Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: bunker!garys@decvax.uucp (Gary M. Samuelson) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: 1 Kings 13 Message-ID: Date: 19 Nov 89 19:45:53 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: ISC-Bunker Ramo, an Olivetti Company, Shelton, Ct Lines: 47 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article chl@m1.cs.man.ac.uk. (Charles Lindsey) writes: [Jereboam sets up an altar; an unnamed prophet (Foo for discussion purposes) prophesies against it...another prophet (Bar) lies to Foo, saying that an angel has said that Foo is permitted to eat with Bar, although Foo was previously told not to stay in Bethel at all. Bar prophesies against Foo, and Foo is killed on the way home by a lion.] >Now for the questions. >1) Are we to take this story as it stands, or is it reasonable to postulate >that it got garbled sometime before the writer of Kings set it down? I, for one, take it as it stands. >2) If the story is taken as it stands, who was the true prophet? Foo? Bar? >Both? Neither? Both. But who says prophets are perfect? Or that everything out of the mouth of a prophet is, in fact, prophecy? Bar lied to Foo to persuade Foo to return to Bar's home. That was Bar's doing, not God's. Then, Bar prophesied concerning what would happen to Foo on his way home. That was God's doing, not Bar's. I would imagine that Bar would have kept that particular prophecy to himself, if he could have. >3) I think Foo could justifiably claim that he had been "set up" (if he had >still been alive, that is). He knew that God told him to deliver his message and then leave; he should therefore have recognized that Bar was lying when he said that God told him otherwise. Compare Galatians 1:8: "If we, or an angel from heaven, preach to you a gospel other than what you received, let him be accursed." [Part quote, part paraphrase, part my poor memory -- look it up for exact wording.] >4) Quite apart from what may actually have happened, what did the writer of >Kings think he was writing about? Surely the ambiguity of the episode must >have been apparent to him. We learn from this that even true prophets are sinners, and that not everyone who says, "Thus saith the Lord," is speaking the words of God, but that we ought to weigh what is said with what we already know about God and his will. Gary Samuelson