Ecclesiastes 9:5

[Bucky Ball]

Prophets didn't "prophesize" anything, in the modern sense of the word.
It's the well-known "presentist" error of what the prophets were supposed to do.
That's what I'm talking about. Total ignorance of the culture. Using prophesy in this way is ignorance of the culture.
The role of a prophet in Hebrew culture was NEVER to predict the future, in fact it's forbidden.
The ONLY way to understand the culture is to do the work, and STUDY it.

The ancient role of a prophet in Hebrew culture was to interpret the words or will of their god to the people OF THEIR OWN DAY. NOT to predict the future. (That's Hollywood's idea of the role of a prophet).

So you often hear fundies talking about "prophesy", and how various prophesies were a 'foretelling", or prediction of the future, and indeed they count them up as "proof" that Jebus or whatever HAS to be true, as the "prophecy" came true.

In fact Leviticus forbade fortune telling and divination, so we know it was an abomination to even think in these terms for many/most centuries in Hebrew culture.
However, with the rise of Apocalypticism, around the turn of the millennium, this changed somewhat, and is evidenced in many Christian writings, including the gospels, as they adopted the notions absent in ancient Israel, but coming into popular view with the Essenes. In terms of Hebrew culture, and the "telling of or prediction of" the future, was unknown, and forbidden, and not at ALL a view of the major prophets themselves. However in the the new view, certain "hidden meanings" or "pesherim" began to be looked for, in the practice of Midrash. The name for this is called "pesher", (or seeking a "hidden meaning"), which was not even known to the original speaker/writer, but only "revealed" later
to certain believers. Originally, the (plural) "pesherim" were only fully revealed to the Son of Righteousness, (the leader of the Essenes), and the idea was first found and fully understood after scholars read the Dead Sea scrolls, and was a sub category of "Midrash", (or study of the texts).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesher
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash

Thus we see that "prophesy" as fortune telling as began to be practiced in Judaism around the First Century, (and picked up by Christians and the gospel writers), really was a very late invention and never a classical part of Hebrew scripture, or understanding, either interpretation, or intention, and certainly was not the function of the ancient office of "prophet", in Hebrew culture, who was to be a "mouthpiece" to the people of their own day, and not Madame Zelda with her crystal ball.

Deuteronomy 18:10
"Let no one be found among you who sacrifices their son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft". ,

---

Prophesy is not about sooth-saying. It was forbidden. We get that your level of education about religion is about the 2nd Grade level.
https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/rel...508899007/
You can cherry-pick any bullshit from anywhere, as you do.

But do please, continue to demonstrate your total ignorance of ancient Hebrew culture.
You're nothing but an ignorant amateur.

https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780765799982/Me...prophecies.
Their role was NOT to be a soothsayer.
"Their task was to warn, criticize the morals and ethics of their day, and counsel and comfort the Israelite people."

"Today’s world misunderstands prophecy. We see it as a foretelling of the future, but that is not what prophecy was about in the days when the various books of the Bible were written, and prophecy is not about fortune-telling today, either.

A biblical prophet’s purpose was to hold up a mirror to society so believers could see who they really were and how they were acting. A prophet held a yardstick to society and said you are or are not measuring up to God’s standard. For example, the prophet Nathan confronted David when the king had Uriah killed and took Bathsheba as a wife. Because of Nathan’s words, David recognized his sinfulness, accepted the consequences and repented.

Prophecy sometimes includes a statement about what will happen in the future. But this soothsaying should not be viewed as definite, unchanging predictions of what is to come. The prophet is saying, "If you continue your evil ways, this is what will happen to you in the future. If you change your ways to conform to God’s desires, your life will have a different future.” "In the familiar story about Jonah, the prophet goes to Nineveh at God’s insistence to tell the Ninevites they will be punished for their sinful ways. The Ninevites respond to Jonah’s prophecy by atoning for their sins, and God refrains from sending down His wrath. Jonah, then, is upset because God forgives the Ninevites. Jonah feels like a fool for expressing the prophecy.

But in the story, Jonah did not understand the purpose of prophecy. Prophecy is never about telling the future; it is always about attempting to change current behavior to be in line with God’s laws and desires for humankind. When that purpose is accomplished, there is no need for the undesirable future to occur." "Likewise, prophecy may tell of good that will be done".

---

[Angrboda]

That being said, it's not clear that something has to be intended as prophecy for it to be prophetic.

[Bucky Ball]

That being said, it's not clear that something has to be intended as prophecy for it to be prophetic.

But what is clear, is that omen-reading and soothsaying was not a part of the Hebrew role of a prophet, and the present day understanding 
of what "prophesy" was is wrong fundamentally, NOT "because it didn't *come true*, but ibecause it's ignorance of that culture and history. 
Another example of "presentism".

As Rabbi Sachs wrote "When a prophesy comes true, it's a failed prophesy, and if it did not, it's a successful prophesy".
Why ? Because the prophet addressed the people of his time, often in a warning that they are not doing what they should be.
If the people listen and take his advice, (which is all "prophesy" is ... advice), then the bad things he warns them of DO NOT HAPPEN, and the prophesy was successful.
If the people do not accept the advice, the warning (prophesy) failed as they did not heed the advice.

Prophesy as such is always intended. The prophets always intentionally were telling the people of their own day, what the will of their god AT THE TIME.
Looking for The "hidden" meanings was never intentional. Looking for "hidden meanings" did not even start until they (the prophets) were all long dead,
It was a novel use of the texts.

This is a very very common misunderstanding of the nature of prophesy. Most Bible 101 students learn this in the first week.
There are open courses at both Harvard and Yale on the topic.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That being said, it's not clear that something has to be intended as prophecy for it to be prophetic.

Isn’t this what’s known as ‘coincidence’?

Boru

[FlatAssembler]

@Bucky Ball If you call me an ignorant amateur, have you published any papers about social sciences? Because I have, most recently about the river names in Croatia, and that paper got mentioned by Glas Slavonije (you can read an English-language summary of that paper on my blog). What qualifications do you have to talk about the matters of social sciences?

It's undeniable that Matthew claimed that the prophets predicted many things in Jesus'es life in the Messianic prophecies, the Gospel of Matthew is full of such claims. What Jews actually believed is another question entirely. You think the Jews didn't believe the Messiah would come? Sounds like a very weird claim. Even more extraordinary than that the authors of the Bible didn't believe in afterlife (when mediums such as the Witch of Endor are being discussed in the Bible).

[arewethereyet]

[Bucky Ball]

@Bucky Ball If you call me an ignorant amateur, have you published any papers about social sciences? Because I have, most recently about the river names in Croatia, and that paper got mentioned by Glas Slavonije (you can read an English-language summary of that paper on my blog). What qualifications do you have to talk about the matters of social sciences?

It's undeniable that Matthew claimed that the prophets predicted many things in Jesus'es life in the Messianic prophecies, the Gospel of Matthew is full of such claims. What Jews actually believed is another question entirely. You think the Jews didn't believe the Messiah would come? Sounds like a very weird claim. Even more extraordinary than that the authors of the Bible didn't believe in afterlife (when mediums such as the Witch of Endor are being discussed in the Bible).

Social Sciences are totally irrelevant to the topic at hand. 
In fact, your argument here is an example of the Argument from Authority fallacy. (Argumentum ad vericundiam). 
Being an expert in one field does not make you an authority in another. Obviously you're a total amateur here. 

Clearly you have read NOT ONE of the references provided to you. 
But I get it's upsetting to be shown your arguments are worthless. 

Of course the authors of Matthew attempted to made it look like various prophets were "predicting" something. 
The prophets were talking to the people of their OWN time about a totally different subject. They "predicted" NOTHING about a Jesus. Some later erroneously INTERPTREYED them to be about him.
It was the NEW use of prophesy I already told you about, you might learn about if you ever bother to actually study anything on this topic. 

LONG after the prophets, who intended to warn / speak to the people of their OWN day, around the time of the Essenes, some began to look for "hidden meanings", which were only revealed in full to the head of the Essenes, The Son of Righteousness. Before this, "prediction" was never understood to be a part of prophesy, and that was never understood until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and read.

Matthew was addressed to a Hebrew community and his aim was to show that Jesus fulfilled some of the hidden meanings which had NOTHING at all to do with what the prophets were advising / warning their own people about. The prophets themselves NEVER had an idea that they were "predicting" anything It was not their role. I will not try to defend this I provided JEWISH references, and it's common knowledge in virtually every Biblical Studies Department on the planet, (except Fundamentalist schools, who refuse the truth about just about everything.)

Take some classes. Watch some videos. You might learn something about ancient Hebrew culture and early Christianity.
 
You obviously actually understood nothing I wrote about. The Witch of Endor conjured the (DEAD) shade of Samuel. 
He's not in heaven, or hell. He's (just as I told you) in a dormant state, in Sheol. Obviously you didn't get that either. 

https://academic.oup.com/book/1920/chapt...m=fulltext
Your level of knowledge about these things is very disappointing, and probably not worth my time on, teaching you 3rd Grade Jewish History and Religion.

Oxford Universit :
"Christian readers typically misunderstand prophecy in the Bible because they assume that its primary intent is to foretell the future. This chapter shows that the intent of the genre of prophecy in the Hebrew Bible was not primarily to predict the future—certainly not hundreds of years in advance—but rather to address specific social, political, and religious circumstances in ancient Israel and Judah. This means that there is no prediction of Christ in the Hebrew Bible. The writers of the New Testament and later Christian literature reinterpreted or reapplied the Hebrew prophecies."

With every word you write, you demonstrate your lack of education in these matters.

[Bucky Ball]

@Bucky Ball If you call me an ignorant amateur, have you published any papers about social sciences? Because I have, most recently about the river names in Croatia, and that paper got mentioned by Glas Slavonije (you can read an English-language summary of that paper on my blog). What qualifications do you have to talk about the matters of social sciences?

It's undeniable that Matthew claimed that the prophets predicted many things in Jesus'es life in the Messianic prophecies, the Gospel of Matthew is full of such claims. What Jews actually believed is another question entirely. You think the Jews didn't believe the Messiah would come? Sounds like a very weird claim. Even more extraordinary than that the authors of the Bible didn't believe in afterlife (when mediums such as the Witch of Endor are being discussed in the Bible).

Social Sciences are totally irrelevant to the topic at hand. 
In fact, your argument here is an example of the Argument from Authority fallacy. (Argumentum ad vericundiam). 
Being an expert in one field does not make you an authority in another. Obviously you're a total amateur here. 

Clearly you have read NOT ONE of the references provided to you. 
But I get it's upsetting to be shown your arguments are worthless. 

Of course the authors of Matthew attempted to made it look like various prophets were "predicting" something. 
The prophets were talking to the people of their OWN time about a totally different subject. They "predicted" NOTHING about a Jesus. Some later erroneously INTERPTREYED them to be about him.  
It was the NEW use of prophesy I already told you about, you might learn about if you ever bother to actually study anything on this topic. 

LONG after the prophets, who intended to warn / speak to the people of their OWN day, around the time of the Essenes, some began to look for "hidden meanings", which were only revealed in full to the head of the Essenes, The Son of Righteousness. Before this, "prediction" was never understood to be a part of prophesy, and that was never understood until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and read. Prophets *warned* the people of their own time to change their ways OR (the) something bad might happen. If the people changed their ways, it would not happen, and the "prophesy was successful if the people accepted the warning, took it to heart, and changed. A successful prophesy does not come about, as the warning is heeded.

Matthew was addressed to a Hebrew community and his aim was to show that Jesus fulfilled some of the hidden meanings which had NOTHING at all to do with what the prophets were advising. and warning their own people about. The prophets themselves NEVER had an idea that they were "predicting" anything It was not their role. I will not try to defend this I provided JEWISH references, and it's common knowledge in virtually every Biblical Studies Department on the planet, (except Fundamentalist schools, who refuse the truth about just about everything.)

Take some classes. Watch some videos. You might learn something about ancient Hebrew culture and early Christianity.
 
You obviously actually understood nothing I wrote about. The Witch of Endor conjured the (DEAD) shade of Samuel. 
He's not in heaven, or hell. He's (just as I told you) in a dormant state, in Sheol. Obviously you didn't get that either. 

https://academic.oup.com/book/1920/chapt...m=fulltext
Your level of knowledge about these things is very disappointing, and probably not worth my time, teaching you 3rd Grade religion.

Oxford University :
"Christian readers typically misunderstand prophecy in the Bible because they assume that its primary intent is to foretell the future. This chapter shows that the intent of the genre of prophecy in the Hebrew Bible was not primarily to predict the future—certainly not hundreds of years in advance—but rather to address specific social, political, and religious circumstances in ancient Israel and Judah. This means that there is no prediction of Christ in the Hebrew Bible. The writers of the New Testament and later Christian literature reinterpreted or reapplied the Hebrew prophecies.

[Astreja]

So, if Hebrew has the past tense, why does it say "God says" rather than "God said"?

In English there's such a thing as the "historical present." 

So if you're writing a history book, you might tell the events of the past in present tense. Something like, "At this point Caesar is unaware of the plot against him, so he attends the Senate meeting as usual. While Caesar remains undefended, Publius Servilius Casca strikes the first blow." If it's clear from context what time you're writing about, narration is often done this way.

When we were studying tenses in Latin last winter/spring, we learned that Latin can do this as well - Sometimes a writer will start describing a historical event in the present tense (for example, a battle scene).

[Belacqua]

If it was a word of God, God wouldn't allow his word to get corrupt.

Are you sure you're allowed to say what God would and wouldn't allow? I thought that was supposed to be up to him. 

I'm wary of people arguing that they know exactly what an omniscient omnipotent being would do. 

If God really had something to say to humanity, why wouldn't it magically appear in everybody's native language? They are people living in small tribes speaking only some small language who haven't even heard the God's word, much less believe it. At the very least, God could somehow make mistranslations not be a problem.

It's interesting to me that your view is exactly like the strict atheists here. They also say that if God wanted to give us a book, he would make it precise and clear and full of useful and unambiguous instructions. The model seems to be an engineering textbook, or maybe instructions for assembling furniture from Ikea. 

I'm not sure if that's really the best kind of book, or if people in biblical times thought it would be a good kind of book. 

Maybe the best type of book is like Plato's Symposium, in which people propose a half dozen answers to a hard question, and then a bunch of drunk people show up, and then it's time to go home. Or maybe it's like an Emily Dickinson poem, which won't give us a clear message no matter how hard we squeeze it. Or maybe it's like one of Blake's book-length poems, in which all the words are spoken by the characters, and Blake's own opinion appears nowhere -- he believed that a book which is clear must also be wrong.

If God sees all time as eternally present, then he knows exactly what interpretation will appear at what moment. Since I'm not omniscient or omnipotent, I can't say that I'd rule out providing a book that's a puzzling fizzing jumble, with which people struggle.