DIVINITY TURN UP - Copy

‘A’ LEVEL DIVINITY
STUDY PACK
TH
5 EDITION
TURN-UP COLLEGE
Publication staff
Publishing Director
[Type text]Page 1
Page 2
Sam Madzingira.
General Editor
C. Mhuri
Contributor
C Mhuri,
Text Printers
Chiedza Muchena; Crystabell Mudzingwa
Publisher
Turn-Up College, Zimbabwe
Office 28, N0. 131 Trade Centre Building
13th /14th AV Bulawayo
ISBN 978 0 7974 4546 8
Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Page 3
Copyright© 2010, by Turn-Up college

First published 2004
Re-printed 2007; 2009; 2010.
All rights reserved; Printed in Zimbabwe, no part of this book may be reproduced, stored
in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission from the
publisher or a license permitting restricted copying in the Zimbabwean Copyright Act.
This study material has been provided in good faith. It is illegal to reproduce it. Should it
be reproduced, we will take legal action against that person and anyone else connected
thereto. For further information contact Turn -Up College 28 Trade Centre, 131 Fort
Street, between 13 and 14th Street, P.O. Box 2759, Bulawayo.
Foreword

Page 4
I had the opportunity of discussing this book with several educationists, teachers and
students when it was in the process of making, and I felt at once that it was likely to
prove unusually useful. It gathers together a great deal of information which must
otherwise be delved for in many books and all this is arranged judiciously and on
practical lines. The authors’ outlook might be described as one of liberal commonsense
clarity, simplicity of expression, and examination – skills - focused. Our study packs are
there to offer a canvas for Zimbabweans to showcase their best ideas to help transform
the country into a knowledge- based society where citizens are free to express their
creativity, knowledge and ingenuity. We have set challenging objectives, but we believe
that only by striving to achieve the highest, can we elevate ourselves above the elements
which tend to hold our country back. However, if your see anything where you feel we
may have failed to deliver, and where we may have failed on issues such as content,
depth, relevance and usability, please let us know by using the contact numbers
(09) 61226/61247, 0773 247 358; or Box 2759 Byo; email at turnupcollege@yahoo.com.
We are here to listen and improve.
In my days as a teacher and as a student I should have welcomed this book warmly
because:
(i) It approaches the syllabus wholistically
(ii) It uses simplified expression
(iii) It has an in-depth coverage of content
(iv) It provides examination skills at the earliest stage of studying
(v) It provides local, international and commonplace examples; illustrations and case
studies.
(vi) It provides intelligent questions and answers of the examination type on a chapter
by chapter basis
(vii) Last but not list, it provides a clear platform for self-evaluation as one prepares
for the final examinations.
I have no doubt that learners and educators would as well find this book to be the best. It
is certainly a manual for success. Every one would find it worthy to have his /her copy. I
should not be surprised if the Turn-up College Study Pack became the best resource in
school and out of school.
Sam Madzingira
Table of contents

Page 5
Chapter Page
Foreword..........................................................................................................................4
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................11
Preface...........................................................................................................................12
General introduction......................................................................................................14
‘A’ level Divinity, comparative study, application and contextualisation: a
new syllabus requirement....................................................21
CHAPTER 1...................................................................22
Brief History of “the Old Testament Israelites”.........................22
CHAPTER 2...................................................................27
EARLY PROPHECY IN ISRAEL..............................................27
What is a prophet?.........................................................................................................27
How did prophecy begin in Israel?................................................................................28
Israel : from theocracy to monarchy..............................................................................31
Seers in Israel.................................................................................................................31
What were the developments and changes that occurred to prophecy in Israel?..........33
Theories on the emergency of prophecy in Israel..........................................................34
Who Was Moses?..........................................................................................................38
Was Moses a prophet?...................................................................................................38
Elijah..............................................................................................................................40
The contributions of Elijah............................................................................................40
Examination type questions...........................................................................................47
CHAPTER 3...................................................................48
THE BOOK OF AMOS.......................................................48
Introduction....................................................................................................................48
Who was Amos?............................................................................................................48
The Text of Amos..........................................................................................................48
The Oracles against the Nations....................................................................................49
Question:........................................................................................................................49
Proclamation of death Chapter 5:1-17...........................................................................51
The postscript: Amos 9:8-15.........................................................................................52
Clarification on the themes of doom and hope in Amos...............................................52
CHAPTER 4...................................................................55
THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH.................................................55
Who was Jeremiah?.......................................................................................................55
His call...........................................................................................................................55
His mandate...................................................................................................................56
Jeremiah`s symbolic actions........................................................................................58
Jeremiah`s conceptions of doom...................................................................................59
A vision of destruction: Jer 13:1-11..............................................................................60
Expression of hope in the book of Jeremiah..................................................................60

Page 6
The struggle against “false” prophecy...........................................................................61

CHAPTER 5...................................................................64
THE BOOK OF HOSEA......................................................64
Introduction....................................................................................................................64
The message of Hosea...................................................................................................65
The marriage and symbolic signs: Hosea 1-3................................................................65
Yahweh’s forgiving love (Hosea 3:1-5).....................................67
Prophecies of judgment and salvation Hosea 4-14........................67
Conceptions of hope: Hosea 11 and 14.........................................................................69
CHAPTER 6...................................................................70
BOOK OF ISAIAH...........................................................70
Who was Isaiah?............................................................................................................70
His call...........................................................................................................................70
Commentary..................................................................................................................70
The major conception in the book.................................................................................71
The prophet, king Ahaz and the Syro – Ephraimite war...............................................73
Shearjashub....................................................................................................................73
Immanuel.......................................................................................................................73
Maher – Shalal – Hash - Baz.........................................................................................74
Final comments on symbolic signs................................................................................74
WISDOM TRADITION AND THE LATER PROPHETS....................75
CHAPTER 7...................................................................79
A DISSERTATION ON THE SCOPE OF PROPHECY IN A ZIMBABWEAN
CONTEXT....................................................................79
CHAPTER 8...................................................................96
GOBBETS.....................................................................96
What are gobbets?..........................................................................................................96
General observations.....................................................................................................96
Presentation of gobbet answers.....................................................................................97
Summary comments on selected gobbet areas..............................................................97
Naboth’s Vineyard (1 Kings 21 : 1 – 29)....................................................................100
The Prophecy of Micaiah (1 Kings 22 : 1 – 28)..........................................................101
CHAPTER 9.................................................................117
THE FOUR GOSPELS......................................................117
General introduction to the four gospels.....................................................................117
The new testament and the Jewish history..................................................................117
Why new testament books were written......................................................................118
The Synoptics..............................................................................................................118
The Synoptic Question................................................................................................119
Solutions to the Synoptic Problem..............................................................................119

Page 7
Marcan Priority............................................................................................................120
Other views on the synoptic problem..........................................................................121
GE Lessing and J.G Icchorn........................................................................................122
F. Schleimacher...........................................................................................................122
J.J. Griesbach and C. Lachmann..................................................................................122
Examination type questions.........................................................................................123
CHAPTER 10................................................................123
INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPELS, THE BOOK OF MATTHEW.....123
Matthew in a historical context....................................................................................123
Persecution of the Christian church by the synagogue................................................123
Who wrote the book of Matthew?...............................................................................124
Explanations................................................................................................................126
The text of Matthew– Commentary.............................................................................126
The birth narratives......................................................................................................127
The virgin conception..................................................................................................127
The visit of the magi: Commentary.............................................................................128
The Herodian genocide................................................................................................128
The baptism and temptations.......................................................................................128
Baptism........................................................................................................................129
The temptations: Commentary....................................................................................129
The Sermon on the Mount (Mtt. 5 to 7)......................................................................130
Structure of the sermon................................................................................................130
Beatitudes....................................................................................................................130
The deeds of righteousness Mtt 6 : 1-18......................................................................133
The practical ministry..................................................................................................133
The parable discourses in Matthew.............................................................................134
The ministry in Jerusalem............................................................................................135
The discourse against the Scribes and Pharisees Mtt 23.............................................136
The passion and resurrection.......................................................................................136
CHAPTER 11................................................................140
THE BOOK OF MARK......................................................140
Introduction..................................................................................................................140
Who wrote the book of Mark and where?...................................................................140
Why was the book written?.........................................................................................141
Discipleship in Mark....................................................................................................142
The Prologue in Mark 1: 1-13.....................................................................................143
The Miracles of Jesus in Mark.....................................................................................143
Parables and mighty works..........................................................................................144
The passion in Mark....................................................................................................144
The resurrection : commentary and interpretation.......................................................144
Examinations type questions.......................................................................................145
CHAPTER 12................................................................146
THE GOSPEL OF LUKE....................................................146
Brief history of the book of Luke................................................................................146

Page 8
Who wrote Luke?........................................................................................................147

Date and place of compilation.....................................................................................148
Purpose and target audience........................................................................................148
Sources of Luke...........................................................................................................149
The birth narratives in Luke........................................................................................151
The birth of Jesus.........................................................................................................152
The practical ministry: Healing and nature miracles...................................................152
Parables in Luke..........................................................................................................152
The Passion in Luke.....................................................................................................153
The resurrection...........................................................................................................154
CHAPTER 13................................................................156
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN...................................................156
Introduction..................................................................................................................156
What is distinctive about John?...................................................................................156
Who wrote John and where?........................................................................................157
The prologue in John...................................................................................................158
The signs in John (miracles)........................................................................................162
The passion in John.....................................................................................................162
The arrest.....................................................................................................................162
The piercing of his side................................................................................................163
The empty tomb and resurrection................................................................................163
Resurrection.................................................................................................................163
The purpose of the gospel. John 20: 30 - 31...............................................................164
CHAPTER 14................................................................169
APOSTOLIC AGE...........................................................169
General introduction to the apostolic age................................169
Acts of the Apostles.......................................................169
Authorship...................................................................................................................170
Structure of acts...........................................................................................................170
Commentary on the events between Easter and Pentecost:.........................................171
Acts 1:1-26...................................................................................................................171
How the church began in Jerusalem......................................171
The coming of the spirit on Pentecost: 2:1-13.............................171
Peter’s speech: Acts 2: 14-36......................................................................................172
A portrait of the early church: Acts 2:42-47................................................................173
Enemies of the early church........................................................................................173
Apostolic resistance.....................................................................................................173
The call of Saul: Comments........................................................................................176
CHAPTER 15................................................................187
1 CORINTHIANS..........................................................187
Introduction..................................................................................................................187
Background Issues.......................................................................................................187
Association with immoral members (1 Cor 5:1-13)....................................................189

Page 9
Sexual abstinence. 1 Cor 7:1-9....................................................................................190

Marriage and divorce: 1 Cor 7:10-16..........................................................................190
Concerning food sacrificed to Idols. 1 Cor 8: 1-13.....................................................191
About women prophets 1 Cor 11:2-16........................................................................191
Divisions at the Eucharist 1 Cor 11; 17-34..................................................................191
About spiritual gifts: Speaking in tongues: 1Cor 12...................................................192
About the resurrection: 1 Cor 15.................................................................................192
The foundation of Paul’s argument: 1Cor 15:1-11......................................................193
CHAPTER 16................................................................195
HEBREWS...................................................................195
Precis............................................................................................................................195
Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews?.........................................................................195
The date when Hebrews was written?.........................................................................195
Destination: For whom was the letter written..............................................................196
References....................................................................................................................197
CHAPTER 17................................................................198
Romans......................................................................198
The letter of Paul to the Romans.................................................................................198
Date, occasion and purpose of Romans.......................................................................198
What pressed Paul to write?.......................................................................................199
“The Jerusalem crisis hypothesis’...............................................................................199
God’s impartiality........................................................................................................200
Abraham: Rom 4:1-25.................................................................................................200
The theme of justification in Romans..........................................................................201
Final exortations: Rom 13-16......................................................................................202
Closing remarks...........................................................................................................203
CHAPTER 18................................................................204
GALATIANS................................................................204
The social and religious composition of the galatian churches...................................205
The date and place of compilation of Galatians are debatable. Some suppose that
Galatians was written early in Paul’s career. Actually a very early date is impossible
since the letter was not written until at least fourteen years after Paul’s conversion:. 205
The purpose of Galatians: the immediate problems....................................................205
Focus on the following quotations:..............................................................................205
CHAPTER 19................................................................212
COLOSSIANS..............................................................212
The Setting of Colossians............................................................................................212
The problems in Colossae: The Colossian heresy.......................................................213
Commentary on the antiheretical polemic: Col 2:6-23................................................213
The final exhortation:..................................................................................................214

Page 10
CHAPTER 20................................................................216
1 THESSALONTHIANS...................................................216
The problem in the Thessalonica.................................................................................216
Textual difficulties.......................................................................................................216
The main themes in 1 Thessalonians...........................................................................217
Paul’s Ministry in Thessalonica...................................................................................217
CHAPTER 21................................................................219
JAMES......................................................................219
Precis............................................................................................................................219
Introduction..................................................................................................................219
Living faith and love: James 2:14-26..........................................................................220
Friendship with God. James 3:13-4:10........................................................................221
Conclusion...................................................................................................................221
CHAPTER 22................................................................223
PROPHECY AND THE NEW TESTAMENT:...............................223
Acknowledgements

Page 11
My special gratitude goes to all the members of the publication staff listed in this book.
Particularly, I thank the staff of Turn-Up Enterprise (Pvt) (Ltd) who soldiered on with the
tedious work of putting up this book. More so, I thank the copy typists, Miss Chiedza
Muchena and Crystabell Mudzingwa for typing up all the manuscripts that came from
different contributors.
I am most grateful to the following for their permission to reproduce copyright materials:
The Society of biblical Literature, Harper Collins Publishers (1988) for commentary
materials on various books of the bible and the bibliographies in it; The Zimbabwe
School Examinations Council for the divinity syllabus specifications on pages 3 and 4
and gobbets texts in the Old Testament.
We have been unable to trace the copyright holder of A.G. Auld’s article on Cities of
Religion in Israel Tradition (1978); and Anderson B.W.’s Living World of the Old
Testament (4th edition) 1978 and would appreciate any information that would enable us
to do so.
Thank you
S. Madzingira
Director of Studies
Preface

Page 12
The new ‘A’ Level Divinity syllabus brings up a new component that will feature in the
examinations up to 2012 according to the circular number 14 of May 3, 2011. This
component puts Zimbabwe in the context of comparative study on the prophetic
paradigm. The underlying assumption is that the phenomenon of prophecy, which has so
much been studied in the context of Israelite history, must as well be envisaged in the
Zimbabwean environment, because there is proof that prophecy existed and still exists in
Zimbabwe.
Despite the fact that there is not much written literature about it at the moment, the
curriculum planners will still feel that our students should be given the chance and the
playground to exercise their comparative faculty to draw similarities between scenarios
from different nations. One teacher submitted that, “The government seeks to train its
own people to analyse their own immediate environs and apply the issues to critical
thinking. The motive is not to put-off the students, but to groom them to build confidence
in themselves by expressing what is not even written down in the textbooks.”
In concurrence with the above submission, the Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity study
pack is the most up to date resource on this aspect as it champions the initial attempt to
give both teachers and students the insight into the new syllabus requirement. It gives
interesting, relevant issues with the majesty of categorisation and classification of the
issues in question. There is definitely a need for educators and learners to acquire the
latest edition of the Turn-Up College Study Pack so that they can all be introduced to the
new syllabus requirement.
This module is prepared with the examination in mind. It approaches the Old Testament
and New Testament, four gospels and the apostolic age on a thematic basis. The major
themes are tackled and analysed using special sources. The analysis and comments are
derived from the most recent scholars on the subject, who are experts’ in particular areas.
The study pack follows both Cambridge and ZIMSEC reports and evaluations on the
examinations that have been written in Divinity in the past years. No doubt that the study
pack replaces any other personal or classroom notes that tend to lose coherence and
clarity as time lapses.
However, this book is not a verse -by- verse commentary per se; it is simply a study pack,
i.e. a collection of important materials only that enable the student to tackle the
examination successfully. What it contains is compulsory. Therefore every student needs
it. But the student is warned not to cram the answers or the sample essays that are in this
module. The sole purpose of these sample essays is to demonstrate the skills of question
interpretation and focusing. Therefore the student should only study the sample essays
with the aim of checking the appropriate approaches to examination questions.
While this warning could apply also to the gobbet answers in this module, it is sincere to
inform the student that the information that has been given in these answers is
compulsory. Therefore the student should familiarize himself with the Gobbet answers
that are in this study pack without choice.

Page 13
The vision of the study pack project is to create a self-sufficient information base for the
student. With this aim in mind this study pack provides all the necessary topical material
in a simplified manner. There after the study pack provides a wide range of examination-
type questions at the end of each topic area. The copyright owners of the publication,
who in this case is Turn-Up College, have the solutions to all the examination questions
in this study pack.
‘Faith in Your Success’ is our motto.
General introduction
The Syllabus for ‘A’ Level Divinity requires a scholarly study of Israelite prophecy from
its formative stages up to its later form. In the New Testament component it is also

Page 14
expected that students should study carefully Jewish history as it reflects on the life and
teaching of Jesus Christ according to the four gospels and also the history of the early
church and the apostolic era and the Pauline doctrines in the apostolic age.
The subject of Divinity is about biblical interpretation not theological appreciation. This
is certainly a skills-based exercise. One scholar, Eldon J. Epp, once expressed that
biblical interpretation and its understanding cannot be achieved without first of all
understanding the socio-cultural nature of the people involved. In view of this fact, the
historical circumstances of the Israelites at some specific times were the basis of the
prophets’ assignment. These prophets were not “madmen”, without an agenda. They all
had a specific mandate from Yahweh, hence they were called prophets of Yahweh.
Similarly the Christ event was not an isolated event occurring in a vacuum. It must be
investigated from the point of view of the historical background of the book and its
audience. Any interpretation done outside this scope is obsolete and misleading, and so
does not meet the new syllabus requirements that: Candidates need to have a basic
overall view of the history of Israel. --- They should understand the context of the events
and people they are studying ----. Throughout, they should be aware of the views of
modern scholars. (see New Zimsec Syllabus).Pages 3-4
In the case of Old Testament prophets, each prophet was divinely assigned by Yahweh to
proclaim God’s will over his people in the light of prevailing conditions. It becomes
common cause to establish first the status quo in the societies where the prophet was to
prophesy. The message of the prophet would always be based on or relate to the socio-
religious, political and economic environment of the target people. To this effect James
Muillenburg wrote that: “Prophets came with a particular word at a particular time”.
The method of delivering the message would sometimes depend on the vocation or
experiences of the prophet e.g. Amos used imageries derived from the agro-industry. He
makes references to fruits, sheep and cattle in chapters 3; 4 and 8, because he came from
a farming background, “a dresser of sycamores” 7:14. Similarly Isaiah reflects on the
political events of his time using symbolic signs, while Jeremiah, articulates on the social
dynamics in Judah using dramatizations and personal experiences e.g. Overholt (1988)
says that Jeremiah refrains from marriage because the land is doomed. (Thomas
Overholt).
In the New Testament, the human and economic geography of Palestine posts some
decisive events in the life of Jesus e.g. fishing, and transport – boats and donkeys. On the
political ground the problems of the early Christian communities versus colonial interests
in Palestine and the thoughts of the old order (Judaism) line up a scenario that is
specifically historical. Therefore biblical interpretation is a practical exercise. This study
pack demonstrates this skill accordingly.
Syllabus Information
‘A’ Level Divinity is a higher level course based on the Bible. In this subject, candidates
are expected to display high language skills and proficiency. The ability to present

Page 15
information, ideas, descriptions and arguments, clearly and logically, with supporting
evidence (textual or scholarly) is a required ability. Both Cambridge and ZIMSEC offer
the examination only in November. Thus, there is no divinity exam in June. The ZIMSEC
examination requires candidates to register carefully for only two papers, although three
papers are set. Papers 9054/1; 2; 3 are available for ZIMSEC, where upon candidates are
to choose any two from the three. In Cambridge exams, candidates would attempt all
papers.
Syllabus Aims
The educational aims of Cambridge and ZIMSEC Advanced Level Divinity are for
candidates to gain biblical knowledge, understanding and the requisite skills. In broad
terms these include:
1. Gaining a greater knowledge and understanding of biblical periods, themes, and the
history of the relevant people.
2. Gaining greater awareness of biblical concepts such as similarity and difference,
form, contextualization, change and continuity, cause and effect, and how exegetes
express them.
3. Appreciating the nature and diversity of biblical thoughts and how exegetes express
them.
4. Exploring a variety of approaches to different aspects of History and different
interpretations of particular historical issues.
5. Thinking independently and making informed judgments on issues.
6. Developing empathy with people living in different places and at different times.
Assessment objectives
To pass Cambridge and ZIMSEC Advanced Level History, candidates must be able to
achieve the following competencies:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of biblical issues during the pre-
canonical, the Christ, and the Apostolic historical periods.
2. Distinguish and assess different approaches to, interpretations of, and opinions
about the Jewish and Christian Religions.
NB: Notice that at A- level, analysis as opposed to knowledge-based descriptions, is

the key determinant for a higher grade (A or B grades). Candidates need to realize
that mere descriptive writing, no matter how full and informative it might be, will
never go beyond a grade C at A-Level.
3. Present clear, concise, logical and relevant arguments.
NB: Since candidates are expected to answer in continuous prose, the quality of
the language they use will be taken into account in marking. Although a general
understanding that candidates are writing in their second language is made, no
attempt is made by examiners to round off unclear sentences or positively

Page 16
reinterpret vague expressions. Unclear or vague expression will naturally discredit

the candidates concerned.
Assessment of Answers at advanced Level
Candidates’ answers should be focused on the question and show a depth of

biblical understanding, analysis and evidence of reading. In addition, answers
should demonstrate a high level of conceptual understanding and/or an evaluation
of the assumptions implied in the question.
An answer which merits a grade ‘A’ at A’ Level adequately meets the
requirements of a three-prong criteria which can be basically represented as
follows below:
Relevance to the question
Divinity
Essay
Explanatory Adequacy of factual

or knowledge
analytical in approach
Therefore relevance, adequacy of factual knowledge and analysis are all essential
elements of an answer which merits an ‘A’ grade. If an answer is highly relevant to the
question, contains adequate factual and illustrative detail, it cannot get an ‘A’ grade if
only the style is descriptive to narrative. By the same token, if an answer is highly
analytical but barely inadequate or incomplete (i.e to say, two to three paragraphs) it
cannot rise to the standard of an ‘A’.
Cambridge and ZIMSEC examiners have adopted a common platform for assessing
answers at this level and these mark thresholds are called generic mark bands.
Examiners will assess which level of response best reflects most of the answers. An
answer will not be required to demonstrate all of the descriptions in a particular level to
qualify for a Mark Band. A clear understanding of the Generic mark band is very critical
indeed. The mark band descriptions also indirectly outline the competencies which must
be reached by the candidates as they offer their answers. The generic Mark bands are
therefore as follows:
Band 1: 21-25 Marks

Page 17
The approach will be consistently analytical and explanatory rather than descriptive and
narrative.
Essays will be fully relevant. The argument will be structured coherently and supported
by very appropriate factual material and ideas (evidence). The writing will be accurate.
At the lower end of the band, there may be some weaker sections, but the overall quality
will show that the candidate is in control of the argument. The best answers must be
awarded 25 marks.
Candidates usually visualise examiners as vindictive and hard assessors, always ready to
penalise them. Nothing can be further than this from the truth: these examiners do
appreciate that the candidates are 16-18 year old youngsters who are under the severe
limitations of time. Be that as it may, the triangular diagram of key requirements will be
applied to assess scripts for this level. Answers ought to be consistently explanatory or
analytical in their approach to the question.
Band 2: 18-20 marks

Essays will be focused clearly on the demands of the question, but there will be some
unevenness. The approach will be mostly analytical or explanatory rather than description
to narrative. The answer will be mostly relevant. Most of the arguments will be structured
coherently and supported by largely accurate factual and scholarly material. The
impression will be that a good solid answer has been provided.
It is important to note too that Bands 1 and 2 answers are where the high-fliers land; i.e.
where the A and B grades are located. What usually separates Band 2 from Band 1
answers is that answers in band 2 lack the balanced approach of the top band although the
style of writing remains explanatory. Band 1 answers are more thorough in their
coverage. For instance, in a question, “- A Band 1 answer will tend to focus on both
aspects of the Berlin conference that it was indeed a driving force to the scramble for
Africa and that when it was in session territories were being taken up in accordance with
the “Doctrine of Effective Occupation.” The other side is that by the time the conference
was held most of Africa had already been taken up by European invaders, and that the
conference mostly rubber-stamped a process that had already taken place. On the other
hand, a Band 2 answer will be explanatory but may focus on one line of argument.
Band 3: 16-17 Marks

Essays will reflect a clear understanding of the question and a fast attempt to provide an
argument and factual knowledge to answer it. The approach will contain analysis or
explanation but there may be some heavily descriptive or narrative passages. The answer
will of course be relevant. Essays will achieve a genuine argument but may lack balance
and depth in factual knowledge. Most of the answers will be structured satisfactorily but
some parts may lack full coherence.
This mark band is best described as one where there is heavy description and narration of
relevant fact but analysis is in the form of intermittent comments as opposed to invariable
analysis/explanation.
Band 4: 14-15 Marks

Page 18
Essays will indicate attempts to argue relevantly although often implicitly. The approach
will depend on some heavily descriptive or narrative passages than on analysis or
explanation which may be limited to introductions and conclusions. Factual material,
sometimes very full, will be used to impart information or describe events rather than to
address directly the requirements of the question. The structure of the argument could be
organised more effectively.
It is important to add that Band 4 answers are basically heavily descriptive and what
usually separates them from the band below (Band 5) is the amount of relevant factual
knowledge given.
Band 5: 11-13
Essays will offer some appropriate elements but there will be little attempt generally to
link factual material to the requirements of the question. The approach will lack analysis
and the quality of the description or narrative, although sufficiently accurate and relevant
to the topic if not the particular question, will not be linked effectively to the argument.
The structure will show weaknesses and the treatment of topics within the answer will be
unbalanced.
Band 5 is also known for answers which just make a basic pass. The narrative is thin but
sufficient enough to make a borderline pass. Answers in this band are usually therefore
tricky to accurately place.
Band 6; 8-10 marks

Essays will not be properly focused on the requirements of the question. There may be
many unsupported assertions and commentaries that lack sufficient factual support. The
arguments may be supported, but being of limited relevance to the topic and there may be
confusion about the implications of the question.
Band 7; 0-7 marks

Essays will be characterised by insignificance, irrelevance, or arguments that do not
begin to make significant points. The answers may be largely fragmentary and
incoherent. Marks at the bottom of this Band will be given very rarely (i.e. O %) because
even the most wayward and fragmentary answers usually make at least a few valid
points.
Bands 6 and 7 are for the very weak answers which do not contain adequate factual
knowledge to be elevated to a basic pass.
In conclusion it is important to emphasize the fact that any essay begins with no mark at
all and then builds up the credit which is appropriate for whatever mark band. It is
therefore important to practice the integration of the requisite skills in each and every
assignment. This will eventually nurture the candidate into the ‘A’ grade.
Structure of the Examination

 Three papers are set.

Page 19
 Paper 9054/1 is compulsory

 Second paper, choose either paper 2 or paper 3.
 In all cases, answer only 4 questions of your choice across the three sections A, B,
and C.
In all papers, the examination is broken into 3 sections A, B and C. You are expected to
answer four questions in any paper you have registered for. Section C has gobbets or
context based questions 1 to 8 or 9. This happens to be a compulsory question in all the
papers, but you have to choose only some four gobbets and answer them. Please note that
the four gobbets you choose from section C of any paper constitute one question. Each
gobbet has six and a quarter marks, hence the four will make 25 marks. Your three other
questions can be raised from sections A and B, the way you like it. But note that you have
to choose at least a question from every section. All questions carry equal marks – a total
of 25 marks.
NB: that in paper 1, the gobbets texts are prescribed by the syllabus. The Turn-Up study
pack highlights all the prescribed texts for this paper. But in paper two and three, there
are no prescribed texts. Gobbets are set from anywhere across the syllabus for that
particular paper.
The total score of the 2 papers is obtained as follows:

Student x in paper 1 got 90%. In the second paper (registered for paper 3), X got 90%.
The total of the two papers is 90% + 90% = 180%. Divide it by 2 to find the average i.e
180% ÷ 2 = 90%. This is the final mark in the whole exam, which is rated symbol A,
equivalent to 5 points.
Weighting of answers in all papers

 Knowledge constitutes 40%
 Analysis and interpretation constitutes 30%
 Evaluation and application constitutes 30%
Total 100%
Therefore, for a valid answer, no aspect of the weighting criterion should be neglected.
Why is this Study Pack the best resource?
Those who teach divinity and those who study it at ‘A’ level will certainly agree with us
that this subject is one of the most difficult A’ level subjects to teach. Actually there is
nothing unique about this subject, but perhaps the following reasons will explain why the
subject appears to be difficult:

Page 20
1. There is no college or institution that trains a divinity teacher.

2. There is no textbook that is specifically an ‘A’ Level Divinity textbook.
Therefore an ordinary teacher who probably studied religious studies at University level
or some theologian from a theological college has to make himself a real teacher, through
extensive teaching of the subject over the years, and self –training for success as a good
divinity teacher can only be proved or confirmed or measured by your constant
production of excellent results in the subject.
As aforementioned there is no specific divinity textbook. The traditional commentaries

that are often prescribed for reading are not specifically meant for ‘A’ level. To mention
some: Peake’s Bible Commentary, The living world of the Old Testament by B.W
Anderson; The history of Israel by J. Bright etc these commentaries do not address any
specific syllabus requirement wholistically. More sincerely the authors of these books
were perhaps professors of religion at some universities. But they certainly were not
divinity teachers. Therefore ‘A’ level divinity material has to be sifted from the enormous
morass of biblical literature known as commentaries. By this fact it then follows that the
traditional commentaries are of course helpful but only to a certain extent.
One of the problems that students encounter in ‘A’ level divinity is that some of the
requirements that the syllabus emphasize are not easily visible from these conventional
commentaries. For example both the new and old divinity syllabus emphasized that
throughout candidates should be aware of the views of modern scholars. Neither the
syllabus itself nor the commentaries themselves define what a modern scholar is. Is a
1950s scholar a modern one? What of a 1970’s scholar? The reasonable assumption is
that candidates are expected to be abreast with the latest works from renowned
intellectuals, for example, professors in the 1980’s up to the present day. In view of this
assumption and other matters related to it in this discussion, the author of this ‘A’ level
study pack worked out an up to date resource that any dynamic examiner will never
disregard. The study pack is a compilation of compulsory issues in the syllabus. It treats
main themes only and draws comments from well- known experts in particular topics, not
general scholars who try everything. The study pack also demonstrates how divinity
questions are interpreted and how to focus on the question. This important skill is
demonstrated in the short model essays that are encorporated in the study pack. But these
are not meant to be exhaustive essays for cramming. A supplementary questions and
answers module is available to complement the main study pack.
Finally, the study pack includes and demonstrates the topic on gobbets – an aspect that
was not known prior to the 90’s. Both teachers and students are often confused by the
‘gobbets’ requirements particularly in the Old Testament paper. It is only in this study
pack that the issue is explained and demonstrated. Our honest conclusion is therefore that
every divinity; teacher and student will need this resource especially when they prepare
for their examinations in Divinity.

Page 21
‘A’ level Divinity, comparative study, application and contextualisation: a new

syllabus requirement
Definition of terms
1) Comparative study
2) Contextualisation and application
1) Comparative study is a concept of study that looks at two or more case studies to
draw any similarities and a bit of contrast where necessary. In ‘A’ level divinity (by
demand of the new ZIMSEC syllabus) a study of early Israelite prophecy should be
done concurrently with the trends in Zimbabwean indigenous religion to draw any
parallels between the paradigms.
2) Contextualisation and application are biblical concepts which seeks to relate or

bring the biblical stories into the real life situations of the people in context. This
concept seeks to protect the biblical stories from being seen as abstract and fictional
stories. Biblical issues must reflect their reality in the real life situations of the people,
so that religion has a real meaning. This is more so with the concept of “application”
by which theologians believe that the underlying system of thought and faith inherent
in the Bible stories can be applied today. What was true then, they have believed, can
still be true now. John Barton (1988) wrote that, “The Bible, like other great classics
of literature and religion, can stimulate an endless diversity of new thoughts and
ideas.” In the light of this view, students of ‘A’ level divinity must seek to discover
the relevance of biblical stories to their own environment, that is, the Zimbabwean
context.

Page 22
CHAPTER 1
Brief History of “the Old Testament Israelites”

Chapter objectives
After studying the chapter, students should be able to:

(a) Explain the origins of the Hebrew story.
(b) Reflect on the key ancestors of the Hebrew tribe.
(c) Explain the reasons behind the Abrahamic Covenant.
(d) Explain the Mosaic Covenant (the Sinai Covenant).
(e) Reflect on the settlement in Canaan.
(f) Discuss the transformation from theocracy to monarchy in Israel.
(g) Discuss the origins of prophecy in Israel.
Issues of the chapter in brief

1. The ancestry.
2. The sorjouney in Egypt.
3. The Abrahamic Covenant.
4. The liberation from Egypt and the wilderness tradition.
5. The Mosaic (Sinai) Covenant.
6. The settlement in Canaan.
7. From theocracy to monarchy.
8. The era of prophetism.
Ancestry
The Hebrew tribe is traced to Abraham. The Hebrew people are sometimes called
Israelites, Judeans, or Jews, depending on the historic period one will be dealing with.
Abraham is here treated as the ancestor of the Hebrews in a linear genealogy. This is to
say that he is viewed in this study as the utmost and most relevant ancestor of the
Hebrews for purposes of this level of study. This starting point deals with Abraham and
his descendants Isaac, Jacob and Jacob’s sons (from Genesis 12). Through Abraham,
humanity was blessed. “With the call of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3) there begins a new
history of blessing,” argues Professor John S. Kselman (1988). The Climax of the point is
that he was promised a great nation and a great name as the source of blessing for all
humanity. Kselman expounds this view by saying that, what human beings failed to
achieve by their own efforts comes to the family of Abraham, and through that family to
all humanity as divine gift. Yahweh’s promised gifts of land, progeny and earthly
prosperity in Genesis 12: 1-3 poses as a reversal of the curses in Eden, in Genesis 3:16-
19, of a hostile earth, pain in human births, and endless human toil.

Page 23
The Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 15:1-21)
Yahweh’s reiteration of the promise of an heir and numerous descendants and a

homeland (Genesis 15:4-7) came in a prophetic way. We argue this out because the
expression which says, “The word of Yahweh came to Abraham”, which occurs twice
(VV 1 and 4) is stereotypical prophetic formula. This can be compared with Jeremiah 1:2,
Hosea 1: 1 and Micah 1:1. Genesis 17:1-27 contains the whole essence of the Abrahamic
covenant which promises him a son and the eternal possession of the land of Canaan.
The child of the promise was Isaac, the only son of the old wife of Abraham, Sarai. At
the time Abraham got this child of promise, a temptation came from Yahweh himself
ordering Abraham to perform a ritual by slaughtering that precious gift as an offering to
Yahweh (Genesis 22:1-24) at Moriah. Abraham’s obedience, though not accomplished,
rendered him the extraordinary credentials of the most obedient human figure to God,
“The father of faith), who would be rewarded with an eternal royal posterity and a
permanent homeland. Thus Abraham became the favourite ancestor of the Hebrew
people.
The death of Abraham (Gen 23:1-20)
When Abraham’s wife Sarai died, he bought land in Canaan from the feudal lord Ephron,
where he buried his wife. When he died also, Abraham was buried in the same piece of
land in a cave known as Machpelah. He was buried there by his sons, Isaac and Ishmael.
Just before his death Abraham gave “everything” of his to his heir, Isaac. This act reflects
the theological point that Isaac and his descendants bear a special status and a special
destiny.
Important historical point of families of Israel
The Jacob and Esau relationships, often called Israel and Edom, is more crucial for
understanding the social and political dynamics in our study of Divinity. An analysis of
this view is attempted in the treatise below?
Jacob and Esau, Israel and Edom
A prominent scholar on the book of Genesis, John. S. Kselman wrote that:

The lives and careers of the great figures of the Old Testament,
such as the liberator Moses or the ancestors from whom tribes or nations took
their names, are not simply stories of individuals; rather, such figures are
sometimes portrayed as living out proleptically the later historical experiences of
the people
whose progenitors and saviours they are.
It has already been pointed out earlier that the ancestor Abraham, anticipated in his life
later experiences of his descendants, for example, the sojouney in Egypt because of
drought, oppression by the Pharaoh because the Pharaoh had affections for Sarah; the
enriching of the ancestor in Egypt; the divine intervention of Yahweh described in the

Page 24
form of plagues, and the subsequent release of the people. Similarly Moses underwent in
his early life a kind of prophetic exodus: endangered by the Pharaoh, he was saved by a
passage through water. as recorded in Exodus 1:22; 2:1-10_, and encountered God at
Horeb after guiding his flock through the desert (Exodus 3:1-3)
What is true for Abraham and Moses is equally so for Jacob and his descendants (Israel),
and Esau and his descendants (Edom). Jacob and Esau were twin sons of Isaac, born by
the wife Rebekah. In Genesis 25:23 Rebekah was told that the older brother (Esau) would
serve the younger brother (Jacob). This statement suggested that the younger brother
would be superior over the elder, already implicating a subjugation of Edom by Israel in
the reign of David (2 Sam 8:14; 1 Kings 11:15-16).
The brotherhood and strive between Jacob and Esau that mark the Genesis narratives are
both reflected elsewhere in the Old Testament. The relationship between the Jacob- Esau
narratives and the texts dealings with the political interaction of Israel and Edom is
complex. While the Jacob- Esau stories in Genesis include material drawn from the
ancient sources, at the same time they reflect later national ethnic issues between the
kingdoms of Israel and later Judah, and Edom in the tenth century B.C. On the other hand
it is likely that the Jacob- Esau circle in Genesis had some influence on the literary
shaping of Old Testament texts dealing with the relationship of Israel and Edom in world
affairs
The brotherhood of Israel and Edom is referred to elsewhere in the Old Testament texts.
Such language not only reflects ethnic relationships but political alliance. In
Deuteronomy 23:7 the Israelites are instructed not to hate the Edomite for he is their
young brother. The language of fraternity is also used in Numbers 20:14 when Moses
was commanded by God to announce to the Israelites that, “You are about to cross into
the territory of your brothers, the sons of Esau, dwelling in Seir.” Brotherhood language
also appears in Amos 1:11. In this text, Edom is castigated for pursuing his brotherhood
with a sword and destroying his treaty-partner. This brotherhood here refers to Israel.
Israel’s hostility towards Edom reached a high point in the exilic period. Many
commentators consider that Amos 1:11-12, as well as Obadiah 10;12, are exilic additions.
These texts suggest that the reasons for the hostility aforementioned was from the event
recorded in 1 Esdras 4:45, where Edom is said to have burned the Jerusalem Temple
during the Babylonian attack in 587 B.C. Other anti-Edomite texts are: Jeremiah 49:7-22;
Isaiah 34:5-6, Lamentations 1:2-5, just to give a few.
The Egyptian bondage
The coming of the Egyptian oppression and the Exodus journey were revealed to
Abraham by Yahweh long back before they occurred. Evidence for this is found in
Genesis 15: 13-16.
The biblical story on how the Hebrews became servants in Egypt starts with the famine
story in the land of the Hebrews. This left them with only one choice, that was to go and
seek food elsewhere. So they went to Egypt seeking for food. The word in the b for this

Page 25
errand is “Sorjourney.” As they sought relief there, eventually they stayed there longer
and then become subjected to the Egyptians as slaves. This especially occurred after the
death of Joseph, their fellow tribesman (a fellow Hebrew) who had become so prominent
in the Egyptian government. (Genesis 47-50)
The Hebrews suffered oppression and enslavement for hundreds of years until God came
to their rescue by the hand of Moses. Moses led their liberation from bondage and went
with them on a wilderness journey that lasted forty (40) years, though Moses died on the
way before they reached the promised land of Canaan (Deutronomy 34:1-12).
The Mosaic Covenant
The Mosaic biblical story says that he was called by God for a political and religious
mission in Egypt where God’s people (Hebrews) were enslaved. The calling occurred at a
burning bush in the wilderness of Sinai where he was herding sheep. The other name for
Sinai is Horeb. Sinai means “the mountain of the sene-bush according to Deutronomy
33:16. The call of Moses is then followed by God’s command to go to Egypt to confront
Pharaoh. Moses took this up with the help of his brother Aaron and his sister Miriam. In
subsequent narratives, the Mosaic covenant proper, deals with the giving of the
Decalogue (ten commandment to Moses by God (Exodus 19-24:11). This Decalogue is a
key feature of the Mosaic covenant. It is this covenant which the later prophets sought to
ratify by urging the Israelites to remember it.
The activity of later prophets on this issue mainly took place after the Israelites had
settled in Canaan, that is, after the wilderness journey. It was Joshua who led the final
part of the wilderness journey, and took the Hebrews into Canaan. Joshua was a military
man (so automatically a judge). He is the man who distributed land to the Israelites in
Canaan using a system of lots to determine who should take which piece of land after
defeating the inhabitants (natives of Canaan) in a series of wars that were backed by a
strong God (Joshua 10-19).
The rule of judges remained subjugated to Yahweh. They had to consult Yahweh on all
issues. This suggests that they had no autonomy to rule. Therefore the authority was with
Yahweh, hence we say the period from Joshua to Samuel was one of theocratic rule (i.e
rule by God).
Theocratic rule ended when Saul was annointed the first king of Israel by Samuel after a
vigorous demand by the people to have a king in line with the trends in the neighbouring
states. Although Yahweh allowed them a king, in the figure of Saul, He never blessed the
new order. Rule by a king is what is called “the monarchy.” The dictum is correct to say
that, “the commencement of the monarchy in Israel is associated with commencement of
real prophetism in Israel.”
References
1. McCarter .P.K Jr 1 Samuel Anchor Bible 8. Garden City. N.Y. Double, 1980

Page 26
2. Gunn D. The fate of King Saul. An interpretation of a biblical story.
Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

Supplement Series N0. 14, Sheffield: JSOT Press,
1981.
3. Walter. E. Rast: Article on Joshua in Harper’s Commentary, Harper San
Francisco, 1988.
4. Lovenson J.D. Sinai and Zion: An Entry into the Jewish Bible.
SanFrancisco:
Harper and Row 1987.

5. Sarna N.M. Exploring Exodus. New York; Schocken, 1986
6. Kselman J. Article on Genesis in Harper’s commentary, Harper
SanFransco, 1988
CHAPTER 2
EARLY PROPHECY IN ISRAEL
By the end of this chapter the student should be able to:
i) Define the concept of “prophecy” using definitions from different scholars.

Page 27
ii) Identify the earliest forms of prophecy in Israel and surrounding areas and
their characteristics and explain them giving examples.
iii) Trace and explain the transition from theocracy to monarchy in Israel.
iv) Examine the role of Seers in Israel.
v) Discuss critically the theories on the emergency of prophecy in Israel.
What is a prophet?
Various scholars define the term “Prophet” with close reference to the relationship
between God and a particular individual who is called to be a prophet. Hermann Gunkel
defined a prophet as a person who has a relationship with the divinity or God.
James Muilenburg says that a prophet was a covenant mediator who represented the
covenant demands to the people from the perspective of the deity. He further says the
prophet uses the messenger – style of speech, “Thus Says the Lord” to legitimize his
divine mission.
Robert Wilson defined a prophet as one who stood between God and human beings.
Prophets are intermediaries. Bernard Anderson defined a prophet as one who
communicates the divine will.
A prophet could be defined as a spokesman or mouthpiece of a deity or someone who

speaks on behalf of another. E.g. when Moses could not speak fluently before Pharaoh,
Aaron became his spokesperson, hence prophecy. This is supported by the use of the
messenger formular; “thus says Yahweh.”
A common aspect in all these definitions is the emphasis on the “master – servant”
relationship between God and his prophet. The latter would serve the will of the former.
These definitions will help to understand how and why prophecy began in Israel.
Earliest manifestations of prophecy in Israel
How did prophecy begin in Israel?
The need for communication between God and his people Israel necessitated the call of
prophets. Johannes Lindblom listed the following as the earliest forms of prophecy in
Israel:

Page 28
1. Visions
2. Dreams
3. Inspiration
4. Divination
Visions
They are a gift of second sight from God. God gives pictures to the inner – eye of an
individual e.g. God spoke to Moses in a vision at Mount Sinai (Exodus 3).A picture of an
event or a scene is screened to the individual. He hears a voice of God speaking to him.
The individual answers. A form of dialogue goes on during the vision. From that scene
God asserts his authority while the individual may show reluctance to obey. Fear may
affect the individual and excuses may be given. In the earliest days of Israelite prophecy
this occurred to Moses when he saw a burning bush at Mount Sinai. God commanded
him to take off his shoes and listen to him. God introduced himself to Moses. It was this
visionary encounter that gave Moses his mandate to be a prophet.
Dreams
A dream is an event that is seen by a person when he is asleep. God can visit a person in
a dream and speak with him e.g. Samuel was called into prophetic office in a dream (1
Sam 3). Dreams were respected from ancient times. Kings also relied on dreams e.g
Joseph interpreted Pharaoh’s dreams; Daniel interpreted Nebuchadnezzar’s dreams. In
early Israelite prophecy Samuel is presented as a prophet who received his call in a
dream.
Inspiration
It is when a person is moved or aroused by the Spirit to act or write in a certain way.
Inspiration could influence one`s behavior. Earliest forms of inspiration influenced
people to behave ecstatically, hence we hear of ecstatic prophecy in connection with Saul
who behaved ecstatically in (1 Sam 10: 5-9). Ecstasy is a state whereby the spirit of a god
overshadows the recipient such that his or her power of reasoning could be suspended.
One could be inspired by God to prophesy at a particular time. In this type of prophesy
the power to prophesy would be temporary. It could be induced by music, vigorous
dancing and cheering. These preconditions are carried out by other people in the group
who are not themselves inspired. In the midst of hyper activity an individual is inspired or
filled with the spirit of God. He is compelled by the spirit to speak out certain matters. In
the process the individual may behave strangely. He may take off cloths, drop himself
down, run wildly, scratch his body all over etc to the amazement of on –lookers. An
example of this is when Saul, the son of Kish joined a band of singers and dancers and he
was possessed and prophesied ecstatically. (1Sam 10:5-9)
Divination
It was a technical way of deducing information-using objects. Bones and dice were
commonly used by experts who claimed to be using God`s powers to interpret behavior
of objects e.g Joshua used lots to allocate land to Israelites at settlement in Canaan.
Diviners would claim that what they did had the authority of God; that their oracles were

Page 29
sanctioned by God. They could be consulted on various matters at a price. Necromancers

also fell into the category of diviners. Saul approached a woman necromancer in disguise
to request a divine over the dead Samuel. (1 Sam 28:3-17).
Ecstatic prophecy as a form of inspiration
Bernard Anderson defined ecstasy as: an emotion which is so powerful, which takes
control of the self. Ecstatic prophecy was aroused by music and dancing.
The practitioners of it were members of a group or a band. Their roles were of a social,
political and religious nature. They performed their activities under a leader whom they
called “their father”. Arguably they charged fees for their services. Some scholars argue
that these ecstatics did not charge fares, but they accepted tokens of appreciation.
The case of Saul is a classic example of these early prophets. It is reported in 1 Sam
10:9-13 that Saul joined a group of ecstatics who were preparing for war against
Philistines. When the group danced and sang, Saul got possessed and prophesied
ecstatically, “Is Saul also among the prophets?”(1 Sam 10:12).This question shows that:
(i)The so-called prophets were expected to behave this way.
(ii)Saul was not known to belong to this group
The following sections should be studied carefully in the bible on ecstasy and divination
to acquaint yourself with evidence for early forms of prophecy in Israel.
1 Samuel 10 : 5-8, 1 Samuel 20:18-24, 2 Kings 2: 4 and 2 Kings 4 :1; 1 Sam 19:20; 2
Kings 3:15;Num 11:25, Num 22:6; 1 Sam 28: 1 – 17; 1 Sam 14:41; Sam 20:35-41.
Characteristics of ecstatic prophecy
(1) It was catalyzed by Music, vigorous dancing and cheering (see the RSV Bible for
textual evidence at 1 Sam 10:5)
(2) It was practiced by a group of people. The group was also called a band or a guild
because they used musical instruments to induce the spirit.
(3) It was also associated with military activities of the nation to give encouragement
to withstand the enemy. The evidence that is in 1 Sam 10:5 says that the band
which Saul joined was performing near a Philistinian garrison
(4) The band belonged to a leader whom they referred to as the “father.” He was not a
biological father as such but a leader who regulated their activities, “And who is
their father?” (1Sam 10:12) This question purports to imply that every group had
a leader who is regarded as “their father.” Most scholars believe that this group
belonged to Samuel.
(5) They behaved in an awkward manner during the process of prophesying, “What
has happened to the son of Kish?” (1Sam 10:11). This question suggests surprise
on the way Saul was then behaving.
(6) The possessed prophet might only prophesy once and no more again in his life
time. Eldad and Medad (the two ecstatics mentioned in Numbers 11: 25,
prophesied ecstatically in the camp and they did it no more.

Page 30
Characteristics of Divination
1) It makes use of objects such as bones; dice; arrows. Lots were also used in
divination in the form of curved sticks or bones which had different symbols on
its faces carrying certain meanings. Archery (use of arrows) was also used in
divination. The behavior of arrows could be interpreted by such experts as
Jonathan to give certain meanings. Witchcraft and necromance were also forms of
divination.
To get a clear picture of the practices of divination as a way of predicting and
interpreting events, you must read the following sections from the bible: 1 Sam
20:18-24; 1 Sam 20:35-41, 1 Sam 14:41 and 1 Sam 28:1-17.
Roles of the early Prophets (Ecstatics and diviners)

Ecstatics and diviners of Israel are depicted performing roles that were of an individual
nature and national nature. Predominantly they focused on fortune telling, fore-telling
and forth –telling.
Fortune- telling- had to do with telling about one’s chances e.g. Saul went to the seer
Samuel to enquire about his father’s lost donkeys (1 Sam. 9); This was personal business.
Fortune-telling could also be done on matters of national interests, “Shall I go to Ramoth-
Gilead or shall I forebare?” In this case Saul enquired on the chances of winning the
battle if he were to confront the Phillistinian enemy at Ramoth-Gilead. In another case of
a national interest Saul approached a woman necromancer to request advice from the
dead spirit of Samuel. The pressing issue was the negative turn of events in the political
affairs of Israel, suggesting God’s anger.
Fore-telling -was about predicting the future. It was the duty of prophets to predict the
future. This gift could come to the prophet by way of visions, dreams or behavior of
objects such as bones, dice and arrows. The archery episode of Jonathan and David (1
Sam 20:14-24) assures David that he would not die or lose God’s favour in the near
future.
Forth-telling was about interpreting what was happening at the present time. The negative
trend of things in Saul’s kingdom was an indication for God’s disfavor with him as
interpreted by the seer Samuel. The calling up of Samuel in the house of the high priest
Eli (1Sam 3) was an indication of God’s disfavor with Eli. This interpretation illustrates
the meaning of forth-telling, though it does not suggest that the call of Samuel was
announced by any prophet. The archery episode of Jonathan and his servant in (1Sam
20:25-41) illustrates the act of forth-telling as Jonathan interpreted the behavior of his
arrows to mean that David had succeeded in getting the everlasting favour of God from
the present moment onwards.
Roles of early prophets in General
-They predicted the future, interpret the present advised individuals and Kings

Page 31
-They led the nation in times of war

-They encouraged the spirit of nationalism and cultivated morale in the people to fight in
defense of their nation
-They communicated the divine will
-They were custodians of the national religion
-They were also custodians of justice e.g. Samuel the seer was also a judge.
Israel : from theocracy to monarchy
It is important that students should understand the systems of governance from the era of
the formation of the nation up to the time of the prophets. Israel was not born a
monarchical (kingship) state. It emerged as a state ruled by God himself (theocratic) and
only transformed into a monarchy after settlement in Canaan. Before the monarchy Israel
was led by patriarchs (fathers of the nation) who worked closely with priests as leaders of
religion and advisors on God’s word. The high priest Eli, to whom Samuel served as an
assistant, is a good example of such priests. Yahweh had been hesitant to grant Israel a
king for fear that such a system would probably be abused: Samuel also had expressed
the same fears. But the Israelites who had suffered the brunt of war and defeat in war by
the Philistines vehemently demanded a king to lead them, like in neighboring states.
Samuel who had just been called to seership (1 Sam 3:1-25) was pressed to mediate
between God and the people in this demand for a king. All excuses and fears could not
materialize but only resulted in God granting Israel a monarchy through the king- elect
Saul who was anointed by Samuel the seer. So Israel transformed from a theocracy to a
monarchy during the time of Samuel. The monarchical system also called for a
distinction of roles between priests and seers (prophets). The king would need to be
monitored in the interest of God’s will, hence God gave prophets to Israel. May be the
great philosopher, Hobbes` fears were also in God’s mind that power corrupts, hence a
need for its constant check. It is therefore a valid view to argue that prophecy in Israel
emerged with the monarchy.
Seers in Israel
The phenomenon of seers in Israel forms the earliest idea of God’s messengers in Israel.
A seer could be defined as “a chosen one” gifted with second sight. The growth of the
term “seer” sterms from the Hebrew word “roeh or hozeh” which means “seer”. J.L
McKenzie has regarded the term “seer” as an older title of the prophet. For instance in
Israel, formerly when a man went to inquire of God he said “Come let us go to the Seer”
for he who is now called a prophet was formerly called a seer. (1 Samuel 9:9) A seer will
be someone who tried to discover God’s will by semi -magical means; much like a
modern fortune teller. The term “roeh” became rare and a new term “nabi” came into
existence meaning, “to call” hence a prophet.
A.G Auld in the article “Cities of religion in Israelite tradition”, Journal for the study of
the Old Testament 10, 1978 submitted that seers were visionary rather than ecstatic. In
Israel they appeared as individuals independent of the cult. It was a seer’s role to
prophesy i.e. to act as a “nabi”. For example, as seen in Amos 7:12. The seers guided
Israel by the revealed will of Yahweh. Yahweh called seers just like “Nabis”. The

Page 32
mission of seers became a foundation for the origins of prophecy in Israel. Relevant
examples are Elisha who had a gift to forgive sins from afar; and Gideon, a judge, who
led the Israelites into victories in war at Jericho through prayer. These seers were
respected men of God to which people went to inquire about different things. A good
example is Samuel, to whom Saul and his servant went to inquire about their lost
donkeys.
The seer Samuel received a vision of Saul as God’s king-elect, and the seer played the
role of the anointer of the first king of Israel. Samuel is singled out as the most popular
seer of Israel. J.L McKenzie has said that Samuel was probably not a judge in the sense
of real judges. Neither was he a prophet in the real sense of the later prophets, but he was
the earliest religious figure after Moses who resembles a prophet (seer) and the prophetic
school was not wrong in seeing him as the earliest representative of prophecy in Israel.
What were the functions of later prophets
1. They were bearers of the word of God to the people e.g. Amos “The Lord called
me from following the flock” Amos 7:15.
2. Pronounced judgement as a punishment from God e.g. Amos, Jeremiah
3. Promised hope or salvation to the people e.g. Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah
4. They proclaimed social and moral justice to the people e.g. Elijah, Amos, and
Isaiah.
5. They preached about repentance and salvation of men e.g. Hosea and Isaiah
6. Advocated the worshipping of one God e.g. Elijah, Moses and Jeremiah
7. Custodians of God’s Law e.g. Moses and Isaiah
8. Advised Kings on national issues e.g. Nathan and Samuel

checked the power of kings. They reprimanded kings wherever they went wrong
e.g in Samuel and Saul’s conflict, Amos vs Jeroboam II, and Ahab vs Elijah.
9. Presided over religious ceremonies e.g. Samuel
10. Covenant mediators e.g. Moses, Hosea and Jeremiah
11. Experts in intercessory prayer e.g. Samuel and Jeremiah
12. Anointed kings e.g Elijah anointed king Hazael
13. They were custodians of God’s religion, they advocated monotheism.

Page 33
14. They predicted the future e.g Amos predicted about the fall of Samaria.
15. They interpreted history and politics of the nations e.g Isaiah and Jeremiah
Textual references for the above functions will be obtained from the Bible in the process
of Studying particular prophets.
How prophets communicated their messages
1) Open proclamations using the messenger- style of speech, “Thus says the Lord…”
2) Dramatizations e.g. Jeremiah’s dramatic actions (see book of Jeremiah)
3) Symbolic actions e.g. Isaiah and Hosea’s symbolic names of children
4) Written oracles e.g. Jeremiah hired Baruch as his secretary
5) Use of art e.g. Jeremiah molded a clay pot to show God’s making up of Israel.
6) Reports of visions e.g. Amos reported several visions of God’s judgement on Israel.
What were the developments and changes that occurred to prophecy in Israel?
The term “development” in this context refers to the changes that took place in the early
prophetic fraternity. Therefore one has to trace the changes in style and roles of the
prophets since Moses.
Moses is believed to be the first prophet of Israel although by Anderson and

Muillenburg’s definitions of the word prophet Abraham, Noah and Adam could qualify
to be called prophets (Gen 20 :7). Moses` type of prophecy was inspirational. He played
a leadership role, leading the Israelites from Egypt. His role was mediatory as he
received instructions from God and took them to the people – a type of prophecy with a
unit of command. The prophet was both a political as well as a religious leader. Moses
is a representative par excellence of the early prophets.
From the Mosaic type of prophecy Israel saw a new form of prophecy as represented by
Samuel. Although most of the roles of Moses were retained, the major development was
the multiplicity of roles vested on the prophet. Samuel became a father of the nation; a
priest; a judge; a seer as well as a leader of the prophetic institute of ecstatic. His
functions were a mixture of social, religious and prophetic roles. He re-organized the
prophetic institutions of Israel. He led the nation from a tribal confederacy under a judge
to a monarchy after settlement in Canaan. Samuel demonstrated how a prophet could
check the abuse of power by kings when he reprimanded Saul who had hijacked the
duties of a priest to offer a sacrifice in the temple. Such a duty had no precedent in the
Mosaic era. Elijah later did it when he reprimanded Ahab for grabbing Naboth`s vine
yard. So the evolution of this task of a prophet is a major development in Israelite
prophetism.
Other changes are noted on the technical side of prophetism. Looking at Elijah his type
of prophecy was more revolutionary than ever before. Prophecy had become
confrontational. Elijah fiercely confronted King Ahab for both moral and political
injustices. Marrying Jezebel was a betrayal of Yahweism and custom. Allowing Baalism

Page 34
to co-exist with Yahweism was a more serious offence. Abusing office for self –
enrichment at the expense of common people were gross evils which prophets took to
challenge. This was a great development in Israelite prophecy. Even methods of
prophesying changed. Elijah used more of miracles to convey his messages e.g the
contest at Mount Carmel – it was a miraculous event, the provision of food to the widow
of Zarephath etc. Such events were further developments on the technicalities of
prophetism. It is also worth noting that the phenomenon of “seers” as men of God
changed, “He who was formerly called a seer is now called a prophet. “Such a change is
best understood in terms of technicality rather than functions. After Samuel, the gift of
second sight became very rare. Prophets got their messages by inspiration. Amos denied
being a seer. Therefore the issue of developments and changes in Israelite prophecy
should broadly focus on functions, roles, methods and structures.
Theories on the emergency of prophecy in Israel
There are various views on the emergency of prophecy in Israel. The fundamental
question is how did it begin? The following views shall be considered:
1. That it originated amongst the Israelites.

2. That it was copied from the Egyptians.
3. That it was borrowed from the surrounding nations.
4. That it was syncretically obtained from the Canaanites.
1. Prophecy originated amongst the Israelites:
Bernard Anderson notes that prophecy was there in Israel since the creation of the
nation. His wide definition of “a prophet” qualifies Abraham as a prophet (cf Gen
20:7) and even Noah. James Muillenburg’s definition of a prophet in particular
qualifies Noah as a prophet. But this feeling cannot be taken too far in the debate on
Israelite prophetism because not much is said about prophetic activities by Noah in
the real sense of prophetism. They communicated with God on behalf of the people
and nothing more. But real prophetism in Israel is attributed to Moses. He was
formerly called to the prophetic office at a burning bush where he was given a
specific mandate to liberate the Hebrews from Egypt and to lead them through the
wilderness to the Promised Land. Ecstatic prophecy is also said to have started
during the time of Moses. The incident of Eldad and Medad who prophesied
ecstatically in the camp (Num 11: 24-29) proves that even ecstatic prophetism
originated amongst the Israelites themselves.
2. Prophecy was copied from Egypt.
Another hypothesis postulates that the Israelites were exposed to works of magicians and
exorcists where some of them worked themselves out into ecstatic behavior. Possibly the
Israelites copied from such experiences and practiced it amongst themselves. Bernard
Anderson highlights the story of Wen Amon, a small boy who was possessed by an
ecstatic spirit at a festival at Byblos. Such an event could possibly influence the Israelites
who saw it.

Page 35
3. Prophecy was borrowed from surrounding nations
The thrust of this view is that the Israelites were influenced by religions of the
surrounding nations. The Philistines practiced Baalism, with its prophets who worked
themselves into ecstatic behavior. The land of Canaan was dominated by the religion of
Baal. At settlement the Israelites compromised Yahweism with Baalism (religious
syncretism). The marriage of Ahab to Jezebel brought in hundreds of prophets of Baal
into the Israelite society. As a result Baalism and Yahweism existed in juxtaposition with
each other. Such a set up would permit a compromise of cultures. This scenario also
explains why Elijah quarreled with Ahab and accused him of being “a troubler of Israel”.
The view that it was borrowed from the surrounding nations is supported by Numbers 22
where Balaam, a Moabite seer could declare a blessing or a curse. He also received a
message from Yahweh that he could not curse Israel and he complied contrary to what
Balak had planned. Prophecy was also found in Syria and Egypt, as supported by
archeological evidence discovered by professor Parrot at Mari. Akkadian sources from
Mesopotamia show that the Mahhu was both a prophet and a priest. (The Mahhu
functioned as a prophet who specialized in wild, ecstatic trance-induced behavior). Thus
there was a kind of prophecy at Mari where prophets who were religious functionaries
and others brought messages to the attention of the king.
Although this view is plausible it is not conclusive to say that prior to this contact there
was no prophetism in Israel. The view can partially explain technical aspects of Israelite
prophetism, but not the genesis of it. Prophetism in Israel emanated from God
particularly after the great the orphan at Mt Sinai (Exodus 19) when God could no longer
face his people. The need for a representative became paramount; hence prophetism
began in the wilderness.
Other views stress further the possibility of Israel borrowing from other religions. The
legend of Wen-Amon is proposed as one of the events that might have influenced the
ecstatic type of prophecy Israel practiced. The legend tells the story of a Phoenician boy,
who, at the city of Byblos, got possessed by a spirit and gave oracles. The view from
Anderson is that possibly the Israelites took experience of that event.
Another view is that the trend in Asia Minor could have also influenced Israelite
prophecy. A popular group known as the Orgies of Dionysus in Asia Minor practiced the
group type of prophecy which discharged its prophetic activities ecstatically. They were
popular for their extremely severe type of prophecy where they could cut and scratch
their bodies and tear off clothes during the practice. They travelled extensively
performing prophetic activities.
Though these hypotheses are propounded in the biblical debate, they are not in any way
conclusive on the matter. Israel had a unique type of prophecy. What makes it unique is
the spirit of Yahweh that inspired it. Therefore the borrowing accusation can only be
limited to the methodologies of early prophecy.

Page 36
Conservative scholars rally behind the traditional theory and the evolutionary theories
whose thrust is that Israel’s prophecy originated with the exodus. They focus on the
Mosaic typology of prophecy where God actually selected “his man,” and gave him the
authority to speak.
The ecstatic type has its precedent in the wilderness. The story of Eldad and Medad in
Numbers 11:24-29 shows that Israel had this type of prophecy from the time of the
exodus. Saying that Israel borrowed or copied is tantamount to saying that God himself
emulated what was being done by foreign gods. This way of thinking is unsustainable.
The semantic theory would perhaps take us out of the mess by proposing that matters of
semantics and terminology should not be allowed to paint the prophetic debate” with just
one brush and one colour. The brand of prophecy in Israel was different from that of
other religions in its ethos and authority.
The distinction between true and false prophets in Israel: The Treatise
The treatise below attempts to summarize the issues on true and false prophets in Israel.
“ In Israel, as in other societies, periods of intense prophetic activity coincided with

times of crisis. Thus, the decision about how to respond to a prophet was a matter of
some urgency, and criteria for making a judgement became a necessity”, wrote
Thomas W. Overholt in his article on Jeremiah in the Harper Bible commentary 1988.
This statement underscores the great difficulty in distinguishing between a true and a
false prophet. Anthropological studies of contemporary societies may provide some
perspective on the problem. It would appear that there are basically four criteria by
which audiences evaluate prophet like intermediaries: their behavior conforms to
traditional customs and beliefs and is adequate to the special circumstances in which
it is uttered; they claim to have received a special commission from a deity: and they
are successful (What they predict comes to pass, the specific problem is resolved.
Evaluations of individual intermediaries do not necessarily involve all four of these
criteria.
In Israel, the interpretation of crises, whether national, local, or personal in scope,

took place within the range of possibilities offered by the particular culture within
which the intermediary (prophet) functioned. This means that inevitably both world
view and the more mundane facts of history, politics, and society were factors in the
judgements made about them, for example, in Jeremiah`s days, the crucial decisions
seemed to have been closely related to assumptions about the nation’s destiny that
mirrored religious convictions and had concrete implications for political actions.
The judgement that a particular prophet was “true” was as always, dependent upon
the view point and commitment of the person(s) making it.
Overholt states that there is no full proof method for distinguishing between them.
The attempt to distinguish between the forms in which the revelation came to a
prophet is probably exilic, and in any case is not consistently applied. The

Page 37
implication is that the prophets` audience possessed no sure criterion by which to

judge between competing claims.
According to the Deutronomic law an attempt is made to distinguish a “true” from a

false” prophet. In Deuteronomy 13:1 “if a prophet was not commissioned to deliver
oracles, he was a false prophet, “If a prophet arises among you, and gives you a sign
or a wonder, and he says let us go for other gods, you shall not listen to the words of
that prophet.” By the same Deutronomic law a more stricter criterion is used, that is if
a prophet claims to be a true prophet and his prophecy fails to pass he must die, “But
the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded
him to speak --- that same prophet shall die” (Deuteronomy 18).This mosaic criterion,
although clearly useless for judgments on individual oracles, is a pragmatic criterion
to evaluate a prophet’s overall performance.
In the Old Testament isolated cases of false prophecy are recorded but no uniform
criterion has been used holistically to deal with them. In the case of Jezebel’s
prophets of Baal, a death penalty was effected when then they were proven wrong by
Elijah at mount Carmel. But when Nathan presumptuously advised David and God
advised otherwise, no death penalty was effected. The issue was more complicated in
the case of Jeremiah and Hananiah. It appears that the Society expected a prophet to
uphold the status quo. If his activities opposed the status quo he was imprisoned. In
the end he could no longer proclaim his words publicly lest he be killed. He took
himself out of action: A prophet who does not operate publicly is no threat because
he is no prophet says Thomas Overholt.
In the final analysis it is clearly noted that the task of distinguishing a true prophet
from a false prophet could not obtain any holistic criterion. Therefore it was not easy
to distinguish them merely from the words they spoke.
The contributions of Moses
By the end of this topic the student should be able to:

1. Identify the figure of Moses and show his significance in Israelite prophecy
2. Outline his call story
3. Argue whether Moses was a prophet or just a statesman, highlighting scholarly
views
Who Was Moses?

Moses is introduced as an infant hidden by his mother in the reeds of the Nile to protect
him from Pharaoh’s decree. Pharaoh’s own daughter found him, takes pity on him, and

Page 38
adopts him. With the help of his sister, who was secretly watching over him, the
Egyptian princess arranges for the infant to be breast fed by a Hebrew wet nurse, who is
none other than the baby’s mother. Thus the child Moses was rescued from death, nursed
by his own mother, and raised in the Egyptian palace. The infant who escaped peril grew
up to became a leader of his people.
His Call
Moses was leading his father- in - law’s sheep to Mt Horeb, where he was astonished to
see a bush that was burning but not consumed. He did not realise that what he had
encountered was a messenger or an angel of Yahweh in the form of a flame until
approaching the bush, he heard a divine voice speaking in the fire. Knowing that it is
fatal for a human being to see God, he covered his face and listened.
(Exodus 33:20)
The message Moses received included an announcement and a commission Yahweh had
taken notice of the affliction of the Israelites in Egypt and he sent Moses to bring them
out of the land. Briefly this is the leading story that brought Moses to the top of the chart
of Hebrew history.
Was Moses a prophet?

The question whether Moses was a prophet or not depends on the definition one gives for
a prophet. Bernard Anderson defined a prophet as one who communicates the divine
will. Jan Thompson defines a prophet as simply a messenger of God. From these
definitions this discussion will view Moses as a prophet with a wide variety of duties.
His responsibilities covered issues from the social, the economic, the political and the
religious realms. Therefore to be more precise Moses was a leader as well as a prophet.
Focusing on the nature of his initial assignment, one notes a divine mandate being
assigned to Mosses – to go and confront Pharaoh and demand the liberation of the
Hebrews from Egypt. The order came from a deity, hence it was divine. The task is a
political one. The approach itself is political.
Looking at the role he played during the wilderness journey, Moses plays the role of a
leader as well as a prophet. He is responsible for the welfare of the Hebrew community.
He shoulders all logistical duties. , but he is guided by the divine spirit. Therefore he was
more of an inspired leader, hence a prophet.
The sinaitic covenant which Moses mediated (Exodus 19) presents him as an agent, and
representative of God to his people and vice versa. He is given the law and the authority
to make further ordinances. Moses seals the Sinai declaration on behalf of the people. In
this case Moses posses as a mediator between God and his people, hence a mediator –
prophet. The powers that were vested on him to make laws qualify him as a legislator.
The custodianship of the torah that was given on him confirms him as “a real man of
God.” Moses could be seen as a legendary figure, considering his escape from Pharaoh’s
inferno and how he was bred in the king’s palace. Considering his death which remains a
mystery, he is a man without a grave.

Page 39
It is therefore no doubt that Moses was a prophet. Perhaps special attention can only be
given to the type of prophecy that he practiced. His duties were all round. He was the
founder father of the Yahwheistic cult, which was sealed at the Sinai declaration.
Deuteronomy 34:10 has described him as “the greatest prophet Israel ever had”.
In the final analysis it is reiterated that Moses was the first real prophet of Israel although
his contributions to its development may be minimal compared to his successors.
Moses
Prophecy developed from what Moses laid down.

Also to be considered is the fact that the passages which make Moses a Prophet were
written after the exile which makes them a read back in history e.g Numbers 11, the
redactors wanted vindicate ecstasy, otherwise the historical authenticity of this event
cannot be ascertained with certainty.
God actually raised Moses and would raise another prophet like him from Israel. (Deutr
18:18). There had never been any other prophet like Moses before him. So Moses was a
model of Israelite prophets. Arguably Moses was a seer trained under his father – in –
Law Jethro, a judge, a Law giver as well as a leader. From these credentials he was a
model for Samuel, Joshua etc.
1. According to Johannes Lindblom God revealed himself to a prophet through visions

and inspiration (the earliest forms of prophecy). Moses received a vision at the
burning bush. He was inspired with the spirit of God in the Wilderness. So he was a
model for future prophets. (cf. Num. 11: 24 – 29)
2. Prophets of Israel harked back to Moses the founder of Yahweism. Elijah was a
second Moses. All later prophets dwelled on the Mosaic covenant. So Moses was a
model for later prophets.
Elijah
The contributions of Elijah

1. Identify the figure of Elijah
2. Highlight the five major attributes of Elijah and qualify them with biblical references
3. Discuss the major events in Elijah’s prophetic career
In Point Form

Page 40
- Elijah was a revolutionary Yahweist

- He was one of the first prophets to confront and challenge kings of Israel e.g Ahab. (but
there was also Samuel who confronted Saul).
- His prophecy focused on religion, politics and social values.
- He was a miracle worker. He provided food to the widow of Zarephat.
- He was a second Moses – a representative of all prophets.
His Religious Contributions

These are noted in the following biblical accounts-
1. The contest at Mt Carmel (1Kings18:20)
2. The escape to Horeb (1Kings 19)
3. The confrontation with Ahab. (1Kings 21:17)
The contest between the gods (Yahweh and Baal) follows a meeting of the two human
antagonists – Elijah and Ahab. Ahab greets Elijah as “the troubler of Israel” an
expression suggesting the ritual pollution of a community and, therefore, the inducement
of communal hardships by the violation of an oath or sacred value. Ahab’s point is that
Elijah is responsible for the drought, but Elijah replies that it is Ahab who has “troubled
Israel” by violating Jehovah’s commandments. Ahab’s pagan wives Jezebel brought
more than 800 prophets of baal into Israel and so have polluted the land of Israel with
foreign gods.
Elijah’s journey through the wilderness to Mount Horeb is the most important of a series
of episodes that present him as the new Moses. The altar he built on Mount Carmel using
twelve stones (according to the number of tribes of the sons of Jacob” is reminiscent of
Moses` alter and twelve standing stones set up on Mt Sinai. Now he makes a journey of
40 days and 40 nights to Horeb and enter the cave which might be the same cleft of rock
from which Moses saw Yahweh’s back. Like Moses Elijah watches as Yahweh passes
by. About the journey to Horeb, many scholars think that pious Yahweists made
pilgrimages to Sinai during the time of the Israelites and Judean monarchies. Elijah is
often seen as a pilgrim in this story. But the reason he gives is that he was seeking refuge
from Jezebel’s threat. The pilgrimage itself is a miraculous journey of forty days and
nights without food or water, for which he is prepared by an angel who requires him to
consume a double portion of both before the trek begins.
“The still small voice” – Many scholars interpret this account as a deliberate rejection of
the storm theophany in Yahwism because of its special associations with the Canaanite
rain god Baal. The rejection comes at the time when Israel was divided between the
worship of Baal and Yahweh, and the danger of syncretism was great. It is clear,
however, that this incident represents a transition from the spectacular theophanies
witnessed by early Israel to the quiet transmission of the divine word to the prophets.
SACRIFICAL WORSHIP IN ISRAEL

By the end of the topic the student should be able to:
1. Define “sacrificial worship” in general and in Israel in particular.

Page 41
2. Trace and explain how sacrificial worship started and how it spread in Israel.
3. Use biblical references to show the presence of sacrificial worship in Israel.
4. Show and prove what different prophets in Israel had to say about sacrificial
worship.
The aspect of sacrificial worship is a major theme in the writings of pre-exilic prophets
Amos, Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiah. The theme is consistently linked with the theme of
the covenant. The pre-exilic prophets apparently denounced sacrificial worship when in
fact it was demanded by Yahweh. The question therefore arises whether these prophets
were opposing what God had put in place. The question needs to be explored using the
following itinerary:
i) The origins of sacrificial worship

ii) The purpose of sacrificial worship.
iii) Its application.
iv) What the prophets had to say about it and why.
(i) The origins of sacrificial worship.
Unanimously the scholars listed on the bibliography above agree that sacrificial worship
in Israel was linked with the Mosaic covenant. Evidence for this is found in Exodus 6;
and 24. According to these texts, sacrificial worship was a wilderness tradition. This
means that it originated during wilderness journey. The practice of sacrificial worship in
Israel was an authorization for divine worship. When the covenantal relationship was
established between God and Israel, it became necessary that an apparatus be set up by
which the Israelites can interrelate with their God. This would require the manufacture of
certain special objects (the arc, the altar etc) that would make human- divine contact
possible and the designation of a special group of people (the priests) who would be able
to manipulate these objects. Above all, a shrine or sanctuary was to be erected (the
tabernacle or tent of meeting) where Yahweh would be present among his people. It is
stressed that these objects were to be erected exactly according to what Moses had seen
on Mount Sinai (Exodus 25:9,26:30). In this mountain Moses had a vision of a heavenly
sanctuary of which the earthly tabernacle was to be a replica. Yahweh himself authorized
the preparation of each item and gives its specification in Exodus 25-31. The carrying out
of his instructions was an actual inauguration of the system of divine service.
The first practice of sacrificial worship occurs during the ratification of the covenant
ceremony recorded in Exodus 24: 1 -11. The whole assembly of Israel took part in this
ceremony at the foot of the mountain. The central event at this occasion was a covenantal
meal. Moses was summoned to the mountain along with Aaron, two sons, and seventy
elders. They ate and drank looking upon the God of Israel. In another account in the same
chapter, the central event was a ritual involving “the blood of the covenant”. Moses read
the law and then performed a blood ritual with the consent of the people. In this case the
covenant is made effective by a sacrifice. Animals were sacrificed, and half the blood
was dashed against the altar as a symbol of Yahweh’s participation in the ritual. The

Page 42
other half of the blood was put in basins and Moses acting as covenant mediator, read to
the people the book of the covenant. When the people consented he dashed the blood
upon the people saying, “The blood of the covenant which Yahweh has made with you in
accordance with all these words”. In this event is confirmed the ancient belief that
sacrificial blood has the sacramental power to bring together two parties in covenant. The
belief in the efficacy of blood figures prominently in the theology of sacrifice in the old
testament.
(ii)The Purpose and Application of Sacrificial worship.

The purpose was 2 fold:
(1) as communion for peace offering)
(2) as expiation (for sin and for reparation)
The large block of Priestly materials in Leviticus chapters 1 to 7 indicates that sacrifice
was not understood as a means of appeasing divine wrath or of cajoling God to show
favors. Rather, the sacrifices were a means of atonement, that is, of healing the breach of
the covenant relationship and reuniting the people in communion with God. It was
believed that sacrifice was efficacious in restoring a broken relationship, not because
there was something magical in the power of blood which contains the potency of life,
but because God had provided the means of grace by which guilt was pardoned and the
people could live in the presence of the holy God. Sacrifice was not an end in itself. No
sacrificial rite is effective in the case of deliberate sin with intention - which represents a
downright revolt against God and the revealed law. Sacrifice must be accompanied by
confession and repentance.
(iii) What the prophets had to say about it and why.
What the prophets and the priests had in common was, above all, a sense of Israel’s
failure as a covenant people. In the period before the fall of the nation in 587 B.C.E, the
prophets, speaking with various accents, interpreted Israel’s suffering under the world
powers as the consequence of covenant failure. A good example is the case of Manasseh
who overturned the reforms that his father Hezekiah had created. Manasseh re-opened the
local pagan shrines in communities outside Jerusalem. He sponsored a programme to
amalgamate the worship of Yahweh with baal’s nature religion. Yahweh was worshipped
at altars of baal. Sacred prostitution was practiced (2 Kings 23:7).Thus the paganization
of Israel’s worship, which had been a threat ever since the time of judges, was given free
vein under royal sanction and patronage hence the prophets had this to say: “Come to
Bethel and transgress, to Gilgal and multiply transgression, bring your sacrifices every
morning, your tithes every three days, offer a sacrifice of thanks giving of that which is
leavened and proclaim free will offerings, publish them, for so you love to do, O people
of Israel”. (Amos 4: 4-5).
Comment
The oracle is sarcastic. It is mockery encouragement which means Israel should go right
on sinning with her sacrifices, which she loves to flaunt, so that they may be seen by all.

Page 43
Amos 5:21-23
“I hate, I despise your feasts, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies. Even
though you offer me, your burnt offerings and cereal offerings, I will not accept them,
and the peace offerings of your fatted beasts I will not work upon. Take away from me
the noise of your songs, to the melody of your harps I will not listen”. (RSV Bible).
Comment
Yahweh proclaims his “hatred” of their sacrifices, the sacrifices they love to proclaim.
Thus Yahweh hates what Israel loves and loves what Israel hates.
Hosea 9:4
“They shall not pour libations of wine to the Lord, and they shall not please him with
their sacrifices. Their bread shall be like mourners bread; all who eat it shall be defiled”.
(RSV Bible).
Comment
Hosea begins his judgment against festivals by prohibiting the celebration, accusing the
people of harlotry, of forsaking their God, and of self – serving ceremonies.
“For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt
offerings”. (Hosea 6;6) read together with Hosea 5: 3-4.
For the same reasons Isaiah and Jeremiah spoke against the sacrificial cult which had
been perverted by foreign worship.
Isaiah 2:6-8 reads:

“For thou hast rejected thy people, the house of Jacob, because they are full of diviners
from the east and of soothsayers like the philistines. Their land is filled with idols. (RSV
Bible).
Commentary
The leaders of Israel have become so arrogant and they have instituted idolatrous worship
in God’s religion. There is also heavy dependence on soothsayers, diviners and graven
images. God cannot accept it, hence the prophet condemned it.
Jeremiah 7:21-23 reads:“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel:”Add your burnt
offerings to your sacrifices and eat the flesh. For in the day that I brought them out of the
land of Egypt, I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt
offerings to your sacrifices”(RSV Bible). Read together with 7:31:
“And they have built the high place of Topheth, which is in the valley of Hinnom and
burnt the sons and their daughters in fire which I did not command, nor did it come into
my mind”. (RSV)

Page 44
Commentary
The accusations focus on religious practices, especially the worship of gods other than
Yahweh and the offering of sacrifices. Because of these perverted acts Yahweh has
rejected and forsaken the chosen people says Thomas W. Overholt.
Conclusion
The general point in this chapter (sacrificial worship in Israel ) is that, of course God had
allowed sacrificial worship as divine service while Israel was in the wilderness. But on
coming into the promised land, Moses had prohibited sacrificial worship (see Deutr 18:1-
22) knowing very well the dangers of syncretism. The kings of Israel later on insisted on
sacrificial worship but then doing it the foreign way. God therefore sent his prophets to
go and denounce the entire practice of sacrificial worship. In finer terms it was not a
matter of a particular prophet’s attitude, but God’s instruction.
SAMUEL

1. Identify the figure of Samuel in Israelite history
2. Show the credentials of Samuel and stress the most important credentials
3. Explain the role of Samuel in the Transition from Theocracy to Monarch in Israel
Introductory facts
His ministry is dated to the 11th century BCE after settlement in Canaan. He appeared
during a period of wars with the Philistines and he helped people to choose a king (Saul).
The Philistines destroyed the holy shrine of Shiloh and captured the arc of God. The
people of Israel felt they needed an army commander instead of the old charismatic
Judges like Gideon to deal with the menace. Saul was chosen to be the king and
commander of the Israelites but Samuel was protesting, arguing that it was a rejection of
God’s rule in favour of a human ruler.
Religious Credentials of Samuel

1) Samuel served as a seer in Israel. Evidence is found in 1 Samuel 19:20 and 1 Samuel
10 : 2-8. Samuel was paid a small fee for his services says R.A.B Ewbank. But other
scholars, including Anderson argues that he was not charging fees as such, but
accepted tokens of appreciation. This controversy arises from the conversation
between Saul and his servant in 1 Sam 9: 8 “What have we?” The servant answered
Saul again, “Here l have with me the fourth part of a shekel of silver, and I will give it
to the man of God to tell us our way”.
2) Samuel was a father of the ecstatics at Ramah. He led the enthusiastic prophets in a
campaign to withstand foreign gods (1 Sam 19:10).
3) He received a call when he was a child. The call came in a dream.

Page 45
4) Samuel was a priest as well as a prophet.

5) Samuel was also a Judge. After the destruction of the national shrine of Shiloh, the
Israelites had no central shrine and Samuel, who lived at Ramah, went on circuit in the
central highlands, trying and settling disputes. The term “circuit” is used in judicial
systems to refer to seasonal visits by a High court Judge to remote districts to try
serious criminal cases that were committed in those districts.
6) Samuel presided over religions ceremonies at the altars of Bethel, Gilgal and Mizpah.
This suggests that he was a priest as evidenced by 1 Sam 7:15-17.
7) Samuel advocated monotheism and campaigned against idolatry. Monotheism refers
to worshipping only one God.
8) On one occasion he led the people to victory over the Philistines (1 Sam 7:3-10) and
so kept alive the spirit of resistance and devotion to Yahweh during the Philistine
occupation.
9) Samuel opposed the idea of a king and preferred the old systems of a confederacy of
tribes led by charismatic judges of whom he was one.
10) Samuel anointed the first king of Israel, Saul whom he did not support.
11) Samuel was an intercessor on behalf of the people of Israel, “Far be it from me that I
should sin against the Lord by ceasing to pray for you and instruct you in the good and
right way”. (1 Sam 12:23).
12. Samuel quarreled with Saul when he took Samuel’s prerogative by offering a
sacrifice in the shrine when Samuel had delayed to arrive. Offering of sacrifices was
the responsibility of priests. (1 Sam13:8-15).
13. Samuel’s last action was to anoint David as king of Israel in place of Saul.
Conclusion
Samuel had the characteristics of a true prophet because he was empowered to speak true
words of God and had also the gift of second sight. Like Moses he influenced the course
of public events and acted as the conscience of the King, and interceded both for the King
and people. He was a patron of the ecstatics who were enthusiasts for the religion of
Yahweh.
THE COMPILATION OF PROPHET BOOKS
By the end of the topic the student should be able to:
1. Define what a prophetic book is

2. Explain how prophetic books were formed
3. Explain how prophetic materials were preserved
Prelude:
This material will seek to answer how and why prophetic books were compiled. But there
is need to research further on this topic

Page 46
What is a prophetic book?
A book is generally understood to be a self – contained production by one author (very

rarely several), published on a specific date and protected by later hands. But in the case
of prophetic books critical study has established that the sayings of the original author
have in many cases been edited and amplified over a period of several centuries.
Prophetic books reached their present form as a result of a cumulative process of editing,
adapting and expanding.
Formation of prophetic books.
Writing down of prophetic oracles might have been an emergency measure, undertaken
when the prophet was unable to deliver the message orally. As an example, Amos may
have had recourse to writing after being expelled from the Kingdom of Samaria.
(Amos7:12), Jeremiah was banned from speaking in the precincts of the Temple (Jer
36:4-6). Writing could also have had the purpose of authenticating predictive prophecy
e.g. Isaiah 30:8, “And now, go, write it before them on a tablet and inscribe it in a book,
that it may be for the time to come as a witness forever”.
The need to preserve prophecies when political or military disaster threatened must also
have been a factor and may help to explain why written prophecy dates from the Assyrian
crisis in the eighth century B-C.
How were the prophetic materials preserved?

The first stage towards the formation of a prophetic book was memorizing, collecting and
writing down of smaller collections of sayings. Some would be held together by formal
or stylistic features e.g. the recurring refrain in Amos 4:6-12; Isa 5:24-25), or an initial
formula e.g. the woe sayings in Amos 5:18-20. Others had in common a particular theme
e.g. Jer 23:9-4 or bore on a particular historical accuracy e.g. Isa 7:1 to 8:15. In the course
of time these collections would have been put together, usually in some meaningful
arrangement, and amplified with a biographical or autobiographical memoir where
available. It is also possible that their origins were simply attached to one, or in some
cases more than one, named collection e.g. Isa: 1-5 Mic 4:1-5.
In Israel as elsewhere, prophetic activity tended to intensify during periods of political,

military or cultural crisis. It is reasonable to conclude that the collecting and editing of
the sayings of Amos and Hosea were one aspect of the Judean response to the fall of
Samaria in 722 B.C. After the fall of Jerusalem one hundred and thirty-five years later a
major effort was made, for the same reasons, to collect prophetic texts, adapting them to
the needs of communities in the Diaspora and the homeland.
Conclusion
In its present form, therefore, the latter prophets is the end product of a cumulative
process extending over several centuries.

Page 47
Examination type questions

.
1. How justified is the view that Samuel was a true model of prophets?
2. Examine the view that the Old Testament prophets saw kings as a necessary evil.
3. Moses was just a good leader but later editors made him into a prophet.’ Assess this
statement.
4. Their involvement of Yahweh in historical events in the life of Israel was at the
Centre of the message of Israelite prophets. To what extent is this assertion valid?
5. “Ecstasy was a phenomenon also found outside Israel” (G. Holscher) Show how this
statement has often been used to dispute that prophecy was quite unique in Israel.
References
1. Anderson B.W The Living World of the Old Testament 4th edition 1978.
2. Childs B.S. The book of Exodus: A critical Theological Commentary, 1974.
3. McCarter P.K. Exodus in, Harper Bible Commentary, 1988.
4. Sarna. N.M. Exploring Exodus; 1986.
CHAPTER 3
THE BOOK OF AMOS
By the end of chapter the student should be able to:
1. Identify the origins of the prophet Amos
2. Examine the call story of Amos
3. Identify and Explain the three main themes in Amos
4. Critically examine why Amos disagreed with people of the South
5. Discuss the view that Amos was a prophet of doom
6. Critically examine the last verses of Amos
Introduction

Page 48
The book of Amos is a prophetic book of only nine chapters. Its central focus is the
proclamation of Yahweh`s judgement against Israel because some Israelites had
oppressed the poor. Yahweh`s burning anger is directed against Israel because it treats
people violently and unjustly. Yahweh`s anger is, in deed so hot that the downfall of
Israel is unavoidable. Only at the end of the book can one find clearly expressed a
message of hope, but that expectation seems to apply primarily to Judah rather than to
Israel. Most scholars think that this article of hope for Judah is the product of later
editors of the book of Amos. It did not come from Amos himself.
Who was Amos?
The little that is known about Amos must be derived from the book itself. Amos came
from Tekoa in Judah (the Southern state). He understood himself to have been
commissioned by Yahweh to prophesy to Israel during the rule of Jeroboam 11(786-
746B.c). He does not seem to have been a lifelong prophet but rather a shepherd and
dresser of sycamore trees (7:14)
The Text of Amos.

The book of Amos consists of three major sections as follows:
1. An introductory superscription and the Motto

2. The main body of the book chapters one to chapter 9.
3. A concluding post script (9:8 - 15)
The first and third sections presuppose Jerusalem to be the focus of divine activities “ the
Lord roars from Zion” (Jerusalem) his dwelling place.
The superscription is a statement of the author of the message “The words of Amos” and
his vocation - “who was among the shepherds of Tekoa”. The motto contains language
typical of the ophanies “The Lord roars from Zion”. Such a motto suggests the wrath of
Yahweh, which is likened to a roaring lion. The motto is noted as the first indication of
Amos` conceptions of destruction.
The second part of the book revolves around the theme of God’s presence. A series of
judgement speeches lays a foundation for an exhortation that the people should prepare
for Yahweh to appear in their midst. The coming of Yahweh marks the death of Israel.
The Oracles against the Nations
The oracles are a repetitional composition containing a series of stereotyped oracles

against various foreign peoples, concluding with oracles against Judah and Israel. They
are introduced by a brief accusation and announcement of punishment, “for three
transgressions of …and for four I will not revoke the punishment”
The rationale for using this formula is unclear. The numbers three and four have no clear
relevance to the series of crimes committed. The nature of the crimes is clearly specified.

Page 49
They are all violent abuses of human beings. Yahweh’s punishment for these crimes
occur in the form of anger, which once sent forth, will not be called back. “Fire” a
stereotypical expression for Yahweh’s anger and destruction is kindled to eat the
strongholds of these nations’ defeat, death by the sword and exile.
Yahweh’s anger which is directed against his own people namely, Judah and especially,
Israel, provides the climax in this repetitional composition. While Judah’s misdeeds are
stated generally as disobedience to the law and walking according to lies, the crimes of
Israel involve oppression of the poor. “They sell the righteous for silver and the needy for
a pair of shoes (2:6). Such social abuses are serious violations against Yahweh, for they
profane his holy name and altars and desecrate his sacred house. Furthermore although
Yahweh has graciously delivered Israel, the Israelites have disobeyed him, “I raised up
some of your sons as prophets ….as Nazarites,” you made the Nazarites drink wine and
say: “you must not prophesy”. (Amos 2: 12.)
Because Israel has oppressed the poor, profaned Yahweh’s name, abused his Nazarites,
and silenced his prophets, Yahweh will punish the nation by military defeat. This defeat
is expressed first by the image of an overloaded wagon that: “presses down what is
underneath”. Then the imagery shifts to the portrayal of the fate of warriors in defeat.
Question:
1. What has Amos to say about God and the nations?
Hints
 Amos’ judgmental oracles in chapters 1- 2
 Focus on various foreign people who committed crimes against humanity.
 The judgements are announced in a stereotype formula.
 The meaning of the formula is not clear.
 Its emphasis is on repeated offences.
 Oracles to other nations are a preamble to Amos’ targeted nation of Israel.
 The judgmental exhortations use the imagery of “fire” to mark the devastative
nature of God’s punishment.
 Israel is a rebellious nation that must suffer a military defeat and face subsequent
exile.
 Israel’s unchecked injustices profane the name of Yahweh.
 The appropriate- penalty is a destruction of the nation by foreign military arsenal.
 The oracles to the nations usher the crucial sentiments of doom in the book of
Amos.
2. What were the matters about which Amos and his contemporaries disagreed?
Amos’ contemporaries were the Israelites of the northern state. Amos announced further
judgement against them in more severe terms, accompanied by mockery of their

Page 50
privileges and luxuries, even their religious ceremonies are sarcastically denounced.
Israel is charged of misdeeds and threatened with judgement. Israel is called to hear the
word of her own destruction, “Hear this word; you only have I known…
Therefore I will punish you…” (Amos 3:2).
Amos avers that election is no guarantee of God’s favour; it involves, rather, a

demanding responsibility and serves as the basis for divine judgement and punishment.
This view of Amos would run contrary to Israelite conception. Amos’ proclamation on
the threat to human life in Israel, which he portrayed by the imagery of a trumpet, “If a
trumpet is blown in a city does not the people tremble”? This involves the audience
personally and threatens their survival. Such a proclamation would be met by an
emotional reaction because the people least expected any reprisals from their God.
The imageries in Amos 3:12 further depict events contrary to Israelite conception. Amos
employs two imageries:
i)- The shepherd who rescues nothing but torn animal parts from the lion and
ii)- the recovery of nothing but furniture fragments from the enemy. Not only will the
strongholds of the capital be brought low, nothing but the fragments of the furnishings
will be left. Still the other image of a lion having devoured its prey (3:12) connects
animal violence to military defeat of Israel. Moreover, the roaring of the lion is said to be
God’s voice, so the lion’s attack; the blowing of the trumpet in the city, the activity of
witnesses in Yahweh`s trial against Samaria, and the enemy’s destruction of the mighty
strongholds of Samaria and the decimation of the furnishings are all images that work
together to depict the total annihilation of the city.
In Amos 3:13-15 he extends the portrayal of devastation. Witnesses are summoned to

witness that the sanctuary at Bethel and the altar will be punished and that Yahweh will
destroy the houses. The worshippers are sarcastically summoned to Bethel to come and
multiply transgression, “Come to Bethel And transgress, to Gilgal and multiply
transgression”. (Amos 4:4)
Such sacarsm would be an insult of the holy religion. The Israelites would least expect
such messages from a true prophet. The proclamation of the death of King Jeroboam 11
marked the climax. He was instantly served with a P.I. order by the high priest Amaziah.
Amos` contemporaries would not expect to hear disfavour or any bad messages that
suggested God taking punitive measures against them.
Proclamation of death Chapter 5:1-17
Amos proclaims a total death of Israel using a funeral dirge, “Fallen; no more
to rise, is the Virgin Israel.” The prophet employs the image of a dead virgin and the
impression of a funeral lament to portray a total end of Israel. It is a regrettable loss for a
woman to die a virgin (Judges 11:29-40). So too Israel dies prematurely and unfulfilled,
like a woman who had born no child.

Page 51
The visions of judgement in chapter 7 also depict the end of Israel. The first two reports
narrate visions of devastating judgements against Israel, in which the prophet succeeds
through intercessory prayer, in persuading Yahweh to withdraw the punishment. In the
third and fourth visions Yahweh announces an irrevocable judgement against Israel.
.
“I will not again Pass him by”, this fifth vision elaborates the judgement. The vision
reports develop the theme of death present in the main theme of Amos. Like a wall tested
by a plumb line and found to be unfit, so Israel fails the test and therefore must, like the
wall be torn down.
The “Summer fruit” introduces a description of Israel’s end. This final vision fills up the
picture of death – none will escape the sword. No matter how far they flee, they cannot
escape Yahweh`s eyes. At his command they will die.
Question
How justifiable is it that Amos was a prophet of doom?
Hints
 An admission statement of the fact that Amos indeed proclaimed doom.
 The motto in chapter 1 and the threats of devastation of the nations by fire and the
subsequent destruction of their strongholds.
 The imagery of a lion mouling a lamb in 3:12 and the wagons that was pressing
down heavily.
 The funeral lament in chapter 5:2 and the mockery of holy places at Bethel and
Gilgal.
 The visions of judgement analysed one by one and their emphasis on devastation.
 The persistence with which Amos attacks the nation of Israel.
The postscript: Amos 9:8-15
The book of Amos ends with a reinterpretation of the message of judgment. By disputing
the claim that deliverance from Egypt exempts Israel from judgment, the author claims
that Yahweh will destroy “the sinful kingdom”. This kingdom is the Israelite monarchy,
which will disappear, but “the house of Jacob” will not be completely destroyed. Only
sinners will die and a remnant will survive. The last four verses (11-15) were
undoubtedly composed during the Babylon exile. They understand the surviving remnant
as linked to the renaissance of the falling David dynasty.
Most scholars attribute these last verses to a later editor who intended to put the book of
Amos on a cool ending. The editor could have intended to regain the souls of the hearers
of Amos.
Clarification on the themes of doom and hope in Amos

Page 52
Often there is controversy among teachers and students of ‘A’ level divinity. The
controversy is based on whether there is a message of hope or not in Amos’ Prophesy.
But such a controversy is not there among biblical scholars especially if one reads
carefully most of them’s views on Amos. In fact the most respected of these scholars on
Amos actually warned that it is futile to attempt to forge any hope in Amos’ prophecies.
In this study pack we seek to make a resolution once and for all on this issue so that the
student of divinity will correctly understand the true nature of Amos’ message in
conformity with the syllabus requirement that through out students should be aware of
views of modern scholars’’. The apparent controversy is based on such texts as in 3: 12-
13; where a sherphard retrieved two legs and a peace of an ear of a sheep from the mouth
of a lion. What is important to note here is that this oracle is not an isolated one from the
rest of the message. In view of this fact you ought to take note that Amos uses imageries
of a life – threatening nature, thus the remains of a sheep in this case are only exhibits to
show that the animal has been killed. J. P. Hyatt, a specialist on Amos, commenting in
Peake’s Bible Commentary, argued that the remains are too insignificant to represent life.
He actually warns readers against a hopeful notion. The resentment which God made
after Amos’ intercession in the visions of locusts and fire does not suggest an alteration
of God’s plan to destroy Israel . At most the resentment could only be a temporary one
that was soon superseded by the threatening visions of the plumbline, the basket of the
summer fruit and the vision of the Lord at the altar. The total impression that is created is
catastrophic and irreversible. That is the view which the student must appreciate.
Summary of the theme on social justice
Strictly speaking the main theme in Amos is the theme of God’s presence. This major
theme splits into two parts. The first part being a series of judgment speeches is laying a
foundation for an exhortation, that the people should prepare for Yahweh to appear in
their midst. The second part of the theme is building upon that exhortation portraying
Yahweh’s presence as an event resulting in Israel’s death. In succinct terms the book of
Amos basically deals with the two themes of social Justice, and the destruction of the
nation.
The first part of the book of Amos opens up with a series of judgmental oracles against
various nations including Israel and Judah. Yahweh has sent his anger against various
foreign peoples. Specifically the crime of all these nations is human abuse.
(Amos 1:3-4:3).
The nations have violently abused human beings as follows:

1)Damascus threshed Gilead with threshing sledges of iron.
2)Tyre failed to remember the covenant of brotherhood and delivered a whole of people
to Edom.
3)Edom pursued his brother with the sword and cast off all pity.
4)Ammon ripped the tummies of pregnant women in Gilead.
5)Moab burned to ashes the corpse of the King of Edom.
6)Israel’s offense is expounded extensively as oppression of the poor and their
enslavement. They sell the righteous for silver and the needy for a pair of shoes. Such

Page 53
social abuses are violations against Yahweh for they profane his holy name and his
altars and desecrate his sacred house. Further more, although Yahweh has graciously
delivered Israel from Egypt, the Israelites have disobeyed him because they have
oppressed the poor, profaned Yahweh’s name, abused his Nazirites and silenced his
prophets. So Yahweh will punish the nation by military defeat.
The accusations of oppression are extended to the women of Samaria (Amos 4).
Specifically this refers to the wives of the rulers and the top class. The women urge
their husbands to exploit the poor at the market places and to charge bribes and bring
the proceeds home. From eating such proceeds these women have grown fat and stout
to fit the image of the fat beasts that were reared in the fertile district of Bashan: “Hear
this word, you cows of Bashan who oppress the poor, who crush the needy who say to
their husbands “bring that we may drink”.
Corruption is rampant in the national courts. Judges accept bribes and prejudice the
poor in the courts. The rulers have turned justice into wormwood and cast down all
righteousness (5:7). False scales are used at the market places to cheat the poor. The
super profits obtained from this robbery is used to sponsor a luxurious life at the
expense of the poor , “…….. You trample upon the poor and take from him exactions
of wheat, you have built houses of hewn stone…….. you who afflict the righteous, who
take a bribe”. (5:11-12). In all sectors of life (political, economic and social) there is
gross injustice in Israel.
1. Amos believed that Israel’s destruction was unavoidable. Discuss.

2. Discuss the view that Amos 9:8-15 was not written by Amos.
3. To what extent can it be argued that for Amos the authority of Yahweh went beyond
Israel?
4. What had Amos to say about God and the Nations?
5. Show how Amos’s vocation influenced his prophetic career
References
Hyatt J.P’s article on Amos in Peake’s Bible Commentary.
Mays J.L. Amos: A commentary. Old Testament Library, Philadelphia (1969)
Melugian. R’s article on Amos in Harper’s Bible Commentary 1988.

Page 54
Tucker G. “Prophetic Authenticity,” A form of critical study of Amos 1973.
CHAPTER 4
THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH
By the end of the chapter the student should be able to:
1. Give an overview of the socio- politico- religious environments in Judah in the
time Jeremiah.
2. Explain the call story of Jeremiah
3. Examine the nature of his prophetic mandate as outlined in the call story
4. Critically examine the dynamics in prophetic activity in Judah in the time of
Jeremiah
5. Examine the view that Jeremiah was a prophet of doom
6. Explain the symbolism in Jeremiah
7. Examine the conceptions of hope in Jeremiah’s book of consolation
8. Discus whether Jeremiah was a patriot or a traitor

Page 55
Who was Jeremiah?
An attempt to identify Jeremiah is made in the superscription in chapter one verses one to
three. (1:1-3). He was the son of Hilkiah. His father was a priest. They lived at Anathoth
in the outskirts of Jerusalem. He prophesied in the days of King Josiah up to the time of
captivity in Babylon in 587 B.C.
His call
He was called in the 13th year of King Josiah`s rule (626 B.C) in Judah. He received two
visions during his call. The first vision stresses Yahweh’s determination to bring his
words, uttered by the prophet, to fulfillment. The second vision sketches the content of
those words i.e. Judah will be destroyed by an enemy attacking from the north as
punishment for its unfaithfulness to Yahweh.
Jeremiah`s call is described as a confrontation and dialogue with Yahweh that proceeds
through four stages viz. commission stage; objection stage, reassurance and the sign.
Such a call report is appropriate for someone who is thought to stand in special
relationship to a God, says Hermann Gunkel. He was ordered not to marry (16:1), not to
join social gatherings and not to participate in family gatherings. He was to refrain from
marriage – because the coming warfare would utterly destroy families.
Refraining from mourning rites (16:5)- meant that Yahweh would remove peace in the
land so much that death would be so widespread such that the custom of mourning would
be meaningless.
Refraining from feasting (16:8)- meant that Yahweh was going to bring sorrow in the
land instead of happiness.
His mandate
Jeremiah`s task was described as being two dimensional i.e. to pull down and to re-build.
To “pull down” referred to the castigation of the nation for its apostasy and to announce
its downfall. To “re-build” referred to an assurance of restoration after punishment. To
put across these two missions the prophet used techniques of dramatizations and
symbolisms. Besides these two techniques Jeremiah would also use temple sermons to
express his message.
The book of Jeremiah in its historical context
It is very important that we put the book of Jeremiah in its historical context so that
correct interpretation can be possible. This context shall focus on the politics and religion
of Judah during the time of Jeremiah. Much of Jeremiah’s oracles have an inclination on
the two factors i.e. politics and religion of the time. Unless one understands these two
factors one cannot interpret correctly the book of Jeremiah. Thomas W. Overholt (1988)
wrote that: “The book of Jeremiah is not the product of a single person operating in a

Page 56
closely circumscribed time and place. To understand it, therefore we must be aware not
only of the context in which the prophet worked, but also those context in which
traditions about his work were known, appreciated, and preserved resulting in the book as
it has come down to use. The time during which this development took place can be
divided into two distinct periods, i.e. before the exile and after the exile.”
Politics
According to the traditional date, Jeremiah’s prophetic activity spanned the last four
decades of Judah’s existence as a nation (626-587BC). This period was a time of
increasing internal factionalism and shifting foreign alliances. King Josiah of Judah (640-
609) took advantage of Assyria’s growing weakness to re-establish Judah’s independence
and in the process brought under his control former Israelite lands to the north. As part of
this effort he undertook a major reform of the nation’s religious establishment (cf 2
Chron 34:1-8).
In 609 BC king Josiah was killed by the Egyptian pharaoh named Neco at the battle of
Megiddo. The death of Josiah was an important turning point and a profound
embarrassment. This death brought the new notion that Judah’s existence as an
independent nation controlling Palestine as it had been in the days of David and
Solomon, was now an illusion. Not all of Jeremiah’s contemporaries had such an insight
into their situation. The continual hopes for national independence remained a source of
internal tension until the very end. Actually Josiah’s fate falsified the assumption of
Deutronomists and prophets alike, that the righteous and God-fearing person and nation
of Judah will prosper.
In 597 BC king Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon mounted a siege against Jerusalem (capital

of Judah) which fell on March 16th. Zedekiah, the third son of Josiah took over after two
other kings as a vassal ruler of Jerusalem placed by the Babylonians. But the Judeans
continued with the cry for independence. Even among those who understood the defeat as
God’s punishment were some who felt that their chastisement was now complete and that
restoration would soon follow.
Later, Zedekiah did rebel against the Babylonians. In January 588BC Nebuchadnezzar
began a second siege of Jerusalem until the walls of Jerusalem were destroyed
completely in 587BC. Judeans were carried into exile. This time the city and its temple
were completely destroyed (cf 2Kings 25:1-21) The few people who had remained in
Judah were put under a new vassal governor called Gedaliah who was appointed by the
Babylonians to look after a few things that had remained in Jerusalem. After the death of
Gedaliah the few people who had remained fled to Egypt. Tradition has it that they
carried the prophet Jeremiah with them against his will.
(Jer 43-44).
The political fate of the nation dominates the book of Jeremiah. One of the notable
features of Judean politics ten years before 587BC was the division of the leaders into
factions, or parties. The book gives no names of these groups, but they can be identified
by their views on foreign policy. One group comprising kings Jehoiakim and Zedekiah

Page 57
(Sons of Josiah) and many of the nobles and religious leaders, was committed to Judean
political autonomy. As a practical matter this group generally favoured alliance with
Egypt and other steps designed to regain independence from Babylon. The other group
made up of a smaller group of nobles and their supporters among religious functionaries,
believed that in the present circumstances it was necessary to submit to the suzerainty of
Babylon. Both groups were able to rationalize their position on the basis of the religious
tradition. Jeremiah sided with the second group. Chapter 27-29 of the book suggest
something of the bitterness of those divisions.
Among Jeremiah’s consistent supporters in this confrontation with various kings were
members of a particular noble family called the house of Shaphan. Shaphan himself had
been Josiah’s secretary and had had a prominent role in Josiah’s religious reforms (cf 2
Kings 22:3-20) This connection of the prophet Jeremiah with the house of Shaphan
allows us to trace the pedigree of what some have called “the pro-Babylonian” party back
to the time of Josiah’s reforms.
Religion
As in politics the official religion of Judah during the decades before the exile was
dominated by the legacy of Josiah, who relatively early in his reign carried out a thorough
going institutional reform. The reform’s main features, removal of foreign religious
practices from both Jerusalem and its environs and from regions further to the north and
centralization of worship in the temple at Jerusalem fit well with Josiah’s political
programme of gaining independence from Assyria and re-asserting Judean control over
formerly Israelite territory to the north.
From Jeremiah 44:15-19 we can infer that the reform was generally effective in bringing
communal worship of other Gods under control. But the enhanced position of the
Jerusalem temple and its priesthood also had the effect of a prevailing conceptual
justification for foreign policy decisions that Jeremiah felt compelled to-oppose (Jer 7:1-
15) (Jer 27-28).
The last decades before 587BC were thus a period of intense politico-religious conflict
between two groups of the nation’s elite each containing both prophets and members of
the ruling aristocracy. Reading throughout the book of Jeremiah gives one the impression
that widespread apostasy among his countrymen was the feature of Judean society that
disturbed the prophet most. (Jer 2:1-4:4) for example is concerned entirely with that
topic. The people are accused for forsaking their God, indeed, of trading him for other
less effective gods. In some of these oracles, apostasy appears to be both a religious and
political issue. In the prophet’s view, the adopting of new gods had diminished rather
than enhanced the chances for national survival (2:14-19; 26-28;36-37). It is not
surprising that the nation’s leaders i.e Kings, princes, priests and prophets are singled out
for special blame. Jeremiah’s central concern was what he perceived to be the leaders’
unwillingness to take God and his demands seriously (chapter 5:12-13, 20-25; 6:10; 7:21-
26; 8:4-7; 15:5-9) will become apparent that Jeremiah’s opponents may reasonably have
assessed their own religious position quite differently.

Page 58
Jeremiah`s symbolic actions
In addition to the prophet`s words sometimes one encounters reports of prophetic deeds
unusual enough to merit special attention. Within the Old Testament, such “acts of
power” can be separated into two categories. There are first of all, acts that are within the
capability of any individual to perform. These are often referred to as “symbolic
actions”. Jeremiah`s breaking of a ceramic pot (19:1 – 15) and Isaiah`s walking in the
streets naked and barefoot (Isaiah 20) are examples of actions of this type. Second, there
are actions often referred to as “miracles” that appear to go beyond what we normally
think it possible for human beings to do. Isaiah`s causing the shadow on the sundial to
move backward (Isaiah 38:7 – 8) and the stories of Elijah and Elisha recalling the dead to
life are examples. (1 Kings 17:22) The attempt to understand these accounts does not
depend upon belief that such things actually happened.
Although there are no miracles in Jeremiah there are a number of “symbolic actions”.
The following are symbolic actions in Jeremiah:
(i)– His refraining from marriage (16:1-2)
(ii)– His refraining from morning rites (16:5)
(iii)– His refraining from feasting (16:8)
(iv)– His breaking of the ceramic pot (19:1)
(v)- His wearing of yoke bars (27:6-15)
(vi)- His buying of a field in Anathoth and protecting the deed (32:6-15)
(vii)-His setting of wine before the Rechabites (35:1ff)
(viii)- Instructions that it be read aloud and be destroyed (Jer 36).
Some might also wish to include the prophet’s “eating” of Yahweh`s “word” (15:16) and
his carrying a “cup of wine” around for various persons to drink.
In addition, the book provides accounts of symbolic actions performed by three other
persons; Hananiah who broke the yoke-bars Jeremiah had been wearing, Pashhur who
beat Jeremiah and put him in stocks and king Jehoiakim who cut and burned the scroll
containing Jeremiah`s oracles as it was read to him. Pashur`s action has the special
feature that it apparently involved the exercise of legal authority.
The accounts of symbolic acts in Jeremiah are simple and fairly regular in structure: the
action is performed before an audience and is accompanied by words. The act is usually
performed first, with the words following as an interpretation. Sometimes a response is
noted, and when this is the case it is always negative. The context suggests that the act
and the accompanying words are integral parts of a rhetorical situation. Their aim is
forceful and convincing communication. Symbolic actions have sometimes been
understood as quasi – magical acts in which the prophet sought to set into motion that
effect which his words anticipated.
Others have seen them from a more theological perspective, namely, as symbolizing the
guaranteed result of Yahweh`s intended action, which had been revealed to the prophet.
Prophets were dependent upon public support. Moreover, continuing support could not

Page 59
be taken for granted. In the prophet’s constant struggle to be accepted by and make
impact upon their audience fluid actions reinforcing and reinforced by words would force
a reaction and might predispose some towards acceptance of the prophet and his message.
Symbolic actions may be seen as part of the rhetorical repertoire by which the prophet
sought to gain the assent and support of an audience.
Jeremiah`s conceptions of doom
Jeremiah is often viewed as a prophet of doom. Some of his sentiments are classified as
catastrophic. Even his cries of lament and mourning in chapters 8, 9, and 10 do create an
impression of disaster. The enemy from the north is deemed to bring catastrophe over the
land of Judah. The dominant theme, in the above-mentioned chapters is copying with
disaster. No hope is expressed that, if the people repent they can avoid catastrophe.
Rather the nation’s downfall seems already to have occurred, though perhaps in the not
too distant past. In all likelihood, the poetry of these chapters reflects the exile but has
yet developed elaborate rationalisations of it, which is evident from the relatively large
numbers of poetic passages in which either the people or the prophet are pictured as
struggling with a disaster that seems at the very least to be virtually complete. The mood
is typified by the wailing of the people.
A vision of destruction: Jer 13:1-11
Jeremiah is instructed by Yahweh to purchase and wear a linen undergarment and,

subsequently, to make two trips, one for the purpose of retrieving it. This account is a
vision report. The undergarment- purchased and worn, hidden away and spoiled, is a
metaphor for the intimated relationship that existed between Yahweh and Judah, which
Judah`s rebellious actions have brought to ruin. The former intimacy is no longer
possible and the nation will be made to suffer as a result. The following symbolic actions
convey a message of doom for Judah:
1. Refraining from marriage, symbolised that the coming warfare would utterly destroy
families.
2. Refraining from mourning rites, symbolised that Yahweh would remove peace in the
land so much that death will be so widespread such that the custom of mourning will
be meaningless.
3. Refraining from feasting, symbolised that Yahweh is going to bring sorrow in the
land instead of happiness.
4. Breaking of the ceramic pot, symbolised Yahweh`s irreparable damage to the nation
of Judah.
Expression of hope in the book of Jeremiah.

Page 60
One of the problems encountered by the interpreters of Jeremiah is the necessity of

accounting for the inclusion of passages containing an element of hope in a collection
attributed to a prophet whose message seems to have been perceived as consistently
negative (cf. Chapters 20; 36; 38). In addition to the “book of consolation” (Jeremiah 30:
-31) there are over two dozen briefer passages of this type.
One may begin with the observation that the element of “hope” is included within the
prophet’s original commission: He was to pluck up and break down, to destroy and to
overthrow, to build and to plant (1:1). Echoes of this theme recur in oracles later in the
book in chapters 12, 24, 31 and 32.
The expressions of hope are sometimes addressed to individuals or small groups, but
most often to whole people or to a larger group representative of them. Frequently there
are Judeans, but in a surprising number of instances the reference is to the northern Israel
either mentioned alone or together with Judah. The oracles against foreign nations also
contain occasional promises of a brighter future. (Chapters 46, 48, 49).
Several themes recur in these passages. One notices first the prominent associations of
hope with Jerusalem, its temple and its royal dynasty. Both Zion and the restored
Davidic dynasty are important in the future of northern Israel, as well as Judah. A second
and closely related theme is the restoration of Judah to its land (Chapters 24; 27; 29; 32;
33).
A third theme - dramatic, though less frequent, is that in the future Yahweh will make “ a
new covenant” with his people. Its fullest statement may be found in Jer 31:31 – 34,
which contains the following elements:
a) Both northern Israel and Judah are included.
b) The new covenant would not be like the old Sinai covenant.
c) Obedience will now be possible because the law will no longer need to be taught but
will be written upon the people’s hearts.
d) Yahweh will again be their God and they are his people
e) He will forgive their past sins, and
f) By implication this new covenant will endure forever.
Clearly this covenant is not completely “new”. It is rather, a revision of the Sinai
covenant which depended upon the people’s obedience to Yahweh`s law and the
covenant’s stipulations. Jeremiah favoured Yahweh and struggled against the attitudes
fostered by confidence in the unconditional covenant that was the foundation stone of the
royal ideology. The oracles of hope are one part of a living tradition associated with the
prophet Jeremiah.
The struggle against “false” prophecy
There is abundant evidence in the book of Jeremiah for conflict among prophets (in
chapters 5, 6, 8,14,23,etc. The point of contention seems to be the content of the
prophecies: Some predict that the nation will dwell securely and at peace; others convey a

Page 61
message of doom. The account about Hananiah and Jeremiah in chapter 28 highlights
this conflict in a striking way, since on the surface the two seem indistinguishable except
for the content of their messages. Such conflicts were not unique to Jeremiah`s time,
though they may have intensified during the last decades of Judah`s existence.
In Israel, as in other societies, periods of intense prophetic activity coincided with times
of crisis. Thus, the decision about how to respond to a prophet was a matter of some
urgency, and criteria for making a judgement became a necessity. It seems that the
conflict between apparently genuine prophets gave rise to a crisis in confidence about
prophecy itself. The implication is that the prophet`s audience possessed no sure criterion
by which to judge between competing claims.
Though the conflict between prophets is a major theme in the book of Jeremiah, we can
discern that there is no full proof method for distinguishing among them. The attempt to
distinguish between the forms in which the revelation came is probably exilic and in any
case is not consistently applied. In fact, with respect to the narrative dominated by
prophetic conflict in chapters 27-29 it is easier to list things that are not a factor in the
prophet’s evaluation of his opponents as follows: association with cultic functionaries,
personal immorality and the fulfillment of prophecy (Det 18:20 – 22). This is easier than
to locate a specific criterion. People were apparently forced to respond to the prophets on
the basis of an evaluation of their message. The judgement that a particular prophet was
“true” was as always, dependent upon the viewpoint and commitments of the persons
making it. The confrontation of Jeremiah and Hananiah in chapter 28 is a case in point.
Essay
Was Jeremiah a patriot or a traitor? Critically discuss.
The treatise:
Patriot or traitor
Jeremiah is depicted in a climate of great political activity. The question of survival of

the nation of Judah was at stake. The declining power of Assyria saw the rise of Egypt
and Babylon as super powers. The Judean foreign policy had two options either to seek
alliance with Egypt and resist Babylon or to submit itself to Babylon. Such a dilemma
resulted in factionalism between two influential groups in Judah. The nobles who rallied
behind kings Jehoiakim and Zedekiah advocated the political autonomy of Judah; they
got the support of the prophet Hananiah. The other group was led by the house of
Shaphan and other members of the nobility who sided with the prophet Jeremiah and
advocated submission to Babylon. (the pro- Babylonian Party) . Jeremiah had an insight
into the role of Yahweh in the whole crisis whilst Hananiah relied on personal assessment
of the whole situation. In this whole scenario the task of judging whether Jeremiah was a
patriot or not becomes a very difficult one.
“Patriotism” is a nationalistic notion. It revolves around one’s attitude to his nation, its
welfare and survival. Patriotism is not merely supporting the status quo but it’s to do with
the survival of the nation. The difficult in which Jeremiah is found, is this that he is

Page 62
inspired and has an insight into God’s role in the whole crisis, whilst his counterparts are
merely relying on personal judgement of the whole issue. On personal judgement it
would appear that Jeremiah was not patriotic since he advocated a submission and non-
resistant policy. That sounds like a compromise of his nation’s sovereignty. On a
different angle Jeremiah is a figure who actually saw the survival of his nation as a
priority. He weighed chances and saw the resistance option resulting in a complete
destruction of the nation. Since the whole crisis was just but God’s punishment on his
people, it is fatalistic for Judah to attempt to resist God’s punishment. It is against this
background that one should judge whether Jeremiah was a patriot or not.
The narratives in Chapters 27 to 29 of the book of Jeremiah, stress a religious

interpretation of the political events. Jeremiah believed that Yahweh had established
Babylon as the enemy over Judah. The opponents of Jeremiah saw the Babylonian exile
as just a short- lived punishment of God but for minor offences. Therefore they opposed
Jeremiah’s interpretation of the crisis. Thomas Overholt observed that it is important to
note that there is adequate theological justification in the Judean religious tradition for
both these positions. Jeremiah’s view point mirrors the Sinai covenant in which national
security and prosperity are contingent upon obedience to Yahweh’s commandments. His
opponents’ position reflects the ideology of the royal covenant, according to which the
nation may be punished by Yahweh but will not be finally abandoned by him.
But this was not simply a dispute over points of doctrine. It is a struggle between political
parties, each seeking for its position on the prime foreign policy issue of the day i.e. the
relationship of Judah to the dominant power in the region, Babylon. For Jeremiah and his
group, the survival of those Judeans who remained in the land after the 597 B.C invasion
depended upon continued submission to Babylonian rule. For his opponents who
prompted for resistance to Babylonian domination and seek support from Babylon’s
greatest rival Egypt, the issue was the political independence of Judah and not merely
survival.
In the final analysis this paper views Jeremiah as one who loved his country with a
sentimentalism that is inspired by God; one who advocates public policies that are
designed in the light of God’s will. He is a pragmatic national who advocates an option
that would not aggravate the crisis and lead to the death of the nation. Therefore Jeremiah
was a patriot rather than a traitor.

1. Explain how the personal background of Jeremiah influenced his message.
2. Was Jeremiah a patriot or traitor? Discuss.
3. Jeremiah has been described as the “weeping prophet”. Explain the validity of this
assertion.
4. Give an account of the socio –politico- religio state of affairs in Judah in the time of
Jeremiah
5. Jeremiah prophesied both destruction and restoration. Discuss this view.
References

Page 63
Bright J. Jeremiah. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor

Bible 1965.
Overholt T. article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, 1988
CHAPTER 5
THE BOOK OF HOSEA
1. Discuss the prophecy of Hosea in the social, political, economic and religious,
history of Israel
2. Identify and explain the two main themes in the book of Hosea
3. Explain the use of symbolic signs in the book of Hosea
4. Discuss the inner conflict of Yahweh over the case of Israel in the book of Hosea
5. Examine the themes of judgment and salvation in Hosea.
Information outline
 Identification of the prophet
 The Mandate
 The Major Themes
 Symbolisms
 Prophecies of judgment and salvation

Page 64
 Conceptions of hope
Introduction
The book of Hosea is one of the most appealing and most difficult books of the Hebrew
Bible. In compelling ways the prophet employs the language and realities of family life,
husband and wife, parents and children, to communicate an understanding of the
relationships, past, present and future between Yahweh and the people of Israel (Gene M.
Tucker).
Christian commentators of the late 19th century and 20th century, in particular, considered
Hosea’s thought as one of the high points of the Old Testament, noting especially his
stress on the love of God and the deep connections he drew between faithfulness to God
and morality.
Hosea prophesied in the northern kingdom (Israel). He is the only one whose words have
come down to us in a separate book. In contrast to Judah, with its relatively stable
Davidic dynasty, Israel’s traditions concerning Kingship involved designation by
Yahweh’s spirit not just hereditary descent, and even allowed for revolt in the name of
Yahweh (7:8-16). During his time the little state lived under the constant threat of
invasion by Assyria and of conflicts with its neighbors. Internally, the situation was
chaotic. There were constant struggles for power. Agricultural prosperity brought
foreigners into the land of Israel to trade. The state became cosmopolitan. In such an
environment the cults of the Canaanite gods thrived. The fertility cult of baal caused a
problem in Israel. Who was responsible for the good harvests? God or baal? This is the
question constituting one of the main problems that Hosea addressed.
The message of Hosea
At the heart of Hosea’s message stands his concern with the relationship between
Yahweh and Israel. Depending heavily on the ancient tradition of Israel’s salvation and
election through the Exodus, he recalls the Lord’s past and present faithfulness to the
chosen people he accuses, and indicts the people not so much for specific sins, though
those were noted but for unfaithfulness. The specific form of this breach of faith is
apostasy, the acceptance of other gods. From this sin all others follow including ritual,
political and social abuses.
The unfaithfulness of Israel justifies the announcement of judgment in the form of

military defeat and destruction. Although that judgment is in accord with the law and
seems absolute, Yahweh struggles within himself, and then renounces the punishment of
Israel (Hosea11:5-9). At certain points the punishment seems designed to correct Israel’s
ways, to re-establish the relationship with Yahweh. In this context, whether before,
during or after the punishment is renounced, Hosea proclaims Yahweh`s courtship of
unfaithful Israel and announces salvation. Like Jeremiah, Hosea emphasizes the two
themes: the covenant relationship with God and the Love of God. With respect to his
emphasis on the core of God, it is remarkable that Hosea, though attacking Canaanite

Page 65
religion, introduced into biblical thought some of its language and symbolism.
Throughout his book Hosea has left the imagery of a God who is like a faithful husband
to people who are like a prostitute, a God who struggles over that people’s future like a
parent agonizing over a wayward child.
The marriage and symbolic signs: Hosea 1-3
Much in these chapters concern Hosea’s family life, but the fundamental message
concerns the relationship between Yahweh and his unfaithful people. In large measure
because of the initial report that Yahweh commanded Hosea to “take a wife of harlotry
and have children of harlotry”, (1: 2), these chapters have presented serious problems for
interpreters and have evoked a wide range of explanations. Some early Christian and
Jewish commentators took the references to Hosea’s marriage and family as allegorical,
thus avoiding the embarrassment that God would actually command an immoral act.
Others argued that Hosea merely reports a dream or vision. Neither interpretation seems
reasonable because the accounts are written as direct reports of events.
One theory says that Gomer was not a whore when Hosea married her but had such
tendencies. Eventually she took a lover or lovers, but the prophet found her and brought
her back. This view assumes that the woman of chapter 3 is the Gomer of chapter 1 and
that the order of the chapters corresponds to the chronology of Hosea’s life.
Another view says that these chapters, more likely contain reports of symbolic actions by
the prophet, actual events performed to show that Hosea knew the word of God before his
marriage and before he gave his children their symbolic names. (Not-Pitied and Not- My-
People, showing God’s attitude to his people).
Hosea’s marriage and family life result from his understanding of God’s word and do not
provide experience that taught him what to believe or say. Gomer as a “wife of harlotry”
represented unfaithful Israel and like most Israelites, had participated in the Canaanite
fertility cult. Hosea’s message is not that his wife and family are so unusual but, to the
contrary, all Israel has prostituted itself to false gods.
Wife and Children: Gomer, Jezreel; Not -Pited; Not- My-People (Hos:1: 2-9)
This third person narrative reports Yahweh’s command to Hosea and the prophet’s
fulfillment of it. The command includes a reason. The reason is, “because the land
commits great harlotry by forsaking the Lord.” The account of the carrying out of the
command occurs in three parts corresponding to the births of the three children each of
whom is given a symbolic name. Although the birth and naming of each child presents a
complete message, the unit as a whole develops from accusation and threat of punishment
(vv4-5), to the Lord’s withdrawal of forgiveness (v6), then to the radical proclamation
that the ancient covenant between Yahweh and Israel is terminated (vv8-9). The passage
announces unqualified punishment upon Israel.
Meanings of Names

Page 66
Jezreel: The name is given in memory of Israel’s sin in the valley of Jezreel where Jehu, a
military commander in Israel revolted and murdered Jehoram and the Judean
King Ahaziah. Such a case is remembered in God’s Punishment plan against
Israel.
Not-My- People: The name marks Yahweh’s rejection of the people of Israel as their God
because of the continued unfaithfulness they have shown. They
continue to sin in the manner of baalism.
Not Pitied: The name symbolizes God’s withdrawal of all mercy and his
commitment to punish the people of Israel. The ancient covenant ceases to be
of any force any more.
When the names changed the relationship scenario is reversed. A new covenant with
Israel comes into force.
Yahweh’s forgiving love (Hosea 3:1-5)

Hosea’s purchase of an adulteress in this unit is not autobiography (personal history) but
a prophetic proclamation. Once Hosea purchases the woman, he places her in isolation
from all sexual contact. The interpretation for this is that the Lord will deprive the people
of Israel of any leaders, and any religious practices so that they will eventually return to
their God.
The newly purchased woman is not here named. She may or may not be the Gomer of the
previous chapters. The meaning of this symbolic action report is that although Israel acts
unfaithfully, Yahweh continues to love her so much that he will buy her away from her
other lovers. God’s love includes discipline, for he will withdraw government and
religion, in effect removing the structures of civilisation from the land. As a result, Israel
will eventually return and seek its God directly. The ultimate result of this action is
already mentioned in Hosea 2:16-23 where the emergence of a new covenant is heralded.
A promise for a renewal of the covenant by God’s own initiative is alluded to. This new
covenant will include all living things thought by many of Hosea’s contemporaries to be
under the control of fertility deities. The relationship between God and people will be
characterised by depth of righteousness, justice, steadfast love, mercy, and faithfulness
and will endure forever.
The names of children which provide dominant metaphors will each be reversed from its
initial meaning to reflect the new scenario as follows:
Not-Pitied will be Pitied.

Not-my people will be You are my people

Page 67
Prophecies of judgment and salvation Hosea 4-14
Virtually all the material in these chapters is presented as the written form of prophetic
speeches. The first chapters 4 to 11, and then chapters 12 to 14 proceed from accusation
and announcement of judgment to announcement of salvation.
The first unit (Hos4:1-3) can be described as Yahweh’s lawsuit. The passage summons
and provides an indictment of Israel. The section follows the pattern of a trial. Professor
Gene Tucker submits that the term “controversy” in verse one (1) is a technical term for a
law suit. It is, however not certain whether the prophet is following a ritual pattern for a
trial against those who break the covenant or simply using the language of ordinary
courtroom procedures.
The general indictment states Israel’s failures as follows: there is no faithfulness,

kindness, or knowledge of God. The specific indictment lists five crimes that correspond
to half of the commandments in the Decalogue (insult, deceipt, murder, theft, adultery).If
the covenant fails this will lead to crimes against persons, which in turn leads to the
destruction and suffering of the natural order itself, including land, air, the sea, and their
inhabitants.
In Hosea 4:4-10, Priests of Israel are also tried in the courtroom of Yahweh. The priests
have failed in one of their central responsibilities, that is, teaching the law to the people
as a whole. Thus they bear responsibility for the destruction of the people. They are
blame worth for this. The term “knowledge” is a major theological term for Hosea. In this
context it refers to the teaching and learning of the content of the law.
In short, the priests are guilty of prostitution, namely, forsaking Yahweh. Their
punishment will suit their crimes, and this includes rejection by Yahweh; destruction of
their families, and shame.
In the unit Hosea 4:11-14, the prophet condemns the corrupt worship in Israel. There is a
spirit if prostitution in Israel. They commit acts of divination, consulting idols or other
pagan cultic objects at places usually identified with Canaanite gods, such as Baal, and
they participate in cultic prostitution. The phrase “to play the harlot; does not refer to
ordinary prostitution, the sale of sexual favours. Rather, it symbolises Israel’s apostasy.
Cultic prostitution in verse 14 refers quite specifically to sexual acts performed as a part
of the fertility cult and therefore constituting one form of apostasy.
As a continuation of the judgment theme, the prophet touches on the folly of war between
Israel and Judah (Hosea 5 to 6). The historical background of the passage alludes to the
border conflicts between Israel and Judah as well as the alliances with Assyria. Probably
this is referring to the Syro-Ephramite war of 733-734BC. As the Assyrian army under
Tiglath-pilesser III began to move into Syro-Palestine, Israel and other states in the
region formed an alliance against the invaders. But Judah refused to join and Israel then
mounted a campaign to force Judah to join the revolt and Judah successfully resisted.

Page 68
Hosea is critical of both houses. He announces judgment on both houses in the form of
military defeat. In Hosea 5:10-14 he alludes to the crimes of each nation: Judah’s crime is
the appropriation of Israelite territory (Hosea 5:10a). Israel’s crime is its joining of the
alliance. The Lord declares that he will withdraw and wait for the people to turn to him in
penitence.
In chapters 7 to 10 Israel is accused of committing sin throughout the land; in high

places; showing rebellious behaviour; rejecting Good and attending to pervert festivals.
For all those offences judgment will come upon Israel. The nation is shouldering a sinful
past and a barren future (Hosea 9:10-17) as they have a history of unfaithfulness. They
even scorn at the prophets of Yahweh saying, “The prophet is a fool, the man of the spirit
is mad’? (Hos 9:7-8).
In Hosea 10:9-12, the prophet explicitly calls the people to repent and change their ways
so that they may be saved from destruction. He accuses the nation of a history of sin;
announces punishment as a means to discipline the wayward people. He also appeals for
acts of righteousness and repentance that will lead to salvation. Read together with Hosea
14: 1-8 the return to Yahweh will have the effect of lifting the death sentence imposed on
Israel at Hosea 13:1-16. This is possible given the new stance that Yahweh takes in
Hosea 11:1-11 where he retorts that, “he is God, not a human being”. The metaphor of a
parent and son at the beginning has already set the basis for a new outcome. Yahweh is
heard to express doubts, to question his decision, and even to have a change of heart,
deciding not to act on the basis of his legitimate anger.
Hosea takes human metaphors for God’s love as far as they will go and then stresses that
the difference between God and human beings involves his capacity for radical, forgiving
love.
Conceptions of hope: Hosea 11 and 14
The book of Hosea is contrasted with Amos on the theme of doom. While both have a
gloomy picture of the future of Israel, Hosea takes a respite and express hope of
restoration for Israel. Bernard Anderson has described Hosea’s hopeful conception as
“an optimism of grace”. He quantifies the chances of surviving as very slim, but a
remnant would return “Despite the eclipse there is still a ray of light shining in the
distant horizon “ but this restoration is well qualified by Anderson when he notes that
restoration of Israel would be conditional – provided they repent and return to their God.
Gene Tucker notes that the use of metaphors of parent and son by Hosea have already
established the basis for a hopeful outlook.
In Hosea 11:8-9. Yahweh is heard to express doubts, to question his decision, and even
to have a change of heart, deciding not to act on the basis of his legitimate anger.
Yahweh’s care for Israel has always been like that of a parent for a child, and his
compassion goes beyond even that. Hosea takes human metaphors for God’s love as far
as they will go and then stresses that the difference between God and human beings
involves his capacity for radical, forgiving love.

Page 69

1. Show how Hosea used his own experience of family life to proclaim his message.
2. “An optimism of grace” (B. W. Anderson) comment in this view with reference to the
book of Hosea.
3. Discuss the part that the Exodus and Wilderness traditions play in Hosea’s message.
4. “At the heart of Hosea’s message stands his concern with the relationship between
Yahweh and Israel” Discuss this assertion.
5. Evaluate the view that Hosea was both a prophet of doom and hope.
References
1. Emmerson .G.I Hosea: An Israelite prophet in Judean perspective Journal for the
study of the Old Testament supplement series, N0. 28. Sheffield: ISOT Press,
1984.
2. Mays J.L Hosea. Old Testament Library, Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969.
3. Tucker .G.M. Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary

Harper San Francisco, 1988
CHAPTER 6
BOOK OF ISAIAH
1. Give an overview of the political events in Isaiah’s time
2. Examine the call of Isaiah and see how it is a microcosm of the macrocosm.
3. Discuss Isaiah’s use of symbolic signs
4. Explain the dynamics of international relations in the time of Isaiah
Introduction
Who was Isaiah?
The autobiographical sections in chapters 7 and 8 provide an introduction to the prophet

as a well-known public figure with a family and children. He appears as one profoundly
well- versed in religious tradition and worship, one who has compassion, “How long O
Lord “ (6:11) for those whom God has destined for destruction. Like any other human
being, he depended on God’s warning and encouragement regarding his actions during a
time of crisis. This is evidenced in Isaiah 8: 11 to 15. The consistent element in his
message appears to be that righteousness and trust in God, rather than international
alliance, will provide Judah’s only security. In spite of his despair and the resistance to
his message, Isaiah found the courage to “hope in God” God and, at God’s request, to
record his teaching as a source of hope for later generations. The prophet’s consistency,
eloquence and fearless confrontation of kings has given later interpreters good reason to
speculate that he was probably a highly educated, stately, or even royal – like figure. The
content of Isaiah `s oracles suggests someone with detached compassion, without the type

Page 70
of passionate identification characteristic of Hosea. He appears well versed with wisdom

traditions but without Amos` zeal for biting satire. As a result biblical readers easily
sense that Isaiah has a different personality from other prophets. This dimension
contributed to the impression that he is subject to familiar human frailties and that the
word of God can be perceived only through the necessary limitations of its human
mediators.
His call
Commentary
The autobiographical statement by the prophet in Isaiah 6:1-3 is properly a report of his
commissioning to deliver a particular message of judgement to the people of God. The
account of the call of Isaiah opens with Isaiah`s vision of God in his Temple.
Immediately the prophet recognizes that he is a human observer of Yahweh`s heavenly
council. He properly fears for his life, since the realm of the holy can be dangerous to the
sinful world. After a purification ritual, Isaiah hears God`s request that someone be
found to represent the heavenly ones on earth by announcing their decision. The prophet
himself volunteers to be the messenger. However, the message he hears is harsh.
Moreover, it is coupled with a command to dull the people’s senses so that they are not
able, through the hearing of it, to change their actions and be healed or redeemed.
In his prophetic role as intercessor for God’s chosen people, Isaiah pleads with God
“Lord, How long?” Like in Amos 7:2 and 5, the answer offers no reassurance: Every
house will be empty, and the land will be, like the vineyard in chapters 5:1 – 7 utterly
desolate. Only the final line offers the slightest hope – a “holy seed” will survive in the
stump of the tree that has been cut down and burned. This possibility hints at a concept,
developed less ambiguously later in the book of a surviving remnant of Judah through
which God would restore the nation of Israel.
This commissioning report implies the same fate for Judah as for Israel. The woe oracles
against Judean leaders and the judgment oracles against the Northern Kingdom
surrounding the testimony underscore this assumption. The fragile optimism at the end
appears as an after thought without in anyway ameliorating the coming disaster. Only in
time, well after a full contemplation of the torturous events of national devastation for
both nations, can one detect a faint glimmer of hope in the stump that is left, a glimmer
that will someday adumbrate a great light to those who walk in the darkness of exile
(Isaiah 9:2).
The major conception in the book
The Lord is supreme over human affairs. He punishes severely the nation of Israel for its
serious sins, until they realise that complete reliance and trust in him is the only way to
salvation. Political turmoil forms the basis of Israel’s judgment and Isaiah is called to
elucidate on it to the king using symbolic figures.
“Isaiah” in its historical context

Page 71
Martin Luther observed that the book of Isaiah divides into two books. The first book is
comprised of chapters 1-39. The second book is comprised of chapters 40-66. The book
that is covered by this commentary is the first Isaiah. It is organized around a complex
scenario of narratives- roughly in chronological order according to the presumed activity
of the prophet Isaiah-together with connections of the prophet’s oracles of judgment and
promise. When read as scripture, the text of Isaiah 1-39 belongs fully to the warp and
woof of history. In this context Isaiah 1-39 overly represents prophetic traditions against
the background of the major events of the eighth century B.C.
In these chapters, one learns that the people of God have fallen into iniquity and have
abused sanctuary worship. Zion abounds with injustice like Sodom and Gomorah and
almost experiences their fate. The rebellious inhabitants of Jerusalem will be purged with
the fire of exile, so that “a few survivors’ remain the only hope for restoration. The city
will be destroyed but it will be restored later as a citadel of justice and righteousness.
How is the message of Isaiah related to the presentation of the prophet’s life in this book?
Implicit in this question is a recognition that the message of the prophet has a double
voice, the human voice of a prophet and behind it, the voice of God. A reading of Isaiah
as scripture entails an effort to hear the word of God as it is mediated through the human
testimony of the words and deeds of the prophet. What incites modern speculation about
the historical Isaiah is a recognition that the biblical Isaiah appears as a believable, vital
“life” caught up in the exigencies of historical experience. In Isaiah 2- 39 the book’s
editors have made some effort to present the traditions in chronological order, according
to the major historical events that punctuated the ministry of the prophet. The opening
chapters of Isaiah 2:5 to 5:7 represent Isaiah’s earliest period of prophecy, when he
pronounced judgment against wrongdoing of complacent national leaders in Jerusalem.
The narratives in Isaiah 6:1-9:7 pertain to the later events of the Syro-Ephraimite war
(735-733 BC) during the time of Ahaz. A consistent element in Isaiah’s message appears
to be that righteousness and trust in God, rather than international alliances, will provide
Judah’s only security. In spite of his despair and the resistance to his message, Isaiah
finds the courage to “hope in “God” and, at God’s request, to record his teaching as a
source of hope for later generations. The prophet’s consistency, eloquence and fearless
confrontation of kings has given later interpreters good reason to speculate that he was
probably a highly educated, stately, or even royal-like figure. The content of Isaiah’s
oracles suggests someone with detached compassion, without the type of passionate
identification characteristic of Hosea. He is a figure who is subject to familiar human
frailties and proves that the word of God can be perceived only through the necessary
limitations of its human mediators.
A topical introduction summarizing the major themes in Isa 1:2-31
Chapter 1 summarizes and prefigures the content of the book of Isaiah through a scenario
of God’s purging and redeeming the nation of Judah. The people of Judah, brought up as
God’s offspring, have forgotten their divinely appointed heritage and grown ignorant of
their relationship with God. Their disobedience consists of open rebellion (vv2; 28) and

Page 72
sinful acts (vv4; 28).Verse 3 epitomises the prophet’s indictment against them: An ox
recognizes its owner; even an ass knows its master’s crib. But Israel does not recognize
anything: My own people do not understand at all.” There is redemption for only a “few
survivors” (v9) those who “return to her Zion by righteousness.
In this scenario Jerusalem as “Zion” appears as a central motif. Due to the corruption of
its inhabitants, the city is called “Sodom” and “Gomorrah” (v10) and a “harlot” (v21).
However, some day it will be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city.
“The concept of the redemption and preservation of Zion plays a highly significant role in
the composition of Isaiah, especially in Isaiah 2-39. Repeatedly the prophet assures the
leaders and the people that they must not be afraid. “Zion” is God’s special habitation, his
holy mountain that will not ultimately fall to the enemy.
This topical introduction summarizes the recurrent theme and sub-themes in the first
book of Isaiah.
The prophet, king Ahaz and the Syro – Ephraimite war
In a series of events associated with the names or naming of three children, Isaiah is
depicted in the turmoil of social unrest in Judah. (735 – 733 BC). The fulfillment of his
commission in Chapter 6 moves from direct conversation with Ahaz in Chapter 7 to
indirect communication with the leaders and the people regarding the word of God. The
king’s and the people`s lack of response to the prophet`s message has already been
anticipated by the commissioning in chapter 6.
Occasionally, ordinary public activities of prophets could carry extraordinary

significance. Beside prophesying oracles, prophets could dress or behave in ways that
symbolized their message. Just as Hosea`s marriage constituted a symbolic act of
prophecy, so Isaiah`s children, by their very names, carried a message throughout their
lives. The Immanuel child in Isaiah 7:14 seems to belong to some unnamed woman,
whereas Isaiah`s son Maher – Shalal – hash – baz is born of “the prophetess,” who is
surely his wife. Unfortunately, nothing more is said about her and nothing is known
about her contribution, if any, to the message of Isaiah.
Shearjashub
In the period prior to the siege of Jerusalem God instructs Isaiah to meet king Ahaz at a
particular place with a message of hope. King Ahaz feared the coalition of Syria and the
northern kingdom (Syro – Ephraimite alliance). Isaiah meets the king soon after,
accompanied by the prophet`s son, Shearjashub – meaning, “ a remnant shall return “.
Isaiah`s message is one of comfort and assurance that God will destroy Ephraim and
Syria, but with the provision that they won’t trust in foreign nations but trusting in God
alone to defend the nation. The ultimatum fell on deaf ears (Isaiah 7: 9). Ahaz saw that
the alliance was weak and could not withstand the mighty of Assyria. With time Syria
and Ephraim attacked Judah where Ahaz was king as a way of forcing him to join the

Page 73
Syro- Ephraimite Alliance and he refused. He wanted to join Assyria for military
protection but the prophet was not comfortable with such a decision.
Immanuel
In an effort to convince the frightened king, Isaiah offers to provide any confirming sign
Ahaz might be able to imagine. Attempting to conceal his unwillingness to obey the
prophetic word, in a gesture of false piety Ahaz refuses “to test God”. The prophet
assured Ahaz that the alliance would cease to exist. The time of the destruction of the
alliance is tied to the birth and early childhood of a boy named Immanuel. The name
symbolized that the presence of God can be a source of the greatest comfort to the
righteous as in this historical moment, an assurance of certain judgment to those subject
to God`s wrath (Amos 9:2-4).
Maher – Shalal – Hash - Baz
As a further sign of the impending collapse of Syria and Ephraim, the prophet secured
officials to witness a large tablet he had prepared on behalf of his future son, Maher-
shalal-hash-baz. Though what was legally accomplished remains unclear, the tablet
became a matter of public record. By this means Isaiah confronted everyone with the
terrifying name meaning “spoil speeds, booty hastes”. As with Immanuel a certain
moment would not be reached before the announced judgment would fall upon the north.
Final comments on symbolic signs
It can be noted that, like Hosea and Jeremiah, symbolic signs were used to elucidate
God`s stance within a given set of circumstances. The issue of God`s relationship with
his people is central in any case. Therefore symbolic signs were used in a historical
context to explain the state of the relationship between God and Israel at any point in
time.
An explanatory treatise on “The Microcosm of the Macrocosm” (B.W. Anderson).

The statement was coined by Bernhard W. Anderson. The explanatory purpose of the
statement was linked with the vision that Isaiah experienced in the Temple of Jerusalem.
Isaiah’s vision presupposes the ancient view that the Jerusalem Temple was a microcosm
of the macrocosm. This means that what Isaiah saw in the Temple was a replica of the
heavenly temple. The significance of this implication was that it enabled people to
believe that Yahweh is truly present in mount Zion in Jerusalem and at the same time
Yahweh is the transcendent God, enthroned on high.
In the prophet’s vision, the earthly temple suddenly enlarges and he finds himself
standing in a spacious heavenly Temple. In this setting the elements of Temple service
were transfigured. These are the antiphonal singing, the altar with its red hot stones, the

Page 74
incense smoke that filled the sanctuary and the mysterious depths of the Holy of Holies.
Even the temple itself was filled with heavenly glory. Isaiah saw Yahweh seated upon a
great throne, clothed in a majestic robe whose skirt filled the Temple. The holy anthem
that is sung three times in the Temple suggests that Yahweh is not only Israel’s king but
the king of the whole human race, upon whose sovereignty the destinies of all peoples
depend. The unearthly seraphim that surrounded his throne (half – human and half
animal) were portrayed by ancient people as attendants of God’s sanctuary. So the
narrative suggests that the prophet, entering through the vestibule of Solomon’s Temple,
stands in Yahweh’s heavenly council. Isaiah then, is drawn into Yahweh’s Heavenly
Council where the divine decrees or orders are announced and where messengers are sent
forth to execute them.

1. Show how the prophecy of Isaiah of Jerusalem was closely related to the political
history of his time.
2. Discuss the symbolic signs in Isaiah.
3. Discuss the idea that Isaiah’s call in the temple represents “the microcosm of the
macrocosm.” (B.W. Anderson).
4. In what ways did the people of Israel violate the covenant agreement in the book of
Isaiah? Discuss how God will deal with the offence.
5. “The word of God can be perceived only through the necessary limitations of its
human mediators.” Discuss this view with reference to Isaiah.
References
1. Anderson B.W, The living World of the Old Testament, 4th Edition, 1978.
2. Sheppard G. the article in Harper’s Bible Commentary 1988.
CHAPTER 8
WISDOM TRADITION AND THE LATER PROPHETS

Chapter objectives
After completing a study of this chapter, the student should be able to:
a) Explain the concept of “wisdom tradition “in the Old Testament times.
b) Show how later prophets applied the wisdom tradition in their prophecies
Competencies
-the ability to conceptualize a concept
-the ability to apply information to a concept
Conceptual framework of the wisdom tradition

Page 75
Wisdom:
James-L. Kugel (1988) and James L. Crenshaw (1981) submitted that “Wisdom
literature” is a modern critical term used to describe a kind of writing that flourished not
only in ancient Israel but through out the ancient Near East. Its hallmark in the Bible is
the ‘mashal” or “proverb,” in Hebrew, that pithy, two part sentence that embodied some
fundamental truths about life. This wisdom is primarily contained in the books of Job,
Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Psalms, and the Wisdom of Solomon. Wisdom was not only a
class of writings in ancient Israel; it was first and foremost a way of life and of
understanding the world. In ancient times the sage (wise man) was the one who sought to
look deeply into the meaning of things, and as such he was a valued member of society.
He was associated with various professions as: royal adviser, court adviser, judge,
teacher, scribe. These are the professions that our Old Testament prophets found
themselves in.
But actually what is that “world of wisdom?” Scholars ask. Among its fundamental tenets
is the belief that the world makes sense; that underlying all the apparent confusion and
injustices and disorders of daily existence is a basic pattern; this basic pattern is the
ordering by which all such phenomena can ultimately be understood. This pattern is some
times referred to as “hokmah” in Hebrew, which means “wisdom,” as in Proverbs 3:11.
“My son, do not despise the Lord’s discipline or be weary of this reproof, for the Lord
reproves him he loves, as a father the son on whom he delights.”
By wisdom the lord founded the earth; by understanding he established the heavens.
An outsider to the world of wisdom might say that acquiring wisdom was first and
foremost an act of faith, a willingness to believe despite at times considerable evidence to
the contrary, that all is happening according to plan and that the old verities about divine
justice, the triumph of righteousness and the necessity for fair and pious conduct were
still the best guide in leading one’s life.
One of the cardinal virtues in the world of wisdom is patience. For only with patience can
one hold back from snap judgments and escape the prison of the moment. In Israelite
wisdom, the patience suggests not only an ability to wait things out, but also an ability
to accept discomfort and suffering. The sage is one who has patience, and knows that,
no matter how much at any given moment the world seems to be in imbalance, and how
we are forced to suffer in a manner that appears unjust, sooner or later the underlying
order will appear. Things will be set aright again, or a previously unknown explanation
will become apparent. Summarily, wisdom says that underlying the hardships and
tribulations in the world of mankind is a pattern that is catering for these occurrences, and
the pattern will sooner or later bringing up a solution to them, temporary or final. One
who can perceive the pattern, or at least part of it, is said to have found or acquired
wisdom. Understanding of this truth is what is called wisdom in this study.
The prophets of Israel (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Amos and Hosea) would fit to pose as sages in
wisdom literature. The supporting view is that these prophets believed that despite the

Page 76
severe punishment that God would give his people, there will be restoration. Wisdom
believes that,
“Better is the end of a thing than its beginning, because it is only the end of a thing that
counts” (Ecclesiastes 7:8)
Jeremiah buys a field at Anathoth to symbolise this wisdom (Jeremiah 32:6-15) that after
the exile persecution the people will be restored to their home land. Amos writes, “But I
will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob” (Amos 9:8a-10).Hosea retorts, “For I am
God, and not man” (Hosea 11:8-9). Isaiah in chapter 29:17-24 gives a vision of promise.
The words of the vision clearly set the preceding judgments of Isaiah chapters 28 and 29
within the context of a divine plan in which the destruction is intended to purge the nation
of disobedience and lead to a time of discernment and restoration. These sections can be
used to show how the later prophets of Israel were conscious of the wisdom tradition.
Accurately speaking all the prophets of Israel were, in one way or another, influenced by
wisdom traditions.
Jeremiah
Chapters 27:1 to 29:32 are prose narratives that deal with events during the year 594 BC.
The narrative stresses a religious interpretation of the political events. Jeremiah believed
that Yahweh had established Nebuchadnezzar’s power (Babylonian king) in the region.
Jeremiah’s opponents on the other hand presumably accepted defeat and exile as
Yahweh’s doing but thought of them as sufficient punishment for the people’s behaviour.
They believed that Yahweh would now restore the nation (chapter 28), and they set
themselves in opposition to Jeremiah’s interpretation.
It is important to note that there is adequate theological justification in the Judean

religious tradition (which embraces the wisdom tradition) for both these positions.
Jeremiah’s viewpoint mirrors the Sinai covenant in which national security and
prosperity are contingent upon obedience to Yahweh’s commandments. His opponents’
position reflects the ideology of the royal covenant, according to which the nation may be
punished by Yahweh but will not be finally abandoned by him. In essence, Wisdom is
here represented by the fundamental conviction that Yahweh is aware of it all, and will
provide a solution.
Isaiah
Chapters 28-32, read together with Isaiah chapters 56:9-57:2 reveal the sentiment of
divine punishment, first , to the leaders of the nation and then to the people. This notion
of divine punishment is in line with the wisdom traditions in Psalms 12; 37; 49; and 73,
and Job 30: 1. At any rate the leaders are blind, deaf, sleepy, wine-sodden, intending only
to sharpen their appetites and neglecting the rest of the people who are poor. Such an
order describes an unjust world in which the righteous person suffers at the hands of the
wicked, as one flamboyant business person in Zimbabwe once said that there is a very
thin line between a businessman and a criminal. “The beginning is not important, but the
end is, “ says wisdom. Isaiah 28-32 attacks the leaders declaring, that they are without
understanding, thinking the future to be a mere repetition of the present. They refuse to

Page 77
see change as a divinely fashioned future. “Any one else other than ourselves will sell out
if they are allowed to rule” so says the unwise in some third world dictatorships.
Hosea
The cause and effect dialectic in Hosea is inherent in the wisdom literature of the Old
Testament where suffering of the people of God is interpreted as a result of the sins they
have committed. It comes as divine punishment from God. The lawsuit in Hosea 4:1-3
and the indictment of the leaders in Hosea 5:1-7 are evidence that Hosea was aware of the
wisdom tradition that, “violating God’s law will result in punishment.” Sin throughout
the land of Israel and in high places (Hos. 6-7:7) was tantamount to a rebellion against
Good.
Amos
The doxological accounts in Amos 4:13; and Amos 9:5-6 reflect on the wisdom tradition
found in such Old Testament books as Job; Proverbs, Ecclesiasts; Sirach and Wisdom of
Solomon. Amos makes, in these doxologies, praises to Yahweh for his creative power.
The hymnist praises Yahweh, the sovereign creator, who controls the waters, moves the
world and even makes it mourn.
The events of punishment and redemption that are proclaimed in Amos 5:1-17, and Amos
9:8b-10, respectively are indications of how the prophet was aware of wisdom. He was
indeed a sage.

1. Explain the concept of wisdom tradition as it is expounded in the Old Testament.
[25]
2. Critically evaluate the influence of Wisdom tradition in the later prophets.[25]
3. Show how wisdom tradition influenced the prophet Isaiah [25]
References
1. Clifford R. Article on Second Isaiah, Harper’s Bible commentary, HarperSan

francisco (1988)
2. Kugel .J.L, Article on Wisdom tradition and the later prophets, Harper’s Bible
commentary HarperSanfrancisco (1988).
3. Melugin R., Article on Amos in Harper’s Bible Commentary, HarperSan
francisco (1988)
4. Tucker G, Article on Hosea, Harper’s Bible Commentary, HarperSanfrancisco
(1988).

Page 78
CHAPTER 7
A DISSERTATION ON THE SCOPE OF PROPHECY IN A ZIMBABWEAN
CONTEXT.
Mhuri. C.K.
Definition of Terms
Contemporary: The length and breath of the meaning of the term contemporary in this
study pack covers the period when prophetic activities started manifesting themselves in
Zimbabwe up to the present time. The word refers to the life-time of the nation of
Zimbabwe and the religious practices experienced during the times. The Longman
dictionary of contemporary English suggests that the word “contemporary’ means,
belonging to the present time” The present time in our case is the era of prophetic events
in Zimbabwe.
“Dissertation”
The Longman Dictionary of contemporary English, (2010) defines a “dissertation” as a

long piece of writing on a particular subject especially one written for a university
degree. The dissertation may contain views, opinions and ideas coming from both
primary and secondary sources.

Page 79
The literature on the phenomenon of prophecy in Zimbabwe has to be compressed into a

dissertation for purposes of the new ‘A’ level divinity syllabus. At the present moment
not much exists in the form of written literature about this phenomenon, specifically with
reference to the Zimbabwean context. Much of the information is in the form of oral
tradition which sometimes suffers heavily the subjectivity criticism.
This dissertation makes a chapter that will open the tentacles of thought in the student so
that he or she can exercise as much of his mind as possible, basing on things that he or
she has seen or heard (oral tradition). The new syllabus component wants to free the
student from the bondage of scholarly blinkers where students were confined to views of
“renowned scholars only. It is the ability to use one’s mind perceptually and critically
that is rewarded in the academic study of social sciences and arts. Therefore, this
dissertation is a worthwhile source for the ‘A’ level divinity course. Much of the
information in this dissertation comes from oral tradition and personal conclusions. The
issues raised in this discussion come from a tradition of sources that can be described as
history, and media information, the veracity of which cannot be authenticated. But the
issues open up the minds for debate. They can stimulate an endless diversity of new
thoughts and ideas as John Barton once said.
Prophetism and Kingship in Israel: A preliminary, comparative overview of the

relationship between prophecy, society and politics.
Most of the phenomena typical of Israelites prophetism are now closely paralleled in
literary and oral sources from other cultures, for example, from some ancient Near
Eastern cultures. Under various titles, prophets functioned as spiritually sensitive
channels through whom gods could convey visions and oracles to human audiences. Not
surprisingly, kings, rulers, chiefs, figure most prominently among those to whom such
divine communications were addressed in various sources (letters, oracles, testimonials).
In biblical traditions, the correlation between prophetism and monarch is particularly
close. Israelite prophecy thus acquired a special institutional significance. Prophets were
seen as having central responsibility in defining the intersection between divine and
human politics. They were more than inspired advisers to kings, because they were
empowered to speak and act on behalf oh Yahweh, Israel’s preeminent sovereign.
This institutional understanding of prophecy must be perceived in the eighty century B.C
prophets of Israel, namely, Amos, Hosea, Jeremiah, Isaiah and Micah. Literary witnesses
site Amos who address the elite of northern kingdom during the Hey days of king
Jeroboam II’s reign (about 750 BC). His message was an outrage at Israel’s pervasion of
social justice, abuse of prosperity, and religious hypocrisy that predominated. Hosea, a
northern, seems to have prophesised during era of frantic royal politics that preceded the
nation’s total collapse. His message, like Amos, knows the certainty of divine judgment.
The Zimbabwean context of prophecy and the Zimbabwean indigenous religion.

Page 80
Roberts J. J M (1985) argued that the phenomenon of prophecy was not peculiar to Israel.
It has been there in many nations; in Asia, in the Mediterranean and in Africa. The
ancient Ethiopia is singled out as one African nation where the phenomenon of prophecy
was so much acknowledged, with the likes of Haille Selasse being honoured as prophet
and liberator of the nation by people of his country.
The one important factor about the phenomenon of prophecy in the African continent is
that it was not canonised. By this, one means that the prophetic history was not written
down. However, this on its own cannot dismiss the phenomenal existence of prophecy in
the nations of this continent. Zimbabwe, in this context, can claim that the phenomenon
of prophecy was there time immemorial. From the time that the inhabitants of Zimbabwe
settled as a nation, the indigenous religion started shaping up as well. This indigenous
religion was distinctly marked with acts of prophetism; divinations, dreams and magical
exorcisms. Although there is no authentic or scholarly works on this aspect, oral tradition
has it, to a credible extent, that the practice of indigenous religion in Zimbabwe had
prophetic characteristics that can be equated to the biblical Israelite prophecy. It is against
this background that we will explore the Zimbabwean context of prophecy from
unwritten times. The commencement of a real Zimbabwean nation from the time of
Chaminuka to this present day is the widest period we regard here as the “contemporary
period” of Zimbabwean prophetic history.
Intercession: A function of prophecy.
From ancient times, the concept of intercession in religious affairs entailed an individual
who makes petitions to or pleads with God on behalf of the people. Most Israelite
prophets (Samuel; Moses; Jeremiah, Amos, Isaiah etc) performed the intercessory
function of either praying or pleading with God on behalf of the people. The earliest
example comes from Abraham, who pleaded with God’s angel not to destroy
indiscriminately all the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. In a similar context Amos
pleaded with God during the visions of the destruction of the nation of Israel (Amos 7),
when God unveiled to the prophet His intention to annihilate the nation of Israel for its
sins. Amos interceded on behalf of the people. Against this background, the Zimbabwean
context of religion has on its register the practice of intercession, especially in veneration
worship. An elder, who may or may not be a horst of an ancestral spirit will make
petitions to the ancestors and plead that they liaise with the Almighty to have issues
answered. This role would not necessarily require prophetic credentials. The bottom line
is that he has the authority to speak, plead or pray on behalf of the others either in a
family or a clan. Therefore intercession is a practice that is indeed engraved in the
Zimbabwean religion.
The definition of Prophecy
Earlier in this book a wide definition of the term “prophecy” was given. The consensus is
that, on the bottom line, a prophet is an agent of God, called upon by God to announce
His will in the present or the future upon the people of the nation (B.W. Anderson, 1978).
The calling can be witnessed by some other individual or it can only be witnessed by the

Page 81
called individual who will in turn tell the people about his call. In this regard we can
recall the call of Samuel which was witnessed by the High priest Eli (1Sam 3 1ff); and the
call of Moses which was only witnessed by himself. Amos himself is another case in
point. He reports that, “The Lord called me from following the flock’ (Amos 7 15). It is
what they did afterwards that could only convince the people that they were truly
messengers of God. In some cases the people would reject them and even what they said.
Jeremiah is a case in point here. He was socially ostracised, rejected by his own people
and even attacked (cf Jeremiah 11: 21-23). Amos also was rejected by his contemporaries
although he tried to explain and prove the authenticity of his word (cf Amos 7:10-17).
From the above case references we notice that a holistic definition for the concept of a
prophet is not possible. The only bottom line to it is that someone must claim to have
been visited and called by a God, and told what to do, and this claim must be supported
by practical activities among the people. If there are verbal predications, they must come
to pass at some memorable time. In the broad spectrum of this definitional framework,
some historic figures in the Zimbabwean religion shall be considered as prophets of God.
The Mwari cult, (Umlimu) in Zimbabwe
History has it that the people of Zimbabwe believed in a God, whom they called
“Mwari,” “Umlimu,” in the Shona and Ndebele vernaculars respectively. The cult was
supported by priests (spirit mediums) and an infrastructure of shrines scattered around the
nation. In the communities, certain individuals became practitioners of healings,
exorcising, and announcing impending catastrophes. Among these you would find
n’anga/ inyangas), priests (Masvikiro/Izangoma or Mhondoro) who discharged their
duties under the spirit of national ancestors, who themselves are subject to the Almighty
God. It was believed that what they said and did was the will of God Mwari/Umlimu),
hence they were man of God in a Zimbabwean context.
The national shrines were holy places that were treated as sacred places. These places
were associated with certain mountains where it was believed that a spirit of God had a
dwelling. Some examples of these shrines are the Njelele shrine in Matopo hills, south of
Bulawayo and the Defe Mountain in Gokwe, the Buchwa shrine in Buchwa Mountain in
Mberengwa, and possibly another shrine in the Nyanga mountains in the eastern
highlands.
These scenarios have very close resemblances to the shrines of Shiloh; Bethel and Gilgal
in Israel, where the religious functions of worshipping, intercession and inquiries were
made. A prophet, such as Amos, or a priest such as Samuel could preside at the shrine. In
the Zimbabwean context, a priest presides at the shrine and this priest is supported by a
team of people, males and females who do back-up tasks such as interpretation of
languages and logistics. Sometimes they play and dance to the traditional music that
appeases the spirit at the shrine, for example the Mbonga (female attendances) at Njelele.
These are female functionaries who reside at the shrine premises to receive and guide
visitors who visit the shrine. This reminds of Samuel and the band of ecstatics at Shiloh.
The Zame/Njelele shrine at Matopo horsts a variety of socio-religio and political issues

Page 82
which is indeed the paradigm of the early Israelite prophetic religion. People go there to
consult on personal matters; cleansing, and to ask for rains, and even national healings.
This is closely similar to Samuel’s shrine at Shiloh where Saul and his servant went to
inquire about their lost donkeys.
The mosaic and Elijah traditions at Mount Sinai and Mount Horeb respectively present a
scenario that is very similar to Samuel Mutendi’s legendary call at Defe Mountain in
Gokwe
In general terms, the Mwari/Mlimu cult in Zimbabwe is shrouded with elements of

prophetism that draw some startling resemblances with the Israelite prophecy, despite the
fact that nothing is written about it in the form of prophetic books.
A possible classification of prophetic figures in Zimbabwe
It is appropriate to put some Zimbabwean religious figures into two broad categories in
order to address the context of prophetism in Zimbabwe. In this book we group them as
follows:
1. Prophetic Priests
These are figures who showed characteristics of divine inspiration which was
recognised by the nation and which is acknowledged up to this day by oral tradition.
These figures have featured in national affairs, predicting, leading and presiding in
key national issues. Though their call stories are missing, but the manifestations of
their activities do convince fair-minded persons that these figures deserve to be called
prophets in the Zimbabwean context. Also the coming- to- pass of their predictions
which we get from oral tradition is another factor that gives them the qualification as
classic prophets. The likes of Chaminuka, Nehanda Nyakasikana, Siginyamatshe, and
Umlugulu can be considered for our study. All of them presided over the national
political crisis at the onset of colonialism. Oral tradition in the Mount Darwin area
has it that just before the arrival of the Pioneer Column in 1890, Chaminuka
announced that there would be a group of foreigners who would invade the country.
And this was fulfilled by the advent of Cecil John Rhodes and the Pioneer Column.
Another piece of Oral tradition says that, at his time of death Chaminuka announced
that “his bones,” meaning his posterity (the people of Zimbabwe) would resurrect and
fight the settlers to the bitter end. This was envisaged and fulfilled in the first and
second Chimurenga of 1896-97, and the 1950’s to 1980-repsectively.It is this

Page 83
coming-to-pass of Chaminuka’s words that makes him a prophet in our Zimbabwean

view.
The roles played by Nehanda Nyakasikana and Umlugulu, among others, in the early
political struggle is closely similar to some of the roles played by such Israelite prophets
like Isaiah of Jerusalem and Jeremiah. They basically advised their nations on the
optimum course of action to take during the political crises of Israel and Judah. Isaiah
advised king Ahaz and the people during the Syro-Ephraimitic coalition crisis, while
Jeremiah advised Judah in the wake of the 597 B.C Babylonian attack. In a similar spirit
Nehanda and Umlugulu advised their own people to stand unrelentingly against their
colonial foes. It is not the equation of the advices that matter in these cases, but the
similarity of the roles each of them played in his or her own nation. Nehanda went so far
to sacrifice her own life to resist colonialism, while Isaiah went so far to sacrifice his
dignity by walking naked in the streets to show his unwavering position (c.f Isaiah 20).
The course of action which Nehanda and Umlugulu advocated later on bore fruit in the
form of political independence in 1980. They featured as inspirational legends of the
revolutionary struggle just like Samuel’s ecstatics who boosted the morale of revolution
for the Israelites near a Phillistinian garrison (c.f 1 Samuel 9-10). A prophet, in ancient
times, had religious, social and political responsibilities, and this we see also in
Chaminuka, Nehanda and Umlugulu in the Zimbabwean context.
2 The Apostolic Charismatics

Although there are lots of prophet-like activities among the Pentecostal sects in
Zimbabwe today, there is a need for a strong argument to classify accurately
prophetic figures in this domain. Are they prophets in a classical sense, or they are
merely apostolic charismatics? Who calls them prophets? What evidence is there
for it? All these questions are stumbling blocks in the quest for prophetic
credentials among Zimbabwean religious functionaries.
The prevailing opinion among most sects is that their founders and some of their
members are true prophets called unto the mission of God, while in the
mainstream churches there is reluctance, if not scepticism, about the validity of
this claim. The litmus test for a true prophet is the ability to foretell the future and
the success of the prediction. Most of the so-called “prophets” in the Pentecostal
sects have their focus on performing unusual acts of healing and exorcisms. The
act of prophesying is not so much publicised in the Zimbabwean context.
Some popular examples of our Pentecostal apostolic “prophets” are:

Johanne Marange; Johanne Masowe wechisamu(5th), Paul Mwazha of the African
Apostolic church, Samuel Mutendi of the ZCC Mutendi sect, to mention just a
few. These have emerged as founder fathers of apostolic sects, at the same time
claiming that they received a divine call in one way or another. A good example is
rendered by the prophet Paul Mwazha, who wrote that, “ The vision came like
this, the sky was polished clean by an invisible hand and the words
“RECREATION OF AFRICA,” were inscribed.” Then the voice of the unseen

Page 84
God commanded in Shona: ‘Nyorera vanavarikuma university vakubatsire pabasa

rekusika Africa itsva iyi’ (write to university students to assist you in this work of
the recreation of Africa!” These figures preside (d) over the worship in their
respective sects, and have performed acts worthy of prophetic acclaim. Oral
tradition has it that they pronounce words of healing on the sick and they were
healed; barren couples are prayed for and they obtained babies. The major
challenge to these claims is that there is no authenticity or any written testimonies
of these acts.
Even the claims that they make remain personal to the extent that those who are
not within their sect are doubtful. However, this doubting on its own cannot
dismiss out rightly that these men are really prophets of God. For example, the
fact that these men commanded a very large denomination of followers suggests
that those who follow them are living witnesses to the mighty works that they
performed, hence they are men of God. In the case of Paul Mwazha, who is
regarded as a prophet by his followers, he wrote down the report of his
commissioning which was then published by the Bantu Mirror which was the only
publishing house for the African people of Zimbabwe then. The theme of his
commission was to revive the Zimbabwean Mwari/ Umlimu cult by preaching
and bringing people to repentance. This is more similar to the apostolic
commissioning of such figures like Paul, who were never regarded as prophets
but apostles. Some unidentified source recently claimed that some university of
Zimbabwe students “dug and unearthed Paul Mwazha’s document at the national
Archives”. This discovery, if it is real, probably provided some empirical
evidence to Paul Mwazha’s record of events. (Source: Chronicle July 2011).
Another possible line of thought is that these men may not have had the chance to
engage a transcriber or secretary like the Baruch of Jeremiah, or they may not
have been able to write on their own like Amos or Isaiah. Otherwise they could
have compiled their utterances into a book of some sort. Who knows and who can
say that such a thing will never happen? After all, we understand that the
canonical tradition of the early Israelite prophets underwent a lot of developments
before they become what they are today.
The later prophets of Zimbabwe

These are not in fact real prophets in the strict sense of the word, but apostolic
charismatics. Such figures like Burombo, who is now late, who featured
prominently in the Kuwadzana suburb of Harare, in the early 1990s, Siziba, who
is also late who featured prominently in the suburbs of Cowdry Park, Makhandeni
and Luveve in Bulawayo (in the late 90’s), Thabiso Ngwenya who is still
featuring in the Pumula suburbs in western Bulawayo and Emmanuel as
Makandiwa who is featuring in the Harare metropolitan district (and many more
others), they performed acts of wonder that leave people with the impression that
they are indeed prophets. What actually discredits them is the absence of a clear
call story and the proof of integrity. How could a man of God (Burombo) end in
such a disgraceful arrest for a disgraceful conduct. His conviction and going to

Page 85
jail would have no parallel. Though figures like Jeremiah and Elijah were
threatened by rulers of their time, they did not fall so low. The claims to cure HIV
and AIDS by Burombo have not yielded any existing evidence. Neither are there
any oral traditions that have lived after them. Therefore, the safest conclusion can
be that these figures are rather apostolic charismatics than real prophets.
Diviners; necromencers, exorcists and magicians in Zimbabwe
The above elements were all features of early Israelite prophecy. In the
Zimbabwean context these elements have also featured as aspects of the African
traditional religion (ATR). Diviners made use of natural objects such as bones;
stones; wooden sticks; clubs, spears, or even calabashes, or the dice. In ancient
Israel Urim and Thummim were instruments of divination. Users of these must
have been trained to use them in conjunction with God’s permission. The king
could even go to consult a diviner. For example Soul went to consult Urim and
Thumimim when the political situation in his country became so bad. He inquired
of God’s reason from these objects.
In the Zimbabwean context diviners are a common phenomenon. Inyanga/

N’angas, and witches, and magicians all practice divination. But in all cases a
training of some sort or an induction is done to prepare an individual for the
course.
In the Ndebele cultural religion the concept of ukuthwasisa or ukuthwasa is

reminiscent of the training and induction phenomenon in divination and magical
practice. But this training would be done only on him or her who is entitled by the
ancestors or amadlozi/midzimu to practice it. While the case of Samuel’s
grooming by the high Priest Eli on priestly duties could be cited as a parallel
phenomenon, the major difference is that Samuel had been set aside for that by
God and not the ancestors. But in our Zimbabwean case it is upheld that ancestral
spirits are intermediaries between our people and God. Therefore, the presents of
an ancestral influence will have been sanctioned by God. Hence these diviners are
men of God (prophets) in a Zimbabwean sense.
These diviners can sometimes perform harmful acts in the form of witchcraft, as
is common with inyangas/n’anga in Zimbabwe. This has its parallel in the bible,
in the case of the witch to whom Saul went to request that she should raise for
him the dead figure of Samuel, so that he could use “the spirit of Samuel
somehow. In Zimbabwean culture such acts are reported among witchdoctors
(n’angas/inyanga who turn dead figures into ghosts and spooks
(Chipoko/isiphoko). When diviners use their extraordinary powers to harm
humanity they then cease to be agents of God. But when they do good for
mankind, arguably they represent the divine will.

Page 86
Oral tradition has it that in Zimbabwe figures like Chikanga, (in the 1970’s)
Mavevure and Gawurani in the Mashonaland east and central traditions featured
prominently in the practice of divination in the years of the armed struggle and
beyond. Guerilla fighters and even their leaders would visit such diviners to
inquire on individual and group chances. These diviners could also perform acts
of healing and exorcisms to cleanse individuals of ngozi and evil sprits. In this
regard these men performed God’s will to save the sanctity of life. At times these
diviners would visit the Njelele shrine at Matopos, south of Bulawayo, to get
further instruction and re-invigoration, especially after performing a deadly
action, like cleansing of a ngozi’s spirit from a certain family or individual. This
gives a hint on one of the most historic shrines, in the Zimbabwean context (the
Njelele shrine) which is renowned as a dwelling of God, Mwari/Umlimu.
The Njelele shrine
The Njelele shrine is parallel to the sanctuaries of Bethel, Gilgal and Shiloh in
ancient Israel. Zimbabweans believe that, from time immemorial people from all
over the country would visit this shrine, (even our political leaders), to honour or
seek consultation with the spirit at that mountain. The divine spirit is believed to
be abiding by a rock at the shrine and the spirit can be heard to speak through that
rock. This could be similar to such phenomenal cases like Moses’ conversation
with a voice at a burning bush in the wilderness of Sinai (Exodus 5) and Elijah’s
encounter with the still small voice at mount Horeb (1 Kings 18). These events
suggest that God can dwell even on rocks and caves. So the Njelele shrine can be
argued to be a true dwelling of God in Zimbabwe. Chiefs would visit the shrine to
present matters affecting their chiefdoms and seek advice on good governance. In
this case we see the role of the spirit of God in the social and political affairs of
Zimbabweans just as it were in Israel during the times of Samuel, Saul, David and
Ahaz.
The seers in the Zimbabwe context
The phenomenon of seers has been present in Zimbabwe for as old as history.
seership was marked by a visionary statement, “Ndavona..................” in Shona, or
“Ngibonile........................” in Ndebele language. This way of speaking suggested
that the incumbent has an inner eye which can foresee events. This is parallel to
Samuel who saw the vision of Saul’s lost donkeys, and who also foresaw the
arrival and election of him as the first king of Israel (1 Sam 9-10:13). In ancient
Zimbabwe, tradition has it that Chaminuka had this gift of seership as he foresaw
the coming of the Pioneer column and their intentions in Zimbabwe.
In recent times, the activities of Tsikamutanda, ambuya/gogo Juliana, and others

have resuscitated and confirmed the existence of seership in the Zimbabwean
context. These figures, who have travelled around the country in a group (the case
of Tsikamutanda), or as an individual (the case of Juliana), is parallel to the bands
of prophets who worked with Samuel, Elisha and the orgies of Dionysus in Asia

Page 87
Minor. They combined elements of seership and divination. This is more so with
Tsikamutanda who could see the deepest secrets of an individual and proceed to
exorcise the evil secret by cutting lines on the lower part of the back of a witch or
wizard with a razor blade, or even destroy a goblin. Although these functionaries
have been declared illegal, their activities leave a permanent mark in the oral
prophetic history of Zimbabwe.
Necromancers and diviners
The phenomenon of diviners and necromancers is in existence in Zimbabwe to

this day. It was also in existence in Israel in the time of Moses, and in many other
nations. The validity of the claims of diviners and necromancers remain
questionable. No objective criterion or any scientific proof for it is in existence.
Hence, Moses had to ban it in the nation of Israel. He declared it abominable.
In Zimbabwe, divination and necromancy are mostly the work of sprits of double
standards. On the one hand they purport to do good for humanity, while on the
other hand they will do harm to mankind. The example for this is that one person
who intends to bewitch his fellowman will approach a diviner for the job to be
done for him, while in the larger clan a senior family member may do
necromancy, pleading with ancestral spirits to cause misfortune to a fellow family
member. Such clandestine and dubious acts disqualify the practitioners of
divination and necromancy from the rank and file of true prophets. This might
have been the case in Israel, resulting in Moses declaring it abominable.
However, some of these diviners have continued to pose as pseudo prophets or

predictors of events in Zimbabwe. Some have predicted the fall of governments,
the death of leaders, the coming or failure of rains, but these predictions have
never been confirmed. The truth of the matter is that most of what they do is
sensational and of no scientific scratch.
But the legalisation of ZINATHA (Zimbabwe National Traditional Healers

Association in Zimbabwe) implies that the people of Zimbabwe regard the works
of diviners and necromancers as valid to some extent. Nevertheless, the challenge
is whether the functioning spirit in these paradigms is the true spirit of God or not.
“If what they say does not come to pass, he has thus spoken presumptuously, and
you must not believe him. But if what he says comes to pass them he is a true
prophet.” (cf Deutr 18).
It seems that a clear-cut way of determining what a prophet is not yet possible.
Only some manifestations of supra-human qualities are what we see among some
religious figures. Whether the supra-human activities are backed by the spirit of
God or by something else, that remains a mystery.
Continuity and consistency in Zimbabwean prophecy

Page 88
A quick survey of the prevailing themes in Israelite prophecy from Moses to the later
prophets will show some continuity of concerns. The themes of monotheism, social
justice, repentance and steadfastness remain the landmarks for the prophetic fraternity in
Israel. When it comes to the era of prophetic events in the Zimbabwean context, this
continuity of theme is apparently absent. For example, while the earliest prophets
concerned themselves with the liberation theology, the present day prophets have nothing
in their messages about the socio-politico themes of the nation. Their pre-occupation is
the healings, exorcisms and preaching, and a bit of the call to repentance. That punch
which Isaiah showed on the political events of his time is missing here. Amos’
denigration of the King and his wife has no parallel in our Zimbabwean scenario. The
role of the court prophets in Israel is absent in the Zimbabwean case. Our “prophets”
have no say about the political events of the nation. One wonders whether “the God of
our own prophets,” has a concern for the justice or political freedom of the nation or does
not have it at all. Each prophet does his own thing his own way. Even the methods that
they use have no uniformity. Some use water, others use stones, while some use bottles,
to do “prophetic-acts”. This miscellany of methods has no parallel in the prophets of
Israel. But the power of prayer in conjunction with the word of command is in common
practice among some of the prophets in Zimbabwe, especially those who expel demons
and heal the sick. It was the power of prayer and the command of the word that Elijah
used at the Mount Carmel contest (1 kings 18:20ff) against the prophets of baal. Elias
Makandiwa, Paul Mwazha and others are reported to have performed such acts of power
as exorcisms and healings, but they do not use the classic messenger-style of speech
which was stigmatic among the prophets of Israel.
“Thus says the Lord..............”
The absence of this formula raises the attribution question: Whose authority are they
using to do their activities?
Typical Questions
(1) How valid is the view that the domain of Zimbabwean prophetism is shrouded
with lack of clarity and suspicion? [25]
(2) The absence of written literature on Zimbabwean prophetism poses a serious
threat to the credibility of contemporary prophets in Zimbabwe. Discuss this
view. [25]
(3) “A crisis of sources.” How relevant is this concern to the study of Zimbabwean
prophecy? [25]
(4) Apostolic charismatics can easily be mistaken for real prophets. Discuss this with
reference to any two apostolic figures in Zimbabwe. [25]
(5) Without a clear call story, one cannot validly claim to be a true prophet. Discuss
this assertion. [25]
(6) Short of a social and political consciousness, Zimbabwean prophets remain
pseudo- prophets. Examine this allegation. [25]
(7) By the time of our independence, prophecy had already been institutionalised in
Zimbabwe. Support or refute this view. [25]
(8) A comparative study of Israelite prophecy to Zimbabwean prophecy is possible.
Assess this view. [25]

Page 89
SAMPLE ESSAYS
Question I:
Compare the methods used by Ancient Israelite prophets in delivering their
message with those used by contemporary prophets in Zimbabwe.
Question Interpretation1:
For your proper focusing on this question, you need to concentrate on the correct
definition of the term “compare.” Epistemologically (Academically) this term means
“ to draw similarities. Therefore, watch against a deliberate delve into “contrasts.”
Contracts are not needed in this question. The other key term is “Ancient Israelite
prophets.” This specifically refers to the classical prophets, and not the later prophets
of Israel. Therefore you are required to focus on the similarities of methods used by
classical prophets of Israel and the contemporary prophets in Zimbabwe. “Method”
refers to the way or ways of putting across or communicating messages to the people.
The model essay given below is based on this interpretation.
Question Interpretation 2
Another line of focusing may take the phrase “Ancient Israel,” so widely to include
all the prophets of Israel prescribed in this study. Such a focus will therefore consider
symbolic actions as another method of communicating God’s message to the people,
in which the prophets Hosea; Jeremiah and Isaiah would be compared with any
Zimbabwean prophets who also used symbolic actions.
Model Answer
“Delivering” and “discerning” are two different things. The focus of this essay is
strictly on delivering and not discerning of messages. Therefore, the methods that
were predominantly used by the Ancient or classical prophets of Israel were, firstly,
the messenger style of speaking, secondly, the ecstatic composure, thirdly, the
ecstatic oracular method and fourthly the divinatory method. It is valid to say that
some close similarities and commonalities do exist in both, the Zimbabwean
paradigm of prophecy and the Ancient Israelite mode of prophecy in the time of
Moses up to the time of Elijah.
Starting off with the mosaic type of prophecy, it is noticed that Moses used the
messenger style of speaking to present God’s messages. The Mosaic formula was
“Thus says the Lord...” This method actually attributed the words of the prophet to
God. The prophet was only a mouthpiece of God. So what he delivered was the word
of God and the people would understand the authenticity of the message accurately. It
was this method that Moses used when he delivered his message to Pharaoh of Egypt
saying,
“Thus says the Lord, Let my people go,

that they may serve me in the wilderness.”

Page 90
This method of delivering God’s message to the people is also found among some of
the renowned prophetic figures in Zimbabwe. Samuel Mutendi of the ZCC apostolic
sect narrated his call story attributing the words of the call to God, while he was
somewhere n South Africa. Tradition says that he said that the Lord commanded him
to go to Defe Mountain in Gokwe to receive the full assignment of his mission.
Translated into the vernaculars, Samuel Mutendi would certainly use the messenger-
style speech to report this experience.
Another tradition says that Paul Mwazha of the African Apostolic sect related his call
story attributing its words to the Lord. The manner he puts it is reminiscent of the
mosaic messenger style of speech. He says that the Lord commanded him to write to
university students to assist him in the work of re-creating Africa. If translated into
the English Language, his Shona command would certainly compare well with the
mosaic typology of speech. Though it is very rare for the so-called prophets in
Zimbabwe to use the messenger style of speaking, the cases of Paul Mwazha and
Samuel Mutendi provided evidence for this method of delivering God’s messages
within the Zimbabwean paradigm of prophecy.
It is also noteworthy that the ecstatic composure in Ancient Israel was another way of
presenting God’s address to the people, and this method has also been manifested
among some of the prophets in Zimbabwe. In simple terms the implications of this
method are that a prophet was to assume an ecstatic state in order for the people to
believe that he was now in a proper state of God’s messenger. This state was acquired
through vigorous dancing and rowdy mob behaviour. Saul, the son of Kish, stands as
a clear case for this. When the incumbent was aroused by the music, the cheering and
the dancing he would fall into a frenzy state (a prophetic composure) and started
delivering oracles. We regard this as a method, because in ancient times that
composure was a pre-requisite for one to receive God’s word, and a condition for the
credibility of prophetic credentials on the individual. It cannot be omitted to mention
that in Ancient Israel, this behaviour was associated with a group or a band of
prophets. In Zimbabwe, a similar scenario is associated with the Izangoma or
Masvikiro, (in Ndebele and Shona vernaculars respectively). The phenomenion
involves the coming together of medium spirits, n’angas/Inyangas to play to
traditional religious music, and the participants eventually start shaking, shivering,
bellowing and swinging around before they speak out oracles. They will interpret and
predict fortunes and misfortunes. In the Zimbabwean context of religion these
practitioners are revered as agents of Umlimu, through the ancestral spirits that
possess them. The method that they used is the ecstatic oracular and the ecstatic
composure style that was used in ancient Israel by such prophets like Saul and the
ecstatics of Samuel and Elisha.
One more critical method that was used by ancient Israelite prophets which is also
found among the prophets of Zimbabwe is the divination method. This method uses
objects of various types to convince the consulting person that the response has
actually come from the Almighty. A case in point here is the Jonathan story in 1 Sam
20: 25-41 wherein Jonathan used the bow and arrows to represent the success of

Page 91
David’s kingdom against Saul. Jonathan used the position of arrows to relay the
secret message. This way of communicating a secret message is divinatory in style.
Another case in point is the use of lots that was used by Joshua to determine the
allocation of land to the people of Israel when they settled in Canaan (Jos 14-19; Num
26:55ff). It is the position of the lot that confirms a message. Urim and Thumimm
could be compared safely with the bones or sticks (lots) that most diviners in African
traditional religion use. Some common names of these objects in the Shona practice
are; Mhururu; Chirume; Mabwemachena, Chitokwadzima, Chinengwena and Gata.
The prevalence of the Gata object would eventually tell the outcome of a message
(good or bad). Among the most recent of the prophetic figures in Zimbabwe are those
who use the “divine touch” on the forehead of a client and pronounce a word of
command (cf Emmanuel Makhandiwa and T.B. Joshua of Nigeria). The triumph of
God’s power must be signified by the fall of the client to the ground and a subsequent
resurrection. Such symbolic gestures are reminiscent of the divinatory method.
Hence, we argue that similarities and commonalities do exist between the ancient
Israelite prophets and the contemporary Zimbabwe prophetic paradigms.
Question 2
“Protest on behalf of the poor and the disadvantaged is one of the most
significant roles of a prophet.” Examine the validity of this assertion with
reference to Israelite prophets and contemporary prophets in Zimbabwe.
Question interpretation 1
The inclusion of quotation marks on the first part of the question suggests that the
statement is an assertion. Somebody else may have uttered the assertion in the context
of prophetic exegesis. It is therefore imperative to examine the validity of the
assertion in the length and breath of the theme of social justice as it was propounded
by the prophet Amos and Isaiah and even Elijah. Zimbabwean prophets can only be
discussed focusing on their inaction or how they neglect the issue of social justice in
their thrust of prophecy.
Model Essay
The proponent of the assertion on this question must have been an ardent scholar of
Amos and Isaiah, who also shared the sympathy for the poor with Elijah who came to
the rescue of the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17: 8-24).
Social justice and a concern for the marginalised should be on the top of the prophetic
agenda if the role of any prophet is to be rated as significant. In Israelite prophecy this
concern was well covered by the prophets of Yahweh to the nation of Israel. But in
Zimbabwean prophecy there is a very disturbing omission of this crucial theme.

Page 92
A survey of the theme of social justice in the prophecy of Amos shows that he was
more concerned with the plight of the poor and the disadvantaged in Israelite society.
The class system pitied the poor against the rich ruling class in Israel. The poor were
severely oppressed and exploited, with no representation in the courts and in the
market places.
“They sell the poor for a pair of sandals.”
This oracle expresses the most extreme of oppression and exploitation as it is further
reported that they even distorted the scales in order to cheat the poor. Amos takes a swipe
at such social injustice and confronts the kings who lived in luxurious mansions while the
majority of the people languished in poverty. The prophet pronounced judgment on the
misdeeds of the ruling class. Roy Melugin (1988) submitted that, because Israel has
oppressed the poor.... Yahweh would punish the nation by military defeat. (Amos 2:13-
16). Such presentations by the prophet actually gives the prophet better credit as a man of
God. Although the rich did not like his message, God’s concern for the under privileged
had indeed been expressed by a prophet.
Elsewhere, the prophet Isaiah had a hot punch on the rich who continued to accumulate
wealth and property, neglecting the poor widows and the marginalised in Society. He
announced a curse of those who added houses and farms to themselves while neglecting
the concern for the social welfare of the majority (see Isaiah 5:8-14) When God brings
the punishment upon these injustices, the punishment will manifest itself in a calamity
that will apparently affect the whole nation.
“The wrath of God is upon his people and his hand shall fall upon them.”
(Isaiah 5:25)
If we had such enthusiastic prophets in Zimbabwe, this issue of material aggrandisement
by the top ruling class would have featured in Zimbabwean prophetic circles. But alas!
There is nothing yet.
The prophetic tradition of Amos and Isaiah of Israel is missing from the contemporary
prophets of Zimbabwe. There is absolutely no discourse about the plight of the poor and
the plunder of wealth by the ruling elite in Zimbabwe. Maybe it is out of fear of
victimisation rather than lack of consciousness that Zimbabwean prophets omit this
concern. Therefore, the absence of this concern among our own prophets will augur badly
against their significance in our social context. The proponent of social justice will thus
rate Zimbabwean prophets insignificant in their own context.
However, the recognition of such figures as Chaminuka, Nehanda, Siginyamatshe, and

Umlugulu as prophets or war priests gives some mileage to the concern for social concern
in the colonial era of the early 20th century Zimbabwe. The uprisings and resistance
against land deprivation by the native people against the foreign settlers can also be
viewed as a concern for social justice by the classic prophets of Zimbabwe
aforementioned. Though it is debatable issue, it is their stance against foreign dominance
that gave them credit as historic war priests in Zimbabwe, hence their significance in our

Page 93
religious heritage is here underscored. Although they set the precedent for social justice,
the later prophets of Zimbabwe did not, and even now, do not say anything about it. This
renders them insignificant.
Question 3
Discuss the religious and political implications of Isaiah’s message to Ahaz. Show
how the prophetic advice may be appropriated in contemporary Zimbabwe.
Question Interpretation
Your focus should be on the exact message that Isaiah gave to King Ahaz of Israel. The
implications of this message should be screened on the mirror of religion and politics in
Israel at that time. It is basically the religious and political meaning of this message
which is important. The message should then be related to the situation in Zimbabwe in a
way that is possible or appropriate.
Model Essay
In certain quarters of biblical exegesis, Isaiah is renowned as a prophet statesman. This

attribution rests in the political credentials that attach to the prophetic career of Isaiah. He
prophesied during a period of political upheavals in both the northern and southern
kingdoms. Foreign policy issues mismatched with the religious dispensation of the
chosen nation. It is this dilemma that Isaiah faced, with Ahaz as the king of Israel. Surely,
there may be some lessons to learn (or relate to) for Zimbabwe, from the Isaiah- Ahaz
dialectics in the period 735-733 BC.
Professor Gerald Sheppard (1988) said that the prophet Isaiah was profoundly well-
versed in religious tradition and worship, with a compassion for those whom God has
destined for destruction. Like any other human being, Isaiah depended on God’s warning
and encouragement regarding his actions during times of crisis. His consistent conviction
on Judah was that righteousness and trust in God, rather than international alliances,
would provide security for Judah. This is the message that Isaiah consistently gave to
king Ahaz without fear. Isaiah’s consistency, eloquence and fearless confrontation of the
king has given biblical interpreters good reason to speculate that he was probably a
highly educated, stately, or even a royal-like figure. He confronted king Ahaz with the
word of “hope,” that with hope and trust in God Judah would find redemption and
security from the threat of a military alliance of Syria and Ephraim (Israel). Ahaz was
torn in mind, between choosing to obey God and to join the alliance. It was at the height
of this political dilemma that Isaiah confronted the king with symbolic signs of his own
children who bore names of assurance (Shear jashub; Emmanuel and Maher-Shalal-Hash-
Baz). Summed up together these symbolic signs assured king Ahaz that if Judah gave its
trust into God, a saviour shall soon intervene in the crisis and bring the downfall of the
monstrous coalition of Syria and Ephraim, while Judah would emerge undestroyed. The
destruction of the coalition would be worked out by the hand of Yahweh sing some other
superpower (Assyria) as God’s instrument of punishment. Therefore, Isaiah’s message to
the king was to keep the covenantal promise (trust in Yahweh) even at the height of
social and political turmoil.

Page 94
Ahaz had been considering joining Assyria in order to get protection from the threat of
the Syro-Ephraimite alliance, but the prophet opposed the option. Ahaz might have
doubted that Yahweh could find Himself in a military tag-of-war with such a powerful
coalition. Ahaz might have been studying also the foreign policy trends in the region.
That is why perhaps he had a reluctance to believe the prophets word. Such a
dispensation stood contrary to the covenant bond wherein the people of God were
supposed to put full trust in Yahweh.
The point to appropriate to Zimbabwe is the economic and political dilemma that this
country faced in the 2000s. The prolonged droughts, the economic recession and the
western imposed sanctions, all brought untold suffering to Zimbabweans so much that
people even doubted whether there was any God for them. The leadership of the country
was even put to the dilemma of choosing between yielding in to foreign demands, or
standing steadfast to guard the sovereignty of the hard won independence. Other options
such as the Look-easy policy came into play as the nation sought redemption from the
turmoil.
With such moves as the expulsion of Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth of former
British colonies and the leadership of the draconian economic sanctions, the imposition
could have bowed in to imperialist mechanised pressures, but they stood firm to guard the
God- given blessing of independence. Although without any involvement of prophetic
figures, the Zimbabwean case finds some similarities with the crisis in Judah in the time
of Ahaz as already discussed above. By God’s design Zimbabwe has remained alive to
this day. One may say that Isaiah’s word in deed applied to Zimbabwe, when finally the
Zimbabwean leadership remained steadfast in guarding their sovereignty by refusing to
succumb to external pressures.

Page 95
CHAPTER 8
GOBBETS
1. Understand the nature of gobbet questions in the old testament and how they must
be answered
2. Explain a gobbet in the context of a larger text and other related biblical texts.
3. Identify points of interest or difficulty in a given gobbet and write explanatory
comments on them.
What are gobbets?
These are extracts from a long text. The question seeks an explanatory comment of the
entire `extract. More importantly the question demands careful explanation of points of
interest and points of difficulty in the extract. These extracts are certainly parts of a large
text, which may be related to some other texts elsewhere in the Bible. Points of interest
or difficulty are those constituent parts of the extract which require special attention.
Any student of Divinity will know these are in any quotation. Gobbet questions carry a
few marks. They carry 6 ¼ marks. Therefore they are short questions calling for short
answers.
General observations

Page 96
Gobbets generally highlight thematic issues. In section A, for example, the gobbets will
be dealing with the phenomenon of early prophecy in Israel; Its emergence and its earliest
forms. Therefore candidates are expected to have a wider view of the phenomenon of
prophecy in Israel and its strategic features.
Those gobbets that are based on pre – exilic prophets also have an inclination towards
major themes in the prophetic books. Therefore the explanations should touch on the
very theme that the gobbet will be relating to e.g. “Fallen, no more to rise is the virgin
Israel …………………” Amos 5: 2
This will certainly require focus on Amos` conception of destruction, death or doom.
Such terms as:
i)Fallen
ii)No-more to rise and
iii)Virgin: are special features which require special attention thus they are points of
interest. Therefore the general observation on gobbets is that they are always based on
theme.
Presentation of gobbet answers
As already mentioned earlier, gobbet answers must be short – only 6 marks at most. But
answers must display a certain pattern. It is correct to say that in most cases these
gobbets are in quoted speech. This generally suggests that they will be words of
someone, obviously to someone else and about a particular subject matter. Therefore
answers are expected, as much as possible, to display the following aspects:
i)The author of the statement

ii)The audience or recipient of the message
iii)The context in which the statement is made, but briefly.
iv)The meaning of the statement, as a total of meanings of points of interest in the
statement.
General reflections on any other related issues in the Bible can be made, but without
making your answer too long. First and foremost Gobbets must demonstrate knowledge
of the text both the general and immediate context of the Gobbet must be identified.
Comment offered must be meaningful, accurate, organized and presented clearly and
logically, using technical jargon in the area.
It is also important to identify possible sources that are linked to the gobbets. e.g D-
Deutronomic, E-Elolistic or Ephramitic source, J-Yahweistic and P- Priestly source. Also
knowledge of form critism and reduction critism should be demonstrated where this is
obvious or necessary.
The answers are not essay answers. They are prose answers that are in continuous
writing. No paragraphs are expected, although on treating points of interest one may
break from the continuous writing.

Page 97
Summary comments on selected gobbet areas
1 Samuel 9 and 10
Two themes govern these chapters. The first is the selection and appointment of Saul as
king, engineered through or by Samuel with the episode of the lost donkeys. The second
theme is based on the relationship between prophets and seer, and Samuel`s apparent
possession of both these tittles, together with the unifying title “man of God”. The story
of Saul, his servant and the lost donkey leads to the phenomenon of early prophecy and
its forms and functions in Israel. Initially they were called seers, with a gift of second
sight. They could see situations in visions. They were believed to be men of God, not
magicians. They told on personal fortunes, and in some instances they charged for their
services or they simple accepted tokens of appreciation. Samuel is a champion of
seership in Israel. He reputably led a group of estatics who stayed at Gilbeah, as “their
father”. This idea introduces the phenomenon of grouped prophets who worked under a
leader. The chapter also clarifies the clear relationship between seers and prophets “He
who was formerly called a seer is now called a prophet”.
The two chapters also highlight the introduction of the monarchy in Israel and the
subsequent functions of prophets in a monarchical system. The advent of the monarchy
system ushered the era of real prophetism in Israel. Kings of Israel would be chosen by
God through his agent, the seer – the prophet. Samuel in this case is given a vision of
Saul as the new king and the “prophet” enthrones the new king. The role of the prophets
had elaborately become national. In this regard men of God had their functions extended
from a mere private practitioner to a public figure; from being static visionaries to mobile
forth-tellers with developed visionary and other powers and perhaps unique to Israel.
F.M Cross says that prophecy arose with the monarchy.
1 Samuel 3
The text highlights on the call of Samuel to seership. Samuel was staying with the high
priest Eli at his house as an assistant. A voice called Samuel three times in a dream. It
was the voice of God calling up Samuel to the office of a Seer. The voice that came to
Samuel while Eli was asleep marks the shifting of God’s favour from Eli to Samuel,
because Eli’s sons have disgraced. Eli was blind to the mistakes of his children and so
God has made him physically blind. There is a comic touch to this scene: God speaks
while his appointed priest sleeps. In chapter 3 verse 18 Eli accepts God’s judgement
against his house. The text highlights, at the end that the word of the Lord was rare and
Israel lived with divine silence. But now Samuel becomes a channel for the word of the
Lord and his reputation spreads throughout the land. So although Eli and his sons still
live, they are no longer in control. The centre of gravity has shifted to Samuel. It is also
noted that God manifested himself through dreams.

Page 98
There is a mixture of two sources, E (because of traits of seership) and D since the book
of Samuel belongs to the D literature. The narrative shows the first signs of the evolution
from the office of a seer to that of a prophet in Israel (in terms of the origins of prophecy)
In this account Saul learns his fate. Samuel`s death is reported. The Philistines
intensified their war against Saul. Saul has only Samuel to turn to. Saul disguise himself
and goes to a necromancer still in the land and persuades her to practice despite her fear
of the king. This act gives a unique picture of an Israelite view of the dead and gives
Saul confirmation of his worst fears. The spirit of Samuel dedicated disaster upon Saul`s
disobedience in the battle against Amelek. Saul meets his down fall and his family too.
Saul starved and the woman advised him to eat and revive himself. Saul ate the fatted
calf miserably just a night before his execution. The text highlights on divination as a
way of consulting God. Although Moses forbade necromancy in Deuteronomy 18, Israel
continued to use it, but with devastative results – Saul finally fell. But it is also noted that
Israel would resort to the disallowed methods out of despair when they felt that God
could not respond to their plight quickly.
2 Samuel 7
The text raises two elements i.e. divine service and dynastic succession. Nathan, a court
prophet, is introduced playing a mediatory role between a king and a prophet (David and
Nathan). Nathan advised David to go ahead with a plan of divine service to build a house
for the ark of the Lord. “Do whatever you have in mind; for Yahweh is with you”. But
unfortunately his advice proves less than sound. The fact that Yahweh is with David
does not give him freedom to choose whatever he wants to do. And Yahweh hastens to
tell the prophet that very night to sort out his theology. On the contrary, Yahweh
suggests with some sarcasm, that a house is not what God actually wants. Yahweh turns
the conversation around and promises that rather Yahweh would build a house for David,
referring to the royal house or dynasty. God offers the prospect of a peaceful transfer of
power with a successor from among David’s sons taking the throne with Yahweh`s
blessing. It is not clear at all, what it means when Yahweh says “Let that heir build a
house for my name”. May be literally that referred to a temple, or metaphorically a royal
house or perhaps the nation of Israel. This text hugely reinforces David’s sense of being
favored. He responds enthusiastically in a long prayer, acknowledging Yahweh`s gift to
Israel and to him.
Deuteronomy 18: 9 – 22
This unit seeks to reform Israel’s attempts to learn about divine will, the future or other
hidden mysteries. It supposedly intends to encourage its readers to listen to those
prophets who follow in the tradition of Moses. As a first step, all divination and magical
techniques of inquiry must be eliminated, in accordance with Israel traditional law.
Imitating Canaanite practitioners is strictly prohibited, because they are abominations that
destroy the integrity of Israel’s relationship with God. The only proper medium of
relation for Israel is the prophet. Moses warns on the ways in which prophecy itself

Page 99
might become a problem. Both unheeding audiences and presumptuous prophets are
warned. Prophecy in the names of other gods is easily rejected, but false prophecy in
God’s name is a more serious matter. This dilemma requires the application of a
pragmatic criterion that, although clearly useless for judgements on individual oracles, is
certainly a way to evaluate a prophet’s overall performance.
Numbers 11:14 – 29
The text is a dialogue between God and Moses. Moses laments the burden of leadership
that God had placed on his shoulders. He, in turn, commands Moses to select `seventy
elders from the twelve tribes to share the burden of leading the people. He also
commands Moses to have the people prepare to eat meat for an entire month, until it
becomes loathsome to them. The people’s desire for meat and their yearning for Egypt
are signs of faithlessness and a rejection of God’s gift of manna. Moses himself
expressed doubt that God would be able to make good on his promises to provide a whole
month`s supply of meat for 600 000 people, but simply told him to wait and see.
“God takes some of the spirit from Moses and placed it upon the seventy elders who
stood at the tent of meeting” in the holy centre of the camp so that they may share the
leadership of the tribes. The episode involving the two people prophesying in the camp
illustrates the need to allow for the possibility that persons outside the institutional
leadership of God’s people may have genuine words and insights from him. The text
highlights on the humble beginnings of ecstatic prophecy among the Israelites.
The escape to Horeb (1Kings 19: 1 – 18)
Many scholars think that Yahweists made pilgrimages to Sinai during the time of the
Israelite and Judean monarchies. Thus Elijah is often seen as a pilgrim in the present
passage. His expressed reason, however is not pilgrimage but refuge. Alarmed by
Jezebel’s threat, he flees first to Beersheba, then one day’s journey further into the desert,
where he sits and despairs of his life. The pilgrimage itself is a miraculous journey of
forty days and forty nights without food or water, for which he is prepared by an angel
who requires him to consume a double portion of both before the journey begins.
The still small voice (1 Kings 19:9-18).
Like Moses before him (Exod 33: 12 - 24), Elijah watches from a cave as Yahweh passes
by at Sinai. The wind, the earthquake and the fire of Exodus 19 appeared again, but this
time Yahweh is not present in them. Instead the word of Yahweh comes to Elijah in a
slight whispering sound or a still small voice. Many scholars interpret this account as a
deliberate rejection of the storm theophany in Yahweism, because of its special
associations with the canaanite rain god, Baal. The rejection comes at a time when Israel
was divided between the worship of Baal and Yahweh and the danger of syncretism was
great. It is clear in any case, that according to the prophetic point of view from which the

Page 100
Elijah story is told this incident represents a transition from the spectacular theophanies
witnessed by early Israel to the quiet transmission of the divine word to the prophets.
Verse 11 to 12, the Context is Elijah’s Flight to Mount Horeb in fear of Jezebel who was
pursuing him after he slaughtered prophets of baal. The term horrible is preferred for
Mount Sinai in the D source with Elijah we witness a transmission from pre classical to
classical prophets.
Naboth’s Vineyard (1 Kings 21 : 1 – 29)
The crime of Ahab is that he has “killed” and also taken possession. He has deprived an
innocent citizen of something that rightfully belongs to him. From the prophetic
prospective according to which this story is told, this is the quintessential royal crime. As
the prophet Samuel warned before the first king was crowned, it is the way of kings to
treat people this way. Ahab’s personal denunciation is expanded in 1 Kings 21 : 21 – 22
to a condemnation of his dynasty that associates it with the condemned houses of
Jeroboam, and Baasha. Jezebel’s contrivance of Naboth’s unjust execution suggests that
the Phoenician queen has acquired an extraordinary knowledge of Israelite law, with its
requirement of two witnesses and death by stoning (Deutr 17: 5 – 6).
The Prophecy of Micaiah (1 Kings 22 : 1 – 28)
The primary interest of the story is not the alliance of Israel and Judah or even the
preparations for war. It is the problem of authentic and inauthentic prophecy. Ahab’s
prophets predict battlefield success for Israel. The prophet Zedekiah dramatises this with
a symbolic act using iron horns. But there is one disagreeing prophet. Micaiah son of
Imlar reports a vision of Israel scattered like sheep without a shepherd i.e. he foresees
that Ahab will die in battle. It is Micaiah’s prophecy that is authentic. Micaiah
authenticates himself by his report of a vision of the divine courtroom. He says that he
saw Yahweh sitting on his throne surrounded by celestial armies. Micaiah watched as “a
spirit” was commissioned to be “a lying spirit in the mouth of all of Ahab’s prophets.
Thus this favourable oracle reported by the other prophets is a trick sent by Yahweh to
entice Ahab to his death. The conflict between Micaiah and Zedekiah is often compared
to that of Jeremiah and Hananiah.
THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS

Short essays

1. Apply the steps of writing an essay.
2. Examine key facts in any of the essays in this topic.
3. Discuss orally the main views in each essay

Page 101
These are short and precise essays on selected past examination questions from the
syllabus A’ Level Divinity. What is contained in this module is not everything the
examiners would set .The assurance is only that the selected questions are based on the
most important themes in any given area of study, which examiners can never ignore.
Therefore your advantage in reading these essays is that you will be studying model
essays on the most important issues only. A further advantage is that you are availing
yourself to the techniques of compiling an essay i.e. the language techniques, the subject
jargon, quoting, paraphrasing and inferences. It is hoped that every candidate will find
this module very valuable.
How far is it justifiable to regard Moses as a prophet?
The question whether Moses was a prophet or not is a controversial one. But the
premises for either of these views is the definition of “a prophet”, then Moses` role can
be checked against this background. This essay therefore considers a few definitions of
“a prophet”, before it proceeds to discuss the issue.
The Collins English Dictionary defines “a prophet” as a spokesman of God. Bernard

Anderson defines “a prophet” as one who communicates the divine will. Muilenburg
defined a prophet as “a covenant” mediator”. Robert Wilson loosely defines a prophet as
one who stands between the deity and human beings. All these definitions emphasize a
relationship of service between God and a human being. It should, however, be noted
that the human being must be formally called either in a visionary experience or in a
dream. A close examination of Moses` history shows safely that he was more of a
prophet than not.
The book of Exodus records that Moses saw a vision of a burning bush while he was
herding Jethro`s sheep. A voice proceeded from the bush calling and commissioning
Moses to God’s work. The initial assignment was that he should approach Pharaoh of
Egypt and negotiate on the release of the Hebrews from Egypt. Moses` unwillingness to
take up the task was dismissed vehemently and an order of immediate compliance was
given by God: Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh ………He said (God) “But I will be
with you ……………….and this shall be the sign for you …………”This particular
incident sets up a scenario of a call by God where Moses is told exactly what to say to
Pharaoh, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, Let my people Go -----” (Exodus 5:1)
Such an order introduces the messenger-style of speech, which is typical of true prophets
of God. Such a style acknowledges that the bearer of the messages is not the author of it.
There is also need to focus on the role(s) that Moses played. He mediated between God
and his people over the covenant. Therefore by Muillenburg`s definition Moses was
actually a prophet. The duties which Moses performed during the wilderness journey
were mainly leadership roles. But it was a leadership inspired by God. Moses was filled
with the Spirit of God when he performed his duties. The book of Numbers 11:25
suggests that Moses had much of this Spirit to the extent of giving some of it to the
seventy elders. This point helps to argue that though Moses performed leadership roles,

Page 102
he remained a prophet because the duties were carried out under the inspiration of God.
He was only a messenger. The declaration in Deuteronomy 34:10, says that Moses was
the greatest prophet Israel ever had. He was formally called and given a mandate by
God. Although the nature of his tasks was political and social it should be understood
that the task was of a divine initiative.
In conclusion this essay reiterates that Moses fits very well in the contemporary
definitions of a prophet, hence he was more of a prophet than not.
Why was Samuel such an important figure in Israelite prophecy?
This evaluation question seeks to unveil the credentials and the contributions of Samuel
against a background of prophetism in Israel. The first thing is to disclose his credentials.
Samuel was the son of Elkanah and Hannah. He grew up and served priestly services as
an assistant to the high priest Eli. When Eli died Samuel took over and served as priest
after settlement in Canaan. He blessed meals associated with sacrifices and sacramental
duties, administering the national shrine of Shiloh. With the credentials of a seer, he
served the nation of Israel as its adviser on social and political encounters. He is given
the credits of a patriarch, a judge, a prophet and a priest before the introduction of the
monarchy in Israel. In fact he is the man who introduced the monarchy in Israel.
Samuel’s importance in Israelite prophecy is best understood in the context of the

contributions he made to the shaping and development of Israelite prophecy. Firstly,
Samuel emerged on the prophetic scene of Israel as “a seer” - a man of God, who served
popularly at a shrine in the city, “Behold there is a man Of God in this city …” (I Sam
9:6)
He offered services ranging from personal to national concerns – Saul went to inquire
about his donkeys. He might have been one of the leaders of prophetic groups known as
“roving bands” in Israel. Credit is given to him that he re-organized these roving bands
into institutions of prophets. The group that Saul joined at Gibeah allegedly belonged to
Samuel. ( 1 Sam 10: 10)
After the institutionalization of the prophetic movement in Israel Samuel focused more
on its proper organisation. He emerged as a spiritual leader of Israel and fogged
redemption of Israel from syncretism i.e. redeeming Israel from worshiping God
alongside Baal. Samuel also led the nation of Israel from a tribal confederacy under a
judge to a monarchy. The process of demanding a king in place of a judge was mediated
by Samuel who did not cling to power like modern rulers. Samuel also handed over to
Saul transparently although he initially expressed fear that a monarchy would result in
abuse of authority. But after relinquishing power he assumed yet another crucial role.
He checked on the proper use of power and advocated a division of labour between king
and priest. He reprimanded Saul for offering a sacrifice - a duty that was earmarked for a
priest.

Page 103
The political transition from theocratic rule to a monarchy, and the religious resuscitation
of Israel gave Samuel prominence as an important man. Therefore Samuel was behind
the development of prophecy in Israel after settlement in Canaan particularly on revival
of the national shrine and the re-organisation of prophetic institutes. Robert L Cohn
summaries the importance of Samuel as follows, “Samuel depicts the difficult transition
from rule by charisma to rule by dynastic kingship by showing the inadequacy of judge,
priest and prophet to provide the stability necessary for national development.”
Discuss the relationship which the prophets Nathan and Elijah had with the kings
they each had to deal with.
It is necessary to distinguish Nathan from Elijah. The major distinction is that Nathan
was a court prophet while Elijah was a free lance prophet. Nathan served at David’s
court as an advisor to the monarchy while Elijah emerged to be a revolutionary who
confronted King Ahab in defence of Yahweism. Therefore the activities of each of these
prophets must be assessed separately.
Beginning with Nathan, it is noted that he advised King David on the building of the
great temple. When consulted by David, he advised him to continue building the temple.
But God reversed the plan. May be the prophet had spoken presumptuously. Nathan is
also remembered for the reprimand he made to David when he took Uriah`s wife. Nathan
also anointed Solomon. He recorded the death of David and advocated the revival of the
covenant. The Davidic house was declared the royal house of Israel during the service of
Nathan. (2 Sam 7). One important thing to note about Nathan’s relationship with David
is that their relationship was friendly unlike Elijah and Ahab who were rivals to each
other.
Elijah and Ahab had an antagonistic relationship. They were extreme rivals. Elijah
blamed Ahab for perverting Yahweh’s religion by allowing Queen Jezebel’s baal
prophets to practice in juxtaposition with prophets of Yahweh. According to Elijah this
was the most serious sin committed by a king of Israel. But Ahab actually saw Elijah as
“the troubler” of Israel because he activated Israel against baalism. The battle between
Elijah and Ahab resulted in the death of hundreds of prophets of baal (1 Kings 18) after
the contest at Mt Carmel. Jezebel threatened to retaliate resulting in Elijah`s escape to
Mount Horeb.
Actually Elijah served as a watchdog of the people against social, political and religious
perversion of Israel by, king Ahab. Some of the major injustices he attacked included the
grabbing of Naboth`s Vineyard by king Ahab using political office. Elijah rebuked the
king and accused him of being “a troubler” of the nation. In a religious contest Elijah
fought for the preservation of the Mosaic Yahweism.
On a comparative note Elijah also anointed kings just like Nathan. Elijah anointed Hazel
to be the king of Damascus and Jehu to be king over Israel, while Nathan anointed

Page 104
Solomon. The two also shared the same concerns for social justice - Nathan rebuking
David for Uriah`s wife and Elijah rebuking Ahab for Naboth`s vineyard.
Finally, it is emphasized that although both prophets dealt with kings of their time, their
relationships with them differed considerably. Nathan and David were in harmony while
Elijah and Ahab were quarrelling.
Discuss the origins of prophecy in Israel and its development up to the time of
Samuel.
This question requires an investigation into the evolution of and changes in the
phenomenon of prophecy in Israel. The question also has a timeframe focus i.e. up to the
time of Samuel or up to the beginning of the monarchy in Israel.
The phenomenon of prophecy in Israel goes back into the formative stages of the Hebrew
nation. Although the issue is highly controversial, it is indisputable that prophecy in
Israel had been there since Abraham. Perhaps it is necessary to attempt an operational
definition of the term “prophet” before discussing further. Bernard Anderson defines a
prophet as one who communicates the will of God, while Robert Wilson defines a
prophet as one who stands in between God and the people, a mediator. These definitions
go a long way to give light on how and when prophecy began in Israel.
It is often believed that prophecy had been there since creation. Under this view people
like Adam, Noah Lot etc have been viewed as prophets because, in one way or another,
they communicated with God on behalf of the people. Noah mediated on the building of
the ark. But what discredits this view is the absence of a divine call or inspiration on the
part of the individual. However, the prophetic status of such a figure like Noah can
possibly be deduced from the pentateuchal source (P) which talks of a covenantal
mediation by Noah in Genesis chapters 6-9 as argued by Kselman J.S. in the article in the
Harper’s Bible commentary at pages 90-92.
Another view has cited Abraham as the first prophet of the Hebrew people. Biblical
evidence for this view is derived from Genesis 20:7 which says ---- he is a prophet
-----“.There is merit in this view on the strong ground that Abraham mediated on the
Sodom and Gomorah issue. Suffice to say that Abraham was inspired when he dealt
diplomatically with Pharaoh to conceal that Sarah was his wife. But the criticism against
this view is that Abraham was not practicing prophecy in the real sense of it. He did not
show that the source of authority to speak was from God. Even when he made the
covenant with God he was merely acting as an agent of the people, not as God’s
messenger. However some scholars say that Abraham was a prophet basing on Genesis
20:7 while some say prophecy did not start with Abraham but with Moses. We do not
hear of him doing other prophetic duties apart from the one stated in Genesis 20:7.
Real prophecy can possibly be traced to Moses. Deuteronomy 34:10 says that he was the
prophet of Israel par excellency. Most scholars subscribe to this view. E.W. Heaton,
Bernard. W. Anderson and many others concur that Moses was a prophet called unto

Page 105
God’s mission. His prophetic record began at the visionary call at a burning bush; to the
assignment to liberate Hebrews from Egypt and to lead the nation politically, socially,
and religiously through the wilderness to Canaan. The man Moses performed his duties
under constant instruction from Yahweh, “Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, thus says the
Lord…” (Exodus 8).
This speech style is typical of God’s chosen prophets who have no personal authority, but
only that authority derived from God. Numbers 11:14 – 29 records that Moses was
actually filled with the spirit of God and he gave some of it to the seventy elders. The
same text suggests that the same spirit of God inspired Eldad and Medad who prophesied
ecstatically in the camp. Therefore many scholars have adopted that prophecy in Israel
started with Moses.
Another view says that real prophecy started in the wilderness after the Hebrews had left
Egypt. But the version of prophecy was a copy of what had been experienced in Egypt.
A particular case that is cited in this view is the incident involving the two ecstatics,
Eldad and Medad. Such an event was compared to the legend of Wen Amon, a
Phoenician boy who was possessed by some spirit at a religious festival in the city of
Byblos. The boy prophesied the type of prophecy which the Israelites later practiced in
the wilderness which possibly was a copy from Egypt. More on this view, the miraculous
prophecy which Moses practiced in the wilderness has been likened to the works of
magicians in Egypt. Therefore a dual view has been propounded that Israelite prophetism
may have started in the wilderness or that it had been borrowed from elsewhere.
Other scholars suggested that Israelite prophecy was borrowed from the surrounding
nations, particularly from the canaanites and the Philistines. This view is based on the
close similarities between the ecstatic prophecy practised by the roving bands of Israel
and the prophets of baal. Also the origins of the word “prophet” from “prophets”
suggests a foreign origin. Samuel had practised as a seer, but when Saul left him he
(Saul) practised a different thing. He was in a group of ecstatics. This is taken to mean
that the “seer” type of prophecy changed to the ecstatic type of prophecy. This further
suggests a heavy influence of Israelite prophecy by surrounding religions.
On the changes or developments, focus should be on the nature of prophecy and its
functions. The mosaic type of prophecy was a one-man affair and its disposition was
sober. The functions were mainly social and religious. The prophet was a social leader.
But at settlement in Canaan, prophecy had changed in nature and function. It had
become a group phenomenon (Institutions of prophets) and an element of inducement
emerged. Prophets became anointers of kings (Samuel anointed Saul), they also became
leaders of revolutions (the band which Saul joined at Gibeah was encouraging an Israelite
uprising against Philistines. Prophets also became leaders of religion and monitors of
kings (Samuel was a priest who reprimanded King Saul when he hijacked the powers of
the priest to offer sacrifices in the temple.

Page 106
What were the matters about which Amos and his contemporaries were
disagreeing?
The “Contemporaries” of Amos should be understood to refer to the hearers of the

message of Amos. More precisely these were the citizens of the Northern Kingdom
(Israel) to whom Amos prophesied in 786 B.C. Suffice to say that the message of Amos
to this nation caused shock. The matters which Amos raised in his prophecy to this
nation were of a nature that would cause discontent and animocity. The most serious of
these issues were: the judgement; the perverted religion; the day of the Lord and the
credibility of Amos, which Amos presented contrary to Israelite conception.
First, it is crucial to mention that Amos` message on Israel’s chosen status was
outrageous. He attacked the status quo in Israel as a crime against humanity “They sell
the righteous for silver and the needy for a pair of shoes” (8:4-6). Such social abuses are
nonetheless violations against Yahweh, for they profane his holy name and altars and
desecrate his sacred house. Professor Gene Tucker as well as Bernard Anderson argued
that the election of Israel was no guarantee of God’s favour. It involves, rather, a
demanding responsibility and serves as the basis for divine judgement and punishment.
When Amos raised this notion to the Israelites, his whole message became unacceptable.
When he further condemned the lucrative trade at the markets in Samaria and the
luxurious life which the upper class people were leading in Israel, the hearers regarded
him as a mistaken stranger who could not appreciate the good economic times God had
given to the Israelites, that the flourishing economy was a sign that God was happy with
his people, yet Amos said the opposite, “Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord. It is
darkness, and not light.” (Amos 5:18-20)
This oracle sets up dissenting feelings between Amos and his hearers. Israelite
conception of this day was bright and joyous. The complacent and conceited Israelites
thought of this day as a day of triumph, but Amos put it in gloomy terms. Such a stance,
according to J. P. Hyatt, was putting Amos` credibility at stake. Amos also attacked the
cult of Israel in a very unexpected manner. He attacked the royal sanctuaries of Bethel
and Gilgal with great biting sarcasm, “Come to Bethel and transgress, to Gilgal and
multiply transgression. I will punish the altars of Bethel -------“(Amos 5:25).
Such oracles were least expected from a prophet in Israel. When Amos made such
statements he found himself out of touch with his hearers. It was unthinkable for any
credible prophet in Israel to condemn the cult, although all the prophets of the pre-exile
era reiterated the same attack. (Hosea, Jeremiah and Isaiah).
When Amos continued to talk contrary to Israelite expectation he put his credibility on a
questionable stance. He was a stranger in the Northern Kingdom and so people found it
easy to disown him, although elsewhere it has been argued that a prophet is not without
honour except in his own home area just because of his negative prophecy. In short, the
fact that he was from the Southern Kingdom made it difficult for his hearers to respect his
words. Amos was rejected in a foreign land, “Go, flee away to the land of Judah and eat
bread there…”

Page 107
In the final analysis it is noted that it was the tone and content of his oracles that put
Amos in perpetual conflict with the Israelites, not necessarily his personal credentials.
Discuss the view that the most important role of the prophets was to maintain social
justice.
The theme of social justice was very recurrent both in the pre- canonical and the pre-
exilic era. Prophets like Samuel, Elijah; Amos and Jeremiah, at different times,
advocated for social justice. These prophets were both messengers and God’s watchdogs
over society. This role became more important when Israel became a monarchical
system. Kings had become entrusted with power. Power can be subject to abuse if there
are no checks and balances for it. Hobbes had this to say in The Leviathan: power tends
to corrupt, and too much power corrupts more. God used his prophets to monitor justice
in Israelite society.
Although it is not precisely stated Robert Cohn noted that Samuel monitored the
transition from rule by charisma to rule by kingship. Such a responsibility would
certainly watch over the administration of justice in the process. Nathan, who served as a
court prophet at David’s palace played a more real role on justice when he checked the
abuse of power by David when he took Uriah’s wife. On a more vibrant note Elijah
confronted King Ahab on social injustices. King Ahab forcefully grabbed Naboth’s
vineyard. He even allowed his wife Jezebel to threaten Elijah with death. Kyle McCarter
commented that Jezebel was a foreign queen who induced an Israelite king to do wrong.
It should be noted , however that monitoring of social justice was not the only important
role of these early prophets. It was equally an important role for the prophets to guard
Yahweism and the sacred covenant, as evidenced by Elijah’s campaign at Mount Carmel
against baalism, and Jeremiah’s out cry against apostasy.
The pre-exilic prophets were also vigorous proponents and advocates of social justice.
Notable among these were Amos, Isaiah and Jeremiah. Amos attacked the social evils
that were perpetrated by the ruling class against the poor,, especially in the market places
in Samaria. “They sell the poor for silver” (Amos 8:4-6). Professor Roy Melugin pointed
out that social justice was one of the major concerns of Amos. Isaiah is also noted for his
high concern for social justice and righteousness. “Learn to do good; seek justice” (1:17).
Gerald Sheppard commented that Isaiah pronounced judgement against the wrong doing
of complacent national leaders just like Jeremiah, in his first complaints, when he
complained about the attempt by the men of Anathoth to use death threats to control his
activity as a prophet (Jer 11:18). Social justice is a pre-requisite for righteousness, hence
God instructed his prophets to prophesy against all forms of social injustices in Israel.
How and why did prophets use symbolic actions?
Symbolic actions were a prophetic technique that was used in specific situations either to
simply clarify or illustrate the message of the prophet. The most notable prophet in this

Page 108
regard were Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiah who used these symbolic actions in very specific
situations.
Thomas Overholt defined a symbolic act as “acts of power that are within the capability
of any individual to perform”. This definition puts into context the marriage of Hosea and
the symbolic signs of Isaiah and the dramatic actions of Jeremiah as prophetic actions to
convey a message. The marriage of Hosea has been regarded as a symbolism to explain
the nature of the relationship between God and the chosen people of Israel. The marriage
was an actual event performed to show that Hosea knew the word of God before his
marriage and before he gave his children their symbolic names. Peter Ackroyd argued
that Hosea’s marriage and family life resulted from his understanding of God’s word and
do not provide experience that taught him what to believe or say. Gomer as a “wife of
harlotry” represented unfaithful Israel who had participated in the Canaanite fertility cult.
Isaiah was another prophet who used symbolic actions to convey his message using
human living symbols. The political turmoil and social unrest in Israel in 735-733 BC is
explained by Isaiah using symbolic names of his own children. Gerald Sheppard noted
that ordinary public activities, of prophets could carry extra-ordinary significance.
Besides prophesying oracles, prophets could dress or behave in ways that symbolized
their message. The Immanuel child in Isaiah 7:14, the Shear-jashub sign and the Maher –
shalal-hash-baz signs symbolized, among other things, God as a provider of great comfort
to the righteous and a source of assurance.
Finally a consideration of Jeremiah will show similarly that he also used dramatic actions
to convey message and meaning. Jeremiah performed many of these symbolic actions
symbolizing doom. To mention most of them (i) his refraining from marriage (16:1) (ii)
refraining from mourning rites (16:5); from feasting (16:8); breaking of the ceramic pot
(19:1); wearing of yoke bars (27:1) and many others. Thomas Overholt commented that
the aim of using these symbolic actions is forceful and convincing communication.
Symbolic actions have sometimes been understood as quasi-magical acts in which the
prophet sought to gain the assent and support of an audience.
“Prophets came with a particular word at a particular time”. (J. Muilenburg).

Explain this statement. Does this mean that the prophets never foretold the future?
Or
“Prophets said nothing new, they always based their message on existing
traditions”. Discuss this statement with reference to the prophets you have studied.
Muilenburg`s dictum is quite valid although it does not necessarily mean that these
prophets never foretold the future. In fact the basis of every prophet of Israel’s message
was always an existing tradition or a particular scenario at a given time. This general
observation will be argued further in the subsequent paragraphs of this essay.
Moses, the prophet of Israel par excellency, dealt with a political scenario of liberation
and the formative stages of, the religion of Yahweh. The most notable prediction

Page 109
(prophecy) he made was the promise of another prophet as great as him for Israel (Deutr
18:15). Elijah concentrated on the existing traditions. He was battling with the pollution
of God’s religion by Baalism. But with Amos prophecy entered a new era.
Amos ushered the era of canonical prophets dwelling on specific issues at very particular
times. They also foretold the future which had a bearing on the present situation.
Professor Roy Melugin comments that Amos mainly prophesied against social injustices
and crimes against humanity which were perpetrated by the ruling class in Israel during
the prosperous years (788-746 B.c). The religious immoralities at the national shrines
of Bethel and Gilgal were offences that were existing on the ground during the ministry
of Amos. But the judgement of doom which Amos predicted was only going to come in
the unspecified future. This view suggests that the prophet Amos foretold the future.
Isaiah and Jeremiah are further examples to consider in this discussion. Isaiah has been
described as a prophet-statesman because of his pre – occupation with the political events
of the time. At the same time he prophesied the destruction of the coalition which would
occur in the distant future, “Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be broken to pieces”
(Isaiah 7:8) Under the same bracket the promise came to pass hence Isaiah foretold the
future. Jeremiah spent much of his time prophesying against the status quo. The society
was deeply sunk in institutionalized apostasy. His struggle against falsehood was just a
task at a particular time. The reforms of Josiah which have a bearing on the prophecies
of Jeremiah were events of a particular time. But the judgement which he announced was
an event in the future. The destruction of Jerusalem occurred in 587B.C long after
Jeremiah had predicted it. Therefore the final stance to adopt on Muilenburg`s dictum is
that while prophets dealt with existing traditions, they also foretold the future.
Amos and Jeremiah have been called prophets of doom. To what extent do they
both deserve this title?
It is a common conception in old testament studies that the prophet Amos and Jeremiah
were prophets of doom. The essence of this view is that the oracles they delivered
proclaimed massive destruction of life in military defeat. This destruction would be a
form of punishment from God on his chosen people. Both Amos and Jeremiah deserve
this title although Jeremiah puts it in less severe terms.
The prophet Amos prophesied the total destruction of Israel by military defeat. He
proclaims a gloomy picture of God’s punishment. Strong metaphors drawn from animal
violence and natural catastrophe are used by Amos to announce destruction. The overall
impression is death. In the first chapter the motto of Amos equates God with a roaring
lion. Using a similar metaphor in Amos 3:12, he uses the imagery of animal violence to
illustrate how God would deal with his people. In this verse J.P. Hyatt in Peakes`s Bible
Commentary sternly warned that the verse is referring to complete death. The lion is a
beast of prey which will never spare its victim. In the main body of his book (chapter 5-8)
Amos proclaims death using poetic devices and visions. The funeral dirge in Amos 5 Vs
2 is a poetic device suggesting destruction of the nation of Israel: Fallen, no more to rise

Page 110
is the virgin Israel. Further elaborations associate this death with the day of the Lord: “it
is darkness and not light.”
The vision of judgement which Amos saw reveal natural disaster which threatened the
whole ecosystem. A great fire (7:4-6) would consume the vegetation and leak the
subterranean waters of the land of Israel. A great swarm of locusts (7:1-3) would invade
the whole crop and destroy it completely. The basket of summer fruit (8:1) suggested
that Israel was ripe for destruction and so would not see the next season. And the vision
of the plumb line (7:7-9) depicted God in his position ready to destroy Israel. Amos is
also quoted saying, “I gave you cleanliness of teeth”, implying drought from which a lot
of people would die. The overall picture is gloomy. These oracles accord Amos the title
that he was a prophet of doom.
The prophet Jeremiah has also been described as a prophet of doom. But it is important
to note that Jeremiah says that the destruction could be averted by a submission of Judah
to the enemy rather than resistance. The destruction could also be averted by repentance
to Yahweh. However, Thomas Overholt argues that no hope is expressed that if the
people repent they can avoid catastrophe. Rather the nation’s down fall seems already to
have happened though perhaps in the not distant past (the exile in 597 Bc). Like Amos,
Jeremiah saw a vision of this destruction when he saw he was instructed by God to buy
and wear a new linen undergarment. The spoiled garment symbolized the destruction of
the relationship with God and hence the nation would suffer. The following symbolic
actions of Jeremiah suggested doom for Judah: Refraining from marriage symbolized the
coming of a war that would utterly destroy families. Refraining from mourning rites
symbolized that Yahweh would remove peace in the land so much that death will be so
widespread such that the custom of mourning would be meaningless. The breaking of the
ceramic pot also symbolized Yahweh’s irreparable damage to the nation of Judah.
The difference between these two prophets is that Jeremiah includes several expressions
of hope in his book. The book of consolation (chapter 30-31) and the oracles in chapters
20, 28 and 36 suggest that there is hope in Jeremiah for the nation of Judah. One may
note that the very beginning of the book makes overtones of hope: He was to pluck up
and breakdown, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant. Amos also, just like
Jeremiah speaks about hope as evidenced by Amos 9:11-15. Verse 14 talks about God
restoring the fortunes of his people Israel. Be that as it may the above mentioned portion
of scripture is belied to have not come from Amos but may have come from some
redactors or editors. In the final analysis it is notable that both Amos and Jeremiah
prophesied doom.
Discuss the prophets` attitude to sacrifice
Some people have erroneously viewed prophets of the pre-exilic era as being opposed to
sacrificial worshipping in Israel. Such a view would be an over simplification of the
matter. If such a view is accepted it would create the irony that God’s own prophets
opposed a practice which God had allowed, “Let my people go that thy may serve me in
the wilderness.” (Exod 7:16). Even Moses had permitted sacrificial worshiping in

Page 111
Deutronomic tradition when he authorized the offering of turtle doves and cattle (Lev
1:1-2)
The problem that surfaced later was the distortion of the practice .Sacrificial worshipping
became associated with murder, e.g. the notorious child sacrifice in the valley of Hinnom,
and its affiliation with the Canaanite fertility cult. Such practices profaned God’s name
and put his religion in disrepute. Worse still, the perversion reduced the sacrifices to
empty practices devoid of faith. By this fact, these practices would therefore be
unnecessary, “- - - though you offer me your burnt offerings and cereal offerings I will
not accept them” (Amos 6:22).
The clear fact is therefore that the prophets were not merely opposed to sacrificial
worship, but they abhorred the abuse of the system. In the case of Amos, he saw the cult
degenerating into a mere formality. The ruling class was perpetrating temple prostitution
during the moments of worshipping. Sometimes the sacrifices were conducted as
activities of luxury. Libations of wine were served to oblivion.
Hosea confronted a similar problem. He saw hypocrisy in the sacrificial system. People
offered empty sacrifices, without genuine faith in God. Hosea saw the absence of Hesedh
in the sacrificial system, hence he condemned it. In no way could it be possible that the
prophet could be having a personal problem with the system. There was no problem of
attitude at all.
Even the prophet Jeremiah had also a quarrel with the sacrificial system in Judah. His
allegations against it were that it was perverted and hypocritical. His contention was that
since Judah had resorted to apostasy the whole sacrificial system had become an
institution of idolatry, “Your burnt offerings are not acceptable, nor your sacrifices
pleasing to me.” (Jer 6:20). On a similar note the prophet Isaiah condemned the worship
because it was being done by hands tainted with human blood. Even when they offered
innocent sacrifices of animals, the prophet warned that God would not accept them,
“What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices ? I do not delight in the blood of your
bulls ------------.” (Isaiah 1:11-13)
In conclusion it is reiterated that when the prophets opposed sacrificial worshipping it

was not a matter of attitude. The essence of the matter was that the system had been
perverted and so had the effect of profaning God’s name.
Comment on the significance of Hosea’s family life in his prophetic ministry.

Or
What effect did Gomer`s sexual immorality have on Hosea’s prophecy?
The book of Hosea posses one of the most difficult texts in the Bible. It is controversial
whether the story of Hosea and his marriage is a real situation or is just a parable. Most
scholars seem to regard the story as an allegory facing the difficulty of the challenging
question whether it was possible for God to instruct his prophet to do a disgraceful,
immoral and embarrassing thing.

Page 112
Apparently chapters one and three seem to describe two different marriages by Hosea.
Bernard Anderson as well as Ackroyd resolved that the two episodes represent a single
marriage with the same woman Gomer. Chapter three may be suggesting a remarriage
after a temporary separation with Gomer. All these worries aside, what could be the
meaning of this marriage? Contemporary interpretation says the marriage represents the
state of affairs in the relationship between God and his chosen people. The analogy is
that God is like a faithful husband to a people and who struggles over that people’s future
like a parent argonising over a wayward child.
Another view says that the marriage story is a report of symbolic actions by the prophet,
actual events performed to show that Hosea knew the word of God before his marriage
and before he gave his children symbolic names. The marriage and the family life result
from his understanding of God’s word and do provide experience that taught him what to
believe or say. Gomer as a wife of harlotry represented the unfaithful Israel and like
most Israelites, had participated in the Canaanite fertility cult. Hosea’s marriage is not
that his wife and family are so unusual but, to the contrary, all Israel has prostituted itself
to false gods.
In a nut shell Hosea’s marriage was not a traumatic experience as such, but it provided an
insight into the nature of God and his dealings with a chosen people who are unfaithful.
The fact that Israel was the chosen nation would not exonerate her from God’s
judgement. The selection was not a right but a privileged responsibility (B.W Anderson)
Failure to exercise this responsibility would result in a withdrawal of the privilege. But
God is ever merciful. He can “re-marry” after a temporary separation.’’
“An optimism of grace.” (B.W. Anderson.) Discuss this view with regards to the
Book of Hosea.
The phrase “an optimism of grace” is the brainchild of Bernard W. Anderson. He used
this phrase to explain a point in the relationship between God the people of Israel. To be
“optimistic” is to be hopeful. The word “grace” refers to the mercy of God. Therefore
the point is that the hope for survival of Israel is only based on the mercy of God.
The election of Israel was only a privilege based on the condition of loyalty, love and
steadfastness (hesed). It was a bond similar to a marriage. If the bond is violated then
the relationship collapses. Gomer disobeyed and Hosea expelled her. But only on the
hope that she could reform, did Hosea re-marry Gomer. Thus the re-marriage was only
based on the mercy of Hosea. Had it not been for this mercy, the re-marriage would be
impossible. The story is parabolic for the case between God and Israel. The chosen
nation had been affected by the deadly virus of sin. God had no other choice except to
destroy the nation. But God is like a parent who agonizes over a wayward child. He will
punish the child and re-accept him in the home. The re-acceptance is only a hope based
on the parent’s mercy – an optimism of Grace.

Page 113
Elsewhere Anderson has philosophized that “despite the eclipse there is still a ray of light
shining in the distant horizon”. This view is generic to his concept of an optimism of
grace. Despite the breaking of the covenant by faithless Israel, God still loved Israel as a
son whom He brought out of Egypt. But the gravity of the offence of Israel would
otherwise warrant a complete destruction. Israel did not deserve to be called the sons of
God any more, but because of God’s grace, they will once more be called “My people” ,
hence an optimism of grace.
God did not forget the promise made to Abraham to increase his posterity and to be a
father of faith (Gen. 22:17) (Gen. 13; 16) Isaiah in deed prophesied reconciliation and
restoration for Israel. But such virtues would only come to Israel as acts of God’s grace.
Anderson describes this as an optimism of grace. The following quotation summarizes
the tender mercy of God: “Therefore behold, I will allure her and bring her into the
wilderness and speak tenderly to her and I will give her Vineyards and make the valley of
anchor a door of hope” (Hos 2:14). This oracle proves that God is gracious. Through his
grace Israel would be restored. Had it not been for this grace, Israel would be completely
destroyed. Bernard Anderson summed up this nation by the phrase “An optimism of
grace.”
How did Isaiah of Jerusalem understand the sovereignty of God, and how did this
affect his message?
The account of the call of Isaiah opens with Isaiah`s vision of God in the temple.
Immediately the prophet recognized that he was a human observer of Yahweh’s heavenly
council. He properly feared for his life, since the realm of the holy can be dangerous to
the sinful world as evidenced by Exod 19:21 which reads, “Go down and warn the
people, lest they break through to the Lord and gaze and many of them perish”. After a
purification ritual, Isaiah heard God’s request that someone be found to represent the
heavenly ones on earth by announcing their decision. Isaiah volunteered to be the
messenger. However, the message he heard was harsh. Gerald Sheppard and P. Ackroyd
say that Isaiah`s conception of the Lord was that the Lord is supreme over human affairs.
God punishes severely the nation of Israel for its serious sins, until they realise that
complete trust in Yahweh is the only way to security. Turmoil forms the basis of Israel’s
judgement and Isaiah is called to elucidate on it to the king using various techniques.
The consistent element in his message appears to be that righteousness and trust in God,
rather than international alliance, would provide Judah`s only security. In spite of his
despair and the resistance to his message, Isaiah found the courage to “hope in God” and,
at God’s request, to record his teaching as a source of hope for later generations. The
prophet’s consistency and eloquence and fearless confrontation of kings has given later
interpretations good reason to speculate that he was probably a highly educated,
statesmen or even a royal – like figure.
The content of Isaiah`s oracles suggests someone with detached compassion, without the
type of passionate identification characteristic of Hosea. He appears well-versed with
wisdom traditions but without Amos` zeal for biting satire. The woe oracles against

Page 114
Judean leaders and the judgement oracles against the Northern Kingdom surrounding the
testimony of destruction underscore this assumption. Biblical scholars have described
Isaiah as having a different personality from other prophets. This dimension contributed
to the impression that he was subject to familiar human frailties and that the word of God
can be perceived only through the necessary limitations of its human mediators.
His oracles have a gloomy outcome for both Judah and Israel. Only a fragile optimism at
the end appears as an afterthought without, in anyway, ameliorating the coming disaster.
Only in time, well after a full contemplation of the torturous events of national
devastation for both nations, can one detect a faint glimmer of hope in the stump that is
left, a glimmer that will, someday, adumbrate a great light to those who walk in the
darkness of exile (Isaiah 9:2)
Discuss the symbolic signs in Isaiah
Thomas Overhalt defined a symbolic act as an act within the capability of any individual
to perform. Ordinary public activities of prophets could carry extra – ordinary
significance. Besides prophesying oracles, prophets could dress or behave in ways that
symbolised their message. Just as Hosea’s marriage constituted a symbolic act of
prophecy, so Isaiah`s children, by their very names, carried a message throughout their
lives.
The symbolic names of Isaiah`s children appear in a historical context of turmoil and
social unrest. The Syro-Ephraimitic alliance (735 – 733 BC) was threatening the
existence of Judah. This political turmoil forms the basis of Israel’s judgement and
Isaiah is called to elucidate on it to king Ahaz using symbolic figures. The Immanuel
child in Isaiah 7:14 seems to belong to some unnamed woman, whereas Isaiah`s sons
Shear -jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-buz are born of the prophetess who is surely his
wife. Unfortunately, nothing more is said about her and nothing is known about her
contribution, if any, to the message of Isaiah.
In the period prior to the siege of Jerusalem God instructed Isaiah to meet king Ahaz at a
particular place with a message of hope. King Ahaz feared the coalition of Syria and the
northern kingdom. Isaiah met the king soon after, accompanied by the prophet’s son,
Shearjashub (a remnant shall return). Isaiah`s message was one of comfort and assurance
that God would destroy Ephraim and Syria, but with the provision that Ahaz should not
trust in foreign nations except in God alone to defend the nation. This ultimatum fell on
deaf ears.
In an effort to convince the frightened king, Isaiah offered to provide any convincing
sign Ahaz might be able to imagine. Attempting to conceal his unwillingness to obey the
prophetic word, in a gesture of false piety, Ahaz refused to test God. The prophet assured
Ahaz that the alliance would cease to exist. The time of the destruction of the alliance is
tied to the birth and early childhood of a boy named Immanuel. The name symbolized
that the presence of God can be a source of the greatest comfort to the righteous as in this
historical moment, an assurance of certain judgement to those subject to God’s wrath.

Page 115
As a further sign of the impending collapse of Syria and Ephraim, the prophet secured
officials to witness a large tablet he had prepared on behalf of his future son, Maher –
shalal – hash – baz (the spoil speeds, the prey hastens). Though what was legally
accomplished remains unclear, the tablet became a matter of public record (Gerald
Sheppard). By this it means Isaiah confronted everyone with the terrifying name “Spoil
speeds, booty haste”. As with Immanuel, a certain moment would not be reached before
the announced judgement would fall upon the north. It can be noted that, like Hosea and
Jeremiah, symbolic signs were used to elucidate God’s stance within a given set of
circumstances.
Further gobbet questions: Write explanatory comments on the following:-
a) ‘But Moses said to him, are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the Lord’s
people were prophets….’ (Numbers 11:29).
b) ‘--------- And he ran to Eli and said ‘Here I am, for you called me.’ (1 Samuel 3:4-5)
c) ‘It is enough; now lord take away my life, for I am no better than my fathers.’
(1 Kings 19:4)
d) But that same night the word of the Lord came to Nathan,’ Go and tell my servant
David, ‘Thus says the Lord.’ Would you build me a house to dwell in?’
(2 Samuel 7:4)
e) Thus says the Lord, ‘For three transgressions of the Ammonites and for four. I will
not revoke the punishment, because they have ripped up women with child in Gilead.’
(Amos 1:13)
f) ‘Hear this word you cows of Bashan, who are in the mountain of Samaria, who
oppress the poor, who crush the needy, and say to their husbands, bring that we may
drink.’ (Amos 4:1)
g) And Amaziah said to Amos, ‘O seer, go, flee away to the land of Judah, and eat bread
and prophesy there --------‘ (Amos 7:12)
h) ‘Behold the days are coming’ says the lord when the ploughman shall overtake the
reaper and the trader of grapes him who sows the seed, the mountains shall drip sweet
wine and all the hills shall flow with it.’ (Amos 9:13)
i) ‘Go take to yourself a wife of harlotry and have children of harlotry by forsaking the
lord.’ (Hosea 1:2)
j) ‘Israel is like a dove, silly and without sense, calling to Egypt, going to Assyria,’
(Hosea 7:11)
k) When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. (Hosea 11:2)
l) ‘And now I will tell you what I will do to my vineyard. I will remove its hedge, and it
shall be devoured ---------‘ (Isaiah 5:5)
m) Then I said, ‘Here am I ! Send me.’ And he said, ‘Go and say to this people.’ (Isaiah
6:9)
n) ‘Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help and rely on horses.’ (Isaiah 31:1)
o) ‘Hear the word of the lord of hosts, Behold the days are coming, when all that is in
your house shall be carried to Babylon.’ (Isaiah 39:5-6)
p) Jeremiah , ‘what do you see?’ And I said , ‘ I see a boiling pot, facing away from the
north.’ (Jeremiah 1:13-14)

Page 116
q) The word that came to Jeremiah from the lord, ‘Arise and go down to the potter’s
house and there I will let you hear my word.’ (Jeremiah 18:1)
r) ‘Thus says the lord of hosts the God of Israel: I have broken the yoke of the king of
Babylon.’ (Jeremiah 28:2)
s) ‘Behold the days are coming, says the lord, when I will make a new covenant with the
house of Judah.’ (Jeremiah 31:31)
CHAPTER 9
THE FOUR GOSPELS
1. Explain what the New Testament means in relation to the Old Testament.
2. Define the synoptic question and the synoptic problem
3. Examine the scholarly propositions on the solutions to the synoptic problem
4. Discuss the two main solutions to the synoptic problem
General introduction to the four gospels
This study pack is prepared to cover the ‘A’ level divinity curriculum. This syllabus
covers the four gospels viz. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The module tackles the
major aspects – facts and views, and interprets the texts using views from the most recent
and most renowned scholars. It offers a thorough examination of all important
background issues i.e. matters of authorship, date of compilation, place of compilation,
the target audience and the purpose of each gospel. It is compulsory that every candidate
should be familiar with all these issues before they can attempt to interpret or comment
on the texts. In view of this fact Eldon J. Epp had this to say:- “Biblical literature, like
other literature cannot be fully understood apart from its historical and cultural context.
Each of the writing that became part of the New Testament originated within a set of real-
life circumstances. To the extent possible, specific circumstances must be sought for each
separate writing……….” This extract is the lamp that gives the light to the work of this
study pack. Therefore this module will begin by giving a brief history of the New
Testament and the Jewish people before it tackles the text.

Page 117
The new testament and the Jewish history
The history of the Jewish people has been a history of colonisation. This colonisation
always threatened the religious, cultural and political independence of the Jews. The
Babylonians, the Greeks, the Syrians and the Romans took turns between 587 B.C to 135
AD to control Palestine. Bernard W. Anderson attributed the independence of the Jews to
the war hero called Mattathias. Mattathias started a revolution of Jewish liberation in 168
B.C. After his death his son Judas Mattathias Maccabeas took over the leadership of the
revolution against the Syrians. He won the war in 164 B.C and reclaimed and rededicated
the temple on that year. The New Testament and rededication of the temple by Judas
Maccabeas marked the absolute rejection of Hellenism in Jewish society and a new
declaration, the Hanukkah, came into existence. This new declaration of the temple is
what is known as the New Testament.
Why new testament books were written
Various factors favoured the crystallization of the Christian traditions in a final written
form. The practice of reading in church the letters of an apostle; the analogy of the Old
Testament read as scripture; the special importance for Christian faith of the original
witnesses of events and the danger that tradition might become distorted and facts
forgotten; the rapid expansion into the gentile world which made oral tradition, rooted in
Jewish Palestine more difficult to maintain, all these have contributed to the need to have
the New Testament books written. As an example, the sayings of Jesus were very
cherished. Once the gospels came into existence they quickly became central in church
life and were liturgically emphasized. Their existence and their centrality in turn probably
meant that most oral tradition about Jesus would die away fairly soon.
Each gospel may at first have had an attachment to a particular community; but the
grouping of the four is explicit and it is regarded as necessary in the writing of the early
church leader Irenaeus (about AD 180). There are signs that of the four Gospels, John
suffered most questioning ; it is little quoted in early sources and may have been regarded
as favouring Gnosticism. When it was later seen that it could be used against that
movement, it achieved acceptance. Mark, though doubtless the earliest, tended to drop
into the background in comparison with the “fuller” three. The idea of combining the four
into one narrative was tried out in Tatian’s diatesaron which was widely popular,
especially in Syria, but the four- Gospel canon remained official in the main churches.
Thus the core of the New Testament canon was agreed upon quite early, but complete
agreement in all aspects was only slowly reached, and indeed was never completely
reached in all sections of the church. The argument by which canonicity was determined
are somewhat better known in the New Testament than in the case of the Old Testament.
Basically, it came down to the authority of the opinion of respected senior persons in the
churches. Authorship was naturally a consideration, but the question of who was the
actual author was itself a matter of opinion, several rejected books bore the name of
Peter. Theological content was also a consideration, but again the question whether a

Page 118
book accorded with the church’s faith was a matter for the estimation of authoritative
persons.
The Synoptics
This refers to the three books i.e. Matthew, Mark and Luke. John is excluded from the
title. The three gospels relate closely in verb, sequence and content. If read in a parallel
manner or synoptically, as Norman Peterson says, the three will show very close
resemblance’s in verb, sequence and context. Exegetical scholars have described the
three books as being synoptically related, hence they are called synoptic gospels.
The Synoptic Question
Willie Marxsen in his book Introduction to New Testament stated the synoptic question
as “Why are the three books, Matthew, Mark and Luke closely similar yet they appear to
have been written by different people at different places, at different times?”
Norman R. Peterson echoed the same concern when he inquired on why there are such
startling agreements in verb and sequence between and among the synoptic.
The question has evoked an answer that somewhat alleges interdependence between or
amongst the gospel writers, reliance on common sources and reliance on oral tradition.
While the interdependence hypothesis sounds plausible, it in turn raises a more
challenging question: Who relied on whom, or Who used whom? as Norman Peterson
puts it. This question has been called the Synoptic Problem. It has remained unresolved
although exegetes have suggested a lot of possible solutions.
Solutions to the Synoptic Problem
Before addressing the answers to this problem, it is well to consider why the question is
relevant to readers. The following reasons are given: (1) The close relationship between
the synoptic gospels is important because the difference between them actually indicate
what information is peculiar to each. (2) Regardless of the answer to the question of who
used whom, reading any one of them in a synopsis or in a parallel fashion discloses its
differences from others. (3) By exploring patterns of differences throughout one of them,
one can gain insights into its distinctive composition and message. Thus, if Matthew or
Mark differs from the other in a message they have in common, the difference in a word,
a phrase, an index or a story is something to be explored further in each narrative. This
kind of comparative reading and thinking, only answers the question of why synoptic
relations are important for readers, not the question of why the synoptic problem is
important. The question of relationships is a literary matter while that of the importance
of the synoptic problem is a historical one – a question of temporal priority.

Page 119
Proposed solutions
Modern scholasticism has concentrated on the broader contours of the two main solutions
viz.: The Matthean Priority and The Marcan Priority views. These are also known as the
Two-source or the modified two-source hypotheses. The Marcan Priority view is the
most widely accepted solution. But in recent years the Matthean Priority view has been
revived by a number of scholars dissatisfied with the prevailing opinion. However, both
solutions are hypothesis, not provable solutions. The following diagrams represent each
solution. The arrow, in all cases points to the one who depended on the other.
Matthean Priority
Matthew Luke
Mark
Source: Norman R. Peterson
Matthean Priorists argue that Matthew was the earliest gospel; that Luke used Matthew
and that Mark used both Matthew and Luke reducing their extent abbreviating and
conflating them.
Marcan Priority
Mark Quelle
M
L
Matthew Luke
Source: Norman R. Peterson

Page 120
Marcan priorists, on the other hand, argue that Mark was first to be written and that
Matthew and Luke used Mark, plus another source consisting largely of sayings of Jesus,
called Quelle (Q). This Q source accounts for that case where Matthew and Luke have
material in common that is not in Mark. In addition, in the modified form of this
hypothesis, material only found in Matthew is attributed to an M – source, while
materials found in Luke only is attributed to an L- source.
Matthean priorists find the Marcan priority weakened in cases where Matthew and Luke
agree with one another against Mark while they are alleged to be following Mark. e.g.
Mtt 13:11 and Lk 8:10 versus Mk 4:11. Marcan priorists respond by hypothesizing either
that Matthew and Luke had different editions of Mark or that later copyists harmonized
Matthew and Luke or that Matthew and Luke coincidentally improved Mark in the same
manner. Suffice it, to say neither hypothesis has persuaded the other.
Regardless of which one prefers, it is apparent that two of the writers radically altered the
earlier narrative. For instance, by the time the gospels were written there was no strict
authority to prohibit significant changing of Jesus’ story, e.g. it is possible that Luke must
have destroyed everything that is characteristic of Matthew e.g. when he turned upside
down the genealogies of Jesus.
Finally, it is emphasized to the student that the above discussion is a synthesis of views of
modern scholars on the synoptic problem. Views from conservative scholars and ancient
writers are also considered in the next paragraphs.
Other views on the synoptic problem
There is general consensus among ancient scholars that the synoptic writers depended on
these possible sources (1) Oral tradition (2) Written records (3) Personal information.
Oral Tradition
In ancient Palestine, Jews committed to memory all the important information so that this
information would be transmitted orally from one generation to another. So it is believed
that gospel writers depended on this oral transmission. Although Jews could be trusted on
this skill, it is generally noted that the problem with oral transmission is that it can be
quite dubious or can suffer distortion. It was believed that this hypothesis could go a
long way in accounting for the synoptic questions.
Written Records
This refers to documented information in the form of epistles or manuscripts. Among

these were apostolic letters that were circulated among churches; the Marcan and the
Quelle sources and archaeological manuscripts such as the Muratorian Canon and Dead
Sea Scrolls. It is believed that the gospel writers depended on such records.
Personal Information

Page 121
A particular gospel writer could think out or source some information on his own. This is
exemplified by such sources as the M, and the L. Such a source could be very subjective
depending on the author’s own bias. The Ur-Mark and the Proto-Luke fall into this
bracket.
The following scholars’ contributions are very important:

Tatian: In his Diatessaron, he postulated on the harmonization hypothesis which cites
harmonious relationships that existed between and among the early eastern churches; that
they shared and circulated Christian scriptures, and that probably the evangelists had
access to that information. However, this hypothesis lacks substantial evidence. And this
only answers the synoptic question “ why are they similar ?”and not the synoptic problem
“who used whom?”
GE Lessing and J.G Icchorn
Lessing propounded what is known as “the original gospel hypothesis”. It postulated that
the synoptic gospels were different translations or extracts from an old Aramaic Gospel
of the Nazarines which Jerome says it was in existence in the fourth century B.C. Bishop
Papias of Hieropolis consented to this view. J.G Icchorn proposed that there were some
nine different gospels issued from the original Aramaic gospel. They were considered to
be apostolic drafts for use in the instruction of churches and so the synoptics were the
concluding phenomenon of this literary process. This view assumes that there was no
interdependence among the synoptic gospels themselves, but perhaps they all depended
on some earlier gospel.
F. Schleimacher
He propounded the fragmentary theory. He says that the apostles wrote down records of
the words of Jesus as they were known to the witnesses. One of them perhaps collected
miracle stories. The other one collected the sayings of Jesus and another one collected the
passion stories, and probably the evangelists had access to this joint apostolic effort. This
scholar based his hypothesis on the prologue to Luke which says, “In as much as many
have undertaken to compile a narrative …..” (Luke 1: 1-4)
G. Herder
Propounded the oral transmission hypothesis. It stated that the similarities and differences
between and among the gospels were a result of an oral transmission process The view is
based on form criticism.
J.J. Griesbach and C. Lachmann
Griesbach propounded on the mutual dependence hypothesis . The view is an 18th century
proposal based on the literal dependence notion, i.e. the evangelists were relying on each
other for their information. The problem with this view is that it does not do justice for
Mark e.g. it says Matthew and Luke depended on Mark. What then about Mark?

Page 122
In the final analysis, the issue of the synoptic question is a very debatable one, without
any absolute solutions hitherto. It remains unclear as to who used whom between or
among Mtt, Mark and Luke.

1. Show the relationship between the New Testament and the Old Testament
2. Why are the 3 gospels (Mtt, Mk, Lk) called synoptic gospels
3. Why are the 4 gospels (Mtt, Mk, Lk, Jn) called gospels? How does John differ
from the others?
4. What do you understand by the “synoptic problem”? What are the proposed
solutions to it? .
CHAPTER 10
INTRODUCTION TO THE GOSPELS, THE BOOK OF MATTHEW
1. Give an overview of the historical context of the book of Matthew

2. Discuss the authorship and purposes of Matthew
3. Discuss the birth narratives according to Matthew
4. Analyze Jesus’ sermon on the Mount according to Matthew
5. Examine the miracle stories according to Matthew
6. Examine the conflict between Jesus and the synagogue authorities
7. Examine the passion stories in Mathew
8. Discuss the crucifixion and resurrection stories in Matthew
Matthew in a historical context
G.E.P Cox wrote that the evangelist Matthew had the church of his day in mind. Reginald
H. Fuller wrote that the evangelist was writing for his church. He was writing after the
persecution of the Jews by Emperor Nero in cica 70 A.D. The evangelist proclaims the
issues if righteousness; Jesus as king, lawgiver, a new Moses and a Judge. Matthew, in a
way, was “prophesying” the coming of love and peace amongst the Christian society
because of the persecution, which they suffered in Palestine under the Romans. Among
other things the evangelist was worried about the state of lawlessness in Jewish society.
Persecution of the Christian church by the synagogue
Judaism was based on the law of Moses. It emphasized legality more than humanity i.e.
the law must be upheld first and foremost, then humanity must come second. This is the
old righteousness. Christianity, on the other hand, was based on the new law which was

Page 123
emphasizing that human life must come first and the law after. Christianity then went on
proclaiming about the law of Jesus, the new law, which was seen as a threat to Judaism- a
religion that did not permit any one who was not a Jew to join. Also the freedom of the
spirit proclaimed by Paul had degenerated into complacence, indiscipline and
licentiousness. This problem was at the heart of Matthew. Faith was being undermined by
free thought in Jewish societies. The Christian church was facing bitter opposition from
the Jewish synagogue. Christians faced persecution to the point of death. Even the
Roman government turned against Christians and persecuted them as well e.g. by taxing
them heavily. Such a background called for a whole-hearted discipleship, against a
common enemy with divine assurance guaranteed by the cross and resurrection of Jesus,
that the poor, the meek and the persecuted are indeed saved. The evangelist therefore
wrote the gospel according to Matthew in view of this background.
Who wrote the book of Matthew?
Generally, there are no conclusive answers to this question on authorship. Willie Marxsen
says that the work was handed down anonymously. The author is not exactly known. But
the author must have been a Jew and a Christian, who used Mark, the Quelle, and his own
material known as the M-Source. K. Stendahl described this view as The Community of
Matthew Theory or the School of Matthew, suggesting that there is a community of
sources that was used to produce the book of Matthew. The book has a strong Jewish
flavour. It also contains vivid Christian doctrines e.g. emphasis on brotherhood, and love
for mankind. The book also shows a keen interest in Jewish traditions as is evidenced in
the genealogies of Jesus. However, it is noted that the text does not render the exact name
of its author.
Reginald H. Fuller says that the author of Matthew was an unknown Jewish Christian of
the second generation writing around 90 AD in or near Antioch in Syria. The bitter
criticism of Pharisaic leaders of Jerusalem in Chapter 23, and the distance from which
Matthew speaks of the Jewish community, when Matthew says, “ their
synagogues”(4v23) shows that he wrote after the emergence of the new rabbinic
institutions at Jamnia i.e. after AD 70 . The Neronian persecutions in the 70’s would
naturally cause a delay in writing the book for fear of victimization. Therefore the book
could possibly be compiled some ten to twenty years after hence a date around 90 AD is
suggested.
It seems that the Christian groups he was addressing were no longer part of the Jewish
community. Matthew wrote to provide his community with an alternative to rabinnic
instructions, (the mosaic torah), hence Jesus is presented by Matthew as a new Moses, the
founder of the true Israel (16:17-19) and the messianic expounder of the new and better
righteousness (Mtt 5: 17 – 20). Matthew’s church had then moved away from the
synagogue. As a result it was opening itself to the mission to the gentiles (Mtt24 : 14; 28:
19), cooperating perhaps with Jewish Christians of a different type who had long engaged
in the gentile mission, bringing into its fold enthusiastic prophets who neglected the
ethical dimension of Christianity. (7:15-20). Matthew is fighting on two fronts, firstly
against legalism on one side and secondly against antinomianism i.e. neglect of a new
righteousness, on the other hand. But it will be wrong to think of Matthew as primarily a

Page 124
polemical work. The author’s purpose was pastoral to protect his church from dangers
that threatened from within. It has been thought that Mtt 13:52 discloses something of
Matthew’s background and method. He was perhaps trained as “a scribe unto the
kingdom of God.”
G.E.P Cox says that the author was a Christian of Jewish origin well versed in the
Pharisaism of his day and the fierce opposition to the Christian church which he bitterly
resented. The suggestion is made in Mtt 13:52 where the author is portrayed as “a scribe
instructed unto the kingdom of God,” a trained rabbi converted to Christianity who knew
and appreciated the moral strength of the old Jewish law which Jesus came not to destroy
but to fulfill (5:17 ; 8:4)
G.E.P. Cox observes the Papias theory on the authorship of Matthew. Papias was a
Bishop at Hieropolis in Phyrigia. He wrote that : “Matthew wrote an orderly compilation
of the oracles (loggia) of the Lord in Hebrew language and each one , i.e. various
authors , translated them as he wanted.” Papias also agreed that the author of Matthew
used Mark as his source.
There are serious criticisms against the Papias theory. Firstly, Papias is said to have been
of weak mind. It is disputed whether what he calls “the oracles” really refer to this gospel
of Matthew, but if they do, two serious difficulties appear viz.:
(1) The original gospel of Matthew was written in Greek and showed no sign of
translation from the Aramaic or Hebrew.
(2) Secondly, if Matthew is the apostle of that name, it is incredible that an actual eye
witness of the gospel events should have relied upon Mark who was not at all an eye-
witness. Papias made the mistake to regard the gospel according to the Nazarenes that
was in Hebrew to be the original Matthew. However, some apologetics have
suggested that the apostle Matthew was actually the compiler of the Q- source and
this document is what Papias meant by “the logia”. G.E.P. Cox acknowledges that it
was common for the ancient world to ascribe a book to some important name. The
title “Matthew” was just a Christian tradition that associated the gospel with the great
apostle Matthew – Levi. Willie Marxsen underscored the same view.
Summary of points on authorship
1. Matthew is an anonymous writer

2. Church tradition stigmatized Mathew the Apostle
3. Internal evidence in Mtt 9:9 is construed to be evidence for the apostle authorship
4. The author was a Jewish Christian
5. The author was a trained scribe.
6. The author had a gentile interest
The purposes of Matthew

In point form
1. The gospel should be universal (28:19)
2. To highlight the shortfalls of Judaism.
3. To disclose an ecclesiastic agenda.

Page 125
4. To warn on the eschatology at the end of time.

5. To serve a liturgical purpose.
6. To show the human origins of the Messiah.
7. To show the Jewish origins of the Messiah.
8. To provide a pragmatic guide to the church
Explanations
Matthew’s gospel opens with the prophecy that Jesus is Emmanuel, God with us, and it
closes with the promise that this same Jesus who is now the risen Christ, will be with his
disciples, drawn from all nations, till the end of time. There is a note of universalism at
the beginning implied in the story of the magi, which is re-echoed in the command with
which the gospel closes “to go to all the world and make disciples of all nations.”
Willie Marxsen described Matthew as an evangelist and a theologian. The books didactic
character suggests that the book was meant to be a book of instructions to the early
church of christians - a kergyma. Its ecclesiastic character also suggests that the book was
meant to build and strengthen the early church. Among other things Matthew wanted to
prove the Christian dogma that Jesus was the Messiah proclaimed in the Old Testament.
Formula quotations were frequently used by Matthew to link Jesus with the Old
Testament prophecies. It is also clear that Matthew wanted to show the human aspect of
Jesus by pointing to his Davidic origin.
Reginald Fuller on the other hand says that the purpose of Matthew was to produce a
foundation book for his community like the torah of Moses in the Synagogue. The book
was to serve as the pre-eminent gospel for the church as a whole. The authors purpose
was pastoral i.e. he wanted to protect his church from dangers that threatened from
within. Matthew wrote to combat legalism and antinomianism and also to emphasize the
ethical dimension of Christianity.
G.E.P. Cox says that Matthew wrote for practical purposes for the church of his day.
Matthew wrote to combat lawlessness especially when he taught about the New Law.
Matthew also wrote to call the church to the blessedness of Christian discipleship and to
the law of righteousness that leads to God’s kingdom. It was also Matthew’s purpose that
the church must keep in mind the urgency of the time and certainty of the final
judgement.
The text of Matthew– Commentary
The best way of studying the book of Matthew is to re-arrange its text into sections as
follows:

Page 126
1.The birth narratives

-The genealogy
-The virgin conception and delivery
-The visit of the Magi
-The Herodian genocide
2.The baptism and temptations
3.The sermon on the mount
4.The baptist movement
5.Messianic deeds i.e. Miracles and Teachings
6.the Passion
-the arrest
-the trials
-the persecution
-the crucifixion
7. The resurrection
Examination questions on Matthew will always be based on these broad categories.

Therefore the exam-based approach to Matthew is the best for divinity students.
The birth narratives
Birth narratives or infancy stories relate to the christology of Jesus i.e. his human
identity, and how it merges with his divine identity – the Messiah. The first of these
narratives is the genealogy in Matthew 1:1-17. Modern commentators say that Matthew
constructed this genealogy out of traditional materials to serve a Christological purpose
indicated by the opening words “son of David, son of Abraham.” Jesus emerges from
Israel and fulfills the Old Testament promise of a Messianic king. The neat pattern of the
genealogy, which breaks into three groups of fourteen ancestors each, indicates God’s
carefully planned execution of his purpose. The special mention of dubious women in the
genealogy (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba, wife of Uriah) foreshadows the dubious
circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth. God worked out his purpose through scandalous
or irregular unions.
It is important to note that the differences between the genealogy in Matthew and that in
Luke is not important, because these accounts do not serve a biological purpose but a
theological purpose, and Luke’s purpose is different from that of Matthew.
The virgin conception
Annunciation stories in the Bible are not meant to serve as a record of historical fact but
to interpret the role a child is destined to play in salvation history and to emphasize that
that role is initiated by God. The appearance of an angel and the announcement of the
child’s future role or destiny form the core of the story. Usually there is an impediment or
some abnormality relating to the birth e.g. sterility or old age. The situation in Mary’s
story is that she became pregnant between her engagement and the actual marriage,
which raises the impression of illegitimacy. In this case the angel also serves the further

Page 127
purpose of inducing Joseph to adopt Jesus as his son so that the child becomes a son of
David. To the ancient world there would be no inconsistency here for adoption provided
one with ancestors as assuredly as did biological descent. This story’s insistence that the
conception was virginal and caused by the intervention of the holy spirit is not a
historical statement but a christological affirmation. It asserts that God initiated the
appearance of Jesus into the world. The citation of Isaiah 7:14 stresses not Mary’s
virginity but the fulfillment of the promise that God would be with his people, a promise
that received its definitive realisation after easter: “…. And lo, I am with you always, to
the close of the age.” (Mtt 28:20). The virginal conception through the spirit has nothing
to do with the pre-existence and incarnation of the divine being. It is only in John that
such an understanding is emphasized.
The visit of the magi: Commentary
The story of the wise-men is like a “haggadah” i.e. a story made from biblical materials
to make a theological point. Such stories have been seen in Num 24: 17 ; Psalms 72: 10
and 11 and Isaiah 60: 1 –7. In fact , these texts continued to influence the tradition after
Matthew’s times, so suggesting that the magi (wise-men) become kings. Coupled with
the memory of an unusual astral phenomenon around the time when Jesus was likely to
have been born, the materials quoted above were thus at hand for the development of
Matthew’s story. The magi story opens the possibility of a mission to the Gentiles,
thereby reassuring the Jewish members of Matthew’s community that the recent
development of gentile mission, however suspect to some stricter Jewish Christians, was
in-fact foreshadowed in Jesus’ birth.
The Herodian genocide
The enquiry of the magi at Herod’s court prepared the ground for three episodes in this
story, viz. (1) the flight to Egypt (2) the massacre of the children of Bethlehem (3) the
return of the holy family to Nazareth. These three episodes are bound together by several
factors. First, each move of the child Christ is undertaken by Joseph as the result of the
appearance of an angel in a dream. Second, each section includes a fulfillment citation.
Third, the whole narrative is governed by a certain correspondence with the story of
Moses and the Exodus. These three features are integrated with Matthew’s overall
theological concerns. The Christ event represents the culmination of God’s plan in
salvation history. The whole fate of Jesus is controlled by the divine initiative. The flight
into Egypt recalls the protection of the infant Moses from the plot of a wicked tyrant. The
massacre of the innocents recalls the slaying of the Hebrew children by Pharaoh. The
return from Egypt is explicitly linked to Israel’s Exodus from Egypt. To some extent
Matthew portrays Jesus throughout the gospel as a new Moses, the founder and law-giver
of the true Israel who in his career recapitulates the story of Moses and the Exodus.
The baptism and temptations

Page 128
The Ministry of Jesus is preceded by the ministry of John the Baptist. First, Matthew
carefully avoids saying that John offers baptism for release from sins. This is something
reserved for Jesus through his sacrificial death. Second, John’s preaching of repentance is
addressed not to the crowds but to the Pharisees and Sadducees. Thus, the Baptist’s
preaching becomes a warning to the Judaism of Matthew’s day. The adherents of the
synagogue have refused to flee from the wrath of God by not responding to the gospel,
and God has raised up children of Abraham in the shape of the Christian church. The
stronger one who was to come after John had by Matthew’s time purged his granary in
the fall of Jerusalem and is already gathering the wheat into his barn and preparing to
burn the chaff with unquenchable fire.
Baptism
Jesus came forward for baptism, and John, recognizing in him the stronger one who was
to bring a greater baptism with the Spirit and with fire, “tried to stop him.” Jesus,
however insisted on going on with it: “Don’t interpose, let God’s plan in salvation history
take its course. Let it be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”
Upon this, John consented “Let it happen”. The divine plan is that Jesus should in
obedience take upon himself the role of the son of God.
The dialogue between Jesus and John was inserted by Matthew to address the
embarrassing problem for the early church i.e. Why was Jesus baptized by John? Does
this not mean that John was greater than Jesus? This problem was made more acute
because of the continuing followers of John the Baptist.
The voice from heaven was not a private communication but a public proclamation “This
is my beloved son with whom I am well pleased”. The Baptist must hear it himself and
his followers must know that their master really points them to Jesus.
In Matthew Jesus was already announced as the messianic saviour at his birth and
conception. The Baptist therefore marked the point at which Jesus publicly commits
himself to the role for which he had been destined at birth. The voice from heaven form
the climax of it all.
The temptations: Commentary
The temptations occurred soon after the baptism but at a different place i.e. “in the
wilderness” where Jesus was taken to by the devil (4:1) . The spirit “snatches” Jesus
(according to R.H. Fuller) . This shows that Matthew thought of a visionary experience,
like the seer in Revelations 17:3, who was also snatched away. The three temptations
come from a later stage of the Q source in which the title “Son of God” which was
originally attached to the moment of resurrection (Rom 1:4) has been retrojected into the
earthly life of Jesus. In form, the temptations are a scriptural midrash. Matthew has
repictured the mosaic type of temptations by a few significant touches. Like Moses in
Sinai, Jesus fasts for forty nights and forty days (cf Exod 34:28). Jesus is shown the
kingdoms of the whole cosmos, like Moses was shown the land of Canaan from mount

Page 129
Nebo (Deut 34 :1 – 4). This prepares the way for the sermon on the mount and is relevant
to the Matthean church’s situation: i.e. the synagogue has Moses as its founder figure; the
true Israel has Jesus, the giver of the messianic torah that fulfills and supersedes the
Mosaic torah. Also the temptations show Jesus to be the true son of God, obeying God’s
command in Deuteronomy where in the wilderness, Israel; the predecessor of the
synagogue had been disobedient.
The Sermon on the Mount (Mtt. 5 to 7)
Analysis and commentary

Matthew has carefully composed this setting. Jesus saw the crowds, but he delivered the
great sermon not to the crowds directly but in their hearing. He went up into the
mountain, a place of divine revelations, as Moses went up on Sinai. He sat down in a
posture assumed by authorized teachers of the law. And his disciples came to him. So the
sermon was addressed directly to the disciples. Finally, he opened up his mouth, a solemn
phrase that tells that Jesus was to deliver divine revelation. Matthew’s church is thus
assured that this sermon is a messianic torah replacing the Mosaic torah of the
synagogue.
The sermon discloses Matthew’s ecclesiastical agenda and provides a pragmatic guide to
the church (didactic) highlighting the universalism of the gospel. It is a church of those
who have entered the kingdom and a description of the quality of life now expected of
them (i.e essential Christianity) that is the ethics of the new age for those who partook of
the new power. The sermon logically develops a basic theme of “the quality and conduct
of life in the kingdom” which is resented in the beatitudes. Some scholars regard it as the
expression of a noble way of thinking/teaching, dealing with what man should be rather
than what he should do. Some 20th century scholars regarded this neither as an
impractical ideal nor a fully attainable possibility. Gilmour S.M regards it as an ethic of
the transcendental order.
Structure of the sermon

The basic structure comes from the Q source. However, Matthew has also added his own
materials from M. He has carefully organized this material in a neat structure including
nine beatitudes, six antitheses and three works of mercy. In general the structure reveals
the following themes: (i) Love for the enemy (ii) prohibition of judgment on others (iii)
the test of true goodness (iv) hearers and doers of the word.
Beatitudes
The beatitudes contain three elements, firstly, the pronouncement of blessedness, second,
the present attitude, state or activity of those so pronounced, and third, the promise of
salvation at the end. “Blessed” means that they already now enjoy the promise of future
salvation. The future salvation is described under a number of different metaphors:

Page 130
possession of the kingdom of heaven, consolation; inheritance of the land; the reception
of mercy and seeing of God. These promises are final rewards for radical obedience in
this present age.
“Poor in spirit”, does not suggest economic poverty and political oppression but a
realization of one’s spiritual inadequacy .
“mourning,” suggests sorrow for one’s sins and a desire for moral reformation.
“meek,” suggests humility and kindness.
“pure in heart,” denotes unreserved commitment to the will of God i.e. the new
righteousness.
“peace makers,” in Matthew’s situation would have meant working for harmonious
relations within the Christian community. This was particularly relevant in a community
that included Jewish Christians of various types and recent gentile converts. They had
faced persecution by the synagogue. They had been persecuted because of their
adherence to righteousness i.e. to the Messianic torah of Jesus rather than to the mosaic
torah.
After the beatitudes Matthew records the authentic wisdom sayings of Jesus which were
originally addressed to Jesus’ disciples. They relate the new righteousness to the torah
(Mtt 5:17 – 48). These sayings were re-applied by Matthew to his church under
persecution. e.g. (The community as the salt and light). The church is a contrast society,
distinctive from the surrounding world, including the synagogue. Its role is to show forth
what it is by its good work. These good works are not its own achievement, for they will
lead the world to praise not the church but the heavenly father. For the way of
righteousness is both taught and made possible by Jesus.
The antitheses Mtt 5: 17 –48

“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, I have come not to
abolish them but to fulfill them” (v17).
This unit serves as Matthew’s introduction to the antitheses. It forms one of the most
difficult yet most important passages in Matthew and one whose meaning is most
disputed among interpreters. A simplified explanation of this text is that Matthew made a
re-interpretation of the torah in the light of the realities of the composition of his church.
Jewish Christians in Palestine perhaps loved to continue observing the torah e.g. on
circumcision and Sabbath laws, but their counterparts, the gentiles and other Hellenistic
in the same church could not be forced to observe Jewish traditions and customs.
Therefore a reinterpretation of the torah would focus and emphasize on love for another
and tolerance towards gentiles. Matthew’s church would have implemented this in the
spirit of the better righteousness of the antitheses, the golden rule and the double
commandment of love.
There are six antitheses. They all have the following form: First, the thesis, which is a
citation from the old torah “You have heard that it was said you shall not kill.” Second,
the antithesis proper, which is a radical reinterpretation of the torah, “but I say to you
……….” Third, a specific illustration of the radical command, often in picturesque
imageries e.g. “If your right eye causes you to sin pluck it out…………….” The first

Page 131
antitheses was on murder (5: 21 – 26) Jesus radicalised the sixth commandment to
include the prohibition of anger. Matthew adds two illustrations that give a positive force
to this prohibition: believers must strive to be reconciled with their fellow believers so
that the church may be a community of love. This was very relevant in a church where
long-standing Jewish Christians and recent gentile converts were trying to settle down in
a single community. In this antitheses Matthew had in mind relationships within the
Christian community. In the sixth and final antitheses, he will be concerned with the
relationship between Christians and the outside world.
The second antithesis was on adultery. Jesus radicalised the seventh commandment to
include the prohibition of the lustful glance. Matthew adds the extreme injunction “to
pluck out the eye”, as advise in carrying out Jesus’ radical command. He does not mean it
literally. It is only a figurative expression for drastic action to avoid situations where
temptation is likely. Matthew’s basic concern here is to protect the marriages in the
church and also Matthew gives recognition to women a thing that was missing from the
rabbis, who recognized women as objects of male gratification.
The third antithesis was on divorce. This antitheses is tacked on to the one on adultery.
It appears to abolish rather than radicalize the torah, “But I say to you that every one who
divorces his wife, except on grounds of unchastity, makes her an adulteress; and whoever
married a divorced woman commits adultery.” (5:32). Paul also knows of Jesus’
prohibition of divorce in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11. It has been suggested that sexual
immorality here refers to unions with kin which was forbidden by the torah or unions
contracted by pagans prior to their conversion. This would accord with the situation of
Matthew’s church, for such previous pagan marriages would be a problem in a Jewish
church open to gentile mission.
The fourth antithesis is on “oaths”. The prohibition is first stated in general terms “You
shall not swear falsely” and four specific oaths are mentioned concluding with a positive
injunction to tell the truth in all circumstances without involving the sanction of an oath.
“Do not swear at all either by heaven or by the earth or by Jerusalem……..”
The fifth antithesis is on retaliation. The old Torah injunction was not intended to
encourage revenge but to restrict it: only an eye, not a life. Once again, the general
injunction is followed by three specific examples (cf Exod 21: 24; Lev 24: 20; Deutr
19:21).
The sixth antithesis is on love of the enemy. This last antithesis forms a climax to the
series. Here above all the better righteousness is expressed. The command itself is from
Q, but Matthew has reformulated it as an antithesis to Leviticus 19:18. The saying is
substantially authentic to Jesus. However, the command to hate the enemy occurs
nowhere in the torah, so Matthew must have a later Jewish interpretation in view.
Matthew is perhaps inferring from the behaviour of the synagogue toward his church that
such teaching was current there too. Matthew has altered the wording of the injunction to
pray for “those who persecute you”. This shows that Matthew has in mind not personal

Page 132
enemies but of the church, whether Jewish or gentile who were persecuting Christians for
their faith.
The deeds of righteousness Mtt 6 : 1-18
Reginald Fuller says that the synagogue across the street had its own list of deeds of
righteousness i.e. alms’ giving prayer and fasting. Matthew provides his community with
the same list, but in each case the pious deed is radicalized. This makes the deeds of
righteousness in Matthew a revised version to suit Matthew’s needs. For Matthew, the
better righteousness includes not only a radicalization of the decalogue and the holiness
code, but also of the Jewish rules of piety that go beyond the torah.
On almsgiving (6:2-4) all three rules are radicalized in contrast to the behaviour of the
hypocrites i.e. the synagogue across the street.
On prayer: Jesus here had private prayer in view. But he did not exclude public or
corporate prayer as shown in Mtt 18: 19. In Judaism, prayer was closely connected with
almsgiving.
On fasting, R. Fuller says that prayer and fasting often went together in Jewish practice.
Fasting added force to the prayer and made it more urgent.
On the sayings on treasures, anxiety and judging Jesus was not addressing humanity in
general or even Israel in particular but his disciples, those who had accepted his message
of the coming reign of God. They are to renounce their earthly callings and possessions to
follow him and proclaim his message. Theirs was to be the radical obedience of itinerant
charismatic preachers. Without losing their primary meaning they had for Jesus the
injunctions are now treated as conventional wisdom teaching about riches. You do not
gain anything by being anxious. Of course Matthean Christians did not have to give up
their possessions, but they were to get their priorities straight, “But seek first God’s
kingdom…..” (6:33). Verse 30 notes that the Jesus of Matthew was addressing those of
little faith, “O men of little faith,” This was a favourite designation for Matthew’s church.
A puny faith has many consequences; one is that it leads people to trust in uncertain
riches and therefore makes them prone to anxiety.
The conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount consists of four units. Each unit features a
contrast: broad versus narrow gate (7:13 –14); good versus bad fruit (15 – 20);
lawlessness versus righteousness; house on rock versus house on sand. Choices made
right will determine believers fate at the end.
The practical ministry
Miracle Stories
The term “miracle stories” is used to refer to the healings and nature miracles that Jesus
performed. Modern scholars call these acts “messianic deeds”. When Jesus performed
these acts, the motive could be two-fold (1) may be to demonstrate his authority, and
(2) may be to show the human purpose of the messiah, that the messiah was championing

Page 133
salvation for men. For Matthew the purpose could be to strengthen the believers in faith;
that the Lord Jesus Christ whom they had received was a mighty God ushering salvation
to those in faith.
Apparently these messianic deeds formed the basis for the conflict between Jesus and the
Jewish authorities. The healings were conducted on outcasts. The nature miracles were
carried out with a claim for messianic powers. Jewish authorities who had the conception
of a pure Messiah found it difficult to accept a figure who was interacting with sinners
and outcasts. Consequently they viewed Jesus as a self-proclaimed Messiah, hence a
blasphemer.
The most notable miracle stories in Matthew are:

(1) The healing of the leper (Mtt 8)
(2) Healing of the Gadarene demoniac (V28)
(3) Healing of The Paralytic Man (Mtt 9)
(4) Healing of the two blind men (V27)
(5) Healing of Peter’s mother-in-law
(6) Calming the storm (Mtt8 : 23-27)
(7) The withered figtree (Mtt21: 18)
These leading stories manifest some exceptional powers of Jesus. In all cases the
miraculous act recedes into the background and everything is concentrated on the
declaration of faith and the remission of sins. On the latter declaration the Pharisees
found him guilty of the charge of blasphemy, “This man is blaspheming” (9:3).
According to Reginald Fuller, two of these miracle stories are deemed important. These
will be used to comment on the significance of the miracle stories for Matthew. The
stilling of the storm (8: 23-27) and the healing of the paralytic (9: 1 – 8) are put under
focus. On calming of the storm, Reginald Fuller renders the following interpretation: The
journey across the sea is a parable for the discipleship. The “little boat” is a symbol for
the church , as early church fathers often put it. The storm that is described in apocalyptic
terms as an earthquake becomes a symbol for the tribulations of Matthew’s community
e.g. its expulsion from the synagogue, the trauma of the admission of gentiles, and the
persecution by the Roman authorities. In the face of these tribulations Matthew’s church
was not strong enough hence Matthew quotes Jesus rebuking the disciples for their puny
or little faith. This symbolizes Matthew’s church, which confesses Jesus as the son of
God.
A concluding observation on these two miracle stories is a point of Matthew’s: editing

that Jesus’ authority to remit sins devolves upon the church as is clearly expressed in Mtt
18:18, “Truly, I say to you, whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven”.
The parable discourses in Matthew
Matthew follows Mark’s parables in Mark 4: 1- 34. Matthew uses these parables for his
editorial purpose. (Please refer to Mtt 13 in the Bible)

Page 134
For Matthew as well as for Luke what is at stake in the parables is not the messiahship of
Jesus, but the revealed truths about God’s purpose in salvation history. For Matthew
these apparent truths are: judgment for Israel now, salvation for the gentiles now and
judgment of the lawless members of the church at the end. The lawless members within
the church are the false prophets i.e. those condemned in the allegorical interpretation to
the parable of the wheat and the tares (Mtt13: 24). There were doubtless people in
Matthew’s community who were opposed to the mission to the gentiles and people who
wanted to oust from the church those gentiles who wanted to abandon the torah
altogether. For Matthew, the Jew and the gentile Christian should be allowed to grow
together until harvest time i.e. the final judgment. Meanwhile, Matthew’s church should
remain a mixed body of wheat (those who live up to the better righteousness) and tares
(those who fall short). Reginald Fuller comments that in chapter 13 the Evangelist is
acting as a scribe trained for God’s reign, “Therefore every scribe who has been trained
for the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out is his treasure what is
new and what is old” (13:52). He brings out of his cupboard new things (i.e. the
Matthean redaction and old things (i.e. the Jesus parables as told by himself and as
preserved in the tradition).
Finally, on a comparative note, it is noted that Matthew portrays differently the disciples
from Mark. In Mark they constantly showed misunderstanding of Jesus whereas in
Matthew they understand all the parables without difficulty (13:51). Similarly Matthew
expects his church will be able to comprehend God’s purpose in salvation history once
they have been explained to them, whereas it is the synagogue that will be blinded.
The ministry in Jerusalem
Matthew portrays the Jerusalem ministry as Jesus’ final confrontation with torah – Israel
and its final judgment. The Jerusalem ministry is marked by the popular triumphal entry.
The event reports Jesus arriving in Jerusalem riding on an ass amidst cheers. The event
draws parallels with “the meek king” (Zech 9:9) who comes riding an ass and a colt. An
ass and a colt is the progeny of a beast of burden. This sets Mathew’s keynote of the
passion: Jesus suffers as the meek and humble king.
The parabolic teachings on the wicked tenants and the great supper are both allegories of
salvation history. The earlier servants stand for the Old Testament prophets and the Son
is equated with Jesus as the last of God’s emissaries. The host of the dinner party
becomes a King (i.e. God); the dinner a marriage feast for the king’s son, represents the
messianic banquet.
The parable of the man without a wedding garment should also be taken allegorically.
The poor man could hardly have been expected to have a wedding garment if he had just
been extracted off the street. G.E.P. Cox says that the man represents those gentiles who
have joined Matthew’s church as a result of its mission, and it is a protest against their
admission on too easy terms. Some of them were sitting loose to the requirements of the

Page 135
torah and the wedding garment represents the better righteousness that is expected of all,
even gentile Christians.
The discourse against the Scribes and Pharisees Mtt 23
The text rails against the Pharisees and scribes “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees…”
Some commentators treat this discourse as part of the final apocalyptic discourse that
runs through the end of chapter 25. This denunciation of the Pharisees makes painful
reading in the post - holocaust era. It is difficult to determine how much of it belongs to
Jesus and how much of it could be the sentiments of the post-Jamnia Matthean
community. In the final analysis of the discourse, Matthew is not anti-torah. He
expressly recognizes the mosaic authority of the scribes (28:2) and urges his church to
obey their teaching. In accusing the scribes of saying and not doing he evidently means
they do not in their behaviour obey the radically interpreted torah as enunciated by Jesus
in the Sermon on the Mount. To put it succinctly, they do not carry out the radical
commandment of love.
The passion and resurrection
The following accounts in Matthew constitute the so-called Passion narratives:

The anointing at Bethany
The Last Supper
The Gethsemane agony
The Violent arrest
The trial of Jesus
The Crucifixion
Basically these passion stories relate the sorrowful events preceding the death of Jesus. It
is interesting to note that Matthew recognizes that it was the high priest and elders, not
the Pharisees, who were the chief instigators of Jesus’ arrest. While his anti-Pharisaic
concern led Matthew to exaggerate the polemic against them, he did not falsify history
and make the Pharisees responsible for the crucifixion. It is noted that in the arrest of
Jesus, Matthew drops the scribes from the contingent that came to arrest Jesus, thus
showing once again his respect for past history as distinct from present controversies,
“While he was still speaking, Judas came, one of the twelve, and with him a great crowd
with swords and clubs, from the chief priests and the elders of the people.” (Mtt 26: 47)
In all events of the passion, as Fuller puts it, Jesus is showing that he is in charge of the
situation e.g. in 26:50 he orders Judas to do what he had come for. In verse 52 he orders
the unnamed disciple to put his sword away and in 26:18 also.
The crucifixion story posses a few interesting points. The first point is that in the account
of the mockery at the cross, Matthew quotes Psalm 22:8 together with the explanation
“for he said he was the son of God.” This recalls the temptation story in Mtt 4: 3; 6, and
so presents the crucifixion as Jesus’ last temptation.

Page 136
The second point is that at the death of Jesus “those with him” join the centurion in
declaring that Jesus was God’s son (v54). This was not a confession of faith on the part of
the Gentile world as in Mark but, as Matthew explains, an expression of fear at the
earthquake and its accompanying phenomena.
In addition to these editorial modifications Matthew inserts some six major insertions into
the passion narrative. The first insert occurs at the arrest 26 : 52-54. When the unnamed
disciple took up the sword to resist , Jesus told him to put it back in its’ sheath. Then
comes an important saying of Jesus which is only attested in Matthew, “……..for all
who take the sword will perish by the sword” (v52). This remarkable passage portrays
Jesus as living out the demands of the Sermon on the Mount (of 5:39) “but I say to you,
do not resist one who is evil”.
The second insert is in 27: 3-10. It concerns the suicide of Judas, a variant of the story
found in Acts 1:18-19,“Now this man bought a field with the reward of his
wickedness…..” This is a legendary explanation of the name of Akeldama (Field of
Blood). Matthew wishes to emphasize that Judas’ end was a self-inflicted judgment.
The third insert involves Pilate’s wife. She came into the court and warned her husband
not to have anything to do “with that innocent man”, and told him of a bad dream she had
had about Jesus. As already seen in the birth narratives, Matthew regarded dreams as a
mode of divine revelation. This insert means that for the Evangelist the doctrine of Jesus’
sinlessness was not a human assessment but a matter of divine revelation.
The fourth insert is the scene in which Pilate washed his hands (27: 24 – 25) and portrays
his innocence of Jesus’ death. This episode is a further attempt by Matthew to shift the
blame for the death of Jesus upon Torah – Israel. (the Holy people of God).
The fifth insertion occurred at the moment of Jesus’ death. There was an earthquake,
rocks were split, graves were opened and many saints were raised bodily. This is a
strange story. One wonders what the resurrected saints were doing between Good Friday
and Easter. Reginald Fuller , as well as Willie Marxsen and G.E.P. Cox observe that this
story flatly contradicts Paul’s teaching that other resurrections will occur only at the
Parousia (1 Cor 15 : 23). To understand it one must recall that in apocalyptic expectation
the resurrection hoped for was a general one. It upset apocalyptic calculations when only
one person, Jesus, was resurrected at Easter. This legend was evidently designed to stress
the fact that the resurrection is essentially a corporate event and that the resurrection of
Jesus is the cause of all other resurrections, since his resurrection was the victory over
death.
The sixth insert is the story of the guard at the tomb. It is dispersed into three separate
installments: first the posting of the guard at the request of the high priests and Pharisees;
second, a series of remarkable events witnessed by the guards on the Sunday morning,
i.e. the earthquake and the appearance of an angel which left the guard convulsed with
fear as dead men; third, the conclusion in which some members of the guard report their

Page 137
experience to the high priests, who bribe them to say that Jesus’ disciples had stolen the
body while the guards were asleep. There are a number of problems with this story. It is
unlikely that the Jewish religious authorities would have gone to see Pilate during the
Passover Sabbath. The reference to Jesus as an “Impostor” seems to presuppose the
church’s post – easter proclamation and Israel’s rejection of it. The claim that Jesus had
foretold his resurrection presupposes the development of the passion/ resurrection
predictions as “prophecies after the event.” The request for the tomb to be sealed till the
third day presupposes the Church’s Easter message and the connection of the “third day”
with the empty tomb. And the resurrection is treated as an observable event rather than as
a revelatory encounter to the Pharisees’ involvement in the plot, and the statement that
the slanderous story was current among the Jews until Matthew’s day, betrays its origin:
it is an apologetic legend designed to counter the Torah-Israel’s slander about the origin
of the Easter faith.
The last important aspect of the resurrection narratives in Matthew is the great
commission in 28: 16 – 20, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit…..” (v 19).In one way this
charge strikes the universal nature of Matthew and further stresses the point against the
synagogue that opposed the inclusion of Gentiles. Matthew’s new righteousness rests on
the doctrine of love and brotherhood in Christ through the implementation of the last
great communion of the Lord.
Concluding remarks
The following important aspects have been left out in this book because examiners may
not raise examination questions on them basing on the book of Matthew only. They can
only be examinable in a comparative way i.e. to say, looking at them as they are
presented in the 4 Gospels. These aspects are (1) The transfiguration (2) The baptism
and temptations (3) The great confession and (4) The Baptist movement.
1. Who wrote the gospel of Matthew and why?

2. “Matthew is mainly writing for the Jews.” How justified is this statement.
3. On what important points did Jesus conflict with the Jewish authorities?
4. Examine the crucifixion and post resurrection stories in Matthew.
Gobbets: Write explanatory comments on the following:

a) “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make
straight his path.” (Matthew 3:3)
b) “Are you who is to come, or shall we look for another.” And Jesus answered them, “
Go and tell John what you hear and see ---- “ (Matthew 11:3-4)
c) And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his
garments became light like snow. And behold, there appeared to them Moses and
Elijah talking to him. (Matthew 17:2-3)

Page 138
d) “And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom and the
earth shook, and rocks were split and tombs were opened and many bodies of the
saints who had fallen asleep were raised…” (Matthew 27:52-5)
e) “Think not I have come to abolish the law and the prophets, I have not come to
abolish them but to fulfill them”. (Matt 5: 17)
f) “Teacher we wish to see a sign from you”. (Matt 12:38).
References for previous topics
1. Dibelius, M, From Tradition to Gospel , (1935)

2. Fuller R.H, Article in the Harper’s Bible Commentary 1988
3. Kummel W. G Introduction to the new testament, (1975)
4. Marxsen W. Article in Peakes’ Bible Commentary
5. Meier J.P. The vision of Matthew: Christ Church and Morality in the Gospel of
Matthew, Paulist Press, 1983.
6. Peterson N.R. Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, 1988
7. Stanton G, The interpretation of Matthew. Issues in Religion and Theology, 1983

Page 139
CHAPTER 11
THE BOOK OF MARK
1. Discuss the authorship and the theological motives of Mark.

2. Explain why the gospel of Mark can be viewed as “an action gospel”
3. Discuss the themes of the humanity of Jesus and the messianic secret in Mark
4. Examine the resurrection stories in Mark
Background Issues:
(1) Authorship
(2) Setting
(3) Date
(4) Purpose
Introduction
The gospel of Mark is the shortest of all the gospels. It is generally thought to be the
earliest gospel. Matthew and Luke are said to have used Mark as their source. Mark alone
is explicitly called a “gospel”. This term is used in second Isaiah 40:9 to mean the good
works of God’s saving action. In Greek the term “gospel” means the good news of the
significant event e.g. the birth of an emperor that is announced by an emissary. Therefore
in Mark the term “gospel” refers to the proclamation of the Christ event i.e. the
significance that the person, life, ministry, passion, death, resurrection and ascension of
Jesus of Nazareth had and still has for human history and existence.
This module will focus on the incorporation of historical recollections material and oral
tradition material along with editorial additions into the literary and theological
composition of Mark. It seeks to show how Mark’s kergymatic narrative confronts its
hearers with that same challenge and offer of grace that Jesus offered to his original
hearers.

Page 140
Who wrote the book of Mark and where?
Professor John R. Donahue says that like other gospels, the text of Mark does not identify
its author. But early church tradition or early church fathers (beginning with Papias)
attributed the book to Mark a companion of Peter in Rome (1 Pet 5:13) who is then
identified with John Mark of Acts 12:12, and Mark of Philemon 24; Colossians 4:10 and
2 Timothy 4:11. This attribution only has its justification in the apologetic desire to
associate a non-Apostolic Gospel with the Apostle Peter; and also by the frequency of the
name “Mark” in the Roman empire, and by the ancient tendency to attribute works to
important figures from the past.
Church history and patristic writers i.e. the early church fathers, and certain internal
evidence set the final composition of the gospel at Rome sometime after the death of
Peter during the Neronean persecution in AD 64. In recent exegesis Mark has been set at
or located in Galilee or southern Syria. This opinion is based on the stress in Mark on
Galilee as the place of the first and expected revelation of Jesus, along with its strong
Palestinian colouring.
Some scholars feel that some internal evidence from the gospel offer clues to its situation
and audience. An example of such evidence is associated with Mark 13. This chapter is
often described as an apocalyptic discourse given in the form of predictions given in the
past. It is assumed that this cryptically depicts upheavals in the lives of the readers. The
civil disturbances and the intensity of the persecution described in 13:7-13, may reflect
both Nero’s persecution in AD 64 and the Jewish war of AD 66 – 70.
The large numbers of Latinisms (Greek terms) suggest a setting where both Latin and
Greek were used. The teaching on divorce reflects Roman law (10: 10-12) and the
widow’s offering in 12: 42, is explained in terms of Roman currency. The community
included large numbers of Jews. Familiarity with Jewish scriptures is presumed and
explicit citations and allusions to them are frequent. They are the authoritative revelation
of God, and the core of Jesus’ teaching as a summary from the Old Testament (12: 28 –
34). Jewish customs are explained (7: 3-4) Aramaic phrases are translated and details of
Palestinian geography are vague (6: 47 – 7:37). The gospel contains strong attacks on
Jewish laws and institutions (7:1 –23; 11: 15-19) and implies a mission to the gentiles,
“….. my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations?”(11:17).
Most likely the audience comprised of Jews and gentile converts living outside of
Palestine, who were breaking away from traditional Jewish observances. The audience is
also most likely of lower socio-economic status. The language is not clear Greek but that
of ordinary people with occasional Semitic influence. The rich and those who hold senior
positions of power are suspect. Ordinary items such as the pallet and the basket are
associated with the poor. (6:43). Though one cannot establish with certainty in these
evidences, it s reasonable to conclude that the book was written for a Jewish-Christian
community at Rome shortly after AD 70.

Page 141
Why was the book written?
Purpose and theological motives

Mark writes to present his understanding of Jesus. This is called the Christology of Jesus,
the humanity of Jesus, “the good news of Jesus, Messiah, Son of God” (1:1) Mark’s
purpose is not to prove this statement, but to unfold its implications for faith and
discipleship. The Christological titles in Mark present important implications of Mark’s
understanding of Jesus. These are: (1) The Christ (2) Son of God and (3) Son of Man.
The Christ means Messiah. In the Bible this is used mainly for anointed Royal figures
and associated with Israel’s hope for a king who would restore David’s rule. Son of God,
according to Donahue, does not imply divine nature, but principally a special relationship
to God, e.g. in Job 38:7 angelic beings and righteous people are described as sons of God.
Son of man: This enigmatic phrase means “human being” in Aramaic. It derives from
Daniel 7: 13-27, where it described the granting of power, honor, and glory in the
heavenly sphere to one like a son of man who has suffered persecution and who is
identified with the saints of the most high. It suggests an individual who also is
representative of a larger group. Jesus, as Son of man possesses power on earth; will
suffer, die and be raised up. At his return as Son of Man, God will save the elect and
punish the wicked.
Mark reinterprets these titles and uses them to shape his Christology. Jesus is Son of God
not simply as a figure of power but as the obedient Son who suffers, dies and is
vindicated by God. The title “Son of Man”, particularly underscores the vulnerability of
Jesus as well as that humanity he shares with others. It establishes rapport with readers
and gives proper understanding to Son of God.
Professor L.W. Hurtado summarized the humanity of Jesus in very precise terms: He says
that this same Jesus who is addressed as beloved Son” by a voice from heaven (1:11, 9:7)
is also very human in Mark. He shows strong emotions such as pity (1:4); violent
displeasure (1:43) anger (3:5) , and is moved at the suffering of others who are like sheep
without a shepherd (6:34). Like the Old Testament prophets, Jesus proclaims the need for
conversion and manifests God’s will through symbolic activity. Like them, Jesus
embodies the compassion of God. (Mk6:34) especially for those who are suffering on the
margin of society – lepers, tax collectors and gentiles.
The messianic secret

Mark uses the amazing messianic secret to convey a proper understanding of Jesus’ life.
When demons acclaim him Son of God, he silenced them. At other times Jesus tells
people who have experienced his power to remain silent. The purpose of this is two-fold:
first, knowledge of Jesus’ identity comes from superhuman power, ether that of the
heavens (1:11; 9:7) or of the demons. Second, proper confession of Jesus’ identity should
not be made on the bass of the miracles, but only after following him to the cross. The
first human figure n Mark who correctly addresses Jesus as Son of God is the Centurion,
who at the moment of Jesus’ death declared that “Truly this man was the Son of God”
(15:39).

Page 142
Discipleship in Mark
While the gospel of Mark is the story of Jesus, it is also the story of response to the call
of Jesus. The disciples in Mark combine negative and positive traits. When Jesus calls,
they follow immediately and they are summoned to be with him and to do the things he
does: teach, heal and cast out demons. Jesus teaches them privately, gives them the
mystery of the kingdom (4:10-12) rescues then and makes them privileged witnesses to
his power. The picture of the disciples is also one of growing estrangement from Jesus.
John Donahue alleges that in the first part of the gospel they misunderstood his miracles
and teachings e.g. 4:40. In the central section, each time Jesus states that it is God’s will
that he suffer and die, they misunderstood this (8: 32-33). Twice they bickered over rank
and prestige (9:33) and at 10:32 – 45. During the passion narrative though they share a
final meal with him, one disciple betrays him (Judas Ischariot); others sleep during his
greatest agony (14: 32 - 42); all flee when he is arrested; and Peter denies ever knowing
him.
This double-sided portrait of the disciples has spawned heated debate among exegetes.
Some argue that they represent those in the community, who, fascinated by a theology of
power, price themselves in their spiritual gifts. The failure of the disciples is seen as a
warning that a theology of the cross, a triumphalist theology of glory can only end in
denial and betrayal. Moderate scholars suggest that the failure of the disciples encourages
those in Mark’s community who have failed in the face of persecution. Though Peter
denied the Lord, the early church knew him as a recipient of a resurrection appearance
and as a great missionary. Kelber and Weeden remarked that Jesus, who conquered death
and empowered Peter to become a witness and a martyr , can conquer the weakness and
betrayal of his followers.
The Prologue in Mark 1: 1-13
The prologue in Mark announces the beginning of the good news. The prologue sets the
stage for the public ministry of Jesus and introduces the major themes of the gospel. The
superscription (1:1) announces “the beginning of the gospel”. “Beginning”, implies not
simply the start of the narrative, but that its total message is the foundation of that gospel
that continues to be proclaimed in Mark’s own time; and establishes the continuity of
saving history: the gospel fulfills God’s promises.
The Miracles of Jesus in Mark
Miracles occupy about a third of Mark’s work. Mark describes the miracles of Jesus as
mighty works, not signs that authenticate the ministry of Jesus. To be more accurate these
miracles can better be called symbols of the power of God manifest in Jesus. This power
is stronger than the forces of evil and illness and responds to the needs of suffering
people. The miracles in Mark comprise four groupings viz. (1) healings (2) exorcisms
(3) nature miracles (4) one resuscitation. The different groups have similar formal

Page 143
characteristics, which argue for oral retelling prior to Mark. Mark incorporates these
stories for a variety of reasons:
(1) to show Jesus as a prophet mighty in word and deed (6 : 1-6)
(2) to exalt him above other claimants to divine power
(3) to evoke wonder and awe in God’s power.
Most of the miracles are placed prior to the first passion prediction (8:31 – 32) and the
beginning of Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. This is done to subject them to the narrative
paradox of this gospel - Jesus the powerful one submits to God’s will in becoming the
powerless victim who is raised up by God. The resurrection story is the ultimate work of
power in Mark.
Parables and mighty works
The section on parables continues the theme of Jesus as powerful in word and deed, but
with escalating opposition. Mark concludes the public manifestation of Jesus with two
vignettes about two groups that have misunderstood the mighty works of Jesus
throughout his ministry. In 8:11-12 the Pharisees ask for a sign from heaven i.e. some
convincing mark of divine approval. They are the opposite of those who approached
Jesus simply with faith. Deeply affected by such a request, Jesus rejects their attitude
saying that no sign will be given to this generation. John Donahue comments that Jesus
used these parables both to proclaim and to defend his mission. They challenge the
hearers to see themselves and God’s action in a new light. The exorcisms of Jesus are the
plundering of the house of Satan and the binding of the power of evil, by the one who
emerged in the initial sections of the gospel as the “stronger one” (1:7).
The passion in Mark
The passion account comprised of details from the arrest; trial and crucifixion of Jesus.
These accounts were never narrated purely for historical purposes. Theological concerns
perhaps shaped up the accounts. First, apologetic concerns show that Jesus was innocent
of the charges against him and it was willed by God and predicted in scripture that Jesus
should suffer; second stereological concerns say his death was ransom for many bringing
salvation to those who, through faith accept it as an offer of God’s mercy. Third,
christological concerns say Jesus’ true nature is revealed during the passion.
Please see textual details of the passion accounts should be obtained from the Bible itself.
The trials of Jesus shall be treated on a comparative approach for all the Gospels.
Therefore no commentary is given for them in the module on Mark.
The resurrection : commentary and interpretation

The whole issue lingers on the “empty tomb”. The narrative of the empty tomb does not
provide for Mark a proof of the resurrection. Mark rejects any sign that would facilitate
belief (8:12; 15:32). Scholars say that in the biblical world the tomb is the anteroom to
the realm of the dead. The empty tomb is a symbol that by the resurrection of Jesus’
death has been emptied of its power. The message of the young man actually directs the
attention away from the tomb, “He is not here”, and to the proclamation “he is risen”.
Christian faith rests on the proclamation, not the empty tomb.

Page 144
The reaction of the women, their failure to deliver the message to the disciples and the
absence of a resurrection appearance pose many problems. Some interpret it as a final
rejection of those disciples who fled and argue that even the faithful women disciples
ultimately fail. This interpretation does not do justice to the force of Jesus’ promise in Mk
14:27 and to Mark’s view that Jesus is the true prophet whose words will achieve their
effect. By the abrupt ending Mark also leaves his readers with a radical challenge to their
faith. Belief, conversion, and discipleship do not really rest on resurrection appearances,
but the word of promise, the victory over death at that very moment when death seemed
sovereign.
Examinations type questions
1. Who wrote the gospel according to Mark and why?

2. “Mark wants to portray Jesus as a human being.” How justified is this statement.
3. “Mark is at pains to show the authority of Jesus.” How does he portray this
4. Discuss the theme of the messianic secret in Mark.
Gobbets on Mark
Write explanatory comments on the following:
a) “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” (Mark 1:1)
b) And when his family heard it, they went out to seize him, for people were saying “he is
beside himself’ (Mark 3:21).
c) For the Son of Man also came not to be serve but to serve, and to give his life as a
ransom for many.” (Mark 10:45).
d) “And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come
upon them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” (Mark 16:8).
e) “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” (MK 1:1)
f) “And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come
upon them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.” (MK 16:8).
References
(1) Donahue John R., Article in Harper’s Bible commentary (1988)
(2) Hurtado L.W, Mark. A good news commentary (1983)
(3) Marxsen W Mark the Evangelist (1969)

Page 145
CHAPTER 12
THE GOSPEL OF LUKE
1. Discuss the background issues to the gospel of Luke

2. Identify the main themes in gospel of Luke
3. Identify and discuss the birth stories according to Luke
4. Discuss the parables in Luke
5. Discuss the miracle stories in the gospel of Luke
6. Examine the passion stories in Luke
7. Examine the resurrection stories in Luke
Brief history of the book of Luke
Major Characteristics
This brief history will focus on the important aspects of the gospel that are relevant to the
needs of ‘A’ Level candidates. Therefore this historical account will focus on the
significance of Luke for the New Testament and the church. Among all the gospels, the
gospel according to Luke is unique in that it has a sequel, the Acts of the Apostles. This
means that Luke and Acts belong to the same author. Craddock F.B says Luke-Acts is
the largest contribution by a single writer in the New Testament.
Luke is a major contributor to the church’s understanding of its relationship to Judaism.

The issue of continuity or discontinuity was a critical one for the followers of Jesus.
Among others, Paul, Matthew, John and the author of Hebrews, are all preoccupied with
the question of continuity, in different ways. Luke’s accent is more on continuity than
discontinuity. The Hebrew scriptures, Jerusalem, the temple and the synagogue figure
prominently and positively in the life of Jesus in Luke and Acts’ accounts of the church.
True, that many Jews rejected Jesus and his message, but Luke-Acts make it clear that
God was keeping and fulfilling promises made to Abraham and his descendants.
Luke alone in the New Testament joins historically rather than simply theologically the
ministry of Jesus and the birth and spread of the church. According to Luke, God is not
only the God of Israel and the church, but also of Adam, of all creation, and of all the

Page 146
nations. Luke, therefore wrote not only of Jesus and the twelve, but also of Augustus,
Tiberius and Gallio, not only Bethlehem and Jerusalem, but also of Athens and Rome.
Luke’s definition of the term “gospel” is “repentance and forgiveness of sins should be
preached in his name to all nations.” This theme occurs more frequently in Luke than in
any other gospel writer. This is the message to Israel and to all nations. The cross is not a
prominent feature in Luke. What is important to Luke is that what happened to Christ was
exactly what had been prophesied in the Law, the prophets and the Psalms. In other
words, God’s will was, and is being realized, even in Jesus’ passion.
In the whole New Testament, Luke is one of the three major witnesses to the presence
and activity of the Holy Spirit besides Paul and John. Luke presents frequently that Jesus’
life was characterised by the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit and prayer.
According to Luke, Jesus’ last instruction to his disciples was to wait for the gift of the
spirit before they attempt to continue his work (Luke 24:49)
Finally, the most widely known characteristic of Luke’s gospel is his attention to and
evident concern for the oppressed and marginalised persons in society. This attention to
the poor and rejected appears early in Mary’s song of praise; reappears in the favour
shown to the shepherds, and surfaces again in the social message of John the baptist (3:
10 – 14); is publicly announced by Jesus in his sermon in his home synagogue (4:16-21),
and then becomes a refrain in his teachings (14:12-14)
Who wrote Luke?
Authorship
Modern scholars say that the third gospel (Luke) is anonymous. This means that the exact
author of the book is not known. The text yields no name, neither does it provide
sufficient information from which the author’s name may be inferred. However it is
possible to sketch the general portrait of the author on the basis of the text. (1) We can
know from the gospel that the author was not an eye-witness of the ministry of Jesus but
records those things delivered to him by those who from the beginning were eye-
witnesses (Lk 1:2) (2) The writer is a student of previous accounts of Jesus’ life. (1.1)
And he assumes that readers are already informed in these matters. (3) The style of
writing indicates that the author was a person of education and taste familiar with the
methods if narrative current in that culture. The content of the gospel also reveals a
thorough knowledge of the Septuagint (LXX) i.e. a Greek translation of the Hebrew
Bible widely used in synagogues in the Hellenistic world. It is, however not clear whether
this means that the author was a convert from Hellenistic Judaism or a gentile Christian.
It is not clear also whether the “we” passages in Acts are to be regarded as evidence that
the writer was a travelling companion of Paul or simply making use of such a record by
one who was in Paul’s company. Arguments popular in the 19th century that medical
terminology in the gospel established the author as “Luke the beloved Physician” (Col.
4:14) have since been laid to rest. The tradition that the third gospel was written by
Luke, a companion of Paul (Col. 4:14; Phil. 24; 2 Tim 4:11) is at least as old as Irenaeus,

Page 147
about AD 185. At the same time when this tradition was prevailing, confirmation of this
tradition, is found in Tertullian (North Africa), Clement of Alexandra (Egypt), and in a
document from Italy called “The Muratorian Canon” that lists and comments on early
Christian writings. In recent times students of both Acts and Paul have seriously
questioned whether Luke – Acts should be the work of a companion in the presentations
of Paul and his message in Paul’s own writings and in Acts. However it has been argued
in the final analysis that the question of authorship is not so significant in understanding
the context and accepting the authority of a biblical text.
Date and place of compilation
If the prologue to Luke speaks of dependence on eyewitnesses, so the date of Luke can be
no later than the second generation of Christians i.e. Christians who emerged after the
death of Jesus. The author also says that many narratives about Jesus had been written
previously, the gospel of Mark most likely being among them. So this gospel can be no
earlier than Mark. Those who have argued to place Luke before A.D 64 just because
Luke concludes Acts with Paul still under house arrest in Rome with no account of his
death (Acts 28: 30-31) have mistaken the literary form for a historical record. The
account of Paul’s death is, in effect, implied in the farewell speech in Acts 20. Many have
reasonably argued that Luke’s record of the fall of Jerusalem, is more precise than that of
Matthew the known facts of the Roman siege and therefore Luke must be dated after A.D
70. But how much later? That Luke knew the writings of the first century historian
Josephus and therefore must have written after A.D 93 has never been satisfactorily
established. Luke was included in Marcion’s canon of Christians writings about A.D 140.
Luke seems not to have known the letter of Paul, which perhaps were circulating as early
as the end of the first Christian century. Hence most scholars settle for a time between
A.D 80 and 90.
The questions of the place of writing is even more open than that of the date. Sentiment
has selected Rome with Luke there with Paul, serving the apostle during his two years of
house arrest. The tradition from the time of Ireaneous (AD 185) is that Luke was
composed in Achaea, (Southern Greece).
Purpose and target audience
Firstly, on the target audience, it is clear from the prologue that the gospel is addressed to
a person called Theophilus or persons already informed about the subject matter to be
discussed (1:3 – 4). Presumably, then the audience is Christian, and very likely gentile
Christians, or at least predominantly so. “Theophilus” is Greek not Hebrew. The prologue
itself is traced up to Adam, unlike in Matthew. Citations from the Old Testament are
based on the Septuagint. When following one of his sources i.e. Mark, the author of Luke
omits sections dealing with issues totally internal to Judaism e.g. the issue of ritual
cleansing in Mark 7: 1-23. The conclusion is that Luke wrote for gentiles. This is also
accounted for by the substitution of Greek for Hebrew or Aramaic terms and names e.g.
“Skull” for Golgotha; “Lord or teacher” for rabbi.

Page 148
Some scholars have added to the arguments for a gentile Christian audience the fact that
both Jesus’ ministry and the mission of the church move favourably toward gentiles. This
same evidence has been used to identify the readers as Greek-speaking Jews converted to
Christianity who need to understand how a movement begun in Palestine among Jews has
moved into the gentile world and is becoming increasingly gentile in its membership. But
even if the background of the readers is not certain, it is clear that Luke assumed the
readers respect the authority of the Old Testament and have knowledge of it. (cf Lk2: 22-
40; Lk 16: 29 – 31 etc).
On the purpose of the book, it would be an error to expect to find a single intention of the
book. One would conclude from the prologue that the production of many narratives
about Jesus and his followers had proven to be confusing and therefore an orderly, well –
researched account would assure the readers. Or, perhaps the assurance Theophilus
needed was certainty that the Christianity of his day was truly rooted in the career and
teaching of Jesus. A long-standing view says that Luke was writing an apology or
defense to the Roman world that Christianity was not an insurrectionist movement but
one that deserved the respect and protection of the civic authorities.
Other scholars, taking note of the continuity Luke draws between Jesus and the law and
institutions of Judaism, identify Luke’s purpose as primarily that of answering such
questions as: if the promises of God were to Abraham (Gen. 12: 1-3) why do Jesus and
his church embrace gentiles? Has God had a change of mind? Is Israel abandoned? Did
Jesus break with his heritage? Certainly Luke gives major attention to the relationship of
Jesus and his followers to the law, Jerusalem, the synagogue, and the temple. Finally a
case could be argued that in Luke’s time, the church was becoming established in the
Roman world and aware, that it now had a history. The parousia, expected by many in the
first generation, had not occurred and the followers of Jesus needed a clear sense of their
past in order to move into the future. The proponents of this view say that Luke
responded to that need.
Sources of Luke
Scholars are in consensus that Luke used the following sources:

1. Oral sources. But such sources are most difficult for readers to identify. Information
obtained by this method is probably that information peculiar to Luke (25%). It
consists primarily of the birth stories, parables and the resurrection narratives. This
material is often referred to as L.
2. Written records: In this regard two written sources were possibly available for Luke.
These are the gospel of Mark, whose records constitute well over one third of Luke.
The other source has been called Q from the German word Quelle meaning “source”.
It refers to material common not in Mark, e.g. Lk 3: 7-9 ; Lk 4: 3-12 : 3-12 (25%).
3. The third source was the Septuagint often referred to as the LXX, which functioned
as a literary guide and model e.g. Lk 1: 5 – 2: 52 has the style and flavor of the LXX.
In Lk 1:46 – 55 , Mary sings as Hannah sang in 1 Sam 2: 1 - 10

Page 149
Commentary: Issues arising from the prologue
The prologue in Luke has no precedent in the New Testament, except its only similarity
in Lk 3: 1 – 2 and Acts 1: 1-2. The gospel of John contains a prologue, but it is a
theological summary and not at all a statement of the author about sources, research,
method, purpose and addressee.
- Luke employed the style of historians and technical writers of the time. In verse 5
(after the prologue), Luke immediately shifts to the more Semitic form writing in the
manner of Greek Old Testament for the whole of the infancy narrative.
- The prologue consists of a single sentence, balanced between an introductory clause,

(the protasis) which reads “In as much as many” (V1) and a concluding clause called
the apodosis, which reads “It seemed good to me also” (V3). Modern commentators
say that such formal writing was a show of respect for a cultured reader, in this case
Theophilus.
- The expression “most excellent”, is used later by Luke in Acts 23:26 to refer to the
Roman governor of Judea. Scholars are divided in their attempts to identify
Theophilus. Some take, the name as a symbol – the word means “friend of God”.
Others regard it as a real person, perhaps a Roman official who is informed about the
Christian faith, if not a convert. Whether, the name is a real person or not, the quality
of the writing is hardly of the type to have either its source or its destination in a
Christian community fitting the popular image of a deprived and unlettered list.
- The many narratives about Jesus that were written could have existed, but scholars
can identify only one i.e. Mark. It is not clear why Luke wished to add another.
Perhaps the many narratives had created confusion. There is no criticism of the
former accounts, but the thoroughness of Luke’s research, his recording of events
orderly and his desire to give the reader certainty in matters about which the reader
was already informed about may combine to argue that Luke found in the earlier
narratives something confusing, erroneous or incomplete.
- If the reader is a Roman official who may soon be making decisions affecting
Christians, then getting the story straight is vitally important.
- It is unclear whether the phrase “you have been informed”, (v4) means having gotten
information or having been instructed as a Christian. What is clear is that some time
has passed since the ministry of Jesus. What Jesus said and did had already , prior to
Luke become a written story passed along as a tradition i.e. “delivered”, a word that

Page 150
translates the special term for transmission but prefers not to call his work a Gospel as
does Mark. Rather Luke chooses a term more historical rather than theological: “an
Account” after making a careful research. Luke sets this account into the larger record
of world history. Luke assumes that much more time will pass before Jesus returns.
Ellis E. submits that, one does not research and write an orderly account if one is
convinced that the day of the Lord is at hand.
The birth narratives in Luke
Let us identify the so-called infancy and childhood narratives in the book of Luke. These
are:
(1) The annunciation of the birth of John the baptist
(2) The annunciation of the birth of Jesus Christ
(3) The visitation of Mary to Elizabeth
(4) The genealogy of Jesus
(5) The birth of Jesus at Bethlehem and the viewing by shepherds.
(6) The presentation in the temple, circumcision and purification of Mary
(7) The Benedictus or Nunc Dimitis.
In studying this section candidates should focus on the meaning and significance of each
narrative for Luke’s audience or Luke’s purpose. But it is important to remember that
although both Luke and Matthew have infancy narratives, these narratives represent quite
different traditions.
The first point to note is that the infancy narratives in Luke introduce many Lucan
themes, viz.: continuity with Judaism; the line of David, God’s favour on the poor and
oppressed and the importance of Jerusalem and the temple, prayer and the holy spirit. The
first story i.e. the annunciation of the birth of John perhaps highlights the importance of
the Temple and prayer, as the whole story is set in the temple with the priest Zechariah
confronting his wife’s barrenness with prayer.
The second is the annunciation of Jesus’ birth. In this story the announcement of the birth
comes not to the man as in Matthew, but to the woman. Mary is a virgin, betrothed, but
not yet married. Betrothals, as legal and binding, were usually arranged when women
were quite young. Joseph’s importance is that he is of David’s house and this provides
Jesus’ legal connection to the throne of David. Mary is portrayed as favoured of God,
deeply thoughtful, obedient, believing, worshipful and devoted to Jewish law and piety.
The visitation of Mary to Elizabeth consists of four parts: the visit itself, the inspired
speech of Elizabeth; the song of Mary and Mary’s return home. Since Mary had accepted
Gabriel’s word “behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your
word,” there is no reason to think of that word. Two women, not only kin but drawn by a
common experience, meet in an unnamed village in the hills of Judea. The old woman
and her son (Elizabeth) will end up an old era. The younger woman (Mary) and her son
will usher in the new era. The leaping in the womb of Elizabeth recalls the struggle in
Rebekah’s womb (Gen 25: 22). Mary’s song – the magnificat , which draws upon the
song of Hannah, who was promised and given a child in her old age, some scholars have

Page 151
understood the song as having originally belonged to Elizabeth rather than Mary. The
significant point of the magnificat is praise to God who acted always in justice and mercy
and will continue to do so in memory of the promise to Abraham and to his descendants
forever.
The birth of Jesus
While Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, their accounts of the
relation of the holy family to Nazareth and to Bethlehem differ. Luke says Mary and
Joseph were in Bethlehem to be registered for an imperial census and taxation. Some
scholars have agreed that Luke could be generally but not exactly correct in his historical
references. Luke’s primary aim was to place the birth in the city of David because Jesus’
continuity with the royal house of David was important for Luke’s christology i.e. his
depiction of Jesus’ identity. Jesus is born in humble conditions; the poor are the first to
discover him, and a divine message is brought to the lowly by an angel. Luke provides
through the angel a summation of his christology of Jesus: Jesus is of the house of David;
he is saviour, he is messiah and he is Lord.
A sufficient summary of the infancy narratives in Luke stresses the opinion that these
narratives highlight on the major themes in Luke’s gospel, which have been listened
before.
The practical ministry: Healing and nature miracles

Luke includes a common list of miracle stories that are found also in Matthew and Mark.
Some of these popular stories are:
(1) Healing of Peter’s mother-in-law
(2) Healing of the leper
(3) Healing of the paralytic man
(4) Healing of Jairus’ daughter
(5) Healing of the Centurion’s servant
(6) Healing of the Gerasene demoniac
(7) Calming of the storm etc
Generally, in all cases all the witnesses are amazed at the power of Jesus’ word and the
news spreads rapidly. All acts of compassion generated great popularity and acclaim for
Jesus. In these miracle stories Luke’s major themes continue to surface e.g. the common
concept that physical illness were a result of evil forces. The marginalised in society are
saved. The Gentile mission is given warrant in Jesus’ healings and exorcisms. These acts
of compassion become the basis of conflict and controversies with the synagogue
authorities.
Parables in Luke
The parables in Luke can be classified as follows:

(1) Parables of the kingdom
(2) Parables of joy

Page 152
(3) Parables on wealth.
1. Parables of the kingdom are found in both Matthew and Mark. But in each case the
meaning depends on the motives and purpose of the author. Luke has two parables of
the Kingdom i.e. the parable of the grain of mustard seed and the parable of the
leaven. (Lk13:18-21). For Luke these parables address the problem of
discouragement and despair over apparent. Lack of success. The measure of kingdom
work is in the result, not in the small and obscure beginnings.
2. The parables of joy in Luke are separated from the parables of the kingdom by some
social lessons:- the lesson for guests; the lesson for hosts and the parable of the
supper. (Lk 14: 7 -24). The lesson on the parable of the guests is that, not etiquette but
kingdom behaviour is the point. But the ego is clever and may prompt the choice of
low seats as a way to move up.
3. On the lesson for hosts it is noted that the host is caught in a cycle of self-seeking.
Hosting may be a way of putting someone in your debt, but what is the purpose of
putting those who cannot repay? In the kingdom, God is the host and who can repay
God?
- The parable of the supper (14: 15-24) assumes the custom of an invitation in advance
and an invitation at the time of the meal to those who accepted the first. It was an
important banquet competing with social and economic engagements. The parable
refers to the messianic banquet. The invitation that widens to the outskirts of the city
is probably a reference to gentiles.
- The parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin and the prodigal son are all about
joyfulness. The three parables on joyfulness were Jesus’ response to a criticism by
Pharisees and scribes that he received sinners and ate with them. The issue for Luke is
table fellowship. In the parable of the lost sheep love for the lost sheep is so strong
that the 99 are left in the wilderness while the search is on. Such seeking love takes
great risks. In the parable of the lost coin, the woman seeks diligently until she finds
it. The joy of finding cannot be contained: a celebration party is appropriate. Even
Jesus’ critics are invited to celebrate for such must be heaven’s joy over the sinners
who have come to Jesus. In the parable of the prodigal son, what the older brother
complains against is the joy that was given to the returning son. The feeling of the
older brother is, of course, let the penitent come home, but to bread and water, not
grain fed veal; to sack cloth not a new robe; to ashes not jewellery; to kneeling not
dancing. Apparently from this parable critics view forgiveness as very much like
condoning.
The Passion in Luke
The passion narratives may have been the earliest material to be circulated among the
churches. The central importance of this material is for the church’s self-understanding,
as well as its proclamation, liturgy and its instruction of new members is evident. Fred B.

Page 153
Craddock says that the passion narrative proper begins with the Passover meal and closes
with the burial of Jesus. At the last supper Jesus predicted his death and his betrayal. The
agony at Gethsemane marked its climax with a violent arrest, which was followed by the
trials and sentencing of Jesus. The final part of the passion is marked by the crucifixion
of Jesus.
The important aspect to comment on in the whole passion is probably the death of Jesus.
Luke records that when he died, the temple curtain between the holy place and the holy
of holies was split. This event could mean three things (1) that God left the temple (2) or
access to God was now open (3) or Jesus was entering God’s presence. Luke does not
have the cry of dereliction or the discussion about Elijah. Following the death, Luke
records three responses which imply that (1) in the person of the centurion Rome again
declares Jesus innocent (2) the crowds go home deeply penitent (3) acquaintances and
women from Galilee witness his death.
The resurrection
Although Luke’s account of the empty tomb is similar to Mark’s, this resurrection
narrative as a whole is unique to Luke. All the appearances of the risen Christ are in or
near Jerusalem, and they are told as occurrences of one day. Perhaps they had been so
framed for the church’s observance of easter.
The empty tomb story is repeated by Luke at chapter 24: 22-24, after the first mention at
24:1-12. This repetition, apparently suggests that the story is important to his resurrection
narrative. The key points in Luke’s story of the resurrection are: (1) Galilee was the place
of Jesus’ teaching, but is the site of resurrection appearances. Jerusalem will now be the
center both for Christ’s appearances and for the mission of the church.
(2) The women are reminded by a creedal formula of the gospel essentially repeated at
vv 26 and 46.
(3) The women are treated as disciples not as messengers to the disciples.
(4) The women do tell the eleven apostles, but also all the rest. That the apostles did not
believe the women reminds the reader what a burden resurrection puts on faith,
especially since there had not been an appearance.
1. Discuss the authorship, date and purpose of the gospel of Luke.

2. How does Luke reveal the interests in outcasts, the temple and prayer in his
gospel.
3. Jesus came to fulfill Jewish expectations.’ How valid is this statement with
reference to Luke’s gospel.
4. How valid is the view that Luke wrote for the gentiles?
5. Gobbets: Write explanatory comments on the following:

Page 154
1. “And an angel said. “ Be not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy
which will come to all people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a saviour,
who is christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:10-12)
2. “You brought me this man as one who was perverting the people, and after examining
him before you, behold, I did not find this man guilty -------“ ( Luke 23:14-15)
3.“If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what sort of woman this is
who is touching him, for she is a sinner.” (Luke 7:39).
4. When he saw them he said to them, “Go and show yourself to the priests.” (Luke
17:14).
References
1. Craddock B F– Article in the Harper’s Bible Commentary, 1988
2. Ellis E.E. – The Gospel of Luke , London, 1994
3. Fitzmyer J.A. – The Gospel According to Luke , 1981
4. Marxsen W , Introduction to the New Testament: 1969

Page 155
CHAPTER 13
THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
1. Identify the 5 main differences between John and the synoptic

2. Discuss the authorship of the gospel of John
3. Discuss the “signs” in the gospel of John
4. Compare the ministry of John the baptist according to the gospel of John and the
synoptic.
5. Discuss the prologue in John
6. Discuss the “I am” sayings in John
7. Discuss the resurrection and the post resurrection accounts in John
Introduction
The Gospel of John is significantly different from the synoptic Gospels. But it is also a
Gospel, a narrative of the ministry and message of Jesus, and as such shares certain
content and characteristics with the synoptic.
What is distinctive about John?
(1) First to note is that in John the ministry of Jesus spans a two or three year period.
Three annual Passover festivals are mentioned in John (2: 13; 6:4; 11:55) whereas
the Synoptics mention only one Passover at which Jesus met his death.
(2) According to John much of Jesus’ ministry takes place in Judea or Jerusalem
while in the Synoptics most of it was in Galilee or its environs.
(3) Places and names unknown in the synoptics play major roles in John e.g.
Nicodemus; the woman of Samaria and Lazarus. These are not mentioned
in the synoptics.
(4) Some disciples, who are only named in the Ssynoptics without any important
roles, are mentioned in John asking questions or making comments e.g. Phillip
and Thomas.
(5) Most of what is found in John is missing from the others but an exception in this
regard is the narrative of Jesus’ death, which runs parallel in all the 4 gospels.
In the synoptics the miracles of Jesus are narrated impressively, but in John they
are called “signs”, and only in John are they set forth as demonstrations of Jesus’
divine origin or mission. Their function is clearly to elicit faith in Jesus, although
to believe that Jesus performed them is not tantamount to attaining genuine faith
and understanding. These signs often lead to extensive discussions and debates

Page 156
about his identity and significance, in the synoptic on the other hand, there are, at
most, brief expressions of amazement at Jesus’ power on the power of the crowds.
In the synoptic gospels, Jesus gives ethical and religious instructions that fall within
the framework of Judaism. Although they contain debates over whether Jesus has
violated the law, it is clear that Jesus does not think his message and mission is to
abrogate the law given to Israel. In John however, Jesus speaks of “your law”
(8:17), implying that the law belongs to an alien community, namely, the Jews,
while he identifies himself with a group of disciples who have broken away to
follow him. If the fundamental question in the synoptic tradition is how one should
understand and respond to God’s will as expressed in the law, the fundamental
questions in the fourth gospel is whether one will understand and respond to Jesus
as the definitive expression of God’s will or revelation.
(6) In John, the mission of Jesus and his message revolve around his self-manifestation
and self-proclamation. The kingdom of God which is prominent in the synoptics
falls into the background as Jesus expounds and debates his own role and status.
(7) In John the sheet content of Jesus’ teaching is different; there is no Sermons on the
Mount or the Plain, no sharp questions and injunctions, and no true parables.
Who wrote John and where?
1. The Qumran and Dead Sea Scrolls showed that the religious background of John and
his thought-world showed similarities with some sectarian Jews in the holy land.
John’s kinship with Jewish thought in Palestine and beyond fits well with the view
that the book was written in Palestine. Not only this, but the scrolls also supported the
tradition that the fourth gospel was the work of John the disciple of Jesus and the son
of Zebedee. 25 years earlier than the end of the second century Bishop Irenaeus had
set this tradition.
Although John, the Son of Zebedee, has some prominence in the synoptic, he does
not appear anywhere earlier in John’s gospel until the end (Jn 21:2) and is then not
mentioned by name. This omission is sometimes regarded as reflecting John’s
modesty, and he is said to present himself under the guide of the beloved disciple,
who appears only in the fourth gospel. Yet the beloved disciple is never identified as
John despite the later church tradition that declares him to be responsible for the
gospel. The identity of the author of the fourth gospel remains a mystery, perhaps
deliberately concealed.
2. The Johannine authorship tradition that is shared by the letter of John and Revelations
was in ancient times related to Ephesus as the place of the origin of these writings.
The church of St. John and his reputed tomb, as well as other relics, tie the Johannine
literature to Ephesus, the ancient city of early christian fame. But the failure by
Ignatius to mention John when he was writing to the church at Ephesus in A.D 120
poses worry over the Ephesus venue. But Ephesus perhaps remains as good a
possibility as can be proposed for the place of origin, or publication, of the Johannine
writings. Scholars conclude that the fact that Johannine tradition originated in
Palestine or Syria need not be denied.

Page 157
John wrote to persuade followers of Jesus to abandon the synagogue and join
distinctively the Christian communities.
The prologue in John
The prologue in John propounds the doctrine of the incarnation. This prologue evokes
themes from the New Testament, and the Old Testament, as well as the history of
ancient Judaism and Christianity. The prologue falls into three parts divided by the
statements about John the Baptist. The first part deals with the cosmic, creative work
of the “Word” and the relationship of the Word to God and creation. The second part,
vv. 9-14, narrates the advent of the “Word” and the response evoked by it summarizes
this advent and begins to set forth the incarnate Word’s nature. For the first time the
author speaks confessionally, in the first person plural. In the third and final part vv.
15 – 18 the community of disciples confesses briefly and succinctly who the “Word”
is and what his advent means.
Commenting on “the Word” in creation contemporary writers such as Philo of

Alexandria (25B.C – A.D50), the great Jewish philosopher of religion, says that the
Word also becomes a semi-independent entity, mediating between God and the Word.
John’s insistence upon the word’s role in all aspects of creation (v3) also parallels the
creative role of wisdom in Old Testament and later Jewish writings. By assigning the
“word” an indispensable role in creation, John makes clear, not only that creation, is
good, but also that in this “word” creation and redemption are linked together.
Salvation fulfills, rather than negates, creation.
The word is the source of light and life for humanity (Jn1:4). With the mention of
light comes the contrast with darkness that is typical in the fourth gospel. In John,
light and darkness have metaphysical and ethical overtones. Human life is lived either
in light or darkness. Or more accurately, life means to be in the light, while to walk in
darkness is death. Thus the light struggles against the darkness but is not overcome by
it.
Jesus and Nicodemus: John 3:1-21

Comments
- Nicodemus is probably a member of the Sanhedrin council

- Like many figures in the gospel of John he is a representative of an attitude
towards Jesus.
- When Nicodemus uses the pronoun “we” it suggests that he speaks for a Judaism
that is open to Jesus; that he accepts Jesus as one sent from God.
- Jesus is indeed a teacher sent from God whose signs accredit his origin
- Jesus himself was perceived as a miracle worker, an exorcist and faith healer (cf
Mtt 11:2-6; 12:28)

Page 158
- Miracles apparently came to be expected of the promised prophet like Moses

(Deutr 18:15-22), even as Moses himself had performed signs.
- Nicodemus’ evaluation of Jesus seems to imply that Jesus is such a prophetic
figure.
- One might have assumed that Nicodemus’s acceptance of Jesus would have
elicited a positive response rather than what amounts to a sharp rebuke and
challenge.
- For the first time in John the phrase “kingdom of God” appears
- When Jesus refers to being born “a new” he meant being born again or “from
alone” But Nicodemus misinterprets him to lean physical rebirth.
- Jesus immediately makes it clear that he speaks on a different level
- Birth by water and spirit looks like an allusion to baptism, performed in water
and, in early Christian expectation accompanied by the gift of the spirit.
- The realms of the flesh and spirit must be understood with reference to Christ and
belief or participation in him.
- The flesh is the realm of unbelief or separation from knowledge of God.
- Nicodemus is called upon not to acknowledge Jesus by his old standards, but to
break away from them into the new realm
- Despite his initial positive reception of Jesus, Nicodemus is still in darkness
- Jesus’ question in verse 12 is proverbial and highlights Nicodemus ignorance. The
key to heaven which Nicodemus and his friends do not know is knowledge of
Jesus, particularly where is from and he is going.
- Mention of the Son of Man in verse 13 sets the stage for the further exposition of
Jesus’ work.
- The reference to the act of Jesus in the wilderness means that as Moses’ acts
saved the people from death by serpent bite so Jesus’ Crucifixitions have his
people from death and opens the door to everlasting life.
- In verse 15 life is made dependent upon faith and believing. The giving and
sending of the son is the expression for God’s saving purpose. He does not intend
to judge or condemn
- Rejection is tantamount to judgment for the unbeliever and is explained in terms
of light and darkness
- The explanation of why some avoid the light while others come to means that
Jesus as light only confirms a preference for light or darkness depending on
people’s previous disposition and conduct. Only in such a confrontation and
decision for o against Jesus may the true character of one’s put, as well as the
direction for the future, be seen.
Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman

Comments

Page 159
vv1-6 Jesus at Jacob’s well.

- John agrees with Luke in showing Jesus having contact with Samaritans (Lk 9:52,
10:29-37)
- In both Gospels the Samaritans are portrayed doing good.
- Probably the place called Sychar was near Shechem, directly north of Jerusalem
in Samaria
- By Hebrew time the sixth hour was noon, at midday. Jesus was tired
- This point is one of the fear occasions when Jesus showed his human quality.
VV7-15 the Conversation

- Jesus’ request to the woman of Samaria is not surprising by modern standards,
given the setting (v6) but the woman’s surprise is understandable
- There is of course no way the woman could know. Jesus as the one bringing
salvation
- The living water hear is also the running water. Jesus meant the water that brings
salvation or sulfuric water.
- The woman thinks Jesus is referring to ordinary running water
- V12 may suggest that he may be a special personality. But her question expects a
negative answer, that Jesus could not be greater than Jacob. But of course Jesus is
greater
- In verses 13-14 Jesus gives a straight forward answer that the water he gives is
radically of a different sort
- The woman begins to understand but is apparently still thinking of the quenching
of the worldly thirst
- The conversation shows a common characteristics John’s Gospel where Jesus
would speak with full authoritarian knowledge but the people respond in the
natural normal but mistaken way. Even Jesus disciples, although they are said t
believe do not fully comprehend him during his life-time (VV32-34)
VV16-26 Jesus reveals Himself.
- Jesus suddenly turns the conversation in another direction
- Understandably she takes Jesus to be a true prophet
- Her question reflects the ancient tension between Jews and Samaritans
- The mountain of the Samaritans is mount Gerizim where the Samaritan Temple
had been located before is destruction by John Hyrcanus in 128 BC.
- The question allows Jesus to contrast the old false worship, whether Jewish or
Samaritan with the new worship in sprit and truth. This actually means the
Christian worship of the God who reveals himself in Jesus who is the truth and
sends a his spirit upon his disciples after his death.

Page 160
- Jesus alludes to the hour of is death and exaltation. That the hour is coming
probably means that the hour is future from the standpoint of Jesus’ ministry and
present to the Johannine church and readers of the gospel.
- The statement of Jesus in verse 22 seems to endorse Jewish worship as more
superior over Samaritan just at the point when both are being declared no longer
relevant.
- It is unexpected of the fourth gospel to say that salvation s for the Jews, because
in this gospel Samaritans are viewed more favorably than Jews.
- Nevertheless from the perception of the Gospel it is correct in that Jesus is a Jew
and representing the Jewish Messianic hope rather than the Samaritan
- The woman’s response to Jesus in verse 25 seems to reflect Jewish Messianic
expectations But perhaps she refers not to the Davidic messiah but to a prophet
like Moses.
- The Samaritans viewed themselves as the heirs of the Northern Kingdom of Israel
in which the royal line was not descended from David.
- The self-revelation “I am” brings the scene with the woman to an end but the
episode continues.
Vv 27-30 The Women Witnesses to Samaritans

- When disciples return they are amazed because by conventions standards
conversations between a man, much less a rabii, and a woma were unusual
- The woman goes away to her people to make clear her groundsfor thinking jesus
may be the Christ.
- Because of her testimony, people of the city now come to see Jesus
VV31-38 Jesus’ Conversation with his Disciples

The disciples fail to understand the riddle of everyday possibilities or circumstances
Jesus solves the riddle by revealing the secret of his symbolic language in verse 34
“The harvest” reference to this may have two explanations as follows: First, Jesus’ own
mission is, in John’s thought closely linked to his disciples. Second, this connection now
finds expression thorough apparently traditional sayings whose referents are no longer
clear may echo Mtt 9:37and Luke 10:2.
- That the harvest is not in the future but now, is typical of John, for whom God’s
salvation is present in Jesus
- The identification of the sower and the reaper is not easy (VV36-37) If they
represent Jesus and the disciples ,as might seem obvious, the “other” who are
referred to in verse 38 is difficult to understand and. The passage can be fruitfully
read in light of Acts 8:4-25 where Philip, who was not one of the twelve, first
preaches the Gospel in Samaria. Only later do the apostles peter and John confirm
the work. If in John 4:35-58 Jesus is addressing his disciples and speaks of others
who laboured before them (v38) he may see a similar situation

Page 161
VV39-42 The Samaritans’ Belief

- Although the testimony of the woman brought many to faith the presence and
word of Jesus himself causes more to believing and makes her testimony super
flows
- That Jesus preached and made large numbers of coverts in Samaria is attested by
no other Gospel except john, and is therefore unlikely to have happened.
- Probably this brief narrative also reflects the mission of the early Johannine
Christians, who preached the Gospel in Samaria in John’s view, firsthand
experience of Jesus is not limited to his earthly or historical presence but is fully
available only after his death and exaltation. Such knowledge and experience
enables one to praise him as “Saviors of the world.” This title was used for
Roman emperors.
The signs in John (miracles)
The miracle stories in John are referred to as “the signs”. These signs are also described
as Jesus’ manifestation of god’s glory before the word. They constitute the practical or
public ministry of Jesus. The first of these was the wine miracle at Cana in Galilee. Jesus’
public ministry began at a wedding feast in Cana of Galilee with Jesus’ mother and his
disciples present. Scholars insist that the story has to be interpreted symbolically. Perhaps
some highlights are that the story has something to say about the hour of Jesus’
glorification and death. Salvation flows from the crucified, exalted Jesus. The “hour”
then suggests that saving event and that Jesus supplying wine should be understood
symbolically. Moreover, in the Christian sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, wine represents
Jesus’ blood i.e. his death. Throughout the gospel all the signs should be interpreted in
the light of the view that they were meant to be Jesus’ manifestation of God’s glory
before the world.
The passion in John
From the account of Jesus’ arrest onwards, the fourth gospel’s narrative is closely parallel
to the synoptic. Quite possibly the earliest Christians put together narratives of Jesus’
passion whether in written or oral form, that antedate all the gospels and account for the
similarities between John and the synoptic as well as the differences.
The arrest
The garden to which Jesus and his disciples retire is not named in John. It is apparently
Gethsemane. Only in John is Judas said to be familiar with the customary meeting place.
Perhaps he betrayed this knowledge to the authorities. Only in John are the Pharisees
involved in Jesus’ arrest. Their involvement is typical of their hostile role in John. In the
synoptic, Judas identifies Jesus with a kiss, but in John Jesus identifies himself. Although

Page 162
armed resistance and the cutting off of the ear of the high priests’ slave is mentioned in
every gospel, only in John are the swordsmen (Peter) and the victim (Malchus) identified
by name. Not all passion accounts are examined in this module. Only those with unique
issues are exemplified.
The piercing of his side.
The piercing causes an efflux of water and blood, which is attested by an eyewitness. The
blood and water came to have great symbolic value for Christians as signifying the
eucharist and baptism, whether or not the correct meaning was understood or intended
originally, and commentators have pointed to a seemingly related passage in 1 John 5: 6 –
8. The blood and water would thus symbolize the salvation wrought through the death of
Jesus, particularly as it was represented in the earliest sacraments.
The empty tomb and resurrection
The common factor in all accounts is that Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb early on
Sunday morning and finds it empty. In John, Mary Magdalene alone makes the
discovery; she conveys the news to Peter and the beloved disciple, who quickly go to the
tomb and confirm it. The beloved disciple, as usual, outdoes Peter by arriving first at the
tomb; he sees the discarded grave-clothes, but allow Peter to enter first and see also. The
disciples return home as Mary apparently stands outside the tomb weeping, creating the
impression that they go past her without sharing the good news. The poor transition and
lack of attestation in other gospels raises the question of whether the episode of Peter and
the beloved disciple is a later insertion into a traditional text.
Resurrection
The resurrection scene of chapter 20, culminate in a pair of appearances of the risen Lord
to his disciples on successive Sunday evenings and find a parallel in Luke 24:36 – 43. In
both the Lucan and the Johannine scenes, the risen Jesus’ demonstration of his identity
with the crucified is a dominant motif. Yet John omits Jesus’ striking demonstration of
his corporeal reality, namely, the eating of broiled fish. In John, the ascended, exalted
Jesus appears to his disciples through closed doors (20:19) and is scarcely a normal,
physical presence. Jesus appears suddenly and mysteriously. He establishes his identity
with the disciples, who are obviously convinced, sends them to continue his mission to
the world. (20: 21) and equips them with his spirit, the fulfillment of earlier promises.
This scene marks the beginning of the church as a body inspired by the spirit of Jesus and
dedicated to the spreading of the gospel (cf Acts 2).
Thomas’ skeptical reaction to the other disciples’ report of their encounter with Jesus (20:
24 – 25) sets the stage for Jesus’ next appearance and secures his own reputation as the
proverbial doubting Thomas. When Jesus reappears and offers him the proof he has been
seeking (v27) Thomas may not actually touch Jesus, although he confesses him as Lord
and God. Jesus’ invitation to Thomas to touch him probably means that he has now
ascended. Jesus’ final word to Thomas puts even seeing Jesus, much less touching him,

Page 163
in proper perspective as Jesus in effect pronounces a blessing upon the church of the
future for which he has already prayed.
Conclusion
The purpose of the gospel. John 20: 30 - 31
The evangelist’s summation sounds like the conclusion of the book, although no
manuscript lacking chapter 21 survives. Appropriately the purpose of the narrative is now
stated. The theological themes of the gospel are brought to a culmination in chapter 20, as
is the literary development.
The gospel of John and the synoptics
The ministry of John the baptist: a comparative outline
Gospel of John Gospel of Mark

- John the Baptist is an emissary of - The coming of John was prophesied
the one crying in the wilderness. by the prophet Isaiah.
- To prepare the way for the Lord. - John was a messenger of the Lord,
- Denies being the Lord himself or to prepare the way of the Lord.
the prophet. - John appeared in the wilderness
- Identifies Jesus as the lamb of God. preaching a baptism of repentance
- Accepts that he did not know Jesus. for the forgiveness of sins.
- His baptism was with water only. - John baptized many people from
- John witnessed the spirit in the Judea and Jerusalem as they
form of a dove descending upon confessed their sins.
Jesus from heaven. - John wore animal skins and ate
- John only identified Jesus after the wild food and honey.
dove. - John acknowledged that the one
- John was told by God that the coming after him was mightier than
Christ will baptize with the holy him. He would baptize with the
spirit. holy spirit.
- John has seen and bore witness that - John would baptize with water
Jesus is the son of God. only.
- John baptized Jesus.
- Jesus saw the dove coming upon
himself .
- A voice was heard from heaven
declaring Jesus as the son of God.

Page 164
Comparative facts: the ministry of John
Gospel of Matthew Gospel of Luke

- John was preaching in the - John was a kinsman of Jesus
wilderness of Judea. through their mothers Elizabeth and
- John preached repentance. Mary.
- The coming of John was prophesied - John was only a few months older
by the prophet Isaiah. than Jesus.
- John appeared in the wilderness - The birth of John as well as that of
preaching a baptism of repentance Jesus was announced by an angel of
for the forgiveness of sins. God.
- John baptized many people from - John was brought up according to
Judea and Jerusalem at the river Jewish customs.
Jordan as they confessed their sins. - Like Jesus, his name came from
- John wore animal skins and ate God.
wild food and honey. - His role was announced to his
- Many Pharisees and Sadducees father Zechariah early at birth. He
came to be baptized by John. was a peaceful prophet who would
- John confronted them with a pave the way for the coming of the
message of warning against their Messiah.
complacency. - John preached a baptism of
- John warned them of an oncoming repentance for the forgiveness of
destruction. sins.
- John baptized with water only for - John came from the wilderness and
repentance. baptized at Jordan.
- The one coming after him will - Many Jews came to be baptized by
baptize with the holy spirit and fire. him.
- The one coming after him is - His baptism was only by water.
mightier than John. - The mightier one would baptize
- John resented to baptize Jesus. with fore and the holy spirit.
- John saw the holy spirit descending - The holy spirit descended upon
on Jesus. Jesus and declared him Son of God.
- The voice from God was heard
declaring Jesus son of God.
Commentary on John the Baptist
All the four gospel writers deal with John, affirming his role in God’s purpose while
keeping him subordinate to Jesus. While John announced the coming of a stronger one,
only in the fourth gospel does John have the revelation that the person is Jesus (John
1:24-34) though it may be implied in Matthew 3:13-14. In the fourth gospel, John is
never called “the Baptist”. In the synoptics he is envisioned in the wilderness of Judea at
some place near the Jordan river. In the fourth gospel it is not told where John was. We
only learnt that he was sent from God, that his name was John, and that he came to bear

Page 165
witness to the light. Unlike the synoptics John’s gospel has no mention of Jesus
‘temptation by Satan, nor is Jesus said to open his ministry by coming forward in Galilee
with a formal announcement of the approach of the kingdom of God. John the Baptist
bears witness to Jesus before Jewish authorities at the same time delineating his own role
and thus expanding on the statement of the prologue that “he was not the light”. (Jn 1:8).
He is not one of the anticipated figures of the end time. That the priests and Levites are
sent from Jerusalem by the Jews, is significant, for the Jews, centered in Jerusalem, are
the chief opponents of Jesus in John. The senders seem also to be identified as Pharisees
and the apparent identification of Jews and Pharisees is typical of the gospel of John for
which the Pharisees are representative of the Jews, particularly Jewish leadership.
Perhaps the titles that John the Baptist refuses are being reserved for Jesus. When pressed
he will only claim to be a voice crying in the wilderness (of Jn 1:3). Thus John the
Baptist describes himself with the same Isaiah passage (1sai 40:3) that is applied to him
by Mark. He is a forerunner and witness of Jesus but claims nothing more for himself.
Probably to establish Jesus’ superiority, the actual baptism of Jesus by John is
suppressed. The Baptist, presumably like others, did not know Jesus, and his baptizing
activity is solely a means of revealing him to Israel (Jn 1: 31). Nothing is said about
repentance and forgiveness as in the synoptics. Significantly, John the Baptist is the first
to bear witness to Jesus, and he himself sees and describes the spirit’s descending and
abiding upon Jesus. The Baptist thus concludes this episode by summarizing and
underscoring what he has done. He attests that Jesus is the son of God, rendering the
definitive statement about Jesus that is attributed by the synoptics to the voice from
heaven. The unique, God – directed role of the Baptist has now been heavenly
underscored. In the very act of bearing witness so decisively to Jesus, John sharply
defines and limits his own role.
Second appearance of John the Baptist
Also in John is Jesus said to have baptized (see Jn 3:26 and 4:1-2). In John 3: 24 as
contrasted with Mark 1:14 we learn that John had not yet been arrested. This statement
seems to reflect some knowledge of the synoptic account of Jesus ministry, whether on
the part of the author or a very early editor, “Rabbi, he who was with you beyond the
Jordan, to whom you bore witness, here he is, baptizing, and all are going out to him”.
From this statement one would have anticipated a dispute with disciples of Jesus if not
with Jesus himself. John himself is not disturbed that Jesus baptism is attracting
multitudes and continues to bear witness to Jesus, referring to his own previous witness.
The friend of the bridegroom is obviously John the Baptist who knows his own role in
relation to Jesus. (Jn 3:29-30). He remains a faithful witness even in the face of a
challenge from his own disciples. The fulfillment of joy is a mark of Jesus’ eternal
fellowship with his followers. The significance of this episode of John the Baptist
becomes clear that: John testifies again to Jesus.
The “I am” sayings in John

Page 166
The “I am” saying are typical Johanine articles. In John Jesus used these articles in his
discourses or debates with his enemies (the Pharisees) and his own disciples. These
articles were used to defend his authority, to affirm it and also to assure his disciples.
There are basically seven famous sayings of Jesus in the gospel of John.
“I am the bread of life” (6:35-51)
In the light of the misunderstandings of the multitude at the sea of Tiberias, Jesus
identifies himself openly as the bread of life. This echoes Jesus relationship to the father
(God) and his life-giving work. The sure salvation of the believer is grounded in the will
and gift of God, as effected in the work of Jesus, the son. Eternal life as the consequence
of belief or faith in Jesus is the central and recurring theme of the gospel. The life-giving
bread from heaven is said to be the flesh of Jesus.
“I am the light of the world” (8:12)
When the Pharisees accused Jesus of witnessing to himself, Jesus insisted on the truth of
his testimony, once more stating his role in terms of his origin and destiny. When the
Pharisees lack understanding, it means that they do not have the light to enable them to
see. The light to see the things of God, the father is in Jesus the Lord.
“I am the good shepherd” (10:11)
The image of Jesus as a Shepherd is again used to describe his role. Jesus devotion to his
“Sheep” is matched only by his knowledge of the father. Jesus would guard
enthusiastically the life of his believers like a shepherd who protects his flock from
wolves. But when the shepherd dies the sheep remain without a shepherd. Jesus
meditated on his own death and resurrection.
“I am the true vine” (15:1)
The vine discourse is based on the necessity and nature of the disciples’ unity with Jesus.
The metaphor of vine and branches represents the unity of Jesus and the disciples. Jesus
has linked discipleship with mutual love. He reiterates that he is a symbol of unity, and
mutual love is a symbol of unity and had mutual love for his disciples.
Summary of the “I am” Sayings
1. “I am the bread of life” (6:35).

2. “I am the bread which came down from heaven” (6:42; 51).
3. “I am the light of the world” (8:12).
4. “I am the good shepherd” (10:11).
5. “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25).
6. “I am the way, the truth and the life” (14:6)
7. “I am the true vine” (15:1).

Page 167
1. Who wrote the book of John.

2. Discuss the issues that arise from the prologue in John’s gospel
3. Compare the ministry of John the Baptist in John’s gospel with that in the synoptic.
4. Examine the discourse between Jesus and Nicodemus
5. Examine the “I am” sayings in John
Gobbets
Write explanatory comments on the following:-
The next day he saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Behold, the lamb of God, who
take away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29)
(a) As he passed by, he saw a blind man from his birth. And his disciples asked him,
“Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind.” (John 9:1-2)
(b) But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, son of God, and
that believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:31).
(c) He said to him, “Tend my sheep.” He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John,
do you love me?” (John 21:17).
References
Smith M.D, Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, 1988

Page 168
CHAPTER 14
APOSTOLIC AGE
General introduction to the apostolic age
In concise terms the Apostolic Age is the era of apostolic activities precisely after the
Great Dispersion. This period focuses on the apostolic developments after the death of
Jesus. Enemies of the Christ movement hunted down his followers, who, for their own
security scattered abroad but without neglecting the spreading of the Christian gospel.
The apostles of Jesus founded Christian churches and congregations where they imparted
Christian doctrines and the gospel. These newly established churches then had internal
problems that resulted, in most cases, in misunderstandings amongst members. When
such problems arose the congregation would present the problems to the apostle who
founded that church. The relevant apostle would make resolutions and send them back by
way of letters that would be carried by an emissary to the church. In this regard Paul
features as the greatest apostolic writer of epistles to the churches mostly in the Gentile
regions.
We take notice that the book of Acts is closely linked with the Apostolic Age though it is
not an apostolic book. The significance of Acts is that it gives the historical genesis of the
apostolic movement after the death of Jesus Christ. It gives comprehensive accounts of
the early church and its immediate challenges. Acts therefore becomes the bridging story
between the Christ era and the era of missionary work.
Acts of the Apostles

1. Give a brief summary of the relationship of acts to the gospels.

2. Explain how the church started in Jerusalem
3. Highlight and discuss the problems of the early church in Jerusalem
4. Discuss the contribution of such important figures like Stephen, Peter, James,
Paul, Silas and Barnabas.
5. Examine the spread of Christianity beyond Jerusalem
6. Discuss the trials of Paul by different authorities
It must be noted from the outset that Acts is not an apostolic letter. It was not written by
an apostle as such. But an important issue to state early is that this book bridges the
gospels with the apostolic age. We begin by examining the background issues on
authorship, date purpose of the book as is always the custom in the study pack.

Page 169
Authorship
In spite of the ancient well- established tradition that the third gospel and the Acts of the
Apostles were written by Luke, the physician, Paul’s travelling companion and close
associate [Philemon 24; Col 4:14; Tim 4:11], both works are anonymous. Neither the
name ‘Luke’ nor an unnamed ‘physician- disciple is even mentioned in either Luke or
Acts. Both works are linked together by their common addressee Theophilus. The
similarity of their language and style as well as their unified literary and theological
purposes leave little doubt that they derive from the same author-possibly, but not
certainly, Luke.
At the earliest, Acts can not have been written prior to the appointment of Festus as
procurator [Acts 24:27] which on the basis of independent sources, appears to have
occurred between A.D 55 and 59. It is also commonly dated in the last quarter of the first
century, after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D 70.
The two- volume work of Luke-Acts should be understood as a narrative with different
dimensions and multiple purposes. Both its form and content suggest that the work was
intended to be read as the continuation of the Old Testament biblical story. The narrative
throughout confirms the notion that the story is told to strengthen faith [Luke 1:4].
Consequently it should be read as an edifying narrative intended to inform, reinforce, and
render more credible faith where it already exists and probably to create and instill faith
where it does not exist.
Structure of acts
In one sense Acts seems organized around geographical concentric circles [1:8] in which
the progress of the word is traced from Jerusalem [chapters 1-7], throughout Judea and
Samaria [chapter 8-12] and finally to the ‘end of the earth’ probably Rome [chapters 13-
28]. In another sense, the work comprises two parts: Firstly, chapters 1-12, which present
the church’s beginning in Palestine and how it overtook or replaced Judaism as the new
locus of God’s presence within Israel and secondly, chapters13-28 which tell how the
gospel moves westward and how God’s promises are extended fully to the gentiles. Each
section has its central figure. The first section is centred on Peter while the second is
centred on Paul.
There are other salient features of the book of Acts, which cannot be left unexamined.
One conspicuous feature is the summaries that are provided throughout the work. These
summaries are fairly extensive texts documenting the numerical growth and spread of the
church. Some few examples are 2:42-47; 4:32-35; 5:12-16; 16:5; 19:20; 24: 44-49; 28:31.
Related to these summaries is the issue or the use of typical examples. This is a literary
technique through which Luke depicts a single character or event to illustrate what
occurred typically. The healing of the lame man [3:1-11] may be regarded as typical of
the ‘many signs’ and wonders performed by the apostles. Barnabas’ generosity is
presented as a concrete example that typifies the many property owners who sold their
possessions [4:34-37]. The episodes reported in detail during Paul’s preaching mission at
Philippi [16:11-40] serve to illustrate typical features of his preaching among gentiles.

Page 170
His [Paul] vindication before Gallio [cf 18:12-17], concretely illustrates the way Roman
authorities typically treated Christian missionaries.
Another most striking feature of the book of Acts is the number of speeches contained in
the book and the amount of space they occupy- roughly 20% of the entire book. They
occur- throughout the work, in each of its major sections exhibiting different types:
missionary speeches directed to Jews and gentiles for example 2:14-36 and 10:34-43
respectively. There are also defense speeches by Peter for example 4:8-12; by Stephen
7:2-53; and by Paul for example 26:2-23 e.t.c. There are also church speeches with
Christians speaking to their Christians for example 1:16-22; 11:5-17, especially Paul’s
pastoral homily or farewell address to the Ephesian elders [20:18-35] and speeches by
outsiders for example 5:35-39]. In addition, numerous prayers and conversations are
reported throughout the book. By providing various types of speeches fitted to the
characters and the occasion, Luke is following a practice well established among ancient
authors- Jewish, Greek and Roman.
Commentary on the events between Easter and Pentecost:
Acts 1:1-26
The first 8 verses are a continuation of Jesus’ story. From the outset, Acts is connected
with the third gospel [Luke] that gives a comprehensive account of Jesus’ deeds and
words until he was taken up or ascended to heaven. Both Luke and Acts have a common
addressee ‘Theophilus’, who is not mentioned anywhere else in the New Testament.
Whereas Luke 24 contains Christ’s appearances to a single day [Easter Sunday], this
period is extended to 40 days in Acts one verse three. Jesus’ activities included many
proofs, presumably signs and wonders, various appearances to the apostles, and
instructions, which are, summarised in Luke 24 verses 44- 49. The continuation of the
kingdom of God is anticipated in the gospel of Luke 22:16; 18. Precisely what the
kingdom signified remained unclear as the apostles question in Acts 1v 6 shows. During
a meal Jesus enjoins the apostles to remain in Jerusalem echoing his earlier instruction
that their prophetic witness to him would begin from Jerusalem. John the Baptist had
anticipated that his form of baptism would be superseded by a more impressive form of
immersion administered by the Messiah in which persons would be suffused or
overshadowed with the holy spirit and confronted with the fire of God’s judgment
[Acts1:5 and Luke 3:16]. At perhaps another gathering [Acts 1:6] the apostles ask when
Christ would restore the kingdom of Israel. His response exposes their misunderstanding.
Entering God’s kingdom is not a matter of knowing when to mark the calendar but of
awaiting and receiving God’s promised spirit.
How the church began in Jerusalem

The coming of the spirit on Pentecost: 2:1-13
The coming of the holy spirit on Pentecost was a fulfillment of the promises made earlier
by John the Baptist and the risen Lord [cf Luke 3: 16 and Luke 24: 49] of all New

Page 171
Testament writers, it is only Luke who sets the church’s beginning on the day of
Pentecost, fifty days after Passover [Luke 22:1]. The nucleus of the messianic community
certainly included the spirit and conceivably the 120 disciples. The spirit’s arrival is
presented in a way that anticipates the prophecy in Acts 2:19; the loud wind from heaven
serves as a wonder in the heavens above while the tongues of fire wresting on those
gathered became signs on the earth’s beneath. Wind and fire may recall a similar
extraordinary appearance of the Lord to Elijah in 1 Kings 29: 11-13. All of those
gathered, whether the twelve or the 120 were filled with Holy Spirit. This is the first of
several such occurrences involving both individuals and groups in Acts. What
distinguishes this particular infusion of the spirit is that the recipients spoke in other
tongues or foreign languages. The phenomenon was repeated at the conversion of
Cornelius in chapter 10: 46.
The crowd attracted by this cacophony of sounds are Jews living in Jerusalem not
pilgrims from abroad. They are struck by the speakers’ distinctive Galilean accent, yet
they understand what is being said in their respective native dialects. The magnitude of
the miracle is underscored as they list the nations from which they have emigrated. The
emphasis of this event is on the universal understanding of believers. But sometimes this
incident is viewed as a reversal of the universal confusion of Basel in Genesis 11 verses 1
–9. More likely Luke wants to stress that the Jewish community which first hears the
gospel at Pentecost is genuinely universal in scope hence representative of world Jewry.
His narrative description here anticipates the promise in Peter’s speech that all flesh
would receive God’s spirit [Acts 2:17].
Peter’s speech: Acts 2: 14-36
Among Peter’s several speeches in Acts, the one in Acts 2:14-36 has special importance.
Like Jesus at his Nazareth inaugural, Peter is introduced as an interpreter of Old
Testament scripture. He now begins to unfold publicly the secrets of scripture
interpretation expounded by the risen Lord to the apostles on Easter [cf Luke 24:44-48].
The sermon of Peter introduces major Lucan themes developed throughout the book of
Acts for example, outpouring of God’s spirit; universality of the gospel; authenticating
signs and wonders, and salvation in the name of the lord.
In the first part [2:14-21] Peter interprets the events of Pentecost as fulfilling Joel 2:28-
32. What was expected in the last days [Isa 2:2] has now come to pass. A dramatic
effusion of God’s spirit is experienced by men and women, young and old accompanied
by signs and wonders, both visible and audible with truly cosmic impact. This
interruption of the normal course of events is seen as a prelude to the day of the Lord,
when history would end, and a time when people would call out to the Lord for salvation.
In the second part [2:22-36], Peter explains Jesus’ death and resurrection in light of two
Davidic psalms: 16:8-11 and 110:7. His introduction to this part summarizes the essential
features of the Jesus story that have been rehearsed at length in the gospel: a ministry
empowered by God’s death by human hands yet according to God’s will, resurrection by

Page 172
God [Acts 2:22-24]. Rather than proving these claims, Peter assumes them throughout the
sermon. These things the apostles have witnessed. [v: 32].
In the last part, Peter disqualifies David as the candidate referred to in the psalms. He
identifies Jesus as the legitimate candidate. The risen Lord now is seen as the one who
pours out the divine spirit at this inaugural event [verse 33].
A portrait of the early church: Acts 2:42-47
Initially the Christian movement’s success is marked with specific impressively large
numbers [v 41]. Eventually, this will give way to further growth and expansion as
indicated in periodic summaries, that have been alluded to in the introduction to this
research. This idealised portrait of the church emphasizes aspects of religious community
valued in both Jewish and Greco –Roman society: daily devotion to both public and
private religious activities; awesome respect in the presence of divine power, internal
harmony and community solidarity expressed in concrete concern for each other and,
generocity. The voluntary sharing of possessions among members of the community
distinguishes the early church. Along with alms giving and showing hospitality, Luke
presents it as one way to use possessions responsibly.
Enemies of the early church
As could be evidenced by the arrest of Peter and John [4:1-4], the temple authorities
[Jesus’ earlier antagonists], have remained enemies even to the early church. A prominent
source of resistance in the first and second arrests of Peter are the Sadducees who had
opposed Paul. Since they denied resurrection in principle, they specifically contest the
apostle’s claim that resurrection had begun with Jesus. Even though the overnight
custody of Peter and John is a relatively mild action, it fulfills Jesus prediction of
persecution of apostles in Luke 21:12. Despite resistance and arrests, the gospel still
meets with significant numerical success [Acts 4:4].
Apostolic resistance
Despite repressive actions by the temple authorities, the apostles remained firm and
defiant to restrictive orders. Peter remains the prominent spokesperson of the apostolic
mission. The apostles are compelled to speak what they have seen and heard, presumably
the deeds and words of Jesus recorded in the gospel. More apostolic signs and wonders
occur in the temple. The second arrest saw Peter giving a firm defense [5:27-32]. The
council’s violence and the urge to kill the apostles foreshadows its later reaction to
Stephen. Vindication of the apostles comes through Gamaliel who urges caution to the
council authorities.
Stephen’s arrest
Resistance to Christianity now extends beyond Sadducees and temple authorities to

include diaspora Jews resident in Jerusalem and for the first time Jewish people. Whether
Stephen’s opponents should be envisioned as a single synagogue with different

Page 173
constituencies, Freedmen; Cyrenians, Alexandrians, Cilicians and Asians) or more likely,

as two separate groups- African Jews who comprised the synagogue of Freedmen, and
Asian Jews – their loyalty was to the Jerusalem temple and the mosaic law. They see
Stephen as a threat to both. The second group later opposes Paul on the same grounds
(Asian Jews). Unable to confute the prophetic deeds and words of the spirit-filled
Stephen, they resort to false witnesses and contrived charges that link Stephen’s
preaching to Jesus.
Stephen’s defense 7:1-53
The sermon surveys Israel’s history in broad sweep, highlighting three figures, Abraham,
Joseph and Moses. It then treats the tabernacle temple and concludes by assailing the
hearers for identifying with Israel’s heritage of resistance. The historical survey is
reminiscent of Old Testament historical summaries that rehearse God’s dealings with
Israel. If anything, it reflects more the censorious spirit of Psalms 78 and 106 which
stress Israel’s persistent, cyclical disobedience through its history, than it does the more
positive doxological spirit of Psalm 105 which recalls God’s gracious care and
deliverance of Israel.
Stephen’s death and its impact
Resistance to prophetic words and deeds intensified as the council which earlier on could
only threaten and imprison and wish to kill (5:33), finally did kill. Stephen final
accusation sends them into utter anger. In great contrast Stephen who was filled with the
spirit behaved like a prophet: he gazed into heaven to see God’s glory. He now sees
vividly what Jesus had promised this same council would occur- i.e the son of man
exalted to God’s right hand (Luke 22:69), although standing (see Daniel 7:13) rather than
seated (Psalm 110:1). In reporting to the council what he sees, he both confesses and
proclaims, for the first time, the risen Lord. These same words (Acts 7:56) attest the
innocence of God’s righteous one whom they have slain and there-by convict the hearers.
By rejecting yet another of God’s prophets, the new Moses of whom their own law spoke
(Deut 18:15), they stand under God'’ judgment and the threat of another expulsion from
God’s presence. This unusual form of proclamation is met with mob violence and a
rejection that recalls Jesus’ own rejection at Nazareth. The council’s actions conform to
the biblical rule on dealing with blasphemers: death by stoning outside the city (Lev
24:13-16) with witnesses going first (Deutr 17:2-7). Once again the crazed mob’s frenzy
contrasts with the prophet’s (Stephen) calm confidence. Stephen’s death is sketched in
terms that recall Jesus’ own passion. It is the death of another innocent prophet. Like
Jesus, Stephen utters a prayer of confidence rephrasing Psalm 31 verse 5, and finally in a
loud voice offers a prayer of forgiveness for his enemies (c.f. Luke 23:34; Acts 7:60).
The death of Stephen also functions to introduce Saul who gradually enters the story and
emerges as the major figure in Acts 13 to 28. Saul’s participation in Stephen’s death
becomes a major reference point for Luke as evidenced in the following texts: Acts 9:1;
21; 22:4; 20; 26:9-11. Acts 9: 1, 21; Acts 22: 4 , 20 and Acts 26: 9 - 11.

Page 174
Stephen’s death becomes pivotal in the story of Acts and marks a major transition. The
great persecution in Acts 8:1 now widens the circle of resistance beyond temple
authorities and Jerusalem residents. Its salutary effect is to scatter the church throughout
Judea and Samaria, in keeping with Jesus’ mandate (Acts 1:8). Imagined here is a single,
great community of believers now expelled from Jerusalem. The apostles, however,
remain behind to authenticate the gospel as it spreads beyond Jerusalem (see and
compare Acts 8v 1 and 8v 14 to prove this point.
Stephen’s speech: Further Analysis
Carl .R. Holladay submits that Stephen’s speech may be read as a unified defense that
develops three interrelated themes viz: God’s dwelling place; promise fulfillment; and
Israel’s rejection of God’s duly appointed emissaries. Stephen insists that, as early as
Abraham, Israel is promised a place to worship God (Acts 7:7 cf Exodus 3:12), the land
of promise, 7: 4. Though moved to Egypt to live as aliens in a land belonging to others,
all the patriarchs (father) were returned for burial in the promised land (7:16). Still, as the
time of the promise drew near, the people of promise remained in Egypt until God
commissioned Moses to deliver them (v 34). They rejected Moses’ leadership and in their
hearts, turned to Egypt (v39), thus refusing the chance to obtain their promised place. As
a result they would be exiled again beyond Babylon (v43). Eventually the patriarchs
(fathers of Israel) transferred the tent of witness from the wilderness to the Promised
Land where upon David and Solomon sought to establish a more permanent dwelling
place for the God of Jacob (v46). Contrary to the prophetic word in Isaiah 66:1-2, they
mistakenly thought God’s presence could be confined to a handmade house.
Consequently, even with the Jerusalem temple, God’s initial promise (Acts 7:76)
remained unfulfilled (v.v. 49-50). The place where God’s spirit resides and where the
presence of God is dramatically at work, is no longer the temple but the newly constituted
messianic community, which finally fulfills God’s original promise.
Although the rejection theme emerges only in the latter part of his speech and especially
with reference to Moses, it is introduced earlier. The jealous patriarchs are attacked for
selling Joseph, only to have their misdeed reversed by divine intervention. (v9). But it
was Moses, above all, whose leadership was rejected by his brethren, the sons of Israel
(v23). First, they refused to accept his God-sent deliverance of a fellow Israelite (verses
25-28) which led to his exile in Midian. Second, they rejected him as the God-sent ruler
and deliverer (v35) who would bring them to the land of promise, and this in spite of
stunning displays of God’s presence through him: wonders and signs in Egypt,
deliverance through the Red Sea receiving the law at Sinai (vv. 35-38). Instead they
thrust him aside, turned their hearts toward Egypt, and became idolaters (vv. 40-41).
Consequently, God rejected them, turning them over to their idolatrous instincts (verses
42-43). The speech is informed by the conviction that Moses prefigures Jesus Christ. If
read against the background of the rest of Luke- Acts, the speech presents the career of
Moses, and Israel’s reaction to him in ways that parallel the Christ story.
The rejection theme reaches its climax in the concluding indictment (Acts 7:51-53). With
vivid metaphors drawn from their own past, the hearers are characterized as stiff –

Page 175
necked (Exodus 33:3-5) and uncircumcised in heart and ears (Lev 26:41). They are
assailed as historically having resisted God’s holy spirit and standing in the succession of
their predecessors who persecuted and killed the prophets (1 Kings 19:10). Stephen’s
indictment here echoes Jesus’ earlier accusation (Luke 11:47-51). The hearers are
implicated in the betrayal and death of the innocent prophet Jesus, the righteous one.
The Christian movement spreads outside Jerusalem to Judea, Samaria, Galilee and
the coastland regions.
As a aforementioned in the last paragraph on the article on the death of Stephen and its
impact, the Christian movement spread to various regions as a result of the great
persecution, in Jerusalem. Phillip, who is identified as an evangelist living in Caesarea
(Acts 21:8) proclaimed Christ in Samaria. The apostle Peter then visited the region to
confirm the Christian mission of Phillip and to establish the church (vv14-25). The
movement went beyond Samaria to the more distant region of the Coastland, as far as
Ethiopia (Africa) where the first African Christian was converted – the Ethiopian eunuch
( 8:26-40). The gospel spread further to Damascus where Saul (Paul), the most important
character in this book, was converted (9:1-31)
The call of Saul: Comments

Saul’s full particulars are not known. He is identified as a native of Tarsus in Cilicia. At
the age of four he moved to Jerusalem where he was reared by his family and then
educated under Gamaliel (Acts 5:34-39). As such he becomes a Jerusalemite formally
educated to adhere strictly and zealously to the sacred traditions of his fathers, hence he
became a zealous persecutor of the Christian movement that advocated for the
abandonment of the traditions of the elders. His call comes while he was on the
synagogue in Damascus to arrest those in the movement. The narrative implies that the
intended victims are Jewish Christians who still attend the synagogue.
The call story resembles other ancient accounts where enemies of God’s cause, through
divine intervention are dramatically halted and converted into God’s proponents. The
encounter is presented as a truly extraordinary reversal of events through direct, divine
intervention. The blinding light appearing suddenly from heaven signifies God’s dramatic
interruption of Paul’s activities. Although Saul does not see anyone, clearly the risen lord
appeared to him presumably in a vision. More important here than what is seen is what is
heard: a prophetic call. A heavenly voice speaks to Saul using a form of double address
found in earlier divine commissions e.g. Gen 46:2; Exodus 3: 4 and 1 Sam 3: 4. The
voice indicts or accuses by interpreting Saul’s activity with reference to the new reality of
Christ’s resurrection: to persecute Christians is to persecute Christ (9:5). The voice attests
that Jesus, once rejected but now risen and vindicated, continues to be active in history.
Earlier Christ had exerted healing power (Acts 3:16) now he exerts power to call new
prophets. The presence of witnesses, who also heard the voice, confirms the reality of the
occurrence. They correspond to the company of Israel who can attest the reality of God’s
revelation to Moses. It is Ananias, the Jewish Christian disciple from Damascus who
experiences an explicitly defined vision (9:10). The risen lord also speaks to him,
directing his actions from heaven. In the dialogue, the lord reveals Saul’s whereabouts;

Page 176
predicts what is to occur, but most importantly, puts in concise terms his commission to
Saul (9:15-16). These words summarize Luke’s theological understanding of Paul as
God’s chosen instrument. Paul’s chief contribution to the church’s mission will be to
carry the lord’s name to the gentiles. Yet he will also witness to the name before kings as
well as before the sons of Israel. Like the prophets, he will also suffer (9:23). In doing so
he follows his apostolic predecessors (5:41).
With his deepest fears allayed by the Lord’s command Ananias obediently proceeds to
ordain God’s designee (Saul) (vv. 17-19). By laying hands on Saul, he bestows God’s
healing power and restores his sight (vv.12; 17). The reality of the healing is attested by
the scales falling from his eyes. Possibly, his restored sight is to be understood as the
visible sign of the spirits presence, elsewhere manifested through speaking in tongues (cf.
2:1-4). His baptism removes the guilt resulting from his previous misdeeds (cf. 22:16).
Paul in Damascus and Jerusalem: Acts 9:19-31.
Saul immediately began to carry out his divinely appointed role of preaching to the sons
of Israel (v15). As was always the case, prophetic proclamation was met with resistance
that entailed suffering. Thus this brief description of Saul’s activity, first in Damascus
(vv. 19-25) and subsequently in Jerusalem (vv. 26-29) itself becomes a fulfillment of the
Lord’s words to Ananias in verses 15 and 16. The portrait of Saul that emerges here is a
miniature of the portrait that unfolds later in the narrative i.e. Paul preaching Jesus as son
of God (v20), the Christ (v22) and lord (v29). These are the central themes of his
preaching to the Jews in their synagogues, creating controversy and meeting resistance,
even to the point of threats against his life yet always dramatically delivered or vindicated
(9:25-30).
Saul’s immediate removal to Jerusalem, his acceptance by the apostles through Barnabas’
generous commendation, and his absorption into the Jerusalem church reflect the Lucan
tendency to align Paul closely with Jerusalem.. The Pauline letters by contrast reflect
Paul’s opposite tendency to stress his independence of Jerusalem (see Gal 1 and 2 ). In
fact, Paul denies being known by sight by churches of Christ in Judea (Gal 1:22). His
opponents in Jerusalem are the Hellenists (Acts 9:29) possibly the same group who
opposed Stephen. Later, Asian Jews figure prominently in opposing Paul in Jerusalem
(Acts 21:27). Once again efforts to kill him prove unsuccessful. Saved by the Jerusalem
church, Paul is moved to Tarsus, his hometown, where he remained until Barnabas
fetched him (11:25).
Paul’s Mission
Paul and Barnabas take the gospel westward starting off with Antioch of Syria where
Peter had already preached the impartiality of God and the justification of the mission to
the gentiles. Paul and Barnabas laboured in Cyprus where he confronted the magician
Bar-jesus and the conversion of the proconsul which shows the gospel’s superior power
over popular forms of magic as well as its power to attract an intelligent Roman official,

Page 177
consequently to the Christian movement. At the same time Paul gets status as a miracle
worker fully on par with Peter.
Paul at Antioch of Pisidia: Acts 13: 13 – 52
At Pisidia Antioch, Paul’s prophetic word is met with a divided response: Jews resist and
Gentiles accept. The synagogue at Pisidian Antioch located in Galatia, the heart of Asia
Minor, some one hundred miles Northeast of Perga, provides the setting for Paul’s
extensively reported sermon or prophetic word. Going first to the synagogue becomes
Paul’s typical missionary practice. This sermon which is identified as a word of
exhortation is given in response to the invitation of the rulers of the synagogue. The
sermon is roughly equivalent in length to Peters Pentecost sermon. While Peter’s
Pentecost address consists more of explicit scriptural exposition than does Paul’s
synagogue sermon here, both result in preaching about Jesus with notable emphasis on
his death and resurrection.
Broadly speaking, the sermon comprises two parts. First, there is a summary of Israel’s
history from the time of the Exodus until David (Acts 13:17-22). This constitutes a third
of the speech. Then the explicitly Christian story begins in verses 23-41 with Christ is
introduced as David’s posterity. The outline then follows a more conventional pattern,
similar to Peter’s Cornelius sermon in Acts 10 verses 34-43. The preaching of John the
Baptist (vv. 24-25) is essential as the middle link between David and Christ with no
specific attention given to the life and ministry of Jesus, the sermon moves directly to
Jesus’ passion (vv. 27-29) with emphasis on the following elements: failure of the
Jerusalem inhabitants and the Jewish rulers to recognize Jesus as the fulfillment of the
prophets; on the motif of the Jews’ ignorance which resulted in Jesus’ trial; Jesus
innocence; Pilates’ role, Jesus’ death on a tree and burial (13:29); God’s raising him and
his post resurrection appearances for many days in Jerusalem to his Galilean follows
thereby qualifying them as witnesses. Special emphasis is given to promise fulfillment
(vv. 32-33) by interpreting his resurrection with reference to Psalms 2 and 16. The form
of argument is similar to that used by Peter in Acts 2:24-36. The sermon concludes with
an offer of forgiveness of sins and freedom from the Mosaic Law. With this later or last
motif Luke gives the sermon a distinctive Pauline ring (cf. Rom 3:28; Gal 3:23-25 etc)
thereby preparing for the subsequent controversy created by the Pauline gospel (esp Acts
15). This dual offer of good news is punctuated by final prophetic threats drawn from
Habbakuk 1:5, which anticipates the Jews’ rejection. Its harshness is reminiscent of
Stephen’s concluding accusation (Acts 7:51-53) and anticipates the note on which the
Pauline mission ends (28:26-29). Ironically Paul’s sermon in the synagogue becomes the
occasion for the gentiles’ hearty reception and the spread of the gospel through the entire
region (13:48-49). The Jews’ expulsion of Paul and Barnabas from the city and Paul’s
response conform with Jesus’ own predictions and instructions concerning appropriate
missionary behaviour. Divine approval of the Pauline mission to the gentiles, and thus
disapproval of the Jewish resistance, is indicated by the presence of joy and the Holy
spirit among the disciples (cf Acts 13:52).

Page 178
The status of gentiles. Acts 15:1-35)

Paul’s mission to the gentiles had been a great success. With the initial success of the
gentile mission it now becomes appropriate for Luke to address the network of questions
created by an emerging gentile Christian church. If gentiles increasingly become
Christians are they to be regarded as full equals with Jewish Christians before God? Are
they not obliged to keep the law of Moses? In particular, must they not undergo
circumcision, the one ritual act that symbolizes full admission to the people of God? By
extension, are they not obligated then to live by the law? In a word, must not gentiles
become Jews, at least in some minimal sense, to be truly saved? The seriousness of these
questions for Luke is seen by the way he reports the Jerusalem meeting. It is a watershed
event.
The council meeting in Jerusalem: Acts 15:1-5
The reasons requiring such a meeting of the Jerusalem authorities are carefully outlined.
The disputing parties are clearly identified and the heat of the debate noted (v.2). It is a
genuine threat within the life of the church requiring the attention of both the entire
Jerusalem church and the highest echelons of its leaders (apostles and elders are
mentioned five times in the chapter (vv. 2; 4; 6; 22; 23).
The picture is further filled out by the parade of distinguished figures, including
Barnabas, Paul; Peter; James, Judas and Silas. Peter represents the old guard, the apostles
who figure as the prominent leadership structure in chapters 1 to 14 and who disappear
after chapter 15, though James, by contrast, represents the new guard, the elders who
figure as the prominent leadership structure in chapters 16-28.
Luke reports two speeches, one by Peter (15:7-11) the other by James (vv. 13-21) and the
contents of the agreement, formally stated in a letter (vv. 23-29). No extensive report by
Paul and Barnabas is given since their activity reported in chapters 13-14 is still fresh in
the readers’ minds.
Peter’s Speech at the Jerusalem Meeting 15:6-11
His remarks reiterate three points already registered in chapters 10-11. First, the decision
to preach to gentiles was God’s choice not Peter’s. Second, visible evidence of God’s
approval occurred in giving gentiles the Holy Spirit just as he did to the apostles. Third,
since God has cleansed the gentiles, the distinction between clean Jews and unclean
gentiles no longer holds. The summary of his conclusion was that gentiles had been
admitted by divine, not human initiative. To refuse gentiles or to turn them away would
have been to withstand God. To the Jewish restrictive traditions Peter further makes two
more new considerations. First, even their own Jewish fathers found the law burdensome
and impossible to keep (15:10; Gal 5:1) and second, there is only one way to salvation
i.e. through the grace of the lord Jesus (15:11; Rom 3:24).

Page 179
James Speech at the Jerusalem Meeting: 15:12-21
After Peter’s speech had calmed the assembly, Barnabas and Paul gave a report of their
mission among the gentiles (see Acts 14:27). Then James’ speech followed, which makes
two contributions to the debate. First, he provides scriptural warrant for the gentile
missions i.e. what Peter started (chapter 10-11) and what Paul and Barnabas continued
(chapters 13-14). Arguing from the Greek version of Amos 9:11-12, supplemented by
Jeremiah 12:15, and Isaiah 45: 21, James insisted that the gentile mission was God’s
ancient intention, not a new idea (v17).
James’ second contribution was to propose a concrete solution: gentiles should adhere to
some four prohibitions outlined in scripture (vv.19-20). These included abstaining from
pollutions of idols including eating meat from a sacrificial beast; second, abstain from
sexual immoralities including prohibited marriages; third, abstain from strangled animals;
fourth, abstain from eating animal blood. The logic of this proposal is that these
restrictions of the Old Testament itself are placed on the gentiles (non-Jews). The
implication is that circumcision was meant only for Jews in the first place not Gentiles.
Accordingly, gentile acceptance of these prohibitions would be fully in keeping with the
Mosaic scriptures that are read weekly in the synagogues. James’ proposal thus
commends itself because it is scriptural in the strictest sense- it binds on Gentiles. What
God through scripture had bound, and that alone it succeeds in suspending circumcision
as a requirement for gentiles. It thus allows gentiles to keep the law of Moses in God’s
intended sense, not in the narrow sense insisted on by the Jewish Christian Pharisees.
The effects of Jerusalem meeting
The agreement at the meeting was endorsed in the letter (15:22-29) to the churches at
Antioch, through Paul and Barnabas. The letter repeated the four prohibitions. It also
indicated the scope of Jerusalem’s influence over Antioch, Syria and Cilicia (v23). The
letter was particularly addressed to Antioch of Syria where the problems had initially
surfaced probably because of its reputation for being the stronghold of the gentile mission
and for sponsoring the Pauline mission to eastern Asia Minor (Acts 13:1). The letter also
characterized the Pharisees as a minority who had acted without due authorization from
the highest authorities (15:24). In addition, it re-affirms the work of Paul and Barnabas
and makes them heroes’ (v26) and acknowledges the importance of Antioch by sending
two highly respected men, Judas, Barnabas and Silas (v22) to affirm the authenticity of
the agreement.
Paul’s mission in the Aegean: Acts 15 to 21
The Aegean area comprises of several cities in mainland Greece and Asia Minor. After
the endorsement of Paul and Barnabas on the gentile mission Paul went on a wider
mission in Philippi; Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens, Corinth and Ephesus before his
journey to Jerusalem again. The Pauline activities in the cities can be summarized as
follows:
1. Converting individuals

Page 180
2. Baptizing converts
3. Establishing an effective mission (churches)
4. Prophetic deeds and confrontation with pagan magic
5. Confronting pagan religion (Christ and Artemis 19:23-41).
The conversion of Apollos at Ephesus has the significance of illustrating how the early
church, Pauline Christianity in particular, dealt with cases of imperfect knowledge, or
how independent streams of Christianity were brought into the mainstream of Apostolic
Christianity. In this instance, the issue was an inadequate understanding of Christian
baptism.
The final episode at Ephesus, the riot in the 24 000- seat theatre prompted by the
complaints of Demetrius the silversmith – serves as Luke’s most detailed encounter
between the gospel and pagan religion (Acts 19:23-41). Paul directly confronts the world-
renowned goddess Artemis (19:27). So now the Pauline gospel becomes a major
challenge to both the religion and economy of an entire city and region (vv. 26-27).
Paul’s sermon at Miletus in Ephesus (Acts 20:17-38)
The sermon forms a natural conclusion to his Ephesian ministry where Luke especially
has stressed the pastoral aspects of Paul’s ministry: preaching; healing; competing with
other miracle workers and the complete elimination of pagan, magical practices from the
church; developing further mission plans, and fully engaging the social, economic and
political life of the city and region (19:8-41).
In form, the speech is a farewell sermon addressed primary to the Ephesian elders and
church, who do not expect to see Paul again (20:25; 38). His departure refers ostensibly
to his departing Ephesus, but clearly means his death. Thus Paul here is bidding farewell
to all his mission churches and the church at large.
The speech encapsulates various features of Paul’s ministry already given above. One
new element in this sermon is the prospect of false teachers who would threaten Paul’s
legacy (Acts 20:28-30). They are depicted as wolves, a common, epithet for heretics (see
Matthew 7:15). Paul cautions against both external and internal threats. This threat of
heresy echoes other New Testament sentiments, especially in the pastoral letters e.g.
Timothy, Colossians and Titus. The speech throughout underscores Paul’s commitment
and fidelity to the apostolic predecessors (Acts 20:21). In his concluding reference to the
saying of Jesus (20:35) he calls for responsible care for the weak (see Rom 15:1 and Gal
2:10) Paul is thus portrayed as faithful to the mission of Jesus, who himself
commissioned Paul (Acts 20:24). Having preached and ministered in ways reminiscent of
Jesus, he now brings Jesus’ teachings to his churches. He is a faithful and humble servant
of the lord.

Page 181
Paul in Jerusalem Acts 21
In verse 17 it is clear that Paul was welcomed by the Jerusalem church. Paul’s return is
reminiscent of his earlier return to Antioch and his report at the Jerusalem conference
where he depicted the gentile mission as God’s doing. God’s full approval of the Pauline
mission is thus explicitly acknowledged by the Jerusalem church. In their speech (Acts
21:20-25), they report the dissatisfaction of many thousands of Jewish Christians,
probably still in Judea, perhaps especially in Jerusalem who are still zealous for the law.
(v20). The new wave of opposition is not concerned with what was resolved at the
Jerusalem conference (i.e. admitting gentiles into the church). Instead, they are worried
about the implications of Paul’s teaching for those Christians who wish to remain faithful
to their Jewish way of life. They fear Paul as a threat to the continued vitality of Jewish
Christianity, especially in the diaspora, and therefore in their own region. These torah-
zealous Jewish Christians are not trying to make gentile Christianity Jewish: they are
trying to keep Jewish Christianity from becoming gentile.
Paul’s arrest: Acts 21:27-40
Paul faces a second source of resistance in Jerusalem. This source of opposition is traced
to the Jews from Asia, probably from Ephesus since they recognised Trophimus the
Ephesian.(21:29) Complaints similar to those leveled against Stephen, and in a sense
against Jesus himself are now leveled against Paul (21:28) He is accused of being anti-
Jewish, anti-law, and anti-temple. So he is charged with being a threat to everyone
everywhere, a universal menace (v28). Luke says that the Asian Jews mistakenly thought
Paul had taken the gentile Trophimus into the Temple (21:29). Their charge is thus
unfounded. Nevertheless they succeeded in inciting the whole city against Paul. The mob
had intentions to murder him (v31). The mob’s cry of murder ‘kill him’ (v36) echoes
similar shouts against Jesus (cf. Luke 23:18). As the Jews dared to kill him, the Romans
came to his rescue (21:31-36). But even so it was a Roman who ordered Paul to be bound
with two chains (21:33) thereby fulfilling Agabus’ prophecy in Acts 21:11. From this
point on in Acts, Paul remains imprisoned.
Paul’s’ defense before the temple crowd (acts 22:1-22)
The first part of his defense speech outlines his status as a true native of Jerusalem (22 v
3). His reference to his vision in the temple (22:17) has the characteristics of a prophetic
call (cf. Isaiah 6:1-13). But it is a call not from God, but Jesus himself. The temple vision
serves as a response to the third charge that Paul is against the temple (Acts 21:28) on the
countary, the temple serves as the place where his prophetic service to God actually
begins, as did Isaiah’s. Although Paul had participated in the death of Stephen and his
subsequent terroristic acts it was to no avail. He is clearly Jesus’ chosen prophet to the
gentiles.

Page 182
Paul before the Sanhedrim: Acts 22- 23
This appearance adds more exposure of Paul to the Jerusalem Jews. Paul is thus
portrayed as a figure of increasing significance in the life of Jerusalem and its Jews. The
curious exchange between Paul and Ananias (23:1-5) contrasts the high priest’s
disobedience of the law with Paul’s complete fidelity to the law. Ananias’ unexplained
action in beating Paul is seen to be in direct violation of the biblical rules for impartial
judgment (see Leviticus 19:15; Deutr 1:16-17). By contrast Paul both quotes the law
(Exodus 22:28) and expresses willingness to live by it. Ananias’ external, visible actions
have exposed the superficial whitewash of his own Jewish loyalty (cf. Ezek 13:10-16).
As was the case with Peter earlier, the Sanhedrin hearing serves as a forum in which
Christianity is heard and supported. In spite of significantly different proceedings that are
reported, in both cases, Pharisees emerge as allies of Christians. The scribes of the
Pharisees’ party who declare Paul innocent of any wrong doing (23:9) and wonder
whether he might truly be an agent of some divine messenger, are echoing the cautious
advice of Gamaliel (5: 38-39). Paul emerges from the Sanhedrin vindicated. This is
evidenced in the night vision of Jesus in Acts 23 v 11, who reconfirms the validity of his
testimony before the council and now also confirms his mission plans formulated earlier
in Ephesus (19:21).
Paul is transferred to Caesarea: Acts 23:31-26
A large group of 40 conspirators-chief priests and elders plotted the transfer of Paul to
Caesarea to stand trials there before several Roman governors: Felix, Festus and Agrippa.
The allegations that were raised by the public prosecutor, Tertullus, were ruinous of Paul
if the governor Felix would accept the state case. The text of the charges were as follows:
Paul is a plague spot, a perfect pest; a danger to the public good. Paul is seditious – a
fomenter of discord, inciting riots; causes dissension wherever he goes among Jews
throughout the world, a universal threat to Roman peace and stability. Ring leader of the
sect of Nazarenes. This probably depicts him as the instigator of a new religion. Paul is
portrayed as an outsider and a Jewish renegade who profaned the Temple. He is
presented as insensitive to the customs and institutions of a well-established, legally
protected religion.
Paul’s defense Acts 24
Paul’s response (24:10-21) is an adroitly crafted defense. His polite deference to Felix,
which contrasts sharply with Tertullus’ damaging introduction scores points with
informed readers who know Felix’s candalous reputation. Moreover, by limiting his
remarks to his conduct in Jerusalem, Paul shrewdly redefines the charge. But the more
important element of Paul’s defense is his consistent claim to be an utterly loyal Jew. He
refuses to admit that he is the spokesman for a new religion. What his enemies
mistakenly call a ‘sect’ is better understood as ‘the Way’. Even though ‘the Way’ is being
used here in a highly technical sense to describe the Jesus movement (9:2), it nevertheless
has a certain resonance with an Old Testament expectation for the truly obedient people

Page 183
of God (Exodus 32:8). Consequently Paul’s preferred term for the movement with which
he gladly identifies himself, more closely aligns him with the biblical tradition.
Another line of his defense is his self-portrait as a devout pilgrim who came to Jerusalem
neither to preach, nor to cause riots, but to worship (vii). His almsgiving (v 17) could
only be construed as evidence of his loyalty to scripture and tradition (Ps 112:9) as well
as his commitment to help the weak (Acts 20:35). What is striking here is that these funds
are for ‘his nation’ which would suggest donations to Jews generally. Conceivably, this is
a reference to the Pauline relief fund for the poor Jewish Christians in Jerusalem, but if so
it is an unusual way of putting it. His mention of ‘offerings’ is intended to recall his
participation with the four men who had a vow (Acts 21:23-27).
While Felix does not decide formally in Paul’s favor, neither does he sustain Tertullus’
charges. That his was not an uniformed decision is indicated by his having a rather
accurate knowledge of the way (24:22). By not losing, Paul wins. This is also reflected in
the relative freedom he enjoys as a prisoner (v 23). The final meeting between Paul and
Felix (vv. 24-27) portrays a shift in Luke’s portrait of Felix. Paul the defender now
becomes Paul the preacher. Accompanied by his Jewish wife Druscilla, the youngest
daughter of Agrippa 1, Felix takes the initiative in summoning Paul. Luke shows the
gospel actually attracting another Roman official. Luke presents Felix as a case of failed
faith, seen especially in his expressed hope for a bribe (Acts 24:26). Felix’s love for
money fails him like Ananias and Sapphira and Judas Iscariot. The final stroke in Luke’s
portrait of Felix is his excessive favor for the Jews, which resulted in his decision to leave
Paul in prison.
Before Festus Acts 25:1-27
The same charges that had been laid before Felix are now pressed before Festus who
succeeded Felix as procurator between A.D 55 and 59. Paul remained resolute, sure of his
rights, unwilling to be intimidated by Roman officials who are willing to bend to political
pressure. Festus’ considered judgment is that Paul’s accusers have vastly overstated the
seriousness of his offense (25 : 18).
Before Agrippa Acts 26:1-23
There is great persuasion in Luke that Paul’s sermon to Agrippa made overtures
tentatively toward faith (24:22-27). Agrippa’s response in 26:28 implies his positiveness
to the strong persuasion from Paul. His final verdict is an unqualified vindication of Paul.
Paul in Rome Acts 28:16-31
The primary focus of Paul’s activity in Rome is on his dealings with the Roman Jewish
community. Two stages are reported:
1. Defense vv.17-22
2. Proclamation vv.23-29.

Page 184
Verses 30 to 31 deal with Paul’s broader ministry in the subsequent two years as a
vindicated apostle.
As he lodged in an inn under the protection of one soldier, Paul has considerable
freedom, which allows him to summon local Jewish leaders. His speech to them is a
highly abbreviated account of the previous charges made against him and his previous
defenses at his various trials.
Obviously unable to go to one of the several synagogues in Rome at this time, as was his
usual practice, Paul summons the Jewish community to his lodging and they come in
great numbers (v 23). The brief outline of his testimony to them represents a digest of
Paul’s previously reported preaching before Jewish audiences. Once again, it conforms
fully to the apostolic preaching of those who came before him, both Jesus and especially
Peter: the breaking in of God’s new reign in the person of Jesus both of which represent
the fulfillment of God’s promise in scripture.
The end of acts
The presentation of Paul at the end of Acts has two fundamental elements: First, the
fulfillment of the divine purpose in Paul, who, as a chosen instrument, carried God’s
name to all who came to him, most likely gentiles, and second, the full vindication of
Paul and ‘the Way’, both of whom have proceeded and flourished throughout the
narrative under Roman protection and are left to proceed boldly and unhindered.
1. Who wrote Acts and why was it written?

2. Why were Christians persecuted, and by whom?
3. Show from the early chapters of acts Peter’s importance as leader and spokesman of
the Christian community.
4. What did Stephen do in Jerusalem? What were the accusation against him? How did
the persecutions that followed affect him?
5. Trace the growth of Jewish opposition to Paul from his arrival in Cyprus on his first
missionary journey up to the council of Jerusalem.
Gobbets
1) And they brought them to the magistrates, and said, these man, being Jews
exceedingly trouble our city.” (Acts 16:20)
2) “Therefore let it be known to you brethren, that through this man is preached to you
the forgiveness of sins” (Acts 13:38)
3) “But they shook off the dust from their feet against them, and came to Iconium.” (Acts
13:51)

Page 185
References
1. Conzelmann, H.A Commentary on the Acts on the Apostles, Fortress, 1987

2. Haencher, E, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary. West Minister, 1971
3. Holladay C.R, Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, 1988.

Page 186
CHAPTER 15
1 CORINTHIANS
By the need of the chapter the student should be able to:
1. Give an account of the problems that affected the church at Corinth.

2. Examine how Paul dealt with each of the problems
3. Examine Paul’s argument on the resurrection
Introduction
Background Issues
Elizabeth Fiorenza clearly points out that the authenticity of the letter, as a letter of Paul
is undisputed. Most scholars put its probable date around AD 54. Robert Jewett had
pointed out that the Pauline letters were originally written to troubled congregations too
distant to visit at the moment. Most of the Pauline letters related directly to the problems
of individual congregations and to the relationships between them and the sender. The
letter to the Corinthians is a direct response to the problems that besieged the Corinthian
church. The corinthian community appears to have sought Paul’s advice – and perhaps
that of others – about moral sexual behaviour, marriage, celibacy and divorce, slavery
and litigations, right order and conduct of women and men, prophets and ecstatics in the
communal assembly, the eating of food sacrificed to idols, the immortality of the soul
and the resurrection of the dead.
Paul’s letter stands as a response to these problems within the Corinthian Church.
Scholars warn that it is not possible to correctly interpret 1Corinthians without examining
first and carefully the historical –theological environment of the Corinthian
Communities. Three major approaches to such an historical reconstruction are going to
be used in the interpretation of this letter. The first school of thought observes that the
underlying factor to the problems at Corinth is the existence of a certain symbol of
theological belief or spirituality. This belief system claimed the original preaching of
some prominent figures i.e. Prisca who had come from Rome, Apollos (converted by
Prisca in Corinth) and even Paul himself, as their sources of inspiration and legitimation.
Such symbolic beliefs manifested themselves as spiritualistic ascetism, or unrestrained
enthusiasm, resulting in clusters or small camps of believes (disciples) who displayed
some pomposity or claim some superiority over another cluster. Their leaders who, like
Paul, claimed to be spirit-empowered persons were therefore understood as advocating
for some special wisdom or incipient gnosticism. Such Corinthians believed that they
possessed divine wisdom and therefore called themselves ‘pneumatics’ or spiritual
persons. Since in Hellenistic thought ‘spirit’ is considered to be a heavenly substance that
endows persons with a new nature, the Corinthians could have claimed such spiritual
status of perfection. Once transformed into a new being the spiritual person no longer
belongs to the sphere of the ‘flesh’ but to the heavenly realm. This notion that the higher
soul or mind is the true self that belongs to the heavenly sphere of the spiritual, is

Page 187
believed to have led to the conviction that the body’s domain is the ‘flesh’ the
corruptible, material, and mortal reality from which the true self must be liberated. This
notion of salvation has implications not only for personal moral behaviour, but also for
relationships to less spiritually endowed members of the community. The ability to speak
in tongues might have been for them a clear sign of such spiritual endowment and may
have caused them to consider other Christians as inferior because they could not speak in
tongues. Those who could speak in tongues regarded themselves as more special than
those who could not speak in tongues (a problem in Corinth).
Paul assumed to argue against such individualistic and enthusiastic spirituality by

underscoring a communal and eschatological perspective. Against the Corinthians’
understanding of transformation and perfection in the spirit Paul points out that they have
not yet achieved final salvation and resurrection. Against their illusory claims to have
become immortal by partaking already now in the divine heavenly sphere of the spirit,
Paul insists that they are still under the power of sin and death and that the resurrection is
not yet achieved in baptism but only in an event of the future. In the mean time Christians
must live under the symbol of the crucified Christ.
The second school of thought on the interpretation of Corinthians maintains that the
problems addressed by Paul should be understood as arising from the interaction of the
Corinthian Christians with their own culture and religion in which they are still deeply
rooted, although they have consciously distanced themselves from it by becoming
Christians. Most of the difficult ties in Corinth can best be understood in terms of this co-
existence between Christianity and paganism. Corinth was a cosmopolitan city, as well as
a trading center. The citizens of Corinth were not only Romans and Greeks but also Jews
and Orientals from Syria, Egypt and Asia Minor. Each of these groups imported its own
religious beliefs, customs and rituals. Thus religious syncretism was widespread in
Corinth. Prophecy, speaking in tongues and ecstasy were highly valued experiences of
the time. Public feasts and private meals of associations and clubs were celebrated in the
name of the gods. It was virtually impossibly to avoid eating meat that had been
sacrificed to the pagan gods either at public festivals or at private business or funeral
banquets in temple dining rooms and homes. The church at Corinth raised questions
about eating meat of animals offered to idols.
The third school of thought or interpretative emphasis seeks to elaborate not only the
religious but also the socio-historical context of 1Corinthians in terms of the social
organisation and ecclesial self- understanding of the Christian missionary movement.
Travelling missionaries and house- churches were central for this movement, which
depended on social mobility and patronage. Like Judaism and other oriental religions so
the Christian gospel was spread by travelling business and trade people like Prisca (a
leather dealer) or Paul. Such travelling missionaries brought a variety of theological
understandings to the churches in the regions in Greece and Rome or Greco-Roman cities
and fostered communication among them. The existence of house-churches presupposes
that some citizens joined the Christian movement who were able to provide space and
economic support for the assembly or the house congregation in their houses. Such
converts mostly came from the ranks of ‘god-fearers’ already sympathetic with Judaism

Page 188
As Christianity spread in a city several house-churches were founded and their interaction
with each other could lead to tension and dissention especially at occasions when all
house-congregations in the city meet. Such was the nature of the problem in Corinth. The
tensions in Corinth had their roots not only in the breaking down of ritual or religious
boundaries between Jews and gentiles, but also in the breaking down of established social
boundaries between freeborn and slaves or between different national or ethnic groups.
Christian house- churches quizzed each other over admission of persons irrespective of
their statuses to full membership. Should gentiles be admitted also on equal status with
the Jews in the Christian church at Corinth?
In a way the above three schools of interpretation expose the most serious problems that
affected the Christian movement at Corinth viz: self-contentment among some Christian
believers on the basis of their spirituality; speaking in tongues and dietary restraints, the
evolution of house-churches and patronage and the problems of superiority of some over
others. Among other things Paul write to the entire corinthians audience responding to the
problems that bedeviled the Christian movement in Corinth.
Association with immoral members (1 Cor 5:1-13)
Verses 1-5 attacks the community for not expelling a man living with his stepmother,
(who probably was not a Christian because she is not criticized). Since such a marriage
was forbidden not only by Jewish, but also by Roman law, it is possible that the couple
was not married but only cohabited. Paul considers this to be a case of gross immorality.
Therefore, he argues that the Corinthians should be filled with a sense of sadness rather
than pride about it. They should expel the man from the community as Paul has already
done, even though he is absent from the community. Paul’s frustration indicates that he
could not intervene directly and expel the sinner on his own authority, because only the
assembled community had the right to make this decision. Paul’s concern is primarily for
the purity of the community and not so much for the fate of the offender. In verses 10-11
Paul clarifies his position by explaining that he did not have in mind the immoral persons
of this world, for then Christians would have to move out of the world. What he actually
had meant was not to associate with immoral Christians.
Problems arising from the baptismal formula of Galatians 3:28 (1 Cor 7: 1-40)
Should married christians continue or abstain from sexual intercourse? Should unmarried
people get married? What is to be done if one’s marriage partner is an unbeliever, either
Jew or pagan? What should women do who are virgins or widows? Should one remain in
an oppressive marriage relationship? Such questions can be seen as practical problems
arising from the attempt to live the social relationships professed at one’s baptism,
although Galatians 3:28 is never explicitly mentioned in Corinthians chapter 7.
Sexual abstinence. 1 Cor 7:1-9

Page 189
The argument in vv2-9 seems to indicate that Paul addresses here a Corinthian question
by introducing qualifications. It is clear from the climax of the argument in vv7-9 that
Paul himself lived a life of sexual abstinence and that he valued this ‘charisma’ highly.
However, he insists, marriage is a necessity if one can not live the asexual life demanded
by freedom from the marriage bond. Those who are tempted should not abstain from
intercourse. Both partners have the mutual obligation to marital intercourse, except for
some limited celibate periods set aside by mutual agreement for worship. As was the
practice in other oriental cults, so also Paul recognizes temporary ritual chastity.
Marriage and divorce: 1 Cor 7:10-16
While Paul counsels those who are not bound by marriage to remain free, he commands
the married not to separate. However despite this instruction of the Lord, wives [7:10-11]
still have the possibility of freeing themselves from the marriage bond. If they do so
however, they must remain in this marriage-free-state. They may return to their husbands
but may not marry someone else.
A somewhat different problem is raised with respect to marriages between Christians and
unbelievers. In chapter 6 verse 12-20 Paul had asked, ‘Do you not know that your bodies
are members of Christ?’ and insisted that therefore they should not be made members of
a prostitute. Likewise christians in mixed marriages could have asked, ‘Can I, as a
member of Christ, continue to have sexual intercourse with someone who does not
belong to the body of Christ? Do I thereby become conformed to my partner’s pagan
existence and lose my standing in Christ?’ In addition as can be seen in Chapter 5, Jewish
and christian missionary theology held that converts have become a new creation. They
were considered to be like new born children. Therefore the Corinthians might have
believed that baptism into Christ dissolved all previous marriage bonds.
In response to this problem Paul insists that because of the missionary situation, the
decision to continue the marriage relationship or not to continue, should be left to the
unbelieving partner but not to the christian. If the unbeliever wants to stay married the
christian partner can consider the marriage bond as reconstituted by intercourse and the
children of such a marriage are holy and legitimate. However, Paul’s insistence that
because of missionary reasons the unbelieving partner had the final decision resulted in
many more difficulties for women than for men, since men were entitled by law to
control the religious practices of the members of their households. In so far as Paul
sacrifices the right of the christian partner to determine her or his marital status, he made
it impossible for christian women to divorce their non-christian husbands, a legal option
that often resulted in greater religious and social freedom especially for economically
self-sufficient women.
Concerning food sacrificed to Idols. 1 Cor 8: 1-13

Page 190
The central question is whether christians are permitted to eat food sacrificed to idols.
Because Jews believed that it was idolatrous to eat such meat, they obtained the privilege
to slaughter their animals and sell their own meat to Jews. However, it was almost
impossible for newly converted christians who were not Jewish to avoid the social
occasions at which such food was offered. Moreover, for many poor citizens the meat
served at public feasts was probably the only meat available to them, since meat was very
expensive. Members of the Corinthian community seem to have argued that they could
consume such sacrificial food, because they all had the religious insight and knowledge
that an idol has no real existence because there is no other god but one.
Paul agrees with the theological contention that the eating of such food is social and not
religious. No religious advantage or disadvantage is engendered by eating or by not
eating such food. However, such religious freedom to eat or not to eat sacrificial food
must not be allowed to become a stumbling block to a weak member of the community
i.e. the converted members who have been eating sacrificial food for the rest of their lives
on the faith that the meat is divine according to their old religion, lest their new
awareness and faith may be spoiled.
About women prophets 1 Cor 11:2-16
Women prophets and women who were leaders of their congregations are admonished to
wear their hair bound up like a crown rather than unbound, since this was in Greco-
Roman understanding a sign of frenzy and in Jewish understanding a sign of adultery (see
Numbers 5: 18). Disheveled or unbound hair was as disgraceful for a woman as for her
head to be shaven. For men in verses 4 and 14 of this chapter, exegetes have recently
suggested that men are prohibited to wear long hair (Ezekiel 44:20) since this caused
suspicion of effeminacy and homosexuality. However, whatever custom or hairstyle Paul
seeks to advocate, it must not be overlooked that he does not prohibit women from
publicity praying and prophesying.
Divisions at the Eucharist 1 Cor 11; 17-34
While Paul praises the community in Corinth for having kept the traditions with respect
to public praying and prophesying of women and men, he severely reprimands their
behaviour at the Eucharist meal. He mentions first the divisions and groupings among
them (vv. 17-19) and goes on to criticize them for not eating the supper of the Son of God
(kyrios) when coming together. Instead of waiting for each other they eat their ‘own
meals’ so that one remains hungry and the other gets drunk (v21). This accusation is
followed by two rhetorical questions in verse 22 and a quotation of early Christian
eucharistic tradition in verses 23 to 26. Verses 17-23 clearly speaks of social class
distinctions. Those who humiliate the poor and despise the assembly of God are
sufficiently wealthy to own houses where they can satisfy their hunger. The rhetorical
question ‘Do you not have houses---?’ is best understood in the sense that Paul wants to
insist that actual eating and drinking of a meal should take place in private homes and not
in the ritual meal celebration of the community. In his critique of the Corinthian
community Paul underlines the contrast between one’s own selfish, individualistic meal

Page 191
and the Lord’s Supper, between one’s own satisfaction and the hunger and thirst of the
poor in the community. However Paul’s advice to eat at home does not overcome this
opposition but transposes it into the division between ordinary, non-cultic eating and
drinking and ritual or sacramental eating and drinking, between an ordinary meal and the
Lord’s supper (v34). In quoting the tradition about the last supper of Jesus, Paul indicates
that according to this tradition the actual meal, the eating and drinking together was an
integral part of the Eucharist celebration. The breaking of the bread and the sharing of the
cup mark the beginning and end of a meal that is celebrated in remembrance of Jesus.
About spiritual gifts: Speaking in tongues: 1Cor 12
Paul does not disqualify and repudiate speaking in tongues but he ranks it as the lowest of
spiritual endowments. His concluding admonition to seek the higher gifts indicates that
he is interested in establishing a hierarchy of gifts. In the interim time, however, when
speaking in tongues and other prophetic gifts are incomplete, three gifts remain: faith;
hope, and love, but love stands supreme as the most excellent gift. Therefore the whole
praise of love (agape) climaxes in the exhortation ‘make love your aim’ (14.v:1), which is
at the same time a transition to the next section – chapter 14:16-40.
Although Paul wishes that all could speak in tongues, he values prophecy higher because
it contributes more to the building up of the community. Those who speak in tongues
have received this gift for their own spiritual uplift, whereas those who prophesy edify,
comfort and teach the whole assembly. Because of its communal, communicative
character, Paul accords prophetic speaking first place, ‘seek to prophesy’. (14:16).
In Chapter 14:13 - 19 Paul downplays the gift of speaking in tongues. He points out its
shortfalls. If someone speaks in tongues, that person should also pray for the gift of
interpretation. Three conclusions are drawn for Christian praying and worship. First,
prayer should not only be ecstatic but also should be fruitful for mind or reason. Further
the community is forced into the role of ‘the outsider’ by such ecstatic prayer, because it
does not know when to respond and ratify such prayer. Finally, Paul refers again to his
own example. Although he speaks more in tongues than any of the Corinthians, he
prefers to say five understandable words of instruction rather than thousands of words in
tongues no one can understand.
About the resurrection: 1 Cor 15
Corinthians got entangled in the question of the resurrection. Some argued that there is no
resurrection of the dead but a resurrection of living people only, while others actually
focused on the question of the form the dead are to be resurrected- a problem raised by
‘someone’ whom Paul calls a fool.
The foundation of Paul’s argument: 1Cor 15:1-11

Page 192
In this section Paul seeks to establish that he is a member of the apostolic circle and
shared in its authority. In verses 1-2 Paul draws attention to the gospel that he received by
which they live, and through which they are saved if they hold firmly to it. However Paul
is uncertain whether their faith was genuine.
In verses 3-8 Paul reiterates the gospel that he has preached to them by quitting a
traditional creedal formula in verses 3-5 ‘After that he was seen by Cephas, then by the
twelve.---‘ that he expands in verses 6-8. This traditional gospel stresses that Christ died,
was buried, was raised and was made visible or appeared. Paul rhetorically asserts that he
is the least of the apostles. At the same time he makes clear that he is the most dedicated
and hardest working of all the apostles. Yet he plays this down by pointing to the grace of
God. Paul thus seeks to show that he is a member of the apostolic group to whom the
gospel is entrusted.
Verses 12-19 is a segment that addresses the argument of some who say that there is no
resurrection of the dead. They are contrasted with the apostles who proclaim Christ as
raised from the dead. It is debated whether ‘some’ denied the resurrection of the dead as
such or only the resurrection of those who died before the Parousia (glorious return) of
1)Christ. However if there is no resurrection of the dead four conclusions must be drawn:
2)Christ has not been raised (vv. 13;16)
3)Paul’s preaching is misleading and nullified (vv. 14;15)
4)The faith of the Corinthians is in vain, they are still in their sins and deserve pity(vv.
14; 17; 19)
5)Those who have died in Christ have perished (v 18).
Whereas in Corinth both the gospel which says ‘Christ was raised’ and the statement that
‘There is no resurrection from the dead’ could be held alongside each other, Paul relates
them as statements exclusive of each other by adding the phrase ‘from the dead’ to the
traditional gospel.
Second, after having pointed out the fatal consequences of this opinion for the dead and
living, Paul positively develops what the resurrection of Christ means (see vv. 20-28).
Christ is the first fruit of those who have fallen asleep (died). Christ’s resurrection as the
first in a whole series is constitutive for all those following (vv. 20 –22). From verses 23-
28 a temporal order of eschatological events is given. First, Christ’s resurrection and
enthronement, then the resurrection of the dead at his parousia, and finally, after having
overcome all domination and evil powers, Christ will give up reign and power to God
who will be ‘all in all’. The resurrection of Christ and that of the dead are not
independent theological data but are integrated as an indissoluble causal and temporal
whole in the salvific plan of God for the world.
Conclusion

Page 193
The concluding remarks in the Pauline letters generally include exhortations as well as
personal plans and greetings. There is always nothing to indicate whether the
congregation has responded positively or otherwise. Anyway the objective of our analysis
of these letters is to expose the problems, solutions and doctrines that were propounded
by the apostle. These are the vital issues in the subject of divinity, which this study pack
pursues.
1. Discuss the date and purpose of 1 Corinthians.

2. Give an account of Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians and 1 Thessalonians on marriage
and relations between both sexes.
3. What were the problems at Corinth? How did Paul deal with them? (Zimsec)
4. Critically examine Paul’s argument on resurrection.(Zimsec)
Gobbets
1) “A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives, but if her husband dies…” (1
Cor 8:39)
2) “Now these things became examples, to the intent that we should not lust after evil
things as they also lusted.” (1 Cor 10:6)
3) “But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her, for her hair is given to her for her
covering.” (1 Cor 11:15)
References
1. Barret C.K, The first epistle to the Corinthians, Harper’s New Testament
Commentaries. New York, 1968.
2. Bratcher R.G., A Translator’s guide to Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. United
Bible Societies, 1982.
3. Fiorenza, E. Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary. Collins 1988
Talbet C.H. Reading Corinthians: A literary and Theological Commentary on 1
and 2 Corinthians, Crossroad, 1987.

Page 194
CHAPTER 16
HEBREWS
By the end of the chapter the student should be able to;
1. Discuss the background issues on Hebrews i.e. authorship, date, destination and
purpose
2. Identify the main theme in the letter to the Hebrews
3. Examine the critical arguments that are raised by scholars on Hebrews
Precis
The letter to the Hebrews is not a Pauline letter. Its author is unclear. Hence it is placed
under what Professor Pheme Perkins described as ‘general letters to the churches.’ Such
letters may follow the Pauline paradigm, with their destinations being certain christian
churches. The approach of this study pack to such letters is systematically designed to
meet any possible examination question that can be raised from Hebrews. The following
topical issues shall be analysed with frequent references to passages in the letter: The
authorship debate; the date of compilation; the destination of the letter and the purpose of
the letter.
Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews?
Professor Harold .W. Attridge has submitted that the work known as the letter to the
Hebrews was not originally a letter; nor were its addressees likely to have been Hebrews.
Though often thought to be Paul, the identity of the author is unknown. The opinion that
it was a Pauline composition was held in Alexandria (Egypt) from the second country on,
although prominent figures such as Origen recognized difficulties with that attribution.
Origen’s remark that ‘only God knows’ who really wrote the piece is often cited. In the
Latin West there were, at first, doubts about Pauline authorship. Tertullian, for instance
considered Barnabas the author. By the fourth century the Eastern opinion came to be
accepted in the West and Pauline authorship remained unquestioned until the renaissance
and Reformation ages, when stylistic considerations again caused doubts. Luther, and
many other scholars, suggested Apollos as the author. Numerous other candidates have
been advanced, including Priscilla and Aquilla, Silas and Jude. None is satisfactory, and
Origen’s judgement that ‘only God knows’, is fully warranted.
The date when Hebrews was written?
The general range within which Hebrews was written runs from about A.D. 60 to about
95. The earlier date (60 A.D.) is suggested by the author’s reference to himself and his
community as second generation christians in Hebrews 2: 3-4. The advanced state of the
traditions used in the text, especially its christology (the way it identifies Jesus), also
presupposes some time for development. Few critics date Hebrews any date earlier than
60 A.D. The upper end of the date range (95 A.D.) is often anchored in the use of

Page 195
Hebrews by 1 Clement (1 Clement 36). Although that use is at times doubted, it is

obvious, especially in chapter 36 of 1 Clement. 1 Clement was a letter from the
leadership of the church in Rome to Corinth. The letter was normally dated to A.D. 95-
96, although that date is hardly secure, and the work could have been written any time
between A.D. 75 and 120. This provides an upper end for the date of Hebrews of about
A.D. 110. The range might be compressed further by internal considerations. Many
critics argue that Hebrews was written prior to A.D. 70 because it refers to the Jewish
temple worship as a present reality and does not mention the destruction of the temple,
but neither argument is probative. Both Jewish and christian authors writing after 70 refer
to the temple in present terms. More important, Hebrews is not interested in the actual
cult of the herodian temple but in the depiction of the cult of the desert tabernacle. The
author uses that scriptural picture as part of his constructive christology, not as an
apologist or polemicist, and the basis of his argument is exegesis, not history. The
reference to Timothy in Hebrews 13:23, if to Paul’s collaborator, could push the upper
end of the date range down to the mid-nineties since it is unlikely that Timothy would
have been alive, well, and ready to travel much later.
Destination: For whom was the letter written
The designation of the addressees as ‘Hebrews’ seems to be a later editorial inference

based on the contents of the text. Many commentators, both patristic and modern have
followed the title’s lead, assuming that because of its concern with Jewish institutions and
traditions, the work was addressed to Jews or to Jewish christians. Identification of the
addressees is correlated with hypotheses about the aims of the text. If written to Jews,
Hebrews might be designed as an invitation to accept the christian confession. If to
Jewish christians, it might aim to prevent a relapse to the ancestral religion. Both
construal of the addressees and the aim of the work have been defended, but neither is
persuasive. The obvious familiarity with Jewish institutions and exegetical traditions is
indicative of the author’s background but says little about his audience. Other Jewish
christians, such as Paul, address predominantly gentile communities e.g. Galatia and
Corinth, with sophisticated exegetical arguments and appeals to Jewish traditions. The
intended audience of this text may also have been gentile.
The purpose why the letter was written
While the ethnic origin of the intended readers is unclear, Hebrews does give some data
about them. They had been christians for some time (evidence in 5:12) and because of
that commitment, had experienced persecution (evidence in 10:32-34), which is expected
to continue (cf 12;3-13; 13:3). Part of Hebrews’ function is to inspire the faithful
endurance necessary to meet such threats. Of equal importance, the community seems to
be undergoing a crisis of confidence. Some have been neglecting the community
assembly (cf text in 10:25). Such behaviour may be a reaction to outside threats or even
to the attractions of traditional Judaism, but it could equally well derive from a waning
enthusiasm with complex causes. It is also not clear how well informed the author was
about these causes. He senses, however, the possibility of apostasy and wants to prevent
it by rekindling faith.

Page 196
The attempt to rekindle the faith of a community faced with pressure from its
environment and with internal fatigue is conducted in two ways. The author appeals
directly to the addressees in a series of warnings (see chapters 6:4-12; 10:26-31; 12:15-
16) and exhortations. The thrust of these exhortations is summarised in chapter 4 verse 14
to 15. The addressees are urged to hold what they have, especially their confession of
Christ. They are also called to movements of various kinds. At times the movement,
based on cultic imagery, is one of approach to God (see 4:16; 10:19-22). At other times it
is movement onward (6:1) or outward (11:15; 13:13) to the world in loving service. Such
hortatory imagery is concretized in the appeals to specific virtues, especially to fidelity
and endurance (evidence in chapters 11 and 12).
Hebrews is grounded in a christological exposition i.e. the exposition of Jesus’ identity.

The text in chapters 7 to 10 verse 18 provides the central exposition and develop a new
presentation of Christ’s person and work. That presentation affirms both the heavenly
character and full humanity of the Son. At the same time, it shows how his sacrificial
death is existentially relevant for the addressees because it inaugurated a new covenantal
relationship with God. It is the virtues of that covenant relationship that the addressees
are called upon to display. They are assured that they can be faithful and hopeful, for
Christ is their example and his exaltation is a surety for their own.

1. Discuss the authorship and destination of Hebrews.
2. What does the author of Hebrews teach about Christ as a sacrificial lamb.
3. Why was the letter to the Hebrews written?
4. What are the critical issues that scholars raise on Hebrews?
Gobbets: Write explanatory comments on the following:

(a) For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are
tempted. (Hebrews 1:8)
(b) For He of whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no man
has officiated at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord arose from Judah of which
Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood. (Hebrews 7:13-14)
(c) Therefore, brethen having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus. By a
new and living way which he consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, his flesh.
(Hebrews 10:19-20)
(d) Looking carefully lest anyone fall short , short of the grace of God, lest any root of
bitterness springing up cause trouble and by this many become defiled. (Hebrews
12:15-16)
References
1. Attridge H.W Article in Harper’s Bible commentary, Collins, 1988
2. Bruce, F.F. The epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Raids, M1: Eerdmans, 1964.
3. Hughes, P.E. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. 1977.

Page 197
CHAPTER 17
Romans
1. Examine the background issues on Romans
2. Discuss the mater that pressed Paul to wrote the letter to the Romans
3. Examine Paul’s references to the figure Abraham and the Law
4. Examine the theme of “justification” in Romans
The letter of Paul to the Romans
Robert Jewett in his article ‘The Redaction of 1 Corinthians and the Trajectory of the
Pauline School.’ Journal of the American Academy of Religion Supplement 46, (1978)
pointed out that Paul’s letters were originally written to troubled congregations too
distant to visit at the moment. Jewett goes on to state that most of these letters related
directly to the problems of individual congregations and to the relationships between
them and the sender. The letters were written by an authoritative person who founded the
church or the congregation. This observation has problems or fails to apply to the letter of
Paul to the Romans. Paul writes to a church he did not found. He did not found any
congregation in Rome. Moreover, the motif of the letter is not to solve any trouble in the
church in Rome. Paul here may also be accused of violating the policy of non-
interference adopted at the Jerusalem council (see Gal 2:7-9). This policy prohibits an
apostle from interfering with congregations founded by another apostle or an area of
missionary activity of another apostle.
Paul .W. Meyer quoted Philip Melanchthon who described Romans as ‘ a compendium of
christian doctrine,’ and it has in fact functioned as such for most of its long history. But
most of Paul’s letters served as substitutes for his personal presence as an apostle and
leader in situations of crisis that developed in churches he himself had founded. In those
letters Paul writes because he has to protect, correct, or strengthen some aspect of the
gospel in the life of a particular congregation that is under risk. Romans appear to be an
exception to this pattern. It is addressed to a church Paul did not establish.
Date, occasion and purpose of Romans
AD 55 or 56 is the undisputed date of Romans. The letter came into existence after the
writing of Galatians and the letters to the Corinthians. Paul draws his justification for
writing to the Romans and his right to be heard by them from his being an apostle to the
gentiles (Rom 1:13-14) and on their being a gentile christian community.
[VERY IMPORTANT] – Scholars say that Paul felt he had no more space to carry on his
mission to the Gentiles in the eastern Mediterranean and wanted to extend it to the west
and to Spain and to be speeded on his way there by the church at Rome, to be supported
by them in this enterprise. Since Paul hopes for such help from a church he did not
himself establish, one motive for writing is clearly implied: he wants to present this

Page 198
church with an authentic representation of his message to gain its trust and backing. But
before he can come to Rome however, Paul has to make one last trip to Jerusalem to
deliver the collection of money he has raised for the Jewish christians there (being
contributions for the Saints). This fixes the date and place for the writing of Romans
fairly well, that is, during his last stay in Greece prior to his final trip to Jerusalem.
What pressed Paul to write?
It has already been pointed out that Paul wanted trust and support from Roman believers.
‘The Roman exile hypothesis’ postulates that Emperor Claudius’ edict of AD 49 had
expelled all Jews from Rome due to disturbances in the Roman Jewish community over
the messiahship of Jesus. After the death of Claudius these Jewish Christians returned to
Rome, but they met resistance from their fellow gentile christians. Enormous problems of
reconciliation resulted. A situation faced earlier by Paul in Antioch (see Gal 2: 11-14)
would have become an acute local Roman problem but with a reverse twist: now it would
be gentile christians against jewish christians. Therefore a need was there for Gentile
christians to be reminded of their debt to their Jewish heritage (Paul does this in Roman
11:18) and they had to be urged to be more tolerant of Jewish religious practices.
“The Jerusalem crisis hypothesis’
It postulates that Paul was very anxious over the outcome of his coming visit to
Jerusalem (Rom 15: 30-33). The visit was for Paul to deliver the money he had collected
for the Jewish churches at Jerusalem. This money had come from gentiles and Jews in
Greece. Such a collection exemplified and actualized the unity of a church composed of
both Jews and gentiles. That had been an issue at the apostolic conference in Jerusalem
(Gal 2:1-10) and that constitutes one of the running themes of Romans. Whether Paul’s
whole career had been worthwhile or futile depended in turn on Jerusalem’s recognition
of the unity of Jews and gentiles (Gal 2:2). Paul’s anxiety therefore is not limited to what
might occur in Jerusalem, it is at least in part an anxiety to be rightly understood in Rome
not only so that he might have the Roman Christians as allies but also that his entire
mission should not be misunderstood as the irrelevant experiment of a free- lancer. The
situation that occasioned Romans in this view is a crisis that lies before Paul in
Jerusalem. The resources for facing it lie in his exposition of the gospel and him as its
apostle. As a matter of fact, the themes of Romans falls rather precisely under two
headings:
1)Abraham and his promise (Justification by faith)
2)Faithfulness and impartiality of God.
This module will pursue these two themes only and analyse them in a manner that meets
examination requirements.
God’s impartiality

Page 199
Paul uses the concept of impartiality to expound God’s dealing with all human beings.
Paul begins by emphasizing the point of God’s wrath. He says that human beings have
had every opportunity to know God. Nevertheless, inspite of knowing God, they did not
honour him as God or give thanks to him (Romans 1:21). That is the central failure. It is a
failure of human beings, they are responsible and indeed without excuse. God’s response
to this failure does not discriminate human kind. Both Jew or non-Jew are liable to the
same treatment or judgement on this provocation. All persons without exemption, the Jew
first and also the Greek, stand on the same footing before God and must face the
consequences of their actions whether for good or ill. Paul’s main point here stands on
the prophetic tradition of Amos 9:10, Micah 2:6-7 and Jeremiah 2:35. All had to counter
the tendency of religious people to turn trust in God into a self immunization from his
judgement, a shield behind which to evade accountability. In Romans 2:24 Paul uses a
text from Isaiah 52:5 that referred to the scorn of the Babylonians for the Israelite exiles
in their midst, Paul turns to charge that the goal of very serious religious person, to bring
honour to God, is in fact subverted into its opposite by those who presume to judge the
world but themselves evade accountability to God by taking their prerogatives as
substitutes for obedience. Referring to circumcision (2:25-29) Paul makes the point that
all the formal tokens of religious identity depend for their meaning and validity on actual
obedience, thus putting Jew and non- Jew once again on exactly the same footing before
an impartial God.
Abraham: Rom 4:1-25
Referring to old testament scriptures was believed to be a powerful tool of authenticating

God’s message. By appealing to Moses the lawgiver and to Abraham the recipient of the
promise, Paul signals his own understanding of what is central or pivotal in his own
Jewish tradition and reclaims it to authenticate his gospel for his readers. Abraham was a
heroic figure whose story could be used to support a variety of ends.
In Romans 4:2-8 Paul uses Abraham to confirm that boasting is precluded if a right
relationship to God is determined by faith. In Gen 15:6 it was Abraham’s believing God
that God regarded as righteousness. Even Abraham was dependent on a God who justifies
the ungodly, who does not merely confirm the virtues of good people but takes the
initiative in restoring a world that cannot save itself. Reckoning righteousness is the
equivalent of not reckoning sin, i.e. forgiveness. Abraham, the model of religious probity
(honour) was as dependent on God’s gracious initiative as David. Therefore the precedent
of Abraham confirms that God’s justifying proceeds on the basis of trust in his
undeserved graciousness and leaves no room for boasting.
In Romans 4:9-12 Paul argues that God’s consideration of Abraham’s faith as

righteousness precedes his covenant with Abraham, and Abraham’s circumcision (Gen
17:1-27). The outward marks of Abraham, the prototype Jew are therefore secondary to
the faith that makes him a true Jew. Another side of Abraham, his role as ancestor, turns
out to embrace all who believe without circumcision. Even in the relation of his physical
descendants to him, the controlling factor in his patriarchal function is trust in God, theirs
and his. So the precedent of Abraham also confirms that the terms of faith established by

Page 200
God for justification apart from the law mean that Jew and non-Jew stand on the same
footing before an impartial God.
In Romans 4:13-17 Paul elucidates that Abraham was the recipient of God’s promise for
the future. In Genesis 15:4-5 this promise was for an heir and descendants (Rom 4:18). In
Genesis 17:6-7 it was for many nations among these descendants (Rom 4:17). Paul’s
point now is that the transmission of this legacy is determined not by law but by the
righteousness of faith. In Romans 4:14 Paul makes a more forceful argument: If the heirs
are those whom the law defines as heirs, then faith is empty and this promise has been
voided. The issue is not what human beings do at all, whether they adhere to the law or
whether they believe. What is at stake is the competence to determine who the heirs are.
Clearly that capability does not belong to the law, whose effect is rather to evoke wrath
by marking human conduct as transgression and so to disqualify people from the
inheritance (Rom 4:15).
The theme of justification in Romans
Justification is defined as peace in one’s relationship to God. Peace refers to the removal
of enmity toward God by the reconciliation effected in Jesus’ death. It is not God who is
reconciled but human beings, because the enmity is not God’s, it is human opposition and
resistance to God. The removal of this barrier opens up access to this grace (justification)
which is not a human condition but the undeserved graciousness on God’s part.
Paul uses Adam to represent sin, taking it from the biblical depiction of the original
disobedience of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3. This biblical depiction correlates that death
is the consequence of sin. This allusion affirms the universal penetration of sin and death
through Adam to the whole human race. In the period between Adam and Moses (in the
absence of the law) sin was not counted i.e. each individual was not held responsible for
sin. But nonetheless everyone died, showing clearly the fateful reign of death over all as a
result of Adam’s action even over those who had not committed the same kind of explicit
transgression of a command as Adams'’. In thus determining the fate of others, Adam
prefigured Christ. In Romans 5:15-17 Paul argues that death proceeded from a single act
by Adam, but the gift of life began with a multitude of trespasses. By the law, trespass,
judgement, condemnation and death emphasize the deserved guilt and responsibility of
every sinner. On the other side the free gift of grace, extravagant generosity, and life,
emphasizes the displacement of what is due to all sinners by a totally undeserved gift in
God’s act of justification (the death of Christ as a ransom for many).
In summation, apart from the law, sin and death (from Adam) and righteousness and life
(from Christ) would be similar impersonal and inexorable or relentless destinies inflicted
upon all people by virtue of the solidarity of all, first with Adam and then with Christ. In
5: 20 Paul returns to the intrusion of the Mosaic Law between Adam and Christ (vv. 13-
14). The law adds to trespass the ‘sting’ of condemnation (1 Cor 15:56). Now that sin is
counted, magnified and deepened by the addition of guilt, death is more than a neutral
destiny; it is deserved by all. But by the very same token, now that sin is counted against
everyone, life has become something more than a neutral destiny. It is the free and

Page 201
undeserved gift of a gracious God. As per Romans 5: 21, Paul has summarised his view
of the law in a very remarkable manner as follows: the purpose of God, served by the law
on the human sin, is that just as death has been the symptom of the reign of sin as a
power over human lives, so righteousness (justification) might become the symptom of
the new reign of grace. Just as the law turned the reign of death in Adam (5v 14) into the
reign of sin, so that same law has turned the reign of life in Christ into the reign of grace.
One of God’s purposes with the mosaic law was to use its ‘increase’ of sin’s power over
men and women to augment and reinforce grace. If that is so, one must necessarily ask
the question ‘Are we to continue in sin in order that grace might increase?
Critics of Paul have accused his teaching here of undermining the Jewish law and invited
irresponsible license in human behaviour. But the theological importance of the question
‘why not sin?’ lies in the fact that it is inevitable and regularly raised whenever the claim
is made, as here, that human perversity cannot decisively frustrate God’s benevolent
purpose. Chapter 5 showed that righteousness, the moral uprightness and integrity
restored to human life in its relation to God through the death of Jesus, is a matter of
grace. It shows God’s love for human beings while they are still sinners (5:8), it is an
undeserved gift, manifesting the lavish profuseness or abundant of God’s generosity. In
chapters 6 and 7 Paul talks of justification as the gift of a re ordered life. Here Paul turns
the argument in the opposite direction answering the question:’ shall we continue in sin
that grace shall abound?’ by showing that God’s grace involves for its recipients a new
righteousness, a reordering and integrity that preclude an undisturbed continuation of
life’s previous patterns.
Final exortations: Rom 13-16
Paul makes exhortations to the readers on a number of social virtues. The first
exhortation is on love (Romans 13:8-10). In Paul’s letters love of God is always God’s
own love, human love for God is mentioned only in Romans 8:28, and 1 Corinthians 2:9
and 8:3, in all three instances only to be overshadowed by human debt to God’s
generosity and initiative. For Paul the more appropriate human response to God’s love
and compassion is honour and thanks giving and trust in God on the one hand, and, on
the other, this love toward neighbour that is nothing else than the reordering of human
life in accordance with God’s will. For this is the substance of the law, the never-ending
claim of God on human life embodied in God’s holy, just and good commandment that
Paul’s gospel never undermines but only confirms.
The other exhortation Paul repeats is that both Jew and gentile stand on an equal footing
before God. They all depend upon his vindication of all human religious practice. They
all benefit from Jesus gift of life to all through their inclusion in Christ’s own pattern of
death and life, and alike accountable to the God they must all eventually recognize
(Romans 14:1-12).

Page 202
Closing remarks
A close study of the letter to the Romans reveals that two major themes are crucial i.e.
Abraham and justification by faith. The impartiality of God is perhaps a third prominent
issue in the letter. For examination purposes a careful analysis of these three issues will
be sufficient preparation. A greater fraction of material in the last chapters of the letter
are recapitulations on these earlier themes. We recommend a thorough understanding of
the material in this module.
1. Who wrote the letter to the Romans and who were the recipients?
2. “ For there is no destination, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”
(Romans 3:22-23). Why does Paul make this statement, and what arguments does he
use to support it?
3. How does Paul use the figure of Abraham in Romans?
4. Critically discuss how Paul deals with the theme of “justification” in Romans.
Write Brief Explanatory Comments on the following:
(a) Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power
and deity has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are
without excuse. (Romans 1:20)
(b) For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:22-23)
(c) For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, it does not submit to God’s law,
indeed it cannot, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:7-8)
(d) So do not let what is good to you be spoken as evil. For the kingdom of God does not
mean food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the holy spirit, he who
thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men. (Romans 14:16-18)
References
1. Barrett. C.K. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. New York: Harper,
1957.
2. Cranfield, C.E.B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the
Romans. Edinburg: Clark 1975-79.
3. Donfried, K.P. The Romans Debate Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg, 1977
4. Kasemann. E. Perspectives on Paul. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971.

Page 203
CHAPTER 18
GALATIANS
1. Understand the historical setting of the letter to the Galatians:

2. Identify the immediate problems in the Galatian churches
3. Discuss the resolutions made to these problems
4. Examine the complex arguments raised in the letter to the Galatians
Introduction
Among the writings of Paul, none is more important or more difficult than the letter of
Paul to the Galatians (W. Baird, 1988).This letter presents important features of Paul’s
life and announces significant doctrines. Yet questions about the historical setting of the
letter cannot be answered with certainty. However, interpreters can be confident about
two issues viz.: First, is the author (Gal 1:1) and second, the letter is a unity. This means
that in its present form the letter is written as a single document.
Historical setting
Although the letter is addressed to the churches of Galatia, the exact location of these
churches is disputed. The original Kingdom of the Galatians was in the north- central
area of Asia minor, but in 25 BC the Romans re-organised this region to include in the
province of Galatia areas to the south. Some two theories are propounded on the
historical setting of the target audience. These are (i) the South Galatian or ‘Province’
theory and (ii) the North Galatian or ‘territorial theory.
The South galatian theory:

According to the South Galatian Theory, the churches addressed in Galatians are
churches of the southern region – churches established during the so- called First
Missionary Journey of Paul recorded in Acts 13: 4 -14:28. Paul normally refers to regions
according to their ‘Provincial’ designation e.g. in Corinthians 16: 19.
The north galatians theory
According to the North Galatian Theory or Territorial Theory the churches addressed in
the letter are churches in the original territory of Galatia. The Acts of the Apostles
includes no account of a mission to this region, but Acts 16: 6 may imply a trip to the
Northern territory. ‘Now when they had gone through Phrygia and the region of Galatia,
they were forbidden by the holy spirit to preach the word in Asia’. After describing a
visit to Derbe and Lystra, the author of Acts notes that Paul and his companions traveled
through ‘the Phrygian and Galatian regions’ Thus, a visit to the region of Galatia appear
to be distinguished from and later than the visit to the cities of the South. In Galatians

Page 204
3:1, Paul addresses his readers as ‘foolish Galatians’. Although this designation would
be appropriate for the ethnic Galatians of the North, it scarcely fits the residents of the
South. Paul does not always refer to regions by their provincial name (see Gal 1: 17).
According to most scholars, the North Galatian theory is to be preferred.
The social and religious composition of the galatian churches

Scholars unanimously agree that the social and religious make-up of the Galatian
churches was composed mostly of members who were gentiles. Paul’s mission is
primarily directed toward non- Jews: ‘To reveal His son in me, that I might preach Him
among the gentiles’ (Gal 1:16).
The issue of circumcision, which is crucial to the letter of Galatians, would hardly be a
question for Jewish converts. When Paul implies that his readers had not known God in
Galatians 4:9, he probably referred to their previous life in paganism. Nevertheless, some
of the Galatians Christians may have been Jews or persons who had contact with the
synagogue. This is suggested by the type of argument Paul employs in chapter 3 and 4
where he addresses churches e.g. in Corinth, members of the congregations were
probably drawn from a variety of social and economic classes.
Date and place of compilation
The date and place of compilation of Galatians are debatable. Some suppose that
Galatians was written early in Paul’s career. Actually a very early date is impossible
since the letter was not written until at least fourteen years after Paul’s conversion:
‘ Then after 14 years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas ------ ‘. (Gal 2:1).
Those who favour an early date usually adopt the south Galatian theory and identify the
Jerusalem visit of Gal 2:1 with that of Acts 11 :30. According to this view, the Jerusalem
visit of Acts 15:4-29 took place after Galatians had been written. More likely, Acts 15
and Galatians 2 refer to the same event – the Jerusalem conference: Assuming the north
Galatians theory and interpreting Galatians 4 :13 to imply two visits to Galatia prior to
the letter, the second visit would have been the one mentioned in Acts 18:23. Paul’s
charge that the Galatians have ‘so quickly turned away’ (Gal 1: 6) suggests that not much
time has elapsed since his last visit. Thus, Galatians was probably written from Ephesus
in about A.D 55.
The purpose of Galatians: the immediate problems.

Focus on the following quotations:
i) ‘but there are some who trouble you and
want to pervert the gospel of Christ’ (Gal 1:7)
ii)‘I could wish that those who trouble
you would even cut themselves off’ (Gal 5:12)
In the letter to the Galatians, Paul attacks a group that is troubling the Galatian churches.
He charges them with perverting the gospel by insisting that the Galatians be circumcised
and keep the law.

Page 205
Concerning the identity of these trouble-makers three main theories have been advanced:
First, they are Judaizers or Jewish Christians, who believe that gentile converts, must
keep the Jewish law,
Second, they are libertine spiritualists (the morally, lax) or gnostics who advocate ethical
license or sexual immorality,
Third, there are two groups causing trouble in Galatia (Judaizers and libertines).
Some variation of the first theory is probably best: the trouble-makers are Jewish
Christians who have invaded the Galatian churches from outside with the intention of
correcting Paul’s short gospel. They believe the people of God need an identity that is
shaped according to Jewish rites and practices.
Purpose of Galatians
The purpose of Galatians is to counter the activity of these troublemakers. Paul’s
primary concern is to‘re-present’ the truth of the gospel – the good news that God has
acted in Christ to redeem all people (Gal 4:4). This action conveys the spirit that is
received by faith and not by works of the law. The identity of the people of God is found
in a new creation that shatters the old distinctions –a new identity in Jesus Christ (see Gal
6:15 ; 3:28).
Commentary on texts
The Salutation in Gal 1:1 -5: The letter is being sent to the churches of Galatia. It is the
only Pauline letter addressed to a group of congregations in a region larger than a single
city. Paul believed that the world was under the control of evil forces, but with the
coming of Christ the new age had already dawned.
The situation in Galatia 1:6-10

The Galatians are turning to another gospel, although there is no other. The
troublemakers are perverting the gospel by insisting that it include the demand to keep
the law and be circumcised. However, to conceive of the gospel, as a collection of rules
and rites is not simply to distort it, it is to destroy it. The troublemakers may suppose that
Paul’s law-free gospel is trimmed to fit his hearers, but Paul says that he does everything
for the sake of the gospel (cf. 1 Cor 9:23)
The gospel received by revelation

Paul’s gospel is not a human gospel. He neither received it from a human being, nor was
he taught it. Proof that God has acted is seen in the transformation of Paul. His former
life was devoted to Judaism. He had been a persecutor of the church (see1 Cor 15:9) Paul
had advanced in Judaism beyond many of his own age among his people, since he was so
zealous for the law and the traditions. The way Paul describes his revelation is
reminiscent of the call of the prophets e.g. in Jeremiah 1: 5 and indicates that Paul is
primary depicting a commission rather than a conversion. However his reference to ‘my
former life in Judaism’ (Gal 1:13) indicates that a conversion was involved. Paul simply
declares that God’s son had been revealed to him. The purpose of this revelation was that

Page 206
Paul should preach Christ to the gentiles; suggesting that the revelation was also
commission. He did not go to Jerusalem to consult with those who had previously been
appointed apostles. Paul went instead to Arabia, or Nabatea, the area to the South of
Damascus.
The visit to Jerusalem 1:18-24

After 3 years, Paul went to Jerusalem. He went on his own initiative to make
acquaintance of Cephas or Peter. Cephas or Simon Peter was the leader of the church at
Jerusalem. Paul stayed for only 15 days. During his stay he saw only James the brother of
Jesus who was later to become the leader of the church at Jerusalem. This is the same
visit described in Acts 9:26 -30.
The Jerusalem conference 2:1-10

After 14 years Paul again visited Jerusalem. The conference described here is the same as
the one depicted in Acts 15:4-21. Paul says he made this trip according to revelation i.e.
according to the will of God. In a private meeting with the leaders of the church at
Jerusalem, he presented the gospel that he had been preaching. He does not intend to
suggest that the Jerusalem leaders were to pass judgement on his gospel. It is not
negotiable. The issue is the practice of the mission – the way the mission is functioning in
the Pauline churches. About this, the leaders of the church could exercise a disruptive
force, as Paul shows in Galatians 2: 11 –21. They, not the gospel, are being judged.
Along with Barnabas, a respected disciple, Paul brought Titus, an uncircumcised Greek
Christian. Titus was proof that a gentile could be a member of the people of God without
being circumcised. Into the conference room slipped in some false Christians who wanted
to enslave Paul by demanding that Titus be circumcised. Paul resolutely refused so that
the truth of the gospel might be maintained for the Galatians and other Gentile converts.
To turn a ritual into a demand is to destroy the gospel.
Next Paul summarizes the deliberations of the leaders. He describes them as those who
are reputed to somebody (v6) while at the same time calling them pillars of the church in
(v9). Although these terms are not derogative, they are given a disparaging or belittling
meaning when Paul observes that the leaders’ reputation means nothing to him or to God.
These leaders demanded no additional requirement for Paul’s mission. They recognised
that he had been entrusted with the gospel to the gentiles just as Peter had been entrusted
with the gospel to the Jews. The reference to ‘the gospel to the uncircumcised’ and the
gospel to ‘the circumcised’ does not imply two different gospels: the one gospel is
preached to different groups.
As a sign of this resolution or agreement at the conference, the Jerusalem leaders

extended to Paul and Barnabas the ‘right hand of fellowship’, a practice signifying
friendship and accord. Although the leaders made no other demands, they requested that
Paul collect an offering for the economically deprived of the Jerusalem congregation.
This he, was eager to do (see 1 Cor 16:1-4 and Rom 15:25-28).

Page 207
The confrontation in Antioch Galatians 2:11-21

After the conference, Cephas (Peter) visited Antioch. There a church had been founded
where gentiles had been accepted into the life of the christian community (Acts 11:19-
26). When Peter arrived he participated in the meals of the congregation. These were
meals where Jewish and gentile converts ate together without regard to Jewish food laws.
Later when some messengers of James arrived at Antioch, Peter withdrew from the
meals, because he feared the partisans of circumcision. These are perhaps the group
identified with the false christians of Galatians 2: 4. But the unnamed people from James
were probably more moderate. They recognised the Jerusalem agreement, but believed
the people of God needed an identity that would set them apart from the pagans.
Following the lead of Cephas, the rest of the Jews of the Antioch church joined in his
hypocrisy – a kind of play acting rather than honesty. Even Barnabas, Paul’s associate in
gentile mission was carried away too. Paul opposed Cephas point blank, ‘When Peter had
come to Antioch I withstood him to his face.’ (Gal 2:11)
When Paul charged Cephas with compelling the gentiles to live like Jews, he implied that
Cephas’ withdrawal was equivalent to requiring the Gentiles to keep Jewish rules in order
to participate in the community. Paul argues that the Jewish Christians know that a
person is not brought into the right relationship with God by ‘works of the law’ but by
faith in Christ. ‘From the works of the law, no one will be declared righteous’ (Psalm
143:2). When Paul says that the Jews, in being justified, are found to be sinners, he
means that the fact that righteousness is by faith has the effect of putting Jews, like
gentiles, outside the law (Gal 2:15). This action, which identifies the Jews as sinners,
however, does not mean that Christ is a minister of sin, since the Jews (before faith) were
already in actuality sinners in need of God’s grace (see Rom 2:17-24).
Arguments form the scripture 3:6-18

Paul begins by quoting Genesis 15 verse 6. God promised Abraham that he would be
father of many descendants. In response, Abraham had faith in God and so he was
regarded as righteous. Abraham was declared to be right with God solely on the basis of
faith. Interpreting the text, Paul concludes that it is through faith that people become
descendants of Abraham. The argument is supported by a reference to Genesis 12:3
together with Genesis 18:18, which says that in Abraham all the nations will be blessed.
By faith people share the blessing of Abraham. According to Paul’s argument in
Galatians 2:16, one cannot be justified by works, and the law shows that those who fail to
keep all commandments are transgressors, under the curse that the law decrees. Through
Christ’s identification with us, we are identified with Abraham so that we are not cursed,
but share the blessing: the promise of the spirit.
Giving of the law versus the coming of the faith.

Since the law cannot supersede the promise, for what purpose then was it given? It was
added because of transgressions, i.e. to increase trespasses, ‘Moreover the law entered
that the offense might abound’ (Rom 5:20). Moreover the law was temporary in force

Page 208
until the true offspring should come and inferior, as it was given by angels through an
intermediary. The intermediary is Moses, and the presence of an intermediary shows that
the revelation was not direct. Is this inferior law against the promises? In spite of
evidence to the contrary, Paul declares a vigorous ‘No’. The law serves a different
purpose in the economy of God. It cannot do what the promise does: to give life (cf Rom
7:10) instead the law imprisons people under the power of sin (Rom 3:9) until the time
when the promise may be received through faith. Before Christ came (Gal 4:4), the law
functioned as the household slave who supervised the discipline of the child. But now
that faith has come, we are no longer under this slave, but have become children of God
through faith in Christ (see Gal 4:5-7 and Rom 8:14) –full members in the household of
God. Paul reminds the Galatians that they had been united with Christ (Gal 2:20). In view
of the resulting relationship with God, why, Paul asks, would the Galatians want to return
to the previous situation – to slavery under the powerless and worthless elemental forces.
Thus Paul presents a startling argument that to submit to the law is to return to the
situation of paganism.
The allegory of the two sons 4:21 -31

Paul presents a concluding argument from scripture. He addresses the Galatians as those
who desire to be under the law, that is, to yield to the teaching of the troublemakers. Paul
refers to narratives from Genesis chapters 16;17 and 21, about the two sons of Abraham –
one by a slave woman and another by a free woman. Interpreting the allegory, Paul says
the two women symbolise two covenants. The slave woman (Hagar) represents the
covenant at Sinai – the covenant of the law that is observed in the present Jerusalem (see
Gal 4:25). The children of this covenant are born into slavery under the law (Gal 5:1).
The second covenant (1 Corinthians 11:25) is represented by the heavenly Jerusalem that
embodies the freedom christians already enjoy. According to Paul, this city is ‘ Our
mother’ –it stands for the new covenant whereby people become children of Abraham
through faith.
Freedom and the slavery of the circumcision. 5:1 –12

Paul encourages the Galatians to resist enslavement to the law, nor submit to the demand
for circumcision. If the Galatians have themselves circumcised serious consequences
would follow. For one, Christ would be of no benefit. If salvation requires this work of
the law, Christ who is the true ground for salvation died for nothing. Also those who
receive circumcision are obligated to keep the whole law (see Rom 2:25). They put
themselves under a requirement that can not be fulfilled. Those who are seeking
justification in this way are separated from Christ. They have fallen from grace. The true
way to righteousness is through the spirit, which the Galatians have received by faith
(Gal 3:2) The spirit is the down payment on life in the future and the basis for the hope of
acquittal in the final judgement (Rom 2:5). From the perspective of faith in Christ,
circumcision is a matter of indifference (1 Cor 7:19). What matters is faith coming to
expression in love- not a required ritual, but a way of life. The Galatians were once in the
right way but someone got in their way. The persuasion to swerve from the truth of the
gospel did not come from God who called them, but from the troublemakers.

Page 209
Practical instructions to the churches

Making use of familiar proverbs, Paul gives practical instructions on how Christians can
live by the spirit (Gal 5:25). If one of the members is caught up in a trespass, perhaps a
legal violation, those who live by the spirit ought to restore that person to the community
in an attitude of gentleness. Since all believers endure difficulties, they ought to bear one
another’s burdens. This concern fulfills the law of Christ – the law, of love that has
nothing to do with legal requirements (Gal 5:23).
Although believers are under obligation to others, they are also responsible for
themselves. They must avoid arrogance (5:26), supposing that they are something when
they are nothing. Each one should examine one’s own work to see if there is any ground
for boasting. Everyone should carry one’s own load. At the same time those who are
taught should share provisions with those who teach the gospel (1 Cor 9:4).
In Galatians 6:7 Paul quotes a familiar proverb, “ Whatever one sows, one will also
reap.” To sow to the flesh means to do the works of the flesh; to reap corruption means to
effect destruction and death. To sow to the spirit means to produce the fruit of the spirit.
To reap eternal life means to assume participation in the coming kingdom of God. This
cause- and –effect relationship should encourage people not to grow weary in doing
good, for at the proper time the outcome will be realised. In the time that remains,
Christians should do good to all people, but especially to the household of faith – the
members of the church.

1.Why did Paul write to the Galatians?
2.Give an account of the arguments on the two main theories on the setting of Galatians.
3.Examine the issues raised at the Jerusalem conference and the resolutions that were
passed
4.Examine Paul’s argument on the law and faith in Galatians.
Gobbets
Write Explanatory Comments on the following:

(a) After him Judas the Galilean arose in the day of the census and drew away some of
the people after him, he also perished, and all who followed him were scattered. So in
the present case. I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone, for if this
plan or this plan or this undertaking is of men, it will fail. (Acts 5:37-38)
(b) He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and being fervent in spirit, he spoke
and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism
of John. (Acts 18:25).
(c) For before certain men came from James, he ate with the gentiles, but when they
came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. (Galatians
2:12)
(d) Now we, brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise. But as at that time. He who
was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the spirit,
so it is now. (Galatians 4:28-29)

Page 210
References
1)Baird .W. Article Harper’s Bible commentary, Collins, 1988
2)Betz H.D. – Galatians: A commentary on Paul’s letter to the churches in Galatians
Hermeneia. Fortress, 1979.
3)Burton E.D. – A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians.
International Critical Commentary Edinburg: Clark 1921.
4)Howard G. – Paul: Crisis in Galatia. A study in Early Christian Theology. Society for
New Testament Studies Monograph Series, 35. London; Cambridge University Press
1979.
CHAPTER 19
COLOSSIANS

Page 211
1. Discuss the authorship of the Colossians

2. Explain the theme of heresy in Colossians
3. Understand the antiheretical argument of Paul in Colossians.
Introduction
The church in Colossae was not founded by Paul, but by Epaphras, a disciple of the
apostle, “ As you also learned from Epaphras, our dear servant, who is faithful minister
of Christ on your behalf.” Cor 1:7 The letter of Paul to the Colossians makes clear that
the Colossians “have not seen my face.” (2:1) and that Paul has only received reports
about them from Epaphras, “Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of your love
for all the Saints” Col 1:4.
Authorship
The letter to the Colossians presents itself as a letter written by Paul while he was in
prison: “ I now rejoice in my sufferings for you------“ Col 1:24. However, the language
and style of the letter strongly suggest its post- Pauline origin. This means that the letter
appears to have been written after Paul. The peculiarities of language and style cannot
simply be explained by appealing to the special situation that Paul faces in his debate
with the Colossian heretics, especially because Paul’s typical vocabulary is absent from
the letter. Terms such as: (righteousness; justification freedom; law, believe; justify)
which are regularly used by Paul in polemical or argumentative situations are missing in
this letter. Colossians was most likely written by a pupil of Paul who wanted to make
sure that after Paul’s death his apostolic authority and presence were continued in Paul’s
missionary territory in Asia Minor. Thus he writes a Pauline letter, very much in the
manner of Paul when he could not be personally present in his churches (Col 2:1 and
4:7). The author shows acquaintance with some of Paul’s letters, especially with Romans,
(Romans 6:1- 11 is comparable with Col 2:11-13)
The Setting of Colossians

Colossae was a city in Asia Minor, located in the valley of the Lycus River. It was
originally an important trading center. It was soon overshadowed by its neighboring
cities, Hieropolis and Laodicea and disappears from history after it was hit by an
earthquake in about A. D. 60.
The problems in Colossae: The Colossian heresy
The letter presupposes a crisis situation in the Colossian church. False christian teachers
have infiltrated the predominantly gentile christian community and threaten to subvert its
loyalty to Christ. The situation is formally analogous to that in Galatia, where Paul also
had to insist on an exclusive commitment of the Galatians to “Christ alone” against
christian teachers who deemed it necessary to supplement the confession to Christ with

Page 212
obedience to the Jewish torah. However, although both Galatians and Colossians focus on
the exclusivity of Christ over against supplemental religious practices, the heretical front
in the two letters is quite dissimilar. To be sure, Colossians gives us no precise picture of
the heretics teaching. The discussion on heresy in Colossae is in chapter 2 verse 6 to 23.
Its nature suggests a blending of various religious elements viz.: asceticism and moral
rigorism combine with features of esoteric rites similar to those practiced by mystery
religious. This type of syncretism was characteristics of the Phrygian region of Asia
Minor, where Colossae, Hieropolis and Laudicea were located. Scholars have traced
Phrygian syncretism from the third century B.C to the Christian movement called
montanism in the second century A.D. Its ascetic features are mentioned in Col 2 :16; 18,
21-23, being
Food; drink; self abasement; do not handle; do not

Taste; do not touch and ‘rigor of devotion, self-
Abasement, severity to the body”
-Asceticism in religious terms refers to a severe self – denial for religious purposes.
-Rigorism in religious terms refers to moral strictness.
-Esoteric in religious terms refers to secret rites.
-Syncretism in religious terms refers to a blending together of aspects of different
religions
Moreover, asceticism is combined not only with mystery elements but also with other
kinds of observance: angel worship; visions; festival; new moon and Sabbath. Thus, it
seems likely that certain jewish- hellenistic features formed part of the syncretistic mix,
although it is difficult to be precise on this point. There is no polemic against the torah in
Colossians. Moreover, the worship of angels (Col 2:18) militates against a Jewish origin
of the Colossian heresy. It is quite possible that the observance of the calendar is not due
to Jewish practices, but to the influence of the moon, god, “Men”, who was popular in the
Colossian region. Finally, it appears that the origin of Colossian heresy is uncertain, yet it
is the main problem that Paul was fighting in Colossae.
Commentary on the antiheretical polemic: Col 2:6-23.

This unit constitutes the center of the letter: the argument intertwines confessional
statements with anti-heretical arguments. The section must be divided into three
paragraphs as follows:
vv. 6–7 : these verses are on Christian imperatives, encouraging the Colossian Christians
to remain stead fast in faith to Christ.
vv.8 -15 : these verses are indicative of God’s victory in Christ.
vv.16-23 : these verses expound on the futility of the heretical demands.
The key to the heretical argument can be summarized as “Christ alone”. Christ represents
not only the total fullness of God but also the all - sufficient fullness of life and salvation
for christians. The “Pauline” gospel does not proclaim a deficient Christology, as the
heretics charge. Rather, the heretics’ insistence on supplementing Christ with other divine

Page 213
agencies constitutes a betrayal of the triumph of Christ, because those supplements to the
gospel honor, in fact those angelic powers and principalities that Christ has annulled in
his death and resurrection, “Having disarmed principalities and powers; He made a public
spectacle of them, triumphing over them in it” Col 2:15. And if Christ alone is the
exclusive basis of christian life, the worship of powers in addition to Christ manifests a
religious anxiety and uncertainty on the part of christians that contradicts the joyful
thanksgiving and knowledge and wisdom of christian life.
Therefore, imperatives of exclusive commitment to Christ abound in this section. These

imperatives are not legalistic demands for perfection. Rather these demands flow
naturally from the pure gift of God’s liberating act in Christ. Thus, it is clear that the
sections 1:9 to 2 :1 - 23 constitutes the basic didactic and thematic unit of the letter. It
consists of two interrelated parts: the Christian foundation for the antiheretical argument
chapter 1 verse 9 to chapter 2 verses 5, and the basic anti-heretical argument itself in
chapter 2 verses 6 to 23.
The final exhortation:
The exhortational chapter emphasizes the quest for a holy life, “Seek the things that are
above, set your mind on things that are above, not on things that are on earth.” The author
stresses that the present life of christians, in Christ, is nevertheless a hidden life that must
await its full manifestation at the parousia, the end-time appearance of Christ when
christians will be joined to him in glory, “When Christ who is our life appears, then you
also will appear with him in glory” Col 3:4.
1. Discuss the date and purpose of Colossians.

2. What were the problems in Colossae?
3. How did Paul deal with the theme of heresy in Colossians
4. Discuss the anti heretical argument and the exhortations of Paul in Colossians
Gobbets
1) “So let no one judge you in food or in drink or regarding a festival or a new moon or
Sabbaths” (Col 2:16)
2) Bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against
another, even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do.” (Col 3:13)
3) “Take hid to the ministry which you have received in the lord, that you may fulfill it.”
(Col 4:17)
References
1) Bekar. J.C, Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, Collins 1988

2) Francis. F.O and Meeks W.A. – Conflict at Colossae Missoula, MT: Scholars press,
1975.

Page 214
3) Lightfoot. J. B– St Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon.. Grand Rapids,

1959
4)Moule. C.F.D The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Colossians and to Philemon.
Cambridge University Press 1957.
CHAPTER 20
1 THESSALONTHIANS
1. Identify the main problems in Thessalonica

2. Examine the textual difficulties that arise from Thessalonians
3. Explain the may themes in Thessalonians

Page 215
4. Discuss Paul’s ministry in Thessalonica
Preamble
What is of importance in studying the epistle to Thessalonians is the analysis of the

Pauline themes in 1 Thessalonians that are found elsewhere in Paul’s epistles. Examiners
will always set questions of a comparative nature, requiring an understanding and
awareness of the Pauline doctrines that are shared by 1 Thessalonians and other epistles.
Introduction
The first letter of Paul to the Thessalonians is probably the earliest of Paul’s letters,
written in about AD 50 or 51. Thessalonica was one of the two most important trading
centers in Roman Greece. It had a harbor on the Thermic Gulf, lay near the midpoint of
the Via Egnatia, and was the terminus of the road leading up to the Danube. Although it
was the Roman capital of Macedonia, Thessalonica remained a free Greek city with its
own council and currency. Paul had founded the church there after preaching in Philippi
(2:2). Acts 17:1-10 pictures a relatively brief mission in Thessalonica.
The problem in the Thessalonica
Conflict led to rioting and accusations before the city officials that Paul was causing
trouble by preaching another king than Caesar. Paul writes to a church composed of
gentile converts, a fact that coincides with Paul’s assertion that his mission was to the
gentiles (Gal 2:9). If Acts is correct at least in reporting that Paul was suddenly forced out
of the city, the concern evident in 1Thessalonians 2:17-18 may be due to Paul’s
unexpected departure. Unable to return, Paul sent Timothy north from Athens (1 Thess
3:1-3). Timothy has rejoined Paul with a good report, at Corinth, about the church.
Thessalonians is therefore written in response to this good report.
Textual difficulties
The most difficult textual question in 1Thessalonians comes from the suggestions of
modern scholars that 1 Thessalonians 2:13 - 16 are a later interpolation into the letter.
The passage evokes thanksgiving for the Thessalonians’ reception of Paul’s preaching
and then launches into a harsh condemnation of the Jews as Jesus’ killers, as enemies of
God and God’s prophets and apostles, and as experiencing God’s wrath. Although Paul
can speak of his own sufferings at the hands of both Jews and gentiles e.g. in 2 Cor
11:26, and Rom 15:31, and has just suffered at Philippi (1 Thess 2:2) the vindictive tone
of this passage is not characteristic of the apostle. The harsh treatment of the Jews in this
passage, some scholars argue, would be less surprising in a Christian writing after the
destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70. Some scholars have argued for a non-Pauline
interpolation here on the basis of computer analysis of the language of this section. They
indicate that the section reflects an amalgamation of different Pauline expressions.
Scholars who continue to treat this passage as part of the original letter insist that it

Page 216
reflect Paul’s response to a particular group of persecutors familiar to himself and the
audience.
The main themes in 1 Thessalonians
The following themes are found in the epistle to the Thessalonians:

1. Destruction of the sinners at the end- time. 2:13-16 the Jewish and gentile believers
shall be exempted from the vessels of wrath, upon whom the Lord’s sentence would
be like that against Sodom and Gomorrah. Elsewhere Paul speaks of Judaizers as
enemies of the cross of Christ and predicts the destruction that awaits them (see Phil
3:18-19).
2. Sexual immorality 4:1-8
-Paul has taught them that Christian life requires abandoning the sexual immorality
and lust that Jewish moralists associated with the pagan world. Marriage was not to
be an occasion for lust. Adultery is condemned in 1 Thess 4:6.
3. Mutual love 4:9-12
-Paul expands on the theme of mutual love. He encourages the Thessalonians to live a
life of quietness, minding one’s own affair, following the Apostles’ example by
working with their hands so as to command respect and depend on no one.
4. Hope for the dead 4:13-18.
-The Thessalonians may have thought that the dead had lost the possibility of
salvation when the Lord returns. But Paul describes death as “sleep”. The deceased
have been snatched from the world of the living; grief should be moderated by the
recognition that nothing from this world can touch the dead.
Paul’s Ministry in Thessalonica
Paul reminds his readers of the example he had set in preaching among them. He uses the
imagery of a philosophic preacher, whose concern is to nurture the souls of human beings
and turn them away from slavery to false opinions, values and passions to the truth. Paul
also wants to remind the Thessalonians that his mission was different from other popular
preachers who might flatter and manipulate their audiences to make money from such
preaching. Paul preaches the gospel he has been given by God in the face of great
opposition and hardship (2:1-5).
Paul uses the images of a nurse and a father to describe his work among the
Thessalonians. These images were frequently used by Philosophers of Paul’s day to show
how the true philosopher would vary his style of speech from harsh scolding to gentle
encouragement and consolation as the needs of the audience changed. Paul has
intensified these images in two ways: He describes himself as a gentle nurse taking care
of her own children, not merely someone else’s. Before he introduces the image of a
father, Paul makes it clear that his love for the Thessalonians goes so far that he is willing
to share not just the gospel but “ Our own selves”. Paul shares himself by laboring at his
trade rather than requiring the congregation to support him. Paul concludes with the kinds
of speech he had used in encouraging the Thessalonians to live lives worthy of God. In

Page 217
addition to such preaching, Paul’s own life and conduct, which is holy, righteous and
blameless is meant to be an example followed by his converts.

1) Why did Paul write the letter to the Thessalonians?
2) Identify and discuss the four main themes in Thessalonians?
3) Discuss critically the textual difficulties in Thessalonians
4) Discuss how Paul dealt with the four main themes in Thessalonians
Gobbets
1) “For this we say to you by the word of the lord, that we who are alive and remain until
the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep.” (1 Thes 4:15)
2) “But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love and
as a helmet the hope of salvation.” (1 Thes 5:8)
3) “Do not despise prophecies, test all things, hold fast what is good, abstain from every
form of evil.” (1 Thes 5:20-22).
References
1)Best. E, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, New York, 1972.
2)Bruce F.F, 1 and 2 Thessalonians. World Biblical Commentary, 45. Waco, TX, word
1982.
3)Perkins P. Article in Harper’s Bible commentary, Collins 1988.
CHAPTER 21
JAMES
1. Understand that the letter is theocentric rather than christocentric

2. Discuss the themes of faith and love
3. Explain the relationship of the friendship between God and human beings.

Page 218
Precis
The letters of James is not a Pauline letter. This means that the letter was not written by
Paul. Professor Pheme Perkins classifies this letter under what he calls, the general letters
to the churches”. This module will concentrate on the theme of faith and works in order
to enable the student to compare it with other letters on the same theme e.g. Hebrews 11;
Romans 4; and Galatians 3. Any tentative question that examiners may set on this letter
will be a comparative one based on the themes of faith, works and the law.
Introduction
The letter of James is a moral exhortation in the form of a general letter. Little is known
about its intended readers. The greeting is directed to the twelve tribes in the diaspora.
Though it would appear to indicate a jewish- christian audience, the practices condemned
and the attitudes prescribed would not suit such an audience. Its author is not clear.
Neither are we certain whether the author is James the brother of Jesus or a
pseudepigrapher
The teaching of James is general rather than particular. It is traditional. It is moral rather
than theological. Its emphasis is on right acting rather than right thinking. He contrasts
‘faith’ and ‘works’. He sets empty belief in opposition to lived practice. James’
perspective is theocentric rather than christocentric. “theocentric” means ‘based on God’,
while christocentric means ‘based on Christ’. Jesus’ name appears only twice. The
messianic convictions concerning Jesus’ death and resurrection are lacking in the letter.
His perspective is theocentric because explicit statements about the God, who creates,
calls, blesses and judges, support James’ moral exhortations. He sees two measures for
human behaviour: (one) the measure of God who creates all things and (two) the measure
of ‘the world’ that resists God’s claim on creation. James calls adherence to these two
measures ‘friendship’. This means that one can either be a friend of the world or a friend
of God, and act accordingly. James’ specific interest is the double – minded person who
wants to live by both measurers at once, confessing commitment to God, but
contradicting it in action. James encourages his readers to match accord with conviction.
James is remarkable for its positive appropriation of the torah, whose separate aspects it
mediates to the messianic community. James also affirms the law, calling it ‘the law of
liberty’ (2:12). He does not mean ritual observances but the moral teaching of torah,
summarized by the decalogue and the law of love (Leviticus 19:18). The letter of James,
being a moral exhortation as it is, emphasizes practical faith and active love.
Commentary
The Law of God’s Kingdom: 2:1-13. In this unit James criticizes the practice of treating
differently the rich and the poor in the same assembly. James condemns the blatant
discrimination. Members of the assembly give precedence to the rich and slight the poor
(2:3). James’ objection has two bases: First, a bias toward the rich contradicts the original
experience of the members of the christian community. In their lives it was the rich who

Page 219
oppressed them by dragging them into court and who scorned their religion (2:6-7). By so
doing, the rich acted consistently by their measure of reality. But James’ readers had been
given another measure. God had chosen the poor in the world’s estimation to be ‘rich
with respect to faith, and heirs of the kingdom.’(2:5). How could an assembly gathered
under God’s rule act in accord with the world’s measure? James’ second objective is that
their ‘respect for appearances’ has led them to betray their faith in Jesus Christ (2:1). He
accuses them of being, as a result, judges with evil designs (2:4). The constant principle
should be that decisions must be made without partiality. Judges were not to be swayed
by appearances but by the merits of a case. But if the rich are given special places in the
assembly because of their lordly appearance, the community is corrupting its judgement.
It betrays faith first of all, because the very basis for the community’s existence is God’s
choice of the poor, so community should have the same preference for the poor that God
has shown.
Living faith and love: James 2:14-26
For James the contrast is between a faith that is merely verbal and one that shows its life
in action. The fiction dialogue in 2:18-23 strikes the point that faith without works is
empty. Deeds rather than speech carry conviction. The example is framed on James 2:14,
17 by its specific application: that faith without deeds is dead.
Like Paul in Galatians 3 verse 6, James cites Genesis 15 verses 6 to show that Abraham
was declared righteous for his faith (2:23), but he adds his distinctive identification of
those who live by God’s measure: Abraham was called “friend of God: (4:4). And as
James explicitly mentions the “sister” in need (2:15), so he adds the female example of
Rahab, whose hospitality to Israel’s spies enacted her implicit response of faith in Israel’s
God (cf. Josh 2:9-13). In Jewish lore Abraham and Rahab stand as symbols of
hospitality. Some readers find James to be at odds with the Paul of Galatians. But Paul
would surely agree that what matters is faith being worked out by love (Gal 5:6). Their
focus, to be sure, is quite different. James is not debating the theological grounds for
salvation. He advocates a true religion, which he understands as effective action for
others in the world. In Abraham’s offering of his son Isaac (Gen 22:9) faith came to
perfection in action. His action was the intrinsic expression of faith itself.
Friendship with God. James 3:13-4:10
The heart of James’ writing and the key to its understanding are found in this unit. In this
unit we meet again the double-minded person (4:8) contrasted to the simple generous
God (4:6); the reversal worked by God so that the proud are lowered and the humble are
raised; and a wisdom from God opposed to a wisdom against God (1:5; 3:15). In a word,
James puts before his readers the choice between two measures and demands of them a
choice: will it be God or the world? One cannot be at the same time a friend of the world
and a friend of God (4:14).

Page 220
James’ specific target throughout the letter is the double-minded person who wants to be
“friends with everyone”, to live by both measures at once. James’ indictment demands of
this person action that conforms with knowledge: “do you not know?” (4:4). He
demands a cleansing of the hands and purifying of the heart, which means becoming
single-minded rather than double-minded, living by God’s standard rather that the
world’s.
In his final exhortations, James makes several remarkable statements concerning the
relationship between God and human beings. By turning, to God, the evil spirit can be
resisted and made to flee (4:7); God can then be approached by humans. More
surprisingly, God responds to such initiative and draws near (4:8). Indeed, God answers
those who humble themselves before him, giving them gifts and “raising them up”.
Conclusion
Life in the Community 5:12-20
The letter of James concludes with the number of separate exhortations whose organizing
principle is, life together in the church, with a specific focus on the sought of speech that
should obtain in the Messianic community i.e. plain speech without taking of oaths
(5:12). The messianic community is also one constituted by prayer. James’ readers are
thereby reminded that their lives are bound by more than mutual affection above all their
shared relationship with God. The community is therefore to respond to threats of
sickness or sin by gathering in prayer. The community is threatened even more
powerfully by the sins of its members. The confessing of sins, therefore, accompanied by
prayers for each other not only restores the deviant individual to spiritual health but it
also heals the community as such. (James 5:16).
1) Discuss the authorship, date and purpose of James.

2) What does James say about treating the rich and the poor?
3) Explain the moral exhortations in James
4) Examine the teaching on faith, works, and love in James.
Gobbets
1) “If you really fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, ‘you shall love your
neigbhour as yourself’, you do well” (Jam 2:8)
2) “And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity” (Jam 3:6)
3) “Thus faith without works is dead.” (Jam 2:17)
References
1) Dibelius M. - James: A commentary on the epistle of James.

Hermenia. Philadelphia, 1976.

Page 221
2) Johnson L.T, Article in Harper’s Bible Commentary, Collins, 1988

3) Laws S. A commentary on the epistle of James. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1980.
4) Mayor J.B. The epistle of St. James, 3rd edition. . London. Macmillan 1910
CHAPTER 22
PROPHECY AND THE NEW TESTAMENT:

THE ZIMBABWEAN CONTEXT IN PERSPECTIVE.
A DISSERTATION, C.K. Mhuri
Chapter objectives
After completing a study of this chapter, the student should be able to:
(a) Examine the applicability of the phenomenon of prophecy in the New Testament.
(b) Discuss the Zimbabwean religions in the context of prophechy.
Competencies
- the ability to synthesize information.

Page 222
- the ability to put up information together.

- the ability to apply information.
Introduction
Arguably, the outer and the inner impressions of the concept of “prophecy” in the New
Testament is no longer as it were in the old testament. In the Old Testament the term is
simply applied to some named figures (e.g. Moses, Samuel, Elijah; Amos; Hosea etc), but
in the New Testament the term is used by inference on certain figures, particularly Jesus
Christ and John the Baptist. There is an implied change of the concept, especially in the
methodology and practice of prophecy in the New Testament. Paul mentions the term
“prophet” in the first epistle to the Corinthians, but does not give any particular names.
Hence the figures who may be cited as prophets in the New Testament may not equate
easily with those in the Old Testament. But nonetheless there is need to emphasise that
the phenomenon of prophecy continued through the New Testament times in another
form.
In the New Testament context, prophecy can possibly be viewed as a heritage that started
with John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, and then later transmitted to the apostles in the
post-Christ era, or what some may call the Apostolic Age. When prophecy is viewed in
the apostolic Age, it is here where we begin to see the contemporary Zimbabwean
religion fitting into the context of prophecy. The parallels of the petrine paradigm of
prophecy, could be found among Zimbabwean apostolic sects and the Pentecostal
churches. What is worrying though, is the question of spirit possession which we see in
some of the renowned figures the apostolic sects. It is not clear to the investigator
whether the spirit is induced or is inherent, since in some cases, a lot of singing and
dancing is done before the figure starts performing miracles. Furthermore, it is not say to
determine whether the spirit is of God or something else. In the Petrine and Pauline
paradigms the whole atmosphere was sober and simple. Everything was done simple in
the name of Jesus. The Apostolic sects and their charismatic figures begin to make
relevance at that stage. The Zimbabwean chapter of prophetism is mesmarised with spirit
possession, induced behavior and language machinations that will persuade the scholar to
regard the whole thing as reminiscent of, if not emulation from the prophetic guilds of the
classical Old Testament times. It is even possible to envisage “schools of the spirit”
among the Pentecostal churches and the apostolic sects in Zimbabwe. Therefore, our
study shall begin by examining the fundamental principles in New Testament prophecy
as evidenced in the New Testament canons.
Prophecy in the New Testament
There are very few texts in both the four Gospels and the Apostolic Age epistles that
allude to the phenomenon of prophecy in the New Testament. The following texts can be
singled out for the attention of our study:
Matthew 7:15-23
Matthew 11:9b-14
Mark 9:38-41
Luke 7:26; 28

Page 223
Acts 2:19
1 Corinthians 12:3; 14:1b
1John 2:22
‘Prophets” in the New testament context can possibly be defined as “Man of God in
action, fulfilling the work of the Father.” Professor Reginald Fuller (1988) portrays Jesus
as the New Moses. Some scholars believe that when Moses promised the coming of
another great prophet like himself (Deuteronomy 18:18) he was actually referring to the
coming of Jesus Christ. But Fuller says that the prophetic dimension of Jesus was to be in
the fulfilling of the Torah of Moses in the form of a new righteousness that is based on
love and brotherhood. This better righteousness would make any one a true “man of
God”, hence a “prophet.”
The New Testament text in Luke 7:28; and Matthew 11:9b, however, imply that Christ
would be the last prophet of greater repute after John the Baptist. Of those born of
women only John the Baptist would be reputed as a prophet (Luke 7:26; 28). Only he
who is the smallest in the Kingdom of God (Jesus Christ) would be a greater prophet than
John (Matthew 11:11). Professor Fred B. Craddock (1988) expressed that Jesus was
Elijah-like as compared with the text in 2 Kings 1:18. But R. H. Fuller saw Jesus as a
Moses-like figure. Both exegetes concur that Jesus indeed was a great prophet of the
time. But from Jesus’ words, John the Baptist was the Elijah, as he was in deed the great
prophet who was prophesied in the Old Testament in Malachi 3:1-2;4:5-6, that he would
come before the messiah to prepare his way.
What we see from the afore-going is that only John the Baptist and Jesus Christ are the
prophets of acceptable authenticity in the New Testament. Their prophecy was marked by
advocacy and the practice of the new righteousness. In this regard John baptised with
water and preached repentance, while Jesus baptised with fire but performed messianic
deeds.
In contemporary Zimbabwean religions we see desperate efforts in both mainstream and

Pentecostal churches and apostolic sects to preach and baptise as was the case in the time
of Jesus. What they preach is the new Torah of Christ which emphasises love and
brotherhood. Therefore, by the definition of prophecy which we got from the John-Christ
scenario, our ardent priests who seek to adhere to the letter and spirit of Christianity can
arguably be viewed as “man of God” (prophets). It is no longer “prophets” in the exact
manner of the Old Testament, but the New Testament. However, it is important to note
that though church and sect priests practice the baptismal prophecy, it is only the baptism
by water, as was John’s, but no baptism by fire as was Jesus’, which is experienced in our
churches. Perhaps, this explains why Jesus has become a unique prophet, with no other
prophet exactly like him, after him.
But the miraculous healings and exorcisms that are popular among the apostolic sects can
be argued to be reminiscent of the messianic deeds of the prophet Jesus. In the
Zimbabwean broadcasted religions, such figures like Emmanuel Makhandiwa; Blessings
Chiza of the Eagle Life Assemblies; Andrew Wutawunashe of the Family of God

Page 224
Fellowship; Freedom Sengwayo of the African Apostolic Faith, Ezekiel Guti of the
ZAOGA church and many others whom you can remember, performed similar messianic
deeds as was in the time of Jesus and as was in the apostolic era (the Pauline era).
Therefore, for academic purposes and from an intellectual point of view the conclusion is
that if the works of Jesus are to be classified as prophetic by their nature the same
attribute can be made for the works of the aforementioned figures in Zimbabwe. This,
however, is not to say that any of the above figures were Messiahs like Jesus. No human
figure can be equated to Jesus Christ, the son of God.
In Acts of the Apostles 2:19 the gift of the spirit of God was poured upon the disciples of
Christ and they became apostles of mighty works. To single out some, Peter and James
became miracle workers of repute. The famous healing of the blind beggar at the
Beautiful Gate in Jerusalem was attributed to the power of the Lord. It is the same
scenario which we see in cases like Pastor Chris, Makhandiwa; Mwazha; Chiza and
others, who attribute their healings to the name of Jesus. We must note without
reservation that the New Testament paradigm of prophecy has no parallel with the
traditional African religion of n’angas, izangoma, midzimu, mashavi; amadlozi and what
have you. To try and relate these to Christian prophetism will be a far-fetched attempt, if
not an intellectual masturbation. They do not attribute their acts to Jesus Christ or the
Holy Spirit. Therefore, they cannot be prophets in a Christian sense.
In 1 Corinthians 12:3 and 14:1 Paul emphasised the issue of prophesying among the
believers. But he stressed that the gift of prophesying will only be found in the Holy
Spirit. While many of the believers have now associated the gift of speaking in tongues
(which is very common in Pentecostal churches in Zimbabwe), with prophesying, Paul
distinguishes the two and even down-grades speaking in tongues. He argued that
prophecy is more preferable because it contributes more to the building up of the
community. Those who speak in tongues have received this gift for their own spiritual
uplift, whereas those who prophesy edify, comfort and teach the whole assembly.
Fiorenza E.S. (1988) expounded on Paul’s argument that, in the interim time, when
speaking in tongues and other prophetic gifts are incomplete, three gifts remain. These
are: faith, hope and love. But love stands supreme as the most excellent gift. This again
sums up the new righteousness point in the post-Christ prophetic era. And Paul believed
that, because of its communal, communicative character, prophetic speaking is more than
speaking in tongues.
The above argument must be exercised in the dichotomy between speaking in tongues in
contemporary Zimbabwean religion and the practice of prophetic acts in the wider
religious community.
A summative position for this dissertation is that prophetic manifestations in the form of
a heritage from John the Baptist and Jesus Christ and the later apostles, are evident within
the contemporary religious practices in Zimbabwe, but the traditional African religion
lacks a clear relationship with the Christ and post-Christ prophetic paradigm.
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS

Page 225
1. Prophecy in the New Testament has taken a new dimension from the Old
Testament. How valid is this view? [25]
2. Discuss the view that Christians still observe the phenomenon of prophecy as an
aspect of their religion. [25]
3. Discuss the view that contemporary Zimbabwean religion does not fall short of
the prophetic character of the biblical times [25]
4. Apostleship and prophetism may be two faces of the same coin. Examine this
view with reference to the Zimbabwean context of religion. [25]
REFERENCES
1. Craddock F.B. Luke, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, 1988
2. Culpepper. R.A. 1, 2, 3 John, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville,
Kentucky, 1988.
3. Donaliue J.R Mark, Jesuit school of Theology at Berkeley and Graduate
Theological Union, Berkeley, California, 1988
4. Fiorenza-E.S 1 Corinthians; Havard University, Cambridge; Massachusetts,
1988.
5. Fuller R.H. Matthew, Virginia Theological seminary, Alexandria, Virginia,
1988
6. Holladay C. Acts Candler school of Theology, Emory University Atlanta;
Georgia, 1988.

DIVINITY TURN UP - Copy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DIVINITY TURN UP - Copy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

‘A’ LEVEL DIVINITY

ISBN 978 0 7974 4546 8

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Copyright© 2010, by Turn-Up college

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

The struggle against “false” prophecy...........................................................................61

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Who wrote Luke?........................................................................................................147

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Sexual abstinence. 1 Cor 7:1-9....................................................................................190

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

‘Faith in Your Success’ is our motto.

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

NB: Notice that at A- level, analysis as opposed to knowledge-based descriptions, is

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

reinterpret vague expressions. Unclear or vague expression will naturally discredit

Assessment of Answers at advanced Level

Candidates’ answers should be focused on the question and show a depth of

Relevance to the question

Explanatory Adequacy of factual

Band 1: 21-25 Marks

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Band 2: 18-20 marks

Band 3: 16-17 Marks

Band 4: 14-15 Marks

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Band 6; 8-10 marks

Band 7; 0-7 marks

Structure of the Examination

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

 Paper 9054/1 is compulsory

The total score of the 2 papers is obtained as follows:

Weighting of answers in all papers

Why is this Study Pack the best resource?

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

1. There is no college or institution that trains a divinity teacher.

As aforementioned there is no specific divinity textbook. The traditional commentaries

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

‘A’ level Divinity, comparative study, application and contextualisation: a new

2) Contextualisation and application are biblical concepts which seeks to relate or

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

Brief History of “the Old Testament Israelites”

After studying the chapter, students should be able to:

Issues of the chapter in brief

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

The Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 15:1-21)

Yahweh’s reiteration of the promise of an heir and numerous descendants and a

The death of Abraham (Gen 23:1-20)

Important historical point of families of Israel

Jacob and Esau, Israel and Edom

A prominent scholar on the book of Genesis, John. S. Kselman wrote that:

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

The Egyptian bondage

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack

The Mosaic Covenant

Turn-Up College ‘A’ Level Divinity Study Pack