Preacher Vrs Prophet

I have been thinking about this question for some time and have wondered what is the answer. What is the difference between a preacher and a prophet? As far as I know, a preacher preaches the Word of God. A prophet is a messenger who speaks the Word of God. Are they not one and the same? Some might say, "Well a prophet predicts future events." However, that is not true. A prophet merely speaks what the Lord tells them. They are a messenger. Sometimes, this may include future events. However, the prophet is not making predictions. The prophet is merely speaking the message as delivered by God. Likewise, a preacher should also be merely speaking the message as delivered by the Holy Spirit. Also, something else that I was thinking about: In Old Testament times, God sent prophets to speak to the people. However, in New Testament times, God has sent His Holy Spirit into all His people. And so, why would God need to send any prophets? Is His Holy Spirit not sufficient? Just some thoughts. I don't know the answer and I am curious to hear what you all think.Thanks,Blake

I agree with krispy on his assertion that most of what passes today *edit* as prophecy is probably not kosher. (although 90% is a little high ;) personally I have always understood a preaher to be one who procalimed the good news. one who shared the Gospel. i think as a whole that the church of the west has lost sight of what a "preacher" really is due to the fact that most associate it with a pulpit type ministry. Prophets, this is just my take on it, are those that recieve insight to the scriptures from the Holy Spirit to see the prophetic implications and how to apply them today (e.g. Wilkerson) I do belive (cautiously) in the decleration of coming events through the proper operation of the GIFT of prophcey. But i tended to muddle up my thinking when i say this because if gift comes upon someone to speak a prophetic word does that make them a prophet? Or simply an instrument. I can play Bass, but that doesn't make me a bassist. sorry if i just heaped more confusion or opened more questions.

Thank you all for the input. Based on what has been said, I gather this: A preacher preaches in accord with thier own understanding. Thier words are not directly from God, but are inspired by God through the wisdom He has delivered. A prophet speaks the exact words of the Lord as given.Thanks,Blake

Blake,A preacher preaches in accord with thier own understanding. Thier words are not directly from God, but are inspired by God through the wisdom He has delivered.I would fully agree with your description as it seems to be what is in accord with Scripture.Thus a preacher will have spent much time in study searching out the Scriptures, and will teach what he has learned in doing so. A prophet is not one who prepares his message beforehand, and does not speak as a result of simply having studied something out. A prophet speaks what "thus says" the Lord. He's speaking exactly what God wants to say right then and there. As God said of the prophetic ministry in Deuteronomy 18, that He would put His words in the prophet's mouth, and the prophet would in turn speak whatever it is God commanded Him to speak, word for word. If we were to falsely elevate all "preaching" as being equivalent to "prophecy," as many people do, then we would have to declare many many men as false prophets, as many preachers mistakenly say things all the time from the pulpit that are not in accord with Scripture. In my opinion, I believe many teachers/preachers from time to time speak prophetically in parts of their messages, though perhaps for many, without even always being aware of the fact. If it is any help to you, I believe the Lord has called me to be a teacher, preacher, and prophet. When I teach in the Church, or preach on a street corner, the Lord leads me to speak on certain ideas. While I generally know the topic I will preach on, and some of the Scriptures I will use, to a great degree, I end up picking what words I will say and how I will say them when I minister in those gifts. Thus, I spend much time in prayer in making sure I say the right things, and that it is sound doctrine, and that I speak it with the right attitude, one that reflects the heart of God. I sometimes seek advice from other teachers and preachers on how to minister on certain things, and various approaches I might take, and seek wisdom from them and God. However, the rare times I speak prophetically, I always know exactly what needs to be said. I am never found wanting for one word. Often it is in a public worship setting in the Church, and is entirely spontaneous. The only "thought" I might give anything is while I'm waiting patiently to speak in proper order (e.g. a break in the public worship), I meditate on what God is going to say, and search my own heart before I say it, and attempt to discern if it is truly the Spirit giving me these words before I stand to speak.

"A preacher makes a pulpit famous. A prophet makes a prison famous."Leonard RavenhillAs great as these sayings that Ravenhill and others have said regarding prophetic ministry and such, I believe we must be careful. Comments like this while striking and easily memorable, are full of romanticism, and aren't quite based in reality. Scripturally speaking, this comment is entirely indefensable.

Actually, Jeremiah found himself cast into prison several times for his ministry (Jer. 32:2; 37:15; 38:6), as well as Macaiah (1 Kings 22:27, read ch 22 for clarity). Also, Joseph could possibly be called a prophet, in that he spoke God's interpretation of each man's dreams (Gen. 40:5-23). There was also Hanani the seer who withstood King Asa and was thrown into prison.(2 Chron. 16:7-10)Therefore, Ravenhill's statement isn't totally defenseless, though not all prophets were cast into prison. Let us also remember what the writer of Hebrews says, "...others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment..." (Heb. 11:35,36)

As great as these sayings that Ravenhill and others have said regarding prophetic ministry and such, I believe we must be careful.I tend to agree. Off hand there is a kind of wit and bravuro in these quotable quotes but we can't take them too serious or we might conclude that Ravenhill held a little contempt for preachers.There are many preachers who are probably tempted to feel from time to time they are in a prison themselves, laboring prayerfully and faithfully over lifeless congregations without giving in to the thought of leaving for greener grass. I believe the Lord has called me to be a teacher, preacher, and prophet.This brings up a question. Is there such thing as a 100% prophet or preacher, or teacher? Doesn't the prophet study the written Word and even theology? Hasn't the teacher felt the Holy Spirit quicken the scholarly knowledge of scripture in order to prophesy? MC

Therefore, Ravenhill's statement isn't totally defenselessActually, Ravenhill's statement is entirely defenseless. He makes a false distinction between prophet and preacher, where one is simply persecuted, and the other is setup on a royal throne. Knowing Ravenhill's works pretty well, I suspect in his comment a hint of critique towards preachers who are afraid to speak the truth. However, as it contributes towards this discussion, it is an indefensable comment. However, Ravenhill has made other such comments about prophets that simply is nothing than sheer romanticism. Yes, many prophets were persecuted. However, some like Samuel were mostly widely accepted by the masses. In the NT, I don't see prophets like Agabaus getting tossed into prison. Seems preachers like Stephen saw a bit of trouble though.

Is there such thing as a 100% prophet or preacher, or teacher? Doesn't the prophet study the written Word and even theology? Hasn't the teacher felt the Holy Spirit quicken the scholarly knowledge of scripture in order to prophesy?There is often some overlap, and it can be hard to tell where one gift begins and the other ends. No doubt, such happens. All believers, prophets and preachers alike, are to study the Scriptures. This is what Samuel's so-called "School of the Prophets" probably did a lot of time doing. However, the main point I am getting at was in agreement with the other post, that other preaching/teaching gifts, while inspired, are more topical/idea oriented in nature, while the prophetic word is word from word a relation of what God is saying right now.

KrispyKrittr wrote:Whenever someone says "Thus says the Lord" I automatically am skeptical. KrispyYou know, its a funny thing, John was called a "prophet" and i cannot see a single time where he prefaced his messages with a "thus says the Lord". Nor did he do any "miricles". just a thought. I think some call John just a preacher, but the whole of his life was filled with prophetic implications.

First, I think an important distinction needs to be made between the office of a prophet and the gift of prophecy. The Spirit of God can choose to exercise the gift of prophecy in any of us at any given moment but that should not be confused with the calling, or office, of a prophet. Art Katz speaks to this very well in his book, The Spirit of Prophecy.Jeremiah 1:9-10 gives us a great definition of the prophetic call; "Then the LORD stretched out His hand and touched my mouth, and the LORD said to me, "Behold, I have put My words in your mouth. See, I have appointed you this day over the nations and over the kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant". The first thing mentioned in Jeremaih's call is that of judgment. It appears his first calling is to clearly identify what is false and to expose and destroy it. He sets down an alternative to the lies, a new view on reality, he restores lost vision.The second thing mentioned in Jeremiah's calling is for him to bring a message of resurrection and restoration. The same guy who tears down, brings comfort and healing.The prophet's message has an urgency and may often seem offensive to the hearers and I believe this urgency is what distinguishes the prophet from the teacher or pastor. I think it is typified in what Jesus said, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin, but now they have no excuse for their sin" (John 15:22).We have to ask, is this definition of the office of prophet still valid for New Testament times? I believe it is and just becuase we don't see this calling much in our time, doesn't mean we should search for a new definition.In Christ,Ron

I have to wonder, Ron, I understand that you do *edit and I agree* that the office of prophet is still valid today, and i do not want to debate that issue *edit*, however i have to ask; Is the gift of Prophecy still, in your opinion n operation and if so, then does it make the person prophecying a prophet? How do you make a distinction between a person who is labeled "prophet" and one who prophecies?

In my opinion, the "office of prophet" would have been made instantly invalid with the introduction of the Holy Spirit. Why would anyone need a prophet to speak truth, when truth would come directly from God through the heart by means of the Holy Spirit?This is not to say God doesn't speak to us through other people. However, even in those times it is still the Holy Spirit speaking through that person.Maybe I am wrong, but it just doesn't seem to make much sense that God would continue to call prophets to speak when He has the Holy Spirit. Another thought....You could say we are all called to be prophets, teachers, and preachers as we are all called to share the gospel through love. In the Old Testament, were not prophets men and women who were filled with God's Spirit? And did not Moses say...Numbers 11:29 - (NLT)But Moses replied, "Are you jealous for my sake? I wish that all the LORD's people were prophets, and that the LORD would put his Spirit upon them all!" By this, we could say, every person who is filled with the Holy Spirit is a prophet.Although, Paul would not agree with this statement, as he said the same thing in 1 Cor. 14:5. He also differentiated between different gifts and "offices" of positions. Even still, we all have the Holy Spirit and are lead by His direction. Are we not?Some thoughts,Blake

Is the gift of Prophecy still, in your opinion n operation and if so, then does it make the person prophecying a prophet? How do you make a distinction between a person who is labeled "prophet" and one who prophecies?I believe all the gifts of the Spirit are in operation today, but the exercise of a gift does not have to do with the calling of a person. I beleive the office can be distinguished from the gift in that it is permanent and abiding. The calling is inseperable from the man.In my opinion, the "office of prophet" would have been made instantly invalid with the introduction of the Holy Spirit.What are we to make of Agabus then?In Christ,Ron

In 1 Cor 14, the apostle Paul makes no distinction between a person with the gift of prophecy, and somebody who is an "office" prophet. To him, they are one in the same. Also, when King Saul prophesied, people didn't sit around and wait for him to do it 2 or 3+ more times before they officially declared him a "prophet." And what about the lonely prophet Obadiah, who made just one prophetic statement in his entire life (so as we have recorded). Though this is a commonly taught distinction, I believe it is entirely foreign to anything taught in Scripture. If anybody can actually show this as taught in Scripture, I'd love to see it. I've searched diligently, and heard much talk on it, yet with all the preaching on it I've never seen it demonstrated in Scripture.Also, for those who think sporadic manifestations vs. constantly flowing manifestations makes one differ in respect to the prophetic, such isn't quite Biblical either. While one might be highly active in their prophetic ministry, others might only get words from time to time. Different people have different measures of grace, that is all. Thus, some people prophesy more frequently than others. There is a lot of confusion out there on these subjects, with many people having many opinions and "revelations" in the matter. Therefore, I'd highly suggest:LET'S KEEP THINGS BIBLICAL.

What are we to make of Agabus then?It is a good question. I kind of see it like this. Right after Christ left and the Holy Spirit was first introduced, there were still a need for prophecy at the time. The collective of believers were few, and at the time, they were reaching out to many of the jews. Paul was the only apostle commissioned to spread the gospel to the gentiles.The Lord still needed to speak directly as His body (the Church) was not fully formed. He had yet to grow any chest hair, so to speak. If we think of the Church as a baby during that time, we might say he was just learning how to walk and thus needed help from Daddy in Heaven. However, as the Church grew, it did not need our Father in Heaven to hold her hands. She could walk on her own. Thus, certain gifts faded like prophecy and healing. Someone could also argue that prophets were needed early on as the bible had not been completed. Once God had finalized the bible, He did not need to speak through prophets. He said everything He needed to say in the bible. (Although, I am not sure I believe this personally.)Personally, I place all my faith in Christ. I can see His hands at work in the hearts of people around the globe. Jesus is a very personal God who develops intimate and meaningful relationships with each of His followers. Using prophets to speak is impersonal. This is not to say the Lord doesn't use people to deliver messages or the sorts. However, I think there is a distinct difference between an Old Testament prophet and how the Holy Spirit works in the world today. God does not need to send a messenger to say, "This is what the Lord says," because the messages Christ sends speak to us in the heart through the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is always in our heart. It never leaves. However, we can choose to accept it or deny it. Therefore, within every Christian is all power and all truth. Christ abides in every Christian. Even still, we have free will and we can choose to listen or not listen. Due to the weakness of our flesh, we choose to not listen most of the time. And so, the Spirit in us is stirred at different times when it encounters the Spirit, or when we have made the decision in our heart to listen. When this happens, we know the Spirit of God is stirring in us and speaking, even though the person speaking to us does not. For instance, we may be sitting at Church listening to a preacher and he says something that is so vivid and real, it is as if God Himself was speaking to us. It may not impact the other 500 people in the church as it did us, and the preacher himself may not know he said anything impacting, but it was exactly what we needed to hear. The Old Testament prophets were speaking to people who did not have the Holy Spirit. They needed to know God's exact commands as they were held in bondage by the law. They needed precise and exact messages (commandments). However, we don't need commandments(laws) for the Holy Spirit is at work in each of us. The Holy Spirit is the Word of God and He resides in the heart of every believer. We are not held in bondage by the law. We have been set free from the law by Christ. Therefore, our relationship with God is more personal. We need guidance and direction(help), not laws and rules(force).One of the greatest blessings that the Lord gave us (I think) is each other. He made a way that we all help each other and work together as a unified body. The Holy Spirit doesn't live inside one shepard like Moses who directs and leads us all. He lives inside each of us, so that we may all give and help each other. He made it possible to share in His love with each other. That is awesome.Anyway, that is my perspective. I could be wrong. Only Christ is right.Blake

What are we to make of Agabus then?I think it's interesting that Paul seemed unflinched by Augubus, even though the prophet was speaking thorugh the Holy Spirit. If Augubus was a prophet the likes of Jeremiah or Isaiah, I do not think Paul would have so easily moved past his warning. Isn't it reasonable to assume that the warning was given as an admonition not to go to Jerusalem? If we were given such a word in our own day, we might conclude that God would not be with us if we ignored such a warning. Yet, Paul acted as if Augubus could predict but ultimately was without authority. So Paul went and was captured and was sent to Rome...was He being self-willed or spirit-led?What do we make of Pauls' response, as a preacher desiring to preach, to Augubus the prophet?MC

Thanks Yeshua,Compton, How can you say 'paul easily moved past what Agabus had said'.I was thinking of the epsisode in Acts 20.Agabus told Paul, who was determined to go to Jerusalem, what the Holy Spirit said would happen to him if he went. “The Holy Spirit says, ‘In this way the Jews of Jerusalem will bind the owner of this belt (Paul) ” (Acts 21:11). Having heard this, Paul's colleagues pleaded that he should not go. Paul, inspite of the warning, still believed he was free to go. He responded, “I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus,”I used the phrase "easily moved past" to contrast Pauls' independence to Augubus's warning against the urgent primacy that seems to be attributed to the words of our contemporary prophets. In my own experience, a modern prophet might very well believe that by ignoring the warning, Paul was "moving without God's covering or blessing." In contrast Paul still felt completely free and right in going, even though he acknowledged the danger as well as the authenticity of the prophecy.I was just curious if others read this episode the same way.MC

Agabus simply predicted what would happen to Paul in Jerusalem, he never told Paul to avoid going... that was the counsel the brethren decided to give Paul based on the word that was spoken.

Dear YeshuaIsMyGod, I am a bit confused by what you have said. Please help me to understand. You said, "I saw a true child of God." What qualifies a person as a true child of God? Are not all Christians true children of God? You also said, "they quite have NOT experienced it by a man/women of God that is beyond reproach." The bible says that all men are bad. I am confused. How can any man be beyond reproach? What do you mean by that exactly? Thanks, Blake

1 Tim 3 teaches that one may live beyond reproach, and demands that if you are going to serve as a pastor or deacon, that you live beyond reproach. In fact, Paul said he labored in order to present to Christ a bride that is spotless and above reproach. Above reproach is so conduct yourself that by all outward observation, you have no spot on your character.

About the prophet thing.. (forgive me if this has already brought up, I have little time atm to read through the posts)Isiahah 20:1-6God told Isiahah to walk around unclothed and without shoes for three years!Isiahah obayed and did this..I was like.. wow! Where would you find people these days that want to become a prophet doing these things?Its not like Isiahah thought, I want to walk around unclothed and without shoes..Also doesn't God chose someone to be a prophet? I haven't really noticed people who decided to become one some day.I don't know much about nowadays prophets, but I do know that there are heaps of false ones around. Perhaps the majority of nowadays prophets live a life of abundance never going through any hardship.. Just a quick thought that crossed my mind.

Haha well.. :)Its just.. being the voice of the Lord seems very 'cool'.. but in reality it must be very hard.I can very much imagine that Isiahah must have had trouble with somethings like you said..Must be fantastic to have the Word of the Lord coming to you! Well then we have Jonah.. who then arose to flee to Tarshish..I'm personally glad that this story about Jonah is in the Bible.. :-) Then I remember some sermons here.. preachers crying because they found it so hard to preach about a given subject..