How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD? -Deuteronomy 18:21b
The writer then goes on to answer the question:
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. -Deuteronomy 18:22a
I agreed with James that this statement could be considered universally applicable, not just to be applied to the situation being discussed in Deuteronomy 18.
Given that, the test for a false teaching can be reduced to the following:
A teaching is false IF:
1) The teacher was a prophet. AND
2) The prophet must have made predictions that did not come true.
In recent posts, I've blogged about Jesus' (Seemingly failed) prediction of his own imminent return, as well as the possibility that Jesus may not have known when he would return. In one post, I discuss a quote by C.S. Lewis where Lewis suggests that Jesus was wrong about his own return.
The test above raises the stakes in this conversation, because if Jesus was wrong (as Lewis suggests), and if he can be considered a prophet (which is undoubtable) then the test above would suggest that Jesus is a false prophet. It seems that C.S Lewis has come dangerously close to declaring Jesus a false prophet.
Lewis called the verse containing what he called Jesus' "exhibition of error" the "most embarrassing verse in the Bible". As I've said before, it seems more appropriate to be embarrassed about what C.S. Lewis said, than about what Jesus said.
2 comments:
I read through your conversation with James, which was some interesting reading, and I may going that conversation too. But this one is a more important topic because it deals with Jesus, and if Jesus is wrong then Christianity is false.
One point that James and you missed by focusing on Deut 18 is that whether a prediction comes true doesn't mean that person speaks for God. Deut 13:1-5 says
"If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, "Let us follow other gods" (gods you have not known) "and let us worship them," you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul. It is the LORD your God you must follow, and him you must revere. Keep his commands and obey him; serve him and hold fast to him. That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt and redeemed you from the land of slavery; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you."
So even if they predict something and it comes true they are a false prophet if they advise people to "follow other gods, gods you have not known, and... worship them." Following God entails keeping his commands, obeying him, serving and holding fast to him. The rest of chapter 13 extends this to all of Israel and for others living in the land, so even if Jesus is not a prophet (I agree with you that is undoubtable that he is) he still falls under this rule. I don't find this to be a problem with Jesus, but Christians need to take care that they don't force Jesus to fail this test, by having Jesus allow not keeping God's commands, or in shifting worship of God to Jesus himself. The latter becomes an issue of the Trinity, so it is not so clear cut. But the former is much clearer.
Does Jesus allow people to break the Law? There is Jesus defending his disciples picking grain on the Sabbath (Matt 12:1-8), which I think is open for debate if what they were doing was unlawful, questionable in the Torah, and unlawful in the Oral Torah. One that I find interesting is Mark 7:19
"For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body." (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods "clean.")" (NIV based on Alexandrian Text)
Is Jesus allowing Jews to eat every type of food, including pork? I don't think he is, that issue is not the context of the conversation so pork would not be included in the "all foods 'clean.'" But most people will use this as a proof text with Acts 10:9-16 that Christians even if they are Jews do not need to keep God's command to not eat "unclean" food i.e. pork, shellfish. This would be making Jesus teach something that would make him a false prophet, which Christians should avoid if he is the Messiah.
I made note of the translation and the textual base because translations that use the Byzantine text translate it "because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?" (NKJV) The difference is a one letter variation in the word translated as "purifying" (NKJV) and "declared... clean" (NIV). In the NIV the words "in saying this, Jesus" are added by translators to make sense of the verse, but also don't follow Greek grammar rules, though the NIV helps push a theological agenda.
Boy, lots of topics in these posts. Just some further thoughts.
1) Jesus was without sin(breaking God's Law)
2) As the bible teaches: The law was our tudor. We were bound to the law like a marraige contract. When the spouse dies, we are no longer bound by that contract.
3) Jesus taught a more specific law. "If you hate your brother in your heart, you have commited murder"
4) Love God, and others as yourself.
5) Jesus could not have in anyway broken God's law. If he did, then he was not our redemption and we are still lost in sin with no hope.
a. So whatever Jesus did that seemed to be breaking the law according to man, was not!
6) We are no longer dead under the law but alive in Christ. We are not under the law, but alive under Christ. To become more like Jesus. That is, righteous and sinless in Him.
7) Through the resurecution we have a new life. If not, then we have a useless, hopeless religion. Pitifull!
Post a Comment