Prophets and Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible

Prophets and Prophecy in the Hebrew Bible 

The Meaning of the Term “Prophecy” 

Broadly defined, the phenomenon of Biblical prophecy begins with Moses and continues without critical interruption in a distinguished succession of persons through both Testaments of the Bible. The term “prophet” is applied to a remarkable range of characters appearing from Genesis 20:7 (Abraham) to Malachi 4:5 (Elijah). It is applied to surprisingly different personalities, from Aaron (Exodus 7:1) to Elijah (1 Kings 17-19, 21). 

The term “prophet” is used for both the “true” and the “false” (e.g., 1 Kings 22), and for both the relatively primitive (e.g., Samuel, in 1 Samuel 10) and the relatively sophisticated (Isaiah of Jerusalem). Prophetic oracles include both the highly visionary (Ezekiel 1:1) and the concretely ethical (e.g., Nathan, in 2 Samuel 12; Elijah, in 1 Kings 21; Amos). They also range from the seemingly objective perspective of an Amos, to the intensely emotionally involved attitudes of a Hosea or a Jeremiah. This is only to suggest the breadth of range of application of the term “prophet” and the concept of “prophecy” in the Hebrew Bible. 

In the very broadest sense “prophecy” is simply a particular way of looking at history. This viewpoint concludes that the meaning of history is to be found only in terms of God’s concern, purpose, and even participation in history. The very arrangement of the books in the Hebrew canon of Scripture presupposes such an understanding of prophecy. Between the first division, the “Torah” ( = “Instruction,” or “Guidance,” or “Law” or “Revelation”) or “Pentateuch” ( = “the five scrolls”), and the third division, the “Kethubim,” or “Hagiagrapha,” “the (Sacred) Writings,” there is a central category, the “Nebi’im,” “the Prophets.” 

This central division includes the books of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve (the so-called “Minor” Prophets). And the Hebrew canon refers to all of these together as “the Latter Prophets.” But this central division includes also the so-called “historical” writings of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. The Hebrew canon refers to all of these together as “the Former Prophets.” In this way the Hebrew Bible formally acknowledges that prophecy is more than just the prophet and his remembered words, but that it is also a way of looking at, understanding, and interpreting the history of the Hebrew people. 

More narrowly defined, of course, “prophecy” is the function of a particular succession of persons—notably Amos, Hosea, Isaiah (with the work of at least two great prophets contained in the book bearing Isaiah’s name), Micah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. These prophets all appear within the span of about two centuries, between, roughly, the middle of the eighth and the middle of the sixth centuries BCE. All of these are preceded and even anticipated, however, by Nathan in the tenth century and Elijah and Elisha and Micaiah in the ninth, and they are accompanied by, and followed by, a succession of distinguished but lesser prophets in the seventh, sixth, and fifth centuries BCE, people like Obadiah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Joel, Haggai, Zechariah, and “Malachi” (which may be simply a title, “My messenger.” 

What, then, is a “prophet”? Our English word comes from a Greek word, prophetes, which means, literally, “one who speaks for, or on behalf of, another,” or, “one who speaks in-front-of/before an assembly,” i.e., as a representative, usually of the gods. And this Greek word, in turn, is a fairly accurate way to render the Hebrew word nabi’, which also refers to one who communicates the will of God to others. 

The Hebrew word apparently derives from an earlier Akkadian word, nabu, which means, “to call, to announce.” There is some uncertainty, however, as to whether the Hebrew word has an active meaning, “caller, announcer, proclaimer,” or a passive meaning, “one who has been called (by God).” In either case, the word seems to point to the prophet’s role as a messenger for God. 

We can get an idea of the way the prophet’s role was understood in ancient Israel by examining a couple of passages in the Book of Exodus that deal with the relationship between Moses and his brother Aaron. These two passages appear to be variant versions of the same event; certainly, at any rate, they describe the same kind of situation. 

Exodus 4:10-16: But Moses said to Yahweh, “Please, O my Lord, I have never been a man of words, either in times past, or now that You have spoken to Your servant: I am slow of speech and slow of tongue.” And Yahweh said to him, “Who gives a person speech? Who makes a person dumb or deaf, seeing or blind? Is it not I, Yahweh? Now go, and I will be with you as you speak, and will instruct you in what to say.” But Moses said, Please, O my Lord, make someone else your agent.” Yahweh became angry with Moses, and He said, “There is your brother Aaron the Levite. He, I know, speaks readily. Even now he is setting out to meet you, and he will be happy to see you. You shall speak to him and shall put the words in his mouth—I WILL BE with you, and with him, as you speak, and and I will tell both of you what to do—and he shall speak for you to the people. Thus he shall serve as your spokesperson [literally, “your mouth”], with you playing the role of God to him.” [Translation adapted from Tanakh, the New Jewish Publication Society version, 1985] 

Exodus 7:1-2: Yahweh replied to Moses, “See, I place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet [Hebrew, nabi’]. You shall repeat all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall speak to Pharaoh to let the Israelites depart from his land.” [Translation adapted from Tanakh, the New Jewish Publication Society version, 1985] 

In these passages the language is used figuratively. Moses was to be in the role of “God” to Aaron and the Pharaoh, and Aaron was to be Moses’ “prophet”/spokesperson before the Pharaoh and his court. Moses would tell Aaron what to say, and Aaron would deliver Moses’ message. The analogy is clear: the Biblical writers and their hearers understood that a “prophet” is a person who speaks before other people as a messenger or spokesperson for someone else. In the case of the Hebrew prophets, that Someone was God. 

The Concept of “Messenger Speech” 

It has become a well-established fact that the form of prophetic utterances is actually almost identical to the form that was used for utterances of official messengers in secular life in the ancient Middle East. There was usually a standard opening phrase, “Thus says . . . ” [Hebrew, koh ’amar . . . ] or “Hear the Word (message) of/from . . .” [Hebrew, shim‘u debar- . . . ] And often, though not always, there was a standard concluding formula: “(this is) the oracle (literally, the “whispering”) of . . . ” [ne’um . . . ] or just, “says . . .  [’amar. . . ]. The Hebrew Bible contains many examples both of secular messenger-speeches and prophetic ones. Note, for example, the following secular speeches: 

Genesis 32:3-4: Jacob sent messengers ahead to his brother Esau in the land of Seir [Edom], and instructed them as follows: “Thus shall you say to my lord Esau, ‘Thus says your servant Jacob, . . . ’ ” [koh ’amar ’abhdeka ya‘aqobh . . . ] 

Numbers 22:4b ff., 15 ff.: Balak son of Zippor, who was king of Moab at that time, sent messengers to Balaam son of Beor in Pethor, which is by the Euphrates . . . Then Balak sent other dignitaries, more numerous and distinguished than the first. They came to Balaam and said to him, “Thus says Balak son of Zippor: . . . ” [koh ’amar balaq ben-zippor . . . ] 

2 Kings 18:19, 28: The Rabshakeh [chief steward, or cupbearer, of the Babylonian ruler, Sennacherib] said to them, “You tell Hezekiah: ‘Thus says the Great King, the King of Assyria: . . .’ ” [koh-’amar hammelech haggadol, melech asshur . . . ] And the Rabshakeh stood and called out in a loud voice in the Judean language: “Hear the words of the Great King, the King of Assyria. Thus says the King: . . . ” [shim‘u debar-hammelech haggadol, melech asshur koh-’amar hammelech . . . ] 

With those secular examples we may now compare some prophetic speeches: 

Amos 2:4-5: Thus says Yahweh [koh ’amar YHWH]: For three transgressions of Judah, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment: Because they have spurned the Torah [“Instruction,” “Revelation,” “Law”] of Yahweh and have not observed His laws; they are beguiled by the delusions after which their ancestors walked. Therefore I will send down fire upon Judah, and it shall devour the fortresses of Jerusalem. 

Isaiah 43:1-3a: But now thus says Yahweh [koh-’amar YHWH]—Who created you, O Jacob, Who formed you, O Israel: Fear not, for I will redeem you; I have singled you out by name, and you are Mine. When you pass through water, I will be with you; through streams, they shall not overwhelm you. When you walk through fire, you shall not be scorched; through flame, it shall not burn you. For I, Yahweh, am your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior. 

Speeches with this “Thus says Yahweh” [koh ’amar YHWH] formula occur 369 times in the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible. 

In ancient Near Eastern culture a messenger’s authority is that of the one who sends him. A messenger must be treated as if he were the master who sends him. Thus, Rahab the prostitute was rewarded for her treatment of Joshua’s messengers (Joshua 6) and Abigail washes the feet of David’s messengers (2 Samuel 25). On the other hand, disgraceful treatment of David’s messengers on one occasion results in warfare between Israel and the Ammonites (2 Samuel 10). 

Likewise the Hebrew prophets understood themselves to be “sent” as messengers. They understood that they had received a commission from God: “Go and speak to this people . . .” (Isaiah 6:9; cf. Ezekiel 3:4). They understood themselves as “sent” to communicate “the Word of Yahweh” [debar YHWH] to their people and to the surrounding nations. They considered that their authority lay not in themselves—in their opinions, or even in their religious experiences—but in the One Who had sent them. Accordingly their message rang with an authority that could shake nations. 

The Concept of “the Heavenly Council” 

Before any message is sent, someone must decide the content of that message. In the case of a royal messenger that someone would be the king, perhaps in consultation with his royal court officials, his councilors. And just as human individuals and groups would send out messengers as the occasion required, so also, the Hebrew prophets and their hearers understood that Yahweh, the Supreme Ruler, acting in concert with a Council of Heavenly beings, sent messages for His people on earth. These Heavenly beings originally may have been thought to be the vanquished gods of neighboring nations that had been conquered by Yahweh and made to serve Him. In later thought they seem to be considered “angels.” Both the Greek word angelos and its Hebrew equivalent malakh, used to designate such beings, are properly translated, “messenger.” (One of the “minor prophets” is never given a personal name, but only a title, malakhi [“Malachi”], which means, “My (i.e., God’s) messenger.”) 

The Hebrew term for such a Heavenly Council is sodh. This term referred originally to a small, intimate group of close friends. For example, in Job 19:19 Job laments that his sodh had turned away from him during the time of his affliction. And in Jeremiah 15:17 the prophet says, rather wistfully, that, because of the burden of his message, he did not join the sodh of the merrymakers, but rather, sat alone. 

But such a human council was not merely a chance collection of individuals. In a sodh decisions often would be made, and plans laid out. And eventually the term sodh came to mean, not only the gathering, but also the decision emanating from such a gathering, as in Proverbs 11:13; 20:19; and 25:9. 

The concept of a “Heavenly” sodh was of the same order. Its members are called qedoshim (“holy ones”) bene ’elohim (“sons/children of God”) or simply, ’elohim (“the gods”), or “the Host of Heaven” [tzebhah shamayim], or some similar phrase. And Yahweh is often referred to as “Yahweh of Hosts” [YHWH tzebaoth], especially in the Book of Isaiah (e.g., Isaiah 6:5). The following passages are good examples: 

Psalms 89:5-7: Your wonders, O Yahweh, are praised by the Heavens, Your faithfulness, too, in the Assembly of the holy beings [biqehal qedoshim, literally, “in the Assembly of the holy ones”]. For who in the Heavens can equal Yahweh, can compare with Yahweh among the Divine beings [bibene ’elohim, literally, “among the sons/children of God”], a God [’el] greatly dreaded in the Council of the holy beings [besodh qedoshim], held in awe by all around Him? 

Psalms 81:1 ff.: God stands in the Divine Assembly [ba’adath-’el; literally “in the Divine Congregation”] among the Divine beings [beqerev ’elohim, literally, “in the midst of the gods”] He pronounces judgment. . . . 

Many Biblical interpreters have suggested that in ancient Hebrew thought this Divine Council was thought to meet only once a year, on New Year’s Day, and that the fate of the nations was believed to be determined on that occasion for the coming year. The language of the opening scenes in the Book of Job seems to point to some such regularity. In the Hebrew text of Job 1:6 and 2:1 the definite article “the” is prefixed to the word “day”; thus, a literal translation of these verses reads: 

Job 1:6: Now it was the Day, when the sons of God [bene ha ’elohim] came to present themselves before Yahweh, and the Satan [i.e., the Accuser, Prosecutor, Adversary] also came among them. . . . 

Job 2:1: Again there was the Day, when the sons of God [bene ha ’elohim] came to present themselves before Yahweh, and the Satan also came among them to present himself before Yahweh. . . . 

This Council, like earthly ones, was thought to issue decisions: 

Genesis 1:16: Then God said, “Let us form a human in our image, according to our likeness; . . . ” 

Genesis 3:22: Then Yahweh God said, “See, the human has become like one of us, knowing good and evil [i.e., totality]; and now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the Tree of Life, and live forever—” . . . 

Genesis 11:5-7: Yahweh came down to look at the city and the tower that the humans had built, and Yahweh said, “If, as one people with one language for all, this is how they have begun to act, then nothing that they propose to do will be out of their reach. Let us, then, go down and confound their speech there, so that they shall not understand one another’s speech.” 

To Whom is God portrayed as speaking in these examples? The Heavenly Council! And from such a Council ancient Hebrews commonly believed that Yahweh sent messengers to announce and/or carry out the Council’s decisions. We may have a picture of this in the story of Jacob’s ladder, in which Jacob dreams of “angels” (messengers) ascending and descending a “ladder/stairway” between Heaven and earth (Genesis 28:12). 

Apparently the prophets understood themselves as having been permitted on certain occasions to be among those messengers who received and announced the decisions of Yahweh’s Heavenly Council. Thus, Jeremiah condemns the “false” prophets of his time in words such as these: 

Jeremiah 23:16-18, 21-22: These are the Words of Yahweh of Hosts [koh ’amar YHWH tsebaoth]: Do not listen to what is prophesied to you by those prophets, who buoy you up with false hopes; they give voice to their own fancies; it is not Yahweh’s Words that they speak. . . . For which of them has stood in the Council of Yahweh [besodh YHWH], has been aware of His Word and listened to it? Which of them has heeded His Word and obeyed? . . . I [i.e., Yahweh] did not send those prophets, yet they ran in haste; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied. But if they had stood in My Council [besodhi] then they would have proclaimed My Words to My people and turned them from their evil ways and their evil doings. 

Likewise the prophet Amos seems to be speaking about the decision of such a Council when he says: 

Amos 3:7: Indeed, my Lord Yahweh does nothing without having revealed His purpose [sodho] to His servants the prophets. 

It is out of such a background that we may understand most, if not all, of the prophetic call-visions. A prophet speaks because he understands himself as having been commissioned by Yahweh in the Heavenly Council. Take note of the following vision account told to King Ahab by the prophet Micaiah son of Imlah: 

1 Kings 22:19-23: But he [Micaiah] said, “Hear this Word from Yahweh! [shema‘ debar YHWH] I saw Yahweh seated upon His throne, with all the Host of Heaven [wekol-tzebhah shamayim] standing in attendance to the right and to the left of Him. Yahweh asked, ‘Who will entice Ahab so that he will march and fall in battle at Ramoth-Gilead?’ Then one said thus, and another said thus, until a certain spirit came forward and stood before Yahweh and said, ‘I will entice him.’ ‘How?’ Yahweh asked him, And he replied, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’” 

Compare that scene with this one from the experience of the prophet Isaiah: 

Isaiah 6:1-10: In the year that King Uzziah died, I beheld my Lord seated on a high and lofty throne; and the skirts of His robe filled the House [Temple]. Seraphs stood in attendance on Him. . . . Then I heard the voice of my Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? Who will go for us?” And I said, “Here am I; send me. And He said, “Go [lech], speak to [we’amartah] that people: ‘Hear [shim‘u shamo‘a], indeed, but do not understand; see [ur’u ra’o], indeed, but do not perceive.’ Dull that people’s mind, stop its ears, and seal its eyes—lest, seeing with its eyes and hearing with its ears, it also perceive with its mind, and repent, and save itself.” 

It is not relevant to the purpose of this discussion to interpret the rationale for the missions of the lying prophet in the first example and of Isaiah in the second one. But it is clear that the two accounts have in common a traditional concept concerning the way Yahweh’s decisions are reached and carried out. It is also clear that, while in the first case, Micaiah saw himself only as an observer, Isaiah saw himself as an actual participant in the deliberations of the Heavenly Council. 

Biblical interpreters refer to the concept of a “Heavenly Council” as “mythological.” That is, it is not necessarily reality, as modern persons understand the term. The Biblical persons who use it were attempting to describe Heavenly matters in inadequate human language. These presentations are the result of prophetic dreams and visions incorporating both the prophets’ perceptions of the will of God, and their contemporary conceptions about how things happen in the courts of monarchs (while also understanding that Yahweh is the greatest of monarchs). A modern person may choose to believe or not to believe that there is such a phenomenon as a “Heavenly Council.” But most people of faith can accept the idea that God communicates to every age in terms and concepts that persons in their own particular age will find understandable. 

It is clear from the discussion above that in the Hebrew Bible a prophet speaks because he understands that, as a result of a Divine decision made in the God’s Heavenly Council, he has been commanded to speak as Yahweh’s messenger. The prophet understands that he has no option in this matter (cf. Jeremiah 20:9).

 

“False” Prophets 

Yet it is clear from passages like Jeremiah 23:16-18, 21-22 quoted above, that there were others who likewise called themselves “prophets,” whom prophets like Jeremiah and Ezekiel accused of speaking only on their own authority without having been commissioned in the Divine Council. They accused such “false prophets” of having identified their own wishful thinking with the Word of Yahweh. Notice also these words of Ezekiel concerning these so-called “false” prophets: 

Ezekiel 13:1-10: The Word of Yahweh came to me [wayehi debar-YHWY elaw lemor]: “Child of human frailty, prophesy against the those prophets of Israel who are prophesying; say to those who prophesy out of their own imagination: Hear the Word of Yahweh! [shim‘u debar-YHWH] Thus says my Lord Yahweh [koh ’amar adonai YHWH]: Woe to those prophets bent on wickedness, who follow their own spirit without having had a vision, for they have seen nothing. . . . Theirs are futile visions and false divinations; they say, ‘says Yahweh [ne’um-YHWH],’ when Yahweh has not sent them, and yet they wait for the fulfillment of their word. Have not the visions you have seen been futile, have not your divinations been false, when you have said, ‘says Yahweh’ [ne’um-YHWH] even though I did not speak? Therefore thus says the Lord Yahweh [koh ’amar ’adonai YHWH]: Because you have uttered falsehood and envisioned lies, I am against you, says my Lord Yahweh [ne’um ’adonai YHWH]. My hand will be against those prophets who have seen futile visions and uttered lying divinations. They shall not be in the Council of My people [besodh ‘ammi], they shall not be inscribed in the lists of the House of Israel, and they shall not come back to the land of Israel. Thus shall you know that I am the Lord Yahweh. Because, in truth, because they have misled My people, saying, ‘Peace,’ when there is no peace; . . . ” 

The classical prophets of the Hebrew Bible always realized that the great unpardonable sin for any preacher is to have nothing worthwhile to say—then to go ahead and say it anyway! 

Prophecy and Prediction 

Essentially a prophetic message consisted of two elements, both of which were indispensable for the communication of that message. The first was a pronouncement of what God was about to do, sometimes in the form of a promise of good, but more often in the form of a threat of coming disaster. 

The second element was a reason or motivation to explain the pronouncement. In explaining threats of coming disaster such reasons take the form of accusation or invective or diatribe, exposing the sins and shortcomings of the people, showing why the threatened disaster had to be a necessary consequence of those sins, as a judgment from God. In explaining the promises of a more reassuring future, it was usual for the prophets to look for this motivation in the nature and character of God Himself, and in particular aspects of the history of God’s past dealings with the people. Such promises take on a very strong theological color because of the manner in which they reveal the prophets’ understanding of the innermost character of God. 

The prophets of the Hebrew Bible were not mere crystal ball gazers who would spend all of their time outlining the course of future events for all of history. Their primary mission was not to forecast events at all, but simply to speak on God’s behalf, interpreting God’s will in the context of their own times. When they proclaimed their message they would speak most frequently about the appalling social conditions of their own time. The distinction sometimes is made that the prophets were not so much fore-tellers as they were forth-tellers. But actually, they were a little of both. 

The prophets were not un-concerned about the future; in fact, they were vitally interested in both the present and the future. But an examination of their oracles in context will show that their concerns about the future were always about the more immediate future in their own age. Furthermore, most, if not all, of the predictions that the prophets did make were conditional ones, dependent upon the response of the people, and of their leaders, to the will of God as announced by the prophets. The prophets would predict prosperity or devastation, peace or war, depending on the degree of moral responsibility exercised by the leaders and the people before God. 

Although the prophetic predictions usually had reference to the immediate future bordering on the present time in which the prophet himself lived, many hearers were unwilling to believe that their dire predictions applied to themselves, and therefore insisted on believing that the prophetic messages were only for the far distant future. (In modern times it appears that wishful thinkers still want to believe that the ancient predictions do apply to the prophets’ distant future, namely our own time). The prophet Ezekiel addresses that kind of response directly: 

Ezekiel 12:26-28: The Word of Yahweh came to me [wayehi debar-YHWH e’lay lemor]: See, child of human frailty, the House of Israel says, “The vision that he [i.e., Ezekiel] sees is far ahead, and he prophesies for the distant future.” Assuredly, say to them, Thus says the Lord Yahweh [koh ’amar adonai YHWH]: There shall be no more delay; whenever I speak a Word, that Word shall be performed—[this is the] oracle (whispering) of the Lord Yahweh [ne’um ’adonai YHWH]. 

And thus, whenever we find the prophets making predictions, it is necessary to notice just what kind they are. They usually foretell doom in one case, or deliverance in another, but it is almost always a doom or a deliverance that is to befall the persons whom the prophet is addressing within his own generation. And more important is the fact that the prophet declares that they will experience the doom or deliverance as an immediate consequence of their moral and spiritual condition at the moment when the prophet is speaking. 

Thus, we encounter a prophet like Isaiah saying: 

Isaiah 1:19-20: If, then, you obey and give heed, you will eat the good things of the earth. But if you refuse and disobey, you will be devoured by the sword—[this is the] oracle of Yahweh [Hebrew, ki pi YHWH dibber, literally, “for the mouth of Yahweh has spoken it.”] 

And that is usually the case, even when the condition is not stated directly. Such predictions are not glimpses of a pre-determined future. The prophet simply proclaims the necessary consequence of a moral and spiritual situation. At the same time it will be the concrete realization of the prophetic “Word,” that expresses the righteous will of Yahweh in relation to that situation. When God is about to act, He makes known His purpose (Council decision) to His servants the prophets (Amos 3:7). 

Two passages in the law of Deuteronomy make an important statement about the fulfillment of predictions as a criterion of the genuineness of a prophetic message: 

Deuteronomy 18:20-22: Any prophet who presumes to speak in My Name an oracle that I did not command him to utter, or who speaks in the name of other gods—that prophet shall die.” And should you ask yourselves, “How can we know that the oracle was not spoken by Yahweh?”—if the prophet speaks in the Name of Yahweh and the oracle does not come true, the oracle was not spoken by Yahweh; the prophet has uttered it presumptuously: do not stand in dread of him. 

Deuteronomy 13:1-3: If there appears among you a prophet or a dream-diviner and he gives you a sign or a portent, saying, “Let us follow and worship another god”—whom you have not experienced—even if the sign or portent that he named to you comes true, do not heed the words of that prophet or dream-diviner. For Yahweh your God is testing you to see whether you really love Yahweh with all your heart and soul. . . . As for that prophet or dream-diviner, he shall be put to death; for he urged disloyalty to Yahweh your God—Who freed you from the land of Egypt and Who redeemed you from the house of bondage—to make you stray from the path that Yahweh your God commanded you to follow. . . 

Those passages imply that, while failure of a prediction may serve as a negative test, the fulfillment of a prediction still is no guarantee of genuineness if the prophet’s message departs from the basic tenets of the religion of Yahweh. True prophecy would turn people from evil (cf. Jeremiah 23:21-22 quoted above). Nothing could be clearer than that the essence of prophecy is not so much prediction and fulfillment, as such, but the declaration of religious truth. It is for this reason that prophets like Jeremiah and Ezekiel in their time denounced the “false” prophets in such a scathing manner. 

A person may ask, however, if anyone has ever compiled a list of prophetic predictions to find out how accurate they really were. Probably not. And in any case, there would be differing opinions, both throughout the intervening centuries and in the current time, as to just what constitutes a “fulfillment.” Not all prophets’ words were remembered and recorded, obviously. But there is a precise reason why the words and work of some prophets were preserved and “canonized.” Those who did the remembering and the recording and the canonizing did so precisely because they concluded that these prophetic understandings of Israel’s history in fact had stood the test of time. 

For the most part, it appears the canonical prophets were accurate in their specific predictions, but there are also some striking instances in which they were not (e.g., Ezekiel’s prediction that Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon would conquer the Phoenician island fortress of Tyre). Actually, most, if not all, of the predictions were conditional ones (stated or implied), dependent upon the response of the people and nations. A person could conclude easily that perhaps the response (the people’s repentance, for example) might have averted a predicted disaster. Also, many predictions (especially those about the eschatological future and those interpreted as “messianic”) were quite vague, and it would be difficult to determine whether a fulfillment ever took place. 

But even if predictions did come true, is there any way any modern person could demonstrate that the fulfillment was a direct result of a Divine action or “prediction”? Actually, no. In a large proportion of cases, it would be just as easy to conclude that the prophets were simply good readers of the signs of the times, when others were not. In our own modern hindsight (an advantage that the Hebrew prophets did not have), it is also easy for later generations to see the almost inevitable consequences that were likely to happen as a result of the bad or good decisions made by those ancient rulers and their people. 

Others may wonder, wouldn’t some of those predictions—for example, the conquest of the northern kingdom of Israel by Assyria in 622/1 BCE, and the conquest of the southern kingdom of Judah by Babylon in 587/6 BCE—have happened anyway, whether Israel and Judah were moral or not? Probably, but not necessarily. 

The Assyrian siege of Jerusalem in 701 BCE is an interesting example. An enemy with overwhelming force overran the entire country. Only the capital, Jerusalem, was unconquered, but it was surrounded and on the verge of starvation. Yet Jerusalem was not conquered, despite its total inability to resist. The prophet Isaiah is said to have “predicted” that this would be the case. The Biblical accounts in 2 Kings 18-20 and in Isaiah 36-38 attempt to provide at least three different explanations for the retreat of the Assyrians. None of them is satisfying. For reasons even the Bible does not explain, the siege was lifted. The prophet Isaiah and the people, in a faith-interpretation, saw in those events the hand of their God, Yahweh. We are not in a position to prove them either right or wrong. For us, too, it must be a faith-interpretation. 

No doubt, had the Hebrew people followed the urgings of the canonical prophets more closely, it is probable that their daily existence would have been more bearable, and their tragic experiences perhaps somewhat less tragic. But that is only speculation, and, in any case, there were many competing voices of “false” prophets, whose words also seemed plausible to people living in that place and at that time. Notice the famous encounter between Jeremiah and Hananiah in Jeremiah 27 and 28. It is easy enough now in hindsight to declare that Jeremiah was correct and that Hananiah was wrong. But how easy would it have been for the inhabitants of Jerusalem living there in Jeremiah’s time? 

We may then ask, does God in every situation really punish nations and peoples who are bad, and reward those who are good? Can anyone prove a connection between human actions and Divine rewards and punishments? Probably not. It is certainly true that the Deuteronomic historians of Joshua through 2 Kings believed there was such a connection, and many in the later wisdom movement (e.g., the Book of Proverbs) firmly accepted such a connection. But many other Biblical writers (e.g., the Book of Job, the Book of Ecclesiastes, and many of the Psalmists) concluded that the Deuteronomists were much too simplistic in their assumptions. 

All of the questions raised above assume that the essence of prophetic ministry was prediction, which, in any case, as we have seen, is an erroneous assumption. Certainly prophets predicted, and it is true that their words survived because people believed the prophetic words had been vindicated by events. But the prophets were not so much gifted with foresight, as with insight, and they attributed that insight to God. They were keen observers of events—some of them more than others—and it did not take a crystal ball in most cases to tell them which way the winds were blowing. In most cases their hearers and opponents saw the same things but many were just unwilling to accept reality. 

The prophets were certainly keen observers of the society in which they lived. When they observed the injustices in their nation, they spoke up, and they measured their society’s practices in light of the standards they understood their God Yahweh had set for them at Sinai. And by those standards they found their society wanting, and they therefore spoke about what they understood would be the inevitable consequences. 

The prophets were thus primarily preachers in the highest sense of that term, rather than prognosticators. The expression that describes them as forth-tellers rather than fore-tellers makes a very useful, if not completely accurate distinction. The prophets certainly did make predictions, and their predictions often did “come true,” but their predictions often were only incidental to their primary message. And the relevance of the prophets today is therefore not that they foresaw the course of historical events down to our own time, or down to the end of time. In fact, they do not speak so much about our age as to our age, and to every age. They speak to our age, because our age, like theirs, is also a critical time, and the issues at stake, now, as then, are still the spiritual and moral ones. 

Selected Bibliography 

Achtemeier, Paul J., and Mays, James Luther. Interpreting the Prophets. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. 

Anderson, Bernhard W. The Eighth-Century Prophets. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978. 

Anderson, Bernhard W. Understanding the Old Testament. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 4th ed., 1986. 

Beegle, Dewey M. Prophecy and Prediction. Ann Arbor, Michigan. Pryor Pettengill, 1978. 

Buber, Martin. The Prophetic Faith. New York: Harper and Row, 1960. 

Heaton, E. W. The Old Testament Prophets. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1961. 

Heschel, Abraham Joshua. The Prophets. New York: Harper and Row, 1963. 

Johnson, Aubrey R. The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel. Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1962. 

Knight, Harold. The Hebrew Prophetic Consciousness. London: Lutterworth Press, 1947. 

Koch, Klaus. The Prophets: Volume I, The Assyrian Period; and Volume II, The Babylonian and Persian Periods. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983. 

Kuhl, Curt. The Prophets of Israel. Richmond, Va.: John Knox Press, 1960. 

Lindblom, Johannes. Prophecy in Ancient Israel. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963. 

Mays, James L. “The Phenomenon of Prophecy” in M. Jack Suggs, et al., eds. The Oxford Study Bible: Revised English Bible With the Apocrypha. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992, pp. 164-171. 

Napier, B. Davie. Prophets in Perspective. New York: Abingdon Press, 1963. 

Newsome, James D., Jr. The Hebrew Prophets. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1984. 

Oxtoby, Gurdon C. Prediction and Fulfillment in the Bible. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1966. 

Paterson, John. The Goodly Fellowship of the Prophets. Studies, Historical, Religious and Expository, in the Hebrew Prophets. New York: 1948. 

von Rad, Gerhard. The Message of the Prophets. New York: Harper and Row, 1968; British title, The Prophetic Message. London, S.C.M. Press, 1968. 

von Rad, Gerhard. Theology of the Old Testament, Volume II: The Theology of Israel's Prophetic Traditions. New York: Harper and Row, and London: Oliver and Boyd, 1965. 

Robinson, H. Wheeler. “The Council of Yahweh” in Journal of Theological Studies, Vol. 45 (1944), pp. 151-157. 

Robinson, H. Wheeler. Inspiration and Revelation in the Old Testament. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1946. 

Ross, James M “The Prophet as Yahweh’s Messenger” in Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter Harrelson, eds., Israel's Prophetic Heritage. New York: Harper and Row, 1962, pp. 98-107. 

Rowley, Harold Henry. “The Nature of Old Testament Prophecy in the Light of Recent Study” in his The Servant of the Lord and Other Essays on the Old Testament. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 2d ed., 1965, pp. 97-134. 

Scott, R. B. Y. The Relevance of the Prophets. New York: Macmillan, 1968. 

Smart, James M. Servants of the Word: The Prophets of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960 

Smith, J. M. Powis, and Irwin, William A. The Prophets and Their Times. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1925, 2d ed., 1941. 

Ward, James M. The Prophets. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1982. 

Westermann, Claus. Basic Forms of Prophetic Speech. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1967; revised 1991. 

Westermann, Claus. Prophetic Oracles of Salvation in the Old Testament. Philadelphia, Westminster, 1991. 

Westermann, Claus. “The Way of Promise Through the Old Testament” in Bernhard W. Anderson, ed., The Old Testament and Christian Faith. New York: Herder and Herder, 1969, pp. 200-224. 

Widengren, Geo. Literary and Psychological Aspects of the Hebrew Prophets. (in series Uppsala universitets arsskrift, 1948, 10), Uppsala, Sweden, 1948. 

Wilson, Robert R. Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980.