The word, or should I say phrase, is face-plant. This is an Americanism for making a complete and utter fool of yourself – typically in front of a sizable public audience. This is the term currently on the lips of somewhat gleeful conservative evangelicals in the US, in response to the
prophetic debacle around the recent US Presidential election. The self-styled media-prophets of the US charismatic movement had to a man (and women) decreed that Donald Trump would win a second term. And when he eventually lost the election? Well, the guy from Bethel put his hands up and said, ‘sorry everyone, I was wrong’, but the rest simply carried on, decreeing that Trump had in fact won the election, even in the face of incontrovertible evidence that he had not (such as the actual result). This would be highly comical but for the fact that it served to add fuel to Donald Trump’s baseless and destabilising claims of election fraud, which precipitated the Capitol riot and loss of life.

Conservative critics of the charismatic movement in the US have had a field day with all of this. And they have been at pains to highlight that atheist commentators have joined in as well, mocking these evangelical Christians by posting amusing memes around the increasingly ridiculous spectacle of these prophets still claiming, long after the election results had been verified, that Donald Trump would be inaugurated as President on 20^th January, because God had decreed it to be so. For one prominent conservative critic, whose channel I viewed on YouTube, this was, undoubtedly, conclusive proof of what he and other conservative cessationists have long asserted, that God does not speak prophetically to the church today. In his view, these self-styled prophets are all charlatans, and fraudsters – ‘they are not hearing from God’.

As a charismatic believer, I must confess that I cannot but agree with him, at least in respect of these prophets misguided and futile attempts to
call the result of the US presidential election. Reflecting on this, one must ask the question why would God ever choose to reveal the outcome of a general election to anyone? Surely, if we believe that democracy is a force for good in the world (accepting that no man-made system will ever be without its flaws and limitations), why would God act to undermine the democratic process by revealing the result before it had taken place? We believe our God to be a God of order, and scripture instructs Christians to respect and value governance and authority, which is bestowed by God (Romans 13:1).

One imagines that the credibility of the prophetic amongst many Christians in the US will have taken quite a hit because of these troubling
events (accepting that the wacko charismatic fringe will just continue to deny reality). Amongst charismatic believers more widely, who might be reflecting on this turn of events in the US, they may well be tempted to quietly up-sticks and join the conservative camp; concluding that the whole contemporary prophetic movement appears to be built on some very shaky foundations.

It is of interest that conservative evangelicals consistently claim to occupy a moral high ground over charismatic believers. They argue that
their doctrinal position, established solely on their consideration of the written word of God, is necessarily superior to that of the charismatic
believer; whom, they assert, chooses to construct their doctrine on the shifting sands of contemporary revelation. My YouTube friend claimed that he is criticised by charismatics for his cessationist beliefs, because in so believing he is effectively denying the power of the Holy Spirit (a criticism he easily bats away). I would counter that any objections to these beliefs is more fundamental than this, for his cessationist position finds no support in scripture – nowhere in the New Testament do we read that the active ministry of the Holy Spirit (prophecy, supernatural healings and miracles and the other charismatic gifts listed by Paul in his letter to the Corinthians) are terminated upon the demise of the first century Apostles. Whilst my conservative friend might assert that the primary role of the Spirit in the world is to convict of sin (John 16:8), there is no indication in these verses that He is constrained to this role only.

Furthermore, his ridicule of those Christians who claim that God speaks to them, is surely, unjustified and indeed nonsensical, if we pause
to reflect on this for just a few moments. Given his acceptance that the Holy Spirit indwells the believer, can he not also accept, that the Spirit so indwelling will actively communicate with the believer? After all, what is the benefit of His indwelling to a believer, if He remains completely silent? I can say with complete confidence that God speaks to me all the time. I cannot claim to have heard the audible voice of God, nor have I had any visions of heaven or been visited by angelic beings or Christ in person as some would claim. But He does speak – for as the scripture declares, ‘the Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God’ (Romans 8:16). The practical and tangible outworking of this is that every morning, from the instant I am awake, I am conscious of both His indwelling presence and his enduring love for me.

And it is this indwelling by the Spirit that is the basis of the prophetic gift that Paul instructs we should all earnestly seek (1 Corinthians 14:9). Hearing from God prophetically is simply an extension of hearing God in the day to day. In the Psalms it speaks of the righteous person having what is, in effect, a ‘light touch’ relationship with the leading of the Spirit of God (Psalm 32:9). Applied to believers today, we may take from this
that we should not need to be steered forcefully by the Spirit (perhaps through our circumstances or the intervention of others) but rather should be responsive to His inner directing and leading. Yes, the bible has a vital part to play in all of this, for if my inner conviction is at odds with the teaching of scripture then that inner conviction is clearly wrong. But God’s speaking to us is not limited to my cerebral assimilation of His written word, in the manner that I might learn the principles of mathematics and then apply them to some situation in my life. No, for the Spirit can quicken God’s word to believers (for this reason Pauls describes God’s word as living and active – Hebrews 4:12), to relate it directly to a particular circumstance or situation in their lives.

So, one wonders how our American friends, these media-prophets, got it all so terribly wrong? My view is that they are guilty of what might be
termed spiritual over-reach (accepting that some of them are completely off the scale). Anyone who has stepped out in the Spirit in any type of ministry situation will be aware of a tension that exists between our possible lack of a faith in response to a situation (effectively unbelief, which Jesus repeatedly bemoaned – Matthew 17:17) and an overly confident response to the same (which is presumption).

Now, I am in the habit of offering to pray for unbelievers, where the opportunity arises, and as it seems appropriate to do so. God does seem
to give me lots of opportunities to do this. Quite recently I pulled into a garage to put some air in my tyres and a few moments later an elderly and frail lady with a stick pulled up beside me to do the same. She was clearly going to struggle to bend down and attach the air hose, so I offered to do it for her. She was a little unsure of my offer, but then signalled that this would be OK. As I went about this task, I was conscious that this was an opportunity to minister to her. Immediately, I was faced with the dilemma I describe above. Should I offer to pray for her? If so, how might she react? Surely, I reasoned, it was enough that I should simply help her practically in this situation. Moreover, with Covid restrictions still in place, should I be offering to pray for anyone?

In the end I left it and simply smiled and went my way. So, what do you think? Did I exhibit a lack of faith in not taking the opportunity
to minister to her or was I right to be cautious and not presume that any such offer would be welcome or appropriate? My guess is that readers will take differing views on this. And this is the dilemma in every situation where we contemplate stepping out to act or minister in the power of the Holy Spirit.

In their spiritual over-reach, these media-prophets evidently got it wrong, believing that they were acting in faith, whereas in fact they were acting presumptuously. Clearly, in terms of magnitude, there is a world of difference between the appropriateness of my offering to minister to an elderly lady, and my supposedly prophetic words likely influencing a significant number of people over such an important matter as a general election. However, the faith verses presumption dilemma facing anyone contemplating stepping out in the prophetic is always there. If I am praying with an individual and I become conscious of a word of encouragement or verse of scripture that I believe is from the Lord for them, the dilemma is the same – is it just my imagination or is the Spirit speaking?

I would not wish to be a high-profile media-prophet. And, like many others, I would question the validity and integrity of any such ministry. After all, if I style myself as a prophet, there must be a lot of pressure on me to keep up with the prophesying. But I do believe that the gift of prophecy has a function in serving the Church for its edification, provided it operates with the checks and balances in place that are laid down in scripture. I would speculate that the prophecy Paul had in mind when writing his letter to the Corinthian church is quite localised and specific to the needs of individuals and the local church situation. Not in the style of the Old Testament prophets, who were in the habit of pronouncing God’s judgement upon the nations. The former, rather than the latter, is very much my own personal experience of the gift – it would not even enter my head to think that I might speak for God in respect of the outcome of a national election.

This is not to preclude the apostolic and prophetic anointing and calling that is specifically listed by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians (Ephesians 4:11), it is to simply make an important distinction between the gift of prophecy that we all should earnestly seek, and the specific calling of as a prophet. Looking across the sweep of Church history, I would say that these latter individuals are quite few and far between. One might speculate that the likes of Luther, Westley and Whitfield, who led significant reformations of the Church, would fall into this category. In more recent times some might well consider John Wimber to have been a prophetic figure. The actions and example of these various church leaders reshaped the Christian world to a greater or lesser extent over their lifetimes. That, surely, is the hallmark of a true prophetic ministry, rather than an individual who claims they have some special or favoured insight into events.

It was, in the event, the checks and balances that the Founding Fathers had built into the American Constitution that prevented Donald Trump and his followers from usurping power through his deceit, bullying and bluster. In respect of the prophetic in the US, and I imagine more widely, there does appear to be a basic lack of oversight and care, on the part of church groups and ministries who seek to promote and develop the prophetic and other spiritual gifts like it for the benefit of the Church and the wider Gospel. The Church must give greater attention to protecting the integrity of these gifts, by rigorously ensuring that all prophetic utterances align fully with the enduring principles found in scripture and by eschewing the ministry of any who refuse to operate accountably under the authority of respected Church leaders.