Southern Baptist In NC

October 15, 2007

What is a Prophet?

When posting my last article concerning the Homemaking Degree at SWBTS, I got side-tracked by a comment concerning the definition of a prophet of God. Brother Les Puryear began this rabbit chase with the following statement:

Please tell me that your last paragraph does not mean that Paige Patterson is always right and those who don’t think so don’t believe the Bible. Please correct my misunderstanding about what you are saying. Please!

Les

His reference was to a comment that I made as a concluding statement concerning Dr. Patterson’s leading in establishing this degree. My concluding remark is as follows:

Well, all I can say is that Dr. Paige Patterson is a true prophet according to Scripture. Therefore, if you have any gripes about Dr. Patterson not being a true prophet and you say you believe the Bible, then take it up with God. But if you do not believe that Dr. Patterson is a true prophet, then you have just told the world that you believe the Bible, but…..

The concern that Brother Les raised was not that much of a concern for me due to the past differences that he and I have had. I knew that Brother Les and I have had, and maintain, ongoing differences concerning different doctrines and personalities within SBC life. However, what caused me more concern and is the real reason for this article, comes more with the comments from others.

First, I will admit that if you take that comment out of the context of the article you have a basis for the questions from Brother Les. I must admit that I do not understand the basis but it is possible for one to read what they would like into that last paragraph. However, you must look at the entire article along with the concluding statement.

Second, there was a statement made by my, always lurking while looking for a weakness to pounce, Brother Aaron Weaver (aka Big Daddy Weave; B Diddy). He stated;

Like Les said, as it stands the paragraph does indeed suggest that The Prophet Paige, Peace Be Upon Him, is always right and those who dare dissent just need to read their Bible’s again.

Once again, if that statement were made by itself, I would understand such a response, but the statement is in context of the Homemaking degree being on the cutting edge of education. Even, my Brother BDW gives me the benefit of the doubt.

Having said all of this let us look at a Biblical understanding of the Prophets. Is there a basic understanding that a Prophet was always right in everything he/she did or said? The answer to that would be a resounding no! There has never been any instance in the Old or New Testament that a Prophet was 100% correct in everything he/she did or said. One cannot find Scripture to support that line of thinking without doing hermeneutic gymnastics. What one can find Scripture to support is the Prophet’s voice of direction, when ordained by the True God, will come to fruition. If the Prophet spoke and said it was of God and did not come to fruition, then it was revealed to be a false prophecy. If the person continually gave false direction that he/she said came from God, then they were revealed as a false Prophet.

Also, one needs to remember that during Old Testament and New Testament times, the cannon was not closed. Thus, God was continuing to give new revelation. How did He give this new revelation? Through the Prophets. This is the reason for the Deuteronomy 18 and 1 John 4 guidelines concerning the discernment between true and false revelation. The question at hand concerns the overview of these passages. Do these passages mean that everything a prophet says is scripture? Or, do they mean that the only time a prophet speaks saying it is coming from God, then it is scriptural? I submit to you it means the latter. Do these passages mean that since the cannon is closed then we no longer have the gift of prophecy today? Leaving the continuationist and cessassionist arguments aside, suffice it to say that it is rare that a cessassionist has to argue for the continuation of a gift against some that have professed to be continuationist. But, suffice it also to say, that while I do believe the office of Prophet is no longer needed, the principle of the Prophet is still very much needed.

However, some have tried to paint me as saying in my last article that Dr. Patterson is above criticism and is infallible. Something I have never said. The Prophets of Scripture were mere mortal men and women that were fallible and prone to the same temptations as you and I. Being referenced as a prophet did not mean that you attained any mystical status with no sin in your life. As I read the Bible I am drawn to the fact that the reason these prophets were not considered prophets in their day was for the reason they were not in any mystical sense different. Many viewed the pagan prophets in mystical sense and thus the children of Israel had to be given the guidelines before they went into the Promised Land. You can look throughout scripture to find many Prophets of God that had huge failures. Jonah is one that comes to mind. Also, if I needed advice on how to raise children Eli would not be a Prophet I would choose for that kind of council. Furthermore, I do not believe you will find in the Bible any place that Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hosea, Malachi, or any other prophet was without sin and did in fact sin and make various mistakes. But when God spoke through the Prophet, or the Prophet spoke for God, whichever semantic you chose to use, it was proven to be truthful.

Therefore, in my last post I do not intend to change anything that was written. For the simple reason that I have not expressed what some are trying to say that I have expressed. As I said, if you desire to pull that last paragraph away from the post and try to make it stand alone, be my guest. That is not what I am saying. However, if you keep the paragraph attached to the post, then you have to admit that Dr. Patterson has stated he believes God has led in beginning this course because there is a huge need for it in the society from which we are getting our students. Now the secular world has affirmed this truth so Dr. Patterson, no doubt, is hearing from God concerning the need. When the secular world addresses a need that is rampant among today’s society, they are lauded as being on the cutting edge. When the Christian world tries to address the same need that is rampant in the Christian community, the ones leading the way are maligned as backwards and stuck in the 1950’s. Go figure!

Dr. Paige Patterson has proven to be a Prophet addressing a need in a non-profit world. What a refreshing wind that is blowing out of SWBTS. Dr. Patterson is speaking prophetically the direction that he senses the Holy Spirit of God is leading him and not responding to the negative issues that come out trying to derail his vision.

19 Comments

  1. Tim,

    It’s a sad state of affairs when the wool is pulled over the eyes of God’s People. The Only, and I repeat Only reason Dr Patterson started this Homemaking Degree is to justify having his wife Dr Dorothy Paterson on Staff and the Pending Lawsuit.

    In His Name

    Comment by Wayne Smith — October 15, 2007 @ 1;51 pm

  2. Brother Wayne,

    I am so glad that you have such insight as to be able to see inside Dr. Patterson’s mind. Maybe you should start your own TV show. Better yet, why don’t you tell me the numbers one needs to pick in order to hit the lottery?

    :>)

    How absurd your statements are!

    Blessings,
    Tim

    Comment by Tim Rogers — October 15, 2007 @ 2;08 pm

  3. I wouldn’t argue with the premise of the blog posts, any more than I’d have argued about Jonah being a prophet when he rebelled against God’s instructions. If I’d been around at the time, I might have commented unfavorably about him on my blog, but he was still a prophet when he showed up at Nineveh and laid the message on them.

    And I don’t think I’m in a position to determine prophetness, anyway.

    Comment by Bob Cleveland — October 15, 2007 @ 2;48 pm

  4. Brother Bob,

    That is my point. No place have I found in Scripture that the Bible indicates a Prophet speaks truth or lives truth 24/7. However, that is what was advocated in my last post. I merely was saying that on the Homemaking Degree, Dr. Patterson was a modern day Prophet of God. He said he believed God was leading to begin that degree program and it was something that was very much needed. This leading was affirmed when I found a public high school advocating the same courses that SWBTS has taken so much heat over.

    Blessings,
    Tim

    Comment by Tim Rogers — October 15, 2007 @ 3;12 pm

  5. My dear brother Tim,

    I believe the issue I was addressing was what is the TEST of a prophet, based upon the scripture reference you used.

    Blessings to you and your family.

    Les

    Comment by Les Puryear — October 15, 2007 @ 6;06 pm

  6. Brother Les,

    What is the difference?

    Blessings,
    Tim

    Comment by Tim Rogers — October 15, 2007 @ 7;56 pm

  7. Brother Tim,

    You don’t know what the difference is between someone claiming to be a prophet and the biblical test of a prophet? Read my latest post. Maybe that will explain my position more completely. If not, I’m sure you’ll let me know. :)

    Les

    Comment by Les Puryear — October 15, 2007 @ 9;04 pm

  8. I prophesy that not one person is speaking prophetically in this comment thread. I futhermore prophesy that not one person speaking on this comment thread is speaking one word of prophetic utterance. Not one of the commenters is a prophet or the son of a prophet, but, I might add…..all of their wives shop at PROFFITTS DEPARTMENT STORES.

    Therefore, I prophesy that all of the men speaking on this comment thread has less money than he had before their wives went shopping.

    That makes me the only prophet among all these non-prophets that are not prophets not the sons of prophets.

    cb

    Comment by cb scott — October 15, 2007 @ 9;39 pm

  9. Tim,

    I don’t really know if I want to opine or not, given the sudden rise in emotions on your blog over the past several days. The comments I made to you were not so much to pile on as they were to offer a voice of reason (as limited as it may be) and try to give an opportunity to moderate some of the comments that seem to have our brothers up in arms. The point is not to argue so much that Patterson is a prophet, but more that it’s just troubling that he seems to be such a lightning rod for our convention. Is he a prophet? Perhaps, but maybe not. Is someone of his stature and influence good for the SBC? Perhaps, but maybe not. I don’t know his heart. Maybe he really does mean well but has a way of stepping into situations that prove divisive. I’ve just always had difficulty with the way he’s always in the headlines and it seems to always cause division among the body of Christ. Sometimes, this is a good thing, and you’ll get no argument from me that there were, and still are, lots ways our convention needs to be pulled back toward the Bible, whether it’s from liberal theology or just simply complaicency. I guess this just reveals some of my bias against the superstar personalities. I’d just rather see us move away from a focus on the people of God and more toward a focus on God Himself. It just causes me to wonder if some of these like Patterson have some kind of martyrdom complex (that’s probably not a good way to describe it, but…)–it seems like the more controversy they’re in the middle of and the more trouble that seems to follow them , the more they feel fulfilled in life.

    Comment by Dave — October 16, 2007 @ 12;13 am

  10. Brother Les,

    I have commented over at your place where you have changed your position. Your original position (10/11/07 at 21:32:15) was that a prophet is “never wrong”. Here is the link to the original post. Now over at your house you have changed your position from a prophet is never wrong to “when speaking When a purported prophet speaks in the name of the LORD (maintains that God is speaking through him)”. Quite a big difference between the two positions.

    Brother CB,

    Keep raggin and I will keep giving you something to rag me about.
    :>)

    Brother Dave,

    Please, Please, Please, never be afraid to opine until you heart’s content. I am a big boy and have been wrong before. When I am wrong I have been known to go back and admit such an event.

    I honestly took your comments as how you tried to present them. I never took them any differently and if I came across that I did, please forgive me as it was not my intent. As to your assessment of Dr. Patterson. I will agree that he is a lightening rod for our convention. But, let me ask. Why do you believe he is such a lightening rod? You also state Dr. Patterson “has a way of stepping into situations that prove divisive”. I do not believe you mean that the way it sounds. But just to be sure, let me ask. Are you saying that he should test the waters before stepping into them if they seem to be divisive? IOW, should he not do something if it is proven it will be divisive? You also go on to say that his headlines have always seemed to bother you. I have never seen him do anything just for the headlines. It has also been proven that the headlines he, along with SWBTS, are getting now days are a result of others calling the news media spreading gossip and innuendo. You end your concerns with, what seems to be, an endorsement of his work that has been effective in bring us back to the Bible.

    Let me end this comment by making a statement and asking you some questions. While, I will be the first to tell you that Dr. Patterson is not perfect, I will also be the first to say that he has been painted as something he is not. Is he arrogant? Yes! Aren’t we all at times. Does he come across as a typical Texan? Certainly! Most Texans do. I have never seen a Texan that believes there is an existence outside of Texas. Shut, they do not even like crossing the Red River. Has he been gracious in all of his dealing with others? Probably not! I believe that you and I can look back on times that we have been less than gracious in our dealings. As we look back on our journey, do you think there are some in our past that would love to come after us if given the chance? If you were to be advanced by God to the position that Dr. Patterson has been advanced, do you think that there would be some that would try to make life miserable for you in that position? There are some that do not even know him that have made accusations about him, out of nothing but jealousy.

    Brother Dave, while I am not about to say let’s just give Dr. Patterson a free pass, neither am I about to say that it is time to forgo everything that he accomplished because the heat has been turned up on him. Neither am I about to say that just because he is a lightening rod it is time to replace him with someone that is not. (I am not advocating that is what you are saying either) I just believe that Dr. Patterson, as anyone else that is fallible, should get better treatment. Brother, I expect to get cussed at and spit on by the godless people that hate everything the church stands for. But I do not expect it from those within the church that calls me Brother. I just believe that is where Dr. Patterson finds himself and my heart aches for him every time another rock is slung his way. ( I am not saying that is what you are doing. That last statement is a reference of generality.)

    Blessings,
    Tim

    Comment by Tim Rogers — October 16, 2007 @ 3;56 am

  11. cb,

    i want to add to your prophesy that not one of them makes any profits off of thier prophecies at proffitts. or, something like that.

    tim,

    i believe that you meant to say, “shoot!” rather than “shut!” :)

    dave,

    i like tim believe that dr. patterson is as fallible as the next man, and i’m sure that he’s made plenty of mistakes in his life. i have too. too many. what about you?

    also, there’s a crowd out there who is just “after” him as the leader of the cr and because of his conservative stand on the bible. they’re also after dr. roberts at mbts, and they’re after dr. al mohler because they dont line up with the pope of oklahoma and his bishop’s confession of faith and practice. richard land also seems to be in thier sights as well. we all know this. it’s a deliberate attempt at a smear and destroy campaign, and it’s sad. this is what tim and many others of us are attempting to fight. we dont like to see things like this done to good men(not perfect…make mistakes….flesh and blood) who love the Lord and have a deep respect for the Word. especially when they have an ecumenical, liberal, egalatarian, drinking alcohol belief system.

    david

    Comment by volfan007 — October 16, 2007 @ 9;13 am

  12. Volfan,

    Allow me to address your comments first-I have never claimed to have made no mistakes, and have thus far reserved judgment on any of these matters. But here’s the thing–I am not talking about divisions between believers and unbelievers. We can debate the motives of the “smear and destroy” crowd ’till the cows come home, and won’t have convinced a single one of them of the error of their ways. You know what…it’s just not worth it. I was tempted to respond back in kind, but that’s just not my style. But at some point the smearing and name-calling and accusations need to stop. Those of us on the conservative side of the nickel have at times resorted to the same tactics as those who are not. And here two of us who I am sure agree on just about all points theological stand divided over Patterson.

    Guys, this is the point I’ve been trying to make. The discussion has become about the personality and not about the Person of Jesus Christ. By saying that he has been a lightning rod for our convention, I simply mean that he tends to attract the kind of attention that draws the focus away from Christ and onto himself. Listen, I’m all for standing up for what is right. We do the cause of Christ a great disservice when we don’t do what we know to be the right thing to do. And maybe there’s just no good solution. I just wish we could spend more time telling others about Jesus than defending each other against attacks from within.

    Tim, Thanks for your assumption that I do not mean that he should test the waters before jumping in. That is in no way what I mean. And yes, if a situation is unacceptable, something should be done. And I do believe he has done a great work for Southern Baptists. But I also believe he has brought some of the attacks on himself. Even the prophets of God choose to lay low once in a while :) . My thing is, I’m just not eager to jump to anyone’s defense who always seems surrounded by controversy. Maybe people are out to get him. Maybe he is a victim of standing up for all the right things while making enemies for the right reasons. But there comes a point when we need to ask and try to discern for ourselves, is he being controversial for the sake of controversy or is this really how God would have us represent Him in the world? Well, this has taken up too much of my time already, so with that…I’m done.

    Comment by Dave — October 16, 2007 @ 11;06 am

  13. tim,

    that last sentence of mine should have ….”after them” in it. that crowd is after the men that i mentioned in my comment.

    dave,

    the point is….who is really being divisive here? tim rogers, dr. patterson, or the “i’m gonna get dr. patterson” crowd? and dave, that crowd believes that they are christians….believers. you made the comment….”But here’s the thing–I am not talking about divisions between believers and unbelievers. We can debate the motives of the “smear and destroy” crowd ’till the cows come home, and won’t have convinced a single one of them of the error of their ways. ” this crowd that tim and many others are engaging would tell you that they are believers….that they are christians. so, who is being divisive?

    david

    Comment by volfan007 — October 16, 2007 @ 1;47 pm

  14. Perhaps you missed the last two words of my post…I’m done

    Comment by Dave — October 16, 2007 @ 2;27 pm

  15. Tim: I would like to ask why you wrote the last sentence of your last post and if you really believe this. I have a definition of a prophet as I see the Bible defining it, but I would like to clarify what I read in the last sentence of your last post.

    Comment by Debbie Kaufman — October 16, 2007 @ 7;47 pm

  16. Sister Debbie,

    Welcome back to Southern Baptists in NC.

    The last sentence of which I believe you speak; “But if you do not believe that Dr. Patterson is a true prophet, then you have just told the world that you believe the Bible, but…..” has to
    remain in context of the original thought. As I have just copied it above, it is now out of context. You may now make that sentence say anything you would like for it to say. That is not how this statement can be used.

    In the context of the article I am referencing, it refers to Dr. Patterson’s his understanding of God’s leading in establishing the Homemaking degree. I point out how the secular world reports on the same need as Dr. Patterson and how this is an affirmation that God was leading Dr. Patterson, as Dr. Patterson has said. While the secular world re-names the courses, they are the basics to the courses that SWBTS has implemented. It seems that some have tried to malign Dr. Patterson as feathering his own nest and how he opened this degree out of selfish motives. I merely am stating that if you do not believe Dr. Patterson was following God’s leading in this particular instance then you are telling the world that you believe the Bible but you place caveats on our belief of the Scripture when it concerns those you do not agree.

    This degree has been affirmed as a need by the public school system. A need that Dr. Patterson has stated God has led him to try and meet in the lives of students that God has called into ministry. So, who do you think is following God’s leading? Dr. Patterson, or those who are sniping at his leadership in developing this degree?

    Blessings,
    Tim

    Comment by Tim Rogers — October 17, 2007 @ 5;40 am

  17. I was wrong once. It was a time when I THOUGHT I was wrong, but I was really RIGHT.

    :)

    Comment by Bob Cleveland — October 17, 2007 @ 10;34 am

  18. Tim: Thank you for clarifying Tim, but I still disagree. One has nothing to do with the other. I would concede that if Dr. Patterson has prayed about this, read scripture and feels strongly that God is leading him to do this, I would not be able to argue with that, but if I were, I would still believe scripture is infallible, full of truth and the final authority. One has nothing to do with the other. Convictions are different than Biblical commands. It’s not scripture I am rejecting but Dr. Patterson’s interpretation I am disagreeing with(or rejecting if you prefer), but that is like saying, I said so and if you don’t agree you reject scripture which is also rejecting God. That’s going way too far off the theological map Tim.

    Comment by Debbie Kaufman — October 17, 2007 @ 11;54 am

  19. 1. I think we need to write it into every institutional documents that those who have the gift of prophecy be disallowed from participating in baptist life. Tongues, Prophecy, Alcohol…the perfect trifecta. Patterson could then take ranks with Jesus and Paul who wouldn’t be allowed to serve as a missionary in the SBC.

    2. Equating creating a “homemaking” degree as being prophecy is ludicrous. Buy women who want to do this a subscription to Directv and let them watch Matha Stewart, Emeril, and HGTV. That would teach them the same things.

    3. Paterson has taken compelemenarian to new hights. Complementarian is the new left. Patterson ascribes to Male domination.

    Comment by Mike Little — March 28, 2008 @ 9;02 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Blog at WordPress.com.