An old prophet in Beth-el

Matthew Henry writes, "The old prophet's wickedness. I cannot but call him a false prophet and a bad man, it being much easier to believe that from one of such a bad character should be extorted a confirmation of what the man of God said (as we find, v. 32) than that a true prophet, and a good man, should tell such a deliberate lie as he did, and father it upon God. A good tree could never bring forth such corrupt fruit. Perhaps he was trained up among the sons of the prophets, in one of Samuel's colleges not far off, whence he retained the name of a prophet, but, growing worldly and profane, the spirit of prophecy had departed from him. If he had been a good prophet he would have reproved Jeroboam's idolatry, and not have suffered his sons to attend his altars, as, it should seem, they did." This is along my way of understanding this passage.

The old prophet may have once been a genuine prophet who fell into disobedience and irrelevance but still had a longing for those days when he was in service to the LORD. He may have had an unnatural curiosity about the man of God from Judah, wanting to share in borrowed glory. His sinful desire lead to God's judgment upon the man of God from Judah, although nothing of that man's prophecy against Jeroboam was altered.

 

Prelude: 1 Kgs 11:26–40 Jeroboam received a prophecy from the LORD that he will be made king over 10 tribes of Israel (the northern kingdom) because Solomon was unfaithful.

1 Kings 13 - Prophet #1
1) Traveled from Judah (southern kingdom) to Bethel (northern kingdom) (vs 1)
2) Proclaimed a three-part prophecy

a. "cried out against the altar by the word of the Lord" (vs 2)
b. "the Lord says, ‘A son will be born to the house of David, named Josiah, and he will sacrifice on you the priests of the high places who are burning incense on you. Human bones will be burned on you.’" (vs 2). ["you" = the alter, therefore the alter will be desecrated with the burned sacrifice of priests from the northern kingdom. ​

3) “This is the sign that the Lord has spoken: ‘The altar will now be ripped apart, and the ashes that are on it will be poured out.’ ” (vs 3)

The meaning understood by Jeroboam is that the northern kingdom has been unfaithful and God will destroy it.
The refusal of hospitality by the prophet reinforces the dire meaning.

(curiously the naming of Josiah 2 1/2 centuries before his birth is similar to the naming of Cyrus 4 centuries before his time in Isaiah 44)​

"I was commanded by the word of the Lord: ‘You must not eat food or drink water or go back the way you came.’ ” (vs 9)

Prophet #2 - "an old prophet"
1) ...living in Bethel (vs 10) [northern kingdom]

1 Kings 13:15–18 (CSB)
Then he said to him, “Come home with me and eat some food.” But he answered, “I cannot go back with you or accompany you; I will not eat food or drink water with you in this place. For a message came to me by the word of the Lord: ‘You must not eat food or drink water there or go back by the way you came.’ ” He said to him, “I am also a prophet like you. An angel spoke to me by the word of the Lord: ‘Bring him back with you to your house so that he may eat food and drink water.’ ” [narrator's comment =>] The old prophet deceived him,

[<= narrator's comment]​

​

PROBLEM = conflicting prophecies

[prophet #1 ate]

1 Kings 13:21–22 (CSB)
...and the prophet [#2] cried out to the man of God who had come from Judah, “This is what the Lord says: ‘Because you [prophet #1] rebelled against the Lord’s command and did not keep the command that the Lord your God commanded you—but you went back and ate food and drank water in the place that he said to you, “Do not eat food and do not drink water”—your corpse will never reach the grave of your fathers.’ ” ​

Prophet #1 listened to bad counsel
Prophet #2 like Balaam [in Numbers 23], could not help but speak the words the LORD gave him.
Prophet #2 knew his fate - he would burn on the alter [die], because of this he had an affinity to Prophet #1

"Basically, 1 Kings 13 continues the book’s emphases on proper worship, the prophetic word, and the slow demise of the covenant people. It also begins to analyze the difference between true and false prophecy."
Paul R. House, 1, 2 Kings, vol. 8, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 187–188.

Why did Prophet #2 lie to Prophet #1 - he was a baaad prophet from a baaad nation.

Rob

 

He was a false prophet.

 

Looks like I'll have to re-think it.

The more I read the chapter, the more I regret "pulling the trigger" on that one.
It's a tough one, to be sure.

But, in 1 Kings 13:18 we read, " He said unto him, I [am] a prophet also as thou [art]; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. [But] he lied unto him."

Why would one of the Lord's prophets lie to another, claiming that he was also a prophet and tellnig him that it was OK to eat and to drink on his mission, when the Lord had specifically told him not to?
Granted, the disobedience was on the head of the younger prophet, and he gave in similar to Eve did, in a way.

But the lie was on the head of the old prophet.

Later we read the condemnation:

" And it came to pass, as they sat at the table, that the word of the Lord came unto the prophet that brought him back:
21 and he cried unto the man of God that came from Judah, saying, Thus saith the Lord, Forasmuch as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of the Lord, and hast not kept the commandment which the Lord thy God commanded thee,
22 but camest back, and hast eaten bread and drunk water in the place, of the which [the] Lord did say to thee, Eat no bread, and drink no water; thy carcase shall not come unto the sepulchre of thy fathers." ( 1 Kings 13:20-22 ).

Later on, the younger prophet is attacked and killed by a lion for his disobedience, and we read this:

" And he laid his carcase in his own grave; and they mourned over him, [saying], Alas, my brother!
31 And it came to pass, after he had buried him, that he spake to his sons, saying, When I am dead, then bury me in the sepulchre wherein the man of God [is] buried; lay my bones beside his bones:" ( 1 Kings 13:30-31 ).

So the old prophet mourns the loss of his younger brother, even though he had lied to him and tempted him to eat and to drink.

Very strange, to say the least.

But then to us, the Law is harsh, and both were under the Law of Moses.
The burden of obedience was on the younger prophet, whether or not he was tempted.

Upon further consideration, I'll have to admit that it appears that both of them were prophets of the Lord, but one failed to obey and was killed for it by Him.

Why the old prophet lied?
I'm not seeing that explanation...but he did go so far as to tell his sons to bury him with the younger one when the time came.

 

Thank for posting this Brother Robert, never really examined this story... I agree that the old prophet was a false prophet and deceived the man of God with a lie... I also like the way in Robs post, cut to the meat of the story and showed the deeper meaning of it... Brother Glen

 

Given the serious moral failings of so many heroes of the faith, I don't seriously question whether the old prophet really was one. The text says he was, he expertly fooled the young prophet, he uttered a narrow prophecy soon fulfilled, and he was certain the main prophecy would come to pass. I find some of the implications of this chilling.

I do wonder at the old prophet's being so bold in retrieving the body. Why should he think the lion wouldn't at least give him a potentially fatal swipe for lying in the name of the Lord which led to another's death?