Judaism Notes Edited 1 1 1

1
LIEBENBERG HIGH FAMILY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES NOTES JUDAISM ADVNCED LEVEL
COVENANTS IN JUDAISM
This involves a mutual agreement entered into by two individuals, or by two groups or an
individual and a group. The effect was that peace prevailed between the two parties involved.
In this case the covenant was between Yahweh and Israel. Here Yahweh was understood to
be actively at work with Israel to guide his people in the path of truth and fidelity to the
covenant. To maintain mutual understanding between these two parties, Yahweh elected the
prophets as covenant mediators. They officiated at sanctuaries. As God’s representatives,
prophets would admonish, reprove, denounce prevailing sins, threaten people with terror of
divine judgement, call people to repentance and proclaim Yahweh’s divine assurance.
Prophets would advise Israelites to put away foreign gods and worship Yahweh alone. They
called upon Israel to face the most severe judgement of Yahweh upon them for their sins and
apostacy.
Prophets never claimed to be introducing anything new, they were reformers who took their
stand on the ground of Sinai. Although their contributions were moral, ethical and theological,
prophets functioned as agents of social change. They were absolutely against social injustice
to the extent that some scholars like K. Whitelam would want to argue that prophets were
usually from the social fringes (they were poor), they were spokespersons of the deprived,
the voice of the voiceless. They were calling for interrelationship between justice, order,
fertility and prosperity. If the king failed to provide justice then the social, politlical and
ecological structure was believed to be thrown open to the ever present powerof chaos. It is
this loyalty to God which stands behind the prophet’s denunciation of Israel.
Elijah came on the scene when there was widespread apostacy and the majority of people
becoming strongly attached to foreign gods. There was an alarming growth of social injustice,
e.g. the killing of Naboth (1 Kings 21). The whole structure of Israelite society was threatened
by the harsh economic system, hence Elijah and Elisha together with the prophetic guilds
declared war on the Omrides and became instrumental in bringing about their downfall. Amos
as a social reformer condemned socio- ethical practices which under the Canaanite feudal
system were regarded as ethical, e.g. dishonest trade practices, luxurious lifestyle of the rich
and oppression of the poor. They were sold for a pair of shoes.
During the monarchical period kingship was seen in an ambivalent light, too dangerous an
institution to go unchecked by the tenets of covenant faith. Prophets therefore intervened
not because they had political ambitions, but they were crying for interrelationship between
justice and prosperity. In fact the functioned as a conscience of people but not to dictate its
politics. Political success was only important to the prophets if it had to do with spiritual
goodness.
SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 1

2
COVENANTS IN ISRAEL
What is a covenant?
 A covenant is a binding agreement between two or more parties. Felix Just, a covenant
is ‘a formal agreement, contract, testament, or treaty between two parties, with specific
obligations on each side’.
 Covenant is coming from the Hebrew word ‘berith’ translated as "treaty", "pact",
"agreement", "solemn promise", "obligation" or more familiarly as "covenant"
 Biblical covenants, refer to instances where God has entered into an agreement with
mankind that involves both promises and responsibilities for each party.
 Five of the primary covenants in the Old Testament are the Noahic, Abrahamic,
Mosaic, Davidic, and the New Covenant.
Characteristics of Covenants
 Covenants often promise specific benefits, rewards, or blessings for people who keep
the terms of the covenant;
 but they also threaten sanctions, punishments, or curses for people who break the terms
of the covenant.
 covenants need to be ratified formally, usually sealed with blood, and thus often involve
animal sacrifices;
 the parties involved might be individuals, families, states, kings, or even God; the
parties might be on the same level (two families, two kings) with mutual obligations
agreed upon freely or they might be on different levels (God and humans; a large empire
and a smaller nation) with the stronger party imposing the conditions on the weaker
party (obedience, taxes, tribute) in exchange for certain benefits protection).
Categories of Covenants in the Old Testament
1. Noahic Covenant (covenant with creation).

Key scripture Genesis 9. It was a covenant between God and Noah in which Noah was
the representative of both mankind and the creation. Covenant conditions.
1. Prohibitions against murder and the consumption of blood (9:4-6).

2. Sanctity of human life, i.e., that “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his
blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.”
3. Following punishment through the flood God promised Noah not to destroy the whole
human race again with a universal flood flood.
Gen 9:11, “I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut
off by the waters of a flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the
earth.”
3. The Lord made an everlasting covenant with Noah and his descendants,
establishing the rainbow as the sign of His promise (Gen. 9:1-17).

3
Sign of the covenant is the rainbow. As long as God still sends rainbows after a
storm, capital punishment will still be a part of God's law for the human race.
2. Abrahamic Covenant
God established the Abrahamic covenant in Genesis 12.1-3 and confirmed it
in Genesis 13.14-17; 15.1-21; 17.1-27; 22.17-18; 26.1-5; 28.10-17; 32.12; 48.3-
4; 50.24.
This covenant was a sovereign promise God made with Abraham. Its validity and
fulfilment depend wholly upon God’s sovereign faithfulness.
The elements of the Covenant were that God would make Abraham great, that he
and his seed would be a blessing to all mankind, that God would bless those who
blessed them and curse him that cursed him, that Abraham would have innumerable
offspring (physical and spiritual), and that God would give Abraham and his
offspring land– “from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river
Euphrates.”
Abrahamic Covenant Promises and Provisions Scripture
God will make Abraham a great nation Genesis 12.2
God will bless Abraham Genesis 12.2; 22.17
God will make Abraham’s name great Genesis 12.2
God will make Abraham a blessing to the whole world Genesis 12.2, 3; 22.18
God will bless those who bless Abraham and his descendants 1 Genesis 12.3
God will curse the one who curses Abraham and his descendants Genesis 12.3
Eternal land grant from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates Genesis 12.6-7; 13.14-15, 15.7, 17.7-8
God will give Abraham innumerable descendants Genesis 15.5; 13.16; 17.2; 22.17
God will make Abraham a father of many nations Genesis 17.4-6
God will establish this covenant forever Genesis 17.7
Circumcision was the sign of the covenant Genesis 17.10-14
Established through the line of Isaac/Jacob, not Ishmael Genesis 17.19-21;
Abraham’s seed will overcome its enemies Genesis 22.17
God confirmed twice to Abraham the promises made to Abraham in Genesis 15 and 17.
The promises form three categories: a) Descendants (12:2; 15:5; 17:4-5; 22:17); b)
Land (12:7; 13:15; 15:18; 17:18) c) Blessing to the nations (12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4;
28:14).

4
3. The Mosaic Covenant (Sinai Covenant)

Upon seeing the suffering of the children of Israel under Pharaoh’s bondage,
God remembered his covenant with Abraham. The people cried out to the God
of their forefathers. “And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his
covenant with Abraham, with Isaac, and Jacob. And God saw the people of
Israel, and God knew their condition.” (Ex. 2:24). After a series of ten plagues
upon the land of Egypt, God brought the Israelites out (Exo. 32:11).
Three months after leaving the land of Egypt, the children of Israel camped at
the base of Mount Sinai (Exo. 19:1). God promised to make a covenant with
the Israelites (Exo. 19:3-6). Before they even knew the conditions of the
contract, the people agreed to abide by whatever God said (Exo. 19:8).
The covenant was mediated by Moses. This covenant was between God and the
people of Israel. The Ten Commandments are the foundation of the covenant,
but they are not the entirety of it.
After giving the first ten commands, the people asked the Lord to speak no more
(Exo. 20:18-20).
Moses then drew near to the presence of God to hear the rest of the covenant
(Exo. 20:21). After receiving the Law, Moses spoke the words of the covenant
to all of the people, and the people agreed to obey (Exo. 24:4).
Moses then wrote the conditions of the covenant down, offered sacrifices to
God, and then sprinkled both the book and the people with blood to seal the
covenant (Exo. 24:8).
4. Palestinian or land Covenant

The Palestinian or Land covenant (Deuteronomy 9.1-29, 10.11, 11.8-12, 22-25, 29-31,
12.1, 10-12, 20, 29, 30.1-10).
It reinforces the land aspect of the Abrahamic covenant and was sovereignly
established and eternal.
It specifies the geographical boundaries of the promised land of Canaan. God
promised to the nation of Israel the land from the river of Egypt to the Euphrates
river (Genesis 15.18).
5. Davidic Covenant
2 Sam 7 In response to David's expressed desire to build a temple for the Lord in
Jerusalem the Lord spoke through the prophet Nathan. God’s covenant with David is
also called the Royal Zion Theology or Ideology.
Covenant mediated by the court prophet Nathan and established everlasting promises.
Key characters in the covenant promises are the city of Jerusalem, Solomon, King
David, and his descendants.
Promises: 1. David was not the one to build a temple,
2. the Lord would establish a house for David and

5
3. his kingdom would last forever (2 Sam. 7:12-17). God will establish forever David's "house"
= the royal dynasty through his descendants (7:11-16)
David's son (Solomon) will build God's "house" = the first temple of Jerusalem (7:4-7,
13)
The "sign" of this covenant: the descendants of David (1Kings 1-3) and the temple
itself (1Kings 5-8)
6. The New Covenant

The new covenant is also termed the renewed covenant Jeh 31:1-34, Jeh 33:14-26.
Covenant predicted by prophet Jeremiah.
It prescribed that the Lord will make "a new covenant with the house of Israel and the
house of Judah" (Jer 31:31)
God's Law will be within people, written on their hearts (Jer 31:34)

6
THE JEWISH LAW
 The term ‘law’ is also understood as ‘statute’, ‘ordinances’ or ‘precepts’. The Old
Testament contain over six hundred commandments to Israel. The four books which
contain the laws: Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. These books, along
with Genesis, were all written by Moses and are referred to as "The Law." (They are
also called the "Pentateuch" which means a volume consisting of five books or
sections.).
 Two types of law are noted in the Hebrew law codes are Casuistic or Case Law and
Apodictic Law. These laws are given in detail on Ex 19-50.
Casuistic Laws
Casuistic, or case, law, which contains a conditional statement and a type of
punishment to be meted out These are laws concerned with civil matters in ancient
Israel.
Case Laws have a three-tier structure namely the introductory formula that begin
with either, ‘if….’, ‘When….’, ‘Whenever….’ etc. Second, the narration of the
offence and then third the consequence/result.
The case laws were conditional or they were subjunctive in terms of mood (cause and
effect).
Casuistry is reasoning used to resolve moral problems
Case laws had striking similarities with surrounding ANE nations hence were believed
to have been borrowed from the surrounding nations.
They are recorded in a section called The Covenant Code (Book of the Covenant):
Ex. 20:23—23:33. Many of these laws elaborate on the Decalogue or provide for its
interpretation in specific contexts.

7
Casuistic laws, which are more wordy and complex, are frequently organized in topical
groups. For example: Exodus 21:2-11 deals with the treatment of servants, 21:18-32
with bodily injuries, and 22:1-15 with property losses.
Apodictic Laws
Apodictic law, or "absolute law," gives laws in unconditional commands and
prohibitions. They issue absolute orders and allow no exceptions. For example, the
Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:2-17; Deut. 5:6-21).
They can be negative in form: for example, Ex 20:13, “You shall not kill.”
They can also be positive in form e.g. Ex 20:12, “Honour your father and your mother,
that your days may be long in the land which the LORD your God gives you.”
These ten apodictic laws are divided into two groups. The first four deal with the
people’s relationship with God. The last six address the relationship of the people to
one another.
Unlike case laws the apodictic laws have a two tier structure beginning with an
introductory formula, ‘Thou shall…’, then the narration of what is to be done or what
is forbidden.
In terms of mood they are imperative (not conditional, absolute instruction) and they
have divine sanction.
The apodictic laws are believed to be authentic or unique to Israel as they have no
parallels from the ANE.
 Such commands are not designed for application in the court. Is killing in war
acceptable? (Some Bibles even translate Ex 20:13 "murder", though the Hebrew is not
specific about the kind of killing being forbidden.) What about accidental killing?

8
Apodictic 'law' does not seek to answer such questions - it is not focused on
application in a court, but declares a general principle.
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________

9
ORIGINS OF PROPHECY IN ISRAEL
Definition of the prophecy .
 According to B. W Anderson, the English word prophet comes from the Greek word
prophetes which literally means “one who speaks for another especially for a deity.”
 The corresponding Hebrew word nabi is apparently related to the Akkadian verb nabu
meaning to call, to announce, to name.
 In view of this, prophets were regarded as persons through whom God speak to the
people.
 Was called to be God’s spokesperson, they received the promise from God’s “word”
Jer 1:9. As would be discussed later, prophets in Israel used the messenger style which
was well known in the ancient times.
 In line with this, Claus Westermann argues that, in Israel, prophets were God’s
Messengers. Prophets believed themselves to have been sent by Yahweh. “Go and say
to my people …” (Amos 1:1-3, Jer 2:1-3, Isaiah 45:11-13).
 The nature of Israel religion was monotheistic worship of Yahweh and Yahwism is
believed to be a borrowed god from the Father in Law of Moses Jethro and it was his
Jethro’s religion.
 It is problematic to know when exactly was the name was first used with Abraham or
with Moses? If it started with the patriarchs , the problem is that God did not
introduced himself to them , thus one can say they were worshipping an unknown god
who later introduced himself to Moses.
 For B.W Anderson, “the word Yahweh name from a Hebrew term YHWH refers to a
personally divine name of God.”
 YHWH is also translated “I AM which connotes personal eternal and all sufficient
aspect of God’s nature and character.”(Ex 3:14). This verse shows that the Hebrews
were polytheist especially when the bible say “which god what is his name”
 It can be assumed that God introduced himself to the Hebrews through Moses and
not through the Patriarchs. It can also be assumed that the reason why God did
introduce himself as “I AM” means that he is an ever-present God as suggested by Ex
3: 12. According to Hill and Walton “I AM in Greek is “ego eimi ho on” to suggest that
Yahweh is the only God of Israel.”
Israelite religion shared some of its things with other religions e.g. circumcision, cult and
prophecy. Circumcision was probably borrowed from Phoenicia but it can be traced back to
(Gen 17) as an introjections ( fore writing of what is to be borrowed) of the borrowed rite. By
tracing it to Abraham, it was give it legitimacy.
Cult- the Israelites didn’t worship at cultic places before reached Canaan because of that, it
is believed that they borrowed cultic worship from the Canaanites.

10
The religion of Israel was manifested with 5 key pillars which are wisdom, Torah,
apocalypism, priesthood and prophecy. These 5 were interconnected and they could not be
separated from the other.
1) Torah/Sacred Law
This was the law of the instruction and was divided into two
The apodictic law
 The apodictic law has been defined above as unconditional law stated in sharp
terse language.
 Alt want suggests that absolute law seems to be more characteristically Israelite
and express the unconditional demands of the covenant and this type of law
goes back to the wilderness period.
 Analyzing the laws, one would discover that the Decalogue, unlike the
ordinances of the casuatic type (Ex 21-23) does not necessarily presuppose an
agriculture society.
 In its characteristic, apodictic law cast in the “thou shall” form of dialogue. It has
a Hebrew origin with participial word meaning one who does something and
concluded with a straightened verbal form which demands the death penalty
absolutely.
 The Israelites did not live without the law either in the desert or in the period of
the settlement.
 Apodictic laws unique to Israel (Exodus 20:1f and Deut 5 )and were statutes
forced to people. They were directives from the deity through the prophets and
were unique to Israel.
 They were given to prophets who where the mouthpiece of God.
Casualty law/curse laws
 Casualty law/curse laws are strongly believed to have been borrowed from the ANE
because Israel was not an outstanding nation. They survived among other nations
which were more than them, more powerful, in economy and politics nations which
had their gods.
 Casuatic law originated in an environment where each individual ordinance was first
formed orally as a result of a crucial legal decision in Israel and they gradually grew
together into a universally accepted customary law. There are debates as to how the
Israelite adopted this Canaanite law.
 Alt suggests that the time of adoption must lie in the generations between the entry
and the foundation of the Israelite kingdom in Palestine when the Israelites came into
contact with the Canaanites.
 Israel had no system of government but desired to live by a unified body of law.
That being as it may, the law had to be taken from outside and was not familiar
11
to the confederate tribe in every detail. In so doing, the law was supposed to be
read out regularly and on certain intervals.
 Casuatic law takes almost half of the Book of the Covenant. The distinctive
characteristic of the casuatic law is inevitably introduced by an objective
conditional clause beginning “if…throughout all those who are concerned in the
case under discussion are spoken in the third person.
 According to L Meek Hammurabi brought together laws of his empire
representing various cultures, reduce them to a common language and make
them more or less oriental.
 C.H.W John contents that “it has been calculated that one of 45 or possibly 55
judgments preserved in the Old Hebrew law, 35 have points of contact of the
Hammurabi Code the laws are several fold restrictions of fine and death penalty.
 Some of the laws are verbatim for example both Hebrew and Hammurabi
promote morality, justice and the spirit of humanness. Punishments are the
same on chastity. Kidnapping, personal injuries for both the debtor unable to
pay would be sold as a slave but must be released after a certain period.
Hammurabi 117 talks of six years cf (Ex 21:2). Meek further argues that the
goring ox was borrowed from the (Hammurabi 250 and 252) which says “if an ox
when it was walking along a street gore a seignior’s to death that case is subject
to claim. If a seignior’s ox was a goerer and …he shall pay one half mina of silver.”
(Ex 21:28-32) This is a literal adoption of the Hamurrabi code by Israel.
 Meek argues that the type of marriage in which a woman continued to live in
her father’s house after her marriage was closely related to the erubu type of
marriage. The erubu type of marriage was practiced by the Assyrians and the
Babylonians.
 There is some evidence of some Israelites who lived with their in-laws after
marriage. Examples are Moses, Jacob and Samson.
 For L Boardt, the Babylonian laws were economic centered. This was necessity
by their large economy and customary use of money to pay for everything;
Israelite laws reflect the still vibrant and proud sense of strict justice inherited
from a liberal background. It can be argued further that Israel did not take
everything.
 There is no guarantee for that. Israelite uses future tense e.g. steals, kills while
the Hammurabi uses past tense e.g. stole. One might want to suggest that the
identity was through Canaanite culture but is not always the case.
2) Wisdom
 Israelite religion was theocentric e.g. Job. However wisdom was borrowed from Egypt
and Babylon. Unlike other pillar of Israelite religion which is theocentric law, Israelite
religion was anthropocentric, it focuses on the problems faced by an individual It had
nothing with the heave e.g., it grapples with such issues like sin, origin and its nature.
 It tries to introduce the sufferings of the righteous question, the right of retribution
which some prophets advocate for.

12
 It raises questions like what is life, life is not real and death is real. What is ral is
permanent.
 Wisdom in Israel was borrowed in Egypt and Babylon especially the book of Job.
 Job is also found in Babylon and has suffered the same. In Babylon, people grappled
with theodicy: why do the righteous suffer?
 There was Satan in Babylon who was evil. For Israel ill-health is a curse from God.
Babylonians attributed this to the devil. It is this devil Gen and Job talks about as Satan.
Job was written about 520BCE the same time with Genesis which is probably the last
book to ne written.
 Wisdom was communicated by the wise.
3) Apocalypsism
 Does not feature prominently in the Old Testament. It is found in the book of
Daniel during the Inter- Testamental period.
 It is not known whether apocalypism is before or after prophecy.
 H.H Rolly argues that apocalypism is a child of prophecy. Scholars who believes
that same with Rolly shares that it is not a pillar of the OT for it has some NT
phenomenon
4) Priesthood
 The OT is clear that the tribe of Aaron was responsible for forwarding priests.
 These priests were later called Levites. Their responsibility was to preside over
sacrifices so that there was communication between Yahweh and Israel.
 The office was inherited. Priests were not paid for their service. They survived on
charity from the members of the society that’s why in he book of Joshua they were
not allocated land.
 The office became corrupt. It is upon the corrupt office that prophesy arose.
5) Prophecy
 Prophecy in Israel is also believed to be a borrowed phenomenon. This is evidence

when dealing with extra biblical material and the archaeological evidence.
 God was believed to be universal and this is testified by the story of Abraham and
Abimelech, Balaam a Moabite was used as a vessel of Yahweh (Num 22).
 If God used Abimelech and Balaam, it shows that prophecy was not unique in
Israel.
 The other assumption was that, Israelite religion was borrowed and there is also
strong evidence that Yahweh was borrowed as previously discussed. This is
evidenced in ( Ex 18) where we are told that Jethro offered a sacrifice to God and
gave advice to Moses on issues of administration
 Jethro was a Midianite where Moses met face to face with God in (Ex 3).

13
 The God worshipped in Midian was El and Yahweh is called Elohim. From such an
assumption, Israel worshipped the borrowed.
 Scholars support this by archaeology and extra-biblical material. However,
archaeological evidence is problematic because people with assumptions’ want to
validate their arguments by stretching it to reach the conclusion.
 Sponsorship is also for such evidence whereby it is the view of the sponsor that
will be carried, thus the sponsor is justified.
 In addition, archeological evidence is scant that why it can be stretched. It is not
uniform in its findings.
 It is not as clear as the Bible is regarding prophecy. Like archaeological evidence,
the Bible has its problems especially in its presentation of the origins, nature and
developments of prophecy in Israel.
 Information is not consistent to allow us come with a conclusion as to how and
why prophecy originate e.g. Samuel and Kings originally were believed to be one
scroll but later were divided into two but both believed to written by Samuel.
Today they appear to be one book. If they were written by one man, there should
be no contradiction. Later it was discovered that it was not Samuel who wrote
because Samuel died in I Sam 12.
 M Noth concludes that 1 and 2 Samuel and 1and 2 Kings belongs to a
Deutronomistic School which also wrote Deuteronomy 4ff, Joshua and Judges. The
writers had the same idea.
 The problems that we have are that both Samuel and Kings do not show how
prophecy originated.
 In 1 Sam 9:9, it shows that there was an evolutionary change from the title of the
Seer to the Prophet.
 This story is told by a redactor who lived during a period where a prophet was no longer
called a Seer.
 In Hebrew: Seer is roeh and prophet is nabi.
 2 Sam 24:11 has a different picture. It says the word of the LORD came to Gad, David’s
Seer which means which means the word Seer was also in use.
 However, being a prophet does not mean a Seer, but this contradicts with 1 Sam 9:9.
 The question one may ask is, why is there these inconsistencies? As we move to the
Canonical era which is far later than the discussed era, Amos is called a Seer by Amaziah
( Amos 7:10-14).
 Amos in his presentation says “I am neither a prophet nor a prophet’s son” In view of this,
a prophet was either a Seer or a prophet’s son.
 If this is the case, the bible is consistent.
 While Gad was a Seer, his counterpart Nathan is always called a prophet ( 2 Sam 12:35)
implying that a prophet and a Seer are different.
 As we move to 1 and 2 Kings, we find almost a different picture from Samuel. 1 Kings
17:18, we a introduced to another title Ish-Elohim (Man of God) referring to Elijah. The
question is, is the prophet also a man of God?
 In ( 1 Kings 18:20-22) Elijah is also referred as a prophet. It is not clear from the Bible
whether the two means the same.
 The disciples of Elisha are called Sons of prophet implying that Elishs was a nabi not a man
of God.

14
 In (2 Kings 6:1ff), Elisha’s disciples are called sons of prophets. With such inconsistencies
we cannot wholly depend on the bible on the nature, origins and the developments of
prophecy in Israel.
 The Bible presents a better picture unlike archaeological evidence.
 Those scholars who use the bible use it as a basis and those who use archaeological
evidence use it to justify themselves.
Given this situation, we need to look into the origin of prophecy in and outside Israel.
 There are two theories:
a) Prophecy as a borrowed phenomenon and

b) Prophecy as a unique feature Israel.

15
ORIGINS OF PROPHECY
Lecture 2
THEORIES
a) Prophecy as borrowed: legend of Wen Amon, Zimri lim, Stelle of Zark.
b) Prophecy as unique feature of Israel.
PROBLEMS CONCERNING THE ORIGINS
1. We do not seem to have enough sources to allow us to reconstruct the history of
the phenomenon, and in particular we do not have extra biblical material with
which to compare and contrast the biblical material that we have. So the bible
remains our primary source.
2. The material that is present is not homogenous enough to allow us to make a
smooth reconstruction of the origins of Israelite prophecy.
3. We do notknow whether the information we have about prophecy is not a
reflection of a changing situation in the life of Israel.
4. We are not sure whether the labels we have are not of self-understanding of other
groups. Sometimes we are given labels that do not tally with what we think about
ourselves. We carry labels given to us by the community and not the original ones.
EXTRA BIBLICAL MATERIAL
In Egyptian texts there is a reference to priestly prophets but this title refers to a
servant of God. So these priestly prophets may not be prophets in the real sense of
the word. Cananite text from Mesopotamia, in particular the Ugarit text, there is
reference to prophet type figures who are diviners. In the bible for example 1Kings
18:19 there is reference to Baal and Asherah, but their exact character is not known.
An overally Canaanite source either refers to divination or they are so vague that no
proper conclusion concerning the origins of prophecy can be drawn.
BIBLICAL SOURCES
Biblical sources are not homogenous in their presentation of prophecy. So it is still
difficult to arrive at a smooth origin of the phenomenon, for example two books of
Samuel the term prophet is used differently in different texts and often used
interchangeably with the term seer. There are certain prophets who are referred to
as prophets e.g. Nathan is always referred to as a prophet, and some who are referred
to as both prophet and seer, for example Gad. According to 1 Samuel 9:9 the two
terms do not mean one and the same thing. It appears the term prophet evolved from
the term seer (Amos 7:14). However in 2 Samuel 24:11 Gad is referred as both seer
and prophet. In the two books of Kings Elijah was regarded as a prophet but
sometimes he is regarded as the ‘man of God’. Elisha is also given the title man of God
in 2 Kings 4:7,9,16,21,27, but the disciples who gather around him are referred to as
the sons of the prophet, as if to suggest that the man of God and the prophet are one
and the same thing. Amaziah referred to Amos as a seer but Amos rejects it and said

16
he was not a prophet as if to suggest a prophet and seer are one and the same thing.
With these fluctuations in meaning then who was a prophet, let alone how the name
originated?
The origins of prophecy is controversial. Various views and theories have been brought
forward of a sociological function, historical and philosophical nature. Such theories
are equally porus.
Basically there are two broad theories on the origins of prophecy:
1. Prophecy as a borrowed phenomenon
2. Prophecy as unique feature of Israel.
PROPHECY AS A COMMON AND BORROWED PHENOMENON/ ASSOCIATIONIST
THEORY
Scholars who subscribe to this view, for example J. Lindblom, use extra biblical
material from the Ancient Near East to show that there are certain similarities which
can be established between prophecy in Israel and Prophecy in the Ancient Near East.
According to J. Bright the patriarchs borrowed the culture of the Mesopotamians. If
they could borrow the culture of the Mesopotamians what could stop them from
borrowing their religion? In support of this view J.Pederson argues that the whole
institution belong to Canaan and is closely related to Canaanite culture. There is some
substance in this theory because of the similarities between Israelite and Ancient Near
East prophecy.
Evidence in support of this:
1. The word prophet itself came from a foreign word nabi which is a Hebrew word
and hence is not of Israelite origin.
2. The covenant arrayed by Yahweh and the people through the prophets are like the
suzerain treaties of the Hitites.
3. Ecstacy which is regarded as one of the earliest form of prophecy in Israel; was not
for them only, for example Baal prophets at the contest at Mount Carmel were
ecstatic too. (Refer to the legend of Wen Amon)
4. Israelite prophets had clear court connections and some Ancientnear East
prophets had connections with courts, for example Mantic and Mahhumm
prophets of the god Dagan in the time of Hammurabi, although they seem not to
have used the oracles as such.
5. Prophets as mouthpieces of deities. In the Mari text there was a Syrian god Adad
who used a prophet as his mouthpiece and the prophet claimed authority over
the king.
6. Prophetic guilds.

17
THE LEGEND OF WEN AMON

According to this legend, there was a certain man by the name Wen Amon from Egypt
who went to a certain centre in Phoenicia called Biblis looking for timber to build a
temple for his god, AmonRe. On arrival Wen Amon forwarded his request to the prince
but the prince ignored him because he was busy offering sacrifices to his God. It was
during this sacrificial ceremony when a youth got into trance or ecstacy. The youth in
this state summoned the priest’s mission, and without making any decision the prince
granted Wen Amon’s request.
According to this school there is a sense in which the possessed youth can be
considered as a prophet. In other words the youth possessed three prophetic traits:
1. Ecstacy
2. Ability to foretell (prediction)
3. Prophetic authority
So if we consider this youth as a prophet there is no way we can say this phenomenon
is unique to Israel.
THE LEGEND OD ZIMRI LIM FROM MARI TEXT
Mari was a cultic centre and Zimri lim was a legendary king of Mesopotamia. The
legend talks about a certain seer who went to Zimri lim with a message from god Adad
and the message was ‘Iam the god who made you king over Mesopotamia if you obey
me I will bless you, if you disobey I will punish you’. This seer is said to have released
this message in ecstacy.
SIMILARITIES
1. The title seer is also used to refer to Israelite prophet.
2. Being ecstatic
3. Prophetic oracle is similar to Israelite prophetic oracles and contents.
THE STELLE OF ZAKR
Zakr was a Syrian king. Stelle is an inscription on the rock. On the tablet there seems
to be an oracle or statement which was released when the Syrians were about to be
capturered. The king released the following words, ‘I lifted my hands to Baal Shamayn
and he answered me and spoke to me by means of visionaries…’. Although it was not
clear from the inscription on the rock, it appears these words are a prophecy in
response to the king’s prayer and the people who are referred as visionaries could be
regarded as prophets.
WEAKNESSES
1. It ignores the theological origins of prophecy that is the link between prophecy
and religion.
2. It ignores political factors behind the emergency of prophecy.
3. It assumes that we have clearly identified characteristics of prophecy which we
can use to define the phenomenon, in particular ecstacy is taken to be a major

18
prophetic feature, the problem is we do not have a clearly developed definition of

prophecy and in particular ecstacy was not a major feature of prophecy in Israel.
Rarely do we find Israelite prophets releasing their oracles in a state of ecstacy. If
at all ecstacy was a major feature of prophecy then it was a feature of earliest
prophets and tends to die out as we move to the classical period. Moreover
according to J. Linblom ecstacy can not be borrowed as it is from a deity.
4. Prophecy in the Ancient Near East was divinatory in nature, while Israelite
prophets were not allowed means of gaining information used by other nations,
e.g. necromancy, sooth saying, e.t.c. Israelite prophets were commissioned by
God. They only prophesy in the name of Yahweh and their objective was to
acertain the will of Yahweh regardless of personal wishes. Being independent of
the hearers was the badge of a true prophet, for example the story of Micaiah
when he was consulted by Ahab and Jehoshaphat.
These differences between prophecy in Ancient Near East and prophecy in Israel led
some scholars to argue that prophecy in Israel must have been unique to Israel.
Basically these scholars pick certain unique features of Israelite prophecy and use this
to argue for their positions. However they do not agree on what is unique about
Israelite prophecy. Hence this broad theory can be split into sub- theories.
TRADITIONAL THEORY
This theory argues that prophecy in Israel originated as a basic mechanism through which
YAHWEH communicated the meaning and demands of his covenant with Israel. Scholars who
subscribe to this theory submits that prophets were messengers of YAHWEH who were
basically intermediaries or covenant mediators. This submission is in the line with the
meanings of some of the terms that are used to refer to prophets. According to
W.B.ANDERSON “the English word prophet is derived from the Greek word prophetes which
can be translated to mean one who speaks for another party, especially for the deity.” As
observed above the Hebrew equivalent term “nabi” can be translated literally to mean the
one who communicates the divine will, so the idea remains the same that prophet were
messengers of god.
From critics like H.GRUNKEL, and C.WESTERMAN support this understanding. They analyzed
the form of oracles and discovered that the oracles almost always began with what they called
the “messenger style”, thus says YAHWEH .The implication is that, the prophets understood
themselves as messengers of the lord who communicated the meaning and demands of gods
covenant with Israel. This therefore means that prophecy was covenant specific, it could not
be understood outside the context of YAHWEH covenant with Israel.
This theory suggests that prophecy originated with Moses, particularly with the Sinai
Covenant. The critics of this theory does not recognize the existence of other covenants in
the OLD Testament like Genesis 15,Abraham.Those who subscribe to this theory submit that
it is with the Sinai Covenant that we begin to see God entering into a Covenant with Israel as

19
a nation. Earlier than Moses, God had entered into covenants with individuals and not with
Israel as a nation. In this context, scholars who argue for this theory maintain that the
covenant was a unique feature of Israelite religion and it is in this light that prophecy in Israel
could be regarded as unique.
An analysis of this theory can lead to the conclusion that prophecy in Israel had cultic origins;
it originated within the religious institutions of Israel. The first scholar to suggest this view
was H.E Wald and it was later developed by G Holscher who explicitly stated that, “prophets
were inspired as cultic figures, who were responsible for explaining the meaning and demands
of the covenant.” However, S Mowingel and A.R Johnston have most convincingly argued the
theory of cultic prophets in the ancient Israel. According to them, “in early Israel, the
difference between a priest and a prophet was not very great since both responded to
inquiries, offered instruction, and performed sacramental functions. Secondly, prophets are
frequently closely related to the priests and the temple, especially in Jerusalem for instance,
Elijah, like the prophets of Baal, offers sacrifices, [1Kings 18:20-40]. In this context, Mowingel
observes that, “prophets associated with the sanctuary served under the supervision and
jurisdiction of the priests or with a status at least as high as, if not actually higher than that of
the priests. Furthermore, Mowingelpointed to the divine speeches and oracles in the Psalms
as further as evidence of prophetic functions within the cult. According to him, “the oracles
were spoken to worshippers during rituals of national or personal lament [Psalm 126; 60:8-
10, 91:14-16] and the coronation of Davidic rulers and other royal occasions [Ps 2; 20; 21; 45;
89; 110; 132]”
Critique
The first problem with this sub-theory is that there were different types of covenants within
Israel. The question, which arises, is that, which one of these covenants was associated with
the origins of prophecy? This theory suggests that different prophets may have arisen in
connection with different covenant traditions within Israel. For instance, prophets from the
North probably originated in connection with and were probably influenced by the Ephramite
traditions while prophets from the south were probably influenced by Judean prophetic
traditions.
The second problem has to do with the assumption that the concept of covenant was unique
feature of Israelite religion. This assumption has no strong base because there are striking
similarities between the mosaic covenant and similar Hittite treaties, like the suzerainty
treaty. Furthermore, this theory is based upon some assumption, which may not be historical.
For example, the historicity of the figure of Moses and thee exodus itself is not
archaeologically confirmed. Finally, it is not explicitly clear that when prophets prophesied
they always communicated the meaning and demands of God’s covenant with Israel.
Prophets were messengers of Yahweh. Prophetes or nabi. The oracles begin with a
messenger style. “Thus says the Lord…..” Prophecy was covenant with Israel.

20
Prophecy originated with Moses at Mount Sinai. However it is weak because there were other
covenants before it. Gen. 9:12 Noah, Gen 15 Abraham. Moses’ covenant is national thus he
becomes the first prophet. Moses arose to explain the demands of covenant.
THEOLOGICAL THEORY
According to B.W Anderson, prophecy originated in Israel as a basic mechanism through
which Yahweh communicated the meaning and his demands of the covenant with Israel. This
is in line with the meaning of the two terms that were used to refer to prophecy. The Greek
word prophetess can be translated to mean one who communicated the divine will. Israelite
prophets regarded themselves messengers of Yahweh. H. Gunkel and C. Westermann looked
at the phenomenon of prophecy from a form critical perspective and they analyse the form
of prophetic utterances and discover that these began with the ‘messenger style’, ‘Thus says
the Lord…’ implying that their message was not from themselves but from an external force.
These oracles specifically dealt with the covenant relationship between Israel and Yahweh.
So prophecy in Israel was covenant specific. Such a covenant relationship was a unique
feature of Israelite religion. This supports that Moses is the first prophet. He is the
representative of all prophets. (Deut 18:18).
PROBLEMS
1. There are some situations and there are some prophets without necessarily talking
about the covenant and similarly there are some circumstances where certain
Israelite figures talked about the covenant without prophesying, for example
Noah.
2. Some scholars like M. Noth challenged the view that Moses was the first prophet
on the grounds that all the verses which support Moses as a prophet are
anachronistic. In fact for M.Noth later editors made Moses into a prophet yet he
was really a very good leader. However Von Rad observed that prophecy I Israel is
associated with the cult, leadership or both. This observation remains valid and
from then onwards we proceed in three directions, that prophecy has either cultic
or political origins or both.
CULTIC ORIGINS
The priestly theory is in support of Samuel as the first prophet as is proven in 1Samuel3. It
states that prophecy is just an advancement of priesthood. Partly in support of the above
theory is the seership theory which states that prophecy originated from seership and this is
also regarded as the evolutionary theory by M. Noth.
This theory is mainly based on 1 Samuel 9:9. The implication of this verse is that the office of
a prophet evolved from that of a seer. There was a historical development from the office of
a seer to that of a prophet. The assumption is that there should be a distinction between a
prophet and a seer.
This theory is supported by semantics. A semantic analysis of the Hebrew terms which are
used to refer to a seer are roeh and hozer meaning one who is gifted with the ability to

21
foretell, whereas the Hebrew term for a prophet is nabi which refer to a person who can do
both foretelling and forth telling. Seers were primarily divinatory in that their emphasis is in
the future but prophets were concerned with the present. If at all they refer to the future
there was specific reason to relate the future to the present.
WEAKNESSES
1. This theory is based on 1 Samuel 9:9 and the assumption is that Samuel was the
last judge and the first prophet, yet Genesis 20:7 refer to Abraham as a prophet
and Deut 18:18, Hosea 12:13 refer to Moses as the first and architect of prophecy.
Therefore we cannot assume that prophecy began with Samuel.
2. This theory assumes that there is a clear distinction between a seer and a prophet,
yet the two terms are used interchangeably, e.g. 2Samuel 24:11, Gad is regarded
as both a seer and a prophet. Amos in Amos 7:14 when he was addressed as a
seer he responded denying that he was a prophet nor a prophet’s son, as if to
suggest the two terms mean one and the same thing. However some scholars try
to distinguish a prophet and a seer.
The difference is that:
1. A seer was more or less associated with specific shrine while prophets were
itinerant.
2. A seer was more or less a priest in that he dealt with issues of the cult, especially
those elements that involve sacrifices.
3. A seer receives remuneration for a service, while a prophet receive gifts.
4. More often than not prophets clashed with kings and its rare to find seers clashing
with kings.
POLITICAL OR SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

It is based on sociological school of Mark Weber and Norman Gottwald. They believe that
prophecy has its origins in sociological tension, as a result of commercialization which led to
the creation of a social pyramid in Israel. When Israel settled in Canaan there developed three
social groups, the aristocracy, the merchant and the commons (poor). The commons were
being exploited by the elite and as a result there was class struggle in Israel. From this class
struggle emerged some charismatic figures especially among the exploited class. Such figures
were prophets who became the champions of the poor. They were the spokespersons of the
deprived, the voice of the voiceless and were supported by Yahweh. This theory is supported
by the incident of Naboth and Ahab in 1 Kings 21. Amos also defended the poor. Such a theory
is important as it considered elements of economic and social factors which influence the rise
of prophecy.
The process of the Exodus and the settlement in Canaan can be explained in terms of a
political movement.in the light of this one can explain the origin of prophecy in terms of the
clash between two ideologies, Yahwism as the ideology of the Hapiru and Baalism as the
ideology of the ruling Canaanite class. The prophets would be considered as the political
commissars of the time who helped to coin, shape and reshape the ideology of Yahwism and

22
articulate it to the people boosting morale and motivation to the Hapirus during the liberation
movement. The prophets acted as the custodians of the ideals of the liberation movement.
One can also look at the link between the origins prophecy and politics in Israel in terms of
transition from a tribal confederacy to a monarchy and from priesthood to prophecy. The
priests were part of the state as the office was sponsored by the state. With the establishment
of the monarchy, kings probably abused their political power and perhaps got away with it
because of the office of a priest would not criticize the king (the hand that was feeding them)
as he was in charge of the state treasury. There was thus need to evolve an independent office
that would speak for the poor and provide checks and balances on the office of the king.
Prophets arose to fulfil thistask
Weaknesses
This theory assumed that there was no prophecy before settlement in Canaan yet we have
Abraham and Moses who are regarded as prophets.
PROPHECY HAS BOTH CULTIC AND POLITICAL ORIGINS
According to F.M Cross prophecy started with kingship and died together in exile. This is also
supported by M. Noth’s evolutionary theory which argued that prophecy evolved from
seership. Prophecy originated as a class struggle or conflict of institutions that is cultic versus
political institution. When the monarchy emerged there was proliferation of prophetic guilds
who were situated near the Philistine garrison to champion holy wars. In this regard prophecy
emerged as a religio- political stance to inspire nationalism and revolutionalism in Israelites
as they were faced with a war torn political event. Such political crisis needed religious
interpreters to give the divine will and inspire holly wars. According to Harrelson the
emergence of prophecy could be associated with institutional conflict. He argued that Israel
was a covenant community with covenant representatives who mediated the divine will, for
example Moses and Joshua. The rise of the monarchy seems to have given the kings the role
of the covenant mediators and yet the community wanted the presence of the freedom of
Yahweh to declaire his will. As a result certain figures arose in a bid to check kingship
usurpation of this religious duty. This explains why Samuel charged Saul in 1 Samuel 13:13-
14. The king was not the official spokesperson of the deity. Nathan refused David permission
to build the temple and promised him a dynastic rule that was to last forever (2 Samuel 7:1ff).
so prophecy emerged as a conflict between two ideologies, that of divine leadership
represented by charismatic office of the judges and that of prophetic office. The fact that
prophecy thrived during the monarchy and later died with it showed interdependence of the
two.
WEAKNESSES
The divine nature of prophecy was not well manifested. 1 Samuel 9:9 is ambiguous, word seer
and prophet are used interchangeably.
CONCLUSION

23
Condensed the whole information showed that to explain how prophecy originated in Israel
is synonymous to seeking a needle in a hay stack. Biblical and extra biblical information is
inadequate to solve this problem. Hence the origins of prophecy in Israel remains veiled in
obscurity. It leaves us on cross roads. what is clear is that prophecy has to do with God and
is generally linked to social, political, religious and cultural crisis of the time. Hence J.
Muilenburg concluded that prophecy came with a particular word for a particular time.
REASONS FOR EMERGENCE OF PROPHECY

1. Need for intercession (Gen 20:7)
2. Need to interpret the misfortunes of Israel and explain the covenant and the
exodus event (Moses)
3. Need for ecstatics, that is charismatic defense and administration (Numbers
11:25).
4. Need to deal with Philistine aggression. Need to revive Israel’sreligion that is,
to combat idolatry. Need to institute and control the monarchy (Samuel).
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN PROPHECY IN ANCIENT NEAR EAST AND THAT OF ZIMBABWE
1. the legend of Wen Amon and the issue of ecstacy. Zimbabwean prophets are
also ecstatic forthtellers and have prophetic authority.
2. Both are caught with the spirit of nationalism.
3. From the legend of Zimri lim a seer used the prophetic formula ‘Thus says the
lord’ which is also used by some Zimbabwean prophets for example some say
‘Zvanzi nashi Jehovha…’
4. From the stele of Zakr the issue of visions come out. Some Zimbabwean
prophets claim to see visions.
5. The concept of a seer can also be equated to the concept of (varatidzwa) in
some African independent churches.
6. Prophets in both Zimbabwe and the ANE is given by individuals wearing distinct
regalia (uniforms).
CALL OF ANCIENT NEAR EAST PROPHETS
A call narrative is the section of a prophetic book that records the call of a prophet.A call was
the mark of a true prophet in Israel and this is probably what distinguished Israelite prophets
from other prophet- type persons in the rest of the Ancient Near East.
A call narrative almost always assumed a definite form or proceeded in definite stages,
namely:
1. Theophany- the deity either appears or he is heard and lets his mission known.
2. Resistance from the prophet
3. Pressure from the deity. This pressure takes two forms, namely force and
persuasion with signs.
4. Acceptance by a prophet
5. Commissioning of the prophet and assurance from the deity.

24
The call of Ancient Israelite prophets was a call to mediate the covenant between Israel and
Yahweh and therefore a prophet as a covenant mediator speaks to the whole people of Israel
and not specific individuals only.
See Bishau pages 45-47
SIMILARITIES WITHG PROPHETS IN ZIMBABWE
1. Prophets in Zimbabwe also claim to have experienced theophanies. Clear
example is Johane Masowe, Johane Marange and Mwazha. Dreams or visions
feature in most accounts of the call
2. It seems most of them did not respond to their calls out of their own will. In a
way they resisted the call.
DIFFERENCES
1. THE FORM OF PRESSURE EXERTED ON PROPHETS IN Zimbabwe is slightly
different from that of Ancient Israelite prophets. Most accounts of prophetic
calls in Zimbabwe show that prophets in Zimbabwe began with strange illness
they could not iunterpret. Johane Masowe for example fell ill and was
transported into the heavenly realm. This is then interpreted as the call.
2. Commissioning is a call to address specific individuals especially in matters of
their illness. The call is almost a call to a healing ministry. Therefore it is not
immediately clear whether or not these prophets are covenant mediators.
3. Most call accounts of prophets in Zimbabwe, especially those from African
Independent churches resemble those of traditional healers more than those
of Ancient Israelite prophets

25
ROLES OF PROPHETS
MESSENGERS OF YAHWEH
The authority enjoyed by prophets among their people depended naturally on the fact that
they were bearers of the divine word. They were commissioned by God and understood
themselves as messengers of Yahweh hence they used the prophetic formula ‘Thus says the
Lord’. Thus they were primarily spokespersons for God to his people, denouncing them of
their sins, pleasing with them to repent to God, encouraging them to follow the will of God in
all phases of their life.
Israelie prophets were spokespersons for monotheistic Yahwism. Key features of Yahwism
that formed the core of prophets are monotheistic, ethical and judgemental dimensions of
Yahwism that stood at the centre of the message of each of the ancient Israelite prophets.
These three had no parallels in the ANE prophecy, i.e. they were essentially inique and made
Israelite prophecy unique. The apodeitic law as exemplified in the Decalogue is the basis of
monotheistic Yahwism.
‘you shall have no other gods before me…’ (Exodus 20:3). The apodeitic law is believed to be
authentic to Israel. If prophets were spokespersons of monotheistic Yahwism, then basically
they interpreted the apodictic laws that were at the centre of Yahwism which implies that the
prophets spoke and represented that which was unique to Israel.
However scholars like G. Fohrer argue that the apodictic rules of conduct were not necessarily
unique to Israel. But oneshould note that matters of religious principle in the apodictic law
had no parallel in the ANE. Prophets were primarily spokespersons of these matters of
religious principle that were uniquely Israelite
INTERCESSORS
This is somebody who pleads on behalf of people to Yahweh, e.g. Gen 20:7, Amos 7:1-6. The
intercessory role is expressed in the tells of Elijah who helped one the widows of Zarephath
to discover in her house oil and milk to keep herself and her son till the next good rains.
CULTIC FUNCTIONARIES
According to Von Rad supported by A. Johnson prophets were cultic office holders though we
cannot deny that prophets were somehow linked to the cultic pattern. They were chief
representatives of the heavenly council, divinely appointed to proclaim the word of God to
the people. They sought no royal or ecclesiastical favours, since their lives were completely
directed and decimated by the divine suzerain.
COVENANT MEDIATORS (See notes above)
SOCIAL REFORMERS CALLING FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE.
Prophets were speaking on behalf of the less privileged in society and become the
mouthpieces of those who had no power to stand for their rights. In times of ill-treatment

26
and injustice such prophets stood for the ordinary people who had no power to confront
leaders and kings in society, for example Elijah and Naboth, Nathan and David.
The poor were deprived of land and wealth, widows, the fatherlessand the weak could not
protect themselves. Prophets directed their messages to leaders or officials of institutions in
society who had power and authority in the social life of Judah and Israel. (1 Kings 21, Amos
5:7-10, Isaiah 1:21-26.
Issues of wealth, pursuit of it and possession of it were also addressed by prophets because
they were sources of corruption. Amos’ message- rich would build hewn stone houses, large
vineyard e.t.c. the most vulnerable in society were oppressed like the widows and ophans-
that was violation of justice. Hence message of judjement to the Israelites was a result of
injustice
ADJUDICATE INTER-TRIBAL DISPUTES
Before the monarchy prophets would at tribal centres adjudicate inter-tribal disputes. So the
designation of a leader of the tribes in time of danger, officiate at the ceremony of covenant.
Above all things the leader was there to maintain the categorical law of the covenant in the
life of the tribes.
POLITICAL ADVISORS
When kingship was established in Israel much of the responsibility of the former covenant
representatives was assumed by the king. However the king was not permitted to become
the official spokesperson of the deity. Therefore prophecy was established to check and
balance the powers of the kings. Prophets were involved in anointing and dethroning of kings.
Whenever a king is enthroned and dethroned prophets are involved. Here prophets are seen
to be playing a leading role in the formation of the kingdom. So at times prophets are
regarded as revolutionaries. For religious and social changes to be fully addressed there was
need to remove political leaders the argument being that religious and political practices
which were a breach to the Sinai covenant were being promoted by the political leadership
hence there was need to remove them to promote genuine reform back to the stipulations
of the Sinai covenant. Thus it is not surprising to note that whenever a king is enthroned or
dethroned, a prophet is being involved e.g. Elisha anointed Jehu while the Omrides were still
in power and Jehu’s revolution lead to some religious and political change. However it is
interesting to note that prophets never headed any movement in Israel, to replace the
monarchy with another form of government that it might have been thought to prefer. This
is true for there is no indication that the prophetic tradition ever possessed either the taste
or the talent for practical politics. Whenever prophecy intervened in these matters, it was not
for any other reason but for spiritual reasons.
They were not against monarchical regime, against decline of Israelite law and custom,
against encrochmates of the magnets, against apostasy and against
oppression of the humble class of Israel. In fact they were against the institution of the kings
which were failing to adequately express loyalty to God. Politics and religion were interwoven

27
and since prophets did not live in ivory tower separated from the lives of their society they
were not puppets in the hands of an arbitrary deity. God used prophets as spokespersons
without violating their own personalities hence they were not hollow tubes. So they reaffirm
Yahweh’s sovereign stay in the political sphere in which Israel lived. This made altogether a
head on collision with the effect which was made to further Israel’s political security
especiallywith diplomacy and policy of military armament. At one point we find prophets
giving oracles to attack showing harmonious co-operation between prophets and military
leadership. Prophets near the Philistine Garrison in a clear indication that prophets were
political. There are there to incite Israelites to engage in holy war against the Philistine enemy.
COURT OFFICIALS
Prophets were consulted when great events were impending mostly before and during wars
e.g. Ahab and Jehoshaphat tried to ensure victory over the Arameans at Gilead. Jehoshaphat
wished to hear the word of Yahweh and summoned 400 prophets (1 Kings 22). Thus when
entering upon important undertaking the king constantly applied to the prophets for the word
from God e.g. David had Nathan as his court prophet, Rehoboam had Shemaiah, and
Jeroboam had Ahijah. However it is not always the case that prophets were for the kings.
Prophet’s independence of the king might make him and sensor the king’s action, e.g. Ahab
hated Micaiah (1 Kings 22:8).
PREDICTION (FORETELLING) AND PROCLAMATION (FORTH TELLING)
Proclamation is addressing of the prevailing situation and prediction is foretelling. In
addressing the prevailing situation prophets often alluded to events yet to come. Prophecy
was first and foremost a matter of conveying the message of God to the immediate listeners
not a matter of predicting the future. It becomes obvious that the words of the prophet were
concerned with repentance or absence of it. However in dealing with the present prophets
often alluded to the events to come. This actually shows that prediction and proclamation
were interwoven but emphasis was on proclamation.
According to J. Muilenburg, prophets came with a particular word for a particular time. This
shows that they were not mere prognosticators whose aim was to show or demonstrate that
God knows the future. If at all prophets told the future, it had a bearing on the present. They
were there to interpret certain events and advise people on what action to take.
B.W.Anderson argues that prophecy in Israel is associated with a particular tradition and
experience. Israel originated with the exodus experience and the covenant. Moses declared
the will of God to Pharaoh that is to free Israelites. Prophets were there to advise Israelites to
put away foreign gods and worship Yahweh only. However other scholars question Moses as
a prophet. G.Von Rad’s observation is more plausible. He argues that prophecy in Israel is
associated with either a cult, leadership or both. Prophets were calling people to practical
holiness and repentance and were advising people to put their trust in Yahweh, e.g. Isaiah
argues that behind the scenes there is Yahweh, the sovereign ruler. The secrets of the Lord
revealed to his prophets his not primarily knowledge of the future events but God’s
governance of the world whereby sins are judged and repentance is accepted. So Israelite
prophets made predictions on the conviction that Yahweh was shaping the course of events,

28
leading from the present into the future, e.g. Amos predicted doom because of people’s
disobedience. According to Von Rad, prophecy in this case did not announce what would
happen but what according to God’s justice was inevitable,e.g. because of its sins Jerusalem
had to perish (Jer 7:13-20). This is not prediction either in the sense of soothsaying or as a
result of some technical skills. This is the proclamation of the acts of holy and righteous God
who does not leave sins unpunished and yet shows mercy to all who love him to keep his
commandments (Exodus 20:5-6). Prophets preached future disasters as well as salvation e.g.
Amos 5:18-24, because what they predicted was not a matter of change but rested at God’s
governance. The prophets could proclaim with matter of certainty, disaster as well as
salvation. Isaiah for instance gave his children names that epitomized his message, Spoil
speed prey hastens, remnant shall return. Thus he showed that he had no doubt about what
would happen or that disaster will come at the appointed times. It is precisely this alliance of
proclamation and prediction that is the hallmark of a true prophet. Previously prophecy was
specifically prediction but with the classical prophets the view has become prevalent that the
true function of a prophet was to become a teacher of ethical and religious truth. However
they never seized to be seers, their face is always turned to the future. They stand in the
council of Yahweh and it is what he is about to do that they declare to men. Their conviction
is that the destruction of the nation is inevitable and they dwell on the nature of Yahweh and
on the moral decision of people to impress their conviction on the nation (Amos 4:12).

29
EARLIEST FORMS/MANIFESTATIONS OF PROPHECY IN ISRAEL

FORMS APPROVED IN THE BIBLE
DREAMS
It is an event that is seen by an individual when he/she is asleep. God can visit a person in a
dream and speak with him, for example the prophetic call of Samuel was made possible
through dream (1 Samuel 3:1ff). In Deuteronomy 13:1ff ‘if a prophet has arisen among you or
a dreamer of dreams…’ clearly points to the existence of this aspect in Ancient Israel. It should
be noted that dreams received by non-Israelites needed a Hebrew interpreter, for example
Joseph (Genesis 41:25-33) was called from prison to interpret Pharaoh’s dream. Daniel also
interpreted king Nebuchadnezzar’s dream (Daniel 2:24-45).
LOTS(URIM AND THUMMIN)
These were cast to detect a guilty person. In Joshua 7:14-19 Joshua discovered by lots the
person who had offended God by taking spoils from the doomed city of Jericho. Achan was
caught and was stoned to death in the valley of Achor.
Lots were probably put in a basin and rapidly rotated. The answer was given by a lot which
leapt first. this method was sometimes divinatory, e.g. the usage of sacred stones (urim and
thumin) in the Old Testament. Urim and thummin were found inside an ephod. It seems
according to 1 Samuel 2:18 and 2 Samuel 6:14, the ephod was some kind of a dress like an
apron (as the word ‘girded’ may suggest).
However in 1 Samuel 23:6,9 and 30:7 an ephod was some kind of symbolic vestment that was
kept in a sanctuary and would be carried along by the priest or prophet during military
expeditions. The urim and thummin were part of this vestment. The main purpose of this
practice is to determine the will of the deity or deities on what course of action to take. The
objects were religiously symbolic.
Use of sacred stones is found in 1 Samuel 14:41-43. Saul used these stones to detect the guilty
action of Jonathan. These objects canbe compared to hakata (casting lots) in Zimbabwe.
These objects need someone who is a religious official.
The difference is that in Israel the ephod in which the lots are found was some kind of dress
whereas in Zimbabwe lots are either bones or dried tree bucks or shells of snails or sea
creatures or even stones.
Just like hakata urim and thummin (two sides of part of an ephod that were marked
differently) were used to determine or to manifest the divine will in terms of yes or no, this
one and not that one. The symbolic nature and the fact that the ephod was kept at a
sanctuary, it’s most probableto have been a priestly object used to perform priestly duties.

30
However determining and interpreting the will of God were usually prophetic functions. So
lots in this case fall in the realm of a prophet.
VISION
It is an appearance seen by an individual which is inaccessible to everybody else. The vision

may be seen when one is in ecstacy. A person may see either symbol which are interpreted
or real experience. Items that may appear in a vision may depend on the prophet’s personal
background, for example if Isaiah was originally a priest it is understandable that he
experienced a vision in the temple. If Amos was a farmer, the imagery drawn in his vision
involves pests. Visions are one of God’s methods of divine revelation (Numbers 12:6)
ECSTACY (see notes, B.W. Anderson page 250 and Bishau pgs 7-13)
FORBIDDEN METHODS OF PROPHECY/DIVINATORY PRACTICES
There is a strong condemnation of these forms in Deuteronomy 18:10 ‘There shall not be
found among you anyone who burns his son/ daughter as an offering, anyone who practices
divination, a soothsayer, an auger, or a sorcerer or a medium, or wizard, or a necromancer…’.
Divination is a process of discovering the unknown or the future through supernatural means.
ASTROLOGY
It is the study of heavenly phenomenon, for example stars, moon, sun e.tc. this method was
common amongst the Babylonians as they were skilled in foretelling the future from the
movement of stars and planets. During the time of Jeremiah he attacked bitterly the worship
of the Queen of heaven (the mother goddess (Jeremiah 7:18). This is also condemned in
Deuteronomy 4:19.
NECROMANCY
It is the process of seeking guidance from the spirit of the dead. This method is strongly
condemned both in Levitical laws and in deuteronomic writings, for example in Leviticus 20:28
‘if a person turns to medium and wizards playing the harlot after them, I will set my face
against that person and will cut him off from among his people’. Though condemned this
practice was still practiced in the eighth century (Isaiah 8:19-20).
Necromancy includes two ideas:
1. Worship of ancestors
2. The dead being consulted to determine the future.
1Samuel 28:1ff Saulconsulted the witch of Endor to raise the spirit of Samuel who
was dead.
HEPASTROPHY

31
It is the process of divining from the liver of the sacrificed animal. Ezekiel 21:21 ‘For the king
of Babylon stands at the parting of the way, at the head of two ways to use divination he
shakes the arrows, he consult the teraphim, he looks at the liver’. It was only commonly
practiced among the Babylonians.
HYDROMANCY
This refers to the use of water or it is divination by water. It is alluded to in Joseph narratives
in genesis 44:5. ‘it is not from this that my Lord drinks, and by this that he divines…’
RHABDOMANCY
This refers to the use of divining sticks or casting of arrows as in Ezekiel 21:21. The same
method is indirectly alluded to in Hosea 4:12 ‘My people inquire of a thing of wood and their
staff gives them oracles…’ a thing of wood could have been play with words which might be
a reference to divining rods or sticks.
RERAPHIM
The use of teraphim or household images was quite common among people of Mesopotamia
and Palestine. They were a sign of authority and land ownership but were also used for the
purpose of divining. This method is alluded in Zechariah 10:2 ‘For the teraphim utters
nonsense…’
DISCUSS THE EARLIEST FORMS OF PROPHECY IN ISRAEL AND OUTLINE THE FUNCTIONS OF
EARLY ISRAELITE PROPHETS.
HOW AND WHY PROPHETIC BOOKS WERE COMPILED AND PRESERVED
1. Small collections of the sayings of the prophet were made during the prophet’s
lifetime, by the prophet or his disciples. Message was the product of the
community and not individual. Sons of the prophets are known to also have
had a task of preserving prophetic traditions.
2. Transmission through a number of unidentified generations. Units of tradition
developed independently and circulated orally independently.
3. When sayings came to the attention of civic or religious authorities they must
have been widely reported, for example Amaziah the priest in charge at Bethel,
was able to quote a saying of Amos as grounds of extraditing him (Amos 7:11)
and his trial for treason.
4. In some cases sayings and stories would have circulated in groups of disciples
to be consigned to writing only when memories began to fade.
5. Utterances of professional prophets were probably preserved among the
temple and court records.
6. Later on the words were put together into small units of literature (periscopes)
following a number of criteria, for example if it had common subject matter or

32
tradition used the same catch words, for example ‘For three transgressions
and for four…’ or common theology, for example 2 Kings 2 where we have a
series of miracles.
7. Redactors later compiled periscopes into continuous narratives.
CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIMITIVE PROPHECY IN ISRAEL (PRE-CANONICAL PROPHECY)
1. They operated in groups/bands/guilds.

2. They needed music in order for them to be turned into the prophetic mood
3. It was contagious in nature
4. Miracles were more pronounced during this period.
5. Their messages were not written down
6. Early prophets were seers or visionaries who had clairvoyant powers.
7. They were ecstatics
WHY WERE THEY COMPILED
1. Political disasters, for example the fall of Jerusalem and subsequent

deportation, seem to have provided a powerful stimulus to the preservation
of prophetic sayings. Probably the first compilation of prophetic material dates
back from this time.
2. To preserve prophetic material.
3. To record and deposit after disappointment as proof in the event of future
fulfilment of his/her prophecy.
4. So that the prophecy might benefit by providing lessons to future generations
(posterity).
5. To keep the prophetic tradition alive.
6. To maintain a reliable record of the prophetic literature.
‘PROPHETS SHOULD NOT BE SEEN AS AUTHORS AND POETS (H. GUNKEL) BUT AS
MESSENGERS OF Yahweh (J. ROSS)’. EVALUATE THESE TWO PERSPECTIVES ON ISRAELITE
PROPHETS.
AUTHORS
According to H. Gunkel prophets were authors in their own right who were particularly poets
because of the nature of their works and how they delivered their message.
In their writing prophets used poetic devices, these include repetition, for example linking
(initial, cross and final linking), parallelism in the case of Hebrew poetry- initial, final,
synonymous and synthetic parallelism.
Apart from repetition prophets also play with words (paronomasia) and panning,
onomatopoeia and other poetic devices to this effect. The form of some oracles, for example
arrangement in stanzas may also be cited to demonstrate the same point..

33
WEAKNESSES
Arrangement into stanzas of prophetic oracles is a later development that cannot be

attributed to the prophets. Also, even at the point of delivering their message, sometimes it
was their secretaries who captured and wrote the words and these were the people
responsible for the artistic skills that went into writing of the prophetic books and not the
prophets themselves.
PROPHETS WERE MESSENGERS OF YAHWEH.
Prophets were messengers of Yahweh because of the nature of their task and also how they
delivered their message. This is primarily based on the definition of the term Nabi as someone
who speak on behalf of another. When applied to Israelite prophecy a Nabi was a messenger
of Yahweh who communicated the divine will. The use of the messenger style or prophetic
formula, ‘thus says the Lord…’ can be used to support that they were messengers of Yahweh.
Prophets received calls from Yahweh. They were not men of self-appointed ministries. The
implication therefore is that the source of their authority was Yahweh.
ECSTACY
According to B.W Anderson, ecstacy is an experience of being overcome with an emotion so

powerful that self control or reason may be suspended. It does not arise from mere emotional
rapture but from the spirit (ruah) of Yahweh which falls upon a person. It takes control of the
self and makes one an instrument of divine will. In such a state unusual things happen, eg
Elijah overtook the chariot of Ahab (1 Kings 18), Saul stripped off clothes and lay naked (1 S
amuel 19:19-24). It transforms a prophet i.e made him another man (1 Samuel 10:6).
It can be divided into three categories:
1. Contagious i.e electric eg when Saul met a band of prophets on his way to
Gibeah and fall into esctacy.
2. Orgiastic eg Elijah overtook the chariot of Ahab from Mt Carmel to Jezreel.
3. Passive eg when Elisha visited Damascus, Hazel came to see him in order to
seek an oracle about Benhadad’s sickness and Elisha told him that he shall die.
Elisha then gazed and stared steadily at him and he burst into tears.

34
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECSTACY AND PROPHECY
Some scholars argue that the term prophet originated from the agitated behavior of ecstatics.
According to Robinson no Hebrew prophet would venture to prophecy without an initial
experience of an extra- ordinary character, that is, ecstacy. It served as the climate of
prophecy. Certainly this condition was the medium of genuine religious experience in which
true conduct with God was achieved.
According to J. Lindblom ecstacy was physical evidence which showed that someone has the
spirit of Yahweh. It gave prophets authority hence distinguished them from ordinary people,
eg is Saul among the prophets?’ it was normally induced by music and it had influence in
politicseg Deborah led people in war and inspire them with music. Prophetic guilds, for
example those stationed near the Philistne garrison were functional in the holy wars. Music
was used to induce patriotism in people. The analogy of other groups of Yahweh’s devotees
such as the Rechabites are the prophetic guilds. Association of saul with the sons of the
prophets after he had been set aside to deliver Israel suggest that they were a religio- patriotic
movement making use of dervish techniques.
MODE OF OPERATION OF PROPHETIC GUILDS
1. The ecstatics lived in bands (groups) under the leadership of a father (ab) and
they were the sons of the prophet (bene hannebiim). The father’s spirit was
shared among the sons (Numbers 11,2Kings 2, 1 Sam 19:24). The function of
the chief prophet was to teach the sons the secrets of the prophetic office
while the sons supported and legitimized the authority of the father.
2. Ecstacy was induced by music (2 Kings 3:15)
3. Ecstatic/ frencied behavior.
4. Decentralization of community households for example some lived in Bethel,
Gilgal, Jericho (2 Kings 2:1-5)
5. Prophesied violently (1Kings 18:28)
6. Use symbolic acts to demonstrate (1 Kings 22)
7. They use slogan to refer to the leaders as chariot and its horsemen (2 Kings
13:12,14).
FUNCTIONS/ACTIVITIES OF PROPHETIC GUILDS
1. The ecstatics lived in bands (groups) under the leadership of a father (ab) and they
were the sons of the prophet (bene hannebiim). The father’s spirit was shared
among the sons (Numbers 11,2Kings 2, 1 Sam 19:24). The function of the chief
prophet was to teach the sons the secrets of the prophetic office while the sons
supported and legitimized the authority of the father. Probably, prophecy like the
office of the priest had to go through some form of learning. So maybe the
responsibility of the father was to authenticate that one has undergone through
all stages and therefore qualified as a prophet. The assumption here is that if
prophets used cultic objects, it simply meant that one had to learn and prophecy

35
is not something that comes spontaneously (2 Kings 4:38-41). So they were

professionally trained and perhaps paid for a service, eg Ahijah is being paid when
he delivered the message of Jeroboam (1 Kings 14).
2. The father anointed and would send sons to anoint kings vindicating the leadership
of the anointed individual by bestowing upon them certain charisma (2 kings 9).
So they were messengers of the fathers who would at one point anoint kings.
3. The sonsin particular acted as political commissars and would gather at military
garrisons in a bid to boost the morale of the anointed kings and their soldiers as
they fight against their enemies. So they were functional during holy wars, eg
when Israel fought against the Philistines, the guilds were stationed near the
philistine garrison, probably to weaken the enemy by proclaiming their defeat in
advance as well as chanting war songs. So they function as a military band.
4. They were upholders of monotheism just like their fathers.
5. They were industrious that is they could cook, farm, gather food for themselves.
6. They could also prophecy.
7. They also had cultic functions. They were experts at intercessory prayers. Some of
them acted as temple personnel.
COMPARE AND CONTRAST PROPHETIC BANDS IN ANCIENT ISRAEL AND SIMILAR
PHENOMENON IN AN AFRICAN INDEPENDENT CHURCH OF YOUR CHOICE IN ZIMBABWE.
Zviratidzo (revelations) and its splinter groups Mabasa evapositori (acts of apostles) and
dhambuza.
SIMILARITIES
1. Secret place of meeting (mativi mana) a mysterious place.

2. The presence of a father who is the chief trainer and the surrounding disciples
who are apprentices.
3. Basic process of incubation that the graduates from there talk about, that
includes the secrets of healing and performing miracles.
4. Inducement of ecstacy through music and dance.
DIFFERENCES
Kind of recruits and their backgrounds are different.It seems apprentices in the African
independent churches are drawn from those candidates who initially were possessed by
spirits making demands upon them to be traditional healers and through some mysterious
process the spirit is cleansed and converted/ termed so that these people can now be healers
within the church.
Miracles performed almost always have to do with healing and their prophesy always involves
witch hunting. This is a marked difference with Ancient Israelite prophetic bands.
HOW ECSTACY ORIGINATE IN ISRAEL

36
Ecstacy like prophecy is a borrowed phenomenon from the Ancient Near East. Its ultimate
origin is traced back to Thrace where it spread into Greece as a cult of Dionysius and into Asia
Minor and Syria. It is likely Israel first becomes acquainted with ecstatic prophecy in Canaan
where it was connected with Baal religion. Baal prophets imported it from Phoenicia.
Probably Israelites borrowed ecstatic prophecy from the Canaanites as it did so much else.
This is supported by the factthat there are similarities between Israelite ecstacy and Ancient
near East, eg the Mesha- stele found in Dibon in the Jordan region dated in the ninth century.
The stele records a command relayed to king Mesha from the Moabite God Kemish to attack
a town called Nebo. The message wasrelayed by an ecstatic figure eg the Elijah and Elisha
narratives reveal a close conduct between Israel and Canaanite cities and testify to the
existence of a certain type of orgiastic prophecy imported into Israel by Jezebel the wife of
Ahab.
There are some similarities between 450 prophets of Baal and the sons of a prophet
associated with Elijah and Elisha. The Elijah- Elisha narratives reveal a close contact between
Israel and Phoenician cities and testify to the existence of a certain type of orgiastic prophecy
imported into Israel by Jezebel- the queen.The Wen Amon incident is another example of
ecstatic prophecy in the ancient Near east similar to that of Israel. In the Mari text there are
reports about several communications from the deities eg Dagan, Adad to Zimri lim. These
messages are reported to have been passed through ecstatic (Muhhum) employed in a
temple. The Mesha stele found in Dibon in the Jordan region that is dated in the 9 th century.
The stela records a command relayed to King Mesha from the MOABITE GOD Kemish to attack
a town called Nebo. The message was relayed by an ecstatic figure. Some scholars like
Blenkinsopp argue that there is huge material in the Mari letters dealing with ecstatic
intermediaries that characterize what must have been a fairly standard pattern in the ANE
urban centres with which Israel had ties. In fact both ANE and Israelite ecstacy were
stimulatedby rythmn of music and body movements ( 3:15). Body is stimulated into hyper-
action. However scholars observed that Israelite ecstacy was not just a mere emotional
rapture but was from the spirit of Yahweh (ruah). Moreover rarely do we find Israelite
prophets delivering their message in ecstacy. Basing on the definition of ecstacy, that is,
suspension of self-consciousness, some scholars argue that there is a difficulty that arises
with trying to understand Israelite prophets solely as ecstatics because going by the definition
it would appear Israelite prophets were not ecstatic. They argue that Israelite prophets never
lost their consciousness. Texts cited to support the view that Israelite prophets were ecstatics
are not explicit eg Numbers 11:11-30 is said to be anachronistic. Moreover there is no
equivalent Hebrew term for ecstacy. Though scholars may accept that Israelite prophets were
ecstatic it seems this phenomenon was prevailing during early phases of prophecy and seems
to be studiously avoided by classical prophets. B.W Anderson argues that if prophecy was
borrowed what was borrowed was transformed to suit the Israelite environment.

37
ECSTACY AS AN ISRAELITE PHENOMENON
It appear for the first time in the reliable records of Israel in connection with the election of
Saul who instituted the prophetic guilds (1 Samuel 10:1, 1 Samuel 19:24). These prophets are
connected with political situation during the philistine oppression of Israel. The source of the
ecstatic experience is the spirit of God. Samuel probably aligned with them because of their
loyalty to Yahweh. However its likely that ecstatic prophets existed prior to Samuel but they
were taken for granded (1 Samuel 3:1). Most scholars interpret Numbers 11:10-30, that is the
incident of the ordination of the 70 elders as marking the beginning of ecstatic prophecy in
the wilderness. In this case ecstacy originated within Israel and was God inspired. Scholars
like Blenkinsopp may argue that this passage appears to legitimize ecstatic prophecy by
deriving it from the spirit of Moses which itself had divine origin. Spirit transferred from
Moses to the elders caused them to prophecy ecstatically. However this view has been
criticized by M. Noth. For him it is doubtful whether this is an authentic episode from the
Mosaic period. In the judgement of many scholars this is anachronistic. Anachronism is the
story teller’s technique or description of the Mosaic period in terms of language or experience
of a later time. One can conclude that ecstacy is part and parcel of the earliest forms of
prophecy in Israel.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PROPHECY AND THE CULT
The relationship between prophet and priest and prophet and cultus is not clear. At one time
it was customary to find in Hebrew religion a tension between prophet and priest or cult. 9 At
present it is more common to find scholars suggesting that prophets may have been a part of
the cultus, associated with priests in cultic ritual. As we shall see, anti-cultic pronouncements
of the eighth century prophets appear to give support to the first hypothesis, but there is a
considerable amount of evidence to lend credence to the second. The prophets encountered
by Saul were from the shrine at Gibeath-elohim, "the hill of the gods" (I Sam. 10:5). The
prophet Samuel was trained by the priest Eli and performed as a priest. As we shall see,
Ezekiel, the prophet, had priestly interests. Isaiah received his summons to prophesy within
the temple precincts. Aubrey Johnson has proposed that prophets and priests worked side by
side in Yahweh shrines and in the Jerusalem temple, and he concludes that when the prophets
criticized, they stood within the cultus seeking to correct abuses. For him prophecy formed a
free but intimate cult association .
S. Mowinkel argues that prophecy was connected with the cult. scholars argue that prophecy
evolved from priesthood. The argument being that, because of the inadequacy and corrupt
tendencies of the priestly office as demonstrated by the sons of Eli, the lack of the voice of
the Lord during time of Eli necessitated Samuel’s call. Priests and Levites were considered to
be gifted with the spirit of Yahweh. They were consulted by the local people for the guidance
of Yahweh. This function is also applicable to the prophets, e.g. Samuel was consulted for the
lost ass, Ahijah is consulted by Jeroboam’s wife pertaining the illness of their child. Prophetic
guilds were linked to cultic centres. Gad is referred to as David’s seer. Elisha is visited by a
Shunamite woman at the cult. So there is an overlapping of the functions of a seer, prophet
and priest. Prophets were either permanently or temporarily connected with sanctuaries.

38
FUNCTIONS
1. Giving oracles
2. Helping in battles and offering sacrifices
3. Interceding.
4. They were experts in prayer
5. Reception of revelation is always found around the cult
The role of the prophets as set forth in the prophetic writings is to proclaim Yahweh's word
or, as the term nabi implies, to act as Yahweh's spokesmen. During the past half century,
prophetic utterances have been subjected to form critical analysis, and it has been
demonstrated that oracular forms stem from cultic, legal, heraldic and other sociocultural
sources. Some utterances, such as those of Amos, may be associated with festal occasions
like the New Year observance. Judgment pronouncements reflect forms used in law court
statements or in proclamations by a royal messenger. Some salvation oracles employ patterns
used in lamentation rituals or in minstrelsy. The results of form critical studies should not be
used to anchor the prophets in any of the groups from which they borrowed their literary
forms, but rather to demonstrate the versatility of the spokesmen for God who were capable
of employing many well-known literary patterns to communicate their message.
It is often pointed out that prophets demonstrate extensive knowledge of Hebrew traditions.
This is true, but the prophets are not confined by past history. Woven through the prophetic
works are references to major themes of the salvation history of the nation: election or choice
of the people by God, the Exodus or the saving-preservation of the people, the covenant
bonds, the occupation of Canaan with divine help, and the Davidic line with its messianic-
kingship overtones.
There were various means of determining the will of Yahweh at cultic centres. There are also
various types of oracles, e.g. judgement, assurance and salvation oracles. There are places
well known for oracle giving,e.g. Elisha and the Shunamite woman refer to the new moon and
Sabbath suggesting the time to receive an oracle. So the function of the Old Testament
prophets in association with the cult as an institution is not in question. The real question has
to do with the extend of the association
But, as we shall see, the prophets also turned away from traditions: Amos reversed the
popular concept of "Yahweh's day" and Jeremiah proposed a new covenant to replace the
old.
The prophets also challenged current practices. Cultic ritual, with its emphasis upon what a
man does in ritual, is played down, and moral themes, concerned with what a man is in human
associations, are emphasized.11
Thus, the prophets should not be universally categorized as anti-cultic preachers, as

upholders of past traditions, as predictors of the future or as moralists. They are best
recognized as charismatic personalities, men under the compulsion of an experience that
causes them to utter, despite opposition, challenge, mockery and imprisonment, the words
they believed to be Yahweh's words given to them, words representing Yahweh's will,
Yahweh's intentions, Yahweh's purposes, and Yahweh's action. Their concern was with their

39
own immediate present. If the understanding and interpretation of that immediate present
demanded recollections from the past or indications of what the future might hold, then past
and future were utilized. If the best and most meaningful presentation called for dramatic
enactment, utilizing legal or mourning or folksong modes of utterance, then these forms were
used. To resist the demands of God or to flee from their assigned role was impossible. One
could only respond to what Yahweh required and suffer the consequences in the conviction
that Yahweh would prove the utterance to be true.
How Yahweh's word came is not known. Rites of incubation, in which the individual slept in a
holy place and received a message in dreams or visions, were practiced in the Near East. When
Daniel (or Dan'el) in the Ugaritic story of Aqht desired a son, he spent seven days and nights
in the sanctuary until he received a revelation.12 Incubation rites were not unknown to the
Hebrews,13 but there is no clear evidence that prophetic messages were received through this
technique. Nevertheless visions were experienced, for Isaiah's prophetic summons came in a
vision in the temple area, and visionary patterns appear in the prophecies of Amos, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel and others.14
Free association rites are known to have been utilized by seers. The whole mind and
personality of the seer is focused upon a single item, or problem; all else is blanked out in
what might best be described as a trance state. A train of thought is begun leading to an
answer to the problem or to an oracle. There is, as we shall see, some indication that the
prophets may have utilized some form of this technique, acquiring oracles from concentration
on a pot of boiling water (Jer. 1:13 f.) or on a man testing a wall (Amos 7:7 f.).
Some prophetic oracles reflect personal experiences either social or introspective. Some of
Hosea's proclamations grew out of his unfortunate marriage and some of Jeremiah's out of
vilification by his countrymen. On the other hand, certain of Jeremiah's and Isaiah's
experiences were personal and inward, suggesting that they developed out of inward
listening or concentration that produced mental images, mental communication culminating
in what might be termed an "ineffable experience" (cf. Jer. 20:7- 9).15
Perhaps it is best to generalize and describe prophetic experiences as many and varied. Lack
of detailed information in the Bible prevents, in the light of present knowledge, real precision
in analysis.
The clash between prophets and priests has been taken by some scholars to mean that they
are two distinct groups. Prophets were not necessarily against the cult but its abuse. The two
offices co-existed. Cult was from the beginning, the tangible expression of the faith of Israel.
It was the rehearsal of God’s mighty deeds and his self -disclosure of the past.
Anti- cultic verses, e.g. Amos 5:3, Isaiah 1:11-12 are against formalization of exterior worship
when it had no corresponding interior dispositions. Israel had come to believe that rituals and
ceremony could atone for their sins. God rejects the paraphernalia of external observance
unless it is accompanied by social justice and consideration for the underprivileged. Prophets
insisted that mere outward forms divorced from inward meaning and practices of genuine
purity are resented. God’s concern is with moral obedience and not prescribed rules.
Examples to support this are 1 Samuel 15:22, Hosea 6:6, Amos 5:21-25, Isaiah 1:10-15,

40
Jeremiah 6:20, 7:22-23. Prophets were against the cult because it had become so much
institutionalized, their concern was that it had become devoid of sincerity. It had been
practiced by immoral people who were syncretic and apostate.
Yahwistic prophetism almost certainly remains in close rapport with the cult. They sometimes
spoke the language of the cult.However it does not necessarily follow that the great Old
Testament prophet was a cult or guild prophet. Prophets and priests were not so positively
and constantly opposed as sometimes assumed. It is significant that these figures were the
most highly ranked in the tradition of Judaism. Moses and Elijah had dual role of priest and
prophet. Moses was a Levite and Elijah conducted sacrifices. In fact prophets operated within
the established priesthood and ceremonial ritual established by Moses. Sacrifices were a
means of expressing obedience.
However prophets emphasized that sacrifices were not to be an end in themselves as Israel
thought, but they were a means to an end. Prophets were seen at cultic centres as experts at
intercessory prayers. They were there to bring people’s petitions to God and communicate
divine answers indicating whether or not the sacrifice was accepted by God. On special
religious festivals such as covenant renewal they may have an important announcement of
the demands and promises of the covenant. Prophets were also court advisors e.g. Nathan a
court prophet sanctioned the rule of the Davidic dynasty.

41
METHODS USED BY PROPHETS TO DELIVER THEIR MESSAGES

SYMBOLIC ACTIONS
B.W Anderson defined symbolic actions as ‘acted out parables’. They were oracles in a
prophet’s book which were acted in real life. These oracles were connected to the message
to be delivered. They disclose the message of Yahweh to the people and they emphasise the
main ideas of the message so that people can easily understand the message.
Quite a number of prophets gave their children symbolic names so that they may be walking
signs or placards to the people. The prophet Moses gave his sons symbolic names; Gershom
which reminds Israelites that they were ‘Sojourners’ and ‘Eliezer’ which reminds them of
deliverance from Pharaoh (Exodus 18:3-4). The prophet Hosea also gave his children symbolic
names: Jezreel named in connection with Jehu’s blood bath in the valley of Jezreel, Not pitied
meaning Yahweh’s patience was exhausted and finally Not my people showing that Yahweh
had dissolved the covenant between him and Israel. In fact the names of Hosea’s children
demonstrate the deterioration of the relationship between Yahweh and Israel. However
God’s judgement was not his last word. After punishment these names were reversed
showing that Yahweh had reconciled with his people.
The prophet Isaiah also had named his children symbolic names so that they will be visualaids.
He gave one of his sons the name Shear Jashub meaning ‘a remnant shall return’ after the
Syro-Ephramite crisis. He also gave his second son the name ‘Maher shalal hash baz’ meaning
‘the speed spoil hastens’, pointing to the weakness of the coalition.the only symbolic actions
performed by the prophets. False prophets also performed actions. The prophet Zedekiah the
son of Chenaah made himself iron horns symbolizing victory. It was during a military campaign
against Syria over the city of Ramoth Gilead. Ahab the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat the king
of Judah joined together against Syria and before they went for a war they inquired of the
Lord from the four hundred court prophets of Baal who belonged to King Ahab. With one
accord they promised these two kings, ‘go up for the Lord will give it into the hand of the
king’. THE two kings were assured of victory, that is when Zedekiah proceeded to make iron
horns in a bid to induce belief in the two kings that surely the Lord commanded or gave them
this to be a false prophet when the two kings were defeated by Syria and king Ahab died.
Hence the efficiency of this method was questionable chiefly because it was also used by false
prophets.
This method was a common method that Jeremiah used. Some of the symbolic actions in the
book of Jeremiah are:
1. The pot in the hands of a potter - a symbolic action which demonstrate that Yahweh
was there to punish Israel as a corrective measure.
2. The broken pottery in the valley of Hinnom or Topeth which symbolize doom.
3. Jeremiah’s purchase of the land at Anathoth symbolizing restoration.

42
4. A yoke bar in the prophet’s neck which symbolize Babylonian exile and slavery.
Hananiah the false prophet broke his bars and assured the Judeans that the exile
period was not going to last for 70 years as prophesied by Jeremiah. He prophesied
that it was to last for two years. Jeremiah proceeded to make iron yoke bars in a bid
to prove to his audience the certainty of the impending catastrophe.
The accounts contain:
1. God’s instruction to perform the action.

2. A description of the action itself
3. An explanation of its meaning
4. They sometimes include a statement made to onlookers.
5. As in a vision emphasis in the text is not on the action but on the lesson conveyed by
the action- usually that God was going to act either against or on behalf of his people
(Hosea 1:1-2)
SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS METHOD
1. Symbolic action acted as visual aids to the audience aid memory. They served not only
to represent and make evident a particular fact, but also to make this fact a reality.
2. They tease the mind into active thought. In fact they deny the hearers the attitude of
a spectator. So they were meant to arouse the emotions of fear or hope, according to
circumstances. Thus what was done powerfully reinforced what is said. Symbolic
actions represent, indicate, point to or demonstrate. Therefore they point beyond
themselves to something else. They served to represent to the bystanders an object,
an occurrence, a course of events which were of particular significance. Therefore
there is a connection with the total message of the prophet.
3. They were used to attract the attention of the people. They always had such a
structure as to evoke in the consciousness of the bystanders the fact which the
prophet had in mind.
4. They were meant to illustrate seriousness of the actions basing on the philosophy that
actions are more effective than words.
5. They express God’s intentions, e.g. destruction. They are symbolic ways in which God
intends to act towards his people.
6. It helped people to remember, see, judge and act. According to Lindblom prophets
frequently acted in unusual ways in order to derive home the oracles they uttered.
WEAKNESSES
1. Scholar by the name Edmund Sigmund view symbolic actions as signs of shear
madness and sign of exhibitionism. After a close analysis between Israelite prophets
who performed symbolic actions and his insane patience on the issue of behavior and
he come to conclude that symbolism is shear madness.
2. It was problematic because false prophets used this method.
SONGS (FUNERAL DIERGE)/ LAMENT

43
The prophet Amos in 5:2 sung a funeral song to the Israelites when he wanted to prove
his audience the inevitability of doom that he was pronouncing. This is a funeral lament
over Israel as if she were a corpse ready for burial. He saw Israel in a coffin waiting for
burial. Attached to the song is the issue of lament which usually begins with a woe cry
(woe…) Amos 5:18, 4:4-5, Isaiah 5:1ff. woe speech is a pronouncement whose tone is deep
and full of grief. It is introduced with catch word, ‘Woe to you…’ (Amos 6:4-6)
PARABLES
Parables are comparisons which use story telling techniques and details drawn from
everyday life experiences in order to present religious truth in a way which attracts the
attention of the listener or reader by its vividness or strangeness and thus provokes
further reflection and appropriate action.
When prophet Nathan rebuked king David for his sins in seducing Uriah’s wife Bathsheba
and murdering him. Nathan used a parable of the richman who took a poor man’s only
lamb. The use of parables for sinners to condemn themselves is a prophetic device (2
Samuel 12:1-14). David was made to condemn himself. David was also caught out again
in the same way by the wise woman of terkoa (2 Samuel 14:1-23). The same method was
used by the prophet Isaiah in 5:1ff, when he used the parable of the vineyard where Judah
was considered as the chosen vine planted on fertile and well prepared land but
regardless of the efforts made to ensure a good harvest the field yielded wild fruits.
The parable was given to express God’s love for Judah and also to justify punishment that
should be given to the Judeans. God’s love is shown by his care in planting his vineyard.
He punishes it because it could not produce the fruit of obedience, hence punishment was
inevitable.
The prophet Jeremiah also employed the same method when he wanted to prove to Judah
that Yahweh was going to spoil the pride of Judah, in the parable of the waist cloth
(Jeremiah 13:1-11). In Jeremiah 18:1-17 he gave another parable of the potter. In the
parable Jeremiah wanted to deliver the message that Yahweh was going to punish the
Judeans as a corrective measure. In his advice to Zedekiah and those who had survived
the first deportation he gave the parable of the good and the bad figs. In the parable
Jeremiah considered the exiles as good figs. (Jer 24:1-10)
SIGNIFICANCE
1. They were used as weapons of warfare in response to criticism of opponents.

2. To deny the hearers the attitude of a spectator. So they tease the mind into active
thought.
3. It is one of the varied ways through which prophets spoke about the sphere of God’s
kingly rule and power which demands obedience.
4. As a challenge to mythically built world
WEAKNESSES
44
The message could be interpreted differently by the audience. For example Nathan’s
parable to David, David did not know that the rich man in the story was referring to him.
So the prophet’s message was not received as anticipated.
MIRACLES
Miracle is something that happens contrary to nature. It is an extra-ordinary event. This

method was used by prophets to show that the spirit of god was working through them.
Prophets used this as a way of inducing belief in their audience that they were not merely
ordinary beings, but were being used as mouthpieces of Yahweh.
Deuteronomy 13:1-12 seem to suggest that miracles were one way people could use to
distinguish true from false prophets. ‘if a prophet has arisen among you, or a dreamer of
dreams or gives you a sign and what he tells you come to pass…’
The archetypal figure Moses performed quite a number of miracles:
1. Changing the rod into a serpent before Pharaoh.

2. Changing water into blood
3. Ten plagues
4. Struck waters of the Red Sea and parted
5. Provision of manna and quails
6. Make bitter water sweet
7. Struck the rock with his rod when they run out of water.
Elijah and Elisha were carbon copies of Moses. Elijah in his battle with Baalism performed
miracles.in 1 Kings 17:1ff he announced drought to prove that it was Yahweh who
provided rains and not Baal.
1. Elijah multiplied the food of the widow of Zarephath.

2. Called fire from heaven to consume sacrifice (1Kings 18:31ff)
3. Raised the widow of Zarephath’s son.
4. Struck the waters of Jordan and water parted
5. Killed 400 prophets of Baal single handedly
6. Taken to heaven by whirlwind
ELISHA
1. Healed Naaman the leper (2 Kings 5:1ff)

2. Raised the Shunamite woman’s son from the dead (2Kings 4:8-25)
3. Purified the water at Jericho (2 Kings 2:19-25)
4. Filled the trenches with water during the battle with the Moabites (2 Kings 3:4ff)
5. Floated the axe.
All the above were messages sent by means of miracles. They point to prophets as
messengers of Yahweh, revealing Yahweh’ compassion and since illness was linked with
evil these miracles were significant in the fight against evil.

45
RHETORIC QUESTIONS
These were questions which required no answer. They were there to provoke the
audience to ponder seriously about the prophet’s message. When prophets used this
method they wanted the audience to answer themselves.
Amos used this method quite often, for example Amos 9:7 ‘Are you not like the Ethiopeans
to me…’ Here Amos wanted the Israelites to notice that they were no longer coddled.
Yahweh had desacrilised them because of their failure to comply with the covenant
stipulations. Amos 3 is full of these rhetoric questions. Jeremiah 13:223 also used this
method. ‘can the Ethiopean change his skin…’
WEAKNESSES
At times this method is rather confusing especially to the audience who had preconceived
understanding of God. For example, ‘Are you not like the Ethiopians…’. Israelites fail to
grasp this since they regarded themselves as sacred and unique nation not to be
compared with surrounding nations, worse still with their enemies.
LETTERS/ DELEGATION
At times prophets passed their responsibilities to their audience through disciples. This
method was convenient where the prophet was barred from talking to his audience direct.
For example during the reign of Jehoakim the prophet Jeremiah having been labelled a
public enemy and a traitor was banned from prophesying in the name of Lord. Jeremiah
dictated his oracles to his secretary Baruch whom he sent to Jehoakim with the scroll. He
instructed Baruch to read the scroll before the king.
Jeremiah also wrote a letter to the exiles in Jeremiah 29. In the letter he informed the
exiles that exilement was to last for 70 years in contrary to Hannaniah a false prophet who
had predicted that it was to last for two years.
WEAKNESSES
Though this method was effective, since a prophet could convey message to a distant
audience, this method had also some limitations in that there were certain areas which
needed emphasis and further explanations which might not have been heard or seen from
the message.
SERMON/ ORACULAR FORMULA
Prophets could use word of mouth to convey their messages to the audience. They
normally use messenger style or prophetic formula, ‘Thus says the Lord…’or ‘Hear this
word that the Lord had spoken…’ (Amos 1:3,6,9, 3:1).This was meant to convince their

46
audience that the message was not from their thinking but from the one who sent them.
They were claiming that their authority was from Yahweh.
Attached to this method is the issue of sermons where a prophet took advantage of a
gathering, say temple worshippers, e.g. Jeremiah 7 and 26 and deliver message to the
people.
WEAKNESSES
False prophets also claimed to have appointed by Yahweh and also use the messenger
style, e.g. Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah (1 Kings 22:11) and Hannaniah (Jeremiah
28:2ff). So at times it was difficult to distinguish true and false prophets since both were
claiming to have been sent by Yahweh.
ALLEGORY
An allegory is considered as an imagery story whose details have a direct application to a

real life situation, that is, the characters in the story corresponds with something else in a
real life situation, e.g. Hosea’s matrimonial experience is often interpreted as an allegory
and not historical event. It was actually an imaginary story which was given to visualize
the relationship that was between Israel and Yahweh.
IMAGERY/ METAPHORICAL LANGUAGE/ PICTORIAL LANGUAGE
It was a method used by prophets to deliver their message in pictorial form. A prophet
could select words which would create pictures to the minds of the audience, e.g. Amos
3:12 where Amos pictured the useless remnant that was going to be saved from the
coming punishment as follows; ‘As a shepherd rescues from the mouth of the lion two
legs or a piece of an ear, so shall the people of Israel who dwell in Samaria be rescued’
The prophet Hosea more often than not used metaphorical language and comparisons
especially when he was describing the sins of Israel. To begin with his matrimonial
experiences which is given as part and parcel of his call narrative was meant to be
comparable to Israel’s harlotry and infidelity.
According to Hosea 1:2, he was asked to take a wife of harlotry and have children of
harlotry chiefly because the Israelites had forsaken their Lord, going after other gods. In
some instances he compared Israel to half-baked cake 7:11, stubborn heifer 4:16. Israel’s
love is compared to a morning cloud and dew, 6:4. Jeremiah call his audience not to
deviate from their Lord just as the leopard does not change its spots or an Ethiopian his
skin.

47
TRUE AND FALSE PROPHETS

CRITERIA USED TO DISTINGUISH TRUE AND FALSE PROPHETS
Since around 2009, Zimbabwe has witnessed an unprecedented surge of Christian preachers
who call themselves prophets/esses. Characteristically, these so-called prophets/esses claim
to work miracles; especially miracles that ‘contradict’ nature. This has earned them
multitudes of both admirers and critics. Interestingly, while admirers and followers quote the
Bible to endorse them as true prophets, critics and sceptics also cite the same Bible to
characterise them as false prophets. The purpose of this article is to prove that by appealing
to the Bible, both camps are wrong. The Bible does not have water-tight criteria to distinguish
true from false prophets. In other words, there is no distinction between a true and a false
prophet in the Bible because fundamentally they are both called prophets! The article claims
that the Bible is the source of confusion and not the solution to the debate regarding the
distinction between true and false in the contemporary world.
Zimbabwe has recently seen not only an increase in the number of Christian movements that
have so far radically transformed the Chris-tian landscape, but it has also seen an eruption of
a phenomenon of ‘prophets’ that perform ‘strange’ miracles. From 2009, names that include,
prophet Emmanuel Makandiwa and wife, prophetess Ruth of United Family International
Church, Uebert Angel and wife, prophetess Beverly, prophet Tavonga Vutabwashe of
Heartfelt International Minis-tries, prophet Passion Java and wife prophetess Yasmin of
Kingdom Embassy, prophet Adventure Mutepfa (Revival Centre World Ministry), prophet
Oliver Chipunza and prophetess Makanyara (now late) of Apostolic Flame Ministries of
Zimbabwe, have made news headlines. In media terminology, stories about their exploits
could be regarded as the most trending. And their popularity is increasing by the day.
Generating much interest is their claim to perform ‘extra-ordinary’ miracles such as filling
pockets, wallets and hands of believers with bank notes and gold nuggets. After prayer,
followers open their eyes only to find their pockets and wallets full of money and gold nuggets
in their palms. These prophets claim to heal any kind of sickness such cancer, HIV, AIDS and
even raise the dead. In full view of their congregations, some have caused people to instantly
stop smoking, instantly lose weight up to 30kgs, and instantly grow full teeth that had long
fallen. They usually confound their congregations by telling them their house numbers, cell
phone numbers, Identity Numbers (IDs), car registration numbers and the colours of
undergarments their followers would be wearing. Other ‘extra ordinary’ miracles include
children being born only after three days or just hours of conception and increasing fuel in
cars instead of it getting used up as one drives. They also specialise in making accurate
predictions of events that will happen in the near and distant future. In short, their miracles
follow closely those performed by West African Pentecostal prophets such as T.B. Joshua of
Synagogue Church of All Nations, Pastor Chris Ayakhilome of Christ Embassy (both of Nigeria)
and Victor Kusi Boateng of Ghana who is Makandiwa’s spiritual mentor, Godfa-ther. All these
miracles and the doctrine of prosperity which is the anchor of their preaching are therefore
not entirely unknown in Zimbabwe and in Africa at large. They have been heard of; even in
the history of Christianity such events and teachings are not new. In fact, in the Bible, working

48
miracles seems to be one of the preoccupations of Israelite prophets, especially pre-classical

ones.
For instance, Abraham prayed for Abimelech and was instantly healed (Gen.20:7), Moses
provided manna to hungry Israelites (Ex. 16:1ff), provided water out of the rock (Num.
20:11ff), at Zarephath Elijah miraculously increased flour and oil, in-stead of these
commodities being used up (1 Kgs. 17:9-16) and he raised the dead (1 Kgs. 17:17-12), Elisha
increased oil and one jar of oil filled several jars until there was no more empty jar (2 Kgs.
4:1ff). Jesus in the New Testament is also depicted as one who performed similar miracles.
Zimbabwean prophets have therefore sought to closely follow these great Old Testament
prophetic figures and Jesus. Their interest is to re-live, to re-enact the biblical times. In other
words, they seek to dramatise what they read in the Bible. Thus Zimbabwe has always been
inundated with stories of miracle workers, who perform miracles similar to the ones these
great men of God performed, from time to time. Prophets in African Initiated Churches and
traditional healers are known to perform such miracles. Followers of Prophet E.H. Guti and
wife prophetess Eunor of Zimbabwe Assemblies of God Africa Forward in Faith (ZAOGA-FIF),
Andrew Wutawunashe and wife, prophetess Ruth of Family of God Church (FOG) and
Matthias and Mildred of Mat-thias and Mildred Church have also claimed that their leaders
perform such miracles. But the popularity of such individuals never reached that of
Makandiwa, Vutabwashe and Angel, who attract around 45 000 followers every Sunday
service. This has never happened in the history of Christianity in Zimbabwe. People flock from
as far as Malawi, South Africa, Zambia, and Mozambique to be ‘ministered’ to by these
prophets. Some suspect that Makandiwa and Angel could be playing African magic acquired
from either Nigeria or Ghana where such priests are common and one from Ghana has
confessed that several pastors from across the globe including from Zimbabwe flock to him
to get the magic to perform such miracles as making money. The Ghanaian magician claims
that he makes ‘miracle money’ from nowhere.
Also, that the whole Zimbabwean society could concentrate on such individuals to the extent
that even politicians, technocrats, economists discussed and consulted them is
unprecedented in post-colonial Zimbabwe.
Therefore, what is new is the popularity of the performers of such miracles and the rich
pickings they get from these activities not the miracles. In other words, the Zimbabwean
society is abuzz with talk of their miraculous exploits. The discussions range from scepticism,
outright dis-missal of them as false prophets and their miracles as magic to admiration. At the
centre of the arguments is the Bible. Those who dismiss them as false prophets appeal to the
Bible and those who absolutely believe them as true prophets also cite the Bible. Such texts
as Mark 16:17-18 which claim that ‘and these signs will accompany those who believe... in my
name they will drive out demons;...speak new tongues;.... they will pick snakes with
hands;...will drink poison (but) it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick
people and they will get well’ and 1 Cor. 2:9, which says, ‘No eye has seen, no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived what God prepared for those who love him’ have often been cited by
the followers in defence of their leaders. Also quoted often is John 14:12 which has Jesus

49
promising disciples that, ‘anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will
even greater things that these’.
For the followers of these prophets, these scriptures are being fulfilled in the ministries and
miracles performed by Vutabwashe, Makandiwa and Angel among others. The prophets at
the centre of the discussion also cite the Bible to show that they are indeed true prophets,
followers of Christ. The main import of this article is to dismiss the criteria set in the Bible as
not sacrosanct in dealing with such a complex phenomenon as prophecy, let alone
distinguishing true and false prophets. Evidence shall be drawn especially from the Old
Testament.
BACKGROUND TO THE “TRUE AND FALSE PROPHECY” DEBATE IN ANCIENT ISRAEL
The problems faced regarding the criteria to distinguish who is a true and who is a false
prophet is not a modern phenomenon. It is maybe as old as the institution of prophecy itself.
The Old Testament bears evidence of a society similar to our own; a society grappling with
the determination of true from false prophecy. While in ancient Israel, the society was
provoked by the existence of conflicting messages from people who both claimed to be
prophets of God, in our contemporary society, the existence of men and women who perform
‘extra-ordinary’ miracles seems to spark the debate more than conflicting messages. The
clashes between Elijah and the 450 prophets of Baal (and 400 prophets of Asherah) at Mt.
Carmel (1Kgs 18: 16-40), that of Micaiah ben Imlah and Zedekiah (1 Kgs 22:24) and the one
between Jeremiah and Hananiah (Jer. 28) are convincing evidence not only to the fact that in
Israel conflicting theological convictions between prophets was the source of contradictory
messages but also that this ideological clash in most cases ended up in real physical
clashes/fist-fighting and death. Thus, prophetic conflict in Israel was not uncommon and the
reasons for their clashes varied.
According to Robert Carroll, while prophetic conflict had been part and parcel of the Israelite
society maybe from as far back as its origins, the problem became acute towards the end of
the Judean Kingdom in the sixth century BCE.
As one prophet said one thing, another said the opposite. This became confusing to the
society until theologians of the era took it as their responsibility to advise the society on the
criteria to differentiate true and false prophets. Unfortunately, some of these theologians
were interested parties in that they were prophets themselves. As such, they premised
themselves as true and condemned as false whoever had a contrary theological or political
ideology to theirs. While such prophets-cum theologians thought their criteria were objective
and water-tight, the suggested criteria, as we look back, are very biased and can hardly solve
the debate within our societies. Be that as it may, this attempt at establishing criteria of
authenticity of prophets in Israel is captured in literature by Deuteronomist
theologians/editors (Deut 3:1-5; 18:15-22), Jeremiah (23:9-32) and Ezekiel (13).
However, rather than solving the debate as regards to who exactly was a true prophet and
who was a false one, the criteria set by the Deuteronomist theologians only provide very
important insights into the dilemma that befell the society of Judah in trying to fish out false
prophets from true prophets. And the same dilemma is on our societies. The criteria set by

50
the Deuteronomists (and in the entire Bible) cannot help us solve the debate. While these
criteria have been invoked as water-tight by some in our contemporary world, (in Zimbabwe
in particular) in the debate relating to numerous Pentecostal preachers who are called
prophets, the present article regards the criteria as having failed to really make a distinction
between true and false prophets.
CRITERIA SET IN THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY
The book of Deuteronomy offers maybe what could be the earliest and most comprehensive
attempt by the society at establishing criteria to determine authentic and inauthentic
prophets in Israel. For instance, in two separate but thematically related texts, Deuteronomy
provides some criteria that have been cited over the ages as important for distinguishing true
from false prophets, even in our midst. The first criterion pro-posed was ‘speaking in the name
of Yahweh’. A true prophet was to speak in the name of Yahweh. This criterion assumes that
in Israel true prophets were messengers of Yahweh, hence were supposed to speak in his
name. And they were supposed to invite listeners to worship Yahweh alone. Any prophet who
spoke in the name of another god, or one who told the Israelite community to worship other
gods beside Yahweh was to be stoned to death (Deut 13:1-5). In the contemporary world, and
especially for the ordinary readers of the Bible, this criterion is clear and has the capacity to
flush out false prophets from true prophets. However, the matter of determining whether a
prophet is true or false is not that simple. Prophecy as a phenomenon is very complex. The
main weakness of this criterion is that in ancient Israel, it only may have catered for the
difference between foreign prophets and Israelite prophets. Indeed, prophets of Baal most
likely spoke in the name of Baal and those of Yahweh spoke in the name of Yahweh. What
this means is that the criterion did not solve the problem among Israelite prophets who all
claimed to speak for Yahweh, yet they had contradictory messages. The same is true in our
modern society. All individuals who claim to be prophets speak in the name of God, even
though their messages some-times are contradictory. Under such circumstances, who could
we call true and who is false?
THE CRITERION OF PREDICTION AND FULFILMENT
It was maybe due to the above weakness that Deuteronomists included another criterion that
had to be considered also in the determination of who is false and who is true; the criterion
of prediction and fulfilment (Deut 13:1-5; 18:21-22). In this sense, Deuteronomy assumes that
a true prophet must speak in the name of Yahweh and the prediction must come to pass in
the manner so predicted. From the point of view of the Deuteronomist theologians, the
criterion of speaking in the name of Yahweh was supposed to be used simultaneously with
that of prediction and fulfilment. If a prophet spoke in the name of Yahweh and predicted
something which comes to pass, but goes ahead and calls upon the people to worship some
other gods besides Yahweh, such a prophet was to be stoned (Deut 13:1-2). In the same
manner, if he spoke in the name of Yahweh but the word was not fulfilled, such a prophet
was to be regarded as a false prophet, hence was supposed to be stoned to death (Deut 13:5;
18:20). With these criteria, maybe no contemporary man or woman who claims to be prophet
would be stoned. They all would be attested as true, for most of their predictions have come
to pass. But at the same time, they would all be stoned, since some of their predictions have

51
not been fulfilled. As noted in the introduction, most (but obviously not all) of the predictions
by Zimbabwean prophets for example are accurate and come to pass as predicted. In fact, in
Zimbabwe, those in support of Vutabwashe, Makandiwa and Angel believe that these
individuals are true prophets because their predictions have come to pass.
WEAKNESSES OF THE PREDICTION AND FULFILMENT CRITERION
Critiquing the two criteria proposed by the Deuteronomist theologians, Carroll is apt when he
observed that, ‘it was too oversimplified an approach to the complex matter of prophecy’.
The criteria leave a lot of issues unattended to. Firstly, the criterion of prediction and
fulfilment of events only caters for prophets who make short-term predictions, such as:
tomorrow you will die, you will get money, or next week or next year there will be drought,
etc. But, prophets who make long-term predictions were left ‘unjudged’ until such a time
predicted has lapsed. But some of these predictions took generations to be fulfilled, hence
caused a lot of anxiety in the society (Ezek 12:27). And by the time the prediction was fulfilled,
the concerned prophet may have died. What this means is that, prophets who made long-
term predictions would die false prophets. In other words, they only could be taken as true
prophets by later generations who would have witnessed the fulfilment of their predictions.
But again, it depended on the memory of the people from one generation to another;
otherwise most of the predictions of these prophets would have been forgotten.
The second weakness is that this criterion is self-contradictory. While according to these
theologians, a prediction was supposed to be fulfilled maybe in the prophet’s life time, some
of these Deuteronomist theologians included in their history, long-term predictions;
prophecies that were not to be fulfilled in the immediate future or in their life-time. For
example, 1 Sam 2:31-36 predicts what is in the very distant future and not yet conceivable. 1
Kings 13:2 also indicates that the prediction was made so many years back and the society
may have forgotten about it. Another incident is that found in 2 Kings 13:15-19, where Elisha
made a prediction but died before the prediction was fulfilled (2 Kgs. 13:20). Thus when we
use the criterion of fulfilment of prediction, Elisha died a false prophet. The same conclusion
could be reached regarding Jeremiah. In Jeremiah 25:11-12 and 29:10, Jeremiah made a
prediction that Judah would be released from Babylonian slavery after seventy years. Basing
upon the criterion of fulfilment of prediction, Jeremiah would only be proven as a true
prophet after seventy years. And by that time Jeremiah and most, if not all the people who
were his audiences would have died. In short, Jeremiah, according to this criterion, died a
false prophet. The criterion has thus the propensity to dismiss as false all the prophets we
have always regarded as true, such as Elisha, Jeremiah, Micah and Isaiah among others. Micah
(5:5) and Isaiah (10:5) for example, predicted that Jerusalem would be destroyed by the
Assyrians in the eighth century but Jerusalem was not destroyed by the Assyrians in the eighth
century.
It was destroyed instead by the Babylonians in 587, in the sixth century BCE. According to
this criterion, Micah and Isaiah are false prophets. A third weakness associated with the
Deuteronomist theologians’ criterion of prediction and fulfilment of prophecy is that it makes
prediction the sole function of prophets. Of course prophets predicted and this is very

52
pronounced in the Old Testament. In 1 Sam. 10:5 for example, Samuel predicted that Saul
would come across a group of prophets, and it happened (1 Sam 10:10). In 1 Kings 11:26
Ahijah predicted the break of the kingdom and Jeroboam would be king over the northerners,
Israel and it happened (1 Kgs. 12:20). Ahijah predicted that Jeroboam’s ill son was going to
die and it happened (1 Kgs. 14:12, 17) exactly as predicted. But equating prophecy with
prediction is not always quite correct.
Prophets were first and foremost preachers, whose preaching was in-tended to cause change
of attitude and change of action from the audience. Herbert Bess is therefore right when he
observes that ‘certainly the (Israelite) prophet did predict the future...but prediction (of the
future) was not the larger part of prophecy; it was as much the prophet’s responsibility to
interpret correctly the past and the present’.
In other words, what they predicted may be offset by the change of behaviour of the people.
In fact, most of the great prophets of Israel always connected their predictions of doom and
gloom with hope and chance of repentance. They always wanted people to repent so as to
avoid consequences which they predicted. The fourth most important weakness of the
criterion of fulfilment of prediction, as implied in Deuteronomy 13:1-5 especially is that even
a false prophet could by chance predict what could come to pass. In other words, there was
also a great chance that a prophet regarded as genuine might on occasion be false and the so
called false prophet might speak the truth (1 Kgs. 13:18).
This scenario was witnessed in many other instances in the history of Israel. A prophet
regarded as true would be deceived by God to prophesy falsehoods. He, in other words,
would be given a false revelation by God. 1 Kings 22 is the classic example of di-vine
deception; the fact that God could lie to true prophets so as to achieve certain goals. In this
case, King Ahab consulted 400 prophets on whether he has to go for war or not. They all
encouraged him to go claiming that God was with the king to give him victory (1 Kgs. 22:6).
Yet, the text is very clear that the 400 prophets had been lied to by God (1 Kgs. 22: 19-23).
This means, had it not been the lying spirit from God that entered these prophets, they would
have said the truth. In fact, it is clear that before this incident they always told the truth; they
were true prophets. It also means after this incident they became false prophets or they
became true prophets again. In other words, 1 Kings 22 makes a bold declaration that both a
true prophet and a false prophet were mediums of the same God! What is also coming out of
this text is that prophets are not responsible for their actions and speech. Therefore, they
can-not be held accountable since they are only agents in the hand of God. This defeats Deut
13:5 which stipulates the death penalty to those who prophesy falsehoods. Why would they
be killed when they were truth-fully serving God by lying? The concepts of divine deception
together with divine repentance pro-vide some of the most likely avenues for understanding
contradictions among Israelite prophets and even prophets in our midst. While the Israelite
history shows that the divine (God) could deceive his prophets, His repentance also left his
messengers, the prophets in limbo. In so many instances in the Bible we are told that God
repented and did not do what he had promised to do (cf. Amos 7:3,6,). Although prophets
were understood or understood themselves as social and religious critics in order to bring
about reform, divine repentance always left them ex-posed as false prophets. The harsh tone

53
with which prophets reacted to their unfulfilled predictions indicates that they were afraid of
being labelled false prophets since the criterion of prediction and fulfilment was in full force.
For example, when the people of Nineveh repented and turned away from their sinful ways,
Yahweh decided to spare them (Jo-nah 3:4). However Jonah could not have it. Jonah is
prepared to die than to live because people would call him a false prophet (Jonah 4:3b).
And Jonah had suspicion already before he went to Nineveh that Yahweh would not fulfil his
words (Jonah 4:1,2). This is why initially he fled to Tarshish (Jonah 1:3). The same frustration
with God’s deception or repentance is evident in Jeremiah 20:7-10. If we apply the criterion
of fulfilment of prediction, these prophets were false prophets. Thus the criterion is weak in
that it does not leave room for both the divine and the society to repent. In the light of divine
deception and divine repentance, the criterion of fulfilment of prediction as a mark of true
prophecy is rendered void. This becomes glaring when we consider 1 Kings 21:21-29. We
encounter Elijah predicting disaster on the house of Ahab and the death of his wife Jezebel.
As a way to fulfil the prediction by Elijah, in 2 Kings 9:1-13 Jehu is anointed by a son of a
prophet who had been sent by prophet Elisha; that is, with divine approval. Elisha through
the madman told Jehu to slaughter all the members of Ahab’s family (2 Kgs 9:6), as had been
predicted by Elijah earlier. And Jehu took the commission seriously and exterminated the
house of Jehu as directed by the Lord (2 Kgs. 9:14-10:36). On the basis of the criterion of
fulfilment of prediction, Elijah was a true prophet because his prediction was fulfilled. Yet in
Hosea 1:4, a fellow Israelite prophet, Hosea is given a word by God to condemn Jehu for doing
exactly what God had commanded through two great prophets, Elijah and Elisha, to massacre
the house of Ahab in the Jezreel valley! Which is which? Who received the word from God?
What this means is, a prophecy that was taken as true by an earlier generation may be
interpreted in bad light by later generations. Or it means God changes his mind. While God
thought what Ahab had done was wrong, he later felt that what he had commanded was
wrong and he repented. But where does the repentance of God leave the prophets who were
just used as instruments? Who was a true prophet between Elijah, Elisha and Hosea? With
this set up, all were true prophets and all were false prophets! According to Todd Hibbard, it
was upon the weaknesses of the criterion of fulfilment of prediction that Jeremiah developed
other supporting criteria to be considered in determining who is a true and who is a false
prophet. The charges made by Jeremiah against his opponents/other prophets that he
labelled false provide further criteria for distinguishing between prophets, but they are
however not without their own problems. The first of such criteria is immorality, particularly
sexual immorality (Jer 23:9-15). Thus, Jeremiah in Jeremiah 23:9ff but especially in Jeremiah
26-29 revised Deuteronomy 13:1-5 and Deuteronomy 18:18-20 which emphasise the criterion
of fulfilment of prediction as sine qua non of prophecy.
For Jeremiah, moral uprightness is to be considered as well.
THE CRITERION OF MORALITY
It is generally assumed that moral uprightness was expected of prophets if they had to be
considered authentic in the Israelite society. Although it is not known exactly how prevalent
this practice of sexual immorality was among prophets, the accusation is a strong one
suggesting that this may have been a real cause for concern. According to Jeremiah any

54
prophet who is immoral is a false one. True prophets must be morally upright. And this has
influenced the way we judge men and women in our midst who claim to be messengers of
God. Anyone who commits adultery or fornication is dismissed as a false prophet. And
anything he or she says is not taken seriously. In Zimbabwe for instance, former Archbishop
for Bulawayo diocese, Pius Ncube commanded great respect as a prophet of God until in 2007
when he was captured on surveillance camera committing adultery with a number of women.
Since then, the Zimbabwean society generally does not regard him as a man of God anymore.
Be that as it may, the criterion can be dismissed as weak on the following grounds. First, we
have prophets in the Israelite society who lived morally questionable lives; yet they are called
true prophets and their words were revered. Hosea, for instance married a prostitute called
Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim (Hos. 1:2,3). And it is explicit in the Bible that she was a
prostitute, an adulterous woman. Therefore, by marrying Gomer, Hosea committed an
immoral act before the Lord. It is not indicated in the Bible whether she stopped her immoral
ways after marriage or not. But taking cue from the divorce and remarriage (Hos. 2-3), she
continued her trade even after marriage. This suggests that Hosea lived an adulterous life.
Yet, he was called a true prophet. Al-though it is possible that sexual immorality was not
understood in the ancient Israelite society in the same way as we do today, Hosea’s marriage
to Gomer, a prostitute (Hos. 1-3) would have been condemned as immoral by his society (cf.
Deut. 24: 2-4). Thus, with this criterion, Ho-sea is a false prophet, yet all of the readers of the
Bible regard him as a true prophet. Actually modern preachers often refer to his book and
even to the marriage itself as a very great lesson! In the same way, ac-cording to this criterion,
Isaiah’s sexual relations with a prophetess (Isa. 8:1-3) would have been condemned.
Of course there are scholars who presume that this prophetess was his wife, but there is no
indication in the Bible that Isaiah was married to this woman he had sexual relations with. It
is possible that she was just a prophetess, whether she was married or not we do not know.
The matter becomes worse if she was married. That means, Isaiah would have committed
adultery. Second, on the basis of this criterion, Isaiah can be regarded as false prophet
because he walked naked for three years (Isa. 20:3). Although he was dramatising the
message of Yahweh, nakedness was considered an immoral act unless one was mad. Besides,
it was a shameful thing to be naked throughout the biblical period (Gen. 3:7; 9:20ff; Rev. 3:18).
Also, Elisha’s cursing of the children was a horrendous act that resulted in the death of forty-
two of them (2 Kgs 2:23-24). This constitutes a very immoral act that can be equated to
terrorist acts. More so, the activities of Elijah and Elisha qualify them as mercenaries, yet they
are not regarded as false prophets. They were associated more with bloodshed than life
preservation. They caused various bloodbaths in Israel (1 Kgs 18:40; 2 Kgs 1:9-12; 9:10) to the
extent that even later generations of prophets condemned their acts (Hos. 1:4). Surely men
of God should have been known for good than for massacres! Without realising the
weaknesses of his criterion of moral upright-ness, Jeremiah goes further to set other
subsidiary criteria of morality that he thought could be used to differentiate true from false
prophets. According to him, since they were immoral, false prophets lie, deceive people and
steal oracles (Jer. 23:23-32) from true prophets; those prophets who have been in God’s
council. Basically, specific elements in the charge were criticisms of the techniques used to
receive oracles by these prophets. They are accused of using dreams and borrowing or

55
stealing each other’s oracles. After stealing oracles, they would only appeal to the messenger
formula that was common with true prophets, ‘Thus says Yahweh....’(Jer. 23:31), as if they
were sent by God. Although this criterion is quite attractive, it is fraught with weaknesses. In
fact, all the criteria set forth in Jer. 23:9-32 still leave a lot to be desired. For example, while
Jeremiah positions himself as morally upright, he can himself be dismissed as false. In Jer.
38:24-27, he lied to protect King Zedekiah. Various other prophets still would fall by the way
side. Micaiah ben Imlah also deceived King Ahab that he was going to win so he should go up
and put up a fight with Syria (1 Kgs. 22:16). He only could tell the truth after some pestering;
otherwise he was prepared to lie so as to speak the same word with other prophets. He had
heeded advice from King Ahab’s messenger who told him not to speak against the word of
other prophets that the king had consulted earlier. With this same criterion, Elisha would be
dismissed for using deception against Ben-Hadad (2 Kgs. 8:7-15).
After all, the accusation that other prophets of Jeremiah’s era were preaching lies and deceit
would only make sense if they deliberately chose to lie and deceive people. Yet, it is clear
from other biblical texts (Ezek 13; 14:1-11; Deut. 13:3) that these people may have been
honestly preaching what they without any doubt considered to be truth. In other words, their
visions may have been false, but without realising it them-selves or without them
intentionally designing to preach falsehoods.
As we noted above with the 1 Kings 22 incident, a true prophet could be deceived by God to
lie. According to Carroll, now if Yahweh used the false prophets or the idolaters to deceive
community and individuals, or if he tested the community by false dreamers or prophets as
is clear in Deut 13:3, in what way were Jeremiah and Ezekiel right to claim that Yahweh had
not sent the prophets who proclaimed such false visions (Jer. 23:21; Ezek. 13:6)?
Indeed these prophets were sent by Yahweh. In fact, it could be Jeremiah and Ezekiel who
are liars. Their belief that these prophets were not sent by Yahweh is a lie because as a matter
of fact these prophets were sent by Yahweh. Further, Jeremiah’s attack on the use of dreams
(Jer. 23:25-28) and the use of other prophets’ oracles (Jer. 23:30) is very problematic. The
Bible has plenty of places where dreams are regarded as a legitimate way of receiving oracles
or inspiration from Yahweh. In other words, Yahweh in the history of ancient Israel has on
various occasions communicated his will through dreams, (Gen 28:12-17; 40-41), (1 Kings 3:5-
15), Joel (2:28) and Daniel. Even in Deut 13:1,3 there is an implication that dreams were a
formal way of receiving revelation from God. The same high regard for dreams as a method
in which the divine communicated to people existed across the ancient Near East especially
in Egypt, to the extent that what Joseph did in Genesis 40-41 by interpreting dreams was not
unknown.
The same is true in the New Testament. Dreams are not condemned. They are a legitimate
way of receiving inspiration from the divine world (Heb. 3:1).
To therefore claim that receiving messages through dreams is a mark of being a false prophet
is misplaced.
Jeremiah’s accusation that false prophets steal oracles from other prophets actually backfires.
On the basis of this criterion, even Jeremiah himself would be dismissed as a false prophet

56
and a lot more prophets that we regard as true, such as Isaiah, Micah, Amos and Joel, because
these prophets have some of their oracles that are identical, betraying the fact that they were
‘stolen’ from one another. For instance, Isa. 2:2-4 and Micah 4:1-3 are basically one and the
same oracle given by two different prophets apparently in the same context.
According to the criterion of Jeremiah, one prophet stole from another. So either Isaiah was
a false prophet or Micah, or even both were false prophets. The same could be said about
Amos 1:2; Jer. 25:30 and Joel 3:16 which all use the same expression. These shared elements
can also be found in Isa. 10:27b-32 and Micah 1:10-15; Isa. 5:8-10 and Micah 2:1-3, Jer. 49:7-
22 and Obad. 1-9. So shall we dismiss these as false prophets? If we are to apply this criterion,
Jeremiah himself would be dismissed. For, in Jeremiah 26:17-18, Micah 3:12 is cited almost
verbatim, something that is very unusual. This has prompted Hibbard to conclude that, ‘this
is the only instance of a prophetic book quoting from another by name any-where in the
Hebrew Bible’.
THE CRITERION OF PRO-STATUS-QUO VS. ANTI-STATUS-QUO
There are scholars who believe that in Israel a true prophet was one who always opposed
the ruling elite or the political establishment. Anyone who agreed or served the political
establishment was regarded as false. In other words, in sociological terms, central prophets
were all regarded as false while peripheral prophets were true. Bess set the matter this way,
‘the great distinction between the messages of the true prophets and those of the false was
not in the manner of its delivery, but in the content of the message itself. The false prophets
were the yes-men of their times, currying favour with the political figures of the day and giving
the messages that would justify the actions of those politicians’.
In the history of Zimbabwe, and even across the globe, this criterion has been applied,
nevertheless quite selectively. However, generally in post- colonial Zimbabwean (and African)
politics, religious leaders who op-pose the government are labelled as ‘prophetic’ meaning,
true prophets, while those who support government programmes and initiatives are regarded
as false prophets.
This is why in Zimbabwe, Makandiwa together with AICs prophets such as Mwazha, Noah
Taguta, Wimbo and other prominent Pentecostal preachers have of late been accused of
being false prophets. They are accused of supporting the ruling party for participating in the
Anti-Sanctions rally in 2011.
On the contrary, pastors who always oppose ZANU PF and those who did not participate are
labelled as true prophets. In the Old Testament, the clash between prophet Jeremiah and
prophet Hananiah (Jer. 28) is cited often to demonstrate the fact that true prophets opposed
the narrative of the ruling class while false prophets agree with them. Thus, Jeremiah is
presented as a true prophet for ‘contradicting’ the narrative of the Judean political
establishment while Hananiah is described as a false prophet for ‘agreeing with the narrative’
of the Judean political leaders. While it is true that Jeremiah and Hananiah differed in their
interpretations of the situation, their differences had nothing to do with either one being true
and the other being false. According to R. R. Wilson, ancient Israelite theological traditions lie
behind both of these views. Jeremiah as a peripheral prophet (one not part of the central

57
religious establishment in Jerusalem) subscribed to the Deuteronomistic school of thought

that viewed the election of Jerusalem and the house of David as conditional to obedience. To
sustain his argument Jeremiah could cite the example of Shiloh and Samaria that were
destroyed in 722 BCE by the Assyrians as punishment for disobedience of the law of God
(Jeremiah 7; 2 Kgs 17). On the other hand, Hananiah, a central prophet (one who was part of
the Jerusalem’s religious establishment) appealed to the unconditional character of the
election of Jerusalem and the house of David (2 Sam 7; Psalm 132). And to support this
theological position Hananiah could cite the miraculous deliverance of Jerusalem when
Sennacherib invaded. Despite Israel’s
This in other words means both prophets were correct and their positions were favourable
among their constituencies. There are people who believed Hananiah to be a true prophet
while disregarding Jeremiah as a false prophet. And the same applied to Jeremiah; among his
constituency, the Deuteronomists, he was a true prophet while Hananiah was a false one. The
claim by Jeremiah that Hananiah was false is therefore not an objective one. The above
position becomes important, particularly when we scrutinise Jeremiah’s encounter with
Hananiah. According to Carroll, what scholars fail to realise is that Jeremiah 27-29 is an edited
account most likely way after Hananiah’s prediction was disconfirmed. The editors of
Jeremiah worked from hindsight and from the premise that Jeremiah was a true prophet and
Hananiah was a false prophet.
But, even if we take the account as it is, we can still realise that fundamentally both Hananiah
and Jeremiah were correct. From a theological perspective, they only interpreted Yahweh’s
action in history from different perspectives; which were not unknown in Israelite history.
Hananiah’s prediction that the 597 BCE deportees would be released after only two years in
exile was informed by a well-known Israelite theological notion of the saviour Yahweh who
would save his people soon after punishing them. On the other hand, Jeremiah saw the
deportation of 597 BCE as the be-ginning of many other catastrophic scenarios to follow. This
is why Jeremiah predicted seventy years.
But essentially both realised that there was hope after exile and that message is central. Finer
details regarding when and how the end of exile would come about depended on the
theological perspective of the prophet. For instance, if someone had predicted in 1980 that
the World Trade Center of America would be attacked in two years’ time on the 11 th of
September that prophecy would have been taken as a true prophecy in 2001 when America
was attacked! The argument is, the time period is not important but the event is. So in other
words, that Judah was going to spend two years or seventy is not important but the event of
release is. After all, their predictions were dependent on their interpretation of very complex
subjects: international and domestic politics. Even so, what modern readers of the Old
Testament also do not take into consideration is that this criterion is very subjective; it is
based upon the Deuteronomist theological conception of prophecy; thus cannot be applied
uniformly across different contexts. For example, according to Deuteronomist theologians as
evident in Jeremiah, true prophets are those prophets who preached war and destruction of
the nation and not hope (Jer. 28:8).

58
This is because most of the Deuteronomist theologians’ material was written after the exile.
And in line with their criterion of fulfilment of prediction as a mark of true prophecy, those
who had predicted a lengthy exile were considered true while those who had predicted
imminent hope were considered false. In this case, Jeremiah had spent the bigger part of his
ministry preaching doom and gloom for the nation which came to pass. Any prophecy of hope
was thus judged as a false prophecy after the exile had taken long. This is why prophets of
hope are presented as serious threats to Jeremiah (Jer. 23:9ff) and accused of speaking from
their own minds without having been sent by Yahweh (Jer. 23:18,22).
What is clear though from Jeremiah 23 is that this is prophecy after the event! If by one
reason or the other, exile had been short, those who preached a lengthy exile, including
Jeremiah would have been labelled false prophets. In any case, this criterion is difficult to
apply uniformly throughout the Bible. There are so many prophets in the Bible that are
regarded as true yet they mixed and mingled with the ruling elite. Some, as in the case of
Nathan and Gad, supported and even worked for the ruling elite. Their support for the ruling
elite was not hidden. Following closely the concept of Ancient Near Eastern royal theology,
Nathan crafted the Davidic royal ideology (2 Sam. 7:2ff) which promised the house of David
to rule for ever. Any opposition to the house of David was effectively opposition to God. This
was unprecedented in the history of Israel.
Prophet Gad was known to be King David’s personal seer (2 Sam. 24:11). This means Gad was
first and foremost responsible to David, which makes him almost a personal assistant of the
king. Another interesting example is Isaiah who believed in the politico-religious ideologies of
the ruling elite: the Davidic Royal Ideology, the Invincibility of Jerusalem and the Temple
theology, to the extent that he is believed by some scholars to have been a foreign minister
in King Ahaz’s government. In fact, Mary Evans is of the opinion that Isaiah belonged to the
royal family in that tradition suggests that he was himself a cousin of Uzziah, (King Ahaz’s
father) and thus of royal blood. She interprets 2 Chronicles 26:22 as implying that Isaiah was
a trained writer-historian employed as the royal recorder during the reign of Uzziah. She
therefore concluded that this is probably why Isaiah was well-educated, familiar with the
king’s court and a trust-ed advisor of King Hezekiah more than any other prophet of his time.
Despite this link with politicians hence his own participation in politics, Isaiah was never
doubted as a true prophet in his community. Even today, most if not all the readers of the
Bible regard him as a true prophet. Therefore, although these prophets cited above
participated in politics, supporting the rulers, they were never thought to be false prophets.
We often give them as great examples of servants of God. Yet, those among us who
participate in politics we condemn. Besides this, by regarding true prophets as those who
oppose the government, in the modern world, this criterion has the danger of supporting
insurgency, banditry, mercenary and rebellious activities. In fact, all terrorists would be
justified as true prophets!
THE CRITERION OF PROFESSIONALISM
In their search for criteria to establish authentic and inauthentic manifestation of prophecy,
theologians in the Israelite society must have come to the conclusion that a true prophet is

59
one who does not receive payment for his services. The basis of this criterion lies in Micah
3:5, 11 which label those who prophesy for hire as false prophets. True prophets therefore
took their ministry as a service not a profession. H. H. Rowley notes that, false prophets on
the contrary, instead of knowing the direct constraint of the Spirit of God, were looking
around for their oracles.
They were the mere members of the profession, not men of vocation’.
Because they took prophecy as a profession from which they got remuneration, there is a
great possibility that they made sure they pleased their clients. That means they would
sometimes alter the message of God. Contrary to true prophets, professional prophets could
for instance preach peace where there was no peace. This criterion is appealed to most in the
contemporary world. In Zimbabwe, due to the huge sums of money they collect from
followers every time they meet, Makandiwa, Vutabwashe, Angel among others are accused
of being professional prophets hence false. It is estimated that Makandiwa collects more than
US$100 000.00 per service; of which he conducts more than five services a week. African
Initiated Church prophets have equally been accused of this professionalism since their clients
have to bring gifts, such as chicken, fresh milk, eggs, bread among others each time they come
for consultation. The major weakness of this criterion is that its claims are not based upon a
critical analysis on the situation obtaining on the ground in Israel. There are several explicit
examples of prominent prophets in the Old Testament who received gifts or remuneration
for their services. Of course, it is not clear if they charged or not. But the assumption we get
from certain passages is that it was the expected tradition for clients to bring gifts to prophets
each time they consulted them. Prophet Samuel, for instance received money for his services
(1 Sam 9:2). The impression in the text is that he always did so. In 1 Kings 14:3 also, Jeroboam’s
wife is instructed by her husband, Jeroboam to ‘take ten loaves of bread, some cakes, and a
jar of honey’ and go to Ahijah to inquire about their ill son’s fate. Further, Nathan is almost
employed by King David as a civil servant, yet he was (and is still) regarded by many as a true
prophet. Biblical evidence shows that even until the classical era of prophecy, (the time Micah
ministered) prophets received payment for their services. In Amos 7:12, Amaziah advises
Amos to go back to the land of Judah and to earn his bread there. This statement may indicate
that payment of prophets for their services was common. There is no adequate evidence
therefore to conclude that professionalism was a mark of false prophecy in Israel. Therefore,
to dismiss Makandiwa or any other prophet for that matter as false on the basis of Micah 3:5,
11 is unwarranted.
THE CRITERION OF ECSTASY
Since the publication of Duhm’s Die Theologie der Propheten in the last quarter of the 19th
Century which associated Israelite prophets with ecstasy,debate surrounding the link started.
To begin with, Duhm’s hypothesis was well received and attracted a lot of disciples, not only
in Germany in the likes of H. Günkel, and Hölscher, but also in Britain and America, with T.H
Robinson and Robert Pfeiffer respectively.
For them ecstasy has been a hallmark of prophecy in Israel. Ecstasy manifests as suspension
of mental faculty to give room to the invasion by the spirit. It is this external spirit that dictates

60
either hyperactivity or extra-ordinary passivity/inactivity. Hyperactivity relates to the display

of extra-ordinary capabilities and usually accompanied by uncontrollable raving. On the other
hand, one in ecstasy may display passivity, dullness or inactivity that is beyond natural. In
short, ecstasy is similar to a condition that one who has been drugged finds him/herself. From
the moment of consumption, drugs take over the individual’s mental and physical state. In
fact, Israelite prophets, including some canonical prophets according to these scholars, were
ecstatic as those prophets of Canaan and Asia Minor. Isaiah walked around the streets of
Jerusalem city naked and barefoot for three years (Isaiah 20:3) and Jeremiah wore a wooden
yoke around his neck for some time (Jer. 27f).
Thus, like ANE ecstatic prophets, there is an assumption that these persons are pictured as
moving across the land from one place to another in wild groups, chanting in loud voices
(maybe accompanied with dance) and making ecstatic inquiry for people upon request to do
so.
The ability of such individuals to enter into ecstasy earned them re-spect and endeared them
to the people who interpreted ecstasy as posi-tive indication that they were indeed sent by
the divine. Equally, in our context, Pentecostal prophets rely heavily on their capacity to make
pre-dictions, speak in tongues, and perform miracles such as making people fall on the ground
and lie unconsciously to authenticate their ministries. Society is, however, divided over this.
Some believe that these are tricks of false prophets who want to claim legitimacy while a
majority of people follow these prophets precisely because of these capabilities. For these
prophets and their followers, the Old Testament provides so many examples to justify their
operations. It should be noted that these differences in interpreting such abnormal behaviour
within the prophetic fraternity started even in ancient Israel. We seem to see the existence
of these two attitudes towards the ecstatic phenomenon. Ecstatic behaviours among
prophets are in some cases positively viewed but in other cases, they are negatively
construed. Today, even scholars are equally divided. Some believe that it was part of Israelite
prophetic heritage while some deny such haste conclusions. For those who believe that
Israelite prophets were ecstatic, the basis of their hypothesis is twofold. First, Israel being a
small nation in the bigger and more illustrious neighbours must have been influenced in all
fronts; political, economic and socio-cultural and religious wise. Therefore, Israelite prophecy
was borrowed with all its features that included ecstasy from the surrounding nations.
Secondly, the Bible has several passages that seem to confirm that indeed Israelite prophets
like their neighbours were ecstatic, that is, they lost consciousness when the spirit of the Lord
came upon them. In that state of unconsciousness, they prophesied; they carried their
prophetic duties. Under the influence of the spirit or hand of God, for example, Elijah killed
all the 450 prophets of Baal that fought him (1 Kgs. 18:20); he also ran with an extra ordinary
speed that he overtook a horse chariot (1 Kgs. 18:46). As in the other nations surrounding
Israel, it is assumed that music and rhythmical dance were very important to induce invasion
or possession by the spirit of the deity (2 kgs. 3:15). Other passages which have been subject
of debate for many centuries now to bolster the fact that Israelite prophets were ecstatic like
their ANE counterparts include, Num. 11: 25-29; 1 Sam. 10:1-13 and 1 Sam. 19:18-24.
Numbers 11:25-29 describes an event whereby Moses’ spirit was transferred and distributed
among seventy elders who began to prophesy ecstatically. The spirit of the Lord was so

61
powerful that even some two elders who were not present, Eldad and Meldad for example,
continued longer than others in this state of unconsciousness. The same condition of ecstasy
is witnessed when Saul met a band of ecstatic prophets. As soon as Saul met the prophets, he
began to prophesy ecstatically like them for he was transformed into another man as Samuel
had predicted (1 Sam. 10:1-13). He prophesied to the amazement of onlooker who exclaimed,
‘Is Saul among the prophets!’. This reaction shows that Saul displayed some hyperactivity
similar to raving by ecstatic prophets. In another incident, Saul met a group of prophets at
Ramah and when he experienced the spirit of God, he fell into ecstasy like the three groups
he had sent before to find David. All began to prophesy removing their clothes according to
the dictates of the spirit upon them. King Saul lay naked the whole night under the influence
of the spirit of God, some-thing that no normal being could ordinarily do (1 Sam. 19:18-24)
except in a state of possession.
This is evidence that he was as good as dead, the whole night; a clear sign of extra-ordinary
passivity. And this behaviour of removing clothes (and cutting oneself) may have been
common among ecstatic prophets (cf. 1 Kgs. 18:18). As we noted earlier, Isaiah also under the
influence of the spirit of God preached along the streets of Jerusalem naked for three years
(Isa. 20:3). The fact that these prophets behaved in these abnormal ways is probably why
some Israelite prophets were despised by their society hence called mad men (2 Kgs. 9:2,11;
Jer. 29:26; Hos. 9:7). While there are evidently so many incidents in the Old Testament that
seem to confirm that ecstasy was part and parcel of Israelite prophecy, there are other
passages that prove the contrary. These passages give credence to arguments against
associating Israelite prophets with ecstasy. Woods believes that ecstasy was not part and
parcel of Israelite prophecy. For him and others it was a foreign practice associated there-fore
with false prophets. However, Woods’, reasons for dismissal of the connotations of ecstasy in
the three main passages (Num. 11:25-29; 1 Sam. 10 and 19) are devoid of any merit. For him
the Hebrew word interpreted in these passages as suggesting ecstasy is similar to the term
used to refer to praise in 1 Chronicles 25:1-3 where praising is ascribed to the idea of
prophesying. In these passages, Woods suggests that they removed clothes to be flexible in
praise, since clothes hindered their movements in praise. Therefore, in these passages to
prophesy is to praise/preach not to be ecstatic.
This is very unconvincing. Although in agreement with Woods that ecstasy was not a positive
characteristic of prophecy in Israel, Bess dismissed connotations of preaching or praising in
relation to these passages. He argued, ‘it is difficult to see how prophesying in this context
could be preaching’.
But perhaps, the most convincing argument that Woods raises is that taking ecstasy as a sine
qua non characteristic of Israelite prophecy excludes so many prophets we have known to be
true prophets. For in-stance, Moses is regarded as the standard of all prophets (Deut. 18:15),
yet he did not display any ecstatic behaviour. Also, Joshua who succeeded Moses, although
he is not formerly called nabi /prophet, he was nevertheless practicing the prophetic role in
that he was a channel of communication between God and the Israelite community. He never
exhibited ecstatic behaviour. The same is true with Deborah who is called prophetess
(Jud.4:4); she, like Moses and Joshua, did not display ecstatic tendencies. The same is true of

62
Samuel, himself a well-known prophet, yet he was not ecstatic. Even as we move through
history fur-ther, Woods argues that we find the same non-ecstatic manner of prophecy with
Nathan (2 Sam. 7:2; 12:25), Gad (2 Sam. 24:11), Ahijah (1 Kgs. 11:29; 14:2-18) and
others, particularly most of the classical prophets. Shall we then dismiss all these as false
prophets because they were not ecstatic? This criterion therefore is weak and cannot help us
solve the debate regarding who is true and who is a false prophet. In other words, we cannot
successfully use this criterion either to dismiss or to authenticate the people who claim to be
prophets in our midst.
THE CRITERION OF PROPHETIC CALL
As we move towards the conclusion of our discussion, it is important to indicate that so far
no criterion is without weaknesses. It is clear even from the language used in the Old
Testament that it was not possible for the ancient Israelite theologians, let alone the ordinary
people, to separate true from false prophets. What made the separation difficult is that
externally one could not tell the difference between true and false prophets since both maybe
dressed, ate and behaved the same. This is why strangely the Hebrew Bible calls both
prophets. According to S. Herbert Bess, the fact that they were always accused of deceiving
people shows that it was not possible to distinguish them on the basis of external criteria.
For him therefore, one of the most distinguishing feature between true and false prophets is
that of call. While both were called prophets, ‘one point of distinction among true prophets
must have been that sense of compulsion to prophesy’. And this compulsion comes at the
point of call. True prophets seem to have been called against their wish, but the divine
overwhelmed them and compelled them to prophesy. Moses, the standard of prophets (Deut.
18:15) was called and he resisted, but the divine pressurised him until he accepted the call;
then the divine commissioned him (Exo. 4:15-7:1ff). The Old Testament clearly attests this
trend, as the call narratives of Jeremiah (Jer. 1:4, 20:7-8) and Isaiah (6:1ff) bear testimony.
According to Bess, even ‘Amos, Hosea and others experienced a definite call which obligated
them to speak out for God’. Therefore, we could conclude that true prophets had definite
calls but false prophets did not have definite calls. Several individuals among us also believe
that anyone who claims to be a prophet must be called. It is because of this desire to be like
Israelite prophets that most Pentecostal prophets claim to have been called in the pattern of
Old Testament prophets, against their wish. What this means is, with this criterion, not even
one Pentecostal prophet in Zimbabwe will be dismissed as false because all of them narrate
how and when they were called. As indicated already, their call narratives are no different
from Old Testament prophets. Shall we then say all are true prophets? The matter is however
not as simple as this. While it appears to have been standard that Israelite prophets had call
accounts detailing how and when they were called and the mission for which they were called,
not all Israelite prophets had calls. Elijah, Ahijah, Micaiah, Nathan and Gad are clear examples.
We only meet them in the midst of their prophetic ministries. Yet, such prophets were never
doubted to be prophets in their communities on the basis that they did not have call
narratives.

63
CONCLUSION
After this long discussion, it is important to admit that the article has come to the conclusion
that ‘the analysis of the criteria for distinguishing the authentic prophet from the rest has
shown that they were too ambiguous to be helpful and that there is no such thing as an
external test by which to tell true prophecy from false, such as all reasonable per-sons may
safely apply’.
As such, there are no solid criteria to test or to enable us to determine who was and who was
not a genuine prophet, in Israel let alone in our contemporary society. The Bible has not
answered the question with certainty.
The long and short of it is that the criteria set by the Deuteronomist theologians in the Old
Testament were (as they are still now) inadequate to deal with a complex phenomenon such
as prophecy. Therefore, appealing to the Bible in order to decipher who is true or false among
Zimbabwean Pentecostal preachers as is common today is a wild goose chase.

64
HOW SERIOUS A PROBLEM WERE FALSE PROPHETS IN ISRAEL

1. True prophets receive a call from Yahweh and had credentials to speak. In fact their
authority was derived from Yahweh while false prophets were men of self appointed
ministries. They had no word from Yahweh (Jeremiah 14:13, 23:21). So they caused a
lot of confusion for they called people to other gods (1 Kings 18). They preached falsely
thereby causing people to follow their own messages (Jer 5:12)
2. They used palatable language in order to gain a living from the people.
3. False prophets opposed true prophets and caused people to oppose and hate them,
e.g. Jeremiah was labelled a traitor because of Hananiah who predicted that exilement
was to last for only two years, yet Jeremiah predicted that it was to last for 70 years.
Micaiah is also hated by the king because of the presence of the 400 prophets at the
king’s court. ‘I hate him for he never prophesy good concerning us but evil…’ (1 Kings
22:8)
4. False prophets placed no barrier between righteousness and sin. They prophesy what
people wanted to hear, prophesying peace where there was none . According to
Jeremiah they heal the wounds of the people lightly. The true prophet had a message
of judgement upon sin. They did not overlook sin like false prophets. For example
Nathan announced punishment on David for taking Bathsheba, Ahijah condemned
Jeroboam 1 for promoting apostacy in Israel and announced the end of his dynasty.
Samuel’s message of doom to Eli’s house for wickedness, rejection of Saul for
disobedience. Elijah pronounced doom to befall Ahab after killing Naboth. Amos,
Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiah pronounced doom to befall Israel and Judah for
committing apostacy.
6. False prophets were destroying yahwism, e.g. 1 Kings 18:21, Elijah questioned the
Israelites that, ‘How long will you go limping on two opinions…’ they caused Israel to
be stubborn and persecute true prophets.
7. False prophets caused the relationship between Yahweh and Israel to be fractured
and hence led to the breakdown of the covenant.

65
MOSES AS THE FOUNDER OF PROPHECY

MOSES AS A POLITICAL FIGURE
1. Liberator of the Israelites from the Egyptian bondage.

2. States craftsmen, that is, he is molding the loosely connected Israelite tribes into one
nation
3. Providing structures to maintain the unique role
4. Law giver
5. Military leader, e.g. organization of the army and military strategies to this effect, e.g. the
Amalekite battle.
The J source regarded Moses as a leader and is the earliest source.
MOSES AS A PROPHET
1. Archetypal figure e.g. he received a call.

2. Spoke to God face to face (Num 12:8)
3. Intercessor, mediator.
4. Prophetic law giver.
5. God’s mouthpiece.
6. Transference of his spirit.
7. Miracle working ability.
8. Established priesthood.
E and D sources regarded Moses as a prophets. According to M. Noth, later editors made
Moses into a prophet otherwise he was really a very good leader and his argument is
based on the fact that the J source which is the earliest source consider Moses as a leader
who is not a prophet.So for him the word prophet on Moses is a literary invention. This is
supported by the fact that the texts which support Moses as a prophet are anachronistic,
hence the conclusion that the word prophet on Moses is an editorial insertion. In fact E
and D sources forced Moses into a prophet.
Considering Von Rad’s position that prophecy has to do with either leadership, cult or
both, we can safely regard Moses as a prophet. According to Makenzie a prophet is a
leader in spiritual sense. So prophecy and leadership worked hand in glove. According to
Holscher prophecy arise when there is need to redeem. So it started when Moses was
appointed to reclaim Israelites who were enslaved by the Egyptians. Moses was the
decisive human personality in the period when the Hebrew emerged as a distinct people
with a unique faith.
Any attempt to reduce the authentic traditions concerning Moses to the one which
preserves the memory of his grave seems somewhat extreme. It is no doubt true that
subsequent generations tended to glorify Moses and often read back into his age and
ascribed to him laws, cultic practices and theological positions which could only have
developed later, but that he was the leader of Hebrews as they escaped from Egypt and

66
when the covenant was made at Sinai is entirely credible. There must have been one
gifted individual who interpreted the meaning of the exodus event to his fellows as an act
of God and then led them to establish a covenant with God. That gifted individual was
Moses.
According to Numbers 12:8 God spoke to Moses face to face and not in dark speeches.
What it implies is that Moses tops the hierarchy of prophets. Other prophets can be
regarded as lesser prophets because God speak with them in dark speeches, e.g. dreams,
visions e.t.c. What it implies is that what lesser prophets said was an interpretation of
Yahweh’s will which may have been wrong if the intermediaries failed to interpret the
dreams, visions or vague speeches. With Moses however, this was not the case. With
Moses Yahweh communicated directly, implying that Moses’ prophecy could not be
wrong. Therefore whenever the message of other prophets conflicted with that of Moses,
Moses’ message was to be preferred. Hence Moses could be regarded as the normative
prophet, the archetypal prophet who fixed the norm, the rule or standard by which all
subsequent prophetic teaching and behavior had to be judged.
Considering this one can argue that Moses is a prophet par-excellent and is the architect
of prophecy. Deuteronomy 18:18 Moses is regarded as the model of prophecy and the
founder of the covenant and this covenant is binding on future prophets. Hence the view
that prophets were not innovators, they took their stand on Sinai traditions is valid.
According to B.W Anderson prophecy originated in Israel in association with a particular

tradition and experience. In particular prophecy in Israel is argued to have originated with
the Exodus experience and Moses is cited as the first prophet. Though this is disputed by
some scholars like M. Noth, the fact that Moses possess all prophetic qualities, most
scholars concluded that he is the paragon of normative prophecy.
MOSAIC PROPHETIC MOVEMENT AS A SECT
FEATURES OF A SECT
1. It starts as a protest against deprivation.

2. Rejects world view of establishment
3. Establish its own world view characterized by egalitarianism
4. Acceptance and the offer of love to those joining the sect.
5. Voluntary nature of the sect
6. Demand for commitment that is almost always sacrificial.
7. The Adventist nature of the cosmology of the sect based on a future world (country
flowing with milk and honey)

67
Samuel
Samuel, heard of God. The peculiar circumstances connected with his birth are recorded in 1
Sam. 1:20. Hannah, one of the two wives of Elkanah, who came up to Shiloh to worship before
the Lord, earnestly prayed to God that she might become the mother of a son. Her prayer was
graciously granted; and after the child was weaned she brought him to Shiloh nd consecrated
him to the Lord as a perpetual Nazarite (1:23-2:11). Here his bodily wants and training were
attended to by the women who served in the tabernacle, while Eli cared for his religious
culture. Thus, probably, twelve years of his life passed away. "The child Samuel grew on, and
was in favour both with the Lord, and also with men" (2:26; comp. Luke 2:52). It was a time
of great and growing degeneracy in Israel (Judg. 21:19-21; 1 Sam. 2: 12-17, 22).
The Philistines, who of late had greatly increased in number and in power, were practically
masters of the country, and kept the people in subjection (1 Sam. 10:5; 13:3). At this time
new communications from God began to be made to the pious child. A mysterious voice came
to him in the night season, calling him by name, and, instructed by Eli, he answered, "Speak,
Lord; for thy servant heareth." The message that came from the Lord was one of woe and ruin
to Eli and his profligate sons. Samuel told it all to Eli, whose only answer to the terrible
denunciations (1 Sam. 3:11-18) was, "It is the Lord; let him do what seemeth him good", the
passive submission of a weak character, not, in his case, the expression of the highest trust
and faith.
The Lord revealed himself now in divers manners to Samuel, and his fame and his influence
increased throughout the land as of one divinely called to the prophetical office. A new period
in the history of the kingdom of God now commenced. The Philistine yoke was heavy, and the
people, groaning under the wide-spread oppression, suddenly rose in revolt, and "went out
against the Philistines to battle." A fierce and disastrous battle was fought at Aphek, near to
Ebenezer (1 Sam. 4:1, 2). The Israelites were defeated, leaving 4,000 dead "in the field." The
chiefs of the people thought to repair this great disaster by carrying with them the ark of the
covenant as the symbol of Jehovah's presence. They accordingly, without consulting Samuel,
fetched it out of Shiloh to the camp near Aphek.
At the sight of the ark among them the people "shouted with a great shout, so that the earth
rang again." A second battle was fought, and again the Philistines defeated the Israelites,
stormed their camp, slew 30,000 men, and took the sacred ark. The tidings of this fatal battle
was speedily conveyed to Shiloh; and so soon as the aged Eli heard that the ark of God was
taken, he fell backward from his seat at the entrance of the sanctuary, and his neck brake,
and he died. The tabernacle with its furniture was probably, by the advice of Samuel, now
about twenty years of age, removed from Shiloh to some place of safety, and finally to Nob,
where it remained many years (21:1). The Philistines followed up their advantage, and
marched upon Shiloh, which they plundered and destroyed (comp. Jer. 7:12; Ps. 78:59).
This was a great epoch in the history of Israel. For twenty years after this fatal battle at Aphek
the whole land lay under the oppression of the Philistines. During all these dreary years
Samuel was a spiritual power in the land. From Ramah, his native place, where he resided, his
influence went forth on every side among the people. With unwearied zeal he went up and
down from place to place, reproving, rebuking, and exhorting the people, endeavouring to

68
awaken in them a sense of their sinfulness, and to lead them to repentance. His labours were
so far successful that "all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord." Samuel summoned the
people to Mizpeh, one of the loftiest hills in Central Palestine, where they fasted and prayed,
and prepared themselves there, under his direction, for a great war against the Philistines,
who now marched their whole force toward Mizpeh, in order to crush the Israelites once for
all.
At the intercession of Samuel God interposed in behalf of Israel. Samuel himself was their
leader, the only occasion in which he acted as a leader in war. The Philistines were utterly
routed. They fled in terror before the army of Israel, and a great slaughter ensued. This
battle, fought probably about B.C. 1095, put an end to the forty years of Philistine
oppression. In memory of this great deliverance, and in token of gratitude for the help
vouchsafed, Samuel set up a great stone in the battlefield, and called it "Ebenezer," saying,
"Hitherto hath the Lord helped us" (1 Sam. 7:1-12). This was the spot where, twenty years
before, the Israelites had suffered a great defeat, when the ark of God was taken. This
victory over the Philistines was followed by a long period of peace for Israel (1 Sam. 7:13,
14), during which Samuel exercised the functions of judge, going "from year to year in
circuit" from his home in Ramah to Bethel, thence to Gilgal (not that in the Jordan valley,
but that which lay to the west of Ebal and Gerizim), and returning by Mizpeh to Ramah.
He established regular services at Shiloh, where he built an altar; and at Ramah he gathered
a company of young men around him and established a school of the prophets. The schools
of the prophets, thus originated, and afterwards established also at Gibeah, Bethel, Gilgal,
and Jericho, exercised an important influence on the national character and history of the
people in maintaining pure religion in the midst of growing corruption. They continued to
the end of the Jewish commonwealth. Many years now passed, during which Samuel
exercised the functions of his judicial office, being the friend and counsellor of the people in
all matters of private and public interest. He was a great statesman as well as a reformer,
and all regarded him with veneration as the "seer," the prophet of the Lord.
At the close of this period, when he was now an old man, the elders of Israel came to him at
Ramah (1 Sam. 8:4, 5, 19-22); and feeling how great was the danger to which the nation was
exposed from the misconduct of Samuel's sons, whom he had invested with judicial
functions as his assistants, and had placed at Beersheba on the Philistine border, and also
from a threatened invasion of the Ammonites, they demanded that a king should be set
over them. This request was very displeasing to Samuel. He remonstrated with them, and
warned them of the consequences of such a step. At length, however, referring the matter
to God, he acceded to their desires, and anointed Saul (q.v.) to be their king (11:15). Before
retiring from public life he convened an assembly of the people at Gilgal (ch. 12), and there
solemnly addressed them with reference to his own relation to them as judge and prophet.
The remainder of his life he spent in retirement at Ramah, only occasionally and in special
circumstances appearing again in public (1 Sam. 13, 15) with communications from God to
king Saul. While mourning over the many evils which now fell upon the nation, he is
suddenly summoned (ch.16) to go to Bethlehem and anoint David, the son of Jesse, as king
over Israel instead of Saul. After this little is known of him till the time of his death, which
took place at Ramah when he was probably about eighty years of age. "And all Israel

69
gathered themselves together, and lamented him, and buried him in his house at Ramah"
(25:1), not in the house itself, but in the court or garden of his house. (Comp. 2 Kings 21:18;
2 Chr. 33:20; 1 Kings 2:34; John 19:41.) Samuel's devotion to God, and the special favour
with which God regarded him, are referred to in Jer. 15:1 and Ps. 99:6.
Samuel was unique because he filled many roles, that is, prophet, seer, priest and judge. He
came during a period of radical change, from theocracy to anarchy and finally the monarchy.
He was instrumental in furthering these changes. He was the greatest spiritual leader since
the time of Moses. Under his spiritual guidance Israel moved from the tribal confederacy to
the monarchy. Samuel anointed the first king of Israel (Saul). Samuel was more than a local
seer, he was also recognized of priestly authority in the city who officiate at sacrificial rites
Some scholars argue that prophecy has priestly origins especially considering 1 Samuel 9:9.
The office of a seer was more or less the same as that of a priest. So because of the inadequacy
and corrupt tendencies of the priestly office as demonstrated by the sons of Eli necessitated
the call of Samuel. Samuel is the one who instituted the prophetic guilds. According to 1
Samuel 3:1 prophecy existed prior to Samuel but its likely that they were taken for granted.
They never delivered any oracles.
SAMUEL AS A JUDGE
Samuel’s judgeship involves settling legal disputes. For the purpose he made an annual circuit
of the shrines of Bethel, Gilgal and Mizpah. 1 Samuel 7:15-17, his judgeship also led to the
triuph against the Philistines. Although he is said to have established this not by military
leadership but by prayer and sacrificial rites. Samuel was also a military leader. He instituted
the prophetic guilds. Although they never delivered any oracles, the prophetic guilds boost
the morale by chanting war songs.
SAMUEL’S PRIESTLY DUTIES
1. Taking care of the sanctuary or specific cultic centre.

2. Teaching or preaching
3. Offering sacrifices
4. Acting as a seer who would be consulted on various issues and provide guidance in
areas where it was needed.
5. A controversial duty in this context of counsel was the use of lots (urim and thumminal)
during oracular consultation. Controversy surrounds whether this should be classified as
a prophetic or priestly duty.
PROPHETIC DUTIES
1. Interpreting the will of God to the people.

2. Providing counsel and guidance to the kings. Samuel was advisor to Saul and when he
breached the commandment of God he was dismissed. Samuel appointed David to
replace Saul.
3. Providing morale during times of war.

70
4. Anointing kings
5. Criticizing kings.
6. Interceding. Samuel was the intercessor between God and Israel when they
demanded a king. Samuel interceded and gave their appeal to God who in reply told
them the disadvantages of a king but later gave them Saul as king.
Samuel had an important role in Israel. 1Samuel 3:1 ‘Before the call of Samuel the word of
God was rare; after it divine revelations were frequent’. This implies that prophecy indeed
began with Samuel. So the call of Samuel is significant in the growth and development of
prophecy. According to F.M. Cross prophecy started with kingship and died together in
exile.This is supported by M. Noth who propounded the evolutionary theory. For him
prophecy evolved from seership. 1 Samuel 9:9 is a key text to this discussion. Principally,
before the call of Samuel, the priest and, or seer used to receive visions and interpret the
word of God. Prophecy evolved from seership because the corrupt tendencies of Elide
priesthood resulted in the loss of proper sight (vision). It is as if the word of God became rare
because of this corruption. Though the sons of Elihad become corrupt, it seems Eli too was
involved in this corruption for even though he was aware of their corrupt tendencies he did
not rebuke his sons. Thus, the priestl office/ office of a seer, was perhaps no longer adequate
to meet the needs of the people. Therefore the call of Samuel signaled the evolution of the
prophetic office; an office that could now meet the needs of the people and put in check the
office of a priest. Once there was the prophet Samuel, God began to speak again and divine
revelation become frequent.
The general assumption is that there was no prophecy earlier than of this settlement in
Canaan. The rise of the monarchy seem to have given the kings the role of a judge. Prophecy
emerged in a bid to check kingship usurpation of this religious duty. This explainswhy Samuel
challenged king Saul, for example when he breached the law of sacrifice and not obeying
God’s commandment that he was supposed to destroy all Amalekites. Prophecy arise so as to
revive Israel’s religion.
However it should be noted that Samuel’s functions are not collectively recognizably
prophetic, in which case his influence on development of prophecy is questionable and
perhaps has been exaggerated through Samuel’s undeniable political influence. Some even
concluded that later editor made Samuel into a prophet otherwise he was just a mere judge.
Samuel traditions comprise material from various sources and each source has a different
image and role of Samuel. So it seems final redactors or compilers of the material suppressed
the other images and roles of Samuel and projected the image and role of Samuel as a
prophet, which was consistent with the interests of this/ these final editors (Deuteronomist
historian).

71
THE PROPHET ELIJAH

Elijah’s first appearance in Kings is sudden and unexplained. He was a Tishbite from Gilead
east of Jordan an area less subject to the influence of Baal syncretism. Of all the places cited
in connection with the settlement of Israel in Canaan this place was the least populated. In
fact it was scarcely populated (J. Bright 1980). The Manasseh tribe that settled there had very
little cultural intercourse with Canaanite inhabitants there and therefore managed to
preserve and maintain the Sinai traditions without adulterations from Canaanite religious
practices. Therefore, Elijah because he was conservative and was one of the most intolerant
of the prophets. In fact he was fundamentalistic when it comes to the Mosaic covenant. This
explains his outrage and vigorus campaign against Baalism.
His dressing and behavior is comparable to certain people of Israel called Nazaretes whose
characteristics are:
1. Separating oneself for the service of Yahweh.

2. Were not supposed to take any wine nor strong drink
3. Are consecrated to the Lord.
4. Made vow
5. No razor to be used to shave their heads
6. Dedicated to Yahweh and holy throughout the period of separation.
7. Bound by other laws that were followed by I sraelites.
Circumstances to Elijah’s ministry are fairly clear:
1. Omri made Samaria his capital though this was one of the cities of Baal and had no
Yahweh sanctuary.
2. Owing to Omri’s alliance with neighboring nations,his son Ahab married Jezebel a
princess of Tyre. Since political alliances of the time involved a mutual recognition of
deities and since Jezebel was not one to take her privileges lightly, the priority of
Yahweh as Israel’s peculiar God was threatened. Jezebel brought the Phoenician form
of worship to Israel and also gave financial support to a large number of Baal prophets
and priests. In fact she was the patron of Baal worship.
When Elijah appear on the scene, Israelites in the rural areas still worship Yahweh but the
royal court and the upper classes in the city were whole hearted adherence of Baalism.
So Elijah came as a direct challenge to Baal as a rain giver. In fact he was there to revive
Israel’s conduct with God. It is Yahweh who gives and withholds rain. We are reminded of
the words of Hosea a century later ‘she did not know that it was I who gave her grain, and
new wine and oil and multiplies for the silver and gold which they used for Baal’ (Hosea
2:8).Elijah declared drought in the name of Yahweh and show that Yahweh is the God of
nature. He controlled nature not in Palestine alone but also in Phoenicia. He wanted to
prove God as the sovereign and universal ruler.
CONTEST AT MOUNT CARMEL

72
The contest at Mount Carmel is regarded as the battle for supremacy. It shows the nature of
God as the provider and Israelites were supposed to save him with heart, soul and strength.
Yahweh demanded his people to be loyal, faithful and obedient. The contest prove that there
was nothing like Baal because the prayers of the prophets were not answered but Elijah’s
sacrifice was consumed by fire. Elijah posed as a stricter promoter of Yahwism in the face of
polytheistic tendencies which was now part and parcel of central cult. Because of Baalism,
Yahwism was threatened with extinction but Elijah was there to revive the worship of
Yahweh.
The contest itself dramatically demonstrated the impossibility of simultaneously retaining

Yahweh as a national deity and Ba'al as the fertilizing or life-sustaining god, the activator of
the land and therefore its rightful owner. Elijah's point was that Yahweh was Israel's god,
responsible for all aspects of national well-being, including the bringing of fertilizing rain, and
was, therefore, owner of the land. Arguments concerning the fire from heaven (which was
apparently lightning), suggestions that Elijah may have poured naphtha rather than water on
the altar, or allegations that someone assisted Elijah and secretly lit the fire are fruitless and
completely miss the thrust of the account. The story symbolizes a power struggle, a point
clearly made by Elijah: "If Yahweh is God, follow him; but if Ba'al, then follow him" (I Kings
18:21). For Elijah there was no choice: his name, which meant "Yahweh is my God," testified
to his commitment. The validity of his belief was demonstrated in the rain contest which
discredited the prophets and priests of Ba'al and Asherah. Elijah struck when he had the
advantage and a blood purge followed, provoking Jezebel to a threat of reprisal.
Other scholars argue that at Mount Carmel Elijah was involved in a rain making ceremony.
This is because Elijah announced drought that was to last for three years. So it seems the
drama at Mount Carmel begin with the need for rain as there was drought that was
threatening the area.
However it should be noted that Canaanite religion basically was a fertility cult where agrarian
concerns were at the centre. Rain would therefore be one of those signs that the deity who
brought it down was the true deity. Rain then prove that Yahweh had accepted Elijah’s
sacrifice and he was the true deity. Hence it is not surprising that the drama ends with a down
pour of rain.
The slaughter of the prophets of Baal was not an act of vengeance or fanaticism but rather an
application of the old amphyctonic law which imposes death penalty to all apostates (Exodus
22:20, Deut 13:6-11).
PROPHETS IN ZIMBABWE AND RAIN MAKING CEREMONY
It is not immediately clear whether prophets in Zimbabwe are involved in rain making
ceremonies as these are officiated by traditional sacred practioners. Indeed, some pastors
now gather members to pray for the rain but these are not rain making ceremonies in the
traditional sense.
NABOTH’S VINEYARD

73
Elijah assures the duties of earlier prophets,e.g. Samuel, Nathan and Gad. They limit the
powers of the kings. Samuel rebuked Saul, Gad rebuked David for taking a census, Nathan
rebuked David for taking Uriah’s wife, and Elijah rebuked Ahab for taking Naboth’s vineyard.
In the Naboth incident the conflict is between two different conceptions of the law, that is
the Canaanite view that the king was accorded the arbitrary powers and by contrast the
typical Israelite view that every man with his possessions are not without respect of persons,
was under divine protection. Elijah wanted to preserve the old order where the land belonged
to God and should not be sold. Land grabbing was unlawful. Using her culture Jezebel ordered
to take the estate of Naboth. She believed that the king was appointed by God and hence
accused Naboth for cursing God and hence was stoned to death. This is why foreign marriages
were forbidden.
SIGNIFICANCE OF JOURNEY TO MOUNT HOREB
Mount Horeb is central of prophecy. It is of archetypal importance because it is connected

with the election of Israel, covenant, salvation and the law of God. It shows that prophets
were not innovators but they demanded the return of Israel to the former covenant allegiance
to God. So the journey show the link between prophecy and sacral law. Elijah as a covenant
mediator journeyed towards Israel’s source of faith. So it was a pilgrimage to the mountain
of Israel’s faith.
Elijah might have gone there out of fear of Jezebel and he needed security from Yahweh. So
he wanted to seek companionship from Yahweh since he was lonely.
The account of the flight to Mount Horeb is tailored to portray him as the second Moses
promised in Deuteronomy 18. This shows the Deuteronomist’s redaction of an earlier Elohist
story about Elijah. Similarities can be drawn between Moses and Elijah in the accounts of their
theophanies at the sacred mountain. Elijah fasted 40 days 40 nights that he took to reach
mount Horeb. Similarly when Moses received the law he fasted forty days and forty nights
(Exodus 24:18, 34:28). At mount Horeb Elijah found shelter in a cave (1Kings 19), probably the
same cave where Moses hid to protect himself from the glory of God (Exodus 32:22-23). In
his conversation with Yahweh Elijah complained that the people had forsaken
Yahweh’s covenant (1Kings 19). His situation is similar to that of Moses who went to mount
Horeb to receive the law and returned to find that people had forsaken Yahweh and were
worshipping a molten calf. Besides both performed similar miracles. For instance, Moses
struck the waters of Red sea and Elijah did the same (2 Kings 2:8). Their theophanies are
similar. So Elijah must have been a second Moses.
He might have gone there to receive orders to anoint kings Hazael of Syria and Jehu of Israel.
It might be regarded as a cleansing ritual after he had spilt a lot of blood, in an attempt to
exterminate the Baal prophets and resuscitate Yahwism.

74
As prophecy move from one period to another certain prophetic traits are dropped and new
traits are picked. On the mountain there is a transition from primitive forms of theophany,
that is fire, wind, and earthquake to a more classical form of audition (small voice). The
journey also showed that prophets were messengers of God and their preaching was not from
themselves but from the andtask and be strengthened by Yahweh. Elijah wanted to inform
Yahweh how he had successfully championed Yahwism.
ELIJAH’S STORIES AS LEGENDS
Some scholars argue that Elijah is a legendary figure. A legendary figure is unbelievable,
speculative and exaggerated. Some scholars concluded that Elijah is nothing but a miracle
worker. This is based on the fact that;
1. He run and overtook the chariot of Ahab

2. He did not see death
3. He single handedly killed the 400 prophets of Baal
4. He was fed by ravens
5. He travelled forty days and forty nights without food
6. He called fire to destroy two companies of fifty men.
7. He kept constant supply of meal and oil for the widow of Zarephath and raised the
widow’s son.
8. He divided river Jordan using his mantle
9. He was takento heaven by whirlwind.
These stories seem to have been written using the Mosaic motif;
1. Moses went to mount Sinai and Elijah does the same

2. Moses separated the waters of Red sea and Elijah separated waters of Jordan
3. Moses kill the apostates and Elijah killed worshippers of Baal.
4. Moses nominated his successor Joshua and Elijah nominated Elisha.
5. No one knows the grave of both Moses and Elijah.
SIMILARITIES IN THEMES
1 according to the author of 1Kings Moses was a prototype of Elijah. Without Moses
prophecy would not have been born and without Elijah prophecy would have died.
2 Prophecy originated with Moses and is considered as the ideal prophet. Prophets who
came after Moses introduced nothing new, they followed the footsteps of Moses.
Hence prophets were not innovators, they took their stand on existing traditions.
3 Similarity may also imply that these stories may be a product of the same redactor or
the final compiler of the Elijah- Elisha narratives used the Mosaic stories as a source.
4 Probably the person of Elijah is a literal creation to dramatise Moses. Such coincidence
could not be coincidental. Maybe the redactor twisted information for it to be
comparable with Moses.
ELISHAAS A SOCIAL WORKER

75
1. He made the bad water wholesome (2 Kings 2:19)

2. He fills the water trenches (2 Kings 3)
3. Helped the widow ofone of the sons of the prophet to repay her debt through the
multiplication of oil (2 Kings 4)
4. Helped the barren Shunnamite woman to conceive (2 kings 4:8)
5. He made poisonous pottage harmless (2 Kings 4:38)
6. HE HEALED Naaman the leper(2 Kings 5:1ff)
7. He multiplied bread of the first fruits and fresh ears of grain to feed many people (2
kings 4:42-44)
8. He helped the manwho had lost a borrowed axe head by recovering it from the water
(2 Kings 6)
9. He restored the Shunnamite woman’s son to life (2 Kings 4:18)
ELISHA AS A PROPHET
1. He performed miracles, for example parting of the Jordan waters (2 kings 2:14)
2. He was a forth teller, for example when he told Gehazi what he had done in his
absence (2 Kings 5:2)
3. He foretold the end of famine (2 Kings 7:1) and predicted the death of the death of
the Shunnamite’s son (2Kings4)
4. He anointed Jehu to be king
5. He had prophetic authority, for example when he cursed Gehazi for not being faithful
and when he cursed the young boys who jeered at him.
6. Elisha participated in the politics of his day when he opposed the foreign policy of the
Omrides

76
ELIJAH’S LINKS WITH PRE-CLASSICAL PROPHETS

1. Man of action/ miracle working ability like Moses and Elisha e.g. Exodus 4:7-11
2. Ecstatic prophecy- Elijah’s running before Ahab’s chariot (1 kings 18:46) indicates an
ecstatic feat. The 70 elders in the wilderness are believed to have prophesied
ecstatically after receiving a share of Moses’ spirit. When a ministrel played, Elisha
prophesied ecstatically. Samuel headed over a prophetic guild that presumably
prophesied ecstatically
3. Prophetic guilds of Samuel’s time continue to exist during the time of Elijah
4. Constant endeavor to recall people to the religion of Moses/ proclaiming Mosaic
standards of righteousness in the community.
5. God appearing/ answering Elijah by fire on two occasions (1 Kings 18:38, 2 Kings 1:10-
12) which seems to look back to the exhibition of God’s presence and judgement in
fire in the Exodugs narratives e.g. 13:21, 19:18, 24:17.
6. Anointing kings. Elijah anointed Jehu and Hazael through Elisha, Samuel anointed
David and Saul, and Nathan anointed Solomon.
ELIJAH AS THE FORUNNER OF CLASSICAL PROPHETS
A transitional bridge that gives birth to classical prophecy. Though he is from old school of
prophets, the pre-classical ones, his work laid the foundational stone on which classical
prophecy is built. Special forms of theophany such as dreams, angels and miracles which were
central in the pre-canonical prophecy seem to be gradually paving way to new forms that are
experienced in canonical prophecy, e.g. auditions (Jeremiah 1:1, Isaiah 1:2, Amos 1:3).
A closer focus on Elijah’s message reveals that rather than addressing a specific individual, the
common practice in pre-classical prophecy, his message was addressed to the citizens as a
whole. The advance of the Canaanite civilization coupled with the syncretism that followed
was the major focus of Elijah’s message. His conviction that the Sinai covenant could not be
tampered with to accommodate religious tolerance and co-existence with Baalism, was taken
up with great zeal by Hosea.
Further it can be gleaned from the prophecy of Amos that his social justice message was
inspired by Elijah’s condemnation of the transition from the tribal confederacy to feudalism.
This transition promoted the spread of urban culture which resulted in the Israelites
forgetting the ethical demands of the sacred law and their traditions. Feudalism created a
class of wealthy land owners who mercilessly increased their holdings by dispossessing the
poor. In the period of Elijah prophets suffered persecution for criticizing these changes.
Possibly, in Amos’ time prophets and Nazarenes tried to speak out against abuses of the poor
by the rich and were ruthlessly silenced (Amos 2:12).
If the contest at Mount Camel is to be understood in the of Elijah’s condemnation of Israel’s

treaty with Tyre, then Elijah did not support Israel’s foreign policy. This stance is taken up
further by Hosea and Isaiah who attacked Israel and Judah, respectively, for their foreign

77
alliances. Prophets viewed foreign alliances as the sources of Israel’s worship of gods other
than Yahweh. For example Isaiah pleaded with Ahaz not to enter into foreign alliances or to
pay tribute to Assyria as this would result in accepting Assyrian gods into the temple.In the
account of the theophany of Elijah at mount Horeb, he was instructed to anoint Hazael to be
king of Syria and Elisha as the next Mosaic prophet. This set in motion a series of events which
would wipe out all Baal worshippers, leaving a remnant of seven thousand. The concept of a
remnant is interesting here because it link Elijah’s message with that of canonical prophets
who were convinced that although Yahweh would punish Israelites, a remnant would remain.
Further, the fact that Elijah is sent to anoint Hazael as king of Syria, shows Yahweh as a
universal God. This theme is carried forward and refined by canonical prophets like Amos,
Isaiah and Jeremiah.
Therefore Elijah is portrayed as a true Mosaic prophets who stood firmly in the Sinai traditions
and opposed to any form of accommodation of Cananite culture and religious practices. His
fanatical zeal for Yahwism saved the religion from extinction and this inspired prophets of the
canonical era like Amos (oracles against foreign nations), Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiah.
However, as a person, Elijah can be viewed as a primitive and conservative traditional Yahwist
who fought a bitter war against the modernizing tendencies of culture and religion. His
religious fanaticism and intolerance was politically dangerous as this threatened the political
stability of the state which consisted of both Israelites and Cananites.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRE-CLASSICAL AND CLASSICAL PROPHETS
There is a debate concerning the criteria used to distinguish classical from pre-classical
prophets. However it could be uncritical to argue that classical prophets could not be
distinguished from their predecessors, the pre-classical prophets. Classical prophets
exemplify what is distinctive about Israelite prophets, that is, all that separate them from
ancient near east pattern.
1. ECSTACY
Ecstacy is a distinctive feature of pre-canonical prophets. It seems to be studiously avoided
as we move to the classical period. Jeremiah condemns ecstacy which was common during
his period. He never appeals to any possession of this prophetic spirit. However other scholars
argue that we can not differentiate between classical and pre-classical prophecy solely on the
basis of ecstacy. It is said that it was because they were ecstatic that in spite of their bold
speech, Amos and Jeremiah escaped with their lives. According to Robinson classical prophets
presents quite a different picturewith regard to the value attached to striking psychic
phenomenon. Indeed on the whole, we have to acknowledge a marked recession of the
ecstatic element when compared with per-classical prophets. Of full scale ecstatic mass
hysteria there is no mention in the case of classical prophets.
2. GROUP PROPHECY
Pre-classical prophets operated in groups while classical were characterized by individualism.
They belonged to guilds or schools. Sons of the prophets lived together in communities under

78
a leader apparently known as their father. Elijah and Elisha were leaders of prophetic
communities at bethel, Gilgal and Jericho. Classical prophets over-emphasised the individual
prophetic genius and originality. They are capable of moving through life in majestic solitude,
even when this means, as it meant, e.g. for Hosea and Jeremiah, that the whole existence is
undated with the most terrible tragedy.
3. PROFESSIONALISM
During the pre-classical period prophecy was more of a profession in which they received
salaries. Classical prophets were not paid for a service. Pre-classical prophets were visited by
people to inquire of God. Not only common people but also kings and queens and high
officials went to the prophets to obtain oracles. Ahijah was consulted by the wife of Jeroboam
pertaining the illness of their son. Classical prophets speak to the whole nation challenging
popular but false values while exhorting people to discover the covenant and to reverse their
evil ways. However classical prophets were also consulted on private matters, but in most
cases they were concerned with national issues
4. CULTIC ASSOCIATION
Pre-classical prophets as professionals were definitely linked to cults. All cult officials received
remuneration from the cult. So they are present at cultic centres on special days for
consultation (2 Kings 4:18-25 1 Samuel 10:5-8). Classical prophets made a protest against the
cult. Sacrifice had become a surrogate for morality of the majority in Israel and strong words
had to be spoken. Classical prophets rejected the view that by offering sacrifices men might
hope to conciliate God’s favours.
5. COURT PROPHETS
Pre-classical prophets determine the will of Yahweh and gave divine sanction to the policies
of the state. This fade away as we move to the classical period. There is face to face encounter
between prophets and kings. Nathan had David, Elijah had Ahab. From classical prophecy
however the controversy of God is with the nation and not simply with kings.
6. PREDICTION
Pre-classical prophets emphasized foretelling e.g.Ahijah predicted the death of Jeroboam’s
son. Elijah predicted drought. Though classical prophets turned to the future their emphasis
was on the present. The true function of a prophet was to be a teacher of ethical and religious
truth.
7. DISTINCTIVE MARKS OR CLOTHING

Bandage in the story in 1 Kings 10:35 may have covered a mark worn on the forehead. Elijah
had peculiar garments (2 Kings 1:18). These were probably used to distinguish themselves
from other prophets of the ancient near east.
CONCLUSION
There are limitations in the application of criteria. You cannot put these two types of prophets
in a water tight category because there are things which continue e.g. how they receive their
79
revelation, for example compare the call of Moses with that of Jeremiah and Isaiah. Behavior
is almost the same. Books were written during the exilic period or post exilic period. So there
might have been an editorial process. It’s likely that group prophecy was no longer
fashionable and so the redactor wanted to show that the classical prophets were no longer
operating in groups.

80
Marriage in Judaism
The Torah provides very little guidance with regard to the procedures of a
marriage. The method of finding a spouse, the form of the wedding ceremony, and
the nature of the marital relationship are all explained in the Talmud.
Acquiring a Spouse
Mishnah Kiddushin 1,1 specifies that a woman is acquired (i.e., to be a wife) in

three ways: through money, a contract, and sexual intercourse. Ordinarily, all
three of these conditions are satisfied, although only one is necessary to effect a
binding marriage.
Acquisition by money is normally satisfied by the wedding ring. It is important to

note that although money is one way of "acquiring" a wife, the woman is not being
bought and sold like a piece of property or a slave. This is obvious from the fact
that the amount of money involved is nominal (according to the Mishnah, a
perutah, a copper coin of the lowest denomination, was sufficient). In addition, if
the woman were being purchased like a piece of property, it would be possible for
the husband to resell her, and clearly it is not. Rather, the wife's acceptance of the
money is a symbolic way of demonstrating her acceptance of the husband, just like
acceptance of the contract or the sexual intercourse.
To satisfy the requirements of acquisition by money, the ring must belong to the
groom. It cannot be borrowed, although it can be a gift from a relative. It must be
given to the wife irrevocably. In addition, the ring's value must be known to the
wife, so that there can be no claim that the husband deceived her into marrying by
misleading her as to its value.
In all cases, the Talmud specifies that a woman can be acquired only with her
consent, and not without it. Kiddushin 2a-b.
As part of the wedding ceremony, the husband gives the wife a ketubah. The word
"Ketubah" comes from the root Kaf-Tav-Bet, meaning writing. The ketubah is
also called the marriage contract. The ketubah spells out the husband's obligations
to the wife during marriage, conditions of inheritance upon his death, and
obligations regarding the support of children of the marriage. It also provides for
the wife's support in the event of divorce. There are standard conditions; however,
additional conditions can be included by mutual agreement. Marriage agreements
of this sort were commonplace in the ancient Semitic world.
The ketubah has much in common with prenuptial agreements, which are gaining
popularity in the West. Such agreements were historically disfavored, because it
was believed that planning for divorce would encourage divorce, and that people

81
who considered the possibility of divorce should not be marrying. Although

one rabbi in the Talmud expresses a similar opinion, the majority maintained that a
ketubah discouraged divorce, by serving as a constant reminder of the husband's
substantial financial obligations if he divorced his wife.
The ketubah is often a beautiful work of calligraphy, framed and displayed in the
home.
The Process of Marriage: Kiddushin and Nisuin
The process of marriage occurs in two distinct stages: kiddushin (commonly

translated as betrothal) and nisuin (full-fledged marriage). Kiddushin occurs when
the woman accepts the money, contract, or sexual relations offered by the
prospective husband. The word "kiddushin" comes from the root Qof-Dalet-Shin,
meaning sanctified. It reflects the sanctity of the marital relation. However, the
root word also connotes something that is set aside for a specific (sacred) purpose,
and the ritual of kiddushin sets aside the woman to be the wife of a particular man
and no other.
Kiddushin is far more binding than an engagement as the term is understood in

modern customs of the West. Once the kiddushin is completed, the woman is
legally the wife of the man. The relationship created by kiddushin can only be
dissolved by death or divorce. However, the spouses do not live together at that
time, and the mutual obligations created by the marital relationship do not take
effect until the nisuin is complete.
The nisuin (from a word meaning elevation) completes the process of

marriage. The husband brings the wife into his home and they begin their married
life together.
In the past, the kiddushin and nisuin would routinely occur as much as a year
apart. During that time, the husband would prepare a home for the new
family. There was always a risk that during this long period of separation, the
woman would discover that she wanted to marry another man, or the man would
disappear, leaving the woman in the awkward state of being married but without a
husband. Today, the two ceremonies are normally performed together.
Because marriage under Jewish law is essentially a private contractual agreement

between a man and a woman, it does not require the presence of a rabbi or any
other religious official. It is common, however, for rabbis to officiate, partly in
imitation of the Christian practice and partly because the presence of a religious or
civil official is required under Western civil law.

82
As you can see, it is very easy to make a marriage, so the rabbis instituted severe
punishments (usually flogging and compelled divorce) where marriage was
undertaken without proper planning and solemnity.
A Typical Wedding Ceremony
It is customary for the bride and groom not to see each other for a week preceding
the wedding. On the Shabbat of that week, it is customary among Ashkenazic
Jews for the groom to have an aliyah (the honor of reciting a blessing over
the Torah reading). This aliyah is known as an ufruf. There are exuberant
celebrations in the synagogue at this time.
The day before the wedding, both the bride and the groom customarily fast.
Before the ceremony, the bride is veiled, in remembrance of the idea that Rebecca
veiled her face when she was first brought to Isaac to be his wife.
The ceremony itself lasts 20-30 minutes, and consists of the kiddushin and the
nisuin. For the kiddushin, the bride approaches and circles the groom. Two
blessings are recited over wine: one the standard blessing over wine and the other
regarding the commandments related to marriage. The man then places the ring on
the woman's finger and says "Be sanctified (mekudeshet) to me with this ring in
accordance with the law of Moses and Israel".
After the kiddushin is complete, the ketubah is read aloud.
The nisuin then proceeds. The bride and groom today typically stand beneath the
"chuppah", a canopy held up by four poles, symbolic of their dwelling together and
of the husband's bringing the wife into his home; the importance of the chuppah is
so great that the wedding ceremony is sometimes referred to as the
chuppah. Jewish Law does require, however, that the groom bring the bride into
the house where they will live (not under a mere symbol of it). The groom (or,
more typically, his agent or agents) recite seven blessings (sheva brakhos) in the
presence of a minyan (prayer quorum of 10 adult Jewish men). The essence of
each of the seven blessings is:
1. the standard blessing over wine.

2. ... who has created everything for his glory
3. ... who fashioned the Man
4. ... who fashioned the Man in His image
5. ... who gladdens Zion through her children
6. ... who gladdens groom and bride
7. ... who created joy and gladness . . . who gladdens the groom with the bride
The couple then drinks the wine.

83
The groom customarily smashes a glass (or a small symbolic piece of glass) with
his right foot, to symbolize the destruction of the Temple; the correct original
practice was to put a bit of ashes on the forehead where the tefillin are placed, as is
still practiced by many in Israel today. The destruction of usable things is actually
forbidden.
The couple then retires briefly to a completely private room, symbolic of the
groom bringing the wife into his home; the correct original practice was to go
immediately into the home where they will live and be alone there, which is also
still practiced by some in Israel today. This is the most important part of the whole
ceremony, and should not be done merely symbolically.
This is followed by a festive meal, which is followed by a repetition of the sheva

brakhos. Exuberant music and dancing traditionally accompany the ceremony and
the reception.
The Marital Relationship
Marriage is vitally important in Judaism. Refraining from marriage is not

considered holy, as it is in some other religions. On the contrary, it is considered
unnatural. The Talmud says that an unmarried man is constantly thinking of
sin. The Talmud tells of a rabbi who was introduced to a young unmarried
rabbi. The older rabbi told the younger one not to come into his presence again
until he was married.
Marriage is not solely, or even primarily, for the purpose of

procreation. Traditional sources recognize that companionship, love, and intimacy
are the primary purposes of marriage, noting that woman was created in Genesis
2,18 because "it is not good for man to be alone", rather than because she was
necessary for procreation.
According to the Torah and the Talmud, a man is permitted to marry more than
one wife, but a woman cannot be married to more than one man at a
time. Although polygyny was permitted, it was never common. Around
1000 C.E., Ashkenazic Jewry banned polygyny because of pressure from the
predominant Christian culture. It continued to be permitted for Sephardic Jews in
Islamic lands for many years. To the present day, Yemenite and Ethiopian
Jews continue to practice polygyny; however, the modern state of Israel ordinarily
allows only one wife, unless you come to Israel with more than one wife, in which
case you can keep the wives you have but you cannot marry new ones.
A husband is responsible for providing his wife with food, clothing, and sexual
relations (Exodus 21,10), as well as anything else specified in the ketubah. Marital
sexual relations are the woman's right, not the man's. A man cannot force his wife

84
to engage in sexual relations with him, nor is he permitted to abuse his wife in any
way (a practice routinely permitted in Christian countries until quite recently).
A married woman retains ownership of any property she brought to the marriage,
but the husband has the right to manage the property and to enjoy profits from the
property.
Prohibited Marriages and Illegitimate Children
The minimum age for marriage under Jewish law is 13 for boys, 12 for girls;
however, the kiddushin can take place before that, and often did in medieval
times. The Talmud recommends that parents marry off their children when they
reach puberty, but many Jewish communities delay marriage till the age 18, or
somewhere between 16 and 24, putting needless physical and mental strain on
Jewish youth and often causing them to sin.
The Torah sets forth a list of prohibited relations. Such marriages are never
valid. A man cannot marry certain close blood relatives, the ex-wives of certain
close blood relatives, a woman who has not been validly divorced from her
previous husband, the daughter or granddaughter of his ex-wife, or the sister of his
ex-wife during the ex-wife's life time. For a complete list, see 613 Mitzvot
(Commandments).
The offspring of such marriages are mamzerim (bastards, illegitimate), and subject
to a variety of restrictions; however it is important to note that only the offspring of
these incestuous or forbidden marriages are mamzerim. Children born out of
wedlock are not mamzerim in Jewish law and bear no stigma, unless the marriage
would have been prohibited for the reasons above. Children of a married man and
a woman who is not his wife are not mamzerim (because the marriage between the
parents would not have been prohibited), although children of a married woman
and a man who is not her husband are mamzerim (because she could not have
married him).
There are other classes of marriages that are not permitted, but that are valid if they
occur and that do not make the children mamzerim. The marriage of minors, of a
Jew to a non-Jew, and of a kohein to the prohibited classes of women discussed
below fall into this category.
A kohein is not permitted to marry a divorcee, a convert, a promiscuous woman, a

woman who is the offspring of a forbidden marriage to a kohein, or a woman who
is the widow of a man who died childless but who has been released from the
obligation to marry her husband's brother. A kohein who marries such a woman is
disqualified from his duties as a kohein, as are all the offspring of that marriage.

85
Divorce
Jewish Attitude Toward Divorce
Judaism recognized the concept of "no-fault" divorce thousands of years

ago. Judaism has always accepted divorce as a fact of life, albeit an unfortunate
one. Judaism generally maintains that it is better for a couple to divorce than to
remain together in a state of constant bitterness and strife.
Under Jewish law, a man can divorce a woman for any reason or no
reason. The Talmud specifically says that a man can divorce a woman because she
spoiled his dinner or simply because he finds another woman more attractive, and
the woman's consent to the divorce is not required. In fact, Jewish law requires
divorce in some circumstances: when the wife commits a sexual transgression, a
man must divorce her, even if he is inclined to forgive her.
This does not mean that Judaism takes divorce lightly. Many aspects of Jewish
law discourage divorce. The procedural details involved in arranging a divorce are
complex and exacting. Except in certain cases of misconduct by the wife, a man
who divorces his wife is required to pay her substantial sums of money, as
specified in the ketubah (marriage contract). In addition, Jewish law prohibits a
man from remarrying his ex-wife after she has married another
man. Kohanim cannot marry divorcees at all.
The Process of Obtaining a Divorce
According to the Torah, divorce is accomplished simply by writing a bill of

divorce, handing it to the wife, and sending her away. To prevent husbands from
divorcing their wives recklessly or without proper consideration, the rabbis created
complex rules regarding the process of writing the document, delivery, and
acceptance. A competent rabbinical authority should be consulted for any divorce.
The document in question is referred to in the Talmud as a sefer k'ritut (scroll of

cutting off), but it is more commonly known today as a get. The get is not phrased
in negative terms. The traditional text does not emphasize the breakdown of the
relationship, nor does it specify the reason for the divorce; rather, it states that the
woman is now free to marry another man.
It is not necessary for a husband to personally hand the get to the wife. If it is not
possible or desirable for the couple to meet, a messenger may be appointed to
deliver the get.
It is important to note that a civil divorce is not sufficient to dissolve a Jewish

marriage. As far as Jewish law is concerned, a couple remains married until the
woman receives the get. This has been a significant problem: many liberal Jews
86
have a religiously valid marriage, yet do not obtain a religiously valid divorce. If
the woman remarries after such a procedure, her second marriage is considered an
adulterous one, and her children are considered mamzerim (illegitimate children
that are almost completely barred from normal marriage; see Deuteronomy
23,3 and note that "bastard" is not properly the word here, as it matters not if the
child's parents are legally married or not).
Inequality of the Sexes
The position of husband and wife with regard to divorce is not an equal
one. According to the Torah, only the husband can initiate a divorce, and the wife
cannot prevent him from divorcing her. Later "rabbinical" authorities in Europe
tried to take steps to ease the harshness of these rules by prohibiting a man from
divorcing a woman without her consent, but the Torah remains as it was. A
rabbinical court can, however, compel a husband to divorce his wife under certain
circumstances: when he is physically repulsive because of some medical condition
or other characteristic, or when he violates or neglects his marital obligations
(food, clothing, and sexual intercourse).
A grave problem arises, however, if a man disappears or deserts his wife, or is

presumed dead but there is insufficient proof of death. Divorce can only be
initiated by the man; thus, if the husband cannot be found, he cannot be compelled
to divorce the wife and she cannot marry another man. A woman in this situation
is referred to as an "agunah" (literally, anchored). The rabbis have agonized over
this problem, balancing the need to allow the woman to remarry with the risk of an
adulterous marriage (mentioned at the end of the previous section) if the husband
reappeared. No definitive solution to this problem exists.
To prevent this problem to some extent, it is customary in many places for a man
to give his wife a conditional get whenever he goes off to war, so that if he never
comes home and his body is not found, his wife does not become agunah.

87
SUMMARY
What is marriage?
- The act of uniting a man and woman for life; wedlock; the legal union of a man and
woman for life.
- A marriage is regarded as a holy covenant between the bride and groom hence it is
sacrosanct.
Background of marriage
- It is evident from Bible history that monogamy was the original law of marriage.
- It seems to have been the practice from the beginning for fathers to select wives for
their sons (Gen_24:3; Gen_38:6).
- Sometimes also proposals were initiated by the father of the maiden (Exo_2:21).
- The brothers of the maiden were also sometimes consulted (Gen_24:51;
Gen_34:11), but her own consent was not required. The young man was bound to
give a price to the father of the maiden (Gen_31:15; Gen_34:12; Exo_22:16,
Exo_22:17; 1Sa_18:23, 1Sa_18:25; Rth_4:10; Hos_3:2) On these patriarchal
customs the Mosaic law made no change.
Nature of Marriage in Judaism

- Marriage is vitally important in Judaism. Refraining from marriage is not considered
holy. On the contrary, it is considered unnatural. The Talmud says that an unmarried
man is constantly thinking of sin.
- The minimum age for marriage under Jewish law is 13 for boys, 12 for girls.
- Traditional sources recognize that companionship, love and intimacy are the primary
purposes of marriage, noting that woman was created in Gen. 2:18 because "it is not
good for man to be alone," rather than because she was necessary for procreation.
- According to the Torah and the Talmud, a man was permitted to marry more than one
wife, but a woman could not marry more than one man. Although polygyny was
permitted, it was never common.
- A married woman retains ownership of any property she brought to the marriage, but
the husband has the right to manage the property and to enjoy profits from the property.
Dating and Relationship

- Judaism teaches that in dating, one should look for a person with good character,
humility, a desire to grow, and warmth. Additionally, there should be mutual attraction.
- In Judaism, dating & relationships are the path toward the goal of love and marriage.
Defining who you are and avoiding touching during dating help the process.
The process of marriage
- The process of marriage occurs in two distinct stages: ‘kiddushin’ (commonly
translated as betrothal) and ‘nisuin’ (full-fledged marriage).
- Kiddushin occurs when the woman accepts the money, contract or sexual relations
offered by the prospective husband. The word "kiddushin" means "sanctified." It
reflects the sanctity of the marital relation.
- However, the root word also connotes something that is set aside for a specific (sacred)
purpose, and the ritual of kiddushin sets aside the woman to be the wife of a particular
man and no other.

88
- Kiddushin is far more binding than an engagement as we understand the term in modern
English. Once kiddushin is complete, the woman is legally the wife of the man. The
relationship created by kiddushin can only be dissolved by death or divorce.
- However, the spouses do not live together at the time of the kiddushin, and the mutual
obligations created by the marital relationship do not take effect until the nisuin is
complete.
The Nisuin (elevation)
- The nisuin (from a word meaning "elevation") completes the process of marriage. The
husband brings the wife into his home and they begin their married life together.
- In the past, the kiddushin and nisuin would routinely occur as much as a year apart.
During that time, the husband would prepare a home for the new family.
- There was always a risk that during this long period of separation, the woman would
discover that she wanted to marry another man, or the man would disappear, leaving
the woman in the awkward state of being married but without a husband. Today, the
two ceremonies are normally performed together.
Celebrating a Jewish Wedding
- The husband signs a ‘ketubah’ (marriage contract) promising to cherish and care for his
wife. The ketubah is also called the marriage contract. The marriage contract (ketubah)
is drawn up and witnessed by two Jews neither of whom may be related to the bride or
groom. The ketubah spells out the husband's obligations to the wife during marriage,
conditions of inheritance upon his death, and obligations regarding the support of
children of the marriage.
- The ketubah also provides for the wife's support in the event of divorce. There are
standard conditions; however, additional conditions can be included by mutual
agreement. The majority maintained that a ketubah discouraged divorce, by serving as
a constant reminder of the husband's substantial financial obligations if he divorced his
wife.
- At the wedding canopy (chuppah), many have the custom that the bride circles the
groom seven times.
Wedding celebrations
- It is customary for the bride and groom not to see each other for a week preceding the
wedding. The day before the wedding, both the bride and the groom fast.
- Before the ceremony, the bride is veiled, in remembrance of the fact that Rebecca veiled
her face when she was first brought to Isaac to be his wife.
- Subsequently, the groom gives his bride a ring, a glass is broken, and then the dancing
and celebrations begin. The ceremony itself lasts 20-30 minutes, and consists of the
kiddushin and the nisuin.
- For the kiddushin, the bride approaches and circles the groom. Two blessings are recited
over wine: one the standard blessing over wine and the other regarding the
commandments related to marriage. The man then places the ring on woman's finger
and says "Be sanctified to me with this ring in accordance with the law of Moses and
Israel."
- After the kiddushin is complete, the ketubah is read aloud.
- The nisuin then proceeds. The bride and groom stand beneath the chuppah, a canopy
held up by four poles, symbolic of their dwelling together and of the husband's bringing
the wife into his home.
- The importance of the chuppah is so great that the wedding ceremony is sometimes
referred to as the chuppah. The bride and groom recite seven blessings in the presence

89
of a minyan (prayer quorum of 10 adult Jewish men). The essence of each of the seven
blessings is:
1. ... who has created everything for his glory
2. ... who fashioned the Man
3. ... who fashioned the Man in His image ...
4. ... who gladdens Zion through her children
5. ... who gladdens groom and bride
6. ... who created joy and gladness ... who gladdens the groom with the bride
7. and the standard prayer over wine.
- The couple then drinks the wine. The groom smashes a glass (or a small symbolic piece
of glass) with his right foot, to symbolize the destruction of the Temple.
- The couple then retires briefly to a completely private room, symbolic of the groom
bringing the wife into his home.
- This is followed by a festive meal, which is followed by a repetition of the sheva
brakhos. Exuberant music and dancing traditionally accompany the ceremony and the
reception.

90
DEATH AND RELATED BELIEFS IN JUDAISM

OBJECTIVES
 Explain how death is perceived in Judaism.
 Compare perceptions of death in in other religions.
Concept of Death
 In Judaism, death is not a tragedy, even when it occurs early in life or through
unfortunate circumstances. Death is a natural process. Death has a meaning and it’s all
part of God's plan.
 In Judaism they share a firm belief in an afterlife, a world to come, where those who
have lived a worthy life will be rewarded.
 Judaism views this life as a corridor that leads to another existence. The belief in an
afterlife – where a person is judged and where the soul continues to flourish – is a
cornerstone of Jewish thought.
 Mourning practices in Judaism are extensive, but they are not an expression of fear or
distaste for death. Jewish practices relating to death and mourning have two purposes:
to show respect for the dead and to comfort the living who will miss the deceased
(respect & honour the mourner).
Death and Burial Practices

Burial requirements for Jews are quite specific:
1. As soon as possible following death and through to burial, the body should be guarded by
somebody of the same gender who is Jewish;
2. With rare exceptions (such as the Sabbath, certain religious holidays or awaiting arrival of
dignitaries), burial must be accomplished by sundown of the following day. Burial must take
place as soon as possible following death. To delay burial is permissible only for the honor of
the deceased, such as awaiting the arrival of close relatives from distant points or if the Sabbath
or a holy day intervenes.
3. The body must be properly washed and dressed in prescribed burial attire by Jewish
community members who are certified in those procedures, and other Jews cannot touch the
body;
4. A plain wooden coffin held together with wooden pegs (i.e. no nails/screws) must be
used;
5. Burial must be in Jewish owned ground (e.g. a Jewish cemetery);
6. The burial service has its own specific liturgy and procedures that must be conducted by
somebody who is Jewish and qualified to perform them, preferably a rabbi; and
7. Personal behaviour in the room of the deceased should be consonant with the highest degree
of respect.

91
8. Generally, the best way to handle the death of somebody who is actually Jewish is to
immediately contact a Jewish chaplain or local synagogue.
9. Cremation is forbidden.
10. Caring for the dead, preparing them for burial, watching over them, and participating in the
burial are all important religious tasks.
11. Tearing a garment is the religiously proper way to express grief for the dead.
Pre-Burial & Burial Rituals in Judaism

1. Rending of the Garments ("Keriah"). First-degree relatives (i.e., the children, siblings,
spouse and parents of the deceased) are obligated to express their pain and sorrow by tearing
their clothes over their hearts. This is usually done at the beginning of the funeral service.
2. Body Cleansing (‘Taharah’). This is a ritual cleansing process in which the body is cleaned
and groomed, and water is ritually poured over it. The cleansing is an acknowledgement of the
life which once resided in the body. The body of the deceased is ritually purified in preparation
for this next phase of its existence. After the purification, the deceased is dressed in special
white clothes (called tachrichim), signifying purity and holiness.
3. The Eulogy ("Hesped") involves: a) speaking of the good that the deceased was and did,
so we should feel the extent of our loss) "let the living take to heart" (Ecclesiastes 7:2)--the
lessons we should learn from the deceased and emulate in our lives. These words may be
spoken by the officiating rabbi and/or anyone who knew the person.
4. Escorting the Deceased ("Lavayah") - Traditionally the coffin or bier was carried on the
shoulders all the way to the cemetery. The family and community would follow in a procession
to accord honor and comfort to the deceased.
The Hebrew word levayah also indicates "joining" and "bonding." Both the living and the
deceased remain bonded living souls despite death. By participating in the levayah Jewish
people provide comfort to the soul as it undergoes the very difficult transition from one life to
another.
5. The Chevra Kadisha (Holy Society). Every Jewish community has a Chevra Kadishah i.e.,
"Holy Society" of dedicated men and women who are committed to ensuring that every Jew
who passes on is accorded a proper Jewish burial. The preparation and interment (burial) of the
body should be entrusted to the local Chevra Kadishah. They will conduct the Taharah
(cleansing of the body), dress the deceased in the tachrichim, and otherwise ensure that the
burial is conducted in accordance with Jewish tradition.
6. Jewish Burial ("Kevurah"). A Jew should be buried only among fellow Jews, in a
Jewish cemetery. Jewish tradition regards it as a matter of great importance that only fellow
Jews should handle the body of a deceased Jew, carry or wheel the coffin, place the coffin in
the earth and fill in the grave.

92
The body is returned to the earth that is its source. This is the Jewish final act of caring, and it
is considered a great mitzvah to physically participate in the burial. Ideally, the whole grave
should be filled in, by hand, by fellow Jews. Where this is not possible, at least the coffin should
be completely covered with earth.
Jewish Phases of Mourning or Mourning Rites

There are five stages to the mourning process:
1) Aninut, pre-burial mourning.
2-3) Shivah, a seven-day period following the burial; within the Shivah, the first three days are
characterized by a more intense degree of mourning.
4) Shloshim, the 30-day mourning period.
5) The First Year (observed only by the children of the deceased).
Who Mourns:
The laws of mourning described below mainly applies to the first seven close relatives
of the deceased: son or daughter, brother or sister, father or mother, and spouse
(husband or wife).
The other relatives and friends form the more outer circle of mourning, offer support
and comfort to the primary mourners.
Jewish mourning practices can be broken into several periods of decreasing intensity.
These mourning periods allow the full expression of grief, while discouraging excesses
of grief and allowing the mourner to gradually return to a normal life.
1. Initial Expression (Keriyah)
When a close relative (parent, sibling, spouse or child) first hears of the death of a
relative, it is traditional to express the initial grief by tearing one's clothing. The tear
is made over the heart if the deceased is a parent, or over the right side of the chest for
other relatives.
This tearing of the clothing is referred to as keriyah (i.e. "tearing"). The mourner recites
the blessing describing God as "the true Judge," an acceptance of God's taking of the
life of a relative.
2. Aninut (Intense grief and mourning):
The first, most intense period of mourning is the period between the death and the
burial. This period, called aninut, is characterized by a distressing paralyzing grief.
During this period, the closest relatives are mainly concerned with the funeral and burial
arrangements such that they are absolved (excused) by Torah law from the observance
of all mitzvot requiring action (praying, sacrifices etc.). During this time, the mourners
are exempt from all positive commandments ("thou shalts"), because the preparations
take first priority. This period usually lasts a day or two; Judaism requires prompt
burial.

93
At this point it is not allowed to comfort the mourner during the time that his deceased
is not yet buried. It is because the grief is too intense for any effort at consolation. It is
a time to simply be with the mourner and offer practical assistance, rather than words
of consolation. It is a time of silence, not words.
During this aninut period, the family should be left alone and allowed the full
expression of grief. Condolence calls or visits should not be made during this time.
3. The Shivah (comfort and consolation)
The next period of mourning is known as shivah (seven, because it lasts seven days).
Shivah is observed by parents, children, spouses and siblings of the deceased,
preferably all together in the deceased's home.
Shiva begins on the day of burial and continues until the morning of the seventh
day after burial. The distinguishing feature of the Shivah is that the mourners take an
almost complete break from the routines and involvements of everyday life to focus
exclusively on the memory of the departed and the manner in which they will honor
him or her in their lives, and receive consolation from their extended family, friends,
and the community.
The basic practices of the Shivah are as follows:

a. Condolence Meal (se’udat havra’ah): When the mourners arrive home from the
cemetery following the burial, they are given a special meal of condolence traditionally,
ring shaped bread and hard-boiled eggs, whose round shape is symbolic of the cycle of life.
After the burial, a close relative, near neighbour or friend prepares the first meal for the
mourners, the meal of condolence. The meal is for the family only, not for visitors. After
this time, condolence calls are permitted.
b. The House of Mourning (Shivah week): For the entire week of the Shivah, the
mourners remain in the house of mourning, and their relatives, friends and members of the
community come to fulfil the mitzvah of consoling the mourner and participate in prayers,
Torah study, the giving of charity and other mitzvot performed in the merit of the departed.
A mourner recites a special prayer called Kaddish at every daily service for a period of 11
months. Kaddish is recited only in the presence of a quorum of 10 Jewish males over the
age of 13.
It is best to do shivah in the home of the deceased, so that the prayers and good deeds
performed in his or her merit take place in his or her "place" and environment.
c. Working and Conducting Business: One of the most fundamental laws of Jewish
mourning (over three thousand years old, and later recorded by the prophet Ezekiel), is the
prohibition of working and doing business during Shivah.
d. Consoling the Bereaved (making a "Shivah Call"): It is a great mitzvah to console the
bereaved. This is done by visiting the mourner in the house of mourning during Shivah,
talking about the life and deeds of the person being mourned, participating in the prayers
and other activities done in merit of the departed, or simply being there for the mourner.
Before leaving, the visitors extend the traditional words of consolation to the

94
mourners: "May God comfort you, together with all mourners of Zion and Jerusalem."
Mourners are there to be supportive, to visit, to listen, but not to place a burden by expecting
false joy and plastic smiles from the bereaved. No mourner should, God forbid, feel obliged
to put on a "nice face" for others.
d. Daily Minyan. A minyan (prayer quorum/group) should gather for the three daily
prayers in the house of mourning, so that the mourners can participate in a communal
prayer service and recite the Kaddish. A Torah Scroll should be borrowed, for use on days
on which the Torah is read. If no minyan can be assembled, the mourners should leave the
house of mourning to attend services with the congregation.
e. Memorial Candles. Candles should be kindled in the house of mourning in memory of
the deceased, as attesting or testifying to the presence of the "candle of G-d [that is] the
soul of man" (Proverbs 20:27). The candles are kindled upon returning from the cemetery
and kept burning for the entire seven-day period of Shiva. According to the Kabbalah, five
candles should be lit, representing the five levels of the soul. (Special Shivah candles are
usually provided by the funeral director.)
f. Covering the Mirrors. It is a time-honoured tradition to cover the mirrors and pictures
in the house of mourning from the moment of death to the end of Shivah. While the custom
is of uncertain origin, its practice is appropriate to the pattern of mourning (see "Leather
Shoes" below).
g. "Sitting" Shivah: It is an ancient Jewish tradition that mourners, during Shivah, do not
sit upon chairs of normal height, but rather on low stools.
h. Leather Shoes: The mourner forgoes the comfort of leather shoes during Shivah. The
less quality shoes of bereavement are symbolic of a disregard of vanity and comfort in order
to better to concentrate on the deeper meaning of life.
i. Grooming: The mourner does not shave or cut his hair, nor does he bathe or shower for
pleasure, during Shivah. Laundering or wearing freshly laundered clothes is also proscribed
(prohibited), as is the acquisition or wearing of new clothes (if the only clothes available
are soiled, they may be washed). The mourner wears the torn garment on which he or she
performed the k'riah throughout the Shivah.
j. Marital Relations: Mourners refrain from marital relations during Shivah.
k. Music or Entertainment: Mourners do not enjoy the sound of music, or any other forms
of amusement or entertainment.
l. Torah Study: The study of Torah is not permitted during Shivah, for it is considered a
source of profound delight. As the Bible itself expresses it, "The laws of God are righteous
and rejoice the heart." However, the mourner is permitted to read the laws of mourning and
study books on ethical behaviour and other parts of Torah that are of a non-joyous nature.
m. Shabbat: During Shabbat (Sabbath), all public displays of mourning are suspended.
Shortly before the holy day begins, the mourners bathe and put on their Shabbat clothes.

95
On Shabbat, they may also leave the house of mourning to attend services and recite the
Kaddish in the synagogue.
n. "Getting Up" from the Shivah. Shivah ends on the morning of the seventh day after
burial (with the day of the burial counting as the first day), immediately following the
morning service. Those present extend condolences, and the mourners rise from their week
of mourning to resume the normalcy of everyday life.
D. The Sheloshim (30 day) and the First Year:

Even as the mourner resumes his or her everyday routine after the Shivah, certain
mourning practices, such as not purchasing or wearing new clothes, cutting one's hair,
enjoying music or other form of entertainment, and participating in joyous events
(weddings, etc.), are continued for a period of thirty days (beginning from the day of
the burial).
In the case of a person mourning the passing of a parent, these mourning practices
extend for a full year. (Regarding the cutting of the hair, the law provides for the
principle of "social reproach." This means that those in mourning for a parent may cut
their hair after 30 days at the first instance of even mild reproach or criticism by friends
or neighbours. Immediately after this social reproach, the mourner is permitted to take
a haircut.)
E. Death Anniversary (Yahrzeit). Yahrzeit refers to the anniversary of the day of death
according to the Jewish calendar. Loved ones light a special memorial candle on the eve
of the Yahrzeit, to burn undisturbed for 24 hours. These candles are available from
appropriate vendors. Yahrzeit candles can be lit only in the Chapel area, not in the housing
units.
It is a day set aside to contemplate the quality and lifestyle of the deceased, and to attempt
to emulate the deceased’s finer qualities.
Yahrzeit is particularly suited for personal fasting, giving charity, performing acts of
kindness, praying, and studying Torah. It may be observed for any relative or friend,
although the observance is meant primarily for parents.

96
CONCEPT OF HEALTH AND WELL-BEING IN JUDAISM

Introduction
Traditional Jewish thought suggests that we must keep our bodies well for the sake of spiritual
pursuits and in order to fulfill mitzvot, commandments.
 Various practices outlined in the Torah, Maimonides and Talmud that have health
advantages. Jewish dietary laws are not laid down as health laws, but religious laws,
even though many of them have a role in illness prevention.
 The one commentator who provided more advice on these matters than any other
was Maimonides, also known as The Rambam (1135-1204). The Rambam's fourth
chapter is devoted almost entirely to health issues. The Torah enjoins us to care for
our health, then the Rambam elaborates on what he considers a healthy lifestyle.
 Maimonides said 800 years ago in the Mishna Torah that one should only eat until one's
stomach is three quarters full. Eating to excess, and high cholesterol foods are unhealthy
regardless of whether they are kosher or not.
Rambam's recommendations;
[1] Having a healthy and whole body is integral to Divine service. It is impossible to
understand or know anything (about the Creator) when one is sick, one must stay far
from things which destroy the body and familiarise himself to things which preserve
one's health.
One should eat only when he is hungry and drink only when he's thirsty. He also should
not delay urination or defecation i.e. 'he should not delay his holes') even one minute.
Rather, whenever one needs to urinate or defecate, he should go immediately.
[2] One should not eat until his stomach is full but should rather eat around a quarter
less than his fill. One should not drink water during his meal, but only a little mixed
with wine. And when his food begins to be digested in his innards (intestines) he should
drink that which he needs. And one should not drink excessively even when his food is
digested. One should not eat until he checks himself well that he doesn't need the
bathroom.
One should not eat until he has first walked before his meal until his body begins to
warm. Alternatively, he should do work or tire himself in some other way. The rule of
the matter is that one should exert (or 'afflict') his body and tire himself the entire
morning until his body begins to warm.

97
He should then relax a little until he recovers and then eat. If he bathes in warm water
after his exertion, that is good. He should then wait a little and eat.
[3] Whenever a person eats he should sit in his place or lean on his left [side]. The
Talmud considered it essential that people lean on their left side rather than their right
in order to ensure their food would go down the correct passageway.
A person should not walk, ride, exert himself, shake/agitate his body, or stroll until his
food is consumed. Anyone who strolls or exerts himself after his meal [risks] bringing
upon himself serious illness.
[4] A day and night together lasts 24 hours. It is sufficient that a person sleeps one third
of that time, which is eight hours. It should be at the end of the night so that there will
be from the beginning of his sleep till sunrise eight hours. One will then be found to
rise from his bed before sunrise.
[5] A person should not sleep on his front ('face') or his back ('the back of his neck'),
but rather on his side, at the start of the night on his left side and at the end on his right.
He should not sleep right after eating, but should wait three or four hours. One should
not sleep during the day.
[6] Foods which loosen the bowels, such as grapes, figs, berries, pears, melons, the
insides of gourds and the insides of cucumbers, one should eat at the start of his meal.
He should not mix them with his food, but should wait a bit till they leave his upper
stomach and then eat his food. And foods which tighten the bowels e.g. apples, one
should eat right after his meal. He should not consume them in too large quantities.
[7] If a person wants to eat chicken and meat together, he should eat the chicken first.
Likewise regarding eggs and chicken, he should eat the eggs first. Meat of small
animals (sheep and goat) and large animals (cattle): he should eat the small animals
first. One should always begin with the lighter food and finish with the heavier.
[8] In the summer a person should eat cold foods, should not spice his food too heavily
(lit., 'should not increase [his intake of] spices'), and should consume vinegar. During
the rainy season a person should eat hot foods, increase his [intake of] spices, and eat a
little mustard.
[9]

98
Causes of illness in Judaism
 Sickness was a result of evil spirits attacks. Psalm 91 mentions ‘plague’ and
‘pestilence’ attacking victims, Leviticus 16 describes Azalel as a desert demon to
whom the high priest annually sends the sins of Israel on the Feast of Yom Kippur.
 or that God sent sickness as a punishment Ps 39:10-11.
 A person must refrain from actions that cause illness and instead work on leading a
healthy life. Thus, excessive drinking, smoking, the abuse of drugs, or the eating of
harmful foods are forbidden. A Jew must aggressively pursue medical treatment
when ill.
 Drinking Contaminated Water - In public health, it was forbidden to drink water
which flowed through a filthy place.
 Consuming wrong kinds of food - Jefferson posits that among Jews there are three
categories of food namely, kosher, that is, permitted food; trefah, that is, forbidden
foods and kashrut, that is, foods not eaten at all. It is the responsibility of a Jewish
housewife to safeguard the religious purity of the home and to make sure that the
food eaten is Kosher (clean according to Jewish dietary laws).
 Contaminated food - Jews were also directed to prepare foods that were fresh and
clean, and not to live in a town where there were no vegetable gardens.
 Unhygienic practices - Cleanliness, bathing, proper nutrition and isolation of
infected patients was advised.
 The Talmudists recognized that unhygienic conditions, dampness and insufficient
sunshine were major factors contributing to illness.
 Eating of unripened fruit was also declared a health hazard.
 The Rambam even dealt with the matter of constipation and holding back bowel
movement, a practice which he considered unhealthy.
Kashrut: Jewish Dietary Laws
Kashrut is the body of Jewish law dealing with what foods we can and cannot eat
and how those foods must be prepared and eaten. "Kashrut" comes from the
Hebrew root Kaf-Shin-Resh, meaning fit, proper or correct. It is the same root as
the more commonly known word "kosher," which describes food that meets these
standards. The word "kosher" can also be used, and often is used, to describe ritual

99
objects that are made in accordance with Jewish law and are fit for ritual use.
General Rules
Although the details of kashrut are extensive, the laws all derive from a few fairly
simple, straightforward rules:
1. Certain animals may not be eaten at all. This restriction includes the flesh,
organs, eggs and milk of the forbidden animals.
2. Of the animals that may be eaten, the birds and mammals must be killed in
accordance with Jewish law.
3. All blood must be drained from the meat or broiled out of it before it is
eaten.
4. Certain parts of permitted animals may not be eaten.
5. Meat (the flesh of birds and mammals) cannot be eaten with dairy. Fish,
eggs, fruits, vegetables and grains can be eaten with either meat or dairy.
(According to some views, fish may not be eaten with meat).
6. Utensils that have come into contact with meat may not be used with dairy,
and vice versa. Utensils that have come into contact with non-kosher food
may not be used with kosher food. This applies only where the contact
occurred while the food was hot.
7. Grape products made by non-Jews may not be eaten.
What Foods Are Kosher?
■ All fresh vegetables and fruits are kosher.
■ Only meats derived from split-hoofed and cud-chewing animals qualify. In effect,
this excludes beasts of prey, swine, insects, rodents, and reptiles.
■ Among fish and seafood, only those with fins and scales are kosher. This

100
eliminates shellfish – lobsters, shrimp, oysters, clams, mussels, scallops, etc.
■ Birds designated by the Torah as kosher are chicken, turkey, and ducks.
■ Birds of prey, such as eagles, vultures, falcons, hawks, and owls, are forbidden.
■ Insects are forbidden. It is traditional to examine fresh fruits and vegetables for
insects before serving.
Healing
 For wounds and external sores, they had many useful remedies which including
the famed balm of Gilead that Jeremiah mentions in his oracles Jeh 8:22.
 For most of the illnesses, one might get help from a doctor, but the primary
source of healing would be God. Doctors were accepted in Judaism but the
ultimate power over life, sickness, and death lies in the hands of Yahweh.
 The Psalms are filled with reference to the suffering of the individual who seeks
God’s healing Ps 32, 38, 88, 99 and the prayer of Hezekiah in Isaiah 38.
 They resorted to prayer, begging God for mercy and healing e.g. Abraham Gen
20, Moses prayed for Miriam Nu 12, Elisha and Naaman 2Kings 5.
 Old age was seen as a time of failing strength with loss of eyesight, inability to
eat, and growing weaknesses.

101
SICKNESS AND HEALING

Judaism believes that matters of illness and healing are interconnected to the body, mind
and the spirit.
Types of diseases common in the Jewish Community, fevers of several kinds, dysentery,
leprosy, intestinal worms, plague, nervous diseases such as paralysis and epilepsy, insanity,
ophthalmia, and skin diseases are among the commonest and will be described under their
several names.
Scabs and boils
 Sickness as result of physical injury e.g. 1 kings 1;2
 Sore disease attacking the knees and legs Dt 28;35.
 Headaches or sunstroke disease such as the one which affected the widows’ son in the
days of Elisha 2 Kings 4:19
 Bites and stings of poisonous reptiles Numbers 21;6
 Disease of the intestines or bowels 2 Ch_21:18, 2Ch_21:19,
 Sickness as a curse for disobeying the law of God given to Moses, Dt 28:58ff
 Plague of leprosy was sent from God according to the Levitical Code of priesthood Lev
14:33ff
 Diseases sent from god as judgements Ps 107:17, Isa 3;17 David’s child 2Sa_12:15,
upon Gehazi 2Ki_5:27, Upon Jeroboam 2Ch_13:20, Upon Jehoram 2Ch_21:12-19,
Upon Uzziah, 2Ch_26:17-20
 Threatened as judgments, Lev_26:16; Deu_7:15; Deu_28:22; Deu_28:27-28;
Deu_28:35; Deu_29:22
To the pious Jew at all times God was the healer (Deu_32:39):
Healing of: From God
Exo_15:26; Exo_23:25; Deu_7:15; 2Ch_16:12; Psa_103:3; Psa_107:20
In answer to prayer: Of Hezekiah

2Ki_20:1-11; Isa_38:1-8, prayer of David Psa_21:4; Psa_116:3-8
Physicians employed for

2Ch_16:12; Jer_8:22;
Use of ointment Isa 1:6, Jer 8;22, 2 Kx 20;7
Being cheerful Prov 17:22,

102
WOMEN IN JUDAISM
Status of women in Judaism
The role of women in Judaism is determined by the Hebrew Bible, the Oral Law (the
corpus of rabbinic literature), by custom, and by non-religious cultural factors. Although
the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic literature mention various female role models, religious law
treats women differently in various circumstances.
The Old Testament presents both negative and positive images of women.
Negative Presentation of Women

J. R. Wegner asserts that in the study of Jewish writings, “we discover a system in which
woman's cultural image, social function and legal status combine to perpetuate patriarchal
norms that had already governed Jewish and surrounding cultures for many centuries”. The
Old Testament Jewish writings portray a negative attitude towards woman.
Relatively few women are mentioned in the Bible by name and role, suggesting that they
were rarely in the forefront of public life.
1. Women as Temptresses (Gen 3) - The story of the fall of humankind in Genesis 3 records
that Eve, the wife of Adam and the first woman on earth, is the temptress and originator of
evil in the world. Eve is viewed as the one who brings sin into the world, but Adam, who is
equally guilty of disobeying the command which he receives directly from God, is never
blamed for the fall of humankind and subsequent evils in the world. Eve is the source of all
evils, the originator of sin in the world. This negative understanding of the woman, particularly
Eve, is presented in the words of some prominent male scholars. The presentation of Eve as
temptress reflects the anti-female bias of Israelite men, including the Old Testament writers.
2. Women as harlots – a negative sexist language portrays women as ‘harlots’ or ‘concubines’

Proverbs 1-9. R.L Huni states that, the Hebrew terms for harlotry (zenuth) and harlot (zonah)
only refer to females. There is no male term for harlot in Hebrew. This shows the negative male
attitude towards female sexuality. “Harlotry” cannot be played by women alone without men,
but men are never described as harlots. Women alone cannot commit adultery without men.
Hosea a man of God married Gomer a harlot but he is presented in a positive sense unlike
Gomer (Hosea 1-3).
3. Solomon is portrayed having 700 wives and 300 concubines but was never blamed. Rather
it’s the wives who are portrayed in a negative sense and given the blame for turning away the
heart of Solomon from the true God.
4. The Uncleanliness of Motherhood and Menstrual taboo - the disqualification of female

persons from sacred activities at cultic centres stamps women as a separate and cultically
inferior entity.
women’s regular menstrual periods are regarded as `unclean’ rather than a blessing. Their
`unclean period’ lasts for seven days and everything they touch becomes unclean; women
remain ‘unclean’ until they are purified (Lev 12:2, Lev 12:5, Lev.15:19ff).

103
5. Bareness as a curse - Even when a woman is unfortunate to become barren, she is

considered as cursed by God. Sarah one of the great matriarch was barren such that she was
scorned by her maidservant Gen 11:30, Isaac had to intercede for Rebekah for the Lord to
remove the curse of barrenness Gen 25:21. Gen. 29:31 - 30:24 among the wives of Jacob,
Rachel the sister to Leah was also barren. See the story of Hannah and Peninnah 1 Samuel 1-
2.
6. The case laws in the Pentateuch also treats barrenness as a curse from God Ex 23:26 and
Dt 7:14. The barren man is not held in low esteem in the Jewish society.
7. Low status of woman as a sexual chattel. The Jewish women were treated as chattels that
is a form of property that can be transferred, inherited and assigned a price.
- The Jewish Mishnah divides women into two opposing categories: 1. dependent and 2.
autonomous. Each of these classes, in turn, breaks down into three subclasses defined by
who has control of the women's sexual and reproductive function.
- Dependant women include, the minor daughter, wife and levirate widow. Each woman is
legally controlled by the man who owns the sole right to use or profit from her biological
function: her father, husband, or brother-in-law as the case may be.
- Autonomous women: these are emancipated (i.e., adult unmarried) daughter, divorcee,
and regular widow. (In their legal entitlements and obligations, these three subgroups form
mirror images of their dependent counterparts.)
- For example, the above status is illustrated in cases involving the control of a woman's
sexual and reproductive function. Thus, a minor daughter's marriage is arranged by
her, while an adult daughter negotiates her own. Penalties for the rape of a minor accrue
to her father, but if she is of full age they go to the woman herself. These distinctions
reflect the fact that the minor daughter's biological function is the legal property of her
father while that of an adult daughter belongs to herself alone. As for wife and divorcee,
here too the rules follow ownership of sexuality.
- A woman's biological function is an economic asset, as a witness of the formalities for
transferring women from one man to another. An Israelite father technically sells his
daughter's virginity for bride-price, although by Mishnaic times it had become customary
to assign the bride-price (Exodus 22: 16ff) to the bride herself as part of her marriage deed.
- Authority over children - “The man may place his son under the Nazirite vow, but the
woman may not impose the Nazirite vow upon her son ... the man may sell his daughter,
but the woman may not sell her daughter; the man may betroth his daughter, but the woman
may not betroth her daughter.”
- A wife forfeits her marriage settlement if she violates Jewish law or custom, for instance,
by breaking the rules of menstrual separation or by being a "loudmouth" whose voice can
be heard by her neighbours when she speaks inside her house.
- The biblical law permits a suspicious husband to divorce his wife without actual witnesses
to her adultery (Numbers 5: 11-31). If he divorces her on suspicion, the Mishnah requires
two witnesses to state that he had warned her to stay away from the suspected lover
otherwise, she retains her right to collect her marriage settlement, because (like any other

104
Israelite) she may not be deprived of her property without due process (Deuteronomy 19:
15).
- Laws governing the ‘chained woman’ – the husband’s exclusive ownership of a wife's
sexuality informs the laws governing the "chained woman" whose husband either has
disappeared without trace or refuses to issue her a get (divorce decree). If such a woman
"remarries" without proof of widowhood or divorce, she suffers huge legal penalties (losing
all her rights in the first, genuine marriage as well as the second one). These penalties apply
even where the woman is innocent of moral wrong.
- Woman’s virginity - Laws concerning the loss of female virginity have no male equivalent.
The status of a dependant woman
- Divorce cases – the Jewish man has all the leverage to divorce a woman. The Mishnaic
law gives the wife no corresponding power to divorce her husband (a severe disadvantage
that wreaks social havoc for Jewish women to this day).
- The levirate widow, who figures as chattel in the automatic inheritance of her sexual
function by her late husband's brother, has no option unless this man chooses to release her.
- Property inheritance laws - Women generally did not own property except in the rare
case of inheriting land from a father who didn't bear sons. Even "in such cases, women
would be required to remarry within the tribe so as not to reduce its land holdings.
- Public prayer meetings - According to John Bowker (theologian), traditionally, Jewish
"men and women pray separately. This goes back to ancient times when women could go
only as far as the second court of the Temple."[4] The reason for this is so that the men do
not gaze at the women (which in itself can be a sin) and get distracted from their prayers.
- 7. Women in the Talmud - the Talmud also has many negative things to say about
women. Various rabbis at various times describe women as lazy, jealous, vain and
gluttonous, prone to gossip and particularly prone to the occult and witchcraft. Men are
repeatedly advised against associating with women, although this is usually because of
man's lust as it is because of any shortcoming in women. It is worth noting that the Talmud
also has negative things to say about men, frequently describing men as particularly prone
to lust and forbidden sexual desires.
Positive attitudes towards women in Judaism
- One scholar notes that, the role of women in traditional Judaism has been grossly
misrepresented and misunderstood. The position of women is not nearly as lowly as
many modern people think.
- However, despite low status of a woman as a sexual chattel, a Jewish woman has far
higher status in all other aspects of Mishnaic private law. Thus, a wife participates
in a reciprocal arrangement of matrimonial entitlements and obligations, performing
specified household chores and producing a requisite amount of cloth in return for
maintenance at a prescribed standard that befits her social class. The catalogue of
spouses' conjugal rights and duties treats intercourse as primarily the wife's right and
the husband's duty.
- Property transfer - Another interesting rule preserves the wife's title to property she
brings to the marriage and even her power of sale (though this requires her husband's

105
consent, because of his legal right to the earnings of her property). Likewise, a husband
cannot sell his wife's property without her consent.
- A wife can appoint agents to transact her business and can act as her husband's agent
to sell his goods.
- She even possesses a right of action against the husband, for she can petition the court
to compel a divorce for specified infringements of her rights. True, the husband alone
can execute the divorce; but the court will endorse draconian measures to secure his
compliance.
- Women depended on men economically - men had specific obligations they were
required to perform for their wives. These included the provision of clothing, food, and
sexual relations to their wives.
- Outstanding roles of women in the bible - the Old Testament presents quite a number
of stories of women who stand as role models for the rest of women in society. The
Matriarchs such as Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah, Miriam the prophetess,
Deborah the Judge, Huldah the prophetess, Abigail, who married David, Rahab, and
Esther. In the Biblical account, these women did not meet with opposition for their
positions and public presence.
- According to traditional Judaism, women are endowed with a greater degree of
intellect and reasoning ability (intuition, understanding, intelligence) than men. The
rabbis inferred this from the fact that woman was "built" (Gen. 2:22) rather than
"formed" (Gen. 2:7). It has been said that the matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and
Leah) were superior to the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) in prophesy.
- Women did not participate in the idolatry regarding the Golden Calf during the Exodus
period.
1. Role and Status of Miriam
Miriam means ‘prophetess’ or ‘lady’; the name points to Miriam as the sister of the
tribal leader. Miriam saved her brother Moses, Exodus 2:1-10. This well-known story
shows that the survival of the leader of the Exodus, Moses, depended on the courage
and ingenuity of one young woman, his sister Miriam. The song of Miriam, Exodus
15:20-21 is one of the oldest poetic songs in the Old Testament. It is an example of a
literary material devoted to celebrating military victories with triumphal poems.
Miriam’s death, Numbers 20:1-2. Miriam died in a waterless place in the wilderness,
but God subsequently caused water to appear there.
2. Deborah - Deborah means a ‘bee’ in Hebrew. It may also mean ‘spirited or fiery
woman’. When attacked, as her story illustrates, she could sting like a bee. Deborah, a
judge of Israel, summoned Barak (Judges 4:1-11, 5:1-18). When war and oppression
come, Deborah acted as a leader of the people. She chose the ablest military general
and told him what he must do. Deborah is the only woman judge mentioned in the Book
of Judges. The people of her time had no difficulty in accepting her as a judge. The
Song of Deborah (Judges 5) sums up all her victory as the judge of Israel at that time.
Deborah stands out from them for her wisdom, courage and faith in God in comparison
to other male judges.
3. Esther - Esther’s Jewish name is derived from the name of a tree ‘myrtle’ whose
leaves

106
only release some fragrance when they are crushed. It was only when her people were
in danger that her true heroism was unleashed. The story of Esther can be summed up
with the following: Vashti was banished, and Esther became Queen (Esther 1 & 2).
Queen Vashti refused to obey the orders of her husband King Ahasuerus, so he divorced
her and sought a new queen. This new queen was to be the most beautiful woman in
the land. A young Jewish girl, Esther, was chosen. Her uncle, Mordecai, overheard a
plot against the king, and warned him through Esther. Esther saved Mordecai from
Haman (Esther 3-8:14). Mordecai offended a high court official, who decided to kill
not only Mordecai but all the Jews in the Persian Empire. Esther pleaded with the king
at two banquets she gave. Mordecai was saved from death, and Haman was punished.
Esther saved the Jewish people of Persia (Esther 8:15-Esther 10).
4. Public religious roles - Women also had a role in ritual life. Women (as well as men)
were required to make a pilgrimage to the Temple in Jerusalem once a year (men each
of the three main festivals if they could) and offer the Passover sacrifice. They would
also do so on special occasions in their lives such as giving a todah ("thanksgiving")
offering after childbirth. Hence, they participated in many of the major public religious
roles that non-Levitical men could, though less often and on a somewhat smaller.
5. respect given to parents in the law - The Ten Commandments require respect for
both mother and father. Note that the father comes first in Ex. 20:12, but the mother
comes first in Lev. 19:3, and many traditional sources point out that this reversal is
intended to show that both parents are equally entitled to honor and reverence.
6. Jewish rabbis and status of their wives - Many rabbis over the centuries have been
known to consult their wives on matters of Jewish law relating to the woman's role,
such as laws of kashrut and women's cycles. The wife of a rabbi is referred to as a
rebbetzin, practically a title of her own, which should give some idea of her significance
in Jewish life.
7. The Proverbs model woman - Women had the right to buy, sell, and own property,
and make their own contracts, rights which women in Western countries (including
America) did not have until about 100 years ago. In fact, Proverbs 31:10-31, which is
read at Jewish weddings, speaks repeatedly of business acumen (skill or ability) as a
trait to be prized in women (v. 11, 13, 16, and 18 especially)
8. Women education - Women are discouraged from pursuing higher education or
religious pursuits, but this seems to be primarily because women who engage in such
pursuits might neglect their primary duties as wives and mothers. The rabbis are not
concerned that women are not spiritual enough; rather, they are concerned that women
might become too spiritually devoted.
5. The autonomous woman's legal status and level of personhood differs from that of
the dependent woman in that she controls every aspect of anything she finds, unlike the
minor daughter or wife, who must turn it over to father or husband. While a minor
daughter's earnings accrue to her father and those of a wife to her, an adult daughter
may keep whatever she makes.
- The autonomous woman can buy and sell without an obstacle, for no man has a claim
on her property.

107
- Her vows are not subject to revocation (reversal) by any man. She can bring suit for
damages or for the return of her marriage portion upon widowhood or, for the right to
sell part of her marriage portion still in the hands of her husband's heirs, or for
maintenance pending collection of her settlement.
- Despite the rule that women are incompetent as witnesses, the autonomous woman can
even testify to her right to the bride-price of virgins when arranging her marriage or
when recovering her marriage settlement on termination of the marriage.
- A woman is deemed as competent as a man to swear certain business-related oaths.
- The most significant power of the autonomous woman is her control over her sexual-
reproductive function, which belongs to no man and hence is hers to bestow. This
control enables her to negotiate (either personally or through her selected agent) with
the suitor of her choice.
- For the same reason, the Mishnah points out that a jealous husband cannot complain of
his wife's sexual conduct before betrothal or after divorce, since this gives him no
grounds for putting her to the ordeal nor can he restrict the future sexual relations of his
divorcee.
- As for the autonomous woman, on whom no man has a legal claim, nothing can ever
justify treating her as a legal chattel so long as she chooses to remain unattached.
- However, despite the above freedoms enjoyed by the autonomous woman in the private
areas., the Rules governing women in public domain are patriarchal in nature.
- The Mishnah systematically exclude women from the intellectual and spiritual forums
of Mishnaic culture. Women are exempted from the recitation of specified prayers and
the disqualification of women from leadership roles by applying a rule that persons not
bound by a particular law cannot validly perform it on behalf of persons who are so
obligated.
- Further prohibitions against women, include 1. objections to women's studying Torah
at all and by male fears of female sexuality both as a cause of cultic pollution and as a
distraction from men's serious business of serving God, 2. women are ultimately
barred from leadership roles in synagogue, study house and courthouse, 3. the
Mishnah even prohibits the formation of women's fellowship, thereby preventing
women from engaging together in Torah study. These laws deprive women of the most
intellectually and spiritually rewarding practices of traditional Judaism.
- Marriage and sexual rights - Women have the right to be consulted with regard to
their marriage. Marital sex is regarded as the woman's right, and not the man's. Men
do not have the right to beat or mistreat their wives.
- Rape cases - In cases of rape, in Judaism a woman is generally presumed not to have
consented to the intercourse, even if she enjoyed it, even if she consented after the
sexual act began and declined a rescue! Traditional Judaism recognizes that forced
sexual relations within the context of marriage are rape and are not permitted.
- In traditional Judaism, the primary role of a woman is as wife and mother, keeper of
the household. However, Judaism has great respect for the importance of that role and
the spiritual influence that the woman has over her family. The Talmud says that when
a pious man marries a wicked woman, the man becomes wicked, but when a wicked
man marries a pious woman, the man becomes pious.

108
- Women and positive commandments - Women are exempted from all positive
commandments ("thou shalts" as opposed to "thou shalt nots") that are time-related
(that is, commandments that must be performed at a specific time of the day or year),
because the woman's duties as wife and mother are so important that they cannot be
postponed to fulfil a commandment. For e.g. a woman cannot be expected to just drop
a crying baby when the time comes to perform a commandment.

109
LAND TENURE IN JUDAISM/JUDAISM AND THE LAND QUESTION
 The land of Israel is central to Judaism. Land tenure in Judaism refer to the laws
governing ownership and occupation of land.
 The idea of Jewish land tenure backdates to the Abrahamic covenant. God’s covenant
with Abraham includes a promise that Abraham’s descendants will inherit the area from
the river of Egypt to the Euphrates. Nonetheless, Israel’s tenancy in the Land is
conditional. the story of Abraham begins when God tells him to leave his homeland,
promising Abraham and his descendants a new home in the land of Canaan. (Gen. 12).
This is the land now known as Israel, named after Abraham's grandson, whose
descendants are the Jewish people.
 The land is often referred to as the Promised Land because of God's repeated promise
(Gen. 12:7, 13:15, 15:18, 17:8) to give the land to the descendants of Abraham. The
land is described repeatedly in the Torah as a good land and "a land flowing with milk
and honey" (e.g., Ex. 3:8)
 M.J.L Staff purports that, The Land is a gift to the Israelites with the provision that they
live up to certain moral and religious standards (Leviticus 18:26). Exile is threatened if
these conditions are not met (Leviticus 26:32).
Summary of the land tenure system in Judaism
 Ultimately, the land belonged to Yahweh (Leviticus 25:23) but was owned and
managed by different families within various tribes. God’s ownership of the land comes
to the forefront in the assignment of the sacred dues (taxes) and in the land-rest
regulations (laws).
 Every Israelite is required to bring to Yahweh the first-fruits of the harvest and the tithe
of all his produce or income. Voluntary offerings also are required.
 Of special interest are the land-rest laws, which are unique to Israel. Every seventh year
and every fiftieth year the Israelites are to allow their land to lie fallow; and the poor,
the strangers, and the animals are to be allowed to eat whatever voluntary cops appear.
The seventh year is the Sabbath year and the fiftieth the year of jubilee.
 Land, once possessed, was regarded as the family heritage, and to be passed from one
generation to the next.
 The land could be sold, but not ‘permanently’.

110
 The seller could always redeem or buy back the land he sold Lev 25:23-24.
 All land not redeemed went back to the original owner at the Jubilee. Land is to be
returned to the person, or his rightful heirs or family, that originally possessed the
land. Lev. 25:10, 13-17, 28, 31, 33-34.
 Thus the land was not really sold but rather only leased for a time-the longest term
would be fifty years.
 The price of the land sold or lease of land would be according to the number of years
left until the Jubilee.
 No taxes appear to have been levied against land. Such taxes could possibly dispossess
a man of his land or inheritance.
 The law of God emphasizes restitution for trespasses or damages done to one's land
or crops (Exod. 22:5). If one caused a fire which destroyed another's property, he must
make full restitution for it (Exod. 22:6).
 If one becomes poor and is unable to redeem his land, a kinsman of his may redeem for
him what he had sold. Lev. 25:25; Ruth 4:3-4; Jer. 32:7.
 If one has no means by which to pay the purchaser of his property the redemption
money, then what was sold shall remain in the hand of him who bought it until the Year
of Jubilee. Lev. 25:28.
 Transfer of land to be by signed through a deed in the presence of witnesses. Jer. 32:8-
12.
 Deeds to land are to be preserved as a record. Jer. 32:14.
 Silver used to buy land. Gen. 23:13-16; Josh. 24:32; Jer. 32:9.
 Do not to remove established landmarks and boundaries. Deut 19:14; Deut 27:17; Job
24:2 Prov. 22:28; Prov. 23:10.
 You should take appropriate precautions of any dangerous situation on your land which
might cause damage or injury to other persons or their property.Exod. 21:33-34; Deut
22:8.
 Restitution is required for damage done to one's land or crops. Exod. 22:5-6.
Land ownership among the Jewish people
Though the Israelites will reside in the Land, God retains ownership. This is highlighted in
the many agricultural laws commanded to the Israelites in the Torah e.g.

111
1. The requirement to leave the corner of one’s field for the poor (pe’ah),
abstain from eating the fruits of a new tree (orlah), and;
2. let the land lie fallow every seventh year (shemitta)–among other similar
laws–all stress God’s right to divvy out produce as God sees fit.
3. Additionally, all sales and transfers of land were revoked in the Jubilee
year, a rule that emphasized that only God has the power to distribute the
Land permanently.
Transference of ownership
As expressed theoretically in the Jewish law of the Old Testament, the only
transference of property in ancient Israel should be through inheritance. Every
Israelite family was allocated a plot of land at the original apportionment, as epressed
in the time of Moses and Joshua (Nm. 26:52–54, 33:54; Jos. 13–22).
It was believed that this ancestral piece of land should remain, if not in the family's
possession, then at least in the possession of the clan. Thus there really should be no
sale of land. Theological justification for this point of view is given in Leviticus : "But
the land must not be sold beyond reclaim, for the land is Mine; you are but strangers
resident with Me" (Lv. 25:23).RSV Quotation. This view regards God as owner of all
property and the Israelites as only temporary tenants who may not buy or sell land.
The duty of redemption and the institution of the Jubilee year (for both, see below)
tend to corroborate this point of view, as does the complete absence in the Bible of
laws concerning the renting of property.
Sale of land
The violation of the Hebrew law on land tenure was evident in monarchical times (as
can be gathered from Naboth's response to Ahab in 1 Kings 21:3). It is argued that
the very emergence of the monarchy and the growth of the cities led to societal
changes as far as land ownership was concerned.
Because of debt, many small farmers were forced to sell their farms to a new landed
aristocracy. The situation became so serious that by the time of the eighth century the
old Israelite society based on the small farmer had been destroyed. This was the
situation that attracted the opposition of the prophets who denounced the various
forms of injustice, oppression and land-grabbing practices of the new aristocracy.

112
Add RSV Text, For example, Isaiah complains, "Ah, those who add house to house
and join field to field, till there is room for none but you to dwell in the land!" (Is.
5:8). Similarly, Micah condemns those who "covet fields, and seize them; houses and
they take them away. They defraud men of their homes, and people of their land" (Mi.
2:2).
Contracts of sale of land
The Bible records a number of property transactions, including Jacob's purchase of

land at Shechem (Gn. 33:18–20), David's purchase of the threshing floor from
Araunah (2 Sm. 24:24), Omri's purchase of the hill of Samaria, site of his future
capital, from Shemer (1 Kgs. 16:24), and Boaz's purchase of a field from Naomi (Ru.
4:9). Two transactions are recorded in detail: when Abraham purchases the Cave of
Machpelah (Gn. 23:3–20) and when Jeremiah, fulfilling his duty as near kinsman,
redeems (purchases) the land in Anathoth from his impoverished cousin Hanamel
(Jer. 32:6–15).
Redemption of Hereditary Land and the Jubilee Year
In accordance with the principle, expressed above, of the inalienability of land, a

person's patrimony should ideally never be sold. However, should a man, due to
economic straits, have to sell his land, then the law provides relief for its retrieval in
two ways. First, the debtors nearest family member is given the option of first refusal
to the property (redemption). Second, in the absence of a family redeemer, the
property ultimately reverts back to the debtor in the Jubilee year.
Redemption of land
Among the Israelites, the redemption of property from poverty stricken or poor family
members was regarded as both a moral obligation and as form of social responsibility.
(Lv. 25:25–34).
Two examples in the Bible of family members redeeming property (already

mentioned) are Jeremiah redeeming his cousin's field at Anathoth (Jer. 32:6–9) and
Boaz redeeming the field belonging to Naomi (Ru. 4:1–10).
Note that in these cases the land is not restored to the poor kinsman but becomes the
property of the redeemers.

113
However, under the laws of the Jubilee, the land is restored back to the original owner.
In both cases, the clan is protected from the alienation (loss) of the i.e. total loss of
the land property.
The law of Jubilee
The law of the Jubilee year is set out in Leviticus 25. It contains three regulations
concerning property;
1. Anybody who is forced to sell ancestral lands may reclaim them every fiftieth
year, pointing to the principle that land cannot be permanently sold (Lv. 25:10,
25:13, 25:28).
2. Because land cannot be permanently sold, what can be sold is the equivalent
value of expected crop yields (Lv. 25:15–16). As a result every sale of land
becomes a kind of lease for a number of years before the next Jubilee.
3. Town houses, other than those belonging to Levites, are not subject to the
Jubilee law. If they are not redeemed within one year of purchase, then the
seller can never reclaim them (Lv. 25:29–30).
Rights of Inheritance
The norm in ancient Israel was that a man's land property was inherited by his sons,
the firstborn receiving a double share (Dt. 21:15–17). In the event that a man had no
sons, the line of inheritance was transferred through a scale of family members: from
daughters to brothers to uncles and, ultimately, to the nearest kinsman of the deceased
(Nm. 27:8–11).
Rights of daughters to land ownership
According to Numbers 27:1–11, daughters originally were not eligible to inherit any
part of the family estate. Only after the case of the daughters of Zelophehad was
provision made for daughters to inherit on a limited basis: They could inherit
providing the deceased had no sons (Nm. 27:8) and they married within the clan, so
that the patrimony would not be transferred to another tribe (Nm. 36:6–9).
Rights of widows

114
As already indicated, the line of inheritance in Numbers makes no provision for the
widow, not even for the right of her husband's property. This omission is usually
explained by the fact that it was passed on to the eldest son, who receives a large
share of the estate, to provide for his mother and the unmarried female members of
the family. It is also pointed out that widows, although not specifically mentioned in
the line of inheritance, were provided with some degree of protection in the laws
concerning the levirate.
The laws of the levirate state that should a man die without leaving a son, the brother
of the deceased must marry the widow. The first child of this marriage is to be
considered the heir of the deceased (Dt. 25:6). By this device, the estate of the
deceased would be preserved, because his inheritance would pass to the child.
However, there are indications that these laws were not widely observed (e.g., in the
story of Judah and Tamar; see Gn. 38), and the penalties for non-observance were
insignificant (Dt. 25:7–10, Ru. 4:7–8).

Judaism Notes Edited 1 1 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Judaism Notes Edited 1 1 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 1

Categories of Covenants in the Old Testament

1. Noahic Covenant (covenant with creation).

1. Prohibitions against murder and the consumption of blood (9:4-6).

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 2

God will make Abraham a great nation Genesis 12.2

God will bless Abraham Genesis 12.2; 22.17

God will make Abraham’s name great Genesis 12.2

God will make Abraham a father of many nations Genesis 17.4-6

God will establish this covenant forever Genesis 17.7

Circumcision was the sign of the covenant Genesis 17.10-14

Established through the line of Isaac/Jacob, not Ishmael Genesis 17.19-21;

Abraham’s seed will overcome its enemies Genesis 22.17

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 3

3. The Mosaic Covenant (Sinai Covenant)

4. Palestinian or land Covenant

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 4

6. The New Covenant

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 5

THE JEWISH LAW

Apodictic Law. These laws are given in detail on Ex 19-50.

Casuistic, or case, law, which contains a conditional statement and a type of

offence and then third the consequence/result.

Casuistry is reasoning used to resolve moral problems

to have been borrowed from the surrounding nations.

interpretation in specific contexts.

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 6

with bodily injuries, and 22:1-15 with property losses.

Apodictic law, or "absolute law," gives laws in unconditional commands and

Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:2-17; Deut. 5:6-21).

have divine sanction.

parallels from the ANE.

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 7

application in a court, but declares a general principle.

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 8

ORIGINS OF PROPHECY IN ISRAEL

Definition of the prophecy .

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 9

Casualty law/curse laws

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 11

 Prophecy in Israel is also believed to be a borrowed phenomenon. This is evidence

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 12

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 13

 There are two theories:

a) Prophecy as a borrowed phenomenon and

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 14

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 15

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 16

THE LEGEND OF WEN AMON

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 17

prophetic feature, the problem is we do not have a clearly developed definition of

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 18

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 19

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 20

POLITICAL OR SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 21

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 22

REASONS FOR EMERGENCE OF PROPHECY

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 23

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 24

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 25

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 26

SIMOYI Z. J. zjsimoyi@gmail.com 0772 302 556 Page 27