Hi Chris, > I, too, have been fascinated at this for years. Unfortunately, > profit-recognition tends to be subjectively in the eye of the beholder... may > the best profit salesman win. This is why unscrupulous charlatans can gain > so much traction and truly inspired profits may go unnoticed. I don’t know > if there ever will be a wide spread solution to this short of a divine > Revelation.
Actually, the solution is quite simple. "The prophetic must always be under the authority of the pastoral." Like with any other prediction/confidence game, the key is to have a "closed community" where people are held accountable for the consequences of their words. If prophets are acknowledged but tested in both their words and their character -- "by their fruits" -- the dangerous ones will be weeded out quickly. -- Ernie P. On Mar 23, 2012, at 8:16 AM, Chris Hahn wrote: > Billy, > > I think the crux of the problem is, as you said, sorting out the charlatans > from the genuine article. And the problem is exacerbated by the exaggerated > damage done by the charlatans vs. the (possibly) humble demeanor of the true > profit. > > I, too, have been fascinated at this for years. Unfortunately, > profit-recognition tends to be subjectively in the eye of the beholder... may > the best profit salesman win. This is why unscrupulous charlatans can gain > so much traction and truly inspired profits may go unnoticed. I don’t know > if there ever will be a wide spread solution to this short of a divine > Revelation. > > Chris > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 9:41 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [RC] Prophetism then and now > > Chris : > Some years ago I carried out a major study of prophets in the religions > of the world. Months and months of research, the topic fascinates me. > There is incredible variety among prophets ( or would-be prophets ). > It is a "revelation" ( pun intended ) to study all the forms that prophetism > can take. So I really should better qualify my views. > > You are quite right, of course, "God chooses" who will or won't be a prophet > --or prophetess. Guess what I was most trying to say is that there needs to > be reliable criteria for who is and who isn't a prophet since there are > a multitude of claimants in today's world and there have been far more > charlatans in the past than the genuine article. Still, in the here-and-now > there are a good number of well-meaning people who sincerely believe > that they are called by God for this purpose but who really, from > every indication, are stumbling in the dark and not doing others > any real good. > > In a way it is like the dispute among various Protestants about who > is qualified to me a pastor. Some groups believe that no special learning > is necessary and all that is required is a pure heart and inspiration. > I simply cannot take that kind of view seriously. > > To use a metaphor borrowed from Thessalonians, it isn't religion that > we are part of, but a spiritual war for the souls of mankind. Another metaphor > then is that we need to take part in a Crusade. But there is all the > difference > in the world between the actual Crusaders who took Jerusalem > after years of hard fighting and the much later Children's Crusade > that ended up with all the devoted Christian children killed or enslaved. > Not the path we should take. > > My view anyway > Billy > > > ====================================== > > 3/22/2012 8:21:10 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: > Billy, > > I agree with you about the LDS take on prophets, but I think you are setting > too rigid an Old Testamentesqe standard for prophetism. > > I think a prophet can be an uneducated amateur in religion. God spoke to > some improbable characters in the Old Testament. If the spirit truly catches > any give individual (and I agree that this is a relatively rare phenomenon), > and if the individual can effectively communicate the message, then I would > give that individual prophetic qualities. I go with the Calvinist flow here > that God makes the selections. > > Your definition.... “A genuine prophet has to go through a helluva lot of bad > stuff to be > taken seriously, has to persevere, and has to not only have a powerful > moral message, but an original message that contributes to knowledge.” > > I am not sure that a prophet has to be taken seriously to be a prophet, but I > do agree that the prophet should have a message that is moral and contributes > to knowledge. > > Chris > > > > > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:58 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [RC] Prophetism then and now > > Ernie : > Coming from a Baptist background, also with Lutheran and Buddhist experiences > that have shaped my understanding, and more could be added, my standards for > what constitutes valid prophetism are "high bar," to use that metaphor. > > My experience with Charismatic / Bible church prophetism in action is very > limited > and, from it, is essentially negative. By way of comparison, today's "church > prophets" > strike me as similar to a shop keeper who goes into politics, or a dentist, > or a > high school teacher. In either case it is something that one makes up as one > goes along. And, allowing for special exceptions, I have extreme difficulty > in accepting any such thing. Amateur hour in politics has no more appeal > than amateur hour in matters of faith , at least concerning such matters > that effect whole congregations or whole populations. > > Hence my criticisms of LDS doctrine that holds that all male heads of families > are "prophets." Sure they are , and being a lifelong rancher prepares one > for > being a prophet how ? Or for that matter a lifelong banker or lifelong > salesman. > Same exact principle for Bible churches, etc. > > My standard is Old Testament or, cie vous plait, Zoroastrian --in which > genuine > prophets , or prophetesses, are uncommon in any population. > > A lot about Jeremiah I disagree with, and also parts of Amos and Isaiah 1, > but these, to me are "real" prophets. As was Zarathushtra. In each case > they took on the establishment of their day, they were not reluctant to > challenge political power or religious authority. They did not do so 100% > of the time, but in all cases where it was needed. > > Do Mormon "prophets" do any such thing ? Do church "prophets" do any > such thing ? To ask the question is to answer it, of course not. > > For me that disqualifies such people from any kind of authentic prophetism. > > Not sure exactly how best to read the Apostle Paul on this issue. At times > he seems to affirm the "Charismatic" position, yet taking a very dim view > of glossolalia, but at other times his standards seem to be consistent > with the views in the Hebrew Bible / OT. In any case, while I make allowances > for exceptions, basically I am OT about this. > > A genuine prophet has to go through a helluva lot of bad stuff to be > taken seriously, has to persevere, and has to not only have a powerful > moral message, but an original message that contributes to knowledge. > Simply expressing inner spiritual feelings doesn't begin to cut it. > > My view, anyway > Billy > > > > > > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > <[email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org > > -- > Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community > <[email protected]> > Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism > Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
