There is an interesting discussion going on at the “Near Emmaus” Blog regarding New Testament prophecy and Old Testament.
It is often brought up from Deuteronomy that the mark of a true prophet is that his prophecy has to come to pass… I am wondering though if we are missing the point of this and that the real mark of the prophet is that they have to be prophesying truth?
Eg the testifying of Jesus is the mark of New Testament prophesy. Therefore if the mark of the OT was to be prophesying the truth of Gods ways this then relieves the OT prophets of being condemned as being false and or the confusion that arises from it when what they say doesn’t actually come to pass…
Trinitarian Dance 
I dont understand this at all, how does this relieve the OT prophets and why would they need to be relieved. The criteria in Dt included not only that the prophecy come to pass but that the prophet not lead the people away from God. Even if the prophecy came to pass, they were to stone the prophet if that prophet taught against the Torah. This is why few Jews will accept the Jesus that Christianity puts forth, he violates the Torah
Hi Vern.
The question then needs to be asked if the 12 minor prophets and Isaiah, Jeremiah and others were false because everything they prophesied didn’t come to pass.