Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Leviticus

[gmw803]

The Leviticus board seemed so lonely without any posts. Do we truly have zero questions about the book?

Do you see any prophetic quality to Leviticus 18:21-23?

- 18:21 - the church will fight a battle against a world that sacrifices its (unborn) children to the gods of free sex and convenience. The church will lose because they placed their trust in the pantheon of the Republican Party rather than in the true and living God?

- 18:22 - the church will fight a battle against a world that normalizes homosexual conduct? The church is losing because it has placed their trust in the novetheon of the US Supreme Court rather than in the true and living God?

- 18:23 - barring the church expelling the god of the US Government from our worship, will we then have to fight a battle against the normalization of bestiality? Is it possible that our grandchildren will see society arguing for marriage to a horse? Complete with medical care and social security survivor benefits? Do you have any prediction regarding which god the church will place their trust in to fight this?

[jimwalton]

This is quite a way to begin questions on the book of Leviticus! While I see the entire OT as prophetic in that it all points to Jesus (Lk. 24.27) and was all fulfilled in him (Mt. 5.17), this text is not to be viewed as prophecy the way most people think of prophecy or the way the OT means "prophetic" in that sense.

I would prefer instead to voice the perspective that truth is always truth, and what was true in their day is true in ours. I would also say that there is such a thing as objective morality, stemming from the character of God, and that elemental right and wrong don't change.

In that sense I would say that these texts are not of particular "prophetic quality," but they do show that 3,000 years of technological progress, historical development, and societal change have not accomplished anything to change the hearts of humanity. Our estrangement from God still shows itself in our choice of sexual expression, political problems, false allegiances, distorted values, deity falsely construed, and misplaced trust.

Thanks for your thoughts, gmw803.

[gmw803]

Excellent response, Jim.

I haven't thought this through yet. But I'm starting to wonder if there is a secondary level of prophecy which we could call "implicit prophecy." I'm having trouble defining it, so for now, I will simply describe how it differs from pure prophecy. As opposed to implied prophecy, “pure prophecy” comes with a full certainty of fulfillment. However, this fails as a definition, because I do not think implicit prophecy is any less certain regarding fulfillment. The issue is not whether one is certain to come to pass, or whether the other is more likely. The distinction seems to come in whether the prophecy is definitely stated such that the reader can hold the prophet accountable should it not come to pass.

The easiest example actually does involve Jesus - the way Matthew 2:15 handles Hosea 11:1. Be honest: If Jesus had not gone to Egypt, is there a commentator who would have charged Hosea with false prophecy? As to the Luke passage, (I fear that going back to your post would delete what I have written) John Walton cautioned us that what we judge as universal language is not always so universal. And I fully agree.

Using a peripheral example to illustrate, I'm sure you have heard the theory that the "secret" in Deuteronomy 29:29 is the Church. I believe that, but if you do not, then that is fine. Similarly, I believe that Joel 1:10-12 is a prophecy of the church age, though written from the perspective of Israel while God is dealing with the Church. Whatever it refers to, it comes between the cutting off of the Messiah (1:9) and the day of the Lord (tribulation, 1:13).

Why wasn't Joel more direct? God was very careful not to put anything in Scripture prior to Matthew 11:14 that would require a church age at all, and thereby spoil the legitimacy of the immediate kingdom offer to Israel. The offer was revoked with the death of John, and the revocation was finalized when Jesus said "I will build my Church." So though Joel 1:10-12 are prophecies to be fulfilled, God did not commit to HOW the prophecy would be fulfilled. And this is what I mean by an implicit prophecy. The term probably needs work.

Sometimes I wonder if Leviticus 18:21-23 qualifies as implicit prophecy.

[jimwalton]

Your thoughts on "implicit prophecy" are certainly interesting. But, as you know, prophecy can be pretty tricky business, and sorting through the explicit and implicit meanings can get dicey. Scholars through the ages have had legitimate disagreements about many things ("Is prophetic Israel the Church, or still Israel?" "Does the coming of Christ happen at the beginning of the Tribulation or at the end?"). It's the riddle-like character of prophecy that can lead to such productive discussions, but also the fluid nature of prophecy that can generate the dubiety as well.

John Walton (A Survey of the Old Testament, pp. 503-515) warns us that the terms "prediction" and "fulfillment" can lead to harmful misperceptions about the nature of prophecy. He says, "If someone today were to predict that the stock market would take a plunge, and then took some action that actually caused it to happen, he or she would not be praised for the ability to predict. The aspect of predictiveness is diminished by the direct link to causation.
In the same way, the predictive element in biblical prophecy must usually be kept distinct from causation, else it ceases to be predictive. On these terms it is obvious that “prediction” would not be the best word to describe biblical prophecy. Prophets themselves were not predicting anything, but merely giving the word of the Lord. The prophecy was God’s message, not the prophet’s. If predicting is understood to preclude causation, then God cannot predict, for he is the final cause of all. So in the end it must be recognized that prophecy is more interested in causation than in prediction. It is true that biblical prophecy spoke of events before they happened, but the purpose was that God would be properly recognized as having caused those events as a part of his ongoing plan.
Rather than regarding prophecy as prediction, it is more helpful to consider it as “God’s syllabus.” The syllabus for a course doesn’t “predict” what will happen in each class period of the term, but presents the instructor’s plans and intentions for each period. The significance of the document is that the instructor is in a position to carry it out. Likewise, when a judge passes a sentence on a convicted criminal, he is not “predicting” what will happen to that person. Rather, he is decreeing what ought to be done and is in a position to see that it is done.
In prophetic literature, God is declaring his intentions and decreeing his judgments. Though these were still future when spoken, they could be considered prediction only in the broadest terms.
Fulfillment: The prophet did not necessarily understand all of the possibilities of the prophecies he was speaking. It was the message itself that was inspired; it was the message that was the medium of God’s revelation. The fulfillment was almost incidental, though it was certainly important that it take place.
Whether or not the interpreter is able to identify the fulfillment with confidence is open to question. There are numerous passages in the OT that, if read in the context of the time, would clearly suggest that certain things were going to happen in certain ways. As history unfolded, however, those things did not come to pass in the expected way (Examples: Isa. 11.16; Ezk. 26.5; Jonah 3). That it did not happen is not a blot on God’s reputation, for who knows how the word could yet be fulfilled? But it suggests that assurance about fulfillment cannot always be achieved. Consequently, one must not become so absorbed in figuring out when and how fulfillment will take place that the message is neglected.
What is fulfillment? It indicates an appropriate correlation between the prophetic word and the event to which it is related. When NT author suggest that some event “fulfilled” an OT passage, he is not suggesting that the OT author was speaking or thinking of this event, but rather than an appropriate correlation can be drawn between the OT and the event."

Jeremiah 18.1-12 gives the same teaching. God's prophecies are fluid things, not rock-solid universalities. They ebb and flow in conjunction with God's purposes and humans responses, without invalidating their authority or inspiration.

Prophecies are tricky things and must be handled with a great deal of discernment.