The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge

It is widely assumed by scholars that Christ was in error on such matters as an expectation that the final judgement and its accompanying events would occur within the timeframe of a generation. While accepting that Christ did indeed prophesy his return within this timeframe, a recent co‐authored wo...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Gaine, S
Format: Journal article
Published: Wiley 2016
_version_ 1797104110206451712
author Gaine, S
author_facet Gaine, S
author_sort Gaine, S
collection OXFORD
description It is widely assumed by scholars that Christ was in error on such matters as an expectation that the final judgement and its accompanying events would occur within the timeframe of a generation. While accepting that Christ did indeed prophesy his return within this timeframe, a recent co‐authored work When the Son of Man Didn't Come aims to defend the veracity of his prophecy by drawing on the same historical‐critical method that has given rise to doubts about it. The authors propose a distinction between Mosaic and Jeremianic prophecy, arguing that Christ's was of the latter kind, which was present in the Ancient Near East, the Old and New Testaments, and other Jewish and Christian authors. Their argument, however, is at risk of reducing the truthfulness of a prophecy to its success. Hence this article explores a further distinction between two kinds of prophecy made in Thomas Aquinas's account of the truthfulness of prophecy, mapping it onto the Mosaic‐Jeremianic distinction, and arguing that, in view of this linking of Aquinas's understanding of prophecy to the argument of the book, the book certainly adds to the set of proposed theological explanations of how Christ's prophecy of his return was true.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T06:29:12Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:f5621eab-2d0e-40ef-82a1-1e93bbdd721f
institution University of Oxford
last_indexed 2024-03-07T06:29:12Z
publishDate 2016
publisher Wiley
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:f5621eab-2d0e-40ef-82a1-1e93bbdd721f2022-03-27T12:26:55ZThe veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledgeJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:f5621eab-2d0e-40ef-82a1-1e93bbdd721fSymplectic Elements at OxfordWiley2016Gaine, SIt is widely assumed by scholars that Christ was in error on such matters as an expectation that the final judgement and its accompanying events would occur within the timeframe of a generation. While accepting that Christ did indeed prophesy his return within this timeframe, a recent co‐authored work When the Son of Man Didn't Come aims to defend the veracity of his prophecy by drawing on the same historical‐critical method that has given rise to doubts about it. The authors propose a distinction between Mosaic and Jeremianic prophecy, arguing that Christ's was of the latter kind, which was present in the Ancient Near East, the Old and New Testaments, and other Jewish and Christian authors. Their argument, however, is at risk of reducing the truthfulness of a prophecy to its success. Hence this article explores a further distinction between two kinds of prophecy made in Thomas Aquinas's account of the truthfulness of prophecy, mapping it onto the Mosaic‐Jeremianic distinction, and arguing that, in view of this linking of Aquinas's understanding of prophecy to the argument of the book, the book certainly adds to the set of proposed theological explanations of how Christ's prophecy of his return was true.
spellingShingle Gaine, S
The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title_full The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title_fullStr The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title_full_unstemmed The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title_short The veracity of prophecy and Christ's knowledge
title_sort veracity of prophecy and christ s knowledge
work_keys_str_mv AT gaines theveracityofprophecyandchristsknowledge
AT gaines veracityofprophecyandchristsknowledge