^{page 129 note 2} This phrase, while not explicitly used, underlies Dr Hebert's discussion of the difference between episcopal and non-episcopal ministries in The Form of the Church, pp. 1 19ff. Cf. Ramsey, A. M., The Gospel and the Catholic Church (2nd edn.), p. 219.Google Scholar

^{page 129 note 3} Adequate references and a survey of recent discussion of the place and work of the prophets are given by Eissfeldt, O. in his article, ‘The Prophetic Literature’ in The Old Testament and Modern Study, ed. Rowley, H. H., pp. 115–161Google Scholar; and by Rowley, H. H., ‘The Nature of Old Testament Prophecy in the Light of Recent Study’, Harvard Theological Review, XXXVIII (1945), 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in his volume of essays, The Servant of the Lord, pp. 89–128. On prophets and prophecy within and without Israel, before and after Christ, there is a full collection of evidence in E. Fascher, ΠPOΦHTHΣ

^{page 130 note 1} Mic. 3.5–7; Isa. 28.7, 30.10; Ezek. 13.1ff, 7.26.

^{page 130 note 2} cf. articles of note 3, p. 129. Also A. R. Johnson, The Cultic Prophet in Ancient Israel; Rowley, H. H., ‘Ritual and the Hebrew Prophets’, Journal of Semitic Studies, I (1956), 338–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 130 note 3} cf. Pedersen, J., Israel, III–IV, pp. 107ff.Google Scholar

^{page 130 note 4} In addition to the articles cited in note 3, p. 129, see also Harold Knight, The Hebrew Prophetic Consciousness, and Porteous, N. W., ‘Prophecy’ in Record and Revelation, ed. Robinson, H. W., pp. 224ff.Google Scholar

^{page 131 note 1} Strack-Billerbeck, II, 126ff.

^{page 131 note 2} Scriptural quotations throughout are taken from the RSV.

^{page 132 note 1} cf. Brunner, E., Revelation and Reason, pp. 84ff.Google Scholar

^{page 134 note 1} Scott, R. B. Y., ‘Is Preaching Prophecy?’, Canadian Journal of Theology, I (1955), 11–18.Google Scholar

^{page 134 note 2} ‘Isaiah of Jerusalem was the first to make this term central in Israel's religion, and Second Isaiah is plainly dependent on him … in Second Isaiah the conception is combined with others, most notably with Redeemer.’ (Cf. 41.14, 54.5 etc.) Muilenberg, James F., Interpreter's Bible, V, p. 400.Google Scholar

^{page 135 note 1} ‘It is manifest that the thought of God as saving did not rest at the point where it began in the Exodus. There He saved Israel from her bondage, and from the lash of the taskmaster. But in the prophetic teaching He was seeking to save her from herself.’ Rowley, H. H., The Faith of Israel, p. 64.Google Scholar

^{page 136 note 1} The New Testament prophet is, of course, related to the eschatological expectation. But in so far as eschatology is realised and the coming of the End determined by what happened in Christ, his eschatological prophecy is purged of a future redemptive element.

^{page 139 note 1} On prophecy in the non-Jewish world cf. Fascher, op. cit., pp. 1–100, 190–209; Edwyn Bevan, Seers and Sibyls; Guy, H. A., New Testament Prophecy, pp. 119ff.Google Scholar

^{page 139 note 2} cf. Plutarch, , De defectu oraculorum, 432ffGoogle Scholar; De Pythiae oraculis, 414ff.

^{page 139 note 3} cf. also Ezek. 13, 14; Deut. 13.1ff, 18.9ff; Amos 7.14f.

^{page 139 note 4} cf. Fascher, op. cit., pp. 149, 150.

^{page 140 note 1} Strack-Billerbeck, I, pp. 125ff; II, pp. 615f; Büchsel, , Der Geist im Neuen Testament, pp. 121ffGoogle Scholar; Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, pp. 177ff.Google Scholar

^{page 140 note 2} Observe how he is described as filled with the Spirit; the return of the Spirit is, according to Jewish teaching, closely connected with the return of prophecy; cf. notes 1, p. 131, and 1, p. 140.

^{page 141 note 1} cf. Fascher, op. cit. pp. 205–9.

^{page 141 note 2} cf. note 1, p. 140, and see also Rust, E. C., Nature and Man in Biblical Thought, pp. 136ffGoogle Scholar. The Qumran community would appear to have had a like eschatological expectation in respect of the Spirit, e.g. 1QS 4.21; cf. 1QSb 2.24, 5.25; 1QS 9.3.

^{page 142 note 1} cf. Campenhausen, H. F. v., Kirchliches Amt und geistliche Vollmacht, pp. 65ff.Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 2} In 14.31 the first ‘all’ refers to ‘all the prophets’ and the second and third occurrences of the word to ‘all the congregation’; cf. Greeven, H., ‘Propheten, Lehrer, Vorsteher bei Paulus’, ZNW, XLIV (1952), 5, 6.Google Scholar

^{page 142 note 3} On the place of the prophets in the Corinthian congregation, see especially Greeven, op. cit., pp. 3–15; Guy, op. cit., pp. 104ff.

^{page 143 note 1} It is irrelevant whether these are regarded as genuine sayings of Jesus or not; they reflect the conditions of the early Church. They would not have retained their position in the tradition if they had not done so.

^{page 143 note 2} We do not by any means accept the distinction that Harnack made between a charismatic and an official ministry.

^{page 143 note 3} cf. v. 26 where by process of elimination ‘revelation’ must also apply to the prophet; tongues and interpretation apply to those who speak in tongues and those who interpret them (cf. v. 27f); hymns are to be connected with v. 15f; lessons are the work of teachers (12.28).

^{page 144 note 1} Particularly interesting is 1 Thess. 4.15–17; there is no known ‘word of the Lord’ corresponding to what Paul says here; the use of the phrase may indicate that what follows came to Paul through prophetic mediation. The words of v. 18 seem to indicate the end of a quotation.

^{page 144 note 2} Lindsay, T. M., The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries, p. 96fGoogle Scholar, suggests that it lay originally with the prophet, and not the priest, to pronounce forgiveness in the early Church.

^{page 147 note 1} If there is an ecstatic element in the New Testament prophet this would connect him again with prophecy in Old Testament days and in the Hellenistic world.

^{page 147 note 2} cf. Greeven, op. cit., pp. 18–24; Guy, op. cit., p. 116f; Lindsay, op. cit., pp. 103ff.

^{page 147 note 3} The Apostolic Preaching.

^{page 147 note 4} ‘Then the proconsul believed, when he saw what had occurred, for he was astonished at the teaching of the Lord’ (Acts 13.12; cf. 5.21). We would have used the word ‘preaching’ in place of ‘teaching’.

^{page 147 note 5} The Holy Spirit in the New Testament, p. 377.

^{page 148 note 1} Mart. 16.2.

^{page 148 note 2} Phil. 7.

^{page 148 note 3} Mand. 11.7ff.

^{page 148 note 4} Dial. Trypho, 82 (cf. 39, 87). It is interesting to observe that Justin continues by virtually equating the prophets of the New Testament with the canonical prophets.

^{page 148 note 5} Adv. haer., 5.6.1; cf. 2.32.4, ‘Others have foreknowledge of things to come: they see visions, and utter prophetic expressions.’

^{page 148 note 6} Contra Celsum, 1.46.

^{page 148 note 7} In the reference in the Muratorian Canon to Hermas it is said that the number of the prophets is complete, and that therefore Hermas cannot be read among them. This implies that on the one hand the Montanist prophets are not on a level with Scripture and should not be heeded, and on the other that Hermas is a prophet, though not of the standing of the canonical prophets. Cf. Streeter, B. H., The Primitive Church, p. 212f.Google Scholar

^{page 149 note 1} Campenhausen, op. cit., pp. 2O5ff, argues that there was no doctrinal innovation with Montanism; he would lay stress rather on the ecstatic nature of Montanist prophecy, alleging that it was for this reason that it was attacked by the catholic Church; but in so far as there was a fresh outpouring doctrinal differences were introduced. Campenhausen also argues interestingly (pp. 195ff) that Paul was fighting against a legalistic or Judaistic Christianity, which really had no place for the Spirit, and therefore the danger of ecstatic prophecy was not obvious to him.

^{page 149 note 2} Epiph., Haer., 48.4.1. Cf. Plutarch, De defectu oraculorum, 436f (48); Odes Solomon, 6.1, 2.