Was The Old Prophets Legit

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by FoxStop, Oct 1, 2013.

  1. When the old prophets claimed they could hear the words of Gods, like a way of a person communicating with a higher being. But if someone did that today, then the likeness of believing it just because the person says so, is likely no way.

    So just curious to how reliable the old prophets where, when we compare to what we know today.
    And how do we know if a prophet is false? What proof can there be of it?
    I know that in the old testament. Atleast it says so, but what evidence is there for it to be a false prophet, can it also not be something to do with "persuasion". How do we know that the old prophets was literally speaking the words of Gods.
    Isaiah 44:25
    And what i mean by that is for example with Isaiah.
    Just curious to hear your views on it.
  2. There are several points that show that the OT Prophets were legitimate.
    1. Open displays of supernatural ability, i.e. controlling weather, causing fire to fall from Heaven, making iron float.
    2. Prophecy - the ability to predict the future in perfect detail.
    3. As a whole, all the OT Prophets were consistent in their message.
    LysanderShapiro, th1bill and Major says Amen and like this.
  3. Glomung has given a really good answer. The key to this is of course the name "PROPHET" which has as its root meaning...
    "to tell the future".

    There were men who told the rulers of that day what the ruler wanted to hear. Then there were the Prophets of God who spoke for God and what they said always came to pass. TIME was the thing that validated the prophesy of the prophets.
    th1bill likes this.
  4. Two very well grounded Christians have already answered this question, so if permitted, I'll tackle what's left.
    First let me warn you not to do what I am about to do in this answer. If you ever name names, you must be ready for the attacks that normally follow. That being true, the evidence for the indictment of Benny Hinn as a false prophet or even for being a prophet of Satan is enormous. Mr. Hinn has made multiple false prophecies that never came true. The argument from the opposition comes from the biblically unstudied because the prophets of God are always without error because they have been given their words, directly, from the only infallible God.
    To summarize, if a man claiming to be a prophet of God, today, he is under a heavy yoke for proof and until he is proven, his teaching must be viewed with skepticism.

    I'll be assuming here that Gods is a typo and believe you meant God. we know they spoke the Word from God because it was one hundred percent correct.

    KingJ and Major say Amen and like this.
  5. Even if a prophet predicts future events in perfect detail, there also needs to be testing to see if what he/she said conflicts with what God has already said, or if it leads us away from God (Deuteronomy 13:1-5, Acts 17:11).
    th1bill likes this.
  6. Fadingman.......
    Just to ease my curiosity, do you recall where a prophet of God gave a prophecy in complete detail that conflicted with something already given?????

    A "dreamer of dreams" was called a False Prophet but I am asking about God's Prophet.
  7. Hmmm... would that be 1 Kings 22:22 where Micah contradicted Zedekiah?
  8. I Don't think so.

    Of course opinions vary as to whether this spirit was an evil one, or a good one or just the personification of the spirit of prophecy. Whichever, the spirit was sent with a false message to deceive both the prophets and Ahab, who persisted in sin and rejected the true prophetic word of God. Ahab has hardened his heart and had used prophecy for his own purposes, now he was being led to his ruin by prophecy.
  9. Two prophecies from God won't ever truly contradict each other. But it may have appeared so here (and in Jeremiah 28) to the listeners.

    There is also Jeremiah 4:10 where the prophet thinks God has contradicted Himself in proclaiming peace, and then destruction. But the peace that was prophesied was conditional upon the people's repentance. God knew the people would not repent without the destruction.
  10. Fading.........Jer. 28 is not a contradiction because it was based on Hananiah who was a false prophet. His prophecy was exactly opposite of what Jeremiah had said in 22:26-27 and 27:16.

    In Jeremiah 28:6 Jeremiah replied, maybe ironically AMEN. (So be it). Would it be true? Only time will tell, Apparently Jeremiah did not have a word from the Lord at this time, but the true test of a prophet was absolute fulfillment (Deut. 18:22).

    Jeremiah 4:10 has caused a lot of difficulty in interpreting this verse, partly because it seems directly to charge Jehovah with "deceit," and partly because the prophecy, seems to call God a liar.

    "Thou has greatly deceived".

    John Gill explains that: ........
    The Targum ascribes the deception to the false prophets, and not to God, "surely behold the false prophets deceive this people, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem;'' or this may be ironically said, because the false prophets pretended to speak in the name of the Lord; wherefore Jeremiah says, "surely thou hast greatly deceived", &c. "saying, ye shall have peace"; as the false prophets did, Jeremiah 6:14, whereas the sword reacheth unto the soul; takes away the life, many are slain by it; so the Targum, "and now behold the sword killeth among the people;''.

    Also, consider the "context".

    Verse 4 says.......
    "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord,
    And take away the foreskins of your hearts,

    You men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem,
    Lest My fury come forth like fire,
    And burn so that no one can quench it,
    Because of the evil of your doings.”
    In context you see the Jeremiah does not call God a liar but that for the people to have true peace they must be pierced in the heart and repent and cut away the foreskin of their heart that has harden them through pride and rebellion and adultery with other gods and idols.

    Jeremiah is pointing out how that might be painful and not peaceful. It is repeated in these words in the New Testament:

    Hebrews 12
    11 Now no chastening seems to be joyful for the present, but painful; nevertheless, afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
  11. #11 KingJ, Oct 4, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 4, 2013
    Just nitpicking. You say ''when we compare to what we know today''...you assume they were dumb back then?

    The way I see it is the LAST prophet BC was Malachi. AD, the ONLY prophets will be Moses and Elijah. Prophets of the Jews and prophets by definition / of today are very different. Prophets in the Jewish days had literal / undeniable power from God as Glomung pointed out.

    Think about what our 'advanced society' :) is going to think of this (Moses and Elijah) Rev 11:5 If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die.
  12. Agreed!

    My only thought is that it may be someone other than Moses and Elijah. I have always had a problem believing it will be those two preaching from the temple.

    Luke 1:17 says..........
    "And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children".

    These IMO seems to say that Malachi 4:5 does not mean the literal Elijah will come before Tribulation but someone who comes in the power and spirit of. Could it be that Malachi 4:5 was referring to John the Baptist and the TWO preachers will be men who God has power like Elijah had.

    Key....Matthew 11:14
    "And IF ye will receive it, this is Elijah which was for to come".

    Israel DID NOT accept his message and killed him as well as the one he was sent to make the path straight for....Jesus.
  13. I just go with what I am taught on it Major :). You do make an interesting point.

    I have always pictured Moses and Elijah just coming back with resurrected bodies. But then they can't be put to death. If they come back with their first bodies, then how has God kept them intact? Guess we will just have to wait and see.
  14. Believe me KJ, I am of the same opinion. I always taught the same thing as you were. I was taught that it would be Enoch and Elijah that would return, But then it occurred to me this. Why would God remove two live people and take then to Paradise only to allow them to come back to be killed. That made no sence to me at all. But if the two men are two different men altogether, then my problem in fixed.

Share This Page