Saturday, December 13, 2008

Prophecy wrongly predicts own fallibility

Frodologist scholars were flabbergasted yesterday, when, during a routine reexamination of a religious text for clues as to Frodo’s opinion on winter shorts, they happened upon a hidden prophetic warning. It appears that the Frodological prophecy foresees its own fallibility:

“And it shall come to pass that none of it shall come to pass.”

The discovery is alarming in that all of the text’s other predictions have so far panned out. For example, it predicted that when the sins of hobbits angered Frodo, a terrible storm should fall upon the land. And it did last summer, when seasonal rains flooded a few fields and delayed the corn harvest by several days. While no one is sure which sin in particular attracted the wrath of Frodo, whatever it was must have been bad, because the storm came. That kind of thing doesn’t just happen.

Prophecy also proclaims that the River Anduin shall dry up when Frodo’s return is imminent. And the great river did exactly that when a group of local hobbits dammed the Upper Anduin in order to fulfill the prophecy.


That's dam fine prophecy fulfillment, boys!


Yet another example is the widely recognized claim that Frodo will not return until His Hobbit Hole is rebuilt for the third time. It hasn’t, and he hasn’t.

I could give more examples, but I won’t, because prophecy predicts that I won’t. The problem provided by the erroneous passage is of course obvious, but in case it isn’t I’ll explain it for the sake of padding out this article.

Prophecy has so far been infallible, meaning that the prediction of its fallibility is wrong and renders it fallible. But when prophecy is wrong, the prophecy that it will be wrong will be vindicated and it will be proof that the Second Coming of Frodo is imminent. But how will scholars know when the prophecy is wrong, thereby proving that prophecy was right in predicting that it would be wrong? Most predictions are so widely worded that we could attribute anything to them, and the others we just ignore.

If prophecy is to be proved correct by it being wrong, Frodologist scholars will have to be more cautious in proclaiming fulfillment. Theologians are expected to start consulting religious skeptics to judge more accurately whether any given prophecy has been fulfilled, since after so many years of sycophantic agreement with scripture, they have apparently lost the ability to think critically.

Will atheists be the ones to save the Faith? That seems like an attention-seekingly implausible conclusion…

33 comments:

Dani' El said...

On June 4, 1978 I knew that today's post would offend me, but I forgot to tell you.
Does it still count as a fulfilled prophecy?

I saw an essay the other day, that said that Tolkien created an analogy of the bible in the Rings.

And as Christ is the Prophet/Priest/King
it was Gandalf-Prophet, Frodo-Priest, What'shisname-King.

You ever read those sites for ideas?
They are goldmines for a satirist.

FrodoSaves said...

On June 4, 1978 I knew that today's post would offend me, but I forgot to tell you.

I was going for gentle nudge in the ribs, more than offense. Come on Dani, you were my chief inspiration for this post!

You ever read those sites for ideas?
They are goldmines for a satirist.


I've heard ideas before about LOTR being an allegory of parts of the Bible before, but I've never investigated it in too much detail. I know that Tolkien was a Christian, but I don't know how much it influenced his work. I'll check out some of those sites though. Is there anything in particular you'd recommend?

Dani' El said...

I was going for gentle nudge in the ribs, more than offense. Come on Dani, you were my chief inspiration for this post!

In that case I'm honored!
(Btw, I wasn't offended at all)

Tolkien was a Catholic, not a christian (there is a difference) and he was good buddies with another one of Satan's cleverest deceptions, CS Lewis, author the the Narnia books.

Lewis and Tolkien got together and decided to write these stories with a clever mix of christian allegory and pagan traditions.
Cyanide Kool Aid.
Deadly wickedness that targeted children, the foulest sin under the sun.

It's a powerful sign that the apostate endtimes church holds CS Lewis in such high regard.

I only did a quick scan of the sites I mentioned so I don't remember where I went.
But they are easy to find.

Vitamin R said...

“And it shall come to pass that none of it shall come to pass.”

I think it's Frodology's version of a zen koan. There is no answer to the question, no revelation. If we think on them hard enough, we don't get answers or enlightenment, but eventually our mind will become as clear and empty as a mountain stream. Only without all the goat piss.

Though the faithful among us hardly need help emptying their minds, so it does seem awfully redundant. . . .

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

The sound of the journey, my friend, the sound of the journey.

Om.

FrodoSaves said...

Dani,

Yes, CS Lewis' promotion of "pagan traditions" is the literary equivalent of trying to get children into your van by promising them tasty candy.

...

Catholic, not a Christian? True Scotsman fallacy strikes again!

----------------------

Vittles,

Frodology as new age feely good mumbo jumbo? That could definitely work. I also feel like that crowd would definitely buy whatever we're selling.

"Yes, ma'am, this trinket is called the 'Eye of Frodo'. It, um, protects you from all kinds of evil, and if you rub it just right, it allows you to communicate with your unborn baby. You can also use it grind your herbs, and look! It even matches your hemp poncho!"

Dani' El said...

From the fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia-

Errors in usage
In situations where the subject's status is previously determined by specific behaviors, the fallacy does not apply. For example, it is perfectly justified to say, "No true vegetarian eats meat," because not eating meat is what defines a person as a vegetarian.

FrodoSaves said...

And your definition of a Christian was what again?

Dani' El said...

Joh 3:3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

A regenerated sinner will bear the fruits of repentance and faith, do good works and lead a godly life in obedience to the commands of God.

Joh 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.

There is more, but that's the basics.
------------------------

Roman Catholics do things like bow down to statues, Idolatry.
And vain repetition of prayer, saying 15 hail frod...er Marys.
etc.

Kelley R. said...

Daniel and Frodo,

Tolkien explicitly states in the foreword to Lord of the Rings that the books are not an allegory (Biblical or otherwise, as many at the time were also claiming it was all an allegory of WWII; the ring was nuclear power, Sauron was Hitler.) While obviously Tolkien's life experience and philosophy (both religious and with regards to his experience as a soldier in WWI) would affect the themes and tenor of his writing, to quote the man himself:

"I cordially dislike allegory in all its manifestations, and always have done since I grew old and wary enough to detect its presence."

Kelley R. said...

Frodo,

I'm totally not trying to be an asshole with that last comment, mostly just taking issue with the allegory thing which Daniel had started anyway.

I love your blog; the sketches are especially hilarious.

:)

Kelley R. said...

Daniel,

Back in the day when I was still holding onto Christianity by the tips of my fingernails, or at least trying to, C. S. Lewis's writings were a big part of what helped me to do that. In the interest of your own cause, sorry but C. S. Lewis is drawing and holding more followers than your lunatic ravings ever will. "You shall know them by their fruit." C. S. Lewis seems to be bearing quite a bit of solid Christian fruit decades after his death, while you succeed in only alienating people, religious and nonreligious alike.

Additionally, you didn't specify if you thought so, but since you're painting (tarring?) Tolkien and Lewis with the same brush I'll go out on a limb and assume it is your presumption that Lewis was catholic; he was not. He was Anglican, and that only because the church closest to his home was Anglican. He wrote himself that he had no especial theological ties to the dogma of Anglicanism, and only went there because it was the local church. Unlike yourself (and like Jesus) he saw little merit in the subdivision of the Christian faith.

I don't even share your beliefs and I am more informed than you. That doesn't exactly reflect well on your message does it?

Word Verification: apologie

It's a sign. ...That you owe C. S. Lewis one.

Dani' El said...

Kelley,
I never said that Lewis was a Catholic, just friends with Tolkein. I know what he claimed to be.

And I only read that others were claiming the Rings were allegory.
Not my own claim.

These are the last days and the great falling away or apostasy is fulfilled.
So who should be popular in these times? A true prophet? or a heretic?

I won't hold me breath for an apology, but you are forgiven none the less.

Shalom!
Dani' El

Kelley R. said...

Daniel,

So what are your problems with Lewis?

FrodoSaves said...

Kelley,

I'm totally not trying to be an asshole with that last comment, mostly just taking issue with the allegory thing which Daniel had started anyway.

I love your blog; the sketches are especially hilarious.


No worries, I'm glad you pointed out that part in the foreword, because I was unaware of it! In many ways it's unavoidable that people will draw comparisons and conclusions because it's such a classic tale. The Hero's Journey, the coming of age, all bundled into an epic saga of friends, foes, loyalty and betrayal.

And I'm even happier that you like my blog & sketches. Thanks for visiting! Shall I find you a Frodology membership application form? ;)

FrodoSaves said...

Kelley,

So what are your problems with Lewis?

I'm going to try to preempt Dani on this one, and guess the disdain arises from Lewis' apathy about the source of his salvation. The Anglican church happened to be closest, so be it. But if the Catholic one had been a tantalizing couple of yards nearer, would dear Clive have ended up a Papist?

If that is the case, then it belongs to the same sort of argument that hate is murder and lust is adultery.

I could of course be way off.

Dani' El said...

Kelley,
Where to begin?

Here's a link to just one of many sites who see through Lewis.
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/006/narnia-trouble.htm

I read Mere Christianity in 2000 and liked it a lot, but after being truly saved I thought better.

For sure Lewis is one of Satan's cleverest deceptions. He is expert at mixing the truth with deceptions. Like his father.

I first began to question Lewis when I was given a book to read in jail called, "Lilith" by George MacDonald.
Lewis wrote the forward and claimed MacDonald was his greatest influence. Indeed Lewis lifted several things from MacDonald's books for the Narnia series.
The book was so full of paganism and occult Kabbalah stuff that I was shocked that Lewis had anything to do with it.
I had never read the narnia stories and they too are full of pagan imagery. The allegory for the Holy Spirit is called "the great magic" the supposed Christ figure, Aslan the lion, fights to defend the pagan fauns, centaurs etc against the humans.
At one point Aslan attends a pagan orgy with false gods like Bacchus etc.

I later learned that McDonald was a defrocked priest and so I reread Mere Christianity and saw that the theology was pretty flawed, works salvation etc. again mixed with cleverly written truths.
Those cleverly written truths are what get quoted so much today, but everyone ignores the rest, to their shame.

A lack of discernment is foretold in these days so it all makes sense to me.

BTW, one of the few beefs, and a serious one at that, that I have with Ray Comfort is his support of the Narnia moves as good christian fare.

Kelley R. said...

Frodo,

Shall I find you a Frodology membership application form?

Depends; I'm assuming there's a membership fee, and being an impoverished, ill-used college student that's always something of a deal-breaker.

About Lewis...

That might play into it, but judging by the reference to Pagan influences in the Narnia books I'm guessing it's something even more asinine. Or more likely, multiple things.

Kelley R. said...

Oops he beat me to it. Well let's see...

Dani' El said...

Also Kelley,

I think many concluded that the Rings were allegory as Tolkien and Lewis both wrote their books at the same time (As I understand) and were close friends.

Lewis clearly claimed his books were allegory.

And if it is as I suspect, a planned deception, I wouldn't give Tolkien's denials much weight.

It can be a classic bait and switch.
Like when the Narnia movies came out, they were marketed heavily to churches.
And right on their heels came several movies of similar title and appearance that pushed atheism and demonology.
What was it? Spiderwick chronicles?
And others?

FrodoSaves said...

Kelley,

Depends; I'm assuming there's a membership fee, and being an impoverished, ill-used college student that's always something of a deal-breaker.

Your membership is gratis in consideration of services to be rendered aboard the Millennial Ark.

Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

Kelley R. said...

Daniel,

God [sic] help us. How ignorant.

Allegory
[al-uh-gawr-ee, -gohr-ee]
–noun, plural -ries.

1. a representation of an abstract or spiritual meaning through concrete or material forms; figurative treatment of one subject under the guise of another.
2. a symbolical narrative: the allegory of Piers Plowman.
3. emblem (def. 3)

And into the fray...

It is an allegory, were it not, were it realistic maybe the arguments against mythical/fictitious content would stand, but as it is, because you can realize it is allegory you are intrinsically allowing that it is not literally true. According to the standard by which you are judging Lewis's allegorical writings allegory doesn't even exist, Jesus's parables can't even exist as they are commonly perceived because there is no delineating line between reality and metaphor.

As far as the example of the spell book in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (referenced on the site you linked to) the purpose of that allegorical episode is to illustrate that God chooses to abide within and restrain himself to the boundaries he has set for himself within his own creation. Don't bash that idea too hard, because it is necessary to many creationist arguments for why the universe is not completely random, with God interfering constantly with physical laws to extremes that would render coherent existence impossible.

At one point Aslan attends a pagan orgy with false gods like Bacchus etc.

An orgy? Really? Careful you aren't lying there, Dan. The common, modern cognitive definition of the word orgy, as you know quite well, is a far sight different from that scene in the book by any means. Who knew eating grapes and fruit, making a bonfire, dancing and having a glass of wine constituted an orgy? Someone alert the morality police.

Additionally, his writings and the fruit he has produced in the Christian world aside (although should you really be putting that aside?) how you feel about George MacDonald, and the contents of George MacDonald's works don't have much to do with this discussion. Yes Lewis was influenced by him, but if there is so much damning evidence against Lewis, why not bring that to bear on the case instead of resorting to guilt by association?

You mentioned Mere Christianity in passing, but apparently assumed your dismissal of it could stand undefended. It can't. What's the problem with Mere?

Do respond, I have finals this week and the periodic intermissions of Dani-Insanity will probably help me stay awake to study.

Kelley R. said...

Frodo,

Wonderful. Sold, then! (Literally?) Draw up the papers, Maestro, where do I sign?

Kelley R. said...

Oh, also:

Daniel said,

And I only read that others were claiming the Rings were allegory.
Not my own claim.


But a little earlier Daniel also said,

Lewis and Tolkien got together and decided to write these stories with a clever mix of christian allegory and pagan traditions.
Cyanide Kool Aid.
Deadly wickedness that targeted children, the foulest sin under the sun.


Well now, that's what we here in reality like to call lying.

The lie aside, Tolkien was not a fan of Lewis's mixed mythologies. He was a purist, hence the detailed, somewhat OCD creation of his own mythology, which was also a response to his regret over Britain having lost any native mythology it may have had and mostly adopted foreign mythologies (like the Merlin and King Arthur which have French origins.) He apparently used to take the piss out of Lewis quite regularly at The Inklings' meetings for mashing together Northern European, ancient Greek, Roman etc. mythologies into one story, and really disapproved of it as completely destroying the stories' continuity. So that portion of your argument (against Tolkien at least) is just plain ignorant. Tolkien's work is fiction, not even remotely related to popularized or historic Paganism. Unless you're anti fiction as well. I guess I'd believe it.

Dani' El said...

An orgy? Really? Careful you aren't lying there, Dan. The common, modern cognitive definition of the word orgy, as you know quite well, is a far sight different from that scene in the book by any means. Who knew eating grapes and fruit, making a bonfire, dancing and having a glass of wine constituted an orgy? Someone alert the morality police.


You forget who you are talking to it seems.
I don't give a hoot of modern definitions of sin.
These are as the days of Lot and Noah, so your perspective is the warped one.
I see things from God's holy and perfect perspective, not the worldview of Sodom and Gomorrah.

As to Lewis' ties to MacDonald.
We are clearly forbidden to have such associations in the Bible.
Again, you are judging from a secular viewpoint.
And to mix christian imagery with pagan imagery to target children?
Whether it is true or not?
Need I say more?

On Mere Christianity.
I want to review it again before responding and I've got a bunch of correspondence to answer.
But like I said earlier, Lewis was one of Satan's cleverest deceptions and he teaches his disciples to camouflage themselves quite well.

2Co 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
2Co 11:15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

So that is only bait in the trap.
One reads Mere Christianity and finds little fault in it, then concludes it is safe to give the Narnia stories to his children.

Kelley,
Are the insults and hostility necessary?
One of the reasons I like talking with Frodoslave is that he shows a bit of respect,
even though he is a heathen idolator on the highway to hell. :-)

Kelley R. said...

Sorry for typos in that last one, I banged it out pretty quick.

Ugh, I should be studying but I do have a somewhat protective streak in regards to Lewis and Tolkien, so:

To make sure I'm fully on the level, and maximize my intellectual honesty, it does bear weight to mention, Tolkien was a huge fan of the Kalevala and I believe even stated himself that Lord of the Rings is ever so slightly in both its linguistic and literary debt, but the Kalevala is an ancient, massive and (apparently) somewhat inaccessible Finnish epic poem, not exactly the stuff of Pagan observance.

Dani' El said...

Kelley,
Again I was not saying that the Rings was allegory.
Just that Lewis and Tolkien were working a bait and switch.
As a team

Remember part of deception is denial and camouflage.

Kelley R. said...

Do give the true definition for orgy then and kindly explain how that scene from Prince Caspian fits it.

I'll admit I am in a somewhat snarky mood tonight, which accounts for the "hostility". Mostly I'm just miffed by what I perceive to be fluent insanity never-ceasing from your corner of the interweebz. I've been reading your blog and comments for a bit now, and just don't really know quite what to say.

However, since forgiving me only earns you good marks in the celestial gradebook, while I don't necessarily wish to offend you, I'm sure I may continue sinning that your grace may abound.

Dani' El said...

Kelley,
Get back to your studies.

I've got emails to answer myself.
I'll talk more tomorrow.

BTW, What are you studying?

Kelley R. said...

They were working together?

Yes, most great friends contrive irreparable fallings-out to deceive the credulous masses and thereby entice helpless children 'to the jaws of Hell.

You know not of what you speak. Do some research.

Kelley R. said...

Daniel,

What I'm studying is somewhat in flux (I'm pretty young) but at the moment - and I really do think I've hit on the final plan this time, all youthful flakery aside - I'm going for Pre Med, eventually Pediatric Oncology, but I'm not quite as solid on the exact branch of medicine yet.

What do you do for a living? Did you ever go to college?

Dani' El said...

And for the road.

If you truly think that I am insane.
Is it then your policy to mock and abuse the mentally ill?

Shalom,
Dani' El

Kelley R. said...

Meh, I've heard you use that defense before. (I think against Rufus?)

First of all, I'm not mocking you, I am interacting with you the same way I would interact with any other person with whom I disagreed to the point of vexation. If you consider this level of interaction abuse, your skin needs thickening up anyway. (Heavens, the Lord's prophet? You'll certainly be in for worse if that's true.)

And I don't necessarily think that you yourself are mentally ill. Not in the raving sort of way, anyway. I consider your beliefs to be... Irreconcilable with reality (insane), but have no idea from whence they come, be it dishonesty, delusion or hallucination.

Talking to you can only help me inform my opinions, which are certainly not solidified yet.

Dani' El said...

Kelley,
You clearly know much more about Tolkien and Lewis than I do.
I read the rings maybe 35 years ago and a couple of Lewis' apologetic books maybe 8 years ago.

It was only after I was called in 05 and read Lilith in jail that I became suspicious.
After getting out of jail the Narnia movies came out so I figured I should form an opinion.
I did a few hours of of research on the innerwebs, saw prince Caspian (boring), and re-read Mere Christianity, and that's about it.
As you know from my blog, I've got my hands full with more important things.
But my opinion of Lewis stands.

K-What do you do for a living? Did you ever go to college?

I did off and on for many years, mostly fine art. No degree.
I wanted to work as a silversmith at one time (and that before I knew I was a Jew, go figure) and took several semesters but never could make the switch from Photography.

My father was a music and photography teacher so I grew up in darkrooms.
I went to work right out of high school in industrial photography and could never afford to leave it.

Eventually I worked my way up to management for a Corporate Audio Visual Co until I went thru a difficult divorce at age 31.

I guess I had a midlife crisis since I dropped out to fulfill my dream of playing in a band before I got too old.
I had some investments that gave me a small income.
I would rent a small warehouse space and build a rehearsal studio and rent it to bands for income.
Along with my own bands, I rented to some other original bands, and some talented cover bands, but the hard bit was the boys night out bands.
Y'know computer programmers who needed to get away from the wife.
I lived in the space as well and I can tell you, I've heard enough horrible renditions of Smoke on the Water, and Born to be wild, to have nightmares into the millennial kingdom.

But I left all that behind in the late 90's and now live on my tiny dwindling portfolio in pretty humble conditions.
No complaints tho'.

I've always detested the materialism and greed of California and enjoyed a minimalist lifestyle.
God gives me all that I need and a little to share so by His grace I am more than content.

Sorry to tell you my life's story but you asked and I can't sleep so why not?
--------------------------
But enough about me, how do you like my hat? ;-)

You mentioned hanging on to Christianity at one point.
Were you raised in a faith tradition?