False Prophets

[JohnPaul]

I think my point was that despite his wrong doings he was used by God to bring about changes that were important. I must admit I had placed him on a bit of a platform as being someone in modern history that was an icon because of his speech and fight for civil rights. So it was a shock to find out about the other side of his life. God can and does use many people , despite their failings.

Yes we are only human. I was shocked myself when I found out about Dr. Martin Luther King, as far as the civil rights movements went, I’m sad and sorry to say that since then, not much good has come out of it for the Black community, that should have come out of like good role models and job skills and such.

 

[farouk]

I believe David was not repentant in his sin for at least a year…..in which time he was still on the throne…still being used by God.

@Rita Psalm 51 is a moving testimony to David's eventual repentance...

 

[farouk]

Yes we are only human. I was shocked myself when I found out about Dr. Martin Luther King, as far as the civil rights movements went, I’m sad and sorry to say that since then, not much good has come out of it for the Black community, that should have come out of like good role models and job skills and such.

@JohnPaul Mrs. King proved to be very resilient both during his lifetime and afterwards.

In the end we look Godward rather than manward for perfection.

 

[amadeus]

Mostly Missouri and Arkansas....Eastern Seaboard....New Mexico....California starting around the 70's.
Changes? The Charismatic movement was a change to begin with. Some Churches there are big events occurring that is amazing.
I have seen a change in the music....a lot of electric. No Crystal Balls.....LOL Mostly the day of the "Holy Roller" has passed. I only saw a little of that in the late 70's. The presence of the Holy Spirit you can feel it and nearly see it sweep across the church. Still ladies with long hair and conservative dress.

I have only seen the Benny Hinn stuff on TV. Or setting some one on stage and they go into a trance....kind of tongues on demand.

What are you seeing in your area that is objectionable.

Greetings my friend from one of those holy rollers.

 

[amadeus]

I think my point was that despite his wrong doings he was used by God to bring about changes that were important. I must admit I had placed him on a bit of a platform as being someone in modern history that was an icon because of his speech and fight for civil rights. So it was a shock to find out about the other side of his life. God can and does use many people , despite their failings.

God uses people where they are according to His purposes. This is where I see both the Right hand and the Left hand of God at work. Some people are used on both sides. Being used in such a way is not a final statement about the person. He may or may not be on the Lord's side at the end of his road. Both King Saul and King David were used by God.

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

Okay, very good. Glad you posted this.
The peculiar thing that Jesus said about recognizing a false prophet is it is his fruit that shows him to be a false prophet, not his doctrine. I've always found this very interesting, but I still find myself automatically thinking doctrine is was distinguishes the false prophet from the true. No, it's his fruit, according to Jesus.

The point of all this is that bona-fide, real teachers in the church can be wrong. That doesn't necessarily make them a false prophet. It makes them wrong, not necessarily fake. It's when they're living in sin, that's when you can write them off as a false prophet. They show by how they live that they do not have the Holy Spirit in them and have not been sent from God. That is the very point Jesus makes in the next few sentences: "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. [...] ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’" Matthew 7:21-23

A false prophet's doctrines and their fruit are not 2 different things as you assume. People practice what they believe, so the person's doctrines are indicated by their fruit. If a person's fruit is bad, it's because their doctrines are bad. That's why Isa. 8:20 says someone is a false prophet if their doctrines aren't aligned with the Law.

But they’re quoting scripture too. I explained the position of Virgin Mary in the Orthodox Church.

Quoting scripture doesn't mean anything. Satan can quote scripture too. He did it when he tempted Christ, and he still does it today through false prophets.

1 John 5:7-8KJV
7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

That is usually the go-to passage for trinitarians, but everything from "in heaven" to "on earth" was inserted by trinitarian translators. It is not in the inspired text, not to mention the fact that this very intentional addition disrupts the entire message John taught throughout his first epistle.

I am not a Jew

Ecclesiastes says it is the duty of ALL human beings to keep Gods commandments:

"Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the duty of all mankind." - Ecc. 12:13

There isn't a single passage where it says it was only the duty of Jews to keep God's commandments, especially because Jews didn't exist as a people until the nation of Israel split into 2 separate kingdoms about 500 years after Moses died. There is also the matter that God says Abraham kept His commandments in Gen. 26:5, and Abraham was not a Jew. As Paul taught in Romans, sin could not exist where God's commandments didn't exist. Seeing as though the Bible says Adam sinned, it obviously means he violated commandments that were already enforced.

To label someone a false prophet has become a loose practice by many. Are they getting a word from the Lord? We all get guidance from the Holy Spirit.
Sometimes it is a misunderstood message, something we thought was from God to us or a word to give others and it wasn't. A false prediction can be viewed as a false prophecy. But wait! Did this person claim God gave them a message or was it just a feeling, an unction on his heart? A person stating their opinion aboit such and such an event will happen and it doesn't is just an error. If someone claimed God told them in a dream, or he saw a vision that Iran was going to fire a nuclear missile towards Israel on Dec. 25, 2021 and it didn't happen, then we can say He is a false prophet.

A person doesn't have to make outright claims of being a prophet in order for the label to be applied to them. The Bible interchangeably refers to false prophets as being the same as false teachers because both presume to speak on God's behalf and people are led towards the worship of a false god in the process. 2 Pet. 2:1, 1 Jhn 4:1, Matt. 24:11, and Eze. 22:25-28 are just a few examples where this is clearly taught. According to what the Bible says, liars get their guidance from the spirit of error, not the Holy Spirit.

Not Jesus.

"For by Him(Christ) all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him." - Col. 1:16

"and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;" - Eph. 3:9

There are no "two Gods". Two divine Persons, yet ONE God.

Jhn 1:1 clearly describes 2 God Beings who have always existed alongside each other as separate Beings.

So if I understand correctly some of you here, you basically have a problem with established things, traditions, church fathers etc. Basically their accumulated knowledge is wrong and your interpretation of the scriptures is right.

No, people have a problem with the orthodox doctrines, traditions, and writings of the "church fathers" because those things clearly contradict the inspired word of God. The "church fathers" were not apostles, nor were they ever given an apostle's authority. And as such, there is no biblical reason to view their writings as having the same amount of authority or more authority than the apostles' writings.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

The Bible interchangeably refers to false prophets as being the same as false teachers because both presume to speak on God's behalf and people are led towards the worship of a false god in the process.

Well, that makes just about every single member of this forum a false prophet - including YOU!
Teaching is not the same as prophesying, " God spoke to me, He said ..."
Teachers always have flaws in their teaching, we are human. My favorite and most brilliant scholars have erred. I do not know anyone on the planet that I agree with 100%.
Apparently - judging by your peers here, most everyone seems to disagree with you about one thing or another. Doesn't look like you hold up to your own litmus test?

 

[Ferris Bueller]

A false prophet's doctrines and their fruit are not 2 different things as you assume.

Actually, they are two different things...I mean, they can be.
Take the Pharisees for example.
Jesus said to do what they say, but don't do what they do:

2“The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3So practice and observe everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach." Matthew 23:2-3​

They had bad fruit, but their problem was not what they preached. The problem was they did not practice what they preach. They were hypocrites. In their case, it was their hypocritical, wicked behavior that revealed them to be false, not their doctrine.

Can someone have bad fruit because their doctrine is bad? Of course. But as I'm showing, it's also possible to have good doctrine but bad fruit. Jesus told us you know a false teacher/prophet by their fruit, how they act. We in the church seem to be more inclined to measure fakes by what they teach. Surely that may be a way to discern someone, too, but Jesus said we will know them by their fruit. I've noticed most Christians chafe at the idea of measuring people by their fruit, but are all too willing to write them off according to what they believe.

People practice what they believe, so the person's doctrines are indicated by their fruit. If a person's fruit is bad, it's because their doctrines are bad.

But as I'm showing you, that's simply not true in all cases. Bad fruit is always indicative of falseness. But bad doctrine is not. If it was, most of us here are fake and not genuine. But as it is, most of us are just wrong on some things, not false brethren.

 

[Wynona]

I think what a lot of people neglect to mention when it comes to false prophets is that they only have influence over decieved people.

We have to stop letting popular Christian writers, pastors, and theologians, even the best of them, do our thinking for us and get back to reading the Bible for ourselves.

1 Timothy mentions men not enduring sound doctrine and heaping up ear tickling teachers in the last days.

The Bible says he gave people over to deception because they loved not the truth.

We have to make sure we aren't so in love with our own opinions that we end up falling prey to the wolves and feed their ministries.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

Teaching is not the same as prophesying

Actually, it can be.
Prophesying is speaking the words of God. That includes speaking the written word of God. You'll notice when you read the Prophets they expound on the already known word of God, not just predict future events.

 

[Wrangler]

"For by Him(Christ) all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him." - Col. 1:16

"and to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ;" - Eph. 3:9

These verses prove Jesus is not the Creator. NOTE: Especially Eph 3:9, where a Being who is NOT Jesus created all things. Who is this Creator of all things per Ephesians 3:9? Not Jesus but God, in his unitarian nature.

Not sure what translation you are relying on regarding Col 1:16 that puts to prepositions together but a more exacting translation makes it clear Jesus is not the Creator but merely "in connection with him" did the Creator create all things.

16 because in connection with him were created all things — in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, lordships, rulers or authorities — they have all been created through him and for him.
Colossians 1:16 (Complete Jewish Bible)

 

[APAK]

@Desire Of All Nations, note that your Ephesians 3:9 translation you used in one of your posts is from one of the KJVs or one of the other 15% of similar translation. They are all in error as they added the phrase 'through Jesus Christ' deliberately for a Trinity bias. This language is not in the earliest Greek manuscripts and many other post 1500s translations. Just saying....

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

@Desire Of All Nations, note that your Ephesians 3:9 translation you used in one of your posts is from one of the KJVs or one of the other 15% of similar translation. They are all in error as they added the phrase 'through Jesus Christ' deliberately for a Trinity bias. This language is not in the earliest Greek manuscripts and many other post 1500s translations. Just saying....

the Trinity is Biblical. The KJV is the most correct translation.

 

[Truman]

the Trinity is Biblical. The KJV is the most correct translation.

Except for the added word, "church." see Revelation 22:18

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

Except for the added word, "church." see Revelation 22:18

Which word would you have preferred?
King James Bible Dictionary - Reference List - Church

 

[Truman]

Which word would you have preferred?
King James Bible Dictionary - Reference List - Church

A reasonable translation of ekklesia/ecclesia.

 

[APAK]

the Trinity is Biblical. The KJV is the most correct translation.

I see you are very ignorant of the origin and translations of scripture.
Why don't you fight will these sources I dug up below, and let me enjoy your self-embarrassing response....LOL And their comments are polite as mine would be not so much.

1. Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
   "The words “by Jesus Christ” should be omitted, probably having crept in from a gloss, and not belonging to the original".
   
   
2. Barnes notes of the bible
   "But the phrase is missing in the Vulgate, the Syriac, the Coptic, and in several of the ancient mss. Mill remarks that it was probably inserted here by some transcriber from the parallel passage in Colossians 1:16; and it is rejected as an interpolation by Griesbach."
   
   
3. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
   "The oldest manuscripts omit "by Jesus Christ."
   
   
4. Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
   "The phrase, "by Jesus Christ", is left out in the Alexandrian and Claromontane copies, and in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions".
   
   
5. Meyer's NT Commentary
   "When διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [by Jesus Christ] is recognised as not genuine (see the critical remarks),"
   
   
6. Expositor's Greek Testament
   "but these words must be omitted, as the best authorities ([285] [286] [287] [288] [289] [290], 17, etc.) do not give them."
   
   
7. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
   "Omit “by Jesus Christ,” with the preponderance of ancient authority".
   
   
8. Pulpit Commentary
   The words, by Jesus Christ (A.V.), are not found in a great preponderance of textual authorities.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

A reasonable translation of ekklesia/ecclesia.

i would argue it is.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

I see you are very ignorant of the origin and translations of scripture.
Why don't you fight will these sources I dug up below, and let me enjoy your self-embarrassing response....LOL And their comments are polite as mine would be not so much.

1. Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
   "The words “by Jesus Christ” should be omitted, probably having crept in from a gloss, and not belonging to the original".
   
   
2. Barnes notes of the bible
   "But the phrase is missing in the Vulgate, the Syriac, the Coptic, and in several of the ancient mss. Mill remarks that it was probably inserted here by some transcriber from the parallel passage in Colossians 1:16; and it is rejected as an interpolation by Griesbach."
   
   
3. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
   "The oldest manuscripts omit "by Jesus Christ."
   
   
4. Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
   "The phrase, "by Jesus Christ", is left out in the Alexandrian and Claromontane copies, and in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions".
   
   
5. Meyer's NT Commentary
   "When διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ [by Jesus Christ] is recognised as not genuine (see the critical remarks),"
   
   
6. Expositor's Greek Testament
   "but these words must be omitted, as the best authorities ([285] [286] [287] [288] [289] [290], 17, etc.) do not give them."
   
   
7. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
   "Omit “by Jesus Christ,” with the preponderance of ancient authority".
   
   
8. Pulpit Commentary
   The words, by Jesus Christ (A.V.), are not found in a great preponderance of textual authorities.

you dont believe in the Trinity, i doubt much else you believe is true. You JW are quite the cult.

 

[Truman]

i would argue it is.

Then you would be wrong. I've done my research...you should do yours as if seeking the truth and not to just validate your stance.