The Process of Prophecy

June 1, 2012 by Bo Sanders 26 Comments

I wrote earlier that we need to be careful with developing a dependance on personal prophecy.

Q: Why didn’t God tell you the accountant was embezzling?

A: Because that is not how God designed things to work.

Having said that, I want to be clear – I believe in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, including the prophetic. I have seen some wild stuff in the past 20 years and while I no longer run in charismatic circles, I am not interested in poo-pooing on my friends’ parade nor explaining away my experience.

Process theology has given me an interesting framework with which to view the phenomenon.
I can do it in 3 simple steps!

Step out of the 3 Tiered Universe. The Bible was written in an antiquated vocabulary that was embedded in a system that had Heaven above & Hell below. We still use that vocabulary but recognize now that it is only imagery – not physical reality.
Step away from the super-Natural. Get rid of the imagery that God is ‘up’ in heaven and periodically pokes through the thin veil to whisper in your ear – if you have enough faith, or if you are a chosen vessel, or if you are not tainted by sin, or … the truth is that God is with you. Holy Spirit is a work all around you.

God doesn’t need to ‘come down, or ‘break in’ or ‘break through’. God is down, in, and through.

Be aware of and open to the reality of God’s presence in the world. From verbal cues to body language – there are hundreds of ways that we perceive and interpret other people and our interactions. The is nothing magical about your receptivity, openness or awareness of what is possibly going on with someone else. As Christians, we believe that God’s Spirit is alive and at work in the world. Part of that ministry is to heighten and intensify our already existent (by grace) ability to listen, perceive and interpret social and relational interactions.

I have done this enough to know the objections that are bound to arise. So let me just say 2 things with the space I have left:

There are several innovative definitions of transcendence (as it relates to God) that get us out of the 3 Tiered Universe but still hold that God is not just a big bearded guy in the sky that we made up to feel like ‘somebody is watching over us’ and will take care of things in the end. Both Process theology and the work of Panneneberg give us visions of God’s otherness that squash most objections to moving in the direction that I am headed: we don’t lose the transcendence/otherness of God.

I love the idea that God is the power of the future. God comes to us in each moment and provides the possibility of a preferable reality complete with contingencies of the past. That gets me out of bed in the morning!

Prophecy is a sign that is meant to create in us a greater level of faith, trust and awareness. It is not a ‘party trick’ nor is it a primary mode of decision making. If you are relying on God’s Voice to plan travel itineraries, invest in the stock market, look for your missing child, counsel people getting divorced, or predict the weather … I got bad news for ya. That is not how God designed this all to work.

Admittedly, you have to downgrade your expectations a little bit. Gone are the days of thinking that some stranger on the street is going to call out your name and tell you all the secrets of your heart – and which fork in the road is ‘God’s will’. The magic show is over. Prophecy happens in relationship.

BUT (and this is a big but) because God is relational and inside a relationship God’s Spirit can lead your friend to speak loving, kind, challenging words to you – by being open and available … that is pretty great stuff! It’s just not magic.

It’s like your sex life. One you get rid of the unrealistic expectations of porn, you can have a healthy real relationship that is both satisfying and sustainable. First, though, you have to acknowledge that the earlier thing was fantasy … or you will be perpetually disappointed.

We are going to touch on this in an upcoming TNT so I would love to hear your feedback, fears, questions, comments, concerns and pushbacks.

Filed Under: engaging, latest, thinking Tagged With: Bible, personal, Process, prophecy, relationship, spiritual gifts, theology

25 comments

Newest | Oldest

timothydown

Hey Bo, thanks again for your post on process thought in relation to the prophetic. Again, I am still working on an assignment for my Philosophy of Spirituality class at Fuller, and so I wanted to address your view of God in this post as “the power of the future.” I am just in this conversation to learn; not to impose my views, or make rigid claims, but rather to pose a lot of questions and to try and grow in my grasp of process thought. You noted that, “God comes to us in each moment and provides the possibility of a preferable reality complete with contingencies of the past.” My first question is, is God relegated to that definition? Or, is it merely an aspect of many other attributes? Is it core, or peripheral in thinking about God through a process lens? It seems to me that much of the process world has created a very useful and true-to-life (especially contemporary life) definition of God, but it seems to be a concept that does not resemble the God revealed in Scripture and tradition. I know with that statement marches in heaves of hermeneutical assumptions, (which I am not even necessarily making), but let’s just say that when I mention process theology to some of my reformed friends, they tend to cringe like they just drank lemonade without sugar, and say something to the effect of, “that’s outside the bounds, man.” And by bounds, they claim 2000 years of orthodox doctrine.

I’m sure you are very much so acquainted with this type of banter, especially concerning the doctrine of God, but I just wanted to bring up the fact that in emphasizing much of God’s relationality, love, and agency as a God who has the power of possibility of the future, we are leaving out huge portions of the “orthodox” claims about God’s character. These are classical claims, that when removed, leave huge gaps in the minds of many…I guess it’s like process thought, in some respects, creates a God of the gaps…err…maybe we need another name for it. J But, you get my drift, how do you respond to others who claim omnipotence, omniscience, etc. etc?

You also move, in your post, towards some pretty strong claims about divine action, (which I have commented on in some of your other blogs). I appreciate how you continue to affirm the action of the Holy Spirit, while encouraging Christians to step out of the three-tiered universe into the world of the natural as opposed to the super-natural. As you mentioned, “Step away from the super-Natural. Get rid of the imagery that God is ‘up’ in heaven and periodically pokes through the thin veil to whisper in your ear – if you have enough faith, or if you are a chosen vessel, or if you are not tainted by sin, or … the truth is that God is with you. Holy Spirit is a work all around you.” I couldn’t agree more with this encouragement. It seems the difficulty for me as a Christian in seminary is primarily when you’re dealing with people who claim to have “inbreaking experiences” when they articulate their relationship with God. God is always moving, always speaking, always acting, the trouble is when certain experiences seem to be isolated as “outside or above” the norm. In your opinion, is it always an issue of our attentiveness? Or are there times when God shouts a little louder than others?

I know you answered this question in part in stating, that “God doesn’t need to ‘come down, or ‘break in’ or ‘break through’. God is down, in, and through. As Christians, we believe that God’s Spirit is alive and at work in the world. Part of that ministry is to heighten and intensify our already existent (by grace) ability to listen, perceive and interpret social and relational interactions.” I too agree that pursuing this posture in our relationship with God makes for a greater ability to discern God’s movements. But, again I ask, is this all there is? What does this say about God? Does it remove God too far out of the biblical revelation of God as a God who speaks very direct words to a very specific audience, and acts in ways that seem to be super-natural? Were the prophets in the OT just agents in community as well? Again, this line of questioning could continue…

I take your encouragement to “downgrade your expectations a little bit,” but I am wondering how that charge can be reconciled with a biblical theology that pushes our view of God to higher and more mysterious grounds? 1 Corinthians 2:7 states that “we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery.” It seems that much of the claims found within process theology tends to remove aspects of mystery in regard to the way God is, acts, and relates. Don’t get me wrong; I actually am akin to much of where the process theology movement is heading, however, I am wondering as to if what “can be said” is overstepping biblical bounds a bit, and not leaving enough room for what “cannot be explained.” I know that classical theology actually says, much, much more about the doctrine of God than process thought generally does, thus leaving little room for mystery, too…but I guess I’m wondering about this in respect to the downgrade challenge you made in light of the process claims and how they can be reconciled with the biblical trajectory to uphold the mystery of God? IE: what can be said about God in process thought eclipses traditional doctrine and also explains away much of the mystery of divine action. Can you help me be clarify this?

I want to go where you are suggesting, I guess I’m just having a hard time “acknowledging that the earlier thing was fantasy,” not in the sense that I can’t get down with a quantum worldview which leaves the 3-tiered and super-natural ideas behind; but more so in the sense that the “biblical orthodox” doctrine of God also has to be acknowledged as a fantasy in order to move into the process realm of affirming new ways of thinking about God, etc. At least my reformed friends push back in these respects. If you could speak to how to reconcile more progressive understandings of God with the biblical revelation and traditional doctrine and characteristics, that would be fantastic!? As always, thanks for taking the time, and for your continued labor at Homebrewed. Peace brother.

BoSanders moderator

@timothydown Holy Guacamole that was a long comment! But because this is for an assignment I will do my best to address your concerns :) I will take each of your 5 paragraphs one at a time:

1) Let's be careful with the word 'orthodox' and realize that when it comes to our Reformed friends, that the real Orthodox (like 'Eastern') think that they are bastard children at best. So when reformed folks use the word is it 'little o' and so it is better to use 'classical' like you do instead of orthodox which is a highly contentious term.

2) The gaps that are created by removing the omni-potence of god are filled in with A) omni-presence and B) God's loving character and revelation in Jesus. Don't be seduced by the use of the word 'biblical' or 'classic'. Omnipotence never appears in the Bible. It is imported from Greek metaphysics and Roman politics and impose upon the text of scripture. They give to God the things that belonged to Caesar. This is not Jesus' Abba.

I would also quickly add that this is a post-modern approach that recognizes the highly problematic nature of holding to a 3rd or 17th century definition and thought structure after the developments of the 20th century.

3) My 'heightened awareness' and 'prophetic commentary' explanation is WAY more inline with post-pentecost revelation of Holy Spirit power than any super-natural pre-modern approach. God is fine. It does no violence to God or our view of God. God IS with us, always working and revealing in every moment. There is nothing supernatural about that. It is the most natural thing in the world. We created the lens of the supernatural in attempt to contend for God working ... but in the end we conceded too much to the natural or rational (even scientific) explanation of things and we lost a lot of ground! Now you have a god of the gaps where you just plug god into the things that you don't understand - call it mystery and your god is getting smaller and smaller the more we are able to explain naturally/scientifically.

4) First, classic systematic theology has more tightly defined god and over-explained every detail and aspect of god's work than Process could even dream of. If you have a bone to pick with keep things mysterious- you need to take that up with pre-20th century theologies :) Second, we can't just hold to indefensible formulation and incoherent explanation and then cry 'mystery' when they don't make any sense. That is not mystery - that is inconsistency or unintelligibility - but it is no mystery. The only mystery there is how people hold to human explanations that don't make any sense at all and think that they are being FAITHFUL to God by holding it up as a litmus test of 'orthodoxy' !

5) you ask 'what about people that have had an 'inbreaking' experience? I want to be clear about this: I truly believe and affirm with no cynicism or suspicion (unlike many) that they had that experience and I myself have had SO many of them. What I AM contending with is that the event they experienced is not a validation of the interpretation of that event! God was always with them, always working and always available.

The important thing to hear me say is the 'inbreaking' was different in degree but not in kind! The experience was a heightened moment synergy and intensity. It is NOT that God was absent before and then 'showed up'. God was up. It is not that God was removed and then 'broke in'. God was in. So it is not different in KIND but only in DEGREE. This is a crucial point that can not be overstated. God is with you. God's Spirit is present and at work in the world right now and we join God in God's work in the world. That is not super-natural : it is the most natural thing in the world. And classic explanations fall short and create gaps that God gets jammed into when we don't know what else it could be.

I would love if you responded :) -Bo

timothydown

@BoSanders

Ha thanks for taking the time! Sorry for the length...it's my teacher's fault. Had to reply to blogs for 5 hours!

1) Yeah I understand, I like Rollins’ thought on this as far as orthodoxy being about right belief (social belief) not believing the right things, and that’s where I tend to sit. It’s my Reformed peeps who it irks. Oh well. That’s a good reminder about Eastern orthodoxy…pretty funny actually.

2) I am not seduced by it, just trying to figure out a good methodological framework for addressing it again with some of my ref. friends. They don’t seem to want to entertain anything but what “classical” Christianity seems to affirm in their mind. May be their issue…but they claim VanHoozer all day on this stuff. Again, good reminders about omnipotence and imposition.

Yes, this is a postmodern approach, which I find does tend to impose contemporary philosophical structures and ideologies upon something that was both written and systematized in a pre-modern world. It’s always a chore to break through and still affirm the “centered set.”

3) Agreed on the first half…esp the supernatural. Much of process thought as I understand it along with neuroscientific discovery has put that to rest for me. I do, however, feel as though I can still claim mystery all day and allow for God to get bigger and bigger. This is not to argue for a god of the gaps, or a deus ex machina, or anything of the sort, but rather to allow for a certain level of mystery in the details of divine action. On some level, even the quantum world is an indeterminate system open to a certain amount wiggle room. Its laws are not essentialist, but rather matters of regularity in which there are “norms” but not closed systems. If we are to allow for divine action at all, I think there’s a bit of mystery there, and I’m willing to go there. This comes into place especially in a teleological and eschatological sense.

4) First, agreed. Second, I’m not advocating for indefensible formulation and incoherent explanation, but rather, as I said above, that at some level, if we do believe God acts in the world, we don’t know exactly how…IE: scientifically, the causal joint there in indiscoverable. That’s the mystery I speak of. I am certainly not advocating for useless explanations like, “I know you got sexually abused, but God knows why he didn’t stop it.” (extreme example, I know) I agree with your last point about not holding to human explanations that don’t make any sense. For me, classical “sovereignty” and meticulous providence fall here, amongst others.

5) I dig your clarification about inbreakings being different in degree, not in kind. I agree wholeheartedly. Legit my man. I would maybe ask…in your mind will God ever intervene in a way that breaks the laws of top-down causation and determinacy that God has set up here in this world in order to bring about a final eschatological reality? Just wondering. : )Thanks for hollering back at me. Praying we’ll all be a bit more sensitive to the Spirit at work in the world. Cheers brother!

kenalto9

Is receiving a call from God part of what you are calling prophecy? There is no heightened awareness or insight about another person in relationship, but there is a heightened awareness of one's own relationship with the Holy Spirit?

BoSanders moderator

@kenalto9 That is a great clarification! I would totally get on board with that. Whenever I here people tell their story about getting their 'calling' it sounds exactly like a heightened awareness of god's presence ;) Thanks for connecting the dots for me. -Bo

Wayne Schroeder

You are describing what Jung described as one pole of receiving awareness and information--Intuition-- in contrast to the the other pole--Sensing (as in five senses).

BoSanders moderator

1 Like

@Wayne Schroeder ;) shhhhhhhh

dangarvin

I totally agree that we need to get rid of "super"natural. That being said, it's one thing to discuss things like prophecy or words of knowledge. Those are all in a kind of nebulous area where it could, potentially, be explained away. What about the more spectacular things that appear to be happening mostly in non-western parts of the world? Things like crazy-ridiculous healing's and people being raised from the dead? Physical stuff that is just downright impossible.

BoSanders moderator

@dangarvin being a part of missionary denomination, we talk about this stuff ALL the time! Let me just say two things

1) I object to Western christians using reports for Africa in order to except themselves from addressing issues and reconciling their religious verbiage with their actual life actions.

2) we must acknowledge that different cultures (including the 1st century Jewish one) have vastly different ways of framing narrative. The language functions differently outside a scientific worldview... So we have to be careful justifying holding some view in N. America based on reports from Africa.

I hope that makes sense (?) I may need to explain that more... -Bo

dood12

@BoSanders Does process still allow for the resurrection of Christ? Not necessarily in a trans-physical way like the gospels describe but in a way where the subjective identity of Christ didn't stay dead but is alive and present with the world today?

BoSanders moderator

@dood12 no, sort of, and yes. How's that ;)

1) No. you should definitely listen to that podcast.

2) This is one of those rare places where we need to speak of Process Theologies plural! I don't know 'most' Process. It is a new conversation partner for me in the past 3 years. But I heard rumors that the incomparable Marjorie Suchocki has a form of subjective immortality she claims Charles Harthshorne helps with.

3) It would be a whole other blog-post to flesh out (pun intended) my view :) - oh that gives me an idea! jk

seriously - the Clayton podcast from Emergent Conversation 2012 is a resource and a half. It is an education on the subject. Listen to it! -Bo

dood12

@BoSanders Does Phillip's view of the resurrection and of process altogether dismiss the idea of personal resurrection and thus subjective immortality as something extremely unlikely/unrealistic? Don't most process theologians subscribe to a more objective view of immortality? Any personal opinions either way of where you stand on this front?

BoSanders moderator

@dood12 I can absolutely say that Process has this covered! In fact, it is so thorough that you may regret asking ;)

- Philip Clayton's new book 'The Predicament of Belief' has a whole chapter on 5 options (including 3 good ones)

- Our podcast with PC he fleshes that out (I have lost the ability to link to to things with this new comment program) but it is called "Philip Clayton on The Resurrection, Trinity, Eschatology & the Predicament of Belief"

- Peter B. also offered 2 alternatives to PC's proposal with "Proposing an Alternative to the Predicament" and "Considering Clayton’s Conundrum"

I will go in and try to add links later.

dangarvin

@BoSanders I object to a lot of things. Like my own stunning ignorance of these matters for instance.

Not trying to justify holding any view since, again, I'm too ignorant of the matter to even have a view.

Just wondering if process allows for something like the resurrection of someone who has been dead for a few days (i.e. Lazarus).

This is an honest question, because when I say I'm ignorant of these matters I mean it. I am someone who has just recently emerged (so to speak) from a very fundamentalist/conservative background and at this point my level of existential confusion has me pretty agnostic on most issues.

willhenderson

@dangarvin @BoSanders

Ya I want to hear your answer on this too Bo!

prophets

Hey Bo, I have lots of fun following you guys through the blog and podcast. While I can't make the shift to process, it's fun to think about. This post doesn't seem to have anything patently process about it. It dismantles archaic systems of thinking, but that's certainly happening outside the confines of process thought as well. While I get the "prophetic within relationship," I have to ask, if one can be prophetic within an instant relationship, do you have to be in the room with that person? Can it happen on the phone, in prayer, etc...? Where is the boundary? One more question, and you may have written about this copiously before, how does process view prophecy in terms of the Major and Minor prophets (setting aside variant prophetic moments in scripture)? Were they defining the best possible future, as I've heard previously discussed, or were the prophetic words looking foreword to, exile, conquest...Christ as revealed in the Gospels? I'm sure there is a third and fourth option, just curious as to how process defines the prophetic that appears to reach well beyond what I understand the limits of God's process to be. Thanks for fielding this in the comments.

BoSanders moderator

@prophets You make many good point! let me take them one at a time.

- Process is a conversation. you are right. It is not a program that one downloads onto an existing operating system. It is switching from WIndows to Mac ;)

- Dismantling archaic systems is happening in other places as well - and technically ALL I said was that Process gave me the framework to do it. but no ... I didn't go into deeper details ;)

- My 'relationship' idea works over the phone & even by email, because you are interacting with a person. That it the inter-connection. What I am talking about is a heightened ability to 'read' someone, perceive, discern and intuit. These are abilities that we all have but which are amplified by Holy Spirit presence.

- The minor and major prophets were not doing this kind of prophecy. Theirs was more of a political critique through a form called prophetic (poetic) imagination. I look at these as apples and oranges. Biblical scholarship is strong and accounts for the political critique quite well.

Thanks for the thoughtful convo! Any thoughts? -Bo

prophetsandpopstars

@BoSanders Hey Bo, thanks for getting to this...sorry I haven't been back until now.

I really appreciate the thoughtful responses.

With the major and minor prophets, if you don't mind taking this a step further, let's take a greatest hit: "In that day, God says, I will pour out my spirit upon all people, your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young will see visions, your elders will dream dreams." Joel 2 and Acts 2.

While I, too, run the prophets through the rubric of the prophetic imagination (poetic language that represents divine logos, if you will), how does this kind of prophetic (poetic) movement fall solely under political critique without future looking, resolution oriented providence (loaded word) at the same time?

Thanks for the dialogue!

danhauge

Hey Bo, overall I would agree with about 90% of this, but my first pushback would be: when discussing this subject you often talk about your past experience, and how you're not interested in explaining away some of the 'weird' experiences Christians have had. Me too. But some of those experiences include people receiving fairly specific words from relative strangers, where somebody speaks about something in my life that they couldn't 'naturally' know, since I'm not in relationship with them (or I hadn't told them about x y or z). So, when you say "the time for that is over, that's not how God designed it to work", the easy pushback for many would be "but that's exactly what happened to me. How can you be so sure my experience didn't really happen?" You start out saying you don't want to invalidate people's experience but end up doing exactly that.

willhenderson

@danhauge

First I would say that I agree with you a bit in the pushback. And responding to Bo below I would say A) I may not want to walk away from my past but I sure want to learn not to be stupid anymore. B) I can explain all my charismatic experiences away now, its easy & obvious. C) I have no trouble poo pooing christians who are just simply hurting others, often with things like witchcraft like tactics.

Also Pentecostals & Charismatics are as different as Methodists & Presbyterians. There is overlap in attendance but doctrinally they are VERY different. I can't even stomach the thought of calling myself Evangelical or Charismatic anymore but I still hang on to Pentecostal. That was a Jewish feast that happened to be going on when the Holy Spirit came to fill us. So since I believe the Holy Spirit to be the central part of my faith I still use that term. Though even doctrinally as an Assemblies of God minister I'm not even in their ballpark.

I think Prophecy today is for encouragement, sometimes we are simply lucky & in the odd moment God for some reason has a word for someone. The mockery people have made of it makes it hard to distinguish the difference. If a fool were speaking that I didn't respect & told me something from God, even if he was saying things he couldn't know, I would reject that word without hesitation.

BoSanders moderator

@danhauge [this is long, you may want to skip to the bottom line] I was waiting for someone to bring this up :) I should be more clear on this point! I don't want to A) walk away from MY past B) explain AWAY my experiences or C) poo-poo on other folks' parade [I am especially mindful of the Pentecostal increase in the the 'Global South' and don't to discredit]

Having said that, I am compelled - nay obligated - to address some of the FRAMING concepts that have been employed. ;p

SO you are right to ask me to be more clear about my intentions. OK - having said that ....

Dan, I have told people things upon first meeting them that I could not have known. Pictures in their homes, that their parents changed their name, that they just lost someone close to them. NOW, A) I am calling that a relationship (face to face) as simple or quick as it might be. I am sharing the same physical space, making eye contact, asking questions. What never happens is that you don't get somebody's name and address 'in prayer' and mail them money. God leads you to give money to people you know (related). People don't find their next pastor by discerning a name and phone #. We pray over resumes and then invite them to meet us.

I am running out of room but, suffice to say - if you and I are within earshot (or eyeshot) of each other and since we believe that there is Holy Spirit is between us, my ability to 'read' you, perceive things and intuit may be amplified. In that sense, prophecy is not 'for-telling' but 'forth-telling'. -Bo

what cha think?

danhauge

@BoSanders That's interesting--I guess if that's how you're framing "relationship" then I could be down with that. It would certainly account for experiences like the one you talk about.

It does make my mind go off on an interesting tangent--though--if two people across the world are both 'related' to God and God is related to both, could that constitute a relationship? It also makes me think of quantum physics, and "spooky action at a distance", where particles separated by huge distances still seem to have some sort of relatedness. All I'm saying is that physical proximity as we perceive it might not be the deciding factor, and this may even fit in with process metaphysics. But, I'm now getting a bit out of my league :)

So yeah, I like that explanation, but I think it provides fodder for other speculation. Thanks :)

BoSanders moderator

@danhauge glad that explanation satisfied :) And you make a great speculation (very intriguing). I, of course, would vote "No". Even though it could in theory work ... I am focusing more on the physical proximity (even voice or email) - of a natural capacity being amplified. -Bo

p.s. this is really fun to think about! Thanks for the conversation

BoSanders moderator

Thanks to everyone who has emailed and tweeted responses and affirmations. I really appreciate it.

This is serious stuff and folks take it really seriously so I appreciate the sensitivity being displayed. -Bo

willhenderson

@BoSanders

Bo on the other hand I would listen to. But only after a few brews :-)

Trackbacks

Are You Looking For a “Special Word” from God through a Person? Probably Ain’t Gonna Happen. | Rebooted Christian says:

June 5, 2012 at 5:44 am

[...] Home Brewed Christianity: http://homebrewedchristianity.com/2012/06/01/the-process-of-prophecy/ Share this:EmailPrintFacebookRedditStumbleUponDigg (function() { var po = [...]

Claremont School of Theology

The Process of Prophecy

Trackbacks

Search

Subscribe via iTunes

Support the brew