Prophecy

Having been in self-imposed excommunication from the church for seven years, my reintroduction was bound to introduce me to various new themes floating around in Christian culture. One of the most prominent themes that I hear thrown around is ‘prophecy’. I have heard a number of people being flippantly referred to as prophets, and even more people claiming to ‘speak words of prophecy’, or having had such prophetic ‘words’ spoken over them. The common use of term ‘prophecy’ in the today’s parlance seems to be conveniently pliant and hopelessly confused and vague.

But just what is prophecy, and what function did the prophet play in history? Like usual, Scripture gives quite clear answers.

The Bible describes the prophet as having a very precise purpose and function, prophets were not people who just predicted the future as is commonly thought. To use a modern analogy, they were basically God’s ‘prosecuting attorneys’, whose specific purpose was to bring God’s lawsuit against both God’s people and the nations that surrounded Israel. So just as a modern prosecuting attorney will represent the government in charging a criminal for an alleged crime, God also sent His prophets to charge His people with a particular crime.

At the start of Ezekiel’s prophetic mission, God enunciated a very clear definition of what prophecy exactly is:

“When I say to a wicked person, “You will surely die,” and you do not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their evil ways in order to save their life, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. But if you do warn the wicked person and they do not turn from their wickedness or from their evil ways, they will die for their sin; but you will have saved yourself.” Ezekiel 3:18-19.

Here we see four clear attributes of a prophecy: 1) identification of sin, 2) dissuasion from sin/call to repentance, 3) pronouncement of punishment for unrepented sin, 4) accountability of the prophet to his task.

So while a prophet would certainly pronounce a future punishment, this was only a small part of the prophet’s purpose. It is important to note that the prediction of the future was always contingent on repentance. If the offending people did repent of their sin, then God’s punishment would be revoked. We see this in Jonah’s prophecy of the destruction of Nineveh where the prediction of their destruction did not come to pass because the people did heed God’s warning and repented.

So the primary purpose of the prophet was not to warn the people of God’s impending wrath, but rather to persuade them to cease their sinful ways and turn back to God. It is God’s love that motivates the prophecy, not wrath.

1 Corinthians 14:3-4 gives another good general guide to what the effect of prophecy is; “everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort”, and “he who prophesies edifies the church”. These verses should not be misconstrued to mean that the prophecy of the New Testament should be solely positive and feel-good. One only has to look at the prophecy in the book of Revelation where the seven churches are addressed to see that quite a lot of harsh words were said of them. Also, while the Old Testament prophecy contained a lot of harsh rebuke, it also contained much encouragement and comfort too (Hos 11:14, 14, Joel 3:17-21, Amos 9:11-15, Mic 7:8-20). And what would be a more effective way to edify the church than for it’s sins to be made known? Progress can not be made unless one’s stumbling blocks are known.

So we see that prophecy also contains encouragement and comfort in tandem with warnings of God’s wrath. Both are integral parts of prophecy. 

The Bible makes it clear that there are just as many false prophets as true prophets, so we need to be discerning when listening to anybody who claims to be speaking prophecy. The two most effective methods for identifying a true prophet from a false prophet are:   1) to see if the specific prophecy comes true. “If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously” Deuteronomy 18:22.               2) “By their fruit you will recognise them.” Matt 2:15,16. The fruit of the spirit is of course a reference to Gal 5:22-23, which is in contrast to the works of the flesh Gal 5:19-21, which would be manifest in the false prophet.

Also prophets are always described as spreading their message on the streets to all the people concerned with total conviction and a desperate vehemence. Prophets do not timidly whisper their message in a church corner.

So in summery we find a number of principles in the Bible for discerning between true and false prophets. These are the characteristics that the Bible describes of a true prophet:

1)      The prophet must be prophesying directly to the people concerned

2)      Specific sins will be identified

3)      The prophet will call the offending people to repent

4)      Specific punishment will be identified for unrepentant sin

5)      Specific blessings with be identified for repentance

6)      The prophecy must identify a path to edification

7)      The prophecy must come true

8)      The fruit of the prophet must be of spirit, not of the flesh

          It is obvious from all this that prophecy isn’t the mere prediction of calamity or blessing- this would be better defined as ‘revelation’- but instead true prophecy will include the above biblical principles. Also it is a quite poignant note that an extremely high responsibility is upon the shoulders of the prophet to do his job properly. This should serve as a dire warning to anybody who wishes to call their words prophecy; it is not a risk-free and glamorous job, and it is also your life that is on the line. So people should be extremely cautious that their compulsion to call their words prophecy is not in anyway a whimsical or self-aggrandizing compulsion. God takes prophecy extremely seriously:

“Woe to the foolish prophets who follow their own spirit and have seen nothing!”, “My hand will be against the prophets who see false visions and utter lying divinations” Ezekiel 13:3, 9.

“But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’” Deut 18:20

           The whole modern understanding of ‘prophecy’ seems to be based on a confusion between ‘prophecy’ and ‘revelation’. If someone is only stating what will happen in the future, then this is revelation, NOT prophecy. The two are categorically different things.

A Spiritual Faith

Having gone through some rather painful relationship trauma lately (hence the large hiatus between posts), I’ve tried to be more Bible-centric. I’ve spend quite a bit of time ruminating on Psalms.

The spirituality of old-school JudeoChristanity is blowing my mind! As a consequence of my rigid traditional Lutheran upbringing, I’ve been stuck in a very dry and insipid rationalism my whole life – which has been instrumental in my campaign against atheism- but I’m starting to see everything in a far more rich spiritual light. I was struck by a quote of Athanasius of Alexandria on the spiritual response one should get from Psalms:

“And it seems to me that these words become like a mirror to the persons singing them, so that he might perceive himself and the emotions of his soul, and thus affected, he might recite them. For in fact he who hears the one reading receives the song that is recited as being about him, and either, when he is convicted by his conscience, being pierced, he will repent, or hearing of the hope that resides in God, and of the succour available to believers –how this kind of grace exists for him – he exults and begins to give thanks to God”

Lately whenever I find myself in some sort of emotional bind, I have been turning to the Psalms and have indeed found succour in them.

Following the lead of David, I have found that spontaneous and heartfelt hallelujah throughout the day –in addition to prayer- leads to a deeper and more spiritual relationship with God.

The Bible like a Jigsaw Puzzle

The Bible like a Jigsaw Puzzle

Christians are constantly bombarded with challenges from critics who claim that the Christian religion is nothing more than a delusion. They say that there are many inconsistencies, contradictions and faux pas which are consistent with Christianity being a manmade phenomenon.

Making sense of such a manmade religion would be like trying to piece together a puzzle that is made up of pieces that are from many different puzzles; they just won’t form a coherent whole.

But I have found that these criticisms are merely superficial challenges, and when you set your mind to investigating them, all the alleged incongruent pieces tend to eventually fall quite neatly into place.

The cynical atheist when he looks at the Bible, sees a huge pile of puzzle pieces jumbled together. He nonchalantly picks up a few random pieces but can’t make them fit together. He does this a few more times then just gives up. The cynic, being overawed by the complexity and the fact that he has never done a puzzle before, simply throws his hands in the air and claims that the pieces simply can’t be put together.

But the Christian has faith that the Bible is true and does make sense, he knows that you just have to work a bit harder at it, just like a 5000 piece jigsaw puzzle. The complexity of the puzzle means that it is not just going to fit together easily in a short amount of time, you have to have patience and dedication in sitting down to analyse and try different combinations of pieces. But eventually the whole puzzle starts to come together, piece by piece, cluster by cluster, into an intricate and complex, but stunningly beautiful and rewarding apogee.  

And this is certainly true of the Bible and Christianity, the more that I have been challenged by often abusive critics, and the more that I have researched and pondered the problems, the better the alleged inconsistencies fit together. Things like the alleged contradictions between Old Testament Law and the New, or the faux pas cruelties of the Old Testament; you just have to look a bit deeper and try a bit harder.

In the end, when you have studied the Bible and all the criticisms charged against it, you see that it is entirely consistent, not just within itself, but with the world around us. It is no wonder why Christianity has been such a powerful force for so long; it just makes so much sense!

Interpreting Scripture

It is generally agreed by laymen and Biblical scholars alike that the best way to interpret the meaning of Scripture is to compare it to itself (that is, cross-referencing with itself), and that a good rule is that the Bible should be taken as literal unless it obviously means otherwise, as is obviously the case with Psalms or Revelations.


Yet when the topic of Creation and the Flood is discussed, the rules suddenly change and we are told that Scripture should also be interpreted by "science" whenever the two disagree.



Essentially what is implied-consciously or not- is that the Christian worldview is to be subordinate to all other worldviews, particularly the currently reigning secular worldview. Whenever there is a disagreement between these two, the Bible is always the one that is reinterpreted. It is claimed that the “science” of the secular worldview is the acme of human knowledge and as such all other forms of knowledge must be subservient.



But what is meant by the term 'science'? It seems that the two terms ‘science’ and ‘naturalistic evolution’ are used synonymously. It is certainly true that most of the public have the fallacious impression that ‘science’ inherently means naturalistic evolution to the exclusion of all other worldviews such as YEC, OLC, theistic evolution etc. And vice versa it is believed that naturalistic evolution has exclusive rights over the term ‘science’, to the exclusion of all other worldviews (Hence why so many religious people feel compelled to reject all ‘science’ outright; they wrongly think that in order to reject evolution they must also reject ‘science’).

Science certainly is a powerful explanatory tool for acquiring knowledge. Therefore because naturalistic evolution claims exclusive rights over ‘science’ it is wrongly assumed that ‘naturalistic evolution’ must similarly be regarded as just as powerful and authoritative by synonymous association alone. Thus, it is claimed that the philosophical worldview of naturalism must be the rule to which all other worldviews conform.

It is for this reason alone that the Biblical account of origins is demanded by secularists to be subservient and must genuflect to their own worldview of naturalistic evolution.





What secularists are erroneously claiming is that any Biblical idea that conflicts with science is wrong.

But what they really mean is that any Biblical idea that conflicts with their philosophy of naturalism is wrong! It has NOTHING to do with science at all!



But what mus be remembered is that science is rather like statistics; you can pick or ignore whatever pieces of science that you like to suit whatever worldview you like; YEC, OEC, IDism, theistic evolution, deistic evolution, atheistic evolution etc, the fact is that ALL worldviews have some sort of science behind them.



So in the end we see that scientific evidence actually does comport with Scripture-rather; it is only the philosophical worldview of naturalistic evolution that does not fit with Scripture. And considering that it was originally designed to oppose the Biblical model, the fact that the two conflict should come as no surprise to anyone.

The conflict is not between ‘science’ vs the Bible at all. Instead the real conflict is between the worldviews of naturalism vs the Bible, as well as between naturalistic science vs Biblical science.



So what Christians are actually doing when trying to compromise the Bible with evolution is making the Bible subservient to the most popular worldview of today in a vain attempt to avoid embarrassment in the face of ungodly man, rather than being concerned with truth in the face of God.



Should the perspicacious Word of God really be subservient to the capricious vogue of man?

Noah's Ark

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/thinking-outside-the-box

Noah’s Ark, the Bible records this giant boat as being over 135 meters long, 22 wide and 13 meters high! People baulk at the idea of Noah’s Ark being real. They automatically think that such a prodigious structure couldn’t possibly have been built in such an ancient culture.


It is certainly easy to question the veracity of the Ark narrative when we have no physical evidence left of such a structure, but we can’t legitimately discard the narrative on these grounds alone. After all, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.



What we need to do is to look back at ancient history and look for other prodigious structures to see what ancient people really were capable of.

For example, surely the Great Pyramid of Giza could be considered a structure of similar magnitude to the Ark. The biggest of the Giza pyramids originally measured over 145 meters tall and each side 230 meters long. Such a structure required over 2.3 million blocks of stone. Still to this day- when we have the technology to send people to the moon and genetically engineer organisms- nobody knows how these giant pyramids were constructed.

Ask yourself, would anyone seriously believe historical accounts of immensely giant pyramidal structures the size of the Great Pyramid if the structure didn’t still exist? Certainly not. Scholars would certainly claim that the stories were either entirely myth or highly exaggerated accounts of much smaller structures.



I’m sure most people would agree that the Great Pyramid of Giza is considerably more sophisticated and a substantially more of a monumental achievement than Noah’s wooden Ark.

When we look at some of the amazing structures that the ancient people of history were able to achieve- giant structures which still stand many thousands of years later- then suddenly the task that Noah had in building the Ark seems quite reasonable in comparison.

Should Christians Follow the Old Testament Law?

Mathew 5:17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.”



A superficial reading of this passage seems to say that Jesus is affirming the validity of the Old Testament Law which would make them still binding for Christ’s followers.



But what did Jesus truly mean by this statement? One point is certainly true, Christ did not come to totally eliminate all the Old Testament laws and start from a blank canvass, we can certainly rule this out.

In this quote Jesus was really stressing the point that His mission wasn’t to invalidate all of God’s prior teachings and render them obsolete and defunct. He was making the point that the Law and prophecies of old were setting the stage for Christ’s arrival to fulfil them! God’s interactions with the Israelites of the Old Testament were only ‘Part 1’ of God’s ultimate plan. Jesus was explaining that He was here to instigate ‘Part 2’; the salvation.



So having pointed out that Jesus wasn’t going to scrap the Old Law, what then was his plan for the Old Law? Well, we know that Jesus did abolish many aspects of the old Law. For instance Mathew 5:38-39 states:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”

Here Jesus is quoting Exodus 21:23-24 which says ”But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,”

So we can see that Jesus is definitely abolishing at least parts of the Old Law. So this begs the question as to what He really meant when He said that he did not come to abolish the Old Law.







The second part of Mathew 5:17 explains what He did come to do; fulfil the Law and the Prophets.

The whole of the Old Testament is full of prophecies of the Messiah’s coming and what He was to achieve. This would make sense if we look at the Old Testament as being a prelude, or setting the stage, for Christ’s arrival.

Jesus further fulfilled the Old Testament by taking the Ten Commandments and further refining them:

“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment.” Mathew 5:21-22

Also:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Mathew 5:27-28

So knowing what we now know, we see that when Jesus said “I have not come to abolish“, He meant that He had no intention of totally wiping away the Old Law and starting fresh, but instead He used it as the foundation of the God’s new Covenant, and built upon it. The Old Law served as a vital basis for Jesus’ new message. He verified parts, trimmed parts and embellished other parts.

So to answer the original question; “Should Christians Follow the Old Testament Law?”

No. We are not to follow the Old Law, but we are to follow Christ’s fulfilment of it. We are to follow Jesus’ new teachings over the superseded Old Law: