Prophecy is central to the LDS church. From the time of Joseph Smith to the present, the title for every president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has been “prophet, seer, and revelator.” Most members of the church believe that the word of the current prophet takes precedence over the words of former prophets. As I am told repeatedly, “That’s why we have a living prophet.”

The faith of most church members is rooted in a unique revelation that their church is the true church. These members believe their church’s departure from Biblical Christianity is justified, not because they can prove that “all Christian churches are apostate” or that Joseph Smith restored the gospel, but because they have a personal testimony that Joseph Smith is a true prophet and the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ. This personal revelation, often described as a spiritual witness, is a cornerstone of their faith. So, the church relies on special revelation for every claim it makes, and the people depend on revelation (rather than objective reasons) for believing these special revelations. We could argue that the church hangs entirely on prophecy – the prophecies of the Book of Mormon as revealed by Joseph Smith, the living prophet, and the personal revelation received by the faithful.

The Apostle Paul gives a rule for handling prophecies and a prophetic word.

And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. (I Corinthians 14:32)

Likewise, John teaches us,

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (I John 4:1)

This aligns with the noble Bereans, who “received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11). The Bible, as the authoritative voice of God, serves as the litmus test for any prophetic word. All revelations must be measured against this standard. Testing prophetic words with the Bible is not just a suggestion but a necessity for maintaining the truth and ensuring that the church’s teachings agree with the divine word.

Our examination of the Book of Mormon centers on a desire to hold it up to the standard of God’s Word. We have already pointed out several contrasts between the Bible and the Book of Mormon. Here is another: the Book of Mormon doesn’t handle prophecy like the Bible. Let me demonstrate.

A Contrast of Prophetic Messages

The Book of Mormon has several notable prophecies in it. Consider this example from I Nephi 10:7-11.

And he spake also concerning a prophet who should come before the Messiah, to prepare the way of the Lord— Yea, even he should go forth and cry in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight; for there standeth one among you whom ye know not; and he is mightier than I, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose. And much spake my father concerning this thing. And my father said he should baptize in Bethabara, beyond Jordan; and he also said he should baptize with water; even that he should baptize the Messiah with water. And after he had baptized the Messiah with water, he should behold and bear record that he had baptized the Lamb of God, who should take away the sins of the world. And it came to pass after my father had spoken these words he spake unto my brethren concerning the gospel which should be preached among the Jews, and also concerning the dwindling of the Jews in unbelief. And after they had slain the Messiah, who should come, and after he had been slain he should rise from the dead, and should make himself manifest, by the Holy Ghost, unto the Gentiles.

If a person wanted to believe that Nephi prophesied exact details from the life of Jesus 600 years before they happened, this would be the proof. Nephi gives an extraordinary amount of detail with exceptional accuracy. No Old Testament prophet came close to prophesying this precisely. Naming “Bethabara” as the location where John the Baptist would baptize, predicting that he would baptize the Messiah, reciting the words he would say when he baptized him, foreseeing that the Jews would kill the Messiah, and saying that he would rise from the dead – that is an unprecedented amount of detail. We have to admire the audacity of it.

But it seems odd that, with this amount of detail, the New Testament wouldn’t refer to the words of the prophet Nephi. The New Testament regularly points back to the prophecies of the Old Testament. Yet, you won’t find a single reference to a Book of Mormon prophet anywhere in the Bible.

The Old Testament doesn’t make predictions the way the Book of Mormon does. The prophets don’t speak directly of the Jews killing the Messiah, nor would any Hebrew believe such a thing. In fact, in the Jewish mind, the crucifixion of Jesus is an argument against him being the Messiah. Old Testament prophecies of the murder of Jesus are shrouded in mystery – a mystery that is opened to us now that Christ died and rose again. As the Apostle Peter points out, the prophets longed to understand what they prophesied. They knew they were speaking of the Messiah but did not know what they were saying.

Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. (I Peter 1:10-12)

The Book of Mormon treats prophecy as “prediction-fulfillment.” Apart from the prophetic warnings about the coming captivity in Babylon, the prophets of the Old Testament didn’t make direct predictions about the life of the Messiah. A brief examination will demonstrate this.

Several places in the New Testament, mainly in Matthew, declare that something was done “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the prophet.” [1] Some of these do not fulfill any direct prophecy. For example, Matthew 2:23 tells us that Jesus and His family “came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth”

that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

This gives us a great example of the way the New Testament uses the word “fulfilled” – not as “prediction-fulfillment,” but as “this is the fullest sense, the fullest meaning, of what was said of the Messiah.” You can search the entire Old Testament, and you will never find a prediction that the Messiah would be called a Nazarene. For one thing, “Nazareth” is never named in the Old Testament. Matthew doesn’t use the word “fulfilled” this way. He means that the entirety of the Old Testament’s teaching about the Messiah would lead us to believe that Jesus would be “despised and rejected of men” – an outcast. Nazarenes were that.

So, we find places in the New Testament where a thing is said to be fulfilled, and we can’t find a direct prophecy for it. At other times, the Bible points directly to an event in the life of Christ and tells us that this fulfills a direct prophecy of the Old Testament. We have several of these to work with, and any of them will provide helpful insight into how the Bible treats fulfilled prophecy. Consider the prophecy of the virgin birth. Matthew 1:20-23 tells us what happened.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Matthew points to Isaiah 7:14, which says,

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

That’s pretty straightforward, and we might be tempted to think of this as prediction fulfillment. Except in context, Isaiah wasn’t talking about the Messiah. His prophecy had its own immediate fulfillment, something King Ahaz witnessed with his own eyes.

Isaiah prophesied this in 735 BC when Rezin was king of Syria and Pekah was king of the northern 10 tribes of Israel. Pekah, Israel’s usurper king, formed an alliance with the king of Syria to fight off the Assyrians. They thought their confederacy couldn’t survive without Jerusalem, but King Ahaz refused to join in league with them. His refusal wasn’t a godly move. At that time, Ahaz was seriously considering an alliance with the Assyrians. Rezin and Pekah naturally saw this as a hostile move. So, they determined to force Jerusalem into an alliance. If Ahaz refused to join them, they would replace him with a puppet king (Isaiah 7:6).

King Ahaz was pretty nervous that they might succeed. Seeing his fear, the Lord sent Isaiah to King Ahaz with a message – their counsel will fail; their plot will not succeed. But Ahaz had already decided to go to the Assyrians for help, and he wouldn’t change his mind no matter what God did for him. Noting Ahaz’s fear and resolve, God made him an offer.

Moreover the LORD spake again unto Ahaz, saying, Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the LORD. (Isaiah 7:10-13)

His pious refusal insulted God, yet God assured him, though he refused to hear it.

And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:13-14)

The sign was for Ahaz. It was fulfilled for Ahaz. Ahaz saw that fulfillment. We don’t know exactly how it was fulfilled. God did it in such a way that Ahaz knew God had done it. A woman who was a virgin at this time gave birth to a son. This wasn’t a virgin birth, of course, as only one Man was ever born of a virgin. But when it happened, Ahaz knew that God had done it.

While that son (Immanuel) was still a youth, too young to know good from evil (so before he was 2 years old), Rezin and Pekah were removed from their thrones. ^[2]

Orthodox Jewish boys become “sons of the Law” at the age of twelve. This special son was a reminder that Syria and Ephraim would be out of the picture within the next twelve years. Isaiah delivered this prophecy in 734 B.C. In 732 B.C., Assyria defeated Syria; and in 722 B.C., Assyria invaded the Northern Kingdom. The prophecy was fulfilled. ^[3]

So, Isaiah’s prophecy didn’t wait 700 years to be fulfilled. It was fulfilled in Isaiah’s day. But then, 700 years later, an angel visited a young virgin girl in Israel and told her that she would give birth to the Messiah. And when that girl asked, “How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?” the angel answered and said unto her,

The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. (Luke 1:34-35)

When her husband Joseph discovered her pregnancy, “he being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.” That’s when the angel explained what God was doing. Were it not for Matthew, we wouldn’t know that this fulfilled Isaiah’s virgin birth prophecy.

The Bible means that while Isaiah’s prophecy had an immediate and obvious fulfillment, one that King Ahaz would have recognized, it also had an ultimate fulfillment. If Isaiah had been alive at the time of Christ, he would have said, “Aha! Now I see!” Isaiah would have recognized his prophecy in the virgin birth of Jesus.

We could find more examples, of course. Micah 5 announces the ultimate humiliation for the nation of Israel. Micah lays out all the ways Israel will be decimated by the Babylonians. And with this crushing defeat as the backdrop, Micah delivers a surprise:

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. (Micah 5:2)

In the Bible, whenever a birth is announced, God is bringing salvation to His people. Thirty years earlier, Isaiah made a direct promise to King Ahaz. Now, Micah builds on that promise. Clearly, the Jews understood it this way – when Herod called on the chief priests and scribes, they were unanimous in their conclusion that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem.

So, Micah’s prophesy announced that Judah’s wound was incurable, and then Micah announced the cure. The heathen would smite Israel’s judge (king) with a rod upon the cheek, but Bethlehem would father a son who would establish the kingdom forever. A promised son from the most obscure and unlikely place would cure the incurable, restoring the throne to David and establishing God’s kingdom forever, and all so we will hope in God.

Fulfilled prophecy gives us the fullest sense of the prophet’s meaning. We don’t find much in the way of prediction that would wait 600 years for fulfillment. Let me point out one more astounding example.

About 100 years after Isaiah prophesied that a virgin would conceive and bear a son, and about 70 years after Micah prophesied that this promised son would be born in Bethlehem Ephratah, the prophet Jeremiah comforted the people of Israel in the face of certain captivity. Jeremiah prophesied when all the prophecies of Isaiah and Micah began to be fulfilled. His prophecies took on a different tone. Instead of promising chastisement for all of Israel’s sins, Jeremiah prophesied that Israel would return and that God would restore the nation to their inheritance.

Jeremiah 31, in particular, focuses on this promised restoration.

The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee. Again I will build thee, and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel: thou shalt again be adorned with thy tabrets, and shalt go forth in the dances of them that make merry. (3-4)

In this chapter, God speaks as if the years of captivity will result in a new relationship between Him and His people. ^[4] God speaks of a new harmony with Israel (vv. 2-6) and a new consolation (7–20). Jeremiah names four specific groups who will enjoy this new comfort: the distressed (8-9), the disheartened (10-14), the disconsolate (15-17), and the despondent (18-19).

God called His people a new creation (21–22). He gave them new conditions (23–30). God would return His people to blessing and prosperity. God would make a new covenant (31–34) and a new commitment (35–37) with them. And He promised to make them a new city (38–40).

At the center of this great promise is a strange interruption. You have all these promises of blessing and restoration interrupted by a cry of pain.

Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.

Jeremiah is foretelling what lies ahead for Israel. In the aftermath of his prophecy, Jeremiah was thrown into prison. Nebuchadnezzar surrounded Jerusalem and besieged it for a year and a half. King Zedekiah attempted to sneak out of Jerusalem. He didn’t get far before the Babylonians caught him. They executed his sons in front of his eyes before putting out his eyes. They burned his house and destroyed Jerusalem. They carried into captivity “the remnant of the people that remained in the city, and those that fell away, that fell to him, with the rest of the people that remained” (Jeremiah 39:8). All the prisoners were taken to Ramah, a village five miles north of Jerusalem, where they gathered and prepared to make the trek to Babylon.

Years before the Babylonians carried away the people into captivity, Jeremiah had prophesied about this rendezvous point in Ramah, the place where the people gathered to be taken to Babylon. He prophesied that a voice would be heard in this same Ramah, Rachel

weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.

Fast forward to Matthew 2:16-18. When Herod knew that the wise men had mocked him, he ordered the death of all the children “that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under.”

Matthew says that this “fulfilled” that which was spoken

by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.

But Jeremiah didn’t make a “prediction” that this would happen in the time of Christ or even that it would happen in Bethlehem. Bethlehem is about the same distance south of Jerusalem as Ramah is north of Jerusalem. What Herod did to the children of Bethlehem didn’t fulfill a prediction.

When the captives were gathered in Ramah, “Rachel” (representing all the mothers of Israel) wept for her children, assuming she would never see them again. But God, through the mouth of Jeremiah, promised that their children would return (Jeremiah 31:16-17). So, when Matthew says that Herod’s slaughter of innocent babies in Bethlehem “fulfilled” the words of “Jeremy the prophet,” what does he mean?

Matthew means to say two things: first, the sadness of mothers in Bethlehem compares to the sadness of mothers in Ramah when their children were carried into captivity. The mothers in Ramah must have been devastated. They assumed they would never see their children again. That must have been their Pearl Harbor moment, their 9-11, a tragedy they would never forget. Matthew compares the slaughter of innocents in Bethlehem to that tragic day in Ramah.

But Matthew makes a second point: Rachel’s sorrow for her children was now complete. Rachel gave birth to two sons, Joseph and Benjamin. The tribe of Ephraim was named for Joseph’s heir, who came to represent the 10 northern tribes of Israel. North of Jerusalem, Ramah represents Rachel’s sorrow for her son Joseph. But Bethlehem was south of Jerusalem. Technically, it belonged to the tribe of Benjamin and later joined with the tribe of Judah. When Herod slaughtered Bethlehem’s babies, Rachel was called on to weep for her children one final time. This was the ultimate fulfillment, the fullest sense of Rachel’s tragedy. When I look at the LDS church’s descriptions of fulfilled prophecy, I find nothing this rich or glorious. The Bible doesn’t try to impress you with predictions that were fulfilled 700 years later. Fulfilled prophecy tells us that God had a plan for His people. God worked in history to bring about that plan. The Bible presents the master strokes of a sovereign God in bringing salvation to the world.

---

[1] Matthew 1:22; 2:15, 22; 4:14-16; 8:17; 12:17-21; 13:35; 27:35; John 19:24

^[2] John A. Martin, “Isaiah,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 1 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), 1047.

^[3] Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Comforted, “Be” Commentary Series (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 33.

^[4] Smith, J. E. (1992). The Major Prophets (p. 276). Joplin, MO: College Press.