CULTIC PROPHECY DEJA VU

Draft: Not To Be Quoted Without Permission CULTIC PROPHECY DEJA VU Lester L. Grabbe University of Hull, England Although the terms “cult prophet” and “cultic prophecy” are found throughout the literature on prophecy, there seem to be few if any recent lengthy studies or discussion. The general concept has not been questioned, as far as I know. This is surprising, since such a major subject should have had challengers by now. However, part of the reason might be that the subject has been of little interest, despite the fact that prophecy remains one of the more plowed fields in Hebrew Bible scholarship. The idea that some prophets may have had a place in the temple cult goes back at least to the 19th century, though the first major treatment of the subject seems to be Sigmund Mowinckel’s treatment of it in Part III of his Psalmenstudien. Actually, much of Mowinckel’s argument was based on the genre of certain psalms, which he thought were composed by prophets. His argument was also tied into his thesis of an important and wide-ranging new year festival in ancient Israel, a thesis now less widely held. A. R. Johnson’s work has become a standard treatment of the subject in English. Like Mowinckel he argued in part on the basis of the book of Psalms, but his monograph, The Cult Prophet in Israel (1944; 2nd edition, 1962), is quite thorough in considering all the various passages that might be relevant to the topic. Although I suggested that the thesis of cult prophets ought to be challenged, it is not my aim to do so here. Indeed, I believe the arguments for the existence of cult prophecy in ancient Israel are convincing. This is despite the fact that the Hebrew Bible text is not explicit about cult prophets. In the rest of this paper, I shall present what seem to me to be some of the main arguments for cult prophecy but also what sort of a phenomenon it is that we are looking at. Arguments Supporting Cultic Prophecy in Antiquity 1. Prophetic Guilds Samuel was the chief cultic figure in Israel under Saul. In his time we first come across a phenomenon known as the “band or company of prophets” (ḥevel nĕvî’îm: 1 Sam 10:5, 10) or perhaps even “senate or school of the prophets” (lahăqat hannĕvî’îm: 1 Sam 19:20) or just “disciples or sons of the prophets” (bĕnê hannĕvî’îm: 2 Kgs 2:3). First, they are simply a group of prophets coming down from a high place of worship (1 Sam 10:10-11), whom Saul meets; at this point he is taken over by God’s spirit and prophesies with the prophets. Note their association with a place of worship, just as later ones are associated with the Jerusalem temple (see below). The next time this group of prophets is mentioned Samuel is at their head (1 Sam 19:18-24). We hear nothing further about them until the time of Ahab and Elijah and Elisha. In 1 Kings 22 Ahab brings together 400 prophets of Yhwh (v. 6). It is unlikely that these were just prophets living in isolated areas across the country who were brought to Samaria by Ahab. More believable is that they were regular prophets associated with the court and temple whom he could call on as needed. A similar gathering of prophets, but outside the court and temple, is associated with Elijah. When the time came for Elijah to leave the earth, he went to two separate groups of the “sons of the prophets”, at Bethel and Jericho, with whom he seems to have had a connection (2 Kgs 2:3-18). Elisha was also involved with the “sons of the prophets” on a number of occasions and seems to have been their leader (2 Kgs 4:1, 38-41; 6:1-7; 9:1-3). 2. Prophets in the Court of David and Other Kings One of the things we find throughout the biblical text is how intertwined prophets are with the temple and priesthood. Not all prophets have a temple association, of course, but many do. Far from being opposed to the temple and priesthood, most prophets in the Bible are intensely concerned with priests and temple, and even their criticisms show this desire to make these institutions better and stronger, not do away with them. In the story of David, there are frequent references to religious figures in his court. Zadok the priest is one, of course, but there are many references to prophetic individuals. One such individual was Nathan the prophet. He appears at a number of crucial points during David’s rule (e.g., 2 Sam 7:1-17; 12:1-14). The other main prophet was Gad the seer. He is referred to in 1 Chron 21:9 as “Gad, David’s seer (ḥōzeh)”, but he is “Gad the prophet (nāvî’), David’s seer (ḥōzeh)” in 2 Sam 24:11. Nathan and Gad are often mentioned together with Zadok, indicating their partnership in advising David (2 Sam 24:11; 1 Kgs 1:8, 26, 32, 34, 38, 44-45). In both 1 Chronicles 21 and the parallel passage of 2 Samuel 24 David sins by taking a census of the young men capable of military service. It is Gad who brings the message of God’s displeasure. According to the text (which is our only real source), after the time of David prophets appear sporadically in narratives about the Israelite or Judean court: if there was a regular office of court prophet, we are not informed of this. Curiously, Solomon is not linked to a particular prophet. Nathan the prophet is associated with the scheme to get Solomon made king and then with anointing him to that office, as is Zadok the priest (1 Kgs 1:7-45), but both disappear from the story afterward. Solomon is criticized for being led astray by his “foreign women” (1 Kgs 11:1-13); the text continues that “Yhwh” spoke to him and predicted that he will take away all the kingdom, except for one tribe, and give it to a servant (1 Kgs 11:11-13). How Yhwh spoke to him is not specified. Possibly it was directly, but this is seldom the way that God would act. More likely is that a prophet delivered the message, but we do not know for sure. Yet we should not overlook the fact that later kings often had named prophets associated with them. If they were not official court prophets, they seem to have spent a lot of time around the court and also the temple. Some of the most interesting episodes have to do with the various prophets associated with Ahab (1 Kgs 17-22). The most significant one is Elijah. In confronting the prophets of Baal, Elijah carries out the priestly function of repairing an altar of Yhwh on Mt. Carmel and offering a sacrifice on it (1 Kgs 18:30-39). It is interesting that one of Ahab’s ministers, Obadiah, hides a hundred prophets to protect them from Jezebel (1 Kgs 18:4), though why they are not mentioned subsequently, especially as giving assistance to Elijah in his difficulties, is a puzzle. Later on, contrary to the impression sometimes given, the 400 prophets consulted by Ahab were not pagan prophets but prophets of Yhwh, just like Micaiah who gave a different message (1 Kgs 22:5-28). They seem to have been cultic prophets, connected with the temple, since Ahab as the head of the cult would probably have freely called on temple resources for his needs when it suited him. A little later, Amos has an episode relating to the Bethel temple (7:10-17). The priest of Bethel sends a message to king Jeroboam that Amos is preaching conspiracy (7:10-11). Amos is not depicted as a prophet of the Bethel cult; on the contrary, he is presented as a foreigner. This has not presented some identifying him as a cult prophet (Würthwein 1950; Reventlow 1962). Another curious situation was that with regard to Hezekiah (2 Kings 18-20). A particular point to note is that the main prophet attached to his court was Isaiah, not least in 2 Kgs 18-20 (which describes the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib, as well as other episodes; these chapters are repeated with only a few minor differences of wording in Isaiah 36-39). Isaiah had his call in the temple (Isaiah 6) but was often in the royal palace and the presence of the king with messages and business. In Isa 7:3-9 with his message to Ahaz, king of Judah, we are not told of the king’s reaction. The messages Isaiah 6-11 are all positive in that Judah would eventually triumph, but they also contain warnings of sins and that Judah would suffer from the Assyrians before they are finally punished. Isaiah does not fit the stereotype of the cultic prophet, but is the stereotype right? At the time of King Josiah, the book of the law was supposedly found in the temple (2 Kgs 22:12-20). The scroll was given to the high priest Hilkiah, who had it brought to the attention of the king. The king took the initiative to consult the prophetess Huldah, who delivered a message to Josiah about the future of Jerusalem and his own future. When Josiah concluded a covenant with the deity on behalf of the people, he associated the prophets, as well as the priests and people, with the ceremony (2 Kgs 23:1-3). Which prophets were these? This looks like a group around the court or temple (or was there a distinction?). The last years of the kingdom of Judah, in the late seventh and early sixth centuries b.c.e., reveal several prophets in the biblical text. The most notable is Jeremiah, who not only had access to the king (at least some of the time) but was also intimately associated with the temple. He was himself of a priestly family from Anathoth, though there is no evidence that he ever served at the altar (Jer 1:1). He often spoke in the temple or at the temple gate (Jer 7:1-2; 19:14-15; 20:1-3; 26:2-19; 28; 38:14; cf. 36:5-20), and there were times when he had access to a room in the temple itself (35:2-4). This is why a few put Jeremiah in the category of cult prophet. Jeremiah does not fit our stereotype but, again, is our stereotype wrong? He was sometimes opposed by temple personnel (“priests and prophets,” in Jer 26:7, 8, 11, 16), but at other times such personnel were his followers or at least consulted him. Was these “prophets” cultic prophets? Another prophet, often overlooked (because he seems to be presented as a false prophet in the text) is Hananiah (Jeremiah 28). He is a prophet of Yhwh and speaks in the name of Yhwh (even though Jeremiah claims that he was not sent by Yhwh [28:15]). His message to Jeremiah is delivered in the temple, in the presence of the priests (28:1). Jeremiah’s reply is also in the presence of the priests (28:5). The temple as the stage for this prophetic contest, with the priests as the main audience, illustrates the importance of the temple to at least some prophets. Could Hananiah have been a cult prophet? Yet he seems to be the mirror image of Jeremiah. Among the Lachish letters in the late period of the Judahite monarchy, there seems to be mention of a prophet. This is in a letter from a military officer during the final period of fighting with the Babylonian army before the fall of Jerusalem. Letter number 3 refers to an individual known as the “prophet” (3.20: hnb’). It has been argued that his role in the letter was to intercede with Yhwh for the nation (Barstad 1993). This brief mention is intriguing but tells us little. Some have speculated that the prophet was Jeremiah, but that is only a guess. In the early post-exilic period, the prophets Haggai and Zechariah son of Iddo support Zerubbabel and Joshua in rebuilding the temple and restoring the religious situation in Judah. They could well be temple prophets, since their concern is almost solely with the temple. 3. Groups of “False” Prophets Many of the attacks on “false” prophets imply that they work in groups and proclaim only peace and good for Israel. This is a somewhat tricky situation, since a number of references to “priests and prophets” seem to be a conventional expression to imply comprehensive inclusion of religious specialists, or a listing with other officials which also implies the whole of society (e.g., Jer 2:26, 30; 4:9; 6:13; 8:1, 10; 13:13; 14:18; 29:1; 32:32; Mic 3:11; Zeph 3:4; Lam 2:9, 20; 4:13). But a number of these seem to be a reference to a social grouping well known in Israelite society. We shall ignore the prophets labelled the prophets of Baal or Asherah, since they really tell us nothing about the Yhwh prophets and the temple. We have already considered the prophets under Ahab (1 Kings 18-19) above. A number of passages talk about prophets who prophesy falsely, which are sometimes included as part of a list of officials who sin or act badly (Isa 9:14; 28:7; 29:10-11; Jer 5:13, 31; 27:9-10, 14-18; 29:8-9; 37:19; Ezek 22:28; Hos 4:5; Mic 3:5-7; Zech 13:2-5; Lam 2:14). Jeremiah 14:13-16 talks of prophets who lie by predicting that bad things (like sword and famine) will not come. The statement could be a general one, but does it not suggest that there is a group or category of prophet who predicts such “good” things? Jeremiah 23 is even more categorical, with an oracle headed, “Against the prophets” (‫)לנבאים‬. Mentioned are prophets of both Samaria and Jerusalem (vv. 13-14). The people are told not to listen to these prophets, because their prophecies promising that nothing bad will happen are false (vv. 16-17). Jeremiah is of course contrasting himself with these prophets (vv. 18-20, 28-29). The group is not specified and could include a number of individual prophets, but one has the impression of some sort of grouping to which many of them are attached. A similar condemnation against prophets collectively is found in Ezekiel 13, with vv. 1-16 detailing false prophecies that all would be well, and vv. 17-23 against women prophets (the charges here are random, though they include lying to the people). Jeremiah 26 presents an interesting scenario in which Jeremiah is sent to speak out in the temple court. Those who hear him are especially “priests and prophets”, who also respond negatively to his message (vv. 7, 8, 11, 16). One expects to find priests within the temple, along with some ordinary people. Yet prophets appear alongside the priests, and they and the priests seem to act collectively. Of course, we may well have a stereotyped scene created (at least to some extent) by the author, but it seems strange that prophets would have been added to the mix if prophets were not normally a part of the temple scene—indeed, part of the temple personnel along with the priests. Zechariah 7:3 speaks of inquiring of the temple priests and prophets. 4. Late References to Temple Singers 1 and 2 Chronicles mention prophets who occur nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible. For example, in 1 Chron 9:22 a seer (rō’eh) named Samuel helps David to establish the temple gatekeepers in their office. (The gatekeepers, while not priests as such, were temple personnel). 1 and 2 Chronicles also indicate that some of the Levites prophesied. 1 Chronicles 25:1-6 associates the sons of Asaph and others, who sing and play instruments, with prophesying: some of these “prophesied” to the accompaniment of musical instruments (25:1-3). 2 Kings 23:2 mentions that the priests and prophets went up with the king to the temple. That itself seems to hint at a cultic position for these particular prophets, but also the parallel passage in 2 Chron 34:30 has “Levites” instead of prophets. Some of these were sons of Heman, the seer (rō’eh) of the king who pronounced “words of God” (25:5). Elsewhere Heman is called a “singer” (1 Chron 6:18; 15:19; 2 Chron 5:12). At the time of Hezekiah, 2 Chron 29:25 makes reference to the establishment of Levites as players of musical instruments by David, Gad the seer, and Nathan the prophet. This has all been interpreted to mean that the books of Chronicles are indicating the former cult prophets have been assimilated into the Levites and temple singers. One of the sons of Asaph gives what seems to be a prophecy to Jehoshaphat (2 Chron 20:14-17). 2 Chronicles 20 describes an episode in which Judah was threatened by a coalition of Moabites and Ammonites, including the inhabitants of Mt. Seir (20:1, 10, 22-23). When Jehoshaphat addressed a congregation of Judahites, calling on Yhwh to protect them (20:3-13), Jahaziel (son of Zechariah son of Benaiah son of Jeiel son of Mattaniah the Levite, belonging to the sons of Asaph) responded with a message when the spirit of Yhwh came on him: they were not to fear but let Yhwh fight the battle (20:14-19). The next day the soldiers of the opposing army fought among themselves, killing each other and leaving nothing but corpses and vast spoil for the Judahites to take (20:20-28). It is not stated that Jahaziel is a prophet, but his position among the sons of Asaph suggests that he functions as a prophet, at least in this instance. Two listings in Ezra-Nehemiah give a division of temple personnel not found anywhere else. Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 divide the returnees into the people of Israel (Ezra 2:2-35//Neh. 7:7-38), the priests (Ezra 2:36-39//Neh. 7:39-42), the Levites (Ezra 2:40//Neh. 7:43), the singers (Ezra 2:41//Neh. 7:44), the gatekeepers (Ezra 2:42//Neh. 7:45), the temple servants (Ezra 2:43-54//Neh. 7:46-56), and the sons of Solomon’s servants (Ezra 2:55-57// Neh. 7:57-59). Ezra 2:65//Neh. 7:67 also mentions 200 or so male and female singers without designating them further, though one presumes they were associated with the temple cult. 5. Language and Themes in the Psalms Sigmund Mowinckel was at the forefront of comparing psalms and prophetic speeches. The language used and the themes treated by some of the canonical prophets suggest that the writers functioned in the cult. For example, Psalms 60, 75, 82, 110 look very much like prophetic utterances even though a part of the Psalter. The sons of Asaph who prophecy in 1 Chron 25 have a number of psalms ascribed to them (Psa 50, 73-83). The sons of Hanan b. Igdaliah, “the man of God”, had a chamber in the temple (Jer 35:4). If he was a prophet, he could well have been a cultic prophet. Some prophecies in the Bible, especially the oracles against foreign nations (e.g., Amos 1-3; Jer 1:4,10; 28:8; 25; 46-51 [MT = LXX: 25:1-13; 46:1-51:58, but different order; 25:15-38]; Isaiah 13; 15-25; Ezekiel 25-32; Num 22:36-24:25), have been thought to originate with prophets in the temple, whose concern—indeed, part of whose job—was to make sure that Israel or Judah was defended against external threats. Even if some or all these passages were by non-cultic prophets, they could well have been imitating the oracles of cultic prophets. 6. Prophecy as a form of divination in the temple. It took an anthropologist, Mary Douglas, to point out the obvious: the importance of divination in a sacrificial system (1999: 109-33). How were you to know a sacrifice was needed? How were you to know what sort of sacrifice to bring? How would you know that Yhwh had accepted you—had accepted your sacrifice and forgiven your sin? She points out that Leviticus in its present form is against divination; however, such may once have been part of the sacrificial system. If so (and her discussion is incomplete because she is not trying to reconstruct the earlier system), this divination would have been the responsibility of the priests: they were to pronounce the person forgiven and accepted by God, just as they pronounced on leprosy and also that the leper had been cleansed after certain criteria had been fulfilled (cf. Lev 13-14). But they also had priestly forms of divination, such as the divine lots of the urim and thumim. Perhaps these were used only on special occasions, not in the routine cultic activity, but who knows? Likewise, the priestly forms of divination might have sufficed in ordinary cases, but what about extraordinary ones? And, especially, what about the case of national emergencies? Here is where cultic prophets might have come into their own. Many of us would classify prophecy as a form of divination. Many think of divination primarily in terms of manipulation of mechanical devices, such as casting lots or interpreting the inner organs of sacrificed animals (extispicy). But prophecy would be a type of “spirit divination”. Note, for example, that the “spirit of God” (rûăḥ ’ĕlōhîm [1 Sam 10:10]) came on Saul, causing him to prophesy. We have one example in 2 Chronicles 20 which was discussed in Section 4, in which Jahaziel prophesied divine aid in a time of a national crisis. Conclusions Who were these pesky cultic prophets, then, if they existed? Some of these arguments carry more weight than others. The main difficulty we have is that cultic prophets are not described as such anywhere in the biblical text. We often have prophets mentioned in connection with the temple, including some important canonical prophets, such as Isaiah and Jeremiah, but this is in passing. No specific function of cultic prophets is laid out for us to use. Often this is enough to deter us, but Hebrew Bible scholars are made of sterner stuff: one does not have to have explicit information before developing hypotheses. Yet before we hike up our skirts and run swiftly away with righteous harumphs, we also need to recognize that all of us accept certain hypotheses for which the biblical text is less than explicit. Perhaps the canonical prophets most often accepted as being cultic are Habakkuk and Nahum (cf. Jeremias 1970, though he sees no evidence for Nahum). On the other hand, there has been a good deal of resistance to seeing some of the “classical” prophets as coming out of the cult. For example, the proposals that Amos and Jeremiah were cult prophets (Reventlow 1962; 1963; Würthwein 1950) have met with little sympathy. There are indeed problems with the argumentation used to prove this last point, yet one cannot help suspecting that ideology has had a heavy hand in bringing scholars to this conclusion. One cannot deny the close association that figures like Isaiah and Jeremiah had with the temple. Yet the clinching evidence for me are the passages in which “prophets”—plural—are associated with the priests and/or the temple. Jeremiah 26 is a prime example, but there are other passages, such as 2 Kings 23:2. Then there is the situation in the books of Chronicles (which I would date as probably from the early Greek period) which clearly assimilate prophecy and temple/liturgical singing. Here, it seems to me, is a historical development outlined by the text in some detail. This would also help explain why cultic prophecy is not so clearly described in the text as we presently have it. References Jeremias, Jörg, Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkündigung in der späten Königszeit Israels (WMANT 35; Neukirchen: Neukirchener Verlag, 1970). Johnson, Aubrey R., The Cult Prophet in Israel (2nd ed.; Cardiff: University of Wales, 1962). Lindblom, Johannes, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Blackwell, 1962). Mowinckel, Sigmund, Psalmenstudien: III. Kultprophetie und prophetische Psalmen (Skrifter utgit av Videnskapsselskapets i Kristiania I: Hist.-Filos. Klasse; Oslo: Dybwad, 1922). Reventlow, H., Das Amt des Propheten bei Amos (FRLANT 80; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1962). Reventlow, H., Liturgie und prophetisches Ich bei Jeremia (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1963). Würthwein, Ernst, “Amos-Studien”, ZAW 62 (1950): 10-52.