1. THE PROPHETIC OFFICE
a. The Normative Navi (Prophet)
The first person who was called a navi (prophet) in the Bible was Abraham (Gen.20:7; cp. Ps.105:15) but Tanakh (Old Testament) prophecy received its normative form in the life and person of Moses, who constituted a standard of comparison for all future nevi'im (prophets) (Dt.18:15-19; 34:10). Every feature which characterised the true navi (prophet) of Yahweh in the classical tradition of the Tanakh (Old Testament) prophecy was first found in Moses.
He received a specific and personal call from Elohim (God). The initiative in making a navi (prophet) rests with Yahweh alone (Ex.3:50-55; cp. Is.6:; Jer.1:4-9; Ezek.1-3; Hos.1:2; Amos 7:14-15; Jonah 1:1), and it is only the false navi (prophet) who dares to take the office upon himself (Jer.14:14; 23:21). The primary object and effect of the call was an introduction into Elohim's (God's) presence, as the passages noted above show. This was the "secret" or "counsel" of Yahweh (1 Ki.22:19; Jer.23:22; Amos 3:7). The navi (prophet) stood before men, as a man who has been made to stand before Elohim (God) (1 Ki.17:1; 18:15).
Again, the prophetic awareness of history stemmed from Moses. When Isaiah makes his tremendous polemic against idolatry, one of his most potent contentions, that Yahweh alone is the Author of prophecy and that the idols are at best wise after the event (e.g. Is.45:20-22), stems directly from Moses and the Exodus. Yahweh sent Moses into Egypt possessed of the clues necessary to interpret the great events which were to follow. History became revelation because there was added to the historical situation a man prepared beforehand to say what it meant. Moses was not left to struggle for the meaning of events as or after they happened - he discerned them beforehand and was warned by Elohim (God) of their significance. So it was with all the nevi'im (prophets). Alone of the nations of antiquity, Israel had a true awareness of history. They owed it to the nevi'im (prophets), and, under the Master of history, the nevi'im (prophets) owed it to Moses.
Likewise they owed to him their ethical and social concern. Even before his call Moses concerned himself with the social welfare of his people (Ex.2:11ff.; cp. v.17), and afterwards, as the prophetic lawgiver, he outlined the most humane and philanthropic code of the ancient world, concerned for the helpless (Dt.24:19-22, etc.) and the enemy of the oppressor (e.g. Lev.19:9ff.).
Many of the nevi'im (prophets) were found confronting their kings and playing an active, statesman's part in national affairs. This was a function of the navi (prophet) which found its prototype in Moses, who legislated for the nation, and was even called "king" (Dt.33:6, NRSV). It is interesting that the first two kings of Israel (Saul and David) were also nevi'im (prophets), but this union of offices did not continue, and the Mosaic-theocratic rule was prolonged by the association of the anointed king and the anointed navi (prophet).
We also find in Moses that combination of proclamation (forthtelling) and prediction (foretelling) which is found in all the nevi'im (prophets). This we will examine in greater detail presently, as a feature of prophecy at large. We will pause only to show that Moses established the norm here also, namely, that in the interests of speaking to the present situation the navi (prophet) often undertakes to enlarge upon events yet to come. It is this interlocking of proclamation and prediction which distinguishes the true navi (prophet) from the mere prognosticator. Even when Moses uttered his great prophecy of the coming Navi (Prophet) (Dt.18:15ff.) he was dealing with the very pressing problems of the relation of the people of Elohim (God) to the practices and allurements of pagan cults.
Two other features characteristic of the nevi'im (prophets) who were to succeed him are found in Moses. Many of the nevi'im (prophets) used symbols in the delivery of their message (e.g. Jer.19:1ff.; Ezek.4:1ff.). Moses used the uplifted hand (Ex.17:8ff.) and the uplifted serpent (Num.21:6), not to mention the highly symbolic system of religious worship which he mediated to the nation. And finally, the intercessory aspect of the prophetic task was also displayed in him. He "represent[ed] the people before Elohim (God)" (Ex.18:19, NRSV; Num.27:5) and on at least one notable occasion literally stood in the breach as a man of prayer (Ex.32:33ff.; Dt.19:18ff.; cp. 1 Ki.13:6; 2 Ki.19:4; Jer.7:16; 11:14; 14:11).
b. Titles of the Nevi'im (Prophets)
Two general descriptions appear to have been used for nevi'im (prophets):
- 1. The first, "man of Elohim (God)", describes how they appeared to their fellow-men. This title was first used of Moses (Dt.33:1) and continued in use till the end of the Monarchy (e.g. 1 Sam.2:27; 9:6; 1 Ki.31:1, etc.). That it was intended to express the difference of character between the navi (prophet) and other men is made perfectly clear by the Shunammite: "I am sure that this man who regularly passes our way is a qadosh (holy, set-apart) man of Elohim (God)" (2 Ki.4:9, NRSV);
- 2. The other general title was "his", "your" (thy) or "my servants". It does not appear that any man ever addressed the navi (prophet) as 'servant of Elohim (God)', but Elohim (God) often described the nevi'im (prophets) as "My servants" and consequently the other pronouns, 'his' and 'your' (thy), were also used (e.g. 2 Ki.7:13,23; 21:10; 24:2; Ezra.9:11; Jer.7:25). Here the other relationship of the navi (prophet) - that towards Yahweh - is expressed, and this also was first a title of Moses (e.g. Josh.1:1-2).
However, passing from the general to the particular, there are three Hebrew words used of the prophet: navi, ro'eh and hozeh. The first of these is always translated 'prophet', the second - which is, in form, an active participle of the verb 'to see', is translated 'seer' (see Visions). The third, also an active participle of another verb, 'to see', is unfortunately without English equivalent and is translated either 'prophet' (e.g. Is.30:10), or 'seer' (e.g. 1 Chr.29:29).
The derivation of navi has been the subject of long debate. The word can be traced to an Akkadian root, and the choice is between the prophet as one who is called, or one who calls, i.e. to men in the Name of Elohim (God). Either of these will admirably suit the nature of the prophet as found in the Tanakh (Old Testament). The possibility that the navi (prophet) is one who calls to Elohim (God), in prayer, is apparent from the start (Gen.20:7), was a mark of a prophetic man.
Nevi'im (prophets) who served kings (like Nathan and King David) were also court historians. Their office included the perception of the meaning of events (Ps.46:8; Is.5:12) and the assessment of character (Ps.11:4,7; 1 Sam.16:1).
c. Foretelling and Forthtelling
The navi (prophet) was primarily a man of the Davar Elohim (Word of God). Even when he seemed to undertake other functions, such as the elborate 'miming' of Ezekiel, it was subordinated to the interests of bringing the Davar Elohim (Word of God) to his fellow-men. This Davar (Word) was not a mere passive opinion, as though Yahweh were anxious simply that men should be aware how He saw matters before they decided for themselves. It was rather the navi's (prophet's) conviction that the proclamation of Yahweh's davar (word) radically changed the whole situation. For example, Isaiah 28-29 shows us a picture of a people struggling for a satisfactory solution to a pressing problem of political expediency, and, in the process, rejecting Yahweh's davar (word). Chapters 30 onwards reveal the situation which then transpires - the problem is no longer one of political balance of power as between Judah, Assyria, and Egypt, on the one hand, and the Davar Elohim (Word of God), on the other. The davar (word) is an active ingredient added to the situation, which is henceforth impelled forward in terms of the davar (word) spoken (Is.40:8; 55:11).
Nevi'im (prophets) spoke to their situation primarily by means of warnings and encouragements concerning the future. Almost every navi (prophet) first appears as a foreteller, as, for example, Amos (1:2). There are three grounds of this practice of foretelling:
- 1. In the first place, it is clearly necessary if people are to exercise due moral responsibility in the present that they should be aware of the future. This at once lifs Tanakh (Old Testament) prediction out of the realm of mere prognostication and carnal curiosity. Calls to repentance (e.g. Is.30:6-9) and calls to practical holiness (e.g. Is.2:5) are equally based on a davar (word) concerning the future; the vision of wrath to come is made the basis of a present seeking of the mercy of Elohim (God); the vision of bliss to come calls to a walking in the light now;
- 2. Secondly, prediction arises from the fact that the nevi'im (prophets) speak in the name of the qadosh (holy, set-apart) Ruler of history. As already mentioned, the navi's (prophet's) call was primarily to a knowledge of Elohim (God). Out of this knowledge sprang the awareness of what He would do, as He guided history according to the unchangeable principles of His qadosh (holy, set-apart) nature. This is to say, that, as nevi'im (prophets), they possessed all the basic information, for by Moses and the Exodus Elohim (God) had declared His Name for ever (Ex.3:15). They were 'in the know' (Amos 3:7); and
- 3. Thirdly, prediction seems to belong to the very idea of the prophetic office. We can see this in Deuteronomy 18:9ff. Israel, entering the land of Canaan, is not only warned about the abominations of the Canaanite cults, such as infant sacrifice, but also about Canaanite religious practitioners, such as diviners. Certainly these men were concerned about what we call 'fortune-telling' - they offered to probe the future by one means or another. For Israel, instead of all these, there will be a navi (prophet) whom Yahweh will raise up from among their brethren. This navi (prophet), speaking in the Name of Yahweh, is to be judged by the accuracy of his forecasts (v.22) - a clear proof that Israel expected prophetic prediction, and that it belonged to the notion of prophecy.
We may note here the extraordinary detailed telepathic and clairvoyant gifts of the nevi'im (prophets). Elisha had the reputation of knowing what was said in secret afar off (2 Ki.6:12) and gave evidence that it was not an inaccurate assessment of his powers. Ezekiel is justly famed for his detailed knowledge of Jerusalem at the time of his residence in Babylon (Ezek.8-11). It is pointless to try and evade this part of the biblical testimony. The nevi'im (prophets) were men of remarkable psychic powers. It is equally unnecessary to question foreknowledge of personal names, such as is exemplified in 1 Kings 13:2 and Isaiah 44:28 (cp. Ac.9:12). Since there is no textual uncertainty at this points, the question is simply one of whether we accept the Tanakh (Old Testament) evidence as to what constitutes Tanakh (Old Testament) prophecy or not. The occurrence of such detailed prediction is perfectly 'at home' in the general picture of prophecy as the Bible reveals it. We should remember that it is illegitimate to pose the problem in terms of our knowledge of this lapse of time between prediction and fulfilment: 'How could the navi (prophet) know the name of someone not born until hundreds of years after his time?' There is nothing about 'hundreds of years' in the passages mentioned. This is our contribution to the question, because we know of the time lapse. The real question is much simpler in statement: 'From what we know of the Tanakh (Old Testament) navi (prophet), is there anything against his foreknowledge of personal names?' In the light of the Tanakh (Old Testament), there is only one possible answer.
2. PROPHETIC INSPIRATION AND METHODS
a. Modes of Inspiration
How did the navi (prophet) receive the message which he was commissioned to convey to his fellows? The answer given in the vast majority of cases is perfectly clear and yet tantalisingly vague: "The davar (word) of Yahweh came...", literally, the verb being 'to be', "the davar (word) of Yahweh became actively present to..." It is a statement of a direct, personal awareness. This is the basic experience of the navi (prophet). It is stated for the first time in Exodus 7:1-2 (cp.4:15-16). Elohim (God) is the author of the words, which he conveys to the navi (prophet), and through him to the people. It is this same experience which Jeremiah had when Yahweh's hand touched his mouth (Jer.1:9), and this passage tells us as much as we are permitted to know: that in the context of personal fellowship which Elohim (God) has brought about, the navi (prophet) receives a donation of words. Jeremiah later expressed this experience as that of 'standing in Yahweh's council' (Jer.23:22) whereby one was then able to make the people hear Elohim's (God's) devarim (words). This, however, adds nothing in the way of psychological explanation.
Dreams and visions also had their place in the inspiration of the navi (prophet). It is sometimes urged that Jeremiah 23:28 teaches the invalidity of dreams as a method of ascertaining the davar (word) of Yahweh. However, in the light of Numbers 12:6-7 and 1 Samuel 28:5,15, which teach the validity of the dream, we see that Jeremiah 23:28 is to be understood as a 'mere dream' or 'a dream of his own fancy'. Indeed, Jeremiah himself appears to have enjoyed the davar (word) of Elohim (God) through a dream (Jer.31:26).
The experience of visions is best exemplified in the navi (prophet) Zechariah, but, like dreams, adds nothing to our knowledge - or rather our ignorance - of the mechanics of inspiration. Exactly the same may be said of the cases where the davar (word) is perceived through a symbol (Jer.18; Amos 7:7ff.; 8:1-3). Inspiration is a miracle; we do not know in what way Yahweh makes the mind of a man aware of His davar (word).
This raises the question of the activity of the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) in prophetic inspiration. There are 18 passages which associate prophetic inspiration with the activity ov the Ruach (Spirit):
- 1. Balaam (Num.24:2);
- 2-5. Prophetic ecstasy (Num.11:29; 1 Sam.10:6,10; 19:20);
- 6-10. The assumption that prophecy arises from the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) (1 Ki.22:14; Joel 2:28-29; Hos.9:7; Neh.9:30; Zech.7:12); and
- 11-18. A direct claim that the prophetic davar (word) is inspired by the Ruach (Spirit) (Mic.3:8; 1 Chr.12:18; 2 Chr.15:1; 20:14; 24:20; Neh.9:20; Ezek.11:5).
It is clear that this evidence is not evenly spread through the Tanakh (Old Testament), and in particular that the pre-exilic nevi'im (prophets) are sparsely represented. Indeed, Jeremiah does not mention the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) in any context whatsoever! This has been taken by some as showing a distinction between the 'man of the davar (word)' and the 'man of the Ruach (Spirit)' (Köhler, Jacob, Vriezen, et al) which we do not accept. The early nevi'im (prophets) were anxious to dissociate themselves from the group-inspiration and frenzy of the so-called 'spirit-possessed' men. The separation of the two is not, therefore, a necessary, or even a probable, conclusion. For one thing, a straightforward identification of the earlier charismatic-type group-ecstatics with the later false nevi'im (prophets), and for another, the davar (word) presupposes the Ruach (Spirit), the creative breath of chayim (life), and for the nevi'im (prophets) there was such evidence of this that they thought it unnecessary to state it explicitly. The nevi'im (prophets) were not 'charismatic' as understood by some modern post-Azusa Christianity.
b. Modes of Communication
The nevi'im (prophets) came before their contemporaries as men with a davar (word) to say. The spoken oracle is the form in which the davar Elohim (word of God) is expressed. Each navi (prophet) stamped the marks of his own personality and experience on this davar (word): the oracles of Amos and Jeremiah are as unlike as are the personalities of the two nevi'im (prophets). There is, therefore, a double awareness in the books of the nevi'im (prophets):
- 1. On the one hand, these devarim (words) which Yahweh gave to the navi (prophet) - He took this man to be His mouthpiece and they are the devarim (words) of Elohim (God);
- 2. On the other hand, these devarim (words) are the words of a certain man, spoken at a certain time, under certain circumstances; and accordingly, many liberal commentators have drawn the erroneous conclusion that the davar (word) became to an extent imperfect and fallible, because it was the davar (word) of imperfect and fallible men - such a conclusion rests upon grounds other than the testimony of the nevi'im (prophets) themselves in so far as we have it in their books, which may be searched without discovering any trace of any suggestion that the nevi'im (prophets) thought the davar (word) through them was in any way less than the davar Elohim (word of God).
Most of the nevi'im (prophets) seemed totally unaware of the existence of voices other than, or contradictory to, their own. They possessed an overwhelming certainty concerning their devarim (words), such as is proper either to lunatics or to men who have stood in the counsel of Elohim (God) and received there what they are to say on earth.
Sometimes the nevi'im (prophets) couched their oracles in the form of parable or allegory (e.g. Is.5:1-7; 2 Sam.12:1-7; and especially Ezek.16 & 23), but the most dramatic presentation of their message was by means of an 'acted oracle'. If we start by thinking of the 'acted oracle' as a 'visual aid' we will end with the wrong conception of its nature and function. Of course, it was a visual aid, but, in association with the Hebrew notion of the efficacy of the davar (word), it served to make the discharge of the davar (word) into the contemporary situation rather more powerful.
This is best seen in the interview between King Joash and the dying Elisha (2 Ki.13:14ff.). In verse 17 the arrow of Yahweh's victory is shot against Syria. The navi (prophet) has introduced the king into a sphere of symbolic action. He now inquires how far the king has emunah (faith) to embrace that davar (word) of promise. The king smites three times, and that is the extent to which the effective davar Elohim (word of God) will achieve accomplishment and not return void. Here we see very vividly the exact relation in which the symbol stood to the davar (word), and in which both stood to the course of events. The davar (word) embodied in the symbol is exceedingly effective - it cannot fail to come to pass. It will accomplish exactly what the symbol declared. Thus, Isaiah walked naked and barefoot (Is.20), Jeremiah smashed a potter's vessel in the place of potsherds (Jer.19), Ahijah tore his new coat into twelve pieces and gave Jeroboam ten (1 Ki.11:29ff.), Ezekiel besieged a model city (Ezek.4:1-3), dug through the house wall (Ezek.12:1ff.), and did not mourn for his dead wife (Ezek.24:15ff.).
We need to distinguish sharply between the acted oracle of the Israelite navi (prophet) and the sympathetic magic of the satanic Canaanite cults. Essentially the latter is a movement from man to a god - the performance of a certain action by man is an attempt to coerce Ba'al, or whatever god was in mind, to function correspondingly. This is the foundation of occultism. The acted oracle was a movement from Yahweh to man: the davar Elohim (word of God), the activity on which Elohim (God) had already decided, was thus declared and promoted on earth. In this, as in every other aspect of biblical religion, the initiative rests solely with Elohim (God).
c. The Books of the Nevi'im (Prophets)
The question of the formation of the Canon is dealt with elsewhere but we cannot evade the question of the compilation of the writings of each navi (prophet). It ought to be taken for granted that each of the prophetic books contains only a selection of the utterances of that navi (prophet), but who did the selecting, editing and arranging? Four examples immediately present themselves:
- 1. The Judean references in the Book of Hosea are probably correctly seen as editorial work after the fall of Samaria, when the navi's (prophet's) oracles were carried south. But who was the editor?
- 2. The series of questions and answers in the Book of Malachi are clearly a deliberate arrangement to convery a total message. Who arranged them?
- 3. On a larger scale, the Book of Isaiah is manifestly a well-edited book. We have only to think of the way in which the series of six "woes"(Is.28-37) fall into two groups of three within which the first three respectively are exactly matched by the second three, or of the way chapters 38 & 39 have been taken out of chronological order to that they may become an historical preface to chapters 40-55. But who was the careful editor? and
- 4. The Book of Ezekiel is a collection of thirteen scrolls which appear not to have been edited (unlike Isaiah) as they are jumbled up out of chronological order, unless they have been arranged by the unknown editor in the current order in order to tell a particular theological story. Theories abound. Of the greatest significance is the fact that modern eschatologists wrongly read it in the order presented and have concluded, incorrectly, that a physical 'Third Temple' is to be authorised by Yahweh, and built by non-Messianic Jews, in the last days. This has, in turn, enabled the pernicious political doctrine of Zionism. The construction of such a temple is imminent in our own day which, according to Messianic Evangelicals, will be an Anti-Messiah (Antichrist) structure and never approved by Yahweh.
If we consult the books themselves we find three hints as to their written composition:
- 1. That the nevi'im (prophets) themselves wrote at least some of their oracles (e.g. Is.30:8; Jer.29:1ff.; cp. 2 Chr.21:12; Jer.29:25; cp. the use of the 1st person in Hos.3:1-5);
- 2. In the case of Jeremiah at least, a lengthy statement of his prophecies so far is made out with the help of a secretary (Jer.36), and that the command is both given and received without any sign that it was at all out of the way; and
- 3. That the nevi'im (prophets) are sometimes associated with a group which was, presumably, the recipient of the teaching of the master-navi (prophet), and may have been the repository of his oracles. Such a group is mentioned as "my talmidim (disciples, learned-, instructed-, taught-ones)" in Isaiah 8:16.
These slender pieces of evidence suggest that the navi (prophet) himself was behind the recording of his own devarim (words), whether by personal act, or by dictation, or by teaching. It could easily have been that the oracles of Isaiah took their present form as a manual of instruction for the navi's (prophet's) talmidim (disciples).
The name "sons of the nevi'im (prophets)" is used of these groups of talmidim (disciples). It is actually found four times of Elijah and Elisha, though Amos 7:14 shows that it survived as a technical term long after. It can be deduced from from 2 Kings 2:3,5 that there were known groups of men settled here and there in the land under the general supervision of an 'authorised' navi (prophet). Elijah, in his effort to spare Elisha the strain of parting, appears to make a customary journey. Elisha in his turn had the management of the prophetic groups or "sons ('companies'- NIV) of the nevi'im (prophets)" (2 Ki.4:38, KJV, NKJV, NASB; 6:1ff.), and availed himself of their services (2 Ki.9:1). Clearly, the members of these groups were men of prophetic gift (2 Ki.2:3,5) but whether they joined the group ny divine call or attached themselves to the navi (prophet), attracted by his teaching, or were called by him, or were the literal biological sons of fathers who were senior nevi'im (prophets), is not clearly stated in Scripture.
There is no need to see in Amos 7:14, as some do, a slur on the the prophetic groups, as though Amos were indignantly distinguishing himself from them. Amos could hardly be denying prophetic status to himself, seeing he is about to assert that Yahweh commanded him to "prophesy" (Heb. hinnabe = 'to perform the part of a navi, Amos 7:15). We may therefore take the words as an indignant rhetorical question, "Am I not a navi (prophet), and a navi's (prophet's) son? Indeed; I was a herdman...and Yahweh took me", or, preferably, "I was no navi (prophet)...and Yahweh took me". Amos is making no sinister accusation against the sons of the nevi'im (prophets) as necessarily professional time-servers, but is alleging the toqef (authority) of a spiritual call as against the accusation of a lack of official status and authorisation.
Very likely, at any rate, it is to such men, grouped around the great nevi'im (prophets), that we owe the safeguarding and transmission of their oracles.
3. TRUE AND FALSE NEVI'IM (PROPHETS)
When Micaiah the son of Imlah and Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah confronted each other before King Ahab, the one warning of defeat and the other promising victory, and both appealing to the toqef (authority) of Yahweh (1 Ki.22), how could they have been distinguished, the true from the false? When Jeremiah faced Hananiah, the former bowing under a yoke symbolising servitude and the latter breaking the yoke symbolising liberation (Jer.28), how could they have been distinguished? Or, a more extreme case, when the "old navi (prophet) in Bethel" brought back the "man of Elohim (God)" out of Judah with a lying message, and then rounded upon him with a true davar Elohim (word of God) (1 Ki.13:18-22), was it possible to tell when he spoke with emet (truth) and when he spoke with deceit? The question of the discrimination of nevi'im (prophets) is by no means academic but thoroughly practical and of the highest spiritual importance.
Certain external characteristics of a general kind have been alleged as distinguishing the true from the false. As we have seen, prophetic 'ecstasy' was the mark of the false navi (prophet) and it has been alleged that Saul was possessed of this 'ecstatic' spirit:
"As Saul turned to leave Samuel, Elohim (God) changed Saul's heart...When they arrived at Gibeah, a procession of nevi'im (prophets) met him; the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) came upon him in power, and he joined in their prophesying. When all those who had formerly known him saw him prophesying with the nevi'im (prophets), they asked each other, 'What is this that has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the nevi'im (prophets)?" (1 Sam.10:9-11, NIV)
The answer is not, as has been claimed by some, that this evident anointing of the Ruach (Spirit) was in any way to be likened to modern charismatic tongue-speaking or unseemly behaviours - it was not induced (as in occultism) by music (1 Sam.10:5; 2 Ki.3:15) or by ritual dance (1 Ki.18:28). Rather, praising Yahweh, singing, dancing and prophesying were a natural response to the anointing given. Neither was he rendered insensible to pain, as has been suggested, but rather:
"So Saul went to Naioth at Ramah. But the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) came even upon him, and he walked along prophesying until he came to Naioth. He stripped off his robes and also prophesied in Samuel's presence. He lay that way all that day and night. This is why people say, 'Is Saul also among the prophets?'" (1 Sam 19:23-24, NIV).
Being filled by the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit), leading to spontaneous worship, sometimes involving believers going into vision for longer or shorter periods of time, seems to have been a common feature of the Old Covenant nevi'im (prophets) specifically and was not uniquely a phenomenon of the the New Covenant (1 Sam.9;10, etc.). This is to be sharply contrasted against pagan Ba'alist ecstatic behaviour which was demon-induced and rendered the one thus possessed very self-forgetful and quite insensible to pain:
"So [the prophets of Ba'al] shouted louder and slashed themselves with swords and spears, as was their custom, until their blood flowed" (1 Kings 18:28, NIV).
Saul's joining the the nevi'im (prophets), which signified his becoming a new man (1 Sam.10:6) rather like a new birth), had nothing in common with either Ba'alism or modern counterfeits in charismatic Christianity. To better understand the kind of ecstasy the navi (prophet) experienced, and the nature of the spirit under which he operated, we need look no further than Isaiah and Ezekiel when they were operating in the prophetic. Thus there is a very clear separation and difference between Israelite (and by extension, Messianic Israelite) prophetic ecstasy and that of the Ba'alists, providing one good means of distinguishing between a true and a false navi (prophet) where ecstatic (enthusiastic, emotional) behaviour is involved.
Another suggested identification of false prophecy was professionalism: they were the paid servants of some king or other and it was to their interest to say what would please the king. A true navi (prophet) is not paid for his services. It has been suggested that Samuel and Nathan were 'professional' nevi'im (prophets), Nathan being a court official, but there is no evidence that either were paid to 'prophesy'. It has also been alleged that Amos was a 'professional' navi (prophet) and that he was paid by King Amaziah:
"Then Amaziah said to Amos, 'Get out, you seer! Go back to the land of Judah. Earn your bread there and do your prophesying there" (Amos 7:12, NIV).
More than likely, nevi'im (prophets) in court service were employed to be tutors, recorders, historical chroniclers, and the like, and it was probably by this means that Amos 'earned his bread'. The court nevi'im (prophets) were found in groups, like the 400 consulted by the king of Israel in 1 Kings 22. Their professional status could have been a corrupting influence leading to sycophancy, as we know happened to the priesthood on occasion, Pashhur being a prime example (Jer.20).
There are three notable discussions of the whole question of false prophecy in the Tanakh (Old Testament). The first is in Deuteronomy 13 & 18. Dealing with the latter chapter first, it states a negative test: what does not come to pass was not spoken by Yahweh. The wording here ought to be strictly observed - it is not a simple statement that fulfilment is the hall-mark of genuineness, for as Deuteronomy 13:1ff. indicates, a sign may be given and come to pass and yet the navi (prophet) be false. Inevitably, fulfilment was looked for as proof of genuine, godly utterance: Moses complained when what was spoken "in the name" failed to have the desired effect (Ex.5:23). Jeremiah saw in the visit of Hanamel proof that the davar (word) was from Yahweh (Jer.32:8). But Deuteronomy states only the negative, because that alone is safe and correct. What Yahweh says will always find fulfilment, but sometimes the davar (word) of the false is fulfilled also, as a test for Elohim's (God's) people.
Thus, we turn to Deuteronomy 13, and the answer to the problem of discerning the false navi (prophet): the test is a theological one, the revelation of Elohim (God) at the Exodus. The essence of the false navi (prophet) is that he calls the people to "follow other gods whom you have not known" (Dt.13:2, NRSV), thus speaking "treason (rebellion) against Yahweh your Elohim (God)...who brought you out of the land of Egypt" (Dt.123:5,10, NRSV). Here we see the final feature of Moses, the normative navi (prophet): he also fixed the theological norm by which all subsequent teaching could be judged. A navi (prophet) might allege that he spoke in the name of Yahweh, but if he did not acknowledge the toqef (authority) of Moses and subscribe to the doctrines of the Exodus he was a false navi (prophet).
This is substantially the answer, also, of Jeremiah. The sensitive navi (prophet) could not carry off the contest with the robust assurance which seemed so natural to Isaiah and Amos. The question of personal certainty was one which he could not evade, and yet he could not answer it except by the tautologous 'certainty is certainty'. We find him in the heat of the struggle in Jeremiah 23:9ff. It is clear from a reading of these verses that Jeremiah can find no external tests of the navi (prophet): there is here no allegation of ecstasy or professionalism. Nor does he find the essence of the false navi (prophet) to consist in the acquisition of his oracles by dreams - that is, there is no test based on prophetic technique.
This is what Jeremoah alleges: the false navi (prophet) is a man of immoral life (Jer.23:10-14) and he places no barrier to immorality in others (v.17), whereas the true navi (prophet) seeks to stem the tide of sin and to call people to holiness (v.22). Again, the message of the false navi (prophet) is one of peace, without regard to the moral and spiritual conditions which are basic to shalom (peace) (v.17); whereas the true navi (prophet) has a message of judgment upon sin (v.29).
Jeremiah ought not to be understood to say that the true navi (prophet) cannot have a message of shalom (peace). This is one of the most damaging notions that has ever entered the study of the nevi'im (prophets) and has been responsible for more subjective carving up of prophetic texts than any other. There is a time when shalom (peace) is the message of Elohim (God); but it will always be in Exodus terms, that shalom (peace) can come only when holiness is satisfied concerning sin. And this is exactly what Jeremiah is urging: the voice of the true navi (prophet) is always the voice of the Torah (Law) of Yahweh, once for all declared through the voice of Moses. Thus Jeremiah is bold to say that the false nevi'im (prophets) were men of borrowed testimony, feigned toqef (authority), and self-appointed ministry (vv.30-32), whereas the true navi (prophet) has stood in the counsel of Yahweh, and heard His voice, and has been sent by Him (vv.18,21-22,28,32). Jeremiah's final position is in fact that 'certainty is certainty', but he is rescued from tautology by the positive revelation of Elohim (God). He knows he is right because his experience is the Mosaic experience of standing before Elohim (God) (cp. Num.12:6-8; Dt.34:10).
The answer of Ezekiel is substantially that of Jeremiah, and is found in Ezekiel 12:21-14:11. Ezekiel tells us that there are nevi'im (prophets) who are guided by their own wisdom and have no davar (word) from Yahweh (Ezek.13:2-3). Thus they make people trust in lies and leave them without resource in the day of trial (Ezek.13:4-7). The mark of these nevi'im (prophets) is their message: it is one of shalom (peace) and shallow optimism (Ezek.13:10-16), and it is devoid of moral content, grieving the righteous, and encouraging the wicked (v.22). By contrast, there is a navi (prophet) who insists on piercing to the core of the matter, answering folk not according to their ostensible quieries but according to their sinful hearts (Ezek.14:4-5), for the davar (word) of Yahweh is always a davar (word) against sin. We see again that the true navi (prophet) is the Mosaic navi (prophet). It is not just that in a vague sense he has a direct experience of Elohim (God), but that he has been commissioned by the Elohim (God) of the Exodus to reiterate once again to Israel the moral requirements of the covenant.
4. THE NEVI'IM (PROPHETS) IN THE RELIGION OF ISRAEL
a. Prophecy Among the Cohenim (Priests)
"Then the Ruach (Spirit) of Yahweh came upon Jahaziel son of Zecharaiah, son of Beniah, son of Jeiel, son of Mattaniah, a Levite of the sons of Asaph, in the middle of the Assembly" (2 Chr.20:14, NRSV).
In a time of national anxiety King Jehoshaphat has led his people in public prayer in the court of Yahweh's House. Immediately upon the conclusion of the prayer, a Levite inspired by the Ruach haQodesh (Holy Spirit), brings a davar (word) from Yahweh promising victory. Here, then, is a Levite, that is, a priestly official, with a prophetic capacity. A further indication of the same happening is said to occur in some psalms (e.g. Ps.60; 75; 82; etc.). In all these psalms there is a section in which a first person singular ("I") voice speaks: this is the oracular response, the navi (prophet) associated with the priestly circle, bringing the contemporary utterance of Elohim (God) to His people.
We first meet a prophetic guild at the high place at Gibeah (1 Sam.10:5). Samuel, the navi (prophet), was an official at Shiloh (1 Sam.3:19), and officiated at a priestly meal at Ramah (1 Sam.9:12ff.). The navi (prophet) Gad commanded David to erect the altar in Araunah's threshing floor (2 Sam.24:11,18), and revealed Elohim's (God's) will concerning the guilds of temple singers (2 Chr.29:25). The navi Nathan was consulted about the building of the Temple (2 Sam.7:1ff.); Elijah staged a priestly scene at an ancient shrine (1 Ki.18:30ff.) and it was customary to visit the navi (prophet) on the divine moedim (appointments) of the New Moon and Sabbath (2 Ki.4:23), a practice continued in a new Covenant form by Messianic Evangelicals in the giving of prophetic devarim (words) at these times of assembly. There are numerous references in which the navi (prophet) and cohen (priest) are coupled together, showing that the gift of prophecy was exercised outside the office of navi (prophet), but seemingly only in the priestly class under the Old Covenant.
b. Nevi'im (Prophets) vs. the Mosiac System?
A false claim sometimes advanced by both liberals, vegatarians, and extreme antinomian (lawless) conservatives, who like to pit the Old vs. the New Testament, is that the nevi'im (prophets) were outside the Mosaic priestly 'cult', as they deridingly call it, and were opposed to the sacrificial system. The crux of this argument is a statement made by the navi (prophet) Amos:
"I hate, despise your moedim (festivals), and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings, I will not accept them; and the offerings of well-being (peace) of your fatted animals I will not look upon. Take away from Me the noise of your songs; I will not listen to the melody of your harps. But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an over-flowing stream. Did you bring to Me sacrifices and offerings the forty years in the wilderness, O house of Israel?" (Amos. 5:21-25, NRSV).
The liberals, vegetarians, vegans, and antinomians are expecting a "No!" answer to the last sentence. However, the issue here is not that the children of Israel made sacrifices, observed festivals and held solemn assemblies or sang and played music) but that a moral concern and qadosh (holy, set-apart) life was missing from their worship. The last verse enforces the emet (truth) that there things are not an 'either/or' but are inseparable sides of religion according to the will of Elohim (God).
According to Proverbs 8:10, we are to "take [] instruction instead of silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold" (NRSV). Clearly this is a statement of priorities, not an exclusion of one thing in favour of the other. The importance of this verse is that its Hebrew is exactly parallel in construction to that of Hosea 6:6. In the light therefore of Hosea's failure to maintain an attitude of rejection towards the Mosaic system throughout the rest of his prophecy, there can be no doubt that he intends here a statement of priorities such as was given classical expression by Samuel:
"Surely, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams" (1 Sam.15:23, NRSV).
Similar attempts are made by liberals and antinomians to attribute to Isaiah 1:11-15 a rejection of the sabbath (v.13) and prayer (v.15). As Amos, Isaiah is simply urging that no outward religious activity avails in the context of a blatanely sinful life:
"What to Me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says Yahweh; I have had enough of burnt offerings and rams and the fat of fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats. When you come to appear before Me, who asked this from your hand? Trample My courts no more; bringing offerings is futile, incense is an abomination to me. New moon and sabbath and calling of convocations - I cannot endure solemn assemblies with inquity. Your new moons and your appointed festivals My soul hates; they have become a burden to Me, I am weary of bearing them. When you stretch out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen; your hands are full of blood" (Is.1:11-15, NRSV).
The traditional interpretation is proved to be correct by the initial verbs of verse 16, the first of which is constantly used throughout the Levitical code for ceremonial purification, a very unlikely verb for a navi (prophet) to use if he considered all such things contrary to Yahweh's will; the second verb applies to moral purgation:
"Wash your hands, make yourself clean; remove the evil of your doings from before My eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow" (Is.1:16-17, NRSV).
The navi's (prophet's) message is thus the Bible's message: the message of the joint requirement of the moral and outer, ceremonial Torah.
That the same attempt has been made by both Christian liberal and conservative antinomians to eliminate outer observances (like baptism, the Master's Supper, the divine moedim or festivals, and the kashrut dietary rules) should not, therefore, come as a surprise. In Micah 6:6-8 we have somewhat of an analagous situation in the words of Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) to the rich young ruler (Mk.10:17ff.) who clearly had the same attitude toward inner morality and outer observance. By His exclusive reply in terms of the moral Torah (Law) does He intend to deny the divine toqef (authority) of the outer Torah (Law) of atoning sacrifice? In view of His constant regard for the Mosaic legislation (e.g. Mt.8:4) not to mention His authentication in terms of Tanakh (Old Testament) sacrifice by His teaching concerning His own death (Mk.14:24), this liberal interpretation is at once nullified. Or again, we might ask if Leviticus 18:5, presenting the moral Torah (Law) as a way of life, intends to invalidate the ceremonial Torah (Law) under the Old Covenant system? Likewise in the case of Micah, we must not understand him to reject whatever he does not specifically approve.
One of the most difficult passages to understand is Jeremiah 7:21-23, which is why the background facts have been attended to first:
"Thus says Yahweh of hosts, the Elohim (God) of Israel: Add your burnt offerings to your sacrifices, and eat the flesh. For in the day that I brought your ancestors out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to them or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this mitzvah (command) I gave them, 'Obey My voice, and I will be your Elohim (God), and you shall be My people; and walk only in the way that I command you, so that it may be well with you'" (Jer.7:21-23, NRSV).
If Jeremiah, in the immediate context, seems, at the least, not to condemn sacrifice as per se unacceptable, may we so interpret verse 22? The difficulty is that, on the face of it, the wording seems to require us to do so. However, closer examination of the Hebrew suggests that the difficulty belongs more to the English translation than to the original. The preposition which the English gives as "concerning" - the vital word in the whole verse - is the Hebrew 'al-divre, which can only mean 'concerning' by a radical weakening of its real significance 'because of' or 'for the sake of' (cp. Gen.20:11; 43:18; Ps.17, title; Jer.14:1; etc.). According to this, Yahweh did not address Israel either 'because of' sacrifices: that is to say, the performance of sacrifice is not a means whereby pressure may be applied to Elohim (God); nor did He address them 'for the sake of' sacrifices, for the living Elohim (God) stands in no need of anything man can supply. The nation has missed the divine priority by its concentration on the mere operation of a religious system (like a church, denomination, organisation, etc.), for the system is not a thing which exists on its own but rather for the sake of the spiritual needs of a people committed to obedience to the moral Torah (Law) of Elohim (God).
We shall conclude with Isaiah 43:22ff., which is, in many ways, the most difficult verse of all:
"Yet you did not call upon Me, O Jacob, but you have been weary of Me, O Israel" (Is.43:22, NRSV).
The emphasis in verse 22 requieres the translation, "Not Me have you called...". On the supposition that this sets the tone of address throughout the verses, we are already clearly within the same circle of possibilities:
- 1. Either there is an indignant repudiation of the whole idea of divine authorisation of sacrifice: 'whatever you may think you appeal to in your outward observances, it is not I, for I did not burden you with offerings'; or
- 2. The accusation is that they abused the divine intention: 'in all your outward labour you have not really called upon Me, for it was never My plan that the ordinances should turn you into slave-labour of ritual.
These alternatives of interpretation are so clear in the text that we may simply ask whether there are any other evidences whereby we might decide between them. The general consent of Scripture points to the second suggestion. Since there is no need to interpret the other cricial verses an an outright denial of sacrifice, we ought to reject that meaning here also. Moreover, within Isaiah, we have to reckon with 44:28, clearly approving the rebuilding of the Temple: for Isaiah to repudiate sacrifice and yet rejoice in the Temple would involve a complete contradiction in terms. There is also the inescapably sacrificial language of Isaiah 53.
c. The Unity of Israel's Religion
The religion of Israel began, as to its normative form, with the navi-cohen (prophet-priest) Moses, and it continued as a religion jointly of navi (prophet) and cohen (priest). This is declared in the covenant ceremony in Exodus 24:4-8. Yahweh has redeemed His people according to promise and they have acquiesced in the Torah (Law) He has imposed on them as His redeemed people. Moses expressed the relationship symbolically: twelve pillars grouped around an altar (Ex.24:4). Here is the visual expression of the fulfilment of the covenant promise:
"I will take you as My people, and I will be your Elohim (God)" (Ex.6:7, NRSV).
Notably, Elohim (God) is represented as an altar, for the qadosh (holy, set-apart) Elohim (God) - the primary revelation of Elohim (God) to Moses (Ex.3:5) - can dwell among sinners only by virtue of the atoning dahm (blood). Hence, the first thing Moses does with the dahm (blood )is to sprinkle it upon the altar. As at Pesach (Passover), the initial movement of the blood towards Elohim (God) is propitiation (Ex.12:13).
The ceremony proceeds with the peoples' self-dedication to obedience to the Torah (Law), and then the dahm (blood) is sprinkled on them. It is thus declared that while the people are brought to Elohim (God) by means of the blood of propitiation, the people themselves need the blood also in in the context of their obligation to keep Elohim's (God's) qadosh (holy, set-apart) Torah (Law). This, then, is the unity of navi (prophet) and cohen (priest): the former calls continually to obedience; the latter reminds constantly of the efficiacy of the dahm (blood). If we drive them apart, the former becomes a moralist and the latter a ritualist; if we keep them together, as the religion of Israel does, and as the Bible does, we see the whole wonder of the Elohim (God) whom navi (prophet) and cohen (priest) - and apostle too (in the New Covenant) - proclaimed: a just Elohim (God), and a Saviour or Deliverer, who will never relax His demand that His people walk in the light and be qadosh (holy, set-apart) as He is qadosh (holy, set-apart), and who sets alongside that inflexible demand the dahm (blood) which cleanses from all sin.
5. NEVI'IM (PROPHETS) IN THE MESSIANIC SCRIPTURES
a. Authentication of the Tanakh (Old Testament) Nevi'im (Prophets)
Prophecy and the nevi'im (prophets) form the greatest line of continuity between the Tanakh (Old Testament) and Messianic Scriptures (New Testament). The Old Covenant prophetic line did not end with Malachi, so to speak, but with John the Baptist. This is the express teaching of our Master: "For all the nevi'im (prophets) and the Torah (Law) prophesied until John came..." (Mt.11:13, NRSV). The customary division into two 'Testaments' unfortunately obscures this marvelous unity unity of Elohim's (God's) program of revelation, but the line is contentious from Moses to John. We see in John, as indeed in his father, Zacharias (Lk.1:67-79), the pattern of Tanakh (Old Testament) prophecy repeated - the unity of proclamation and prediction. It was the prediction of wrath to come (Lk.3:7) and of grace to come (Lk.3:16; Jn.1:29ff.) that gave John such a potent message for his generation.
Furthermore, the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) stands in a relation of fulfilment to the actual message of the Tanakh (Old Testament) nevi'im (prophets). Time and again this is the burden of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament): what Elohim (God) said of old He has now brought to pass (Mt.1:22; 26:56; Lk.24:25,27,44; Ac.10:43, etc.). The importance of this feature of the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) in authentication of the Tanakh (Old Testament) can hardly be over-emphasised. The nevi'im (prophets) can never be men of mere antiquarian attraction for us. Though a persecuted minority (Mt.5:12; 22:29-37; Lk.6:23, etc.), they are the most important voice coming to us from the ancient past, for they are not mere dreamers or idle speculators. They are raised to the level of proclaimers of eternal emet (truth) by the verification of their greatest devarim (words) in the greatest of all events, the person and work of Messiah.
We can state the matter more completely. The Master Yah'shua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) Himself points us back to the nevi'im (prophets) and their message as a permanent revelation of Elohim (God). They stand in the relation of authorised teachers of the Messianic Community (Christian Church), men whose devarim (words) are still to be heeded as the Davar Elohim (Word of God). For Elohim (God) has set His seal to their message, both by the fact of fulfilment and by the positive teaching of His Son (Mt.5:17, etc.).
b. Prophets in the Messianic Community
Every believer is potentially a navi (prophet) and indeed must be when it comes to testifying of Messiah (Rev.1:10). The pouring out of the Ruach (Spirit) on all flesh carries with it this result, "and they shall prophesy" (Ac.2:18, NRSV). Paul called upon the Corinthian qodeshim (saints, set-apart ones) to "strive for the spiritual gifts, and especially that you may prophesy" (1 Cor.14:1, NRSV) concerning Messiah. We see this actually happening in the case of the Ephesians in Acts 19:6, in the daughters of Philip (Ac.21:9), and in the men and women of the Corinthian Assembly (Church) (1 Cor.11:4-5).
However, there was, in the New Testament Community, also a special group known as 'nevi'im (prophets)' set apart for the ministry of prophecy. They are mentioned next after apostles in the lists of ministries (1 Cor.12:28-29; Eph.4:11). They are associated with teachers in the assembly (church) at Antioch (Ac.13:1), the two senior grades of ministry under the apostles. As we meet them in Acts and the Epistles, their function was the customary double prophetic ministry of proclamation and prediction. Agabus, one of the few nevi'im (prophets) named for us, is noted for prediction (Act.11:28; 21:10-11), making use of this power of foresight to issue spiritual guidance to the Messianic Community (Church). The whole book of Revelation is the most outstanding example in the Bible of foretelling harnassed to the task of forthtelling. In their capacity as preachers to the Messianic Community (Church), their work is described as exhortation (Ac.15:32), edification, and consolation (1 Cor.14:3). The reaction of the non-Christian to the ministry of the nevi'im (prophets) shows that they were preachers of the whole message of sin and salvation, wrath and grace.
In the context of the congregational meeting (1 Cor.14:26ff.) the ministry of the navi (prophet) is spoken of as revelation (v.30). This could take the form of spontaneous utterance, and is associated with the Ruach Elohim (Spirit of God) (cp. 1 Thes.5:19). This prophetic activity is not the same as speaking supernaturally in a foreign language ('tongues' - see 1 Cor.14:22-25,27-29), nor is it the interpretation of tongues. It is some perception of the emet (truth) of Elohim (God) directly and intelligibly made to the assembly. It was an abuse of prophecy to pretend to an ecstatic frenzy so that the nevi'im (prophets) became, as it were, out of hand. Paul insists that "the spirits of [the] nevi'im (prophets) are subject to the nevi'im (prophets)", that is to say, each is in full possession of his faculties and is able to restrain the impulse to speak if the interests of order so require (vv.32-33). Most important of all, the nevi'im (prophets) were not to be given undiscerning credance.
Two tests were applied to any prophetic utterance:
- 1. First, there was the test of the experience of other nevi'im (prophets) present. The apostle says, "let the others weigh [in the balance] (discern) what is said" (v.29, NRSV), that is, let them subject the utterance which is being made to their knowledge of Elohim (God) and His emet (truth);
- 2. Secondly, there is the over-all test of the apostolic deposit. The test of any true navi (prophet), or any man who lays claim to spirituality, is that he must acknowledge "that what I am writing to you is a mitzvah (command) of the Master. Anyone who does not recognise this is not to be recognised" (vv.37-38, NRSV), for apart from this there is nothing but ignorance.
This teaches us that the nevi'im (prophets) were not sources of new emet (truth), but expounders of emet (truth) otherwise revealed, following the divine tavnith (pattern) of building upon extant revelation. Just as the Tanakh (Old Testament) navi (prophet) stood in a subordinate relation to Moses, who provided the doctrinal norm of sound teaching, so the New Testament navi (prophet) stood toward the apostles, and was bound to submit to the test of that which they declared as the Davar Elohim (Word of God). It is in this sense that the apostle urged the Messianic Community (Church) of his day, and would urge us also, to desire earnestly to prophesy: not to desire the notoriety of doctrinal innovators, but to contend earnestly for the emet (truth) once for all delivered to the qodeshim (saints, set-apart ones) (Jude 3).
6. THE NEVIA OR PROPHETESS
Throughout both Testaments 'prophetess' (Heb. nevia, Gk. prophétis) is used in a wide sense of women as 'navi (prophet)' is used of men.
Prophetesses specifically named are Miriam, sister of Moses, who led a choral dance in celebration of Israel's deliverance from Egypt (Ex.15:20), Deborah, wife of Lappidoth, "a mother in Israel" (Judg.5:7, NRSV), who was consulted as an inter-tribal judge (Judg.4:4), Huldah, wife of the keeper of the royal wardrobe, who declared the divine will to Josiah after the discovery of the Book of Torah (2 Ki.22:14), Noadiah, who joined other nevi'im (prophets) in attempting to intimidate Nehemiah (Neh.6:14), and Anna, who praised Elohim (God) in the Temple at the appearance of the infant Messiah (Lk.2:36ff.).
Isaiah's wife is called "the nevia (prophetess)" (Is.8:3, NRSV), whether because she was the navi's (prophet's) wife or because she was one in her own right, is not clear. Philip's four unnamed daughters prophesied in Caesarea (Ac.21:9). In the early Messianic Community (Church), as Paul's Corinthian correspondence indicates, the gift of prophecy was exercised by various believers irrespective of gender (cp. 1 Cor.11:4ff.). This was in accordance with the prediction of Joel who said that "your sons and your daughters shall prophesy" (Joel 2:28, NRSV), fulfilled on the day of the first Messianic Shavu'ot (Weeks, 'Pentecost').
There were false prophetesses as well as false prophets in Israel (cp. Ezek.13:17). In the Messianic Scriptures (New Testament) unenviable notoriety is attained by "that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a nevia (prophetess)" (Rev.2:20, NRSV).
THE NCAY REGISTERS
The register that follows is divided into several categories:
- Prophecies received by the Presiding Patriarch, Lev-Tsiyon, and others of the New Covenant Assemblies of Yahweh (plus one or two from outside our community) that have been released to the public. These may be found in two sections:
- I. The Olive Branch (1970-1997) which was published in 1997; and
- II. Prophecies published in articles & sermons since 1977 not found in the Olive Branch Revelations.
Not all the propehcies of NCAY (which run into the thousands) are for public scrutiny but are to be had in the Holy Order (Chavurat Bekorot) and not all those that are available to the public are in this register because there are simply too many of them.
- III. NCCG.ORG Prophecy sub-sites, collections of prophecies that pertain to a particular nation (like Great Britian), certain people (like Donald Trump) or to prophetic events (like judgment).
- IV. Articles about the nature of prophecy itself and the biblical nevi'im (prophets)
It is our hope to add a number of other categories in due course such as:
- a. Prophecies concerning the nations; and
- b. NCAY prophecies that have already been fulfilled, partially fulfilled, or are still awaiting fulfilment.
(6 May 2018)
|
= Key Prophecies Associated with NCAY's Mission
