nd prophets an especial gift for
an especial purpose._

We read in 1 Cor. xii. 4, 8-11, 28, 29, R. V., "Now there are diversities
of gifts, but the same Spirit.... For to one is given through the Spirit
wisdom; and to another the word of knowledge, according to the same
Spirit; to another faith, in the same Spirit; and to another gifts of
healings, in the one Spirit; and to another workings of miracles; and to
_another prophecy_; and to another discerning of spirits: to another
divers kinds of tongues; and to another the interpretation of tongues: but
all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each severally
even as He will.... And God hath set some in the church, _first apostles_,
_secondly prophets_, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of
healing, helps, governments, divers kinds of tongues. _Are all apostles?
Are all prophets?_ Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? Have all
gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?" It is
evident from these verses that the work of the Holy Spirit in apostles and
prophets is of a distinctive character.

The doctrine is becoming very common and very popular in our day that the
work of the Holy Spirit in preachers and teachers and in ordinary
believers, illuminating them and guiding them into the truth and opening
their minds to understand the Word of God is the same in kind and differs
only in degree from the work of the Holy Spirit in prophets and apostles.
It is evident from the passage just cited that this doctrine is thoroughly
unscriptural and untrue. It overlooks the fact so clearly stated and
carefully elucidated that while there is "the same Spirit" there are
"diversities of gifts" "diversities of administrations" "diversities of
workings" (1 Cor. xii. 4-6) and that "not all are prophets" and "not all
are apostles" (1 Cor. xii. 29). A very scholarly and brilliant preacher
seeking to minimize the difference between the work of the Holy Spirit in
apostles and prophets and His work in other men calls attention to the
fact that the Bible says that Bezaleel was to be "filled with the Spirit
of God" to devise the work of the tabernacle (Ex. xxxi. 1-11). He gives
this as a proof that the inspiration of the prophet does not differ from
the inspiration of the artist or architect, but in doing this, he loses
sight of the fact that the tabernacle was to be built after the "pattern
shown to Moses in the Mount" (Ex. xxv. 9, 40) and that