- 社會改革家(Social Reformer)
- 為著強調他們所傳講的是來自那差他們的神，他們大部分都會以「上主如此說」（hwhy rma hk）（參賽8:11；耶2:2；結11:5；摩1:3；彌2:3；鴻1:12；該1:2；亞1:3；瑪1:4）或「這是上主說的」（hwhy ~an）（參賽14:22；耶1:8；結13:6；何2:15；珥2:12；摩2:11；俄4；彌4:6；鴻2:14；番1:2；該1:9；亞1:3；瑪1:2）來開始或結束他們的信息。這兩句話的重要性，是要強調他們所說的，就是神所說的。
- 先知通常都用「口」來傳講信息（參賽6:6-7；耶1:9；結3:1-3）。除此之外，先知也會用「象徵性行動」（symbolic action; sign act）來將信息「做」出來，例如，以賽亞露身赤腳行走（賽20:1-6）、耶利米將所買的腰帶藏在盤石穴中，過了多日又把它取出來（耶13:1-11）、以西結在一塊磚上面畫一座耶路撒冷城，四面被圍困和攻擊（結4:1-3）、何西阿娶淫婦為妻（何1:2-3）。
- 約的執行者(Prophet as Covenant Enforcement Messenger )或約的守護者
- 在後先知書中，我們可以找到一個先知蒙召的敘事(Call Narrative)，例如：賽 6；耶 1；結1-3。
這是先知傳講責備和審判信息最常用的表達方式。審判神諭包括兩方面：第一方面，先知指出上主子民的罪行（沒有按著約的準則來生活）；第二方面，先知指出上主的審判將會臨到他們，例如，摩3:9-15；4:1-3；7:10-17；何10:13-15；13:4-8；賽8:6-8；30:12-14；彌1:3-9, 3:9-12；耶 4:5-12 5:1-6, 7-11, 12-17, 20-31 7:16-18, 20等 。
這是先知傳講責備和審判信息的另一表達方式。這些神諭以ywh來開始（例如，摩5:18-20；6:1-7；賽5:8-10, 11-14, 18-19, 20, 21, 22-25；10:1-3, 5-19；28:1-4；29:1-4, 15-16；30:1-5；31:1-5；彌2:1-5；鴻3:1-4；哈2:6-8, 9-14, 15-17, 19）。當先知向受眾發出禍災神諭時，他猶如宣告死亡將會臨到，以強調神對他們的忿怒。
- 另一方面，為著要將上主的子民從毀約的光境中挽回過來，先知傳講呼籲回轉的信息，而他們所用的表達方式，是「回轉的呼籲」，例如，摩5:4-9, 14-15；何6:1-3；14:1-3；賽55:6-7；耶3:12-13；4:1-4；番2:1-3；珥2:12-14；亞1:1-6等。
- 此外，為著要指出審判不是上主最後的說話，審判過後，上主的子民仍是有盼望的，先知傳講拯救或盼望的信息，例如，何2:14-23；3:4-5；14:4-8；賽24-27；34-35；彌2:12-13；4-5；耶30-33；結34-39。這些拯救或盼望的信息很多時都以「在那日」（awhh ~wyb；何2:16〔希2:18〕, 18〔希2:20〕, 21〔希2:23〕；賽24:21；26:1；27:1；彌4:6；5:9；番3:11, 16；耶30:8；結38:14；俄8；珥3:18〔希4:18〕；該2:23；亞2:15；3:10；9:16；13:1；14:9）、「在末後的日子」（~ymyh tyrxab；何3:5；賽2:2；彌4:1）、「日子將到」（~yab ~ymy；摩9:13；耶30:3；31:31；33:14）來標誌的。
- 在後先知書中，先知會特別針對當時一些外邦國家，宣講「敵對列國的神諭」（Oracle against the nations），因為他們在上主面前驕傲（賽13-23），或他們敵對上主的子民（耶46-52；結25-32；珥3:1-16；俄1-21），或在戰爭中他們殘殺無辜、毫無人性，沒有尊重和珍惜人的生命（摩1-2）。當先知宣講這些神諭時，他們不是向外邦國家講的，而是向上主的子民講的。從這角度來看，這些「敵對列國的神諭」的目的，是要安慰上主的子民，讓他們知道，這些曾欺壓他們的外邦國家，上主必定會審判他們。
 Sailhamer: “The book of Micah is about the prophet Micah” (Sailhamer, NIV Compact Bible Commentary, 423); McConville: “When we look for Jeremiah, what we find is a book that tells us about Jeremiah and the things he did and said” (McConville, A Guide to the Prophets, xii).
 Sweeney: “Reading the prophetic books of the Hebrew Bible calls for an understanding of the nature of prophecy and the social roles of the prophets in ancient Israel and Judah as well as the larger world of the ancient Near East. It also calls for an understanding of the specific forms of literary presentation and linguistic expression that one encounters when reading prophetic literature” (Sweeney, The Prophetic Literature, 23); McConville: “Some studies focus so much on the book – in the guise of ‘the tradition’, or the ‘final form’ – that we lose the prophet altogether. Some regard the prophetic figures as the fictitious creations of the writers or communities who created the books. In my view, the opposite poles of prophet and book need not be treated as a problem. They are simply an inevitable part of the study before us. Both poles must be respected: the book because it is part of the canonical literature, and the prophet because his God-given message is the controlling idea in the book” (McConville, A Guide to the Prophets, xii).
 McConville: “In studying the prophets we cannot avoid the ‘book’” (McConville, A Guide to the Prophets, xii).
 Wright: “Now the words ‘prophet’ or ‘prophetic’ are sometimes used today about foretelling the future. ‘I’m not a prophet,’ we might say, meaning, ‘Don’t ask me to predict what’s going to happen.’ And some people have the idea that all the Old Testament prophets did was sit around predicting the future all the time” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 187).
 Holladay: “Christians for centuries understood the biblical prophets to be predicting events of later centuries, notably the coming of Jesus Christ” (William L. Holladay, Long Ago God Spoke: How Christians May Hear the Old Testament Today [Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1995], 173).
 Nelson: “According to Scripture, non-fulfilment of prediction marks those who speak falsely in Yahweh’s name” (Jimmie L. Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 24 : 87).
 Osborne: “The basic misunderstanding regarding the prophetic literature of the Old Testament is that it relates primarily to the future” (Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation [Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP, 1991], 211); Efird: “One of the first misunderstandings which must be set aside is that of viewing the prophets as primarily predictors of the future” (James M. Efird, The Old Testament Prophets Then and Now [Valley Forge, Pa.: Judson Press, 1982], 10); Ellison: “ . . . the popular conception of the prophet as primarily a foreteller is alien to the thought of the Bible” (H. L. Ellison, Men Spake from God: Studies in the Hebrew Prophets [Exeter: The Paternoster Press, 1973], 14).
 Nelson: “Prediction is one of the essential components of the prophetic message” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 87).
 Ellison: “Speaking for God may involve foretelling the future, and in the Old Testament it normally does, but this is secondary, not primary” (Ellison, Men Spake from God, 14); Efird: “One can ascertain almost immediately, then, that foretelling the future was not a primary consideration in the total program which the prophet was compelled to undertake” (Efird, The Old Testament Prophets Then and Now, 10); Wright: “. . . certainly the prophets did sometimes speak about the future and predict certain things ahead of their own time. However, we should see that kind of thing as secondary to their main purpose and actually serving their main purpose. Their main purpose was to speak God’s word directly to the people around them—their own generation” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 187); 黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：「信徒常常以為先知所說的主要都是以預言為主，是預告某些事情的發生。這想法與事實不符，因為先知的言論，絕大部分內容與一般人所期望的預言無關。先知的話也不是為了說給將來的人聽，而是向與他同時代的人發言」（黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：《舊約先知書要領》（香港：基道，2007），頁35）。
 Ellison: “. . . the foretelling of the future is never merely to show that God knows the future, or to satisfy man’s idle curiosity” (Ellison, Men Spake from God, 14).
 Wright: “. . . at any point when they did speak about something in the future, it was in order to make the people think and act differently in the present” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 187); Osborne: “. . . the prophet was a ‘forth-teller’ before he was a ‘foreteller’” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 205).
 Arnold and Beyer: “They did so primarily to motivate God’s people to faithful living in the present” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343).
 《聖經—串珠‧註釋本〔舊約全書〕》，頁1307；Wright: “Future predictions . . . were intended to affect the present (their own day), not just leave people gazing into the distance” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 187).
 Joseph G. Bailey, “Amos: Preacher of Social Reform,” Bible Today 19 (1981).
 Holliday: “. . . the prophets were proclaimers of God’s urgent words . . . rather than teachers of fresh notions about how to organize society” (Holliday, Long Ago God Spoke, 178); Bramer: “. . . there is little indication that Amos had as his primary intent a desire to alter the socioeconomic structures and thereby help Israel avoid God’s punishment” (Stephen J. Bramer, “The Literary Genre of the Book of Amos,” Bibliotheca Sacra 156 : 60).
 Bullock: “The prophets were not social reformers. They were theological reformers, for their basic motivation was generated within their commitment to the fundamental laws of God” (C. Hassell Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books [Chicago: Moody Press, 1986], 25); 作者同上: “That social concern . . . was an index to covenant loyalty” (Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, 25).
 Osborne: “It is popular in many circles today to make the prophets revolutionaries or at least urban social reformers. This is not the case, however. . . . They were not social workers but primarily were preachers” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 207).
 Oswalt: “[The] main task [of the prophets] is to call Israel back to obedience to her covenant God and to remind God’s people of the consequences of a lack of obedience” (John N. Oswalt, “The Mission of Israel to the Nations,” in Through No Fault of Their Own? The Fate of Those Who Have Never Heard, ed. W. V. Crockett and J. G. Sigountos [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993], 85-95); Holliday: “They urged repentance on the people and proclaimed that, in the absence of repentance, God would come to judge the people for their wrongdoing” (Holliday, Long Ago God Spoke, 178).
 Kaiser: “Too often the prophets are thought of mainly as predictors of the future. But the truth is that they were mainly forthtellers, for they spoke forth the word of God over against the rising tide of idolatry, apostasy, and sin of the nation” (Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Preaching and Teaching from the Old Testament: A Guide for the Church [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003], 111); Nelson: “A thorough study of Old Testament prophecy, while including the predictive element, reveals the major thrust of the prophet’s ministry and message, was to his contemporaries. He is primarily a forthteller; foretelling was secondary” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 89); idem: “The prophet was primarily a preacher of the word of God” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 89); Efird: “The great proclaimers of the word of God to the people of Israel and Judah were known in the development of Israelite religion as prophets” (Efird, The Old Testament Prophets Then and Now, 9); Arnold and Beyer: “The Bible asserts that God prepared his prophets for a very special ministry. They brought the divine word to a people who desperately needed to hear it” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 340); Holliday: “In short, the prophets were proclaimers of God’s urgent words to the people” (Holliday, Long Ago God Spoke, 178).
 Arnold and Beyer: “. . . the prophets were messengers” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343); Schultz and Smith: “The prophets were messengers of God, delivering His words of judgment as well as His words of encouragement and hope” (Samuel J. Schultz and Gary V. Smith, Exploring the Old Testament [Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2001], 144); Quinn: “Prophets are God’s messengers, called to speak to people on his behalf” (Carissa Quinn, “Message of the Prophets,” Bible Project [www.bibleproject.com/church-at-home/message-prophets);「差遣」的希伯來文是xlv，參賽6:8; 61:1; 耶1:7; 7:25; 19:14; 結2:3-4; 哈1:12; 亞2:12, 13, 15; 瑪3:23。
 Stuart: “All prophets understood themselves as messengers sent from God, expected to reproduce faithfully what he had told them to say to the audience he had provided” (Douglas Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, Word Biblical Themes [Dallas/London/Sydney/Singapore: Word Publishing, 1989], 84); Nelson: “The prophets were constantly receptive to the Word of Yahweh. These men of God were faithful in proclaiming the divine message” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 101); James F. Ross, “The Prophet as Yahweh’s Messenger,” in Israel’s Prophetic Heritage: Essays in Honor of James Muilenburg, ed. Bernhard W. Anderson and Walter Harrelson [London: SCM Press, 1962], 98-107.
 Wright: “. . . the prophets should be thought of as ‘forth-tellers,’ not ‘fore-tellers’” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 187); Arnold and Beyer: “. . . the prophets were forthtellers, telling forth God’s truth to their own generation” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343); Osborne: “. . . the prophet was primarily a ‘forthteller’ whose message was addressed to the people and situation of his day” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 212); Helyer: “. . . the prophets were first and foremost preachers to their own times. The burden of their messages centred upon a crisis: Israel had broken their covenant obligations to their great overlord and was liable to the curses of the covenant” (Larry R. Helyer, Yesterday, Today, and Forever: The Continuing Relevance of the Old Testament [Salem, Wisconsin: Sheffield Publishing Co., 1996; 2nd ed., 2004], 284); Ellison: “. . . the prophet speaks primarily to the men of his own time, and his message springs out of the circumstances in which he lives” (Ellison, Men Spake from God, 14, 深體屬作者); Laney: “. . . the prophet is one who speaks forth the message which God has revealed to him. Thus the prophet is a speaker, mouthpiece, or spokesman for God. His primary duty was to speak forth God’s message to God’s people” (J. Carl Laney, “The Role of the Prophets in God’s Case against Israel,” Bibliotheca Sacra 138 ): 313); Ellison: “. . . they were not philosophers uttering eternal truths in the abstract. They were God’s spokesmen in given historical situations” (H. L. Ellison, The Message of the Old Testament [Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1969], 54); 彭振國：「先知在他們所處的時代……宣告適切時代的信息」（彭振國：《聖經釋讀：大先知書》〔香港：中國基督教播道會文字部，2013〕，頁11）。
 Schultz and Smith: “The Hebrew word prophet means to be God’s spokesman” (Schultz and Smith, Exploring the Old Testament, 144); Ellison: “The best picture of the true function of a prophet is given by Exod 7:1f. The prophet is to God what Aaron was to Moses. When Moses stands before Pharaoh . . ., Aaron does all the speaking . . . In other words, the prophet is God’s spokesman” (Ellison, Men Spake from God, 14); Bullock: “he vast body of literature on the prophets has shown them to be first of all religious spokesmen in their own world and to their own times” (Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, 28); Wright: “Quite simply, prophets were messengers. They were God’s mouthpiece. God spoke his word, through them, directly into the ears and minds and hearts of his people at different times” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 186); Waltke: “. . . a prophet is God’s human mouth” (Bruce Waltke, An Old Testament Theology: An Exegetical, Canonical and Thematic Approach [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007], 805); Stott: “. . . a prophet was a person who ‘stood in the council of God’, who heard and even ‘saw’ his word, and who in consequence ‘spoke from the mouth of the Lord’ and spoke his word ‘faithfully’. In other words, a prophet was a mouthpiece or spokesman of God” (John Stott, The Message of Ephesians, The Bible Speaks Today [Leicester/Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1979], 161); Nelson: “He was Yahweh’s spokesman-interpreter to a people who had set themselves against divine purposes” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 89); idem: “The prophets were his [God’s] spokesman, his mouthpiece” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 87); idem: “The prophet was primarily a preacher of the word of God” (Nelson, “His Servants, the Prophets,” 89); 黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：「先知其實就是上帝的代言人，是代替上帝向人說話」（黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：《舊約先知書要領》，頁34）；彭振國：「先知作為神的代言人，就是擔負著向人傳遞神話語的角色……先知的主要職責是傳遞神的說話」（彭振國：《大先知書》，頁3）；作者同上：「先知的主要工作是為神傳話」（彭振國：《大先知書》，頁13）；劉少平：「先知是上帝的代言人，直接領受上帝的啟示」（劉少平：《何西阿書》〔香港：天道，2010〕，頁12）；《聖經—串珠‧註釋本》：「先知都是被神呼召，挺身而出為神發言……作祂自己的代言人」（頁1307，1308）。
 Arnold and Beyer: “The prophets were not trying to sell their own ideas” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343); James F. Ross, “The Prophet as Yahweh’s Messenger,” in Israel’s Prophetic Heritage, 98-107.
 參賽18:4；29:22；31:4；37:6, 21, 31；38:1, 5；43:1, 14, 16；44:2, 6, 24；45:1, 11, 14, 18；48:17；49:7, 8, 25；50:1；52:3；56:1, 4；65:8；66:1, 12。
 參耶2:5；4:3, 27；5:14；6:6, 9, 16, 21, 22；7:3, 21；8:4；9:6, 14, 16, 22；10:2, 18；11:3, 11, 21, 22；12:14；13:1, 9, 12, 13；14:10, 15；15:2, 19；16:3, 5, 9；17:5, 19, 21；18:11, 13；19:1, 3, 11, 15；20:4；21:4, 8, 12；22:1, 3, 6, 11, 18, 30；23:2, 15, 16, 38；24:5, 8；25:8, 15, 27, 28；26:2, 4, 18；27:2, 4, 16, 19, 21；28:2, 11, 13, 14, 16；29:4, 8, 10, 16, 17, 21, 25, 31, 32；30:2, 5, 12, 18；31:2, 7, 15, 16, 23, 35, 37；32:3, 14, 15, 28, 36, 42；33:2, 4, 10, 12, 17, 20, 25；34:2, 4, 13, 17；35:13, 17, 18, 19；36:29, 30；37:7, 9；38:2, 3, 17；39:16；42:15, 18；43:10；44:2, 7, 11, 25, 30；45:2, 4；47:2；48:1, 40；49:1, 7, 12, 28, 35；50:18, 33；51:1, 33, 36, 58。
 參摩1:6, 9, 11, 13；2:1, 4, 6；3:12；5:4, 16；7:17。
 參該1:5, 7；2:6, 11。
 參亞1:4, 14, 16, 17；2:12；3:7；6:12；7:9；8:2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 14, 19, 20, 23；11:4。
 參賽14:23；17:3, 6；22:25；30:1；31:9；37:34；41:14；43:10, 12；49:18；52:5；54:17；55:8；59:20；66:2, 22。
 參耶1:15, 19；2:3, 9, 12, 29；3:1, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 20；4:1, 9, 17；5:9, 11, 15, 18, 22, 29；6:12；7:11, 13, 19, 32；8:1, 3, 17；9:2, 5, 8, 21, 23, 24；12:17；13:11, 14, 25；15:3, 6, 9, 20；16:5, 11, 14, 16；18:6；19:6, 12；21:7, 10, 13, 14；22:5, 16, 24；23:1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 23, 24, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33；25:7, 9, 12, 29, 31；27:8, 11, 15, 22；28:4；29:9, 11, 14, 19, 23, 32；30:8, 10, 11, 17, 21；31:1, 14, 16, 17, 20, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38；32:5, 30, 44；33:14；34:5, 17, 22；35:13；39:17, 18；42:11；44:29；45:5；46:5, 23, 28；48:12, 25, 30, 35, 38, 43, 44, 47；49:2, 6, 13, 16, 26, 30, 31, 32, 37, 38, 39；50:4, 10, 20, 21, 30, 35, 40；51:24, 25, 39, 48, 52, 52。
 參何2:18, 23；11:11。
 參摩2:16；3:10, 15；4:3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11；6:8, 14；9:7, 8, 12, 13。
 參番1:3, 10；2:9；3:8。
 參該1:13；2:4, 8, 9, 14, 17, 23。
 參亞1:4, 16；2:9, 10, 14；3:9, 10；5:4；8:6, 11, 17；10:12；11:6；12:1, 4；13:2, 7, 8。
 Schultz and Smith: “To make sure that the people of Israel understood that they were speaking for God. The prophets repeatedly began or ended their messages with phrases such as: ‘Thus says the Lord;’ ‘declares the Lord;’ ‘an oracle of the Lord;’ ‘the Lord came unto me and said.’ These statements assured the people that the prophets were not speaking their own words but the words of God” (Schultz and Smith, Exploring the Old Testament, 145); Stuart: “In the ancient world, people were used to messengers being sent by someone with a message, arriving in a given place and seeking out their audience, speaking the message just as it had been entrusted to them, and then departing. The messenger would begin the text of the message with words such as ‘This is what X said’ and would end portions of the message with reminders such as ‘said X’ or ‘message of X.’ Indeed, the prophets routinely employ just such introductions and reminders in their speeches, making it clear that they regard themselves as messengers repeating what they have been told to say to the audience to whom they have been sent” (Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, Word Biblical Themes, 84); Arnold and Beyer: “The expression ‘This is what the Lord says’ or ‘thus says the Lord’ occurs over 350 times in the prophetic books” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343).
 Osborne: “They delivered not their messages but Yahweh’s, and their introductory formulas (‘Thus says the Lord,’ ‘The Lord said to me’) demonstrate their consciousness that they were entirely vehicles for the divine message” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 207); Wright: “What the prophet said was what God wanted to be said. When they spoke they began or ended with words like ‘This is what the Lord says’” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 186); Bullock: “. . . ‘Thus says the Lord,’ ‘The Word of the Lord was to the prophet,’ or similar messenger formula verifying the message as Yahweh’s Word to the prophet” (Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, 29).
 Bramer, “The Literary Genre of the Book of Amos,” 49-56; Efird: “. . . prophets were primarily proclaimers, not writers;” 作者同上: “The great proclaimers of the word of God to the people of Israel and Judah were known in the development of Israelite religion as prophets” (Efird, The Old Testament Prophets Then and Now, 26); Arnold and Beyer: “. . . the prophets were creative individuals who used a variety of literary and oral techniques to communicate their messages” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the old Testament, 343).
 Ake Viberg, Prophets in Action : An Analysis of Prophetic Symbolic Acts in the Old Testament (Stockholm : Almqvist & Wiksell, 2007); Garrett: “. . . prophetic ‘speech-act’ in which the prophet does something strange or shocking to carry home his message” (Duane A. Garrett, Hosea, Joel, The New American Commentary [B&H Publishing Group, 1997], 49); Friebel: “Sign-acts are nonverbal means of communicating the prophet’s message” (Kelvin Friebel, Jeremiah’s and Ezekiel’s Sign-Acts: Rhetorical Nonverbal Communication [London: Bloombury Publishing, 1999], 14)。象徵性行動包括三方面：第一，神的命令；第二，先知的行動；第三，神或先知對行動的解釋（參結24:24, 27）(Bramer: “God commanded a prophet to perform an action, to report on the performance, and to interpret the performance” [Bramer, “The Literary Genre of the Book of Amos,” 56])。
 Wright: “. . . sometimes God instructed his prophets to deliver a message along with an action or sign that would reinforce it” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 194); Schultz and Smith: “Sometimes the prophets spoke their messages orally, but at other times they acted out a dramatic message” (Schultz and Smith, Exploring the Old Testament, 145); Smith: “At various times God told a prophet to act out a message, instead of relying solely on the verbal presentation of God’s words” (Gary Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books: An Exegetical Handbook [Grand Rapids: Kregal Publications, 2014], 42).
 上主命令以賽亞：「你去解掉你腰間的麻布，脫下你腳上的鞋。」以賽亞就露身赤腳行走。上主的解釋：「我僕人以賽亞怎樣露身赤腳行走三年，作為關乎埃及和古實的預兆奇蹟。 照樣，亞述王也必擄去埃及人，掠去古實人，無論老少，都露身赤腳，現出下體，使埃及蒙羞。 」
 上主命令耶利米：「你去買一根麻布帶子束腰，不可放在水中。」 耶利米就照着耶和華的話，買了一根帶子束腰。 上主又命令耶利米：「要拿着你所買的腰帶，就是你腰上的帶子，起來往幼發拉底河去，將腰帶藏在那裏的磐石穴中。」 耶利米就去，照着上主所吩咐他的，將腰帶藏在幼發拉底河邊。 過了多日，上主再吩咐耶利米：「你起來往幼發拉底河去，將我吩咐你藏在那裏的腰帶取出來。」耶利米就往幼發拉底河去，將腰帶從他所藏的地方刨出來，見腰帶已經變壞，毫無用了。上主的解釋：「我必照樣敗壞猶大的驕傲和耶路撒冷的大驕傲。這惡民不肯聽我的話，按自己頑梗的心而行，隨從別神，事奉敬拜，他們也必像這腰帶變為無用。」「腰帶怎樣緊貼人腰，照樣，我也使以色列全家和猶大全家緊貼我，好叫他們屬我為子民，使我得名聲，得頌讚，得榮耀；他們卻不肯聽。」
 上主命令何西阿：「去娶淫婦為妻。」何西阿就去娶了滴音的女兒歌篾為妻。上主的解釋：「這地大行淫亂，離棄耶和華」；Bramer: “Of the minor prophets, Hosea is the only one who used this form” (Bramer, “The Literary Genre of the Book of Amos,” 56)。
 Wright: “Basically, the prophets were sent by God to remind the Israelites of the covenant relationship that existed between them . . . they were recalling, reinforcing, explaining, and applying what the people should already have known on the basis of all that God had done for them and said to them in the past—and especially in the covenant and law that God had made with Israel at Mount Sinai after the exodus” (Wright, How to Preach and Teach the Old Testament for All Its Worth, 199).
 Sailhamer: “. . . the prophets as messengers of the covenant God. Sent to a disobedient people, they were like modern-day revivalists, calling the people back to the faith of the fathers, the faith of the covenant promises to Abraham, Moses, and David (Sailhamer, NIV Compact Bible Commentary, 362).
 Fee and Stuart 形容先知為 “covenant enforcement mediators” (Gordon D. Fee and Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth, 3rd ed. [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003], 184-85); John A. Mclean, “The Prophets as Covenant Enforcers: Illustrated in Zephaniah,” Michigan Theological Journal 5 (1994); Silva: “Hosea was commissioned by God to serve as His covenant enforcement mediator” (Charles H. Silva, “Literary Features in the Book of Hosea,” Bibliotheca Sacra 164 : 34); 作者同上: “Hosea was a royal diplomat or covenant enforcement mediator whom God (the divine suzerain) used to call His servant nation Israel (the vassel) into account for idolatrous and harlotrous breach of covenant” (Silva, “Literary Features in the book of Hosea,” 43); Bramer: “. . . the message of judgment Amos brought to Israel as a covenant enforcement mediator was based . . ..” (Bramer, “The Genre of the Book of Amos,” 60).
 Schultz and Smith: “Some prophets describe their ‘call’ to the prophetic office . . . but most prophets never had a spectacular call experience” (Schultz and Smith, Exploring the Old Testament, 144); Dennis Bratcher, “The Prophetic ‘Call’ Narrative: Commissioning into Service,” from www.cresourcei.org.
 每個先知的蒙召都是獨特的，都有不同(Arnold and Beyer: “Sometimes God’s calling came early in the prophet’s life (Jer 11:4-5). At other times, the Lord took his servant from an established profession (Am 7:14-15)” [Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343])，但他們都有一些共通的表現，就是當上主的呼召臨到他們時，他們都拒絕上主的呼召(Bratcher: “. . . when confronted by the calling of God, their immediate response is unwillingness to take up the office” [Bratcher, “The Prophetic ‘Call’ Narrative: Commissioning into Service”])。但那位呼召他們的神對他們作出肯定，並給他們兆頭來堅定他們的信心，以致最終他們都願意順服神的呼召。
 Arnold and Beyer: “. . . the prophets possessed a strong sense of calling. They had not chosen the prophetic role for themselves; rather, God had called them to this ministry and commissioned them for his service” (Arnold and Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament, 343).
 Bullock: “. . . the prophets found their legitimacy and valid credentials first of all in Yahweh’s call” (Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, 17).
 Stuart: “What do the prophets talk about most? In a general sense it is the relationship of Israel to Yahweh” (Stuart, Hosea-Jonah, Word Biblical Themes, 27).
 Matthews: “They employed a variety of methods to convey their message” (V. H. Matthews, “Prophecy and Society,” in Dictionary of Old Testament Prophets, ed. Mark J. Boda and J. Gordon McConville [Downers Grove: IVP, 2012], 627; Gene M. Tucker, “Prophecy and the Prophetic Literature,” in The Hebrew Bible and Its Modern Interpreters, ed. Douglas A. Knight and Gene M. Tucker [Philadelphia: Fortress Press/Decatur: Scholars Press, 1985], 335-345).
 William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, ed. Kermit A. Ecklebarger (Dallas, TX: Word, 1993), 292.
 Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books, 29.
 「控訴」包括：第一，控訴的宣告（傳召當事人出庭）；第二，審訊的場景（原告是先知、被告是以色列人、法官是上主、見證人〔天地或大自然；參賽1:2-3；耶2:12；彌6:1-2〕）；第三，控訴的原因；第四，裁決；參Kirsten Nielsen, Yahweh as Prosecutor and Judge: An Investigation of the Prophetic Lawsuit (Rîb-Pattern), JSOT Supplement Series 9 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1979), 74-83; Herbert B. Huffmon, “The Covenant Lawsuit in the Prophets,” Journal of Biblical Literature 78 (1959): 285-95; James Limburg, “The Root byr and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,” Journal of Biblical Literature 88 (1969): 291-304; Michael de Roche, “Yahweh’s byr against Israel: A Reassessment of the So-Called ‘Prophetic Lawsuit’ in the Preexilic Prophets,” Journal of Biblical Literature 102 (1983): 563-74; J. Carl Laney, “The Role of the Prophets in God’s Case against Israel,” Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (1981): 313-25。
 楊牧谷：「藉法庭控訴的程序來顯出以色列人的背約棄義，是舊約先知常用的方法」（楊牧谷：《受傷的戀者 何西阿書今釋 》 〔 台北：校園， 1991〕 ，頁 147）。
 Richard J. Clifford, “The use of ywh in the Prophets,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 28 (1966); 458-464. 關乎「禍災」神諭，參E. Gerstenberger, “The Woe-Oracles of the Prophets,” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962): 249-63; R. J. Clifford, “The Use of Hoy in the Prophets,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 28 (1966): 458-64.
 Kaiser, Jr., Preaching and Teaching from the Old Testament, 110.
 Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books, 37-38; 中文聖經把ywh翻譯為「禍」，英文聖經為 ‘woe,’ 不能將原文的意思譯出來，原文的意思是表達對死了的人的哀悼(Clements: “. . . the ywh formula is quite evidently a formula of lamentation, more precisely of funeral lamentation. So in Jer 22:18, which is probably the clearest instance of the use of the ywh–cry as a cry of mourning. Hence, although it occurs in a prophetic passage, it is not in the strictest sense a prophetic usage that is envisaged here, but rather that of mourners grieving for a dead relative” [Ronald E. Clements, “The Form and Character of Prophetic Woe Oracles,” Semitics 8 (1982): 25]; Sandy & Giese: “Questions arise as to the setting that commenced the woe cries and thus the emotion the cry should evoke from the audience. Is it an educational device from wisdom schools contrasting blessed and cursed ways of action? Or is it the grief cry at a funeral (see Jer 22:18)? The latter seems more likely, the prophet expressing grief over the action of God’s people and conveying God’s anger at such action” [D. Brent Sandy & Ronald L. Giese, Jr., Cracking Old Testament Codes: A Guide to Interpreting the Literary Genres of the Old Testament (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 163])。
 Gerstenberger: “The woe speech expresses divine outrage at sinful behaviour” (Erhard Gerstenberger, “The Woe Oracle of the Prophets,” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 : 54); Clements: “In its essentials . . . the form of the ywh–oracles of the prophets has been taken over and adapted from the context of family life and instruction in which a sharp rebuke could be expressed by such a simple onomatopoetic expression. It connotes anger and hostility” (Clements, “The Form and Character of Prophetic Woe Oracles,” 25).
 Bramer: “Prophets used the disputation speech ‘primarily to quote the people’s own words against them and to use their own statements to show their error” (Bramer, “The Genre of the Book of Amos,” 57).
 Dempster: “The prophetic message could also be summed up in one word: bwv (‘repent’)” (Dempster, “Prophetic Books,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, electronic ed.); Oswalt: “[The] main task [of the prophets] is to call Israel back to obedience to her covenant God and to remind God’s people of the consequences of a lack of obedience” (Oswalt, “The Mission of Israel to the Nations,” in Through No Fault of Their Own?, 85-95); Osborne: “Primarily he was a messenger from God sent to call the people back to their covenant relationship with Yahweh” (Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, 206); Matthews: “. . . call on the people to “return” (Heb bwv) to their devotion to the covenant” (Matthews, “Prophecy and Society,” in Dictionary of Old Testament Prophets, 627); 參賽30:15；31:6；耶18:8；結18:21；何6:1；珥2:12；亞1:3等）。
 Thomas M. Raitt, “The Prophetic Summons to Repentance,” Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 83 (1971): 30-49.
 Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books, 38.
 Waltke: “The formula ‘in that day,’ or ‘behold the days are coming,’ characteristically introduces the salvation oracles” (Waltke, An Old Testament Theology, 832).
 John H. Hays, “The Usage of Oracles against Foreign Nations in Ancient Israel,” Journal of Biblical Literature 87 (1968): 81-92; C. L. Crouch, “Ezekiel’s Oracles against the Nations in Light of a Royal Ideology of Warfare,” Journal of Biblical Literature 130 ( 2011): 473-492; H. G. L. Peels, “ ‘You Shall Certainly Drink!’: The Place and Significance of the Oracles against the Nations in the Book of Jeremiah,” European Journal of Theology 16 (2007): 81-91; Harold R. Mosley, “The Book of Amos: The Oracles against the Nations,” The Theological Educator 52 (1995): 37-45.
 Bullock: “Were the oracles ever delivered to the Gentile nations with which they were concerned? Generally scholars answer that question negatively” (Bullock, An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophetic Books, 30); Dillard and Longman: “The large collections of oracles against foreign nations in the canonical prophets did not require that the prophets travel to those places to deliver them” (Dillard and Longman, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 318).
 Sandy & Geise: “Even the addressee can be debated since the oracles overtly address foreigners but seem most likely to have been delivered in an Israelite setting for the benefit of the Israelite audience. This means that overt announcements of judgment may function as an indirect announcements of salvation for Israel” (Sandy & Geise, Cracking Old Testament Codes, 164); Smith: “The prophet’s announcement of judgment against these nations was meant to be an encouragement to the citizens of Judah who were oppressed . . . These prophets reassured the Israelites that God knew about the unjust ways of their enemies and would hold them accountable” (Smith, Interpreting the Prophetic Books, 35); Bramer: “When a war oracle was used by a prophet for an oracle of disaster or judgment against a foreign nation, it served a twofold purpose: ‘to announce the enemy’s de-feat and to reassure Israel that God protects her security’” (Bramer, “The Literary Genre of the Book of Amos,” 54).
 Silva: “As a result of Israel’s violation of God’s covenant mandates, as recorded in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy, God’s covenant enforcement messengers, the prophets, were dispatched to accuse the people of sin and pronounce judgment according to the terms of the covenant” (Charles H. Silva, “Literary Features in the Book of Hosea,” Bibliotheca Sacra 164 : 35); Laney: “When the prophets accused Israel of breaking God’s law and predicted coming judgment, they used terms that appear to refer back to the covenant. Their message was set against a covenant background” (Laney, “The Role of the Prophets in God’s Case against Israel,” 318); 作者同上: “. . . the royal covenant emissaries sent by the suzerain to deal with his vassals provided a model for the office of the biblical prophets sent by Yahweh to His covenant people. Like their secular counterparts, the royal diplomats, the prophets were messengers of the Suzerain to a rebelling vassal people. The prophets in Israel acted in behalf of Yahweh as prosecuting attorneys indicting the people of both kingdoms for their violations of the Mosaic covenant. They accomplished their prophetic responsibilities by calling attention to the covenant stipulations and Israel’s violation, and by pronouncing judgment for continued disobedience” (Laney, “The Role of the Prophets in God’s Case against Israel,” 320-21); 黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：「先知責備……的原因，並非純粹因他們行了不道德的事……他們批評社會上的不公義和種種罪惡，主要不是因為他們是道德的監察者。他們因國家政治而發言，主要不是因為他們是政治評論員；他們抗議本國與外邦結盟，更不是因為他們對當代列國的局勢有透徹而獨到的見解。這全因為他們是從西奈盟約的角度看所發生的事，傳遞立這條約之主－耶和華—所發出的信息」（黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：《舊約先知書要領》，頁20）。從這角度來看，先知不是信仰的始創者，而是信仰的傳承者(Sailhamer: “In approaching the question of the central message of prophetic literature, we should begin with the understanding of the prophets as messengers of the covenant God. Sent to a disobedient people, they were like modern-day revivalists, calling the people back to the faith of the fathers, the faith of the covenant promises to Abraham, Moses, and David. Thus they were not so much innovators as revivalists” [Sailhamer, NIV Compact Bible Commentary, 362]; Harrison: “. . . these prophets are not to be described, as has often been done, in terms of great spiritual pioneers who discovered ethical monotheism. On the contrary, it is now clear that they were heirs to a spiritual tradition that was already centuries old. Their attacks upon the social and religious abuses of the day were made in the light of the Covenant provisions that themselves were firmly rooted in the historical past of the nation. The eighty- and seventh-century BC prophets added nothing that was specifically new and distinctive to the traditional Torah, or ‘teaching’, but instead concentrated upon a re-examination or a fresh interpretation of Mosaic tenets” [R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (Tyndale, 1970), 413)]; Rust: “The prophets have often been represented as innovators, as those who created the monotheistic faith of Israel. There is no doubt that they were creative personalities and that they were gifted with revelatory insights which gave them a deeper insight into the nature and purpose of Israel’s God. The coming together of creative imagination and divinely inspired insight gave to their message a challenge and hope which provided a new kairos in the movement of God’s dialogue with his people. Yet their message and insight were never severed from the past of their people. . . . They inherited a historic past which had been enshrined in the religious life of their day, expressed in their credos and acted out in their rituals. They were persons who looked back and who were better able to understand Yahweh’s revelation to them because of their religious heritage. . . . Hence, although their theology is richer than that of their predecessors, it rests upon the same foundations and never denies the basic theological insights which were carried by the rich traditions, confessions of faith, and ritual practices which constituted the religious life of old Israel” [E. C. Rust, “The Theology of the Prophets,” Review and Expositor 64 (1977): 337]; Dillard and Longman: “In an earlier period of critical scholarship, the prophets were often described as the creative innovators of Israel’s theology. But this idea would be quite foreign to Jeremiah. Jeremiah does not introduce any ‘new ideas’ about God—quite to the contrary, he proclaims Yahweh to the nation in much the same way as other prophets did before him. Jeremiah implores the nation ‘to 1ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it’ (6:16). The prophet thought of himself as one who called the nation to fidelity in her ancient covenant with God. Yahweh was the living God, the source of life-giving waters (2:13)” [Dillard and Longman, An Introduction to the Old Testament, 297]).
 Silva: “When Hosea . . . accused Israel of breaking the Law and predicted coming judgment, he used language that referred back to the Mosaic Covenant, which was established between Yahweh and His elect people Israel at mount Sinai (Exo 19-24)” (Silva, “Literary Features in the Book of Hosea,” 35); 黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：「何西阿宣講的信息是基於記錄在摩西五經中耶和華上帝與以色列人所立的聖約，這也是其他許多先知書的情況相同」（黃嘉樑、梁國權、雷建華：《舊約先知書要領》，頁145）。
Archer: “Amos earnestly stressed their duty of cordial compliance with the legal code of the Torah, both in letter and in spirit. Israel’s failure to present to the Lord a true and living faith and their attempt to foist upon Him the wretched substitute of mere empty profession could lead only to the utter ruin and destruction of the nation” (Gleason L. Archer, Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction [Chicago: Moody, 1964], 351); Allen: “. . . the message of judgment Amos brought to Israel . . . was based on the stipulations, punishments, and hopes found within the Mosaic Covenant God made with Israel at Mount Sinai;” 作者同上: “The message of Amos was based upon this ancient tradition. . . . this God was the God of the ancient covenant, and his message was the re-application of the old ties to a changed society” (L.C. Allen, “Amos, Prophet of Solidarity,” Vox Evangelica : 60).
 Schultz稱呼先知為 “interpreters of torah” (Richard Schultz, “Hearing the Major Prophets,” in Hearing the Old Testament, 334).
 Chisholm: “The prophets did not speak about God in abstract philosophical or theological terms. They portrayed Him as actively involved in the world He created and as intimately concerned with His covenant people” (Chisholm, “A Theology of the Minor Prophets,” in A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, 398); Ellison: “. . . some slight knowledge of the history and social background of the prophet are a help to the understanding of his message” (Ellison, Men Spake from God, 14).