Origins of Israelite Prophecy
Prophecy as a Borrowed phenomena
Prophecy in Israel presents a complex and multifaceted background as scholars endeavor to trace its origins and development. This scholarly pursuit involves examining various theories and evidence to determine where Israelite prophecy actually originated. One prominent school of thought posits that Israelite prophecy has its antecedents in the Ancient Near East (ANE) and Mesopotamia. This theory is supported by a number of ancient legends and texts, which include the Legend of Wen Amon, the Mari texts concerning the legend of Zimri-Lim, the stele of Zakir, and the Muhhum prophets associated with the god Dagon.
These extra-biblical narratives provide intriguing connections that suggest a link between Israelite prophecy and the broader cultural and religious milieu of Mesopotamia and the ANE. For instance, the Legend of Wen Amon, an Egyptian text, recounts the journey of an Egyptian priest to Byblos and includes prophetic elements that resonate with Israelite traditions. Similarly, the Mari texts, which date back to the early second millennium BCE, contain references to prophetic figures and practices that bear resemblance to those found in Israelite contexts. The stele of Zakir, an inscription from the 8th century BCE, and the Muhhum prophets of the god Dagon further illustrate the widespread nature of prophetic activity in the region.
In addition to these extra-biblical sources, there are also significant biblical references that contribute to our understanding of Israelite prophecy. For example, the Balaam prophecy, found in the Book of Numbers, describes a non-Israelite prophet who delivers messages from God, highlighting the existence of prophetic figures outside of Israel. Another notable biblical account is the contest at Mount Carmel, where the prophet Elijah challenges the prophets of Baal, demonstrating the power and authority of the Israelite God in a dramatic and public display.
Together, these various sources and references paint a picture of Israelite prophecy as a phenomenon deeply embedded in the broader cultural and religious traditions of the ANE and Mesopotamia. By examining these connections, scholars can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the origins and development of prophetic practices in ancient Israel, shedding light on the complex interplay between different cultures and religious traditions in the ancient world.
The Legend of Wen Amon
Moving from Mesopotamia to the West Semitic region, we revisit an event reported by Wenamon the Egyptian in the Phoenician city of Byblos. In this classic example of the “Canaanite” background of “Israelite” prophecy, Wenamon describes how the ruler of Byblos, who had initially rejected him, was offering to his gods when:
the god (Amon) took control of a great seer, putting him into an ecstatic state, and the seer said: “Bring up the god! Bring the messenger who carries him! It is Amon who sent him. He made him come.”
With today’s cuneiform evidence, Wenamon’s report makes sense, though there is nothing uniquely “Canaanite” about the prophecy he experienced. A prophet, acting as a divine messenger, is seized by the deity and delivers a message to a ruler during temple worship—this is well-known from cuneiform sources. That an Egyptian claims this happened in Phoenicia is significant, especially since it was written in the eleventh century BCE, a period with little historical clarity on prophecy.
Whatever truly happened in Byblos, Wenamon’s account shows how an Egyptian would interpret a prophetic event, aligning with cuneiform evidence he couldn’t have known. This suggests a shared, long-term Near Eastern view of divine-human communication through prophecy.
The Mari Texts
MARI, one of the principal centers of Mesopotamia during the third and early second millennia B.C.E. The archaeological and epigraphical discoveries there are of prime significance for the history of Mesopotamia and Upper Syria. The Akkadian-language documents from Mari date from the Old Babylonian period and are thus centuries earlier than those of the Hebrew Bible. However, the residents of Mari were western Semites, ultimately related to the Israelites and Arameans who first surface in the late second millennium but who are best known from the first.
In consequence, although there is no demonstrable direct connection with the history of ancient Israel as was once thought (see *Genesis and *Patriarchs), there are numerous linguistic, cultural, and social data from Mari that aid us in the study of ancient Israel and the Bible. Mari (sometimes Ma?eri in the cuneiform sources) was located at Tell ?ar?r?, at present some 1.5 mi. (2.5 km.) west of the Euphrates, near Abu Kemal, around 15 mi. (25 km.) north of the modern Syrian-Iraqi border. It was in an optimal position for contacts with the West and its location on the river artery, yet immediately adjacent to the desert, was decisive in the shaping of its fortune and character.
A. Excavations and Discoveries
The French excavations at Mari were instituted in 1933 under the direction of A. Parrot and exploration continued as regularly as the international situation allowed. The archaeological evidence indicates that Mari was founded in the fourth millennium B.C.E. at the very beginning of the Early Dynastic period (ED I), reaching a cultural-artistic peak during the first half of the third millennium B.C.E. Dating to this period (known as “Early Dynastic II–III,” or “pre-Sargonic”) are a ziggurat and several sanctuaries: including a temple where the earliest list of the Mari pantheon was discovered, temples to Shamash, Nin?ursag, and Ishtar, and the pair of temples of Ishtarat and Ninni-Zaza. In the latter three, there came to light many inscribed statues of local kings (such as Lamgi-Mari, Iku-Shamagan, and Iblul-Il), lesser royalty, and courtiers. Although Sumerian culture was predominant, the character of the cultic installations, the appearance of bearded figures in art, and especially the occurrence of particular divine and private names are all clearly indicative of a basic Semitic element from earliest times, with Semitic rule there centuries before the rise of Akkad.
The Legend of Zimri Lim
The Mari texts are crucial for reconstructing political history in the early second millennium B.C. and for understanding the prehistory of West Semitic languages. They also help trace early forms of prophetism.
So far, twenty-seven Mari letters have been found that mention communications from individuals claiming to have dreams or direct messages from deities. These messages are usually directed to the king. Before the Mari texts, divine guidance through various divination practices was known from Mesopotamian sources. While message dreams existed, they were rare. The Mari dream messages and direct prophetic messages are unique outside of the Old Testament, leading to numerous publications for comparison.
One notable Mari prophetic text, published only in French, is the only letter written by a prophet himself. It reads: “Speak thus to Zimri-Lim, king of Mari: Thus says the apilum-prophet of Shamash, lord of the country: ‘Send immediately to me in Sippar the throne for my residence and your daughter. Hammurabi, king of Kurda, has spoken against you. When he attacks, you will be victorious; then relieve the land of its debts. I grant you the whole land. When you take the city, declare amnesty from debts.'”
This text highlights two main concerns in Mari prophetic messages: proper care of deities and their temples, and promises of military success or threats of defeat.
Researchers often compare Mari materials with Old Testament prophets: Do they use similar language? Do they discuss similar topics? Do they have similar societal roles? The answers are mixed. Old Testament form critics noted the formula “x deity has sent me,” but Ellermeier showed that there are too many variations at Mari to consider it primary.
The content of the quoted letter shows many similarities with the Old Testament. For example, repeated announcements to Zimri-Lim about victory over Babylon are reminiscent of Biblical oracles, though the Mari prediction was incorrect, as Hammurabi eventually destroyed Mari. However, the strong moral emphasis of Biblical prophets is missing in Mari texts.
The role of Mari prophets seems comparable to that of Israelite prophets under unresponsive kings. Jeremiah, for example, was often ignored and had little impact on political events. The prominence of some Israelite prophets today is due to their high-quality literary works that have survived.
We must be cautious in comparing Mari prophets with Old Testament prophets for two reasons: (1) we have limited evidence on the response to Mari prophets’ messages; (2) we have no literary works from Mari prophets comparable to those of Israelite prophets.
In conclusion, the use of prophets as intermediaries by the God of Israel was not new. Prophetism was an old phenomenon, elevated to new moral and aesthetic heights in Israelite religion.
The Stele of Zakkur
In an early 8th-century Aramaic inscription found on the base of a stela at Tell Afis (ancient Apish), which lies 25 miles southwest of Aleppo, Zakkur, king of Hamath and Luash, says that while he was besieged in one of his cities he lifted up his hands to Baal Shamayn, the patron deity of Hamath, and the god answered him through “seers” (ḥzyn) and “visionaries” (‘ddn). They delivered a salvation oracle, saying that Baal Shamayn had made Zakkur king and would stand by him and deliver him from kings fighting against him. The oracle begins with “Fear not,” which is common in Assyrian oracles and is also well known from the Bible.
Criticism of the Borrowed Theory
Cultural and Historical Context:
Shared Cultural Sphere: Israel was part of the broader ANE cultural sphere, which included Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Levant. This region shared many cultural, religious, and political interactions, suggesting that Israelite prophecy could have been influenced by surrounding cultures.
Similar Forms of Divination and Prophecy: Both Israel and its neighbors practiced various forms of divination and prophecy. For instance, Mesopotamian texts mention seers and prophets, such as the Mari texts from the second millennium BCE, which document prophetic activities similar to those in the Hebrew Bible.
Literary Parallels:
Prophetic Literature: The Hebrew Bible contains prophetic literature that has parallels with ANE texts. For example, the Oracles of Neferti and the Prophecy of the Potter from Egypt exhibit themes of social upheaval and divine judgment akin to those found in Israelite prophetic books.
Common Themes: Themes like divine anger, social justice, and the call for repentance are common in both Israelite and ANE prophecies, suggesting a shared cultural milieu.
Counterpoints:
Unique Characteristics of Israelite Prophecy:
Monotheism: Israelite prophecy is distinctly monotheistic, centered on the worship of Yahweh, unlike the polytheistic contexts of ANE prophecies. This theological focus sets Israelite prophecy apart.
Ethical Monotheism: The ethical dimension of Israelite prophecy, emphasizing justice, mercy, and righteousness, is more pronounced and distinct compared to ANE counterparts, which often focused more on political and ritual concerns.
Historical Development:
Independent Development: Some scholars argue that while there are superficial similarities, Israelite prophecy developed independently due to unique historical and social conditions. The role of the prophets in Israelite society, serving as social critics and moral reformers, differs from the roles seen in neighboring cultures.
Internal Evolution: The evolution of Israelite prophecy can be traced internally through its own historical and literary traditions, from early figures like Samuel to the classical prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah, suggesting an indigenous development.
Function and Role of Prophets:
Different Social Functions: In Israel, prophets often acted as intermediaries between God and the people, delivering messages that called for societal change and covenantal faithfulness. In contrast, ANE prophets were frequently more aligned with royal courts and served to legitimize the king’s rule or divine favor.
Theological Context:
Covenantal Framework: Israelite prophecy is deeply rooted in the covenantal relationship between Yahweh and Israel, which is a unique theological concept not found in the same form in ANE cultures. This covenantal framework shapes the content and purpose of prophetic messages in Israel.
Conclusion:
The idea that prophecy in Israel was borrowed from the ANE is plausible given the cultural and geographical proximity and the shared themes in prophetic literature. However, significant differences in theological focus, social function, and historical development suggest that Israelite prophecy also has unique characteristics that distinguish it from its ANE counterparts. While it is likely that there was some degree of influence and borrowing, Israelite prophecy can be seen as both a product of its environment and a distinctive religious phenomenon that evolved within its own context.
