How do we distinguish false Christ & false Prophets according to Our Lord?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Interesting. Wow. Yep, you definitely saw something. Muslims have a strong deception on them. Maybe God led the guy across your path to pray for.
I think God was protecting my cell mate by using me (and a few other Christians with a good depth of knowledge) to shield him from a Islamic theology that is clearly not biblical. Additionally, it also made me recognize the voice of Jesus/God a bit clearer. I was successful in warding off the Muslim from influence and stop him from confusing my cell mates biblical understanding. This increased my faith and reaffirmed to my cell mate what Christians believe and how the bible is truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burn1986
I think God was protecting my cell mate by using me (and a few other Christians with a good depth of knowledge) to shield him from an Islamic theology that is clearly not biblical. Additionally, it also made me recognize the voice of Jesus/God a bit clearer. I was successful in warding off the Muslim from influence and stop him from confusing my cell mates biblical understanding. This increased my faith and reaffirmed to my cell mate what Christians believe and how the bible is truth.
That’s awesome 👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: legion
I think God was protecting my cell mate by using me (and a few other Christians with a good depth of knowledge) to shield him from a Islamic theology that is clearly not biblical. Additionally, it also made me recognize the voice of Jesus/God a bit clearer. I was successful in warding off the Muslim from influence and stop him from confusing my cell mates biblical understanding. This increased my faith and reaffirmed to my cell mate what Christians believe and how the bible is truth.
You might think about keeping a journal of what you feel God speaking to you
 
That’s awesome 👍
Yeah it was shocking to me actally... when I got some alone time I prayed and thanked God for being there. Note that races do not interact at that level very often while incarcerated because even members of your own race will attack you for interacting. However here is the upshot of that story... At the 3 or 4th month one of the guys leading the bible studies was sent to another lock up and I replaced him in the daily bible study. Here's the wild thing. Everyone in the "church/study" was African American and every one of them kept me from harm while locked up because they would say "hey leave him be, that's not a normal white boy". No joke people left me alone because they wanted to have me help them with their bible learning. While the prison walls did not crumble and free me early, God had already had my back and in some ways, I feel that that was part of his plan. It certainly wasn't mine. While i lived a wild life prison was very scary, and God gave me a peace that literally passed all my understanding. I don't want to sound like a cliche but really i mean I can see how that it was actually the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burn1986
Yeah it was shocking to me actally... when I got some alone time I prayed and thanked God for being there. Note that races do not interact at that level very often while incarcerated because even members of your own race will attack you for interacting. However here is the upshot of that story... At the 3 or 4th month one of the guys leading the bible studies was sent to another lock up and I replaced him in the daily bible study. Here's the wild thing. Everyone in the "church/study" was African American and every one of them kept me from harm while locked up because they would say "hey leave him be, that's not a normal white boy". No joke people left me alone because they wanted to have me help them with their bible learning. While the prison walls did not crumble and free me early, God had already had my back and in some ways, I feel that that was part of his plan. It certainly wasn't mine. While i lived a wild life prison was very scary, and God gave me a peace that literally passed all my understanding. I don't want to sound like a cliche but really i mean I can see how that it was actually the case.
Praise God, man, you got a testimony that people need to hear. That’s why I think it would be good if you can, if you have the time, try to jot your thoughts down daily..
 
Praise God, man, you got a testimony that people need to hear. That’s why I think it would be good if you can, if you have the time, try to jot your thoughts down daily..
This is one of literally dozens of events that I can link together in my testimony (one thing leads to this, then to this then to this... etc) that is literally like a psychological thriller movie testimony. I have tried and tried to document everything buyt when i do i get lost in the details and never get it done. Thanks for the encouragment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Burn1986
You didn’t misunderstand my point — you shifted the definition.
Scripture defines false prophets by objective revelation tests (Deut 18),
objective fruit tests (Matt 7),
objective doctrine tests (1 Tim 4), and
objective deception tests (Matt 24).
Your definition replaces those with subjective moral impressions:
“changed lives,”
“Christ‑imitators,”
“surrender,” “compassion,”
“rejecting elitism,”
“not reducing God to a box,”
“not hating certain people,”
“not following 16th‑century writers,”
“not preaching prosperity,”
“not ignoring the poor,”
“not restricting access,”
“not crushing questions,”
“not being brittle,”
“not being sectarian.”
Those may be true ethical critiques, but they are not the biblical definition of a false prophet.
OMC:
As usual, I find myself struggling with your citations, especially when you hide under an umbrella of "proof texts" that do not prove you contention. Deut 18 has these features. 1 There is no land inheritance for a priest. 2. Priest will eat from sacrifices. 3. Do not imitate conquered nations. Do not practice human sacrifice, consult mediums, cast a spell or consult with the dead (as did King Saul). 4.You must be "blameless before God." You must listen to the prophets of God through Moses all others must be put to death. 5. How do we know if a prophet is from God, if their prophecy comes true, then they come from God. As you seem to hold this sacred and binding, exactly how many witches have you murdered? How many slaves do you have and do you council your community to put to death women who commit adultery?? If not, where is the line and who determines it?

Matthew 7:
1“Do not judge, or you will be judged. 2For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. (seems like a clear condemnation of judging the "intent" of those asking "uncomfortable questions) 3 Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? 4How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye? 5You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 Do not give dogs what is holy; do not throw your pearls before swine. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces. 7 Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened to you. 8 For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. 9 Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10O if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 So if you who are evil know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good things to those who ask Him! 12In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the Prophets. 13 Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it.

I find this citation vastly supports my intuition than yours:
15 Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So then, by their fruit you will recognize them. 21 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. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’

This supports my contention that only those who "do the word of God = fruits" All who claim God's blessing but refuse to produce fruit will be burned. All who bear "not fruit" will be burned.

In each case, only those living day to day in compliance with God's will produce the "fruit of salvation. No those who claim they are justified by their doctrines, creeds, statements of faith, but those who DO the will of God.

I Timothy 4 is a warning about Christians who get caught up in the religious practices of their day.
15Beware of false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20So then, by their fruit you will recognize them.

21Not 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. 22Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’

23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!

I Timothy 4 is a contested Pauline document and among other things, it violates the promise Paul made to the Jerusalem Council concerning the conversion of Gentiles. They are to abstain from 1. eating meat offered to idols, 2. eating nothing strangled and offered to idols, eat nothing with blood and 3 obtain from sexual immorality.
1Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the later times some will desert the faith and occupy themselves with deceiving spirits and demonic teachings, 2influenced by the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared. 3They will prohibit marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4For every creation of God is good and no food is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving. 5For it is sanctified by God’s word and by prayer.

if reject you definition of you contention that my list of defining by determining if we are LIVING in harmony with the Gospel, not just playing theological tic tac to.

I would never have expected you to protect the Prosperity Gospel, supporting Christ imitators, ignoring the poor, et. al. Why not do an exegesis on 1 corinthians that allow replacing love with hate? Why not include an exegesis of Galatians 5 to dispute the fruits of the Gospel? Why not do an exegesis on Matthew 25 in with this is just "allegory, metaphor and hyperbole? On the other hand why not stop warring for 16th century theology and contend with today's reality.
 
OMC:
As usual, I find myself struggling with your citations, especially when you hide under an umbrella of "proof texts" that do not prove you contention. Deut 18 has these features. 1 There is no land inheritance for a priest. 2. Priest will eat from sacrifices. 3. Do not imitate conquered nations. Do not practice human sacrifice, consult mediums, cast a spell or consult with the dead (as did King Saul). 4.You must be "blameless before God." You must listen to the prophets of God through Moses all others must be put to death. 5. How do we know if a prophet is from God, if their prophecy comes true, then they come from God. As you seem to hold this sacred and binding, exactly how many witches have you murdered? How many slaves do you have and do you council your community to put to death women who commit adultery?? If not, where is the line and who determines it?
You’re loading a lot into those texts that they don’t actually say.
Deut 18’s context list (priests’ inheritance, eating sacrifices, banning divination, etc.) sets the covenant frame, but the prophet test is explicitly stated and limited: “when a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken” (Deut 18:22).
That’s an objective revelation test, not a demand that I personally enforce every Mosaic penalty; Israel as a theocratic nation executed those sanctions (Deut 13:1–5; 17:2–7), the church does not bear the sword (Rom 13:1–4; John 18:36).
Matthew 7 does not forbid discernment; it forbids hypocritical judgment.
Jesus immediately commands discernment: “give not that which is holy unto the dogs… by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt 7:6, 16, 20). The “fruit” there is not vague niceness; it is the visible outcome of their teaching and life—bad doctrine and lawlessness—since He ends with “depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matt 7:23).
That’s why He ties false prophets to “many” who prophesy, exorcise, and do miracles yet do not do the Father’s will (Matt 7:21–23)—their works contradict their claims.
1 Tim 4, contested or not in your system, still defines false teaching doctrinally: “giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils… forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats” (1 Tim 4:1–3).
That’s an objective doctrine test, not just “are they compassionate.”
Matthew 24 adds an objective deception test: “many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many… if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert… believe it not” (Matt 24:11, 26).
So Scripture’s pattern is: revelation (does what they say in God’s name come true?), fruit (does their life and outcome match righteousness?), doctrine (are they teaching what God has revealed?), and deception (are they leading people away from Christ’s words?).
Your list—“rejecting elitism,” “not following 16th‑century writers,” “not crushing questions,” “not being sectarian,” “not preaching prosperity,” “not ignoring the poor”—may be valid ethical critiques, and many of them are supported by passages like 1 Cor 13 (love), Gal 5:22–23 (fruit of the Spirit), and Matt 25:31–46 (care for the least), but they are applications of the fruit/doctrine tests, not replacements for them.
Historically, the church has always had to weigh both: Arius had piety yet denied the Son’s true deity; medieval indulgence‑peddlers funded the poor yet sold false assurance; modern prosperity preachers speak of “faith” yet contradict Christ’s warnings about riches (Luke 12:15; 16:13–15).
The biblical line is not “who seems loving to us,” but “who speaks according to this word” (Isa 8:20), “who abides in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9), and “who manifests the Spirit’s fruit rather than the works of the flesh” (Gal 5:19–23).
That’s why I’m not defending prosperity or sectarianism—I’m insisting that we judge them by the same objective tests God gave, not by our own shifting intuitions.
 
You’re loading a lot into those texts that they don’t actually say.
Deut 18’s context list (priests’ inheritance, eating sacrifices, banning divination, etc.) sets the covenant frame, but the prophet test is explicitly stated and limited: “when a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken” (Deut 18:22).
That’s an objective revelation test, not a demand that I personally enforce every Mosaic penalty; Israel as a theocratic nation executed those sanctions (Deut 13:1–5; 17:2–7), the church does not bear the sword (Rom 13:1–4; John 18:36).
Matthew 7 does not forbid discernment; it forbids.
Jesus immediately commands discernment: “give not that which is holy unto the dogs… by their fruits ye shall know them” (Matt 7:6, 16, 20). The “fruit” there is not vague niceness; it is the visible outcome of their teaching and life—bad doctrine and lawlessness—since He ends with “depart from me, ye that work iniquity” (Matt 7:23).
That’s why He ties false prophets to “many” who prophesy, exorcise, and do miracles yet do not do the Father’s will (Matt 7:21–23)—their works contradict their claims.
1 Tim 4, contested or not in your system, still defines false teaching doctrinally: “giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils… forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats” (1 Tim 4:1–3).
That’s an objective doctrine test, not just “are they compassionate.”
Matthew 24 adds an objective deception test: “many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many… if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert… believe it not” (Matt 24:11, 26).
So Scripture’s pattern is: revelation (does what they say in God’s name come true?), fruit (does their life and outcome match righteousness?), doctrine (are they teaching what God has revealed?), and deception (are they leading people away from Christ’s words?).
Your list—“rejecting elitism,” “not following 16th‑century writers,” “not crushing questions,” “not being sectarian,” “not preaching prosperity,” “not ignoring the poor”—may be valid ethical critiques, and many of them are supported by passages like 1 Cor 13 (love), Gal 5:22–23 (fruit of the Spirit), and Matt 25:31–46 (care for the least), but they are applications of the fruit/doctrine tests, not replacements for them.
Historically, the church has always had to weigh both: Arius had piety yet denied the Son’s true deity; medieval indulgence‑peddlers funded the poor yet sold false assurance; modern prosperity preachers speak of “faith” yet contradict Christ’s warnings about riches (Luke 12:15; 16:13–15).
The biblical line is not “who seems loving to us,” but “who speaks according to this word” (Isa 8:20), “who abides in the doctrine of Christ” (2 John 9), and “who manifests the Spirit’s fruit rather than the works of the flesh” (Gal 5:19–23).
That’s why I’m not defending prosperity or sectarianism—I’m insisting that we judge them by the same objective tests God gave, not by our own shifting intuitions.
I appreciate the quandary I put you in. When you must default to dogma, it is unfortunate. "Objective reality test, but not a command" is dogma. I get Romans 13:1-4 and John 18:36 and I raise you with Revelation 9... where God and Jesus torture humans for years then create a winepress and squeeze out a river of human blood bridle high and 180 miles long.

Your deduction that I am rejecting the fruits-truth test is not a component of my response. I am recounting all the distorted and sectarian ways these verses are used to point fingers at every other Christian community but NEVER at themselves.

Is hypocritical judgment not the prosperity Gospel? Is it not the "determination" that my sect, dogmas and theology is right and all other "Christians" are wrong? Is there any difference in the sexual and money scandals of huge Christian churches a matter of "false doctrine" of just a matter of false Christianity?

Matthew 7: Jesus balances the command against harsh judgment with a call for clear discernment. Believers should be loving, but they do not need to be foolish with sacred truths. This raises the question of what did Jesus mean by "sacred truths?" In the context of his listeners the imagery likely references the holy sacrificial meat from the temple, which would be desecrated if thrown to wild, unclean dogs. But the modern application is that what my sect, denomination, cult or church believes is "the truth" and what all other Christian claimants are but swine eating God's pearls.

My contention is that the norman checks and balances that frame what Jesus provides between loving and vanity, between love and performance, between truth and "my truth", between the actual action of his servants (Matthew 25) and all the work arounds, excuses, interpretations and creeds and justifications for modern Christian practice is "wanting."
 
I appreciate the quandary I put you in. When you must default to dogma, it is unfortunate. "Objective reality test, but not a command" is dogma. I get Romans 13:1-4 and John 18:36 and I raise you with Revelation 9... where God and Jesus torture humans for years then create a winepress and squeeze out a river of human blood bridle high and 180 miles long.
It isn’t dogma I’m defaulting to—it’s the category distinction the text itself forces. Jesus gives commands to His disciples, but Revelation shows God’s own eschatological judgment, not a pattern for human behavior. Revelation 9 and the winepress scenes don’t overturn Romans 13 or John 18 because they’re God’s own final judgment, not a model for human ethics; Scripture itself keeps those lanes separate.
Your deduction that I am rejecting the fruits-truth test is not a component of my response. I am recounting all the distorted and sectarian ways these verses are used to point fingers at every other Christian community but NEVER at themselves.
You’re not rejecting the tests; you’re exposing how Christians use them as mirrors for others and shields for themselves, turning discernment into vanity instead of repentance. Agreed. And apologize if that's what I made you feel in my comments.
Is hypocritical judgment not the prosperity Gospel? Is it not the "determination" that my sect, dogmas and theology is right and all other "Christians" are wrong? Is there any difference in the sexual and money scandals of huge Christian churches a matter of "false doctrine" of just a matter of false Christianity?
Hypocritical judgment is the prosperity‑gospel impulse, the sectarian “we alone are right” impulse, and the scandal‑ridden “false Christianity” impulse, because Scripture treats all of them as the same root problem: claiming God’s favor while producing the very lawlessness Jesus calls bad fruit (Matt 7:23). The prosperity preacher says “my doctrine guarantees blessing,” the sect says “our theology makes us the true Christians,” and the megachurch scandal says “our public orthodoxy excuses our private corruption”—but all three collapse under Jesus’ own test in Matthew 7: if the fruit is rotten, the tree is false, no matter how polished the doctrine.
Matthew 7: Jesus balances the command against harsh judgment with a call for clear discernment. Believers should be loving, but they do not need to be foolish with sacred truths. This raises the question of what did Jesus mean by "sacred truths?" In the context of his listeners the imagery likely references the holy sacrificial meat from the temple, which would be desecrated if thrown to wild, unclean dogs. But the modern application is that what my sect, denomination, cult or church believes is "the truth" and what all other Christian claimants are but swine eating God's pearls.
Agreed, Jesus’ “dogs and swine” line isn’t a license for sects to treat their own doctrines as pearls; it’s a warning not to carelessly expose what God actually revealed, not a justification for tribal superiority. In context the “holy” thing is consecrated temple meat, not “my denomination’s creed,” and Jesus pairs “judge not” with “by their fruits ye shall know them” to forbid hypocritical condemnation while commanding real discernment. The modern twist—each group calling its own system the pearl and everyone else the swine—is exactly the vanity He’s correcting, which is why the real issue isn’t the test but the self‑exemption Scripture exposes through Matthew 7, Deuteronomy 18, 1 Timothy 4, and Matthew 24.
My contention is that the norman checks and balances that frame what Jesus provides between loving and vanity, between love and performance, between truth and "my truth", between the actual action of his servants (Matthew 25) and all the work arounds, excuses, interpretations and creeds and justifications for modern Christian practice is "wanting."
I agree, your point is simply that Jesus’ built‑in safeguards—humility over vanity, love over performance, truth over my truth, and actual obedience over theological loopholes—get buried under modern Christian self‑justification, so the whole system becomes wanting; Matthew 25 judges by action, Matthew 7 judges by fruit, yet churches often replace both with creeds, excuses, and tribal loyalty, which is exactly the distortion those passages were meant to prevent, and why the original tests like Matthew 7, Deuteronomy 18, 1_Timothy_4, and Matthew_24 still stand as the corrective to everything Christians build around them.