Prophethood

John H, the thread is more concerned with the particular articles written by mr Bacchiocchi than about his character.

Mark, I found several things interesting. The point that in NT times the criteria for bible authors was not prophethood but a documented link to the 12 apostles + Paul. The point that Paul advices to test and keep whats good when talking about the gift of prophecy in the churches he started. And also the testimony from the quoted letters showing the many casualities made by missuse of Ellens books.

Tom, what links are you making between our picture of God and how we view EWs work? Would you clarify that?

Regarding the NT criteria for inspiration, I've heard that the selection of NT books by the early church was, as you say, based on a direct link to the apostles. They must have also tested them based on harmony with OT scripture. But is Dr. B saying the prophetic gift was not also an essential ingredient?

The authority of scripture derives from the same source as the authority structure in the church; that is, spiritual gifts. The first gift, apostleship, is the foundation of authority for both then and now. It always has been that way from the time God first manifested Himself to the ancient church in the days of Moses. The New Jerusalem is build on the 12 foundations of the apostles with the chief cornerstone being Jesus Christ, because the gift of apostleship is the basis for and backbone of the rest of the structure of the Holy City.

The gift of prophecy is secondary to apostleship. The passages in scripture on the gifts underscore the point that the 'lesser' gifts are like the lesser members of the body - the more humble they are, the more we treat them with honour. But the fact remains that the head still is the head, Christ, and has its role in managing the functions of the body, and the eyes are still the eyes, the prophets, and they still have their role. But apostleship is the most fundamental of the gifts and includes the prophetic gift. It would be good to spend some time reviewing the basis for authority in the church and in scripture because many people don’t seem to realize that the divine structure and authority of both derive directly from the Holy Spirit through spiritual gifts.

Which brings me back to the SOP. Ellen White was much more than a prophet: I have no doubt she was an apostle.

The Protestant reformers rejected the claim of the papacy to apostolic succession and all agreed that scripture was the true basis for authority in the church. But there is, in fact, an element of truth in Catholicism’s doctrine of apostolic succession; that is, that the primary ground of authority in scripture and church derive from the Holy Spirit in the form of the apostolic gift. So while the reformers were correct that a single word or verse of scripture is worth more that an ocean of ink from an uninspired source, the basis of the authority of scripture itself is rooted in its inspiration which in turn is based on the two foundational gifts of the Holy Spirit, apostleship and prophecy, with apostleship being pre-eminent.

1888 is a more recent example of what can happen when the church is confused on the issue of inspiration and authority and how both derive from the Holy Spirit in the form of spiritual gifts. I suggest that the main dynamic at work in 1888 was that the leading men of the church had unwittingly adopted a worldly view of the structure and ground of authority in the church. They thought that since they were God’s appointed leaders of the church, as church administrators, under Christ, they were the head that directed the body. While it is true many or all of them had the gifts of administration and ministry, those gifts are secondary to apostleship and prophecy. Rather than bracing themselves against the message as the defenders of the faith, they should have taken a more humble approach and said to themselves, ‘Look, we are not apostles or prophets, but there is one person here who we know has at least one of those gifts. She endorses what they say. Perhaps the prophetic spirit in her has been given in some measure to Jones and Waggoner. This is what she seems to say. Let’s come to this with open minds and be willing to be taught and let’s test their doctrine carefully and prayerfully against scripture.’ In other words, if they had studied and understood the authority of spiritual gifts in the church, they would have had a more humble view of their own endowments and it would have prevented those in leading positions from attributing undue authority to their positions in leadership.

John, did you read the articles or did you dismiss them when you saw it was Mr Bacchiocchi who was the author?

I'm sorry my replies weren't more direct Thomas. Regarding Dr. B's suggestion that prophethood was not a criteria for selecting the books of the NT, if that is what he said, what I meant to answer was that whatever criteria was used, God had a hand in ensuring that only inspired writings were allowed into the canon, and if inspired, then given though the prophetic gift. John, Paul and Peter would be among the prophets. Matthew, Mark, James and Jude, as apostles also had the prophetic gift. Is Luke counted among the prophets? Maybe not, but I think it's safe to say his writing was prophetically inspired. An inspired writing is always, in my view, prophetically inspired and I think this agrees with the scripture.

But what do you think of my comments about the role of gifts as foundational to the authority of scripture and the church? Today we seem tied to the view that crippled the church in 1888 which is to improperly place the gifts of ministry and administration above prophecy and apostleship. So long as the SOP and scripture is allowed to be overruled by policy created by men and committees, in many cases gifted administrators, but uninspired in their counsels, the church will take the wrong course of action. The Protestant Reformation came about when for the first time in many centuries the prophetic word was placed above the counsels of fallible men. Isn’t it time we sought the same source of rejuvenating life and nourished fellowships that have the same high regard for the prophetic word that was taught by the reformers.

Mark

I agree with you that all scripture is inspired, wether it be by prophecy or apostleship. If luke and Mark where prophets, we dont know but what we are told that Luke was thaught by Paul and Mark by Peter so their right of authorship is by these two men who each was called in person by Jesus.

The proper order of the gifts mentioned? Seems apostleship is always mentioned first in when counted. I spoke with a man who is in the serbian orthodox church who told me that the orthodox churches are lead by a council of elders who make the decisions after meeting and praying much. It seemed like a biblical thing to do.

What I, and probably the protestant reformers, would question in what you wrote is mentioning SOP (in the adventist definition of the word I assume) in a thought you say is built upon the reformation ideals. Maybe I am missinformed, but, whatever divine leading either of the reformers knew they had they are still known for preaching sola scriptua(siq?). SOP (with the adventist definition) in my view does not fit within the concept of scripture alone.

/Thomas

(edited for more proper words)

I have to concede one other point to you Thomas. There are many Christians, non-Adventists, who have well-ordered lives. They appear to be getting along fine without her. But if they only adopted her health emphasis they would, on average, add some years to their lives and better quality in terms of health. If they adopted the whole package and put the testimonies into practise as well, I believe the benefits would be exponential.

EGW referred to herself as the lesser light in reference to her writings, leading to the greater light in reference to the Bible.

Mark
You wrote that the reason Ellens writings are important are becourse we are too unfamiliar with the bible itself. There is probably much truth in many of us being all too unfamiliar with the bible, however, do you think people who are neglecting their bibles are thorough students of Ellens books? And if a person is a careful student of Ellen while being an negligent student of the bible, dont you see a problem with that? Surely Ellen didnt intend her writings to be a substitute for poor bible reading habbits?
And if we then consider Ellens writings as the bible, dont we then come into the situation where God would be reasoning something like "they dont study the testament of my dealings with israel nor do they study what my Son Jesus thaught as they should, I must send them a third testament and maybe they will read that." Is this really where you want to go?

/Thomas

It's true. I've met Adventists who read the SOP and neglect the Bible. That's a problem with some. Usually though, those who study her carefully also study the Bible carefully and compare the two. Those who are not careful students in general use her writings as a short cut and are not careful with them.

It's true too that in past generations they only had parts of the Bible. That supports the idea that the truth is progressive and we need to keep in step with it.

Not everyone overrules the prophets Tom: "The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets". And not only are the prophets subject to the prophets, those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus which is the prophetic spirit are in harmony with the prophets. I know what you are getting at by way of exaggeration though.

What I'm saying is that everybody thinks they are interpreting Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy correctly, and not putting their own thoughts above either. Nobody recognizes their own deficiencies in this matter, but are very quick to recognize the deficiencies of others.