In Tents 61 How Prophets Behave Rhetorically, or Don’t Part I

Jesus was a Jew.

That should be obvious and non-controversial, but some people would point out the tense, saying, “Was, but no more.” Others would point out there’s nothing particularly Jewish about the sentence. Jesus is not a Jewish name, not even a Greek name, but an English transliteration of a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew name we’re not even sure of. Does Iesous represent Yeshua, Yoshua, Yehoshua? The name Jesus is two languages and two alphabets removed from the words out of the angel’s mouth who named him to his mother.

Jesus was a prophet.

Again, it should be obvious and non-controversial. In the third chapter of Acts when Peter and John heal a lifelong lame man in the name of Jesus they use the word prophet to explain what they’ve done:

22 For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.

Except some people will read the sentence as “only a prophet,” or, “a prophet, not the savior of the world.”

Jesus was a Jewish prophet.

Again, non-controversial. Matthew presents him as the fulfillment of the biblical prophets, and Luke connects him with Isaiah in his first public teaching. (Incidentally, in his novel Mary, Sholem Asch accounts for Yeshua’s literacy by having one of the villagers–Taddi the tanner, I think, later an apostle–conduct a village school.)

But draw out the implications of that sentence a little: Jesus was a Jewish prophet steeped in the writings and lives of Jewish prophets.

Still not controversial? Try this. Jesus was a Jewish prophet who learned how to be a prophet by studying the words of Jewish prophets, learned how a prophet talks and prophesies by studying the rhetorical patterns of fiery Jewish prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Amos.

This shouldn’t be controversial. Luke ends his account of the birth of Jesus with this comment:

And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

Still, I suspect many people would be deeply troubled by the idea that increasing in wisdom and stature means Jesus had to learn how to be a prophet. We like to think of the prophetic mantle as descending upon him like a fully fledged dove.

But it’s probably that word rhetoric that would be most controversial, drawing some such comment as, “The Lord does not engage in rhetoric. He speaks plainly, saying what he means and meaning what he says.” We associate the word rhetoric with insincerity, saying things like, “It’s always dangerous when politicians start believing their own rhetoric.” But there are many uses and definitions of rhetoric, and there are many ways of suggesting that the words you are speaking mean something different from what your audience may think of as their face value without being insincere.

I was listening to D&C 19  one day and did an audio double take. Wait a minute. ‘The words I’m about to say are phrased strongly to produce a rhetorical effect but they don’t mean quite what you think.’ Is that what the Lord really said there? Yes. Or at least it still strikes me that way. (See posts 55 and 56 for a fuller consideration of this passage.)

Here’s another example, both of prophetic rhetoric and rhetoric about a prophet:

24 And when the messengers of John were departed, he began to speak unto the people concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A reed shaken with the wind?
25 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled, and live delicately, are in kings’ courts.
26 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and much more than a prophet.
27 This is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.
— Luke 7:24-28

Note that parallel repetition of a question is a rhetorical device that helps make a passage memorable. But there’s also a piece of rhetoric about John that puzzled me for years, maybe from the time I first read the New Testament in 9th grade seminary until after I finished my MFA, maybe half my life up to that point.

How can Jesus say John is the greatest prophet born of women and yet not part of the kingdom of God? I don’t know why I never asked anyone (or maybe I did and their answers weren’t memorable), but one day, after I had graduated from the University of Washington and started taking classes across the street (15th Ave NE) at the Institute of Religion, I was headed for class one day and it hit me that “he that is least in the kingdom of God” is Jesus’s title for himself. (My brother Dennis taught me that biblical speech often suggests there were accompanying hand gestures–“God do so to me and more”–and I can imagine a gesture that indicates himself but also draws the audience into an embrace.)

It makes sense both as a shadow of John’s comment to the people gathered at the river

one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire
—Luke 3:16

and as a foreshadow of Jesus’s later instructions to the twelve:

He that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.
—Luke 22:26-7

Saying Jesus learned how to be a prophet by studying other prophets places him into a context, a context which can help us understand some of the more fiery passages, such as Matthew 23, and the vigorous debate of John 8.

I want to explore both chapters in detail. Whether we’ll get that far this year I know not. For right now I’ll simply say that the harshest things Jesus says are not worse than statements like these from Amos

I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies.

and Hosea

I will also cause all her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts. And I will destroy her vines and her fig trees, whereof she hath said, These are my rewards that my lovers have given me: and I will make them a forest, and the beasts of the field shall eat them.

Of course the harshness of biblical prophets in denouncing both sin and sinful Israel and Judah was matched by a promise of redemption. If we don’t see as eloquent a promise of redemption in Jesus’s words as we do in, say Isaiah 52, that may be because Jesus enacted redemption with his body, as well as his words.

Your turn.