返回总目录
Bible Commentary: Deuteronomy 18:20
In Deuteronomy 18:20 we read:
But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name
which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks
in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.
Based on this verse, some Muslims have therefore concluded the
following:
Muhammad spoke for God for over 22 years. If he were an imposter,
God would have killed him as this verse promises. God didn't kill
him, therefore, he was a true prophet. Hence we have to accept
him and convert to Islam.
Well, sure. But let's not stop there. Deut. 17:12 says that
anyone who won't obey the priest or the judge shall die; so all
those criminals, thieves and murderers in our society must really
be innocent since God didn't strike him dead, right? Deut 22:25
says that a man who rapes a maiden in the field shall die, so if
the man isn't instantly struck dead by God then she must have
wanted it, right??? Deut 24:7 says that if you sell your relative
as a slave you shall die, so if you're not struck dead then it must
have just been a lease, not a sale :-)
In English we can also use what is commonly the future tense to
give a strong command. When I say to my son "you are going to
clean up your messy room today" then I am not really making a
statement about the future (he could disobey) but I am giving
a very serious command. I could also say: "Clean up your room",
but the very seriousness is expressed in using the future tense
for it.
And the Hebrew works similarly and the future tense is often used
to give commands to be obeyed instead of predictions of what God
will do.
For example, the Ten Commandments are (nearly) all expressed in
future tense. "You shall not have other gods before me" is a
strict commandment, not a prediction. In fact, the Israelites fell
into idolatery many times and God had to punish them for their
disobedience.
Therefore the NIV translates this verse Deuteronomy 18:20
appropriately in this way:
But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything
I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks
in the name of other gods, must be put to death.
It is not a promise from God what he will do, but a command to
the people of Israel how they have to deal with false prophets.
They did not always obey and that is why we read about the existence
of false prophets at many times of the history of Israel.
Technically, the translations who say "shall die" are right.
Semantically and contextually, the NIV is the correct translation
of the intended meaning.
Several such commands in the Torah follow with something like
"And you shall put away the evil from among you." That makes it
pretty clear that the sense being conveyed is that of execution,
not divine wrath. For example, in Deuteronomy 17:12 (just one chapter
before our verse) we read:
The man who acts presumptuously by not listening to the priest
who stands there to serve the LORD your God, nor to the judge,
that man shall die; thus you shall purge the evil from Israel.
It is absolutely unambigiuous that the phrase "that man shall die"
is a command to be acted upon by the people of Israel, not a
prediction of what God will do.
Grammatically prediction and command are pretty much the same in
Hebrew. These Deuteronomy passages use the participle of "die"
whereas Ezek 18:4 "the soul that sins shall die" uses the imperfect,
but that's probably a feature of later Hebrew (i.e. post-exilic vs.
the age of Deuteronomy). But the reductio ad absurdum at the
beginning should make this point clear enough.
And the crucifixion of Christ fits in exactly with this scenario.
God didn't strike Jesus dead for blasphemy and false prophecy,
but the religious authorities decided to kill him for blasphemy.
They are the ones to act and to decide and they did.
Obviously, as in every society, the authorities can be wrong
every once in a while. The fact that somebody was killed for
blasphemy doesn't prove that he is guilty nor does geting away
for a while without being punished (Muhammad) automatically prove
the authenticity of the person claiming prophethood.
The Muslim claim about this passage is based on a misunderstanding
of the Hebrew language - or rather of the English translations
they read without comparing how this construction is used in
many other places of the scriptures.
Even more discussion on this passage is found here.
Bible commentary Index
Answering Islam Home Page