Difference between revisions of "Distinguishing Between True and False Prophets/2"
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky) |
(Original Author: Neima Novetsky) |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
<point><b>Understanding Yirmeyahu 18</b> – These commentators look to this passage as support for their claims, as the verses clearly state that Hashem can change His decrees in both directions. | <point><b>Understanding Yirmeyahu 18</b> – These commentators look to this passage as support for their claims, as the verses clearly state that Hashem can change His decrees in both directions. | ||
</point> | </point> | ||
− | <point><b>Yirmeyahu and Chananyah</b> – These verses are difficult for this position, as they seem to distinguish between positive and negative prophecies. | + | <point><b>Yirmeyahu and Chananyah</b> – These verses are difficult for this position, as they seem to distinguish between positive and negative prophecies. |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
<li>This is what leads Ralbag to assert that Yirmeyahu is speaking of a particular type of positive prophecy, one which is limited in scope and duration, subject to the laws of the heavenly spheres and not open to change.<fn>As above, other positive prophecies cannot be used to determine the veracity of a prophet since they can be overturned.</fn></li> | <li>This is what leads Ralbag to assert that Yirmeyahu is speaking of a particular type of positive prophecy, one which is limited in scope and duration, subject to the laws of the heavenly spheres and not open to change.<fn>As above, other positive prophecies cannot be used to determine the veracity of a prophet since they can be overturned.</fn></li> | ||
<li>Alternatively, one might suggest that Yirmeyahu is contrasting the majority of prophets who bear tidings of doom, with Chananyah who was predicting peace, telling him that since he is the exception, the onus of proof is on him.</li> | <li>Alternatively, one might suggest that Yirmeyahu is contrasting the majority of prophets who bear tidings of doom, with Chananyah who was predicting peace, telling him that since he is the exception, the onus of proof is on him.</li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
+ | </point> | ||
<point><b>Identifying a true prophet</b> | <point><b>Identifying a true prophet</b> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
Line 35: | Line 36: | ||
<li><b>No test needed</b> – Alternatively, Abarbanel suggests that perhaps, in general, no proof is needed, since anyone who prophesies to uproot a mitzvah or to worship idolatry is obviously problematic, whereas any righteous person who chastises the people to do Hashem's bidding should be listened to. A person's words and deeds alone can testify to his veracity.<fn>As proof he points to Yirmeyahu and Yeshayahu who never actively brought a sign to the people.</fn> Only in cases where a prophet calls for a one-time violation of Torah law (הוראת שעה), or when he is contradicted by a second prophet, is verification necessary.</li> | <li><b>No test needed</b> – Alternatively, Abarbanel suggests that perhaps, in general, no proof is needed, since anyone who prophesies to uproot a mitzvah or to worship idolatry is obviously problematic, whereas any righteous person who chastises the people to do Hashem's bidding should be listened to. A person's words and deeds alone can testify to his veracity.<fn>As proof he points to Yirmeyahu and Yeshayahu who never actively brought a sign to the people.</fn> Only in cases where a prophet calls for a one-time violation of Torah law (הוראת שעה), or when he is contradicted by a second prophet, is verification necessary.</li> | ||
</ul> | </ul> | ||
− | + | </point> | |
<point><b>Signs of false prophets in Devarim 13</b> – These verses are difficult for this position as they suggest that even a false prophet can perform signs and wonders, which would render these useless as a litmus test. | <point><b>Signs of false prophets in Devarim 13</b> – These verses are difficult for this position as they suggest that even a false prophet can perform signs and wonders, which would render these useless as a litmus test. | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
Line 57: | Line 58: | ||
<point><b>Understanding Yirmeyahu 18</b> – This position encounters difficulty from the verses in Yirmeyahu 18 which suggest that positive prophecies, too, can be overturned (and thus cannot be a good yardstick to determine false prophecy). | <point><b>Understanding Yirmeyahu 18</b> – This position encounters difficulty from the verses in Yirmeyahu 18 which suggest that positive prophecies, too, can be overturned (and thus cannot be a good yardstick to determine false prophecy). | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
− | + | <li><b>Good given and removed</b> – Radak explains that Yirmeyahu is not claiming that the promised reward will be cancelled, but is merely saying that it will be neutralized by a subsequent punishment. Thus, if a person was promised good but then no longer deserved it, Hashem nonetheless keeps His promise, but due to the changed circumstances, Hashem will then undo the good.<fn>Radak thus maintains both the principle that all get what they deserve and the concept that positive promises are always fulfilled.</fn></li> | |
− | + | <li><b>Thought versus statement</b> – <multilink><a href="OhrHashem2-4" data-aht="source">R. Chasdai Crescas</a><a href="OhrHashem2-4" data-aht="source">Ohr Hashem 2:4</a><a href="R. Chasdai Crescas" data-aht="parshan">About R. Chasdai Crescas</a></multilink> suggests<fn>This is how R. Crescas explains the Rambam's position. R. Crescas, himself, adopts a different approach – see below.</fn> that this approach might differentiate between Hashem's internal thoughts (which can change even from good to bad) and explicit statements (which can only change from bad to good). Yirmeyahu, thus, might be referring only to a case where Hashem considered, but never promised via a prophet, to bestow good. In such a case, Hashem might change His mind; but had He already given over an explicit prophecy for good, He would not.<fn>Yirmeyahu's words actually differentiate between the verbs "אָמַרְתִּי" and "חָשַׁבְתִּי", but their placement runs counter to this reading, as the former is the one found by a positive prophecy and the latter by a negative one.</fn></li> | |
</ul> | </ul> | ||
</point> | </point> |
Version as of 12:58, 30 August 2014
Distinguishing Between True and False Prophets
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
When attempting to define the test that distinguishes fraudulent and true prophets, commentators struggle both to make sense of seemingly contradictory sources and to balance these with their beliefs regarding the power of repentance to overturn decrees and the question of whether Hashem changes His mind. To do so, most commentators focus on one central text, while reinterpreting the others.
Thus, R. Yosef Bekhor Shor learns from Yirmeyahu 18 that a person's deeds can affect a prophecy's materialization, and consequently asserts that the test must be related instead to the performance of miracles or the fulfillment of neutral predictions. Rambam and his school, instead, concentrate on Yirmeyahu 28, and this leads them to distinguish between positive and negative prophecies. Only the latter can be overturned, allowing positive prophecies to be a fair arbiter of a prophet's veracity. Finally, a third approach learns from Devarim's inclusive language that the test can be via any type of prophecy. To make sense of the other verses as well, R. Crescas limits the test to overt demonstrations of prophetic status, while Ibn Kaspi limits it to prophecies which are explicitly conditional.
Through Wonders or Neutral Prophecies
A prophet's veracity is tested through the performance of miracles or foretelling of future events that are not conditional on people's behavior. If the wonders do not occur or the prophecies do not come true, the prophet is not an authentic messenger of Hashem.
- All are subject to change – According to R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Abarbanel, all prophecies are subject to change since a person's actions can affect and overturn both positive and negative predictions.2 As such, only signs or neutral predictions which are not affected by people's actions can be used to test a prophet.
- Most are subject to change – Ralbag agrees that most prophecies can change in accordance with a person's deeds,3 but he asserts that positive prophecies which are not subject to Hashem's personal providence, but instead to astronomical signs, will rarely change.4 Thus, such positive prophecies can also be used to test a prophet.5
- This is what leads Ralbag to assert that Yirmeyahu is speaking of a particular type of positive prophecy, one which is limited in scope and duration, subject to the laws of the heavenly spheres and not open to change.6
- Alternatively, one might suggest that Yirmeyahu is contrasting the majority of prophets who bear tidings of doom, with Chananyah who was predicting peace, telling him that since he is the exception, the onus of proof is on him.
- Miracles – Abarbanel posits that the test of a true prophet is the inverse of that for a false prophet. He can be identified through the miraculous signs that he performs, or through the fulfillment of neutral predictions.7 As proof, he points to Moshe's performing signs before the Israelites,8 Eliyahu bringing forth fire on Mt. Carmel, and Shemuel verifying Shaul's appointment as king by predicting what would happen to him en route home.
- No test needed – Alternatively, Abarbanel suggests that perhaps, in general, no proof is needed, since anyone who prophesies to uproot a mitzvah or to worship idolatry is obviously problematic, whereas any righteous person who chastises the people to do Hashem's bidding should be listened to. A person's words and deeds alone can testify to his veracity.9 Only in cases where a prophet calls for a one-time violation of Torah law (הוראת שעה), or when he is contradicted by a second prophet, is verification necessary.
- Ralbag asserts that it should be clear to all that such signs do not stem from Hashem, and are rather the result of magical craft or trickery, as they are accompanied by a directive to worship idolatry.10 As such, it should be easy to distinguish the real from the fake.
- Alternatively, this position might agree with R. Akiva in the Sifre who maintains that the verses are referring to a sign done by a true prophet who later strayed and became an idolater.
Through Positive Prophecies Only
A prophet is determined to be spurious only if he forecasts a good development which does not come true. In contrast, the foretelling of a negative event which does not materialize indicates nothing about the prophet's veracity.
- Good given and removed – Radak explains that Yirmeyahu is not claiming that the promised reward will be cancelled, but is merely saying that it will be neutralized by a subsequent punishment. Thus, if a person was promised good but then no longer deserved it, Hashem nonetheless keeps His promise, but due to the changed circumstances, Hashem will then undo the good.13
- Thought versus statement – R. Chasdai Crescas suggests14 that this approach might differentiate between Hashem's internal thoughts (which can change even from good to bad) and explicit statements (which can only change from bad to good). Yirmeyahu, thus, might be referring only to a case where Hashem considered, but never promised via a prophet, to bestow good. In such a case, Hashem might change His mind; but had He already given over an explicit prophecy for good, He would not.15
- Unknown – R. D"Z Hoffmann asserts that the verses in Devarim do not provide enough information for the reader to know how to ascertain who is a true prophet18 and that the fulfillment of a positive prophecy alone would not suffice.
- Consistent fulfillment of prophecies – Rambam, in contrast, maintains that a person whose positive prophecies continuously come true, in all their details,19 is considered a true prophet.20 He adds that a person who performs a sign or wonder, and has proven himself worthy of prophecy through his deeds and intellect, should also be listened to as a prophet, even though it is possible that such a sign could have been performed by a layperson.
Through Both Positive and Negative Prophecies
A prophet is declared false if his prophecies, whether foretelling good or bad, are not fulfilled. The commentators, though, limit the circumstances in which such prophecies can be tested:
Only During a Test of Prophetic Status
A prophet's validity can only be determined when giving a prophecy whose whole purpose is to demonstrate that the prophet is speaking in the name of Hashem. During such a demonstration, any prophecy which does not come to fruition will indicate that the speaker is a false prophet. If other prophecies are not fulfilled, though, they do not incriminate the prophet.
Only if the Prophecy is Explicitly Conditional
If a prophecy includes an explicit qualification, the conditions of which are met, but nonetheless the prophecy is not fulfilled, the prophet is considered false. If, on the other hand, the prophecy was stated without any conditions, nothing can be determined.