1 Kings 13:11-19

B. THE DECEPTION OF THE MAN OF GOD 13:11-19

TRANSLATION

(11) Now a certain old prophet lived in Bethel; and his son[347] came and related to him all which the man of God had done that day in Bethel; the words which he had spoken unto the king, they told to their father. (12) And their father spoke unto diem, What way did he go? For his sons had seen the way which the man of God who had come from Judah had gone. (13) And he said unto his sons, Saddle the donkey! And they saddled for him the donkey and he rode after him. (14) And he went after the man of God and found him sitting under an oak; and he said unto him, Are you the man of God who came from Judah? And he said, I am. (15) And he said unto him, Come with me to my house and eat bread. (16) And he said, I cannot return with you, nor go with you, nor will I eat bread or drink water with you in this place. (17) For it was said unto me in the word of the LORD, Do not eat bread nor drink water there; do not return by going the way in which you went. (18) And he said to him, I also am a prophet like you, and an angel spoke unto me in the word of the LORD, saying, Bring him back with you unto your house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied to him. (19) So he returned with him, and ate bread in his house and drank water.

[347] The Hebrew is singular here, but plural in the last clause of the verse. Apparently one of the sons acted as spokesman for the rest.

COMMENTS

It is somewhat surprising to find a prophet of God residing in Bethel, the very stronghold of the Northern apostasy, Faithful priests and Levites had emigrated to Judah (2 Chronicles 11:13-16), and probably most all other devout worshipers of the Lord had followed their lead. It was not a sense of duty which kept the old prophet in Bethel. The fact that he remained silent while the schism was being born, and that he permitted his sons to attend Jeroboam's sacrificial feast is perhaps an index to the character of this prophet. His allegiance to his tribe superseded his allegiance to truth. Despite his better judgment, he had gone along with the majority of the nation. Now he found it difficult to withdraw from that position even though he personally could not participate in the apostate worship.[348]

[348] Others see the old prophet as one who had condoned Jeroboam's apostasy and who attempted to use the weapon of lying to thwart the mission of the man of God. He would, then, be one of the first of the false prophets.

Upon returning from the Bethel temple, the sons of the old prophet reported to their father what they had seen and heard[349] (1 Kings 13:11). The account of the fearless appearance of the man of God before Jeroboam stirred the old prophet to assert himself. The old prophet, wishing to converse with the man of God inquired as to what way the man of God had gone. The motives of the old prophet are not entirely clear. Did he merely wish to fellowship with the dynamic and daring young prophet? Or was it his intention to persuade that man of God to reverse or change the curse he had pronounced against the Bethel altar? The sons, having noted the route the young prophet had selected,[350] related this information to their father (1 Kings 13:12). The old man promptly ordered his donkey to be saddled and he then rode off in pursuit of the man of God (1 Kings 13:13).

[349] 1 Kings 13:11 begins by quoting one son and ends by quoting several of them. Very likely one son started talking and the others joined in the account of what happened. Something of the excitement of the occasion is thus skillfully conveyed to the reader (Honor, JCBR, p. 193).

[350] Targum, Septuagint and Vulgate read his sons showed him the way the man of God went. This implies a change only of one vowel in the Hebrew text.

The old prophet caught up with the man of God sitting under an oak[351] along the road to Judah. Some have seen in this brief rest the beginning of the sin of the young prophet, and certainly it would seem against the spirit of his instructions to tarry so near a place from which he was to speedily disappear. In any case the action betrays his fatigue and exhaustion. Suspecting that this might be the man of God, the old prophet inquired and learned that he was indeed the man for whom he had been searching (1 Kings 13:14). He invited the man of God to his home to eat with him (1 Kings 13:15), but was rebuffed with the same words used in response to Jeroboam's invitation (1 Kings 13:16-17). Determined to succeed in his mission, the old prophet fabricated a story about an angelic visitation in which he was instructed to bring the man of God back to Bethel (1 Kings 13:18). Probably the angel was mentioned partly for the purpose of making his story sound authentic, and partly to convey the idea of his having a superior authority for his message. A communication through a celestial messenger would seem to have been regarded as a higher form of revelation than a subjective communication to the mind of the prophet.[352]

[351] The Hebrew reads the oak suggesting that some particular, well-known landmark is meant.

[352] Hammond, PC, p. 296. cf. Acts 7:53; Hebrews 2:2; Luke 1:13; Luke 1:29, etc. Slotki (SBB, p. 101), on the other hand, regards a communication through an angel as being inferior to the direct communication from God which the man of God had received. Gray (OTL, p. 330) thinks the angel was mentioned in order to avoid telling a deliberate lie in the name of God, which might have called down immediate wrath.

The motives of the old prophet are not entirely clear. Putting his action in the best possible light, his lie may have been born out of an ardent desire for fellowship with the man of God. At least two more sinister interpretations for his actions have been suggested:
1. When the man of God rejected the hospitality of Jeroboam, he had put the city of Bethel and the calf cult under a bana prophetic anathema. Though the old prophet had not personally participated in the temple activities, he felt himself condemned by the actions of the man of God. If the man of God returned to Bethel and broke bread there, it would be a public repudiation of his earlier stern stand against any fellowship with the apostates.
2. Still another viewthat of Gray (OTL, p. 322)is that the old prophet was testing the authority of his colleague, attempting to determine whether the prophet spoke with the authority of God or was merely an agent for the political enemies of the Northern Kingdom. He concentrated on the alleged divine command not to eat and drink. If the man of God could evade this word of God with impunity, his threats regarding the future of the Bethel altar might be viewed as idle.
Thus it may be that the old prophet was acting in the interest of his king. By bringing back the man of God the old prophet would make the whole city, and especially the sovereign, his debtor. By accomplishing what the king had failed to effect, he would secure for himself a position of no little influence in the new kingdom.