Two prophets killed for what?

4

March 20, 2009 by J. Madson

moses_and_elijah-12
I have often wondered about the two prophets the book of revelation speaks of. For just a moment, lets assume that this describes future events that take place in Israel or as revelations says in the holy city Jerusalem.

What exactly would they be preaching that would cause them to be killed?

And am I wrong in assuming that its the nation of Israel that kills these two men?

And why exactly did they kill Jesus again? Is this one of those history repeating moments?

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Two prophets killed for what?

  1. Grégoire says:

    Hey J,

    This is a very interesting topic. My reply is going to be lengthy and probably pretty tedious so I don’t blame you or anyone if it’s not read.

    When I was 24 I went and read Talmud with a bunch of Hebrews. I never fully appreciated the historical significance of quotes like these until I got the other side, as it were.

    I saw similar anti-Christian artifacts here and there written by Jewish scholars. It was explained to me at that point that traditionalists and modernists (the two groups that eventually evolved into modern Jews and Christians) spent several centuries struggling for converts and fighting with one another. There was an incident at one point where one guy walked into a synagogue and after a debate for an hour he walked out with the entire congregation and they all became Christians. There were similar incidents on the other side. These things caused a lot of strife. Anyway, there were bad feelings all around, hence quotes blaming Jews for killing Christ, analogizing them to snakes, etc. in the Bible.

    From a historical perspective I see the scriptural concept in that fashion. At the same time, the sentiments you’ve brought up do teach useful truths.

    I think it’s a general criticism of people who think they have the *one true way*. Israel, in this case, could be any group which chooses to persecute outsiders rather than indulging in a constructive, inter-subjective discourse.

    One example of choosing to demonize rather than discuss, off the top of my head, is George W Bush, who said “…either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” I thought that was not only dreadfully closed-minded, but utterly un-American at the time. From the perspective of your article, I think now that it might also be un-Christian.

    People who are secure in their own positions are never afraid of criticism.

    As far as “they” killing Jesus, from my frame of reference we might all be “them”, in that every time we choose destruction rather than dialogue we are holding the spear and piercing the side of the very wisdom that can help us grow into better people.

    Anyway, that’s just my take. I’m interested to know how you interpret this quote and what you think.

  2. J. Madson says:

    Gregoire,

    Wendell Berry once wrote

    “If change is to come… it will have to come from the outside. It will have to come from the margins… this sort of change is a dominant theme of our tradition, whose “central figures” have often worked their way inward from the margins. It was the desert, not the temple, that gave us the prophets.”

    I have always been struck by the fact that those called prophets in the scriptures have been those who stood outside the power structures of their day. They generally criticized the rulers and the society in which they were placed. Samuel the Lamanite is a great example of a prophet who not only condemns the host society, the government, their self-righteous narratives on economic and military issues.

    Whether it be Jeremiah in the OT, Isaiah, or Jesus the prophet from Nazareth there is a common thread of denouncing the self serving narratives.

    In the context of the two prophets in the streets of jerusalem I have to wonder whether they are like all other biblical prophets. Is it possible that they will not be part of the Zionist mindset? Is it possible that they will not be cheerleaders of the current regime but will denounce the “-ism, schism game?”

    I personally believe that Jesus’ death was not brought about because he did some magic or healings, which was very common in the ancient world, nor was he killed because God is so petty he needed his pound of flesh. I think he was killed for the same reasons that all the other prophets were killed. They refused to play ball with the establishment and were not afraid to speak truth to power.

  3. Dave P. says:

    That’s exactly what the parable of the wicked husbandmen is about, J. Madson.

    And I’ve recently come to firmly believe that the two prophets spoken of in Revelation will NOT be coming out of the Quorom of the Twelve or any quorom from today’s corporate Mormon church. Why? Because having them come from outside of the church will be a wonderful wake-up call for the church itself as a test to see if the members are more willing to follow the “prophet” or the Lord.

  4. Ron Madson says:

    Ditto Dave!

    In fact I believe it is the exception rather then the rule that the “prophets” types found in the scriptures are the leaders/presidents of the current church. Yes we sustain them as Presidents and Presiding High Priests and yes we sustain them to actually “prophesy, reveal and use the seer stone” but the reality is that the Lord sends messengers, plural, sends prophets plural and send whomever He wants and when he wants to send them. I would refer you back to my Jeremiah post for more on this pattern https://themormonworker.wordpress.com/2010/11/04/where-is-jeremiah-today/#comment-3026
    If Lehi, Jeremiah, Amos, Samuel Lamanite, John Baptist, Samuel the child, etc etc are types as well as even Joseph Smith then I am not going to limit myself to institutional authority—the Lord doesn’t seem to do so. We do so out of insecurity I suppose. So I sustain the priesthood, the office and lines of authority, but the GIFT of Prophesy will come from where it comes from. It is up to us and even the Priesthood to recognize it—apparently most of the priesthood ignored Samuel the Lamanite and did not add his prophesies in their scripture until the Lord asked them “why not”? Maybe it was the whole, “he is dark skinned Lamanite and where is his “authority’? thing. Thus confusing gifts with office. sometimes coincide—sometime not. The test is on

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 256 other followers

Categories

Archives

%d bloggers like this: