Its Recognition in the Early Christian Church by J. O. Corliss

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jul 27, 1911

Its Recognition in the Early Christian Church

By J. O. Corliss

Tracings of the Prophetic Gift — No. 12

Its Recognition in the Early Christian Church

J. O. CORLISS

By rejecting the prophetic testimonies sent from heaven, the Jewish nation sacrificed their claim to national covenant blessings, which depended upon their full obedience to the “voice” of God. Ex. 19:5. Separating themselves, as they did, from their inspired monitors, they thus severed the tie by which they had been united to heaven as a “peculiar treasure.” This connection parted, the entire nation was left to drift helplessly away from all its former divine moorings, and into the darkness of atheistic despair.

But this in no way restrained the extension of God’s infinite mercy. He had heard the plaintive cry of those who still sighed and cried for the manifestation of Jehovah’s guiding hand in Israel; and as the time drew near for the revelation of himself through his only begotten Son, he again made known what he was about to do through the prophetic gift. “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness” was heard proclaiming, “Prepare ye the way of the Lord” (Isa. 40:3; Matt. 3:1-3); and all Judea and Jerusalem were startled into attention at the cry.

This reappearance of the prophetic gift, through which to introduce the Son of God and his work of salvation for the race, is strong evidence that the old-time method of leading men in the counsel of God had not been abandoned. On the other hand, an old prophecy had foretold that in the Messianic age the gifts of the Spirit would be more widespread than before. Joel 2:28. In fact, through its varied manifestations the church was to be entirely controlled. 1 Cor. 12:7-12, 27, 28. One can not fail to notice that each of these gifts is from the same Spirit, and those persons bearing them are especially chosen of God for their work. Through these specially chosen individuals, the Spirit of God spoke to the church relative to that part of the work in which they were called to lead.

It seems clear that in coming to earth as the “Word” of God,—that is, having God within, speaking through him to sin-darkened minds, in order to reconcile them to God (2 Cor. 5:19),—Christ thus became anew the head, or director, of the church. Eph. 4:15. As God was in Christ speaking to men, it is evident that whoever stands in the place of Christ to men must also have the indwelling of God, in order properly to be the word of God to men. This condition was fully set forth by the Saviour himself when he said: “Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me . . . unto the uttermost part of the earth.” Acts 1:8.

True to this rule of proceeding, we find the prophetic gift of the Spirit in the first organized church, that of Jerusalem. Acts 11:27; 15:32. In the church at Antioch there were both prophets and teachers. Acts 13:1. Just why the record was made so specific as to state that the Antioch church had both prophets and teachers, is revealed in the next verse. It is there stated that while these waited on the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit—the indwelling representative of Christ—instructed the disciples to ordain Barnabas and Saul to the ministry. Then comes the significant expression, “They, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia.” Not only was it necessary for a direct message from God to send these men “forth;” but the place where they ought to go was clearly indicated.

In this way God evidently designed to lead his church and people from the first. Not only was the church to have teachers, but it was also to have prophets to direct the teachers and others in their church work. It has been generally known that this method was acted upon to a greater or less degree until near the close of the second century, or until Montanism bore sway in the councils of the church. Montanus, an ascetic of Phrygia, became prominent in the church during the last half of this century through his claim to a prophetic calling, in which he and two others had frenzied contortions, under which they claimed that God, and sometimes Christ, spoke through them. These manifestations divided the councils of the church, and opened the way for the great apostasy, reference to which must be reserved for future study.

On account of the Bible revealing little beyond the establishment of the Spirit-gifts in the Christian church, little was known of their later actual working until the discovery by Bryennios of an ancient Christian work which is called διδαχὴ τῶν δώδεκα ἀποστόλων, or “Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles.” By this disclosure, knowledge of the importance of the prophetic gift in the early church has been greatly extended.

From this writing we learn that prophets and prophetesses were regarded as an essential element in the church. Until the middle of the second century these inspired persons were regular preachers of the churches, without confinement to any particular congregation. The “apostles” of that time acted as missionaries in the “regions beyond,” while the prophets themselves were at liberty to settle with any church, or travel from one to another.

As to the nature of their prophetic utterances, these might embrace anything necessary to the edification of the church. Consequently they not only recited the dealings of God with them, and gave public thanks for the same, but they pointed out future events, and instructed the church how to relate itself to them. These special directions sometimes extended to the most minute details, even to the disposal of church funds.

The prophets being regarded as a gift of God, and moved by the Holy Spirit, no congregation had any right of control over them. When one was duly approved as a prophet, and exhibited the “conversation of the Lord,” no one was then to be permitted to criticize him. The author of the “Doctrines” cited asserts that whoever dared do this, was guilty of “the sin against the Holy Ghost.”

This unique position of the prophets, despite the prohibitions by which they were surrounded, laid them open to several dangers. Jealousy on the part of church officials caused them to manifest suspicion and envy of the activity and earnestness of the prophetic messengers. Added to this was the advent of pseudoprophets, who were animated by a worldly spirit, which tended to neutralize the virtuous instruction of the true message from God. Another party, styled “Alogi,” or unreasonables, arose, and these rejected all Christian prophecy.

These conditions became more and more complicated as time went on, until a rigid set of rules was introduced, by which to distinguish between true and false prophets. It was declared to be devilish for a prophet to speak in ecstasy. To accept a gift was evidence of being a false prophet. Such restrictions, to be applied by the people themselves, struck a fatal blow at all prophecy. The theory was soon advanced that prophecy in general was a peculiarity of the Old Testament, and that under the new covenant God spoke only through apostles. It was further alleged that all the Scripture necessary to salvation is contained in the New Testament, and consequently the church needed no new revelations, nor even instruction through prophets.

This revolution soon transformed the church into a legal and political organization. An episcopal constitution was adopted, which placed the government of the church under bishops, and these created a “clerical order,” which entirely ignored the prophetic gift. For a time, here and there, were found isolated ones who professed to maintain the prophetic gift; but as a vocation, this class of religionists was relegated to the past, as a superfluity.

This was but a repetition of history. As the Jews, by rejecting the prophetic gift, had been left to every species of satanic deception, so the Christian church, by the same mistake, opened the way for the introduction of the highest system of deceit that the world has ever known. But the consideration of this point must await the introduction of a following paper.