Distinguishing Between True and False Prophets/2

Distinguishing Between True and False Prophets

Exegetical Approaches

THIS TOPIC HAS NOT YET UNDERGONE EDITORIAL REVIEW

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.

Sources: R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBereshit 6:7Devarim 18:22About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RalbagDevarim 13:2Devarim 18:21-22Milchamot Hashem 6:2:13About R. Levi b. Gershom,¹ AbarbanelDevarim 13:2Devarim 16-18 QuestionsDevarim 18Devarim 18About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel

Must a prophecy come true?

• 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

Understanding Yirmeyahu 18 – 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.

Yirmeyahu and Chananyah – These verses are difficult for this position, as they seem to distinguish between positive and negative prophecies.

• 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.

Identifying a true prophet

• 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.

Signs of false prophets in Devarim 13 – 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.

• 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 Sifre DevarimDevarim 84About Sifre Devarim who maintains that the verses are referring to a sign done by a true prophet who later strayed and became an idolater.

‏"אֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר הַנָּבִיא בְּשֵׁם ה'"‏ – This position does not limit the "words spoken by the prophet" to a prediction of future events, but also includes in it the performing of signs and wonders and the revealing of unknown facts regarding the present.

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.

Sources: RashiDevarim 18:21Yirmeyahu 28:7About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, R. Yosef KaraYirmeyahu 28:7About R. Yosef Kara, RambamCommentary on the Mishna, IntroductionYesodei HaTorah 7:7Yesodei HaTorah 10About R. Moshe Maimonides, RadakShemuelI 15:29Yirmeyahu 18:9Yirmeyahu 28:7Yonah 3:10About R. David Kimchi, MalbimYirmeyahu 28:7About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, R. D"Z HoffmannDevarim 18:21-22About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

Must a prophecy come true? These commentators maintain that negative prophecies need not be fulfilled, since a person's repentance can avert an evil decree.¹¹ All favorable prophecies, on the other hand, regardless of a person's deeds, must come true.¹²

Understanding Yirmeyahu 18 – This position encounters difficulty from the verses in Yirmeyahu 18 which suggest that positive prophecies can also be overturned due to bad behavior (and thus cannot be a good yardstick to determine whether a prophecy is true or not).

• 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 CrescasOhr Hashem 2:4About 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

Yirmeyahu and Chananyah – These commentators point to Yirmeyahu's words to Chananyah as proof of their position.¹⁶ They understand that Yirmeyahu is telling Chananyah that only through the fulfillment of his prophecies for peace can it be proven that he is a true or false prophet. In contrast, other prophets who have spoken of upcoming tragedies cannot be tested through the fulfillment of their words or lack thereof.¹⁷

Identifying a true prophet

• 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 does 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.

False prophets in Devarim 13 – R. D"Z Hoffmann asserts that the verses in Devarim 13 show that false prophets can also perform certain signs, and this proves that these do not suffice to establish someone as a true prophet. Although Rambam does not totally reject using such wonders to validate a prophecy, these verses lead him to add the requirement that one must also look at the character of the prophet performing the sign.

‏"אֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר הַנָּבִיא בְּשֵׁם ה"‏ – According to this position, the "words spoken by the prophet" refer to only positive prophecies that are uttered, as only these must by necessity come true.²¹

Through Either Positive or Negative Prophecies

A prophet can be declared false if his prophecies, whether foretelling good or bad, are not fulfilled. Commentators, though, suggest two possible limitations on the circumstances under which such prophecies can serve as a valid indicator:

Only During a Test of Prophetic Status

A prophet's validity can be determined only in a case of a prophecy whose entire purpose is to establish the prophet's credentials as a Divine messenger. During such a demonstration, any prophecy which does not come to fruition indicates that the speaker is a false prophet. The lack of fulfillment of subsequent prophecies, though, does not incriminate the prophet.

Sources: R. Chasdai CrescasOhr Hashem 2:4About R. Chasdai Crescas

Must a prophecy come true? Both positive and negative prophecies do not always come true²² since a change in behavior can result in a change of the decree. Only prophecies which are part of a test to prove the status of a prophet will always come true.²³ Thus, it is only through these that a prophet's legitimacy can be verified.

Understanding Yirmeyahu 18 – R. Crescas understands these verses according to their simple sense, that prophecies can be overturned in instances of repentance or sin.

Yirmeyahu and Chananyah – R. Crescas understands Yirmeyahu's words to be in jest. Yirmeyahu is mocking Chananyah, telling him that when his prophecy comes true he will be known as a true prophet, knowing all the while that this will never happen. The statement, thus, neither differentiates between positive and negative prophecies, nor suggests that either must come true.²⁴

Identifying a true prophet – When a prophet makes a prediction with the stated purpose of verifying his prophetic status and that prediction comes true, his status is confirmed.²⁵

Signs of false prophets in Devarim 13 – R. Crescas does not address the issue, but might suggest that signs are not a good test of prophetic status since false prophets can also perform them.

Only if the Prophecy is Explicitly Conditional

If a prophecy includes an explicit qualification with conditions which are met, but nonetheless the prophecy is not fulfilled, the prophet is deemed to be a fraud. If, on the other hand, the prophecy was stated without any conditions, nothing can be determined.

Sources: R. Yosef ibn KaspiDevarim 18:22About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi

Must a prophecy come true? Ibn Kaspi claims that all prophecies must come true, since God's will is unchanging.²⁶ He asserts that any verse which states that Hashem regretted an action is referring to the erroneous human perception of that action.²⁷ This mistake occurs because many prophecies are actually conditional on a person's behavior, even if the prophet does not state so explicitly. Thus, if a certain prediction does not unfold as stated, a person might think that Hashem changed his initial decree, when in reality it had been conditional all along and the circumstances changed.²⁸ Due to this inability on the part of humans to distinguish between decrees which Hashem intends to be final and those which are conditional, Ibn Kaspi asserts that only in cases where the condition is actually stated, can a prophecy be used to test prophetic status.

Understanding Yirmeyahu 18 – According to Ibn Kaspi, these verses refer to conditional predictions (even if unstated). As such, when a person changes his ways, the prediction is not fulfilled. Yirmeyahu does not mean, though, that Hashem changed His mind, for from the beginning He had meant the decree to be contingent on a person's deeds.

Yirmeyahu and Chananyah – According to Ibn Kaspi, Yirmeyahu is simply telling Chananyah that, since the two prophets are giving opposite predictions, one for destruction and one for peace, the only way that the nation will know who is a true prophet will be when they see which prophecy is fulfilled.²⁹

Identifying a true prophet – The test for true and false prophets is the same. Just as a false prophet is identified by the lack of fulfillment of his words, a true prophet is marked by the fulfillment thereof.

Signs of false prophets in Devarim 13 – Ibn Kaspi might suggest that a prophet is not identified by his abilities to bring wonders, since even false prophets are capable of producing such signs.

‏"אֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר הַנָּבִיא בְּשֵׁם ה'"‏ – Ibn Kaspi attempts to prove from this inclusive formulation that any type of prophecy uttered by the prophet can be used as a test. He argues that if the verse meant to limit the cases to only those in which the content was positive, it would have stated so explicitly.³⁰

¹ Ralbag's full position is difficult to ascertain as his comments on Devarim and in his Milchamot Hashem do not completely align. While the former adopts the current position, the latter moves in the direction of the Rambam's approach below, differentiating between good and bad prophecies. However, even in his Milchamot, Ralbag disagrees with the Rambam on certain fundamental points and maintains that only certain positive prophecies can be used to test a prophet, those which are essentially "unconditional".

² This would work with the Bavli Berakhot 4a which explains that Yaakov did not trust in Hashem's promise of protection, "שמא יגרום החטא". It does not, though, match the opinion in Bavli Berakhot 7a which asserts that all positive prophecies, even if conditional, are indeed fulfilled. Abarbanel asserts that this is just an individual Amora's opinion and is not the normative position.

³ According to Ralbag, in general, the world is run via the course set by astronomical constellations. In certain instances, though, Hashem decides to interfere. For example, when people repent or do other good deeds which merit Divine Providence, Hashem might decide to overturn an evil decree. As a result, all negative prophecies are subject to change. Positive prophecies, on the other hand, are much more stable since a person's negative actions won't merit Divine intervention to change the path set by the heavenly spheres. The one exception is any overarching prediction of long lasting good, since these are subject to Hashem's personal providence, and therefore also subject to change.

⁴ See below that Ralbag's distinction is driven by the verses in Yirmeyahu 28 which appear to say that a prophetic fraud can be detected through his positive (rather than negative) predictions.

⁵ They are but one of several other methods, including the giving of a wondrous sign, foretelling a neutral event, or the telling of a present truth. The common factor between all the methods is that none are conditional on a person's behavior.

⁶ As above, other positive prophecies cannot be used to determine the veracity of a prophet since they can be overturned.

⁷ Ralbag, in contrast, asserts that the fulfillment of prophecies is not an adequate indicator since others, too, might be able to make accurate predictions through divination or dream interpretations.

⁸ See Shemot 4, "וַיַּעַשׂ הָאֹתֹת לְעֵינֵי הָעָם וַיַּאֲמֵן הָעָם".

⁹ As proof, he points to Yeshayahu and Yirmeyahu who never actively presented a sign to the people.

¹⁰ This does not totally solve the problem, since in other situations where the false prophet might not be telling the nation to actively sin, a person would have no way of differentiating between a sign performed through magic and one brought by a Divine messenger. Ralbag does not address the issue, but he could respond that while the inability to perform a stated wonder indicates a fraud, the ability to do so proves nothing either way.

A variation of Ralbag might posit that it is exclusively the prophet who incites to idolatry who is given powers by Hashem to perform signs, so as to test (see 13:4) the nation and ensure that they are not swayed by such wonders to worship idols. Other false prophets, though, would not be able to perform such miracles.

¹¹ Thus the prophecies against Nineveh and Chizkiyahu did not come to fruition, but this did not affect the status of either Yonah or Yeshayahu as true prophets.

¹² These commentators point to the words of R. Yochanan and R. Acha in the Bavli as support. This position must explain cases where people seem not to trust that such prophecies will automatically be fulfilled, such as Yaakov's fear of an attack by Esav despite Hashem's promise of protection. Rambam answers by differentiating between prophecies given to a prophet to relay to a third party and promises relayed directly to and concerning the prophet himself. Only the former are unaffected by a person's deed and must be fulfilled. R. Crescas notes, though, that the example brought by R. Yochanan to prove that positive prophecies are always fulfilled relates to a promise given directly to Moshe concerning himself, suggesting that he does not agree with Rambam's distinction.

¹³ Radak thus maintains both the principle that everyone receives what they deserve and the concept that positive promises are always fulfilled.

¹⁴ This is how R. Crescas explains the Rambam's position. R. Crescas, himself, adopts a different approach – see below.

¹⁵ 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.

¹⁶ Rashi, following the Sifre DevarimDevarim 178About Sifre Devarim, even claims that the verses in Devarim are speaking explicitly about this particular episode.

¹⁷ These exegetes posit that the end of Yirmeyahu's words in verse 8 are not stated (the verse is a מקרא קצר) and are simply understood as a contrast to the next verse.

¹⁸ They deal only with a false prophet, and one cannot simply assume that the inverse of the test would indicate the presence of a true prophet.

¹⁹ This is what will differentiate him from someone skilled in the art of divination who might also at times predict the future, but will inevitably err in some detail or on some occasions.

²⁰ He points to Shemuel about whom it is said, "וְלֹא הִפִּיל מִכָּל דְּבָרָיו אָרְצָה... וַיֵּדַע כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל... כִּי נֶאֱמָן שְׁמוּאֵל לְנָבִיא לַה'‏".

²¹ See Ibn Kaspi below who questions the legitimacy of limiting a seemingly all inclusive statement of the Torah to a more particular instance.

²² R. Crescas claims that neutral prophecies, though, must be fulfilled.

²³ Abarbanel questions the justice of this exception. If a person's repentance would otherwise have averted an evil decree, why is it fair that simply because the decree happened to be made during a test of a prophet's abilities, a person's changed deeds should no longer be able to overturn the prophecy?

²⁴ R. Crescas offers an alternative reading which suggests that Yirmeyahu is differentiating between positive prophecies which stem from individual providence and negative ones which relate to the heavenly spheres. Yirmeyahu tells Chananyah that if his words are fulfilled, it will be known that his words were "אמת", i.e. came directly from Hashem's providence and not via astronomical signs. The statement, thus, has nothing to do with testing a prophet's veracity.

²⁵ Crescas points to Eliyahu's statement "אִם אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים אָנִי תֵּרֶד אֵשׁ מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם" and Moshe's declaration "בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי ה' שְׁלָחַנִי... אִם כְּמוֹת כָּל הָאָדָם יְמֻתוּן אֵלֶּה" as examples of such prophetic predictions that served to demonstrate the prophet's true status. Abarbanel questions these examples, pointing out that both Moshe and Eliyahu had been confirmed as true prophets long before these events and, thus, these statements cannot be viewed as a test of their validity. R. Crescas. though, does not claim that the prophetic test can only take place when a person is initially being presented as a prophet. He seems to assert instead, that whenever a prophet finds himself in a position where he needs to verify his status, if he makes a prophetic prediction, it will inevitably come true.

²⁶ See Bemidbar 23:19.

²⁷ Cf. R. Yosef Bekhor Shor above on Bereshit 6:6.

²⁸ Ibn Kaspi points to the decree against Nineveh, which is worded as an unqualified decree ("עוֹד אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם וְנִינְוֵה נֶהְפָּכֶת"), but was nonetheless conditional on the people's actions.

²⁹ To support his reading against that of Rambam and his school, Ibn Kaspi points to the fact that the cantillation mark under the word "שָׁלוֹם" is an אתנחתא (similar to a semicolon) which connotes a break. Thus, the verse does not link the test specifically to positive prophecies, but rather to all the prophecies mentioned in the verses, including those predicting doom.

³⁰ Ibn Kaspi argues strongly against the reading of Rambam and his school, since it necessitates adding words to the Torah so as to limit the verse's meaning. He says that were this to be allowed, "אין לנו תורה ומקרא", for anyone could change the Torah's intent by adding or detracting from it.