Modern Prophets of Biblical Proportions

Biblical prophets¹ are all pretty simple characters to the bone when their fat is boiled away:1) They live in 'rough' times (socially, politically, religiously, etc.).
2) They see a change is necessary.
3) They reason what the steps to meet that change might be.
4) They reason what the consequences of not making that change might be.
5) They preach their proposed changes and warning of the consequences till their lungs collapse.Sound familiar? I believe many modern-day scientists to be prophets in the most Biblical sense of the term. For example, take the Global Warming Prophets:1) They live in 'rough' times: it's gettin' hot out there!
2) They see a change is necessary: gotta cool the place down!
3) They reason what the steps to meet that change might be: stop emitting poisonous gases into the air that make it warmer.
4) They reason what the consequences of not making that change might be: little ol' Earth gets too hot to handle.
5) They preach their proposed changes and warning of the consequences till their lungs collapse: see Al run!Of course, we can draw similarities as well with political scientists, but I will save that for later in the thread. For now, it is worth it to point out that such folk, modern-day scientists and Biblical prophets, seem to have a lot in commonsame goals, same methods.So...Are modern-day scientists prophets? And, were the Biblical prophets examples of ancient scientists?Jon
__________
¹ That is, the real Biblical prophets (as they're actually portrayed in the Bible), not the ones 'invented' by Biblical fundamentalists (who believe them to be spooky, magic fortune cookies).Edited by Jon, : That dern backslash again!Edited by Jon, : No reason given.Edited by Jon, : By request of AdminPD.Edited by Jon, : Remove message to Admins...

---

"Can we say the chair on the cat, for example? Or the basket in the person? No, we can't..." - Harriet J. Ottenheimer

​

"Dim bulbs save on energy..." - jar

Hey Jon,The first sentence doesn't read well. I suggest leaving out or rephrasing the part between the commas. Malarkey is a noun and not an adjective. Since the words don't really work together, I suggest you choose one or the other if you must include the comment between the commas. IMO, the comment is unnecessary to the post. You also have a typo in your first #3.Do you know which forum you'd like?Thanks
AdminPD

LOL. I thought I had edited that typo; oops. I hope the post is better.Thanks,
Jon

Thread copied here from the Modern Prophets of Biblical Proportions thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Yes. Probably not. They were perhaps more akin to Al Gore and Michael Moore, as promoters of science based warnings, than to the scientists themselves.

dunno but do prophets like 2 black women i once saw in london green park screaming REPENT REPENT, THE END IS COMING, THE SIGHNS ARE EVRYWHERE; REPENT REPENT!!!!!

I'd be inclined to call Al Gore and Michael Moore the prophets. The prophets of old were the promoters of the information, not the originators of it.That would put today's scientists in the role of God.

---

"It appears that many of you turn to Hebrew to escape the English...." -- Joseppi

I would not call modern scientists "prophets" in the sense of Biblical Prophecy.Biblical Prophets were more like the Talking Heads we find on news shows or maybe a telegraph operator. They read what was on the sheet of paper stuck in front of them. They were not even the equivalent of a Rush or Stewart. They simply read the lines they were given.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Very interesting. Then who supplied them with the information?

---

"Can we say the chair on the cat, for example? Or the basket in the person? No, we can't..." - Harriet J. Ottenheimer

​

"Dim bulbs save on energy..." - jar

In the stories, God did. That was their purpose. They transmitted messages from God, broadcast those messages.The other thing is that their prophecies had about the same half-life as a newspaper, read one day, lining the bird cage the next. It is always interesting to speculate on which phase had the greater value and impact.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

The real prophets in the last 100 years have been the science fiction writers.The scientists just figured out how to make thhttp://209.160.41.193/Images/Moods/mood12.gife stuff work.The prophets of old just had good press agents.

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Although I like the idea, it doesn't seem to match reality...I used to be very impressed by Jules Verne's 'predictions', but when I did some reading about it recently, it seems he didn't fortell any modern technology. There is also the problem of 'a million chimps could write Shakespear'.
With so many sci-fi authors churning out endless suggestions/ideas, it would be a surprise if none were correct.(I guess it is still too soon to tell if the likes of William Gibson have any 'precognition'...)

Unlike news anchors, though, were not the prophets more invested in the messages they 'passed along'? News anchors seem to want to be viewed as 'impartial', while prophets were never shy about telling whose side they were on.Jon

---

Check out the Purple Quill!

Of course there are exceptions and yes, the prophets did say which side they were on. But have you watched "news" lately? Maybe the locals try to stay neutral but that is why they are still at the local stations.There are a few stories that depict the "prophet" in somewhat of a similar manner to a modern planner; Joseph is a good example. He provided an interpretation of the dreams and claimed that God explained them, but then he took the next steps, 'splaining what needed to be done and taking the steps needed to address the issue.But so much of what is called 'prophecy' in the Bible is far more just story telling and after the fact creation.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!