This passage values the content of what someone teaches
above their ability to perform some sign or wonder. It's very explicit.
Most of what a prophet did in the Old Testament had nothing to do with End Times,
as we think of End Times. A good portion of it had something to do with
the culmination or outcome of something for Israel, Judah, their enemies,
that sort of thing. But that's sort of near future prediction.
But actually, most of what even Old Testament prophets did
had nothing to do with predicting anything. It really wasn't their main job,
even though they do some of that. So we need to adjust the way we think
about what's going on. Instead of asking, or thinking;
"here's what's going to happen." When we think of a prophet.
Most of what a prophet preached about and wrote about
was more along the lines of;
"why has your believing loyalty failed?" So, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
they're not running around, and the Minor Prophets as well.
They're not running around spending most of their days preaching or writing
asking their audience to think about what's going to happen.
Instead, they spend most of their time asking their audience to think about their failure
to believe in the true God, their failure to be loyal to the Salvation offered to them
in the covenant that God had made with them.
This is why scholars tend to describe prophets as "covenant enforcers."
They were preachers, basically, they were there to remind people
of what God had done for them, the terms of the covenant
that they were supposed to believe and be loyal to the God of Israel.
That was basically their job.
And they're typically sent into situations where most of the people
aren't anywhere close to that.
Apostasy was a big reason why prophets were raised up. The people were going after
other gods and so God would raise a prophets to go into places
and preach to the people saying, "remember, remember this.
Remember what God did. Why aren't you? You know, Where's your loyalty?
Why are you going after other gods?" It wasn't about, hey, it's showtime. You know,
let's talk about what's going to happen 1000s of years from now, or 10 years,
again, they do some of that, but most of the time, that just isn't even on the agenda
with a prophet. Who counted as a prophet?
Well, Matthew 23 has an interesting statement. Jesus says,
«“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets
and decorate the monuments of the righteous, saying,
‘If we had lived in the days of our fathers,
we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’
Thus you witness against yourselves that you are sons
of those who murdered the prophets.
Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. You serpents, you brood of vipers,
how are you to escape being sentenced to hell? Therefore I send you
prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill
and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town,
so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth,
from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah,
whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar.
Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.»
So, who counts as a prophet? I mean, this is a pretty extensive list,
it goes all the way back to Genesis 4 with Abel,
and if we really defined things broadly; a prophet was someone who spoke for God,
I talked about this in Unseen Realm, a prophet was God's mouthpiece.
He was a person living in a time where he was loyal to the true God
and he told other people to be loyal.
That there was something about the conversations that he had, or she,
that would convince people, or cajole people, or try to move people
into covenant loyalty, or to remember covenant loyalty.
To essentially believe, and be, and do what God wants. And Abel fits this
because he was righteous. His response to what God ask them to do was righteous.
Cain's was not. And so he fits into the broad definition.
But even Adam would do that, you know, Adam probably isn't on this list
because there's only Adam and Eve.
But Adam and Eve were both intended as spokespersons for God,
to their posterity, to their children, because they knew God, they were with him.
Jesus statement picks up with Abel, who was their righteous son in contrast to Cain,
but it runs the gamut. This is why Jesus answers the way he does.
A prophet wasn't only someone who predicted the future
a prophet wasn't only someone that has a book named after them.
Okay, to speak with a prophetic voice, we actually still use this kind of terminology today,
even within the church, or even politicians, where some of their public figure,
if they speak truth, where truth needs to be told.
And if they're the voice of righteousness in some way,
that's to speak with a prophetic voice, and then we use that expression.
You know, we're not getting theology out of that, but I'm using as an illustration
that this is what a prophet meant,
okay, back in the biblical days, to speak God's words. To represent him publicly,
especially in context where lots of people were not doing that.
That was what a prophet was.
So how could you discern a false prophet, though? Well, there were basically two ways.
One was if he spoke something that was utterly contrary to God's character,
or the covenants and things like this. The other one concerns prophetic acts.
So one is prophetic speech, the content of their message, and you can tell
by virtue of what other prophets had said, specifically important leaders like Moses,
we'll just use him for example, in the Torah. If you have some guy come along and say,
"I'm a prophet", and he starts teaching you things that are not in the Torah
or contrary to Torah, as an Israelite, you would know, well, you're not the real deal.
«When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass
or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken.»
So this refers to predictive sense. This was one of the ways you would tell
that you had a false prophet on your hands, if that mouthpiece for God
or someone who claimed to be that taught something against Torah, that was easy.
If he said, "Thus says the Lord, XYZ is going to happen in the future",
and it doesn't. Okay, that's pretty easy, too.
Because if God was behind it, it's going to come to pass. So there were passages
in the Old Testament that discuss this, how do you tell a true one from a false one?
And we sort of know those passages, I think, the next one
I'm going to show you is a little less familiar.
Because things could get more complicated.
Could false prophets successfully predict the future? In other words, could you have
somebody successfully predict the future and still be a false prophet?
You know, claiming to speak in God's name? Well, let's click out to this passage,
Deuteronomy 13. And everybody sort of knows the passage, I just showed you,
Deuteronomy 18, and you know, these tests for a prophet.
But this passage tends to get skipped a lot. Now I want to read it to you.
«If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder»,
so he actually does some signer wonder,
«and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass»,
now we're into the predictive element, «and if he says», you know, along with that sign
and wonder that he was somehow able to do «‘Let us go after other gods’»
now you've gone to the first test, you know, speaking something that's
obviously against God's word. «If he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’
which 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 know whether you love the LORD your God
with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God
and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice,
and you shall serve him and hold fast to him.
But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death,
because he has taught rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out
of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery.»
You know, I mean, you look at that, this passage values the content
of what someone teaches, above their ability to perform some sign or wonder.
It's very explicit. And the penalty obviously, in the Old Testament theocracy
was pretty harsh. Because it was viewed as rebellion.
So this is how you would tell a true from a false prophet.
You had two litmus test, not just one, not just this idea;
oh he predicted something that didn't happen. It's broader than that.
What does he teach? Okay, does the Prophet teach something consistent
with covenant loyalty or not?