Speaking of the false prophets Jesus says “by their fruit you will recognize them.” Then he goes on to say that some that appear good will be rejected by him. Only the ones that do the will of the Father in heaven will be accepted.
If one has an experience, and the word says something that conflicts with the experience, which do we accept? The word of God, of course. But we know that some false prophets will have worked the same sort of miracles that Jesus worked, as in the casting out of demons. How is it then that we can tell them by their fruit?
If there is a person who we see casting out demons, or healing the sick, we must reserve our judgment about them until we can know more about the fruit of the rest of their life. Does not the warning “you will know if they are my prophets if what they say comes to pass” imply a wait-and-see attitude? When a foretold event comes to pass, then we will know the one who foretold it is a prophet. The warning “try the profits to see whether they be from God” and “by their fruits you shall know them” implies a waiting. We will wait, then we will judge the fruit, whether it is good or bad.
None of this suggests we go along with what is happening assuming it is good. If someone prophesizes we do not automatically assume it is from God. If someone is “slain in the spirit” we do not automatically assume God occupied them. We wait, we observe, we compare with what we already know about God. We compare with the word. We compare with those who we know from experience have good fruit. We compare with our own good fruit. We compare with the history (tradition) of men we have known to be good.
When we hear someone speaking what is supposed to be the word of God, or healing, or casting out demons, he is either a Daniel or a Balaam, a Jeremiah or a Hananiah. From our position and the situation at the time we will have to decide, or wait and see.
