THE CALL OF THE MAJOR PROPHETS:

ISAIAH (6:1-10), JEREMIAH (1:4-10), AND EZEKIEL (1:1-3:27)

SYNTAX, NARRATIVE, AND THEOLOGY

A Dissertation Proposal

Presented to

Loyola School of Theology

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements of the Degree

Doctorate in Sacred Theology (S.Th.D.)

Biblical Theology

By

Sr. Nimfa Ebora, PDDM

Prepared Under the Supervision of

Fr. Emeterio Chaparro Lillo, CMF, Ph.D.

31 March 2023
 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations ……………………………………………………………………… 3
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… 4
Review of Relevant Literature ………..…………………………………………………… 4
The Call of the Major Prophets and the Call Narrative Genre ………..…………… 5
Call Narrative Before the Age of Form Criticism ….……………………………… 8
Call Narrative in the Age of Form Criticism ……………………………………… 9
Contemporary Research on the Call of the Major Prophets ………………………11
Earlier Research on Call of the Major Prophets …………………………………13
Jeremiah ………………………………………………………………… 13
Isaiah ……………………..………………………………………………14
Ezekiel ……………………………………………………………………15
Thematic Unity of the Call of the Major Prophets ……………………….16
A Call for a Fresh Method and Perspective ……….……………………………… 16
Statement of the Problem ……………………………………………………… 16
Morphology and Syntax ………………………………………………………….. 18
Narrative Analysis …………………………………………………………………18
Theology ………………………………………………………………………….. 19
Pastoral Implications ………………………………………………………………19
Significance of the Study …………..……………………………………………………… 19
Methodology ……………………………………………………………………………… 21
Scope and Limitation of the Study……………….………………………………………… 22
Definition of Key Terms …………………………………………………………………… 24
General Terminologies …………………………………………………………… 25
Morphosyntactic Terms ……………………….………………………………….. 26
Narrative Analysis Terms ………………………………………………………… 29
Bibliography ……………………………………………………………………… 31
 3

ABBREVIATIONS

AYB The Anchor Yale Bible

BZ Biblische Zeitschrift
FOTL The Forms of Old Testament Literature
FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments
IBC Interpretation, A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching
ITQ Irish Theological Quarterly
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JBQ Jewish Bible Quarterly
JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament
JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series
LASBF Liber Annuus Studium Biblicum Franciscanum
LHB/OTS Library of Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament Studies
OT Old Testament
ST Scripta Theologica
SHBC The Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary
TLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung
VE Verbum et Ecclesia
VT Vetus Testamentum
VTSup Vetus Testamentum, Supplements
WMANT Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament
WBC Westminster Bible Companion
ZAW Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft
 4

INTRODUCTION

Vocation stories are one of the most loved stories in the Church. Stories of great saints

would never be complete without any reference to their experiences of encounter with God

which led them to the perception of their call and eventually to a life of commitment. Call

narratives in the Scriptures have been a source of inspiration to those who are called. These

stories encourage response to God’s call amidst feelings of insufficiency and difficulties.

Since vocation is an essential point in the life of every Christian and community, stories of

call in the Bible have also been frequently dealt with in scholarship.

My motivation in choosing the call narratives of the major prophets came from the

above-mentioned aspects of vocation stories: they are inspirational and they are worth

reflecting on in scholarship. The calls of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel were set during the

most turbulent times in the history of Israel. Assured by God’s presence and help, they give

heed despite insecurities and opposition. As a religious sister myself who received and seeks

to respond to God’s call in spite of my insufficiency and the challenges relevant to the call, I

would like to study a text that makes sense in my own life of discipleship. As a lover and

proclaimer of God’s Word, I would like to be engaged with the words of the Scriptures and at

the same time be influenced by them in my own life of faith. For such reasons, I propose to

explore the call narratives of the major prophets for my dissertation.

REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE

The call accounts of the Prophets Isaiah (6:1-10), Jeremiah (1:4-10), and Ezekiel (1:1-

3:27) are among the often discussed in connection with the “call narrative,”1 an OT literary

1
Also called commission narrative, vocation account, Berufungsbericht. See, D.N. Phinney,
“Call/Commission Narratives,” in Dictionary of the Old Testament Prophets, eds., editors: Mark J. Boda and J.
Gordon mcConville (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2012), 65.
 5

form depicting a certain prophet or a particular individual being called by the Lord and

commissioned for a specific task. The OT contains numerous narrations of call and

commissioning by the Lord. Many of them belong to prominent and well-loved figures in the

Bible such as Abraham, Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Saul, Samuel, some of the minor prophets,

and the major prophets. Stories of call can also be discerned in other less-known biblical

characters like Micaiah (1 Kgs 22:1-28).

The Call of the Major Prophets and the Call Narrative Genre

Scholars, however, differ in opinion regarding the conventions which would

determine which texts really belong to the call narrative genre. For example, while the call of

Abraham, Joshua, and Samuel often figure as call narratives, others do not consider them part

of the proper call narrative genre.2 It is said that the call accounts which truly exhibit a

“complete” call account are that of the Major Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel)3

because these are more elaborated in the OT while other call stories including that of Hosea,

Amos, and Jonah contain only more limited references to a call experience.4

Some scholars in particular have looked into the call accounts of the major prophets.5

Supposedly, a group of texts belongs to the list of call narratives when they exhibit significant

formal similarities based on an established “call narrative” scheme.

2
Ibid., 65.

3
Ibid., 65.

4
Ibid., 65.

5
The figures of Moses, Gideon, and even Saul come up among the call paradigms used to compose the call
stories of the prophets, most notably that of Jeremiah. Ibid., 66. G. von Rad, however, advances that call account
is sui generis. It is unique and cannot be compared with other Israelite literature or life setting but owes its
development with the rise of prophetism. See, Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, vol. II: Theology of
Israel’s Prophetic Traditions, trans. D.M.G. Stalker (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 54.
 6

The problem though is that scholars do not have a uniform model for what they call a

“call narrative”. N. Habel (1965) proposes his call narrative paradigm based on his study of

the call of Moses and Gideon. His examination led him to conclude that the call of Jeremiah

was patterned after a common literary form6 while the slight variation of some elements in

the call narrative of Isaiah and Ezekiel is influenced by another tradition which prototype we

read in Kgs 22: 19-21.7 Habel sets the call of Moses, Gideon, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and Ezekiel

to exhibit a unified structure and form namely:8 1) divine confrontation which states the mode

of divine revelation to the one being called, 2) introductory word which consists of a

preparatory word or an explanation given by the divine or a heavenly being to the subject of

the call, 3) the commission which is formulated in the imperative 4) objection or the chosen

individual’s declaration of insufficiency 5) reassurance where the Divine caller guarantees

the recipient of his presence and help, 6) sign as an additional confirmation of the call and

commission from the Caller.

Based on this model, Habel excludes the call of Amos, Hosea, and Micaiah from the

call narrative genre. He states that there is no statement of “commission” (an integral part of

the call Gattung) from Amos’ vision narratives.9 Likewise, Hosea’s call is “not formulated

according to the pattern and structure of the other call narratives” although it shares “word-

6
See, N. Habel, “The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,” ZAW 77, no.3 (1965): 305.

7
Ibid., 305.

8
Ibid., 297-305.

9
For Habel, the visions of the Prophet Amos, though frequently associated with his call, “do not exhibit
the call-Gattung…the commission, which is an integral part of the Gattung, is absent from Amos.” The
“objection” and the “sign” element of the narrative is also missing, according to Habel. Ibid., 306.
 7

action narratives” with Jeremiah’s call.10 Micaiah’s vision, on the other hand, does not signify

a “commissioning” but “a public explanation of the prophet’s actions in specific situation.”11

But F. Guyette (2015) sees Habel’s model as limiting and “only applies to the formal

call narrative when God directly confronts and specifically commissions an individual.”12 He

opines that call accounts in the Bible have been narrated in many different ways which may

not necessarily exhibit a clear-cut scheme like Habel’s.13 His opinion is corroborated by W.

Pikor (2020) who expresses the difficulty of confining the “so-called” prophetic call

narratives into one model as some of these do not follow any predictable pattern. As an

example, he cites Amos (7: 14-15) who speaks of his call when he ran into conflict with

Amaziah, the priest of Bethel.14 Jeremiah also refers to his call in the style of lamentations

(15:16) or in defense of himself (26: 12-16). Guyette and Pikor’s opinions, in fact, reflect

only a portion of the issues related to the call narrative genre. Other problems pertain to its

definition, origin, and function within the prophetic literature.

Other than the issues already hinted at, here’s what critical scholarship shows about

prophetic call accounts before and during the age of form criticism.

10
Ibid., 306.

11
Ibid., 310.

12
Fred Guyette, “The Genre of the Call Narrative: Beyond Habel’s Model,” JBQ 43, no.1 (2015): 55.

13
Ibid., 57.

14
Wojciech Pikor, “A Prophet as a Witness to His Call: A Narrative Key to the Reading of Prophetic Call
Narratives,” ST 52, no. 1 (Apr 2020): 78.
 8

Call Narrative Before the Age of Form Criticism

D.N. Phinney writes on the subject which includes the history of critical scholarship

from the pre-modern period until early 2000.15 His article shows that call narrative only

acquired its status as a literary genre with the rise of form criticism16 in the 20th century as a

method of biblical exegesis.17

In pre-modern times, prophetic call accounts were seen as autobiographical or third-

person stories that narrate the Lord calling and commissioning a prophet or other individuals

to undertake a certain task (J. Calvin).18 Prophets were seen as historical and unique figures

in Israelite religion and scholars were mainly preoccupied with delving into their psychology

and spirituality.19

15
See, Phinney, “Call/Commission Narratives,” 65-71.

16
Form criticism classifies types of biblical literature by genre. A genre follows a stereotyped literary
pattern. In biblical historical criticism, identifying the genre of the text may help in locating the time of its oral
composition. In societies steeped in oral tradition such as ancient Israel, different genres have different social
settings. The study of the text’s form/genre sometimes facilitates tracing the social and religious life implied in
the text. See, Ilona Rashkow, “Current Trends in Academic Biblical Studies,” JBQ 50, no. 2 (Apr-Jun 2022): 76.

17
For the history of the development of form criticism, see Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and
Interpretation, “Form Criticism,” by Kenton L. Sparks, ed. Stanley E. Porter, 111-114.

18 See, John Calvin, Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah and the Lamentations, vol. 1,
trans. and ed., John Owen, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1950), https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom17.html
(accessed 1 Mar 2023). A downloadable PDF copy is also available at
https://ccel.org/ccel/c/calvin/calcom17/cache/calcom17.pdf

19
In his 1972 article “The Prophetic Call Narrative,” ITQ. 39, no. 4 (1972): 164, Gerard Meagher’s review
of literature showed that the prevailing discussion on the prophets was still centered on the prophets in relation
to Israel’s worship, the covenant, and prophetic inspiration. Some of the literature also tried to probe into the
prophets’ psychology. For example, the inquiry on whether the prophets were ecstatic figures such as Albert
Gelin’s, Introduction à la Bible, 1, 467 ff. (Tournai: Desclée et Cie 1959), 467 ff. English translation of this
work is under the title Introduction to the Old Testament (New York, Desclée Company, 1968), 252 ff.
 9

Call Narrative in the Age of Form Criticism

The identification of literary forms within the prophetic books came with H. Gunkel

(1915)20 after observing the time gap between the actual existence of the prophets and the

time of the collection of their writings. This subsequently led him to discover genre after

closely examining the major prophets. His work laid the foundational work on the call

narrative, especially after H. Schmidt21 applied Gunkel’s method and found patterns of

similarity in the call accounts of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Schmidt suggests that the

narrative presentation of their prophetic calls bears a pattern that points to an existing form or

literary convention employed in the writing of their calls. It was E. Kutsch (1956)22 who first

outlined the vorprophetisches Berufungsschema (preprophetic call scheme) based on his

study of the call of Gideon (Jgs 6:11-24) and supposed that the pattern also operates in the

calls of Moses (3:10-12), Jeremiah (1:5-10), and Saul (1 Sm 10:1-7). Kutsch identifies four

elements in the call scheme: the announcement of the assignment by Yahweh, the refusal of

the one called, the overcoming of the objection by Yahweh, and a sign as proof that the

commission comes from Yahweh.23

W. Zimmerli (1955),24 on the other hand, writes about two types of call narrative

patterns (similar but with an additional feature): the Moses-Jeremiah narrative type where

20
H. Schmidt, Introduction to Die grossen Propheten, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1915) ix-
lxx, and Hermann Gunkel, Die Propheten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1917), cited by Phinney,
“Call/Commission Narratives,” 65.

21
H. Schmidt, Die grossen Propheten (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1915).

22
Ernst Kutsch, “Gideons Berufung und Altarbau Jdc 6,11-24.” TLZ 81 (1956):75-84.

23
See, Phinney, “Call/Commission Narratives,” 67.

24
Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, trans. Robert E.
Clements (Philadelphia Fortress Press, 1979), 98-100.
 10

personal encounter and dialogue with Yahweh is part of the narrative, and the Isaiah-Ezekiel

type – an impersonal type – where a dialogue with the Divine did not occur. Zimmerli notes

that the latter call narrative type has an elaboration that includes “divine throne vision” in the

account, a genre which he identifies as arising from the 9th-8th cent. B.C.E. Based on these

observations, Zimmerli concludes that prophetic call narratives may take varied presentations

as shown by the call narratives of the three major prophets.

Habel (1965),25 for his part, comes up only with a single, six-element narrative call

scheme for Moses, Gideon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel (see above). Unlike Zimmerli, he

does not identify types of narrative calls. Rather, he speculates on the tradition provenance of

call narratives. From his investigation of the call of Moses and Gideon, Habel believes that

the author of Jeremiah patterned the prophet’s call narrative after a common preliterary form

(following Kutsch).26 He also advances that the slight variation of some elements in the call

narrative of Isaiah and Ezekiel is due to a tradition which prototype we read in Kgs 22: 19-

21.27 Habel’s position which delineates Moses as the influencing figure for the prophetic calls

is carried over even by contemporary commentators and scholars.28 As to the historical

setting of the genre, Habel points to the calling and commissioning practiced among court

25
N. Habel, “The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,” 297-323.

26
Ibid., 305.

27
Ibid., 309-310.

28
To mention a few, see Benedetta Rossi, MDM, “Jeremiah,” in The Jerome Biblical Commentary for the
Twenty-First Century, eds. J.J. Collins, G. Hens-Piazza, B. Reid, O.P., D. Senior, CP (London: t&t clark, 2022),
and Benedetta Rossi, “Reshaping Jeremiah: Scribal Strategies and the Prophet like Moses,” JSOT 44, no. 4
(2020): 575–593; Vincenzo Lopasso, Geremia: Introduzione, traduzione e commento (Milan: San Paolo, 2013),
45; Daniel Johnguk Kim, “Comparative Study of Prophetic Call and Shamanic Call and Its Implications for
Christian Missionary Call,” 복음과 선교 44 (2018): 275, Christoph W. Stenschke, “The Prophet like Moses (Dt
18:15-22): Some Trajectories in the History of Interpretation,” VE 42, no. 1 (2021): 3.
 11

messengers in the ancient Near East. He posits that Genesis 24:35-48 reflects this practice

where a messenger is sent on a special mission. Putting the call narratives at the beginning of

the prophetical book, says Habel, highlights the divine authorization that gives the prophets

their credentials for the ministry. Habel’s single prophetic call scheme is not widely accepted

though.

Taking up again the preprophetic call accounts (Gideon, Moses, Saul) and comparing

them with the major prophets, W. Richter (1970) adds “description of the need” to Kutsch’s

scheme. The word “to save [the Israelites],” according to Richter, is a formula that points to

the time of the judges as the origin of the call narratives – the call of Gideon and Saul being

the earliest form.29 K. Gouders (1971),30 on the other hand, takes the position of von Rad that

call narrative originates with the prophets and that the genre was applied to Moses and the

judges, not the other way around.

Contemporary Research on the Call of the Major Prophets

In the 70’s onwards, the trajectory of the research on the call accounts shifted from

identifying the genre and its historical setting, and the question of redaction to locating the

call account within the prophetic book’s larger literary theme.31 New aspects of the call

account were explored such as its connection to wisdom traditions.32 More recently, scholars

29
Wolfgang Richter, “Die sogeannten vorprophetischen Berufungsberichte: Eine
literaturewissenschaftliche Studie zu 1 Sam 9,1-10, 16, Ex 3f. und Ri 6,11b-17,” FRLANT 101 (1970).

30
Klaus Gouders, Die prophetischen Berufungsberichte Moses, Isaias, Jeremias und Ezechiel: Auslegung,
Form- und Gattungsgeschichte, zu einer Theologie der Berufung (Bonn: Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-
Universität, 1971).

31
See, Phinney, “Call/Commission Narratives,” 68.

32
For example, Von Hans-Christoph Schmitt’s observation that human helplessness without God as a
theme in the prophetic narrative recurs in the Old Testament wisdom. See Von Hans-Christoph Schmitt, “Das
 12

explore new avenues to apply the prophetic call narratives to new contexts such as the call of

the prophets and its relation to the missionary call and to some social sciences33 and

anthropological realities.34 W. Pikor’s article skipped the usual diachronic approach in favor

of synchronic reading of the call accounts.35 For Pikor a call account is a testimony to the

prophet’s calling and its authenticity rather than a justification for his prophetic ministry.

According to Pikor, assuming that the disciples were behind the writing of the prophet’s

account of his calling, the act of the disciple’s writing about the prophet’s call itself verifies

the prophet’s credibility.36 Pikor identifies three communicational elements in the call

account of the prophets: the prophet who relates the events of his call with his listeners, the

prophet’s disciple as the narrator/ witness to the first testimony, and the prophet as the

implied author, who tells about his call to the implied readers.37

sogenannte vorprophetische Berufungsschema. Zur »geistigen Heimat« des Berufungsformulars von Ex 3,9–12;
Jdc 6,11–24 und I Sam 9,1–10,16,” ZAW 104 (1992): 214-215.

33
For example, Lester L. Grabbe, Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of
Religious Specialists in Ancient Israel (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press, 1995), see especially 108-112; Matthijs
de Jong, Isaiah Among the Ancient Near Eastern Prophets: A Comparative Study of the Earliest Stages of the
Isaiah Tradition and the Neo-Assyrian Prophecies (VTSup 117; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 340-341; Paul M. Joyce,
"The Prophets and Psychological Interpretation", in Prophecy and the Prophets in Ancient Israel: Proceedings
of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed. John Day, LHB/OTS 531(London & New York: T & T Clark,
2010):133-148; R. A. Werline, "Assessing the Prophetic Vision and Dream Texts for Insights into Religious
Experience," in 'I Lifted My Eyes and Saw': Reading Dream and Vision Reports in the Hebrew Bible, eds. E. R.
Hayes – L.-S. Tiemeyer, LHB/OTS 584 (London & New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2014): 1-15.

34
For example, Kim, “Comparative Study of Prophetic Call and Shamanic Call and Its Implication for
Christian Missionary Call.”

35
Pikor, “A Prophet as a Witness to His Call,” 73-95.

36
Pikor states, “The original event of the word of God in the prophet’s life becomes now the subject of the
disciple’s testimony; having recognized its credibility the disciple passes it on through the word of his
testimony.” Ibid., 76.

37
Ibid., 76.
 13

Earlier Research on the Call of the Major Prophets

Jeremiah

It was already mentioned that Jeremiah’s call is often associated with the call of

Moses, Gideon, and Saul, but most particularly with Moses’.38 The theological supposition is

that the resemblance intends to underline Jeremiah’s prophetic succession with Moses. As

with Moses (3:15-16), Yahweh intends Jeremiah to speak his words (Jer 1:9).

Holladay suggests that the historical Jeremiah understands himself and his prophetic

ministry in terms of Moses (Dt 18:18).39 W. Thiel40 and C. Seitz,41 however, attribute

Jeremiah’s connection with Moses to redaction. Both Seitz and W. Pikor note that the

editorial activity in Jeremiah effectively stole the prophet’s words from the prophet himself.42

B. Rossi, 43 also embarked on the study of the redaction of the book of Jeremiah and

concludes that the book shows a development that breaks the concept of prophecy from

Mosaic succession. Using textual cross-references, Rossi demonstrates that the “prophet like

38
Rossi: “…the association was established right from the call account of Jeremiah.” See, “Jeremiah,” 882.

William L. Holladay, “The Background of Jeremiah’s Self-Understanding: Moses, Samuel, and Psalm
39

22,” JBL 83, (1964): 153-164.

40
Winfried Thiel, Die deuteronomistische Redaction von Jeremiah 1-25, WMANT 41 (Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener, 1973): 62-79. Thiel ascribes the redaction in Jeremiah 1-45 to the Deuteronomist.

41
Christopher R. Seitz “The Prophet Moses and the Canonical Shape of Jeremiah,” ZAW 101, no.1 (1989):
3-27.

42
Seitz, “The Prophet Moses,” 4: “Editors and shapers of the present book depicted the man Jeremiah
along lines consistent with the broader theological views of deuteronomism. The degree to which they distorted
the historical Jeremiah in the process is a matter of debate. Some argue it makes little difference, the historical
prophet is so lost behind secondary Interpretation.”; Pikor, “A Prophet as a Witness to His Call,” 74.

43
Rossi, “Reshaping Jeremiah,” 575-593.
 14

Moses” concept was revised in Jeremiah and that Dt 18.18 meant to depict Jeremiah not “as a

successor but rather as a substitute for Moses himself.”44

Isaiah

The Book of the Prophet Isaiah also contains a narrative of the prophet’s

commissioning similar to other call narratives.45 Some scholars, however, observe the

unusual presentation of Isaiah’s call such as the absence of the “sign” element in the

prophet’s call narrative. Moreover, in Isaiah, the objection has been declared by the prophet

prior to being appointed to a task. The idea of a “call” is also obscure since the dialogue

happened among the divine council which the prophet only overhears (Is 6:8). Thus, several

scholars do not consider Isaiah 6 a call narrative.46 Likewise, C. Seitz, agrees with O.H.

Steck that Isaiah 6 is not an inaugural call to the prophetic office but rather a narrower

commission to a specific task.47 Sweeney, on the contrary, believes that Isaiah 6 functions as

a call narrative, even though it does not fit the expected pattern.48

44
Ibid., 576.

45
Like Jeremiah and Ezekiel, the prophet has divine action or words associated with his mouth (Is 6:6-7).
He expresses his inadequacy (Is 6:11) and receives reassurance (Is 6:11-13). Cf. N. Habel, “The Form and
Significance of the Call Narratives,” 312.

46
On the exclusion of Isaiah’s call from the call narrative genre, see the survey made by Marvin A.
Sweeney, Isaiah 1-39: With an Introduction to Prophetic Literature, FOTL 16 (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1996),
135. Here he cites Odil Hannes Steck, "Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6," BZ 16 (1972): 188-206, Mordecai M.
Kaplan, "Isaiah 6:1-11," JBL 45 (1926): 251-59, and Rolf Knierim, "The Vocation of Isaiah," VT 18 (1968): 47-
68, among others.

47
Christopher R. Seitz, Isaiah 1-39, Interpretation Bible Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox
Press, 1993), 54.

48
Sweeney, Isaiah 1-39, 136.
 15

Ezekiel

Ezekiel’s call narrative has also presented issues for form critics, the most significant

of which is the connection between the commissioning narrative (Ez 2:1—3:15) and vision

narratives before it (Ez 1:1-28).49 Likewise, there is difficulty in identifying the “sign”

element and the expression of inadequacy using the traditional model of the narrative. Habel

identifies the sign as the feeding of Ezekiel with the scroll (Ez 2:8-3:3).50 By contrast,

M. Greenberg51 claims that no sign is either asked for or given, indicating a discontinuity

with the call narratives of Moses52 and Gideon. Habel invokes a different tradition (1 Kgs 22:

19-21) to explain the novel features (the “throne vision” and “divine council” elements) of

Isaiah and Ezekiel’s call accounts.

Thematic Unity of the Call of the Major Prophets

Although scholars vary in opinion regarding the exact literary pattern that

would define the narrative genre of the calls of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, it is

nevertheless clear that Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel have been called by the Lord to a

prophetic ministry. They encountered the Lord in their own unique life circumstances and

were commissioned at a particular point in Israel’s history. In spite of feelings of

49
Invoking form-critical and tradition-historical grounds, Walther Zimmerli advances that the visionary
material of Ezekiel 1 strongly links with the commissioning episode. Cf. Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1: A Commentary on
the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel Chapters 1-24.

50
See N. Habel, “The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,” 313-314.

51
Moshe Greenberg, Ezekiel 1-20, The Anchor Yale Bible, vol. 22 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983),
81.

52
Habel notes that the “sign” element in the Moses narrative is peculiar because it was given after Moses
has accomplished his commissioned task. Habel comments, “…in Moses’ case the sign is only experienced after
the execution of the commission.” He adds that the sign intends to give Moses “new impetus and power” rather
than a guarantee that clears his doubt. See Habel, “The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,” 305.
 16

insufficiency, they responded to their prophetic vocation after being assured of God’s help.

This researcher believes that, although their narratives of call are ridden with issues from the

perspective of diachronic approaches, the common elements just stated above allow for a

study of their vocations as one unity.

A Call for a Fresh Method and Perspective.

D.N. Phinney once wrote that so much has been written about the prophetic call

accounts to the point that scholars felt apologetic for saying anything more about the topic.53

The proposed text has indeed been extensively studied. Yet it is apparent from the review of

literature that the prophetic call stories have been mainly treated using the diachronic

approaches. It even shows some exegetical impasse54 and the lack of consensus among the

scholars resulting from the historical, form-critical, and redaction approaches to the text. The

challenge of the prophetic call narratives seems to point to the direction of the synchronic

reading being the underemployed approach to the topic. This research will attempt to answer

that call to a new approach to the text, and thus, to a new perspective.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

As this researcher has shown, the calls of Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel have common

elements that allow for a study of their vocations as one unity. I also see the advantage of

introducing a new perspective – that is, a progressive study that begins with the linguistic

elements, and then to proceed with the analysis of how these elements are disposed of as a

53
Phinney, “Call/Commission Narratives,” 67.

54
Among these are issues related to the narrative’s genre and its function, the tradition behind the call
accounts and their location in Israel’s historical setting, and the problem of redaction and its implication to the
message of the prophet and the whole book.
 17

narrative text. After the result of the two processes (language and narrative), it would be ripe

for gleaning the theological message and their pastoral imports, and finally, to offer some

pastoral indications based on the theological message offered by the texts.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission itself says that the historical-critical method,

although an “indispensable method for the scientific study of the meaning of ancient texts,”55

cannot address all aspects of the text. Thus, it calls on the use of other methods and

approaches to profoundly study the Scriptures. This study then seeks to explore and

appreciate the literary and thematic unity of the call narratives told in Isaiah (6:1-10),

Jeremiah (1:4-10), and Ezekiel (1:1-3:27) by adopting a process that begins from the ground,

that is, by starting from the text itself.56 S. Porter, succinctly explains the value of starting the

interpretation right from the text. He says:

Linguistic criticism is one of several emerging forms of criticism. In those few places
where it has been applied, there have often been highly constructive results that have
emerged. Some of these include the realization that the authors of the biblical texts
have used a variety of linguistic means at their disposal to create, shape, and develop
their writings, and that there are a variety of linguistically based means to analyze this
usage. Rather than simply concentrating on individual words and phrases, linguistic
criticism has drawn attention to a number of larger patterns of usage. Some of the
results have threatened to overturn tried and true conclusions reached by other means.
Even though linguistic criticism can possibly provide new and substantial support for
traditional interpretation, linguistic criticism has often been dismissed because it dares
to challenge the traditional perspective.”57

The method hopes to demonstrate the web of relationship between morphology,

syntax, and theology58 and to draw a fresh perspective of the proposed texts.

55
Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church, 23 April 1993.
https://www.catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/PBC_Interp-FullText.htm (accessed 21 March 2023), I.A.
56
Linguistics approach to the text is a challenging method and hence, the least popular of all the exegetical
approaches. S. Porter explains: “…like many other disciplines, [linguistic approach] comes with its own
technical vocabulary, and this technical vocabulary is often seen as threatening since it suggests that a scholar
needs to learn a new form of critical discourse to participate.” The biggest contribution of the linguistic
approach to the text though, according to S. Porter, is the sure foundation it lends to exegesis. Dictionary of
Biblical Criticism, 2007 ed., s.v. “Linguistic Criticism,” by Stanley Porter, edited by Stanley Porter, 199.
57
Porter, “Linguistic Criticism,” 201.
 18

Morphology and Syntax

Morphology and syntax will be the starting point of the study. It commences with the

most basic element, that is, the language, the words, and the message that they try to convey.

The writer expects to encounter the following questions in the process of the analysis: What

does the morphosyntactic yield in relation to the texts in question? What are the linguistic

elements in the texts and how do they influence one another? What is the significance of the

words and figures of speech in the texts in terms of their frequency? What do semantic levels,

parts of speech (nouns, verbs in their tenses and aspects, particles, etc., reveal about the texts

and their meaning? What functions do these elements play in the texts? What is the syntactic

structure of the texts in question? What morphosyntactic commonalities and differences do

the three texts have?

Narrative Analysis

After the morphosyntactical analysis, the study will now proceed to analyze how the

words, the clause, and other morphosyntactical elements of the texts are disposed of from the

narrative perspective, and how through these elements, the message is conveyed. In

particular, the narrative analysis will deal with and try to answer the following: What is the

narrative makeup (construction) of the texts? How is this shaped in the discourse and the plot

of the texts? What does the narrative analysis say about the events represented in the texts,

the characters and their characterization, the actors’ identities and interests, and the time

order and spaces mirrored in the text? What message do the text structures send to the

readers? What commonalities and differences do the three texts have from the point of view

of narrative analysis?
 19

Theology

After considering the linguistic and narrative elements of the texts, the third

stage will be dedicated to gathering and formulation of the theological message through the

following relevant questions: What theological message of the texts do the morphosyntax and

narrative yield? What is the theological “core” of the texts? What are the common or

different theological perspectives of the three texts?

Pastoral Implications

Having identified the theological core of the texts through the laborious application of

morphosyntactic and narrative analyses, the last major part of the study will be devoted to the

pastoral indications that the texts convey.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The review of literature demonstrated a topic, i.e., the call of the major prophets, that

has been read and interpreted predominantly from the diachronic point of view and not for

the beauty of the literature itself. Along this line, the study may be significant in relation to

the following:

1. It answers the call of the Pontifical Biblical Commission to use other methods,

particularly new approaches different from the historical-critical method, in

the interpretation of the Bible text.59

59
Since, “the historical-critical method cannot claim to be totally sufficient,...leav[ing] aside many aspects
of the writings which it studies, ...other methods and approaches are proposed which serve to explore more
profoundly other aspects worthy of attention.” See, Pontifical Biblical Commission, The Interpretation of the
Bible in the Church, B.
 20

2. It hopes to contribute to the scholarship that appreciates the value of Isaiah

(6:1-10), Jeremiah (1:4-10), and Ezekiel (1:1-3:27) in their linguistic and

literary beauty and beyond their diachronic brand.

3. The method chosen by the writer hopes to free the texts from the exegetical

issues that the historical-critical method is unable to illuminate. At the same

time, this research hopes to contribute to the demonstration of how syntax,

narration, and theology intertwined with each other in exegesis.60

4. From a narrative point of view, stories are a powerful conveyor of meaning.

Artistic and poetic stories from scripture had shaped and continue to shape

convictions and theological ideas. These stories influence beliefs and praxis.61

The theological and pastoral implications that the texts generate will facilitate

the reader’s reception of the message without being preoccupied with the

diachronic issues tied to the text.

5. The first beneficiary of this research is this writer herself who, together with

her community, continues to seek icons of discipleship and paradigms of

response to one’s vocation through the words of the Scriptures. The result of

60
Retrieving the meaning of the text necessitates dealing with them as they occur in sentences, paragraphs,
chapters, discourses, and textual wholes. They cannot be treated in isolation. As Longman points out, “Words
are the building blocks of texts; texts are the place where words find their meaning. This means that the meaning
of a word is dialectically related to its literary contexts. Those of us who live thousands of years after the
completion of the Bible need to pay special attention to the literary approach because the literary conventions
employed by the ancient Hebrew storytellers and poets are not necessarily the same as those that we are used to
in our own culture” See, Tremper Longman III, “Literary Approaches and Interpretation,” in A Guide to Old
Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed., Willem A. VanGemeren (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1997), 100, 110.

61
Narratives are relational in nature because they resonate with common experiences which link people to
the text. Stories are able to transcend cultural and historical and influence both beliefs and praxis. This makes
narrative study essential in understanding the meaning of the text. J.C. Robinson comments that it would be an
error to scholarship to suppose “sacred literature to be so unlike other texts that it could not be examined
appropriately as literary work.” See, Dictionary of Biblical Criticism, 2007 ed., s.v. “Narrative,” by J.C.
Robinson, edited by Stanley Porter, 236.
 21

the research hopes to contribute to the deepening of reflection regarding call

and vocation. The result also hopes to be useful to persons engaged in the

ministry of accompaniment to individuals in vocation discernment.

METHODOLOGY

The writer intends to proceed with the study according to the following outline:

Chapter I is composed of the general introduction, review of related literature,

statement of the problem, statement of the significance of the study, description of the

methodology, scope and limitation of the research, and definition of the terms.

Chapter II will include:

a. Presentation of the three texts using the BHS edition. Doubts about parts of the

texts will be dealt with using textual criticism.

b. Morphological study with considerations on the frequency of words, nouns,

verbs, particles, etc. A summary of relevant findings will be provided at the

end of this segment.

c. Syntactical treatment where types of clauses will be analyzed as well as the

syntactical structure and its function in the sentences, the linguistic levels,

temporal axes and highlights, and the type of sentences present in the text.

Synthesis of the significant findings will be again presented at the end of this

section.

d. Presentation of the English translation of the texts based on the

morphosyntactic analysis.

Chapter III will be dedicated to the narrative analysis of each of the texts. This part

will study the main elements of discourse guided by universal and biblical publications in the
 22

field of narrative analysis. Theological themes based on the analysis will be underlined in this

chapter.

Chapter IV will take up the important theological themes revealed by the

morphosyntax and narrative investigation and draw from them indicators for the faith-life of

the readers. Since the final goal of the study is not only exegesis but also to engage the text as

faith text that would lead the people of God to a committed response to faith, then

engagement of the text is made complete by referring to some pastoral implications that

resulted from the exegesis.

Chapter V, the last of the main parts of the study will provide the general conclusions

of the study. Here, the researcher will also indicate some recommendations arising from the

study such as the application of the same method to other similar biblical texts, or a

recommendation to study other vocational texts that have not been, until now, studied using

the same methodology, that is, the combinations of linguistic, narrative, and theology.

After Chapter V, appendices containing tables, charts, and graphs that will further

illustrate the concept of the study will be included. The appendices may also serve as a

reference and guide for those who will embark on the study of other texts using same

methodology.

SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The concern of this research is primarily to treat the proposed texts, Isaiah (6:1-10),

Jeremiah (1:4-10), and Ezekiel (1:1-3:27), not from a diachronic/historical perspective but to

draw an interpretation of the texts relating to the call of the major prophets using

synchronic/literary analysis that starts from the study of morphology and syntax of the text.
 23

This research will also employ narrative analysis of the three texts after the

morphosyntactic investigation in the hope of drawing sound theological conclusions and

pastoral implications from the results. This researcher believes that the said method has the

potential to generate fresh insight from the text. It is expected to offer new perspectives

different from what the historical treatment of the text yields. The review of relevant

literature shows that the method proposed by this author has not been a prevalent method of

exegesis applied to Isaiah (6:1-10), Jeremiah (1:4-10), and Ezekiel (1:1-3:27). Thus, this

research will embark on the use of morphosyntax and narrative analysis as the main tool for

drawing theology from the texts, and subsequently to formulate pastoral implications to the

faith-life of the readers. The use of synchronic analysis does not mean, though, that the

historical dimension of the text will be left out in this study.62 Since, the principal aim of the

study is to show how the text is built up, in order to appreciate not only the artistic

compositions, the structural relationships of the text, and their relevance to theology, the

diachronic issues will be dealt with in this research in so far as it will be helpful in the

analysis and clarification of the aspects of the text.

In the morphosyntax analysis, this research will be dependent on the text linguistic

theory63 of Alviero Nicacci.64 The narrative analysis will be guided mainly by the published

62
The Pontifical Biblical Commission acknowledges the importance of the historical dimension of the text,
even in synchronic approaches. It says, “The synchronic approach which it brings to texts needs to be
supplemented by diachronic studies as well.” See Pontifical Biblical Commission, "The Interpretation of the
Bible in the Church," I.C.2.
63
Nicacci’s approach to the Hebrew verb system is a development of the linguistic theory initiated by
Harald Weinrich. The latter based his ‘text linguistics’ on the modern European language. It was W. Schneider,
however, who first applied his theory to Hebrew. Nicacci felt that Schneider’s application of Weinrich’s theory
is yet to be completed, hence, the birth of his own school of thought on this field. Quoting Weinrich, Nicacci
defines the term ‘text linguistics’ as “a method used in linguistics to describe all the elements of a language
including the function these have in oral and written text… A grammar which does not accept units beyond the
sentence can never even notice let alone resolve the most interesting problems of linguistics.” See Alviero
Nicacci, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, trans. W.G.E. Watson, JSOTSup 86 (Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press, 1990), §2.

64
Other published contributions of Alviero Nicacci on this field include: “Analysis of Biblical Narrative,”
in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of
Linguistics, 1994): 175-198; “Analyzing Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” JSOTSup 74 (1997): 77-93; “Basic Facts
 24

work of Antonio Garrido Dominguez on the narrative text.65 Other books on narrative

analysis, both biblical and universal will also be consulted as needed.66

DEFINITION OF KEY TERMS

Terminologies in Hebrew syntax are hard to define. It sometimes happens that the

term used by one author is defined differently by another author. In other words, the same

terminology may denote different ideas depending on the one who is authoring the work. It is

therefore important to define the terminologies according to the author whose work one is

consulting – for example, in our case, Nicacci’s work, especially in the morphosyntactic

analysis. The list of the words below relevant to the study is not exhaustive. Other important

terms may appear in the course of the actual analysis. What appears here, therefore, are only

the most basic and the most expected to be encountered in the study.

and Theory of the Biblical Hebrew Verb System in Prose,” in Narrative Syntax and the Hebrew Bible: Papers of
the Tilburg Conference 1996, ed. Ellen van Wolde (Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002): 167-202; “On the
Hebrew Verbal System,” in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed. Robert D. Bergen (Dallas, TX:
Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994): 117-137; “Marked Syntactical Structures in Biblical Greek in
Comparison with Biblical Hebrew,” LASBF 43 (1993): 9-69; “Poetic Syntax and Interpretation of Malachi,”
LASBF 51 (2001): 55-107; “Syntactic Analysis of Jonah,” LASBF 46 (1996), 9-32; “Syntactic Analysis of
Ruth.” LASBF 45 (1995): 69-106; “Types and Functions of the Nominal Sentence,” in The Verbless Clause in
Biblical Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches, ed. (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999): 215-248; “The Biblical
Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry,” in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest Semitic Setting: Typological and
Historical Perspectives, ed. Steven E. Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006, 247-
268; “The Finite Verb in the Second-Position of the Sentence: Coherence of the Hebrew Verbal System,” ZAW
108, no. 3 (1996): 434-440.

65
See Antonio Garrido Domínguez, El texto narrativo, (Madrid: Sintesis, 1996).

66
For example, Luc Herman and Bart Vervaeck, Handbook of Narrative Analysis, Frontiers of Narrative,
ed. David Herman (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2001); Mark Allan Powell, What is Narrative
Criticism? New Testament Series, ed. Dan D. Via, Jr. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990); Jean Louis Ska,
“Our Fathers Have Told Us”: Introduction to the Analysis of Hebrew Narratives, Subsidia Biblica 13. (Rome:
Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1990).
 25

General Terminologies

Below are some general terms related to the process to be used in the study:

Morphosyntactic. Denotes the involvement of both morphology and syntax in the

analysis of the text.

Text Linguistic. “A method used in linguistics to describe all the elements of a

language including the function these have in oral and written text.” 67 This method

approaches the text from the perspective of morphology and syntax. It stands on the principle

“that there is an important correlation between form and function.”68 On the linguistic value

of the text, Porter explains:

“Another presupposition is that language is a complex system or set of systems, in

which there is an intricate interplay between various elements. These systems are
really the heart of the language under examination, because each element of the
system enjoys a complex relationship with the other elements. These systems offer
choices between forms and establish the meaningful relations between various
component parts of the system. A third presupposition is that whereas there is much
value in studying individual words and phrases of a language, there is an ever-
increasing recognition that one must study units beyond the word and phrase, and
even the sentence. This suggests that units larger than the word, such as the clause or
sentence, or even larger units, are the basis for determining meaning in a text.”69

Narrative Criticism. A method of literary analysis that focuses on the text as a story.

It analyzes the text in its literary value rather than its historical elements. As such it takes into

consideration the events, characters and characterization, setting, time and space, among

others.70 This method also “distinguishes the real author (the person who actually wrote) from

67
Alviero Nicacci, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, §2.

68
Porter, “Linguistic Criticism,” 200.

69
Ibid., 200.

70
Herman and Bart, Handbook of Narrative Analysis, 41-91.
 26

the implied author (the one who can be inferred in the narrative), and the real audience

(those… who actually read/heard what was written, or even those who read it today) from the

implied audience (those whom the author envisions in writing).71

Morphosyntactic Terms

Since Niccacci’s work will be paradigmatic for this study, I adopt his definition of the

following terms for analysis:

Sentence. A message with a full sense constituted by an independent clause or by two

or more clauses, dependent on one another.

Phrase. A part of the clause.

Verb. Verbal forms are distinguished from grammatical constructions. Verbal forms

is composed of simpler grammatical morphemes, while grammatical constructions are the

combinations that verb forms assume in texts.

Syntagms (= Word Group or Phrase): A chain of morphemes/lexemes with a function

in a clause.

Clause. A chain of syntagms of which one is the predicate; a part of a sentence; a

syntactic unity provided by a predicate; with basic components, namely the subject

(topic/reference/ theme/ who is spoken?), and the predicate (comment/predication/rheme).

“… a verbal clause begins with a verb, a noun clause, begins with a noun. A
verbal clause tells us what the subject does, in other words, what the action is; a noun
clause tells us who the subject is. If a noun is followed by a verb the noun is complex.
Gen 3.13 is quoted in various grammars as an example of a complex nominal clause
with the function of specifying the subject and not of providing information on the
action as such.”72

Narrative and discourse.

71
Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997),
25.
72
Nicacci, The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose, §6.
 27

“Narrative concerns persons or events which are not present or current in the
relationship involving writer-reader and so the third person is used. In discourse, on
the other hand, the speaker addresses the listener (dialogue, sermon, prayer).
In Hebrew, the verb-form used in the narrative is WAYYIQTOL while
YIQTOL is the dominant form in discourse. Typically, ‘narrative’ uses
WAYYIQTOL in first position (verb clause). ‘Discourse’, on the other hand, exhibits
more variety. Volitive forms can be used as well as x-indicative YIQTOL, the simple
noun clause and QATAL.”73

Narrative text. Composed of three aspects: a) linguistic attitude (narrative,

commentary), b) Emphasis (or highlighting): foreground, background, c) linguistic

perspective: retrieved information (flashback, ‘antecedent’ to the ensuing account, degree

zero (the level of the story itself), anticipated information (‘disclosure’, reveals the end of the

story).

Nicacci illustrates the verbal forms of discourse and narrative according to the three

basic axes of time (in their English equivalent) as follows:74

axis Discourse (1st & 2nd person) Narrative (3rd person)

present present imperfect
past present perfect simple past
past perfect
future future conditional

Below is the illustration of the narrative text showing the three aspects. Verb forms

are shown in English and their corresponding Hebrew constructions:

a) Linguistic attitude: narrative, commentary

English Narrative Discourse

Hebrew WAYYIQTOL volitive forms
WAW-x-QATAL simple nominal clause
indicative x-YIQTOL
WeQATAL
(x-)QATAL

73
Ibid., §7-8.
74
Ibid., §3.
 28

b) Emphasis (or highlighting): foreground, background

English/Hebrew foreground background

imperfect
past perfect
Narrative ------- ------------------ ---------------------------
WAYYIQTOL simple noun clause
complex noun clause
weQatal
present circumstantial clauses
volitive mood gerund, past
------------------ participles
volitive form ---------------------------
(x-)QATAL WAX-simple noun
x-indicative clause
YIQTOL WAW-complex noun
simple noun clause
clause

c) Linguistic perspective: retrieved information, degree zero, anticipated information

English/Hebrew Recovered information ( ) degree zero (0) anticipated

information ( )
past perfect simple past conditional
imperfect
Narrative-------- -------------------------------- ----------------- -----------------
WAW-x-QATAL WAYYIQTOL YIQTOL
present perfect present future
volitive moods
------------------
Discourse ------ -------------------------------- volitive forms ----------------
x-QATAL (x-)QATAL YIQTOL
x-indicative final clause etc.
YIQTOL
simple noun clause

Temporal transitions. The successions given to different verbal forms.

Macrosyntactic signs. Elements that indicate the relationship between the parts of the

text.

Subject. The element in the verbal clause that is congruent in number and gender

with the predicate.

Predicate. The finite verbal form in a verbal clause.

 29

Narrative Analysis Terms

Below are the terms relating to narrative analysis. Here, I follow Mark Allan

Powell’s What is Narrative Criticism? for the definition of terms:

Narrative. Any work of literature that tells a story. It has two aspects: Story and

discourse. Story refers to the content of the narrative and what it is about. It consists of

elements such as events, characters, and settings. The interaction of these comprises the

plot.75

Discourse. The rhetoric of the narrative and how the story is told.

Implied author. The "authorial character" that a reader infers from a text is based on

the way a literary piece is written.

Real author. The author who actually wrote the literary work.

Narrator. The teller of the story within the text.

Implied reader. The reader that the text implies (to whom the story is told) or the

imagined receiver of the narrator’s text.

Real reader (actual reader). The actual person who picks up the text and reads it.

Narrative Patterns. Recurrent structural devices and design features that are used to

organize and present the story.76

Events. Incidents or happenings that occur within the story.77

Characters. Actors in the story, the ones that carry out various activities that

comprise the plot. 78

75
Powell, What is Narrative Criticism?, 23.
76
Ibid., 32.
77
Ibid., 35.
78
Ibid., 51.
 30

Settings. The aspect of the narrative that provides context for the actions of the

characters.79

Narrative space. The space of the story world, or the spaces and places that make up

the physical environment in which the characters of a narrative live and move.

79
Ibid, 69.
 31

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Sources

Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1997.

Gesenius, Wilhelm. Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by Emil Kautzsch. Translated by

Arthur E. Cowley. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1910.New King James Version,
Atlanta 1958.

Nicacci, Alviero. The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose. Translated by W.G.E.
Watson. JSOTSup 86. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1990.

Pontifical Biblical Commission. The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church. April 23,
1993. https://www.catholic-resources.org/ChurchDocs/PBC_Interp-FullText.htm
(accessed 8 February 2023).

Septuaginta. Rahlfs-Hanhart: Editio altera. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006.

The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. New York: Oxford University, 1996.

B. Dictionaries

A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament: Based Upon the Lexical
Works of Ludwig Koehler and Walter Baumgartner. Edited by William L. Holladay
Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1988.

Phinney, D.N. “Call/Commission Narratives.” In Dictionary of the Old Testament Prophets.

Edited by Mark J. Boda and J. Gordon McConville. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity,
2012.

Porter, Stanley. “Linguistic Criticism.” In Dictionary of Biblical Criticism. Edited by Stanley

Porter. London: Routledge, 2007.

Robinson, J.C., “Narrative.” In Dictionary of Biblical Criticism. Edited by Stanley Porter.

London: Routledge, 2007.

Sparks, Kenton L., “Form Criticism.” In Dictionary of Biblical Criticism and Interpretation
Edited by Stanley E. Porter, 111-114. London: Routledge, 2007.

A. General Commentaries

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Ezekiel. IBC. Louisville, KN: John Knox Press, 1990.
 32

Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1997.

Bruggemann, Walter. Isaiah 1-39. WBC. Edited by Patrick D. Miller and David L. Bartlett.
Louisville, KN: Westminster John Knox Press, 1998.

Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Jeremiah and the Lamentations, Vol.
1. Translated and Edited by John Owen. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,1950.
https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom17.html (accessed 1 Mar 2023).

de Jong, Matthijs. Isaiah Among the Ancient Near Eastern Prophets: A Comparative Study of
the Earliest Stages of the Isaiah Tradition and the Neo-Assyrian Prophecies. VTSup
117. Leiden: Brill, 2007.

Garrido Domínguez, Antonio. El texto narrative. Madrid: Sintesis, 1996.

Gelin, Albert. Introduction à la Bible. Tournai: Desclée et Cie, 1959.

Gouders, Klaus. Die prophetischen Berufungsberichte Moses, Isaias, Jeremias und Ezechiel:
Auslegung, Form- und Gattungsgeschichte, zu einer Theologie der Berufung. Bonn:
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität, 1971.

Grabbe, Lester L. Priests, Prophets, Diviners, Sages: A Socio-Historical Study of Religious

Specialists in Ancient Israel. Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press, 1995.

Greenberg, Moshe. Ezekiel 1-20. AYB 22. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983.

Gunkel, Hermann. Die Propheten. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1917.

Herman, Luc, and Vervaeck, Bart. Handbook of Narrative Analysis. Frontiers of Narrative.
Edited by David Herman. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 2001.

Joyce, Paul M. Ezekiel: A Commentary. LHB/OTS 482. New York: T & T Clark, 2007.

Lopasso, Vincenzo. Geremia: Introduzione, traduzione e commento. Milan: San Paolo, 2013.

Odell, Margaret S. Ezekiel. SHBC, Vol 16. Macion, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys Publishing
Inc., 2005.

Powell, Mark Allan. What is Narrative Criticism? New Testament Series. Edited by Dan D.
Via, Jr. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.

Richter, Wolfgang. Die sogeannten vorprophetischen Berufungsberichte: Eine

literaturewissenschaftliche Studie zu 1 Sam 9,1-10, 16, Ex 3f. und Ri 6,11b-17.
FRLANT 101 (1970).

Seitz, Christopher R. Isaiah 1-39. IBC. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993.

Schmidt, Hans. Introduction to Die grossen Propheten. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &

Ruprecht, 1915.
 33

Ska, Jean Louis. “Our Fathers Have Told Us”: Introduction to the Analysis of Hebrew
Narratives. Subsidia Biblica 13. Rome: Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1990.

Sweeney, Marvin A. Isaiah 1-39. FOTL, Vol XVI. Edited by Rolf P. Knierim and Gene M.
Tucker. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996.

Thiel, Winfried. Die deuteronomistische Redaction von Jeremiah 1-25. WMANT 41.
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1973.

Von Rad, Gerhard, Old Testament Theology, vol. II: Theology of Israel’s Prophetic
Traditions. Translated by D.M.G. Stalker. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.

Zimmerli, Walther. Ezekiel: A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel. Translated by
Robert E. Clements Philadelphia Fortress Press, 1979.

B. Monographs

Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse. Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. London:
Cornell University Press, 1978.

Chaparro Lillo, Emeterio. Y ahora ¡Escucha Israel! Sintaxis y narración en Dt 4, 1-40.

Madrid: Publicaciones Claretians, 2017.

Habel, Norman. “The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives,” ZAW 77, no.3 (1965):
305.

Guyette, Fred. “The Genre of the Call Narrative: Beyond Habel’s Model.” JBQ 43, no.1
(2015): 54-58.

Kim, Daniel Johnguk “Comparative Study of Prophetic Call and Shamanic Call and Its
Implications for Christian Missionary Call.” 복음과 선교 44 (2018): 265-302.

Holladay, William L. “The Background of Jeremiah’s Self-Understanding: Moses, Samuel,

and Psalm 22.” JBL 83, (1964): 153-164.

Joyce, Paul M. "The Prophets and Psychological Interpretation." In Prophecy and the
Prophets in Ancient Israel: Proceedings of the Oxford Old Testament Seminar, ed.
John Day. LHB/OTS 531. London & New York: T & T Clark, 2010.

Kaplan, Mordecai M. "Isaiah 6:1-11." JBL 45 (1926): 251-59.

Knierim, Rolf, "The Vocation of Isaiah." VT 18 (1968): 47-68.

Kutsch, Ernst, “Gideons Berufung und Altarbau Jdc 6,11-24.” TLZ 81 (1956):75-84.
 34

Longman III, Tremper. “Literary Approaches and Interpretation.” In A Guide to Old

Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by Willem A. VanGemeren. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: ZondervanPublishingHouse, 1997.

Nicacci, Alviero. “Analysis of Biblical Narrative.” in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse

Linguistics.Edited by Robert D. Bergen Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics,
1994: 175-198.

_____. “Analyzing Biblical Hebrew Poetry,” JSOTSup 74. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1997: 77-93.

_____. “Basic Facts and Theory of the Biblical Hebrew Verb System in Prose.” in Narrative
Syntax and the Hebrew Bible: Papers of the Tilburg Conference 1996. Edited by
Ellen van Wolde. Boston: Brill Academic Publishers, 2002: 167-202.

_____. “On the Hebrew Verbal System,” in Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, ed.
Robert D. Bergen (Dallas, TX: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1994): 117-137.

_____. “Marked Syntactical Structures in Biblical Greek in Comparison with Biblical

Hebrew,” LASBF 43 (1993): 9-69.

_____. “Poetic Syntax and Interpretation of Malachi,” LASBF 51 (2001), 55-107.

_____. “Syntactic Analysis of Jonah,” LASBF 46 (1996), 9-32.

_____. “Syntactic Analysis of Ruth.” LASBF 45 (1995): 69-106.

_____. “Types and Functions of the Nominal Sentence.,” In The Verbless Clause in Biblical
Hebrew: Linguistic Approaches. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1999: 215-248.

_____. “The Biblical Hebrew Verbal System in Poetry,” in Biblical Hebrew in Its Northwest
Semitic Setting: Typological and Historical Perspectives. Edited by Steven E.
Fassberg and Avi Hurvitz, Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006: 247-268.

_____. “The Finite Verb in the Second-Position of the Sentence: Coherence of the Hebrew
Verbal System,” ZAW 108, no. 3 (1996): 434-440.

Meagher, Gerard. “The Prophetic Call Narrative,” ITQ. 39, no. 4 (1972): 164-177.

Pikor, Wojciech. “A Prophet as a Witness to His Call: A Narrative Key to the Reading of
Prophetic Call Narratives,” ST 52, no. 1 (Apr 2020): 73-95.

Rashkow, Ilona. “Current Trends in Academic Biblical Studies.” JBQ 50, no. 2 (Apr-Jun
2022): 73-92.

Rossi, MDM, Benedetta. “Jeremiah.” In The Jerome Biblical Commentary for the Twenty-
First Century. Edited by J.J. Collins, G. Hens-Piazza, B. Reid, O.P., D. Senior, CP.
London: T&T Clark, 2022.
 35

_____. “Reshaping Jeremiah: Scribal Strategies and the Prophet like Moses.” JSOT 44, no. 4
2020): 575–593.

Seitz, Christopher R. “The Prophet Moses and the Canonical Shape of Jeremiah.” ZAW 101,
no.1 (1989): 3-27.

Schmitt, Von Hans-Christoph. “Das sogenannte vorprophetische Berufungsschema. Zur

»geistigen Heimat« des Berufungsformulars von Ex 3,9–12; Jdc 6,11–24 und I Sam
9,1–10,16.” ZAW 104 (1992): 202-215.

Steck, Odil Hannes. "Bemerkungen zu Jesaja 6." BZ 16 (1972): 188-206.

Stenschke, Christoph W. “The Prophet like Moses (Dt 18:15-22): Some Trajectories in the
History of Interpretation.” VE 42, no. 1 (2021): 1-11.

Werline, R.A. "Assessing the Prophetic Vision and Dream Texts for Insights into Religious
Experience." In 'I Lifted My Eyes and Saw': Reading Dream and Vision Reports in the
Hebrew Bible. Edited by E.R. Hayes and L.S. Tiemeyer. LHB/OTS 584. London &
New York: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2014.