Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to How and why biblical prophecies work
I had a girlfriend in the 1970s, Gome...
Who remarked to me one pleasant, romantic afternoon, "It's wonderful that we have so much in common – You're an Engineer and I'm a Numerologist!"
People read their horoscopes back then, and believed that astrology worked because the Moon affected the tides (water), and humans are about 90% water – ergo sum! A typical "scientific" argument went like this: Why are fire engines red? 3 x 4 = 12; there are 12 inches in a foot; a foot is a ruler; a ruler is Queen Elizabeth; Queen Elizabeth is a ship; ships go on the ocean; oceans have fish; fish have fins; the Finns fought the Russians; the Russians are Red; that's why fire engines are red – they're rushin' all over.
Go figure!
posted by
arGee
on October 3, 2007 at 7:25 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I've been trying to remain an amused bystander
I will say that after reading posts and comments not only associated with this little dispute but in general, I am still surprised at how readily so many people accept non science as science. Is this a new phenomona or was our generation just as devoid of a collective understanding of scientific principles and we simply didn't realize it?
posted by
gomedome
on October 3, 2007 at 6:52 AM
| link to this | reply
What do you think, Gome...
Am I the ass or lion in Bhaskar's tale – or maybe the fox?
posted by
arGee
on October 3, 2007 at 6:44 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Re: Hi Gome....I think you've done an excellent job here. Part 1
ugh. DIAL UP SUCKS.
So it being a book, or a story, to try to apply the stories to history and say that the prophets predicted anything in them I think is a total misuse of the stories, which lead many to make incorrect assumptions about what is found in the pages, and how to use these truths. A compilation piece can give guidence, but isn't the "font of truth" to which so many have elevated it. In the end, it's a book, and God is not the words printed on its pages.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on October 3, 2007 at 4:37 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: Re: Hi Gome....I think you've done an excellent job here. Part 1
absolutely, we can learn from it, even if it's not true. Any piece of fiction contains "truth" even if it's not "fact". Truth and fact are not necessarily synonyms.
An example: Take a novel, something as obviously fictional as The Lord Of the Rings. Any sane person would easily see that this work contains little to no fact. It does, however, contain truth. There is truth embedded in the story. We can suspend reality when we read it, and we can glean the lessons that lie within the story and understand that these lessons are "truths". Friendship might require walking into fire--a truth. A battle that appears hopeless can still be won--a truth.
Same with the prophets. Whether or not "The Lord Said to...." whichever author we're reading is less important as the truth that the story is trying to get across. It is, after all, only a book.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on October 3, 2007 at 4:19 AM
| link to this | reply
saul_relative - thank you again - planting some seeds of debate is what I
like to think this blog is about.
posted by
gomedome
on October 2, 2007 at 10:11 PM
| link to this | reply
Love this blog, gomedome. It inspires great dialogue. Nothing to add,
just wanted you to know that I agree with your argument. Please, carry on...
posted by
saul_relative
on October 2, 2007 at 9:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Hi Gome....I think you've done an excellent job here. Part 1
FineYoungSinger - that's not quite what I am saying. I did not suggest " . . . that biblical prophecy is a kind of fortune-telling." What I am suggesting is more than a subtle difference in that; biblical prophecy and fortune telling derive their success or "work" for the same reasons. I do however completely agree that a good portion of the bible and especially the old testament was written for an audience from another time in history. You lose me at the end of your comment though: " . . . we can glean truth (which is not necessarily fact) . . . " Do you mean learn from it even if it is not true?
posted by
gomedome
on October 2, 2007 at 8:17 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee - I remember someone in college trying to convince me of the validity
of the predictions of Nostradamus.
He blathered on and on about how many uncanny parallels he had found with his own research and how there was no mistaking his findings (which were merely an extension of prevailing sentiment at the time) . . . and how he could "prove" the prophetic ability of Nostradamus. I hate to admit that at the time I was buying it, that is until I read his so called research. The only words I could think of saying to him were "You've got to be kidding?"
Typically, his so called research was in reality an exercise in illustrating only what he had wanted to see from the outset. An observer without the desire to prove that Nostradamus was prophetic would not possibly derive the same conclusions. Then to make matters worse, this guy had an effective and convincing way of selling this idea, by the end of the school year it seemed as if the entire campus was wandering around remarking what an incredible prophet Nostradamus was.
posted by
gomedome
on October 2, 2007 at 8:06 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Hi Gome....I think you've done an excellent job here.
As a tangent to my line of thinking: a reader can glean truth from any book, fiction or non-fiction. A BIBLE is just that: merely a book.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on October 2, 2007 at 12:52 PM
| link to this | reply
Hi Gome....I think you've done an excellent job here.
I agree with every bit of your conclusion. I do, however, disagree with your initial assumption, that biblical prophecy is a kind of fortune-telling. I've come to understand that prophecy, particularly that found in the Bible, is less a kind of fortune-telling or revelation of the future, and more an avenue to reveal a truth or a series of truths.
When a modern-day reader applies to the books of prophecy (even to Revelation, to a lesser degree) post-modern Western logic, they completely misunderstand the text. None of the Old Testament, for that matter, was written directly to us living today. It was written to a Hebrew audience that lived 2,000 to 5,000+ years ago.
It's only when we read the prophets and Revelation in that framework that we can glean truth (which is not necessarily fact) and apply those lessons to ourselves today. Any attempt to use it as a foundation of fact is a mistake.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on October 2, 2007 at 12:27 PM
| link to this | reply
arGee, you had better not try belittling my understanding
Here it is then arGee. Have the guts to come and tell this in my space. Don’t go on advertising my stupidity on others’ blog. gomedome may not even have a clue to what this is all about.
No matter how ‘well’ you may have argued, I was angered at your ungentlemanly behavior, name calling etc., and that rendered all you arguments hollow and worth being rejected. I do not know whether you have read my comment that as long as you criticized me, you still did have a right. It’s my blog and I would give you the freedom to do so. But I will never allow you the same liberty when it comes to casting aspersions on the intelligence of my readers. They are my guests, just as you are. And they don’t need your opinion. You may write anything you choose to on my stupidity in your blog, and let those who read me read you too. If they are ‘enlightened’, I’ll be the first person to come running to shake my dirty hands with you.
Sorry, but I can’t help putting this on record, insinuating though it might be, I don’t care now -
Once in the jungles, a lion and a donkey became good friends. Without a care in the world, they would play, make merry and engage in a friendly duel together.
Time went on happily for about a year, until one day, it suddenly dawned upon the donkey as to why all the other animals in the jungle addressed the lion as ‘Great King, Samraat, Maharaaj,’ etc.? This was too much for the donkey to bear. And from now on started all his troubles. Thought the donkey, “Am I not strong and big enough as the lion? Why then, am I not being given the respect that should be due to me as well? I must do something about it.”
So one day, to prove his supremacy, he challenged the lion to a duel – a duel to death, if necessary. The lion, however, hardly waited to ponder over the challenge and slowly started to walk away. A fox that happened to overhear this dialogue from behind a tree trunk was perplexed and came up to the lion and asked, “What is the matter Samraat. Why are you backing out from such a simple challenge? I don’t understand.”
The lion said, “Look, there are three reasons good enough for me from getting into a mess. First, it does not behove of a lion to accept a challenge from an ass! What kind of challenge? I could kill him with a single stroke of my paw. Second, it will bring much disgrace to my entire tribe. They will say, “What? A challenge! And that too from a donkey? Shame on you”. So, you see, even if I were to win, his losing will earn him no shame, and my win, no fame!
And lastly, God forbid, but who knows? An ass is an ass, after all! Supposing he wins, then? Haven’t you seen their stupid rear-kicks? They can use it most effectively without a warning. Anything can happen. And then I’ll be doomed forever.” Therefore, concludes the lion, “No, I have decided not to take up any cudgel with the likes of an ass.”
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on October 2, 2007 at 9:23 AM
| link to this | reply
Another quick comment, Gome...
Regarding the psychic/mystic world, James Randi has a standing offer of $1 million to anyone anywhere who can demonstrate any kind of psychic ability under controlled circumstances. This is a no-strings-attached offer. All the applicant need do is comply with Randi’s rigorous scientific protocol. Of course, since he put up this prize twenty years ago, nobody has successfully claimed it. The typical reason losers give is that the scientific controls stifle the psychic energy, or some other such silliness.
posted by
arGee
on October 2, 2007 at 8:32 AM
| link to this | reply
I have two observations, Gome...
I spent some time on Bhaskar’s blog taking him to task regarding his bewildering exhortations. I gave him and his readers a bit of science to ponder, and then responded in detail to Bhaskar’s subsequent reaction. In reading through that conversation and the inputs from some of his readers, I find myself wondering if we are even speaking the same language. The fundamentals of formal logic are so ingrained in the English language as I know it, that it is unnecessary to demonstrate that if A = B, and if B = C, then A = C. Nevertheless, Bhaskar and his readers don’t seem able to understand even this most simple of logical statements – at least when it is couched in a sentence. I find it most interesting, therefore, that Bhaskar has responded affirmatively to your article. I offer him congratulations, but strongly suspect that he did not really understand your argument.
Hugh J. Schoenfeld translated the New Testament into English back in the late 1950s. He did this as a scholarly work instead of a religious work, approaching the task in exactly the same manner as he has many other “ancient” texts. It makes for a very interesting read, especially when combined with his excellent footnotes. The Book of Revelation is especially interesting. He noted that the book apparently was written by two different writers, and was able to successfully separate the two completely intertwined writings. One of the resulting texts retained its internal consistency, and appeared to Schoenfeld to be a coded Coptic writing. He applied several of the known codes, and to his delight, one of them “broke” the message, which he details in several lengthy footnotes.
It appears that the Book of Revelation really is a detailed, precise history of the persecution of the early Christians by Nero’s Court, written in Coptic code to protect the writer from even more persecution. This seems to hold true, even down to the correct spelling of Nero’s name. There simply is no room in this “revelation” for any prophecy, but don’t tell that to the “true believers.”
posted by
arGee
on October 2, 2007 at 8:28 AM
| link to this | reply
I am fully with you on this write, gomedome.
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on October 1, 2007 at 10:14 PM
| link to this | reply
Antonionioni - I'm not one to scoff at things I don't fully understand and
there seems to be something real happening in some psychic visions but . . .
A great deal of what to us ordinary people seems to be the psychic or prophetic abilities held by others are instead mentalist abilities. A heightened and sometimes developed through training ability to manipulate the human subject to the desired outcome. The best I have ever witnessed was the Amazing Kreskin, in a different vein and possibly much more impressive would be Chris Angel. In the case of the Amazing Kreskin he is guilty of playing huckster with prophecies which I feel detracts from his being so "amazing" . . . he makes predictions of world news and just like all of them, he discards and ignores his failures, highlights his successes and gives the impression that he is much better at it than he actually is.
posted by
gomedome
on October 1, 2007 at 9:51 PM
| link to this | reply
Agreed - although fortune tellers do have uncanny abilities and so do
faith healers. Although I don't believe a fortune teller, tarot card reader etc can always see the future, they can certainly tap into psychic energy somehow and describe your thoughts, even when you're not there. i know because it happened to me in my absence when my wife went to this man and he described my hopes perfectly even though she hadn't mentioned me at all! My wife seems to have strange characteristics too. She seems to attract psychic energy. Me, I've never sen anything odd in my life. But I'm just not attuned to it.
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 1, 2007 at 2:14 PM
| link to this | reply
Xeno-x - one of the things biblical prophecies have fostered is what you
allude to as a "psychology"
. . . and an unhealthy one at that. In an effort to create validity for the contents of the bible, so many people adhere to the notion that somehow our cattle sacrificing primitive ancestors had an insight that escapes all highly educated modern men in the ability to foresee the future. Except when their prophecies are examined without bias the limitations to their ability to foresee are quite obvious. There is nothing at all referenced that is outside of the realm of the small portion of the world that they lived in. Further, everything that is a so called prophecy is in primitive language describing things that never touch on the developments and advancements that mankind has experienced since their time.
posted by
gomedome
on October 1, 2007 at 1:56 PM
| link to this | reply
biblical "prophecies" are really after the fact lessons.
written after the fact.
OT prophecies were written about the time of the Babylonian Captivity or during Persian rule, pertaining to hundreds of years before.
Some want to demonstrate that these were written before the events described and that some events are ongoing, such as the fall of Tyre. Doesn't mean a thing.
The Matthew 24 prophecy concerning the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Temple was written 20 years later.
The Book of Revelation? -- PLEASE THERE IS NO "S" AT THE END, AS IN REVELATIONS!!!!
Very first verses says it is what is "shortly to come to pass" -- doesn't pertain at all past the First Century -- had to have been written about the time of Nero (666). And it is entirely a metaphor for events contemporary to the writer.
But there are the "doomsdayers" who want a coming destruction on all who don't ascribe to their beliefs. They may say they don't, but the psychology is obvious. But that's the way with all prophecy, or afterlife scenarios: because the present if not a paradise for certain, but far from it, people want that hope of something better, a pie-in-the sky Eden of some sorts, and they seem to want certain rules for having that better life.
These are people afraid of living in the here and now.
posted by
Xeno-x
on October 1, 2007 at 8:33 AM
| link to this | reply