What is the difference between us and a Prophet

angellous_evangellous · Oct 10, 2005

No, my point is not that God would only choose those who can understand her. Openness is not an issue at all. God captures the prophet and uses the prophet to communicate a message. No cooperation, openness, or ability is needed on the part of the prophet - it just makes life easier.

lilithu · Oct 10, 2005

When I think of what it means for any us to be a prophet, I don't think of the model prophets like Abraham and Moses. I do no have Abraham's faith, nor Moses' endurance. When I think of what it means any for us to be a prophet, I think of one more like me, weak and scared. In keeping with what AE is saying, the book of Jonah tells us that God calls unexpected people and when God calls us, we cannot help but obey.

For anyone who's interested, I posted a poem about prophets in another thread:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?p=249691#post249691

I especially liked this line:
"a prophet is supposed to redeem the future, not predict it."

angellous_evangellous · Oct 10, 2005

BTW, I was specifically thinking about Jonah. One can add Jeremiah, Isaiah, John the Baptist, Paul and many other prophets. Few of the prophets were willing and open. All of them were captured by God.

Draka · Oct 10, 2005

angellous_evangellous said:
No, my point is not that God would only choose those who can understand her. Openness is not an issue at all. God captures the prophet and uses the prophet to communicate a message. No cooperation, openness, or ability is needed on the part of the prophet - it just makes life easier.

OK, I see. I can't help but wonder though. Why would God choose a prophet that may not even believe in Her or worse yet (because She could make them believe easy enough)have a grudge against their God? Wouldn't it make more sense for Her to pass on Her messages through someone who already is open to Her and not misperceive Her Word in any way? Just a question. I'm interested to know how you view how this works. Because as you said...it would make life easier. And making sure the message is communicated and passed on with ease and accuracy would be important. Wouldn't picking someone who may be easier with the whole process assure a more accurate passing of the message?

Edit: you posted before I finished my post...you've answered a bit...can you answer why those who were chosen were chosen? Just trying to make sense of the view here. Also, assuming what I stated above may be true...is it possible that any of those prophets messages could be distorted in any way?

angellous_evangellous · Oct 10, 2005

Draka said:
OK, I see. I can't help but wonder though. Why would God choose a prophet that may not even believe in Her or worse yet (because She could make them believe easy enough)have a grudge against their God? Wouldn't it make more sense for Her to pass on Her messages through someone who already is open to Her and not misperceive Her Word in any way? Just a question. I'm interested to know how you view how this works. Because as you said...it would make life easier. And making sure the message is communicated and passed on with ease and accuracy would be important. Wouldn't picking someone who may be easier with the whole process assure a more accurate passing of the message?

Most people do have a grudge against God, so finding a person like that would be pretty tough. Perhaps God may want to change that, and the prophetic life changes even the prophet herself. Redemption is critical to the Christian message, and it is found even in God's choosing of his prophets. Take Gideon for example. God found him as a soldier hiding in a hole (winepress). Gideon surely had a grudge against God - God was not establishing the people in the land. But God redeemed Gideon and gave him special victory in life, and a message for God's people.

Misunderstanding really is not an issue. When God captures someone, the message must come out. It makes life easier to submit to God, but God will accomplish his (I do not think of God as exclusively male or female, but the male pronoun is overused) will no matter what.

Draka · Oct 10, 2005

OK. So you believe that God speaks directly through someone...His words alone...the person's own stance on something has no bearing on anything. Ok. Well, I guess that cinches up any question as to the accuracy of what they say then. Okie Dokie...got it now. Thanks.

Katzpur · Oct 10, 2005

lilithu said:
I must confess that I do not know what you're referring to in terms of "ordinances." I don't recall anyone talking about the sacrament of marriage until St. Paul. As for baptism, yes, Jesus was baptized by his older cousin John but that only makes me think that baptism already existed as a practice before Jesus. So I question whether it was Jesus who "ordained" marriage and baptism or any of the other sacraments of the church.

Sorry, I probably should have used the word "sacraments." I view sacraments and ordinances as essentially the same thing. The Latter-day Saints generally use the word "ordinances" instead, unless we are specifically talking about the sacrament of the Last Supper, which we call "the Sacrament." I believe that there are seven sacraments or ordinances in the Church, and that they were all a part of the Church Jesus Christ established. As far as I know, most Protestants believe in only two of them, but I can never remember which two. Catholicism, like Mormonism, accepts all seven. They just call some of them by different names. So you think that when Jesus told His Apostles to go out into the world, teach His gospel, and baptize those who would accept it, you don't, evidently, think He was speaking of baptism by water. Is that right?

In fact, what I remember is Jesus calling on people to leave their homes and families, sell everything they own and follow him. I would argue that Jesus was radically anti-establishment, and that he was a communist in the true sense of the word (everyone sharing and everyone being equal), and that religious structure and hierarchy was what he was fighting against.

Hmmm. That's interesting. I agree that He was pretty "anti-establishment," but I don't see this as meaning that there was not order, and even a specific structure, in His Church. I'll have to admit, that your saying He was a communist in the true sense of the word made me laugh. I say that because I understand what you are saying and I even agree (aside from the fact that the word "communist" has some very negative connotations). Back in the early days of the LDS Church, they attempted to live according to what they called "the United Order." It was supposed to be a true utopian society where every shared everything and everyone was equal. Unfortunately, it failed miserably, since very few people are ready to be that "Christian."

When Jesus said "upon this rock (Peter) I will found my church" I personally believe that he meant the community of all believers, not just the hierarchical organization that developed from that. It all depends on what "church" means there. And since "church" did not exist at the time as we know it, I see no reason personally to interpret that as Jesus referring specifically to the thing that later became known as the church. (We all know that there are people who belong to a church who don't really believe and there are people who believe who don't belong to a church.) I believe that Jesus was simply saying that he had brought a message, and that he was trusting Peter (and the others) to pass on that message to others, and that they would in turn pass on that message to still others, and so on and so on. The church then is the community of all believers, all followers of Jesus' word.

Wow! I couldn't disagree more. But I don't want to totally hijack this thread. I've already semi-hijacked it, I think. Maybe we can talk some other time about this.

I believe that the truths that Jesus taught are just as significant today as they were then. And I believe that striving to live a good life is all that is of consequence to God. That is why I do not worry about differences of belief between us - Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, UU, Hindu, atheist... - because I do not believe that God will judge us based on whether our beliefs were "right." We are judged by our hearts and actions, and anyone who sincerely tries to live a good life is judged to be right in the eyes of the Lord. The only time I am concerned about differing interpretations of the bible is when someone's interpretation harms someone else. I am concerned about interpretations that justify racism or sexism, etc. I am concerned about interpretations that put so much emphasis on the afterlife that it encourages people to ignore this life and their duty to help their brothers and sisters in need. When I read the gospels, what I see is someone who instructed us to love God more than anything (more than our own possessions, more than our own individual beliefs), who instructed us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves and said that even our enemies are our neighbors (parable of the Good Samaritan), who said that feeding, clothing, and caring about the least powerful of humanity is the same as feeding, clothing, and caring about God (Matthew 25:34-45) Yes, I believe his teachings are just as important today, and honestly I think we are in dire need of hearing his message today.

I agree that the most important of all His teachings was love. And I believe how we treat one another is going to carry a lot of weight with God when we stand before Him to be judged. I just believe that the other "truths" are important, too, and that without a prophet who can receive continued revelation from God, we'd be "tossed about with every wind of doctrine," just like Paul said would be the case without the organization Jesus Christ established.

I've got to say one thing for you Unitarians (the Christian ones, at least). You've got to be the most open-minded people around. No wonder you guys never seem to get into fights with anyone!

Kathryn

Katzpur · Oct 10, 2005

angellous_evangellous said:
No, my point is not that God would only choose those who can understand her.

Excuse me, but didn't you say somewhere that you're a Baptist preacher? And you are referring to God as "she"? You've got to explain yourself!

ChrisP · Oct 10, 2005

Terrywoodenpic said:
What is the difference between you and me having a message from God and a Prophet recieving the same message?

Is there a difference in Kind between a Prophet and us?

Why would God differentiate?

Forgetting what might be written. Can you think of a reason why God would no longer Have Prophets?

My view is that it is most likely that there are prophets.
It is just that most Churches are so set against them that they are neither acknowledged nor their messages respected?

Terry_______________________________
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.

I believe that if you can stay still for long enough, and empty your head of thought. Gods nature (maybe not will) is revealed to you.

So I guess we're all prophets.

Katzpur · Oct 10, 2005

SnaleSpace said:
I believe that if you can stay still for long enough, and empty your head of thought. Gods nature (maybe not will) is revealed to you.

So I guess we're all prophets.

How do we know that what is being revealed to us is from God? Why do you believe that we get different messages from Him, sometimes even contradictory ones?

ChrisP · Oct 10, 2005

Katzpur said:
How do we know that what is being revealed to us is from God? Why do you believe that we get different messages from Him, sometimes even contradictory ones?

I think the messenger has more to do with it than the sender

.

God is three things, Compassionate, patient, simple. That's all I need to know

Katzpur · Oct 10, 2005

SnaleSpace said:
God is three things, Compassionate, patient, simple.

I agree.

That's all I need to know

Wow, you're lucky! I wish I were in your shoes!

ChrisP · Oct 10, 2005

Sometimes I think I need to know more, then I meditate and the experience is enough to remind me that it doesn't matter.

Being close to God in spirit is an amazing experience, that I wish more people could have, if only to affirm (or reaffirm) their faith. I'm sure prayer is the same for you?

Katzpur · Oct 10, 2005

SnaleSpace said:
Being close to God in spirit is an amazing experience, that I wish more people could have, if only to affirm (or reaffirm) their faith. I'm sure prayer is the same for you?

Yes, more or less. I just don't think I'll ever get through learning.

lilithu · Oct 10, 2005

Katzpur said:
So you think that when Jesus told His Apostles to go out into the world, teach His gospel, and baptize those who would accept it, you don't, evidently, think He was speaking of baptism by water. Is that right?

Yes, I believe he was refering to baptism thru the Holy Spirit.

Katzpur said:
Back in the early days of the LDS Church, they attempted to live according to what they called "the United Order." It was supposed to be a true utopian society where every shared everything and everyone was equal. Unfortunately, it failed miserably, since very few people are ready to be that "Christian."

Very few people are ready to be that "Christian" including myself.

Katzpur said:
Wow! I couldn't disagree more. But I don't want to totally hijack this thread. I've already semi-hijacked it, I think. Maybe we can talk some other time about this.

Sure. Tho I don't know what else we can say other than to agree to disagree.

Katzpur said:
I agree that the most important of all His teachings was love. And I believe how we treat one another is going to carry a lot of weight with God when we stand before Him to be judged. I just believe that the other "truths" are important, too, and that without a prophet who can receive continued revelation from God, we'd be "tossed about with every wind of doctrine," just like Paul said would be the case without the organization Jesus Christ established.

I will admit that this is something that we UUs struggle with. On the one hand, we tend to reject tradition and hierarchy as being "oppressive," believing that humanity's innate goodness will express itself if allowed to. But otoh, we are often directionless and perhaps too quick to change with the times. All I can do is admit that we don't have all the answers, and like most people we are trying as best we can.

Katzpur said:
I've got to say one thing for you Unitarians (the Christian ones, at least). You've got to be the most open-minded people around. No wonder you guys never seem to get into fights with anyone!

My first reaction to this is to say that I'm not Christian. I don't know if you realize this but I spend time in the other forums as well, and my personal practice is more Buddhist and nature-based than anything else. But then again, I've had (liberal) Christian friends tell me that they consider me to be Christian (and my ethics are most definately Christian), so who am I to argue? I certainly don't think it's a label to be avoided.

But at the risk of completely hijacking this thread, let me tell you my views on Christ so that you know where I am coming from. (These are my personal views and if anyone wants to argue with me about their validity, too bad. I will not defend these views in this particular thread.) I believe that Jesus was a human being. Whether by God's design or by Jesus' own doings or both, I believe that Jesus was filled with the Holy Spirit and knew the will of God - he and God were one - and he taught God's will to us. I do not believe that he died in order to redeem our sins, as I do not believe that God requires a blood sacrifice. But I do believe that Jesus willingly died in order to preserve God's message. And as such he is the ideal of what we ought to be - one who knows God's will and practices it in his daily life and is willing to die in order to preserve it. Personally, I believe that it is this ideal as the perfect role model that was ressurrected as the Christ that lives within the hearts of his followers. I contemplate the life and teachings of Jesus almost every day, but my devotion ultimately is to God. I leave it up to you to decide from what I've written whether I am Christian or not. But of course I hope that whatever you decide to call me that we still respect each other. I certainly respect you!

Unitarians in general are very open-minded when it comes to differences of belief. We have to be because we experience so much of it within out own ranks!

But I don't get along with everyone by any means. I find it especially grating when people talk down to people who disagree with them, or talk as if they have all the answers. Since I have never seen you be anything other than respectful to people of other faiths, and firm yet humble in your own beliefs, how could I not get along with you?

Majikthise · Oct 11, 2005

The difference between us and a prophet?

From my atheistic point of veiw, we (common folk) are relatively sane and ,for the most part , real.

IMHO

Bennettresearch · Oct 11, 2005

Terrywoodenpic said:
Kathryn

This shows me that God has given us all gifts (various abilities) to enable us to do the work of Christ.

It certainly does not limit the number of each, or say who they should be, except that they (the abilities) are the gift of God. Nor does it say the chosen people were born with the gift or that they are appointed by God at some other particular time during there lives. It still leaves a lot of possibilities open for how God dispenses his gifts, and to who might receive them.

Hi Terry.

Yes, to be aprophet requires a certain gift, that which allows their brain to receive. One has to be able to quit thinking so much to do this. AS far as our brains go, we all have this ability to some degree. Someone said it best once when they said; "We all can sing, but some people are better singers than other."

Bennettresearch · Oct 11, 2005

Binyamin said:
Jewish prophets were Torah observant Jews, steeped in the law of Moses, both following it themselves, and admonishing the people to do the same when the people strayed from it. Thus, Jewish law and tradition is the ONLY framework that you can examine their prophesies in. Examining them in another framework, or even outside any framework, is an exercise in the ridiculous. It would be as ridiculous as reading an American court's opinion in a case while disregarding 200 years of common law precedent. Who would even think to do such a thing? Doing something like that both makes no sense and would render the opinion senseless. Yet, that is precisely what Christians do in my opinion. To make the Jewish prophesies, prophesied by religious, law abiding, law cherishing Jewish prophets fit your conclusions, Christians are willing turn Jewish law and tradition on its head. I understand that they may be ready, willing and able to disregard the paramount context of the prophesies. But I don't see why the prophets themselves would do that.

This is the main reason why Jews tend to ignore the laws of Jesus and the Christian prophets that stemmed from Jesus's teaching.

Hi Bin,

I agree whole heartedly. I am writing a book about Ezekiel and the first thing I point out is that the mellenialists who want to hijack his prophecy are re-interpreting it. And also, Ezekiel did not see a UFO, his vision had a message within it about the Temple and was directed at the present audience. Not some distant civilization 2000 years later. It is also apparent that his prophecy only reached to the rebuilding of the Temple after the return from the Babylonian captivity. He did not forsee the future destruction by the Romans.

I will disagree with your last sentence. Jesus was a Jewish prophet, He just wasn't an establishment prophet. I think the Jews at that time were afraid of the changes He said He would make.

Bennettresearch · Oct 11, 2005

Katzpur said:
How do we know that what is being revealed to us is from God? Why do you believe that we get different messages from Him, sometimes even contradictory ones?

Hi Katz,

Got to agree with Snale on this one. Two things are very important. You have to have the ability to know the difference between something that comes from outside of you and something that may come from your own mind. The mind can generate all kinds of thoughts and images from the subconscious. To know when something is truly coming from without, one needs to know their own mind. The second most important thing is to be able to interpret what is being received properly. Our minds once again may interfere with this.

Bennettresearch · Oct 11, 2005

lilithu said:
Very few people are ready to be that "Christian" including myself.

Hi Lil,

Forget about this utopian interpretation. Jesus commanded His apostles to follow Him like that. He was not indicating it as a life style for everyone. He most likely would have settled in one place and had a domestic life at some point in the future, but we all know what happened to any plans He may have had.

Craig

What is the difference between us and a Prophet

angellous_evangellous

Guest

The Devil's Advocate

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Wonder Woman

angellous_evangellous

Guest

Wonder Woman

Not your average Mormon

Not your average Mormon

Veteran Member

Not your average Mormon

Veteran Member

Not your average Mormon

Veteran Member

Not your average Mormon

The Devil's Advocate

Majikthise

Guest

Politically Incorrect

Politically Incorrect

Politically Incorrect

Politically Incorrect