The Eighth Century Prophets

The prophets have been instrumental in shaping the life and faith of the people of God during
the Ancient Israel. Their roles vary widely from rebuking, confronting, predicting, and
proclaiming on behalf of Yahweh the almighty. Very often they stood in between Yahweh
and the people. The importance of their role is affirmed by the fact that Israelites being a
minority was always encountered with the problem polytheism and henotheism because it
was surrounded by a pagan nation. Very often the belief and practices of these pagan people
became a stumbling block for the Israelites. In the midst of these religious challenges the
eighth century saw a new day because in this century there was a huge development in
economic and political growth. This economic and political success led the Israelites further
away from God. It is at such time like this the prophets come into importance.

5.1. Political Power and Economic Growth in the Eight Century Israel and the
Prophetic Response:
The early eighth century saw Judah and Israel achieving great heights of prosperity on one
hand and on the other the evils which came along this period. For instances, Jeroboam II of
the Northern Kingdom was an aggressive monarch who successfully extended the borders of
Israel towards the north at the expenses of the Aramean power centres of Damascus and
Hamath and towards the south as far as the Dead Sea. The kingdom also had good military
power (Amos 6:13). During his reign the great Assyrian subdued the Arameans who were the
enemy of Israel. Because of this the Israelites enjoyed undisturbed freedom of being attacked
by Arameans for nearly half a century. Therefore, Israel’s military and political power under
Jeroboam II resulted in increase of commerce and wealth.

5.1.1. Social Stratification

Werner H. Schmidt in his book Old Testament Introduction makes a social contrast in the
time of the major prophet. According to him this development begins with the monarchs who
saw the gradual development of social changes, but he underlines the fact that this process of
social changes speed in the eighth century. There were certain social safeguards and legal
prescriptions to maintain the social equality among the community however, with the new
conditions created by monarchy and urbanization it was inadequate to maintain the balance.
The political, military and economical, cultic etc., all came under the monarch; hence it
became a centralised power. This led to urbanisation and few cities becoming more important
than the others, at the same time there was a change in the workplace from rural pleasantry to
trades people with this developed the crafts and business (Jer. 37:15; cf. I Kgs. 20:34). The
king’s civil service collected the taxes and were rewarded with crown lands and this group of
people became the upper class. This became the genesis for social stratification.

There were at least four strata,

 The officials (civil and military)

 Tradesmen and crafts men who lived chiefly in the cities;
 Free property owners in the rural areas;
 The people without property, the poor (including the widows, orphans and foreigners)

5.1.2. Change in Ethnic Aspect

The Israelite community has always been an egalitarian society however with the change in
social stratification the ethnic aspect was also affected for in this change the Canaanite social
and economic order replaced the ancient Israel. Since, the Canaanite society is more rigid
stratified as well as superior in trade, city life and large estates the Israelites began to have
relationship with other nations or with the non-Israelite. With the economic growth in the
eighth century this relationship building shot up hence affecting the Israelites.

5.1.3. Violation and Exploitation of the Land

With the growth of commerce and communication, buildings became more splendid (Amos
3:15; 5:11; 6:4, 8; Isa. 5:9). The barter economy was replaced by the money economy (Exod.
21:32; 22:17; Hos. 3:2; etc.). The landowners violated the rule of Exod. 22:25 charging
interest for the loans given to the simple farmers and demanded high interest which most
often could not pay their debt. This gave an advantage to the landowners to grab the
possession or the sale of the land in return of their debt. Hence, resulting the loss of land’s
ownership by the farmers on one hand and accumulation of wealth on the other hand (Isa.
5:8; Mic. 2:2 in contrast to Ezek. 47:14; Lev. 19:13; 25:39f; Deut. 24:14), sometimes even
leading to slavery to a creditor (Amos 2:6). This violation and exploitation of the land made
the disparity between the rich and poor more obvious, the poor became the majority who lost
their social position along with this lost their legal rights too (Exod. 23:3, 6 f.).
5.2. Response of the Prophets

5.2.1. Social Injustice

Leon J. Wood describes the time of prophet Amos saying, “… it was a day of moral and
religious decay.” One of the reasons that made the prophet say this is because the nation was
so prosperous because its richness and wealth were obtained by violence and robbery (Amos
3:10) by oppressing the poor and the needy, some were even driven to actual slavery by their
cruel creditors (2.6, 7; 8, 6). Amos goes on to describe the sin of Israel and pronounce God’s
judgement upon the Israelites saying, “I will not revoke the punishment” because of the
exploitation which is directed against the powerless, and the poor. Amos describes the
wickedness of the rich and the powerful saying, “to sell the righteous ... and the needy”
referring to the creditors selling into slavery those who cannot pay their debts (2Kgs. 4:1),
“price for a pair of sandals” which indicates how insignificant the poor have become before
the rich and the powerful that they are sold into slavery for no more than a debt amounting to
the cost of a pair of sandals. Or “silver” and “pair of sandals” could be an indication to the
bribe paid to judges for a decision against the righteous and the poor. This possibility is
strengthening in Amos 2:7, “push the afflicted out of the way,” here the verb “push or turn
aside” is used with the nouns – way, path, or road often means to “pervert justice” (Prov.
17:23; Job 24:4 cf. Exod. 23:6). All these conditions affirm what Amos stated of the poor and
the weak are being trampled into the dust through the corrupt judiciary system. The image
used by Micah is far more brutal as he compares the heads of the rulers of Israel to butchers
who would violently and brutally treat the people like animal carcass. This image is antithesis
of justice that rulers are called to administer (Mic. 3:1-3). Therefore, the punishment of
Yahweh will not be spared even if they are the chosen tribe of Yahweh. The whole city will
be given for destruction and they will be taken as slaves.

5.2.2. Moral Degradation and Anarchy: Lawlessness

Blenkinsopp remarks among the eighth century prophets Hosea concentrated more upon the
false worship (Harlotry, whoredom). He says, if “mispat” (Justice) and “sdaqah”
(righteousness) are key words for Amos (5:24), Hosea would prefer “hesed” (fidelity) and
“da’at e lohim” (the knowledge of God). Wealth and luxury characterised the day of Hosea,
the people therefore gained confidence upon themselves forgetting their dependency on
almighty God. With this prosperity there was also the negative prosperity of degraded moral
life. Hand in hand with the growth of wealth poverty was also gaining ground. Israel turned
from fidelity to God to the false worship of Baal (Hosea 4) bringing about the foreign
entanglements and with its foreign cults. Blenkinsopp notes that for Hosea the root of false
worship or infidelity against God can be traced back to moral failure and social disintegration
originating from the abandonment of its (Israel’s) traditions upon the entry into the land
(9:10) and a passage to monarchy (8:4; 9:15). Hosea therefore warns the Israelites that, “They
shall not remain in the land of the Lord; but Ephraim shall return to Egypt, and in Assyria
they shall eat unclean food” (9:3). This punishment would come not because God lacks
compassion but because Israel needs this chastisement, as a spouse laments a faithless
partner, so also God grieve over Israel.

5.2.3. Failure to Preserve the Land Rights

Both prophet Micah and Isaiah criticised the economy-based injustice more than any other
prophets. Micah criticised the economy based on large estates and the greed of the upper
classed for house and property, Micah at this point seem to be giving concrete form to the
tenth commandment (Exod. 20:17):

“Woe to those who devise wickedness… they covet fields, and seize them; and houses, and
take them away; they oppress a man and his house, a man and his inheritance (2:1f; 2:8ff;
3:2f., 10).”

Isaiah like prophet Amos was against the injustice and oppression to the poor and the weak
who were subjected to discrimination (Isa. 3:14f.; 10:2) however, unlike Amos he was into
the legal aspect as well. For instances, defend the fatherless, plead for the widow (Isa. 7,23;
10:2; earlier, Exod. 22:21; etc.). Isaiah felt the society has failed the litmus test to determine
whether the society is just. This is because the structure of the ancient Israel society was open
for abuse in its relationship between the urban rich and the peasants in the surrounding towns.
Ancient Israel was an agricultural society which means the Israelites were mostly farmers
who were tied to the land they were born. This land was traditionally passed on from
generation to generation. The land was not to be sold outside the family. And supposedly in
overtime the land must have been divided into small portion for each member of the family
until the farms were too small to support and meet the needs of the family, high death rates
and some migration could perhaps keep from destroying the system. There is therefore a clear
reason that because of these things the land might have been passed out of the hands of the
family into the hands of wealthy class. Such exchanges were presumably not always fair.
Hence, the social evils that Isaiah points out are the greed of the nobles, which is manifested
in their attempts to build up large estates by forcibly ejecting the weak and smaller land
holders. This way the widows, the orphans and the poor were without defender when they are
being cruelly robbed and plundered (Isa. 1:23;5:23; Micah 2:9). Micah and Isaiah cry the
same chorus confronting the judges and the nobles who were more than happy to assist the
law offenders in robbing the land of the poor. The people had to also bear the heavy taxation
from the king in order to erect magnificent palaces in the capital (Mic. 3:10). Micah describes
how the greed and rapacity of the nobles knew no limits they were like highway robbers who
would pounce upon passer-by and stripped off their garments (Mic. 2:8) where the women
and children were, they special prey.

5.2.4. A brief account of each of the eighth-century prophets

a. Amos:
First of the group was Amos. This fact alone, that he was the first of the literary prophets, is
sufficient to entitle him to distinction; but apart from that he was a striking man with a
striking message.

Of his life we know little—nothing, in fact, except what is contained in his book. From it we
learn that his ministry fell in the reign of Jeroboam, probably about BCE 750. His home was
Tekoa, a village located twelve miles south of Jerusalem on a high hill giving a commanding
view over the region round about. As a youth he had no special opportunities of training. He
was neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet. Indeed, he repudiated all connection with the
professional prophets (7. 14). He was not dependent on others for support. He earned his
bread by honest toil as a shepherd and trimmer of sycamore trees. But his mind on that
account was none the less alert. He acquainted himself with the past of his own people and he
knew what was going on about him. He was observant and reflective, brooding over the evils
and perils of his own time.

Thus, unconsciously, he prepared himself for a special divine call, which came to him
suddenly and “took” him from following the flock. The impulse that seized him sent him to
the larger northern kingdom, there to proclaim his message of doom. His ministry was
probably of brief duration, but it was of stirring power. The prophet put his finger on the sore
spots of the body politic, and the land began to tremble. It “is not able to bear all his words,”
said the priest of Bethel in alarm. So Amos was ordered to return to Judah, and the order was
probably obeyed, though not until he had repeated his message of doom in the very presence
of the royal priest and applied it directly to the priest himself and his family. This seems to
have ended the prophet’s public ministry. But while silenced abroad, he could write at home.
The pen took the place of the voice, and in this way the brief ministry at Bethel came to
exercise a world-wide influence.

The book of Amos has at its close a brief word of hope (9. 8-15), but otherwise it is made up
of an almost unrelieved message of doom. In chapters 1, 2 there is a poem pronouncing doom
upon the surrounding nations and reaching its climax in a doom upon Israel. The latter doom,
then, becomes the theme of the rest of the book down to 9:8. Chapters 3-6 contain a
miscellaneous collection of oracles of judgment, and chapters 7 to 9:7 a series of five visions
of judgment. What, however, gives significance to the message of Amos is not his prediction
of doom, but the reason for it. Elijah in his day predicted evil on the land because of the
worship of the Tyrian Baal. But what Amos condemns is not the fact that the people do not
worship Jehovah, but, rather, the fact that they do not worship him in the right way. Jehovah
in his essential nature is a God of righteousness. The only worship, therefore, which he will
accept is one that manifests itself in social justice. Religion is thus indissolubly bound up
with conscience. To seek the good is to seek Jehovah, and to seek Jehovah is to seek the good
(5.6,14). Itis the clearness with which Amos laid hold of this great truth that gives to his
teaching its epoch-making significance and that leads us to speak of him as in a special sense
the prophet of righteousness.

b. Hosea:
Hosea was a younger contemporary of Amos. Concerning him also our only source of
information is his own book. From it we gather that his ministry probably fell between BCE
743 and 734. He belonged to the northern realm and is the only one of the writing prophets of
whom this is true. His exact home, however, we do not know, nor do we know anything with
certainty concerning the details of his life. It has been conjectured that he was a priest, and
this is quite possible in view of the frequency with which he refers to the priesthood and the
high conception he had of the priestly office. It has also been maintained—and with
somewhat greater confidence—that chapters 1 and 3 are to be interpreted literally. If so, the
prophet married a woman, Gomer by name, who later proved untrue to him. Three children
were born in the home, but they were not the prophet’s own, and they were given names
symbolic of the approaching doom and rejection of Israel. This situation became after a while
intolerable, and the wife either fled or was driven from home. Later the prophet received a
divine command to love his wayward wife and restore her to his home. This he did, buying
her back from the bondage into which she had sold herself. If this was actually the experience
of the prophet, we are able to understand somewhat better his conception of the supreme love
of God for Israel; and his message comes to us with a new power if we realize that back of it
lay a bleeding heart.

But whatever may have been the prophet’s home experience, we know that he was a man of
tender and sympathetic nature. He weeps over the sins of Israel, the anarchy within her
borders, and the impending doom. Yet he does not lose hope. While his message is
necessarily, like that of Amos, in large measure a message of judgment, he accords a larger
place to the promise of a better day to come (1:10-2:1; 2:14-23; 3:1-5; 11:8-11; 14:1-8). This
he is able to do because of his stress on the divine love. He had an insight into the heart of
God such as had been granted to no one before his time, and this insight made certain for him
the redemptive purpose of God. He thus supplemented in a remarkable way the message of
Amos. As the latter was the prophet of law and right, so Hosea was the prophet of love and
hope.

c. Isaiah:
Isaiah, the third of the eighth-century prophets, began his ministry shortly after the beginning
of that of Hosea. The date given is “the year that king Uzziah died” (Isa. 6.1). This was
probably BCE 740. But Isaiah’s ministry was much longer than Hosea’s and was carried on
in the southern kingdom. His home was Jerusalem. It is also not improbable that he was of
noble birth. He was married and had two sons, to whom he gave symbolic names (7:3; 8:3).
The prophetic call came to him when a young man. The description he has given of it is one
of the most impressive chapters in all the Old Testament (chapter 6.) The vision he then
received of the majesty and sovereignty of Jehovah went with him through life and imparted
to him something of the same quality of mind. His was a regal nature. He trod the high places
of the earth.

His ministry extended over a period of at least forty years and possibly fifty or even fifty-
five. It was one of the most critical periods in Hebrew history. In BCE 734 came the war of
Syria and Ephraim against Judah, which aimed at the capture of Jerusalem (Isa. 7. 1 ff.); in
732 Damascus, which had served as a bulwark between Israel and Assyria, fell; in 721
Samaria was captured; in 711 Ashdod met a similar fate; and in 701 Jerusalem barely escaped
capture and destruction at the hands of Sennacherib. Crisis thus followed crisis in the national
life, so that the people must have been kept in constant agitation. In it all Isaiah played an
important role and throughout it maintained a consistent position. He opposed foreign
alliances, as Hosea also did, and all attempts to solve the problems of the nation by force of
arms. The one hope of the people, he insisted, lay in trust in Jehovah. So persistently did he
preach this doctrine, and so basic was it in his teaching that he may be called “the prophet of
faith.”

Isaiah’s faith manifested itself in several different ways: First, it gave him the conviction that
Jerusalem was inviolable when on two notable occasions it was threatened by foreign
enemies (7:7; 37:33). Secondly, it led him to teach that in the impending doom, which he as
well as Amos and Hosea announced, a remnant would be saved. All the people would not be
destroyed (7:3; 10:20-23). In the third place, it assured him that the coming judgment would
be followed by a glorious restoration. A veritable kingdom of God would be established with
a Messianic Ruler at its head, a “Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father,
Prince of Peace” (9.6). The descriptions he has given us of the new era are among the
sublimest passages in literature (2: 2-4; 11:1-10).

It was Isaiah who first developed in this way the doctrine of faith. In originality he
consequently ranks along with Amos and Hosea as one of the three great founders of literary
prophecy. As a writer he wielded a two-edged sword. Then, too, he had a strong and
commanding personality, which, by virtue of his long ministry and high social station, he was
able to bring to bear with tremendous influence upon the issues of his day.

d. Micah:
Micah, the fast of the eighth-century prophets, was not equal to the others in importance. But
he is nevertheless not without interest and significance. Of his life we know nothing except
that he was a native of Moresheth, a village in the Judaean lowlands. He began his ministry
before the fall of Samaria (1:6); but when it ended we do not know. He was thus a
contemporary of Isaiah but represented a different social class—the rural as opposed to the
urban. Something of class spirit seems to manifest itself in his antipathy to the cities of
Samaria and Jerusalem. He predicted in unqualified terms the destruction of Jerusalem (3. 12)
at the very time that Isaiah was active in it. This prediction evidently produced a profound
impression upon the people of his day. For a century later, in the time of Jeremiah, the elders
recalled it and also the further fact that Hezekiah turned unto Jehovah, and hence the city was
spared (Jer. 26: 16-19). In the message of Micah there is nothing distinctive unless it be found
in the intensity with which he championed the cause of the poor. Some have consequently
called him “the democrat” among the prophets. The most notable passage in his book is 6:8.
This is in some respects the greatest saying in the Old Testament.

Questions
I. Explain the political power and economic growth in the Eight Century Israel and
the Prophetic Response?
II. Who are Eighth century prophets and bring out the prophetical response towards
social injustice?
III. Elucidate the Hosea’s date, home, and occupation.

Bibliography

Blenkinsopp, Joseph. A History of Prophecy in Israel. London: SPCK, 1984.

Eiselen, F.C. Prophecy and the Prophets. New York: Eaton & Mains, 1909.

Gordon, Alex R. The Prophets of the Old Testament. New York: Hodder and Stoughton, n.y.

Grant, Michale. The History of Ancient Israel. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1984.

Kuhl, Curt. The Prophets of Israel. Translated by Rudolf J. Enrich and J. P. Smith.
Richmond: John Knox Press, 1960.

Leclerc, Thomas L. Introduction to the Prophets Their Stories, Sayings and Scrolls. New
York: Paulist Print, 2007.

Lindblom, J. Prophecy in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1963.

Newsome, James D. Jr, The Hebrew Prophets. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1984.

Wood, Leon J. The Prophets of Israel. Grand Rapids: Baker Book, 1998.

Zucker, David J. Israel’s Prophets an Introduction for Christians and Jews. New York:
Paulist Press, 1994.

Ezekiel, a younger contemporary of Jeremiah, was born in captivity in BCE 597 and settled
in Tel-abib. He was called to prophetic office at the age of thirty, during the fifth year of the
exile of Jehoiachin, king of Judah. Ezekiel's ministry continued for at least twenty-two years,
and he was a member of a priestly family. However, he was unable to fulfill his priestly
vocation while living in exile far from Jerusalem. Instead, God called him to serve as a
prophet. Ezekiel's vision of God riding in his war chariot was an ominous portent, as God
would soon abandon Jerusalem. The exiles, a privileged group, were hostile to Ezekiel's
message and dismissed his words as entertaining prattle. Ezekiel was active during the period
of the rule of Nebuchadnezzar II, the great King of Neo-Babylonian dynasty (605-562 BCE).
The internal strife in Jerusalem led to King Zedekiah's defection from Nebuchadnezzar and
the withholding of tribute. In 605 BCE, the Babylonians aimed to rebel and work back
Judah's independence. Prophet Jeremiah's message was carried out in opposition to this
political opportunism.
Election
The primary term for election in Old testament is “Bahar,” which means to elect. Key among
the other terms7 associated with election are ‘ahab (Deut. 7:7; 10:15; Mal. 1:2-
3)8 and yada` (Gen. 18:19; Job 34:4; Amos 3:2; Hos. 13:4-5).9 Several common appellative
phrases also imply election: ‘My people’ (Exo. 3:7, 10; 7:4; Isa. 1:3; Amos 7:8), ‘servant of
Yahweh’ (Deut. 32:36; Jer. 25:9), ‘people of Yahweh’ (Deut. 32:36, 43; Jud. 5:11), and a
‘people of Yahweh’s special possession’ (Exo. 19:5; Deut. 7:6; 14:2; 26:18; Psa. 135:4; Mal.
3:17). Beyond the words or phrases associated with election, certain relationships in Scripture
picture God’s choice of His people: marriage (Hosea, Jer. 2:17; 3:11-22; Eze. 16, 23; Isa.
50:1; 54:5, 8, 10; 62:4-5) the father-son relationship (Exo. 4:22; Deut. 14:1; Hos. 11:1; Isa.
63:16; 64:7-8), and the potter and clay imagery (Jer. 18:1ff; Isa. 64:8). On the discourse level,
the passages that develop the OT doctrine of election most fully are Deuteronomy 7:6-8, 9:4-
6, 2 Samuel 7:8-16, and Isaiah 41:8-16, 42:1-9, 43:1-3, 44:1-5Israel discovered its own
history through historical election and had an idea of history as a framework for the elect
people. Israel was the pioneer of history-writing, influenced by its religion and prophets. The
greatest gift given to Israel was the consciousness of being chosen by Yahweh to be His
people in a special sense. This idea was central to ancient Israel's religion and prophets'
thought. Pre-exilic prophets used various terms to express this idea, emphasizing Israel's
special relationship with Yahweh, love, devotion, obedience, and the great goal.
The term bahar, chosen, is not used by Amos or other prophets. However, from Amos to the
latest prophets, Israel is Yahweh's people or children and Yahweh is King over them. Israel is
Yahweh's child, and through deliverance from Egypt, Israel became Yahweh's child,
establishing the relationship between Yahweh and Israel.
Covenant

The covenant, or berit, was a significant aspect of the relationship between Yahweh and His
people in ancient Israel. It was believed to be a formula for history and was founded on
various acts of alliance, with the most significant being the covenant at Sinai. The idea of
covenant was not central to pre-exilic prophecy, but became prominent in Jeremiah's
preaching. He reminded the people of the covenant, which was seen as a guarantee for
Yahweh's mercy and imposed religious and moral obligations. This idea was likely
influenced by the ideology of Josianic reform and Deuteronomy.
Salvation
The prophets in Israel repeatedly proclaimed that salvation comes in the shadow of judgment,
a concept that can be interpreted as eschatological. They believed that Yahweh would
establish salvation through fresh acts, focusing on personal deliverance from Assyria,
oppressors, and ransom. The concept of justice and righteousness is also connected to
salvation. Jeremiah's famous prophecy of the 'new covenant' contrasts the old covenant made
at the Exodus with the promise of a new covenant for God's people. Ezekiel believed that the
loss of Jerusalem was not solely due to previous generations' sins, but for God's own name.
Salvation for Judah was inescapable for God's own name, and the return to Zion was a
necessary consequence of God's nature.
Liberation
Amos, Hosea, and Micah all prophesied about the liberation and justice of the Hebrews,
focusing on the Torah and the covenant community. They believed that Yahweh had brought
the Hebrews out of Egypt and placed them in the promise land. Amos assumed that the
Israelites would share his belief that Yahweh had given them Torah, which emphasized the
nature of covenantal life. Hosea criticized the people for not remaining faithful to their loving
God, while Micah emphasized the exodus and Torah, ignoring the Davidic-Zion kingship
tradition.
The prophets emphasized the importance of Yahweh's love and liberating work, which
included detailed guidance for living in justice and Shalom. They aimed to help the Hebrews
find healing and restore harmony. The restoration of harmony is not complicated, and the
people should return to their God, hold fast to love and justice, and wait continually for their
God. Amos believed that when the people seek God, their common life would be transformed
in practical ways. The prophetic books are structured to underscore God's healing love and
foster trust in the Hebrews' loving, patient, and healing God.
Justice and Righteousness
Social justice and righteousness are central themes in the messages of prophets, especially
those of the 8th century BCE. Amos, Isaiah, and Micah emphasize the importance of justice
in daily life and reject religious practices that lack reality. Amos denounces religious pietism
and ritualism, while Isaiah calls for justice and ethical standards in worship. Micah
emphasizes the vanity of worship and sacrifices without justice, love, and righteousness.
Jeremiah condemns people seeking unjust gains and false dealings, stating that everyone is
greedy for unjust gains. Justice and righteousness are components of ethical and moral
standards that should characterize the religiosity of the people. Regularity in various practices
and worship is in vain in God's sight, and the prophets denounced faith and its practices that
do not contain justice and righteousness.
Prophetic understanding of God
The Old Testament prophetic understanding of God is characterized by His sovereignty,
justice, mercy, and faithfulness. God is depicted as the supreme ruler and creator of the
universe, demonstrating His power over all nations and peoples. The prophets condemn
social injustices, such as exploitation of the poor and corruption among the powerful. Despite
the Israelites' disobedience, God consistently displays mercy and compassion, willing to
forgive and restore them if they repent and turn back to Him. His faithfulness is a recurring
theme, particularly in His covenant relationship with Israel. The prophets also offer hope for
the future, envisioning a time when God's justice will prevail and His kingdom will be
established on earth. This hope is often tied to the coming of the Messiah, who will bring
salvation and restoration to God's people. (Isaiah 40 to 48).
Eschatology
Many Old Testament scholars maintain that the true nature of this phenomenon becomes
clear only when the term is given a broader meaning.
 Israelite eschatological thought was considered a unique Near Eastern phenomenon,
influenced by Babylonian creation myths. Gressmann believed that eschatological
thought was the forerunner to prophecy and older than the prophetic canon. However,
it was also noted that the eschatology of Israel had no parallels in other Near Eastern
religions.
 Eschatology, according to some scholars, is about the end of the present period and
the short time before it. It is found in apocalyptic literature, where speculations on the
end of time and the beginning of a new era are significant. The Old Testament only
includes the book of Daniel as 'eschatological'. This view acknowledges a breach
between the world and God's world, but has been unpopular among scholars.
 Mowinckel explains Israel's eschatology as linked to the cult and Yahweh's
enthronement festival. The enthronement festival saw Yahweh's kingship as a reality,
 representing hopes for a better future. However, the latter part of the Judean kingdom
led to disillusionment, and eschatology became a 'Flucht in die Zukunft' ('Escape into
the Future'). The relationship between cult and eschatology is not yet settled, but
tension exists between the two.
Eschatology was an integral part of Israel's religion from an early age. It was believed that
Yahweh would continue to influence history and complete it through his promises and
fulfilment. Eschatology is the part of salvation history that is still in prospect and presses for
realization. The Israelites believed that a time would come when the present state of affairs
would replace with a new state, and the coming of Yahweh was central to their eschatological
hopes. Eschatology was not an accidental appendage but an essential and integrating part of
the Old Testament faith in God.
In 1953, Vriezen's paper on the relationship between prophets and eschatology influenced the
study of the future expectations of the prophets. He argued that the term 'eschatology' should
be used in a wider sense, considering the prophetic preaching about Israel's future. Vriezen
identified Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Trito-Isaiah as witnesses to Israel's
future and tracing the apocalyptic back to Amos. Amos revealed that his people would be
judged and their downfall was inevitable, while Hosea believed that Yahweh was paving the
way for a new relationship. Isaiah emphasized the distance between Yahweh and Israel,
arguing for a renewal that would be historical and supra-historical. Deutero-Isaiah's
preaching proclaimed the imminent salvation of Yahweh, which dominated the post-exilic
prophets' preaching. Haggai and Zechariah proclaimed the time of salvation was near, while
Haggai and Zechariah proclaimed the time of salvation was near. Vriezen concluded that
eschatology is rooted in the faith of Israel and can be applied to various texts. He
distinguished four main periods, each with its own lines of development. The first period,
pre-schatological, was before the classical prophets, where the people expected a 'day of the
Lord', a day of salvation, and the idealized age of David.

The eschatology of the Bible is divided into three periods: Isaiah, Deutero-Isaiah, and the
apocalyptic period. The Isaiah period envisions a new people and kingdom, encompassing the
whole world. The Deutera-Isaiah period sees God's kingdom as close at hand, with Israel
summoned to be a light for the world. The apocalyptic period is marked by dualistic
eschatology, with Israel's hopes not being realized and Persian dualism causing God and the
world to become separated. This period has greatly influenced views on eschatology, with
some scholars arguing that true eschatology only started with the prophets and others
formulated new ideas.

Ecology
The Old Testament teaches principles of environmental stewardship and care for creation. It
emphasizes creation care, respect for nature, justice and land, Sabbath rest for the land,
covenant relationship, warning of consequences, and hope for restoration. Prophets like
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Micah condemned practices like deforestation, overgrazing, and
pollution that harmed the environment. The concept of Sabbath rest promotes sustainability
and prevents soil depletion. The Old Testament also warns of consequences of disobedience,
including natural disasters and ecological devastation. These teachings provide a foundation
for understanding our responsibility to care for the environment and inspire many
contemporary environmental movements.
Gender issues
The Old Testament, despite its patriarchal nature, contains instances where prophets
addressed gender-related issues and women played significant roles. Women, such as
Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah, served as prophetess, leading Israel politically and spiritually.
Some prophetic texts condemned gender-related injustices, such as exploitation and violence
against women. Prophets often used gendered imagery to convey spiritual messages, such as
depicting Israel as an unfaithful wife or harlot. Some prophets challenged patriarchal norms
by advocating for social justice and equality. Wisdom literature, such as Proverbs and
Ecclesiastes, also provided insights into gender roles and relationships.