Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in
Question 8
Pike argues Deuteronomy 18 cannot point to a foreigner because the prophet must be “from among your fellow Israelites,” and then he stacks 20+ Moses–Jesus parallels from John and the Torah; which parallels struck you as strongest or weakest, and how would you test whether this is faithful interpretation or overreach?
Another way to ask: Pike says Deuteronomy 18 must mean an Israelite prophet, and he lists many Moses–Jesus parallels. Which parallels seem strongest or weakest to you, and how would you check if this is good Bible reading or stretching it too far?

Direct Answer From the transcript, the strongest case is the explicit textual requirement that the prophet be an Israelite plus multiple repeated Moses–Jesus connections in John; Chuck’s implied test is to “go back and read” and verify the pattern in Scripture rather than accepting a single clever comparison.

Support from Transcript:

  • He stresses the boundary condition: “a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites…He had to be a Jew according to the prophecy.”
  • He applies this against a foreign claim: “You can’t tell me that the prophet came from Arabia.”
  • He says John highlights the Moses–Jesus parallel “especially…in the first half of the Gospel of John,” giving examples like John 1:17 (Moses vs Jesus), water-to-wine vs water-to-blood, lifted-up serpent, manna/bread.
  • He adds broad-life parallels beyond John (infancy threat, Egypt as child, zeal for holiness, new covenant with blood, mountain encounters, leading through water, hands held up on wood, etc.).
  • His verification method is Berean: “go back and study these things out,” and specifically: “go back and read Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy…and you will find even more parallels.”
Discussion Follow-ups Pick 2–3 parallels and read the original contexts this week—do they naturally point to a “second Moses,” or do they feel forced? What rules should we use to decide when a parallel is legitimate?