Deuteronomy 18 and prophecies about Jesus

[Barney2.0]

That answer doesn't make any sense. In the thought experiment, scriptures don't yet exist on the matter. Read the last sentence again.

I'm asking you how you would know which of the two to execute.

We’ll know from what previous prophets have told us.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

We’ll know from what previous prophets have told us.

That's not part of the thought experiment. These are the first two prophets to prophesy about the Messiah's birthplace. How do you know which prophet to write down in scripture and which prophet to execute? How do you even know if either is correct?

 

[Chriliman]

See post 72.

Where’s the scripture that says prophecies must be fulfilled within a prophets lifetime?

You realize that if God actually requires prophesies be fulfilled within the prophets lifetime then anything Jesus said about his own resurrection must be thrown out.

If you can find scripture where this is a requirement then I’ll concede, but as it stands, it’s only you who’s saying this is a requirement, God never said in scripture that it’s a requirement as far as I know.

Sure, false prophets can say their prophecies won’t be fulfilled until 500 yrs later, but that doesn’t mean a true prophet can’t be discerned from a false one, eventually the truth will be known.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Where’s the scripture that says prophecies must be fulfilled within a prophets lifetime?

22 when a prophet speaketh in the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken: the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

What happens when a prophet speaks presumptuously?

20 But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.

If far-future prophecies are allowed, then verse 20 will never be enacted. Any prophet who gives no specific date and who prophesies in the name of Jehovah will never face consequences. They can literally make up anything they like whatsoever.

You realize that if God actually requires prophesies be fulfilled within the prophets lifetime then anything Jesus said about his own resurrection must be thrown out.

When I say, "Within the lifetime of the prophet" you can just as easily interpret that as, "Within the lifetime of the witnesses."

If you can find scripture where this is a requirement then I’ll concede, but as it stands, it’s only you who’s saying this is a requirement, God never said in scripture that it’s a requirement as far as I know.

But it is a requirement that false prophets be executed. And false prophets are defined as those whose prophecies don't come true.

I don't understand what your expectations are of that. If a prophet said something about the messiah and he turned out to be wrong 500 years later, what then? He's off the hook with no penalty? Is that the design that is clearly laid out in the portion of scripture cited in the OP?

Sure, false prophets can say their prophecies won’t be fulfilled until 500 yrs later, but that doesn’t mean a true prophet can’t be discerned from a false one, eventually the truth will be known.

Eventually the truth will be known. So what?

Imagine there was a murder, and the defendant said, "There is no need to punish me. Eventually, in 500 years, the truth of these events will be known."

The fact that the truth will eventually be known is irrelevant. God is demanding a punishment takes place. You're ignoring that. The system you're proposing actually makes the passage we're discussing totally irrelevant so long as no prophet ever gives an exact date for his prediction.

 

[Chriliman]

22 when a prophet speaketh in the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken: the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

What happens when a prophet speaks presumptuously?

20 But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.

https://www.christianforums.com/bible/deuteronomy/18:20/

Both true and false prophets eventually die anyway and then face judgement after that, see below.

If far-future prophecies are allowed, then verse 20 will never be enacted. Any prophet who gives no specific date and who prophesies in the name of Jehovah will never face consequences. They can literally make up anything they like whatsoever.

Not necissarily:
Hebrews 9:27
"Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,"

When I say, "Within the lifetime of the prophet" you can just as easily interpret that as, "Within the lifetime of the witnesses."

So God shouldn't speak of things that will happen beyond someone's lifetime? I think that's rather limiting.

But it is a requirement that false prophets be executed. And false prophets are defined as those whose prophecies don't come true.

Right, and if they say it will happen in the far future then you shouldn't execute them because you don't know whether its true or not, leave it to God to bring justice.

I don't understand what your expectations are of that. If a prophet said something about the messiah and he turned out to be wrong 500 years later, what then? He's off the hook with no penalty? Is that the design that is clearly laid out in the portion of scripture cited in the OP?

No, see above: Hebrews 9:27

Just because we can't bring justice for something that happened in the past doesn't mean God can't either.

Eventually the truth will be known. So what?

Imagine there was a murder, and the defendant said, "There is no need to punish me. Eventually, in 500 years, the truth of these events will be known."

The fact that the truth will eventually be known is irrelevant. God is demanding a punishment takes place. You're ignoring that. The system you're proposing actually makes the passage we're discussing totally irrelevant so long as no prophet ever gives an exact date for his prediction.

God only demanded it if the prophet was found to be false. I trust God to know who's a true prophet and who's not even if I don't currently know on account of the prophecy be fulfilled in the future beyond my time.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Both true and false prophets eventually die anyway and then face judgement after that, see below.

Therefore let murderers off the hook? I don't personally equate murder with false prophecy, but God condemned both under the same punishment. Your argument here, if taken seriously, would lead to absolutely zero personal accountability whatsoever for anyone who is alive on earth.

Not necissarily:
Hebrews 9:27
"Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,"

I don't see how the NT is relevant for people from the OT days who were trying to determine if someone was a false prophet or not.

The NT is 100% off topic. Please don't pollute the thread.

So God shouldn't speak of things that will happen beyond someone's lifetime? I think that's rather limiting.

Verse 16 establishes that God does not speak to everyone at once because the people are terrified of seeing/hearing God and they think they might die. This is why prophets existed: God would instead just speak to one man, and that one man would then relay the message to the people.

But how do the people know if a prophet is speaking for Jehovah? Well, if the things he says come true then he is a prophet for Jehovah. If his prophecies don't come true within the lifetime of the people he was talking to, why would they think he's a prophet? Why would they preserve his texts for hundreds of years, considering that the relative cost of making a book in those days was around the price of a car or house these days?

You aren't supposed to have faith in prophets. You're supposed to have faith in Jehovah. It seems rather cartoonish to me that these people would have so much faith in a prophet that they would continue to copy and preserve his prophecies for hundreds or thousands of years, waiting for them to come true.

Right, and if they say it will happen in the far future

Can you even show me a prophecy where it is explicitly stated that it will occur in the far future? The best example I can think of for your case is the statue of Daniel. I'd like to see how it is impossible for that to be taken as a contemporary prophecy.

then you shouldn't execute them because you don't know whether its true or not, leave it to God to bring justice.

OK, so again, you are rendering verse 20 to be worthless.

No, see above: Hebrews 9:27

No. Not a valid response. See above.

Just because we can't bring justice for something that happened in the past doesn't mean God can't either.

God has given commands. He's not giving you the option to leave it to him. He's giving you a job to do.

God only demanded it if the prophet was found to be false.

Yes, and it says exactly how to know if the prophet is false. You just prefer to not read what it says.

If your interpretation is exactly in line with what the ancient Jews of the time believed, then NO ONE would ever give a contemporary prophecy because it would be totally stupid to do so, and therefore no one would be executed as a false prophet so long as they prophesied in the name of Jehovah. Again, it renders verse 20 worthless.

Or, you can go with what I'm saying:

The masses did not want to see/hear God, for fear of death (verse 16). Therefore, a mediator (a prophet) would speak for God to the people. The people would then test the prophet to know for sure if he speaks for God (because, remember, they had faith in Jehovah and NOT IN MEN). The metrics of the test are given in the passage of scripture I'm quoting.

If a prophet gave a prophecy of something in the far-future, no one would care. They'd be unable to prove it as either true or false, and further, even if it was true it would be of absolutely no consequence to them.

If you can't tell if something is true or false, and if it is of no consequence, then it is what we call "something that doesn't matter." It's not something you would spend thousands of dollars on (modern equivalent) to write down.

And again, no matter how much faith they had in Jehovah, this amount of faith in a MAN is unwarranted.

I trust God to know who's a true prophet and who's not even if I don't currently know on account of the prophecy be fulfilled in the future beyond my time.

This is quite a silly thing to say. Until the prophet passes GOD'S TEST, he's just a man speaking for himself.

 

[Barney2.0]

22 when a prophet speaketh in the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken: the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.

What happens when a prophet speaks presumptuously?

20 But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.

If far-future prophecies are allowed, then verse 20 will never be enacted. Any prophet who gives no specific date and who prophesies in the name of Jehovah will never face consequences. They can literally make up anything they like whatsoever.



When I say, "Within the lifetime of the prophet" you can just as easily interpret that as, "Within the lifetime of the witnesses."



But it is a requirement that false prophets be executed. And false prophets are defined as those whose prophecies don't come true.

I don't understand what your expectations are of that. If a prophet said something about the messiah and he turned out to be wrong 500 years later, what then? He's off the hook with no penalty? Is that the design that is clearly laid out in the portion of scripture cited in the OP?



Eventually the truth will be known. So what?

Imagine there was a murder, and the defendant said, "There is no need to punish me. Eventually, in 500 years, the truth of these events will be known."

The fact that the truth will eventually be known is irrelevant. God is demanding a punishment takes place. You're ignoring that. The system you're proposing actually makes the passage we're discussing totally irrelevant so long as no prophet ever gives an exact date for his prediction.

Then most Biblical prophets would be false prophets.

 

[Barney2.0]

That's not part of the thought experiment. These are the first two prophets to prophesy about the Messiah's birthplace. How do you know which prophet to write down in scripture and which prophet to execute? How do you even know if either is correct?

I already answered the question.

 

[Chriliman]

Therefore let murderers off the hook? I don't personally equate murder with false prophecy, but God condemned both under the same punishment. Your argument here, if taken seriously, would lead to absolutely zero personal accountability whatsoever for anyone who is alive on earth.





I don't see how the NT is relevant for people from the OT days who were trying to determine if someone was a false prophet or not.

The NT is 100% off topic. Please don't pollute the thread.




Verse 16 establishes that God does not speak to everyone at once because the people are terrified of seeing/hearing God and they think they might die. This is why prophets existed: God would instead just speak to one man, and that one man would then relay the message to the people.

But how do the people know if a prophet is speaking for Jehovah? Well, if the things he says come true then he is a prophet for Jehovah. If his prophecies don't come true within the lifetime of the people he was talking to, why would they think he's a prophet? Why would they preserve his texts for hundreds of years, considering that the relative cost of making a book in those days was around the price of a car or house these days?

You aren't supposed to have faith in prophets. You're supposed to have faith in Jehovah. It seems rather cartoonish to me that these people would have so much faith in a prophet that they would continue to copy and preserve his prophecies for hundreds or thousands of years, waiting for them to come true.




Can you even show me a prophecy where it is explicitly stated that it will occur in the far future? The best example I can think of for your case is the statue of Daniel. I'd like to see how it is impossible for that to be taken as a contemporary prophecy.



OK, so again, you are rendering verse 20 to be worthless.



No. Not a valid response. See above.



God has given commands. He's not giving you the option to leave it to him. He's giving you a job to do.




Yes, and it says exactly how to know if the prophet is false. You just prefer to not read what it says.

If your interpretation is exactly in line with what the ancient Jews of the time believed, then NO ONE would ever give a contemporary prophecy because it would be totally stupid to do so, and therefore no one would be executed as a false prophet so long as they prophesied in the name of Jehovah. Again, it renders verse 20 worthless.

Or, you can go with what I'm saying:

The masses did not want to see/hear God, for fear of death (verse 16). Therefore, a mediator (a prophet) would speak for God to the people. The people would then test the prophet to know for sure if he speaks for God (because, remember, they had faith in Jehovah and NOT IN MEN). The metrics of the test are given in the passage of scripture I'm quoting.

If a prophet gave a prophecy of something in the far-future, no one would care. They'd be unable to prove it as either true or false, and further, even if it was true it would be of absolutely no consequence to them.

If you can't tell if something is true or false, and if it is of no consequence, then it is what we call "something that doesn't matter." It's not something you would spend thousands of dollars on (modern equivalent) to write down.

And again, no matter how much faith they had in Jehovah, this amount of faith in a MAN is unwarranted.



This is quite a silly thing to say. Until the prophet passes GOD'S TEST, he's just a man speaking for himself.

I understand your point. It may be that the prophet wasn’t speaking about Jesus specifically but rather a type of Jesus that God would appoint in their lifetime.

This wouldn’t negate anything Jesus did in his time. It just means we in our time have the advantage of hinesight to see the similarities between Jesus and whomever the prophet was speaking about. Just a theory...

 

[Nihilist Virus]

Then most Biblical prophets would be false prophets.

Appeal to consequences, a logical fallacy.

I already answered the question.

No.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I understand your point. It may be that the prophet wasn’t speaking about Jesus specifically but rather a type of Jesus that God would appoint in their lifetime.

Yes. I think it's referring to Joshua, the successor of Moses.

This wouldn’t negate anything Jesus did in his time. It just means we in our time have the advantage of hinesight to see the similarities between Jesus and whomever the prophet was speaking about. Just a theory...

The OP is not trying to disprove all of Christianity. And even if it did, I wouldn't expect you to drop everything without digesting it a bit. I'm only trying to show that there is not and cannot be an unambiguous prophecy exclusively about Jesus Christ in the OT.

 

[Barney2.0]

Appeal to consequences, a logical fallacy.



No.

I did answer the question already and I fail to see how it’s a logical fallacy.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

I did answer the question already

I asked how you'd know which prophet is correct if they contradict one another and their prophecy won't be fulfilled in your lifetime. You said to reference previous prophets. I then added the stipulation that no precedent exists for this particular prophecy (not at all and unreasonable addendum considering that there has to be a first time). You responded by saying that you already answered, which is a complete farce.

and I fail to see how it’s a logical fallacy.

I told you by name which logical fallacy you commited. Appeal to consequences fallacy: "Conclusion X cannot be true because consequence Y is not preferable."

 

[Barney2.0]

I asked how you'd know which prophet is correct if they contradict one another and their prophecy won't be fulfilled in your lifetime. You said to reference previous prophets. I then added the stipulation that no precedent exists for this particular prophecy (not at all and unreasonable addendum considering that there has to be a first time). You responded by saying that you already answered, which is a complete farce.



I told you by name which logical fallacy you commited. Appeal to consequences fallacy: "Conclusion X cannot be true because consequence Y is not preferable."

There will be previous references to where the Messiah will be born, secondly you’d also have to bring me a passage like this in the Bible. Where two prophets conflict with one another.

 

[Nihilist Virus]

There will be previous references to where the Messiah will be born,

If you say there is an instance of X, yet deny that there was a first X, then you are saying that the quantity of X is infinite.

secondly you’d also have to bring me a passage like this in the Bible. Where two prophets conflict with one another.

No I don't. I'm not saying the Bible would record any of this and I'm certainly not saying that the Bible would record the words of a false prophet who was executed. I'm asking you how they would have known which was the false prophet. And you're doing an utterly terrible job of answering.

Please just bring this question to someone else and give me their answer or consider dropping out. I'm not interested in your responses anymore because you clearly aren't engaged in the conversation.

 

[Barney2.0]

If you say there is an instance of X, yet deny that there was a first X, then you are saying that the quantity of X is infinite.



No I don't. I'm not saying the Bible would record any of this and I'm certainly not saying that the Bible would record the words of a false prophet who was executed. I'm asking you how they would have known which was the false prophet. And you're doing an utterly terrible job of answering.

Please just bring this question to someone else and give me their answer or consider dropping out. I'm not interested in your responses anymore because you clearly aren't engaged in the conversation.

How am I denying that there was a first X? If a prophet makes many correct prophesies and then makes another one about the Messiah, then we could trust his word, yet if someone else comes and claims the Messiah would be born somewhere else then we’d know he’s lying.

 

[Chriliman]

How am I denying that there was a first X? If a prophet makes many correct prophesies and then makes another one about the Messiah, then we could trust his word, yet if someone else comes and claims the Messiah would be born somewhere else then we’d know he’s lying.

Well technically we wouldn’t know for sure until the prophecy is fulfilled.

I think Nihilist Virus makes a good point in that the people of the time would’ve expected to see the prophecy fulfilled in their lifetime since God said in the referenced scripture that if said prophecy doesn’t come to pass (it’s assumed before the prophet and/or witness dies) then they are a false prophet and should be executed.

It could be that the prophet was actually refering to Joshua or someone who’s a type of Jesus but not specifically Jesus himself. This would solve the above problem.

 

[Barney2.0]

Well technically we wouldn’t know for sure until the prophecy is fulfilled.

I think Nihilist Virus makes a good point in that the people of the time would’ve expected to see the prophecy fulfilled in their lifetime since God said in the referenced scripture that if said prophecy doesn’t come to pass (it’s assumed before the prophet and/or witness dies) then they are a false prophet and should be executed.

It could be that the prophet was actually refering to Joshua or someone who’s a type of Jesus but not specifically Jesus himself. This would solve the above problem.

I believe it fits Jesus more then anyone else, but it could be some sort of parable, maybe it doesn’t reffer to Jesus specifically, but it seems Jesus has the most similarities to Moses.