Religion and Theology

This book Prophets and wise men is written by William Mackane. The book consists two parts, in first part old wisdom and the case of ahithophel and second part the prophetic use of the vocabulary of wisdom. He is eminent and famous author in the field of literature. He worked on many projects and several theses too. Mackane has contributed much revaluation of the Hebrew Prophecy. The book is fully dedicated on religion and spirituality. Many chapters points out the significant role of wisdom in matter of states and the reputation enjoyed by its leading advocates for the words. The first is the general explanation of the political role of old wisdom and the second a consideration of the respective spheres of Esa and Dabar in the Old Testament in relation to statesmanship and political decisions. The saying of many chapters hints that they form two substitute and disconnected system for political guidance, but this is at best a temporary definition or working arrangement and it reveals a situation in which the seeds of conflicts are present. It has been pointed out that there is a twist of wisdom in the Old Testament which is this knowing and has no obligation to ethnical values and it has been mostly believed that this brand of wisdom was after transformed through its weakness to particular Israelite religion and ethnical insights. The conflict between prophet and statesman which it has been the principle of this work to investigate is more than an affair of historical interest for it throws light on a current conflict between the same parties which turning points on the same Incompatibilities.
                                                                                                                 
This review reveals that the Israelite prophets and contemporary prophets emphasizes that the power is not built in with historical existence in the way that statesmen expect. Prophets emphasizes that the power is not built in with historical existence. There are one or two passages in the book of Psalms where the vocabulary of wisdom appears in a similar framework of legal piety. The author detailed about the sense the old wisdom added to a rejection of the Dabar of Yahweh. Human beings are in very different theological atmosphere from that of Old Testament. God no longer pronounces his Esa plainly through the Dabar of his prophet ,but his communication are hidden in the puzzle like contents of vision and dreams and are unintelligent expert to those who have been initiated into their mysteries .The prophet has been replaced by the interpreter who in virtue of his God given Bina can crack the code in which God conceals his detailed plans for the future.                                                                                                                                 
The review illustrates particular the lack of ethnical commitments in this old wisdom. It is general thought of political convenience overcome. Humanism is not a total philosophy of life but principally an intellectual posture with which to face the complex business of statesmanship. It refers to the purified culture and literary tastes of this educated class. The book highlighted during the reigns of David and Solomon Israel was in the Egyptian rather than the Babylonian sphere of influence, that there is evidence of close relation between Solomon and Egypt and ought to seek there for the models of Solomons bureaucracy.

 Many passages revealed the principal parts of power, which was under the king. The worldliness of this narrative is an indication that the real center of interest is man and not God and so the story is about men their passion, desire, motive and intrigues. God does not intervene in this world of unfettered human action in any directly miraculous. David (p16) says to Solomon, Act according to your wisdom. Many stanza points out the prophecy in relation to the sect and the treaty covenant tradition. C.E Wilrethmein says (Prophet and politics 113) the prophet sought out an interview with Ahaz in order to offer him advice on a matter of prime political urgency. He believed that it was mostly in the sect and that forms of prophetic remark were developed. It was the prophets who borrowed from the language and style of the sect mantras, not the psalmists who borrowed the prophets. The older predictor did the prophets a disfavor by claiming too much for them. They did not inform about a new principle of God in Israel or instruct a new morality. The prophets, clearly taken their hearers to know, what they were talking about and were successors of a very rich and full traditional. The main focus of such a tradition was the trust in an agreement between Yahweh and Israel. This traditional agreement made what Hosea in particular explained as the knowledge of God, not a biased experience of communion but intentional tradition of history and law. The Israelite prophets and the modern prophets stresses that power is not made in with historical existence. The conflict between prophet and statesman become painfully sharp. The prophet is subject issued to violence and imprisonment and is threatened with death. Weiser agrees that the Sarim recognized the urgency of the crisis given by God and had full understanding of and were completely sympathetic towards the intention of the new action of the prophet which was to initiate and urge a policy of repentance. The conflict between prophet and statesman which it has been the purpose of this work to explore is more than an affair of historical interest for it throws light on a contemporary conflict between the same parties which centers on the same incompatibilities.   
                  
The author did not draw out new thing the implication of the argument which has been developed in this review. The review also examined some detail the use made of the vocabulary of wisdom by Isaiah and Jeremiah. The author highlighted the dialogue between Isa and Ahaz on a matter of prime political urgency. The cause of this crisis was the determination of Syria and Israel to use force if necessary in order to bring Judah into  a Coalition and to replace Ahaz with a more flexible king. The gist of Isaiahs advice was that Ahza should not be intimidated by the threats of the two neighboring kings and he should not embark on any extraordinary diplomatic measures in order to counter syro-Ephraimite pressure. In this review many characters were so sincerely persuaded that religious faith even when allowed by the words of a prophet ought not to decide policy in this sphere. This is the general theological per misses from which this prophetic intervention into politics derives. The prophet demands that power should be banded of the fearful crudity and grossness of which it partakes in the terrible anxiety of our world.

The statesman emphasized to know the will of God and do it, beyond this everything rests with God. He too agrees that the crudity of the balance of power in our world today is a true reflection of the tension and unsafe insecurity of the international community and it is the unresolved, difficult problems, overwhelming in their magnitude and weakness which will have to be tackled and solved one by one before there is any betterment .but the prophet believes that faith or confidence has a creative potential and can convert a situation if we had faith in God and loved our neighbors and were prepared to take complete risk for the sake of Christ the world would stop to be armed camp so speaks the contemporary Christian prophet. It is only this dialectical form that the shape of the relationship between statesman and prophet can be outlined .Otherwise we can say that the relationship is one of simple inappropriateness and to take sides with one or the other .While reviewing, I do not see how the statesman can concentrated in God this would total handing over from political power and responsibility. Certainly, it ought not to be supposing that any contribution to the understanding of these matters can be made by the stale observation that we live in a sinful world.