There shall not be found among you ... anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens.
1) What is wrong with predicting the future?
2) How widely is this to be applied? Is meterology a sin? Predicting an election outcome? Trying to predict the reaction of the stock market?
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
I think there's a difference between divination and interpreting the facts. As to meteorology, Jesus doesn't condemn it in Matthew 16, rather, it's just piecing together the information that has been made available to us.
Divination comes into play when we're searching for the 'secret' will of God.
On a different note, Proverbs 16 and James 4 talk about making plans without God, saying it's at least foolishness to think that we determine our own future (that is, will know for sure what will happen to us).
Divination comes into play when we're searching for the 'secret' will of God.
On a different note, Proverbs 16 and James 4 talk about making plans without God, saying it's at least foolishness to think that we determine our own future (that is, will know for sure what will happen to us).
What is wrong with knowing what god wants from people? After all, if god has a plan what is wrong with knowing what that plan is?
And if we don't determine our own futures does that mean there isn't free will?
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
There shall not be found among you ... anyone who practices divination or tells fortunes or interprets omens.
1) What is wrong with predicting the future?
The concepts of “practicing divination”, “telling fortunes” and “interprets omens” are all examples of Hebrew Chiasmus/Parallelism – the expression of one idea in two or more different ways. In this case the idea/concept is the seeking knowledge by supernatural means.
It is condemned because if God doesn’t reveal something, then it cannot be revealed. What one gets, instead, is a demon or group of demons saying what they’re going to do to the seeker or how they're going to affect the seeker's environment, which they can indeed do. They reveal this knowledge via the diviner who is usually unaware that s/he is being played for a fool by a bunch of malevolent creatures who seek his/her destruction as well as the destruction of the souls of them who are seeking the unknown information.
None of the examples you listed involve attempting to foretell the future/discovering the unknown through supernatural powers; therefore, there's no need to burn Jim Cantore at the stake as a witch.
Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
I don't believe in supernatural beings such as demons and sorcerers. However, if knowledge that comes by way of such beings is false and deceptive, what am I supposed to make of Saul conjuring up the ghost of Samuel to find out why God is miffed at him? Conjuring up the dead certainly sounds like a supernatural ritual, yet we are supposed to believe that the conjured-up Samuel told the truth to Saul.
I prayed for deliverance from the hard world of facts and logic to the happy land where fantasies and prejudices reign. But God spake unto me, saying, "No, keep telling the truth," and to that end afflicted me with severe Trenchant Mouth. So I'm sorry for making cutting remarks, but it's the will of God.
I don't believe in supernatural beings such as demons and sorcerers. However, if knowledge that comes by way of such beings is false and deceptive, what am I supposed to make of Saul conjuring up the ghost of Samuel to find out why God is miffed at him? Conjuring up the dead certainly sounds like a supernatural ritual, yet we are supposed to believe that the conjured-up Samuel told the truth to Saul.
Saul knew what the problem was; therefore, there wasn’t any need to conjure anyone up.
That said, the Church Fathers agree that Saul didn’t speak to Samuel, but to a demon disguised as Samuel and that what the demon said was true. Who says that demons can’t speak the truth? They’ll do it if they think it will accomplish their end of ruining you.
Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
I don't believe in supernatural beings such as demons and sorcerers. However, if knowledge that comes by way of such beings is false and deceptive, what am I supposed to make of Saul conjuring up the ghost of Samuel to find out why God is miffed at him? Conjuring up the dead certainly sounds like a supernatural ritual, yet we are supposed to believe that the conjured-up Samuel told the truth to Saul.
Saul knew what the problem was; therefore, there wasn’t any need to conjure anyone up.
That said, the Church Fathers agree that Saul didn’t speak to Samuel, but to a demon disguised as Samuel and that what the demon said was true. Who says that demons can’t speak the truth? They’ll do it if they think it will accomplish their end of ruining you.
Quite interesting! I have encountered the idea that Saul actually spoke with a demon only once before, many years ago when I was having a discussion with a Witness of Jehovah. But it does seem to me that if one takes the Bible as authoritative and believes that the being who spoke to Saul was not Samuel but a demon, then I have to ask: would it not have been a lot clearer if the text said something about a demon posing as Samuel? This interpretation forces one to reject the very plain meaning of the words. On the other hand, if we consider the episode to be entirely allegorical, why do we need to bother changing the meaning of the words since we would not be interpreting them literally in any case?
I prayed for deliverance from the hard world of facts and logic to the happy land where fantasies and prejudices reign. But God spake unto me, saying, "No, keep telling the truth," and to that end afflicted me with severe Trenchant Mouth. So I'm sorry for making cutting remarks, but it's the will of God.
Divination comes into play when we're searching for the 'secret' will of God.
On a different note, Proverbs 16 and James 4 talk about making plans without God, saying it's at least foolishness to think that we determine our own future (that is, will know for sure what will happen to us).
What is wrong with knowing what god wants from people? After all, if god has a plan what is wrong with knowing what that plan is?
He reveals a lot of His plan. But one possible explanation is that uncertainty is necessary for being 'tested.' God puts a situation in front of us so that, by experiencing such a trial, He reveals His character and our measure of faith.
And if we don't determine our own futures does that mean there isn't free will?
We make our own choices, but we don't have control of things outside of us.
Take Jonah - he made a choice to go West, but God had other plans. He had free will over a decision, but not over his environment.
I don't believe in supernatural beings such as demons and sorcerers. However, if knowledge that comes by way of such beings is false and deceptive, what am I supposed to make of Saul conjuring up the ghost of Samuel to find out why God is miffed at him? Conjuring up the dead certainly sounds like a supernatural ritual, yet we are supposed to believe that the conjured-up Samuel told the truth to Saul.
Saul knew what the problem was; therefore, there wasn’t any need to conjure anyone up.
That said, the Church Fathers agree that Saul didn’t speak to Samuel, but to a demon disguised as Samuel and that what the demon said was true. Who says that demons can’t speak the truth? They’ll do it if they think it will accomplish their end of ruining you.
thats not the plain meaning of the words
the Witch of Endor intended on calling up a demon; but was shocked when Samuel showed up and told Saul -tomorrow you will meet me in Sheol
Quite interesting! I have encountered the idea that Saul actually spoke with a demon only once before, many years ago when I was having a discussion with a Witness of Jehovah.
But it does seem to me that if one takes the Bible as authoritative and believes that the being who spoke to Saul was not Samuel but a demon, then I have to ask: would it not have been a lot clearer if the text said something about a demon posing as Samuel?
Of course it would have been clearer had it explicitly said as much.
This interpretation forces one to reject the very plain meaning of the words.
Yep – just like has to reject the very plain meaning of the words that righteousness and justice will rain from the heavens since that entails the belief that righteousness and justice are forms of precipitation.
On the other hand, if we consider the episode to be entirely allegorical, why do we need to bother changing the meaning of the words since we would not be interpreting them literally in any case?
We all defer to some expert sooner or later. I happen to defer to the Church since she’s the one who preserved the text for me.
Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
