Christian Prophets? When God Speaks to US.

While every Christian can hear God’s voice for themselves, the early Christian Church had a structure of checks and balances that allowed it to hear His voice as a group.

In the summer of 1978, I was at a west coast church family camp. During the worship, a woman prophesied that we should march on Washington. In an instant, leaders and laity all agreed. The idea was quick to spread to many, like-minded Christian churches.

The “Washington for Jesus” Rally occurred on April 29,1980. Then President Jimmy Carter’s clumsy attempt to rescue the American hostages in Iran had failed on April 24. Had the rescue worked, it would have been a Jimmy Carter rally. We got that. Ronald Reagan endorsed us. The needle moved in his direction. We sang, prayed, went home and voted. Reagan won. Those who watched the campaign up till then were shocked. Where did this new voter block come from? It was like some guy, coming in off the street, stepping into a boxing ring, and knocking down the champ with one blow. Many of the faithful were then inspired to go from pew to public service.

Most mainline churches would shudder at the idea of having a sudden, unplanned, fervent, outburst from a lay member in a service, speaking to the church body in the name of God. No matter how sincere the speaker, the chance of doing harm seems great. They would be right.

Pentecostal, Charismatic churches who permit such things counter these concerns by teaching about the larger process it requires. Christian “Prophets” in the book of Acts differed from their former, Jewish ones. They tended to work in groups (Acts 11:27, 15:32), they would take turns in speaking and their words could be “judged” (1Cor 14:29). Since all church members could now hear God’s voice, their message confirmed a course of action rather than directed it. The change was subtle but vital.

The early Church office of the “Prophet” was also partnered with four other leaders: Apostles, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers (Eph 4:11). These titles imply diverse callings that balance each other. So, an inspired message would be balanced with a Pastor’s rightful concern for the well-being for his flock. The Teacher could bring the ordered logic and the primacy of scripture as a check on what was said. When the Apostle Paul heard an inspired warning about his coming arrest, as overseer of the new faith he saw the warning in a larger context (Acts 21:11-13).

So, a faithful, proven member could address the church body when moved to do so because the checks and balances were in place and the rules were known. These safeguards made for a climate or milieu that allowed the early church to hear from heaven, when heaven chose to speak.

God may not care much about how a country votes, but He does care about how His Church contends for the Faith. Evangelical Christians may dismiss this idea of modern-day Christian Prophets and might not see those in their own pews who are also gifted in hearing His voice. Do those gifted people know both the promise and the limits of that gift? Does their church know? We may not agree on how to apply these insights, but the insights themselves are sound.

The current mix of Christian churches who refuse to bend the knee to the hostile culture are finding more common ground. This allows for more exchange of ideas. This insight, common to one small part of the larger Christian Church, allowed it to move into the ring of conflict with the deftness of a prize fighter.

The larger Christian Church should take note.