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.

On the inadmissible understanding of prophecy is also based the interpretation according to which the sons of the prophets artificially prepared themselves for prophecy. Thus, Jewish interpreters, for example, Abarbanel, say about the sons of prophets: se ipsos disponunt ad vaticandum. But is it possible to admit the teaching of prophecy? Is prophecy an art, an ability that can be developed in oneself through personal effort if desired? The only answer is no. A prophet needs neither a school nor a teacher; the Lord Himself calls him from his mother's womb (Isaiah 49:1; Jeremiah 1:5), drawing him as if against his will; the fire burns in the bones of the prophet, and he cannot restrain it (Jeremiah 20:79). One cannot prepare oneself for prophecy ad vaticandum. For this, a special overshadowing by God is necessary. According to the view of the Old Testament, a prophet must be born spiritually [39].

A more definite account of the occupations of the sons of the prophets is in the 2nd Book of Kings, where it is said of the sons of the prophets that they "sat before the face" of their leader, the prophet. The expression "to sit before someone" as it is used elsewhere in the Bible means the relation of the one being taught to the one who is teaching. In the book of Ezekiel it is said several times that the elders of the people sat before him (see 8:1; 20:1); but the elders came to inquire of the Lord (see 20:1), and the prophet, while they sat before him, gave them revelations and visions, the word of God (see 8:1; 20:2), that is, he taught them. In another place, the Lord said to the prophet Ezekiel: "They come to you as to a gathering place of the people, and My people sit down before you, and they hear your words, but do not do them" (Ezekiel 33:31). On the basis of this use of the expression "to sit before someone," it must be stated that the prophets taught a more or less close circle of the sons of the prophets that gathered around them. Elders and other persons of the people came to the prophets and sat before them on certain special and rare occasions; the sons of the prophets were more or less constant listeners of the prophets. "Sitting before the prophet" consisted in listening to his advice, instructions, explanations, and in general his speeches as a man of God and an influential prophet [40]. On the basis of this expression, the majority of scholarly researchers present the relationship of the sons of the prophets to the prophet as the attitude of disciples to teachers [41]. The same relationship is clearly indicated by the name prophetic sons. Of course, "prophetic sons" cannot be taken literally; in a figurative sense, the name "son" in the Old Testament always means a student, a disciple. Come, children, hear me: I will teach you the fear of the Lord, says David (Psalm 33:12). In the book of Proverbs, the teacher always addresses the one being taught as a son: "Hear, my son, the instruction of your father" (Proverbs 1:8; see: 1:10,15; 2:1; 3:1,21; 4:1,10,20; 5:1,7; 6:1; 7:1,24, etc.). Thus the sons of the prophets may be called disciples of the prophets, and the societies of the sons of the prophets themselves may be called the schools of the prophets. However, if we call societies prophetic schools, then it is absolutely necessary to renounce modern ideas about the school; Prophetic schools did not and could not have a school character in the modern sense. There is no reason to suppose that theoretical scientific systems were taught in the prophetic schools, or that theoretical theology was developed there (Maybaum). Meanwhile, the view of the prophetic schools as schools in the modern sense is shared by many. Even the Jewish rabbis called the sons of the prophets talmidim, and the prophetic schools bathe hamidrasch. Many of the later scholars also see in the prophetic schools educational institutions where various sciences were taught, comparing them with the philosophical schools of the Pythagoreans [42]. But the teaching in the Bible is never presented as teaching and assimilating theoretical knowledge. The Bible, like antiquity in general, does not distinguish between knowledge and virtue. Wisdom was combined with teaching or instruction, Heb. - musar. This instruction meant the entire system of educational measures (Slavic - "punishment") [43].

A teacher should not be a funny singer with a pleasant voice and a good player, who can only be listened to, and whose words cannot be sung (Jeremiah 33:32). The prophetic schools were not schools in the modern sense; they were not only educational institutions, but were more religious and educational institutions. We have said above that in the prophetic schools there was even a special way of life. This system must be considered an essential feature of the Old Testament prophetic school. Blessed Jerome, paying attention to this way of life, calls the prophetic schools monasteries and the sons of the prophets monks [44]. In their outward way of life, the prophetic schools were indeed similar to monasteries, but, of course, they were not entirely monasteries [45]. Prophetic schools were religious, educational institutions with a monastic order of life.

What was the educational side of the prophetic schools? The Bible answers this very interesting question with perfect silence. Various scholars, at their own will, determine the plans and programs of classes in prophetic schools [46]. Without inventing any detailed programs, we can call the subject of study only the sacred books, not only the law, but also the historical books. On the basis of some biblical data, we can even attribute literary and historical activity to educational subjects. In the books of Chronicles, the historical writings of the prophets are mentioned many times (see: 1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 12:15; 13:22, see above). But the chronicles were kept by the prophets, and what was the participation of the sons of the prophets in this matter - nothing is known about this.

The life of the prophetic schools did not consist of teaching alone; no, this life was a religious education. At the first mention in the Bible, the prophetic assembly is represented as descending from the height (see: 1 Samuel 10:5,10). Perhaps this host was making some religious procession; That is why there was such enthusiasm that it involuntarily captured those who joined this chorus of prophets. The same religious and liturgical education is also evidenced by the study of music, which was in the prophetic schools. Even in the time of Samuel, the assembly of prophets, descending from on high, had a psalter, and a tympanum, and a pipe, and a harp (see 1 Samuel 10:5,10). The sons of the prophets are said to have "prophesied," but this may mean that they sang inspired hymns in Jehovah's honor and accompanied them with music. For the very verb "naba" sometimes means religious music. Of the sons of Asaph, Heman, and Idithun it is said that they prophesied (hanebiim - prophesied) in kinnors, psalters and cymbals (see 1 Chronicles 25:1); Asaph himself played (haniba) at the king's instruction (see 25:2). Everywhere there is religious music, which is noted in v. 3, which says: Idifun played the zither to the glory and praise of the Lord (haniba alhodot vehallel lajhovah).

Finally, it should be noted that some of the prophetic sons served the prophets and sometimes carried out their commissions. Beginning with Moses, we see in almost every prophet a special servant who follows his master everywhere, takes care of him, and carries out his commands. The Bible has preserved for us one case when a prophet entrusts his disciple with a very important task. Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets and said to him, "Gird up your loins, and take this vessel of oil in your hand, and go to Ramoth-Gilead..." and anoint Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat, the son of Namesiah... to be king over Israel (2 Kings 9:13).

We have noted everything that can be considered the subject of classes in prophetic schools. But how to imagine all these activities? What was the nature of these classes? You can talk about all this as much as you like and in any way, but all this will and can only be subjective. Here we will give the floor to another person who thus conceives of the nature of the occupations of the sons of the prophets. "The prophet, who was himself the first and direct organ of the reception of Divine revelation, was better able than any later interpreter to explain by his living word those true testimonies contained in writing, on which millions of people later based their hope. The prophets simply and graphically revealed to their listeners a wondrous picture of the creation of the world, drawing attention to the [ubiquitous] traces of the creative actions of the Great Provider of the universe. The living prophetic spirit extracted from under the veil of the dead letter living thoughts, clothing them in flesh and blood, warming them with its breath and illuminating with new light this or that truth according to the needs of its listeners and interrogators" [47]! The same author describes the teaching of history in the following terms: "To the spiritual gaze of the interlocutors there were not mute skeletons of randomly woven facts and tables of chronology, but vital and fresh pictures, everywhere woven with miraculous facts of God's guidance, marked by the presence of Jehovah and sealed by His feet, deeply connected with the present and the future. The prophets vividly described to their spiritual sons the history of their ancestors, sealed by Jehovah's boundless love for his people. History in the words of the prophet and in his life-giving breath turned into a series of living pictures with living figures. In conversations about the law, the life-giving spirit in a dead letter was revealed; in the laws on sacrifices, from under various types of blood sacrifices, the martyric image of the promised Lamb, who had to bear the sins of the world, rose before the eyes of the listeners, and from under the sacrificial veil the most holy essence and mystery of the New Testament was revealed." "Nor did the mother tongue seem unworthy of reasoning, since it was the language of Jehovah in His dealings with His people and the language of the Divine Scriptures, and it was not the letter of the language that was examined, but the spirit revealed in it, its beauty, vitality, power, and loveliness" [48]. Such descriptions of the nature of the prophetic schools are no doubt beautiful and eloquent, but they are no less arbitrary. It is only true in all these descriptions that the general spirit of the prophetic schools was very far from the dry, strained, and official spirit of many modern schools. There was no juridism in the prophetic schools. The prophetic school can only be represented as a closely united brotherhood, a family, where there is no external authority, no ostentatious order, where obedience necessarily follows from reverent respect and gratitude; A family where everyone is dear, and not accidentally gathered, disgusting to each other, where everyone knows each other and loves each other, and does not tolerate only. One has only to read one verse of the Bible, and read it according to the Slavonic Bible: And one meek said: Come and thyself with thy servants. And he said: I will go. And go with them (2 Kings 6:34). Is it not already evident in these words that priceless spirit of brotherly love, which is the adornment of every society? The Prophet was not obliged to establish schools; he was impelled to do so only by zeal for the glory of God. The prophetic school was the feat of the prophet, his walk before God. The sons of the prophets did not receive any "rights", and therefore for them staying in the "school" was a matter of their love for God and their moral aspirations. For teachers and students, "learning" was an animated, unselfish feat. With such enthusiasm, the ascetic way of life was also natural, which in itself had, of course, a great educational significance. In prophetic schools they were not taught, but educated. Teaching passed into divine services, and all life in the prophetic schools was one religious feat, inspired and free, capturing all the sons of the prophets and uniting them into a common family dear to everyone. The freedom of the sons of the prophets was not the freedom of confusion, reminiscent of the well-known fable where the cart was taken in different directions. The prophetic son was free because he found what he was looking for, because he was among people who aspired to the same high and beautiful goals as he did, with whom he could therefore live and merge into one brotherhood, where each felt happy and free, although others could understand neither his happiness nor his freedom. It is this system of prophetic schools, a system alien to "officialdom" and full of spirit and like-mindedness, that we would like to emphasize especially.