The need of Prophethood (arguments for and against)

[Link]

Salam

People who believe in need of books revealed from God can try to make a case for it. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Bahais, Ahmadis, etc, would be on the same side here.

I would think religions who do not believe the need of scripture or deists or atheists who believe if God exists, he would be a deist type, can argue against these.

I will post my proofs after some people participate for and against.

 

[LuisDantas]

I am very definitely in the "against" side here. In fairness, I don't think there is much of a case for any other stance, regardless of belief stance.

Why? Because these subject matters are just way too personal and require way too much awareness of specific situations and circunstances.

There is only so much wisdom or ethics that can be transmitted from static texts and very scarce prophets claiming to reveal them.

There is a legitimate use for texts in religion, but it is rather limited. And much of it comes from the religious person deciding how exactly to use them, up to and including all-out rebellion or even full disregard of those texts. Discernment and personal responsibility trump subservience every time, and more so in religion than in most other fields.

Prophets, if they have a place at all, would have to be somewhat close to the practicioner.

 

[Quintessence]

For the most part, prophets are a non-concept in Pagan traditions in part because it is simply the norm for practitioners to develop relationships directly with the gods themselves rather than relying on intermediaries. When the gods are nature, it's a simple matter to experience the gods for yourself so intermediaries are simply not needed. Anyone can do it, though granted not everyone can do it equally well as is the case with any skill or practice.

This means there is a place for experts - those who have, over time, developed a deeper and more consistent relationship with particular gods. That's perhaps the closest you'll find to "prophets" in Pagan traditions. With so many gods, not every practitioner can practice the same level of devotion and commitment to all of them. So you will have those who are especially close to and knowledgable about certain gods who should be given a modicum of respect for their expertise.

 

[Link]

I am very definitely in the "against" side here. In fairness, I don't think there is much of a case for any other stance, regardless of belief stance.

Why? Because these subject matters are just way too personal and require way too much awareness of specific situations and circunstances.

There is only so much wisdom or ethics that can be transmitted from static texts and very scarce prophets claiming to reveal them.

There is a legitimate use for texts in religion, but it is rather limited. And much of it comes from the religious person deciding how exactly to use them, up to and including all-out rebellion or even full disregard of those texts. Discernment and personal responsibility trump subservience every time, and more so in religion than in most other fields.

Prophets, if they have a place at all, would have to be somewhat close to the practicioner.

I think the problems you show, show that Prophethood without succession in terms of leadership to interpret the book, apply it to current times, and keep a close link to followers, is problematic. However, if there is a leader in all times, then is this still problematic?

 

[Link]

For the most part, prophets are a non-concept in Pagan traditions in part because it is simply the norm for practitioners to develop relationships directly with the gods themselves rather than relying on intermediaries. When the gods are nature, it's a simple matter to experience the gods for yourself so intermediaries are simply not needed. Anyone can do it, though granted not everyone can do it equally well as is the case with any skill or practice.

This means there is a place for experts - those who have, over time, developed a deeper and more consistent relationship with particular gods. That's perhaps the closest you'll find to "prophets" in Pagan traditions. With so many gods, not every practitioner can practice the same level of devotion and commitment to all of them. So you will have those who are especially close to and knowledgable about certain gods who should be given a modicum of respect for their expertise.

Interesting. I think I would argue the need of proof is where we differ. I don't have a problem with experts and experiencing the unseen world(s) directly or nature's spirits, but people can claim link to nature as well how do we know the gods claiming to be gods are worthy and to be followed? I also differ in that I would say at most gods can be exalted entities (whether human or not), but never on equal level of the Creator and hence I would never call them gods no matter how powerful or exalted they are.

I think where I differ is that I require proof for claims to unseen and for religion. I also am distrustful of most spirits in unseen because from what I perceive, they blind most of mankind to the truth in belief they are not to be taught the truth and are unworthy of it and they mind control most of mankind who are heedless of them. Jinn in short, are problematic to be trusted.

I believe the reason why most people don't detect the unseen world is due to Jinn who misguide people. I also believe all thoughts are telepathy and they come from unseen entities, we just interpret them and phrase them in our own words. So this realization is something for example the Quran constantly tries to awaken mankind to, yet, most can't see it. Who we tune into is important yet the dark side doesn't want people to realize this and wants people to think all thoughts are their own and sourced from within.

It might be argued the gods would reveal themselves if they deem us worthy, but to me, I believe Angels on the other hand are constantly trying to awaken mankind to the truth the other side blinds them to and trying to make us journey unseen and realize what we are connected to.

It's not that a person cannot discern between Angels and Devils from Jinn, it's that it takes some skill and defeating of evil within to do that.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I am very definitely in the "against" side here. In fairness, I don't think there is much of a case for any other stance, regardless of belief stance.

Why? Because these subject matters are just way too personal and require way too much awareness of specific situations and circunstances.

There is only so much wisdom or ethics that can be transmitted from static texts and very scarce prophets claiming to reveal them.

There is a legitimate use for texts in religion, but it is rather limited. And much of it comes from the religious person deciding how exactly to use them, up to and including all-out rebellion or even full disregard of those texts. Discernment and personal responsibility trump subservience every time, and more so in religion than in most other fields.

Prophets, if they have a place at all, would have to be somewhat close to the practicioner.

I see you have offered the reasons that are the most logical arguments for the necessity of God's Messengers. Without the Messengers their is no focal point for God, humanity would be free to make God's of anything they choose to, anarchy would prevail and does prevail once that focal point is lost in our material mind.

The Messengers are given for us to become aware of God given guidance, no matter how we hear about them, they are the ultimate proof of God. Their person and life are the first levels of proof, the writings remain for those that do not meet the Messengers as sure guidance in the age they are given. God gives us a line of Authority after the Messengers to carry forward the attributes and stories of the Messengers that future generations can prosper from.

Prophets, if they have a place at all, would have to be somewhat close to the practicioner.

That is exactly what they are, for humanity they are the God given "The Self of God". This can be described in great detail.

Regards Tony

 

[Nakosis]

Salam

People who believe in need of books revealed from God can try to make a case for it. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Bahais, Ahmadis, etc, would be on the same side here.

I would think religions who do not believe the need of scripture or deists or atheists who believe if God exists, he would be a deist type, can argue against these.

I will post my proofs after some people participate for and against.

So the next generation of prophets will know where they are to fit into the scheme of things. We need a running narrative for all of the characters to fall in place. Otherwise the end wouldn't make any sense.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think the problems you show, show that Prophethood without succession in terms of leadership to interpret the book, apply it to current times, and keep a close link to followers, is problematic. However, if there is a leader in all times, then is this still problematic?

I would say so.

At the end of the day, I just don't think of religion as something that involves that much reverence for written texts. A prophet of god is even more anathema to my views.

Religion as I understand it involves quite a lot of personal responsibility.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Salam

People who believe in need of books revealed from God can try to make a case for it. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Bahais, Ahmadis, etc, would be on the same side here.

I would think religions who do not believe the need of scripture or deists or atheists who believe if God exists, he would be a deist type, can argue against these.

I will post my proofs after some people participate for and against.

Baha'u'llah answered why there is always a need for a new Guidance from God in every Age:
1.
"As to thy question concerning the heavenly Scriptures: The All-Knowing Physician hath His finger on the pulse of mankind. He perceiveth the disease, and prescribeth, in His unerring wisdom, the remedy. Every age hath its own problem, and every soul its particular aspiration. The remedy the world needeth in its present-day afflictions can never be the same as that which a subsequent age may require. Be anxiously concerned with the needs of the age ye live in, and centre your deliberations on its exigencies and requirements."

The religion of God, comes as guidence to show the Right way of Life. As each Age has its own conditions and problems, therefore each Age, needs a diffent remedy or solution. And who is more capable than God who is all-knowing to give us this guidance?
This has always been the way of God, and shall always be His way.

2. Another reason that, each Age, the Religion must be renewed is, as time passes, the original teachings of the previous Revelation are misinterpreted and gets distorted. People loose the essence and spirit of the Faith, and instead adhere to the apparent form of the Religion. For example, they may say their Regular Prayers, yet, forget the more essential teachings, such as kindness, fairness, truthfulness, etc, as humanity tend to become materialistic and worldly overtime, therefore a new Warning from God is required from Time to Time.