So what are prophecies then?

[rikuoamero]

Following on from my discussion on Micah 5, I was told the following by a Christian.

He only related the word of God to the Israelites. That's what Biblical prophecy is. Biblical prophecy is not prediction of the future, Riko. Open your mind. Forget about Nostradamus. LOL!

MICAH. DID. NOT. PREDICT. ANYTHING.

one more time -- Micah was not and is not predicting anything.

So I'd like to take this time and space to ask basically...what are biblical prophecies then (or what are called prophecies)? What exactly are they? Apparently, I was wrong in thinking they were foretellings of the future, descriptions of events yet to happen at the time of their writing, and that the fact they got it correct means they could only have been told by God.
Are there any other Christians on this website who agree with the above quotes? Or are Micah and other things listed by Christians as prophecies...predictions of the future?

[marco]

Well good! I'm happy for you. But, maybe one day you'll think back to the things you've said and laugh, too.

This is like a G&S Opera, HMS PInafore:
O joy O rapture unforeseen
The clouded sky is now serene,
The God of day, the orb of love
Has hung his ensign high above.... as I recall it from schooldays.


From schooldays too I recall my Latin master telling us that mistakes are a useful learning process. We learn from them rather than laugh at them. If I recapture the beliefs of my childhood I should imagine there will be a permanent smile on my face. Dread thought.

Yes, I have had some good chuckles at many of the things I've seen in this forum (and not just from you, obviously). But my heart also goes out for you guys. And I mean that in all honesty.

Perhaps teaching the ignorant instead of laughing at them is the Christian thing to do. It may be that the quiet voice of truth is drowned out by our own laughter - be we believer or atheist.

If Jesus did not see himself as God, but as the VIP spoken about by sundry prophets, why should we in this advanced year think otherwise?

Ah, but He most certainly did. Many times. We've had that conversation, several times over. The only two possibilities we're really left with are that He was either 1.) a complete lunatic, or 2.) He was (is) who He said He was (is) -- God, made man.

I see immediately there is the possibility of Christ being sane, but wrong in his ideas. There is evidence of that too. There is another possibility that people take the words of Christ and attach a meaning he never intended - and he retains his sanity. I don't know why you would wish to entertain only two possibilities.


Go well and may your God go with you.

[PinSeeker]

From schooldays too I recall my Latin master telling us that mistakes are a useful learning process. We learn from them rather than laugh at them. If I recapture the beliefs of my childhood I should imagine there will be a permanent smile on my face. Dread thought.... Perhaps teaching the ignorant instead of laughing at them is the Christian thing to do. It may be that the quiet voice of truth is drowned out by our own laughter - be we believer or atheist.

The mistake you seem to be making, Marco, is taking my "merriment" personally, in the sense that I'm laughing at you, rather than merely at your comments. That's easy to do... I can understand that, but, well, it's not meant that way.

Too, describing it as "merriment" is a mischaracterization thereof; such is really not the case. Again, I chuckle at the comments I see, and not at the person, but it goes much further than that. To explain:

I pray for my children every day that they will never know a day when they didn't know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior... for them, but also because I can't say that about myself. There was a day up until which I had the same -- or at least a similar, in many aspects -- outlook on God and Christ and the Bible as you and many others on this forum. Thanks be to God, those days are in the rear view mirror for me, but from time to time I look back at a lot of the things I thought and said... and I laugh -- sometimes in amusement, sometimes in regret, and sometimes even in pain. The point is, I was once where you are... or at least a quite similar place. But then, God... well, to put it Biblically, He redeemed my life from the pit (Job, the Psalms, et al.). He called me out of darkness and into His marvelous light. Because I deserved it? Most certainly not; I deserved just the opposite. But He did it, because, as the Bible says, it pleased Him to do so. Why? I have absolutely no idea. And so, there's a hopefulness in my "merriment," too, that God might do for you what He did for me. So there ya go.

As for the teaching comment, I agree with you on that, but that's exactly what I've been doing. Or trying to do, anyway; a teacher's job is immensely harder (if not impossible) when the hearer takes things personally, even though that's not the intent of the teacher. But I can't let myself be deterred; God is sovereign over all that.

If Jesus did not see himself as God, but as the VIP spoken about by sundry prophets, why should we in this advanced year think otherwise?

Ah, but He most certainly did. Many times. We've had that conversation, several times over. The only two possibilities we're really left with are that He was either 1.) a complete lunatic, or 2.) He was (is) who He said He was (is) -- God, made man.

I see immediately there is the possibility of Christ being sane, but wrong in his ideas. There is evidence of that too. There is another possibility that people take the words of Christ and attach a meaning he never intended - and he retains his sanity. I don't know why you would wish to entertain only two possibilities.

Ah, but His "ideas" are not really what we're talking about, here, is it, Marco? No, the immediate context here was Jesus claiming to be God, which He did many times over. Forget about whether you believe Him or not; if a person claims to be God, those are really the only two alternatives. Either he (or she) is nuts, or he (she) is who he (she) says he (she) is.

Go well and may your God go with you.

Well thanks. But my God has promised to never leave or forsake me, so I don't have to worry about His going with me. I do have to make sure that I always go with Him, though. But I hope the same for you.

[marco]

The mistake you seem to be making, Marco, is taking my "merriment" personally, in the sense that I'm laughing at you, rather than merely at your comments. That's easy to do... I can understand that, but, well, it's not meant that way.

Then perhaps the fault is with the instruments of your expression rather than the intention behind what you say.

There was a day up until which I had the same -- or at least a similar, in many aspects -- outlook on God and Christ and the Bible as you and many others on this forum. Thanks be to God, those days are in the rear view mirror for me, but from time to time I look back at a lot of the things I thought and said... and I laugh -- sometimes in amusement, sometimes in regret, and sometimes even in pain. The point is, I was once where you are... or at least a quite similar place. But then, God... well, to put it Biblically, He redeemed my life from the pit

Then if you have attained the certainty that others might perhaps crave, that was your fatted calf moment and doubtless justifies jubilation. It is good you have identified this as private rejoicing in your own epiphany rather than perhaps schadenfreude. One would otherwise be reminded of the verse:



" The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. "

As for the teaching comment, I agree with you on that, but that's exactly what I've been doing. Or trying to do, anyway; a teacher's job is immensely harder (if not impossible) when the hearer takes things personally, even though that's not the intent of the teacher. But I can't let myself be deterred; God is sovereign over all that.

The teacher learns from his students and adjusts his lessons accordingly. If the teacher hears only his own voice, never that of a student, then he is not a good teacher. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

No, the immediate context here was Jesus claiming to be God, which He did many times over. Forget about whether you believe Him or not; if a person claims to be God, those are really the only two alternatives. Either he (or she) is nuts, or he (she) is who he (she) says he (she) is.

The words you think illustrate a claim to deity are subject to interpretation; they are never: "I am God." Yours is a deduction, and I am saying it is an erroneous deduction. Like other very sincere and obviously good people here, you have a personal conviction and in many respects you are to be envied. Your arguments are easy to forumlate and your assistant has impressive weight. The feeble cry of "non credo" hardly touches the armour, and perhaps there is reason for laughter. But the publican, in his miserable manner, does occasionally merit a hearing, however brief. I think Jesus suggested so.

[PinSeeker]

...perhaps the fault is with the instruments of your expression rather than the intention behind what you say.

I'm quite sure that's true, at least to some extent. Yeah, my own sin is going to rear its ugly head in any conversation. But that surely goes both ways; it takes two to tango, right? So what is needed is forgiveness and repentance on both ends of the conversation. If that were the case, maybe some real conversation could happen. But God is sovereign over that, too. If His purpose were to use our conversation and, via the Holy Spirit, thereby change your heart and give you new life in Christ, then that would indeed happen regardless of any sin on my part or yours.

...if you have attained the certainty that others might perhaps crave, that was your fatted calf moment and doubtless justifies jubilation. It is good you have identified this as private rejoicing in your own epiphany rather than perhaps schadenfreude. One would otherwise be reminded of the verse:

• "The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican."

Agreed. Luke 18. The Pharisee wrongly thinks he's "better" than the publican and that he merits salvation, which is surely not the case for anyone; Christians know -- or should know -- that salvation from God is unmerited in any way, that they are just as much a sinner as, and therefore no "better" than, anyone else. As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 1:

• "...no man may boast before God. But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, so that, just as it is written, “Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord."

The teacher learns from his students and adjusts his lessons accordingly. If the teacher hears only his own voice, never that of a student, then he is not a good teacher.

Agreed again. And I have. I listen to your objections, and I address them all very patiently. But again, it takes two to tango. Some people are just unteachable regardless of the skill of the teacher.

The words you think illustrate a claim to deity are subject to interpretation...

Well sure. Wrong interpretations. Sure.

...they are never: "I am God."

Not those exact words, but in irrefutable effect, they are. All we really should need is Jesus's conversation with Philip in John 14:

• (Jesus said) "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.â€� Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.â€� Jesus said to him, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on My own initiative, but the Father abiding in Me does His works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me..."

At the end of that conversation, Jesus says to Philip, "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments." Only God made commandments, right? And Jesus is saying they are His commandments.

Aside from that, Jesus ascribes the name God gave Himself (I AM) to Himself many times, most notably to the context of this particular conversation, "Before Abraham was, I AM." Anyway, seven, to be exact (which is very Biblical; the number seven denotes completeness all through God's Word).

In all this, He is leaving absolutely no room for doubt that He is indeed God. Some refuse to acknowledge this... and either deny it outright or make up reasons to refute it. Either way, they bring condemnation upon themselves -- although certainly not from Christians, because, as I said above, Christians deserve no better because of their sin.

Yours is a deduction, and I am saying it is an erroneous deduction.

Understood. But likewise, I'm saying yours is. See above. Yeah, we both know where the other stands, for sure.

Like other very sincere and obviously good people here, you have a personal conviction and in many respects you are to be envied.

Well I would argue that I'm no more to be envied -- really less so -- than anyone else, but thanks.

Your arguments are easy to forumlate and your assistant has impressive weight.

Thanks again, but any credit I would divert to God.

The feeble cry of "non credo" hardly touches the armour...

Well, it's not my armor. Ephesians 6 is the full description of the armor of God.

... and perhaps there is reason for laughter.

Nah, there's never any reason for the laughter of haughtiness. That's sin rearing its ugly head. If you think I have been guilty of that, I apologize and ask forgiveness. But again, my intent was never such.

But the publican, in his miserable manner, does occasionally merit a hearing, however brief. I think Jesus suggested so.

Yeah, the publican in that parable represents what all Christians should be, humble to the core, realizing his own need of Christ and salvation even above that of all others.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 4 by bluethread]

When a Prophet makes a statement regarding a future event, it is presumed that such a statement has the approval of said deity. If what is stated does not come to pass, that shows that the person is not speaking on behalf of an actual deity.

Brilliant strategy. Heads I win, tails you lose.

I don't see that. If what the Prophet says regarding the future does not come to pass, not only are they not speaking for Adonai, but they are also subject to capital punishment. So, for the prophet, it is heads I live, tales I die.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 4 by bluethread]

When a Prophet makes a statement regarding a future event, it is presumed that such a statement has the approval of said deity. If what is stated does not come to pass, that shows that the person is not speaking on behalf of an actual deity.

Brilliant strategy. Heads I win, tails you lose.

I don't see that. If what the Prophet says regarding the future does not come to pass, not only are they not speaking for Adonai, but they are also subject to capital punishment. So, for the prophet, it is heads I live, tales I die.

Two words.
Jehovah's Witnesses.

(Just to be explicitly clear, I am not saying that JWs kill or ought to kill fake prophets. Just that they have a strong tendency for those who make predictions to slide right on by when (not if) those predictions are not shown to come about. Most famous being the prediction of Christ's return in 1914, which was later reinterpreted as being him returning in a spiritual sense)

[Clownboat]

1. things that had already happened (even long before).
2. things that were taking place at the time of the prophet(s) speaking.
3. things that -- relative to where those prophets and the original hearers were standing in linear time -- were (and maybe still are) yet to take place.

The overall takeaway (among others) in all these things -- regardless what category above (1, 2, or 3) any particular prophecy fell/falls into -- is that God is always in control of all things, and that He alone is worthy of our trust and devotion regardless of what comes to pass, and that He works all things together for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose. And that in the end, He will redeem His creation unto Himself. Jesus wins. And we (Christians, anyway), by being in Him, win, too; we are co-heirs with Christ. This... is the Gospel.

Holy monkey butts! That is your takeaway?!? Seriously?

"Look at this prophecy, it could be explanation 1, 2 or 3, which means that god is in control of all things...".

How is this even close to being logical, rational thought? How is this different then reading Humpty Dumpty and then claiming a god is in control of all things? Both statements arrive at the conclusion that you desire, but hopefully you can see why your thinking is completely nonsensical.

You sir, would make for a great Muslim!

[Clownboat]

As for the teaching comment, I agree with you on that, but that's exactly what I've been doing. Or trying to do, anyway;

Matthew 23:8
8 But do not be called Rabbi (Teacher); for One is your Teacher, and you are all [equally] brothers.

[PinSeeker]

1. things that had already happened (even long before).
2. things that were taking place at the time of the prophet(s) speaking.
3. things that -- relative to where those prophets and the original hearers were standing in linear time -- were (and maybe still are) yet to take place.

The overall takeaway (among others) in all these things -- regardless what category above (1, 2, or 3) any particular prophecy fell/falls into -- is that God is always in control of all things, and that He alone is worthy of our trust and devotion regardless of what comes to pass, and that He works all things together for the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purpose. And that in the end, He will redeem His creation unto Himself. Jesus wins. And we (Christians, anyway), by being in Him, win, too; we are co-heirs with Christ. This... is the Gospel.

Holy monkey butts! That is your takeaway?!? Seriously?

"Look at this prophecy, it could be explanation 1, 2 or 3, which means that god is in control of all things...".

How is this even close to being logical, rational thought? How is this different then reading Humpty Dumpty and then claiming a god is in control of all things? Both statements arrive at the conclusion that you desire, but hopefully you can see why your thinking is completely nonsensical.

You sir, would make for a great Muslim!

Ohhhhhhh, boy. I see Clownboat is stalking me again and taking what I said completely out of context. Oh, well. At least he got the sir thing right...

[PinSeeker]

As for the teaching comment, I agree with you on that, but that's exactly what I've been doing. Or trying to do, anyway;

Matthew 23:8
8 But do not be called Rabbi (Teacher); for One is your Teacher, and you are all [equally] brothers.

In that verse, Clownboat, Jesus was warning his listeners (and by extension, us) that they should not imitate the scribes and the Pharisees, and were to keep in mind that "(they) are all brethren,� that no one should be exalted above others by titles that are either demanded or received. Simply put, Jesus warned His listeners (and by extension us) against giving anyone inappropriate honor. One may have a father or teachers in a normal human sense, but should not regard them in a sense that gives them excessive spiritual honor or authority.

Thanks for "playing."