The Minor Prophets

Q1 What is prophecy?

I tried to find definitions of prophecy on the internet, but was overwhelmed by extreme Calvinist websites each trying to prove their own eschatological interpretations.

McConville³ does not seem to contain a definition as such. His book covers those canonical books generally referred to as ‘prophecy’, but points out that some might fit more comfortably in ‘the writings’. A valid point that he makes is to distinguish between the life, work and words of the prophet himself, and the book recorded in his name. He may have written it, or it may have been recorded subsequently by others, particularly where there are elements of biographical narrative.

General usage of the word ‘prophecy’ in common English implies that it is the foretelling of the future, but this is only part of its dictionary definition: -

Prophecy n. faculty of a prophet (the gift of prophecy); prophetic utterance; foretelling of future events. [ME, f. OF profecie f. LL f. Gk propheteia (as PROPHET; see –CY)]⁴

So it also includes ‘prophetic utterance’, which following through the definitions in the same dictionary leads one to:

Prophet n 1. inspired teacher, revealer or interpreter of God’s will….etc.

Thus prophecy is not just about foretelling future events, although that can be and is often included. In Scripture it is more often in its first sense, a matter of revealing God’s will in the present tense, through inspiration by the Holy Spirit. It proclaims God’s word.^{2 (note on Luke 1:67)}

Q2 Who were/are the prophets?

There are various groups of people that one might term ‘the prophets’

The company of the prophets. This appears to have been a known group of prophets who would ‘perform’ in public together. Their behaviour may have been eccentric – see 1 Samuel 11 and 19 when Saul was overcome by the Spirit of God and joined the company temporarily, causing comment. It is likely that Samuel was their leader.

During the monarchy, there would be prophets included amongst the King’s advisors. This practice may have followed on from the role of Samuel with Saul and David, or may have been a copy if practices in adjacent kingdoms, or both. Some of these were clearly true believers, some were clearly pagans, and some may have been part of the religious establishment, nominally prophets of Yahweh but actually speaking their own mind (perhaps unwittingly, perhaps from secret paganism) eg Zedekiah in 1 Kings 22 v 19 to 25

Other prophets mentioned in narrative books, eg Elijah, Elisha, Micaiah (in 1 Kings 22 v 19 to 25), Nathan, etc. They may have been part of the groups above or may have been independent.

The prophets who have books named after them. Some may have been part of the above groups. Note that some are post exilic, which would imply that the company of prophets continued to this time.

Prophets in the New Testament - these would be anointed with the Holy Spirit, perhaps to a greater and more constant level than their predecessors. Eg Agabus and the seven sons of Sceva. John could also be included here for writing Revelation.

Modern times. I was brought up to understand that the verse in 1 Cor 13 v 9,10 meant that on completion of the Bible there was no further need for prophecy, as the will of God is fully proclaimed in the Bible. I agree with that in the context of developing Scripture – I don’t expect more prophecies to be recorded and taken to be of equal authority as the scripture. But I believe there is also a role for modern day prophets to speak the will of God into particular situations, though this must always be subject to the Bible and tested against it. I am sceptical of people who start off with “Thus saith the Lord…”, but if someone humbly and sincerely feels that God has put an idea in their heart, I will listen with interest.. It is important also to recognise different forms of prophetic speech. It may be a ‘thus saith the Lord’ thing, an inspired message that comes apparently from nowhere. It may equally come from someone who has studied the scriptures over a period of time and come to see truths therein which he/she then proclaims to the congregation. It can come unwittingly, words spoken as part of a normal conversation which have a deep impact on the hearer. Once I was washing dishes at the age of 18 when my elder brother bounded into the kitchen. “Hail, mighty man of God!” he said, and bounded out again. It changed my life; years of self-doubt and self-deprecation fell away as I realised that Christ didn’t save me to be a miserable worm but a man in his own image.

Q3 What is the purpose (i.e. role and significance) of the Bible’s prophetic writings?

The Word of the Lord came originally to speak to his people about the current situation in which they found themselves.

This has been taken down in writing, in some cases at a slightly or significantly later date, sometimes by a different person, and in some cases re-interprets the original message to speak to a new situation.

The prophetic writings also predict the future at several different levels

a. The first coming of the messiah

b. The church age

c. The second coming of the messiah, eschatology, and the end of the world.

Some prophecies have multiple fulfilments.

The reason that predictive prophecies arise is not that someone has found out how to discover what the future is, as if it is ordained by fate. Predictive prophecies are inspired by the God who not only sees the future in his timelessness, but actually writes the future and determines what it will be. He wants us now to know what he says about it so that we will recognise it when it comes. He doesn’t want us to be surprised by it, but more importantly he wants us to recognise that it is his doing, that it is not chance, it is in fact the fulfilment of the purposes he commenced in Genesis chapter 1. So when we read “there will be earthquakes in many places, but do not fear, the end is not yet” (OK yes, that is New Testament, not the subject of this session, but the same principle applies) we are not surprised by the boxing day tsunami. God is saying he is in control – nature has not run amok. And by the way, bigger disasters will come. If you listen to me I will keep you safe through them. And in the end the world will be completely destroyed but my remnant will be kept safe.

Q4 What relevance does prophecy have to twenty-first century Christianity? Where might we find it today?

It tells us about God’s relationship with his people in Biblical times.

We can assume that he continues to be the same God and therefore relates to his people today in a similar manner

The predictive element if the prophetic writings works on several levels: -

a. It told the people of the time about events in their immediate future

b. It told the people of the time about the coming of the Messiah

c. It told the people of the time about the end of the world.

d. For the people in the time of the New Testament, point ‘a’ above confirmed the reliability of the prophecies, giving the people confidence in the Messianic prophecies being fulfilled in their time, and also confirming those prophecies yet to be fulfilled.

e. Similar to point ‘d’, the fulfilments of points ‘a’ and ‘b’ confirm to us the veracity of these messages, and give us confidence in the reliability of those prophecies yet to be fulfilled.

Sadly, knowing that a prophecy in the Bible is true and reliable is very different from knowing what it actually means. As I indicated in my first paragraph under Q1, people are very inclined to make interpretations of the prophecies based on intimate studies of the detail, and having made their conclusions hold on to them vigorously, using strong language to defend their own view and vilify anyone who thinks differently. This is true both in terms of events surrounding the second coming of Christ and in terms of the role of the modern nation and ethnic group of Israel. I am reminded of John 7v 52 – “Look into it and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee”. They were knowledgeable students of the law, but got it wrong. (Jonah was from Galilee², God can raise a prophet wherever he feels like it, and where the prophecies predicted the coming of ‘the branch’, this apparently shares a common root with the name ‘Nazareth’ which is of course in Galilee). So in interpreting prophecy it is important to avoid getting too dogmatic about the details.

Q5 Sketch a timeline to show how the prophets/prophetic writings may have fitted with events of Old Testament history.

See Appendix 1

Note the difficulty in dating the prophets. It is natural for different scholars to lean towards dates that fit their own interpretations. My table attempts to date the life of the prophet rather than the book, which may have been recorded later.

Q6 Consider a pair of Minor Prophets and prepare brief introductions to each

Couplings are: -

Hosea/Malachi

Joel/Zechariah

Amos/Haggai

Obadiah/Zephaniah

Jonah/Habakkuk

Micah/Nahum

	Joel	Zechariah
Who they were	Unknown.	Well Known. Grandson of Iddo, the priest that worked alongside Zerubabel. i.e a priest as well as a prophet, and possibly the head of Iddo’s priestly family (Neh 12:163)
In which Kingdom they lived	Judah, pre exile	Judah, post exile
To whom were their messages addressed	Presumably the local people under threat from the problems mentioned below.	Returning Exiles rebuilding the temple.
When they lived	Dating of Joel is very uncertain owing to the lack of specific external references. NIV study Bible2 prefers an early date in the 9th century BC, at a time of natural threats from locusts and political threats from emerging superpowers, but acknowledges the possibility of it being post-exilic. McConville3 prefers a late date of 587 BC. Balchin at al1 suggest he was one of the earliest of all OT prophets and might have known Elisha and Elijah.	Post Exile. McConville’s dates3 lie between those in my other sources at 522-515BC. However, the second half may have been written later.
What were their messages	The day of the Lord is coming, like a locust swarm. The Day of the Lord will bring judgement on the hearer/reader, not just his enemies. God is at work in international evnts. The only hope is to repent, and receive God’s mercy. A call for Religious revival, and proclaiming the source of true hope in a time of crisis.	Go on believing that God is at work. There is an unseen spiritual battle going on. There will be judgement and salvation, and a hope of the ultimate triumph for God over the powers of darkness.
Suggest what (for you) is the key verse or verses in each book	I will pour put my Spirit on all people. Your sons and your daughters will prophesy … and everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.	Ch3 v 4 See, I have taken away your sin, and I will put rich garments on you.

References

Balchin et al, The Bible in Outline, Scripture Union, London, 1985

NIV Study Bible, Hodder and Stoughton, 1987

G McConville, Exploring the Old Testament Vol 4 Prophets, SPCK, 2002

The Concise Oxford Dictionary, seventh edition ED JB Sykes, Oxford, 1981

Appendix 1 Timeline of Prophets

Session 2 The Structure of the Bible

Q1 When was the new testament canon finally decided?

There is a lot of contradictory writing on this topic.

Evangelical literature seems to quote the Council of Carthage AD397 ¹ but Oesterley⁴ suggests that this council also approved the OT Apocryphal books, which I’m sure the Evangelicals would reject.

A synod at Rome was convened in the year 382 CE³ to discuss this matter but its outcome is lost - one possible outcome is the Decretum Gelasianum which omitsthe Revelation to John. Pope Innocent I, in 405 CE, reaffirmed the canon in a letter to Bishop Exsuperius of Toulouse^3, but it was not until the Council of Florence (1439-43) that the See of Rome delivered for the first time a categorical opinion on the Scriptural canon³

In response to Protestant expansion Rome convened Council of Trent in order to consider what, if any, moral and administrative reforms needed to be made within the Roman Catholic Church on April 8 1546³ And this confirmed the present NT canon.

Guthrie⁵ has studied available literature on the topic, and while in my book he does not enter specifically into canonicity he does touch on it in the discussion of each book, demonstrating that although theories casting doubt on the authorship and the acceptance of the books by the early church cannot be disproven, neither is the evidence strong enough to conclusively support the doubts and to exclude the traditional acceptance of these books as canonical and as written by the traditionally assumed authors. The doubts cannot be completely discounted, but there is no real reason to follow them.

Q2 How and why does the grouping of the OT differ from the Jewish Bible

Hebrew Canon² Law (Torah) The Pentateuch

The Prophets (Nebhiim) Former Joshua

Judges

Samuel

Kings

Latter Isaiah

Jeremiah

Ezekiel

The Twelve

The writings Poetical Psalms

Proverbs

Job

Five scrolls Songs

Ruth

Lamentations

Esther

Ecclesiastes

Historical Daniel

Ezra/Nehemiah

Chronicles


Christian Canon² Same OT canon, but topical order, and subdivision of some books .

Oesterley⁴ distinguishes the Eastern Greek OT canon and the Western Hebrew canon, supporting the use of the apocrypha in the Greek versions which he says formed the original basis of the Christian canon, but says that Pharisaic and Rabbinic influences later discouraged the use of the apocrypha with its Sadducee tendencies. This was carried into the church, but later it became a source of contention between Rome wishing to keep it in as per the original and the reformers wanting to keep it out. Oesterley has two thrusts - one is that the books would not meet Rabbinic criteria or were written after the canon was fixed. The other is that the books were used by Christians to refute Jewish views and it was therefore convenient for the Jews to discount them. Oesterley’s intention in this debate is to substantiate the inclusion of the apocrypha in the Bible, on the basis that the original Christians used the Septuagint rather than the Hebrew version. However, it seems likely to me that Jesus, an Aramaic speaker in Palestine with a mission firstly to the Jews, would have used and quoted from the Hebrew. And it is unlikely that the divine plan of Salvation would have had him using the duff version!

Q3 Origins of Chapters and Verses

Chapters Stephen Langton 1228¹

586BC - Pentateuch divided into 154 “Sedarim” to fit three year reading cycle²

536BC - further sectioning to 669 segments - one year cycle and to assist in locating refs²

250 AD - Greek divisions²

350 AD - Codex Vaticanus margins (first chapters)²

1227AD - Stephen Langton (Professor at University of Paris, later Archbishop of Canterbury)²

Verses Robert Stephanus 1560¹

First divisions were non standard spaces or numbers²

First standard verse divisions around 900AD²

Latin Vulgate first Bible to use both verse and chapter divisions in both OT and NT²

Q4 Does it matter which version we us

Theological perspective of translator. The NIV is very good, but does have an Evangelical bias. The Jerusalem Bible is a Catholic bible, with their interpretations. Differences can be very important, for example the division of verses in the 10 commandments is different, such that the command about not making graven images is merged into part of the first commandment in the Catholic Bible, but is a commandment in its own right in the Protestant versions. This is also part of the Islamic justification for NOT translating the Koran, and only interpreting it into other languages. The original Arabic is considered to be the only true version. For Christians, it is the intent of the message that is important.

Manuscripts available to translator. The KJV was extremely good for its time, but more recently older manuscripts have been found, giving rise to more accurate translations.

Language changes with time. “Thee” and “Thou” are seen by modern readers as being a reverent, submissive form of address to a might God. In fact they are the English equivalent of ‘Tu’ in Spanish and French - the familiar form, and the English ‘You’ is equivalent to the Spanish formal “Usted” or “Vos” and the French “Vous”. English has made the formal form of address the normal one, unlike Spanish and French. Back in the 80s I think, there was a series on TV about an English sailor trapped in medieval Japan - I think it was called Shogun. Of course, he fell in love with a local woman, and said to her “I love thee”, illustrating that the word is familiar not formal.

In summary, most versions have value, but it is important to select the right version for the task in hand and to know about its background and how this influences its accuracy.

Q5 Is the Bible written by God

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.¹

2 Peter 1:20-21 You must understand that no prophecy of scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origins in the will for man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (cf Carried along by wind in Shipwreck Acts 27)¹

Compare with Islamic doctrines re Koran - eternal ‘word of God’ revealed by dictation to Mohamed

Having browsed through the various bits I found in my own books, I found that they were written from a fundamentalist Evangelical perspective, which usually suits me just fine but wasn’t independent enough for what I was looking for. I followed the links on the Readers website and found my way to ntcanon.org, which looks at historical evidence provided from the early church fathers. Many of these come from Roman Catholic sources, with which I would not normally be comfortable . However, it was notable that the documents are very, very old. (I hear that there is not such a volume of near original material for Homer’s Iliad or even for the works of Shakespeare). It was also notable that the books had been collected together by organised people at a very early stage, and also that while there were variations for example the Syrian Church having a slightly different list, on the whole there was broad agreement on the NT. The cross reference table on ntcanon.org is particular useful for showing that although not all the canonical NT books have definitive support from all the fathers, there are only James, II Peter and II and III John that have any reliable queries against them. In contrast the non-canonical NT books have virtually no support at all. It seems therefore that the bulk of the canon was already well established (even though not ‘officially’) at a very early stage.

I started the study expecting to find all manner of criticism of the canon, but this has not materialised and I come away more convinced than ever that the New Testament is an accurate record of God’s revealed will at the time.

Granted, the fact that some early Christians believed these things is not a guarantee of their truth, but this has been built upon by the experience of Christians down through the ages as they have felt the words come alive as they read them. Also, some of the ‘quotes’ used³ to show that So-and -so believed XYZ book was canonical because he quotes it in ABC letter seem very tenuous - sometimes just two words which could easily come together in the thinking of any Christian person. Also Oesterley⁴ suggests all the same church fathers supported the apocrypha in the same way. It seems to me that the Evangelical writers only look for stuff that supports their case, while Catholic writers are equally guilty in the same way. It becomes not so much a search for truth as a search for bits to prove “I am right”. And I am just as guilty!

We are also at risk of trying to prove an element of the faith, which is always bound to fail since in my experience God will not allow himself to be tied to proof.

I find the ‘proof texts’ often quoted to be a little unreliable on their own as they don‘t list which scriptures they consider to be scripture - yes its good to have internal verification, but to be truly acceptable external verification is required. Notwithstanding what I have just written in the previous paragraph, I feel that the testimony of the early fathers that A, B, and C are in but X, Y, and Z are out is sufficient for that external verification. On top of that, I find that when I apply the principles of the scriptures in my own life, miracles do happen.

In answer to the question, Yes I do believe that the Bible is written by God, as it is unique in its origination and transmission through the ages, and has a powerful positive effect on our lives. There is a tendency among Evangelicals to become so obsessed with the Bible that they make an idol out of it, believing things because ‘THE BIBLE SAYS’ rather than because God says. God’s real word is incarnated in the form of Jesus - an eternal revelation of God more similar to the Islamic concept of the Koran than the Bible. I have also been concerned that there is a circular reasoning in selecting books for canonicity - we choose the ones that reveal God’s plan of salvation, but then we say the Bible is remarkable because whatever book you look in it tells you about God’s plan for salvation. On the other hand, I would steer away from doubt of the received scriptures, because they have been substantiated by the changed lives of believers. And I find that much of the doubts sown have less to do with finding truth than with finding ways to re-interpret God’s words for our own convenience, following the example of the serpent in the garden of Eden - “Did God really say…?” And this is taken to extremes by scholars whose real intention is to debunk the whole thing.

If we start to imagine that there are flaws and inaccuracies (bar those that come about from imperfect translations) or that it was limited to the knowledge of the inspired authors, then it starts to become unreliable. And if it is unreliable in part, then it is unreliable. A bit like being a ‘mostly virgin’ - you either are virgin or not, and the Bible is either reliable, or not. My experience is that it is reliable. Those that find it slightly unreliable end up picking and choosing the bits that suit them, or else if they are more sincere reject it altogether. But if we are to have the Bible as reliable, that should not preclude us from admitting that our own interpretation of it is not reliable, and needs always to be re-examined. Neither should the Bible take the place of God.

Present an overview of the Bible using a simple chart.

Reference

1 Matthew, Stephen, Getting the Most from the Bible (School of the Word Series), Havestime Sevices Ltd, Leicester, LE6 0UT, 1990

2 McDowell, Josh, Evidence that demands a verdict, Campus Crusade for Christ, San Bernadino, California CA 92414, 1977

3 http://www.ntcanon.org/

4 W O E Oesterley D D Litt D,An Introduction to the Books of the Apocrypha, 1935. First published S.P.C.K. 1935. Prepared for Kata-Pi by Paul Ingram 2003 katapi bible resource pages

5 Guthrie, Donald, New Testament Introduction, 1970, IVP, Leicester, UK