore than God did with Moses.

Huldah, the prophetess

So, how does one explain the prominent and significant appearance of the prophetess Huldah in II Kings 22? Here is just one of the woefully weak responses from some who oppose the ministry of prophetesses: prophets were solely from the tribe of Levi. There is muted silence when it is noted that King David who was of the tribe of Judah was a prophet. Then, there was Anna, the prophetess of the tribe of Asher who prophesied concerning the eight day old baby Jesus. Suddenly, the presumption of exclusivity is thrown into some serious doubt or a need for closer examination. When God said of a prophet “I will reveal myself to him” He did not intend to limit, as is assumed, the office of prophet according to gender to men only. This may be a good starting point to make good on the debt owed the saints for an understanding and explanation on this obvious variation. Clearly, it is not a contradiction from the principle concerning prophets as declared by God Himself in Numbers 12. Huldah was not sought out by King Josiah because there wasn’t, as another weak reason is often given, a qualified man around. The prophet Jeremiah was a contemporary of Huldah in the city of Jerusalem. (Jeremiah 1:1-3)

The incident in Numbers 11 is not a mere coincidence as it relates to God’s definition of what constitutes a prophet. The definition was spoken, not by Moses or a prophet, but by God Himself. Prior to that definition in chapter 12 God had instructed Moses to bring out the seventy elders of Israel. God does as He said He would do. He puts some of the Spirit that was in Moses and puts Him upon the seventy elders.

A glitch occurred. God was unfazed nor was his power limited by that glitch. Only sixty eight of the seventy came out of the camp. The glitch that happened next was that when God placed some of the Spirit that was in Moses on the sixty eight the other two, Eldad and Medad, who had remained in the camp _ prophesied, too.

This was too much for Joshua, Moses’s right hand man in training. “Moses, my lord, restrain them.” Joshua cried to Moses concerning Eldad and Medad, the two men of the seventy elders who had not gone out of the camp with the other sixty eight elders. Here is another popular mistaken notion debunked. There is a strained and forced insistence by some to create a distinction between women prophesying in the assembly and prophesying outside of the assembly. This is as though God’s power were limited either way, or _ even worse_ as though prophesying by women -or men (like Eldad and Medad) were more acceptable to God if it were done by women out of His presence. When God put some of the Spirit on the sixty eight who were not, so to speak, “in the assembly," those two men received the same measure of the Spirit of God as the other sixty eight. Ponder that closely.

God never called deaconesses in the New Testament

Beware of negative statements which may sound imposing, truthful and full of understanding, but which are none of these. The first problem which the church faced in the first century was between the Hellenistic Jews and the native Jews concerning the distribution of food to their widows. The apostles called on the congregation to “select from among you seven men” to “serve tables.”

Although one of the most popular texts cited concerning the selection and duties of deacons is First Timothy 3:8-14 the passage in the book of Acts also involves deacons, that is, men who serve in the fulfilling of tasks of the church. There is no contradiction or problem merely because Paul’s letter was written long before Acts.

This is the principle concerning deacons in the New Testament which is similar and not unlike the principle concerning prophets in the Old Testament.

The reaction and rationale to the words of the apostles for the selection of seven men is pretty much the same as to the words of God in Numbers 12 when He said He would speak “to him,” that is, the prophet among the people of Israel. The reaction and rationale is one which includes males and excludes females. The masculine gender noun is seized tenaciously. It is taken to mean that the office of deacon is solely limited to males and to the exclusion of females, right? After all, this is the principle in the New Testament concerning deacons, right?

However, the Old Testament principle concerning prophets demonstrates graphically in the matter of Huldah that it was meant to extend to the inclusion of women as prophetesses. The question needs to be asked if this is so in the New Testament concerning a similar extension that would include women as deaconesses. The answer to that question is just like in the Old Testament. The extension of the principle concerning deacons in the New Testament is evident in Phoebe whom Paul identifies by name and describes her as a deaconesses in Romans 16:1.

Conclusion

God made his declarations in the form of principles and practices for Israel. He was not vague or ambiguous. Despite the focus and bearing down on single words in isolation to extract a clear meaning of what God said that limited focus can be one part of our understanding. The second part of that is to understand what he meant. In the matter concerning women as prophetesses and deaconesses God did not leave us to guess or to wonder. He has given us His word and His meaning together with graphic demonstrations for us to understand. Whether we accept it is a completely different matter.

The truth is that the reactions and attempts of men, and not a small number of women, to rationalize their at-odds and inconsistency between their understanding or lack of understanding of principle and practice is not a matter of intelligence. It is a matter of the carnal emotions of the heart and whether we will allow ourselves to continue to be deceived by those emotions. This effect of the emotions of the heart were graphically demonstrated and modeled in the jealousy of Joshua when he saw Eldad and Medad prophesying. The same carnal emotions was graphically demonstrated in the apostles when they argued among themselves as to which one of them was the greatest. They revealed their own mistaken notions of exclusivity when they  thought Jesus would beam proudly that they had done their best to prevent a disciple from casting out demons in the name of Jesus because that disciple was not walking with them and Jesus.

What all of these objections and oppositions reveal in common is that they have nothing to do with gender. They all have to do with the notions of prestige, power and positions of males, particularly, and the emotions that come into play with them. Gender is merely the more useful cudgel which seems most effective when muttering something vague about what God never said or God never meant concerning women, our sisters in Christ, as prophetesses and deaconesses. It is far better to speak clearly and out loud and teach the scriptures for the understanding and edification of the saints in the body of Christ, the church.

Read More

Principle and Practice, Prophets and Deacons

Much of the discussion concerning prophets and deacons is often framed by gender and exclusivity. It is assumed that these offices are the sole domain of males and they exclude females. This is much the same as to advocate for the presence and ministry of women in the church, but without a lack of understanding of the scriptures. This is equally true of those who oppose the presence and ministry of these women in the church, but who lack an understanding of the scriptures. The inability of the former and the latter to present a consistent understanding and explanation for the edification of the saints is uncannily similar.

Read More

Observations and lessons for women and men from Huldah, the prophetess

This article was developed from my recent daily reading which covered II Kings 22. The passage relates the finding in the temple of the book of the law of Moses by the Hilkiah, the priest, during the reign of King Josiah in Jerusalem. The book of the law had been lost for an unspecified period of time. There are some observations and lessons for our learning concerning our sisters in Christ in the royal priesthood of believers.

observations

1. The book of the law was read by Shaphan, the scribe, in the presence of King Josiah who was the leader of Jerusalem and Judah.
2. King Josiah, as the leader of the people of God, showed the wisdom into which he had grown. Josiah had ascended to the throne at age eight. Now, at age twenty six his wisdom was evident. After the book had been read to him by Shaphan, the scribe, King Josiah did not close the book and conclude that the content of the book was clear and self explanatory. No, he directed Shaphan to return to the men who had sent him to King Josiah. The king directed them to inquire of the Lord for him concerning the words of the book. They, Shaphan, Ahikam, Achbor and Hilkiah, did not take King’s Josiah’s instruction to mean that they were to discuss it among themselves and to come back to the king with the result of their discussion.
   

Read More

110% Proof Jesus is not God - - a response

(I informed the author of this video of this response on the YouTube video and on Facebook where I first saw it. Readers are encouraged to view the video. gt)

First, what is readily apparent is that those things about which you were ignorant during your days as a professing disciple of Jesus remain with you in your embrace of Islam.
Specifically, your glib, but ignorant claim of Jesus as prophet. Yes, this ignorance is too common among many Christians, but the Muslim claim of Jesus as prophet has its own motives. What motives are those you might ask? It is that if Muslims associate and align their self-prophesing prophet with one, such as Jesus, who is well known, revered, adorned, respected and mistakenly regarded by some as a prophet it could only be good to associate Muhammed with Jesus.

The qualifications of a prophet were defined by Yahweh to Moses and Miriam and Aaron who had spoken against Moses in Numbers 12.

He said, “Now hear my words. If there is a prophet among you, I, Yahweh, will make myself known to him in a vision. I will speak with him in a dream.

Additionally, note how Yahweh distinguishes Moses from a prophet. While you acquiesce to Jesus having MUCH knowledge like any prophet with your free, lax tendency to attribute prophet status; you neither understand what constituted a prophet and how that individual received knowledge as to the will of God. The significance of this definition by Yahweh is for you to ask yourself when did Jesus receive ANY message through from God through a vision or a dream.

Second, you are correct there are multiple and various explanations from my saints in Christ as to Jesus' seeming lack of knowledge in Mark 13:32. This is another instance which reveals your ignorance of days past and which remains with you today.

But of that day or that hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Watch, keep alert, and pray; for you don’t know when the time is.

No, Jesus did not know the day of his return. This is what he said.

My question is what bearing does this supposed lack of knowledge have or what it effect does it have, 1) on his imminent return, and 2) our being prepared for that day?

This seeming lack of knowledge by Jesus, which you seize as the opportune case for denial of his deity, is a complete on-your-ear throw down from what had happened in the garden of Eden. Despite Adam and Eve being told by the God of knowledge of good and evil not to eat the forbidden fruit they did so. He knowingly had told them what would happen, - they would die – on the day they ate of it.

Do you similarly question or deny it was God who called out to Adam and Eve, “Where are you?” because he didn't KNOW where they were in the garden? Do you think God didn't KNOW who had told Adam and Eve they were naked?

The response by Jesus that he did not know the time of his return is nothing less than God's call, a reverse action from what the all-knowing God had done in the garden, to TRUST. Jesus had previously sought to ease the disciples' anxiousness about his imminent departure. They could not understand exactly where he was going, but he reasurred them telling them to not let their hearts be troubled and that he was going to prepare a place for them.

Your attempt, with your own seeming knowledge, to scrutinize the Mark 12:32 verse for a discovery that's not there, but which is actually revealed much more clearly and without uncertainty in a later instance. Interestingly, this later instance is wholly explained and shrouded in a web of deception and lies, as I learned according to Muslims, and with which I am sure you are quite familiar. As in the beginning, the all-knowing God has declared, “Unless you believe I am He, you will perish,” but the response is not much different than what happened in the garden.

Read More

If There Is A Prophet

Is Jesus a prophet? Is Jesus the prophet? Those are questions not often asked. The answer is one many people assume as yes, but this is not a determination based on understanding. This answer from non Christian theists is of no concern. However, when brothers and sisters in the faith that is in Christ Jesus reply in a similar manner it is cause for concern. The effect of these misplaced claims on the church  is evident. It reveals an erosion of confidence and boldness in her proclamation of the faith in accordance with the scriptures. The claims and fulfillment of Jesus’ words stand as radically different from anything in history. So, why do some Christians claim Jesus as a prophet? the prophet? or another prophet like so many others?

How do we determine who is a prophet? How do we determine if Jesus is a prophet or the prophet? It is God who determines that for us. The account in Numbers 12 is vital to the first question: Was Jesus a prophet?

"If her father had put spit in her face would she not bear her shame for seven days?"

This statement shows the anger of God towards Miriam and Aaron when He struck her with leprosy. These are God's words to Moses and Aaron. These words are no less harder than what incurred the judgment of God: Miriam and Aaron had spoken against Moses, the servant of God. They pleaded with Him to heal Miriam. God would not relent. The matter of Miriam being the target of his anger is not the focus of this article. What is significant in the Numbers 12 passage is that Miriam and Aaron were not afraid to speak against Moses. Subsequently, God revealed to them how He communicates with a prophet and that God regarded Moses as something other than a prophet with whom He communicated his words mouth to mouth and not as a prophet. First, lets look briefly at prophets and some ancient tactics from Numbers 12.

The prophets of old

The Old Testament scriptures are the best source to determine whether messenger and message were from God. Some prophets such as Jonah who preached to Ninevah, were sent by God to those who were not his people. They did not necessarily like the message. Rather than being accepted or embraced they were rejected, persecuted and killed.

There were also imposter prophets. False prophets mimicked the prophets and prefaced their false message with, Thus saith the Lord. False prophets were a frustration to Jeremiah. They followed Jeremiah's delivery of his prophetic messages to Israel with their own false message. God made it clear to Jeremiah those were not his prophets (Jeremiah 23). He did not send them. Sometimes those who presumed themselves prophets did so with some help. People declared and accepted messengers as prophets of God simply because they loved, as Jeremiah records, their smooth words.

Ancient tactics

Two tactics common in discussions regarding prophets are diminishment and association. For example, the belief statement god is everything and god is everywhere is an example of diminishment. It says a lot as much as it says nothing. It does nothing to direct the seeker towards God. It tells the seeker God, the Transcendent Creator is as much in him or next to him as he is in the form of the stick or the rock he just kicked down the road. There is no focus on God. Diminishment makes no distinction between Creator and creation or the living from the lifeless and inanimate for the seeker. Similarly, there is no attempt to define and qualify a prophet because diminishment tactics have no source of authority beyond the individual who makes the claims.

The phrase, All the prophets including Moses, Jesus, Mohammed and Buddha is an example of association. Without commenting on the veracity or applicability of the term prophet to Moses, Mohammed or Buddha it is the application of this term to Jesus which raises questions. Christians often accept the association application of prophet to Jesus by other Christians as readily as from people of other beliefs outside of the Judeo-Christian biblical tradition. This tactic of association has the unwitting (by Christians, at least) effect of casting Jesus in a role neither He nor the apostles ever claimed. However, well-intentioned this association by Christians and non Christians to honor and present Jesus in the tradition and succession of prophets from Noah to Abraham to Moses, Isaiah and Jeremiah it is a diminishment of Jesus. It produces the desired result for those who wish to elevate their prophet with one perceived and regarded (like Jesus) as a prophet through a Christian interpretation of scripture primarily. The intended purpose of this tactic is simple: Association of one's prophet with one regarded and renowned as a great prophet makes one's prophet great by association.

These ancient tactics date back to Miriam and Aaron's murmur against Moses.

They diminished the relationship and failed to see a distinction

between themselves and God and God and Moses and

simultaneously exalted themselves because of their association with

Moses.

These tactics continue to be used today. They muddle and distort what constitutes a prophet and confuse Christians who desire to be confident in sharing their faith with conviction and understanding..

The Deuteronomy 18 pronouncement

How is it Christians come to declare Jesus as A prophet: The oneness of God on the basis of Deuteronomy 18? The passage is also a proof text for other theists outside the Judeo-Christian tradition who hold little regard for the Old Testament scriptures to support their own claims concerning their prophet. While a Christian view of Jesus as prophet may not be a gross mishandling of scripture or the endangerment of the Christian's salvation it merits more than merely navigating around these negative and dangerous realities. It is just as important Christians build their confidence and joy in the greater glory of Jesus, not as another prophet or a special prophet, but as Lord and Savior. He is so much more radical, bold and immensely different than any other single individual in the history of the world.

After the Levitical priesthood was established of those who ministered before the Lord and led Israel in their sacrifice to God, one need  remained to be filled:  Someone to take up as a spokesman of God like Moses in Israel. This is the background context for the pronouncement to Israel through Moses that God would raise up a prophet like Moses.

1.     The prophet was to be from among their brethren, an Israelite. A contrast to the sorcerers and the people who listened to them in the land Israel was about to conquer.
2.     The prophet was to speak as God gave him the message. He was not to conjure up a message of his own like the diviners of the land.
3.     The prophet was to be obeyed no less than Moses.
4.     The test the people were to apply to anyone who professed himself a prophet of God was whether his words came to pass.

This Deuteronomy 18 singular noun reference term of prophet holds equally true for every Old Testament prophet. All were Israelites, they spoke what God said, they expected obedience not for themselves, but for their message as being from God. Their words came to pass invariably. Yes, these same particulars concerning prophets hold true of Jesus just as well. However, this truth does not establish or prove Jesus was a prophet in the general sense or the prophet in the specific sense.

The perception of prophet in the New Testament

The only indirect reference by Jesus of himself as a prophet in Matthew 13:57 reflects the popular perception concerning prophets in Israel. Jesus found an affinity with the prophets who were rejected in their own hometown and household, were persecuted and killed by Israel.

The people answered their own perceptions Who is this saying This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee. (Matthew 21:11) The chief priests and Pharisees held Jesus to be a/the prophet (John 6:14) on the basis of either/and/or Deuteronomy 18 and Malachi 4. The Samaritan woman (John 4) stated to Jesus that she perceived him to be a prophet.

John answered the people's questions clearly and without hesitation that he was not the prophet. This question suggests the people (and their leaders) believed in expectations of a (singular) prophet who was to come. John's response suggests he himself may possibly have held a similar belief. This inquiry by Israel may be per their understanding of Deuteronomy 18 or, as regards John, their imminent expectant fulfillment of the words of the prophet Malachi. Jesus applied his interpretation of the Malachi prophecy to John.  John saw himself as a fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy yet it does not seem he saw himself as the fulfillment of the Malachi 4 prophecy.

4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Yahweh comes.

4:6 He will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.”

Jesus' testimony of John was that John was more than a prophet. John's mission was short, but immensely important: To make ready the way of the Lord, make his ways straight.

But why did you go out? To see a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and much more than a prophet.  For this is he, of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’*  Most certainly I tell you, among those who are born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptizer; yet he who is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he.   From the days of John the Baptizer until now, the Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force.

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John. If you are willing to receive it, this is Elijah, who is to come.   Matthew 11:9-14

The explanation of the scriptures by Jesus

Jesus, with masterful brevity, distinguished himself apart from the prophets to the men on the road to Emmaus.

He said to them, “Foolish men, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Didn’t the Christ have to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?” Beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he explained to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.  Luke 24:25-27

The NT interpretation and application of the Deuteronomy 18

The proclamations by the apostle Peter in Acts 3:19-26 and Stephen in Acts 7:35-39, 51-53 are the only two instances where the Deuteronomy 18 passage is quoted in the New Testament. The passage quotations are framed within references in the plural form to the prophets. Peter marks the beginning of this succession of prophets with Samuel and those who followed after.

If Peter's preaching was informative Stephen's preaching is accusative. Stephen is as unrelenting as was God towards Miriam's murmur against Moses. Stephen put the same guiltiness of refusal, disobedience and rejection of the people towards Moses on his own audience. Stephen's fate, like that of the prophets, was sealed. His audience killed him.

3:19 “Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, so that there may come times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord, 3:20 and that he may send Christ Jesus, who was ordained for you before, 3:21 whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God spoke long ago by the mouth of his holy prophets. 3:22 For Moses indeed said to the fathers, ‘The Lord God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him in all things whatever he says to you. 3:23 It will be, that every soul that will not listen to that prophet will be utterly destroyed from among the people.’* 3:24 Yes, and all the prophets from Samuel and those who followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. 3:25 You are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘In your seed will all the families of the earth be blessed.’* 3:26 God, having raised up his servant, Jesus, sent him to you first, to bless you, in turning away everyone of you from your wickedness.”


 7:35 “This Moses, whom they refused, saying, ‘Who made you a ruler and a judge?’—God has sent him as both a ruler and a deliverer by the hand of the angel who appeared to him in the bush. 7:36 This man led them out, having worked wonders and signs in Egypt, in the Red Sea, and in the wilderness for forty years. 7:37 This is that Moses, who said to the children of Israel, ‘The Lord our God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers, like me.^*’^* 7:38 This is he who was in the assembly in the wilderness with the angel that spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, who received living oracles to give to us, 7:39 to whom our fathers wouldn’t be obedient, but rejected him, and turned back in their hearts to Egypt,

7:51 “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit! As your fathers did, so you do. 7:52 Which of the prophets didn’t your fathers persecute? They killed those who foretold the coming of the Righteous One, of whom you have now become betrayers and murderers. 7:53 You received the law as it was ordained by angels, and didn’t keep it!”


Peter and Stephen interpret and apply the singular noun prophet in their preaching to the succession of prophets. Both men focus, interpret and apply a second word to Jesus. It is the verb raise. The sense of the primary verb "raise" used in the passage would likely and could properly be understood as in raising a child, for example Hannah raising up her son Samuel to dedicate him to the Lord. However, Peter and Stephen relate a secondary use of the verb raise to the resurrection of Jesus.

The Acts passages represent the Bible response to the question: Is Jesus the prophet of Deuteronomy 18?

Note: The apostle Paul teaching in the synagogue in Antioch of Pisidia made a similar interpretation and application of the Old Testament prophecy of Psalm 2 (Acts 13:26-34) between the words begotten and raised. Those who reject the deity of Jesus cite Psalm 2 focus on the term begotten as proof Jesus was created. However, the apostle Paul through inspiration of the Holy Spirit declares God fulfilled his promise concerning his begotten Son when he raised up Jesus from the dead.

Having examined the Deuteronomy 18 passage in the light of Acts 3 and 7 and glanced briefly at certain ancient tactics in Numbers 12 lets examine what God said to Miriam and Aaron as to how he communicates with a prophet.

Numbers 12: The definition of a prophet

He said, “Hear now my words. If there is a prophet among you, I Yahweh will make myself known to him in a vision. I will speak with him in a dream. 12:7My servant Moses is not so. He is faithful in all my house. 12:8 With him I will speak mouth to mouth, even plainly, and not in riddles; and he shall see Yahweh’s form. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant, against Moses?”

God defined in the Numbers 12 passage to Miriam and Aaron that visions and dreams is the way he communicates with his prophets. This is not the way God communicated with his servant Moses. This is equally true of Jesus:

There were no visions and dreams for Jesus.

Equality between Father and Son precluded the need

for visions and dreams.

Christians as more than prophets

We are, as Jesus said of John, more than prophets. Like Jesus and the prophets we know the treatment faithful prophets can expect from the world. Yet, like Jesus, we are not prophets. We do not receive visions and dreams, but whatever we declare as is written in the God-inspired scriptures will come to pass. It is vital for the church that the saints in Christ understand the Deuteronomy 18 passage as it pertains to the succession of prophets. The scriptures, Numbers 12 and Acts 3 and 7, specifically, represent an explanation, interpretation and application of the Deuteronomy 18 passage concerning prophets both in the singular and the plural sense. The testimony of Jesus concerning the prophets was to exalt their work and to identify with their suffering, persecution and death. Well-intentioned application of this passage to Jesus as tolerance gestures in interfaith discussions is a misplaced acquiescence. It reveals an erosion of Christian confidence and boldness to proclaim Jesus as Lord and Savior.

The early church (see I Corinthians 14:29,30) was fully dependent for her message and guidance from men and women who had received the gift of prophecy through the Holy Spirit. We have the full, written revelation of God as declared by the prophets, Jesus and apostles for our obedience. It is not for us to choose either a perceived hard message such as No one comes to the Father, except through me or soft message such as Love one another. Teach and preach, being not ashamed, the full counsel of God. We, like the prophets, are sent by the Living God to proclaim the gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, our Lord and Savior. This is our confidence and our boldness in the power of the Holy Spirit.

Conclusion

Numbers 12 reveals God communicated with his prophets through visions and dreams. It was a succession of prophets God raised up, per Deuteronomy 18, to speak to Israel on behalf of God after the death of Moses. This succession of prophets began with Samuel.  The Deuteronomy 18 passage is interpretated and applied by the apostle Peter and Stephen to the prophets, not a singular prophet.

Jesus did not receive communication from the Father through visions and dreams. The equality between Father and Son meant the Son had complete knowledge of the will of the Father. He had no need for the Father to communicate with him through visions and dreams or any other means. Christians rejoice, not in Jesus as a prophet or any other prophet, but in Jesus as Lord and Savior risen from the dead.

Read More