Hi Chris,

On Mar 23, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Chris Hahn wrote:

> Ernie,
> 
> I agree that, in a closed system, present-day prophets can be vetted from
> the false prophets by their character and their fruits (for short-term
> prophecies).  I suppose that longer term prophecies can also be tested in a
> closed system if the system keeps track of the prophecies.  
> 
> I guess, this begs the question, has there ever been a
> generally-acknowledged open community prophet?  Jesus and Mohammad probably
> come closest.  Stretching back a bit, Abraham is the root prophet to both,
> but is that even good enough to qualify as an open system prophet?  Probably
> not to Buddhists and Hindus.
> 
> This gets back to your assertion that the recognition of prophets must be
> done in a closed community by the standards recognized by that community.

Better to say that those are are communities *created* by a prophet. And there 
are quite a lot of them (Mormonism arguably falls in that category).

So I think empirically, healthy prophets either are part of a community or 
start a community.  If a random outsider comes to you and claims to be a 
prophet, stone 'em. :-)

-- Ernie P.


> 
> Chris 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dr. Ernie Prabhakar
> Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 12:05 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [RC] Prophetism then and now
> 
> 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
> 
> -- 
> 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

Reply via email to