There exist a select few in each generation with a distinct ability to shed important insight on the world around them. In ancient Israel, as recorded in the Bible, a group of divinely inspired prophets both celebrated and criticized the societies around them. At once conservative and progressive, Israelite prophets maintained a largely religious bent, and often focused on Israel’s impending doom due to the abandonment of divine covenant obligations. In the modern era, others have been described (controversially) as prophets. Greta Thunberg, the 18-year-old Swedish environmental activist, is one such figure. In an essay on prophecy, W. Sibley Towner explains that any investigation of prophecy itself amounts to our larger “quest” for the modern locus of authoritative moral and religious guidance (496). In a world deeply scarred by environmental disaster, among other crises, finding and assigning this modern “locus” of moral authority involves the important task of defining prophecy. In this short essay, I will establish a working definition of modern prophecy based on various scholars’ conception of prophecy in the ancient Near East. Throughout, I will argue that despite replacing G-d with earth as her inspiration, Thunberg serves as a modern prophet in her actions which amplify societal issues.
To start, it is critical to highlight that biblical prophecy was largely grounded in direct communion with the divine presence. The examples abound, but I will turn to Jeremiah due to its rich bounty of evidence about this relationship. The book opens with the divine election of Jeremiah as prophet: “Now the word of the LORD came to me saying, / ‘Before I formed you in the womb I knew / you, / and before you were born I consecrated / you; / I appointed you a prophet to the nations’” (Jeremiah 1:4-5). This portion sets up the rest of the book, which is largely a work of “ethical and redemptive” content during and after the fall of Judah in 587 BCE (Attridge 999-1000). Clearly, Jeremiah’s actions and prophesying are deeply related to his divine election. But human morality and hope for redemption did not disappear in the dusk of Y-hwistic revelation. As I will go on to argue, it is distinct prophetic actions which allow us to draw clear connections between the ancient prophets of the Bible and modern figures like Greta Thunberg, or Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK).
Towner suggests four distinct characteristics of prophetism in the Hebrew Bible, starting with style, and Thunberg matches all of them in a modern way. To start, Towner explains that prophets gained notoriety due to their “flamboyance of style,” and “abrasiveness,” often expressed in socially unacceptable ways (Towner 497). This flamboyance of style, evident throughout the prophetic works, comes to life in Ezekiel. The prophet claims to see “visions of G-d” while among the exiles at the river Chebar (Ezekiel 1:1). His description is hard to picture, but it involves moving components of animalistic creatures, fire, “the spirit,” and wheels (1:4-21). Since the world of ancient prophets remains in biblical literature, the text conveys their eccentric actions and unique style through particularly exciting passages. Meanwhile, Thunberg demonstrates a modern flamboyance in her style. In the fall of 2019, for example, she traveled across the Atlantic to New York “by boat” to address the U.N Climate Action Summit (Remix). Such an eccentric move commanded the world’s attention and fits the nonconformist prophetic style which Towner understands as a “badge of integrity” and “unwillingness to be silenced” (498). Thunberg meets these characteristics in her climate activism but fails to dedicate such a style to any total personal commitment to the divine word (498). Thus, we begin to see that the thread which ties together prophets across the ages is related to their actions, not necessarily the inspiration for their beliefs.
Thunberg also embodies the other aspects of Towner’s prophetic “style,” which include a wide public audience and utter conviction in her statements. We can uncover multiple similarities between Thunberg and the prophet Amos, who prophesied in the Northern Kingdom in the late eighth century BCE (Attridge 1216). Amos’ words, like Thunberg’s, are “direct” and “uncompromising” in their condemnation of his fellow Israelites’ transgressions and the implications of their departure from the covenant (1217). He shares his criticism with a wide audience. For example, he opens one of his speeches saying, “Hear this word that I take up over you in lamentation, O house of Israel,” before going on to criticize those who “trample on the poor” and “push aside the needy,” among other social ills (Amos 5:1; 5:11-12). In her U.N. address, Thunberg use of the word “you” serves as an address to the wide audience of both U.N. representatives and those whom they represent (Remix). Thus, it is a wide audience, like Amos’ call to “O house of Israel,” that receives Thunberg’s statement that people are “suffering” and “dying” (Remix). While Thunberg’s style may evade the repetitive “says the LORD” of Amos and other ancient prophets, her personal eccentricity, wide audience, and conviction illustrate her modern prophetic style. So, I will include those three descriptors in my definition of the modern prophet.
This close look at language ties into rhetoric, the next topic of examination in line with Towner’s characteristics of biblical prophets. In Towner’s discussion of MLK, the author notes that MLK’s message of racial equality was “couched” in biblical language designed to arouse “group hopes and convictions” that lie deep in Americans’ hearts (501). For men like MLK, the rhetorical style of the prophets provided a means to connect generations later with Americans on new topics. While Thunberg’s language is farther from that of the prophets than MLK, a career preacher, her rhetoric does arouse group hopes and convictions. For example, she condemns adults for stealing her childhood and dreams in their contribution to climate change (Remix). Her words suggest a common humanity: the shared experience of childhood, and dreams of a better life. Towner also notes, critically, that the same “clarity” and “professional skill” have always been critical tools for outspoken social critics, ancient or modern (501). Both biblical and modern prophets employ such tools to strengthen their clear condemnations of certain aspects of society. These qualities, then, now add to our growing understanding of modern prophecy.
Towner’s third characteristic of ancient prophets as highly institutionalized is harder to pair with my modern definition and may very well be left out. Towner notes that we have “little warrant” to see ancient Israelite prophets as radicals who exist on the periphery (504). Instead, in his conception, it is their very existence within ancient societal institutions like the cult and kingdom which gives them the platform to prophesy to a large audience. Thunberg on the other hand, who started her activism as a child, hardly represents existing institutions. Instead, it is precisely her outsider identity which makes her such a strong voice for change. In a scathing rejection of Thunberg as a modern prophet, one historian writes that “the best way to think of Thunberg is to simply think of her as a child” (Boucher). It is her youth, according to Boucher, that leads Thunberg to see the world in binary terms and criticize the so-called “moral flexibility” that serves as a refuge of adult inaction (Boucher). So too was Amos an outsider in two ways. First, he was a southerner preaching in the Northern Kingdom (Attridge 1216). But more importantly, he set himself apart from fellow prophets during his famous row with the priest, Amaziah. Fed up with Amos’ miserable prophesying at the Bethel cult center, the sullen Amaziah commands Amos to return to Judah and leave the “king’s sanctuary” and “temple” of the Northern Kingdom at Bethel (Amos 7:12-13). Amos’ response is highly instructive, as he responds that he is “no prophet, nor a prophet’s son” (Amos 7:14). No, Amos is but a “herdsman, and a dresser of sycamore trees” (Amos 7:14). This mere agricultural worker and herdsman is the antithesis of Towner’s definition of the institutional prophet. He is at odds with the institution in which he operates but convinced of his truths. Though modern prophets can certainly be institutional players, they can also follow in Amos’ anti-institutional footsteps.
Next, I would like to focus on the prophetic tone of suffering and redemption which extends from the Bible into modern prophecy. One truth in Towner’s institutional argument is that at the widest level, both the ancient and modern prophets suffer because their lives are intricately tied to the actions of their contemporaries. Towner argues that biblical prophets’ social responsibility forces them into a suffering role, because they share in the “disaster” of the very establishments subject to their criticism (504). Of course, for the ancients, the suffering derives from a tortured relationship to serve G-d to the dismay of peers. Jeremiah cries out “O LORD, you have enticed me, / and I was enticed; / you have overpowered me … I have become a laughingstock all day / long; everyone mocks me” (Jeremiah 20:7). The prophet is forced into this position, but due to utter conviction in the truth of his message, holds fast to his goal. For example, just a few verses later, Jeremiah praises G-d for delivering “the life of the needy / from the hands of evildoers” (Jeremiah 20:13). Thunberg emphasizes her own suffering to inspire others, claiming in her 2019 speech: “I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean” (Remix). Her choice to speak to the U.N. instead of sitting quietly in class, though, demonstrates personal sacrifice in the name of a greater good. This serves as a good rhetorical strategy, but more broadly shows both biblical and modern prophets tie their personal suffering to hopes for a better world.
So too do prophets throughout time stress the suffering of their fellow man while highlighting a future redemption. Isaiah, likely prophesying during the initial return to Judah from exile in Babylon, sums up the prophetic tropes of suffering and redemption (Attridge 914). He exclaims that his mission is to bring “good news to the / oppressed” and “proclaim liberty to the captives” (Isaiah 61:1). The prophet goes on to illustrate a future of “gladness,” “riches,” and “glory” in Zion (Isaiah 61:3; 61:6). Similarly, Thunberg explains: “We are at the beginning of a mass extinction” (Remix). Thus, she paints an image of not only a suffering man, but a suffering earth. Key to her argument, too, is the unspoken promise of a future where this “beginning” is somehow reversed through environmental action: a scientific redemption of past wrongs. Modern prophecy thus ties together suffering with hope for the future.
Next, I would like to tie my definition of modern prophecy to the act of healing. In Patrick D. Miller’s book, The Religion of Ancient Israel, he makes a point of describing the ancient prophets’ intercessory acts of healing. For example, in I Kings, Elijah brings an ill child back to life after “there was no breath left in him” (I Kings 17:17). Isaiah also has a hand in healing, but his patient is King Hezekiah of Judah. After the king “had been sick” and recovered from his illness, the text explains that Isaiah had instructed the king to apply a “lump of figs” to his boils, so that the monarch could recover (Isaiah 38:9; 38:21). Again, as we have seen, the healing practices conducted by the ancient prophets are ascribed to the divine presence. In modern times, secular prophets like Thunberg argue that it is humans (i.e., powerful adults) who can heal a sick world. Healing societal ills is a key component of modern prophecy, though the agency to do so for modern prophets like Thunberg is not from the divine, but entirely human.
Now, I will draw some conclusions about modern prophecy from Towner’s fourth biblical characteristic: message. That is, outside of style, rhetoric, and institutions, prophets’ messages must have some internal truth which resounds with the audience (505). Towner highlights the importance of Israelite prophets’ ability to “indict corruption” at whatever personal cost. The author cites Amos’ exclamation: “Alas [Woe] for those who are at ease in Zion,” as an example of Amos’ indictment of the overly comfortable élite (Amos 6:1). It is easy to draw a direct parallel between the ancients in this regard to modern prophets like Thunberg, who routinely indicts adults for their environmental inaction. She exclaims that all adults can talk about is “money,” and “fairy tales of eternal economic growth” (Remix). “How dare you!” she reproaches them, in near-biblical terms (Remix). This willingness among prophets to indict those in power relates to Miller’s description of the Hebrew word for prophet, nābî’, which comes from the Semitic root nābā’, “to call, proclaim, name” (Miller 178). That is, to proclaim or name things which others may not. There is something resonant throughout the ages about a figure willing to take on the establishment because they know there is some truth to their message.
Finally, I would like to discuss the importance of ingenuity in prophecy. One major critique of Thunberg, which could be extended to other modern prophets, is Boucher’s claim that the Swedish activist is telling us “what we already know” (Boucher). That is, it is the widespread scientific consensus that humans are causing environmental issues. As I have explained, Boucher ascribes Thunberg’s passion to her binary approach to adult issues. But, as I have tried to argue, even Biblical outsiders have been named as prophets, and engaged in important acts of nābā’. The biblical prophets’ demands of return to the covenant are not entirely new, either. As Towner points out, there is a “conservative principle intrinsic” to our understanding of prophetism (509). That is, the biblical prophets call on society to return to the (conservative) covenant values with which, according to the Bible itself, it had been entrusted (509). Indeed, prophets like Amos’ frequent references to early Israelite history, like his discussion of Exodus (2:10; 9:7), demonstrate such a conservatism. Amos did not create the story of Exodus or the covenant, but he took it upon himself to amplify it. Thus, we can start to break down Boucher’s argument that repeating something we know disqualifies one from prophecy. A brief replacement of G-d with earth, and worship with environmental practices, suddenly transforms many biblical passages into direct corollaries for Thunberg’s actions. For example, Miller points out that “critique” of peer worship practices was a frequent theme of prophetic oracles (188). In the Bible, such critique would have been focused on the pagan worship of Baal, the Queen of Heaven, Tammuz, or other deities besides the G-d of Israel (188). If we replace the G-d of Israel with earth, and Baal with say, corporate finance, suddenly we have a direct parallel between biblical prophets and Thunberg. Even if just in amplification, modern prophets’ unique ability to command style and rhetoric (among other means) to provide necessary introspection is reason enough to call them prophets in the Hebrew sense of the word.
The modern prophet commands the powerful style and rhetoric known to biblical prophets to convey important issues. Individuals like Thunberg, though drawing their inspiration from science and human ability instead of divine revelation, still match this new working sense of the modern prophet. While biblical messengers like Isaiah or Jeremiah viewed themselves as heralds of the divine word, so too do modern prophets like Thunberg work to translate important information into a message accessible to the masses. Just as biblical prophets called for a return to covenant obligations, so too does Thunberg inspire common people with her actions to return to a more harmonious relationship with the earth and one another.
Works Cited
Attridge, Harold W. Harper Collins Study Bible. New York, NY, HarperOne, 2006. Print.
Boucher, Ellen. “The Dangers of Depicting Greta Thunberg as a Prophet,” The Conversation,
December 12, 2019. https://theconversation.com/the-dangers-of-depicting-greta-
thunberg-as-a-prophet-128813.
Miller, Patrick D. The Religion of Ancient Israel. Louisville, KY, SPCK, 2000. Print.
Remix News. “Former Archbishop of Canterbury compares Greta Thunberg to biblical prophet.”
August 5, 2021. https://rmx.news/article/former-archbishop-of-canterbury-compares-
greta-thunberg-to-biblical-prophets/.
Towner, W. Sibley. “On Calling People ‘Prophets’ in 1970.” Interpretation 24.4, 1970. Web.