The Conception of History in the Prophets and Jesus

Abstract

THIS SYMPOSIUM seeks a deeper understanding of the prophets and Jesus by means of comparative study. My assignment is to discuss their viewpoint with regard to the historical process. Many such comparative analyses proceed upon five assumptions: (I) that the central and definitive factor of religion lies in the area of beliefs; (2) that each of these beliefs may be reduced without difficulty to an abstract concept which may be defined with precision; (3) that the total configuration of ideas may be dissolved and the component elements be withdrawn from the complex; (4) that the growth and relative validity of each separate concept may be determined by genetic study; and (5) that the superiority of Jesus, if there be such, must be found by locating the unique ideas which he held. For some purposes these assumptions may be valid, but they do not help us enter into the real world of the prophets and Jesus. They may help us dissect the idea of the kingdom, but they do not help us share the consciousness of the kingdom which dominated the lives of the prophets and Jesus. Taking these five assumptions in reverse order, let us suggest the main objections to them. (5) Never has the Christian church held that the authority of Jesus rests upon the novel ideas which he espoused. Such was not the basis of his call to discipleship, nor was it the substance of the preaching of Peter or Paul. (4) Never did the prophets or Jesus test the origin of their message by the process of objective study. Their word came from God and was intended for immediate acceptance by men. In most cases, their theological ideas coincided with those of the false prophets; their message was unique in its origin and impact, not in the discovery of new ideas. (3) Nor is the skeleton of Biblical thought such that we are able to dissect it one bone at a time, analyzing the genesis and growth of that bone. To separate the concept of God from the immediate encounter with God is to falsify both. It is God and not the idea of God who acts in history and who through such activity speaks to the prophets. (2) Hence, to consider any aspect of prophetic experience as an abstract concept is to blind ourselves to the concrete experience from which thought proceeded. (I) Of course, the prophets held ideas, as all men must. And these ideas are susceptible to genetic study. But the distinguishing mark of Biblical faith is its character as history and as revelation. God speaks; He acts. The prophet hears; he sees. To understand the prophet we need to stand with him at his point of standing. Our purpose, therefore, is to enter into the historical consciousness of the prophets and Jesus. We will proceed by outlining three areas: the distinctive historical con-