can a fake prophet perform miracles can a fake prophet perform miracles
according to deuteronomy a fake prophet who has no message from yhwh or talk in his name without any kind authority and advocates worshiping a false lord can still successfully perform miracles and have de ability to predict the future
deuteronomy the words portion chapter thirteen [debarim parashah mem]
deuteronomy the words portion chapter thirteen [debarim parashah mem]
hebrew scriptures traditions [kitvei ibrim masoret] moses warns the people about of false prophets who are attempting to steer the people yisroael toward the worship of other lords
[ moseh zehar et nekhelami nahal beis yisroael neged shabakh raah baalim]
deuteronomy the words portion chapter thirteen [debarim parashah mem]
hebrew scriptures traditions [kitvei ibrim masoret] verse one and two[pasuk alef ve bet ve gimel ]
[ki ya_qum be_qereb_eka nabii o_u kholam khalo_u_m qesem ve nathan el_eka oth o_u mo_u_pheth]
so the escritures and the tradition say that a fake prophet could perform a miracle or predict the future even he gives a sign or wonder and the sign or wonder for sure comes true
and the sign or wonder comes true
[hananiah ben azzur died 588 BC was a judean false prophet who lived during the reign of king zedekiah born in gibeon he became an advisor to zedekiah and counseled him to fight against babylonia with egypt aid
the answer that really solve for us the problem why would elohim yhwh allow treacherous prophets they have supernatural powers why would elohim yhwh allow treacherous prophets they have supernatural powers only by the ruakh of yhwh it can be get but we must be sure it involves provation
therefore the torah is telling us that it may look as if a false prophet has been told the future by elohim yhwh but this is not so is for that reason that the coming of yhwh like yhwh yahshua left it established
but the straightness interpreter advocate counselor the ruach ha kodesh which will send to you with my name he will teach you all things and will testify to you of all things which I told you [ melitz yosher ruakh ha kodesh be shem ]
let remember miracles of all sorts those performed by the prophets of yhwh or by false prophets—are never determinative ruakh trumps miracles since the message of the fake prophet to worship false baalim is inherently counter to the ruakh of yhwh no amount of proof from miracles can compel someone to worship those baalim
In the 14th century, this same point was made forcefully by another philosophically inclined Bible commentator, Rabbi Nissim of Marseilles. After discussing the same two possibilities ibn Ezra quoted above, Nissim goes on to explain why yhwh elohim would perform such a test and why a false prophet with powers would fail to influence true believers:
With this [test of the false prophet] your wisdom will be tested, and you can develop through it a strong character trait, namely, following truth because it is the truth.[5] Furthermore, through this the whole world will know that you hold firmly to your beliefs. And this will be a proof and a test, whether you love the truth with all your hearts and all your souls, in other words, whether you hold firmly to the truth, and believe in it because it is the truth, and know it with intellectual knowledge, not merely because of tradition or because you are following the custom of your fathers. For one who knows truth . . . will not grow indolent about it and will not have doubts on account of a sign or wonder that a false prophet performs to discredit it.[6]
According to this, the man of reason should pay no attention to miracles. This position does not take a stand about whether a false prophet can perform a miracle, only that the question does not matter.
3. “Signs and Portents” Are Symbolic Actions
Finally, ibn Ezra offers his own explanation:
In my opinion, the Hebrew words אות and מופת here have the sense of “sign” [and do not refer to anything supernatural]. The words of Isaiah provide evidence for this interpretation. He said “Behold, I, and the children whom elohim yhwh has given me, are —for signs and for portents” (Isaiah 8:18). Another example, the prophet’s —sign: “…just as my servant Isaiah walking naked and barefoot… [is an —a sign and a portent]” (Isaiah 20:3). Furthermore, the names of his sons are signs (אותות) about an event which would occur in his lifetime: “Immanuel”[7](Isaiah 7:14), “Maher-Shalal-Ḥash-Baz” (Isaiah 8:3), and “Shear-Yashuv” (Isaiah 7:3). Similarly, concerning the plagues [that yhwh said He would inflict upon the sinning Israelites, Scripture says,] “They will serve you as signs and proofs” (Deut 28:46). Many similar examples exist.
According to ibn Ezra, the words אות and מופת (signs and portents) here do not refer to anything supernatural but to symbolic actions. Isaiah’s walking naked and barefoot involved no supernatural element; it was a symbolic action. Similarly, when yhwh told Isaiah that the baby that would soon be born should be called Immanuel (“elohim is with us”), the naming of the baby was not a miraculous occurrence. The name was purely symbolic.
Following this explanation, a false prophet is never able to perform a miracle or predict the future. He might perform a compelling symbolic action that could tempt you to follow him, but the Torah is telling you not to.
What Is the Test?
Ibn Ezra’s explanation has several weaknesses. First, he does not address the question of how to interpret the phrase ובא האות והמופת, which suggests that the false prophet made a prediction about the future that came true. Another weakness, which ibn Ezra recognizes, is that our passage says that false prophets constitute a test of the Israelites’ loyalty by predicting the future in order to test the Israelites. But if the false prophet simply performed a symbolic action, what is the test?
To this ibn Ezra answers:
The meaning of “test” here is that He [yhwh wlohim] left him [the false prophet] alone and did not kill him.
elohim according to ibn Ezra, tests us with false prophets by allowing them to live. yhwh could make things easier for us by killing off the false prophets. But since He does not, we must resist the temptation of listening to them. With this unusual explanation, ibn Ezra is able to insist that false prophets have no supernatural powers and nevertheless constitute a test for the Israelites.[9]
False Prophets Have Power Too: Rashbam
Ibn Ezra’s Northern French contemporary, Rashbam (R. Samuel ben Meir, c. 1080-c. 1165) was not bothered by the verses about false prophets, since he believed that false prophets were able to perform miracles and/or predict the future:
ו
[The sign of such false prophets could come true] because they know the future, since they make use of the forces of impurity or teraphim, or [they consult] ghosts or familiar spirits.
In Rashbam’s understanding, the world is filled with effective ways to predict the future. Some, like biblical prophecy, are legitimate, but many of the other methods are not. Sorcery is forbidden not because it does not work, but despite the fact that it does. The simple understanding of the story of Saul and the woman from En-dor who consults spirits (בעלת אוב) in 1 Samuel 28 supports this claim.
For Rashbam, the “test” from yhwh elohim in these verses is explained simply:
“Because YHWH is testing you” yhwh granted powers to the forces of sorcery to be able to predict the future in order to test the Israelites and to increase their merit. He warned them (18:10-13), “Let there not be among you … a soothsayer, a diviner, a sorcerer…. You must be wholehearted with YHWH your elohim If the Israelites refrain from believing in the signs of idolatrous prophets, it will be to their merit.
The fact that elohim yhwh created a world where sorcerers and other diviners have real powers constitutes a test for the Israelites. In this way, Rashbam has, indirectly, softened the text a little. The Torah is not suggesting that elohim endowed any specific false prophet with powers in order to test us, an idea that already bothered the likes of Rabbi Akiva, as discussed above. Rather, according to Rashbam, elohim yhwh created a world where false prophecy is possible and actually happens; accordingly, the Israelites can be tested through it.
Urim and Thummim vs. Impure Divination
Rashbam makes his belief in magical powers and divination clear in another passage, his comment on the Urim and Thummim (Exod 28:30):
“The Urim and the Tummim” – A type of conjuring using divine names to determine yhwh words. They were placed inside the breastpiece and were used to provide [answers for] the decisions required by the Israelites and [information required in order to fulfil] their needs. If the other nations have teraphim and magic that tell them the future through the forces of impurity, how much more so may it be done through the forces of holiness; although one should hardly be comparing the forces of impurity and the forces of purity at all!
Rashbam assumes that his readers know that teraphim and magic work and he builds on this assumption to sustain his claim that the Urim and Thummim worked that way, too.[11]
Is Rashbam Being Polemical?
Rashbam’s interpretation reflects his belief that our world contains forces of good and forces of evil, and that supernatural powers can be found in both. Nevertheless, as he lived in a Christian world, it might be tempting to connect the dots between the “false prophet with magical powers” and the stories about Jesus in the New Testament.
Whether Rashbam had these in mind or not, Rashbam’s younger Northern French contemporary, Rabbi Joseph Bekhor Shor makes this connection explicit:
How much more so [should we never listen to the words of] someone who performs [miracles by using] magic, as Jesus did, who [performed signs by using magic that he first learned in Egypt and then] brought [that] magic out from Egypt; or if the sign is performed through sleight of hand[13] or through theft.[14]
As was his wont, Bekhor Shor is explicitly anti-Christian.[15] On the other hand, there is no hint in Rashbam’s words that he is alluding to Jesus.
Much has been written about the extent to which Rashbam concerns himself with Christianity.[16] Rashbam makes critical comments from time to time about Christian Bible commentaries,[17] and he defends Judaism against Christian claims.[18] He refrains from the type of insulting vituperation about Jesus that characterizes Bekhor Shor here and in other passages.[19] Of course one cannot rule out the possibility that he was thinking about Jesus when he commented on our verse. But it seems more likely that he is simply explaining the verse.[20]
Polemic Against ibn Ezra
Nevertheless, I believe it is possible Rashbam is polemicizing here, only not against Christianity, but against ibn Ezra. Itamar Kislev has argued that Rashbam’s Torah commentary reflects knowledge of ibn Ezra’s “short commentary” on the Torah,[21]part of which is his commentary on Deuteronomy. If so, Rashbam may be emphasizing here his belief in the powers of sorcery in order to distance himself from ibn Ezra’s philosophical approach.
Rashbam and ibn Ezra
Ibn Ezra and Rashbam were two of the greatest advocates of peshat, the plain or contextual interpretation of the Bible, in medieval times. Rashbam was just a few years older than ibn Ezra. At one point, they both lived in Northern France. It is tempting to imagine them meeting and talking about Bible interpretation, but most scholars doubt that that happened.[22] Both of them were daring Bible commentators who were often willing to buck traditional exegesis. But the differences between them are significant.[23]
Rashbam was a leading Talmudist and expert in halakhah. Ibn Ezra is not known for any contributions to those fields. Aside from his Bible commentaries, he wrote poetry and works of grammar, philosophy, and astrology (science). He was a proud Spanish Jew, a product of the so-called Golden Age in Spain.
Ibn Ezra spent the last decades of his life in Christian Europe and, as Uriel Simon has argued, looked down on his Ashkenazic brethren, viewing them as culturally backward.[24] In particular, he had disdain for their lack of knowledge of Hebrew grammar and philosophy—two areas that he felt were crucial for educated Jews.
Peshat or Philosophy
Their respective attitudes towards Greek/Arabic style rationalist philosophy undergird the difference between ibn Ezra and Rashbam’s approaches to this passage. For ibn Ezra, “finding” that the Torah is saying something philosophically valid is more important than uncovering the plain meaning, the peshat of the biblical text. Or, to put it differently, since the text is divine, it must be in line with philosophical truth, even if the words need to be stretched to make them fit with this truth.[25]
Rashbam, on the other hand, generally does not place limits on his search for peshat, and felt that the plain meaning of the text may contradict halakhah. Moreover, he believed in magic, as we saw above, and was not interested in Greek/Arabic style philosophy, as was the norm in his community.
Nowadays, we do not believe in magic or sorcery, and thus may be inclined to prefer ibn Ezra’s understanding of the world. Nevertheless, to try to interpret the Torah to fit with 21stcentury conceptions of reality would be forcing the text to say something it does not, just as ibn Ezra did by trying to read the Torah as a document reflecting medieval Greco-Arabic rationalism. Instead, it would seem that Rashbam’s more natural approach to the text comes closest to the modern academic way of reading it, even if some of his premises about how the world works are starkly different than ours.
and comes to pass the sign or the wonder of which he spoke to you comes true saying let us go after other baalim which not you have known and let us worship them
[ve bo_a ha o_u_th ve ha mopheth asher da_i_ba_e_r el_eka le ama_o_r ne_halak akhar_e baalim akherim asher lo yada_tam ve na_aba_e_d_em]
not you shall listen to the words of prophet that or to dreamer-diviner of dream for is testing of yhwh your elohim you to know whether you love yhwh your elohim with all your heart and mind and with all your soul
[lo ti_shama el da_i_bar_e ha nabii hahu o_u el kho_u_lem ha khalo_u_m qesem hahu ki me_nasa_e_h yhwh elohimkem ethkem la_yada_at ha_ye_i_sh_kem a_o_ha_e_bim et yhwh elohimkem be kol lebab_kem ve be kol nephesh_kem]
so the escritures and the tradition say that a fake prophet could perform a miracle or predict the future even he gives a sign or wonder and the sign or wonder for sure comes true
and the sign or wonder comes true
we can see how deep the scripture verse goes that in the end the idolaters will be given power over the sun moon stars and constellations but yhwh our elohim say do not listen to them since the adon your elohim is testing you to see whether you really love him
elohim yhwh would stop the sun and its work assigned the same with the moon stars or constellations for the sake of idolaters elohim yhwh would stop the sun and its work assigned the same with the moon stars or constellations for the sake of idolaters
rather the verse is speaking of those who were once true prophets but then turned to become false prophets as was the case with hananiah ben azzur and with this we must be careful because the prophets from yhwh our elohim are still working for him
[hananiah ben azzur died 588 BC was a judean false prophet who lived during the reign of king zedekiah born in gibeon he became an advisor to zedekiah and counseled him to fight against babylonia with egypt aid
when the prophet jeremiah came to zedekiah court under a yoke and exhorted him to accept babylonian rule rather than risk the jerusalem destruction hananiah broke the jeremiah yoke by force and said that if the jews rose up to break the yoke jerusalem would be delivered within two years
jeremiah responded that hananiah had replaced a yoke of wood with a yoke of steel and just two months later hananiah was slain at the siege of jerusalem as yhwh had said that false prophets would die]
the question is how could someone who was not sent by elohim yhwh can have such super_human powers the question is how could someone who was not sent by elohim yhwh can have such super_human powers
in fact has been revealated someone who is trying to undermine proper belief in elohim yhwh whether can have such super_human powers
in fact has been revealated someone who is trying to undermine proper belief in elohim yhwh whether can have such super_human powers
even the false prophet may have stolen the sign from a prophet of our elohim yhwh
a false prophet could successfully predict the future not only by stealing from a true prophet who legitimately predicted the future and yhwh with the purpose of test our obidience leave the fake prophet to say what he want to say
a fake prophet may be has stealing the words of yhwh from a true prophet who offers a specific prediction in order to call the people for repentance and trust in yhwh
the fake prophet hears the words and then offers it himself to establish his own credibility
a false prophet could successfully predict the future not only by stealing from a true prophet who legitimately predicted the future and yhwh with the purpose of test our obidience leave the fake prophet to say what he want to say
john portion chapter fourteen [yahonan parashah nun]vers twenty six [pasuk waw kaf]
hebrew scriptures traditions [kitvei ibrim masoret]
but the straightness interpreter advocate counselor the ruach ha kodesh which will send to you with my name he will teach you all things and will testify to you of all things which I told you [ melitz yosher ruakh ha kodesh be shem ]
also could be that the prophecy is rejected because it is unreasonable
that even if the prediction comes true we should not believe it because the message conveyed by the false prophet is against reason and the feeling that come to us only by the ruakh of yhwh who is the only one with the true
In the 14th century, this same point was made forcefully by another philosophically inclined Bible commentator, Rabbi Nissim of Marseilles. After discussing the same two possibilities ibn Ezra quoted above, Nissim goes on to explain why yhwh elohim would perform such a test and why a false prophet with powers would fail to influence true believers:
With this [test of the false prophet] your wisdom will be tested, and you can develop through it a strong character trait, namely, following truth because it is the truth.[5] Furthermore, through this the whole world will know that you hold firmly to your beliefs. And this will be a proof and a test, whether you love the truth with all your hearts and all your souls, in other words, whether you hold firmly to the truth, and believe in it because it is the truth, and know it with intellectual knowledge, not merely because of tradition or because you are following the custom of your fathers. For one who knows truth . . . will not grow indolent about it and will not have doubts on account of a sign or wonder that a false prophet performs to discredit it.[6]
According to this, the man of reason should pay no attention to miracles. This position does not take a stand about whether a false prophet can perform a miracle, only that the question does not matter.
3. “Signs and Portents” Are Symbolic Actions
Finally, ibn Ezra offers his own explanation:
In my opinion, the Hebrew words אות and מופת here have the sense of “sign” [and do not refer to anything supernatural]. The words of Isaiah provide evidence for this interpretation. He said “Behold, I, and the children whom elohim yhwh has given me, are —for signs and for portents” (Isaiah 8:18). Another example, the prophet’s —sign: “…just as my servant Isaiah walking naked and barefoot… [is an —a sign and a portent]” (Isaiah 20:3). Furthermore, the names of his sons are signs (אותות) about an event which would occur in his lifetime: “Immanuel”[7](Isaiah 7:14), “Maher-Shalal-Ḥash-Baz” (Isaiah 8:3), and “Shear-Yashuv” (Isaiah 7:3). Similarly, concerning the plagues [that yhwh said He would inflict upon the sinning Israelites, Scripture says,] “They will serve you as signs and proofs” (Deut 28:46). Many similar examples exist.
According to ibn Ezra, the words אות and מופת (signs and portents) here do not refer to anything supernatural but to symbolic actions. Isaiah’s walking naked and barefoot involved no supernatural element; it was a symbolic action. Similarly, when yhwh told Isaiah that the baby that would soon be born should be called Immanuel (“elohim is with us”), the naming of the baby was not a miraculous occurrence. The name was purely symbolic.
Following this explanation, a false prophet is never able to perform a miracle or predict the future. He might perform a compelling symbolic action that could tempt you to follow him, but the Torah is telling you not to.
What Is the Test?
Ibn Ezra’s explanation has several weaknesses. First, he does not address the question of how to interpret the phrase ובא האות והמופת, which suggests that the false prophet made a prediction about the future that came true. Another weakness, which ibn Ezra recognizes, is that our passage says that false prophets constitute a test of the Israelites’ loyalty by predicting the future in order to test the Israelites. But if the false prophet simply performed a symbolic action, what is the test?
To this ibn Ezra answers:
The meaning of “test” here is that He [yhwh wlohim] left him [the false prophet] alone and did not kill him.
elohim according to ibn Ezra, tests us with false prophets by allowing them to live. yhwh could make things easier for us by killing off the false prophets. But since He does not, we must resist the temptation of listening to them. With this unusual explanation, ibn Ezra is able to insist that false prophets have no supernatural powers and nevertheless constitute a test for the Israelites.[9]
False Prophets Have Power Too: Rashbam
Ibn Ezra’s Northern French contemporary, Rashbam (R. Samuel ben Meir, c. 1080-c. 1165) was not bothered by the verses about false prophets, since he believed that false prophets were able to perform miracles and/or predict the future:
ו
[The sign of such false prophets could come true] because they know the future, since they make use of the forces of impurity or teraphim, or [they consult] ghosts or familiar spirits.
In Rashbam’s understanding, the world is filled with effective ways to predict the future. Some, like biblical prophecy, are legitimate, but many of the other methods are not. Sorcery is forbidden not because it does not work, but despite the fact that it does. The simple understanding of the story of Saul and the woman from En-dor who consults spirits (בעלת אוב) in 1 Samuel 28 supports this claim.
For Rashbam, the “test” from yhwh elohim in these verses is explained simply:
“Because YHWH is testing you” yhwh granted powers to the forces of sorcery to be able to predict the future in order to test the Israelites and to increase their merit. He warned them (18:10-13), “Let there not be among you … a soothsayer, a diviner, a sorcerer…. You must be wholehearted with YHWH your elohim If the Israelites refrain from believing in the signs of idolatrous prophets, it will be to their merit.
The fact that elohim yhwh created a world where sorcerers and other diviners have real powers constitutes a test for the Israelites. In this way, Rashbam has, indirectly, softened the text a little. The Torah is not suggesting that elohim endowed any specific false prophet with powers in order to test us, an idea that already bothered the likes of Rabbi Akiva, as discussed above. Rather, according to Rashbam, elohim yhwh created a world where false prophecy is possible and actually happens; accordingly, the Israelites can be tested through it.
Urim and Thummim vs. Impure Divination
Rashbam makes his belief in magical powers and divination clear in another passage, his comment on the Urim and Thummim (Exod 28:30):
“The Urim and the Tummim” – A type of conjuring using divine names to determine yhwh words. They were placed inside the breastpiece and were used to provide [answers for] the decisions required by the Israelites and [information required in order to fulfil] their needs. If the other nations have teraphim and magic that tell them the future through the forces of impurity, how much more so may it be done through the forces of holiness; although one should hardly be comparing the forces of impurity and the forces of purity at all!
Rashbam assumes that his readers know that teraphim and magic work and he builds on this assumption to sustain his claim that the Urim and Thummim worked that way, too.[11]
Is Rashbam Being Polemical?
Rashbam’s interpretation reflects his belief that our world contains forces of good and forces of evil, and that supernatural powers can be found in both. Nevertheless, as he lived in a Christian world, it might be tempting to connect the dots between the “false prophet with magical powers” and the stories about Jesus in the New Testament.
Whether Rashbam had these in mind or not, Rashbam’s younger Northern French contemporary, Rabbi Joseph Bekhor Shor makes this connection explicit:
How much more so [should we never listen to the words of] someone who performs [miracles by using] magic, as Jesus did, who [performed signs by using magic that he first learned in Egypt and then] brought [that] magic out from Egypt; or if the sign is performed through sleight of hand[13] or through theft.[14]
As was his wont, Bekhor Shor is explicitly anti-Christian.[15] On the other hand, there is no hint in Rashbam’s words that he is alluding to Jesus.
Much has been written about the extent to which Rashbam concerns himself with Christianity.[16] Rashbam makes critical comments from time to time about Christian Bible commentaries,[17] and he defends Judaism against Christian claims.[18] He refrains from the type of insulting vituperation about Jesus that characterizes Bekhor Shor here and in other passages.[19] Of course one cannot rule out the possibility that he was thinking about Jesus when he commented on our verse. But it seems more likely that he is simply explaining the verse.[20]
Polemic Against ibn Ezra
Nevertheless, I believe it is possible Rashbam is polemicizing here, only not against Christianity, but against ibn Ezra. Itamar Kislev has argued that Rashbam’s Torah commentary reflects knowledge of ibn Ezra’s “short commentary” on the Torah,[21]part of which is his commentary on Deuteronomy. If so, Rashbam may be emphasizing here his belief in the powers of sorcery in order to distance himself from ibn Ezra’s philosophical approach.
Rashbam and ibn Ezra
Ibn Ezra and Rashbam were two of the greatest advocates of peshat, the plain or contextual interpretation of the Bible, in medieval times. Rashbam was just a few years older than ibn Ezra. At one point, they both lived in Northern France. It is tempting to imagine them meeting and talking about Bible interpretation, but most scholars doubt that that happened.[22] Both of them were daring Bible commentators who were often willing to buck traditional exegesis. But the differences between them are significant.[23]
Rashbam was a leading Talmudist and expert in halakhah. Ibn Ezra is not known for any contributions to those fields. Aside from his Bible commentaries, he wrote poetry and works of grammar, philosophy, and astrology (science). He was a proud Spanish Jew, a product of the so-called Golden Age in Spain.
Ibn Ezra spent the last decades of his life in Christian Europe and, as Uriel Simon has argued, looked down on his Ashkenazic brethren, viewing them as culturally backward.[24] In particular, he had disdain for their lack of knowledge of Hebrew grammar and philosophy—two areas that he felt were crucial for educated Jews.
Peshat or Philosophy
Their respective attitudes towards Greek/Arabic style rationalist philosophy undergird the difference between ibn Ezra and Rashbam’s approaches to this passage. For ibn Ezra, “finding” that the Torah is saying something philosophically valid is more important than uncovering the plain meaning, the peshat of the biblical text. Or, to put it differently, since the text is divine, it must be in line with philosophical truth, even if the words need to be stretched to make them fit with this truth.[25]
Rashbam, on the other hand, generally does not place limits on his search for peshat, and felt that the plain meaning of the text may contradict halakhah. Moreover, he believed in magic, as we saw above, and was not interested in Greek/Arabic style philosophy, as was the norm in his community.
Nowadays, we do not believe in magic or sorcery, and thus may be inclined to prefer ibn Ezra’s understanding of the world. Nevertheless, to try to interpret the Torah to fit with 21stcentury conceptions of reality would be forcing the text to say something it does not, just as ibn Ezra did by trying to read the Torah as a document reflecting medieval Greco-Arabic rationalism. Instead, it would seem that Rashbam’s more natural approach to the text comes closest to the modern academic way of reading it, even if some of his premises about how the world works are starkly different than ours.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario