Everything A Prophet Says Must Come True

[Princess3dward]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

[mmm12345]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

D- why did you quote those?

[Palerider]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

if you don't want anything to do with the Church......why does this bother you....which Bible translation is this from....its not the KJ Bible....whats your point????

[lds_mormon]

This is a scripture that is usually used to discredit the church, claiming that we can not be right because of alleged false prophecies made by church leaders. I don't know if that is the case here; I'm not on often enough to know the topic starter's tendecies or religious affiliation.

One thing that is interesting to note with this verse is that it doesn't say "If a person speaks..." it says if a "prophet speaks..." That could indicate that it's talking on a case by case basic, that just because something doesn't come true doesn't mean the man is not a prophet, just that he was wrong on that one account, maybe he was speaking his own opinion. And thus, that particular prophecy has no bearing on us.

[prisonchaplain]

This particular verse is used against a variety of prophetic groups, often labeled cults by certain Christian organizations. I first saw it leveled against Jehovah's Witnesses.

In context, a dicussion might arise about what is a prophetic message vs. an opinion held by one who gives prophetic messages. Also, in the context of the passage, it might be that the test is meant for those who claim to be prophets, but who have not been recognized by spiritual leadership.

Ultimately, those who are LDS will likely say that since the prophets they recognize are approved by the church, there is no issue, and those who are opposed to your church will say that the test absolutely applies, since their leaders have not endorsed the LDS prophets.

So...as everyone else has asked...what is the purpose of citing this passage without context? hmmmm.

[sixpacktr]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Well, let's consider that for a moment...

2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.

3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.

4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

5 ¶ So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

10 ¶ And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

(Jonah 3:2 - 5, 10)

Soooo, Jonah wasn't a prophet? What he proclaimed didn't happen either, even though he said it would. It doesn't mention the 'unless' phrase "IF you don't repent...". It simply says that the city will be destroyed.

Or am I missing something here??

[CrimsonKairos]

10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. (Jonah 3:2 - 5, 10)

Then there's this little gem:

God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? (Num. 23:19)

So I guess the Book of Jonah is a forgery because it says God repented, but Numbers 23:19 clearly says that God does not repent and fulfills everything He speaks. Well He said He would destroy Nineveh, yet Jonah claims God repented and that God did not fulfill His oath against Nineveh?

Guess the Bible is false.

[Dr T]

Great question/point, Six. I guess I'd have to question. I'd have to look at the story again to see what was going on there. As I've said before, I'm not a theologian or Bible scholar so I'm sure there are others more suited for that task. I guess my first question would be, "Why are we calling him a prophet?" I don't know where it says he was a prophet. Maybe it does? I remember that he preached to the Ninevites. I don't think that makes him a prophet.

[CrimsonKairos]

Well...he prophesied in the name of the Lord, and God commanded him and authorized him to do so.

If that ain't a prophet, I don't know what is. B)

[Dr T]

What was posted however, was "preach" not "prophecy." I think there is a difference there. Do you agree that there is a difference between preaching and prophecy?" I'd say that preaching may be a warning but it's not at all the same as prophesying. So then we need to ask ourselves, "Was Jonah preaching or prophesying?"

If we look at Matthew 12:41 we see the answer.

The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.

We see he was preaching in that verse.

[sixpacktr]

What was posted however, was "preach" not "prophecy." I think there is a difference there. Do you agree that there is a difference between preaching and prophecy?" I'd say that preaching may be a warning but it's not at all the same as prophesying. So then we need to ask ourselves, "Was Jonah preaching or prophesying?"

If we look at Matthew 12:41 we see the answer.

The men of Nineveh will stand up with this generation at the judgment, and will condemn it because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.

We see he was preaching in that verse.

Hey T,

I think your picking pepper off of fly poop on this one. The Lord commanded Jonah to go to Nineveh and told him: 'what I tell you, you tell them'. Then he made a prophecy: the city is going to be destroyed in 40 days. He wasn't telling them to be nice, or don't lie, or anything else. He made a prophecy, something that was to happen in the future. He preached unto them what the Lord told him to say, but it was still prophesying.

Ta-may-ta, To-mah-toe in my opinion...

[Dr T]

I guess I don't know much about being a prophet. Something I should look into.

[Princess3dward]

<div class='quotemain'>

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Well, let's consider that for a moment...

2 Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee.

3 So Jonah arose, and went unto Nineveh, according to the word of the LORD. Now Nineveh was an exceeding great city of three days' journey.

4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

5 ¶ So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

10 ¶ And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

(Jonah 3:2 - 5, 10)

Soooo, Jonah wasn't a prophet? What he proclaimed didn't happen either, even though he said it would. It doesn't mention the 'unless' phrase "IF you don't repent...". It simply says that the city will be destroyed.

Or am I missing something here??

He certainly wasn't a model prophet if you say he was a prophet.

He tried to run away from the LORD and in turn got swallowed by a whale.

Your call on making him your example.

Any others?

Guess the Bible is false.

Your call.

I would say maybe mistranslated.

But if you want to discount the whole book because of that, go right ahead.

p.s. Don't worry. I know you were trying to be clever.

[sacred1]

He certainly wasn't a model prophet if you say he was a prophet.

He tried to run away from the LORD and in turn got swallowed by a whale.

Your call on making him your example.

Any others?

It doesn't matter if he was a model prophet or not, he WAS a prophet. And what he prophesied did not come true. If the verse you quoted can be used to discount our prophets, to show how they are false, then it certainly can be used to discount a biblical prophet. There really isn't any difference.

[prisonchaplain]

It's safe to call Jonah a prophet, imho. Furthermore, just because the text does not include Jonah offering a proviso, he may have. It may also be that he intentionally did not, because he hated the Ninevites. Nevertheless, imho, if a prophet is predicting doom upon a society for its immorality, there seems to be some implied hope that repentence might bring mercy.

Now, if Jonah had said, "You are going to be destroyed, and there's no use trying to escape your punishment. You will all die, and there is no hope," then the accusation of false prophecy might be legitimate.

As for the "God does not repent" verse--my take is that this is an affirmation of God's competence, not an absolute rejection of God ever making a turn in his decision.

It doesn't matter if he was a model prophet or not, he WAS a prophet. And what he prophesied did not come true. If the verse you quoted can be used to discount our prophets, to show how they are false, then it certainly can be used to discount a biblical prophet. There really isn't any difference.

The verse does not apply to Jonah, because it is not clear, from the context, that he offered the people no hope whatsoever. As part of the canon, Jonah can safely be said to have been a true prophet of God.

When the Deuteronomy passage is used as a measurement toward modern prophets, it certainly carries some weight if the one in question said something that was clearly meant to be taken as prophecy, and that which was predicted clearly did not or will not happen. The judgment is rather severe in Dueteronomy, therefore the cases to which it applies should be blatant, imho.

[CrimsonKairos]

Furthermore, just because the text does not include Jonah offering a proviso, he may have.

He may not have, though. What makes your "may have" better than my "may not have?"

Nevertheless, imho, if a prophet is predicting doom upon a society for its immorality, there seems to be some implied hope that repentence might bring mercy.

Unfortunately, the Deuteronomy verse doesn't say, "If a prophet speaks a thing in the name of the Lord and it doesn't come true (unless it's because the people repented and changed God's mind) then that prophet is a false prophet."

I'm being ridiculously Pharisaic here (and it's fun being the anal one for a change instead of letting the anti-mormons have all the fun), but this is the argument that is used against LDS prophets and if it is indeed the touchstone for true prophets, many Biblical prophets come out as false since their prophecies didn't come to pass.

As for the "God does not repent" verse--my take is that this is an affirmation of God's competence, not an absolute rejection of God ever making a turn in his decision.

I know, PC, but it is that sort of surface contradiction that is leveled so often against LDS scripture and which is equally as ridiculous.

The verse does not apply to Jonah, because it is not clear, from the context, that he offered the people no hope whatsoever.

But PC, the Deuteronomy verse doesn't include a proviso that a prophet can still be a true prophet even if his prophecy fails to come to pass as long as it fails to come to pass because the wicked repent. It seems you're rewriting the Deuteronomy excerpt.

When the Deuteronomy passage is used as a measurement toward modern prophets, it certainly carries some weight if the one in question said something that was clearly meant to be taken as prophecy, and that which was predicted clearly did not or will not happen.

We just need to be careful in deciding what is "clearly" meant to be taken as prophecy and what is not, because to me Jonah was clearly prophesying to Nineveh, yet you don't see it as such.

[prisonchaplain]

Crimson, I'll start with the obvious: Jonah is a true prophet because his story made the canon. So, if God tells the prophet he's going to destroy a city--go tell the people--well...why go tell the people, unless there is hope for reprieve and mercy?

Your real issue, of course, is not Jonah, but how critics of your church interpret and then denounce some of Joseph Smith's words. Since I have not examined those controversies of late, I can't really comment on how fair or unfair the critics are. So, I just stick with my proviso that the Dueteronomy test would likely require a pretty blatant unfulfilled prophecy, in order to qualifty the speaker as a false prophet.

[sixpacktr]

He certainly wasn't a model prophet if you say he was a prophet.

He tried to run away from the LORD and in turn got swallowed by a whale.

Your call on making him your example.

Any others?

Why even discuss this with you then? You point something out of the 'infallible' Bible, I show where a prophet (and yes, Jonah was a prophet: he prophesied to Nineveh because THE LORD TOLD HIM TO) made a prophesy that didn't happen because the people repented. Then you say, "well, he wasn't REALLY a prophet..."

You aren't going to be convinced. You simply wanted to poke, and when you were proven wrong, you dismiss it with the wave of a hand.

The Lord spoke of people like you. Always wanting a sign, never satisfied when you hear something that answers your question. 'Wicked and adulterous' was how he put it...

[pam]

<div class='quotemain'>

He certainly wasn't a model prophet if you say he was a prophet.

He tried to run away from the LORD and in turn got swallowed by a whale.

Your call on making him your example.

Any others?

Why even discuss this with you then? You point something out of the 'infallible' Bible, I show where a prophet (and yes, Jonah was a prophet: he prophesied to Nineveh because THE LORD TOLD HIM TO) made a prophesy that didn't happen because the people repented. Then you say, "well, he wasn't REALLY a prophet..."

You aren't going to be convinced. You simply wanted to poke, and when you were proven wrong, you dismiss it with the wave of a hand.

The Lord spoke of people like you. Always wanting a sign, never satisfied when you hear something that answers your question. 'Wicked and adulterous' was how he put it...

Good luck Six. You are wasting your time.

[Dale]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

The law and its rules have been abolished. So whats to prevent God from today allowing any prophet one or more mistaken prophecy. though after examining the prophecy we would have to both agree it qualifies as a false prophecy. Jesus is higher than the law so can over-rule these two verses.

The basic false prophecies attributed to Joseph Smith all have been proposed valid explanations. One i think can't is the effort of joseph Smith to sale the copy-write for the Book of Mormon only for the area of Canada. David Whitmer recalled the Lord as telling Joseph Smith to be more careful as some revelation's were of men, others of God, and others of the Devil. But since the law and its rules have been abolished Jesus not the law can decide to keep Joseph smith as a prophet. What greater test can a prophet pass than to get Jesus personal ok on a prophetic mistake?

Nothing in verse 20 prevents a true prophet from starting out with a true idea of God and teaching Gods later. On that basis i see Joseph Smith passing the verse inspite of many thinking plurality of Gods as heresy so to them he fail's the verse.

The Jewish apologists think the Trinity idea is speaking in the name of another God. The only way creedal writers could defend themselves against the idea the Trinity came close to poly-theism was to say the three wern't more than mere roles of God, or dumb person's of an actor. They adopted the latin word persona to say God was one person like an ancient actor via face masks playing persons in a play.

Though the person's are distinct centers of consciousness within God so arn't mere roles of God. But they adopted the one word that say's just that. The word fits modalism not the creedal idea of three distinct entity like distinctions within the divine being.

[Ron Beron]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

Why do you consider this necessarily to be so? The role of a prophet in the OT and contemporaneously is much more complicated than a simple prognosticator.

*First a prophet was one who saw or watches (Isa 29:10;43:10-12;Eze.33:7).

*Secondly, he would be a witness or martyr to that which he saw. He would promote the saving ordinances of the gospel, the decrees and rites. (Isa I1:11-12(but)1:13 and DC 132:2-4). He would keep the scripture alive in the hearts of the new generation.(Isa 50:4;DC 68:4) He would teach that Israel had been elected by God and had a special covenant with him. He would teach them a sense of belonging that Israel was a place set apart. That Israel alone taught about the real God. (Isa. 40:11;DC49:9,36)

*He would also render Gods judgement (Isa 30:12-14;Jer. 5:3,12,14;DC 19:3, God's compassion or mercy which implied a covenant. (Isa 54;7-8 ;DC 64:2;101:9), redemption (Isa 51:11;DC29:42), and final consummation (Isa 53:4-5/2:2-4)

*Finally he would seal his life with his death.

[Doctor Steuss]

Princess3dward,

I’m wondering if you are aware of the fact that this is how one is to know whether or not a prophet (note, not necessarily a “false prophet”) is giving utterance in behalf of G-d. The key to understanding this is the nuance of the language in verse 20.

There are two interesting implications brought by these verses from those kooky Deuteronomists.

1) A prophet (note, not necessarily a “false prophet”) can indeed give utterance that is not from G-d.

2) A punishment is given for someone (i.e. death) in such an instance. So, we are then left to wonder (if we force your interpretation upon it) since the fact that there are (and have been) false prophets running around alive, if the individual who wrote the Deuteronomist passage was not a prophet and therefore not speaking on behalf of G-d thus nulifying it.

Also, why is it people are so quick to throw out aspects of the Deuteronomist law (usually claiming that Christ fulfilled all of it), yet so readily cling to other aspects when it serves their beliefs? Do you happen to similarly believe that Deuteronomy 23:1 is valid?

[NeuroTypical]

Deuteronomy 18:20-22

20 But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death."

21 You may say to yourselves, "How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD ?" 22 If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

I've highlighted the parts that critics of our church continually fail to understand.

Prophets are human. You don't become perfect or infallible when God picks you as prophet. Nor is everything that comes out of the mouth of a prophet, put there by God. Prophets have opinions and beliefs like anyone else. Sometimes they're right, sometimes they're wrong.

Here are some quotes from President Hinckley that help clarify a bit:

"We encourage you again to read the talks in your family home evenings and discuss them together as families. They are the products of much prayer and meditation and are well worthy of careful consideration." - October '07 General Conference Report (Please note - several Apostles and President Hinckley himself gave talks)

"We hope that you will use the May edition of the Church magazines as a text for your family home evenings, to review that which has been spoken in this conference. What has been said by each of the speakers represents his or her prayerful attempt to impart knowledge that will inspire and cause all who have heard it to stand a little taller and be a little better." - April '07 General conference Report (Sounds different than "We've revealed new scripture here")

Here's another one, from October 1998 Conference:

"Now, brethren, I want to make it very clear that I am not prophesying, that I am not predicting years of famine in the future. But I am suggesting that the time has come to..."

(So tell me, if everything a prophet says is prophecying, how do you handle it when he says he's not prophecying?)

LM

[Dale]

Critic's of Joseph Smith gather up together a number of his prophetic statements they see as false prophecies. I recall Dick Baer a crony of Ed Decker once wrote a book detailing 60 of what he considers false prophecies. The LDS message board's tend to unfortunately bleep out his first name mistakingly thinking i was referring to a part of the male anatomy. I never have read the entire set of statements. Usually i see the critic's pick out 7-10 favorite example's they point to all the time.

The law and it's rule's have been abolished so i do not agree today that everything a prophet say's must come true. Neither the law or the Bible is my final authority on such mistake's Jesus is via modern revelation. I do not think with one exception that anything on the basic critic's list qualifies as a false prophecy. I think in their zeal to say they have disproven Joseph Smith they fail to find the solution's that i feel place's the prophecies off the false prophecy list's.

[VisionOfLehi]

I'm taking a turn from this topic, a bit. I am not addressing the original starter of this topic. That's a dead end. Nevertheless, it's certainly sparked some interesting things to research!

First off, let me start with an OT quote. It's Jeremiah 26

12 ¶ Then spake Jeremiah unto all the princes and to all the people, saying, The LORD sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard. 13 Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; and the LORD will repent him of the evil that he hath pronounced against you.

Here is a specific time when a prophet has told the condition "unless you repent" to the people he is confronting. I'm extremely confident that if one studies the scriptures, they will find that this is actually a condition for ALL such prophesies of destruction. I'm vaguely aware of some supposed exceptions, but in those instances the people were told that they had already lost their chance to repent. God does not say we will be able to repent whenever we want.

God does not change His mind. I do not believe this. For an Eternal being with all knowledge and power, it seems... false. His "changing of mind" isn't really that. He's already told us that His punishments will occur unless we repent.

I know a famous prophecy in the Church that is cited as being false. It concerned the destruction of the US government because of Missouri's wrongdoings against the Saints. However... it's not in our Scriptures, which means it's not been testified to a prophet AND his apostles. Also, we have no idea what the Lord would consider a "redress" (as the "prophecy" says) for the wrongdoing.

I think most of the "false prophecies" are such instances. Likewise, I believe BLESSINGS that are prophesied are much contingent upon the parties involved being fully obedient to the Lord.

Like the global condition "unless you repent" for punishment, I think there's as much evidence in the scriptures to show that blessings all have the condition "if you are obedient and keep my commandments."

Interested to hear feedback on this.