Talk:Prophecy/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of things that need doing

Here are some tasks you can do:

  • Wikify: being done as I go
  • Cleanup: being done as I go
  • Stubs: being done as I go
  • Verify: citation needed is being inserted where references and source require insertion. This will be relegated to the end of the edit
  • Update: yes
  • Neutrality: trying given the number of statements already made which are clearly not neutral * Copyedit: not expected
  • Merge: maybe with Prophet article, but that would require editing two articles!
  • Style: improving
  • Expand: yes
  • Requests: where citation needed is inserted, reference needs to be inserted

--Mrg3105 09:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

non-POV

I had edited the page to reflect Jewish understanding of prophecy, but someone has removed it. Before I report this article for vandalism, I will first place here an explanation of the reasons why I had performed the edit. I will then return tomorrow, and replace the edit unless someone has REALLY good arguments to the contrary.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The parts below are taken from unedited body of the article.

"Prophecy in a broad sense, is the prediction of future events or the speaking of divine words (divine Revelation) through chosen human messengers (prophets)."
  • The Jewish understanding of prophecy is that it is a warning of consequences if a given advice is not followed. It is therefore NOT a 'prediction of future'.
  • In Jewish understanding the speech, images or sounds are projected through the prophet by God. Because Jews only believe in One God, they always refer to God in English as Divine, and not 'divine'.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Use of 'Revelation' rather then 'revelation' is a blatant reference to a Christian text.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Not all prophets are 'chosen'. In most cultures such human messengers are appointed by non-Divine means (king or head priest) or are self proclaimed.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
The reference to Greek word prophet and its etymology ignores that it is a translation of the Hebrew. The Ancient Greeks did not have prophets. I therefore suggest that this information is included with reference to the Hebrew word 'navi', and the activity of prophecy, 'nevua'.
"Throughout history, people have sought knowledge of future events from special individuals or groups who were thought to have the gift of prophecy, such as Oracles at Delphi in ancient Greece. Cultures in which prophecy played an important role include the Assyrians, Celts, Chaldeans, Chinese, Druids, Egyptians, Greeks, Hebrews, Indians, indigenous North Americans, Mayans, Tibetans, and many in the Christian and Muslim traditions, among others."
  • There is no example anywhere in the Jewish scriptures of individuals who received any degree of prophecy by 'seeking knowledge of future events'. --Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • In Jewish scriptures anyone who proclaimed prophecies were not doubted of this since there is a test for revealing false prophets administered for any claimant. Therefore Hebrews can not be included in the list above.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Prophecy is not a part of Jewish tradition, but a part of Jewish knowledge. There is a difference. --Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Prophecy in religion

"In many religions, gods or other supernatural agents are thought to sometimes provide prophecies to certain individuals, sometimes known as prophets, by dreams or visions. The Tanakh, the Old Testament of the Bible, contains prophecies from various Hebrew prophets who spoke judgement upon the Israelites, foretold of their impending trials, tribulations, and then promised divine blessings if the Hebrews repented from their evil ways. The Book of Revelation in the New Testament is accepted by many Christians as a prophecy that includes divine promises of a anointed messiah or Christ that would lead the people in war and personally issue judgement at the end times and Armageddon (see Eschatology, Bible prophecy and "End of the World")."

  • Again, in Judaism no individual actively sought prophecy. Those that did claim prophecy and were acredited as such were always known as prophets, not 'sometimes'.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • In Judaism dreams and visions are but two of ten levels of prophecy. This is not a tradition but a documented definition. --Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • The Tanakh [TaNaKh] is not the 'Old Testament' of the Bible. The reference here is to the Christian Bible, but 'New Testament' is not a part of anything n Judaism, so this is a one-sided statement that does not reflect reality, particularly since Christianity does not use Jewish version of TaNaKh.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • There is not 'speaking of judgement' by prophets of Israel 'upon' the People of Israel (this is the correct way to refer to the population of ancient Israel). The role of the prophet is to WARN of the consequences of popular actions or behaviour. The judgement is done by God. In Jewish law the role of the accuser (the prophet) and the Judge (God) are separate, and this needs to be reflected.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • There is no 'repentance' as a concept in Judaism, which has teshuvah, or literally return. Repentance is a Christian concept. "Evil ways" suggests that the people were evil. However this is a misrepresentation. In Jewish understanding they were either sinful or they were obedient of the commandments (all 613 of them). Even the most sinful of people had been able to 'return' as it were...or they were killed by God. The only reference to evil in the Torah refers to homosexuality.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
"Christians believe that Jesus fulfilled many of the promises spoken in Old Testament prophecy, including that he would be called 'son of God', and that he will return in the future and fulfil other prophecies such as those in the Book of Revelation. In the New Testament, many Christians see most of Jesus' life as God speaking through Jesus' words and deeds."
  • What Christians believe is not the subject or relevant to the discussion of prophecy. Aside from this it ignores the fact that it is irrelevant what Christians believe. Jesus, if he indeed existed, was Jewish, and therefore if he claimed to be a prophet, and was confirmed as one by the Jewish Court (for which there is no evidence) he would have been expected to fulfil requirements of a Jewish prophet. Everything else above refers to the MESSIANIC concept and there is a separate article for that. Therefore the contents needs to be removed from here and pointed to the Messianic article.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • The reason the writer of the article was required to restate what the Christians believe Jesus to be is because the article dos not define what prophecy is. Prophecy is not something one group believes. Many people working in investment banking believe some analysts to be highly accurate at predicting future trends in finance, and believe their predictions on the progress of their career. This does not make the analysts prophetic.

In any case Jesus had not achieved the vast majority of prophecies attributed to him. He is called 'son of God' by the decree of the Christian dogma. Almost no one in general society calls Jesus 'son of God' these days.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"In the Bible prophecy is often referred as one of the fivefold ministries or spiritual gifts that accompany the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The five ministries being; Apostles; Prophets; Evangelists; Teachers and Pastors.(Eph. 4:11)"
  • If you refer to the TaNaKh as being part to the Bible above, then you can not refer to "fivefold ministries@ since this is a Christian concept. You also need to clarify that the 'Holy Spirit' is the literal translation of the Hebrew Ruach HaKodesh, which in Judaism is in fact not an identity of God, but the highest level of prophecy attainable.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • The concepts of "The five ministries being; Apostles; Prophets; Evangelists; Teachers and Pastors.(Eph. 4:11)" do not refer to prophecy, and are specifically Christian.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • "The focus of prophecy is not just future events though; this is only part of the prophetic gifting. Prophets often brought words of comfort, exhortation or general upliftment to the Church. Paul teaches in Corinthians that it is for the benefit of the whole body. It is not meant in Christianity for believers to know the future. But it is important for God to speak to believers as he does through his prophets."

This is a direct reference to Christianity, and how it defines prophecy. However this post-dates the Jewish definition and has to be reflected accordingly lest the reader be confused in thinking that this is shared by other faiths.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

"Muslims maintain Muhammad (circa 600 AD), was mentioned in the prophecies of earlier prophets, in the chain of their prophets like Jesus & Moses [1]. Their belief is that an angel (Gabriel) visited him in the cave called Hira on the Mount Jabal-al-Noor in Makkah. From then onwards he started reciting the Koran they believe to be from God ("Allah," in Arabic). Such events equated with dreams, visions and remote viewing by deniers were taken to be true by followers & took him to be the 'Last Prophet' until the 'End of Times'. Then again Muhammad left some prophecies about future personalities like Mahdi & the second return of Jesus. Some of the followers keep waiting for such prophecies to show up."
  • Why are Jesus and Muhammed mentioned by name and given a paragraph, but the far more numerous Jewish prophets and prophetesses are not named at all, not even Moses?! Why is revelation on Mount Sinai not mentioned at all? Why is prophecy in the First and Second Jerusalem Temples not mentioned?--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
"More recently, in the 1800's, Joseph Smith claimed to have translated golden plates through divine inspiration from Jesus, thereby producing the Book of Mormon. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that their founder was a "latter-day" prophet and that God has continued to call prophets to lead the Church in modern times."
  • In Judaism there is a term 'sons of prophets'. However there is no concept of transfer of prophecy between unrelated individuals. This needed to be included above in the introduction as a practice acceptable in Christianity.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
"In 1863, Bahá'u'lláh, the founder of the Bahá'í Faith, claimed the he is the 'Promised One' of all religions. And Baha'is see both the Jewish and Christian scriptures, especially the books of Isaiah, Daniel, Micah, and Revelation as containing many prophecies promising the coming of Baha'u'llah and the Baha'i Faith. He is not acknowledged by Christians, Jews or Muslims as the 'Promised One' as they believe the events of the End Time did not occur during his lifetime."
  • This, and the following block of text, is a reference to messianic claims and needs to be removed and included in the appropriate article.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Evidence of prophecy
"Prophecy always involves some kind of communication with the future or with different realms of existence, which are usually not discernible by or in harmony with empirical science. Therefore, sceptics consider prophecy to be false. Believers, however, claim that prophecy is possible through supernatural means, which bypass the natural laws.”
  • There is no evidence provided! Provision of evidence requires sighting of the experience by witnesses or record of the events. It would seem to me that these are missing.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • “The hypothetical power of prophecy has not been scientifically tested and remains unproven, but many people believe that certain prophecies have been fulfilled, especially if they are central to their religion. Others consider that some apparently fulfilled prophecies can be explained as simple coincidences, or that some prophecies were actually invented after the fact to match the circumstances of a past event (vaticinium ex eventu).”

This seeks to describe ‘power of prophecy’ while the evidence has not been provided. Considering that Jewish understanding maintains that prophecy is no longer possible, it is pointless to suggest that science is incapable of attesting to it without examining the arguments to the contrary! In fact this is a new topic in the article.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

  • “Many prophecies are also vague, allowing them to be applied to many possible future events. The cryptic prophecies of Nostradamus are a prime example of this, but Nostradamus's supporters argue that detailed predictions would have earned him a reputation for witchcraft or that can become a Self-defeating prophecy. Some charismatic ministers such as William Branham, Richard Rossi, and Paul Cain are regarded as prophets by their Pentecostal followers.”--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • This is not part of evidentiary proof of prophecy either, but only challenges its veracity. How this is possible without providing the evidence, or standards for analysing of the evidence is unclear.--Mrg3105 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

POV

I removed the following recent addition:

Christians have long held that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament, thus proving Jesus is the messiah. Unfortunately, there are numerous problems with this proposition.

The second sentence is POV, so it needs to be removed. The first sentence, although true, doesn't add anything to the description of prophecy, although with a good link (wiki or otherwise) I think it could go back in. - UtherSRG 13:11, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Added the first sentence back in with a link to the article Christian views of Jesus, where the various interpretations and controversies are discussed. — No-One Jones (talk) 13:32, 23 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I knew there'd be a good link for it, but I know there's a ton of Christianity and Jesus articles.

A View of Prophecy

I was wondering about the following,

Prophecy is a poor guide to the future. You don't understand the events until they are already you, or have already occured.

Would that be accurate to say about prophecy?

JesseG 03:32, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)


I like agreeing with you JesseG. Prophecy may be, sometimes you feel something is going to happen, an inner experience or feeling by instinct, but you just cant get a picture of how it would materialize finally, or you just cant tell someone that it would be such a such scenario. One needs to present simple clues and hints and fire the issue, it's a prophecy if you already are some famous person. A wise person, someone learned and having insight into future can thus lead people wisely by guiding them to something of their advantge, giving obscure leads to what he finds by his intellect which others due to some base reasons fail to recognize such benefits. Rather out of their lust they try hastey methods to reach their goal. Ripening of fruits need time. The wise person sees it and says his riddles taken as prophecies. Such propheccies could only take natural course and unfold due following natural factors.
I dont take magicians or soothsayers to be wise people, they are some other sort. Do they count as prophets!?!
The other prophecies like Nostradamus' may be similar but the source of the basic insight or his personal experience inside his brain is unexplainable.
What you say??
Azgs 06:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


Say what?

The first paragraph of the History of Prophecy section seems a bit unlikely to me, perhaps examples would make it make more sense or names of schools of prophecy or something that would explain how they survived from 400 to 1800 without many knowing of it.

The whole article seems unlikely to me. It's patently POV, because it assumes that prophecy is real, and there are plenty of people who believe otherwise. From there it goes on to explain one person's view of what prophecy is and how it works... a POV that wouldn't even be accepted by all of those who do believe prophecy is real. And then there's the unsubstantiated historical claims, which render the whole history section highly suspect. It's not a fundamentally bad essay; it would be a fine article for the anonymous author's own web site to teach what he believes to be the truth. But it's inappropriate for Wikipedia. We ought to copy what little can be salvaged into Prophet, then turn this page into a redirect. Tverbeek 23:19, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The article does have problems, but I think there's a good bit that can be salvaged. Conceptually, it ought to be a separate topic. The beginning should point out that some people question prophecy. Later there should be described various means and agencies of prophecy, from divine revelation to animal entrails, palm reading, tarot cards (and other cards), etc. etc. As it stands right now, I agree with the 'cleanup' and 'NPOV' tags, but removed the request to merge. 204.117.36.52 17:27, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Statistics

I think the page could use statistics of religions involving prophecies and how many people follow these religions. The point would be to show that many people (possibly the majority of the world) buy into some sort of prophecy.

Signs of the Times

I was wondering about starting an article on End Times prophecies and the Signs of the Times. Such an article might discuss what the prophets have projected as end times scenarios, and how fulfillments might or are being interpreted. Can somebody more familiar with this area in Wikipedia give me a clue? Tom 18:11, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Maybe take a look at Christian eschatology, Jewish eschatology, etc.? "Eschatology" is the "study of last things," sounds like what you're looking for. Wesley 17:14, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Prophecy distinct from Prophet

User:Gtrmp has placed a banner urging a merge with the entry Prophet. The confusion between the two in some Christian cults is not an issue for the rest of us. It has no basis in the history of ideas.

I think it would be more helpful to keep them distinct. I'm going to remove the banner for now; if it goes back up it would help to see a rationale for the merge. Wesley 17:15, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I just removed the listing from Wikipedia:Duplicate_articles#P since it seems the majority decision has been to not merge them. -- Zawersh 06:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Though I must not characterize it, the section Nature of reality in prophecy really does not represent any mainstream concept. How can this folk-culture be presented at Wikipedia in a genuinely neutral manner, which also discusses the cultural context from which these ideas have arisen? --Wetman 03:14, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Couldn't we just delete the rant?

The zany additions from a couple of anonymous ISPs June 19 and 20, 2004, were made by a User who hasn't returned. Couldn't we just revert and move forward again more sensibly than by giving the prophecy-school curriculum as of 7500 B.C. etc etc? --Wetman 14:16, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

even though prohpecies aren't understood until they happen, they have influence on the veiw taken on the events that occured. it creates insight into what we would otherwise never understand.

...prophecies that don't "come true" are ignored. Prophecies do tend to surface after the fact.

How does the section "Nature of reality in prophecy" belong in Wikipedia? This is a personal fantasy, contributed by Anonymous User:4.225.197.202 back in June 2004, which has stood in the article long enough. I have moved it here for your perusal, as part of the requested "Clean-up":

To understand prophecy and the nature of reality from the mystic's alleged point of view, viewing life in the future (or past)is analogous to watching a 21st century film. When a movie is made, moments of time are captured through a camera. When you watch a film, you see the film frame by frame, from the perspective of what you think is the beginning to the end. (In reality, film scenes are normally shot "out of sequence" and edited together to present the illusion of a linear sequence) From the everyday human perspective, life appears to occur in a linear sequence of events and responses, just like watching a film. From the mystic's viewpoint, the whole "film of life" is complete (like a DVD or video), and can be experienced in a nonlinear order. What does that mean? Consider viewing life like a DVD or video where you can witness any sequence of events, forwards or backwards in time, and at any point of the "life movie" that you like.
In viewing the past, the seer may witness both the events and the responses, much like watching a full color movie. In viewing the future, the seer may witness events and possible future responses. Based on an individual's past responses, the seer can then determine the individual's possible future responses, and hopefully narrow down the most probable future response. This would be analogous to seeing numerous possible endings to a movie and then picking the most probable. There are a few seers/prophets who claim to have attained a more advanced understanding of reality and themselves, and so can view the probable future responses and know the one definite response that will be chosen. The majority of these people would be considered enlightened mystics.

--Wetman 08:49, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Much of rant deleted

I meant to move it here but lost the contents of my clipboard. My bad. Please see history if you want to it. - Trick 23:10, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

"History" of Prophecy

The following was so completely unread I had to move it here:

Historical evidence of prophecy claims dates back to the Tibetans and societies in the Himalayan regions, where monks spoke of future events.

The Egyptian prophets and divinators were highly revered in their society, as they helped the Pharaohs make decisions to deal with the daily activities of their people. Many Egyptian murals can still be found depicting these seers advising the Pharaohs.

The Chaldean prophets and astrologers were so renowned that if a Chaldean person was found to be traveling outside of Chaldea, they were automatically thought to be able to prophesize and read the stars.

The Greek Oracles were visited by people from all over the ancient world. The Oracles used a variety of techniques to induce the prophetic trance, that included sitting in hot springs caves, dancing, singing, and meditation. The Delphic seer in particular was known as the "eyes and ears of God".

The Roman historian Pompeius Trogus declared that the Celts excelled at prophecy when reading from the Akashic Records and the stars. On his way to Rome, St. Malachy (Maelmaedhog Ua Morgair) fell into a trance and uttered prophecies about every pope from 1143CE to the end of the Catholic Church.

Tibet: not understanding the cyclical nature of events an uncomprehending outsider might imagine "prophecy." Egypt: part of a priest's role was interpreting the will of the gods. There was an oracle at Ammon but priests were not prophesying. Chaldean: This is in Victorian Bible books. Delphi: ""eyes and ears of God" an invention. "God" is a giveaway. You can't begin at this level and reach any kind of adult text. --Wetman 20:25, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fine with me, FWIW. I took the text and edited it to make it clear that prophecy is a claim, not a demonstrable fact, but didn't really check the actual content. However I'm sure some of the "History" text can be useful. At the very least it should contain links to articles on important prophets (from Isaiah to Jesus), as well as some Christian mystics, and a few words about unconventional "prophets" like Nostradamus. --Pablo D. Flores 01:19, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Quite right. I just couldn't find anything in the above text that was even in the ballpark. --Wetman 23:16, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The Word of God

The main page has a sentence that starts, "About 40% of the text of the Bible is the actual Word of God or prophecies". This is somewhat misleading, as it says something different than what most Christians mean when they use the phrase, "the Word of God". All the Reformed Confessions (along with most fundamentalists) are emphatic that the whole of the Bible is the Word of God, and that includes all the parts which are narrative history and comment on events, etc. I suspect that whoever wrote this sentence intended to mean that about 40% of the text is set out in the form of God speaking. If so, the wording should be altered to reflect that. DFH 17:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Further remark: someone should check the percentage, otherwise this 40% is an unsubstantiated statistic. DFH 17:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Dreams and visions "lost"?

The sentence, "That dream or vision based ability includes foreseeing healthful solutions to ailments, and several other abilities, all of which were 'lost' by Romans taking over the religious control of the early church." is an unsubstantiated POV statement, which has no place in an encyclopedia page. I am about to delete it. DFH 17:36, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The "how" of Bible prophecies

The sentence in the main page, "The Bible itself is a long series of prophecies, written by people inspired by God from their dreams and visions." is inaccurate both as a description of the Bible and as a theory about the "how" of Biblical prophecies. Only a relatively small fraction of Bible prophecies are set out as having come through dreams and/or visions. Obvious examples are parts of the Book of Daniel and the whole of the Book of Revelation. The major part of prophetic writings in the Bible are not so described in the Biblical text, and it is misleading to report that they are. There is no single method whereby Bible prophecies were given, but rather there is considerable variety in time and place as to how the prophecies were received. This whole section needs a rewrite by someone who really knows the subject. DFH 17:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

External links - too many of them and no descriptions!

The external links section is becoming too large (I suspect many of these links are merely vanity advertising or hobby-horses). Moreover, none of them have even the briefest of descriptions to indicate why the particular link should be of interest or relevance to the main article. Those who posted the links should review them asap, otherwise someone is likely to start to prune most of them in the near future. DFH 13:55, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

-I'm deleting the following:
• Thiaoouba Prophecy - does not deal with prophecy
• Elijah List - does not deal with prophecy, but rather with an online community
• The Celestine Prophecy - new age work of fiction
• I Ching - belongs in the divination article, or maybe Chinese philosophy
• Akashic Records - does not deal with prophecy
• Cassandra - a misinterpretation of the Greek text which actually deals with Precognition

--Mrg3105 06:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Four Guardians?

Seriously, wasn't this artical deleted before? Why has it reappeared? What is it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.61.220.143 (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

I don't think it should be deleted, altho it has no citation, i've been monitoring this topic very closely, and no matter how many times it's deleted it just keeps coming back . . .


You're saying all prophecies come true - surely that's not right?

In the section entitled Scientific prediction it says:

A scientific theory differs from prophecy in that it is both falsifiable and reproducible. In principle, a scientific theory makes a prediction that could actually invalidate the theory by not coming true.

... the implication being that non-scientific prophecies necessarily always come true. I'm afraid I don't believe this. What about all the date-specific "end of the world" prophecies that have failed to materialize? - 84.65.12.158 19:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Evidence of Prophecy

You cannot have an article about prophecy without also mentioning Sollog. He has made many prophecies that have come true and the evidence for this is stored on Google. He has issued time stamped prophecies on Google such as this one :

http://sollogs.com/911warning.html

That was about 911. The date shows it was made 3 years to the day before 911. The date stamp is genuine. So shouldn't this be included in this article?

There are more examples of his prophecies on his website.

There is also an article about him on Wikipedia. If he is notable enough to be included on Wikipedia then why no mention of him in this article?

Arnold1 06:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, Grover from Sesame Street made some astounding prophecies with 100% accuracy. There is an article about him on Wikipedia, so obviously he belongs here, too. His website includes a great deal of very valuable information. Note that Grover's prophecies are not just time-stamped, but are witnessed, notarized, placed in sealed envelopes, and enclosed in vacuum chambers in impenetrable granite fortresses, which are then placed in geosynchronous orbit, all prior to the foretold events occurring, which they invariably do. For example, Grover foretold the exact score of every baseball game in 2005, as well as the invention of Eggs Benedict, centuries before either of those things happen. Seriously, you can look it up.

Instead of making fatuous comments why not show how that prophecy above did not come true. Problem is you can't. That prophecy above, and others that have come true, should be mentioned in this article as evidence of prophecy.Arnold1 01:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I have added this evidence of prophecy to the article. Do not delete this, skeptics. It is evidence of prophecy that is missing from the article. Arnold1 (talk) 16:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I deleted this edit. This research appears to be original and unverifiable. Wikipedia can't publish an editor's own argument that Sollog's writings show evidence of prophecy; it can only publish information from reliable sources. It also cannot publish fringe points of view. There needs to be a source showing that Sollog research is considered a significant point of view on the subject of prophecy. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 01:54, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Like I said on your talk page. A google time-stamped prophecy is not original research as defined by Wikipedia. Wikipedia say no opinion, experience or argument is allowed. A google time-stamped prophecy is neither an opinion, experience nor is it an argument, so I can't see how it is original research. The article was asking for evidence of prophecy and that is exactly what i put there. If you think PART of my contribution was original research, then you should edit it WITHOUT removing the link to the time-stamped prophecy. If you can show the time-stamp is fake then you can remove it, but so far you have failed to show that. What I wrote there has also, I believe, been up at the sollog article for more than 12 months with no one complaining about it. Several other time-stamped prophecies are also up in the Sollog article with no complaints. Several admin have edited there in the past and they have not complained about this kind of evidence being included in the article. You are the only admin I have come across who has a problem with it. So why do you have a problem with it if other admin don't? I would also like to know why you did not delete any of the unsourced material from skeptics that was in the same section. What i would like to happen is that you accept that the evidence from the time-stamped post remains in that section. If you do not accept this then perhaps we can invite a more neutral third party to get involved.Arnold1 (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
It means legitimate evidence of prophecy. I think you're right, a more neutral observer is needed. You do not appear to be impartial in this matter at all. Enigmaman (talk) 04:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
In what way exactly is it not legitimate evidence of prophecy? You do not say. I have said why it is prophecy. The time-stamp shows it was written exactly three years before the 911 attacks. The title of the post is "SOLLOG PREDICTS 911 EMERGENCY". So how is it not evidence of prophecy?Arnold1 (talk) 04:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Sollog happens to be a criminal who has made all kinds of "prophecies" that never came true. I guess you're one of his followers. Enigmaman (talk) 05:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
The fact he is in jail is totally irrelevant to the question I asked you. In what way exactly is it not legitimate evidence of prophecy?Arnold1 (talk) 17:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but Wikipedia's reliable sources policy prohibits self-published sources, and Sollog is a self-published source. In addition, the SPAM policy prohibits repeatedly adding statements about or links to products, personalities, or websites in ordinary articles. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 17:45, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, no. Reliable Sources is not Wikipedia policy at all. It is a guideline, which means it it sometimes permissible not to follow it. Writing about a prophecy and providing a time-stamp to that prophecy as evidence the prophecy was genuine is one occasion when it should be allowed. This is simple Common Sense. Arnold1 (talk) 01:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I am sorry, but providing spam links to a fringe figure's self-published web site is not an example of WP:SENSE. It doesn't matter if you can convince us that this individual predicted something that happened. WP:OR requires that an independent reliable source has to verify that (a) the predictive statement is a "prophecy" (self-characterization by self-described prophets doesn't cut it); and (b) it corresponds to a particular real-world event. (your own interpretation of the statement claiming it corresponds to a particular real-world event also doesn't cut it.) Are we clear? If you persist you may be blocked. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 01:43, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
You did not address the point I was making about Common Sense in the article and have instead made a personal attack on me. I ask that you focus on content, not on me. I am not proposing to add links going to Sollog's website to this article. I am saying you should add the prophecies that are time-stamped on Google in the same way that they have been added to the Sollog article. The admin there did not have a problem with it. They have used Common Sense in applying a guideline, not a policy, in order to improve a Wikipedia article. You don't need to add my own interpretation of the statement claiming it corresponds to a real world event if you don't want to, but I notice you haven't deleted any of the unsourced comments made by skeptics in that section of the article. As to the allegations you made against me, I have checked my own history and found that apart from adding a link going to Sollog's website to the article about Sollog himself, I have not added links going to Sollog's website at other wikipedia articles as you claimed I did. I have, however, added links going to the Sollog article to other articles such as this one about prophecy, because prophecy is what Sollog does. The link I added was deleted, even though it is related to prophecy. Arnold1 (talk) 03:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandals

Is it just my lack of knoweldge on the subject or should it not read "Oliviaaaas sick nasttyyy" right under the "for other uses" part at the top of the page? I will remove it so tell me if I have done something wrong.65.93.199.170

Me again, I have alos found other statments "hyping up" one said person, leading me to belive that these are acts by a vandal. I will remove all I can find but some one should comb this to double check it.65.93.199.170

Spam

This article had passed the spam event horizon. Please review the links and reinsert only those which provide additional authoritative information over and above what a great article would contain. For example, Discover what God's Prophets and Prophetic People are Saying Daily is probably the worst excuse for a link justification imaginable. Guy (Help!) 10:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

External links

Folk prophecy section doesn't meet notability criteria

Does anyone agree that the section headed Folk prophecy does not meet WP:N and should therefore be removed? DFH 19:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the section probably does not meet WP:N - that's why it doesn't have its own article. Notability guidelines do not directly limit article content; if they did, then articles would have very little content (if any)! I restored the section for now seeing as it was deleted with no explanation beyond "arbitrary" (not very specific). I'd be pleased if someone better versed on the subject could look into it to better analyze what is sufficiently relevant. — xDanielx T/C 06:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Define 'falk prophecy'.--Mrg3105 02:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Prophecy in folklore? — xDanielx T/C 01:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Prophesy and foreknowledge are very different things

"Foreknowledge" redirects to "prophesy", but the concepts are distinct. One could say that prophesy is revealed foreknowledge, but foreknowledge itself is an important and specific religious concept that should be discussed in its own article. After all it's possible to hold the worldview that prophesies do not exist but that foreknowledge does. Dianelos

evidence of prophecy

"Therefore, some sceptics consider prophecy to be false" should be revised. Prophecy itself cannot be false because it is by definition the foretelling of future events. Specific prophecies can be false however, and they could all be false if none of them ever came to fruition. The problem is, even skeptics will agree that some future events have been foretold (the odds that every prophet ever to prophecy was wrong is very low). That would make these particular prophecies "not false". The disagreement comes over how the prophet receives the word that he or she speaks. A believer would say the word is from a supernatural source whereas a skeptic would say the word was from somewhere else.

"but many people believe that certain prophecies have been fulfilled". It is quite obvious that certain prophecies have been fulfilled. It is true that many people believe certain prophecies have been fulfilled, but that's only because certain prophecies have in reality been fulfilled. It should say, "Some prophecies have been fulfilled, and many people believe the prophecies to be from supernatural sources." The phrase "many people believe" is intentionally weak and should only go in places where many people also do not believe.

In other words, the truth value of prophecies is not what is under dispute but the information source is where the disagreement lies.

I would also add that 'scientific prediction' does not belong under prophecy. The two are barely related. The scientific method as well as modern logic are both described in detail in their respective articles.

--64.173.170.122 06:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I had given it seven months, and so will now try to re-edit the article since it seems to me that it is an important subject given the role prophets and prophecy have played in human civilization.

I'll work off-line, and then mark up and past the lot in for review. My usual approach is to define, provide evidence, site sources where available, and link to other articles in Wikipedia. As part of the rewrite I will try to address the issues I raised in my earlier and more detailed analysis of the article, but will also take into account the comments made since then by others. --Mrg3105 04:36, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Claimed by Christianity?

This section was originally posted at Category talk:Prophets of the Hebrew Bible but is about this article.

I'm curious how the article on prophecy became a part of WikiProject Charismatic Christianity? Given there were at least 55 named prophets in Israel, and only one claimed by Christianity, is that not a bit of a hijacking?--Mrg3105 11:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Christians recognise all the Hebrew Bible as scripture, and therefore recognise all the people it identifies as prophets. Some minor Bible characters are recognised as prophets in Jewish commentaries which Christians wouldn't necessarily all agree with. The discussion at Template talk:Prophets of the Tanakh may be relevant. I don't know what you mean by "only one claimed by Christianity", unless you're referring to Daniel.
Anyway, part of the point of renaming categories using the term Hebrew Bible was that Jews and Christians share interest in these articles; there is no need for duplicate categories for the two religions. Likewise with articles. - Fayenatic london (talk) 13:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Don't want to get into a theological debate, but Daniel is not considered a prophet of the same ranking as the rest, and in Judaism there are different levels of prophecy not recognised by Christianity. However, Moses is considered the greatest of prophets in Judaism, but his authority is not recognised as being higher then that of Jesus, who lived in a post-prophetic period of Judaism, and as a Jew he would have recognised this. Jesus, who is claimed to be a prophet in Christinity after the fact had never himself made explicit claims of prophecy that I know of, but I could be wrong. The claims were made based on theological interpretations of later adherents, and not based on his life expereince, much of which is unrecorded. His statements also do not follow the common description of prophetic expereince from TaNaKh. Besides that, the vast amount of recorded prophecies are in Hebrew, and charismatic Christianity is very much a late-20th century phenomena. All this suggests that prophecy article belongs firmly in the Judaism category.
The point you make about Christianity's recognition of all Jewish prophets is not quite true. In Judaism most of the halakhah or law is derived from prophetic authority, and not just by Moses. There are rules about not disputing statements made in TaNaKh by later interpreters in Mishnaic and Talmudic texts. Since in Christianity the entirety of Tanakh is called Old Testament, the authority of the Jewish prophets is expressly not recognised, but only their text authorship is recognised. There is a significant difference there, wouldn't you say?--Mrg3105 23:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
First, staying on-topic: I don't understand your edit summary about "moving the article to WikiProject Judaism". More than one WikiProject can keep a watching eye on particular articles or categories. There is no conflict or contradiction in that; e.g. WikiProject Bible might watch these categories too.
There is the separate matter of category hierarchies. If you dispute any of the head categories that this category is in, please specify what your objection is. If not, I don't follow why you raised the topic here.
Jesus' warnings in Mark 13:1-30 to flee the destruction of Jerusalem come to mind as an explicit prophecy. A fuller response would not belong on this page, which is about prophets in the TaNaKh/Hebrew Bible, but you are welcome to "E-mail this user" from my user page if you want to discuss it off-wiki. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
The vast majority of prophetic texts are from the TaNaKh. I have failed to grasp relationship of prophecy to charismatic Christianity. Prophets certainly are not charismatic in TaNaKh. In any case, the article was abandoned considering the amount of extraneous text that is had added to it, and lacked definition and sources (which I am in the process of adding).
I had added the article to Judaism for now because the vast bulk of the article will be derived from there. Certainly not all of it given claims of prophecy outside Judaism, but that is the area that will take the most doing in research.
For now I am not concerned with category headers.
Thank you for pointing out the reference to Mark. When I get to the section on Jesus, I will make sure to add it as a source of claim for prophecy with the other three I'm aware of.--Mrg3105 12:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion was originally posted at Category talk:Prophets of the Hebrew Bible but is about this article so I've moved it here. Fayenatic (talk) 18:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

This is horrific trash...

Wow. I'd spruce up this article but it's so bad that I'd want to scratch the entire thing and start all over again. It's silly, stupid, inaccurate, apparently written by illiterate homeschool children who should spend their time on conservapedia. It's complete and utter trash from the start to the end.

"Prophecy is the act of a person stating a truth, often regarding future events, which they have no natural means of knowing."

That's the first statement and is pretty well a microcosm of the whole thing. First off prophecy is a noun as well as a verb, there is no necessity on truth value. I could say that on January 29th, 2014 a great darkness will cover the land. And certainly that's a prophecy, but of no real regard or truth value. It's all that bad.

My suggestion is to get a reasonable definition of prophecy and replace the entire article with it. Tat 21:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

There's a request in to fix this article up, and I'll lend a hand. Jonathan Tweet 01:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Without disagreeing with you about the quality of the article, I beg to differ on a matter of vocabulary. The verb is "prophesy", pronounced /ˈprɒfəˌsaɪ/. The article is about the noun "prophecy", pronounced /ˈprɒfəsi/. [2] [3]TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Evidence section

The section is currently completely unsourced. The source stated as unattributed fact many claims that are subject to disputed. For example, it stated as fact that all claims of prophecy are inconsistent with empirical science. Some people believe this but some do not. Best, --Shirahadasha 14:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I also trimmed material that seemed to have nothing to do with the "evidence" section, such as a claim that some evangelical ministers are regarded as prophets. Best, --Shirahadasha 14:34, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Persistent re-editing to present Christian POV

Is this going to be permitted?--Mrg3105 (talk) 05:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Which edits are you referring to? Enigmaman (talk) 21:24, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Enigmaman, look at the edits history, and if not that, then just look at article. Judaism has 55 prophets and prophetesses, and the larges body of record of their activity as well as writing on the meaning of prophecy and its phenomena. It actually defines various grades or prophetic expereince, which is what this article is supposed to be about.

Now consider the CURRENT section on Judaism:

Torah prophetic record

The Jewish Tanakh (Old Testament of the Christian Bible) is there a need to insert this here?, contains prophecies from various Hebrew prophets who communicated messages from HaShem (Hebrew: 'the Name, a term for YHWH not a Jewish term, but a Christian) to the nation of Israel and population of Judea and elsewhere.

What about all the prophets BEFORE Malachi, like Moses! Malachi's full name was Ezra Ha'Sofer (the scribe), and he was the last prophet of Israel if one accepts the opinion that Nechemyah died in Babylon before 9th Tevet 3448 (313 BCE). Babylonian Talmud, vol. San.11a, Yom.9a/Yuch.1.14/Kuz.3.39,65,67/Yuch.1/Mag.Av.O.C.580.6

[edit] Book of Enoch prophecy

Around the time of the Maccabees, ~150 BC, a Jewish prophet left a 108 chapter book of prophecies. It is the largest source of prophecies relating to the End of an Age (End of Time) This is a Christian favourite . BECAUSE It is quoted or referred to in the New Testament.
Consider the proportionality of this article in terms of POV. 55 recorded Jewish prophets vs one claim by Christianity and one by Islam. One woudl think that there would a least be proportionate treatment in the article content?
Consider the introduction: In Western religion, prophecy (from Greek, "before-speech") is the divine gift of speaking the truth, especially about the future. One who speaks prophecy is called a prophet. The meaning and understanding of prophecy varies by culture and history. These are entirely Christian views of prophecy. Hebrew prophets lived at a time when there were no Greeks to record anything, and for a significant time when Greeks had no writing. Certainly before a "Western" conception of prophecy. Certainly it does not reflect the Jewish view that prophecy is NOT about either JUST speaking the truth, OR about the future.

Prophecy often consisted of a warning that God's wrath would destroy the people if they disobeyed God or did not repent'. Repenting is something a Christian might do Prophecies sometimes included promises of blessing for obeying God or repenting. Warning prophecies feature in Jewish scripture (Elijah,Isaiah, Ezekiel, etc.) Actually they feature in the Torah also and in the Christian New Testament (John the Baptist, Jesus, etc.)'Yet more Christian references Prophecies sometimes foretell the coming of a divine figure, such as Jesus AND AGAIN, or appear in apocalyptic literatureAND AGAIN, such as Daniel or Revelation AND AGAIN, because MISINTERPRETATION of Daniel is a significant part of Christian apocalyptic literature in the 20th century.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE DEFINITION AND PROCESS OF PROPHECY THAT I ADDED? Does one have to be an administrator and lock down the articles because of religious marketing that goes on?
Lastly the only source provided is

  • "Prophecy". Catholic Encyclopedia. (1913). New York: Robert Appleton Company.

and in See also is there any mention of Judaism? (Christian subjects in bold)

  • Self-fulfilling prophecy
  • Apocalypticism
  • Bible code
  • Bible prophecy
  • Oracle
  • Mahdi
  • Muhammad al-Mahdi
  • Malachy* Nostradamus Vaticinia
  • Prediction
  • Prophet
  • Vaticinium ex eventu
  • Summary of Christian eschatological differences
  • Rapture
  • Apostolic-Prophetic Movement
  • False prophets
  • Kalki
  • Kalki Purana
  • Bhavishya Purana

Why yes, he is listed in an disambiguation page along with two bands and an Iraq war protester as
# Malachi, the supposed name of the author of the Book of Malachi in the Jewish Bible. Which actually denies his being a prophet and misplaces him from the Tanakh to Books of Moses.
I think this is just a very clear case of Antisemitism in Wikipedia
And if you go to the Prophet article you will see the same effort. Sections on Christianity are exaggerated, and those on Judaism abbreviated and had to be redirected to Tanakh, and even there a section on Christian literature was inserted. And mind you, the article on Prophet STILL does not talk about the individuals, so much as the beliefs held about them by their followers!

This entire section was removed:
Definition of Prophecy is a instrument of social change, predominantly in the ancient societies through communication delivered usually by an individual prophet, male or female, usually orally to a large group. Its purpose is that of changing the group’s current intentions, behaviours, cultural or social practice or structure to conform to standards demanded by a Divine power accepted as the source of Universal creation of all knowledge, energy and matter.
As a result of the prophetic message, the consequences of the change not taking place may be included in the message in the form of positive or negative effects on the society as a whole, groups within the society, specific communities, or individuals and their immediate relatives, friends or employees.
Prophecy is either self-evident due to the change in the individuals physiology or behaviour, or claimed as a gifted ability from a Divine source which is usually followed by a display in the change in the individuals physiology or behaviour.
So typical is the change described above, that it is the most often witnessed display by individuals seeking to imitate prophetic phenomena, sometimes as displays of quasi-psychotic episodes and often through extreme kinesiological or verbal displays.
A prophet can be true or false, and may be tested as such by the group to verify his or her authenticity. The prophet does not seek prophecy, the ability being an unexpected and sometimes disturbing mental phenomena, and the group rarely desires its communication due to its unwanted content. Prophecy may be acquired spontaneously, or over a short time, at any age usually after early teenage-hood, in any lifestyle environment, to individuals in any profession or position within the society. The only prerequisite for being chosen as a prophetic messenger is the individual’s ability to satisfy the selection criteria of the Divine that is gifting the ability. Usually this is enshrined in absolute adherence to the highest standards of faith in the said Divine power.
At the core of the viability of the prophecy is the element of uncertainty usually found in the content. The content of the prophetic message may contain information of one or more types that are understood through explicit literal interpretation, suggestive analysis based on a degree of literary interpretation, allusive through use of mental imagery, similes, metaphors and allegories, or implicit requiring extensive and complex data analysis. For this reason, prophetic messages are difficult to authenticate immediately at the time of their delivery. This denies the receiver the ability to attempt to micro-manage events while seeking to avoid the effects of the prophecy.
The life of the prophet may be an eventful one because the group, or its elite, may seek to persecute, exile, incarcerate or execute the messenger in the attempt to eliminate the source of the message that may be countering their own intended actions, decisions, or policies.
The uniqueness of the prophetic experience is the ability of the messenger to foretell the consequences for the group should the message’s content not be heeded.
At the core of the prophetic concept is therefore the society’s acceptance of the higher Divine and Supreme power that is able to enact supernatural events beyond the control of the society in which prophecy is taking place, and which can not be predicted by reason, calculation of probability or historical analysis. Therefore, prophecy cannot be compared to methodologies used as part of scientific reasoning, calculation of probability or historic analysis in disciplines such as engineering, social psychology, public health, meteorology, Earth sciences, governance or economics.
It is reasonable to suggest that prophecy may not take place in a society which does not accept the Divine source of the prophetic content as the supreme Universal authority over nature’s understood and accepted laws, and understood and expected behaviour of society’s own and other societies behaviours.
It is therefore simplistic to say that prophecy is the ability to foretell the future. Scepticism of prophecy is therefore founded on the basis of:
a) objective criteria specific to the system of faith within which it occurs
b) the evidence that substantiates the content of the prophecy
c) the society’s evidential willingness to accept a higher authority over that of its chosen human individual or elite group exercising governance over it
d) the willingness to deny prophecy through acceptance of statistically improbable occurrences as inconsequential
e) the subjective comparative methods by which it is being authenticated by various modern methodologies used as part of scientific reasoning, calculation of probability or historic analysis
Prophecy should not be confused with divination, premonition, or fortune telling defined elsewhere in Wikipedia.

Why was it removed? Why, of course because there is no mention of any specific religion since it talks about the CONCEPT of prophecy as an introduction to the subject of the article in a non-POV and neutral way! It failed the marketing of Christianity test.
--Mrg3105 (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you and action should be taken. If your edits get reverted, bring it up with an independent administrator.

Prophecy or Record of prophecy?

What is the subject of the article? Prophecy is neither defined nor explained in the article as it stand now with all my content removed. It largely deals with Record of prophecy in recounting alleged historical figures. No mention of the Hebrew Bible and Tanakh prophecies is made at all although they span the longest period of prophetic culture.--Mrg3105 (talk) 05:52, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Prophecy in Islam

There is no prophecy in Islam. Reiteration of Old Testament prophecy cannot legitimately be claimed as Islamic prophecy and unless sources can be provided in a timely fashion for the claims of original prophecy, all mention of prophecy on behalf of Islam should be removed from this article. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 22:38, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Alterations

I slightly modified the section on Christianity. In my experience, I would say that the Mormon church is a separate entity from the main stream Christian church so I have created a new subsection for it.

I have also altered the link for the five fold gifting relating to Apostles. In this instance, this does not relate to the twelve apostle. I was surprised to find that there was not actual section on Apostles.Paulrach (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


As far as I know the Mormons still consider themselves Christian even if the others may not. Since it is heresy for any Catholic to attend non-Catholic liturgy, one can say that most of the adherents of the 22,000 non-Catholic congregation types in the United States are heretical though they may have a different opinion on this.
Apostles never claimed prophecy that I know of, unless you refer to the Catholic Apostolic Church? Their writings were claimed to be prophetic, but with most of them being Jews, they would have been aware at the time that prophecy in Israel had ended. Only John in Revelations can be said to have had an prophetic experience, but this is largely a restatement on the texts found in earlier Torah sources, and is disputed within Christianity as such.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for comments. I have amended the section accordingly and have put the Mormon church as a subsection of prophecy in Christianity. I have also made a section on prophecy in the modern , into which should be included things like the visions of Fatima. It makes for easier reading of the article. Likewise I have done the same with Ahmadiyya, who have a similar relationship to Islam as do Mormons to Christianity.
As I am new to this topic, it seems that this article is a little thin. Is there any obvious reason why this is so? As far as I can tell a lot of text on Old Testament/Tanakh prophecies was removed. Why? Surely this formed the basis of prophetic teachings for the worlds three major religions? Or am I wrong here? If we are writing or editing a balanced article on prophecy this needs including, as does the use of prophecy in other religions and/or spiritual practices. To my knowledge the majority of cultures/beliefs have some aspect of prophecy in them.
Also, the term Apostle as I understand it, is someone who has been called by God to lead the church, and in terms of the New Testament five-fold giftings is different from someone with the gift of prophecy. In Christian terms, the period of prophecy didn't end but actual was renewed at Pentecost. However, the term is much used (or is that over used?) in the church at present, especially with the 'big' name speakers. Paulrach (talk) 09:03, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Definition and Incidence of Prophecy

1) Judaism's claim is to have invented prophecy -- is this contested? If not, how can it be defined ouside the parameters of Judaism? If, for instance, Judaism defines prophecy as exclusively A and, by definition, not B, how can it be that others come along afterwards to alter the definition yet maintain the link to the essence of original prophecy?

2) Reiteration of previous prophecy is hardly a claim to divine revelation. In fact, recapitulation serves to do nothing but support one's claim that he read the original sources and is aware of the original prophecy. The New Testament makes no claim whatsoever that God spoke to Jesus. Where is the evidence that prophecy occurred? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 12:52, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, to be absolutely correct "Judaism" had not 'invented' prophecy, God did.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Judaism was the first to speak of it, thereby defining it. DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 14:22, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Interesting use of logic. However, using that view point the elements would be defined as Earth, Wind, Fire and Water; the moon would be made of cheese; the earth would be flat; and that the land of Israel would actually be defined as Caanan. Just because an individual, group or religion first describes something it does not mean that its definition can be refined or even re-defined through experience, experimentation and maturation of those ideas.
As we have seen with my examples science and history have shown us that there are now 110+ elements; the moon is made of rock that most probably came from the earth; the earth is a speherical body; and that the land of Israel is a place that is being re-defined by its people and not by what it originally was.
Using your logic, here's a provocative question: Abraham was the Father of Jewish people/Judaism - (that is a Fact). So therefore people and event preceding him cannot be claimed as being defined by Judaism - (Thats using your definition). But Noah was a prophet, 300 years before Abraham - (From definition of prophecy). So how can you say that Judaism defined prophecy? Paulrach (talk) 15:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Actually its not logic, but documented evidence. The documents, in this case Hebrew Bible, state that God related to human beings (and one donkey), and this is broadly called prophecy, therefore God invented prophecy. God also, according to same documents, created Earth (and soil), wind, fire, water, and planets, to which can be added the Moon.
Its hard to "refine or even re-define through experience" or experimentation a phenomena which has not been in evidence, and was not initially understood, and indeed had been discarded by those trying to do so! Now this would be an interesting use of logic - the suggestion being that "although we don't accept the phenomena, and we have no personal evidence of it, and there is no clear definition of it in our culture, we think it should be redefined to include any phenomena that we think fits the description which we are yet to define, primarily due to inability to experiment with it"!
Consider my logic - no phenomena can be included in the class unless it satisfies the parameters of the phenomena as it was first observed. If the parameters are different, then the observed phenomena is also different - enter taxonomy.
I chose not to respond to your assertion as it bore no relevance to the subject of the article, however if you insist...
  • there are now 110+ elements - the list is incomplete, however note the applied use of substances in the Bible; application of knowledge is more important then its academic foundations for practical reasons
  • the moon is made of rock that most probably came from the earth - and the relevance of this finding is? There is no claim I'm aware of in the Bible to contradict this statement
  • the Earth is a spherical body - And? There is no evidence to contradict this statement in the Bible either.
  • the land of Israel is a place that is being re-defined by its people and not by what it originally was - I suppose this hinges on what you define as "originally" and which "people" you refer to
No, Abraham was the father of the nation of Israel - that is a fact.
Yes, "people and event preceding Abraham cannot be claimed as being defined by Judaism (the system of practice as defined by the Hebrew Bible). The claim is never made.
To understand the concept of prophecy as defined by Jewish thinking, you need to understand that it is not a monolithic concept defined by one word. There are 10 levels of what is a God-to-people relationship experience. These levels (hopefully will be added to the article) define proximity, and therefore intensity of the prophetic experience. For the most part the use of 'prophecy' as believed in the modern non-Jewish World addresses only the highest level of prophecy, erroneously believed to be the ability to foretell future. Noah was not able to foretell future. Noah was not able to do anything other then execute the explicit direction to build in preparation for an event that no amount of his activity could avert. Moreover, he was not directed to try and avert this event. Noah did not even get to reply! Clearly Noah's experience can not be used to define far higher levels of God-to-people relationships, and therefore can not be used to define the phenomena of prophecy any more then the horse and cart can define all manner of modern land transportation although all have wheels.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I think you missed the point of what I was saying. My argument was that just because the Hebrew Bible was one of the first documents to record an incident does not mean that the original definition was always the fullest or most up to date definition of prophecy. A significant example of this is with the law. Initially there were ten commandments. (Which, IMHO, are still today the best way for a community to live in relationship with each other and with God.) These were subsequently expanded to include what is now Leviticus and Deuteronomy. These were then expanded further into what is the Talmud. But basically the original definition of the law was the ten commandments. A rhetorical question is did God change his mind? Of course not. He just revealed more of himself to his people, as the people and the community developed.
This is what has happened with prophecy. As we go through the Bible the way in which God revealed Himself to his prophets changed. First He walked with Adam, we see a burning bush, a pillar of fire, the still small voice and so on. The definition of how God talked to His prophets changed. And so Christians believe that this continued on through Jesus, and then the Apostles and through to the modern day. I personally know people who can speak prophetically, they do not tell the future, but can speak God's word into situations. (They will also go through this life unheard of by the vast majority of other Christians.) This is because to Christians, God has not stopped that relationship with us. Events like Christmas, Easter and especially Pentecost are reminders of this.
The four examples I gave while being flippant were certainly not meant to be looked at against scripture rather they were cultural, and some were simply humorous examples of how an original definition of an idea can change with new evidence and thought. And yes, there is new evidence of prophecy both in New Testament and in the subsequent two thousand years.
I also think that your argument that the modern non-Jewish World addresses only the highest level of prophecy, erroneously believed to be the ability to foretell future, is for the most part incorrect. To me, and many of my Christian friends and colleagues, that way of thinking is only a very small part of what prophecy is.
As I have contended all along, and this is why I have persisted with this line of thought, is that your version of the article will be a primarily a Jewish version of what prophecy is. My intention is to expand and include what other viewpoints believe, Christians, Mormons, Pagans etc. Personally, I disagree with the teachings of what the Mormons believe, and among other things how they interpret prophecy. However, as we are creating a balanced encyclopaedic article, we do need to discuss and include their beliefs. They are documented, so can be cited. Whether we agree with them is irrelevant. But primarily if you cannot include what Christians believe, and not what you think Christians believe, then we do need to split the article into two. However, I personally think that, the article would all the more poorer for it. Paulrach (talk) 10:28, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
The problem with big solid blocks of text is that they are difficult to answer.
"the original definition was always the fullest or most up to date definition of prophecy" - as a matter of fact almost no one outside of Rome could read Hebrew until the 1600s. Given that the Roman Church has only possibly accepted one source of prophecy during that time, what makes you think this is grounds to redefine prophecy based on a spate of self-proclaimed individuals at the turn of the 19th-20th centuries? In any case, how do you define prophecy, since you are so keen on definitions.
"Initially there were ten commandments." - no, initially there were 613.
"These were subsequently expanded to include what is now Leviticus and Deuteronomy." - no, those came at the same time.
"These were then expanded further into what is the Talmud." - no, they were not expanded, but added to (7), and now there are 620. The extra 7 constitute a separate class though.
"But basically the original definition of the law was the ten commandments." - no, see above.
Don't ask rhetorical questions
"This is what has happened with prophecy." - no, prophecy changed due to circumstances, and waned from single individuals to being wide-spread in the Israeli society, to being extinguished. In fact different prophets during same period, and even same time and place had different experiences.
"As we go through the Bible, the way in which God revealed Himself to his prophets changed." - yes, its an obvious statement
"how God talked to His prophets changed. And so Christians believe that this continued on through Jesus, and then the Apostles and through to the modern day." - firstly Gd did not always "talk". In fact, He never "talked", but "He spoke". There is an important difference in this. Christians may believe it, but there is no evidence for it. While prophecy has been attributed to Jesus, he did not claim it, and there is nothing to suggest in the texts that he had an experience anything like that of other prophets. In any case, he would have been aware that prophecy had seized, so proclaiming himself to be a prophet would have made him a false one, and he had never been proclaimed a false prophet, therefore he was not claiming to be one. Had he claimed to be a prophet, the authorities were Law-bound to conduct a test of a true prophet, but there is not suggestion in any of Christian texts of this. I am, also not aware that any of the disciples spoke Hebrew or even Aramaic in which all other prophecies were conducted. In any case, none of then were asked to participate in a false prophet test either.
"I personally know people who can speak prophetically, they do not tell the future, but can speak God's word into situations." - that's great, however, you will need to clue me in on your definition of "speak prophetically"
"I also think that your argument that the modern non-Jewish World addresses only the highest level of prophecy, erroneously believed to be the ability to foretell future, is for the most part incorrect." - consider doing a survey
"your version of the article will be a primarily a Jewish version of what prophecy is." - no, of what prophecy was, based on primarily Jewish sources.
"as we are creating a balanced encyclopaedic article, we do need to discuss and include their beliefs. They are documented, so can be cited." - Although they may be documented, the issue is in how these new prophets define prophecy, and if their definition matches the former phenomena. The greatest problem here is that Christians do not recognise the experience of the former prophets as being authentic, or relevant, so they can hardly base their experience on the same parameters.
"if you cannot include what Christians believe, and not what you think Christians believe, then we do need to split the article into two." - It is not a question of including what Christians believe that is the issue. In fact what they believe is not an issue at all. The issue in this article is the experience of prophecy. If Christianity does not accept the phenomena of the 55 accepted Jewish prophets as true, then obviously they have a definition of prophecy which is different. If the definition is different then the phenomena are different. Do you accept this?

Consider a definition from here [4]. There is no "Mystical Theology" in Jewish sources.

Now consider the titles of "Old Testament" and "New Testament". Christianity has rejected all the prophecies of the pre-Jesus story for obvious reasons. None of the former is applicable to those who follow the later. The prophetic content of the former includes conditions unacceptable to the average Christian, and for this reason the prophetic experience had been rejected based on the belief that supposedly "God changed His mind" after 55 prophets in how He communicates, and with whom. This may or may not be true, but the onus is on you to prove this assertion. The proposal that I take your word for it because you "know some people" is not acceptable under Wikipedia policy on verifiability. Given that almost anyone can publish almost anything within the 22,000+ registered religious denominations in the United States, ranging from self-identifying Jews, people who await return of alien beings, and those rediscovering ancient pagan beliefs to s_tan worshippers, I hope you will forgive me if I remain somewhat sceptical of any sources you may bring. Freedom of speech can be a hindrance as well as a benefit sometimes. However, please bring your sources and we'll see. I may have difficulty getting hold of them, but others may be in a better position to evaluate their applicability for the article.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Fortune Telling or Prophecy?

In connection with your recent edit to the prophecy article. I'm not sure were to post, here or on the article.

The wikipedia definition of prophecy is: prophecy is the divine gift of speaking the truth, especially about the future. So by that definition, any fortune telling could be included! However, in terms of a broad based article on prophecy, not including modern day examples of Christian prophecy will give a biased and insignificant article. The people who gave the prophecies to Reagan and Bush believed they were hearing from God in much the same way as did the prophets of the Old Testament/Tanakh. The examples that were quoted were legitimate and referenced examples of prophecy in the modern church. Whether or not you define them as legitimate is irrelevant, they happened.

Should we remove references to Nostradamus? He was not religious, and could be described as a fortune teller. Personally, I think not. We are looking to create a balanced article here.

In driving the quality of this article forward, do we need to have sub-articles? Eg Christian Prophecy, Judaic Prophecy, Pagan prophecy etc? In the modern Christian church there are two main strands in connection with prophecy: (1) those that are waiting for the end times and using OT prophecies.(2) those that use and encourage prophecy in the church today. As I can only legitimately comment with confidence on Christian tradition, I am not sure what other belief system require.

The two references that you removed had been on the article for quite a while, all I did was find the references and tidy up the language. Personally I had never heard of the two 'prophets' in question, so don't have an agenda here. I just think that there inclusion is legitimate in presenting a balanced view point.Paulrach (talk) 12:44, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

If you look at the section on the Nature of prophecy, you will see that it has a context and a scope. The context is usually within the relationship between a given society and God; the scope is, even when directed at individuals, with implications for the entire society. Prophecy is therefore something very profound and has a bearing on a lot of people. This is what distinguishes it from fortune telling, the fortune teller is rarely able to provide a service for such large numbers of individuals. In the article Prophet, false prophecy is also mentioned (I hope still).
So, prophecy = society-wide, and includes relationship with Divine
fortune telling = individual or a small group (family) specific, and not necessarily related to the Divine
Nostradamus is included because some of his quatrains clearly addressed societies, and events befalling them, even if their exact interpretation is problematic. They are implicitly suggestive of a relationship with the Divine, although this has also been questioned.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 13:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Personally, I would disagree that prophecy is just for society, and I suspect that a large proportion of the pentecostal/charismatic denominations would also disagree. If that is what the general conscenus is, then a new article needs writing on the Christian interpretation of prophecy. I also suspect that other religious groups and movements have a different view also.
However, following your line of reasoning through, the two examples you removed certainly had scope for affecting large numbers of people. After all, how much more influential is the President of the USA? But this isn't the place to discuss whether GW is God's appointee or not.
Also, your argument regarding Nostradamus could certainly be applied to the guy who prophecied over Bush...as I was looking up the references he seems to have been making prophecies regarding the USA...that certainly are suggestive of a relationship with the Divine.
Also, I would advise caution in calling ordained ministers Fortune Tellers. Modern day fortune tellers usually do so for money. (I know there are many "christian" leaders/televangelists, who it could be argued, act like fortune tellers.) However, the two who were in the article appear to be very conservative in their Christianity and would adhere to OT teachings on fortune tellers and occult practices. Also, claim that their prophecies were the words of the Divine.
It appears that there is a separate article for False Prophet. But again, I would always advise caution on saying who is a false prophet and who isn't... unless you just don't like them of course :o) (That bit was a joke by the way...) Paulrach (talk) 16:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
This article is about prophecy, and not who claims to be one. I knew very little about either of these individuals and their proclamations, but in general the prophets were typified by an almost obligatory delivery of what was not likely to be a well received message to the general population, and only later they were brought to the attention of authorities and powers-that-be due to their impact on the psyche of the general population. Did either of these individuals conform to this type of behaviour?
Moreover, prophecy is not intended for the "converted". For example the Jewish prophets did not prophecy to the Temple priests who were the group most occupied with the practice of ritual as it should be. Therefore claims of prophecy to to "converted" can not be considered prophecy in the sense derived from its original phenomena records.
Another feature of prophecy is that was delivered by people who were not part of the religious establishment in every case, that is they were not (again in the Jewish case) priests or Levis, or even rabbis. Their activity did not call for a general population to adhere to anything more specific then the tenants of the Hebrew Law, and not a particular interpretation of it, or by adding or subtracting to or from it. So, representatives of specific congregations who preach in order to attract membership to their particular understanding of a given religion within the whole also can not be regarded as delivering prophecy because they are exclusionary while prophecy of the Biblical variety, including that of Jesus, was inclusive, in fact overly so in the case of the later.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
What we have here is a difference in view point on what prophecy is and how it is delivered. Looking back through this talk page I suspect that a lot of your input has been from a perspective of Judaism. Therefore, your viewpoint is therefore different to mine. But it does not mean that mine is not valid or correct! Likewise, it doesn't mean that yours is not valid or correct, either. If we are creating a valid encyclopaedic article on what prophecy is, and how it has been, and is being, manifested then we need to include a wide range of view points.
So here are some thoughts, in no particular order, on possible ways of making this article better:
- Expand what the nature of prophecy is, - At present it focusses primarily on a Hebrew view point, what is there is good. However a NT biblical and contemporary viewpoint would also give more credibility to the article as a whole.
- Expand section on prophecy in connection to Judaism - the current section seems a little thin. From what I gather you contributed a lot to this and it has been removed, why? And why has it remained so?
- Expand section on prophecy in the modern church, including both positive and negative aspects. - Whether we agree with what is happening or what people believe, a lot of people do, so I think in creating a neutral article it needs including. If written correctly information can be provided with an NPOV.
- Expand section on prophecy in other beliefs - other than trawling the Net I don't know where to find much information on this.
I am away for a week, so might not get chance to update - I don't want to look like a hit and run editor. I am working on some of my ideas on my sandbox, but might not get chance to get them online. Paulrach (talk) 15:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Why is anyone but the initiator of prophecy allowed to define prophecy? If Judaism defines prophecy as X and not Y, how can it later be contested that, no, it really is Y? DRosenbach (Talk | Contribs) 20:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
You mentioned that you thought my perspective was predominantly from the Jewish perspective. This is not true. It is just that the data on the subject is predominantly from Jewish sources. Quite simply the attestation of the phenomena begins there, and includes 55 individuals that were widely acknowledged by their societies to have ha the ability to prophecy. The Christian data is maybe related to a single individual who was also Jewish, but was not accepted as such by his society. The data from Islam is in the same vein, except that the recognition of the prophetic ability was later forced upon the general society as a means of acceptance. I am therefore left with somewhat over 3% of less then acceptable data as opposed to somewhat less then 96% of fairly explicit data to work with on the subject. 96% data quality is generally regarded as good enough in science to evaluate any phenomena.
  • - Expand what the nature of prophecy is, - At present it focuses primarily on a Hebrew view point, what is there is good. However a NT biblical and contemporary viewpoint would also give more

credibility to the article as a whole.

The phenomena is defined by its initial manifestation's, and the vast majority of data relates to that manifestation range. In order to expand the definition of the phenomena (which is what you are asking) one needs to at least obtain as much new data as that already available. However I am not aware of other 55 prophets that have been widely accepted by their societies, and have exhibited anything like the attributes associated with the early dataset.
  • - Expand section on prophecy in connection to Judaism - the current section seems a little thin. From what I gather you contributed a lot to this and it has been removed, why? And why has it remained so?
I had expanded the section, but this is one of these articles that is edited constantly, and I had been away for a year, so I have no idea why it was removed.
  • - Expand section on prophecy in the modern church, including both positive and negative aspects. - Whether we agree with what is happening or what people believe, a lot of people do, so I think in creating a neutral article it needs including. If written correctly information can be provided with an NPOV.
Sure, go ahead, but remember, this article is not about "what people believe". Most people did not choose to believe the prophecies until they were shown to be true, which is how we know of the phenomena. This article is about the nature of prophecy, and not its claims.
  • - Expand section on prophecy in other beliefs - other than trawling the Net I don't know where to find much information on this.
Prophecy was not found in other cultures before it was realised in Israel. Subsequently several cultures have made claims to prophecy-like phenomena, but these are largely under influences of Western expansion and borrowing. For example most languages lack the word for prophecy, and what is there is usually derived from the divination or fortune telling practices found in most cultures by anthropologists (i.e. shamanism).
The problem with modern claims of prophecy is that they are based on poorly understood sources, and are often motivated by personal and group oriented motives and agendas even if the individuals claiming the ability are genuinely convinced themselves to be so gifted.

These are very interesting claims. Do you have any sources for them? "Prophecy" is a contemporary subject and phenomenon, and in general religious subjects, the realities of contemporary scholarship and Wikipedia's approach are such that, generally speaking, what the Hebrew Bible (and Judaism) has to say is a significant opinion, but nonetheless one opinion among many (and there are often multiple opinions about what they have to say). It's important to recognize when our logic is representing a potential tautology. If we narrow the definition of "prophecy" to reflect only the characteristic practices of the Biblical prophets, then of course only the Biblical prophets qualify for that term. In an article on Judaism it would be entirely appropriate to use such a definition exclusively. But in a general religion article other opinions have to be taken into account in determining the appropriate scope of the term. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 17:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Be my guest and show that "Prophecy is a contemporary subject and phenomenon" to show "the realities of contemporary scholarship"
I also don't see an article on "general religion"--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 02:54, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
I fully agree. If we are to make this a worthy article we need to take a broad approach. I can see no reason why we cannot use the knowledge of our individual faiths and beliefs to create an outstanding article. If we reject the ideas of another belief system, as wrong, then the article will be the poorer for it. This article is not the place for promoting one religion over another.
We have two choices: (1) We can improve the article in the way I have already suggested above, expanding all of the current areas, Jewish, Christian, Pagan alike. (2) Split the article into separate pages on each of the definitions and belief systems. My personal choice is to go with option 1, and take a mature and un-pedantic approach and improve the article. It is not too much to ask is it? :o)
Even though I have only recently become involved in this article, I can already get a sense of the tensions that have been present throughout. Looking back through the page history this article has at times been hijacked by those wanting to put a predominantly Christian POV and those wanting a predominantly Jewish POV. With offensive comments going both ways. There have even been Wikipedia Administrators using their position to put there own POV, certainly no neutrality and consensus involved!!!
Okay, if we are going to be thinking and writing with good heads, here is the Chambers On-line Dictionary definition of prophecy: prophecy noun (prophecies) 1 a the interpretation of divine will; b the act of revealing such interpretations. 2 a the foretelling of the future; b something foretold; a prediction. 3 a gift or aptitude for predicting the future.
If we are in the process of making Wikipedia a better place and a better resource, then this should be the starting point.
Does what is written reflect well against this? If so keep it. If not lets get rid, and the write it.
Can there be room for more than one divine being? In Wikipedia-land, yes. This should not affect anyones faith. We are creating and improving an article!
Is there room for more than one definition of prophecy? There better be or this article should be tagged as not having a NPOV.
I should point out that the Chambers definition for prophet is even more interesting but look that one up for yourselves ;o)
That's all for now Paulrach (talk) 22:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't object to splitting into subsections going to sub-articles. It's quite common to do this in a variety of religious subjects. There are in fact multiple definitions of prophecy, the religions have different views on what prophecy is and how it happens, and what one religion calls prophecy may not meet another's definition. This is all quite normal. It's important not to construct our own, original-research definition by synthesizing the separate views ourselves; we can only report the work of others who have attempted to do so. There are those who say prophecy is in its nature unknowable from the outside and comparative/analytical methods have limits. I personally wouldn't want to go under the knife of someone learned surgery entirely by correspondence course, and there are those who would take this view of prophecy as well. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Section on New Testament

Have updated the section on the New Testament as it was quite unreadable. Have spilt it into logical sections that relate more fully to the appropriate sections of the NT.

Still to do in this section:

  • Need to provide citations for references that were already in text, ie destruction of the temple, return of son of Man, John the Baptist.
  • The section on Acts may need more input.
  • Have not touched section on prophecy in Revelation.
  • Need to expand section on prophecy from the Pauline Epistles.

Paulrach (talk) 14:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I am tempted to remove the entire Christianity section. The actual prophecies of the various types are a matter for articles so linked. This article is on the nature of Prophecy, and not the contents of prophecies. Maybe this is the reason virtually everything I had added on the nature of prophecy in the Judaism has been removed?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 03:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


When did this article become about the experience of prophecy? The text was only added today!!! If it is about the experience of prophecy this article should be deleted, as there is no verifiable scientific data that it exists!!! Religious texts are not verifiable! However, if this is a general article about prophecy then there is room for the Christian point of view and the Jewish point of view.
As I have mentioned I want this to be a balanced article about prophecy. You keep removing anything that doesn't fit your view....yet you have not added anything! You have blocked this, yet there has been no vandalism but more importantly no discussion or consensus was reached as to the nature of this article. I am personally disappointed that Administrators behave this way.
I have sought in good faith to improve the quality of this article. That includes all sections and from whatever religion.
Paulrach (talk) 05:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Bahá'í Faith

Bahá'í Faith is not related to Islam or a subset of Islam. Someone with little understanding of world religions as added this to the wrong section. But as this is article has now been blocked no one can correct this! Paulrach (talk) 05:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Smith

"is said to have translated golden plates through divine revelation by the spirit" - how is divine revelation by the spirit different from the divine revelation?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 07:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This section is very oddly worded and needs to be reworked. --Storm Rider (talk) 07:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Recent protection

I read Paulrach's comments on the Christianity project page and then reviewed the recent history. mrg3105, it appears a little heavy handed to semiprotect this page. What was your reasoning for it? We generally do not evade cooperative efforts by using semiprotect or protects on pages. I would hope you would review your logic here and then revert yourself.

I appreciate your efforts to request references, but it should have gone farther. This article has few references given the topic and it makes some pretty sweeping claims. For example, on the Joseph Smith section it states, "there is no record of his experience of prophecy". Who wrote that and from what position of expertise? The whole article makes broad states without few reputable references; quote or use experts in the field when making sweeping statements or delete them. --Storm Rider (talk) 07:57, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The subject of the article is prophecy as a human experiential phenomena, not what people believe, not claims to it, not quoting from prophecies, but the experience of it. All the other subjects are covered in the many other articles. The consistent misunderstanding of this had resulted in constant editing of the article without adding any relevant substantive referenced information to it. Usually it is done based on the desire to promote one's religious beliefs, but the simple truth is that so far (last six months) no contribution has been about the prophet's, male or female of any religious affiliation or ethnicity, experience of the phenomena. Almost everything I had added last year had been edited out without much discussion although it focused on the subject of the article. The problem is largely the unwillingness of editors to accept that despite their beliefs (which are their own) there are just no sources that discuss the experience of prophecy as a human phenomena outside of the Jewish scriptures. I have been implicitly told that I am biased in adding only information derived from these sources, but no other sources exist save for very recent descriptions from such activities as "speaking in tongues" or other exotic forms of Christianity. I'm happy to add anything, as long as it deals with the subject of the article and is supported by verifiable sources.
Claims of prophecy, or belief in it, do not add to description or definition of it.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 08:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
I think I understand your objective for the article. If you are Hebrew then I would suggest that you are not the best resource for determining your POV; often, our own POV is often unseen by ourselves, but readily seen by others. For example, the Tanakh section has a lot of language that has nothing to do with the process of prophecy or descriptions of the experience of it. It is an example of what you say is wrong with the article. I do not mean to offend, but I suspect that you have a good understanding of the Jewish perspective; are you as well schooled in other religions? When you make a statement such as, "there are just no sources that discuss the experience of prophecy as a human phenomena outside of the Jewish scriptures"; it shows a marked lack of knowledge about other religions and the experience of humanity.
You are promoting a very narrow defintion of Prophecy. I would recommend that the title change to "Experience of prophecy" or "Process of prophecy"; at least something that allows other editors to more quickly focus on the objective you have put forward. The current title allows the topic to cover the full range of prophecy from all religions; the process or experience is a very small subset of that topic. Does that make sense to you?
It is always best to "keep to our own knitting"; it is what we know best. When you do not have in depth knowledge of all religions, you should never make such sweeping statements. When we do, we show our ignorance all too readily. Rule of thumb to always remember: find experts to state something and quote them; Wikipedia does not take a position on anything, we just report what experts say. --Storm Rider (talk) 09:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "my definition of the subject". Prophecy (a noun) is a phenomena of human experience. Can you offer other?
How do you determine what I am "well schooled in"? Have we met before?
The reason the Tanakh section is so poor in referencing is because all have been removed and I have to put them back, which I can't do as quickly. I don't know that either my ethnicity or religious beliefs matter for the purpose of Wikipedia editing.
If "there are just no sources that discuss the experience of prophecy as a human phenomena outside of the Jewish scriptures" is untrue, then the best way to prove me wrong is to document such sources here.
I suspect what you mean by the "the full range of prophecy" is the acceptance of claims of it in diverse beliefs. However, this is documented in the main articles that deal with these beliefs. The article Christianity is about specific belief in some prophecy, or lack there of in other prophecy, right? Again, how do you define "prophecy"?
Well, here is your chance to prove my ignorance and provide not only a broader definition of prophecy, but also documented description of it as an experience.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Again, I would like to ask the question, when did this article become solely about the 'Experience of Prophecy'? When ngr3105 made your first edit to the page (29.12.06) it was a general article about prophecy! When I made my first edit (last week) it was a general article about prophecy. When did all this change? Where has the discussion about this change taken place? Why has one POV hijacked the determination of a neutral article?
All along I have proposed that we get a high quality article on prophecy, from whatever religious perspective. After all if someone Google searched the term prophecy this is the first article they would come to. So let's do it prophecy. The experience of prophecy is a valid and worthy sub-topic of prophecy, which could if it were allowed also shine light on many negative aspects of the topic.
However, as it stands this article does not even measure up to a dictionary definition of prophecy!!! Paulrach (talk) 10:11, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, the article I found in 2006 was fairly woeful.
How does your article define prophecy (noun)?
To me the definition is fairly obvious - an experience by a human being of knowledge and understanding of something he/she can not come to by means of logic. Do you disagree? In fact I'll add this to the rather short introductory sentence.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 10:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Once again you have not answered the question but taken it on yourself to re-define the scope of this article, without discussion or consensus.
The definition of prophechy is simple: prophecy noun (prophecies) 1 a the interpretation of divine will; b the act of revealing such interpretations. 2 a the foretelling of the future; b something foretold; a prediction. 3 a gift or aptitude for predicting the future..[1] And basically that is that.
You are talking about experience. How do you define experience? How do you really know what the Biblical prophets experienced? Were you there? Experience is something that is very subjective, and is open to a wide range of interpretations. We have two different definitions of prophecy, and there are probably many more out there. 87.195.19.208 (talk) 12:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, computer had logged itself off and just signed an IP. That should read Paulrach (talk) 12:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
As you will see in the introduction, although I do offer my own definition (do you dispute it?), I have provided referenced definitions to three other sources...and that makes four. The definition you provide is from an online dictionary, but is included in the definitions I provided also, since the online dictionary took it from there, so you need not worry about my POV.
Again, you may not have seen the most recent version of the article, but the experience is defined there. The experience is based on the study of the interaction of the many prophets and God or His agents, so I need not have been there since I can read the accounts in the sources. I will be citing these as I go along.
Ok, if you think I or the sources I cited, are subjective, maybe you would like to offer your own interpretation, cited of course?
We do not have two different definitions of prophecy, but one, since one of these states that "it means the foreknowledge of future events", meaning it only talks about the product of prophecy, and not the experience of it - that is the process. However, the product of prophecy is scripture, and that is dealt with in other articles, which is what I have been trying to explain all along.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 12:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
Again you have not answered the question. When did this article become about the experience of prophecy and not just prophecy as the title of the article so obviously suggests? If this is to be an article about the experience of prophecy then its name should reflect that.Paulrach (talk) 07:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
It always was about the experience. Prophecy, is a result of the interaction between the Divine and a human being. The product of prophecy is either the oral or written record. The prophecy itself is an experience or phenomena. The product of prophecy is dealt with in the many articles that deal with the oral or written records of the interaction. If anyone tries to cram all the records of all the claims of prophecy into this one article, it will become what it had become on at least two previous occasions, a dump for every claim of prophecy in history. I am being neither bias, not exclusionary, but somewhat more-then routinely disciplined about the definition and what falls under it. The definition that prophecy is about foretelling the future is inadequate because as soon as the foretelling takes place, it becomes the record of the claimed prophecy and not the actual prophecy.
Consider for example the case of an encounter between human beings. A manager comes to the subordinate's office space, and asks him or her to perform a task of recording a team meeting. The result of the request is the record of the meeting. The actual interaction is however the immediate subordinate's expereince of the manager in the office space. The subordinate may be feeing unhappy because he or she is required to leave what he or she was doing to perform this task. He or she may be required to travel to another facility, and its possible that the person doesn't like taking minutes of meetings anyway. The people in the team may resent having their words recorded on this occasion, and maybe somewhat hostile towards her or him, although she or he is just performing a task set by the manager, etc. This is the experience. For this person the experience of such a task may always be negative regardless of the content of the records of many meetings, or how others regard him or her in the performance of this task.
The reason this is called prophecy is because this is the most common name used in the English language, even if misused most of the time. This was something I brought up very early on in our discussion when I suggested that the average individual regards prophecy as the ability to foretell the future, but almost anyone can make that claim to some degree. For example I will be mostly right if I say that the vast majority of the population of my country will brush their teeth in the morning tomorrow. With a reasonable amount of research I can even make more wide-reaching events such as difficult economic times, wars, natural disasters, etc. For this reason there are defined guidelines as to what is considered a prophetic phenomena, and examples are to be found throughout the Bible, and I will provide them and reference them given time. These create a clear division between what prophecy is as it was defined in the first instance, and complex analysis which I studied at university, although as you know, claims of divine assistance are often made by the students, particularly after term exams. ;o)
Please be patient and see how I develop the article, and by all means comment if you disagree. However there is no need to rename the article. If I do, it will very quickly devolve into something which does not meet any Wikipedia standards and will have no chance at even a B class rating.
I would suggest that to deal with record of prophecy, or claim to it, you need to add the relevant sections to the main articles in the appropriate faith systems. All faiths that can show sources of claimed prophecy will be linked in this article, however if there are no actual descriptions of the claimed prophets in the act of prophecy (as opposed to recording it), then I can not invent this as it would become OR and contrary to Wikipedia policy and guidelines.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Why this article is being restricted to the experience of prophecy

The protect was only there to prevent all and sundry IPs from editing (as it explains in the template page), and not registered users. I'm sorry if the one particular user through inexperience was not aware of this. I would appreciate if the pp-protect was replaced.

I had previously extensively explained at length why this seemingly generic article name only relates to the experience of prophecy in the talk page.

Essentially one has to read the (in this case) the Bible to appreciate my arguments, but the particular User:Paulrach may not have realised that the Bible, at least the Hebrew version from the Jewish perspective, is all prophecy, as is much of Tanakh! The New Testament is also claimed to be prophetic, as is the Quaran, and other scriptures. In other words, the contents of these scriptures are a record of prophecy that include the identification of the Source (God in the Judeo-Christian scriptures), the experience of being a prophet or prophetess (a list of 55 in the Jewish case), and the record itself (the various oral and written records).

Therefore prophecy is not just about the content of prophecy, i.e. the text, and specifically "foretelling future".

If the widest scope of definition of prophecy is applied to the article as suggested, the entire contents of the Hebrew Tanakh which is attributed to the prophets recognised as such in Judaism can conceivable be reproduced in the prophecy article!

For this reason, I suggested that there are in fact many articles in Wikipedia that exist which link to the prophecy article, but are about the record of, claims of or beliefs in prophecy, and not the prophecy itself, which is a human experience of the phenomena of interaction with the Source.

Even the experience of prophecy itself needs to be trimmed to manageable proportions for the purpose of a reference work article since the biographies of all prophets can not clearly be included in the one article, and can only be linked to the articles dealing with their lives.

What other editors will have a problem with, is that most non-Jewish records of prophecy are largely lacking the description of prophecy as a process. There are many religious systems where this is the core principle of belief. This is extensively discussed by Rambam (I'm sure you are aware).

My attempt to restrict the article content to the experience of prophecy is, as I see it based on past experience with editing this article, is in the need to keep the article content manageable, and adhering to Wikipedia standards. I am quite willing to add any content or include links to any pages that relate to anything other users may seem fit to be linked to prophecy, including claims or, record of, belief in, etc., and I had created an article from a large and entirely unreferenced section of the prophecy article which was added spuriously, and is now listed for speedy deletion. No comment had been added to the article talk page since 4.4.2008. Previous entries added to the article which I watched over a period of 6 months included links to occult, divination, obscure individuals, statements of personal beliefs, and other content I can only call a miscellanea, usually unreferenced, or linked to highly biases online sites.

If you find this argument unjustified, be prepared to conduct substantial re-edits, nay, wholesale rewriting of the article every six months, as I am doing now.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi! Just letting you know that only an admin can protect a page. If you want a page protected, you need to ask an admin to protect it. This seems to be a simple edit dispute, and page protection policy advises admins to use protection sparingly and only as a last resort in such cases. I certainly agree that material of dubious notability and sourcing has been regularly added to the article. Link-spam to websites of obscure contemporary religious figures and groups seem to be pretty common nuisances for Wikipedia religion articles, and I agree part of maintaining the article is cleaning such stuff out. However, I'm personally not sure I understand what you mean by "the experience of prophecy" as opposed to "beliefs about prophecy"; perhaps I'm simply getting what your proposed scope is. Religious beliefs about prophecy, for example, would seem relevant to scope. In addition to cleaning out some dubious additions, you seem to have also rewritten material in some sections that would seem to be more regular parts of the article. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 01:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
I was getting around to finding an admin. However it seems that the template was (unintentionally) effective on its own. In any case, you are an admin, so could you put that into effect?
Ok, I'll try again on explaining what "prophecy" entails. It is a process.
  • 1. There is an original condition stated by the Divine to a given individual, group or society
  • 2. There is a need for a prophecy predicated by some divergence from the original condition
  • 3. There is the selection of the messenger of the need to correct the divergence by the Source, the prophet
  • 4. There is the experience of the messenger's realisation of his/her new role and mission
  • 5. There is the delivery of the message...
  • 6. ...and its recording as a claim to acting on behalf of the Source (which may occur at a later time)
  • 7. There is the acceptance or rejection of the message by the intended addressee(s)
  • 8. The content of the prophecy becomes reality, or not, if the message is accepted
  • 9. If the prophecy becomes reality, the messenger is accepted as a prophet/prophetess based on the (point 8.) outcome
  • 10. Once the messenger is accepted as a prophet (i.e. true prophet), he/she may make further claims of prophecy that are likely to be accepted based on the precedent of the previous delivery
  • 11. Once the claims of prophecy are accepted, the prophet/prophetess become a part of the belief system, or faith
It is not possible to cover all this in one article for every instance of claimed prophecy, agreed?
Much of the above is already described in the main articles of the named prophets and prophetesses elsewhere in Wikipedia, so repeating it here will simply be an unnecessary duplication, and is likely to enlarge the article to an unmanageable size, as it had done before.
To link the main articles of the named prophets to provide the reader with the understanding of prophecy , it is only sufficient to say in the introductory paragraph of each main article that the subject of the article is known for his/her prophecy.
This is because prophecy is the one common trait of all those who claim it as their experience. ::This experience, is what has been defined, and hopefully understood here. --mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 03:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Statements on belief

Ok, statements that express belief, like this "From this many Christians believe..." do not belong here, but in the article on Christians or Christianity because it is impossible to derive anything about prophecy from what people believe it is.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 22:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Christian part

I would like to understand how the following explains anything about prophecy:

In the Christian New Testament prophecy is often referred as one of the fivefold ministries or spiritual gifts that accompany the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. From this many Christians believe that prophecy is the supernatural ability to receive and convey a message from God or the divine. The purpose of the message may be to edify, exhort and comfort the body of Christ or an individual believer. In this context, not all prophecies contain predictions about the future. The Apostle Paul also teaches in Corinthians that prophecy is for the benefit of the whole Church and not just the individual exercising the gift.[2]

The term for prophecy in Christianity is spiritual gifts
The manifestation of prophecy is the "indwelling of the Holy Spirit" which is derived from the Hebrew Ruach HaKodesh.
The "body of Christ" is an allegorical term "used by Christians to describe believers in Christ. Jesus Christ is seen as the "head" of the body, which is the church. The "members" of the body are seen as members of the Church." - plain meaning, since there is no need for allegories in this article, it not being the study of literature or terminology, "The purpose of the message may be to edify, exhort and comfort Christians"
"In this context, not all prophecies contain predictions about the future." - as I have tried to explain, the "predictions about the future" are the product of the prophecy, and are dealt with in their respective articles. However, if the prophecies in Christianity are not only for predicting, what else are the "edify, exhort and comfort" for, counselling? This too is a message, but what we are interested in here is not the message, but the experience of receiving and delivering it, the messenger him/her self being dealt with in prophet article.

""The Apostle Paul also teaches in Corinthians that prophecy is for the benefit of the whole Church and not just the individual exercising the gift." - I am somewhat confused. We seem to agree on the definition that all prophecy emanates from a Divine Source. How can "the individual exercising the gift"? In any case, Corinthians 14:22 is taken completely out of context based on the Isa 28:11 to which it refers to unwillingness to learn the Torah by Isaiah's contemporaries to the point at which it became as a foreign tongue

9. Whom shall he teach knowledge and to whom shall he explain the message? To those weaned from milk, removed from breasts? 10. For a precept for a precept, a precept for a precept, a line for a line, a line for a line, a little there, a little there. 11. For with distorted speech and in another language, does he speak to this people. 12. For he said to them, "This is the rest; give rest to the weary, and this is the tranquility," but they would not listen. 13. And the word of the Lord shall be for them a precept for a precept, a precept for a precept, a line for a line, a line for a line, a little there, a little there, in order that they go and stumble backwards and be broken, and be trapped and caught.

Hence the 1 Corinthians 14:21 says

In the Law it is written, "BY MEN OF STRANGE TONGUES AND BY THE LIPS OF STRANGERS I WILL SPEAK TO THIS PEOPLE, AND EVEN SO THEY WILL NOT LISTEN TO ME," says the Lord.

and in Corinthians 14:22

Therefore other languages are for a sign, not to those who believe, but to the unbelieving; but prophesying is for a sign, not to the unbelieving, but to those who believe.(World English Bible translation)

(Note: prophesying in this case refers tot he prophecy of Moses, i.e. the "knowledge" from Isa. 28:9 and "the word of the Lord" from Isa. 28:13)

So the reference is not to prophecy at all because the translation is taken out of context. It really means - it is pointless teaching those who do not want to be taught, because to them the language in which the teaching is being delivered will seem like a foreign language. The popular English expression to this is "Its all Greek to me", derived from Shakespeare.

The line was first spoken by Casca, one of the conspirators against Caesar in the first act of 'Julius Caesar.' He was speaking of the comments made by Cicero after Caesar three times refused the crown of emperor. Cicero actually did speak in Greek, using that language as a device to make sure that casual passers-by did not understand his remarks. Today the expression 'It's all Greek to me' simply means that what has been said is beyond the speaker's understanding." From "Morris Dictionary of Word and Phrase Origins" by William and Mary Morris (HarperCollins, New York, 1977, 1988).http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/4/messages/1274.html

--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 00:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


"edify, exhort and comfort" for, counselling? - This is not a message, this is what prophecy can also be. Remember, Christians have a different view point of who and what God is to Jews.
My point being - is there a need to use three words, two of them undefined, where one suffices?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Your interpretation of Corinthians appears to be taken from a position with little or no understanding of Christian scriptures. Just because you don't think this is a reference to prophecy does not mean that it is not correct. You very readily criticise and misquote the Christian scriptures.
Well, no, I used Christian sources for the quotes, and the reference to Isaiah verse also. It is very clear that Isaiah is not "speaking in strange tongues" since there is a list of issues he delivers in those verses. The reference to Corinthians was made by yourself. I am not criticising or misquoting anyone by the way. I am simply saying - look a the context.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
You are interested in what the experience of prophecy is. Historically this article is about prophecy, what it is, how it manifests itself, instances of prophecy. The experience of prophecy is just one part of this topic. A small part at that. Now you may argue differently but look at the dictionary definition. It is wider than that.
This is not a dictionary! In a dictionary only the definition of a word is given, here in a reference work much more care needs to be taken. Prophecy is made up of many parts, and all these parts have articles of their own. I fail to understand why you want to combine all these articles in the one place here!--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
You are attacking and criticise anything that does not relate to Judaism. If that is the case why don't you write the article about the Jewish interpretation of prophecy or the experience of prophecy. However, this article is just about prophecy...and that should include Jewish, Christian, Mormon, Islamic and Pagan viewpoints.
Firstly, where am I "attacking and criticise anything that does not relate to Judaism"?
Secondly, and yet again, in Wikipedia no one is interested in POV. It you write something, be prepared to WP:VERIFY and WP:SOURCE it.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Recently, you only make contributions to this article to change what others have done without adding new material. Is this really in the spirit of what Wikipedia is about? Remember, it's about collaboration and consensus. Paulrach (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
I had not made any edits in this article for months to see what would happen. Rather then talking or questioning what I wrote my edits were summarily removed, and replaced with unsourced claims. The reason I remove contributions of others is for the same reason - they are unsourced claims. So, I have asked questions in order to foster discussion, and all I got in return are accusations of "attacking and criticising" others, but not actual citations where I have done so. If you want to make the rules, be prepared to live by them. However, you do not make the rules. There are Wikipedia editing policies and guidelines that apply equally to all. I suggest you familiarise yourself with them.
Believe it or not, I do not spend all my time editing in Wikipedia, and usually do so between other tasks. Adding substantial VERIFIED and REFERENCED material takes time. I can tell you now that I will be editing this article for a while yet. However everything I will add will have a reference to a readily available authoritative source.--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Do you want to give my questions another go in answering?--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 09:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I also tend to see no basis for limiting the scope of this article to "the experience of prophecy" or removing material based on such a limit. There has been no consensus for such a limit, and it seems inconsistent with dictionary definitions etc. Because the naming conventions guideline says to use the ordinary English meaning of article titles, and specifically suggests using dictionaries in case of disagreement, the dictionary meaning of "prophecy" would seem to be the default basis for the article's scope in the absence of consensus otherwise. It seems to me that Christian beliefs about the nature and meaning of prophecy, experientially based or not, are relevant to this article and I see no basis for deleting them except for claims that particular content is original research and not verifiable (or is a tiny minority view that doesn't fairly or neutrally represent mainstream Christianity). Disagreement with the Christian view or a claim that it is wrong or makes no sense is simply not a basis for removing content. Best, --Shirahadasha (talk) 16:30, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yet again I would like to point out that I had not removed any content because it was "wrong or makes no sense".
Please note that Wiktionary's definition of prophecy is - A prediction, especially one made by a prophet or under divine inspiration.
In turn the meaning of prediction is - A statement of what will happen in the future
Under this definition Most of what is the five books of Moses are not considered prophecy!
On the other hand daily weather forecasting does constitute prophecy!
To me the dictionary definition is therefore clearly inadequate as the basis for the article.
When including "Christian beliefs about the nature and meaning of prophecy", will the Jewish and Islamic and all other beliefs about nature and meaning of prophecy will be included? Consider the wider implication of applying this, and therefore widening the scope.
Each one of Christian denominations sees some different interpretation of the Christian belief system, and these are covered in copious articles. There are also articles that cover divergent beliefs in Judaism and Islam, and other belief systems which are not a part of these three main religions. Add to these the beliefs of all pagan beliefs that have claims of predicting the future, and all modern claimants, the various articles dealing with the nature of belief, its academic analysis, and forms of interpretation and exegesis ("meaning of prophecy"), and what you end up with is an article that is a compilation of several hundred articles from elsewhere in Wikipedia. Furthermore, based on this wide scoping of the subject, almost no contribution can be excluded if sourced, and sources are not hard to find since many come from online sites published by individuals representing small groups of believers such as this[5].
How will the "nature of prophecy" be defined? The Wiktionary has
1. The essential characteristics
2. A wild primitive state of being
3. The summary of everything that has to do with biological and geographical states and events on earth
4. The environment, the outdoors
I propose that only the essential characteristics (#1) of prophecy be included in this article, and that essentiality, to me, is the experience, because without experience there is no connection between the Source, and the record of prophecy, and hence no prophecy.
If other definitions are also included, then I can see editors arguing that #2 allows theories of primitive belief systems; argument based on #3 will stress the word "everything", and #4 can arguably add to the common English meaning of prophecy as being confined to the spiritual the meaning of prophecy as weather pattern changes predicted by the scientific community. This adds another couple of hundred articles to the religious tally.
If the consensus turns out to be the wider scope of the "nature of prophecy", then I suggest that it will constitute an abuse of logic and an unreasonable editorial goal for this article.
The inclusion of the "meaning of prophecy" is a particular problem for this article since it requires copious quoting and variant interpretation of text. Even the average Christian gospel article such as the Gospel of Matthew could not cope with this and used the in-article disambiguation to dozens of other articles!
This is why I propose that only the narrow scope of prophecy is considered here. It is physically impossible to create a reference article on prophecy that will not force its splitting if allowed to incorporate even the introduction sections of all the possible articles it can be linked to! Six months ago when I first begun editing this article I assessed some 400+ possible article inclusions if all content found in that version was to be used. The end result would not be a reference article but a moderately large essay of some 20 pages (MS Word Ariel 10pt).
What is the problem?
The problem is that prophecy is a root subject for many concepts by virtue of the centrality of Biblical texts in many cultures. As such, it has to be seen as a "trunk" and not the "branches" to use an allegory, even if it is a "bush". The "branching" can be facilitated by in-content links as part of editing. The editors have to be able to project a virtual "stumping line". This means the article deals with a very narrow (literally) aspect of the subject after a process of "delimbing". It is this process that some editors may find so "painful".--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 23:05, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Hold on a second. If, in fact, the article was ridiculously bloated, then a debate on its scope might be necessary. But the article is a mere skeleton. I can see lots of potential for fleshing out a historical and global overview of the Christian understanding of prophecy, as I'm sure other editors will want to do for their respective religions. And if a lot of editors do so, then perhaps there might be content that is better split into other articles. But that's not the case at the moment. TrickyApron (talk) 03:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
I'll even hold on for a minute! ;o)
"the article is a mere skeleton" now! but before...
I never said there was no potential; I have only just begun to flesh it out again, but I do not devote all my time to one article, and tend to meander from article to article, and from project to project, occasionally fixing up a plethora of other articles, so it will take time.
However, "if a lot of editors do so, then perhaps there might be content that is better split into other articles" - DONE!!!! There are major categories in religion and all that they connect to! In case of Christianity there are so many articles dealing with every aspect of every denomination, including history and global overviews that I have not even visited them all as I browse the categories. There is no need to write another article that will be split yet again! And what will be left when you split it? You will be left yet again with the same issue of defining what to keep! Welcome to Square One ;o)
There are two excellent but paradoxical expressions in English
  • More hands make light work
and
  • Many cooks spoil the broth
I am not the first to make this observation

What is the use of saying that ‘Many hands make light work’ when the same copy-book tells you that ‘Too many cooks spoil the broth’? (1923 Observer 11 Feb. 9)

Having some experience in a commercial kitchen, I can say that editing an article is just like cooking. Firstly everyone has to be using the same recipe! The definition of what prophecy means is that "recipe"

.

What I would like people to do is spend time perusing the articles in the categories to understand that the ONLY area not really covered is the clear exposition of who is a prophet, and what is his or her experience - prophecy. Every other aspect of every specific conceivable recorded or claimant of prophecy has an article, more or less complete to often Start of even B class. There is absolutely no need to rehash these many articles here. This would amount to "chopping chopped wood".--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♥♦♣ 05:34, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Err... so because there's extensive details on every aspect of Pokemon, the main article on Pokemon shouldn't "rehash" the topic but should instead focus on areas "not really covered" in the other articles? I disagree. My position is that this article should provide a clear, concise, comprehensive overview of Prophecy in relation to the major religions of the world and as defined by major dictionaries and encyclopedias, guiding readers to other articles on prophecy if they want more detail but providing a sufficient general overview of the whole subject for those readers who don't. TrickyApron (talk) 20:29, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, we agree on something - "this article should provide a clear, concise, comprehensive overview of Prophecy in relation to the major religions of the World"
Why don't you start a sandbox, and see how far you get?
  1. ^ http://www.chambersharrap.co.uk/chambers/features/chref/chref.py/main?query=prophecy&title=21st&sourceid=Mozilla-search
  2. ^ 1 Corinthians 14:22
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Prophecy/Archive_1&oldid=1087972349"