On the basis of a philological analysis of the term hebel, we have said that the prophetic host lived together and separately from other people. Biblical data confirm our assumption. Thus, already at the first mention of the prophetic schools, we see a host of prophets descending from on high (1 Samuel 10:5,10). If the assumption of some is correct that at the height of the hill there was a residence of the host, then we have here the first testimony about the life of the sons of the prophets in special places. In the same way, Nawaf can be considered the place of a prophetic settlement near Ramah. But the story of the construction of a common dwelling is especially clear about the common and separate life of the sons of the prophets, which is conveyed in the 2nd Book of Kings. The sons of the prophets said to Elisha, "Behold, the place where we dwell with you is narrow for us; let us go to the Jordan and take from there each one a log, and make ourselves a place to dwell there. He said, "Go." And one said, "Do me mercy, and go with your servants." And he said, "I will go." And he went with them, and came to the Jordan, and began to cut down trees (2 Kings 6:13). From this news, which was accidentally preserved, since the writer intended to report on the miracle performed by the prophet Elisha on the Jordan, it is quite clear from this news that the unity of the sons of the prophets extended even to the place of residence, and it is absolutely impossible to deny the joint life of the sons of the prophets, as Krapichfeld does. It should be noted, however, that the sons of the prophets in verse 1 speak of the narrowness of the place where they sat in the face of Samuel - this is how the Hebrew jasehabim scbam lephaneha should be literally translated. From this we can assume that in [this] narration it is about the construction of a new room for the actual meetings around the prophet. But there is reason [to suppose] that the sons were prophets and lived together near Jordan. Even if we are talking about the construction of only a prefabricated building, this still not only does not exclude, but even, on the contrary, proves that the sons are prophets and lived together. Otherwise, why did they build a building for their meetings near the Jordan, and not where they lived permanently? But in addition, the text itself indicates that the sons of the prophets do not separate their dwellings from the place of assembly. Let us make, they say, a place for ourselves to dwell there (2 Kings 6:2). The place where they sat before the prophet is here called a place of residence. Consequently, the sons of the prophets lived together wherever they gathered, perhaps under the same roof.

There is an earlier indication of the same common life of the sons of the prophets. In the Bible we read: When Jezebel was destroying the prophets of the Lord, Obadiah took a hundred prophets, and hid them, fifty in number, in caves, and fed them with bread and water (1 Kings 18:4,13). It can hardly be positively asserted that this refers only to individual prophets who gathered together during the time of Jezebel's persecution. Against this understanding speaks the very number of prophets, about whose activity nothing is said. It is strange to suppose that so many prophets lived and worked in the kingdom of Israel at one time: Jezebel, it must be supposed, had already destroyed some of them (cf. 1 Kings 19:14), and yet there remained a hundred of them. But Obadiah's attitude towards these prophets speaks especially against this position. Obadiah said of himself: "I hid a hundred men of the prophets of the Lord fifty men in caves" (1 Kings 18:13). If these were individual prophets, they themselves would be hiding from persecution, but here comes Obadiah, who, as it were, commands all of them. Therefore, it can be assumed that the prophets of Jehovah mentioned in the 1st Book of Kings (chapter 18) formed a prophetic school, headed by Obadiah. When the hard times of Jezebel's persecution came, Obadiah took care to hide his "prophets" in a safe place. The name "prophets" does not contradict the fact that they were members of the prophetic school; for even the members of the assembly of Samuel's time are called prophets (1 Samuel 10:5,10; 19:20,24). But this passage also shows that these prophets lived together. If these prophets had lived in their homes, they would not have hid themselves together; it is utterly unwise to gather together in the time of persecution out of dispersion; Obviously, the prophets did not have their own dwellings. In addition, Obadiah emphasizes that he, hiding the prophets in caves, divided them into two parts of fifty people each. In our opinion, this circumstance conceals a subtle hint that all the prophets used to live together; dividing them into two parts, therefore, deserved to be noted.

The above cases are noted when the prophets lived together in dwellings located in solitude. Sometimes there were prophetic schools in the cities, as we see in Bethel (2 Kings 2:3), in Jericho (2 Kings 2:5), but in the cities the members of the prophetic schools speak together. Perhaps they lived together in the cities. These prophetic dwellings are called coenobia by some [30].

The community of life was not limited only to the community of the home. The Bible gives some grounds for conjecture in the prophetic schools and the common table. When there was a famine, Elisha said to his servant: "Set up a great pot and cook pottage for the sons of the prophets" (2 Kings 4:38). On another occasion a man from Befaris came, and brought to the man of God the firstfruits of bread, twenty barley loaves and raw grains in husks. And Elisha said, "Give to the people, let them eat" (2 Kings 4:42). But in these two passages the common table is spoken of each time on a special occasion, and therefore it would be too hasty on the basis of these two passages alone [to draw a conclusion about] a permanent common table in the prophetic schools. On the contrary, is it not because these cases are mentioned that they were somewhat outstanding from the ordinary ones? But if not constantly, then sometimes in the common dwellings of the sons of the prophets there was also a common table.

Common life, life in common dwellings, was not, one must think, obligatory. The Bible tells us that some of the sons of the prophets had their own houses, especially those who were in charge of the schools. Samuel had a house in Ramah, where he returned after each tour of the cities of Israel (see 1 Samuel 7:17). Thus, Elisha lives either on Mount Carmel (see 2 Kings 2:25; 4:25), or in Samaria, where he had his own house (see 2 Kings 5:9; 6:32). Other members of the prophetic schools also had their own homes. When one of the wives of the sons of the prophets told Elisha that her husband was dead, and asked him to help, Elisha asked her: "What have you in your house" (2 Kings 4:12)? Consequently, the deceased son of the prophet had his own house. Taking into account these separate houses of their own for some prophetic sons, almost all researchers assume that only unmarried and unmarried prophetic sons lived together. Married and married sons of the prophets lived in their own houses and only at certain periods of time for a certain period of time did they join the sons of the prophets, who lived together in one separate place. Samuel, as it is said, had his house in Ramah, and not far from Ramah was Nabat, where the prophetic assembly had its residence (see 1 Samuel 19:19, 2223). Perhaps the other sons of the prophets had their own houses near the common place of assembly, so that they could often and easily attend the prophetic school. It can be assumed that all the other sons of the prophets did not break ties with their native homes and with their relatives, and sometimes [for a while] lived at home.

The hosts of the sons of the prophets were quite significant in the number of members included in them. This number is already indicated by the earliest name "host" - "kahal", a name that is applied to the whole Jewish people (see: Lev. 4:13; Num. 16:3; 20:4; Deut. 31:30, etc.). Then we see that Obadiah hides a hundred prophets (see 1 Kings 18:4,13); the servant contradicts Elisha, who commanded that the sons of the prophets should be given the firstfruits of bread: "What shall I give to a hundred men" (2 Kings 4:4243)? Elisha orders to cook soup for the sons of the prophets in a large cauldron (see 2 Kings 4:38). The number of prophetic schools is especially indicated by the history of the taking of Elijah to heaven and the history of the construction of a new dwelling. When the sons of the prophets who lived in Jericho went out to meet Elisha, they said to him, "Behold, we thy servants have fifty men, mighty men; let them go and seek your lord (Elijah)... And they sent fifty men (2 Kings 2:1516,17). Obviously, fifty people were only a part of the Jericho prophetic school, the number of its members was much greater. In another story we see that the sons of the prophets found their former quarters cramped (see 2 Kings 6:1); Consequently, there were a significant number of them, and this number grew: the room was not cramped before. The following reasoning of the same sons of the prophets is also characteristic: "Let us go to the Jordan, and let us take from thence each one a log, and make ourselves a place to dwell there (2 Kings 6:2). If the sons of the prophets say that they have only to take one log at a time, and it will be possible to build a new building, then it is clear that the increased number of members of the mentioned prophetic school was considerable. Thus, the prophetic school should be represented as a rather crowded society, and not as a narrow circle of selected people.

In the history of the Israeli people, there were several such prophetic schools at the same time and at different times. In the Bible one can find indications of the existence of the following prophetic schools: 1) in Gibeah (1 Kings 10:5, 10), 2) Nebatha, near Ramah (1 Kings 19:18, 23), 3) Bethel (2 Kings 2:3), 4) Jericho (2 Kings 2:5), 5) Gilgal (2 Kings 4:38), 6) on the banks of the Jordan (2 Kings 6:14) - where the school may have been moved from Gilgal, 7) in Mount Ephraim (see: 2 Kings 5:22), 8) near Samaria (see 1 Kings 18:4,13), perhaps in Afekah (see 1 Kings 20:30). There may have been prophetic schools elsewhere, but there is no trace of their existence in the Bible. And all these schools are known either from some one incident from their lives, which is recorded in the pages of the folk chronicle, or only from a vague or controversial mention of them. And yet each of these schools lived its own life, had its own history, in which sometimes the gloomy pages of persecution and persecution were intertwined, and sometimes the pages of intense activity; Each school had golden years of its life and years of decline and impoverishment. But we know nothing about all this and will never be able to find out.

Who were the members of the prophetic schools? Who were these prophetic sons? There is no reason to consider them as prophetic children, who would become members of the prophetic school by virtue of their natural birth. No, the Old Testament prophecy itself was not connected with either class or social status. God chose priests (Jeremiah 1:1), the children of the high priest (2 Chronicles 24:20), and farmers and shepherds, who used to gather sycamores (Amos 1:1; 7:14). In the same way, the "sons of the prophets" were made such regardless of their origin. Biblical evidence of this can be found. And it came to pass, when Saul prophesied with the assembly, that the multitude said to one another, What has become of the son of Kish?..? And one of those who were there answered and said, "And what about those who have a father" (1 Samuel 10:1112)? Such an answer can be understood in the sense that it indicates the ignorance of the sons of the prophets in general. The family of Kish and Saul, perhaps, did not differ in any way from the others; and the people asked, "How does the son of Kish prophesy this?" Nothing of the kind was expected of him. To this someone answered: and those who have a father? After all, they are all from the most ordinary families. It is not surprising that the son of Keyes also prophesies. Other biblical data describe to us the sons of prophets as poor people. Tell me what you have in your house," the prophet Elisha asked one of the wives of the prophet's son, whose husband had died. She said: "Thy servant hath nothing in the house but a vessel of oil" (2 Kings 4:12). The dead son of the prophet, of course, lived in such poverty even before joining the ranks of the sons of the prophets, and after his death he left nothing but debts, so that after his death the lender came to take both of his children as his slaves (2 Kings 4:1). And in general, in Jewish society, only the tribe of Levi was privileged, but after the division of the kingdoms, the Levites no longer remained in the kingdom of Israel, where we meet the prophetic schools (see 2 Chronicles 11:13). With regard to the origin of the sons of the prophets, one can only notice that in all probability they were all Jews. At least, God promises to raise up prophets from among the people, from among their brethren (Deuteronomy 18:15,18).

From the passages already quoted above, it can also be seen that the sons of the prophets were both married and unmarried. There was no celibacy in the prophetic schools. The virginity of all the sons of the prophets is not affirmed by Blessed Jerome either; in a letter to Eustochia de custodia virginitatis he writes: virgines multi filii prophetarum.

Regarding the age of the sons of the prophets, it can also be said that there was no one definite age. The name "son of the prophets" does not speak of the age of the sons of the prophets; As we shall see below, it has a different meaning. Among the sons of the prophets there were men of maturity. The prophetic sons who were in Jericho said to Elisha, "Behold, we have... fifty men, mighty men (2 Kings 2:16). It is in vain to look upon these strong men as ministers in a prophetic school; Of course, there could not be such a staff of servants. These strong men were sons of prophets, and in the Jericho prophetic school there were, therefore, up to fifty members in adulthood. Another passage points even more decisively to the young age of the sons of the prophets. Gehazi said to Naaman, "My lord has sent me to say, Behold, now there have come to me from Mount Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets" (2 Kings 5:22). Here the prophetic sons are called nearim in Hebrew. The noun naar often means "young" in the Bible. Naar is called seventeen-year-old Joseph (Genesis 37:2); so is the young Solomon (see 1 Kings 3:7; cf. 1 Chronicles 29:1) [31]. Thus, in the prophetic schools there were young, grown-ups, although, it must be supposed, they did not live to see those years of which it can be said: I have no pleasure in them! (Ecclesiastes 12:1ff.)

Some researchers admit that all the prophetic sons even wore special clothes, there was something similar to the school prophetic uniform. Such clothing was the meil mentioned in the 1st Book of Samuel (15:27) [32]. Indeed, there is biblical evidence that the prophets wore special clothing (see 1 Kings 19:13; 2 Kings 1:8; Zech. 13:4) [33]. Elijah, for example, when he chose Elisha as his successor, threw his mercy at him (see 1 Kings 19:19), apparently as a characteristic attribute of the prophet. Ehler (in Herzoga) calls this a kind of investiture. But there is no indication in the Bible whether the sons of the prophets had special clothing. The most zealous defenders of the special form of the Jewish rabbis cite as proof 1 Samuel 19:24: And he took off... (Saul) his garments, and prophesied before Samuel, and all day and all that night he lay unclothed.

This passage is interpreted by some rabbis in the sense that Saul, having taken off his royal robes, put on the garments of the sons of the prophets. Rabbi Isaiah explains: Saul, having taken off his royal robes, dressed in the pattern of one of these students - nudatus vestibus suis regiis, et vestitutus fuit instar unius ex illis litterarum studiosis. Rabbi Solomon interprets in the same way: he took off the royal garments in order to put on the garments of those disciples of Divine wisdom - vestes exuit regias, utindueret vestes illorum Divinae Sapientiae Studiosorum. But the text says only that Saul took off his outer garments, and whether he put on prophetic garments - only the rabbis guess about this. Together with Vitringa, we can say: I doubt whether the text indicates a special clothing, and I leave it to the reader to judge [34]. It seems to us possible to point to one verse which speaks against the special clothing of the sons of the prophets. Gehazi, having informed Naaman that two young sons of prophets had come to Elisha from Mount Ephraim, said: "Give them a talent of silver and two changes of garments" (2 Kings 5:22). Naaman could not, of course, give the sons of the prophets uniforms, and Gehazi obviously asks for the most ordinary garments for them. Is there not a hint here that the sons of the prophets did not differ in clothing from other people?

The Bible also gives us some information about the sources of the maintenance of the sons of the prophets. A certain man from Bethharis brought to the man of God the firstfruits of bread - twenty barley loaves and raw grains in husks (2 Kings 4:42). Here we encounter a remarkable phenomenon: Elisha, the prophet, is brought the firstfruits, that is, what belonged to the Levitical priesthood according to the law of Moses. At the time of the division of the kingdoms, the priests and Levites, who were all over the land of Israel, gathered to Rehoboam from all the borders... to Judea and to Jerusalem; for Jeroboam and his sons had left them from the priesthood of the Lord, and had appointed priests among himself to the high places, and to the goats, and to the calves which he had made (2 Chronicles 11:1315). But it is evident that for some zealots of the law of Moses, the priests were replaced by prophets. In the 2nd Book of Kings (4:42) we see how a pious Jew devoted to the law brings the firstfruits to the prophet Elisha. In general, offerings were customary in relation to the prophets. Jeroboam said to his wife, sending her to the prophet Aniah: "Take with you for the man of God ten loaves of bread, and cakes, and a pitcher of honey" (1 Kings 14:3). Some of the people, who respected the prophets, took it upon themselves to take care of their material support. One day Elisha came to Shunam. There a certain rich woman begged him to eat bread with her; and whenever he passed, he always went there to eat bread. And she said to her husband, "Behold, I know that the man of God, who passes by us continually, is holy; let us make a small upper room over the wall, and set there for him a bed, and a table, and a seat, and a lampstand; and when he comes to us, let him go there (2 Kings 4:810). Such offerings and donations, it should be thought, were assigned not only for the prophets personally, but also for the sons of the prophets. But, of course, all these and similar offerings were not something permanent and definite, just like everything voluntary. Therefore, it cannot be thought that the sons of the prophets were supported only on such offerings. The Bible says very little about offerings, but the sons of the prophets, as we have already said above, were many. It should be thought that the sons of the prophets earned their own means of subsistence; they may not have abandoned those affairs and occupations that provided them with the means of subsistence before. But it should also be noted that the external needs and comforts of life were left behind in the prophetic schools. The material side of the life of the sons of the prophets occupied very little, and their whole life was severe, amidst constant deprivations; The life of the prophetic schools was ascetic. We see all the sons of the prophets at work at the construction of a new building on the banks of the Jordan. And the great prophet Elisha himself, who in his days did not tremble before the prince and who was overcome by nothing (Sir. 48:1314), together with his "sons" went to work: they came to the Jordan and began to cut down trees (2 Kings 6:14). And when one was felling a log, his axe fell into the water. And he cried out, and said, Ah, my lord! but he was taken for support (2 Kings 6:5). The sons of the prophets lived in such poverty that even the axe had to be taken for support. We have already drawn attention to the poverty of another son of the prophet, who after his death had nothing left in the house except a vessel of oil and debts, so that even empty vessels had to be asked for by his wife on the side (see 2 Kings 4:13). In another place we see how and what kind of food is prepared for the sons of the prophets. Elisha said to his servant, "Set up a great pot and cook pottage for the sons of the prophets." And one of them went out into the field to gather vegetables (Slavic: potion divia), and found a wild climbing plant, and gathered from it wild fruits full of his garments; And he came and crumbled them into a pot of soup, for they did not know them. And they poured them something to eat. But as soon as they began to eat the soup, they raised a cry and said: "Death in the cauldron, man of God!" And they could not eat (2 Kings 4:3840). Here we see that for cooking they gather what comes across in the field, they collect it themselves in their clothes. And the soup turned out to be good, if you almost got poisoned with it! On another occasion Elisha gives twenty barley loaves and raw grains in husks for a hundred sons of the prophets, so that the servant asks in bewilderment: "What shall I give to a hundred men" (2 Kings 4:4243). Such an ascetic way of life of the sons of the prophets sometimes corresponded to the place of their settlement: sometimes the societies of the sons of the prophets settled far from human habitation, in the desert or in the mountains [35]. In this case, the order of life became even more definitely ascetic. The ascetic way of life in general corresponded to the whole spirit of the Old Testament prophecy. The Old Testament prophet can be represented as a severe ascetic. That man was covered with hair and girded with a leather belt around his loins, - they said about the prophet Elijah (2 Kings 1:8). We see the prophets fasting (the story of Daniel and his companions, especially see Dan. 10:23). In the spirit of the Old Testament there was John the Baptist, neither eating nor drinking (Matt. 11:18), a stern ascetic, who had a robe of camel's hair and a leather belt on his loins, eating locusts and wild honey (Matt. 3:4; Mk. 1:6). Therefore, it is quite natural that the prophetic schools, having prophets at their head, themselves received an ascetic way of life.

Up to now we have indicated only the comparatively easy features of the prophetic schools, but these features can characterize the prophetic schools from their external side. We must now point out the more essential features which, together with those presented, may give a more or less complete idea of what we have hitherto called the prophetic school. We must answer the question: What did the sons of the prophets do in their schools, as we have called them, and what was their activity? Without a doubt, this is the most important part in the question of the prophetic schools, but it is precisely in this part of the question that we are left with the scant Biblical data and with full scope for all kinds of assumptions. But what does the Bible tell us about the occupations of the sons of the prophets? In 1 Samuel, it is said about the sons of the prophets that they prophesied, both Saul's servants and Saul himself prophesied (see: 19:2024). In the 2nd Book of Kings, it is said about the sons of the prophets that they sat before Elisha (see: 6:1). These are the general definitions of what the sons of the prophets were doing. What does this mean? The meaning of the word "prophesied" can be understood in different ways. In solving the question of the essence of prophetism, there is the theory of passivism (Gentenberg, partly Toluk, and others), which understands prophecy in a narrowly passive sense. If we accept this theory, then the societies of the sons of the prophets will at least appear to us in the form of exalted ecstasies, something like our mystical and ecstatic sectarians. The verb naba (to prophesy) itself is given the meaning of "to be ecstatic", overestimating the meaning of the form of hithph used in the book of 1 Samuel - itnabbe. This form sometimes does mean a state of ecstasy, as in the appendix to Saul in 1 Samuel 18:10. But the meaning of this form is disputed, and this form itself is used only three times in application to the true prophets: Jeremiah 29:2627; 26:20; Ezekiel 27:10, and in the first place this word is used about the prophet Jeremiah by his enemy, the priest Shemaiah, in the abusive sense [37]. The verb naba itself has an active meaning - "to proclaim, to pronounce an inspired speech, to teach". A prophet - and the members of the assembly in 1 Samuel are called prophets - can mean "taught"; prophets are sometimes called disciples and students (see Isaiah 8:16; 54:13; Jeremiah 32:33) [38]. Therefore, if in the 1st book of Samuel it is said about the members of the host that they prophesied, then this can be understood in the sense that they were edified by the inspired words of each other, and especially by the prophet Samuel.