| Question: Your comment
about Edgar Cayce being an abysmal failure as a prophet is a
completely subjective view of his work. There are those who believe that the
things of which Mr. Cayce spoke are true. Also, because you can not have a
truth without it being believed and it having both epistemic certainty as well
as facts to back it up, you can not say as a truth that he was a
failure as a prophet. Even Nostrodamus was off in many of his predictions, yet
he was accurate in what he said.
* * * * * * *
Answer: You begin by stating,
Your comment about Edgar Cayce being an abysmal failure as a
prophet is a completely subjective view of his work. There are those who
believe that the things of which Mr. Cayce spoke are true.
Although I would probably not
have chosen to use the adjective abysmal, the claim that Cayce was
a failure as a prophet is actually not subjective. It is based on the objective
authority of Gods Word in the Bible. The Bible actually sets up an
objective standard for determining whether someone is, or is not, a true
prophet. This standard is nothing less than 100% prophetic accuracy. In
Deuteronomy 18:20-22, we read, But the prophet who shall speak a word
presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he
shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die. And you may say
in your heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord has not
spoken? When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does
not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken.
The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.
In light of this passage, the
Christian reasons as follows:
1.Edgar Cayce
uttered certain prophecies, or healing remedies, that were not accurate.
2.Gods word says that a true prophet is always accurate in what he
predicts.
3.Therefore, Edgar Cayce was not a true prophet of God. Biblically speaking, he
was a false prophet.
This, of course, is not to deny
that Edgar Cayce may have uttered some prophecies and healing remedies that
were accurate, but since he also uttered some false prophecies, Gods word
indicates that he was not a true prophet. The same reasoning would also apply
to the prophecies of Nostradamus. As you yourself pointed out,
Nostradamus was off in many of his predictions.
There is another passage of
Scripture that seems particularly relevant to Edgar Cayce. Remember, even Cayce
at times wondered about the true source of his special powers. In Deuteronomy
13:1-4 we read, If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and
gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning
which he spoke to you saying, Let us go after other gods (whom you have
not known) and let us serve them, you shall not listen to the words of
that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the Lord your God is testing you to
find out if you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your
soul. You shall follow the Lord your God and fear Him; and you shall keep His
commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him.
This passage is especially
interesting in light of Cayces own comments concerning his powers,
The power was given to me without explanation...it was just an odd trait
that was useful in medicine...Thats what I always thought, and against
this I put the idea that the Devil might be tempting me to do his work by
operating through me when I was conceited enough to think God had given me
special power. (Edgar Cayce: The Sleeping (False) Prophet) Since Cayce
was quite familiar with the Bible, he had every reason to be suspicious of the
source of his power, especially since he made predictions which did not come
true.
Please let me also briefly
address your description of truth. You write, ...because you can not have
a truth without it being believed and it having both epistemic certainty as
well as facts to back it up, you can not say, as a truth that he
was a failure as a prophet.
I would simply have to disagree
with this statement for two reasons:
1. I can imagine
many examples of something being objectively true and yet not being believed by
anyone, not possessing epistemic certainty (a very difficult criterion to meet,
by the way), and not even having any independently verifiable facts to back it
up! For instance, suppose an angel appeared to an unbeliever and told him to
repent of his sins and to put his faith in Christ for salvation. Suppose this
was an objective experience, capable of sense verification (sight, hearing,
touch, etc.) by anyone who happened to be present. Suppose no one was present
but the unbeliever - and after having this experience, he concludes it was
merely a subjective hallucination! Furthermore, suppose everyone who hears this
story accepts his interpretation; namely, that the event was simply a
hallucination - not an objective experience. Finally, suppose that the angel
leaves absolutely no physical trace of his appearance - nothing to confirm that
the appearance had been an objective event in the external world! In this case,
it would be absolutely TRUE to say that an angel had appeared to this man, etc.
However, no one actually BELIEVES this to be true (including the man who
experienced it), it LACKS epistemic certainty, and there are NO independently
verifiable facts to support that this event actually happened. The only
evidence that this event actually occurred is the mans memory, which he
believes pertains to a hallucination - not an actual visit from an angel. In
spite of this, however, it would still be TRUE to say that the event actually
occurred in the real, mind-independent, external world of the observer; it was
completely objective. Such examples could be multiplied, but you get the idea.
2. Since there are
good reasons to believe that the Bible is the Word of God, I think that one can
legitimately conclude that Cayce was a false prophet by Biblical standards. If
this is true, then Cayce was ultimately a failure as a prophet according to the
standard of the Ultimate Judge of all such matters, namely, God Himself. The
Bible gives us Gods standards for determining whether someone is, or is
not, a true prophet. Cayce failed to meet these Biblical standards. Therefore,
the Christian has good grounds for believing that Cayce was not a true prophet.
I know
that there are indeed those who believe that the things
Edgar Cayce spoke in his trances are true, but I hope
you can see why Biblical Christianity must reject that
belief.
Please
feel free to send feedback
concerning this article. Also, please include the title
of this article in your feedback. Thank you for visiting
Central
Truth Ministries.
|