Could God Still Use Prophets Today?

[White Knight]

[i]Malachi 3:6 "Surely I, the Lord, do not change, nor do you cease to be sons of Jacob."

John 1:1 "In the Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the word was God."

John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father's Only Son, full of grace and truth."

John 10:30 "I and My Father are One."

Hebrews 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."[/i]

The scripture I just quoted up there gives us biblical proof whom Jesus Christ our Lord was and is, He is God, and God is un changing so it says in the Sola Scripture.

Now that God has given us the man both covenants old and new, both work together to reveal to the world God's Will for the people of this world.

I'm also aware of the fact that Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture go hand and hand together, you have both the Spoken Word & Written Word of God. So my questions are.

1) Can God use Prophets today according to the Catholic Church and its Teachings?

2) Was Saint Paul & Saint John considered the two Last "Offical Biblical" Prophets?

3) Did the Numerous amounts of Saints through out the ages give visions and prophecies to the people of world in there day? (Bear with me on this one I still dont know alot about the Saints yet)

PS: I tried looking in the Catechism of the Catholic Church for information about this and I came up empty handed.


Thank You all, God Bless, Pax Christi, Have a Blessed Advent, and Merry Christmas.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

1. No, at least not in the way you mean. Any prophecy nowadays would be private revelation, which does not have to be believed by the faithful.

2. St. John the Baptist was the last prophet if you're talking about the line of prophets preceding Christ. If you mean more generally those who prophesy, then St. John the Evangelist was the last public prophet. After that they were all private.

[White Knight]

Okay thanks for clearing that up.

[KnightofChrist]

Ok, but what about The Apocalypse Of Saint John
Chapter 11:3-12.
[quote]
3 And I will give unto my two witnesses, and they shall [color="#FF0000"]prophesy[/color] a thousand two hundred sixty days, clothed in sackcloth. 4 These are the two olive trees, and the two candlesticks, that stand before the Lord of the earth. 5 And if any man will hurt them, fire shall come out of their mouths, and shall devour their enemies. And if any man will hurt them, in this manner must he be slain.

6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy: and they have power over waters to turn them into blood, and to strike the earth with all plagues as often as they will. 7 And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast, that ascendeth out of the abyss, shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. 8 And their bodies shall lie in the streets of the great city, which is called spiritually, Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord also was crucified. 9 And they of the tribes, and peoples, and tongues, and nations, shall see their bodies for three days and a half: and they shall not suffer their bodies to be laid in sepulchres. 10 And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry: and shall send gifts one to another, because [color="#FF0000"]these two prophets[/color] tormented them that dwelt upon the earth.

11 And after three days and a half, the spirit of life from God entered into them. And they stood upon their feet, and great fear fell upon them that saw them. 12 And they heard a great voice from heaven, saying to them: Come up hither. And they went up to heaven in a cloud: and their enemies saw them.[/quote]


Now of course using The Apocalypse is only good for people who believe its "real", for all times, past present and future.

Edited December 14, 2006 by KnightofChrist

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1142336' date='Dec 14 2006, 03:47 PM']
Ok, but what about The Apocalypse Of Saint John
Chapter 11:3-12.
Now of course using The Apocalypse is only good for people who believe its "real", for all times, past present and future.
[/quote]

What I was trying to say above was that when most people refer to "the prophets," they actually mean "the Old Testament prophets and St. John the Baptist." So if that is the understood definition, then we can say that the line of prophets ended with St. John the Baptist. However, if the definition you're using is more general, that is, referring to Biblical prophets in general, then the line of prophets ends with St. John the Evangelist. Moreover, if you're using it in the sense of anyone who prophesies at all, then those to whom things are privately revealed could also be called prophets (although the Church does not confirm private revelation as definitive). Finally, in the broadest sense, we are all prophets because we all share in Christ's ministry as Priest, Prophet, and King.

[toledo_jesus]

[quote]Could God Still Use Prophets Today?[/quote]

Sure He could. If He wanted to. Does He need to? Probably not, unless He wants to give us a heads up when something particularly bad is going to happen.

And even then, it never works! We generally have a 'mock and ignore' policy with prophets.

[Katholikos]

One of the definitions of a prophet is one who speaks for God. In that sense, we had two great prophets among us: Pope John Paul II the Great and Mother Teresa.

[White Knight]

I dunno what to say, because Pope John Paul the Great had some very powerful messages to say across his life. I dunno about Mother Teresa though, unfortunately dont know much about her.

[Lounge Daddy]

bump

[Guest JeffCR07]

as Raph explained above, it matters very much what is meant by "prophet."

If by "Prophet" you mean someone who preaches a new revelation of God that he or she claims is necessary to be believed for salvation, then no, no prophets can arise after Christ and his Apostles.

This is true because Christ, who is God, lacks nothing. Now if we agree that Christ became flesh for the salvation of man, then the existence of any prophets [i]after[/i] Christ preaching things that "must" be believed in order to be saved would mean that something was lacking in Christ's ministry here on earth. If Christ is God, and He Is, then it follows that his ministry on earth was perfect, and we find everything that is necessary for salvation in His Person. The Apostles, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, did not preach their own word, but rather, they preached Christ, who is God's Word.

All of this having been said, it is possible for us to understand the term "prophet" in a different (and more historically accurate) way. Originally, the word "prophet" simply meant someone who speaks for someone else. Thus, God tells Moses that he will become His prophet, and that [i]Aaron[/i] would be [i]Moses'[/i] prophet to the people. This is because Moses would speak (be prophet for) God and Aaron would speak (be prophet for) Moses.

Now, in this more traditional sense, then of course there are still prophets. Anyone who speaks the Word of God truly and gives testimony to Christ and the Church is a prophet.

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff

[SanctitasDeo]

[quote name='JeffCR07' post='1147373' date='Dec 22 2006, 11:00 AM']
This is true because Christ, who is God, lacks nothing. Now if we agree that Christ became flesh for the salvation of man, then the existence of any prophets [i]after[/i] Christ preaching things that "must" be believed in order to be saved would mean that something was lacking in Christ's ministry here on earth.[/quote]

This, of course, leaves out the possibility that things Christ taught were lost. Christ taught the full gospel, but that doesn't mean that the full gospel survived. And if parts of the gospel were lost, then a Prophet would be necessary to restore those parts.

After all, man could not do it by himself. He would need revelation.

[Akalyte]

Christ said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against his church, and that "he would always be with us" and "we would be led into all truth. If these are true. A restortation is not needed. It means. there may be sinners and hypocrites in the church but there will always be someone who is faithful enough to continue carrying on the teachings of Christ and his Apostles.


How is it that some teach that the Church he founded, fell right away and gave into paganism then? God does use prophets, they come in the office of the Papacy, as they have for the last 2000 years.

[Guest JeffCR07]

The sheer possibility of Christ's message being "lost" would itself constitute a lacking in the ministry of Christ. As the Word of God, it is within His power to ensure that His teaching could never be lost on the world. Given that it is within His power to do, not doing so would entail some kind of lack on his part, which is impossible.

It is for this reason (as Akalyte mentioned) that the gates of hell shall never prevail against his church, for he has ensured that it will not fall into error when he promised to send another advocate, the Spirit of Truth, which would be with us always.

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff

[SanctitasDeo]

[quote name='Akalyte' post='1147550' date='Dec 22 2006, 06:44 PM']
Christ said "the gates of hell shall not prevail against his church, and that "he would always be with us" and "we would be led into all truth. If these are true. A restortation is not needed. It means. there may be sinners and hypocrites in the church but there will always be someone who is faithful enough to continue carrying on the teachings of Christ and his Apostles.
[/quote]

In the verse "the gates of hell shall not prevail against his church," why does church have to mean the earthly church just founded. Jesus could very well have been referring to the entirety of his church (i.e. everyone who believed on his name and followed him), as he does in the Old Testament. The Church is a heavenly organization founded before the world (Ephesians 1:4 "He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world"). The earthly church may disappear and reappear, but the Church will always survive.

What does Christ mean by "the gates of hell?" In the Greek, the word is Hades, which. in early Christian and Jewish thought, referred to a place of waiting for the spirits of the dead remained until the resurrection. You might call it purgatory. It seems to me that Christ was not speaking of the immortality of his earthly church, but rather promising protection from death and sin.



[quote name='JeffCR07' post='1147587' date='Dec 22 2006, 08:42 PM']
The sheer possibility of Christ's message being "lost" would itself constitute a lacking in the ministry of Christ. As the Word of God, it is within His power to ensure that His teaching could never be lost on the world. Given that it is within His power to do, not doing so would entail some kind of lack on his part, which is impossible.
[/quote]

This is erroneous. It would not necessarily entail a lack of power, or any kind of lack. It would merely mean that the apostasy of his church was part of his plan. It is within His power to ensure that his teachings are never lost on the world, but that assumes that he wanted to keep them there. We have free agency, given to us by God. So did the early Christians. If enough of them chose to reject the truth, God would allow his earthly church to disappear.

[Guest JeffCR07]

[quote]This is erroneous. It would not necessarily entail a lack of power, or any kind of lack. It would merely mean that the apostasy of his church was part of his plan. It is within His power to ensure that his teachings are never lost on the world, but that assumes that he wanted to keep them there. We have free agency, given to us by God. So did the early Christians. If enough of them chose to reject the truth, God would allow his earthly church to disappear. [/quote]

There are numerous problems with this objection:

First, with regards to the assertion that Christ might have not wanted his teachings to remain on this earth, this is the same as saying that Christ wanted his teaching to be forgotten (at least for a time). Not only is such a thing practically absurd, but it is also logically impossible, since doing so would be to desire something evil, which God cannot do.

Second, the argument makes the false assumption that the Church is merely a human institution, and thus could fail. However, if we learn anything from the Acts of the Apostles, it is that the Holy Spirit is a primary and essential component of the Church, and the Holy Spirit, being the Spirit of Truth, could never abandon Christ. Thus, the Holy Spirit, which works throughout the Church, would never let the Church fall into apostacy, and for that reason Christ said "the gates of hell shall never prevail against it."

Third, you seem to assume that grace and free will are incompatible. This, however, is not correct. Grace perfects, rather than destroys, nature. As such, one who is filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit will be both utterly free and utterly incapable of sinning. Thus, even if (as in the time of the Arian Heresy) the vast majority of the Church fell into apostacy, the Holy Spirit would pour such grace upon some members of the Church that their free wills would be perfected and they would be unable to fall themselves, for "where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more."

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff