Why Prophecy Ceased
Author(s): Frederick E. Greenspahn
Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Spring, 1989, Vol. 108, No. 1 (Spring, 1989), pp. 37-49
Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3267469
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3267469?seq=1&cid=pdfreference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms
TheSocietyofBiblicalLiterature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49
Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
WHY PROPHECY CEASED
FREDERICK E. GREENSPAHNUniversity of Denver, Denver, CO 80208
Among the most dramatic differences between the biblical our own is the existence of prophecy as an officially sanctioned divine communication in antiquity. The perception of this distinction uniquely modern. The pseudonymity of intertestamental apocalyptic gests that claims of direct revelation were by that time no longer and indeed the biblical canon includes no prophetic works figures who lived later than Malachi.' This conforms to the rabbinic that the holy spirit withdrew from Israel after the death of Haggai, and Malachi.2 Several texts from the intertestamental period also absence of prophecy, occasioning various theories about the circumstances and causes of its coming to an end?
Although it is perfectly reasonable to suppose that some conditions more conducive to such activities than others, it is in fact virtually to identify a specific point at which prophetic figures no longer Moreover, such efforts may be entirely misdirected. One must what actually happened from what was later believed. The presence individuals claiming to speak for God (i.e., prophets) is very different whether they were accepted as authentic in their own time or, more tant, by later authorities. Careful analysis will show that the available rarely assert that prophecy had come to an end, temporary or Jewish tradition regarded prophecy as a gift of the holy spirit. ample, raah. nba'it (spirit of prophecy) and raah qad~a' (holy spirit) are usedalmost interchangeably to translate biblical references to God's "spirit" in various targumim.5
T Yad. 2:14 and b. Meg. 7a seem to correlate canonicity with inspiration by the holy spirit.
2 T Sota 13:2; cf. y. Sota 24b; b. Sota 48b; b. Sanh. Ila; b. Yoma 9b; and Cant. Rab. 8:9 #3.
3 1 Macc 4:46; 9:27; 14:41; Josephus Ag. Ap. 1:40-41; 2 Apoc. Bar. 85:3; Pr Azar 15; cf. T Benj. 9:2.
4 Biblical references to "spirit" (rwh) are commonly equated with prophecy, as in Lev. Rab. 10:2 and Tg. Ps.-J. Deut 18:15-18; see H. Parzen, "The Ruah Hakodesh in Tannaitic Literature;' JQR n.s. 20 (1929-30) 62-63, 71; for a similar view, see Zech 7:12; 1 Enoch 91:1; 1QS 8:16; Mart. Isa. 5:14; Eph 3:5; and 2 Pet 1:21.
5 Discussion and references can be found in P. Schiifer, "Die Termini 'Heiligen Geist' und 'Geist der Prophetie' in den Targumim und das Verh~iltnis der Targumim zueinander,"' VT 20
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Biblical Literature
Several rabbinic texts, which provide the most explicit information regarding this issue, allude to the loss of the holy spirit, usually in with the Babylonian Exile. Its presence is thus listed as one of tinctions between the first and second temples,6 a position consistent the tradition that Jeremiah was the last of the prophets7 Elsewhere, spirit is said to have ceased with the deaths of Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.8 Despite the diversity of details, there is an underlying consistency: the rabbis seem to have agreed that the holy spirit had departed from sometime between the sixth and fourth pre-Christian centuries?
Scholars have generally accepted the fundamental accuracy reports. Some have even argued that it was the Bible that made superfluous, since God's word was now more immediately accessible ten form.'0 This explanation was rejected by Yehezkel Kaufmann. prophetic exhortations for observance of the law, which in turn
(1970) 304-14; idem, Die Vorstellung vom heiligen Geist in der rabbinischen Literatur K6sel, 1972) 23-26, to which should be added the use of riah n bi'd in Tg. Neb. 1 Sam 10:6; 16:13; 19:23; 2 Sam 23:2; Isa 61:1; Ezek 11:5, 24; 37:1; Mic 3:8; and in Tg. Neb. Isa 42:1. At Exod 2:12, Tg. Neof. has rwh qwd9' in the left margin and in the right margin; see also at Exod 31:3.
6 Y Ta'an. 65a; b. Yoma 21b; Num. Rab. 15:10; and Cant. Rab. 8:9 #3.
7 Pesiq. Rab Kah. 13:14 (ed. B. Mandelbaum [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1. 238) and Midr Tanna'im 'al Sefer Devarim (ed. D. Hoffmann [Berlin: Itzkowski, This may also be the implication of the phrasing in 'Abot R. Nat. A 1 (ed. S. Schechter 1887] 2); see also Mek. Bo' ?1 (ed. H. S. Horowitz [2d ed.; Jerusalem: Bamberger 1970] 5-6); Qoh. Rab. 12:7; and Augustine City of God 17.24, as well as the treatment in b. Meg. 14b-15a. M. Yad. 4:3 refers to prophecy in Babylon and t. 'Erub. 11:22; and b. Sebu. 16a to its existence among the returnees.
8 See citations in n. 2. Rabbinic references to Mordecai and Esther as prophets contradict this, inasmuch as Malachi was understood as an epithet for Mordecai; 14a-15a, where the possibility of identifying Malachi with Ezra is also considered. to Daniel as a prophet (e.g., Josephus Ant. 10.11.4 ?246, 249; 12.7.6 ?321; and not similarly problematic, since the Bible dates him to the early exilic period; however, denial of his being a prophet in b. Meg. 3a and b. Sanh. 94a as well as his book's the Jewish canon's prophetic corpus (although Pesiq. Rab Kah. 4:4 [ed. B. Mandelbaum, and Pesiq. R. ?14 [ed. Meir Friedmann (Vienna: Y. Kaiser, 1880; reprint, Tel Aviv, seem to treat him as a prophet).
9 The reference to the period of Alexander the Great (S. 'Olam Rab. ?30 [ed. B. Romm, 1897) 140]) is a result of the rabbis' having collapsed the Persian period to one generation (E. Urbach, "Matay Paseqah Hanevu'ah,' Tarbiz 17 [1945-46] 2). stein's claim that prophecy was believed to have come to an end after the destruction Second Temple (Studies in Jewish Theology [London: Oxford, 1950] 123-24) has been by P. Schifer (Die Vorstellung vom Heiligen Geist, 100).
10 E.g., J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (6th ed.; Berlin Gruyter, 1927; reprint, 1981) 401-3; see also R. Meyer, "Prophecy and Prophets of the Hellenistic-Roman Period:' TDNT 6. 816; and J. Giblet, "Proph6tisme et messie, Prophete dans l'ancien Judaisme," in LEattente du Messie (Recherches bibliques) Cerfaux et al.; Bruges: Desclee de Brouwer, 1954) 91.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greenspahn: Why Prophecy Ceased 39
prophecy (Deut 18:15), as demonstrating that Torah and prophecy were plementaryM. Instead, Kaufmann turned to biblical passages which warn prophecy could be withdrawn as a punishment for Israelite sin as laying theological groundwork for Judaism's belief that prophecy had ceased Malachi.12 The absence of prophecy, he contended, was understood inevitable result of Jewish sinfulness. He was thus able to periodize Jewish history in a way which demonstrated that postexilic prophets only in times of eschatological excitement.V3
The most serious problem with this and similar interpretations is their treatment of prophecy as an institution which could be controlled by popular consensus. Even if there was a prophetic office under the monarchy, hardly clear that the great prophets all held such positions; this seems precisely the status denied by Amos in his famous assertion that he was a prophet (7:14).14 Nor is it clear that public opinion carried much weight determining the behavior of these iconoclastic personalities. While perceptions were undoubtedly shaped by their environment and their speeches affected by their audience,"5 the prophets did not hesitate to popular expectations. They felt compelled to proclaim what they understood to be God's word regardless of the people's belief about the accessibility the holy spirit.16
Kaufmann's use of rabbinic texts as a source for postexilic history is flawed. The rabbis did not witness, or claim to have witnessed, the cessation of prophecy. Rather than drawing on personal observation, they offered logical reflections on their tradition, as is evident from their phrasing, emphasizes the holy spirit's departure rather than prophecy's end. Other texts cited to confirm the absence of prophecy during the lenistic period are also not as straightforward as is usually implied. than resting on a belief that prophecy had ended, 1 Maccabees' report various actions had to be deferred "until there should come a prophet.. (4:46; cf. 14:41) could be merely an observation that there happened be any prophets at that moment. Similar statements about the priesthood
1 Y. Kaufmann, Toledot Ha'emunah Hayisra'elit (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute; Tel Aviv: 1937-56) 8. 386.
12 E.g., Amos 8:11; Mic 3:5-7; Lam 2:9. The rabbis made a similar connection; cf. t. b. Sabb. 138b; Midr. Tanhuma (Buber) Vayese' 4; and Lam. Rab. proem 25.
'3 Toledot, 8.392-400; D. W. Barnett makes a similar claim regarding the prophets mentioned by Josephus ("The Jewish Sign Prophets--A.D. 40-70, Their Intentions and Origins,' [1980-81] 687-88).
14 A recent bibliography of discussions on the meaning of this much-debated verse found in H. W Wolff, Joel and Amos (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 305-6.
15 Cf. T W Overholt, "Commanding the Prophets: Amos and the Problem of Prophetic Authority," CBQ 41 (1979) 518.
16 Cf. Amos 3:8 and Jer 20:9. The rabbis recognized prophecy's irrepressibility (b. Sanh.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Biblical
conventionally understood in precisely this way." The statement that ets [had] ceased to appear" (1 Macc 9:27) need reflect only the prophets, rather than a conviction that prophecy had ended or away. Similarly, Josephus's assertion that "there has not been an exact sion of prophets since [Artaxerxes]" states only that the presence could not be assumed at any particular time, rather than that it had a complete stop.8 The other sources usually cited to demonstrate prophecy was widely believed to have ceased can be similarly Intertestamental authors may have sensed an absence of something noted in other periods as well (cf. 1 Sam 3:1) - but they not state that prophecy had come to an end, temporarily or otherwise. Moreover, such texts cannot be assumed to represent ancient consensus. Their assertions may be only one point of view rather general opinion during the periods they describe. Although Bible has a clearly favorable view of prophets, as demonstrated by sive corpus of prophetic writings as well as the prominent role prophets in other biblical books, many of the canonical prophets have been widely accepted, much less respected, in their own lifetimes. can easily imagine preexilic figures lamenting the lack of God's despite knowing of Amos or Jeremiah. If Psalm 74 was written shortly the destruction of the Temple,9 then its statement, "There prophet" (v. 9), could be virtually contemporary with Ezekiel. we must not read more into Second Temple sources than they actually Whether there were prophets during a particular period is a very question from whether prophecy was believed possible. For that makes little difference how the Hebrew nabf' or its Greek equivalent phatis was understood. The very use of such language places the so designated in the same category as their classical predecessors.
Put in these terms, there is little evidence that people believed had ended during the Second Temple period. Even "false prophets" strate the contrary, particularly when they attract a following. Denying ballat's charge that the Jews had prophets proclaim him king, grants implicit recognition to both prophecy and prophets (Neh Deutero-Zechariah's polemic against prophecy must have been against would-be prophets whose claims the author found unacceptable
'7 Ezra 2:63 and Neh 7:65, which were accepted in rabbinic tradition (m. Sota 13:2, y. Sota 24b, and b. Sota 48b).
18 Ag. Ap. 1.8 ?40-41; cf. W. C. van Unnik, Flavius Josephus als historischer (Heidelberg: Verlag Lambert Schneider, 1978) 48. Josephus was fully aware teaching that prophecy might be taken away from Israel as a punishment; in context, his point seems to be only that none of the prophetic books is to be dated later than period. The Greek term diadochen is also used by Justin (Dialogue with Trypho for an almost exactly opposite view.
~9 Cf. H. J. Kraus, Psalmen (BKAT 15; Neukirchen: Verlag des Erziehungsvereins,
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greenspahn: Why Prophecy Ceased 41
(Zech 13:2-6). The Qumran hymn scroll refers to lying prophets (1QH and Josephus mentions several prophets, some of whom seem to have sizable followings (J.W 6.5.2 ?285-86; cf. 2.13.5 ?261-62; Ant. 13.11.2 ?311-13; 20.5.1 ?97; 20.8.6 ?169). He also ascribes the power of prophecy to Hyrcanus (J.W 1.2.8 ?68; Ant. 13.10.7 ?300) and quotes Alexander histor's reference to a prophet named Cleodemus, whose Jewishness sible though not certain (Ant. 1.15 ?240).2?
Early Christian sources likewise allude to prophecy within the Jewish community. Even if we exclude clearly Christian figures (e.g., Acts 6:9; 19:6)21 and assume that vague or general references are to canonical prophets (e.g., Matt 23:34; Rev 18:20), there still remain pre-Christian such as Anna and Zechariah (Luke 1:41, 67; 2:26, 36)?2 Most prominently, both John the Baptist and Jesus are considered prophets by numerous authors,23 although some treat them as earlier prophets now resurrected Luke 9:8, 19)24 or the prophet, suggesting an eschatological reference.5 These statements have commonly been connected with the resumption prophecy in what the early Christian community believed to have been messianic age; however, they could as easily be understood as part perfectly normal and continuing religious phenomenon?6
The Wisdom of Solomon states that prophecy exists in every generation (7:27), and a similar view can be found in the writings of Philo (Quis divinarum heres 259) and Paul (1 Cor 14:4-5; see also 11:4-5; 12:8 passim). Although these authors may have held diverse views of prophecy, of which differed from that of the Hebrew Bible, theirs are still Jewish none of which would be conceivable in a community that believed prophecy had come to an end.
In sum, there is sufficient evidence to conclude that those living in the postbiblical period considered prophecy- however that term was understood -as possible, at least in principle. Without denying the existence of other
20 Cf. D. E. Aune, "The Use of IIPO(QHTHE in Josephus,' JBL 101 (1982) 420.
21 Perhaps also Simeon according to Luke 2:25-26; see also Luke 1:41; Acts 11:27; and 13:1; for a survey of early Christian prophecy, see D. E. Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983); D. Hill, New Testament Prophecy (Atlanta: John Knox, 1979); and G. Friedrich, "Prophet and Prophecy in the New Testament,' TDNT 6. 828-61.
22 One might add here the false prophets about whom Jesus was so concerned in Matt 7:15, although this may reflect the church's later concern; see also Acts 13:6; 2 Pet 2:1; and Rev 2:20.
23 E.g., Mark 6:15; 8:28; 11:32; Matt 11:9; 14:5; 16:14; 21:11, 26, 46; Luke 1:70; 7:16, 26; 20:6; 24:19; John 4:19; 9:17; cf. Luke 7:39.
24 Cf. 13:28 re all the prophets, as if to imply that there could be no more than those who have already been.
25 John quite regularly transforms synoptic references to "a prophet" into "the prophet"; 1:21, 25; 6:14; 7:40.
26 Cf. J. Lindblom, "Gesichte und Offenbarungen,' in Vorstellungen von g6ttlichen Weisungen und fiber natiirlichen Erscheinungen im iltesten Christentum (Lund: Gleerup, 1968) 171-73.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
beliefs, we must recognize that the rabbinic teaching on this subject reflect a general consensus.7
Cognizant of the fact that the rabbis lived long after prophecy's ported end, Ephraim Urbach has ascribed a polemical motive rabbinic statements. Noting that several church fathers claimed that had lost the holy spirit for having denied Christ, he suggests that sought to rebut the Christian position by placing the end of centuries earlier?
This view resolves many of the difficulties in Kaufmann's approach. existence of prophets during the Second Temple period, whatever merit or legitimacy, ceases to be problematic; and the fact that were doing more than reporting facts is fully appreciated. Moreover, interpretation places early Christian claims about the Jews' loss of in their proper context. For example, Origen includes it alongside destruction of the Temple, the loss of the divine presence, and expulsion their land as a sign that God had rejected the Jews (Homily on With the advent of Christ, prophecy was now to be found among As Justin points out to Trypho, "The spirit.., .rested, that is, Christ came. For after man's redemption was accomplished by gifts were to cease among you, and ... be given to all His believers" with Trypho 87)?. The Christian claim that prophecy ceased among was thus part of the church's perception of itself as the true Israel.
Despite his appreciation for the dynamics underlying the patristic Urbach's interpretation of the rabbis is not without problems. among these is the fact that he presents them as conceding everything their Christian opponents had proposed, namely, that had been removed from the Jews as a punishment for wrongdoing, doing for which, moreover, they were still suffering. Rather than
27 Cf. S. Sandmel, Judaism and Christian Beginnings (New York: Oxford University 1978) 174. Van Unnik makes a similar point regarding Josephus (Flavius Josephus, evidence of a different perspective in antiquity, see D. L. Petersen, Late Israelite Studies in Deutero-Prophetic Literature and in Chronicles (Missoula, MT: Scholars 37-38.
28 Urbach, "Matay Paseqah Hanevu'ah?" 9-10; see Justin Dialogue with Trypho ?52 (PG 6. 589-92), Origen Contra Celsum 7.8 (PG 1H. 1432) and Homily on Psalm 37 3.10 (PG 12. 1387). Others who have perceived an anti-Christian element in this theme include N. Glatzer ("A Study of the Talmudic Interpretation of Prophecy,"' RR 10 [1945-46] 136), J. Giblet ("Prophetisme" 98), and R. Leivestad ("Der Dogma von der prophetlosen Zeit,"' NTS 19 [1972-73] 289).
29 PG 12. 617; cf. the Jewish lists of differences between the first and second temples cited
30 PG 6. 683-84; trans. Thomas B. Falls (Saint Justin Martyr [The Fathers of the Church, A New Translation 6; New York: Christian Heritage, 1948] 288); see also Clement of Alexandria Stromata 1.21 (PG 8. 856); Tertullian Adversus Judaeos 3 (PL 2. 637); Hippolytus Fragmenta in Danielem (PG 10. 654); Athanasius De Incarnatione 40 (PG 25. 163-66); and Lactantius Divinarum Institutionum 4.11 (PL 6. 476).
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Why Prophecy Ceased 43
church fathers, Urbach seems to have the rabbis go them one better: didn't just start sinning,' he would have them say; "we have been sinning suffering for six hundred years.
Although the rabbis' recognition of Jewish sin is not to be denied, are unlikely to have conceded so much to their rivals, particularly competitive environment where this debate is said to have taken Moreover, reports of early Jewish discomfort with emergent Christianity owe more to Christian self-perceptions than to Jewish reality?. Furthermore, the fact that the rabbinic tradition can be traced to at least tannaitic times leaves the direction of influence, if indeed there was any, open for discussion. Christian polemicists could as easily have modified an existing Jewish doctrine as the reverse.2 Finally, Urbach does not really answer the question at issue. To be sure, he does offer an explanation for why the rabbis dated the cessation of prophecy as they did, but he has not told us why they believed prophecy had ceased in the first place. For Christians, who believed that the holy spirit was present in their own community, to have claimed that it had been taken away from the Jews is hardly surprising; why Jews would have found this credible remains to be explained.
The rabbis sensed that their time was different from the biblical period.3 Their need to cite scripture itself attests to a feeling that the age of revelation had passed. The same conclusion can be drawn from their description of the "gilyanim and heretical books, Ben Sirah and all books written afterwards" as non-defiling (t. Yad. 2:13; cf. y. Sanh. 27c-28a).4 While some of these may have been unacceptable because of their content, others (those written after Ben Sirah) are rejected solely because of their date. As a result, material which the rabbis might otherwise have endorsed, theoretically including rabbinic texts themselves, was effectively excluded.
They certainly did not feel out of touch with the divine. Rabbinic texts are filled with miraculous occurrences. The tradition of the holy spirit's departure itself allows for the continuation of divine communication via the Bat Qol, whereby God's will is revealed to those who, in an earlier age, would have merited the holy spirit (t. So.ta 13:3-4; y. So.ta 24b; b. So.ta 48b)35
31 R. Kimmelman, "Birkat Ha-Minim and the Lack of Evidence for an Anti-Christian Jewish Prayer in Late Antiquity" in Jewish and Christian Self-Definition (ed. E. P. Sanders; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 2. 233; and S. Katz, "Issues in the Separation of Judaism and Christianity After 70 C.E.: A Reconsideration,"' JBL 103 (1984) 66.
32 Cf. Schiifer, Die Vorstellung vom heiligen Geist, 145.
33 Cf. the debate in b. Yoma 9b, which is epitomized in R. Yohanan's comment, "The fingernail of earlier generations is better than later generations' whole body"; see also A. Kariv, Shiv'at 'Amudei Hatanakh, 'Ishim Ve'ide'ot Besefer Hasefarim (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1968) 232-37.
34 For a discussion of gily5nfm, see G. E Moore, "The Definition of the Jewish Canon and the Repudiation of Christian Scriptures,"' in The Canon and Massorah of the Hebrew Bible (ed. S. Z. Leiman; New York: Ktav, 1974) 120-21.
35 Cant. Rab. 8:9 #3 compares the two periods as the difference between a king's actual
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
44 Journal of Biblical Literature
In fact, rabbinic sources are not unaware that many Jews prophecy still available. Although Haninah ben Dosa denied being (b. Ber. 34b; b. B. Qam. 50a; b. Yebam. 121a),36 the query itself indicates for some prophecy was very much a possibility. Other sages encountered similar inquiries (b. 'Erub. 63a). Some rabbinic traditions even view. One tradition holds that prophecy is available to only one in (Midr. Tanhuma [Buber] Miqqes 4 [p. 96b]), and several texts proper treatment of prophets (e.g., m. Sanh. 1:5; 11:1, 5, 6; b. Pesah 66b).7 While admittedly hypothetical and couched in terms priate to biblical figures, these should not automatically be dismissed purely speculative. R. Yohanan describes the possibility of receiving prophecy" (b. Ber. 55b), and Hillel's remark that, although not prophets, Jews are b n& nbi'ifm (y. Sabb. 17a; y. Pesah 33a; b. Pesah 66b) suggests sort of special status, particularly since in its original, biblical term means literally "prophets:'38 In one version, Hillel explictly all Jews possess the holy spirit (t. Pesah 4:2)-this from a man where said to have been denied the holy spirit only because it was accessible!39 Gamaliel, Akiba, Meir, Shimon bar Yohai, and indeed Israel are also said to have acted on the basis of the holy spirit, departure notwithstanding.0
These traditions are not as problematic as they may initially seem. Although the rabbis often linked the holy spirit with prophecy, they were not one and the same. In some places they are explicitly distinguished; elsewhere the relationship seems more one of cause and effect than identity (e.g., Sipre Deut 176)W' The rabbis also ascribed the holy spirit to figures not normally
presence and that of a statue. Sometimes the Bat Qol is not clearly differentiated from the holy spirit which it is supposed to have replaced.
36 Note that the request is ascribed to talmidW hdkkamfm. Hannaniah's allusion to Amos's claim not to be a prophet is not unequivocal, since Amos was surely a prophet in rabbinic eyes.
37 See also Seder 'Eliyahu Rabbah, chap. 10 (ed. M. Friedmann; Vienna: Carl Fromme, 1902; reprint, Jerusalem: Wahrmann Books, 1969) 48.
38 Tobit 4:12 also links Israel with prophets. For the biblical ben& nabt' m, see KB 133.
39 Cf. t. Sota 13:3-4; y. Sota 24b. Y Sukk. 55a asserts that it was the "holy spirit" which was "drawn" at the Beit-Hasho'evah, a Second Temple institution (although there the explicit reference is to Jonah).
40 T Pesah. 1:27; y. Seb. 38d; y. Sota 16d; b. 'Erub. 64b; Lev. Rab. 21:8; 37:3; Qoh. Rab. 10:7. As A. J. Heschel has shown, medieval figures were sometimes identified as prophets ("'Al Ruah Haqodesh Biyemei Habeinayim ('Ad Zemano shel Harambam)"' in Sefer Hayovel Likhevod Alexander Marx [New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1950] Hebrew Section pp. 181-86, cf. also Todros ben Yehudah Abulafiya, Gan Hameshalim Vehahidot [ed. D. Yellin; Jerusalem: Hasefer, 1932] 1. 7 [no. 3, line 1]). In the seventh century, Abu Isa (Obadiah) of Isfahan claimed to be a prophet, regarded the rabbinates as equal to prophets, and described Jesus and Mohammed as having been "sent by God to their own people" (see L. Nemoy, "Al-Qirqisini's Account of the Jewish Sects and Christianity,"' HUCA 7 [1930] 328 and 382-83).
41 Cf. Tg. Neb. Isa 40:13 and Lev. Rab. 15:2. They also seem distinct in y. Sanh. 28b; 'Ag. Ber.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greenspahn: Why Prophecy Ceased 45
considered prophets - including the patriarchs, several kings and prominent women, and sometimes even all ancient Israelites (e.g., b. Meg. 48a; Rab. 21).2 While the meaning of the term nabi' was surely extendedbeyond its biblical use, as was typical of the Second Temple period, frequency with which the holy spirit was ascribed to priestly figures counsels against assuming that its possession was ipso facto a prophetic prerogative.3
It is significant that despite numerous references to the holy spirit's departure, rabbinic tradition does not usually claim that prophecy itself ceased.4 Nor did the rabbis say that it would eventually resume, which after all be tantamount to admitting that it had come to an end. Elijah's called "second coming" is much exaggerated. Most of the commonly texts are not rabbinic at all. Several traditions suggest not so much will return as that he had never left,45 a view derived from the biblical tion that he had not died which is therefore unrelated to the rabbinic view of prophecy-past or future. Even eschatological references, beginning
23 (ed. S. Buber [Cracow: Josef Fischer, 1904] 47) and the targum renders some biblical references to God's spirit with rutah gabiird (e.g., Judg 6:34; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6, 19; 14:14; and 1 Sam 11:6; cf. I. Heinemann, "Die Lehre vom heiligen Geist im Judentum und in den Evangelien,' MGWJ 66 [1922] 174).
42 Cf. Num. Rab. 15:19; y. Ber. 4d; y. Meg. 7a; and b. Meg. 17b. See also Jude 14 regarding Enoch, 2 Pet 2:16 for Balaam, Matt 22:43 and Acts 4:25 regarding David, 4 Ezra 14:22 about Ezra, and Pss. Sol. 17:17 regarding the future king. For a thorough treatment, see Schfifer, Die Vorstellung vom heiligen Geist, 27-61; note also the references to myriads of Israelite prophets in Mek. Begallah 6 (ed. Horowitz, 114); b. Meg. 14a; b. Sukk. 27b; y. Sukk. 55a; Cant. Rab. 4:11 #1. Such views as those of Paul and Philo cited above as well as that of Josephus (e.g., Ant. 5.8.5 ?285) and Acts 2:30 should be read with this in mind, as well as the apparent connection between wisdom and the holy spirit in Wis 9:17-18. This broadening of the concept is anticipated already in Num 11:24-29 as well as later biblical texts, regarding which see below.
43 Thus Aaron (Josephus Ant. 3.8.1 ?192 and Sipra 46 at Lev 10:4; but cf. Exod 4:16; Phineas (Josephus Ant. 5.2.1 ?120; 5.2.10 ?159; and Lev. Rab. 21:12); Eli (b. Ber. 31b), Abiathar (Josephus Ant. 6.14.6 ?359), Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zechariah (2 Chr 24:20), Hyrcanus, Simon the Righteous, Caiphas (John 11:49-51), and the high priest (Josephus Ant. 6.6.3 ?115; 6.12.4 ?254; 6.12.5 ?257; 7.4.1 ?73, 76; cf. b. Ber. 73b); for biblical precedent, see Petersen, Late Israelite Prophecy, 87. Josephus identifies the Levite Yahaziel as a prophet (Ant. 9.1.2 ?10; cf. 2 Chr 20:14), while T Levi 8:2 notes Levi's use of the "ephod of prophecy."
44 The most obvious exception is in the relatively late S. 'Olam Zuta' ?7 (ed. M. Grossberg [London: Y. Narodetzky, 1910; reprint, Tel Aviv: Zion, 1970] 26-27) 'Ag. Be. 23 and Midr.Tanhuma (Buber) Bre 'lit 23 (p. 9a) claim only the absence of prophets at that particular time, while the reference to Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi as the last of the prophets (s6p nbn'fm) in b. Bat. 14b refers to their books' placement in the canon, thus also their designation as ntbf'fm ha'aharonim in b. Sanh. 1a (cf. t. Sota 13:2; b. Sota 48b; b. Yoma 9b), which may mean only "later,' as is likely from its juxtaposition with ri'6nim in R. Yohanan's statement cited above inn. 33. Jeremiah is similarly designated in Pesiq. Rab Kah. 13:14 (ed. B. Mandelbaum, 1. 238) and Midr. Tanna'im (ed. D. Hoffmann, p. 63).
45 Cf. G. Molin, "Elijahu, Der Prophet und sein Weiterleben in den Hoffnungen des Judentums und der Christenheit,' Judaica 8 (1952) 82.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Biblical Literature
already with Mal 3:23 (Eng. 4:5), have less to do with Elijah's prophetic (some texts emphasize rather that he was a priest)46 than with what accomplish (e.g., Sir 48:10; m. 'Ed. 8:7; Cant. Rab. 4:12.5; Pesiq. rabbis' eschatological hope was not that prophecy be restored but tually all Jews would be prophets as they once had been (Midr. [Buber] Miqqes 4 [p. 96b]; Num. Rab. 15:25).7
The belief that the holy spirit had been removed from Israel stand alone in rabbinic tradition. Isaac, Jacob, Moses, the elders, and Hannaniah- all are said to have "lost" the holy spirit at various Its presence is thus a sign of divine favor, and its departure reflects status. As recognized by Kaufmann, this is a reflex of biblical theology, potentially tendentious overtones. The rabbinic statement that the had been taken from the Gentiles49 belongs to the theological underpinnings of Israel's uniqueness every bit as much as the patristic notion of from the Jews was part of early Christian self-understanding. expect a similarly forceful motivation for the rabbis' claim that the had now been removed from Israel.
It is tempting to see an anti-Christian element in such statements. Christianity certainly relied heavily on the Hebrew prophets for legitimation, while claiming both new revelation and prophetic leadership. The spirit's presence was very clearly near the core of Christian belief. But, as we have already seen, Christians were not the only ones laying claim to prophetic inspiration; nor would rabbinic tradition have had any reason to place the holy spirit's departure as early as they did if they were.
According to a tradition repeated often in the rabbinic corpus, the presence of the holy spirit is but one of several differences between the First and the Second Temples; more than Christianity is denied legitimacy by such
46 Cf. Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 6:18; Deut 30:4; 33:11. Whether he was conceived of as a messianic precursor is thus not directly relevant; for recent discussion of that issue, see M. M. Faierstein, "Why Do the Scribes Say That Elijah Must Come First,' JBL 100 (1981) 75-86, with responses by D. C. Allison, Jr. ("Elijah Must Come First,' JBL 103 [1984] 256-58) and J. A. Fitzmyer, S.J. ("More about Elijah Coming First," JBL 104 [1985] 295-96).
47 Cf. Gen. Rab. 37:7; Sib. Or. 3:582, and perhaps Sir 24:33. Recall Paul and Philo above. This is not excluded by Maimonides' position cited in Jacob Mann, "Hatenu'ot Hameshihiyot Biyemei Massa'ei Haselav Harishonim'," in Hatequfah 24 (1926) 356. For biblical precedent, see Joel 2:28-29 (Eng. 3:1) and Ezek 36:27; compare Petersen, Late Israelite Prophecy, 38-54, and Y. Hoffman, "Hazon Haqdashah Vetoda'ah Nevu'it," Tarbiz 53 (1983-84) 181.
48 Tg. Ps.-J. Gen 45:27; Midr. Tanhuma (ed. Buber) Vayesei' 4; Gen. Rab. 65:4; 91:6; Cant. Rab. 6:4.2; 'Ag. Ber. 69/70:5 (p. 138); Pesiq. R. 12a; Pirqe R. El. ??38 and 47 (Warsaw: Bomberg, 1852; reprint, Jerusalem, 1970) pp. 89b, 113b; Midr. Tanhuma (Buber) Beha'aloteha 2; and Midr. Tanna'im (ed. D. Hoffmann, p. 63).
49 Num. Rab. 10:1; Cant. Rab. 2:3.5; S. 'Olam Rab. 47a; Yal. Sim. 1.267a (?771); cf. Tg. Ps.-J. Exod 33:16; cf. E. Urbach, "Derashot Hazal 'al Nevi'ei Ha'ummot Ufarashat Bil'am;' Tarbiz 25 (1956) 272-89.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greenspahn: Why Prophecy Ceased 47
statementsPO The rabbis clearly sensed something about the Hellenistic period, something earlier than Christianity, which led them to conclude the holy spirit had departed from Israel. While some have connected with apocalyptic,"5 such authors rarely claim prophetic status; their donymous style suggests a quite different view of their roleP2
Rabbinic ambivalence toward prophecy is well known. According to sage, "The wise are superior to prophets.'53 Elsewhere prophets are the right to make legal innovations,54 while yet another tradition claims they merely restated what had already been taught at Sinai, rebuking people for not following Moses' law (y. Pe'a 10a; Exod. Rab. 28:6; 42:8)P. the rabbis, prophecy was a concession to necessity (Qoh. Rab. 1:13).P6 However, at the same time that they reduced the prophets to preachers exegetes, the rabbis laid claim to their mantle. In the words of R. Abdimi, "Since the destruction of the Temple, prophecy has been taken from prophets and given to the sages" (b. B. Bat. 12a). Similarly, Seder Rabbah ?30 notes that prior to Alexander the Great "prophets prophesied with the Holy Spirit; hereafter, incline your ears and obey the sages' words.'57
Rather than claiming that prophecy had come to an end, these traditions assume that it still existed, but that leadership had been given to others. is also the force of the famous chain of authority: "Moses received Torah Sinai and gave it to Joshua; Joshua gave it to the elders, and the elders
50 So Schiifer, Die Vorstellung vom heiligen Geist, 83 and 97. See n. 6 for rabbinic references, as well as Pesiq. R. 35:1 and Midr. Pss. 22:10.
51 J. Blenkinsopp, "Prophecy and Priesthood in Josephus,' JJS 25 (1975) 256; see also Fischel, "Jewish Gnosticism in the Fourth Gospel,' JBL 65 (1946) 170.
52 Rev 1:3 is an apparent exception; as a Christian work, however, it hardly represents "normative" Judaism.
53 T Hor. 2:8-9; y. Hor. 48b; y.'Abod. Zar. 41c; b. B. Bat. 12a.
54 T Sanh. 14:13; Sipre Behuqotay 13 (end); y. Meg. 70d; b. Yoma 80a; b. Tem. 16a; 104a; b. Meg. 14a; b. Hor. 4b; Ruth Rab. 4:5; Yal. gim. 1.882; cf. b. Hag. 10b; b. Nid. 23a; Qam. 2b. Some passages, however, attribute to them the invention of the final forms of consonants (b. gabb. 104a; b. Meg. 2b-3a; but see y. Meg. 70d), the observance of Purim 14a), recitation of the Hallel (b. Pesah. 117a), waving the willow (b. Sukk. 44a), or the tithe Yad. 4:3). On this whole concept, see Urbach ("Halakha Unevu'ah'," 1-27), who ascribes of the rabbinic concern to Christianity.
55 Cf. Num. Rab. 10:6. B. Yebam. 49b and Lev. Rab. 1:14 emphasize Moses' superiority later prophets, a contrast which J. Blenkinsopp finds implicit already in Deut 34:10 (Prophecy and Canon: A Contribution to the Study ofJewish Origins [Notre Dame, IN: University Dame Press, 1977] 44). For a broader contrast with all Israel, see Mek. girta' 3 (ed. Horovitz, p. 126). For a contrary tradition, that a true prophet may transgress the Torah, see b. 90b and b. Sanh. 90a.
56 Cf. y. Meg. 70d, which asserts that prophecy-but not Torah-will be revoked in the messianic age.
57 The conclusion of this statement is from Prov 22:17; cf. b. gabb. 119b, which understands the term "prophets" in 1 Chr 16:22 as applying to "students of the sages,' and Wis 7:22-25, which links wisdom and spirit.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Biblical Literature
it to the prophets, and the prophets gave it to the men of the Great .. " (m. 'Abot 1:1; cf. m. Pe'a 2:6; y. Sanh. 27c). Traditions of the holy removal likewise assert not that Malachi was the last prophet but the last to have functioned with the holy spirit. Such statements diminish the status of later figures rather than to deny their existence.
In a well-known passage, R. Yohanan asserts that since the of the Temple prophecy has been given to fools and to children 12b).8 Here, too, the existence of prophecy is implicitly conceded. of the evidence that there were claimants to prophetic status at this is not difficult to imagine the motivation for such statements. several groups vying for religious leadership, the rabbis would have sympathy for their competition. As a class of exegetes who determined will through interpretation, they were unlikely to view more figures charitably. This is dramatically manifest in the famous story to which God's will was to be determined by neither miracles nor but by a vote, an approach to which divine endorsement is ascribed.9 sociological terms, institutions and the kinds of routinized leadership require are rarely tolerant of charisma - even though their own legitimacy often derived from such figuresP.o By accepting prophetic leadership stage in Jewish history, the rabbis relegated it to the past. prophecy protected them from its contemporary practitionersp.I
More than institutional self-interest may have motivated the deny the legitimacy of contemporary prophets. As Josephus makes clear, these figures' eschatological mission posed a severe threat existing social order. To the extent that rabbinic authority was dependent Roman support, the rabbis were unlikely to grant legitimation to lizing an influence.
The statement that the holy spirit had departed from Israel is an empirical observation as to the absence of prophets, whose clear from numerous sources, but a denigration and even denial figures' legitimacy, albeit one whose roots are deeply embedded
58 Contrast Matt 11:25; perhaps a similar attitude underlies the pejorative use dibre nebPilt in b. 'Erub. 60b and b. B. Bat. 12a.
59 B. B. Mes. 59b, although according to one tradition the debate between the house of Hillel and that of Shammai was resolved by the Bat Qol (see y. Ber 3b; b. 'Erub. 13b; b. Pesah. 114a; b. Meg. 32a).
60 Max Weber, On Charisma and Institution Building (ed. S. N. Eisenstadt; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968) 39, 54; cf. his Ancient Judaism (New York: Free Press, 1952) 395; N. Glatzer, "A Study of the Talmudic Interpretation of Prophecy," 117; and R. Meyer, "Prophecy and Prophets,' TDNT 6. 828.
61 The Montanist movement may have played a similar role in the canonization of the NT; see H. von Campenhausen, The Formation of the Christian Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972) 221-36; see also H. Paulsen, "Die Bedeutung des Montanismus fiir die Herausbildung des Kanon,"' VC 32 (1978) 19-52.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Greenspahn: Why Prophecy Ceased 49
tradition. Rather than challenging Christianity, which emerged centuries after the holy spirit's purported departure, or apocalyptic, whose proponents rarely preached in their own names or those of their contemporaries, polemic appears to have been directed against a much broader phenomenon of continuing Jewish prophecy.
The decision to locate the holy spirit's departure near the time Babylonian Exile, many centuries before our earliest attestation of this tion, suggests that its original concern was not limited to first- or century charismatics. It need not, therefore, have been a rabbinic innovation. Similar conflicts can be discerned already in the early postexilic period. rabbinic tradition, which became normative in Judaism, thus culminates long process in which office came to supplant spirit as the mark of authority.
By rejecting the holy spirit's presence, the rabbis, whose own legitimacy rested on the interpretation of previous revelation, protected themselves from those claiming a more direct link to the divine while undermining theological basis for such figures' anti-establishment activities. Rabbinic statements about the removal of the holy spirit thus parallel the church's repudiation of Montanism62 and Mohammad's claim to be the of the prophets" (Qur'an 33:41).63
Judaism probably could not have survived in any other way. Temporal authorities were unlikely to tolerate those claiming divine sanction for were perceived as revolutionary activities, just as the rabbis could hardly tolerate a rival vision of God's message. The claim that the holy spirit was longer operative removed a very real threat to rabbinic authority, principle, since the rabbis did not claim direct contact with God, and in tice, given the reality of others who did.64
62 E.g., Irenaeus, Adv. haer. 3.11.9 (PG 7/1. 890); Epiphanius Haer. 1.1 (PL 41. 855); and Chrysostom, Adversos Judaeos 6 (PG 48. 910). Sources of this movement, known as Prophecy, are collected in P de Labriolle, Les sources de l'histoire du Montanisme (Fribourg: Librairie de l'universit6 [0. G. Schwend]; Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1913). For a survey tanism, see H. Kraft, "Die altkirchliche Prophetie und die Entstehung des Montanismus,'11 (1955) 249-71; and G. Friedrich ("Prophet and Prophecy," TDNT 6. 859-60), who comments that "the dogma that there are Christian prophets survived longer than prophecy itself' MacDonald has found in the Pastoral Epistles an attempt to "replace the obstreperous prophet with the obsequious bishop" (The Legend and the Apostle: The Battle for Paul in Story and [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983] 72). Eusebius, however, expected prophecy to continue the final coming" (Hist. eccl. 5.17.4 [LCL 1. 484]).
63 Cf. Tertullian Adversos Judaeos 9 (PL 2. 615).
64 Research for this paper was greatly enhanced by the support of the NEH Seminar program; I am also grateful to Robert Goldenberg, David Petersen, and Mary D'Angelo for their comments and suggestions, although responsibility for the conclusions presented here is obviously my own.
This content downloaded from 208.95.48.49 on Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:06:34 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms