Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peterkirk AT qaya.org>]

On 05/04/2005 00:53, George F Somsel wrote:

> > ... Those who reject this possibility do so only 
> >
> > because they reject the possibility of predictive prophecy from an a 
> >
> > priori philosophical position.
> >
> > ...
>
> Peter,
>
> That is a patent falsehood.  I would say that the Isaianic prophecy of Is
> 7 is predictive and the *young woman* not virginal.  I would also assert
> that the concept of Josiah's being **named** long before his birth is
> nonsense and inserted ex eventu.
>
>  
George, I should have qualified my statement a bit more, as follows: 
"Many of those who reject this possibility do so only because they 
reject the possibility of predictive prophecy... Others do so because 
they follow the interpretations of the former group without adequately 
examining their basis."

It seems that your a priori position is "Prophecy does not name specific 
names -- that is its nature." And this position does not have the 
benefit of the philosophical coherence of the position that predictive 
prophecy is impossible. You seem to believe that it is possible but only 
if it is very vague. Do you see prophecy as akin to weather forecasting, 
seeing the direction in which things are going and making judgments, or 
guesses (e.g. that the child in Isaiah 7 would be a boy rather than a 
girl), about the future? If so, I would say that you are in fact 
rejecting genuine predictive prophecy, which is a revelation from God 
rather than a human prediction based on current circumstances. Or do you 
agree with me and Karl that God can and did reveal to the prophets 
specific facts about the future? In that case, why are the specific 
facts necessarily vague?

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 01/04/2005