found in the Old and New Testaments. To some this

programme will seem exceedingly simple and rudimen-

tary. They would think it a greater thing to                 The need

read many books, and discuss the bearing of              of original

their contents on the subject in hand. But                   study

no amount of reading can supersede the necessity of

examining for ourselves the direct evidence in the case.

Just this has been more neglected than anything else

in dealing with the subject of the prophets of Israel.

Men of learning as well as others have neglected it.

We must do this first of all, and do it with care, or

all other study of the subject will be of little value

to us.

          Men have assumed that they were already famil-

iar with what the Old Testament says concerning the

prophets, when they were not really so ; and have

hastened on prematurely to the examination of the col-

lateral branches of the evidence. Many of the current

statements as to what the Old Testament says are based

on analogies, or on later traditions, to a much greater

extent than on the actual testimony of the Old Testa-

ment. Such statements are instances of mistaken

method. The direct evidence in the case is not only

the most important, but it is essential to the correct

understanding of the indirect evidence. The indirect

evidence can genuinely assist in interpreting the direct

only on condition of its being itself interpreted by

the direct. In Old Testament studies, the thing now

more needed than anything else is a more correct

knowledge of what the Old Testament says. Always

the, beginner should begin by attaining to this correct

knwledge; and at present, in Old Testament work,

this is the need of advanced scholars as well as of

beginners.

 

6        THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

          At once we see the importance of the question of the;

degree of credence to be accorded to the testimony of

In what degree   our principal sources, If we hold to a divine

is the testimony inspiration that guarantees the remarkable

credible?         truthfulness of all parts of the bible, it

does not therefore follow that we must take this doc

trine as a presupposition in our historical study of

the prophets. And if one holds that the bible is full

of mistaken statements, that does not justify him in an,

undiscriminating rejection of the statements concerning

the prophets. Both as a matter of correct method;

and for the sake of convincing those with whom we

differ, we should waive, at the outset, all questions of

inspiration, and treat our sources merely as literature

that has come down to us from a remote past. In

respect to trustworthiness we will make no stronger

claim than this : that statements of fact found in the

Old and New Testaments are to be provisionally

regarded as true except as reasons appear to the

contrary.

          This is not an extravagant claim to make for the

truthfulness of the scriptures. Our courts would accor l

as much credence as this, not to a reputable witness

only, but even to a witness who is a jailbird or a harlot

or a noted liar. If statements of fact are self-contradic-

tory, or contrary to known truth, we will not accept

them. Even if they are seemingly credible we will at

the outset accept them only provisionally, till we can

test them by their results when we bring them into corr.-

bination with other truths. We will fully admit the prin-

ciple that human historians often make mistakes. Blot

this we must insist upon: that statements of fact are

to be provisionally accepted unless there are substantial

reasons for not accepting them.

 

                           PRELIMINARY                               7

 

          It follows that in using the testimony of the Old and

New Testaments on this and other questions, we ought

to begin with a direct examination, and not                Direct examination

with a cross-examination. We ought to take               versus cross-

the trouble to understand what their statements                     examination

mean, in the form in which they have come down to us,

as preliminary to testing the truth of them, and either

accepting or rejecting them.

          As our investigation depends largely on the question

of the historical correctness of the affirmations of the

bible, so it depends indirectly on questions                 Dependence

concerning the structure, the date, and the                  on critical

authorship of the books. For these have                      questions

their bearing on the question of historicity, and also on

the question of the interpretation of the statements we

find. Yet we need not wait till all these other questions

are settled before we begin our studies concerning the

prophets. Indeed, many of the questions concerning

the prophets are more simple and primary than the

others, and therefore ought to be studied first, that the

results reached may assist us in our inquiries into mat-

ters that are less obvious.

          Our first inquiry is : What are the representations of

the Old Testament in regard to the prophets? In other

words : What manner of men were the proph-            The provi-

ets, supposing the statements of the Old                               sional point

Testament concerning them to be historical,               of view

so far as they purport to be so, and supposing them also

to be correct? From the point of view of all parties this

is a fair question. It is supposable that, in seeking the

answer, we may find the statements of the Old Testa-

ment unsatisfactory, but at the outset the question is a

fair one. On the supposition that the Old Testament

gives a truthful account of the prophets of Israel, what

 

8           THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

is that account? We do not affirm that it give a

truthful account; we do not deny it; we simply up-

pose it.

          It is wisest to start from this point of departure, not

trying to settle beforehand all questions in regard to the

character or the trustworthiness of our data, but using

them at first as provisional, and as leading only to pro-

visional results. We shall surely test the data as we ad-

vance. If they are not trustworthy, we shall find it but.

If they are trustworthy, we shall see them to be so, and

shall thus transform our provisional results into final

results.

          These last considerations are important. How shall

we determine whether statements of fact found in any

Use as a test source are to be depended upon? There is

of evidence no better test than that of actual use.  By

carefully examining what the Old Testament says on

such a subject as the prophets, we may form a judgment

concerning the Old Testament as a source of evidence.

Certain schools of criticism deny that these books are

historically valid, asserting that they are full of anach-

ronisms and inconsistencies and absurdities. In base

this is so, we shall be pretty sure to find traces of the

unhistorical character of the books, if we carefully ex-

amine some section of them, running through different

chronological periods. Such a section for testing them

is afforded in what they say concerning the prophets.

This is found scattered through all the books, including

a vast number of details and allusions, belonging to

periods of time separated by centuries. It is conceivable

beforehand that we may find these details so confused

and inconsistent as to be incredible in many points, and

that we may be compelled to estimate the books accord-

ingly. On the other hand, if we find their account of

 

                             PRELIMINARY                              9

 

the prophets to be throughout consistent and probable,

that will be an argument of no little weight in favor of

the historical trustworthiness of the books themselves.

          Thus our attitude toward these writings and their

testimony is at the outset neutral. It will not remain

so. As the investigation proceeds we shall inevitably

either gain or lose confidence in the witnesses.

          II. In the interpretation of our sources, and especially

of the Old Testament, there is one point in particular in

which we need to be sedulously on our guard. That is

the point where we are in danger of substituting an

eisegetical treatment for an exegetical.

          None of us come to this study as to a new and unfa-

miliar subject. We already have pretty distinct ideas

concerning the prophets and their activities,               Eisegesis is

and in particular concerning messianic predic-            to be avoided

tion, and the meaning and use of the term Messiah. It

is supposable that our preconceived ideas may be crude

and misleading. We can decide this only by holding

them in suspense until we can test them by the facts

we find by study. We cannot be too jealously careful

against the process of merely first putting our ideas into

the Old Testament passages, and then dipping them out

again. There is especial danger of eisegesis from two

sources, Christian theology and theories of Compara-

tive Religion.

          We must avoid alike the carrying back of Christian

ideas into the Old Testament and the neglecting of

those ideas that belong to the Old Testament in com-

mon with Christianity.

          When we are studying the Old Testament we ought

not to import into it ideas drawn from the New Testa-

ment, or from some scheme of Christian messianic the-

ology. This rule is nowadays often laid down; if we

 

10         THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

violate it, we shall not do so for lack of being warned; but

it is a correct rule. And we shall not properly observe

Eisegesis of      it unless we take pains. We are familiar, for

Christian         example, with a certain interpretation of w5at

doctrine                    the New Testament says concerning Jesus

as the Messiah, and we go to the Old Testament look-

ing for the same teaching expressed in similar terms.

In this way we are likely to find what we are looking

for, whether it is there or not. We sometimes find

thing's where they are not. We put the idea into he

passage, instead of looking to see what is already in he

passage ; and then, by way of interpretation, we take out

just what we have put in, possibly a little miscolored by

the process.

          This way of studying the Old Testament is all he

more dangerous because it is not altogether valueless.

The method of interpreting the Old Testament by he

light of the New is within its proper limits correct.

Even when the method is incorrectly used, such study

is study. Though faulty, it may, especially in the case

of persons who have spiritual insight, result in he

reaching of truth. Critically bad as this way of learn-

ing is, we cannot afford to forego it save as we an

replace it by something better.

          Nevertheless it is logically bad. It is contrary to

accepted laws of investigation. There are grave objec-

tions to it. First, it is needless. All the truth it yields

is equally attainable by methods that will stand the test

of correct criticism. Second, it is perilous. The truth

we thus reach, though genuinely true, has yet been

inferred from premises that can be shown to be false.

There is danger that when we come to see that he

premises are false, our confidence in the truth will be

shaken. Third, it is wasteful. By this particular way

 

                               PRELIMINARY                   11

 

of learning the Old Testament through the New we

obtain from it nothing but a pale reflection of the New.

This is a great loss. In a wide range of truths the

Old Testament is more rudimentary, and therefore

simpler and fuller than the New. It is capable of

illuminating the New, and not merely of being illuminated

by it. When so much light is ready to glow, we cannot

afford to take a point of view which brings the object

perpetually into the shadow.

          Equally true, however, and at present far more to

the purpose, is the converse rule that, in studying the

Old Testament, we should not drop out the                 Eisegesis of

ideas which we actually find there, merely be-           negative

cause the same ideas are also found in the                  assumptons

New Testament. We are just now in far greater danger

of making this mistake than the other. There are men

who are so afraid of reading into the Old Testament

some more recent truth that does not belong there that

they actually expel from it, in their interpretations, some

of its simplest and most evident teachings. They say,

for example, that the fatherhood of God is a New Testa-

ment teaching; ands they affirm that the Old Testament

passages which speak of God as father must be under-

stood as meaning something less than they say. We are

not infrequently told that the heart of the religious teach-

ing of Jesus is his doctrine concerning love — to love God

with the whole heart, to love our neighbors as ourselves,

to love our enemies and in this the religion of Jesus is

contrasted with that of the Old Testament; and pas-

sages in the Old Testament which verbally teach just

these doctrines are subjected to a squeezing process to

expel from them this alleged impossible doctrine of love.

Those who practise this style of interpretation ignore

the fact that the doctrines of supreme love to God,

 

12           THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

equal love to men, and love to enemies are chiefly

taught in the New Testament by direct citation from

the Old, with distinct affirmation that these are the doc-

trines which are to be regarded as central in the Old

Testament. The same style of interpretation is prac-

tised in many other instances, and in particular n the

interpretation of the Old Testament statements concern-

ing the prophets.

          Against this I protest as being critically worst than

even the current habit of reading New Testament ean-

ings into the Psalms and the Prophets. We are to go to

the Old Testament to find what is there, and not to find

what we suppose ought to be there. Anything we find

there is not removed from there by the fact, if such be

the fact, that it is also found in the New Testament, or

in the Vedas or the Sagas or the Chinese or the reek

literature. Not to speak at all of possibilities rising

from the inspiration of the writers of the Old and New

Testaments, nothing is more in accord with probability

than that great truths should be repeated by the great

minds of different ages.

          Quite as baneful in its effect as any other form of

eisegesis is the practice of unduly interpreting the

Eisegesis of      biblical statements by the theories th t one

theories of       may hold as to the evolution of religion. To

religion                     the evidence from the analogy of other reli-

gions we should allow just its proper value, and no

more. There are scholars who reason on the asump-

tion that certain propositions, inferred from the com-

parison of the various human religions, are to be

regarded as ascertained scientific facts; so that biblical

statements, if they conflict with these alleged facts, are

thereby proved to be untrue. This is unscientific. The

religion described in the bible is the one early religion

 

                              PRELIMINARY                        13

 

in regard to which we have, on the whole, fuller and

more trustworthy information than in regard to any

other. Any generalizations on the rise and develop-

ment of religions, made without using the data given in

the bible, are, by that very circumstance, so far forth

defective and unscientific. Again, no other known re-

ligion is so decidedly marked by its own peculiarities

as the religion described in the bible. If generalizations

were made by the comparison of all other known reli-

gions, still no one would be justified in arguing that these

give us facts concerning the religion of Israel, in oppo-

sition to the specific evidence we have concerning that

religion.

          Here is the danger in one direction. On the other

hand, the analogies of other religions may indirectly

throw great light on the history of the religion of the

bible. It is foolish to neglect this or any other source

of possible evidence. In fine, these analogies are, in

biblical questions, of the nature of remote evidence, and

should be treated as remote evidence is properly treated

in any investigation. They should neither be discred-

ited, nor pushed into the chief place to the discrediting

of the direct evidence.

          This is the general rule. How much credit should

be given to any particular scheme of Comparative

Religion is another question. For instance, how shall

we account a theory which assumes that the religion of

Israel was primitive in the times of the judges, and

advanced thereafter by certain specified steps from

lower to higher? Do we know that the religion of the

time of the judges was primitive? If the chronological

opinions now current are correct, the times of the

judges are modern compared with the earliest times

in which splendid religious cults are known to have

 

14          THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

existed in Babylonia or Egypt. Who knows that the

order of evolution in a religion is uniformly in an as end-

ing series, according to some particular theory of ascent

and descent?^l  It is obvious that conclusions derived

from such processes need to be very cautiously used

when they are set forth in contradiction to specific

evidence.

          In opposition to such methods as have just bee dis-

cussed, the true method is to come to an Old Testament

A true             passage with the question : What did this

method                     mean to an intelligent, devout, uninspired

Israelite of the time to which it belongs? The Old

Testament passage, whatever its date may be, is it elf a

monument of the Israelite mind of that time. As a dis-

closure of Israelite religious thought in the time when

it was written or in earlier times, it is more authoritative

than any inferences we may draw from what we happen

to know of the religious thought of the Iroquois o the

Hottentots or the Chinese or the Thibetans. In order

to understand the passage, we must bear in mind t at it

was uttered for thoughtful people, and was suite to

their capacities. The great majority was then as now

unintelligent and superficial in matters of religious

thinking, and we are not to gauge the utterance by the

likelihood that such would take an interest in it

 

            ¹ "Scholars of this class are in the habit of arranging all know

and cults in linear series, placing those which they consider the lo

the bottom, and those which they consider the highest at the to

others graduating between these two extremes. From this artificial

proceeding on the assumption that the lowest must of necessity

most ancient, they write the history of civilization and thought.

method is a radically pernicious one. The series of facts might

easily read in the descending scale; . . . The history of religions

be based, not upon gratuitous assumptions . . . but upon such real

cal facts as are obtainable." — Merwin-Marie Snell in Biblical

September, 1896, p. 209.

 

                         PRELIMINARY                           15

 

there were miraculously inspired men in those days,

they may supposably have understood the thought

given in the passage in the light of all the future history

of mankind ; but it was not for such men that the utter-

ance was chiefly given. The givers of the message

claim to be inspired, but it was to uninspired though

thoughtful men that the message was immediately

directed. So far forth as we can assume their attitude,

we are in shape to understand the utterances that were

primarily designed for them.

          III. The order of treatment adopted in this volume

is based in part on a conception of the relative present-

day importance of the several topics treated.              Order of

The greatest interest we feel in the prophets               treatment

arises from the doctrine they taught concerning the

Messiah. On the basis of this fact, the subject separates

into two principal parts, dealing respectively with the

prophets as the men who promulgated the messianic

promise and with the promise which they promulgated.

In treating the first of these two parts we must necessarily

begin by some discussion of the terms used. Then we

pass naturally to a biographical and historical account

of the succession of persons known as the prophets.

Nowhere in history can we find a line of men more

picturesque and interesting in themselves, or whose

achievements have been more, significant. They figure

more prominently than any other men in the history of

Israel. A series of the biographies of the prophets

would be a complete history of Israel. This particularly

attractive part of our subject, however, we must dismiss

with a single chapter, instead of allowing it to expand

into a volume. With the questions of the personal pre-

sentment and the functions of the prophet we must deal

somewhat more fully. Further, the authorship of the

 

16        THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

Old Testament is attributed to the prophets, alike in

the Old Testament itself, in the New Testament, and in

Jewish and Christian tradition. There is no studying

the Old Testament or Old Testament criticism, apart

from the prophets. We must discuss this claim, though

briefly. These topics will occupy the first part of the

volume, leading up to the consideration, in the second

part, of the messianic promise. The second part

naturally closes with the question of the bearing of the

whole upon Christian Apologetics.

          It may not be superfluous to mention a fe matters

of detail. Most of the scriptural passages used have

Certain mat-     been freshly translated. The translating has

ters of detail     been done with the fact in mind that readers

are likely to have the current English version s within

reach. The translations I have given are ordinarily

more literal than those in the versions. In same cases

I have deliberately made them so at the cost of liter-

ary smoothness. Occasionally, however, the variation

from the common translation is made for the purpose

of bringing out the point under discussion.

          The use of Hebrew type has been avoided. In

transliterating Hebrew words the attempt as been

to make them look as little un-English as possible, and

to avoid employing unusual type. Proper names and

other words familiar to the eye of English readers have

been retained in their traditional form. In words less

familiar a more accurate transliteration has been used,

though even in these the vocal sh'was are sometimes

represented by a short vowel instead of an apostrophe.

The continental vowel system has been used in trans-

literating, on account of the clumsiness of ou English

way of writing the vowels. Waw is represented by

w, and Yodh by y. The quiescing Waw is omitted,

 

                           PRELIMINARY                    17

 

save in special instances. The quiescing Yodh is

omitted after Hhiriq, but retained after Tsere and

Seghol, to distinguish these words from those that are

spelled with Aleph. I have not thought it necessary

to distinguish between Sin and Samekh, or between

Taw and Teth. Readers who know even a little

Hebrew can make these distinctions for themselves,

and for others the matter is unimportant. Aleph and

Ayin are commonly omitted in transliteration, though

for distinction Aleph is sometimes represented by the

spiritus lenis, and Ayin by the spiritus asper. Tsadhe

is represented by ts, and Hheth by hh.

          For the name of the national God of Israel I have

used the form Yahaweh. No one should judge this

name until he has first acquired the habit of                The name

pronouncing it correctly, according to the                   Yahaweh

analogies commonly accepted in pronouncing Hebrew.

Accent the last syllable, make the middle h distinctly

a consonant, and pronounce the middle a so short as to

make it a mere breathing. I do not care to discuss

the question whether "Yahweh" is theoretically a more

correct transliteration. Whoever tries to pronounce the

word with this spelling will inevitably either accent the

first syllable, or fail to sound the middle h, or introduce

a slight vowel sound after it. The third is the correct

alternative. If the word were rare, the best translit-

eration might be Yahweh, but for a frequent word,

Yahaweh pleases the eye better.  For the rest, the

purposes of this volume require that this word shall

be distinguished as a proper name, and it seems to me

that the correct form of the word is better for this pur-

pose than the artificial combination "Jehovah.”

          As for other designations of the supreme Being.

The name Yah should not be confounded with Yaha-

 

18         THE PROPHETS AND THE PROMISE

 

weh, as is done in the English versions. Even if

holds that Yah is an abbreviated form of Yahawe

must also acknowledge that the two are used

tinctively. The Hebrew word El is most exactly!

English word God, while Elohim is a more abs

term, like our English word Deity. Sometimes in

volume Elohim is translated Deity, for distinction;

more commonly it is translated God, following

established practice.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                     PART I

 

 

 

                  THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

               

           

 

                              CHAPTER II

 

 

   TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS

 

 

          OUR English word " prophet " is, of course, the Greek

word profh<thj, from pro<, and fhmi<. The word needs

no discussion here, as it is fully considered in            “Prophet"

dictionaries and other accessible works.¹ It                in Greek and

denotes, not one who speaks beforehand,                   English

though the prophet was believed to be a foreteller of

events ; nor one who speaks in behalf of another, though

the prophet ordinarily speaks in behalf of Deity; but a

person who speaks forth, speaks publicly, speaks out

the word that he has to speak. When he predicts, he

speaks forth the future verity that would otherwise

remain in concealment. When he speaks for another,

he speaks forth the message which the other has com-

mitted to him, and which would otherwise have remained

unknown. The thing uttered is often a divinely given

prediction, but the word "prophesy" does not signify to

predict.

          In the Hebrew, the prophet and his functions are

described in various terms. The standard term, the one

that is most distinctive, is the noun nabhi and             Nabhi and

its cognates of the stem nabha. The words                 its cognates

of this stem are used in every part of the Old Testa-

ment. In our English versions they are uniformly

translated "prophet," "prophesy," "prophecy," and so

 

            ¹ See the Greek lexicons of Cremer, Thayer, Liddell and Scott, etc.

Or see the Century Dictionary, or Skeat's Etymological Dictionary, or simi-

lar books of reference.

 

                                              21

 

22             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

forth. Except in five verses, no other word is so trans-

lated.¹  The instances number some hundreds in all, and

they can readily be found for study by the aid of a con-

cordance, either English or Hebrew. We shall have

occasion to examine many of them, one by one, in our

present study of the prophets. The lexicons attribute to

the stem an original physical meaning, "to boil up," and

from this derive the idea of fervid utterance as charac-

terizing the prophets ; but this is an etymologist's con-

jecture, and is disputed by other etymologists. It is too

uncertain to build upon. What we know as to the

meaning of the word is inferred solely from the use of

it. Fortunately, the usage is abundant and unequivo-

cal. The whole of our study of prophecy will be really

a study of the meaning of the word. We need not antici-

pate further than to say that the meaning of the Hebrew

term is well expressed in its Greek-English equivalent.

          In our English versions two different Hebrew words

are translated " seer," and each of them has a group of

cognates widely used for expressing matters concerning

the prophets.

          Of the two, the one most properly so used is hhozeh.

It is the active participle of a verb that is common to the

Hhozeh and      Hebrew and the Aramaic. In the Aramaic

its cognates      it is the ordinary word for physical seeing,

but in Hebrew it is little used except to express thought-

ful insight, or in connection with prophetic matters.

David's friend Gad is described as a seer (2 Sam. xxiv.

11; 1 Chron. xxi. 9, xxix. 29; 2 Chron. xxix. 25). Asaph

and Heman and Jeduthun are severally called seers

(2 Chron. xxix. 30, xxxv. I 5 ; I Chron. xxv. 5). The

term is applied to Jedo and Iddo and Jehu and Amos

 

               ¹ The five verses are Prov. xxx. i, xxxi. I; Isa. xxx. 10; Mic. ii. 6, ii.

The five verses contain in all ten instances.

 

TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS     23

 

(2 Chron. ix. 29, xii. 15, xix. 2; Am. vii. 12), and is also

used in cases where no individual is mentioned (2 Ki.

xvii. 13; Isa. xxix. 10, xxx. 10; Mic. iii. 7; 2 Chron.

xxxiii. 18, 19).

          The verb of this stem is commonly translated "see."

It is often used in cases where an object is thought of

as presented to the eye, but it does not necessarily imply

that. It may denote any form of mental perception,

whether through the senses or not. The following are

examples. " The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz,

which he saw " (Isa. i. 1, cf. ii. 1, xiii. 1; Am. i. 1; Mic.

i. 1; Hab. i. 1). "The diviners have seen falsely "

(Zech. x. 2, cf. Lam. ii. 14 ; Ezek. xiii. 6, 7, 8; and the

Aramaic of Dan. vii. 1, 2, 7, 13, etc.). In one passage

the English versions render this noun and verb by

"prophet" and " prophesy," in order to distinguish

them from the other words for "seer" and "see"

(Isa. xxx. 10).

          Several different nouns of this stem are also in use,

and each of them is sometimes rendered " vision " in

the English versions.¹

 

            ¹ The following are the nouns that occur most frequently: —

            Hhazon, used thirty-five times. It commonly denotes a revelation

given to a prophet, whether through an appearance presented to the eye

or by some other method (t Sam. iii. i; i Chron. xvii. 15; Isa. xxix. 7;

Jer. xiv. 14, xxiii. i6, etc.). Often the word is used as part of the literary

title of a prophecy (Isa. i. i; Nah. i. t; 2 Chron. xxxii. 32).

            Hhazoth (2 Chron. ix. 29). Part of a title of a writing.

            Hhizzayon (2 Sam. vii. 17; Job iv. 13, vii. 14; Zech. xiii. 4, etc.).

Like Hhazon, except that it is not used in literary titles.

            Mahhazeh appears four times: "The word of Yahaweh was unto Abra-

ham in the vision" (Gen. xv. 1 JE). Balaam habitually " saw the vision

of Shaddai, falling, and being uncovered of eyes" (Num. xxiv. 4, 16 JE).

"Have ye not seen a vain vision " (Ezek. xiii. 7).

            Hhazuth, translated "vision" (Isa. xxi. 2, xxix. 11), "agreement "

(Isa. xxviii. 18), "notable horn" (Dan. viii. 5, 8).

            Add to these the Aramaic noun Hhezev, occurring only in Daniel,

24              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          The other noun translated "seer" is roeh. It is the

active participle of the verb which is in most common

Roth and its      use for physical seeing. The persons who

cognates          in the use of this word are called seers are

Samuel, Zadok, and Hanani (1 Sam. ix. 9 et al.; 2 Sam.

xv. 27; 2 Chron. xvi. 7, lo). The word is also used in

this sense without particularly mentioning the person

(Isa. xxx. io). As a participle the word is used dozens

of times. The stem is used hundreds of times.

          The English versions make no difference in transla-

tion between this word with its cognates and hhozeh with

its cognates. For the sake of distinction, even at the

cost of somewhat ungainly English, I shall translate the

words of this stem by the English words "behold," "be-

holder," "a beholding," "appear," "appearance," "sem-

blance," reserving the words "see," "seer," "vision," for

rendering the Hebrew words of the stem hhazah.

          The verb in the simple active voice is used of a per-

son beholding something, and thus receiving a revelation

from Deity. Ezekiel says : " The heavens opened them-

selves, and I beheld divine beholdings " (i. 1). Zecha-

riah says: " I lifted my eyes and beheld, and lo, four

horns " (i. 18). Jeremiah is asked: "What art thou be-

holding? "He replies: "I am beholding a pot that

boils, its face being from the direction of the north"

(i. 13).¹  In the reflexive or passive stem the verb is

used of Deity appearing to men for purposes of revela-

tion. "Yahaweh appeared unto Abram;" "and Deity

appeared unto Jacob again;" "Yahaweh appeared to

Solomon the second time;" "the Angel of Yahaweh

 

eleven times in the sense of prophetic vision, and once (vii. 20) in the

sense of outward appearance.

            ¹ See also Isa. xxx. 10; Dan. viii. 2, x. 8, etc., and the construct infini-

tive in 2 Chron. xxvi. 5.

TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS      25

 

appeared" unto Moses at the burning bush (Gen. xii.

7, xvii. 1, xviii. 1, xxxv. I, 9; I Ki. ix. 2; Ex. iii. 2).

In the causative-active stem the verb is used of Deity,

causing one to behold something that constitutes a divine

revelation. Amos says: "Thus the Lord Yahaweh

caused me to behold, and lo, he formed locusts." Again

he says: "Thus the Lord Yahaweh caused me to be-

hold, and lo, he called to contend by fire." And again :

"Thus he caused me to behold, and lo, the Lord stood

beside a plumb wall, with a plumbline in his hand "

(vii. I, 4, 7). Jeremiah says: "Yahaweh caused me to

behold, and lo, two baskets of figs" (xxiv. I). Finally,

there are two nouns from this causative stem, a mascu-

line, mareh, and a feminine, marah (mar-eh and mar-ah),

which denote either the divine process of causing one to

behold, or the human act of beholding so caused, or the

object which one is thus made to behold.¹

 

            ¹ These nouns start in usage as the hiphil participle, "causing to be-

hold," either in the sense of giving one power to behold or in that of an

object presenting itself to be beheld, and thus causing one to behold it.

            Once the feminine noun denotes mirrors (Ex. xxxviii. 8). A mirror

causes one to behold, in the sense of enabling one to see what would other-

wise be invisible. Elsewhere the noun is used only of revelations from

Deity. It can always be translated, though in some instances awkwardly,

by the English noun "beholding," denoting either the divine enabling or

the human act or the object beheld. The object is thought of as either

really or ideally presented to the eye. The following are the instances: —

            "And Deity said to Israel in beholdings by night" (Gen. xlvi. 2 E).

            "In the beholding I will make myself known unto him ; in the dream I

will speak with him "(Num. xii. 6 E).

            "Samuel being afraid to declare the beholding unto Eli" (I Sam. iii.

15)

            "The heavens were opened, and I beheld beholdings from Deity"

(Ezek. i. I).

            "A spirit . . . brought me in to Jerusalem, with beholdings from De-

ity" (Ezek. viii. 3).

            "With beholdings from Deity he brought me in unto the land of

Israel " (Ezek. xl. 2).

26             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

The nature of the functions denoted in these two

groups of words is reserved for a future chapter. For the

The uses of       present we note that the words of the two stems

raah and                    are not properly interchangeable. At first

hhazah           sight, especially in the book of Daniel, the words

of one stem seem to be confused with those of the other,

but closer examination shows that this is not the case.

 

            "Beholdings like the appearance which I had beheld" (Ezek. xliii. 3).

See below under mareh.

            Mareh, the masculine noun, is more widely used than its feminine. It

appears participially, for example, " all that I am causing thee to behold "

(Ex. xxv. 9; Ezek. xl. 4). Most commonly, however, it is a substantive,

denoting the external aspect of persons or things, their looks, semblance,

appearance. Like marah it implies either a real or an ideal presentation

to the eye, or to the other senses. It is oftener translated by " appearance"

than by any other word. In cases of revelation from Deity it has four

different meanings. First, it has its usual signification, denoting the looks

of anything. Second, it denotes an apparition, a visible semblance, of

some particular person or thing. Third, it denotes more generally a mani-

festation or disclosure coming from Deity to a man. Fourth, it is some-

times used in the sense of marah.

            The first and third of these meanings are illustrated in the following

instance: —

            "And the appearance of the appearance which I beheld was as the ap-

pearance which I had beheld at my coming in to destroy the city; and

[there were] beholdings like the appearance which Thad beheld at the

river of Chebar; and I fell upon my face" (Ezek. xliii. 3). The meaning

of this becomes clear if we translate: "And the aspect of the manifesta-

tions which I beheld was like that of the manifestations which I had beheld

at my coming in to destroy the city; and [there were] beholdings like the

manifestations which I had beheld," etc.

            The following are additional instances of the third meaning. In each

case notice that the word " appearance" denotes a manifestation, a dis-

closure, from Deity.

            "That I may behold this great appearance" (Ex. iii. 3 E). Burning

bush.

            "And the appearance of the glory of Yahaweh as devouring fire at the

head of the mountain" (Ex. xxiv. iq P).

            "There used to be over the mishkan as it were an appearance of fire,

. . and an appearance of fire by night" (Num. ix. 15–16 P).

TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS          27

 

For example, the verb hhazah never has mareh or marah

as its object. When this verb is used of the seeing of

a vision, the word for vision is always of its own stem.

 

            "Mouth unto mouth I speak with him, and an appearance, and not in

riddles" (Num. xii. 8 E). In contrast with nzarah of ver. 6.

            "The glory of the God of Israel, according to the appearance which I

beheld " (Ezek. viii. 4).

            "And a spirit lifted me up and brought me in at Chaldea unto the ex-

iles, in the appearance, by the Spirit of Deity; and the appearance which

I beheld went up from upon me" (Ezek. xi. 24).

            The second of the four meanings is frequent, and may be illustrated by

the following instances. In some cases there may be room for doubt as

between the second, third, and fourth meanings. Using the English word

"appearance " for each, there is room for difference of judgment as to the

meaning of the word.

            "According to the appearance which Yahaweh made Moses behold',

(Num. viii. 4 P). Is the "pattern" here a semblance, or a divine mani-

festation?

            "And his face according to the semblance of lightning" (Dan. x. 6).

            "And lo, there stood before me as it were the semblance of a person"

(Dan. viii. 15). See also Ezek. i. 26, 27, viii. 2, 4.

            In the book of Daniel the distinction between mareh and nzarah is not

so consistently maintained as elsewhere. In the following instances I trans-

late the masculine noun by "appearance," and the feminine by " behold-

ing"; but the two alike denote a manifestation or disclosure by Deity.

"Gabriel, make this man to understand the appearance " (viii. 16).

"He understood the word, and had understanding as to the appear-

ance " (x. i).

            "And the appearance concerning the evenings and the mornings, as

bath been said, is truth ; and as for thee, close thou up the vision, because

it is for many days " (viii. 26). The reference here is to what has been

said concerning the "vision" and the 2300 "evening-mornings" (vv.

13-14).

            "And I was astonished concerning the appearance" (27).

"And to understand the matter, and to give understanding in regard

to the appearance " (ix. 23).

            "And I Daniel myself alone beheld the beholding, while the men who

were with me beheld not the beholding" (x. 7).

            "And I beheld this great beholding" (x. 8).

            " My lord, at the beholding my pangs are turned upon me, and I retain

no strength" (x. 16).

28           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

The verb raah, however, a few times takes as its object

a word of the stem hhazah. "Your young men shall

behold visions " (Joel ii. 28 [iii. 1]). " As I Daniel was

beholding the vision " (Dan. viii. 15). In this context

in Daniel the reflexive voice of raah is also used with

derivatives of hhazah. "A vision appeared unto me

. . . after the one that had appeared unto me at the be-

ginning " (viii. I). But these expressions are explained

by the parallel expression, " I beheld in vision " (viii. 2)

2, ix. 21), and also by the use of the nouns in these chap-

ters of Daniel. Hhazon here denotes the whole transac-

tion (viii. I, 2, 2, 13, 15, 17, iX. 2I, X. 14, xi 14).  It is

something that can be put into written form, and sealed

or closed up (ix. 24, viii. 26).  Mareh and marah, on the

other hand, designate certain parts of the transaction,

parts that may be thought of as presented to the eye

(viii. 15, 16, 26, 27, X. 1, 6, 18, 7, 7, 8, 16). The use of

the verbs is quite congruous with this. It is everywhere

true that the words of the raah stem imply the possi-

bility of presentation to the eye or to the senses, while

those of the hhazah stem are capable of being used inde-

pendently of that implication, in the sense of insight or

reflection or other mental processes, as distinguished

from physical seeing.¹  It further illustrates the differ-

ence to observe that the derivatives of hhazah are fre-

quently employed, as we have seen, in the literary titles

of the prophetic writings, but the words from raah

never.

          The phrase "man of God," ish elohim, ish haelohim,

occurs often in the Old Testament as the equivalent of

nabhi, and is probably never employed except in this

 

            ¹ The cases in which a preposition is used with a noun of either stem,

forming the phrase " in vision," afford no additional instance that is signifi-

cant.

   TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS      29

 

use. Moses is many times called a man of God (e.g.

Deut. xxxiii. i; Josh. xiv. 6; i Chron. xxiii. 14).¹  So are

Samuel and Shemaiah and David and Elijah and Elisha

and many others (1 Sam. ix. 6, 7, etc.; i Ki.                Man of God

xii. 22, etc.; 2 Chron. viii. 14, etc.; 2 Ki. i. 9,

io, etc.; 2 Ki. iv. 7, etc., and concordance). The Angel

that appeared to Manoah and his wife is by them

described as a man of God (Jud. xiii. 6, 8, JE). The

person who spoke against Jeroboam's altar (called Jadon

by Josephus, probably "Jedo the seer" of 2 Chron. ix.

29) is several times called "man of God," and once

"prophet" (1 Ki. xiii. 1, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, etc., and 18, 23),

while the term "prophet" is uniformly used of the

resident prophet who brought him back (11, 18, 20,

etc.).

          Corresponding in form to the phrase "man of God "

is the phrase "word of Yahaweh," d'bhar yahaweh,

the usual designation for a message given                  Word of

by Deity to or through a man endowed with               Yahaweh

the prophetic gift. " The word of Yahaweh came unto

Abraham in a vision " (Gen. xv. 1, 4 E). Moses is rep-

resented as saying: "I stood between Yahaweh and

you at that time, to tell to you the word of Yahaweh"

(Deut. v. 5). Isaiah says: "Out of Zion law shall go

forth, and the word of, Yahaweh from Jerusalem " (ii. 3).

The phrase appears in the titles of prophetic books:

"The word of Yahaweh that came to Micah" (Mic.

i. I). It is habitually used for opening the prophetic

narratives: "The word of Yahaweh came unto Jonah";

"the word of Yahaweh came unto Jonah the second

time" (Jon. i. I, iii. I). The phrase is probably never

employed in any other meaning, and at least this is its

 

            ¹ The new tradition assigns Deut. xxxiii to a date earlier than J or E,

and Josh. xiv. 6 sq. to JE.

30          THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

ordinary use.¹ The parallel term "word of God,"

d'bhar elohim, or d'bhar haelohim, sometimes occurs,

though but seldom.

          Cognate with this are the phrases of asseveration,

amar yahaweh and n'um yahaweh, each occurring hun-

Saith              dreds of times, and in our versions both trans-

Yahaweh         lated " saith Jehovah." Both are commonly,

perhaps exclusively, applied to prophetic utterances (e.g.

Jer. ii. 2, 5, iv. 3 and i. 8, 15, 19), though it is in many

cases doubtful whether amar yahaweh is used as an as-

severation or as giving a mere statement of fact. In

asseverations of this kind the word elohim, "God,"

"Deity," is not often used, except in combination with

other words. The different expression yomar yahaweh,

“Yahaweh is saying,” sometimes appears (e.g. Isa. i.

11, 18, xxxiii. 10, xl. I), though it is not distinctively

translated in the English versions. In numberless in-

stances we find the merely descriptive statement that

Yahaweh, or Deity, spake, or said.

          As the prophetic gift is constantly represented as

bestowed by the Spirit of Yahaweh (I Ki. xviii. 12;

Man of the Isa. lxiii. 10, 11; Joel ii. 28–29; 2 Chron.

Spirit xv. I; Num. xi. 25-29, etc.), the prophet is

very naturally designated by the descriptive phrase

"the man of the Spirit" (Hos. ix. 7).

          The word massa, "burden," is used to denote a

prophecy of a certain kind, from the days of Elisha,

                    and later. A massa is poetic in form, and

Massa          in most cases minatory in character, and

always relatively brief. Jehu is represented as saying

to Bidkar his captain that Yahaweh had "lifted up this

burden" upon Ahab: —

 

               ¹ For additional instances see Isa. i. 10; i Ki. xvii. 2, 8, 16, 24; i Sam.

iii. I, 21, xv. 23, 26; Ex. ix. 20, 21, and concordance.

 TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS      31

 

          "Surely the blood of Naboth and the blood of his sons

              I beheld yesterday, so saith Yahaweh!

          And I will make requital to thee

             in this plat, so saith Yahaweh!"

 

Jehu mentions this as a reason for casting the corpse

of Ahab's son, whom he has just slain, into the plat of

Naboth (2 Ki. ix. 25-26). In Isaiah, the "Burden of

Babylon," "Burden of Moab," "Burden of Damascus "

(xiii. 1, xv. 1, xvii. 1), are poems of threatening upon

those countries. The instances of "burdens " are nu-

merous (e.g. Ezek. xii. 10; Nah. i. i; Zech. ix. 1, xii. i;

Mal. i. 1; Isa. xiv. 28; 2 Chron. xxiv. 27 and concord-

ance). In Prov. xxx. 1, xxxi. 1, where the poems are

not minatory, the King James's version translates massa

in the title by "prophecy." The revised version every-

where proposes "oracle " as the alternative translation

of the word.  Massa seems to be used in 1 Chron. xv.

22, 27, to denote the singing when David brought the

ark to Jerusalem, and this may possibly indicate the

nature of its use in matters prophetic.

          Certain forms of the causative-active stem of nataph

are sometimes applied to prophetic utterance. The

verb means to drip, to fall'' in drops, as in                  Hittiph,

the case of drippings of honey, or a gentle                  mattiph

shower. When used of human speech (Prov. v. 3;

Cant. iv. 11; Job xxix. 22) the idea seems to be that of

sweet or smooth or persuasive talk. When the words

of this stem are applied to prophets (Am. vii. 16; Mic.

ii. 6, 11; Ezek. xx. 46 and xxi. 2 [xxi. 2, 7], they can

be forcibly translated by the English words "preach,"

"preacher." In Micah ii these words seem to be used

by enemies, and ironically.

 

          “Preach ye not! They will be preaching! They shall not preach

to these! One never ceaseth uttering reproaches!"

32           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

And a few verses farther on appears this statement:

 

          " If a man going in wind and falsehood has lyingly said, I will

preach for thee of wine and of strong drink, then he will become the

preacher of this people " (Mic. ii. 6, i 1).1

 

          A prophet is also sometimes called an angel of

Yahaweh (e.g. Hag. i. 13), or a shepherd or a servant

Metaphor- Or a watchman, or by other like names ; but

ical terms these terms are properly figures of speech

rather than appellations. Other like forms of expres-

sion might be added.

          Three general observations are to be made in regard

to the use of these several terms in the Old Testament

— observations that are equally true whether we apply

them to the history or to the records that contain the

history, and in the main equally true whether we follow

the old tradition concerning the dates of the records, or

follow some form of the newer tradition.

          In the first place, there is no definite succession of

dates at which the various terms describing the prophets

The several      come successively into use.         In a general

terms not        sense it is true that all the principal terms

confined to       are employed in all parts of the record.

particular         One critic may infer from this that the prophetic

dates              phenomena were practically all in existence

before the earliest records were written; and another

may account for it by some theory of interpolation into

the records by later writers; but in any case the fact

exists. It is true that particular words have a limited

range of use. For example, roeh in the sense of seer

 

            ¹ The English words " prophet," " prophesy," " prophecy," are used in

the King James or the revised versions to translate hittiph in this passage,

to translate massa in Prov. xxx. 1, xxxi. 1, and to translate the hhazah

words in Isa. xxx. lo. Elsewhere they are restricted in these versions to

words of the stem nabha.

TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS     33

 

appears only in the literature treating of the times from

Samuel to Isaiah ; while hhozeh first appears in the

history of David, and may possibly be said to supersede

roeh for the later times. In the time of Samuel roeh

was the appellative in common use in place of nabhi

I Sam. ix. 9, I0, II, cf. x. 5, IO, II, I2, I3). Massa

appears only from the time of Elisha and onward. But

it is doubtful how far an absence of these terms from

any part of the Old Testament is really significant.

Their not being used in the writings which we have

for any period does not necessarily prove that they were

at that time unknown. And one may see, by running

over the references given in this chapter, that the

phrase " man of God " is applied to Moses, and to other

men from his time on ; and that the phrase " word of Yaha-

weh," with words of the stems nabha, raah, and hhazah,

are used in describing divine revelations to men from

the times of Abraham. And these several terms are in

frequent use, not only in those parts of the Old Testa-

ment which the critics of the Modern View regard as of

relatively late origin, but in those which they assign to

the times of Amos and Hosea and earlier. For example,

the references include passages from those parts of the

book of Judges that are regarded by the men of the new

tradition as early, and also passages from those parts of

the hexateuch which they assign to J or E or J E or

independent early sources. Follow what critical theory

you please, there is a somewhat extensive vocabulary of

prophetic terms from a time as early as the earliest sur-

viving records of the earliest times in Israelitish history.

          Further, it is in general true that the terms we have

been considering are interchangeable, so far as their

application to any given person is concerned. Each

term has of course its own differential meaning. The

34           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

terms differ in meaning when they denote the functions

of the prophet. The seers seem to be distinguished

The personal               from the beholders. As we have seen above,

terms all applicable       the men who are spoken of by name as seers

to the same                    are different men from those who are spoken

person                      of as beholders. Samuel the beholder is spe-

cifically distinguished from Gad the seer, and beholders

in general are distinguished from seers in general

(i Chron. xxix. 29; Isa. xxx. 10). But Samuel was both

a roeh and a nabhi. Gad was both a hhozeh and a

nabhi (i Sam. xxii. 5 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. i r, etc.). So was

Amos (Am. vii. 12-16). So probably was Jehu, the son

of Hanani (r Ki. xvi. 7, 12, etc., cf. 2 Chron. xix. 2), the

alternative being that Hanani was both roeh and hhozeh

(2 Chron. xvi. 7, 10, cf. xix. 2). With perhaps some limi-

tation in the case of roeh and hhozeh, a person who was

regarded as having certain supernatural gifts was called

indifferently man of God, prophet, seer, beholder. One

term may have been at certain times current, rather than

another, the term roeh, for example, just before the pro-

phetic revival under Samuel, but all four of the terms

were current from very early times. The permanent

differences between the terms were differences in the

form of the thought, and not in the person designated.

          Finally, it should be noted that these several terms

are used in the Old Testament with different degrees of

What is com-              comprehension. First, they are applied to

prehended in               persons who are better known as prophets

the terms                   than in any other capacity, for example, Sam-

uel or Elisha or Jeremiah or Isaiah. Such prophets were

also eminent as judges, priests, statesmen, and the like;

but the mention of any one of these names suggests to

us the services of the man as a prophet, rather than in

any other capacity. Second, the terms are applied to

TERMS USED IN DESCRIBING THE PROPHETS    35

 

persons who are better known in some other capacity

than as prophets, but who exercised prophetic gifts.

Some of these, as Moses the lawgiver or David the

king, stand very high in the prophetic ranks. By

parity the character of prophet belongs to other men of

like position, for example, such men as Joshua and Solo-

mon and Ezra and Nehemiah. It will sometimes be

convenient, for distinction's sake, to call such men pro-

phetic men, rather than prophets. That is partly a

question of convenience in the use of language. But

when we are discussing the prophets as a subject, we

must take into the account all persons who have the

prophetic character. Third, the terms are applied to

persons who were prophets only in a secondary sense,

to the pupils or disciples or assistants of the men who

were strictly prophets. As we advance in our study we

shall find much said concerning certain prophetic "com-

panies," and certain so-called "sons of the prophets,"

men who were banded together into organizations under

such great prophets as Samuel or Elijah, men who were

recognized as disciples of such a prophet as Isaiah. A

person of this type may naturally be spoken of as a

prophet or a man of God, especially when he is sent by

his superior on some prophetic errand. The secondary

prophets were at times much more numerous than the

primary prophets, and it sometimes becomes important

to distinguish between the two.

          In addition to these uses, many assert that the words

that denote the prophet and his functions are also used

to denote mere frenzied utterance, and that primarily

the prophetic gift is conceived of as a kind of insanity.

We shall find that there is no ground for this, and that

herein there is a difference between the prophets of

Israel and the prophets of the nations.

 

 

 

                               CHAPTER III

 

 

    THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS

 

 

          THIS subject, though we must dismiss it with a single

chapter, is a fascinating one. Some of the older treat-

The attrac-       ments of it are dull through the lack of

tiveness of       imagination, or through the wrong use of

the subject       imagination. They regard the prophets as

unearthly revealers of the divine will, with no human

blood in them. Some of the more recent treatments are

yet more faulty, rejecting half the biblical data, filling

in the gaps thus made from conjecture or by inference

from theory, and thus giving portraits utterly different

from those in the bible, and immeasurably inferior. In

contrast with both these modes of treatment would be

that of one who should simply take the trouble to find

out just what the biblical statements mean, using his

imagination only to render the facts distinct and vivid.

What we need is a treatment at once correct and im-

aginative. Why does not some one write a history of

Israel in the form of a series of biographies of the

prophets, working it up, not from Bible Dictionaries,

not from volumes, not from Josephus, not from com-

mentaries, not from theories of the evolution of religion,

but purely from the data given in the bible ? There are

no heroes in history more picturesque or interesting or

full of vitality than these same prophets, provided we

picture them rightly.

          Many of the books of reference affirm that the succes-

 

                                              36  

 THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS     37

 

sion of the prophets began with Samuel. In proof they

cite passages from the Acts and from I Samuel. But

the context in Samuel, as we shall see below,             The division

implies that prophecy was previously in exist-            into periods

ence, and that in the Acts affirms that prophecy had

been in existence from the days of Moses, and, indeed,

from the beginning of the world.¹ Other parts of

the record give details in abundance. Certainly the

biblical view is that what occurred in Samuel's time

was not an origination but a revival. There was

then a new beginning in the progress of an ancient

institution.

          The biblical presentation of the history of the prophets

is in very clearly marked chronological periods. The

first great period, that before Samuel, includes as sub-

ordinate periods the pre-Abrahamic times, the patriar-

chal times, the times of the exodus, and the times of the

Judges before Samuel. The prophets of the second

great period, from Samuel to the close of the Old Testa-

ment, fall into six groups, namely, the group in which

Samuel and Nathan and David were eminent, the

Elijah and Elisha group, the Isaiah group, the Jeremiah

group, the exilian prophets, and the postexilian prophets.

Then any survey of these two great periods is incom-

plete unless supplemented by obtaining, in part from

 

            ¹"Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after

.. . told of these days" (Acts iii. 24). It is easy to understand this as

affirming that Samuel was the earliest prophet, but the immediate con-

text shows that the writer intended no such meaning. Only a few sen-

tences previously he has used this language: "The times of restoration of

all things, whereof God spake by the mouth of his holy prophets which

have been since the world began." Moses indeed said: "A prophet shall

the Lord God raise up unto you . . . like unto me " (Acts iii. 21-22, cf. vii.

37; Lc. i. 70). With this agrees the New Testament mention of the pro-

phetic gift in the times of Balaam and of Enoch (2 Pet. ii. 16; Jude 14).

38               THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

extrabiblical sources, some account of the closing of the

succession of the prophets.^l

          I. We take up the first great period. The Old Tes-

tament agrees with the New in representing that the

patriarchs exercised prophetic gifts; that such gifts were

abundant in the time of Moses, and that they continued

during the time between Moses and Samuel.

          Books on the subject have been very free in ascribing

prophetic phenomena to the times before Abraham.

Prophecy         Jude says that Enoch prophesied (14), and in

before            Luke and the Acts it is affirmed that there

Abraham         have been holy prophets from the beginning

of the world (Lc. i. 70; Acts iii. 21). Parts of the

first eleven chapters of Genesis have figured largely in

discussions concerning prophecy ; for example, the pro-

tevangelium, the sacrifice of Abel, some of the experi-

ences of Noah (Gen. iii. 15, iv, vi—ix, and New Testament

parallels). Something very like prophetic character

has been attributed to Adam, Seth, Enoch, Abel, Noah,

and others. Any detailed consideration of these mat-

ters belongs to a later stage in our investigation. For

the present it is sufficient to note that the various terms

denoting prophetic function are not used in the accounts

of the times before Abraham; but that there is nothing

to forbid the opinion that the writers of these accounts

 

            ¹ The biblical account seems to be that with Samuel there began cer-

tain arrangements for cultivating the prophetic gift, which, thenceforward

to the close of the Old Testament times, secured a more abundant succes-

sion of prophets than had previously existed. If we distinguish between

prophets and prophetic men, applying the latter term to men who had

prophetic gifts, but are better known in some other capacity, the great

names before Samuel are of prophetic men only. It further happens to

be true that the Old Testament books called the Prophets, in distinction

from the Law and the Hagiographa, are ascribed in the traditions to the

prophets of Samuel's time and later, while the Law and the Hagiographa

are ascribed, in the main, to prophetic men.

 THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS      39

 

thought of pre-Abrahamic men as possessing prophetic

gifts.¹

          Old Testament history, however, properly begins with

Abraham. From Abraham onward the Israelite litera-

ture is familiar with the distinctive titles and duties and

powers that belong to a prophet.

          It is represented that Abraham and Isaac and Jacob

had prophetic gifts, though this representation is not

very greatly emphasized. Abraham is once                 The patri-

expressly called a prophet. In the time when              archs were

he led a migratory life, going from one coun-             prophets

try to another, we are told that Abimelech took posses-

sion of Abraham's wife. To him a revelation was

made: —

          "And now, restore thou the wife of the man, for he is a prophet,

          that he may make his prayer in thy behalf," etc. (Gen. xx. 7 E).

 

One of the psalmists, centuries later, cites this incident

in the following lines : —

 

          "And they went about from nation unto nation,

             from one kingdom unto another people.

          He suffered no man to wrong them,

             and he rebuked kings for their sakes:

          Touch ye not mine anointed ones,

             and to my prophets do ye no harm."

                    (Ps. cv. 14-15, repeated in t Chron. xvi. 20-22.)

 

          In addition to this one instance in which the word

"prophet " is used, it is represented that Abraham had

visions, and that the word of Yahaweh came to him in

 

            ¹ One who accepts the Graf-Wellhausen analysis should observe that the

passages which have commonly been cited as prophetic occur alike in the

earlier and the later J and in P, though with characteristic differences.

On any critical theory it is probable that all the authors of Genesis, earlier

or later, thought of the prophetic gift as current among these predecessors

of Abraham.

40               THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

vision (Gen. xv. I, 4 E). A very prominent part of his

experiences consists in those when Yahaweh " appeared "

to him.¹

          "And Yahaweh appeared unto him at the oaks of Mamre," fol-

lowed by extended details (xviii..i J).

 

It is further represented that Isaac and Jacob had simi-

lar experiences. Yahaweh appeared unto Isaac, for-

bidding him to go down into Egypt as Abraham had

done ; and again appeared to him, promising to bless

and multiply him (Gen. xxvi. 2, 24 D. Jacob had a

prophetic dream, wherein the Angel of God commanded

him to return to Palestine (Gen. xxxi. 11, E). God ap-

peared to him at Bethel, after his return from Paddan-

aram (Gen. xxxv. 9 P). When he was about to go

down into Egypt,

          "God spake unto Israel in the visions of the night" (Gen. xlvi.

2E).

 

Look up these instances in detail, and it will be evident

that the patriarchs are here represented as having per-

sonal interviews with the supreme Being, essentially the

same as were enjoyed by the prophets of later times.

This is not a matter which depends wholly on the

critical theories one may hold. If the hexateuch was

written by Moses and Joshua and their associates, then

we have the testimony of that generation to the facts in

the case. But how is it on the theory of those who

analyze Genesis into the three documents, J and E and

P, dated respectively 800, 750, and 400 B.C.? On the

basis of their partition some of the passages that have

 

            ¹ For example, at his first coming to Palestine,

"Yahaweh appeared unto Abram, and said, To thy seed will I give this

land. And he built there an altar to Yahaweh that appeared unto him"

(Gen. xii. 7 J).

            "And Yahaweh appeared unto Abram, and said unto him, I am El-

shaddai" (Gen. xvii. 1 P [RP?]).

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS     41

 

been cited are taken from J, some from E, and some

from P. That is, all three alike testify to the prophetic

gifts of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. It is not unim-

portant which theory of the hexateuch we hold; but on

any theory the oldest Hebrew literature testifies to the

view we are advocating.

          In the records of the times of Moses and Joshua

the mention of prophecy is very abundant. In the

account of the exodus, for example, the stem             Prophecy in the

nabha occurs seventeen times, and the other              time of Moses and

terms that denote prophetic phenomena are                Joshua

much used. Instances will presently be given. Per-

haps we habitually think of Moses as a statesman, a

warrior, a lawgiver but, none the less, the record says

that he was remarkably endowed with the prophetic

gift. He is described as the greatest of prophets.¹

He is frequently spoken of, both in the hexateuch and

elsewhere, as "the man of God " (e.g. Deut. xxxiii. i;

Josh. xiv. 6; Ezra iii. 2; I Chron. xxiii. 14; 2 Chron. xxx.

16). He has the various experiences that characterize

a prophet. Habitually he has supernatural communica-

tion with God. Yahaweh appeared unto him (Ex. iii. 2,

16, and many places). Yahaweh caused him to see in

the prophetic sense (Ex. xxvii. 8; Num. viii. 4 et al.).

Using words of the stem raah, the beholding of visions

is attributed to Moses (Num. xii. 8; Ex. iii. 3). In cer-

tain instances presently to be cited, he is the typical

prophet with whom others are compared. The prophet

who is to be raised up he describes as "like unto me."

Yahaweh enables other men to prophesy by taking of

 

            ¹ "There arose not a prophet since in Israel, like unto Moses" (Deut.

xxxiv. so).

" And by a prophet Yahaweh brought up Israel out of Egypt, and by a

prophet he was guarded" (Hos. xii. 13 [14]).

42                    THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

the Spirit that was upon Moses and placing it upon

them. He is so superior to other prophets as to be

fairly in contrast with them.

          The records represent that Moses was not the only

prophet of this period. We read that " Miriam the

prophetess took a timbrel in her hand," and celebrated

the overthrow of Pharaoh at the Red Sea (Ex. xv. 20 E).

Miriam appears again in the narrative in which she and

Aaron find fault with Moses on account of the Ethiopian

woman. Yahaweh rebukes them, in language that im-

plies that Miriam is a prophet with whom Yahaweh

communicates in beholdings or in dreams, and that per-

sons of this sort were not unfamiliar to that generation

of Israelites.¹ This same fact of the multiplication of

prophecy appears in the story of the prophesying of

Eldad and Medad and the seventy, and in the wish then

expressed by Moses that all Yahaweh's people were

prophets.²

 

            ¹ "If there be a prophet of you,

                 I Yahaweh make myself known unto him in beholdings,

                 in dreams I speak with him.

             Not so is my servant Moses,

                in all my house he is trustworthy.

            Mouth unto mouth I speak with him,

                even causing him to behold, and not enigmatically,

                and the likeness of Yahaweh he gazeth upon " (Num. xii. 6—8 E).

It is not implied here that Moses has a different gift from the prophetic

gift of Miriam and Aaron, but that he has prophetic seeing power in a

much higher degree than they.

            ² "And he gathered seventy men of the elders of the people, and made

them stand around the Tent. And Yahaweh came down in the cloud, and

spake unto him, and took of the Spirit which was upon hire and gave it

upon seventy men, the elders. And it came to pass, as the Spirit rested

upon them, that they prophesied, and did no more. And there remained

two men in the camp, the name of the one being Eldad, and the name

of the second Medad; and the Spirit rested upon them, they being among

those who were written, and they not having gone forth to the Tent; and

they prophesied in the camp. And the young man ran and told Moses,

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS        43

 

Besides these passages, in which certain persons are

spoken of as prophets, there are others which make

such mention of prophetic functions as to imply that

prophets were something well known in that generation.

Words of the stem hhazah are less used in the records

for this period than in those of later periods. But it is

said of the elders of Israel: —

 

          "They had vision of Deity, and did eat and drink " (Ex. xxiv.

11 J).

 

And it is represented that Balaam twice describes

himself as —

 

"He that heareth the sayings of El,

  That seeth the vision of the Almighty,

  Having fallen, and his eyes having become uncovered" (Num.

          xxiv. 4, i6 JE).

 

Whatever the date of the book of Job, its action is

located in the time of the exodus or earlier. It affords

such instances as the following : —

          “In thoughts from the visions of the night" (iv. 13).

          "Thou scarest me with dreams, and terrifiest me with visions "

                    (vii. 14).

          "He shall be chased away as a vision of the night" (xx. 8).

 

          Passing to the use of other terms, the relations of

Aaron to Moses are defined in the words: —

 

          "Behold I have given thee for a Deity unto Pharaoh, Aaron

thy brother being thy prophet" (Ex. vii. i P).

 

Such language presupposes familiarity with the notion

of a prophet, and of the relations he sustains to Deity.

In Deuteronomy laws are given formally defining the

 

and said, Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp. And answered

Joshua the son of Nun, the minister of Moses, of his choice young men,

and said, My lord Moses, forbid them. And Moses said to him, Art thou

jealous for me? Would that all Yahaweh's people were prophets! that

Yahaweh would give his Spirit upon them!" (Num. xi. 24—29 JE).

44             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

character of a prophet, prescribing how true prophets

are to be distinguished from false, forecasting a line

of prophets to come (xiii. 1, 3, 5 [2, 4, 6], xviii. 15, 18,

20, 22). There is no need here to consider these pas-

sages at length. They will be discussed when we reach

the subjects of the functions of a prophet and of mes-

sianic prophecy.

          In these several passages a prophet is defined, as we

have seen, as a spokesman of Deity, divinely inspired

through visions, dreams, trances, divine appearings.

These affirmations are found not merely in the narrative

portions of the books, but in the statements which the

books say were made by the persons whose history they

narrate. Their validity depends not at all, directly, on

the question who wrote the pentateuchal books. If the

books are historically true, then the statements are true,

no matter when they were written in their present form.

And even from the point of view of those who regard

them as unhistorical, they testify to what their authors

believed to be true of the times of Moses. Further,

our citations have been made indifferently from sections

which the critical hypotheses ascribe to J, E, JE, P, and

D. If there were authors of all these classes, then all

alike agree in affirming that prophecy was abundant in

the days of Moses.

          For the times from the settlement of Israel in Canaan

to the birth of Samuel the mention of prophecy in the

Prophecy in                narratives is relatively unusual; but the

the times of                 stream of prophecy through this region of

the Judges                  the history is perceptible though slender.

Deborah is called a prophetess (Jud. iv. 4). Perhaps

we may be at a loss whether to classify her as a states-

man sometimes acting the part of a prophet, or as a

prophet sometimes doing the duty of a statesman.

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS       45

 

Gideon and others are occasionally represented as hold-

ing communication with God, such as a prophet might

hold. We are told of a prophet whom Yahaweh sent

to Israel in the days of Gideon (Jud. vi. 8), and we

have a record in three verses of his prophecy. We

are told of the appearing of the Angel of Yahaweh

to Gideon (Jud. vi. 12) and to Manoah and his wife

(Jud. xiii. 3, 10, 21). Few instances of theophany in

the bible are presented with as much fulness of detail

as these two. "The Angel," in the book of Judges,

is always a supernatural being, and not a prophet.

This is particularly the case with the Angel who ap-

peared to the wife of Manoah, and afterward to her and

Manoah, announcing the birth of Samson. But, four

times in the narrative, they speak of him as a " man of

God " ( Jud. xiii. 6, 8, 10, 11 ). Evidently a man of God,

a prophet, was a well-known fact within the range of

their experience.

          In the time of Eli, just at the close of this period,

the dearth of prophecy was deepest.

 

          "The word of Yahaweh being precious in those days, there being

no widespread vision" (i Sam. iii. I).

 

These words affirm that prophecy had then nearly dis-

appeared from Israel. The same fact is implied in the

statement concerning the recognition of Samuel.

          "And all Israel knew, from Dan and even unto Beer-Sheba, that

Samuel was made sure for a prophet to Yahaweh. And again

Yahaweh appeared in Shiloh ; for Yahaweh disclosed himself unto

Samuel in Shiloh in the word of Yahaweh " (I Sam. iii. 20-21).

 

          From these statements it has been inferred that there

was no prophecy in Israel before Samuel. This infer-

ence differs from the representations of the In the time

bible. If the passage last cited implies that of Eli

the wealth of prophecy which came in with Samuel was

46             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

in contrast with the poverty which directly preceded, it

equally implies that there had been an earlier time

when Yahaweh appeared in Shiloh by his prophetic

word. The other passage says that prophecy was at

that time a rare thing, not that it was nonexistent.

From the context we learn that it was not nonexistent.

We are told of a "man of God " who came to Eli with

just such a message as prophets are accustomed to

bring.¹ Further, we are told that Eli was sufficiently

familiar with the idea of prophetic function to recog-

nize the nature of Samuel's call when it came to him.²

In fine, the history of the times of the Judges justifies

the assertion of Jeremiah: —

          "Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of

Egypt unto this day, I have sent unto you all my servants the

prophets, daily rising up early and sending them" (vii. 25 RV).

 

          So much for the first great period of the history of proph-

ecy. Besides other statements in other terms, the words

"prophet" and "prophesy" are applied not less than

twenty-four times, in the Old Testament, to the period

before the death of Eli.³ And let us once more remind

ourselves that this is the testimony of the records irre-

spective of the question when or by whom the records

were written. Assuredly, if a person is in the habit

 

            ¹ "And there came a man of God unto Eli and said unto him, I surely

revealed myself unto the house of thy father when they were in Egypt,"

etc. (I Sam. ii. 27-36).

            ² Of Samuel it is said that he, being an inexperienced boy, "did not yet

know," that "the word of Yahaweh was not yet disclosed unto him."But

Eli was older and more experienced. "And Yahaweh again called Sam-

uel the third time, and he arose and went unto Eli, and said, Here am I

for thou calledst me; and Eli understood that Yahaweh was calling the

boy. And Eli said to Samuel, Go, lie down, and it shall be, if he call unto

thee thou shalt say, Speak, Yahaweh, for thy servant is hearkening"

(i Sam. iii. 7-9).

            ³ As we shall presently see, there is in this nothing contradictory of

I Sam. ix. 9.

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS      47

 

of designating certain parts of the hexateuch and of

Judges and Samuel as J and E, and of saying that J and

E are "prophetic" narratives, that person is precluded

from denying that these narratives recognize a prophetic

element in the history. And if he admits that these

writings which he regards as the earliest testify to the

existence of prophets in this part of the history, he must

all the more admit that what he regards as the later

parts of the record testify to the same fact. Any one

who reads the writings without thus dividing them into

earlier and later sections, will find the same testimony

there. In other words, there is a consensus of testi-

mony among the writers of the Old Testament, no mat-

ter how you regard them critically, to the effect that

prophecy in Israel came down from the earliest times.

          II. In the second great period of the history of the

prophets, the first subordinate period is that in which

Samuel and Nathan and David are proms-                  Prophecy in

nent. Its natural limits are from the death of                the times of Samuel,

          Eli to the disruption of the kingdom after          David, and

Solomon. The chronology is in dispute, but                Nathan

the biblical numbers make it about one hundred and

sixty years.

          The distinguished prophets named in the record for

this period are Samuel and Gad and Nathan, David and

Solomon, Zadok, Asaph and Heman and

Ethan or Jeduthun, Ahijah and Shemaiah and The prophets

Jedo. The easiest and most effective way of obtaining

information concerning these men would be to look

them up, with the aid of a concordance, in the Old

Testament. In this chapter we must dismiss them with

just a few sentences.

          Samuel is the earliest and, with the exception of

David, the most distinguished great prophet of this

48             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

time. His career is too well known to need recapitula-

tion here. Gad was associated with David from the time

when David first became an outlaw to near the close of

the reign. It was by his advice that David chose his

hiding places within the borders of Judah, and he was

the prophet consulted when Oman's threshing floor

was purchased, and the temple site fixed (i Sam.

xxii. 5; 2 Sam. xxiv. 11ff.; I Chron. xxi. 9 ff.).

Nathan first appears in the middle years of David's

reign, rebuking him for his sin in the matter of Uriah;

and, later,¹ as the prophet through whom the great

promise was given to David, in response to David's dis-

position to build a temple (2 Sam. xii ; Ps. li, title; 2

Sam. vii; I Chron. xvii). Still later Nathan figures as

the strong supporter of the claims of Solomon to the

throne (I Ki. i). The Chronicler groups David and Gad

and Nathan, and refers to "the words" of Samuel and

of Gad and of Nathan as written sources for the history

of David and of the times before him (r Chron. xxix. 29;

2 Chron. xxix. 25).

          David is spoken of as a "man of God," upon whom

the Spirit came mightily, to whom Yahaweh appeared

(e.g. 2 Chron. viii. 14; Neh. xii. 24, 36 ; I Sam. xvi. 13,

etc.; 2 Chron. iii. I. Also Acts ii. 30). In these and

other terms he is presented to us as richly endowed

with prophetic gifts. To Solomon also prophetic reve-

lations are attributed.²

 

            ¹  The affair of Uriah occurred while the Ammonite war was in progress,

before David's conquests had brought him rest. The bringing up of the

ark to Jerusalem and the giving of the great promise occurred after Yaha-

weh had given David rest from all his enemies, and when his dominions

extended from Hamath to Shihor of Egypt (2 Sam. vii. I; I Chron. xiii.

5). That is, the Uriah affair preceded the others, though it is narrated

after them.

            ² "In that night Deity appeared to Solomon." "In Gibeon Yahaweh

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS        49

 

          Zadok, afterward highpriest, is in one passage called

a seer (2 Sam. xv. 27). In his detailed description of

the large temple choirs organized by David, the Chron-

icler speaks of Asaph and Heman and Jeduthun as

prophesying, and calls Heman the hhozeh of the king.¹

In his account of the last reigns in Judah he makes

similar statements, speaking of Asaph as "the hhozeh,"

and of "Asaph and Heman and Jeduthun the hhozeh

of the king " (2 Chron. xxix. 30, xxxv. 15).

          Ahijah the Shilonite, we are told, in the later years

of Solomon, promised the kingdom to Jeroboam, tear-

ing his robe into twelve pieces, and giving Jeroboam

ten. Later he gave a most uncomforting reply to

Jeroboam's queen, who sought him in behalf of her sick

son (1 Ki. xi. 29-39, xiv. 1-18). We are told of an-

other prophet who came from Judah, when Jeroboam

was king, and prophesied against the altar of Bethel,

and of an old prophet who entertained him (I Ki. xiii ;

2 Ki. xxiii. 17-18). Josephus says that the prophet

from Judah was named Jadon. In Chronicles, Jedo or

Jedai is mentioned (2 Chron. ix. 29), along with Ahijah

and Nathan, as a source for the history of Solomon.

The name appears as Iddo in our English versions, but

it is different from the name Iddo as elsewhere occur-

ring, and Jedo is probably the Jadon of Josephus. Be-

 

appeared unto Solomon in a dream by night." "And the word of Yaha-

weh was to Solomon, saying " (2 Chron. i. 7-12; I Ki. iii. 5-15, vi. 11-13,

cf. ix. 2).

            ¹"And David and the captains of the host separated to the service the

sons of Asaph and hIeman and Jeduthun, who prophesied with lyres, with

harps, and with cymbals . . . the sons of Asaph upon the hand of Asaph

who prophesied upon the hands of the king. To Jeduthun; the sons of

Jeduthun . . . upon the hands of their father Jeduthun, who prophesied

with the lyre, to give thanks and to praise Yahaweh. To Heman; . . .

all these were sons to Heman the hhozeh of the king in the words of God,

to lift up horn" (i Chron. xxv. 1-5).

50                   THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

longing to the same group of prophets is Shemaiah, who

forbade the attempt of Rehoboam to subdue the ten

tribes, and who encouraged Rehoboam against the inva-

sion of Shishak (I Ki. xii. 22; 2 Chron. xi. 2, xii. 7).

The Chronicler refers to him along with Iddo (probably

a much later writer) for the history of Rehoboam

(xii. 15).¹

          These distinguished prophets, with other great men,

constituted a brilliant circle around the thrones of David

Organiza-        and Solomon. But besides these there were

tions               a large number of other prophets. With

Samuel, prophecy had entered upon a brighter era.

There was a great revival of prophetism. When the

writer of 1 Sam. iii. I says that during Samuel's child-

hood there was no widespread vision, he implies that

vision was widespread when he wrote. That prophets

were numerous is suggested by Saul's complaint that

Yahaweh answered him not, either "by dreams or by

Urim, or by prophets" (I Sam. xxviii. 6, 15). Promi-

nent among the evidences of the growing influence of

prophecy, at this time, are the organized bands of

prophets that present themselves to view. We find a

procession of prophets meeting Saul when Samuel had

anointed him, and a body of them engaged in concerted

services at Naioth in Ramah when David fled thither

(I Sam. x. 5 ff., xix. 18-24). The nature of these organi-

zations we are to consider later. For the present we

simply note that they are characteristic of the period.

Through the influence of Samuel, prophecy so impressed

itself upon his generation, that the impression remained

to future generations. There is no room for our being

 

            ¹ In the long addition after 1 Ki. xii. 24 in the Greek copies, Shemaiah

is said to be the prophet who tore his robe into twelve pieces and gave

Jeroboam ten.

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS       51

 

surprised that he is commonly regarded as the father of

prophecy.

          In the literature concerning this period we find nearly

all the different terms that are used in the bible to

designate prophetic function, — "man of                             The terms

God," "word of Yahaweh," "Spirit of Yaha-               that are used

weh," and the words of the stems nabha and hhazah

and raah.^l  On the strength of i Sam. ix. 9 many

affirm that the word "prophet " was new in Israel when

this narrative in Samuel was written, and that neither

the word nor the fact had ever before been known.

The true inference from the biblical phenomena is that

both the institution and the word had formerly been

well known, but had temporarily faded from use, and

now reappeared.² The statement in Samuel is: —

 

          “He that is to-day called a prophet was formerly called a seer."

 

But the writer of this statement says that the word

"prophet " was in familiar use, and that prophets were

well-known personages, not merely at the time when he

 

            ¹ Samuel and Zadok are called roeh (1 Sam. ix. 9, II, 18, 19; I

Chron. ix. 22, xxvi. 28, xxix. 29; 2 Sam. xv. 27). Samuel has vision,

mar’ah (I Sam. iii. 15). Theophany is frequent (e.g. 1 Ki. iii. 5, ix. 2,

xi. 9).

            The term hhozeh is applied to Gad, Asaph, Heman, Jeduthun, Jedo,

Iddo (2 Sam. xxiv. II; I Chron. xxi. 9, xxix. 29, xxv. 5; 2 Chron. xxxv.

15, xxix. 25, 30, ix. 29, xii. 15). Other nouns of the stem appear in I Sam.

iii. 1; 2 Sam. vii. 17; I Chron. xvii. 15; Ps. lxxxix. 19 [20]; 2 Chron.

ix. 29. The word hhazon first appears in I Sam. iii. 1, this being the

word that is afterward mostly used in the literary titles of the prophetic

writings.

            ² The disappearance of words from use, and their subsequent reappear-

ance, is one of the familiar phenomena of language. For example, Mr.

Leon Mead is quoted as saying in his book Word Coinage that such words

as transcend, bland, sphere, blithe, franchise, carve, anthem, in good use

in Chaucer, were regarded in the seventeenth century as obsolete, but have

since been reinstated.

52              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

wrote, but at the time concerning which he makes the

statement.¹  On the very next day, this writer says,

prophets were seen, mentioned, discussed, not by

Samuel alone, but popularly. The point which he

makes is this : that though prophets and the name

prophet were now familiar in Israel, Saul was one of a

class who took no particular interest in them. He still

habitually used the term "seer," which had till recently

displaced the term "prophet." The writer contemplates

prophecy, both the word and the fact, as a gift to Israel

which had been interrupted but was now restored, and

not at all as a new gift which had never till now been

bestowed. In this he agrees with the writers of the

earlier history, who speak of prophets as existing at least

from the times of Abraham.

 

            ¹ "And the young man . . said, Behold there is found in my hand a

quarter shekel of silver, and I will give [it] to the man of God, and he

will tell us our way. (Formerly in Israel thus said the man when he went

to inquire of God, Come ye and let us go unto the seer. For he that is to-

day called the prophet was formerly called the seer.) . . . And they went

unto the city where was the man of God. . . . And when they found young

women coming forth to draw water, they said to them, Is the seer within ?

. . . And Saul approached Samuel, . . . and said, Tell me, pray, where is

the house of the seer. And Samuel answered Saul, and said, I am the

seer."

            The next day, when the two parted, Samuel gave Saul directions.

            "Thou wilt come unto the hill of God, . . . and wilt fall in with a

string of prophets coming down from the highplace, and before them

psaltery and timbrel and pipe and harp, and they prophesying. And the

Spirit of Yahaweh will come mightily upon thee, and thou wilt prophesy

with them, and wilt be turned to another man."

            It happens as Samuel has said. "And they came there to the hill, and

behold a string of prophets meeting him, and the Spirit of God came

mightily upon him and he prophesied in the midst of them. And it

happened in the case of any one who knew him formerly, that they looked,

and behold he prophesied with prophets. And the people said, each to his

neighbor, What is it that has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also

among the prophets ?" (1 Sam. ix. 8-11, 18-19, x. 5-6, 10-12).

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS      53

 

The second subperiod may be designated by the

names of its two great prophets, Elijah and Elisha. It 

extends from the disruption of the kingdom                Prophecy

to the death of Elisha, about one hundred and             from the disruption

thirty-five years by the biblical data. Its last               to Elisha

fifty years correspond nearly to the earlier Assyrian

period, when Shalmanezer II and Rimman-nirari III

made most of Palestine tributary. Its distinguished

prophets are Ahijah and Shemaiah and Jedo, who

survive from the former period, Oded and Azariah and

Hanani and Jehu, Elijah and Elisha, Micaiah and Jahaziel

and Eliezer, Jehoiada and Zechariah.

          Oded and Azariah his son urged Asa to reforma-

tion work, after his victory over Zerah the Ethiopian

(2 Chron. xv. I, 8). Hanani the reek rebuked Asa for

his intrigues with Ben-hadad, and was imprisoned

(2 Chron. xvi. 7-10).  "Jehu the son of Hanani the

hhozeh," elsewhere described as "Jehu the prophet,"

prophesied against Baasha of Israel (I Ki. xvi. I, 7, 12).

He met Jehoshaphat with rebuke and counsel, on his

return from the Ramoth-gilead expedition, and his his-

tory of Jehoshaphat is said to have been "brought up

upon the book of the kings of Israel" (2 Chron. xix. 2,

xx. 34). His career was largely contemporary with

that of Elijah the Tishbite. Elijah and Elisha are so

well known that they may here be passed by. The

picture of Micaiah the son of Imlah prophesying before

Ahab and Jehoshaphat (i Ki. xxii; 2 Chron. xviii) is a

familiar one. A little later, when Jehoshaphat was

preparing to meet the Moabite invasion, the Spirit of

Yahaweh came upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, in

the midst of the congregation (2 Chron. xx. 14). Just

after the death of Ahab, when Jehoshaphat had joined

with Ahab's son Ahaziah to build Tarshish-going ships,

54             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Eliezer the son of Dodavah prophesied against the

alliance (2 Chron. xx. 37). The long life of the pro-

phetically gifted highpriest Jehoiada (2 Ki.;

2 Chron. xxiii–xxiv, especially xxiv. 15) was nearly con-

temporary with this whole period of prophetic history.

His death and that of his spirit-gifted son Zechariah

(2 Chron. xxiv. 19-22) occurred not very long before

that of Elisha.

          In several instances prophets are individually men-

tioned, though their names are not given. Such, for

example, is the prophet who announced to Ahab his

victory over Syria (1 Ki. xx. 13). Later in the same

chapter a prophet promises him another victory, and

yet later a prophet, also spoken of as " of the sons of

the prophets," rebukes Ahab for not securing the fruits

of his victory. We have also an account of a person

who is described as "a prophet," and as " one of the

sons of the prophets" (2 Ki. ix), who anointed Jehu as

king.

In the northern kingdom the organizations described

as "the sons of the prophets " are, next to the person-

The sons of      ality of Elijah and Elisha, the characteristic

the prophets     feature of this period. Their character will

be considered later. For the present we only note that

they were under the supervision of Elijah and Elisha,

and that they probably account for the very large num-

ber of the prophets at that time.

          That the number was large the record clearly affirms.

Of those in the northern kingdom, Elijah at Horeb says:

"They have slain thy prophets with the sword" (Ki.

xix. to, 14). "When Jezebel slew the prophets of Yaha-

weh," Obadiah the steward of Ahab hid a hundred of

them by fifties in a cave (I Ki. xviii. 4, 13), and the ac-

count seems to suggest that this was but a fraction of

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS       55

 

the whole number. The prophets of Baal and of the

asherahs numbered eight hundred and fifty (i Ki. xviii.

19), and it is possible that Yahaweh's prophets were

as numerous. Perhaps, however, there were not many

prophets who were supernaturally gifted. Most of those

who are called prophets may have been "sons of the

prophets" (see i Ki. xx. 35, 38, and 2 Ki. ix. 1, 4), that

is, either pupils of some particular prophet, or members

of the organizations. Note that the community at Jeri-

cho was able to send out detachments of fifty (2 Ki. ii.

7, 16, 17). For the southern kingdom the accounts are

less explicit, but prophets were also numerous there.

Jehoshaphat gives the exhortation: "Believe his proph-

ets, so shall ye prosper" (2 Chron. xx. 20). In the

account of the defection of Joash of Judah we read:

"He sent prophets to them to bring them again unto

Yahaweh, and they testified with them, but they did not

hear" (2 Chron. xxiv. 19).

          A class of men make their appearance within this

period whom the biblical writers regard as false

prophets of Yahaweh, and from this time False

on they abound throughout the history. Of prophets

this class is the old prophet of Bethel (1 Ki. xiii).

Apparently he has had genuine prophetic gifts, and

has perverted them. There were four hundred proph-

ets, Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah being one of

them who prophesied falsely in the name of Yahaweh

to persuade Ahab and Jehoshaphat to go up to Ramoth-

gilead (1 Ki. xxii. 6, 11; 2 Chron. xviii. 5). The proph-

ets had become so influential that there was a field of

operations for counterfeit prophets.

          Words of the stems nabha, raah, hhazah, and also the

usual phrases descriptive of the prophet and of prophetic

function, are current in the accounts of all parts of this

56               THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

period. In the latter part of the period, Jehu the king

is represented as using the word massa, "burden," in the

technical sense in which, from this time on, it denotes a

prophecy of a certain type (2 Ki. ix. 25-26).

          The third subperiod is that of Isaiah and his near

predecessors and successors. It extends from the death

Prophecy from             of Elisha to the captivity of Manasseh, per-

the death                   haps about two hundred years, but fifty years

of Elisha to                 less by the usual interpretation of the A.ssyr-

Manasseh                  ian chronology. It covers the middle As-

syrian period, that in which Tiglath-pilezer is prominent,

and the later Assyrian period, that of Sargon and his

dynasty. To it belong the earlier group of the so-called

literary prophets. The distinguished names for the

period are Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, the Zechariah of Uz-

ziah's time, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, the author or authors

of Zech. ix-xiv, Micah, the Oded of the time of Ahaz.

This is the most conspicuous time in the history of the

prophets, and the fullest in the materials it offers, but

we must deal with it only in the barest outline.

          We have no information concerning the prophet Joel,

save as the author of the book of that name. It is gen-

erally agreed that the book is either the earliest or the

latest of the fifteen known as the major and minor proph-

ets. I have no doubt that it is the earliest. It pre-

sents a very distinct historical situation, which seems to

me to be that of the invasion when Hazael swept the

region and besieged Jerusalem (2 Ki. xii. 17-xiii. 9 and

2 Chron. xxiv. 23-25), the prophet being contemporary

with the event. Perhaps the death of Elisha occurred

after this event, in the same year, so that Joel was in

early life a contemporary of the illustrious northern

prophet. Joel teaches a doctrine of the Day of Yaha-

weh, on which the succeeding prophets build. He prom-

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS      57

 

ises an outpouring of the Spirit, which may be plausibly

regarded as having its first fulfilment in the days of

Isaiah and his contemporaries.

          Obadiah takes up the great theme, the Day of Ya-

haweh, illustrating it by a single instance, Yahaweh's

dealings with Edom. The brief prophecy pictures two

historical situations, — that of Edom's offence, and that

of Edom's punishment. The offence-situation, it seems

to me, is the situation that had been outlined in Joel, the

punishment being that inflicted in Amaziah's expedition

(2 Ki. xiv. 7 and 2 Chron. xxv). There is an account

of a man of God who persuaded Amaziah not to take

Israelitish allies with him on this expedition, and an

account of a prophet who rebuked him after his return

for worshipping Edomite gods (2 Chron. xxv. 7-10, 15-

16). Supposably this prophet and this man of God may

be identical, and supposably one or both may be identi-

cal with Obadiah.

          The prophet Jonah lived just before the conquests by

Jeroboam II.¹ This historical prophet Jonah is the hero

of the story in the book of Jonah, whatever one may

think of the authorship or the character of the book.

The Chronicler tells us of one Zechariah, " who had

discernment in beholding of the Deity " during those

years of Uzziah in which that king was faithful and

prosperous (2 Chron. xxvi. 5).

          Concerning Amos we have no information except in

the book of that name. He is represented as a Judean

prophet, not affiliated with the " sons of the prophets "

of the northern kingdom (i. 1, vii. 14, etc.), though his

 

            ¹ "It was he who restored the coast of Israel, from the entering in of

Hamath unto the sea of the Arabah, according to the word of Yahaweh

the god of Israel, which he spake by the hand of his servant Jonah the son

of Amittai, the prophet, who was from Gath-hepher" (2 Ki. xiv. 25).

58             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

extant prophecies concern mainly the northern kingdom.

The book has a title, dating it "two years before the

earthquake," at a point of time when Jeroboam was

king in Israel and Uzziah in Judah, perhaps making

Amos a boy when Joel was a man. The several proph-

ecies in the book seem to be of one date. The book

opens with a motto cited from Joel (Am. i. 2; Joel

16), and, apparently, it rebukes certain persons who are

taking unwarranted encouragement from what Joel has

prophesied concerning the Day of Yahaweh (v. 8 ff.).

          What we know concerning Hosea comes from the

title and contents of his book. He began prophesying

almost contemporaneously with Amos, but his career

extended through the reigns of Jotham and Ahaz, and

into that of Hezekiah, a period of several decades„ He

is a prophet of the northern kingdom, but his sympa-

thies are wholly with the house of David.

          Isaiah is perhaps the greatest of all the prophets.

The title to his book mentions the same kings of Judah

with the title to Hosea. Isaiah's career began later in

the reign of Uzziah than those of Amos and Hosea, and

may have extended into the reign of Manasseh. In

more passages than one he perpetuates the preaching

of the Day of Yahaweh, which his predecessors had

inaugurated. We cannot here consider the questions

that have been raised concerning the relations of Isaiah

the son of Amoz to our existing book of Isaiah.

          The second part of our book of Zechariah consists of

two "burdens " (ix–xi, xii–xiv). The first presents a

situation in which the separate kingdoms of Judah and

Ephraim are in existence, and in which Assyria is the

great world-power (ix. 1o, 13, x. 6, 7, 10, 11). The

second is addressed to persons who can remember the

earthquake in the time of Uzziah (xiv. 5). Other marks

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS            59

 

of like significance abound in both. These marks seem

to date these two Burdens during the time when Isaiah

was contemporary with Hosea.

          Micah, according to the title of the book, was the

contemporary of Isaiah from some date in the reign of

Jotham. In later times Jeremiah's friends cite him as

a precedent in favor of prophetic freedom of speech

(Jer. xxvi. 17-19). So far as appears, he was exclusively

a prophet of Judah.

          Early in the reign of Ahaz, in the midst of the careers

of Hosea and Isaiah and Micah, we have a brief note

concerning a prophet named Oded, a different man from

the Oded of the time of Asa. He secured the return

of two hundred thousand women and children whom

the Israelites under Pekah had carried captive from

Judah (2 Chron. xxviii. 9).

          Many allusions in the literature dealing with these

times indicate that the prophet was a familiar figure,¹

and that prophets were numerous.² This indication is

reenforced by the very frequent mention of false proph-

ets.³ The true prophets were numerous enough to have

numerous counterfeits. Perhaps the statement of Amos

that he is not a son of a prophet implies that the pro-

phetic organizations were still maintained in northern

Israel (vii. 14), but this allusion stands alone.

 

            ¹ "The mighty man and the man of war, the judge and the prophet"

(Isa. iii. 2). "I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young

men for Nazirites " (Am. ii. 11).

            ² "Yahaweh testified unto Israel and unto Judah by the hand of every

prophet, and of every seer." "As he spake by the hand of all his servants

the prophets" (2 Ki. xvii. 13, 23). "I have also spoken unto the prophets,

and I have multiplied visions, and by the hand of the prophets have I used

similitudes" (Hos. xii. 10 [11]). See also, among other instances, 2 Ki.

xxi. 10 and 2 Chron. xxxiii. 10; Isa. xxx. 10; Hos. vi. 5, iv. 5, ix. 7, 8;

Am. ii. 12, iii. 7, 8, vii. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16; Mic. iii. 6, 7.

            ³ Isaiah is emphatic concerning these. "The prophet that giveth lies

60            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          Roeh, in the sense of seer, is employed for the last

time in the Old Testament in Isa. xxx. 10. The other

derivatives of raah, with those of nabha and hhazah,

continue to be used in this and the subsequent periods.

So do the phrases " man of God," " word of Yahaweh,"

"Spirit of Yahaweh." In Isa. xxx. to the English

versions render hhazah and its noun by " prophesy "

and " prophets," to distinguish them from raah and its

noun which they render "see" and "seer." Massa,

"burden," is much used in this period (e.g. Isa. xix. t„

xxi. t, xxii. I). Twice (Prov. xxx. t, xxxi. t) the old

version renders it " prophecy " and the revised versions

"oracle."  Hittiph and its noun are used of prophesying

only in this period (Am. vii. 16; Mic. ii. 6, 11) and in

two places in Ezekiel.

          The fourth subperiod is that of the Palestinian

prophets of the time of Jeremiah, he himself being the

Prophecy from             central figure. Counted from the captivity of

Manasseh to               Manasseh to the burning of the temple, the

the exile                    time is perhaps about sixty years; counted

to the death of Jeremiah it is longer, perhaps by some

decades. The distinguished names are Nahum, Habak-

kuk, Zephaniah, Jeremiah, with three others that are

incidentally mentioned in the records. In the great

crisis of the reformation under Josiah, the prophet con-

sulted was not Jeremiah or Zephaniah, but the prophet-

ess Huldah, then living in Jerusalem (2 Ki. xxii. 14 and

2 Chron. xxxiv. 22). The narrative makes the impression

that she was a person of distinction and influence, and

highly gifted with prophetic power. In the book of

 

for torah, he is the tail" (ix. 15 [14]). "Priest and prophet have erred

through strong drink " (xxviii. 7). "Yahaweh . . . hath closed your eyes,

ye prophets, and hath covered your heads, ye seers; and to you vision

hath become wholly like the words of the book that is sealed" (xxix. 10).

And Isaiah is not alone in this (e.g. Mic. iii. 5, 11).

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS       61

 

Jeremiah, Baruch the scribe appears with prominence

(xxxii. 12-16, xxxvi, xliii, xlv), though it is not expressly

said that he is a prophet. We have also an account of

one Uriah the son of Shemaiah of Kiriath-jearim, who

prophesied in the time of Jehoiakim, and who was

brought by some form of extradition from Egypt and

put to death (Jer. xxvi. 20-23).

          Other prophets were numerous. The biblical writings

concerning the time speak of them in more than thirty

places. They speak thus of true prophets (e.g. 2 Ki.

xxiii. 2 and 2 Chron. xxxvi. 16 ; Lam. ii. 9 ; Jer. vii. 25,

xxvi. 5), and of false prophets as well (e.g. Zeph.

iii. 4 ; Lam. iv. 13; Jer. ii. 8, 26, xiv. 18, xxiii. 9, 11).

The false prophets are more to the front than the true.

Not less than four are mentioned by name. In the

fourth year of Zedekiah, the prophet Hananiah the son

of Azzur broke the yoke from off the neck of Jeremiah,

in token of the breaking of the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar.

Jeremiah predicted his death in punishment for thus

making the people trust in a lie ; and the prediction

was fulfilled (Jer. xxviii). Ahab the son of Kolaiah and

Zedekiah the son of Maaseiah prophesied a lie in the

name of Yahaweh, and were roasted in the fire by

the king of Babylon (Jer. xxix. 21-23). Shemaiah the

Nehelamite prophesied, causing the people to trust in a

lie, and sent letters to Jerusalem reviling Jeremiah as a

madman, and was divinely punished ( Jer. xxix. 24, 28, 31,

32). The last named and possibly some of the others

prophesied in Babylonia among the exiles.

          The fifth subperiod is that of the prophets in Babylonia

during the seventy years of the exile. It begins with

the earlier deportations by Nebuchadnezzar from Jeru-

salem, nearly twenty years before the burning of the

temple, and thus overlaps the preceding subperiod, the

62             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

distinction between the two being in part geographical.

The two great names are Daniel and Ezekiel. On the

Prophecy in      basis of views concerning the book of Isaiah

Babylonia        that were held twenty years ago, many scholars

among the exiles               exiles would add a yet greater name, that of the sup-

posed second Isaiah. These prophets flourished in the

country of the Euphrates, and are thus placed in a dif-

ferent class from their contemporaries in Palestine,

whom we have assigned to the preceding period.

          In the earlier part of this period, at least, we find

mention of numerous false prophets, male and female,

prophesying in the name of Yahaweh ; men who daub

with untempered mortar, and women who sew pillows

upon all elbows (e.g. Ezek. xiii. 2, 3, 4, 9, 15–16, 17-18,

xiv. 4, 7, 9, 10). True prophets are not so much in

evidence, though there may have been numbers of them

also. Certain critical theories now current seem to

require the hypothesis that prophets now began to

multiply in the lands of the exile.

          The last subperiod is that of the prophets after the

return from exile in the first year of Cyrus. The great

Prophecy in      names are those of Haggai, the Zechariah of

the post-          Zech. i–viii, Ezra, Nehemiah,- the author of

exilian times     Malachi. Daniel was still alive at the open-

ing of the period. Haggai and Zechariah flourished

in the early years of it (Ezra v. 1, 2, vi. 14; Hag. i. 1;

Zech. i. 1, etc.). It is supposable that in early life they

may have known Jeremiah and Ezekiel. Ezra is chiefly

known as the scribe, and Nehemiah by his political

achievements ; but there is no room to doubt that the

biblical narrators regard them as exercising prophetic

gifts. No one is qualified to say whether the book of

Malachi was written by a prophet of that name, or by

Ezra, or by some one else.

 

 

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS      63

 

          The period was not without its other prophets, true

and false (Zech. vii. 3, viii. 9; Neh. vi. 7). Nehemiah

speaks of Shemaiah the son of Delaiah, who had been

hired to pronounce a false prophecy, and of "the

prophetess Noadiah and the rest of the prophets" who

sought to frighten him (vi. 10-14). These notices, with

the analogy of the preceding periods, confirm the tradi-

tions concerning the Great Synagogue, which affirm

that prophets were numerous at this time.

          Nevertheless the time is priestly rather than prophetic.

So far as the record shows, the prophetic organizations

have vanished. In their stead we find the place Casiphia,

for training men for the various duties of the temple

service (Ezra viii. 17). A marked feature of the period

is the habit of appeal to the prophets of earlier times

(Zech. i. 4, 5, 6, vii. 7, 12; Mal. iv. 5; Ezra ix. 11;

Neh. ix. 26, 30, 32). Evidently these earlier prophets''

are regarded as authoritative scriptures.

          The question of the cessation of prophecy we must

here dismiss with a few sentences. The period of the

so-called men of the Great Synagogue covers             The cessa-

the last two prophetic periods and the time                 tion of

following. With the exception of Ezekiel,                   prophecy

who is probably included by implication, all the distin-

guished exilian and postexilian prophets are expressly

named in the lists of the men of the Great Synagogue.

Others besides prophets are also named, the number

being one hundred and twenty in all, and the latest

great name being that of the highpriest Simon the

Just. The Talmuds say that Simon was highpriest in

the time of Alexander the Great, and Josephus is clearly

mistaken in assigning him to a later time.

          Most statements that are made concerning the men

of the Great Synagogue as an organization are insuffi-

64          THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

ciently based—alike those that affirm and those that

deny. But there is no room for doubt that this succes-

sion of men existed historically, or that the traditions

apply this name to them, or that they did many of the

things which the traditions attribute to them. Among

the acts attributed to them are the writing of the latest

Old Testament books and the completion of the Old

Testament.

          While the traditions say that many of the men of

the Great Synagogue were prophets up to the time of

Nehemiah and the writing of Malachi, they also say

that the men of the Great Synagogue as a whole are

later than the succession of the prophets taken as i'a

whole, that is, that the succession of prophets ceased at

some time before Simon the Just, and therefore before

the beginning of the Greek period. This finds confirma-

tion in the phenomena of the latest narrative books of

the Old Testament. The latest events mentioned in

these occurred (many assertions to the contrary notwith-

standing) some time before the death of Nehemiah.

Both in and out of the Old Testament, prophets are

abundantly mentioned as contemporaneous with Nehe-

miah, but none as living later. Josephus testifies (Cont.

Ap. I, 8) that the succession of the prophets ceased

with the reign of the Artaxerxes who reigned after

Xerxes. Of course he means that it ceased with the lives

of the prophets who were contemporary with Artaxer-

xes. Some of these, Nehemiah for example, may have

survived Artaxerxes by several decades.

          There has been some dispute over the interpretation

of the Jewish traditions in this matter, and there is some

confusion in the traditions themselves, this last being in

part due to the inexplicable confusion of the rabbinical

chronology for the Persian period. But there are cer-

THE EXTERNAL HISTORY OF THE PROPHETS       65

 

tain very solid facts which ought to interpret the facts

that are less evident. Judas Maccabus and his asso-

ciates regarded themselves as under the influence of the

divine Spirit, and claimed a certain power of making

predictions and working miracles. It has been inferred

that they counted themselves as prophets, but there is

clear proof to the contrary. We are told that they were

at a loss what to do with the altar of burnt offering

which the heathen had profaned. So they pulled it

down and laid away the stones "until there should

come a prophet to give answer concerning them"

(I Mac. iv. 46). A few years later they decided "that

Simon should be their prince and highpriest forever,

until there arise a faithful prophet" (xiv. 41). We are

told that under Bacchides "there arose a great affliction

in Israel, such as had not occurred since the time that

a prophet appeared not amongst them " (ix. 27). Such

instances show that the Maccabees were consciously not

prophets, however conscious they may have been of the

possession of supernatural powers. In their time proph-

ets in the proper sense were thought of as belonging

to the past. Similar reasoning would apply to Simon

the Just, or to Jesus the son of Sirach, or to others.

          In fine, the Jewish tradition holds that the succession

of the prophets ceased with the dying out of Nehemiah

and his associates, about 400 B.C. There was an expec-

tation that it would sometime be renewed, but it be-

came at that time non-existent. From the Christian

point of view it is plausible to affirm that the succession

reappeared in the person of John the Baptist, followed

by Jesus himself, and by the apostles and prophets of

primitive Christianity.

 

 

 

                                 CHAPTER IV

 

 

   THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE

 

 

          WHAT manner of man was the prophet outwardly?

What do we know concerning his personal appearance

and the external insignia of his office and the visible life

he lived among his fellow-citizens? In answer to these

questions we will discuss mainly three topics : first, the

outward presentment of the prophets; second, their

communal organizations; third, the so-called prophetic

order.

          There is no reason why one's conclusions on these

topics should be greatly affected by the critical position

One's view as              he occupies. In regard to the external his-

affected by his             tory of the prophets, as we ran it over in the

his critical position       position last chapter, the men of the Modern View

differ widely with the older scholars ; though even here

the difference is less over the question what the scrip-

tures say than over the question how far what they say

is to be believed. But in the matter of the outward

phenomena presented by the prophets there is less

room for difference. The prominent characteristics are

the same at all dates in the history, however the proph-

ets of the different periods may differ in matters of

detail. This fact the scholars of the Modern View

might account for by regarding all the scriptural pic-

tures of the prophet as late ; but however one accounts

for it, it is a fact. Owing to it, our conclusions on these

points depend much less than in some other cases on

 

                                       66

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE     67

 

our opinions as to the dates of the writings. Some of

the views presented in this chapter are unlike those that

have been commonly held; but the differences are not

along the lines of the controversy between the Modern

View and the older views.

          I. This preliminary being disposed of, we proceed to

inquire as to the external appearance of the prophet of

Israel.

          In centuries past Christian people have been accus-

tomed to think of him as though he were a Christian

priest or monk. Painters have painted his Baseless cur-

picture with this idea in mind. In Christian rent ideas

art a prophet is hardly more or less than an ecclesiastic,

barefoot, with a robe and a tonsure and a general air

of unearthliness. This is a miracle equal to that by

which art has transformed the angels of the bible, who

are always either young men or old men, into stocking-

less winged women. Far be it from me to make criti-

cism upon this as art; I only remark that art isn't

history.

          With this idea of an ecclesiastical personage has been

combined that of a revealer of hidden things. Certain

lines of the picture have been modelled upon the medi-

eval astrologer, or the priest of a Greek oracle, as if

the prophet were a weird, mysterious being who sits on

a tripod in a cave, and gives other-world advice to such

frightened souls as come to him.

          Or one starts with the assumption that religion is

developing from lower forms to higher, and that the

earlier Hebrew prophets must have started at a pretty

low degree. So he comes to the study of them with a

mind preoccupied with African fetich-men, or voudou

practitioners, or American Indian medicine-men. Look-

ing through glasses of this color, he may see in Samuel's

68            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

companies of prophets little else than medicine dances

and powwow circles.

          Or, taking his cue from the notion that the Orient

never changes, that what now exists there is what always

existed there, one may imagine the prophetic companies

as bands of whirling dervishes.

          Evidently we are in danger of being misled both by

our preconceived notions and by our love of the pictu-

resque, and we therefore especially need to be on our

guard, attending with care to the evidence in the case.

Let us do this. Let us examine what information we

have, and base our pictures of the prophets upon that,

instead of first forming our ideas concerning the proph-

ets, and then manipulating the information to make it

conform to the ideas.

          A particularly significant thing in the biblical ac-

counts is the absence of phenomena of this unearthly

Significant       sort among the prophets as a class. On cer-

absence of       tain occasions particular prophets practised

unearthly         austerities for purposes of symbolical teach-

phenomena      ing. But ordinarily Moses or Samuel or Isaiah or

David or Nathan or Daniel appear as men arnong men,

citizens among citizens, and not at all like the frenzied

seers or oracle priests of the heathen religions. To

this even Ezekiel is not wholly an exception, though he

comes near enough to it to be quite in contrast with the

other prophets. An average Old Testament prophet is

not weird or mysterious. He is not a recluse, but an

active citizen. He is not picturesque through eccentric

personal appearance or habits. Elijah, indeed, was a

man of unusual personal appearance (2 Ki. i. 7-8), and

for a time led the life of a recluse, but he is presented

to us as being peculiar in these respects. He is as dif-

ferent from other prophets as he is from citizens of any

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE      69

 

other class. We make a serious mistake if we count

him as typical, instead of counting him the exceptional

instance he purports to be.

          The books of reference tell us that the prophets wore

a distinctive costume. In proof they cite what is said

in Zechariah (xiii. 2–6) concerning certain                  Was there a

prophets associated with idols, who "wear a               prophetic

hairy mantle to deceive." It is inferred that                 costume?

Jehovah's prophets were accustomed to wear a hairy

mantle, and that these frauds adopted the usual pro-,

phetic garb, to give color to their pretences. It would

be exactly as logical to infer that they adopted an un-

usual garb in order to attract attention. Further, the

hairy mantle is here one of two devices by which these

idol prophets made themselves conspicuous. The other

was by cuts on their bodies.

 

          "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds between

thy hands? And he shall say, Those with which I was wounded

in the house of my friends " (Zech. xiii. 6).

 

The cuts on the body are here on the same footing with

the hairy mantle. Clearly, the writer had no intention

of saying that either was a part of the regulation uni-

form of the prophets of Yahaweh.

          Further, they cite the hairy mantle worn by Elijah

and inherited by Elisha, and in connection with this

they mention the hairy garment worn by John the

Baptist. But you will remember that when King

Ahaziah's messengers reported to him that the man

who had met them wore a hairy garment, he at once

knew that the man was Elijah (2 Ki. i. 8). Elijah's

mantle distinguished him from all other prophets, as

well as from citizens who were not prophets. This

clearly shows that the prophets in general did not;

wear the hairy mantle as a uniform.

70              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          They cite also the statement that Isaiah once upon a

time wore sackcloth, and put it off, going " naked and

barefoot" (xx. 2). But Isaiah's wearing sackcloth

exceptionally is no proof that all the prophets wore a

uniform regularly. No more can the same inference

be drawn from Samuel's being " covered with a robe"

when the witch of Endor called him up. The word

me'il is employed alike in describing the dress of kings

and priests and private citizens and boys and girls.

This is all the testimony that is cited for the exist-

ence of a distinctive prophetic costume. Evidently it

has very little weight. And there are strong considera-

tions on the other side. In the story that tells us how

Saul and his servant sought the asses and found a king-

dom (I Sam. ix), we are informed that they met Samuel

in the gate of the city, and asked him to tell them where

the seer's house was (ver. 18). It is evident that there

was nothing in his garb to indicate that he was himself

the seer. But he was at that moment on his way to a

public solemnity, and in those circumstances, if ever,

he would have been officially attired. We have an

account of a prophet who rebuked Ahab for suffering

Benhadad to escape (i Ki. xx. 38, 41). He disguised

himself by pulling his headband over his face. The

king knew him when he removed the headband. The

king knew him by his face, and not by his costume.

Similar statements would apply to the prophet who

anointed Jehu for king (2 Ki. ix. II). There is no

sacred uniform to tell Jehu and his friends who the

"mad fellow" is.

          These are representative instances, and they seem to

be decisive. The cases cited to prove the existence of

a regulation prophetic costume are clearly exceptional,

and, therefore, prove the contrary, so far as they prove

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE        71

 

anything. No article of prophetic apparel is ever spoken

of as distinctive of the class. There is no trace of a

special costume by which prophets were distinguished

from men who were not prophets. Religious art has

given to the prophet a monkish robe and tonsure; so

far as the Old Testament accounts go, sober truth

should give him the usual dress of a citizen of his time

and nation. If we should picture him as wearing a sack

coat and a Derby hat in the forenoon and a dress suit

in the evening, our picture would be no more anachro-

nistic than that of current art, and would be far truer

in spirit.

          Some one may rejoin that the Old Testament evidence

in the case is negative rather than positive, and that we

must still infer, from the analogy of other                   The fact sig-

religions, that the Israelitish prophets had a                nificant, even

peculiar dress of their own. Medicine-men                 if negative

and fetich-men, the prophets of savage religions, trick

themselves out in grotesque dress. In higher civiliza-

tions the prophet makes himself impressive by the garb

that indicates his profession. Is it possible that the

prophets of Israel were an exception?

          In reply to this, I should deny that the Old Testament

evidence is a mere argument from silence. It seems to

me positive and distinct. But if any one thinks other-

wise, I should not take the trouble to argue the case

with him. At all events, the biblical writers leave the

question of a prophetic dress in the background. They

describe in detail the costume of their priests, but not

that of their prophets. The writers of other peoples

make much of the garb of the men through whom they

consult the unseen world; not so the writers of Israel.

With them the man is everything, and his dress nothing.

The record is, therefore, unique at this point, whether

72            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

the fact recorded be unique or not. Why should we

not hold that both are unique? Israel as existing to-day

is unique. Jesus Christ, of the stock of Israel, is unique.

These are unique, whether we look at them from the

evangelical point of view or from the agnostic point of

view. Unique results probably had unique antecedents.

We should not be surprised if we find the uniqueness

extending to many matters of detail. The fact that

the biblical account of the prophets makes them in any

particular different from the prophets of other religions

is no argument against the truth of the account; for

we ought to expect to find that they were different.

          Some of the books of reference affirm that the

prophets were addicted to habits of religious frenzy. Ian

Did the           proof is given an alleged derivation of the

prophets                    word nabha, from nabha’, "to boil up." But

rave?              the derivation is at the strongest merely a

conjecture; and it would not prove the point even if it

were known to be correct.

          Worldly men are twice spoken of as calling the

prophets mad—that is, crazy.  Shemaiah the Nehela-

mite wrote to the officials at Jerusalem, asking them

why they had not rebuked Jeremiah, under the provision

for putting "in the stocks and in shackles " "any man

that is crazed, and maketh himself a prophet" (Jer.

xxix. 26-27). This epithet, we learn from the context,

was not called forth by crazy conduct on the part of

Jeremiah, but by his writing a particularly sane letter to

the exiles in Babylonia. The prophet who came to

anoint Jehu, a quiet, secret errand, is called by Jehu"s

brother officers a "crazed fellow" (2 Ki. ix. 11). There

is no trace of raving in either case. Worldly men called

the prophets crazy, just as worldly men to-day call ear-

nest preachers crazy.

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE       73

 

          In one place a prophet speaks of the prophets as

crazy. Hosea says: —

 

"The prophet is a fool, the man that hath the spirit is crazed, for

the multitude of thine iniquity, and because the enmity is great "

(ix. 7).

 

Here, clearly, he represents himself and other prophets

as distracted under the strain of current evil; but he

does not attribute frenzied utterance to himself or to

them.

          In one instance it is said that the evil spirit came upon

King Saul, "and he prophesied" (I Sam. xviii. 10).

David played before him as usual, and he attempted to

kill David. Doubtless this was an attack of mania, but

it does not follow that Saul's raving is called prophesy-

ing. It is quite as easy to think that Saul talked on

religious subjects, and that this was a characteristic

symptom of his fits of insanity ; in other words, that

Saul's utterances are here called prophesying not

because they were crazy, but because they were re-

ligious.

          In the account of Saul's pursuing David to Naioth in

Ramah (I Sam. xix. 18-24) we have a similar connec-

tion between religious utterance on the part of Saul and

the insane attacks to which he was subject. Excited

by his rage against David and the disobedience of his

messengers, and afterward by the prophesying as he

heard it, he himself prophesied, —

 

          "And he went on and prophesied until he came to Naioth in

Ramah. And he also stripped off his clothes, and he also prophe-

sied before Samuel, and fell down naked all that day and all that

night."

 

Apparently Saul, in his prophesying, conducted himself

in an insane and indecorous manner. But it does not

appear that any one else did so; nor that Saul's conduct

is called prophesying because of the craziness of it.

          We have an account (i Sam. x..5–13) of the company of

prophets that Saul met when he was first anointed king.

"A band of prophets coming down from the highplace, with

psaltery and timbrel and pipe and harp before them; and they shall

be prophesying ; and the spirit of Yahaweh will come mightily upon

thee, and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into

another man."

          We need not necessarily figure this as a company of

dancing dervishes. It may equally well be a band of

serious men, holding an outdoor religious meeting, with

a procession and music and public speeches.

          In all the instances of this kind the alleged prophetic

frenzy is a matter of interpretation, and not of direct

statement. If one comes to the passages with the idea

that frenzied utterance lies at the root of the original

notion of prophesying, he may find in the passages the

outcropping of this underlying notion in the word; but

he will hardly find it without such assistance. This

being the case, the passages should certainly be inter-

preted in the light of the habitual sanity that marks the

conduct and the utterances of the prophets. The idea

that Saul's attacks of mania made him very religious in

his utterances is in accord with facts with which we are

familiar. The idea that the prophets preached in the open

air, attracting attention by means of a procession and a

band, has in it no element of absurdity. If one starts

by assuming that the prophet developed from a medi-

cine-man or a voudou-man or a fetich-man, or that the

prophet is of a piece with a Greek oracle priest, drunk

with vapor, one may be able to stretch these texts so

as to make them fit his assumption; but that is not

their natural meaning.

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE       75

 

          In short, the inference that the prophets were character-

ized by frenzy is baseless. The statement that Jeremiah

was crazy is recorded as a slander, and not as a fact.

Religious talking was a symptom in Saul's periods of

insanity. The prophets held religious meetings under

the excitement of which Saul conducted himself strangely.

But there is no proof that the prophets acted like crazy

men.

          In one personal peculiarity the prophets are repre-

sented to have been remarkable, — their longevity. As

a class, judging from the biographical notices             The prophets

we have, they were unusually long-lived men.            long-lived

To say nothing of the patriarchs, Moses died at the age

of one hundred and twenty years, being till then vigor-

ous (Deut. xxxi. 2, xxxiv. 7). This is not to be explained

by saying that the term of human life has diminished

since then. According to the priestly laws in Leviticus

(xxvii. 3, 7, etc.) the age of manly vigor was then from

twenty to sixty years. Caleb regarded it as exceptional

that he was still a warrior at eighty-five (Josh. xiv. Io–I 1 ;

cf. Ps. xc. 1o). Moses had his successors in longevity.

Joshua reached the age of one hundred and ten years.

(Josh. xxiv. 29 ; Jud. ii. 8). Jehoiada, the prophetically

gifted highpriest, lived to be one hundred and thirty

years old (2 Chron. xxiv. 15). The public career of Elisha

extended through not less than' sixty years, and that of

Isaiah was yet longer, and that of Daniel about seventy

years. The list might be extended. In a general way

art has good ground for its habit of picturing a prophet

as old and venerable ; though it happens that in many

particular instances art has given gray hairs to a

prophet who should have been pictured as a young

man.

          So much for the prophets as they presented themselves

76            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

to the eyes of their contemporaries. Save in special

instances we are to think of their personal appearance

as simply that of respectable citizens.

          II. Similar results await us as we turn to a second

topic, the arrangements for the communal organizations

of the prophets.

          Of these we know but little, save what lies on the

surface of the biblical texts. It will help to a clear

understanding of what is said concerning these organi-

zations if we begin by fixing firmly in our minds the

fact that they are mentioned in connection with two

periods, — the time of Samuel and the time of Elijah

and Elisha. Nothing is said concerning them in the

history of the other periods, the mention of "a son of a

prophet" in Amos (vii. I4) being properly no exception

to this statement.

          In the King James version the phrase "company of

prophets" occurs in two connections, suggesting that

Prophetic         the prophets were organized and operated

organizations    in companies. The verbal statement of this

under             fact vanishes when we examine the Hebrew;

Samuel           but the fact itself remains, based on inference. The

account of it is given mainly in two passages.

          The first of the two passages is the one cited above,

in which we are told of Saul's meeting the prophets

after Samuel had anointed him (z Sam. x. 5-13). Saul

met what the old version calls a " company," and the

new version a "band" of prophets. "A string of

prophets " would be an exact rendering in vernacular

English, that is, a procession. They had a band of

music "before them," stringed instruments and drum

and fife. They were prophesying. After meeting them

Saul joined them in prophesying, the spirit of God com-

ing "mightily" upon him. The change in him was so

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE      77

 

remarkable that people noticed it, and asked: " Is Saul

also among the prophets?"

          I have already indicated the opinion that we have

here an account of outdoor religious services, differing,

of course, from anything that could occur in our time,

as that time differed from ours in everything, and yet

properly analogous to such services as might now be

held by a corps of the Salvation Army, or by the Young

Men's Christian Association. The remarks that are

represented to have been made by the people imply

that they were familiar with such services by the

prophets. They recognized the fact that Saul belonged

to a worldly-minded family, not given to participating

in evangelistic meetings. And whether you admit the

correctness of these analogies or not, at least such

movements as are here described must have had behind

them some form of organization, looser or more com-

pact.

          The other passage in question has also been cited

above, the one that describes Saul's pursuit of David

to Naioth in Ramah (t Sam. xix. 18-24). It is said of

Saul's messengers that

 

          "They saw the company of the prophets prophesying, and

Samuel standing as head over them."

 

The word here translated "company " occurs nowhere

else. Evidently, however, the prophets were together

in some sort of assembly, engaged in con-                 The Naioth

certed action of some sort, Samuel being                              gathering of

either the president or the conductor. The                   prophets

atmosphere was charged with religious excitement.

Saul's successive relays of messengers, as they came

under the influence of the scene, joined in the prophe-

sying, and so did even the king himself when he

78              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

at last followed his messengers. Saul and possibly

others divested themselves of part of their clothing.

Saul seems to have had a fit that lasted several

hours.

          This incident, as well as the previous one, presupposes

organization of some sort. Concerning the forms and

the purposes of the organizing, we have little inEorma-

tion. We cannot escape the conclusion, however, that

an educational element was included. The instruments

of music in the one incident, and the concerted proph-

esying under the conduct of Samuel in the other,

suggest that training in orchestral and choral music

was made prominent. We shall not be far out if we

suppose that instruction was given in patriotic history,

in theology, in literary practice, in whatever would fit

the disciples of Samuel to be preachers of the religion

of Yahaweh to their contemporaries. The remarkable

blossoming out of Israel in the times of David and

Solomon, in matters of literature and culture, was

doubtless largely due to these prophetic organizations

introduced by Samuel. It is probable, however, that

these organizations were not merely schools, but were,

like those of a later time, also centres of political and

religious movements.

          The mention of music as a part of the 'prophetic

training under Samuel is in accord with those passages

in the books of Chronicles which speak of Asaph,

Heman and Jeduthun and their associates as prophesy-

ing in song or with instruments of music (e.g. I Chron.

xxv), and with all the statements in the Old and New

Testaments which represent the second half of the

reign of David as resplendent with culture and music

and psalmody. Before one rejects these traditions as

unhistorical he should take into account, among other

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE        79

 

things, their marked continuity with the recorded events

of the time of Samuel. Supposing them to be histori-

cal, it was not by mere accident that the temple choirs

appeared in the generation following the death of

Samuel, or that Heman the grandson of Samuel was

one of their leaders.

          So much for the organizations of Samuel's time.

The other type of prophetic organization is that de-

scribed in the term "sons of the prophets."                  “The sons of

So far as the records show, it belongs exclu-              the prophets”

sively to the northern kingdom, and, save for general

mention in Amos (vii. 14), exclusively to the times of

Elijah and Elisha. Groups of the sons of the prophets

existed at Bethel, Jericho, Gilgal (2 Ki. ii. 3, 5, iv. 38),

and presumably at other places. We are accustomed

to call them the "schools of the prophets," but this

term is not biblical. A good many details are given

concerning them. In his lifetime Elijah was at the

head of them, and he left this office to Elisha (2 Ki. ii.

3, 15, etc.). In studying them one should study the

entire biography of these two prophets. We have a

story that one group of them found their home too nar-

row and went to cut timber for enlarging it, on which`

occasion Elisha performed the miracle' of causing an

iron axe to swim (2 Ki. vi. 1-7). From this we learn that'

in some cases the sons of the prophets were a commu-

nity, living in a common house. We also learn that they

were not afraid of manual labor. They were numerous,

for the community at Jericho could send its fifty men to

search for Elijah (2 Ki. ii. 16, 17), and Obadiah hid a

hundred of Jehovah's prophets "by fifty in a cave "

(1 Ki. xviii. 4). They were not mere lads, some of

them being married men, as we learn from Elisha's

miracle of the oil, wrought in behalf of the widow of

80           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

one of them. Kindly disposed people sometimes con-

tributed to their support. Witness Elish's feeding a

hundred men with the twenty loaves of the man from

Baal-shalishah (iv. 42-44). Sometimes they eked out

their subsistence by gathering wild vegetation, as we

see in the incident when there was "death in the pot"

(iv. 38-41).

          This system of communities was evidently widespread

anti influential. Doubtless they had somewhat of the

character of schools for personal education; but they

were rather houses of reform, centres of religious and

patriotic movement. Their members were especially

obnoxious to the Baalite party in Israelitish politics.

They promoted the overthrow of Joram and the acces-

sion of Jehu (2 Ki. ix. 1-12). Their political attitude is

one of the most significant things about them. We

shall return to this in another chapter. Meanwhile we

may fix in mind the fact that the work of the sons of the

prophets is represented to have been analogous to that

of our Young Men's Christian Associations, or of some

of our organizations for reform or for good citizenship,

rather than to that of our schools or colleges or semi-

naries.

          The "college" in Jerusalem, where, according to the

King James translation, the prophetess Huldah dwelt

(2 Ki. xxii. 14; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 22), is simply an instance

of the uncertain meaning of a word.

          III. We turn to a third topic, the so-called prophetic

order.

 

          Much stress is laid on this by some writers. Most

denominations of Christians hold that the Christian

“Holy             ministry is an order of men who have "taken

orders”           orders " in the sense of being set apart by

ordination. The Anglican and Roman churches hold

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE      81

 

that the ministry exists in three different orders ; namely,

bishops and priests and deacons. In a sense something

like this many speak of the two orders of the ministry

under the Old Covenant ; namely, the priestly order and

the prophetic order.

          Is this a proper use of language? Are we to think

of the prophet as belonging to an order? Was he an

ordained man, like a Jewish priest or a Christian min-

ister? In other words, are we to think of the priests

and the prophets as two orders of Israelitish clergymen?

These questions must be answered by examining the

facts.

          I. First, it is probably true that there was an un-

broken succession of prophets from Samuel to Malachi

— perhaps from Abraham to Malachi—in                  The prophets

the sense that Israel was never during that                  a succession

time wholly without true living prophets or prophetic

men. This is probable, though it cannot at every point

be proved.

          2. But, secondly, the prophets were not a sacerdotal

order, holding definite relations to the priestly order.

They were not a priesthood, or a section of                The prophets

the priesthood, or a body analogous to the                  not a sacer-

priesthood. In this the usage of Israel dif-                   dotal order

fered from that of other peoples. In Egypt, for ex-

ample, the prophets were a class in the priesthood. Mr.

George Rawlinson tells us that they ranked next to the

highpriests, and that they —

 

“were generally presidents of the temples, had the management of

the sacred revenues, were bound to commit to memory the contents

of the ten sacerdotal books " (History of Egypt, I, 447).

Similar representations are made in such a novel as

the Uarda of Ebers; and more minute and accurate

statements may be found in later Egyptological works.

82            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

And what was true of the prophets of Egypt has been

true of those of other countries. In Israel, however, the

case was different. We have no account of any priestly

functions regularly exercised by the prophets as proph-

ets ; and none of any official relations between the

priestly body and the prophetic body.

          It is true that some prophets were also priests, Zadok

and Jeremiah and Ezra, for example. That is to say,

a priest might become a prophet, as might any one

else. Further, in certain instances, a prophet, without

being a priest, may have been commissioned to perform

priestly acts. We are told that Moses was so commis-

sioned, officiating as priest in the original setting apart

of Aaron to the priesthood (Lev. viii. 15-30). It is

commonly alleged that Samuel performed priestly acts,

but the records do not sustain the allegation.¹ There is

no trace of any defined sacerdotal rights or duties regu-

larly devolving upon the prophets. The prophet, as such,

was not a priest. The two offices were entirely different.²

          3. It is probable, thirdly, that the prophetic ranks

 

            ¹ Certainly, it is said that Samuel offered sacrifices (I Sam. vii. 9, xvi.

2, and other places). But this would be said of any person who brought

a sacrifice for offering, even if he employed a priest to-sprinkle the blood

and to perform all the other priestly functions in the case. In particular,

a public man is said to offer sacrifices when he causes them to be offered

by the proper officiating priests. The record is capable of this interpreta-

tion in every case where it speaks of an offering by Samuel. In one in-

stance only we have a specific statement of the part personally taken by

Samuel in a sacrifice (I Sam. ix. 13); and in this instance he was to pro-

nounce a blessing at the sacrificial meal, long after all the priestly rites had

been completed.

            ² The priest must be from the tribe of Levi; the prophet might be from

any tribe. The priest was selected according to descent and ceremonial

condition; the prophet was directly and individually commissioned by

Deity. The priest was accredited by solemn religious services and care-

fully kept genealogical registers, the prophet by the possession of the

extraordinary powers that God gave him. The priests served in a yearly

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE      83

 

were somewhat generally recruited from among men

who were disciples of the acknowledged                              Was the

prophets, and had thus received special tui-                prophet a

tion for the service. In the times of the                       graduate?

" sons of the prophets," for example, it is likely that

most men who became prophets were those who had

previously been connected with these so-called prophetic

schools (2 Ki. ix. I, 4; Am. vii. 14-15). But there is

no trace of this having been done as a matter of regular

course. There is no evidence that most of these pupils

ever became prophets in the strict sense, much less that

they became so in a routine way, by graduating. Ap-

parently, however, they were regarded as prophets in a

secondary sense, and were called by the name. In the

periods when prophets were very numerous, it is likely

that most of them were prophets only in this secondary

sense—sons of the prophets, followers of the great

prophets, rather than men who were believed to be

themselves highly endowed with prophetic gifts.

          4. There is no indication, fourthly, that the prophets

were ordinarily set apart to their office by any ordaining

act. They were sometimes set apart to some               Ordination

special work, but there is no instance in which

any one is admitted to be a prophet by any such act.

The anointing of Elisha is the principal case in point

(1 Ki. xix. 16, 19). But the facts of Elisha's life show

that he was a distinguished prophet long before this

anointing. He, was to be anointed, not to the prophetic

 

round, according to a minutely prescribed ritual; the prophets came and

went as God sent them. The priests administered and taught the divine

laws which the prophets brought and proclaimed. The priests ministered

at the altar; the prophets preached the word. The priests were the offi-

cial clergy of the Israelitish church; the prophets, especially in the matter

of scripture-writing, "spice from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost,"

not to Israel only, but to all the ages.

84           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

office, but to be the successor of Elijah, in Elijah's

special work. It is a question whether there was any

ceremony of anointing save Elijah's casting his cloak

upon him. And in any case the transaction is set forth

as exceptional and peculiar. In the same breath in

which Elijah is directed to anoint Elisha he is also

directed to anoint Hazael and Jehu. But the anointing

of Hazael king over Syria, by an Israelite prophet

(1 Ki. xix. 15), is evidently something exceptional.

Equally so is the anointing of Jehu over Israel, in a

private room at Ramoth-gilead (1 Ki. xix. 16; 2 Ki. ix.

1-13). And not less exceptional is the setting apart of

Elisha that is mentioned along with these. And with

this vanishes the last sign that any one ever entered

upon the prophetic office by taking orders.

          5. In fine, every man or woman whom God endowed

with prophetic gifts thereby became a prophet. No

How one          other door to the office is mentioned in the

became a         scriptures. The law in Deut. xviii says : " A

prophet           prophet . . . will Yahaweh thy God raise

up to thee." The prophet becomes a prophet simply

j by being raised up for that purpose. He becomes a

prophet, so far as the records show, solely by becoming

endowed with prophetic gifts. He becomes recognized

as a prophet through the exercise of his gifts among his

fellow-citizens. As people discovered that a person had

the gifts, they accepted him as a prophet, and that

irrespective of outward insignia or previous training

or ceremonies of ordination. If one claimed to be a

prophet of Yahaweh, his claims were to be tested not by

the clothes he wore, or by his ascetic mode of life, or

by appealing to a register of genealogy or of ordinations,

but by ascertaining whether he had the gifts of a prophet

—by observing, first, whether he spoke in Yahaweh's

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE      85

 

name only, and, secondly, whether the signs which he

gave in Yahaweh's name came to pass.

          This applies, of course, only to prophets who were

properly such. In the secondary sense of being a dis-

ciple, one of the sons of the prophets, one might become

a prophet merely by becoming connected with prophets

whose gifts were recognized.¹

          I have not the hardihood to expect that every one will

accept the opinion I am advocating as to the costume,

the freedom from excited conduct, the ordina-            The prophet

tion, of the prophets; but every one will cer-               especially a

tainly recognize the significant fact that these             manly man

things are only slightly touched in the records; and this

fact constitutes nine-tenths of the value of the view I

offer. At least no stress is laid on matters of regulation

costume or of marvellous personal bearing or of ordina-

tion. In Deuteronomy the phrase, "of your brethren,

like unto me," stands in contrast to the characteristics

alike of the priests and of the heathen practitioners of

magic arts. Unlike these, the prophet is a man of the

same sort with other men. A distinguishing thing in

the religion of Israel is its proclamation that a manly

man is the truest channel of communication between man

and God. We cannot too strongly recognize the manli-

ness and the manfulness of the prophets, as set forth in

the Old Testament, or of Jesus and the apostles as set

forth in the New.²

 

            ^l Either in these organizations or in other forms and at other dates,

there is reason to hold that the prominent prophets had their disciples,

some of whom were permanently attached to them, looking to them for

instruction, and assisting them in their work. See such passages as Isa.

viii. 16, 1. 4; Jer. li. 59-63. It may be assumed that literary and theologi-

cal studies generally formed a part of the training of the disciples of the

prophets.

            ² I suppose that no careful student will hold that the positions which I

86            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          To repeat this once more. According to the records

a prophet might be judge or king or priest or general or

The absence statesman or private person, in fine, might

of insignia occupy any position in the commonwealth;

noteworthy as a prophet, he was simply a citizen with a

special work to do. The prophets as such had no settled

position in church or state. They were sent by God on

individual missions, natural or supernatural, to supple-

ment the routine administration of secular and religious

affairs. The bible refuses to present any other picture

of a prophet than that of a citizen, like other citizens,

holding a commission from God, and endowed with the

gifts requisite for accrediting his commission. This

agrees with everything that we shall hereafter learn

concerning the prophets. The human individuality of

the prophet is emphasized, to the neglect of outward

appearance, or official character, or other like things.

In the scriptures as they stand, leaving out the excep-

tional instances that serve to emphasize the rule, our

attention is withdrawn from external marks, and fixed

upon the personal man or woman whom God has ap-

pointed to be prophet.

          In this there is a significant contrast .between the re-

ligion of Israel and other religions. The conception of

religion which thus exalts manhood, when considering

our relations to Deity, is a fine conception. Men some-

times speak of this conception as if it were the new prod-

uct of the thinking of the last decades of the nineteenth

century. When men exploit twentieth-century religious

ideas, they give prominence to this: the recognition of

 

maintain as to the absence of outward insignia can be positively disproved;

and that no one will dispute that it is better to form our conceptions of the

prophets more by the facts that are positively stated, and less by accessories

that some suppose are alluded to, than many are in the habit of doing.

THE PROPHET. A CITIZEN WITH A MESSAGE       87

 

the truth that the most human man or woman is the per-

son most suitable to be the prophet of the Lord. It is

not a small thing among the glories of the religion of

Yahaweh that it has recognized this truth from the be-

ginning. This conception characterizes the monotheism

of the worshippers of Yahaweh, as differing from all other

religions. It characterizes this monotheism as expressed

in the earliest records we have concerning the prophets,

as well as in the latest. It is one of the phenomena

which mark that religion as, among the religions, the

one fittest to survive.

                             

 

 

 

                                 CHAPTER V

 

 

THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET—NATURALISTIC AND

                         SUPERNATURALISTIC

 

 

          IN the preceding chapter we have tried to answer the

question: How did the prophet look when you met him?

and other affiliated questions. In the present chapter

the question becomes : How, in his character as prophet,

did the prophet occupy himself? What did he do?

We need from the outset to guard against two mis-

taken assumptions, — the assumption that the prophets

were merely or mainly predicters of events, and the re-

actionary assumption that they exercised no supernatu-

ral gifts.

          No scholars hold that the prophets were mere givers

of oracles or predicters of the future; and yet this phase

The assump-     of their work has been so emphasized that

tion that                    wrong impressions are common. One needs

prophecy is      to reiterate the statement that a prophet is

prediction        not characteristically a person who foretells, but

one who speaks forth a message from Deity. To regard

him as mainly a foreteller involves a narrowing of the

idea of his mission that is all the more mischievous

because of its being popularly very common. The

argument from fulfilled prediction has been made so

prominent among the proofs of the divine origin of the

scriptures, and again in advocating the claim of Jesus

to be the Christ, that many have come to think of pre-

diction as being substantially the whole of prophecy, and

even to interpret the prophetic writings as if they must

 

                                         88

              THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET            89

 

needs be regarded as predictive throughout.) This state

of things renders it necessary to repeat the statement

that prophecy and prediction are different terms. It

greatly obscures the prophecies to count them as pre-

dictive only. In bulk, predictions constitute but a small

part of them, and what predictions there are consist

almost entirely of promises and threats.

          This is one bad assumption. But we should not for-

get that the opposite assumption is as bad or worse.

Prophecy is not prediction, but it does not                  The worse

follow that prophecy does not include predic-             contrary

tion. The absence of supernatural endow-                   assumption

ment for the prophets is a thing to be proved, not a thing

to be assumed. Prediction should neither be interpreted

into the prophetic utterances, nor interpreted out of

them. The predictive element in prophecy may be gen-

uine and important, even if it is only a part and not the

whole.

Taking the matter up positively, let us repeat once

more that the functions of the prophet are correctly

indicated by the etymology of the English                  The name

word. A prophet is a person who speaks out               indicates the

the special message that God has given him.              function

The priesthood, and, in a modified sense, the judge or

king or other secular authorities, were, in their routine

duties, the exponents of the will of Yahaweh in Israel.

The prophets were his spokesmen for the purposes not

covered by the routine administration of affairs.

 

            ¹ This is not confined to advocates of old-fashioned opinions. Several

scholars have published, for example, arguments for the Maccabaean date

of the book of Daniel, based on the assumption that prophecy and predic-

tion are equivalent. They say that inasmuch as the book of Daniel is

peculiarly predictive, the editors of the Hebrew bible would certainly have

placed it among the prophets if it had been in existence when the writings

of the prophets were collected.

90        THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          In a general study of this topic very little depends

on dates. In matters of detail, indeed, there is much

Principal         difference between the earlier and the later

functions the     prophets. The civilization of Israel was not

same at all        stationary, and the training and the tasks of

dates              the prophets changed with their environment. But

in its principal outlines their work was essentially the same

at all periods?

          We will begin with passages which describe a prophet's

duties in outline, and will afterward consider particulars.

In the narrative concerning Moses a prophet is thus

defined: —

         

          "And Yahaweh said unto Moses, See, I have given thee as a

Deity to Pharaoh, Aaron thy brother being thy prophet " (Ex.

vii. 1).

 

Aaron was to utter before Pharaoh the messages which

A prophets       Moses should commit to him for the purpose.

functions         In doing this, he sustained to Moses the re-

outlined          lation which a prophet sustains to his God.

Nothing could be more explicit. A prophet is a person

who speaks forth the message that God has committed

to him.

          Altogether the same is the definition of the func-

tion of a prophet as given in the twelfth chapter of

Numbers : — iv t

 

          "If there be a prophet of you, I Yahaweh make myself known

unto him in the vision, in a dream I speak with him. Not so is my

servant Moses. In all my house he is faithful. Mouth unto mouth

I speak with him" (vv. 6-8).

 

Here the prophet is described as one who receives mes-

 

            ¹ That the Old Testament writings declare this to have been the case is

beyond dispute, though some critics may account for it by saying that the

earlier writings have been reworked.

             THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET             91

 

sages from God. That he utters the messages he receives

is not affirmed, that being left to implication.

          This idea that the prophets were revealing spokesmen

for Deity is more fully defined in the eighteenth and the

thirteenth chapters of Deuteronomy. First, the prophet

is differentiated from the Levitical priest (Deut. xviii.

1-8), the ordinary spokesman of Yahaweh. The differ-

entiation is none the less real for its being indirect and

by suggestion only. The prophet's functions are unlike

those of the priesthood in that they are special, rather

than matters of routine. He is next distinguished from

all practisers of occult arts (9-14). He is unlike these

men to whom people are apt to go when they fancy

themselves in need of supernatural information. The

distinction in this case is made directly, and consists in

the fact that the prophet has genuine revelations from

Deity. Then (15-19) the prophet is positively described.

He is a man, like other men, "of thy brethren, like unto

me," raised up by Yahaweh for purposes of especial

communication from him, so that men may not need to

seek intercourse with the supernatural world through the

magic arts just forbidden, or through any other channel.

In the rest of the chapter and in the first verses of xiii,

the test of a true prophet is declared.

          The messianic bearings of this passage are reserved

for future notice. It is enough for the present that they

do not conflict with the interpretation just given. The

word "prophet" in the passage, though not a collective

noun, is distributively used. Yahaweh would raise up

to Israel a prophet "from among their brethren," at his

own pleasure, whenever he had a special revelation to

make by one; and that would be as often as they really

needed communication with the unseen world. He

promised that a prophet should appear on the arising

92             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

of any such need. The New Testament writers cor-

rectly apply this to Jesus Christ, both because they

regard him as for his own time a prophet in this succes-

sion, and because they regard him as the great antitypal

prophet in whom the succession culminated.¹

          In our English version the last clause of the four-

teenth verse reads: —

 

          "The Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do."

 

This translation is so inadequate as to be misleading.

Literally the clause is: —

          "nd as for thee, not Thus bath Yahaweh thy God given to thee."

 

That is, he has not given to thee the spurious and fool-

ish modes of consulting with the unseen which are prac-

 

            ¹ "For these nations which thou art dispossessing hearken unto sorcer-

ers and unto diviners; while as for thee, not thus hath Yahaweh thy Deity

given to thee. A prophet, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like

me, will Yahaweh thy Deity raise up to thee; unto him shall ye hearken.

According to all which thou didst ask from with Yahaweh thy Deity in

Horeb, in the day of the Assembly, saying, Let me not again hear the

voice of Yahaweh my Deity, and this great fire I shall no longer see, lest I

die. And Yahaweh said unto me, They have spoken well that which they

have spoken. A prophet I will raise up for them from the midst of their

brethren, like thee, and will give my words in his mouth, and he shall

speak unto them all which I shall command him; and it shall be that the

man who will not hearken to my words which he shall speak in my name,

I myself will make inquiry from with him.

            "Only, the prophet who shall presume to speak a word in my name

which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the

name of other Deities, that prophet shall die. And inasmuch as thou wilt

say in thy heart, How shall we know the word which Yahaweh bath not

spoken? The prophet who shall speak in the name of Yahaweh, and the

word shall not be, and shall not come to pass, that is the word which

Yahaweh bath not spoken" (Deut. xviii. 14-22).

            "When there shall arise in the midst of thee a prophet or a dreamer

of dreams, and shall give unto thee a sign or a miracle; and the sign or

the miracle come to pass, which he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go

after other Deities, . . . thou shalt not hearken to the words of that prophet

. . ." (Deut. xiii. i-6).

              THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET            93

 

tised by the augurs and diviners and sorcerers of other

nations, but has given thee something immeasurably

better, namely, his prophets; and he therefore forbids

thy resorting to these other methods. The words "not

thus hath Yahaweh thy God given to thee," in mention-

ing what God has not given, call attention to the dif-

ferent thing which he has given. He disallows the

consulting of the invisible world through necromancers,

because he has provided a glorious opening of com-

munication with himself through the prophets. The

words of the verse distinctly contrast the forbidden

looking into the unknown world, that by the practice of

occult arts, with the revealing of the unknown which is

promised in the following verse, in the office work of

Yahaweh's prophet. In fine, according to this chapter,

the prophet is like the priest in that he is the authorized

representative of Yahaweh, and unlike him in that his

work is special. He is like and unlike the magicians,

in that he is genuinely the channel of especial communi-

cation with Deity, which they falsely pretend to be.

To repeat this in other words, he is differentiated from

the priest by the fact that his message is direct and

special and from those who practise magic arts by the

fact that his communication with Deity is real.

          Having taken this general view, we are prepared to

descend to particulars. The functions which the records

ascribe to the prophets may be arranged in two classes,

—those which do not require the exercise of distinctly

supernatural gifts, and those which require such gifts.

For convenience let us designate these as their natural-

istic and their supernaturalistic functions.

          I. We begin with certain classes of their activities

which presuppose no powers on their part but such as

may be common to all gifted men.

94              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          I. They were prominent as the public men of their

times; they were statesmen, often political leaders.

When we find such men as Moses or Samuel or David

or Daniel engaged in public affairs, we might perhaps

explain it by saying that they occupy themselves thus,

not in the character of prophet, but rather in that of law-

giver or judge or king or prime minister. But even so,

it seems to have been true that in times of crisis, when

there were great deeds to do, the office of lawgiver or

judge or prime minister was peculiarly apt to fall into

the hands of a prophet.

          But this way of accounting for the matter will not

apply in all the instances in which we find the prophets

taking part in public affairs. So far as we are informed,

Elijah or Elisha or Amos or Hosea or Isaiah or Jere-

miah or Ezekiel were never officeholders, but they habit-

ually deal with questions of state. Reflect on what you

know concerning them, and you will see that a book

which should contain their biographies in detail would

also be a detailed history of national affairs. In the

peculiar constitution of Israel, political and religious

questions were so closely identified that the prophet

could hardly be a religious teacher without being also a

political leader.

          Take Jeremiah as an illustration of this. In his time

Judah has become a tributary kingdom, subject to

Jeremiah as      Babylonia. The nobles are restive under the

a statesman      yoke. They are constantly plotting to throw

it off, are seeking to influence the king and the nation

in that direction, are advocating alliances with Egypt.

Jeremiah steadfastly opposes their policy. He con-

trives to exert an influence over both Jehoiakim and

Zedekiah, holding them back from revolt. He writes

letters to the exiles in Babylonia, advising them to be

              THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET         95

 

docile and. make the best of their situation. Half of

his prophecies, as we have them, are attempts to con-

vince the Jews that successful revolt is impossible, and

that attempted revolt can only bring additional miseries

upon them. He preaches a doctrine of restoration

after seventy years as a reason why they should cease

from their hopeless efforts for present independence.

Nebuchadnezzar recognizes the services of Jeremiah,

and shows him distinguished favors when Jerusalem is

at last destroyed.

          But writers are unjust to Jeremiah when they simply

describe his political position as anti-Egyptian and pro<

Babylonian. - He was not in any proper sense pro-Baby-

lonian. So far as appears he refused the Babylonian

king's invitation to go to Babylonia and be there treated

with honor. No prophet denounced Babylonia more se-

verely than he. His position is that of all the prophets,

opposed to all entangling alliances with foreign powers.

He wanted nothing to do with Babylonia any more

than with Egypt. But when his king had sworn alle-

giance to Babylonia, Jeremiah held that the oath should

be kept, that good policy as well as good faith forbade

the breaking of it. He would accept Babylonish

supremacy for the time being as an accomplished

fact, in opposition to those who advocated continued

resistance.

Similarly the career of Isaiah is throughout marked

by participation in national issues. In particular, he

works against the Assyrian alliance made by              Isaiah and

Ahaz, and the opposing Babylonian or Egyp-             Hosea as

tian alliances considered by Hezekiah. Hosea             statesmen

is equally positive in denouncing intrigues with Assyria

or Egypt, and in advocating a policy of solidarity between

the northern and the southern kingdoms.

96              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          It was characteristic of the politics of the prophets

that they were a bond of unity between the northern

Prophetic         and the southern kingdoms. Judaean proph-

ideal of a         ets such as Amos and Isaiah prophesied for

united Israel     Ephraim as well as for Judah, Isaiah dis-

tinctly recognizing " both the houses of Israel" (viii. 14);

and such northern prophets as Hosea and Elijah and

Elisha prophesied for Judah as well as for Israel (Am. i.

I, iii. I, 12, etc. ; Isa. ix. 9, 2I, xxviii. I, 3, etc.; 2 Chron.

xxi. 12 ; 2 Ki. iii. 14 ; Hos. i. I I, iii. 4-5, xi. 12, etc.).

The northern prophets recognize some sort of alle-

giance as due to Jerusalem and the house of David,

as well as to their own kings. Those of both kingdoms

earnestly seek to keep alive the consciousness of Israel-

itish unity. They take pains to cultivate the fraternal

spirit. Hosea, and Amos less obviously, had a definite

programme for the reunion of the two kingdoms under

a king of the line of David. The marriage of Jehoram

and Athaliah probably indicates an earlier attempt in

the same direction.¹

          According to the record, Elijah and Elisha were party

leaders, though their public policy is less obvious to a

Elijah and        superficial reader than that of some of the

Elisha as                    other prophets. For two generations before

statesmen        the sudden coming of Elijah upon the scene,

the false worship of Yahaweh through the calves of

 

               ¹ It is obvious that this marriage might supposably have resulted in the

acceptance of a prince of the house of David as heir to both the thrones.

Supposably this was the intention in the negotiations for the marriage.

Presumably the prophets favored it at the time, and built great hopes upon

it. There is much plausibility in the hypothesis that the forty-fifth Psalm

is a marriage song sung by a prophet of Judah on this occasion. On this

hypothesis, the result was a grievous disappointment; but this would not

be the only time in history when statesmen and prophets have been out-

witted by a brilliant, wicked woman.

            THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET          97

 

Bethel and Dan has been the state religion of northern

Israel. But there have been nonconformists all the

while. Lately, under Jezebel, the worship of Baal has

been introduced, and the state church has largely gone

over to the new cult. This has increased the numbers

of the nonconformists, and their activity. Their ideal

would be a participation in the sacrifices at the one

place of national sacrifice in Jerusalem. But this is

impracticable. As a protest against the false worship

of the state church, they make offerings of certain kinds

at many inconspicuous private altars. Unlike the ad-

herents of the state religion, they are inflexible in their

opposition to Baal, and thus draw upon themselves the

horrible persecutions of Jezebel. This drove them to

yet more desperate resistance. They formed the or-

ganizations known to us as the "sons of the prophets."

Possibly the Tishbites, "the settlement men of Gilead "

(I Ki. xvii. I), of whom Elijah was one, were another

organization of the same sort. Elijah and Elisha were at

the head of these organizations. We get glimpses of them

going hither and thither, engaged in strenuous activities.

          These people constituted in effect an ecclesiastical

and political party, in opposition to the existing govern-

ment. It is the familiar story of men professing to be

loyal to a king, but in revolt and even in arms against

his policy and his counsellors. John Knox and Mary

queen of Scots have not a better parallel in history

than that presented by Elijah in his relations with

Ahab — Ahab, brilliant, impulsive, well-meaning, but

weak when it came to resisting evil influences.¹

 

            ¹ Sometimes Elijah and Elisha, the leaders of the opposition, are in a

certain degree of favor at court. Their advice in public matters is sought,

and in some instances followed. When Elisha offers to speak in behalf of

the Shunamite to the king or the general of the army (2 Ki. iv. 13), it

 

98             The PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          In these several political affairs such prophets as

Elijah and Elisha, Hosea, Isaiah, Jeremiah, are simply

doing what other prophets of all dates were accustomed

to do. The Israelitish prophet was a statesman. Most

of the distinguished statesmen of Israel were prophets.

          2. Apart from their political activities, the prophets

were the reformers of their times.

          Every age has need of men who shall lead in warfare

against organized evils, or against evils that are other-

wise rampant. Witness the efforts of John Howard in

the cause of prison reform, of William Wilberforce in

resistance to the slave trade and slavery, of John B.

Gough against intemperance in drink, of Henry Bergh

for the prevention of cruelty to animals, of Clara Barton

for the more humane care of wounded soldiers and

sailors. In matters analogous to these, the prophets

were the leaders of reforms in Israel.

          It is possible to mention here only a few of the

many questions of public struggle against evils which,

at different periods, engaged their activities, giving only

a reference or two, out of many that might be given,

 

seems to be with confidence that his word will be influential. At other

times the situation becomes strained, even to the extent of bloody hostility.

When Elijah first appears in the narrative, he is in the act of presenting an

ultimatum to Ahab. Then he withdraws from relations with him, and. the

rupture lasts three years, in spite of Ahab's strong efforts for resumption

Ki. xviii. i, 1o). When he at last meets the king, the slaughter of

Baal's prophets at Mount Carmel follows. I suppose that this and, later„

the destruction of Ahaziah's soldiers by fire from heaven may properly be

counted as battles between the contending parties. The effect of them

was salutary. The Baalites learned that Yahaweh's followers were not to

be murdered with impunity, and the persecutions were relaxed. And so

affairs moved on from year to year, until the prophets became convinced.

of the futility of their war against Jezebel so long as the existing dynasty

remained in power, and consequently instigated Jehu to the revolution in

which the house of Omri went down in blood.

         THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET           99

 

under each question. In addition to matters of reli-

gious reform, such matters as idolatry, the high places,

the support of the temple worship and the                  Some of the

like, they advocated reforms in the matter                  reforms which

of divorce, of licentiousness, of usury, of                   the prophets led

land monopoly, of drunkenness and dissipation, of sla-

very (Mal. ii. 10-16; Jer. v. 7-9, etc.; Neh. v; Ezek.

xviii. 8, etc.; Isa. v. 7-10, 11-22, etc.; Jer. xxxiv. 8-22).

More prominently than anything else they rebuke un-

equal and unkind practices in the administration of

justice, and inexorably demand reformation. It is

largely for purposes of reform that they engage in

public affairs. In the interests of reform we constantly

find them rebuking kings and priests and people, teach-

ing the populace, making public addresses, reading and

expounding the scriptures, organizing the prophetic

bands and other enginery for forming public opinion.

          3. Again, the prophets were evangelistic preachers

and organizers.

          Their writings which we have show this. The histori-

cal books of the bible are narrative sermons. They so

present history as to make it preach to us on the sub-

ject of our duties to God and men. Most of the other

prophetic books are volumes either of sermons or of

homiletical poems or tracts. In a good many instances

a passage in the prophets becomes intelligible only when

we recognize it as a syllabus or brief sketch of an ad-

dress that was much longer when delivered orally.

          In other ways than by their discourses they exerted

an evangelistic influence. We have already had our

attention called to the organizations of the times of

Samuel and of Elijah and of Elisha. These were not

mere literary institutions for giving instruction to young

lads, but systematic arrangements for exerting an in-

100               THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

fluence; as we should now say, arrangements for Chris-

tian work.

          I have called this function evangelistic. It was some-

thing quite apart from the priestly function of main-

taining ordinary services of public worship. It was

aggressive and missionary in its character. But it

would not be altogether amiss to say that it was also

evangelistic in the sense of the proclamation of good

news. Some of the distinctive doctrines taught by the

prophets, particularly the doctrine of a Messiah., will be

considered later. They came very much nearer than we

sometimes imagine to possessing and preaching what: we

now call the gospel. At all events they urged the cardinal

duties of repentance, faith, love, change of heart, the fear

of God, public and private obedience to his requirements.

          The work of the prophets as ethical and religious

preachers is on the whole that which is most kept in

the foreground in the descriptions given of them. in

the bible. What they did as public men or reformers

or writers of literature might be said to be branches

of their work as preachers.

          4. Yet again, the prophets were the literary men. of

Israel.

          It is fashionable in some quarters to assert that they

did not become writers till the time of Arnos and

Isaiah ; but by using a concordance of proper names

any one can easily convince himself that the scriptures

attribute literary authorship to prophets earlier than

these. Express mention is made of it in the case of

Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Gad, Nathan, David, Asaph,

Heman, Ethan, Jeduthun, Solomon, Ahijah, Jedo, Iddo,

Shemaiah, Jehu, Elijah, and this constitutes an implica-

tion that others also engaged in literary work. Such

work is yet more prominently characteristic of the

 

 

          THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET           101

 

prophets of later times, whose names are attached to

the books we now possess.

          Whether Israel before Malachi had literary writers

who were not prophets does not appear from the evi-

dence ; though it is natural to think that the men who

are mentioned in connection with public affairs under

the title of scribe or recorder were not in all cases

prophets. That there was an extensive literature in

addition to that now preserved in the bible appears

from the references which the biblical writers make to

books by their titles. We shall have occasion to speak

more in full of the literary work of the prophets when we

come to speak of them as the writers of the scriptures.

          5. In connection with these naturalistic functions of

the prophet there are two or three points which we

ought not to neglect.

          (a) The distinction between primary and secondary

prophets here becomes important. In our study of the

external history, our attention was called to                Different

the fact of the great numbers of the prophets              kinds of

at all periods between Samuel and Nehemiah.            prophets

This may seem to be a strange fact, when one's atten-

tion is first called to it. Is it not inconsistent with the

idea that the prophets are rare and special messengers

from heaven?

          In reply to this question it should be said that the

prophets who were regarded as having supernatural

gifts were probably more numerous than many suppose,

though not so numerous but that they were always rela-

tively rare. But the majority of those who are called

prophets were doubtless secondary prophets, the "sons

of the prophets," members of the prophetic organiza-

tions, or in some other capacity disciples of the prophets

who were highly gifted. These secondary prophets

102             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

were associated with the others in public or evangelistic

or literary work. Most of the prophetic functions thus

far enumerated were shared by them, and the term

"prophet" was naturally extended to them.

Very likely a large proportion of the very numerous

false prophets were secondary prophets who had be-

come misled, though some of them were doubtless mere

counterfeits. It is not necessary to think that the false

prophets generally were men who were acknowledged

as having supernatural gifts from Yahaweh.

          (b) We should note, further, that a prophet, in virtue

of his being a statesman or a reformer or a preacher or

The prophet,     an author, is likely to have been at once a

both local        cosmopolitan man and a man who had local

and cosmo-      and temporary interests. While he was emi-

politan            nently one concerned with the whole world and

with all future time, he was at the same time eminently

practical, dealing with the concerns of his own locality and

his own generation.

          It hinders a correct understanding of the writings of

the prophets to ignore the local and temporary element

in them. In the main they are composed of the same

sorts of material with sermons and reform addresses.

They contain the truths with which the prophets tried

to move the consciences of the men of their times and

of all future time. Predictions, for example, were to

them matters of supernatural revelation. They used

them just as they and we use scripture texts, to en-

force the practical message in hand. Isa. ii-iv, for

example, is a sermon preached from the prediction, ii.

2-4, as a text, the sermon being of the nature of rebuke

and counsel to the men of that generation.

          Equally fatal, however, to correct interpretation, and

now more widely prevalent, is the mistake of too much

 

            THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET       103

 

restricting the prophecies to local and temporary mean-

ings. Doubtless most of the prophetic discourses had

some specific local purpose to accomplish; but the dis-

course would seek its ends through those general appli-

cations of truth in which all men alike are capable of

being influenced, and not through those only which were

peculiar to their own times. The universalness that

differentiates literature is especially marked in these

writings.

          In reading the prophecies we are to recognize a local

allusion or statement when we find one, just as we are

to recognize a prediction when we find one; but we are

not violently to give to any passage either a local char-

acter or a predictive character, as if the meaning of the

passage depended upon this. The Israelites of Isaiah's

time, for example, needed divine teaching because of

the peculiarities of the age and land in which they

lived. But they needed it yet more because they were

human sinners, like the men of all countries in all ages.

          (c) Yet again, so far as the functions we have been

considering go, the Hebrew prophets have their coun-

terparts both in the Christian church and elsewhere.

These counterparts are of' two different kinds.

          First, any adherent of the true religion may be said

to prophesy when the Spirit of God gives him a special

message for the edification of others. No                              A sense in which

miracle is needed for this, but only that illu-               all devout persons

mination which devout persons sometimes                 are prophets

enjoy, and which God offers to all. In Paul's epistle

we have details concerning the gift of prophecy as

possessed by members of the Corinthian church (I Cor.

xiv). The gift as described here and elsewhere in the

New Testament does not necessarily differ from that

set forth in the Old Testament. And, within limits,

104           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

prophesying still abounds among earnestly religious

people. One who speaks for God in some special and

marked message, in a Christian meeting, exercises so

far forth the gift of prophecy.

          But again, in a quite different sense, any gifted person,

raised up by God for some marked and especial pur-

A sense in        pose of reform or training for the age in

which great      which he lives, has some of the marks of a

leaders are       prophet. This is true if the man is earnestly

prophets          religious, and it remains true even if he is irreligious

or falsely religious. The New Testament goes so far as

to say that Caiaphas prophesied (Jn. xi. 51), and its

writers call Balaam a prophet, and the heathen poet of

Crete a prophet.¹ Most believers in a personal God

believe that God raises up the great men of history, the

bad as well as the good, for the accomplishing of special

purposes. To attribute to such men, within properly

defined limits, the character of prophets is to say what

is distinctly true.

          There are reasons, perhaps decisive reasons, against

ordinarily using the term "prophet" and the term "inspi-

ration" in such ways as these. Unless carefully, defined,

the terms when so used are likely to be misunderstood

and to be misleading; and if you delay every time for

definition, the terms are liable to lose all their energy.

But it is correct to illustrate the naturalistic functions of

the prophets of Israel by applying the term "prophet "

and the term "inspiration," so far forth, to men of all

times and races; to say, for example, that Shakespeare

 

            ¹ "Balaam the son of Beor, who loved the hire of wrongdoing; . . . a

dumb ass spake with man's voice and stayed the madness of the prophet"

(2 Pet. ii. 15-16).

            "One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, Cretans are always

liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons " (Tit. i. 12).

           THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET         105

 

was a prophet of God, divinely inspired for the pur-

pose of producing certain effects upon the literature and

culture and human character of England and of the

world.

          There are disputants who say such things as these by

way of denying that the prophets had any divine mes-

sage different from those of other leaders in human

thought. One who opposes this denial will have a great

advantage if he fully acknowledges the reality and the

prominence of the naturalistic functions of the prophets,

such functions as we have thus far been considering.

Over a wide range their activities were like those of

other religious men at any time in history. Again, over

a wide range their activities were like those of other

leaders of thought, at any date or of any blood.

          II. But an account of the prophets which should stop

at this point would be so incomplete as to be thoroughly

erroneous. The scriptures affirm that the prophets, in

addition to these naturalistic activities, exercised dis-

tinctly supernatural powers.

          The facts we have been looking at are genuine, and

are essential to an adequate view of the subject. But

they are entirely subordinate as compared with certain

other facts. The bible prophets also claim functions

that imply superhuman gifts—functions that differ in

kind, and not merely in degree, from those thus far

mentioned. They claim an inspiration different from

that which they possess in common with other men.

And this higher inspiration they claim, not merely for

purposes of prediction, but for other activities as well.

Elisha working miracles, Daniel revealing the king's

dream, or any prophet uttering a rebuke that came by

revelation, lays claim to superhuman gifts as really as a

prophet who foretells the future.

106       THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          These superhuman activities may be spoken of in

Pave classes: the working of miracles, the disclosing

of secrets, the foretelling of events, the revealing of

Yahaweh's law, the teaching of the doctrine of the

Messiah. The last two of these will be considered at

length in subsequent chapters. The first three we will

now discuss very briefly.

          First, the prophets claim to have wrought miracles.

We need not, in order to prove this, claim that every

The prophet      wonderful event narrated in the Old Testa-

a worker of       ment is a miracle. Men of the past have

miracles          mistakenly interpreted marvels into the bible.

Perhaps it is true that even some of the most stupendous

interpositions in which Yahaweh manifested himself to

Israel were events which can be accounted for by known

natural laws. There are those who think that the cross-

ing of the Red Sea can be accounted for by an unusual

combination of wind and tide, occurring at a certain

juncture in the affairs of Israel; and that the rain of

fire that destroyed Sodom can be accounted for by the

sinking of a broken tract of ground into a deposit of

bituminous products; and that Israel's crossing the

Jordan dryshod can be accounted for by the- hypothesis

of a landslide above into the river; and that it was

Arabs rather than ravens that brought bread and flesh

to Elijah. We need not go into the discussion of such

instances. The question in each case is a question as

to the meaning of the testimony ; and the divine inter-

position is equally signal whether we can or cannot ac-

count for the events by the known laws of nature. But

when we have gone as far as possible in accounting natu-

ralistically for the deeds done by the prophets, it will

still remain true that they claimed the ability sometimes

to effect supernatural results. Familiar instances are the

     THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET                 107

 

wonders done by Moses in Egypt, Elijah's raising from

death the boy at Sarepta, and his calling down fire from

heaven, Elisha's multiplying the oil, causing the iron to

swim, raising to life the Shunamite's child.

          Secondly, the prophets claimed to be able to disclose

secrets by supernatural help. Instances of this, familiar

to all, are those of Joseph before Pharaoh, of              The prophet

Daniel before Nebuchadnezzar, of Elisha in               a discloser of

the matter of the raids planned by the king                 secrets

of Syria (2 Ki. vi. 12).

          Thirdly, the prophets claimed to predict the future.

In proof that they made this claim, and appealed to

fulfilled prediction as accrediting their com-               The prophet

mission from Yahaweh, one need only read              a predicter

such a passage as Isa. xli–xlv (especially xli.             of events

22-23, 26, xlii. 9, xliii. 9, 12, 18-19, etc.). This claim

stands in the less need of being discussed, on account

of our being so familiar with it. The predictions of the

prophets form the staple of one of the familiar arguments

for the divine origin of the religion of the bible.

          Of course the validity of this argument depends in

each instance on the question whether the prediction is

specific enough to distinguish the case to which it re-

fers from all other cases. The threats of the prophets

against Tyre are different from those against Damascus.

Those against each of these are different from those

against Jerusalem ; and similarly with Babylon and

Nineveh and other cities and countries. The strength

of the argument lies in the degree in which the differ-

ences in the fulfilments correspond with those in the

predictions.

          Probably no one denies that the prophets made many

predictions that were remarkably fulfilled. Certain

scholars affirm, however, that many of their predictions

108              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

are also shown by the events to have been false. Whether

one accepts this charge as true will depend on his in-

terpretations of the facts. Many predictions have been

understood in senses in which they failed to conform to

the events; but against the charge that untruthful pre-

dictions abound in the utterances of the prophets of

Israel, it is safe to enter a general denial.

          I am not now concerned to prove that the prophets

actually exercised these supernatural abilities — that

At least they     they wrought miracles, foretold the future,

claimed           disclosed hidden things ; I am only concerned

superhuman      to call attention to the fact that they claimed

powers            to exercise them. Some proofs that their claim

was well founded will come later. The fact now before us

is that they make the claim, constantly appealing to

these abilities as proving their divine commission. If

one has convinced himself that miracles never occur, he

will of course refuse even to consider this claim ; but

if one's mind is open to conviction on this point, he

must take these claims into the account. Indeed, they

constitute a part of the phenomena of the case, even

from the point of view of one who holds them to be

false.

          Without particularizing further, let us note that all

the prophetic functions of every sort are capable of

The mono-        being generalized into a single statement.

theism of the     The religion of Israel is monotheism of a cer-

religion of        tain type, the monotheism of the worship of

Yahaweh         Yahaweh. Christianity and Mohammedanism, 

the two more bulky successors of the religion of Israel, preserve

this same type of monotheism. We are all worshippers

of Israel's God. This monotheism is the greatest factor

in all Israelitish or Christian or Moslem civilizations.

The great work of the prophets, the one essential work,

       THE FUNCTIONS OF A PROPHET              109

 

was the giving of this type of monotheism to Israel and

to mankind.

          According to the claim of its adherents, Yahaweh re-

vealed this monotheism to men by the process of first

causing history to be transacted, and then causing a

record of the transactions to be made. The prophets

were the public men who had the greatest part in trans-

acting the history. They were the literary men who

made the record of the history. They were the preachers

who interpreted to men the ethical and spiritual lessons

of the history. They claim to have been the inspired

seers who perceived and made known Yahaweh's pur-

pose in the history. All their functions, natural and

supernatural, may be summed up in this brief descriptive

clause, the revealing of the monotheism of Yahaweh to

Israel and to mankind.

 

 

 

 

                                    CHAPTER VI

THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE — HOW GIVEN TO HIM, AND HOW

                               UTTERED BY HIM

 

          WE have found that the Israelitish sacred literature

presents the prophet to us as a citizen like others, dis-

tinguished only by the fact that he has an especial mes-

sage from Deity to his fellow-citizens. In the delivery

of this message we have found him acting in the char-

acter of statesman, reformer, preacher, author, and

claiming powers and authority from the realm of the

supernatural. The question arises: Were there any

distinctive peculiarities in the mode in which he re-

ceived his message, and in the mode in which he uttered

it? Our sources give us some detailed information on

these points. We take up the two parts of the question

in their order.

          I. First, how the prophet's message was revealed to

him. What was the source of his inspiration ? What

were the modes in which it made itself apparent?

          I. The source of his inspiration is represented to be

the Spirit of Yahaweh, variantly called also the Spirit

of Elohim.

          Save in exceptional instances the Hebrew word for

spirit is feminine; but like the word for soul, also femi-

nine, it may denote a masculine person. When per-

sonally used, its suggestions are masculine rather than

feminine.^l The prophetic gift is said to be by the Spirit

 

            ¹ The word denotes either spirit or wind. In both meanings it is regu-

larly feminine. The lexicons give certain instances in which it is mascu-

line when denoting wind (Ex. x. 13; I Ki. xix. 11; Jer. iv. 11; Job viii.

 

                                     110

                 THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE               111

 

coming upon the prophet, coming mightily upon him,

being put upon him or within him, being given, being

poured out. This could best be studied by looking up

all the numerous passages, with the aid of a concordance.

We will recall a few of them, mostly those that are very

familiar.

          Every one remembers the instance when Moses, at

Yahaweh's command, took the seventy elders to the tent

of meeting outside the camp, and Yahaweh                Prophets in-

took of the Spirit which was upon Moses,                  spired by the

and put it upon them, and they prophesied.                 spirit to

Eldad and Medad, two of the men whose names were speak

in the list, did not go with the others, and the Spirit

came upon them where they were, and they prophesied

in the camp. That the Spirit here spoken of is the

Spirit of Yahaweh is throughout distinctly implied, and

in one verse is explicitly stated (Num. xi. 16—17, 25—29).

          In the passage from Joel, cited by Peter at the pente-

cost, we read: —

          "I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and

your daughters shall prophesy . . . And also upon the servants

and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my Spirit"

(RV of Joel ii. 28-29; cf. Acts ii. 16-18).

          Samuel said to Saul: "The Spirit of Yahaweh will

come mightily upon thee, and thou wilt prophesy."

 

2), but there is room for doubt. When used personally the word very

naturally passes into a masculine.

            "A spirit passed before my face " (Job iv. 15).

            "Renew thou within me a spirit that is made ready " (Ps. li. 10).

            "The Spirit of Yahaweh spake by me" (2 Sam. xxiii. 2).

            "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever" (Gen. vi. 3).

            "The Spirit of Yahaweh will take thee up" (I Ki. xxiii. 12).

            "Lest the Spirit of Yahaweh hath taken him up" (2 Ki. ii. i6).

            "And the Spirit came forth and stood before Yahaweh."

            "Which way went the Spirit of Yahaweh from with me to speak with

            thee?" (i Ki. xxii. 21, 24).

112              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Accordingly, the narrator says, "the Spirit of Deity

came mightily upon him, and he prophesied " (I Sam.

x. 6, 10). In a little prophetic song attributed to David

the singer says: —

          "The Spirit of Yahaweh spake by me" (2 Sam. xxiii. 2).

 

In the prayer in Nehemiah the worshippers say to

Yahaweh: —

          "And thou testifiedst against them by thy Spirit by the hand of

the prophets " (Neh. ix. 30).

Micah says: —

          "I truly am full of power by the Spirit of Yahaweh" (iii. 8, cf. ii.

7, II).

Hosea uses the parallelism : —

          "The prophet is a fool,

          The man of the Spirit is made mad" (ix. 7).

          Similar instances might be multiplied.  In particular

the book of Isaiah is full of them. It became customary

to connect adjectives with the Spirit, describing him as

Yahaweh's " good Spirit " (Neh. ix. 20; Ps. cxliii. 10), or

his "holy Spirit" (Isa. lxiii. 10-11; cf. Ps. li. 11 [13] ).

If one should undertake to make a count of the instances,

he ought not to omit those in which the divine name is

represented by a pronoun (e.g. Gen. vi. 3; Pss. cvi. 33,

cxxxix. 7; Isa. xxx. I).

          Our survey of the subject of the Spirit that inspired

the prophets is not complete till we have looked at a

Deeds of          very different class of manifestations of the

men inspired     Spirit of Yahaweh. In the narrative concern-

by the Spirit      ing Elijah we are told of the Spirit's carrying

him away, rendering him invisible (I Ki. xviii. 12; 2 Ki.

ii. 16). Marvellous acts of this nature are not often at-

tributed to the Spirit; but marvellous acts in the form

of great achievements of men are as prominently so

 

              THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE              113

 

attributed as even the inspiring of the messages of the

prophets. Samson's exhibitions of wonderful strength,

for example, were by "the Spirit of Yahaweh "coming

"mightily" upon him (Jud. xiii. 25, xiv. 6, 19, xv. 14).

It was when "the Spirit of Yahaweh " came upon

Othniel and Gideon and Jephthah (Jud. iii. lo, vi. 34,

xi. 29) and others, that they wrought the exploits by

which they delivered Israel. When "the Spirit of

Yahaweh came mightily unto David," its presence was

probably manifested by David's achievements quite as

much as by his words; and the removal of the Spirit

from Saul was probably indicated by his failure in

achievement (I Sam. xvi. 13, 14). The Isaian singer says

of Israel in the wilderness (Isa. lxiii. 10-11): —

          "They rebelled, and grieved his holy Spirit." "Where is he that

put his holy Spirit in the midst of them? that caused his glorious

arm to go at the right hand of Moses? that divided the water before

them?"

          In saying this he attributes to Moses the great deeds of

the exodus, and not the great words only.

          At first thought, the qualifying a man for war or states-

manship, and especially the qualifying a man for such

athletic feats as those of Samson, by an inrush of

spiritual influence, seems to be very different from the

qualifying a prophet to utter a divine message; but

certainly there is no incongruity between the two. Es-

pecially should this idea find a hospitable reception

among us of the present generation, now that we have

introduced athletics so prominently among our appli-

ances for Christian service.

          More difficult is the case where the four hundred

prophets are prophesying in the name of Yahaweh

before Ahab and Jehoshaphat, and Micaiah has his

vision of "the Spirit" proposing to be a lying spirit

114            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

in the mouths of the prophets, and finding his offer

acceptable to Yahaweh (I Ki. xxii. 21, 24); but we are

Micaiah's         not at liberty to evade the difficulty by omit-

lying spirit       ting this passage from our induction. This

seems to me to be a truly oriental instance of extremism

in the use of figure of speech. These prophets, profess-

ing to be moved by the Spirit of Yahaweh, were prophe-

sying falsehood. Micaiah says that it is as if the Spirit

of Yahaweh had become a lying spirit in them in order

to deceive Ahab to his destruction. That is all that they

understood him to mean. They did not understand

that in fact the Spirit became a lying spirit.^l

          What is the Spirit of Yahaweh as delineated in the

passages we have studied? To this question I give here

no philosophical or theological answer. The answer

The nature       that lies verbally in the accounts is clear.

of the Spirit      The Spirit is effluent energy from Yahaweh

of Yahaweh      the infinite Spirit. But if we stop with this,

the answer is incomplete. This effluent energy is

spoken of in terms of personality. But the language

used concerning the Spirit of Yahaweh is different from

that used concerning the many personal spirits whom

these writers conceive of as doing the errands of the

supreme Spirit.² The inspiring Spirit is one, and is

spoken of in terms that are definite. If we were con-

fined to the instances in which other divine names

than Yahaweh are used, there might be room for disput-

 

            ¹ The English versions try to solve the difficulty by translating, "a

spirit," a translation that is within the limits of possibility. Other solutions

have been proposed. In Deity's causing or permitting Ahab to be de-

ceived, we have simply one more unsolved detail in the unsolved problem

of the origin of evil.

            ² Of these Saul's evil spirit is a familiar instance (1 Sam. xvi. 14b, xix.

9). Job says: "A spirit passed before my face" (iv. 15). "He maketh

his angels spirits " (Ps. civ. 4).

                THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE                       115

 

ing this, but concerning "the Spirit of Yahaweh" there

is no room for doubt. And it is reasonably certain that

"the Spirit of Deity" in such cases as those of Bezalel,

Balaam, Azariah, Zechariah (Ex. xxxi. 3, xxxv. 31;

Num. xxiv. 2; 2 Chron. xv. 1, xxiv. 20), is the same

with "the Spirit of Yahaweh." In fine, this Spirit that

inspires the prophets is presented to us as a unique

being, having personal characteristics, effluent from Ya-

haweh the supreme Spirit of the universe, at once iden-

tical with and different from Yahaweh.

          2. We turn to the question of the modes in which

it is represented that the Spirit gave the prophet his

message.

          In books of reference these are usually classified, I

believe, as three; namely, by dreams, by visions, by direct

communication. This classification seems to              Modes of revelation

me inadequate. It is based in part on the                               as commonly

assumption that the words from the stem                              classified

zaah, to see, are interchangeable with those from the

stem hhazah, to see. This assumption, as we have seen

in Chapter II, is not confirmed by a close examination

of the instances.

          Partly on the ground of the difference between these

two sets of terms, and partly on other grounds, it seems

to me that a better classification of the modes Abetter

of revelation to the prophets is the following: classification

first, dreams; second, picture-visions ; third, visions of

insight; fourth, theophanies. The understanding of

this classification will be the vindication of it, provided

it is capable of being vindicated. When we understand

it, we shall see that it is really the classification that is

implied in the statements of the bible.

          (a) The first of these four modes of revelation is that

by dreams. The number of passages in which this

116                THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

mode is recognized is considerable, and the recognition

is distinct; and yet the impression is made that this

mode is regarded as of a lower type than the others.

          General statements concerning revelation by dreams

abound. In the thirteenth chapter of Deuteronomy, in

General           the directions given for testing a prophet's

mention of       claims, the phrase "a prophet or a dreamer

prophetic         of dreams " is three times repeated, as if one

dreams            might be a prophet in virtue of his being a dreamer

of dreams (Deut. xiii. 1, 3, 5 [2, 4, 6] ). In the account

of the incident when Miriam and Aaron "spake against

Moses," Yahaweh says : —

 

          "If there be a prophet among you; I . . . will make myself

known unto him in a vision, I will speak with him in a dream"

(Num. xii. 6).

 

          We are told that King Saul resorted to the witch of

Endor because Yahaweh did not answer him

 

          "by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets" (i Sam. xxviii. 6, 15).

 

Very familiar is the promise in Joel: —

 

          "Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men

shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions" (ii. 28).

 

Job recognizes God's speaking "in a dream, in a vision

of the night," and complains of God's scaring him with

dreams, and terrifying him through visions (xxxiii. 15,

vii. 14). Jeremiah lays down the following rule as ap-

plicable even when sham prophetic dreams abound: —

         

          "The prophet that bath a dream, let him tell a dream, and he

that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the

straw to the wheat? saith Yahaweh" (xxiii. 28).

 

          Observe, however, that it is possible, in each of these

instances, so to interpret as to make the dream an

inferior mode of revelation. I do not say that this is

the true interpretation, but it is a possible one. And

             THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE             117

 

in other passages, considerable stress is laid on the

deceiving dreams of some of the prophets. Speaking

of " teraphim " and "diviners," the second                  False

Zechariah says, "They have told false dreams"                     prophetic

(x. 2). Jeremiah has a good deal to say of                   dreams

the false dreaming of the prophets (xxiii. 25, 27, 32,

xxvii. 9, xxix. 8).

 

          "The prophets . . . that prophesy lies in my name, saying, I

have dreamed, I have dreamed."

          "Who think to cause my people to forget my name by their

dreams which they tell."

          "That prophesy by lying dreams."

          "Hearken ye not to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to

your dreams."

          "Neither hearken ye to your dreams which ye cause to be

dreamed."

 

          There are about a dozen instances of significant

dreams in the Old Testament ; Joseph's dreams con-

cerning the sheaves, and concerning the                               Instances of

sun and moon and stars; Jacob's dreams                               significant

at Bethel and in Paddan-aram; Solomon's                   dreams

dream; Daniel's dream, with the vision of the four

beasts; the dreams of the chief butler and the chief

baker and Pharaoh; those of Nebuchadnezzar; of

Abimelech king of Gerar; of Laban; of a Midianite

soldier in Gideon's time (Gen. xxxvii. 5-20, xxviii. 12,

xxxi. 10-11; I Ki. iii. 5, 15; Dan. vii. I; Gen. xl-xli;

Dan. ii, iv; Gen. xx. 3, 6, xxxi. 24; Jud. vii. 12-15). In

a majority of the instances the dreamers are heathen;

and in most of the instances where the dream is pro-

phetic, it does not loom up very large.

          Really the interpretation of dreams seems to be more

honorably presented as a prophetic function than the

dreaming of dreams. It is spoken of as especially dis-

tinguishing Daniel that he had "understanding in all

118             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

visions and dreams " (i. 17). His " excellent spirit "

manifested itself in the "interpreting of dreams" (v.

Prophets as   12), as well as in other ways. The inter-

interpreters   pretations of the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar

of dreams     and of Pharaoh by Daniel and Joseph are

certainly in the records on the ground of their being

notable achievements of men who had prophetic gifts.

          (b) The second mode of revelation to the prophets

is that by visions that are conceived of as presented

to the physical eye. Not necessarily visions that are

actually perceived, notice, by the physical sight, but

visions that are thought of as so perceived.^l

          Instances of this mode of communication with Deity

are numerous in the Old Testament, and are familiar

Instances of      to all readers. A few, taken at random, are

picture-           Jeremiah's beholding the rod of almond, the

vision             seething pot, the baskets of figs (Jer. 11, 13,

xxiv); Zechariah's beholding the lampbowl and olive

trees, the flying roll, the woman in the ephah, the

four chariots (Zech. iv, v. 1-4, 5-11, vi. 1—8); Ezekiel's

beholding the four living creatures, and the hand with

the book-roll (Ezek. i, ii. 9, etc.); Yahaweh's causing

Amos to behold the locusts devouring the latter

growth, the fire devouring the great deep, the plumb-

line, the basket of summer fruit (vii. 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, viii.

1-3); his causing Elisha to behold the approaching

death of Benhadad and the accession of Hazael (2 Ki.

viii. 10-13); the appearing to Ezekiel of the semblance

 

            ¹ These are the instances in which prophetic vision is described in terms

of the qal, the hiphil, the hophal, or the nouns of the stem raah, as distin-

guished from the stem hhazah. See Chapter II. In the remainder of this

chapter we will translate the words of this stem by such English terms as

"behold," "appearance," "picture-vision," reserving the words "see" and

"vision" to be used in translating from hhazah. The niphal of raah will

be considered later, when we reach the subject of theophany.

               THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE                       119

of a throne over his cherubim, and of a hand under their

wings (x. 1, 8) ; and very many others.

          (c) The third mode of revelation to the prophets may,

in the lack of a better term, be said to be by visions of

insight. It is expressed in the Hebrew by the words of

the stem hhazah, when these are specifically used. It

would include all methods of appeal to the mind except

that by picture-vision.

          We have already seen (Chapter II) that the verb

hhazah, though it is in Aramaic the ordinary word for

physical seeing, is in the Hebrew mainly con-            Hhazah

fined to the instances in which the seeing is               versus

prophetic, and in other instances the restric-               raah

tion of it to the idea of mental perception or thoughtful

seeing is persistent. The hhazah words are used as liter-

ary terms in the titles of the prophecies and elsewhere,

while the raah words are never so used. Even in the

Aramaizing Hebrew of the book of Daniel the difference

between the words of these two stems never quite fades

out, and elsewhere it is very distinct.

          The hhazah words sometimes denote a genus, under

which the raah words designate a species. Every raah

vision is a hhazah vision, but there may be hhazah visions

which are not raah visions.^l  Again, the hhazah words

are sometimes applied to the whole of some transaction,

while the raah words are used to denote a picture-vision

 

            ¹ Speaking of his vision of the ram and the he-goat, Daniel says, "I

Daniel had beheld the vision" (viii. 15). What he had beheld was an

appearance presented to the eye, but it was also vision in the wider sense

of prophetic revelation, and the speaker here prefers the generic word to

the specific. In verse 16 the other term is used: "Make this man to un-

derstand the appearance." The phrase "whom I had beheld in the vision"

is used in ix. 21. Similarly it is said in Joel (ii. 28) that the young men

shall "behold visions." Amos is called a "seer" (vii. 12) in the midst of

the account of the series of objects which Yahaweh "caused him to behold."

120             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

which constituted a part of the transaction.¹  These uses

of the words of the two stems explain the phenomena

which have sometimes been mistakenly regarded as cases

of interchange. Samuel and Zadok and Hanani are

doubtless called roim because they somehow came to be

thought of as receiving revelations in forms that appealed

to the senses. Gad and Asaph and Heman and Jeduthun

and Iddo and Jehu the son of Hanani are called hhozini

because they were believed to have insight into the will

of Deity, without emphasizing the form of the revelations

made through them.

          As the hhazah words may denote a genus under which

the raah words denote a species, so they may also denote'

Vision other     another species of the same genus; namely,

than that by      mental vision in distinction from the actual or

sense-images    apparent presentation of objects to the senses.

This is apparently the meaning in a large proportion of

the instances in which a prophetic writing is spoken of

as a vision (e.g. Isa. i. 1 ; Na. i. 1 ; Hab. ii. 2), and in

those in which the word of Yahaweh is said to come to

some one in a vision, or in which some other like expres-

sion is used (e.g. Gen. xv. 1-6; 2 Sam. vii. 17; Nu. xxiv.

4, 16; Isa. ii. I).

          Obviously it is supposable that the prophet might

receive his message through other avenues than his

picture-making faculty. Even if it were indispensable

that he be in a tranced or ecstatic condition, such a con-

dition might supposably act upon his memory, his pow-

ers of perception or reasoning, his association of ideas,

 

            ¹ In Dan. viii-x hhazon (viii. I, 2, 2, 13, 15a, 17, :z6b, ix. 21, 24, x. 14)

denotes either the whole of a transaction, or some part of it thought of

generically as divine revelation; while mar'eh and mar'ah denote specifi-

cally objects that are thought of as presented to the eye (viii. 15b, 16, 26a,

27, ix. 23, x. I, 6, 7, 7, 8, 16, 18).

              THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE             121

 

and not exclusively upon his imagination. Through

these other mental powers, without any intervention of

sense-perceived images, he might be made to know things

which he would not know in an ordinary state of mind.

But the records do not say that the prophet was always

in an ecstatic state when he received his message. In

by far the larger number of the instances there is no

mention of either dreams or apparitions or trances. It

is possible to think of most of the communications to the

prophets as reaching them through their aroused spiritual

insight, unaccompanied by the consciousness of mani-

festations appealing to the senses. The revelation may

have been the product of a sharpened intuition or a quick-

ened intelligence, brought to bear upon the problem of

the hour.

          These things are supposable. That they are also

matters of fact appear from the contents of the writ-

ings which have come down to us from the prophets

under the title of visions. In these writings the proph-

ets exhibit themselves as actively and consciously using

all the faculties which a human mind possesses. Evi-

dently they regarded themselves as guided by the Spirit

in making investigations, in remembering, in judging of

facts, in estimating persons, in making inductions and

deductions, in mental processes of all sorts. The records

specify dreams and appearance visions and other like

modes, but they do not represent the prophet as restricted

to these. The terms used have meanings wide enough

to include any supposable influence exerted by the divine

Spirit over the mind of the prophet. In many cases the

language of the scriptures will justify no narrower inter-

pretation than that Deity in some way made the prophet

understand his will.

          (d) The fourth mode of revelation to the prophets is

122           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

by theophany. It is superfluous to say that the word

"theophany" is of Greek origin, and denotes an ap-

pearing of Deity in visible form.

          The Hebrew expression for this fact is the Niphal of

the verb raah, to see. It denotes the state of being

The Niphal       seen, or the act of becoming visible. It is

of raah            commonly translated by the English verb

"appear." Not all the instances in which it is used are:

cases of theophany. For example, Yahaweh is said to

have appeared to Solomon (I Ki. iii. 5) in a dream. But

the theophanic instances are easily distinguishable.

          The cases of theophany may be described as those in

1which we find Yahaweh appearing in human form and

conversing with the prophet, with or without additional

miraculous manifestations ; or Yahaweh uttering audible

words from the midst of miraculous manifestations.

          Instances of theophany are given in passages that are

those most familiar to us. Abraham is sitting at his tent

Yahaweh         in door, and suddenly becomes aware of three

human sem-      men standing near him. He talks with them,

blance            they eat with him; one of them promises to

Sarah a son; he accompanies them on their way; they

part, two of them going toward Sodom. The one who

remains with Abraham turns out to be Yahaweh, and he

and Abraham have a memorable interview. The other

two are the angels who rescue Lot when Sodom is de-

stroyed (Gen. xviii. 1-2, 9-10, 13, 17, 20-2I, 22, xix. I).

          This is, perhaps, the instance that is more explicit in

its details than any other on record. In some of the

Varying           instances there is a miraculous manifestation

forms of          in addition to the appearing in human form of

theophany       the person who utters the message. A good

example is that of Manoah and the Angel who talked

with him, and the miraculous burning of the food which

               THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE               123

 

he placed before the Angel (Jud. xiii. 3, 6, 16, 19, 20-

21, 22). In other cases, there is the miraculous mani-

festation and the uttering of audible words, without any

human form being visible; for example, the giving of

the ten words from Sinai, or the revelations from the

pillar of cloud or of fire over the tent of meeting (Ex.

xix–xx; Deut. v; Num. ix. 15-23). In some cases

there may be a doubt as to whether the narrative repre-

sents that a human form appeared ; for example, at the

burning bush, or at the sacrifice of Isaac (Ex. iii. 2–3;

Gen. xxii. 11-12, 14, 15-16).

          The personage who is described as " the Angel"

is prominent in most of the detailed instances of the-

ophany. His presence is explicitly mentioned,            The Angel

I believe, in all the cases that have just been

cited. Scholars have given much attention to this per-

sonage, and he deserves much. He appears in the Old

Testament narrative, in nearly all its stages, not as some

angel or other, but as the Angel, a distinct, separate

being. In any particular case we are likely to find him

presenting himself as a man, afterward spoken of as

the Angel, and later in the narrative identified with

Yahaweh himself. We must not delay to discuss the

subject, but the Angel seems to be in some sense a

temporary incarnation of Yahaweh.

          From one point of view, theophany might be classed

as a species of picture-vision. It is like picture-vision

in that it presents Deity as assuming the                     Theophany

form of a visible person, or as speaking from   versus

the midst of visible manifestations. It is           picture-vision

unlike picture-vision in that it is of the nature of a per-

sonal interview of a man with God, and not mainly of

the nature of an object lesson taught by emblems. Gen-

uine theophanies are regarded as something rare and

124           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

precious, the highest form of divine communication with

men. The difference between Moses and the less gifted

prophets was that Yahaweh spoke with him in theophanic

"picture-vision," mouth to mouth, and not merely in

dreams or ordinary picture-vision (Num. xii. 6-8).¹

          (e) Very noteworthy in the biblical accounts of the

prophets is the absence of the use of artificial parapher-

The absence     nalia or processes for exciting the prophetic

of artificial       mood. In one instance we are told that Elisha

excitation        required the presence of a minstrel as the con-

dition of his giving a message (2 Ki. iii. 15). This case

is the only one of its kind. If we regard it as an in-

stance in which external means were used to induce a

suitable frame of mind in a prophet desiring a revelation,

it is altogether exceptional.

          In this the scriptures are in contrast with what we

find elsewhere in all ages, in persons who profess to give

supernatural revelations. The shaman has his snakeskin

rattle, the conjurer has his strange-looking tools, the as-

trologer has his elaborate, scholarly-seeming apparatus;

and they use these in compelling the other world to dis-

close its secrets or to bring help. The prophets of

ancient Egypt had their magic formulas, the persons

in the Arabian Nights pronounce the ineffable Name;,

Prospero compels the spirits by spells and charms. The

Pythia at Delphi inhaled intoxicating vapor, the augurs

consulted the flight of birds or the entrails of sacrificial.

victims, Ezra in the legend drinks a potion to enable:

him to reproduce the inspired scriptures, the witches

 

            ¹ It is surprising that the identifying of theophany with what is above

described as mental vision has gained a good deal of currency, and along

with it a theory that mental vision is presented in the Old Testament as

the highest form of revelation. Linguistically, the descriptions of the-

ophany are affiliated with the derivatives of raah, and not of hhazah.

                THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE                 125

 

in Macbeth dance around the caldron, the modern spir-

itualists have their seances. In Odd Craft, the latest

volume of stories, the fortune-teller burns something in

a bowl, and he and the inquirers sit among the fumes.

Other characters in recent novels consult the unseen by

burning a hair, or by drawing blood, or by stirring the

grounds in a teacup. From the biblical narratives we

learn that processes of these various sorts were in exist-

ence throughout the times covered by Israelitish his-

tory.^l  In view of all this, it is a thing very remarkable

that the prophets of Yahaweh are not represented as

resorting to means of artificial excitation in order to stir

up the spirit of revelation in them or for them. In this,

as in their being simply citizens with a message (Chapter

IV), they are unique among the prophets of the nations.

          II. As our second principal topic we take up certain

peculiarities which characterized the prophets in giv-

ing their messages to men. As we should expect, these

bear a certain correspondence to the modes in which

revelation came from God to them.

          I. They are noted, for example, for their very

abundant use of symbols. They delight in simple but

striking object lessons, in which physical                   Prophetic

objects or personal acts are employed to                              object

represent truths. Ahijah rends the garment                  lessons

into twelve pieces and gives Jeroboam ten, in token that

Jeroboam shall reign over ten tribes (1 Ki. xi. 30-31).

Ezekiel inscribes one stick with the name Judah and

another with the name Joseph, and puts the two to-

gether, in token of the union of the exiles from the

 

            ¹ Instance the witch of Endor, the prophets of Baal cutting themselves

in their frantic efforts to obtain a revelation, and the derivations of the

many different words that are used in speaking of practitioners of magic

arts.

126              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

northern and the southern kingdoms (xxxvii. 15-25).

Isaiah went naked and barefoot, to indicate the way

in which the Assyrian would lead Egypt and Ethiopia

into exile (xx). Jeremiah wore a bar of wood as an.

emblem of the subjugation of the nations to Nebuchad-

nezzar and when the false prophet Hananiah broke off

the bar, Jeremiah declared that Yahaweh would replace

it with a yoke of iron (Jer. xxvii, xxviii). Jeremiah

publicly broke the potter's vessel in the valley of the

son of Hinnom, to indicate Yahaweh's breaking of

Judah and Jerusalem (xix).          ,

          2. The teaching of the prophets by types should be

distinguished from their ordinary teaching by symbols.

The type is a higher form of symbolism, in which actual

persons or facts or events are used in setting forth

greater events or spiritual truths.

          The older treatments of prophecy make much of the

doctrine of types. Extensive works have been written

A type            on Typology, and many of them. In some

defined                     the doctrine has been mistakenly treated, but

it is nevertheless important. In actual use the word

"type" is applied to emblems or figures of speech of

all kinds, but it is better so to define it as to make it

distinctive. Perhaps the best definition for the purpose

is that which prevails in the sciences. A type is —

 

"one of a class or group of objects that embodies the characteristics

of the group or class"; or "the ideal representation combining es-

sential characteristics, as of a species, genus, or family; an organism

exhibiting the essential characteristics of its group " (Standard

Dictionary).

 

Using this definition in connection with the phenomena

of prophecy, the most important form of type is that

in which a historical fact or person or event is used as

an example foreshadowing some other fact or event or

            THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE                   127

 

person. It is best to distinguish a type from all objects

that are not thought of as historical, and from historical

events that are used merely for purposes of illustration.

A type is an emblem of a peculiar kind, a fact or a

person embodying a truth, and used as a foreshadowing

example of a greater manifestation of that truth.

          The prophetic typology is mainly concerned with the

messianic doctrine taught by the prophets, and will

come before us again when we reach that subject. For

the present it is sufficient to add that it is the characters

and experiences and works of the prophets that are

typical, rather than their utterances. They themselves

claim to be a succession of types. The institutions of

Israel as moulded by the prophets are typical of some-

thing higher to be unfolded in the future. Under their

guidance much of the history has a typical value.

          3. In considering the modes of utterance by the

prophets, we cannot wholly ignore the questions that

have been so often raised concerning a double sense

and a manifold fulfilment.

          (a) It is not to be admitted that any of the utter-

ances of the true prophets of Yahaweh have     Deceitfully

a double sense, meaning thereby a deceitfully equivocal

equivocal sense. The Greek oracle to Pyrrhus   meanings

on his way to invade Italy is said to have been: —

                              "I say that Rome

                    Pyrrhus shall overcome."

 

When Pyrrhus failed to overcome Rome, and com-

plained that the oracle had deceived him, he was told

that the oracle was not to blame for his mistaken pars-

ing. In I Ki. xxii. 12 the false prophets say: —

 

          "Go thou up to Ramoth-gilead and prosper, and Yahaweh will

give it into the hand of the king."

128         THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

They give the same equivocal message variantly in

verse 6, and Micaiah repeats it ironically in verse 15.

But among the recognized prophets of Yahaweh serious

instances of this kind are conspicuous by their absence.

          Instances of alleged double sense of a different kind

may be exemplified by the citation of Jeremiah (xxxi. 15)

in Matthew (ii. 18) concerning Rachel weeping for her

children. We read in Genesis that Rachel was buried

in Ramah on the way from Bethel to Ephrath, known

later as Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19-20, xlviii. 7; cf:

I Sam. x. 2). Jeremiah in a fine burst of figurative

language represents Rachel in her grave as weeping

over her children, who have vanished by slaughter and

captivity from the depopulated region. Matthew quotes

the language, with the formula: "Then was fulfilled

that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet," and

applies it to the slaughter of the infants by Herod.

There are those who insist that Matthew says that the

words of Jeremiah were a prediction of the slaughter

by Herod, and were in that sense fulfilled. It would

seem to follow that Jeremiah had two meanings in mind

when he spoke the words, one meaning for his own

time and another for the time of Jesus. Several of the

places where the New Testament speaks of the words

of a prophet as having been fulfilled are regarded as in-

stances of this kind of alleged double sense. But it is

not necessary to think that Matthew regarded the words

of Jeremiah as a prediction of the cruelty of Herocl.

Probably he meant no more than that the words of the

prophet are capable of being used as a vivid descrip-

tion of the affair under Herod. Nothing is more com-

mon than to apply familiar old diction to new situations.

With this interpretation of instances of this sort every

sign of a double sense vanishes.

              THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE             129

 

          (b) The question of manifold fulfilment is entirely

different from that of an equivocal sense, and should be

treated accordingly.

          On this point the one most important consideration is

that the idea of manifold fulfilment is not an afterthought,

devised for the explaining of difficulties, but              Manifold ful-

is a recognition of an essential part of the                   filment not

structure of biblical prophecy. The predic-                  an afterthought

tions found in the extant works of the prophets are

almost exclusively either promises or threats. And

they are not sporadic, but parts of a connected doctrine

concerning the workings of a Deity whose plans are rep-

resented as extending through the ages. That his plans

extend through the ages is a point much insisted upon.

          In the very nature of things the execution of a threat

may be accomplished in parts, and at different times.

In the nature of things a promise, operative without

limit of time, may begin to be fulfilled at once, and may

also continue being fulfilled through future period after

period. In the time of our civil war a soldier's life was

saved by a comrade. He promised that he would

always show himself grateful. After the war he came

to possess wealth and influence. He kept his promise

when his comrade was sick, by seeing that he was taken

to a hospital and cared for. He kept it later by paying

the expenses of his comrade's son through college.

Year by year he insists upon a visit from his comrade

and his comrade's family, and the two give themselves

up to the good fellowship of the occasion. He has just

presented his comrade's granddaughter with a handsome

marriage portion. The prediction that he made when

he promised to be grateful has naturally this manifold

fulfilment. So a prediction that is in the form of a

promise of never ending benefit from Deity has neces-

130            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

sarily a manifold fulfilment. Most of the prophetic

predictions are of this type. It is very clear that such

a prophecy may have manifold application, manifold

fulfilment, without having a double sense.

          This matter is principally important in connection

with the messianic forecast found in the prophets, and

it will be abundantly illustrated when we reach that part

of our subject. For the present we will only illustrate

the principle in hand by barely mentioning a few of the

different ways in which scholars have stated it.

          Writers have applied the term "generic prophecy" in

more ways than one. According to one idea a generic

Generic           prediction is one which regards an event as

prophecy         occurring in a series of parts, separated by

intervals, and expresses itself in language that may

apply indifferently to the nearest part, or to the remoter

parts, or to the whole—in other words, a prediction

which, in applying to the whole of a complex event,

also applies to some of the parts. A certain law of

perspective has played a prominent pail: in this way of

presenting the matter. It is as when a person looks

out over a wide view made up of several parallel ranges

of hills. The more distant ranges are much the grander;

though to his eye the nearer look the larger, and the

farther are blended with the nearer. Study, for example,

the words of Jesus concerning the destruction of Jerusa-

lem and his coming and the end of the age (Mat. xxiv-

xxv).

          Others speak of the successive or the progressive

fulfilment of a prediction. An event is foretold which

Successive or    is to be brought about through previous

progressive      events that in some particulars resemble it.

fulfilment        The prediction is to be thought of as fulfilled,

though inadequately, in the first event of the series, and

             THE PROPHET'S MESSAGE                  131

 

as more or less adequately fulfilled in each succeeding

event, but as completely fulfilled only in the final event

in the series. Another form of statement is that only

the final event is foretold, but that this incidentally

includes the foretelling of some of the means by which

it is accomplished, that is, of some of the intervening

events that lead up to it.

With some a favorite way of presenting the case is to

say that types and antitypes may exist in a series, one

event being typical of a second, the second                Series of

being typical of a third, the third of a                         types and

fourth, and so on. In such a case it is evi-                   antitypes

dent that a prediction or other prophecy, applying to the

first event in the series, may through it apply to the sec-

ond, and so to each succeeding event till the antitype

is reached. In foretelling parts of such a series the

remaining parts are foretold.

          When the point of a prophecy consists in its enunciat-

ing the principles on which God acts in dealing with

individuals or communities, then the prophecy                     The

may of course be so far forth applied to every            principles

instance that comes wholly or partly under                 God's administration

these principles. Especially is it true that if the

prophets believed that Deity had some central plan in

view in his management of the world, their teachings

concerning that plan and its details would be thereby

affected. Many of their statements would apply equally

to the whole plan or to certain of its details. Some of

their statements would apply equally to details which

were in themselves very unlike. I have stated this

hypothetically; but nothing is more certain than that

the prophets had a theory of this kind, and that their

utterances were greatly affected thereby.

          4. In treating of the modes of utterance of the

132             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

prophets, we have considered mainly the points which

seem most to call for remark. But there is some danger

Masters of        that in doing this we may mistake exceptional

the art of         things for the things that are essential. Realty

persuasive       the greatest quality in the modes of utterance

speech            of the prophets is that they were masters of the

art of persuasive speech. They were enabled to utter moral

and religious truth so directly and incisively that the

truth they uttered has lived ever since.

 

 

 

                                   CHAPTER VII

 

THE PROPHET AS A GIVER OF TORAH AND WRITER OF

                                     SCRIPTURE

 

          AT the close of the fifth chapter our attention was

called to the fact that the one great function of the

prophets was the transmitting of monotheism in its

Israelitish type to Israel, to mankind, and to future

ages. The monotheism they transmitted may be looked

at with respect to its contents or with respect to its form.

As to its contents, the chief thing in it is its messianic

doctrine. In its form it is an alleged revelation or series

of revelations from God, commonly described by the

prophets themselves as "law," torah. Torah, when

written, becomes sacred scripture.

          The discussion of the distinctive contents of the

monotheism of this type, namely, its doctrine of the

Messiah, will occupy the second part of this volume;

the discussion of its form will occupy the present chap-

ter. Nothing can be more important in this investiga-

tion than to get a clear idea of the relations of the

prophets to torah, that is, directly or indirectly, to the

written scripture.

          Most students of the Bible, even if they do not

understand Hebrew, are familiar with this word torah,

commonly translated "law." From the careless use

of it arise many errors. When one gets so far along

as to know that the Old Testament consists of the Law

and the Prophets and the Hagiographa, he is liable

 

                                      133

134           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

to assume that "law" and "pentateuch" are converti-

ble terms. Even scholarly men have made this assump-

tion, and with disastrous results. For this reason we

need carefully to consider the term torah and its equiva-

lents. We will study it, first, as used in writings later

than the Old Testament; second, as used in the Old

Testament; third, as indicating the character of the

Old Testament.

          I. First, the term is not restricted, in the literature

that has been written since the Old Testament, to the

denoting of the pentateuch. In particular, it is also

employed to denote the entire bible, or to denote the

Old Testament.

          I. Certainly, we ourselves use the term "law" in

this extended sense. If you heard some one speak of

the written law of God, you might understand him to

mean the pentateuch, but you would be more likely

to understand him to mean the bible.

          2. The same usage prevails among the Jewish scholars

of past centuries. For example, one finds such a passage

as the following: —

 

          "This whole work is called Mikra, that is, Scripture or Bible.

It is also often called Law, as R. Bechai teaches in Chadh Hake-

                    mach: . . . 'The Law is divided into three parts„

Rabbinical       into the Law, the Prophets and the Hagiographa'''

usage             (Ugolino, Vol. I, Col. 226).

 

As another instance, Lightfoot (Pitman's ed., 1823,

Vol. XII, p. 546) quotes from Bab. Sanhedr., fol. 91, 2,

a discussion in which three Old Testament passages are

cited on the question: "Whence is the resurrection of

the dead proved out of the law?" The passages are

Josh. viii. 30; Ps. lxxxiv. 4; Isa. lii. 8. It is evident

that the word "law" in this passage denotes the Old

Testament, and not the pentateuch only.

             THE PROPHET AND THE LAW             135

 

          These instances are relatively late. It is alleged that

no such usage prevailed in the early Christian centuries,

but this is a mistake. In the celebrated four-      Usage in

teenth chapter of 2 Esdras, for example, the     2 Esdras and

things "which were written in thy law" in-        Josephus

elude, apparently, "the works that shall begin," and

"all that hath taken place in the world since the begin-

ning" (vv. 20-22), that is, the contents of the predictive

and the historical parts of the Old Testament. Ezra is

represented as saying:  "The world therefore lieth in

darkness . . . since thy law is burnt," and as asking

for the gift of the Holy Spirit that he may write the

things that had formerly been written in the law. Re-

ceiving the inspiration he sought, he writes, according

to the most probable text, ninety-four books, the first

twenty-four of which he is to publish openly (vv. 44-

46). It is clear that these twenty-four books were, in

the mind of the author of the story, the "law" of which

he had been speaking, and it is equally clear that by

them he intended the Old Testament.¹

          Josephus, like the author of 2 Esdras, wrote not far

from the close of the first century A.D., a little later

than the writers of the New Testament. In the third

section of the Preface to his Antiquities he says, speak-

ing of King Ptolemy and the Septuagint translation of

the Old Testament: —

 

          "For he did not obtain all the record, for those who were sent

to Alexandria as interpreters gave him; only the books of the law.

But there is a vast number of other matters in the sacred literature."²

 

            ¹ If the expression "a law of life" in verse 30 refers especially to the

pentateuch, that simply shows that this author, like others, used the term

"law" in both senses. It should be noticed that the point here made de-

pends solely on the author's use of language, and not at all on the truthful-

ness of his statements of fact.

            ² This translation is based on those of Whiston and Shilletto, but is

136             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Josephus here distinguishes between "the books of the

law "on the one hand and " the record," "the sacred.

literature," on the other. It is commonly assumed that:

by the first of these terms he means the pentateuch,

and by the other two the rest of the Old Testament.

But it is at least as plausible to say that by the first he

means the Old Testament, and that in the other two he

includes the body of secondary sacred literature which

he uses so freely in the work that follows. The con-

text proves that this latter statement is certainly the

correct one. By "the books of the law" Josephus here

means the aggregate of the Hebrew Old Testament

writings. These had been for several generations''

accessible to Greeks, in the Septuagint translation.

Josephus now proposes to render accessible a portion

of the contents of the secondary sacred writings.

          3. Not to consider other uses of the term "law" in

the New Testament, its writers sometimes designate the

New Testa-       pentateuch as the law, and sometimes include

ment usage       under this designation the whole body of the

"scriptures" to which they are in the habit of referring.

It is impossible to be sure which of these two meanings

of the term was the more familiar to their minds.

          A marked instance of the second of these two mean-

ings is that in which Jesus asks the question: "Is it

not written in your law, I said, Ye are Gods?"¹ Here

the reference is not to a passage in the books of Moses,

 

changed to avoid their confusing of the literary terms used by Josephus.

The plural ypaµµara, letters, is rendered "literature," to distinguish it alike

from ypa i7, scripture, and OtfX1a, books.

            ¹ " Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are

gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the

scripture cannot be broken), say ye of him whom the Father sanctified

and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son

of God?" (Jn. x. 34).

             THE PROPHET AND THE LAW               137

 

but to one of the psalms (lxxxii. 6). Jesus speaks of

this phrase from the psalm as "written in your law,"

and immediately afterward calls it "scripture." You

can only explain his use of words by saying that he and

those who heard him were alike in the habit of some-

times speaking of the whole body of the scriptures as

"the law." Similarly Jesus speaks of the sentence,

"They hated me without a cause" (Ps. xxxv. 19 or

lxix. 4), as "written in their law" (Jn. xv. 25). A

more general instance is the following (Jn. xii. 34): —

 

          "The multitude therefore answered him, We have heard out

of the law that the Christ abideth for ever: and how sayest

thou, The Son of man must be lifted up?"

 

Here the reference may be to any one of several specific

passages, or it may be to the general spirit of the mes-

sianic passages; but in either case it is to the Old

Testament outside the Mosaic books.

          John is not the only New Testament writer who em-

ploys language in this way. Paul says to the Corin-

thians (I Cor. xiv. 21):

 

          "In the law it is written, By men of strange tongues and by

the lips of strangers will I speak unto this people; and not even

thus will they hear me, saith the Lord."

 

This citation is from Isaiah (xxviii. 11, 12). Add to these

instances the series of citations in Rom. iii. 10–19 :

          "As it is written,

          There is none righteous, no, not one;

          There is none that understandeth,

          There is none that seeketh after God;

          They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofit-

                    able;

          There is none that doeth good, no, not so much as one :

          Their throat is an open sepulchre;

          With their tongues they have used deceit:

          The poison of asps is under their lips :

138         THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:

          Their feet are swift to shed blood;

          Destruction and misery are in their ways;

          And the way of peace have they not known:

          There is no fear of God before their eyes.

          Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh

to them that are under the law."

 

Here the marginal references are to the Psalms, Jere-

miah, the Proverbs, and Isaiah. None of the sentences

are from the pentateuch. Yet they are quoted as parts

of what the law says to them that are under the law;

and they are introduced by the formula, "It is written."

No one can make the term "law" in this passage other

than synonymous with the term "scripture."

          These instances are conclusive to the effect that in

the time of Jesus there was a distinct usage under which

the whole body of the Old Testament scriptures was

familiarly called "the law." And inasmuch as what-

ever is in the pentateuch is also in the Old Testament,

these authors may sometimes have had the whole Old

Testament in mind even when they cite the pentateuch.

It follows that we cannot be certain which of the two

meanings was the more prevalent.

          4. Correct interpretation finds the same usage in

the earlier extrabiblical literature. For example, the

Usages of         twenty-fourth chapter of the book of Ec-

Ecclesiasti-      clesiasticus, written either about 200 B.C. or

cus, Baruch,     about 300 B.C., is a part of a continuous

etc.                series of citations, mostly from Job, Proverbs, and the

scriptural books of that class, with enlargements taken

in part from the pentateuch. This is followed by the

affirmation: —

 

          ¹ There is a less distinct instance in Mt. xxii. 36, 40, where the question

is asked concerning the law, but answered concerning "the whole law, and

the prophets."

                THE PROPHET AND THE LAW                  139

 

          "All these are the book of the covenant of the most high God,

          The law which Moses commanded us

          As an heritage unto the congregations of Jacob" (ver. 23).

 

Apparently this author thinks of Moses as only the be-

ginner of "the law which Moses commanded us," and

thinks of that law as including the wisdom books of the

Old Testament, as well as the pentateuch.

          Precisely similar is the passage in the book of Baruch

(iv. 1), where, alter many lines made up from the books

of Moses and from Proverbs and Job, the writer says : —

 

          "This is the book of the commandments of God,

          And the law that endureth forever."

 

II. This glance at the later usage has prepared us for

studying the term as it appears in the Hebrew of the

Old Testament.

          1. First, we look at its derivation.

          The noun torah and its cognate verb horah are causa-

tives from yarah, which denotes the act of shooting an

arrow or hurling a javelin. The two have the     Derived from

same use, and should be studied together, the   yarah, "to

mechanical translation of the verb being " to    shoot

give torah." The causative stem of yarah sometimes

denotes shooting, like the simple stem. Its derivative

yoreh (Deut. xi. 14 Jer. v. 24) is translated "former

rain." The "arrows of the rain" afford a not unfamil-

iar figure of speech. But the causative verb of the stem

nearly always, and the noun torah always, are used in

the secondary sense in which the noun is translated

"law" and the verb is translated "teach."¹

 

            ¹ The lexicons say that this secondary meaning comes through the no-

tion of shooting out the hand by way of monitory gesture. Possibly a

better conjecture is that the term is of military origin. An officer causes

his men to shoot, when he gives the order for shooting. From such a be-

ginning the noun might naturally come to denote an order given by com-

140            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          The usage of the word is abundant for the purpose of

ascertaining its meaning. The noun occurs more than

two hundred times, and the verb more than sixty times,

in the different parts of the Old Testament.

          2. Very important to the ascertaining of the significa-

tion of these words is the fact that the law or teaching

they denote is divine. To this there are only a very

few exceptions in the case of the verb, and probably

none in the case of the noun.

          In a few instances, as we have seen, horah retains the

meaning "to shoot." Once it is used of Judah going

Horan             in advance of his father to Goshen, "to give

commonly        torah," that is, to give orders (Gen. xlvi. 28).

describes         In Proverbs (vi. 13) it is said concerning the

divine law        "man of iniquity":--

or teaching

          "He winketh with his eyes, he talketh with his feet,

          He giveth torah with his fingers."

 

But in most of the instances, the directions or teachings

denoted by this verb are either given directly by Deity,

or are given by one who speaks in the name of Deity.¹

 

petent authority. This explanation, as we shall find, agrees with the usage

of the word. In military usage, the " orders" given in a camp are some-

times of the nature of information rather than command, though the infor-

mation so given is official and authoritative. If we could keep this in mind,

we might translate horah by the English phrase "give orders," and torah

by "an order" or "orders."

            ¹ In a few instances the subject of the verb is a false god, or simply some

god or other. In Habakkuk the men are scathed who appeal to a molten

image to give lying torah, or who look to a dumb stone to give torah

(I-lab. ii. 18, 19). In Isaiah (xxviii. 26) the husbandman's God is said to

give him torah.

            In perhaps one-third of the existing instances Elohim or Yahaweh is

directly the subject. For example, Yahaweh gave Moses and Aaron torah

as to what they should say and do before Pharaoh (Ex. iv. 12, 15). He

gave Moses torah concerning a tree for healing the bitter fountain (Ex.

xv. 25). He promised the tables of stone and the torah and the com-

                THE PROPHET AND THE LAW            141

 

          So much for the verb. So generally does it denote

requirement or teaching that is thought of as coming

from Deity, that this is presumptively its                    Torah means

meaning in all cases except where the context divine law or

clearly shows the contrary. And if this is                    teaching

true of the verb, it is more decidedly true of the noun.

There are probably no exceptions to the rule that the

Old Testament men think of torah as of divine origin.

If there are any exceptions, they are seven or eight of

the thirteen instances in which the word is used in the

book of Proverbs.¹ There are other Hebrew words

 

mandments, "to give them torah," or, "to give them as torah" (Ex. xxiv.

12). He is asked to give Israel torah concerning "the good way" (i Ki.

viii. 36). He is asked to give the Psalmist torah concerning "his way,"

"the way of his statutes" (Pss. xxvii. lxxxvi. 11, cxix. 33). He gives

different persons torah "in the way," "in that way thou shalt go," "in a

way that he shall choose" (Pss. xxv. 8, 12, xxxii. 8). He gives the nations

torah "out of his ways" (Mic. iv. 2; Isa. ii. 3). He gives Israel torah

"unto the good way" (2 Chron. vi. 27). He gives torah (Ps. cxix. 102).

Deity gives torah (Job xxxiv. 32, xxxvi. 22).

          The most prominent use is that in which a prophet or a priest gives

torah as the representative of Deity. Instances are needless, though many

are given in the course of this chapter. In other instances the subject of

the verb is indefinite, or is some person or thing, but the teaching given

concerns divine matters, and has been received from Deity. Bezalel is to

give torah concerning the tabernacle work (Ex. xxxv. 34). One of the

toroth in Leviticus (xiv. 57) is for the purpose of giving torah concern-

ing the clean and the unclean. In the forty-fifth Psalm (4) the king's

right hand gives him torah in " terrible things." In various places in the

Wisdom books, the fathers or the beasts or the earth or " my father" or

Job's friends are said to give torah. In some of these places it is' clear that

the speaker has a divine revelation in mind, and in none of them is it clear

that he has not.

          ¹ And these, although the revised versions annotate them with the alter-

native "or teaching," are not real exceptions. There is nothing to prevent

the phrase "the law of thy mother" (Prov. i. 8, vi. 20) from meaning Ya-

haweh's law as taught thee by thy mother. Similar statements might be

made concerning the phrases " my law" (iii. I, iv. 2, vii. 2), " their law "

(vi. 23, if one accepts the emendation), "a wise man's law" (xiii. 14), "a

 

142             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

which apply equally to human or divine laws or state-

ments ; but torah, unless in these passages, is always

divine. Elsewhere, at least, the usage is uniform.

          3. Another point follows from this ; or it might be

independently made out by reexamining the instances :

torah always denotes authoritative command or informa-

tion. The idea of authority is inseparable alike from

the noun and from the verb.

          In the English versions the verb is commonly trans-

lated "teach." In the revised versions the noun is

Always au-       sometimes annotated with; the phrase "or

thoritative        teaching." Some authors tell us that the

teaching          noun denotes instruction, and they draw im-

portant inferences from this weakened meaning of it.

This is commendable so far forth as it is an attempt to

disentangle the Old Testament term from misleading

associations with the English word " law," or its equiva-

lents in other languages. But we must limit the attempt

carefully, or, in rescuing the word from uncongenial

company, we shall lead it into company that is still less

congenial. Torah and horah are never used of teach-

ing or instruction merely in the sense of giving informa-

tion. Always they denote authoritative teaching. With

the few exceptions already noted, they denote teaching

that is regarded as divinely authoritative. Not that

they always express commands; the thing expressed by

them may be information, and not command; but it is

information that is thought of as authoritative, and,

 

law of loving kindness " (xxxi. 26). It is easy to understand these to mean

simply thy mother's teachings, my teachings, the teachings of thy parents,

teachings of a wise man, teachings concerning loving kindness; but it is

quite as easy to understand them to mean God's revealed will as made known

to thee by thy mother, by me, by thy parents, by a wise man, by the virtu-

ous woman." Either we must thus interpret these phrases, following the

use of the word elsewhere, or we must regard them as a group of exceptions.

 

               THE PROPHET AND THE LAW           143

 

ordinarily, as of divine authority.¹ In fine, the idea

they express is not far different from our current idea

of divine revelation, including God's commands, but

including also his promises and threats, and such

information or such inspiring truths as he may have

communicated to men.

          4. Another point in the usage concerns the relation

of torah respectively to the prophets and the priests.

          Since these were thought of as in a special sense the

representatives of Deity, we should expect that they

would be particularly concerned with torah. This ex-

pectation is met in the record. It represents the proph-

ets as the medium through whom torah is given from

Deity; the priests as the official custodians and admin-

istrators of torah; and both as the expounders and

interpreters of torah.

          (a) The prophet is the person through whom Yahaweh

reveals his torah.

          There are general statements to this effect; for

example, the following from Daniel:—            General

                                                                      statements

          “His toroth which he gave before us by the hand of

his servants the prophets " (ix. io).

 

            ¹ The English word "law" has connotations different from those of

torah, but it is relatively easy to set these aside so that they will not mis-

lead us; much easier than in the case of the other English words that have

been suggested. But "law" in English has no cognate by which to

translate the verb horah. Such phrases as "give law," "lay down the

law," have some good points, but are impracticable.

            When a government puts an officer in charge of an expedition, it gives

him " instructions," often written instructions, sometimes secret instructions

either oral or written, the instructions including information as well as

commands. If we could confine our English words "instruct" and "in-

struction" to this meaning, they would fairly translate horah and torah.

But this we cannot do. Similar statements might be made concerning the

English terms "orders," "give orders," and "direct," "directions," "give

directions." For the purposes of this chapter we may transfer the words

 

144              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Or this, from the record of the downfall of Samaria: —

 

          "And Yahaweh testified with Israel and with Judah by the hand

of every prophet of his, every seer, saying, Turn from your evil ways

and keep my commandments, my statutes, according to all the torah

which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent unto you by the

hand of my servants the prophets" (2 Ki. xvii. 13).

 

Or this from Jeremiah: —

          "Thus saith Yahaweh, If ye will not hearken unto me, to walk in

'my torah which I have given before you, to hearken unto the words

of my servants the prophets whom I send unto you" (xxvi. 4-5).

 

          General statements like these are frequent. They

are supported by particular instances in abundance.

Particular      It was through Nathan the prophet that " the

instances      torah of mankind "was announced to David

(2 Sam. vii. 19). Sealed written torah was given

through Isaiah the prophet (viii. 16, 20). The various

toroth of the pentateuch are represented to have been

given by Moses the man of God, the greatest of the

prophets.

          Other passages teach the same by suggestion. In

Nehemiah's time confession was made that Israel had

"cast thy torah behind their back, and murdered thy

prophets" (Neb. ix. 26), suggesting that the prophets

were the givers of the torah. The writer of Lamenta-

tions says: —

 

          "Her king and her captains are among the nations; there is no

torah; also her prophets have not found vision from Yahaweh"

(ii. 9).

 

And in Isaiah we read of —

         

"lying sons, sons that are not willing to hear the torah of Yaha-

weh; who say to the seers, Ye shall not see ; and to them that have

visions, Ye shall not for us have visions of things that are correct"

(xxx.9—II).

rather than translate them; but perhaps there 's no translation that will be

correct without careful definition.

               THE PROPHET AND THE LAW             145

 

          It would be easy to multiply instances in which it is

thus said or implied that the prophet is the man through

whom Deity reveals his torah to men, but                  The act

we will only add a few in which the verb is                denoted by

used, not the noun. Manoah desired that                              horah is prophetic       

the Angel, whom he supposed to be a "man of God,"

might be sent again to give torah in regard to the son

that was to be born (Jud. xiii. 8). That is to say, he

regarded the giving of torah as the function of a man

of God. Isaiah says that the prophet who gives false

torah is the tail in Judah (ix. 15). Samuel the prophet

promised not to cease giving Israel torah, notwithstand-

ing they had made a king (I Sam. xii. 23). The "teach-

ers" — givers of torah mentioned twice in Isa. xxx. 20

are probably prophets).

          (b) The priests are the guardians of the torah, but

are not its revealing agents.

          They are as prominently mentioned in connection

with torah as are the prophets, but their functions are

different.  In conjunction with the elders                              The priests'

and with the judges or kings, they are the                   functions

custodians and administrators of the torah,                 with torah

but they are not law-bringers, like the prophets. The

conception is that as the successive parts of the torah

were brought from Deity by men who had prophetic

gifts, these toroth were placed in the hands of the

priests for use.

          What the priests had to do with torah in general is

fairly represented by what they had to do with the so-

called book of the torah. The record is that this was

written by the prophet Moses, and put into the keeping

 

            ¹ When Job (xxvii. 11) proposes to give his friends torah "at the hand

of God," we probably ought to understand him as claiming prophetic gifts.

Those whom the outcast (Prov. v. 13 RV) calls "my teachers" may have

been prophets. There is nothing to indicate that they were not.

 

146              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

of the priests and elders. They were to guard it safe,

and once in seven years were to teach it by public read-

ing (Deut. xxxi. 9-13). They were t have charge of

the torah in the place which Yahawe should choose,

and were to administer it in cases of a peal. The king

was to have a copy of the torah made from the one that

was before "the priests the Levites" Deut. xvii. 8-12,

18). We. are told that Jehoshaphat had priests who

went through the land on a mission o instruction and

reform, carrying with them "the boor of the torah of

Yahaweh" (2 Chron. xvii. 9). The prophet Haggai

sends men to the priests to ask questions as to a point

in the ceremonial law (ii. 11, 12, 13).

          In these passages the noun is used, some of them

using the verb also ; the following ay indicate the

usage of the verb when priests are in question. The

priests are to "teach" the people, give the people

torah, concerning leprosy (Deut. xxiv. 8). That is, they

are to make known and enforce the la on this subject,

as it has been committed to them. Aaron and his

sons are to teach the sons of Israel, to give the sons of

Israel torah, all the statutes which Go. gave by Moses

(Lev. x. i I). Here their torah is the statutes which

have already been given through the prophet noses.

Ezekiel says of the priests (xliv. 23):

 

"And they shall give torah to my people between holy and profane,

And between clean and unclean they shall give knowledge to them."

 

We are told that the king of Assyria sent the Israelite

priest to the foreign populations which he had placed

in Samaria, —

 

"that he might give them torah, the usages of the god of the land,

. . . how they might fear Yahaweh" (2 Ki. xvi . 27-28).¹

 

            ¹ Study also the following additional passages. In Asa's time Israel is

said to have long been "without a torah-giving priest, and without torah"

            THE PROPHET AND THE LAW            147

 

          (c) The prophets and the priests were alike the ex-

pounders and the interpreters of the torah, but with

a difference.

          Some scholars are accustomed to speak of a priestly

torah and a prophetic torah, as if the two differed in

their contents. There is no ground for this.                  No separate

There may be passages that are capable of                 priestly torah

being understood in this way, but there are none that

necessarily give this meaning, and none that with any

strong probability imply it. The representation is rather

that the prophets and the priests had a common body of

torah, to which they stood in differing relations. They

were both teachers of torah, but the prophet was, in ad-

dition, the revealing agent through whom the torah was

given.

          We have examined a good many passages in which

this is explicitly said, and others in which it is implied.

 

(2 Chron. xv. 3). Jeremiah calls the priests "the handlers of the torah"

(ii. 8), and censures his opponents for saying that "torah shall not perish

from priest" (xviii. i8). Zephaniah complains that "her priests have

profaned sanctuary, have done violence to torah" (iii. 4). In the "Bless-

ing wherewith Moses the man of God blessed Israel," the function of Levi

is thus stated: —

          "They shall give as torah thy judgments to Jacob,

             and thy torah to Israel" (Deut. xxxiii. 1o).

Micah makes it a matter of rebuke that "her priests give torah for hire"

(iii. 11). The relations of the priests to the law are magnified in the sec-

ond chapter of Malachi: —

          "A true torah was in his mouth" (6).

          For a priest's lips keep knowledge,

                    and torah they seek at his mouth,

                    because he is the angel of Yahaweh of hosts.

          While ye, ye have removed from the way,

                    ye have caused many to stumble in the torah,

                    ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi,

                    saith Yahaweh of hosts" (7-8).

          "And ye are lifting up faces in the torah" (9).

 

148          THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

The priest does not, like the prophet, receive torah by

direct revelation from Deity ; but he as charge of torah

which has already been revealed, to administer and in-

terpret it. The only way in which he gives additional

torah is by interpreting that already given, answering

questions concerning it, making decisions upon it, estab-

lishing precedents and usages from it. Functions of this

sort belonged to both prophets and priests, and rendered

them both, in a sense, sources of torah. But in the

prophet's gift of revelation the priest, as such, had no

share. Of course both functions might be combined in

one person, as in Jehoiada the prophet-priest, the torah-

teacher of King Joash (2 Ki. xii. 2).1

          5. Having in mind this ''conception of torah as a body

of divine revelation given through the prophets, and

administered and expounded by there and the priests,

we are ready to take up another point,— the different

forms which torah assumed, as indicated by the variant

uses of the word.

          (a) Torah was sometimes oral and sometimes written.

To prove that the prophets gave torah orally, or that

they and the priests gave oral interpretations, and oral

decisions on points that arose, would be a work of super-

erogation. It is equally needless to prove the existence

of written torah. But we have to note that at this point

 

            ¹ Some one may raise the objection that the respective relations of the

priests and the prophets to the law probably differed in different periods

of the history. The reply is that the passages that have been cited cover

all the periods. If they tell the truth, that settles the question, no matter

when or by whom they were written. And even critics who dispute their

truth will nevertheless concede that they present correctly the situation

that existed in the later times when these critics allege that they were

written, and that their writers believed that the same situation existed in

the earlier times. It would not be easy to find sufficient reason for denying

that these writers were correct in their opinion.  Reasons for affirming that

they were correct will appear as we proceed with our investigation.

             THE PROPHET AND THE LAW                149

 

the element of time becomes more important than it has

been in the matters thus far discussed.

          Written torah began at an early date. In Isaiah we

have an account of torah written and sealed               Early written

(viii. 16, 20). Hosea, in a passage that has                  torah

been much discussed, says of Ephraim:

 

          "I write for him the ten thousand, my torah

          As a stranger they are accounted" (viii. 12).

 

That there was written torah from the time of Moses is

the testimony of all the numerous passages that speak

of Moses writing the law, or of the book of Moses, or of

the book of the law. These affirm that Moses wrote torah

(e.g. Deut. xxxi. 9, 11, 24, 26, xxviii. 58, 61, xxix. 21, 29,

xxx. to), and that Joshua wrote torah (Josh. xxiv. 26).

Of course there are scholars who assign a late date to

these passages,^l and count their testimony as either false-

hood or fiction. But these scholars themselves hold that

the writing of torah was a part of the earliest literary

writing in Israel, though they date this earliest writing

many centuries after Moses. The passages cited in this

chapter abundantly indicate that the Old Testament writ-

ers lay especial emphasis on the idea of written torah.

          (b) Again, the noun torah is subject to the various

modes of use which we should expect in the case of a

term that was so frequently employed. These throw

light on its meaning.

          It is used in the singular number, in the plural, col-

lectively, abstractly. In other words, we find mention

of a law, laws, law as an aggregate, law as an abstract

conception. It is used definitely or indefinitely, with a

subject genitive, with an object genitive. Certain par-

ticulars in its use are especially significant.

 

            ¹ The Hexateuch regards Josh. xxiv. 26 as a late addition to E.

 

150            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          First, the term torah is applied to any particular divine

requirement or other message. It is thus used indefi

Torah denot-     nitely in the singular, both indefinitely and

ing a particu-    definitely in the plural, definitely in the sin-

lar revelation    gular with an object genitive, and perhaps

also with a subject genitive.¹ This usage is found in

the records concerning the exodus and concerning

Abraham, in the writings which the older tradition attrib-

utes to Moses, and in the sections which the analytical

critics assign to E and to J. That is, you find it, no

matter to what critical school you belong, in the earliest

extant Hebrew literature, and in every subsequent period.

 

            ¹ As torah comes from Deity, the subject genitive is invariably a noun

or pronoun denoting Deity; for example, "the torah of Yahaweh," or

"my torah," in the passages cited above. The object genitive denotes the

matter with which the torah concerns itself, e.g. "a torah of loving kind-

ness" (Prov. xxxi. 26). Whenever the word is used, the subject genitive

is implied, and there may be in addition a second subject genitive. For

example, in the instance just given one might speak of the worthy woman's

Yahaweh's law of loving kindness, that is, Yahaweh's torah concerning

loving kindness as presented by the worthy woman.

            A reader is not likely to master these distinctions sharply except by the

process of actually examining instances. The following will serve for

this purpose.

            Torah is used indefinitely in the singular: "Bind thou up a testimony,

seal a torah, among my disciples" (Isa. viii. 16). The context shows that

by torah the prophet here means a particular message in writing. In the

balancing statement (ver. 20) the term torah is perhaps used abstractly.

            The term is also used indefinitely in the plural: "They have trans-

gressed laws" (Isa. xxiv. 5).

            Oftener the plural is used definitely. In connection with the visit of

Jethro, Moses is spoken of as making the people to know the toroth of

Deity (Ex. xviii. 16, 20 E), apparently in judicial matters. Abraham is com-

mended for keeping Yahaweh's toroth (Gen. xxvi. 5 J or J^S). At the giving

of the manna, Yahaweh rebukes Israel for not keeping his toroth (Ex. xv:i.

28 J or Ps). Later instances of the word in the plural are Neh. ix. 13; Ps.

cv. 45; Lev. xxvi. 46; Ezek. xliv. 24 and perhaps xliii. 11.  xliv. 5.

            For this purpose of denoting a particular message the word is also used

definitely in the singular with an object genitive. This is frequent in lit-

erary titles or subscriptions. "Moses began to declare this torah" (Deut.

 

            THE PROPHET AND THE LAW               151

 

          Second, the word torah in the singular is employed to

denote an aggregate of divine messages or requirements.

A more specific use with the article or with a             Torah as an

defining subject genitive will be considered               aggregate of

later. For the present, we note that this use                 toroth

occurs when the word has no article, or when the article

only indicates that the torah spoken of has been defined

by the context. An instance without the article occurs

in the prayer of Nehemiah: —

 

          "And commandedst them commandments and statutes and a

torah, by the hand of Moses thy servant" (Neh. ix. 14).

 

Here, clearly, torah denotes the aggregate of the Mosaic

requirements or revelation. There are enough similar

instances, some of them referring to Moses and some

not, to make out a clear case.^l Instances with the arti-

cle will be found below, especially in connection with

 

i. 5), the torah referred to being the address that occupies the four follow-

ing chapters. "This is the torah of the burnt-offering" (Lev. vii. 37–38).

"This is the torah of the plague of leprosy in a garment" (Lev. xiii. 59).

Cf. Lev. vii. r, 11, xi. 46–47; Num. v. 29–30, etc.

          Possibly the term denotes a particular message in some cases where it

is definite with only a subject genitive.

          "Hear ye the word of Yahaweh, ye officials of Sodom!

Give ear to the torah of our God, ye people of Gomorrah!" (Isa. i. io).

Here it is possible to hold that the torah to which the prophet refers is

merely the message which he is in the act of uttering; though the context

shows that the term may equally well have a wider meaning.

          1"A true torah was in his mouth" (Mal. ii. 6).

          "A law Moses gave in charge to us,

          A possession for the assembly of Jacob" (Deut. xxxiii. 4).

          "And he established a testimony in Jacob,

          And a law he placed in Israel" (Ps. lxxviii. 5).

          "A wise man's torah is a fountain of life" (Prov. xiii. 14).

          " A torah of loving kindness is on her tongue " (Prov. xxxi. 26).

          " A commandment is a lamp, and a torah is a light " (Prov. vi. 23).

          The requiring " one law " for the stranger and the homeborn, or for the

sin-offering and the guilt-offering (Ex. xii. 49; Num. xv. i6, 29; Lev. vii.

7), may perhaps be regarded as a variant of this usage.

152            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

what is said concerning the book of the law. Some of

the instances with the article are of early date.

          Third, this indefinite general use easily passes over

into an abstract use. This is mainly concealed in the

Torah used       English versions, which translate in such

as an abstract    cases with the article, but the usage is very

noun              abundant. It occurs sometimes in plain prose.

In Asa,'s time Judah was "without law-expounding

priest, and without law"; and Jehoshaphat's judges

were to be faithful "between law and commandment"

(2 Chron. xv. 3, xix. 10). But the usage is more fre-

quent in poetry, and is to some extent a matter of

poetic diction. In the only place where the word torah

occurs in the book of Job, Job's friends are exhorting

him to submit to the divine will: —

 

          "Receive, pray, law from his mouth " (xxii. 22).

In the glowing description common to Isaiah and Micah

we read: —

 

          "For out of Zion law shall go forth,

          and the word of Yahaweh out of Jerusalem" (Isa. ii. 3; Mic. iv. 2).

 

It is not "the law," but "law," which Yahaweh-- or

his Servant —magnifies and makes honorable (Isa. xlii.

21). And so in other instances). Such use as this of

such a term presupposes that the term has long been

 

            ¹ Additional instances are: —

            "Forsakers of law praise a wicked person,

            While keepers of law contend with them."

            "He that guardeth law is a discerning son."

            "He turneth away his ear from hearing law,

            Also his prayer is an abomination" (Prov. xxviii. 4, 7, 9).

            "Where there is no vision a people is to be shunned,

            But one that keepeth law, happy is it" (Prov. xxix. i8).

            "Law will go forth . . . for a light of peoples" (Isa. li. 4).

            "Law is slackened" (Hab. i. 4).

            "Her' priests . . . have done violence to law" (Zeph. iii. 4).

            "Law is not" (Lam. ii. 9).
           THE PROPHET AND THE LAW                        153

 

familiar, and we are therefore not surprised at finding

this use absent from the earlier writings.

          Fourth, among the uses of the word torah one in par-

ticular is significant — that in which the definite phrase

"the torah" designates a certain definite and               The definite

recognized aggregate. The phrase may of                   aggregate known

course appear in variant forms: "the torah                  as the torah

of Yahaweh," "the torah of our God," "my torah," "thy

torah," "his torah," "the torah," "this torah." We must

presently consider this somewhat in detail, but it is more

convenient to complete first our classification of the uses

of the term.

          Fifth, there remains one more use to be noted. It is a

matter of natural variation that any part of the torah-ag-

gregate may sometimes be called by the name            "The torah"

that properly belongs to the whole. A con-                 as some part

spicuous instance is that of "the law," which              of the aggregate

Joshua is said to have inscribed on the altar at Mount

Ebal. As this was written not on fine-grained stone but

on plaster, it must have been in coarse script, and there-

fore cannot have been a very long piece of literature.

Yet it is described as " all the words of this law " (Deut.

xxvii. 3, 8).¹

 

            "Law shall perish from priest " (Ezek. vii. 26).

            "Pray, ask the priests for law" (Hag. ii. u).

            "And law they seek from his mouth" (Mal. ii. 7).

            ¹ This appears more specifically in the statements in Joshua: —

"And he wrote there upon the stones the duplicate of the law of Moses

which he had written before the sons of Israel." "And afterward he read

all the words of the law, the blessing and the cursing" (Josh. viii. 32, 34).

This altar inscription must have been a good deal briefer than the whole

book of Deuteronomy, and much more must it have been briefer than "the

book of the law" taken in any wider meaning. Perhaps it was that part

of Deuteronomy that contains the blessings and the curses, say xxvii—xxviii

or xxvii-xxx (Josh. viii. 33-34; Deut. xi. 26-29, xxvii. 2 sqq.). Perhaps it

had the same limits with "the covenant" of "the land of Moab" (Deut.

xxix. I [xxviii. 69]). It may perhaps be identical with "the book of the

154             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Such are the five uses of the term. It is used of a

single divine requirement or other message; it is used

of an undefined aggregate ; it is used abstractly; it is

used of the recognized definite aggregate; it is used by

synecdoche of the parts of this aggregate.¹

 

covenant" (2 Ki. xxiii. 2) which, in Josiah's time, was read entire at one

public meeting, and which is clearly identical with either the whole or a

part of the book of the law that was found at that time.

            We should he careful not to confuse the phraseology in Josh. viii. 30-

35. Verses 30-34 describe the solemnities of the altar, with the accom-

panying blessing and cursing. Verse 35 seems to describe a different solem-

nity as occurring at the same time — that of the public septennial reading

of the law, as required in Deut. xxxi. 10-13. This appears from the men-

tion of "all the assembly of Israel, and the women and the little ones, and

the sojourner that walketh in the midst of them."

            In the account of the altar solemnity we are told that they acted "ac-

cording to that which is written in the book of the law of Moses" (31),

and that one read the blessings and cursings "according to all that is

written in the book of the law" (34). In these two places " the book of

the law " is the book which Deuteronomy says that Moses wrote. From

this book they took "the duplicate of the law of Moses" which was in-

scribed on the altar, and "all the words of the law, the blessing and the

cursing" which were read. The passage that was inscribed is probably

also the one that is here said to have been read. It was both read and

copied from the book of the law, but the question whether it was the whole

of that hook is left open.

            ¹ There can be no dispute, I think, that these five categories are distinct,

or that they include all the instances that occur, though there may occa-

sionally be room for difference of opinion as to the category to which a

particular instance should be assigned. Above we have cited, for example,

the Levitical "torah of the burnt-offering" as one of the particular toroth

which have been combined into the torah-aggregate; it would be equally

possible to regard it as merely a section of that aggregate. Or how is it

with the torah introduced in Deut. iv. 44? Did the writer conceive of what

follows as a single prophetic message? or as a relatively brief aggregate of

such messages? or as a section of the well-known torah-aggregate?

When David speaks of the message which Nathan has just brought him as

"the torah of mankind" (2 Sam. vii. 19; I Chron. xvii. 17), he seems to

be thinking of it not as a separate message, but as the significant repetition

of something in the torah-aggregate. Such differences in detail do not

affect the validity of the classification itself.

                  THE PROPHET AND THE LAW            155

 

          6. What we have learned concerning the five uses of

the term will help us as we now inquire into the nature

of the torah-aggregate.

          (a) The word torah might supposably denote `he for-

mally recognized aggregate of the toroth received from

Deity whenever the word has the definite                   Limitations

article, or is made definite by some designa-              of the term

tion of Yahaweh or Elohim used as a subject genitive.

In fact, however, there are important limitations to this,

both those drawn from the several contexts and those

drawn from other sources. It seems best to examine

some of the limitations before we look at instances.

          First, as we have already seen, the term "the torah"

may denote some particular torah made definite by the

context, instead of denoting the one recognized torah-

aggregate.¹  Or second, the definite phrase may be used

of some lesser aggregate, and, in particular, of some

section of the great aggregate.² Third, there may be

instances in which the definite phrase is used in a

vague and general way. One cannot with perfect

sharpness draw the line between the use in which

torah is an undefined aggregate and that in which the

aggregate is perfectly defined. Fourth, it will not do

to assume that the phrase is always the equivalent

of written scripture. "The torah" is wide enough to

 

            ¹ For example, "the law of our God" (Isa. i. 10) is capable of being

understood as denoting the message which the prophet is uttering at the

time.

            ² For example, the entity that in Deuteronomy is called "the book of

the law" seems to be also called "the law" (Deut. xvii. 18, iv. 8).

The long discourse in Deuteronomy (iv. 44–xxvi) is in its title called "the

torah." It is possible to regard an instance of this kind as a particular

torah, or as a lesser aggregate of torah, or as a section of the one torah-

aggregate; it is not imperative, and in some cases is impossible, to regard

it as the one torah-aggregate.

156          THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

include oral as well as written torah.1 And, fifth, if

the torah-aggregate existed at all, it was as a growing

A growing        aggregate. It was a body of literature when

aggregate         the term first began to be applied to writings,

and it enlarged its boundaries afterward.²

          Remembering these points, as we examine the in-

stances, we shall find them yielding the conception that

all torah, oral or written, is a unit. There are plenty of

 

            ¹ Nevertheless it is in fact applied mainly to written torah, which offered

especial facilities for being aggregated. The phrase is not tied up to any

particular theory of the collecting of the writings; they might supposably

be thought of as an aggregate without any collection being physically made,

or prior to the making of a collection. But certain passages inform us

that there was a custom of laying up writings "before Yahaweh," and the

existence of this custom is affirmed even by scholars who reject as unhis-

torical the particular accounts we have of it. It seems certain that written

torah was aggregated physically, as well as in thought.

            It was in the temple that the men of Josiah's time found "the book of

the law" (2 Ki. xxii. 8). The accounts say that the priests of Jehosha-

phat's time had in their charge " the law of Yahaweh " in writing (z Chron.

xvii. 9). The book of Deuteronomy is very explicit in its account of the

written law placed by Moses in the charge of the priests and the civil au-

thorities (Deut. xxxi. 25-26), and touching their use of the written law for

the guidance of the king, when there should be a king (xvii. i8). In view

of these instances we cannot resist the conclusion that the author of t Sam-

uel regarded "the book " (x. 25, not " a book") in which Samuel wrote

"the manner of the kingdom" and "laid it up before Yahaweh" as a rec-

ognized aggregate of torah. On the same footing is "the book" (Ex.

xvii. 14) in which Moses wrote "for a memorial" concerning Amalek.

"The torah" in writing is said to have been accessible to Joshua "at the

sanctuary of Yahaweh " ( Josh. xxiv. 26).

            ² This conception is not necessarily excluded by the views of any school

of criticism, though the different schools would picture the details differ-

ently. The view properly to he inferred from the phenomena is not that

there came to be in Israel a heterogeneous accumulation of writings, from

which ecclesiastical authority at length made a selection, the selection

thereby acquiring the character of torah. On the contrary, all torah,

whether oral or written, was regarded as sacred from the moment when it

came from the tongue or the pen of the prophet. The writings testify to

this, and it is also independently proved by the phenomena they present.

             THE PROPHET AND THE LAW           157

 

instances that are not vague, but clear and distinct.

There are plenty of instances that are not limited to

some particular torah, or to some lesser aggregate. We

shall find that this conception implies a general aggre-

gate of written torah. Not all the toroth given through

the prophets were preserved, but some of them were.

They were regarded as an accumulating sacred litera-

ture, God-given and authoritative ; and this growing

aggregate was, while it was yet growing, called "the

torah."

          (b) We proceed to examine some of the instances.

Look first at a group of instances from the records of

the early part of the public career of Moses, in writings

which the older tradition ascribes to Moses,               Instances

and which the analysis now current ascribes               from the earlier

to J and E. Above, we have found these records                   Mosaic records

writings mentioning toroth in the plural. They also use

the definite singular phrases, "the torah of Yahaweh,"

"my torah," "the torah." The instances prove at least

that in that generation men thought of Yahaweh's re-

quirements not merely as so many toroth, but as a unit,

torah. Of course the unit is here not the pentateuch,

for the passages represent that most of the pentateuchal

events were then still in the future. But the habit of

thinking of Yahaweh's communications as aggregated

in a unit was already a mental habit in Israel. And we

 

            ¹ The Israelites are to teach their children concerning the passover

"that the torah of Yahaweh may be in thy mouth" (Ex. xiii. 9 D. When

he gives the manna he chides Israel for not keeping his toroth, but he also

tests them "whether they will walk in my torah" (Ex. xvi. 28, 4 J). And

at Sinai he says: "And I will give thee the tables of stone and the torah

and the commandment which I have written" (Ex. xxiv. 12 E or E⁸).

In the first two of these instances, and probably in the third also, "the

torah" is an aggregate. In the third, and possibly in the other two, " the

torah" is in writing.

158            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

may be sure that people who had this habit did not:

exempt from its operation any written torah which they

might possess. The testimony of the passages is that

this habit dates as far back as the beginning of the forty

years of the exodus; and even one who disbelieves the

testimony of these writers must see that the writers them-

selves have the habit. Whatever be one's critical point

of view, one is compelled to hold that this way of think-

ing was prevalent in Israel from the times of the earliest

records.

          Second, the conception of " the torah" as an aggre-

gate is frequent in Deuteronomy, and in the scriptures

which presuppose Deuteronomy.

          Conspicuous here are the passages that speak of the

"book of the torah." The account specifies portions of

"The book        its contents (Deut. xxxii. 44-46, xxvii, xxviii

of the torah      especially 58, 61, xxix especially 21, 29, xxx

especially 1o). It says that Moses wrote this book and

laid it up by the side of the ark, in the custody of the

priests and of the civil authorities (Deut. xxxi. 9-13,

24-26). It says that the book was to be publicly read

every seventh year; was to be kept by the priests at the

capital, and the king furnished with a copy (xvii. 18–19);

and, by inference, that the priests shall use it in decid-

ing appealed cases (xvii. 11). The biblical narratives

further say that this book of the law was handed to

Joshua, and used by him (Josh. i. 7, 8, viii. 31, xxiii.

6), and was an important factor in all the subsequent

history.l

 

            ¹ It is represented to have been so when David charged Solomon, in

language strongly Deuteronomic, to act "according to that which is written

in the law of Moses" (i Ki. ii. 3); and when it is recorded of Amaziah

that "the children of the murderers he put not to death, according to that

which is written in the book of the law of Moses" (2 Ki. xiv. 6; cf. Deut.

xxiv. 16); and in the days of Josiah, when the highpriest "found the book

            THE PROPHET AND THE LAW             159

 

What was this "book of the law"? Supposably it

might be a general name for the aggregate of all recog-

nized written toroth, or supposably it might denote some

section of this aggregate, or some lesser aggregate, or

supposably it may be used sometimes in one of these

senses and sometimes in another.¹ In its wider use it

expresses the conception of a growing body of sacred

literature, which was regarded as having begun with

Moses, and as having been carried forward by his suc-

cessors. As the wider aggregate included such nar-

rower aggregates as might exist, any speaker may

have had the wider in mind even when he refers to

the contents of the narrower.

          But whatever else the book of the law may be, it is a

unique, explicitly recognized aggregate of written toroth.

It is conclusive proof that this concept existed in the

Deuteronomic and post-Deuteronomic times. This con-

cept is presupposed even in the instances in which the

book of the law itself is something less than the great

aggregate.

          The same concept appears in many instances that

mention the law without mentioning the book. Wit-

ness the following:

 

of the law in the house of Yahaweh " (2 Ki. xxii. 8); and in the days of

Nehemiah, when they read in " the book of the law of Moses," "the book

of the law of Deity," "the book of the law of Yahaweh" (Neh. viii. 1, 18,

ix. 3).

            ¹ In some instances the most natural inference from the context is that

the book is the whole or a part of our Deuteronomy, and that the record

says that it was completed by Moses; but other instances give a different

view, making " the book of the law" a wider body of literature, one in

which Joshua wrote after the death of Moses (Josh. xxiv. 26). In Josiah's

time the most influential statements that were read were certainly from

Deuteronomy, but that does not decide the question whether "the book of

the law" from which they were read was Deuteronomy or merely included

Deuteronomy.

160              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

Other Deu-       "And what great nation is there that hath statutes

teronomic        and judgments so righteous as all this law which I set

instances         before you this day?” (Deut. iv. 8).

 

The term "this law" here clearly denotes an aggregate

of " statutes and judgments," a recognizable, well-known

aggregate. The same definite use abounds in the later

history and in the psalms and the prophets).

          The basal conception in these Deuteronomic and post:

Deuteronomic utterances is that of "the torah" as the

aggregate of the toroth that have been revealed from

Deity. In many of the instances the term has literary

implications, and the aggregate it denotes either is or

includes an aggregate in writing. It would be less easy

to prove that this aggregate was a canon, or even physi-

cally a collection; but it is recognized, in thought at least,

as a known unit. If one accepts these writings as credi-

ble testimony, he is convinced of the existence of the

torah-aggregate in Israel from the time of Moses. And

even if one thinks that the testimony is false, and that

Deuteronomy was written about 620 B.C., or a century

earlier, or some centuries later, he must still find that

Israel had an aggregate of written torah from the time

when Deuteronomy was written, and no one knows how

much earlier. And from the historico-critical viewpoint

of such an one, even this makes the conception preva-

lent at a relatively early period in the history.

 

            ¹ Witness "the law . . . which Yahaweh commanded the sons of Jacob"

(2 Ki. xvii. 34); "the law . . . which he wrote for you" (37); "the law

of Yahaweh" in which Jehu failed to walk (x. 31), in which the sons of

Israel were to walk (2 Chron. vi. 16), which Rehoboam forsook (xii. 1),

in which the perfect man meditates day and night (Ps. i), which is perfect

(xix. 7), which is better than thousands of gold and silver (cxix. 72), which

Yahaweh will write within his servants (Jer. xxxi. 33), which Judah has

despised, but for which the coastlands wait (Isa. xlii. 24, 4), which is in

the heart of those who know righteousness (li. 7); "the law of Moses my

servant" (Mal. iv. 4 [iii. 22]).

              THE PROPHET AND THE LAW           161

 

          And thus a third and much smaller group of instances

becomes of especial importance for determining the

date when this conception of torah as a single            Instances

aggregate became current. Torah is men                              from the earlier

tioned many times in Amos and Hosea and                prophetic books

the first half of Isaiah, and the definite phrase occurs

not less than seven times in these writings.¹ In one or

two of these seven instances "the torah" may possibly

be something less than the recognized torah-aggregate;

but in most of them it is clearly that aggregate, more

or less definitely conceived. In one of them the aggre-

gate is described as an existing body of literature, and

this one must needs have weight in interpreting the

others.

          In these instances, when compared with those of the

other two groups, we have proof — proof from phe-

nomena as well as from testimony — of the early

prevalence of this concept of the divine torah as a

known aggregate. Whatever your critical position,

instances of this emerge in the earliest Israelite litera-

ture. At the beginnings of the authentic history, no

matter when one dates these, we have glimpses of " the

torah" as an aggregate of some sort, and glimpses of

literary torah. The concept of "the torah" as a liter-

ary aggregate cannot have been long delayed.

 

            ¹ "I write for him the ten thousands of my law."

            "And thou hast forgotten the law of thy God."

            "They have transgressed my covenant and trespassed against my law"

(Hos. viii. 12, iv. 6, viii. I).

                        "Because they have rejected the law of Yahaweh,

                                    and have not kept his statutes,

                        And their lies have led them astray,

                                    after which their fathers walked " (Am. ii. 4).

            "The law of our God," "the law of Yahaweh of hosts," "the law of

Yahaweh" (Isa. i. to, v. 24, xxx. 9).

162              THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

In order to reach these conclusions we have not

had to press doubtful instances. In most of the actual

The instances    instances there is no ambiguity; in them the

clear              conception of a single recognized aggregate

is clear, and these instances have value for interpreting

the others. We have pursued the safe course of leaving

each instance to its own natural implications. If we

accept the testimony of the Old Testament, what we

have found is the aggregate of written torah beginning

with Moses, and growing, after his time, by additions

made to it at different periods, the later as well as the

earlier parts being sometimes called by his name. And

if we reject the'' testimony, and accept the currently

assigned late dates for the writings, we still find that this

conception of Yahaweh's torah as a unit is one of the

earliest of the phenomena, and that at a relatively early

time it had become a conception of the torah as a known

body of literature.

(c) It remains for us to discuss the relations between

"the torah" and our present pentateuch, or our present:

Old Testament.

          First, the aggregate we have been considering is not

primarily the pentateuch, although, necessarily, the pen-

tateuch has from its first existence been included in the

torah.

          "The torah" is rather, at any date, a general name for

the aggregate of the toroth as then recognized. When.

The law,          ever men began to think of the written torah

the prophets,     as an aggregate, they would naturally apply

and the           to it the three names that now describe the

hagiographa      three divisions of the Old Testament. They would

think of the aggregate as " the law," the body of torah

which Deity had given. They would think of it as " the

prophets," because they regarded it as given through

           THE PROPHET AND THE LAW                        163

 

the prophets. They would think of it as "the writings,"

distinguishing it from the toroth that were given orally.

They would think thus of the aggregate, even if no

collection of it were made; much more would they

think thus of it if they possessed it in collected form.

It was doubtless the law and the prophets and the writ-

ings during the time when additions were being made

to it. And when at length it ceased to grow, and

thereby became the fixed body of writings which we

now call the Old Testament, it was still the law, and

was still also the law and the prophets and the writings.

          We have found the definite phrases in the penta-

teuch itself, applied to situations of a date long before

the pentateuch as a whole existed. In these The torah

instances' the aggregate intended is of course not the pen-

something different from the pentateuch. tateuch

Many of the passages we have examined speak of torah

as commensurate with the authoritative teaching of the

prophets, and these indicate that the torah is something

wider than the pentateuch. The same view appears in

such a statement as that Joshua wrote "in the book of

the law" after the death of Moses (Josh. xxiv. 26).

When one reads with care he sees that " the law " so

much emphasized in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah

and Daniel is a body of writings differing from the

pentateuch, though implying the pentateuch. The

institutions presented in these books are quite as much

those that are attributed to David as to Moses. And

even such phrases as "the law of Moses " or "the

book of Moses " are not restricted to the designating of

the pentateuch.^l

 

            ¹ The enemies of Daniel sought occasion against him in his obedience

to "the law of his God" (vi. 5). That the Aramaic word is here used as

the equivalent of torah is evident by comparison with Ezra (vii. 12, 14, 25,

164           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

          If one holds that the pentateuch was completed in Mo-

saic times, and also holds that the pentateuch and not the

hexateuch is the literary unit, he will find room in his

theory for a time when the pentateuch constituted the

aggregate of existing written toroth; but otherwise this

is logically impossible.

          It is even doubtful whether the Old Testament any-

where recognizes any separation between the penta-

Is the pen-        teuch and the other writings to which it

tateuch rec-      attributes prophetic authorship. There are

ognized as        several passages that use the terms " law

separate?         and "prophets " in such proximity that we might

interpret them as distinguishing between the two, after the

fashion of the later times. There are other passages

which emphasize the Mosaic character of the law in a

 

26). But the law-keeping for which Daniel was accused consisted in his

praying toward Jerusalem three times a day. Praying toward Jerusalem is

not mentioned in the pentateuch, but appears elsewhere (i Ki. viii. 29, 30,

44, 48; Ps. V. 7; Jon. ii. 4). Praying three times a day is not found in

the pentateuch, and is found elsewhere (Ps. lv. 17). It is evident that the

writer and the first readers of the book of Daniel thought of the law as

including matters now found in the prophets and the hagiographa.

            We are told that in Zerubbabel's time —

"they set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites in their courses,

            for the service of God which is at Jerusalem, as it is written in the book

            of Moses" (Ezra vi. 18).

The matters touching the divisions and courses of the priests and Levites,

here said to be written in the book of Moses, are to be found in 1 Chroni-

cles (xxiii, xxiv), and not in the pentateuch. In the prayer in Nehemiah,

based on " the law " that has been read, the historical recapitulation passes

without a break from the contents of the pentateuch to those of the other

Old Testament books (ix, especially 3, 13, 14, 26, 29, 34, etc.). Similar

statements would be true of the several psalms that recapitulate the early

history. "The torah" which Ezra and Nehemiah put in force included

matters concerning the singers and gatekeepers and Nethinim, and con-

cerning choral and orchestral worship, and fasting and public prayer, all

of which belong to the other parts of the Old Testament, and not to the

pentateuch.

             THE PROPHET AND THE LAW             165

 

way which has been understood as implying the same

distinction. But in none of them is this a necessary

interpretation.¹ The passages intermingle the penta-

teuchal requirements with those of other writings. They

 

            1 The more important of these passages are the following: —

"And their heart they set as adamant not to hear the law and the words

which Yahaweh of hosts sent by his Spirit by the hand of the first prophets"

(Zech. vii. 12).

            "And we hearkened not to the voice of Yahaweh our God, to walk in

his laws which he gave before us by the hand of his servants the prophets.

And all Israel having transgressed thy law, . . . thou hast poured out upon

us the curse and the oath which is written in the law of Moses the servant

of God." Then follow allusions to Deuteronomy, and then: " According

as it is written in the law of Moses there came in all this great evil upon

us" (Dan. ix. 10-13).

            "If ye will not hearken unto me to walk in my law which I have given

before you, to hearken upon the words of my servants the prophets whom

I send unto you, even rising early and sending and ye have not hearkened,

I will give this house as Shiloh" (Jer. xxvi. 4-6).

            "And Yahaweh testified with Israel and with Judah by the hand of

every prophet of his, every seer, saying, Turn from your evil ways and keep

my commandments, my statutes, according to all the law which I com-

manded your fathers and which I sent unto you by the hand of my servants

the prophets" (2 Ki. xvii. 13).

            In the case of Manasseh, king of Judah, the narratives emphasize the

statement that God's promises to Israel were conditional. '" If they will

observe to do according to all that I have commanded them, and to all the

law that my servant Moses commanded them " (2 Ki. xxi. 8). " If they

will observe to do all that I have commanded them, to all the law and the

statutes and the judgments by the hand of Moses" (2 Chron. xxxiii. 8).

At the first glance one might say that "the law" here spoken of is clearly

the pentateuch. But the charge against Manasseh is that he failed to

comply with the condition; and the point in his failure that is emphasized

is that " he set the carved image . . . in the house of God, concerning

which God had said to David and to Solomon his son, In this house and

in Jerusalem, which I have chosen from all the tribes of Israel, will I put

my name forever" (2 Chron. xxxiii. 7; 2 Ki. xxi. 7). This is an abridg-

ment of such statements as those in t Ki. ix. 3—7, ii. 3—4; 2 Sam. vii;

i Chron. xxii. 6-13. The writer was thinking of the times of David and

Solomon as well as of the times of Moses, and he apparently thinks of the

record of both periods alike as included in what he calls the law of Moses.

166           THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

evidently use the name of Moses when they mean

Moses and those who followed him in the giving of

torah. And a good deal of weight is to be allowed to

the fact that the Old Testament recapitulations of the

history regularly pass without a break from the penta-

teuchal events to those recorded in the other books (e.g.

Neh. ix; Pss. lxxviii, cv, cvi).

          Did this recognized aggregate consist, at every stage,

of those parts of our present Old Testament which had

The torah         then been written ? The two are certainly in

and our pres-    a general way identifiable, but beyond this

ent Old Tes-      the question is not to be answered without

tament            definitions. That "the torah" contained matters

not now in the Old Testament is a proposition which it

would be difficult either to prove or disprove. In the

sense in which the Old Testament is of the nature of

torah, its authors were by the very fact of their writing

it writers of torah. It is clear that they used as sources

earlier writings that were of the nature of torah; and

equally clear that they drew from sources that were

not torah. What they drew from profane sources only

became torah through the process of incorporation.

One cannot always be sure as to which parts they drew

from sources that were already authoritative, and which

parts from other sources. And we have no adequate

means of deciding how far the earlier torah was abridged

or amplified or otherwise changed in, their hands. This,

however, can be safely said : the existing Old Testament

is " the torah" in the sense of its being the aggregate in

the form which it finally assumed.

          In this treatment " the torah" has several times been

spoken of as a growing aggregate. This is proved

both by the phenomena we have been examining and

by the oldest traditions. But the growth indicated by

                 THE PROPHET AND THE LAW             167

 

the evidence is not strictly uniform, little by little, each

generation having its torah-writing prophets; rather

there were five periods that were especially                Five torah-

fruitful in the production of written torah.                   producing

The first period is that of Moses and his con-             periods

temporaries who survived him, the latter best repre-

sented by Phinehas the grandson of Aaron. The second

is that of Samuel, Gad, David, and Nathan. The third

is that of Isaiah and "the men of Hezekiah " (Prov.

xxv. I). The fourth is that of Jeremiah and his disci-

ples who survived him. The fifth is that of Ezra and

Nehemiah.

          These results do not favor the commonly accepted

notion that the torah is primarily the pentateuch, and is

made to include the prophets and the hagi-                 Not three

ographa only by a process of extension. On                canons

the contrary, they indicate that the three terms were

originally applied alike to the whole aggregate, both

while it was growing and after it became complete.

The restrictions of meaning by which each of the three

terms became the name of one division belongs to a

later and secondary use. The idea of three successively

formed canons—the idea that the pentateuch was first

selected from other literature and segregated as sacred,

the prophets being segregated later, and the hagiog-

rapha still later—is not necessarily inconsistent with

the conception of the torah as a growing aggregate;

but there is a hypothesis which is at once simpler and

more adequate; namely, the hypothesis that the Old

Testament as a whole was differentiated first, and the

three divisions adopted later as matters of classification.

The order of succession was clearly this: first, concrete

toroth, regarded as messages from Deity; at a very early

date some of these toroth in writing; also, from an early

 

168            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

date, the habit of thinking of Yahaweh's torah as an

aggregated unit; this habit fixing itself especially upon

the written toroth, and leading to the use of means for

collecting and authenticating these; the written aggre-

gate coming to be known as par excellence the torah,

and also coming to be known as the torah and the

prophets and the writings; and these terms acquiring

later the secondary sense in which they denote respec-

tively the three divisions of the aggregate. Whenever

the Old Testament came into existence, it was the

aggregate of the written toroth as then extant, and was

therefore the torah; and this remains true even if the

pentateuch had then already come to be known as

" the torah," in the sense of being the part of it which

was most emphasized.)

          III. From our study of the term torah certain corol-

laries follow touching the character of the prophets

as writers of scripture. Only a summary statement of

these is here possible.

          First, the Old Testament scriptures are the extant

 

            ¹ The postbiblical facts fit in continuously with these phenomena. The

author of Ecclesiasticus possessed a body of writings that were nearly or

exactly the same with our Old Testament. We know this from his list of

worthies, from Adam to Nehemiah, which is virtually a table of contents.

It presents the books in an order which is mainly that of the events of

which they treat, and which gives no hint of a division into the pentateuch

and the prophets and the hagiographa. He has something to say con-

cerning the law of Moses, but his law of Moses apparently included more

than the pentateuch, and in particular it included the wisdom books. Two

generations later his grandson emphasizes some sort of a division between

the law and the prophets and the other books, but leaves the matter indefi-

nite. Some generations after him Philo at last sharply marks off the pen-

tateuch as the law, and perhaps hints at a line between the prophets and

the other writings. A century after Philo we first find a mention of our

present masoretic threefold division; and this was contemporaneous with

the entirely different threefold division mentioned by Josephus. It is not till

some time after this that our present division can be counted as a settled fact.

                 THE PROPHET AND THE LAW                169

 

aggregate of the prophetic toroth. No one disputes

that the prophets were, in general, in some sense the

authors of these scriptures. Our investigation shows

that they wrote them in their capacity of bringers of

torah from Yahaweh. The revelation they brought, so

far as it is now discernible, has become aggregated

in this familiar body of writings.

          Second, they make the claim, and it is supported

by the New Testament and by the secondary Israelitish

literature, that the word of a supernaturally endowed

prophet is, next to God himself, the ultimate source

of authority in Israel.

          Torah is binding, they say, because it comes through

a prophet. Whenever Deity sends a great prophet

properly accredited, then kings and priests                 Other author-

and governors are alike subordinate to him.                ity subordinate to

Moses the prophet outranks Aaron the priest.             the prophetic

Whatever difference they make between the Mosaic

part of the torah and the other parts, they insist that

the authority of Moses was simply that of a great

prophet. This has been discussed in our earlier chap-

ters, but it is in place to add here a citation or two.

Hosea says:--

 

          "Meanwhile I am Yahaweh thy God from the land of Egypt;

I yet cause thee to dwell in tents as in tabernacle days; and I speak

upon the prophets, it being I that have multiplied vision, and I give

similitudes by the hand of the prophets." "And by a prophet Yaha-

weh brought up Israel from Egypt, and by a prophet he was kept "

(Hos. xii. 9, 10, 13 [Ia, III, 14]).

 

This represents a claim which the prophets steadily

made. It was under prophetic guidance, they say, that

God brought up Israel from Egypt, sending before them

"Moses, Aaron, and Miriam " (Mic. vi. 4). God gave

Moses his Holy Spirit, they affirm, as he gave it to the

170            THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

prophets who succeeded Moses (Isa. lxiii. 11, 12, 14).

Next to Deity, they say, supreme authority is ultimately

lodged, not in the priesthood, nor in civil rulers, nor in

written or oral legislation, but in the supernaturally

endowed prophets and prophetic men.

          The same view prevailed, as we have seen, in the

times of the Maccabees, and, later, in the times of Jose-

phus and of the New Testament. The books of Moses

and the Psalms are quoted as authoritative on the

ground that Moses and David were prophets (e.g. Acts

iii. 22, vii. 37, ii. 30). Up to the time of the destruction

of Jerusalem this was certainly the accepted view.

          Third, what was the authority of the living prophet

as compared with that of torah that had already become

The living        accepted in writing ? Of course he might

prophet           interpret or supplement the written precept;

versus the        but might he repeal or suspend or supersede

written torah     it? Inasmuch as torah originally depends on the

word of the living prophet, there is no absurdity in supposing

that it may always have been given subject to modifica-

tion at the word of some later prophet. If it were true

that Samuel and Elijah and Elisha are represented. as

sanctioning acts inconsistent with the pentateuch, this

might be explained as the superseding or suspending

of an earlier prophetic word by a later. But if such

instances occur, they are exceptional. The respect of

the prophet for the prophets who had preceded him was

a marked characteristic.

          Fourth, the facts we have been examining forbid

Are the           certain assumptions which, unfortunately,

scriptures        are- often made, as to the unequal authority

unequal in        of the different parts of the Old Testament.

their              Professor W. Robertson Smith makes an as-

authority?        sertion that is not peculiar to his school when he says: —

 

                  THE PROPHET AND THE LAW               171

 

          "What place, then, was left for the prophets, the psalms, and the

other books? They were inspired and authoritative interpretations

and applications of the law of Moses, and nothing more" (Old

Testament, Lect. VI).

 

In the context he intimates that the Jews were accus-

tomed to regard all the books except the pentateuch

as on the same footing with the oral tradition.

          This representation differs radically from those which

we have been considering. The latter regard all the

books of the Old Testament as alike the prophetic word

of God, and as having, in that sense, equal divine author-

ity. Some were better known and more prominently

cited than others. The books of Moses, as treating of

the oldest events, and as containing the received direc-

tory for worship, had the place of honor and were men

tioned first. But the most obscure scriptural book was

regarded as the prophetic word of God;  while the pen-

tateuch itself could not possibly be anything more than

the prophetic word of God.

          It would be out of place to discuss here the nature of

the divine authority thus attributed to the scriptures, or

the inspiration that was the basis of it. Certainly the

different parts of the scriptures are very unlike in the

matter of the mental processes through which they,

came into existence, and in their applicability as a rule

of conduct. And there is a sense in which the entire

Old Testament is the unfolding of certain original

germs of revealed truth. In this sense one might re=

gard all the other books as an enlargement of the first

five. Jesus and his disciples and the scribes alike held

that both the pentateuch and the entire scripture is

summed up in the precepts of love to God and to man

(Rom. xiii. 9 and parallel passages). In a parallel sense

they may have regarded the pentateuch as comprehend-

172             THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL

 

ing all the scriptures. But this is different from count-

ing the other scriptures as of a secondary and inferior

grade.

          Certain relatively late Jewish rabbis are cited as hold-

ing opinions concerning the superiority of the penta-

teuch which may be transposed into affirmations of the

inferiority of the other scriptures. But can any one

produce a particle of proof of the prevalence of such

opinions prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus ?

What evidence we have examined is clearly to the

opposite effect. The New Testament is for this pur-

pose typical. It contains about two hundred formal

controversial appeals to the Old Testament. These are

almost evenly distributed between the pentateuch, the

prophets, and the hagiographa, though a majority of 1:he

hagiographic citations are from the psalms, and a ma-

jority of the prophetic are from Isaiah. With this wide

field before us it is incredible that we should find no

hint of the fact, if either Jesus or his opponents re-

garded the other scriptures as less binding than the

pentateuch. But is there a single New Testament

instance in which a disputant, on either side, replies, or

could naturally be thought of as replying:  "Oh, your

citation is from one of the other books, and is therefore

not as authoritative as if it were from one of the five

books of Moses?  "Jesus rebuked the scribes, not for

making the other books and the oral tradition alike in-

ferior to the five books of Moses ; but for exalting the

oral tradition at the expense of the books of Moses and

of the other books. In his view the word of God was

equally incapable of being broken, whether found in the

Mosaic books or the psalms or Isaiah or Daniel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                          PART II

 

 

 

THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC

               PROPHECY

 

 

 

                                CHAPTER VIII

 

THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE AS TAUGHT IN THE NEW TESTA-

                                        MENT

 

          IN the preceding chapters it has been asserted that

the thing which differentiates the monotheism of Yaha-

weh from other religions is its doctrine of the Messiah.

Other religions, it may be, have their Messiahs, but ours

is different from the others, and this difference is the

really distinctive element. Of this assertion I offer no

proof except our examination of this same doctrine of

the Messiah, but we shall find, I think, that this is

sufficient.

          For clearness of thought we need to begin by sharply

perceiving the differences of meaning among the three

terms, "messianic prediction," "messianic                  Messianic

prophecy," "messianic doctrine" taught by                 prediction, prophecy,

the prophets. The first of these terms is                      doctrine

narrower than the other two. The second and third

really describe different aspects of the same fact.

Provided we remember this, messianic prediction is a

good term. We have been taught that the prophets

uttered predictions of a coming Deliverer ; that these

were fulfilled in the events of the life and mission of

Jesus; and that this proves, first, that the prophets

were divinely inspired, and second, that the mission of

Jesus was divine. All this is true if rightly understood,

but full of difficulty if we stop here. It is correct pro-

cedure, when correctly carried out, to select passages

 

                                     175

176       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

from the Old Testament in which specific facts are fore-

told concerning the Messiah, and then show, from the

history, that these marks characterized Jesus, that he is

therefore the Christ, and that prediction, thus made and

fulfilled, is a mark of supernatural knowledge, authen-

ticating revealed religion. But if we go at it in this way

we are liable to misconceive the terms we use in our

reasoning. And we mislead ourselves if we imagine

this to be an exhaustive study of messianic prophecy,

or even of the much narrower subject, messianic pre-

diction.

          Some persons, pursuing these studies, have been

struck with the great variety and the apparently dis-

connected character of what are commonly regarded as

messianic predictions, coupled with the remarkable fact

that, diverse as they are, they all meet in the history of

Jesus, so that what would otherwise be heterogeneous

and unintelligible is thus seen to have a common end,

and becomes intelligible. Thus, it is said, the gospels

become the key to the prophecies, opening the meaning

of things that were otherwise obscure. Considerations

of this kind are regarded as giving especial strength to

the argument from messianic predictions.

          This reasoning is valid within its own proper limits.

But it suggests another point. If we really have here

a wide and varied body of instances, capable of being

shown by induction to have a common value, then the sug-

gestion is that as they thus converge toward a single fact,

so they may originally have diverged from a single fact.

If further study shall thus discover in them a unity at

the beginning, as well as at the end, their value as evi-

dence will thereby be increased. And this is what

further study actually discovers. The more adequate

idea is not that of many predictions meeting in one ful-

   THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT         177

 

filment, but that of one prediction, repeated and unfolded

through successive centuries, with many specifications,

and in many forms; always the same in essential

character, no matter how it may vary in its outward

presentation or in the illustrations through which it is

presented.

          Messianic prophecy is doctrine rather than prediction.

The prophets were preachers. If there was some one

messianic prediction which they repeated and unfolded

from age to age, we should expect that they would

present it in the form of a religious doctrine, for the

practical benefit of the men of their times. We Chris-

tians preach the facts concerning Jesus Christ. On the

basis of these facts we ask men to repent of sin, to obey

God, to seek their own highest good, to receive help

against temptation, and comfort in distress. Had the

prophets any doctrine that they could preach for the

accomplishment of these and other like ends ? There

can be no doubt that they had. Their foretelling of the

Christ stands on a different footing from all their other

predictions, just as the biography of Jesus, in the New

' Testament, is on a different footing from all other matters

of fact there recorded. As the biography of Jesus is

really doctrine rather than biography, and is the heart of

the apostolic Christian doctrine, so the prophetic forecast

of the Messiah is doctrine rather than prediction, and is

the heart of the religious teachings of the prophets.

Certainly we should treat their utterances as predic-

tive; but this by itself is inadequate. They teach a

doctrine concerning God's purposes with Israel, intelli-

gible in each stage of Israel's history, so as to be the

basis of religious and moral appeal for that age, but

growing in fulness from age to age until it becomes the

completed doctrine of the Messiah.

178         THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

In other words, we are accustomed to a generalization

of what the prophets say concerning the Messiah which

A scriptural was devised to meet the needs of our the:o-

generaliza- logical systems. One need find no fault with

tion

          this. But if we could substitute for it a strictly

scriptural formula of generalization, there would at least

be a gain in the way of freshness of statement. Is there

a scriptural way of stating this matter ? and if so, what

is it?

          The proposition that the Old Testament contains a

large number of predictions concerning the Messiah to

come, and that these are fulfilled in Jesus Christ, may

be scriptural in substance, but it is hardly so in form.

The bible offers very few predictions save in the form of

promises or threatenings. It differs from the systemized

theologies in its not disconnecting prediction from promise

or threatening. We shall find that it also differs from

some of them in emphasizing one promise rather than

many predictions. This is the prevailing note in both

Testaments — a multitude of specifications unfolding a

single promise, the promise serving as a central religious

doctrine.

          This biblical generalization of the matter may be thus

formulated: God gave a promise to Abraham, and

through him to mankind; a promise eternally fulfilled

and fulfilling in the history of Israel; and chiefly ful-

filled in Jesus Christ, he being that which is principal in

the history of Israel. In the present chapter we are to

consider this doctrine as taught in the New Testament.

The most prominent thing in the New Testament is

its proclamation of the kingdom and its anointed king.

But it is on the basis of the divine promise that its

preachers proclaim the kingdom, and when they appeal

to the Old Testament in proof of Christian doctrine,

    THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT         179

 

they make the promise more prominent than the king-

dom itself.

          I. First, the men of the New Testament hold that a

doctrine of the Messiah, the Anointed one, in the form

of a record of a promise made by Deity, appears in all

parts of the Old Testament scriptures.

          They say that this doctrine is taught not in selected

passages only, but throughout the scriptures. Jesus in

the Emmaus incident reminded his disciples that all

things must needs be fulfilled which were written con-

cerning him "in the law of Moses and the prophets and

the psalms." In the same passage it is said of him: —

 

          "And beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he inter-

preted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself"

(Lc. xxiv. 44, 27).

 

That this statement is typical no one will dispute.

Under the general fact which it affirms, we note a few

specifications.

          I. In the first place, the New Testament men regard

the messianic teaching of the Old Testament as mainly

the unfolding of a single promise (e]paggeli<a). How-

ever scholars may have neglected' this aspect of the

view they present, it is the one which they themselves

bring to the front.

          Paul, on trial for preaching Jesus as the Messiah, risen

from the dead, said to Agrippa: —

 

          "And now I stand to be judged for the hope of the promise made

of God unto our fathers; whereunto our twelvetribe nation, strenu-

ously serving night and day, hopeth to attain; and concerning this

hope I am accused by the Jews, 0 King " (Acts xxvi. 6-7).

 

It was on such an occasion as this, if ever, that Paul

would formulate most carefully the central article of his

creed. Evidently he has weighed his words and made

them exact. The messianic hope, he says, is based on

180       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

the promise; not some promise or other, but the promise.

He founds his appeal to Agrippa not on a good many

Paul before       scattered predictions, but on the one prom-

Agrippa           ise; and he expects Agrippa to understand

him. Speaking of his hope as a Christian, he describes

it as "the hope of the promise made of God unto our

fathers," and he speaks of the twelvetribe Jewish nation

as hoping to attain to this promise. The thing he is

speaking of he calls, not prediction, but promise ; not

promises, but promise; not a promise, but the promise.

The word he uses is singular and definite. ,The whole

essential messianic truth, as he knows it, he sums up in

this one formula, "the promise made of God unto our

fathers."

          The context here sufficiently indicates what promise

is meant; and Paul's words are to be interpreted by the

fact that the offence for which he stood accused was his

teaching that the promise was for the gentiles as well

as the Jews. But, waiving these points, we just now

only note that Paul here speaks of "the promise." Sim-

ilar phraseology abounds in the New Testament appeal

to the Old Testament. Nearly forty passages that con-

tain this word "promise" might be cited, besides many

that touch the matter in other ways. And these pas-

sages in which the doctrine of the one promise is found

are the central, conspicuous passages of the New Testa-

ment. They affirm that all revelation concerning the

Messiah is the unfolding of the one promise. Into this

mould all the New Testament teaching on the subject

may readily be cast. This is the way in which the men

of the New Testament themselves generalize the messi-

anic statements they make, this in distinction from all

the other ways that have been devised.

          2. In the second place, the New Testament writers

 

 

THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT     181

 

do not leave us in doubt as to the identity of the one

promise which they regard as summing up the hope

of those who believe in Christ. They iden-                 The one

tify it for us as the promise that was made                  promise

to Abraham when God called him, the prom-             identified

ise that in him all the nations of the earth should be

blessed. With this transaction in mind the writer of

the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks of God's having

"made promise to Abraham," says of Abraham that

"having patiently endured, he obtained the promise,"

and that God's oath was given to show "unto the heirs

of the promise the immutability of his counsel" (vi.

13-15, 17). He speaks of Isaac and Jacob as "heirs

with him of the same promise." And of "these all" he

says that they —

 

"received not the promise, God having provided some better thing

concerning us" (Heb. xi. 9, 39-40).¹

 

          In a similar strain Paul says to the Romans that "the

promise to Abraham or to his seed" was "not through

the law," "but through the righteousness of faith," and

that unless this is so " the promise is made of none

effect." He adds concerning Abraham, that "looking

unto the promise of God, he wavered not through

unbelief " (iv. 13-14, 20).²

 

            ¹" For when God made promise to Abraham, . . . he sware, . .

Surely, blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.

And thus, having patiently endured, he obtained the promise. . . . God,

being minded to show more abundantly unto the heirs of the promise the

immutability of his counsel, interposed with an oath" (Heb. vi. 13-15, 17).

" By faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land

not his own, dwelling in tents, with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of

the same promise" (Heb. xi. 9).

            ² "For not through the law was the promise to Abraham or to his seed,

that he should be heir of the world, but through the righteousness of faith.

For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the prom-

ise is made of none effect" (Rom. iv. 13-14).

 

 

182     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          3. In the third place, the New Testament writers

speak of promises, using the word in the plural, but

not in such a way as to weaken what has just been

said concerning their doctrine of the one promise.

          Very rarely they use the word without the article.

For example, certain worthies are spoken of " who

"promises,       through faith . . . obtained promises," that

and "the          is, promises of some sort or other (Heb.

promises"        xi. 33). But most of the instances are in

contrast with this, the definite article being used—for

example, the following from Romans: —

 

          "Who are, Israelites; whose is the adoption, and the glory, and

the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service, and the

promises " (Rom. ix. 4).

          "Christ hath been made a minister of the circumcision for the

truth of God, that he might confirm the promises [given] unto the

fathers, and that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it

is written" (Rom. xv. 8-9, followed by four quotations in succes-

sion, in reference to the Gentiles).

 

Here the thing spoken of is not promises in general,

but "the promises." The definite article is used. A

recognized specific group of promises is indicated, and

it is identified as the Abrahamic group.  That is, "the

promises " here intended are precisely the same thing

that we have heretofore found spoken of in the singular

as "the promise." The one promise is capable of being

thought of as divided into specifications, and when so

thought of, the plural number is used.

          Similar instances are frequent in the book of Hebrews.

We are exhorted to "be not sluggish, but imitators of

them who through faith and patience inherit the prom-

 

            "For this cause it is of faith, that it may he according to grace; to the

end that the promise may be sure to all the seed; not to that only which

is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham (16)."

 

       THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT     183

 

ises " (vi. 12). It is said that Melchizedek blessed

"Abraham . . . him that hath the promises " (vii. 6).

We read: —

 

          "Yea, he that had gladly received the promises was offering up

his only begotten [son] " (xi. 17).

 

It it said of Abraham and Sarah and their predeces-

sors: —

 

          "These all died in faith, not having received the promises"

(xi. 13).

 

The new covenant is called, in contrast with the old, —

 

          "a better covenant . . . enacted upon better promises " (viii. 6).

 

In these and like instances the use of the plural is

simply a recognition of the fact that the one promise

includes many specifications.

          4. In the fourth place, this one promise, with its

specifications, the New Testament men regard as the

theme of the whole Old Testament.

          They trace the unfolding of it throughout the his-

tory of Abraham's descendants, identify it with the

promise made later to Israel, and still later to David,

and regard, it as having been continually fulfilled, but

likewise as always moving forward to larger fulfilment.

Stephen is represented as beginning his oration before

his accusers with the statement: —

 

          "The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he

was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Haran, and Stephen's

said unto him, Get thee out of thy land, and from thy view of the

kindred, and come into the land which I shall shew matter

thee" (Acts vii. 2).

 

From this beginning Stephen traces down through the

events recorded in the Old Testament a doctrine which

he evidently intends to identify with the doctrine of the

184    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Messiah as held by Christians. When he reaches the

period of the exodus, he says : —

 

          "But as the time of the promise drew nigh, which God vouch-

safed unto Abraham, the people grew and multiplied in Egypt" (17).

 

That is to say, he represents the promise made to

Abraham as being fulfilled, in its proper time, in the

events of the exodus ; though he regards it as still hold-

ing on, after the exodus, for further fulfilment

          Paul, in his speech in Antioch of Pisidia, adopts the

same method, beginning, however, with the exodus.

                    Following the history down, he comes to

Paul's view       the time of Saul the king of Israel, and

adds:--

          "And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their

king; . . . Of this man's seed hath God according to promise

brought unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus" (Acts xiii. 22-23).

Evidently Paul, like Stephen, regards the messianic

revelation as a process extending through the history

of Israel, so that it is proper to cite the facts of that

history in explaining how it came about that Jesus is the

Messiah.

          The hymns cited in the first two chapters of the

Gospel according to Luke are saturated with the same

The Lucan    idea. They speak of the events connected

hymns          with the births of John the Baptist and Jesus

as proving that the Lord remembers —

                    "his holy covenant;

          The oath which he sware unto Abraham our father" (i. 72-73).

 

But they also speak of the same events as the Lord's

having —

                    "raised up a horn of salvation for us

          In the house of his servant David" (69).

 

In doing this they identify the promise made to and

 

THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT      185

 

through Abraham with the promise made later to and

through David.

          If additional instances were needful, we might add all

the numerous New Testament passages in which the

Christ is directly or indirectly spoken of as the son of

David.

          5. In the fifth place, they not only trace the promise

through the Old Testament, but make the Old Testa-

ment phraseology a part of their own diction.

          In their teachings concerning the promise they

employ peculiar terms brought over from the Old

Testament, in some cases modifying the                              Special terms

terms by the use they make of them; for                               and forms of rep-

example, kingdom, Messiah, servant, son, mine                   resentation

elect, holy one, and the like. They also bring over a

good many peculiar forms of representation: the last

days, the day of the Lord, my messenger, the Spirit,

ceremonial types, biographical types, the prophet as a

type, Jehovah's day of judgment, and the like. Most

of these will be discussed in subsequent chapters. At

present we only note that such phraseology exists.

          II. If now we have firmly grasped the idea that the

men of the New Testament base everything on the one

great promise which they found in the beginning of the

old scriptures, and which they regarded as radiating

thence all through those scriptures, we are prepared to

proceed to a study of the use they make of this promise.

          I. First of all, they regard the promise as eternally

operative, and as irrevocable, and they emphasize this.

The author of the book of Hebrews says : —

 

          "For when God made promise to Abraham, since he could swear

by none greater he sware by himself."

          "Wherein God, being minded to shew more abundantly unto the

heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, interposed with

 

186     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

an oath; that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for

God to lie, we may have a strong encouragement" (Heb. vi. 13,

17-18).

          Note how strongly the eternal, operativeness of the

ancient promise is here affirmed. In the eleventh

chapter of Romans, the chapter in which Paul affirms

that though a hardening in part hath befallen Israel "

(25), yet God has not cast off his people, the irrevoca-

bility of the old promise is presupposed throughout,) and

is explicitly stated in the words :

 

          "For the gifts and the calling of Gocc are not repented of" (Rom.

xi. 29, marg. of RV).

 

And yet more forcible, if such a thing can be, is Paul's

language to the Galatians : — '

 

          "Though it be but a man's covenant, 'yet when it bath been con-

firmed no one maketh it void, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham

were the promises spoken, and to his seed. . . . A covenant con-

firmed beforehand by God the law, which came four hundred and

thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of

none effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of

promise; but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise'" (Gala

iii. 15-18).

 

          And in a score of passages which I have cited or shall

cite to prove other points, this same thought of the eter-

nity and immutability of the promise is magnified.

          2. As a second point, the men of the New Testament

claim that Jesus Christ is the culminating fulfilment of

 

            ¹ In particular, one does not completely understand the allusion to

Isaiah (Rom. xi. 26—27), unless he has in mind the clauses which in Isaiah

follow the ones cited: —

            "This is my covenant with them, saith Yahaweh : My Spirit that is

upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart

out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth

of thy seed's seed, saith Yahaweh, from henceforth and forever" (Isa. lix.

21).

 THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT         187

 

the ancient promise, so that, in preaching him, they are

preaching the promise.

          We have noticed above that Paul, in his address at

Antioch, follows down the history of the promise from the

times of the exodus ; and we have found him reaching

the point where David appears in the history, and then

speaking of "a saviour, Jesus," as coming from Israel,

from the seed of David:

 

          "Of this man's seed hath God according to promise brought unto

Israel a saviour, Jesus " (Acts xiii. 23).

 

He makes this lead up to another statement: —

 

          "And we bring you good tidings of the promise made unto the

fathers, how that God hath fulfilled the same unto our children, in

that he, raised up Jesus" (32-33).

 

That is, Jesus is the fulfilment of the promise made to

the patriarchs and to David.

          We have just considered the statement made to the

Galatians concerning the promise-covenant that cannot

be disannulled. Paul insists upon that, not on account

of its abstract importance, but because, as he says, he

and his fellow-believers have a direct interest in it.

And here again he leads up to a specific statement :

 

          "The scripture hath shut up all things under sin, that the promise

by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe " (Gal.

iii. 22).

 

Here Paul speaks of the Abrahamic promise as "the

promise by faith in Jesus Christ."

          With the apostles this is a common way of speaking.

The whole eleventh chapter of Hebrews might be cited

in proof of this assertion. We cited from the sixth of

Hebrews, a moment ago, certain words concerning God's

oath to Abraham, and the two immutable things in which

it is impossible for God to lie. The author is insistent

188     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

upon the promise thus authenticated, in order that he

and his fellow-Christians may claim a share in it. He

makes the statement for the purpose of enforcing the

exhortation —

"that each of you may show the same diligence unto the fulness of

hope even to the end ; that ye be not sluggish, but imitators of

them who through faith and patience inherit the promises " (Heb.

vi. 11-12).

 

He carries his thought forward to the conclusion that —

 

"we may have a strong encouragement, who have fled for refuge

to lay hold of the hope set before us; . . . that which is within the

veil; whither as a forerunner Jesus entered for us " (Heb. vi. 18-20) .

 

          We might quote in addition a long list of passages

(e.g. Gal. iii. 6-9, 26-29). The more one studies such

utterances in their contexts, the more he sees the reason

for the intense interest which the men of the New Tes-

tament take in the eternity and the immutability of the

promise. They regard it as the charter of all the rights

which they and their successors may possess as Christians.

          3. Further, they claim especially that the salvation of

the gentiles through Christ comes under the promise.

They make it emphatic that God's promise to Abraham

was for the nations, and therefore conveys title to the

gentiles, under which they may receive the gospel. Paul

says to the Galatians: —

 

          "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles

by faith, gave the gospel beforehand' unto Abraham, [saying], In

thee shall all the nations be blessed" (iii. 8).

 

In this sentence Paul affirms three things: that the giv-

ing of the gospel to Abraham was a giving of it before-

 

            ¹ The versions translate "preached beforehand." The word is proeuag-

geli<zomai, not prokhru<ssw. The statement that the scripture evangelized

Abraham beforehand means, I suppose, that it preserves the record of the

gospel as announced to him. But in any case the contents of the Old

Testament are here described as a giving of the gospel.

 THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT     189

 

hand; that the substance of the gospel thus given was

in the words, " In thee shall all the nations be blessed";

that this promise, given to Abraham, is the same gospel

by which the nations are saved in Jesus Christ.

Paul says further to these gentile Christians:

 

          "And if ye are Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, heirs accord-

ing to promise " (iii. 29).

 

And again: —

          "That upon the Gentiles might come the blessing of Abraham in

Christ Jesus; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through

faith" (iii. 14).

 

He makes the same claim, in different language, in the

fourth chapter of Galatians :

 

          "The [son] by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the [son]

by the freewoman through promise." "Now we, brethren, as Isaac

was, are children of promise " (iv. 23, 28).

 

And to the Ephesians Paul says that " the gentiles are

. . . fellow-partakers of the promise"; that the Ephe-

sian gentile converts have ceased to be " strangers from

the covenants of the promise"; that they " were sealed

with the holy Spirit of promise."¹

          4. Yet further, the men of the New Testament trace

a connection between the promise and the several great

doctrines of the gospel.

          (a) They connect it with their proclamation of the

kingdom of God, on earth and in heaven, and so with

the universal and eternal reign of Christ as prince of

 

            ¹ "In whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit

of promise" (i. 13).

            "Ye, the Gentiles . . . were . . . alienated from the commonwealth of

Israel, and strangers from the covenants of the promise" (ii. 11-I2).

            "That the Gentiles are fellow-heirs, and fellow-members of the body,

and fellow-partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel"

(iii. 6).

 

190     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

peace. This statement scarcely needs proof. Any one

can verify it by means of a concordance.

          (b) In view of the eternal and irrevocable character

of the promise, their doctrine of the kingdom easily

carries the promise idea with it as it passes into the

eschatological teachings of the New Testament.

In many passages, both those which mention the com-

ing of the Lord and others, they closely connect the

promise with the doctrine of the resurrection and of

future reward. The second Epistle to Timothy opens

with these words: —

          "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, according

to the promise of the life which is in Christ Jesus."

 

In 2 Peter we are told that

"the Lord is not slack concerning his promise, . . . the day of the

Lord will come as a thief" (iii.

 

And we are warned against those who say —

          "Where is the promise of his coming ? " (iii. 4).

 

Paul before Agrippa, arguing the promise given to the

fathers, asks the question:--

          "Why is it judged incredible with you), if God doth raise the

dead?" (Acts xxvi. 8).

 

In 1 John we read : —

          "Ye also shall abide in the Son and in the Father. And this

is the promise which he promised us [evert] the life eternal" (ii.

24-25).

 

And in Hebrews : —

"He is the mediator of a new covenant, that . . . they that

have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inherit-

ance" (ix. i5).

 

And again :

" For ye have need of patience, that, having done the will of God,

ye may receive the promise " (x. 36).

   THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT      191

 

          (c) They connect the promise with the gift of the

Holy Ghost that marks the new dispensation.

Paul writes to the Galatians: —

 

          "That upon the Gentiles might come the blessing of Abraham

in Christ Jesus; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit

through faith" (iii. i4).

 

Peter is reported to have said on the day of Pentecost : —

 

          "Repent ye, and be baptized . . .; and ye shall receive the

gift of the Holy Ghost. For to you is the promise, and to your

children, and to all that are afar off" (Acts ii. 38-39).

 

Peter is here speaking of the ancient promise, though

he does not explicitly connect it with Abraham.

          These two instances will serve to interpret others. It

is not necessary to think that the speaker is always

thinking of Abraham when he uses the word "promise."

This mode of conception and of diction, once established,

would maintain itself. But the reference to the ancient

record is real, whether direct or indirect. When Jesus

was about to part from his disciples at his ascension, he

said: —

 

          "And behold I send forth the promise of my Father upon you ;

but tarry ye in the city until ye be clothed with power from on

high" (Lc. xxiv. 49).

          "He charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for

the promise of the Father," adding, " But ye shall be baptized with

the Holy Ghost not many days hence" (Acts i. 4-5).

 

Peter refers to this in the words: —

          "Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and having

received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath

poured forth this which ye see and hear" (Acts ii.33).

 

          (d) Finally, they connect Abraham, the recipient of

the promise, with what they have to say concerning re-

demption from sin; and in particular with their doc-

trine of justification by free grace, through faith.

192    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

In Genesis we are told that Abraham was wont to

believe God, and he counted it righteousness to him."

This utterance is made central by the apostles, not

merely in their theology, but in their messianic theology.

Paul and James alike cite the words, and insist upon

them (Jas. ii. 21—23; Rom. iv. 2-5, 9, Io). Paul de-

clares that —

 

"it was not written for his sake alone, . . but for our sake also,

. . . who believe on him that raised Jesus our Lord from the dead,

who was delivered up for our trespasses, and wb.s raised for our justi-

fication " (Rom. iv. 23-25).

 

He draws the inference : —

          "Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him

for righteousness. Know therefore that they which be of faith, the

same are sons of Abraham."  "So then they which be of faith are

blessed with the faithful Abraham." "If ye are Christ's, then are

ye Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise" (Gal. iii. 6-7i 9, 29,

and the whole chapter).

 

          We have thus seen that the men of the New Testa-

ment find a messianic doctrine pervading every part of

Recapitula-       the Old Testament. In their minds it takes

tion               the form of the one promise. They identify

it as the promise made to Abraham fof the nations.

They recognize the particulars included in it as "the

promises." They trace it throughout the Old Testa-

ment. They appropriate the phraseology in which the

Old Testament speaks of it. Further; they preach this

promise as the one great thing they have to preach ;

emphasizing its irrevocability, claiming that Jesus Christ

is the culminating fulfilment of it, basing upon it the

hope of salvation for the gentiles, connecting it with the

whole body of the doctrines of the gospel.

          The passages which describe the promise to Abraham,

his faith as related thereto, the experiences that arose

THE PROMISE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT        193

 

from it, are those which the men of the New Testament

cite more prominently than any others as sources con-

cerning the Messiah. In these recent centuries Chris-

tian scholars have busied themselves with the important

doctrines of justification and election as taught in the

New Testament comment on these passages, and have

largely overlooked the messianic part of it. What the

New Testament here principally teaches is that Christ

is the perfect realization of this promise as made to the

patriarchs, and as renewed to Israel later, particularly

in the times of Moses and of David. The Christ is the

goal of the mission of Israel. In him the line of David

is eternal. His kingdom is David's everlasting king-

dom.

          We cannot dismiss this survey of the facts without

calling attention to one very important bearing of it. It

offers the basis for a genuine Christocentric               A Christo-

theology. As men employ this term, it is                              centric

sometimes a mere euphemism for a theology              theology

from which everything has been omitted save a few glit-

tering generalities concerning Christ. I for one have

no use for such a theology as that. But the apostolic

world-view that has been traversed in this chapter is

certainly Christocentric.  It is Christ to whom the

promise points forward. It is on account of its con-

taining Christ that the promise is cited with so much

reiteration, and not for anything it contains apart from

Christ. The promise passages connect themselves with

everything that is essential in Christian doctrine. They

outline the nature and the person of Christ. The the-

ology of the Holy Spirit is in them, he being the divine

Agent in carrying out the promise. They are a study

in the doctrine of the divine decree, that decree having

Christ as its determinative point. The whole of this

 

194     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

line of teaching is true to the summary of it given in

the Epistle to the Ephesians : —

 

          "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according

to his good pleasure which he purposed in him unto a dispensation

of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things

in the heavens, and the things upon the earth " (i. 9-1o).

 

          The Calvinistic theology is Christocentric in fact,

even if not in form. Perhaps some theologian will arise

who shall succeed in discovering a dogmatical rearrange-

ment into a system that shall be Christocentric in form

as well as in fact. At all events, the theology of the

promise, as it appears in the New Testament, is Christo-

centric.

 

 

 

                             CHAPTER IX

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS

 

          IN the last chapter we examined the doctrine of

Yahaweh's promise to mankind through Israel, as that

doctrine is formulated in the New Testament. The

men of the New Testament say that Yahaweh, when

he called Abraham, announced a promise given through

him to the human race ; that the history of Israel is the

unfolding of this promise; that the promise was re-

newed with David, and preached by all the prophets;

that it began to be fulfilled directly after it was made,

and has been fulfilling ever since; that its greatest ful-

filment is in the person and work of Jesus Christ; that

it will never cease being in process of fulfilment; and

that this promise-doctrine is the sum of what the

prophets teach in the scriptures.

          We are now to inquire whether the New Testament

writers are correct in their exegesis" of the Old Testa-

ment. An adequate answer would require an examina-

tion of all the teachings of the prophets, and would fill

a series of volumes rather than a couple of chapters.

All that can be here attempted is an informal study of

the situation at four periods in the history; namely, the

times of the patriarchs, of the exodus, of David, of the

post-Davidic prophets. The present chapter deals with

the patriarchal times.

          The main line of the Old Testament record, for any

purpose, is that which presents the history of Israel.

Properly this begins with the account of the calling of

      

                                       195

 

 

196      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees, as found in the

twelfth chapter of Genesis, the contents of the pre-

ceding eleven chapters being preliminary.

          But these preliminary sections are of prophetic author-

ship, and were written from prophetic points of view.

Pre-Abra-        It is therefore not surprising that interpreters

hamic messi-     have found in them abundant traces of the

anic passages    prophetic doctrine of the Messiah. Much

stress has been laid on Yahaweh's relations with Adam,

including the protevangelium (Gen. iii. 15); on the sac-

rifice made by Abel (Gen. iv; Matt. xxiii. 35; Lc. Xi.

51; Heb. xi. 4, xii. 24; I Jn. iii. 12; Jude 11); on the

experiences of Noah, especially the covenant (Gen. vi.

18, ix. 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 17). The messianic subject-

matter includes whatever indications there may be of

God's plan of redeeming blessing for mankind, as found

in the accounts of the creation, the fall, or the flood.

The instances are very fully treated in current works,

but I do not purpose to discuss them here; not even to

argue the question in case any one shall think that they

belong to the main line of Old Testament messianic

teaching, that line beginning with Adam rather than

with Abraham. In any case, the record of these pre-

Abrahamic events supplements the messianic teaching

found elsewhere, especially in such important matters

as sin and redemption, and God's purpose for mankind.

          Dismissing these preliminary chapters, we turn to the

calling of Abraham, and there begin our search for the

main line of messianic doctrine. Both at the beginning

and afterward, we shall find it to be the principal thing

in the Old Testament. Luthardt well says (Bremen

Lectures, p. 195) that the whole history of Israel is

prophetic of Christ. We will first examine the pres-

entation of the case as made in Genesis, and will after-

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS    197

 

ward look at certain problems which arise from this

presentation.

          I. We have seen in the preceding chapter that the

Old Testament passage more emphasized in the New

than any other is the promise made to Abraham. Let

us study this promise.

          1. The earliest account of it is as follows : —

 

          "And Yahaweh said unto Abraham, Get thee out from thy land,

and from thy native place, and from the house of thy father, unto

the land that I shall cause thee to see; that I may make thee a great

nation, and may bless thee, and may make thy name great; and be

thou a blessing; and I will bless those who bless thee, and curse

those who make light of thee, and in thee shall all the families of the

ground be blessed" (Gen. xii. 1-3 J).

 

          The promise is in two parts: first, a promise to Abra-

ham that he shall have the land of Canaan, shall become

a great nation, shall have a distinguished name, and

shall have the divine favor for his friends and disfavor

for his enemies; second, a promise to him and all man-

kind that he shall be the channel of Yahaweh's blessing

to the human race. The second part comes last, the

order being apparently climacteric. Abraham is repre-

sented as chosen to be the recipient of peculiar favors,

not for his own sake, but that through him all the fami-

lies of the ground may receive blessing. This is the

supreme thing in the promise as given, all the other

specifications being subordinate to it.

          The subordinate items reappear in many places in

Genesis. A glance at them will help us in                   Subordinate

our understanding of the principal promise.                items in the

          First, a "seed," that is a posterity, is prom-       promise

ised to Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob (xiii. 14 if., xv,

xvii. 6-7, 15-16, etc., xxvi. 3, 4, xxviii. 3, 4, xxxv. I I, 12,

xxviii. 3, 4).

 

198     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Second, this seed shall be or shall include persons

countless as the stars, as the dust of the earth, as the

sand on the seashore (lb.).

          Third, it shall be or shall include a great nation

(xviii. I 8, xxxv. I I, xlvi. 3).

          Fourth, it shall be or shall include what is called "an

assembly of nations," "an assembly of peoples " (xxviii.

3, xxxv. II, xlviii. 4). In xvii. 6, i6, the meaning is the

same, though the phrase is simply "nations." The

nation intended is Israel, and the federated parts of

Israel are the assembly of nations or of peoples, though

confused translation has sometimes led to other conclu-

sions.¹

          Fifth, in these same passages it is promised that kings

 

          ¹ It is a pity that the versions, in rendering these passages, have made

them unlike, as they should not be, and have also confused them with

other passages that are very unlike them. For example, the versions make

it that Ephraim's seed (xlviii. 19) shall become "a multitude of nations";

its distinctive meaning is that his seed "shall fill the nations." The mean-

ing of Gen. xvii. 4-5 will be considered below. It is entirely different

from that of the passages just cited. It is often assumed that the "nations"

of Gen. xvii. 6 include the Ishmaelites and Edomites and other A.bra-

hamic descendants; and it is true that Ishmael and Esau are elsewhere

spoken of as nations, and as having promises through Abraham (xvii. 20,

xxi. 13, i8, xxv. 23, etc.); but xvii. 6 is to be grouped with xvii. 16, as re-

ferring to Sarah's descendants only, and these two passages belong with

the other three in which the "assembly of peoples" or of " nations" are

derived from Jacob.

          The Hebrew word in these three places is qahal, sometimes translated

in the Septuagint by 1KKXpvfa. Stephen (Acts vii. 38), alluding to this

word as found in Deuteronomy (xviii. i6), says: "the church in the wil-

derness." The word properly denotes the officially convened assembly of

the twelve tribes, called to order for important business (e.g. Jud. xx. 2,

)xi. 5-8). It appears scores of times in this use, and seldom, if ever, save

in this use or some natural modification of it.

          The meaning, therefore, is definite and clear, though much ignored.

Abraham was to be the ancestor of a nation, Israel, which would exist in

the form of an assembly of nations; namely, the federated tribes and

families of Israel.

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS         199

 

shall spring from Abraham, from Sarah, from Jacob

(xvii. 6, 16, xxxv. 11). The kings that spring from Jacob

can be no other than the line of the monarchs of Israel.

Whether the promise to Abraham should be interpreted

as also including the kings of the Ishmaelites, Edomites,

Midianites, etc., may be a question.

          Sixth, in many of the passages cited and in other

passages it is promised that Abraham's posterity, in

the line of Isaac and Jacob, shall inherit the land of

Canaan, sometimes called " this land," or "these

countries."

          Seventh, there are other items. Abraham's name

shall be made great; his friends are to be blessed, and

those who contemn him are to be cursed (xii. 2-3). His

seed shall take possession of the gates of their enemies

(xxii. I 7).

          2. Among these various aspects of the promise, where

does the emphasis lie? The answer is clear. The

principal thing is that all mankind shall be blessed in

Abraham and his seed. In the narratives concerning

the patriarchs this is emphasized beyond all else.

With slight variations in phraseology this statement

is five times repeated in Genesis. Besides its first

occurrence, already noticed, it is uttered by                Five times

Yahaweh to Abraham at the time of his inter-             repeated

cession for Sodom,¹ and at the time when he has been

commanded to sacrifice Isaac.² After the death of

 

            ¹ "Seeing Abraham shall surely become a great and strong nation, and

all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him" (Gen. xviii. 18 JE⁸).

Note how formally the two separate parts of the promise are here distin-

guished.

            ² "I will greatly bless thee, and will greatly multiply thy seed, as the

stars of the heaven, and as the sand that is upon the edge of the sea; and

thy seed shall take possession of the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed

shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves" (Gen. xxii. 17-18 JE⁸).

 

200     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Abraham it is repeated to Isaac.^l  Finally, we are told

that when Jacob started for Paddan-aram, Yahaweh re-

peated it to him at Bethel, where he saw the angels

ascending and descending.² In these passages the dif-

ference between "nations of the earth" and "families

of the ground" seems to be unimportant. The presence

of the "seed" in some of the passages, and its absence

from the others, makes no real difference in the mean-

ing. The difference between the variant phrases "be

blessed" and "bless themselves" is not significant.

What is significant is the fact that the promise is thus

five times repeated, the clause concerning the nations

being each time in the climacteric position. Irrespec-

tive of position, its more noble meaning would give it

superiority to the other specifications, but it has the

dignity of position also. As the whole promise to

Abraham and his seed is the central fact in our record

of the patriarchs, so the clause of blessing to mankind

is set forth as central in the promise itself. That is the

heart of the heart of the book of Genesis.

          In a form quite different the promise to mankind is

Father of a       emphasized in the transaction in which

multitude of      Abram's name is changed to Abraham, at

nations           the time when the covenant of circumcision

was made: —

 

          "Behold my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt become father

of a multitude of nations. . . . And thy name shall be Abraham,

 

            ¹ "Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee ... ; because to thee and

to thy seed I will give all these countries; and I will establish my oath

which I sware to Abraham thy father; and will multiply thy seed as the

stars of heaven, and will give to thy seed all these countries; and in thy

seed shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves" (Gen. xxvi. 3-4

JE⁸).

            ² "The earth upon which thou art lying, I will give it to thee and to thy

seed. And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, . . . and in thee

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS         201

 

because I have given thee to be father of a multitude of nations"

(Gen. xvii. 4, 5 P).

 

The phrase, "multitude of nations," here used, is entirely

different from "assembly of nations," "assembly of peo-

ples," used elsewhere to denote the federated tribes of

Israel, springing from Abraham ; and is analogous to

"all the nations of the earth " in the form of the promise

which we have been considering. Paul is correct when

he cites this passage in proof that the Gentile Christians

are children of Abraham (Rom. iv. 16-18, I I-12).¹

 

shall all the families of the ground be blessed, and in thy seed" (Gen.

xxviii. 13-14. J).

            ¹ The old version does not distinguish the phrase here used from

Ephraim's filling the nations (Gen. xlviii. 19), or from the phrases concern-

ing the federated Israel (xxviii. 3, xxxv. 11, xlviii. 4), but the word used is

entirely different. "Assembly" is a limited word. Some populations

have a right to be represented in any given assembly, and others have

not. "Multitude" is an unlimited word.

            It is through their failure to discriminate that some have here charged

Paul with an accommodating interpretation. Paul is arguing to prove that

Abraham is —

"the father of all of them that believe, though they be in uncircumcision"

(Rom. iv. II).

His argument is: —

            "To the end that the promise may be sure to all the seed; not to that

only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham,

who is the father of us all (as it is written, A father of many nations have

I made thee) before him whom he believed, even God, . . . Who in hope

believed against hope to the end that he might become a father of many

nations, according to that which had been spoken, So shall thy seed be"

(Rom. iv. 16-18).

            At first blush one might say that Abraham's being made father of a mul-

titude of nations must have the same meaning with the clause, "I will make

nations of thee," which occurs in the next verse in Genesis. But it is more

reasonable to regard the latter as a specification under the former. As in

the five passages in which the promise is verbally repeated, the statement

of Abraham's relation to the nations is accompanied by specifications sub-

ordinate to it. One of these is that nations will descend from him. But

his being father of a multitude of nations is parallel with all the nations

 

202      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          The promise for the nations is further emphasized by

what the narrative says concerning the seed of Abraham.

The prom-        Among the subordinate items, those touching

ised "seed"       the seed are especially connected with the

principal item, and are especially emphasized. The

"seed" appears in a twofold character: it is associated

with Abraham as the recipient of the promise, and is

itself a crowning part of the promised blessing;¹ and

in both these characters it is the indispensable link for

the transmission of the promise. Abraham's anxieties

and trials are mostly concerning his seed. It is through

his seed that the nations are to be blessed (xxii. 18,

xxvi. 4, xxviii. 14).²

 

being blessed in him, and not with his being the progenitor of numerous

descendants.

            ¹ Paul in the New Testament keeps up this distinction. Sometimes he

uses the term "the seed" to denote the Christ, the great benefit promised,

and sometimes to denote the beneficiaries, those whom he calls "the heirs

of the promise," whether Jews or believing gentiles.

            ² It may be assumed that Abraham at first thought of Lot as his heir,

and thus as the seed that had been promised. From the time when Lot

left him he is anxious concerning the seed. Directly after that, his seed is

associated with him in the promise: —

            "All the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed

forever" (xiii. i5).

When Lot remained separate from Abraham, after he had been rescued

from the four kings, we find the following record (Gen. xv. 2-6): --

            "And Abraham said, 0 Lord Yahaweh, what dost thou give me, as long

as I am going childless, while the son of possession of my house is Damas-

cus Eliezer? And Abraham said, Behold to me thou hast not given seed,

and behold the son of my house is my heir. And behold the word of Ya-

haweh was unto him, saying, This one will not be thine heir, but one who

will come forth from thy bowels will be thine heir. And he made him go

forth out of doors, and said, Look, pray, toward the heaven, and count the

stars, if thou art able to count them. And he said to him, So shall thy

seed be. And he was wont to believe in Yahaweh, and he counted it

righteousness to him."

            So the promise to Abraham becomes one that is to be fulfilled through his

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS      203

 

          The promise of the nations is emphasized in what is

said concerning the covenants between Deity and Abra-

ham. Two formal covenant transactions are                The cove-

described, — that in which Yahaweh's symbol                     nants and

of fire passed between the parts of the sacrifice                    the promise

(xv), and that when circumcision was instituted (xvii).

In each the covenant is in confirmation of the promise,

and with especial reference to the "seed." The con-

nection with the promise is implied in the narrative of

the covenant of the parts; the covenant of circumcision

is explicitly connected with Abraham's change of name,

and so with his relations to the multitude of the nations.

Clearly the covenants are concerned with the larger

purpose of Deity to bless mankind through Abraham,

and not exclusively with his narrower and subordinate

purposes.

          The one especially condensed and comprehensive

statement of the substance of the covenant, as the

matter appears in the records of the later                              The peculiar

history, is that Israel is to be to Yahaweh for              people and

a people, and Yahaweh to Israel for God; in               the promise

other words, that Israel is Yahaweh's peculiar people.

Perhaps it is not, though it ought to be, superfluous to

say that the word "peculiar" in this familiar phrase

denotes, not a people different from other peoples, but

God's own people. In the patriarchal times, when Israel

had not yet become a people, this formula appears sel-

dom, and only in part; but a part of it appears in con-

 

posterity, and here the faith of Abraham centres. In the subsequent record

the birth of Ishmael, the promise of Isaac, his birth, the plan to offer him

as a burnt-offering, all emphasize this idea of the seed of Abraham as con-

nected with the promise. It is the seed that shall constitute the promised

nation of federated nations. In a meaning considerably different, though

not inconsistent, Paul argues that the believers from the "multitude of

nations" are also Abraham's seed, since they have him for father.

 

204      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nection with the covenant of circumcision, and at the

renewal of the covenant with Jacob.¹

          The covenant is simply the promise in a different form.

Yahaweh constitutes himself the God of Abraham and

Israel, their God in a peculiar sense, not for their sakes

alone, but for the sake of mankind. It is thus that the

seed of Abraham is to be the channel of the divine

blessing to all the nations.

          3. We do not properly understand the bearings of the

promise as thus emphasized, unless we note with care

The promise     the fact that it is declared to be eternally

eternally                    operative. We have seen that the New Tes-

operative         tament lays great stress on this. In so doing,

it merely echoes the representations found in Genesis.

According to both alike, the promise and the covenant

and the seed are eternal.²

 

            ¹ “That I may give my covenant between me and thee, and may

multiply thee very exceedingly, . . . Behold my covenant is with thee,

and thou shalt be father of a multitude of nations, . . . And I will establish

my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee, to their gen-

erations, for an eternal covenant, to be to thee for God, and to thy seed

after thee. . . . And I will be to them for God " (Gen. xvii. 2, 4, 7, 8).

After this follows, with much reiteration of similar language, the establish-

ing of circumcision, with the promise that Isaac shall be born, and

that —

            "I will establish my covenant with him, for an eternal covenant to his

seed after him" (xvii. 19).

            See also Jacob's vow at Bethel: —

            "If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, . . .

and Yahaweh will be to me for God, then this stone which I have set up

for a pillar shall be God's house " (xxviii. 20-22).

            ² "For all this land which thou art beholding, to thee I give it, and to

thy seed, unto eternity" (Gen. xiii. IS).

            "And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed

after thee, to their generations, for a covenant of eternity, to be to thee

for God, and to thy seed after thee" (xvii. 7),

            "And I will give to thee and to thy seed . . . all the land of Canaan,

for a possession of eternity, and I will be to them for God" (xvii. 8).

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS     205

 

          Observe that the promise does not mean precisely the

same that it would if this idea of eternity were not con-

nected with it. If Abraham's retainers and                   Therefore of

friends thought that this promise had been                  progressive

made to him, they thought that it was fulfilled            fulfilment

when Isaac was born. But inasmuch as they were

informed that the fulfilment was to be eternal and

cosmopolitan, they must have regarded the birth of Isaac

as only the beginning of it. They looked forward, far

forward, to additional fulfilment. The promise would

be operative in the future in a never ending line of

descendants; it would be operative in ever widening

limits till the blessing had reached all nations. The

idea of a progressive fulfilment is inherent in the

promise itself; it is not the afterthought of a later time,

contrived for the obviating of difficulties. Whoever at

the outset understood the promise at all must necessarily

have understood it in this way.

          It might occur to any one as significant that these

passages employ the word "seed," a collective noun in

the singular, to denote Abraham's descendants for the

never ending time to come—never any plural noun,

such as "sons," for example.^l Presumably this is not

 

            "The one born in thy house or bought with thy money shall surely be

circumcised, and my covenant shall be in your flesh for a covenant of

eternity" (xvii. 13).

            "And thou shalt call his name Isaac, and I will establish my covenant

with him, for a covenant of eternity to his seed after him" (xvii. 19).

            "And I will give this land to thy seed after thee, a holding of eternity"

(xlviii. 4) .

            "And he called there on the name of Yahaweh, God Eternal" (xxi. 33).

            ¹ In the Hebrew the word is never used in the plural in the sense of

posterity. The Aramaic sometimes pluralizes it when used in this sense

(e.g. Targ. of Gen. iv. 10), but in the promise passages follows the Hebrew

usage, and uses the singular only. Sometimes, however, in the Aramaean

dialects, the word "son" is used instead of seed in translating these passages.

 

206       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

accidental. The word thus chosen designates the whole

line of Abraham's descendants as a unit, and marks

The seed a        their whole future history, without limit of

continuing       time, as a single movement. The expression

unit               is elastic, and not rigid. It is flexible for

denoting either one person or many persons, and it

represents Abraham's posterity as a unit, whether the

thought be concerning one or concerning many. If the

record had used the phrase, "the sons" of Abraham,

that phrase would not have been thus flexible.

          As this view might naturally suggest itself to any one,

so it actually suggested itself to the apostle Paul. His

argument in Galatians is to the effect that the word used

in Genesis contemplates the descendants of Abraham as

a unit, the Christ being the dominant part of the unit.

His reasoning is scholarly and correct, though it is not

what a good many understand it to be.¹

 

            ¹ "To Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. He saith

not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed—which

is Christ." "What then is the law? It was added because of trans-

gressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise hath been

made" (Gal. iii. i6, 19).

            These words are often cited as an instance of rabbinical misinterpreta-

tion by Paul. They would be so if his argument were that the word is in

the singular number, and therefore refers to the one person Christ, tc the

exclusion of the descendants of Abraham in general. But, as we have

seen, this is not the nature of Paul's argument. He argues from the fact

that the scriptural author uses a collective noun in the singular, instead of

some plural noun which he might have used, to designate the descendants of

Abraham, and thus indicates that the "seed," from Isaac to the end, is to

be thought of as a unit. Then Paul counts Jesus Christ as preeminently

this unit, but not to the exclusion of the other members of it. And of

course Paul is correct, provided his estimate of the greatness of Jesus is

correct.

            Note that Paul here presents the dual relation of the seed to the

promise, as we have above alluded to it. In this passage, Christ the

seed is the benefit promised; while the descendants of Abraham, both

lineal and spiritual, are the seed to whom the benefit is promised. And

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS      207

 

          II. Two particularly important problems connect

themselves with this presentation as made in Genesis.

The first of these concerns the critical character of the

presentation itself. The second concerns the contempo-

rary understanding of it.

          I. In the first place, whatever may be one's personal

point of view in a matter like this, one needs to look at

it from the different points of view held by others.

And on any critical theory now held, the views just

stated as to the presentation made of the promise in

Genesis have in them at least an important residuum of

truth.

          The older view is, of course, that the accounts in

Genesis are at least virtually of Mosaic authorship, and

that whatever they affirm as historical fact is              The old view

something that actually occurred. On this                   versus the

theory the statements in Genesis concerning               Modern View

the promise-doctrine have the simplicity and strength of

pure fact. Certain critical theories now prevalent teach

that Moses wrote nothing that has come down to us;

that our book of Genesis is a conglomeration, produced

in different centuries long after Moses; that the earliest

parts of it were based on oral legends, and confuse fact

with fiction; that the writers of the later parts deliberately

imported into the narrative the ideas of their own times.

          The difference between these two views is not un-

important. It is especially to be considered because of

the attitude of the men of the New Testament. No one

doubts that they held essentially to what has just been

described as the older view. I know of no sufficient rea-

son for thinking that they were mistaken. Nevertheless

 

if any one finds in this a confusion of thought, at least the thought is

intelligible when we recall Paul's habit of mystically identifying Christ

with believers.

 

208      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

it is worth while to inquire what the promise-doctrine

in Genesis becomes on the basis of the other view.  The

question is not, notice, what the scholars of the so-called

Modern View teach concerning the promise, or whether

they have taken enough interest in it to formulate a

doctrine. We ask, rather: What is the logical bearing

of the recent critical theories on the promise-doctrine as

presented in Genesis?

          Our conclusions as above reached do not depend

entirely on any one view as to the inspiration or the

These con-       critical or historical character of the penta-

clusions in       teuch. If one holds that this literature is

the light of       ancient and is genuinely historical, these are

recent             criticism propositions to be affirmed on their own

criticism          merits; but we are not compelled to argue them as

preliminary to our study of the messianic doctrine in

Genesis. Our interpretation is not tied by any logical

necessity to this view of the case. The most important

elements in it stand unimpeached even if one goes far

in accepting the opinion that the book of Genesis is of

late origin and of doubtful historicity. On this basis

the Genesis presentation of the promise becomes greatly

emaciated, but that in it which is most essential survives.

          It is obvious that the view we have taken of the

promise depends not at all on the question of author-

ship, provided the recorded facts are correct. Suppos-

ing the record to be true, it is so whether made by

Moses or by others. If any one holds that it was written

after the exile, but that it is authentic history, we have

no need, for our present purpose, to argue the matter

with him. If the history of the promise given to Abra-

ham and repeated to Isaac and Jacob be authentic, that

is all we need. So far as our present use of it is con-

cerned, it makes no difference when the history was

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS     209

 

written, provided only it is true history. The argument

depends on the facts, and not on the person who re-

corded them.

          This point, however, is not very important, because

most persons who deny the early origin of Genesis deny

also its historical truthfulness.  A more                      The doctrine

important thing is that we may in thought                   versus the

separate this theological doctrine concerning              details of it

the promise from the external details which the narra-

tive connects with it. I do not care to make the obvious

point that one might find the doctrine to be theologi-

cally true, even though he regarded its literary setting

as fiction. A different point is that the fact of this doc-

trine being known and taught in Israel in the earliest

times does not necessarily depend on the historicity of

the details. It follows that the most important parts of

our position might remain intact, even if one held that

there are such uncertainties concerning the authorship

of Genesis as to cast doubt upon the facts there re-

corded. Suppose one should even go to the extreme in

this, counting the narratives in Genesis as not history at

all, but as fiction written for the purpose of theological

teaching; at least, the theological doctrine is there —

the doctrine that Yahaweh, anciently chose Israel to

himself for his own people, that Israel might be his

channel of blessing to all the populations of the earth.

Even those who question the historicity of the records

cannot question the fact that this teaching concerning

the promise is one of the ancient doctrines of the reli-

gion of Yahaweh, dating as far back as that religion

can be traced.

          The scholars who analyze the hexateuch into docu-

ments hold that a good deal of the matter in Genesis

concerning the promise, including one or more of the

 

210      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

five repetitions of it, are from the writings which they

designate J or E, that is, from the very earliest of the

It was known    written sources of the Old Testament.¹  From

in the earliest    their point of view it may not be a fact that

times              the ancestor of the Israelitish nation actually

received a divine call with this promise to mankind

in it, but it is a fact that the earliest prophets whose

teachings are now extant taught that he received such a

call. That is, this idea of the matter was in existence

in Israel from the earliest times concerning which we

have information.

          Other parts of the matter connected with the promise,

these scholars attribute to the sections of Genesis which

they regard as of later authorship. The logical infer-

ence from this is that when the alleged later writers in

Genesis came to deal with the writings of their prede-

cessors, they were so impressed with this promise-doc-

trine, as they found it there, that they enlarged upon it,

and emphasized it by much repetition.

          Whatever critical view we take, therefore, we are

confronted with this immensely important fact, -- that

at the very beginning of the recorded history of the

religion of Israel the prophets were teaching this

promise-doctrine, the doctrine that Yahaweh was in

communication with mankind through Abraham and

his seed, and that through them he had promised dis-

tinguished blessing to all nations. They were teaching

that this had been the supreme fact in Israel from the

 

            ¹ These scholars differ much as to matters of detail. The Hexateuch

attributes Gen. xii. 3 and xxviii. 14 to J; and xxii. 18, xxvi. 4 to a sup-

plementer of JE; and xviii. 18 to a J supplementer later than JE. Driver

everywhere assigns more to J and E without qualification than do the

critics who analyze more minutely than he. Ball, in the Polychrome

Bible, shows a tendency to assign the promise passages to late supple-

menters.

 

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS     211

 

time when Israel had his beginning in Abraham. They

were teaching that this was what the seed of Abraham

was for, that it was for this that Yahaweh had made

them his own people.

          2. In the second place, we ask the question: What

was the contemporary understanding of this doctrine?

          We have gone over the record of the patriarchal

times. It is the record of an eternal covenant, made by

an eternal God with Abraham and his seed to eternity,

signalized by the change of name from Abram to Abra-

ham, having the nature of a promise, and having its

principal force in the statement that in the seed of

Abraham all mankind is to be blessed. The passages

that give this record are not one or a few, but many.

The book of Genesis so persists in repeating declara-

tions of this sort as to make it evident that they are

regarded as the utterance of a political and religious

doctrine of the highest importance. This doctrine is

reiterated at every turn of the narrative. It is brought

into connection with each stage of the lives of the

patriarchs. It is treated as the key to all the historical

and biographical statements that are made.

          This is the record of that which, in the New Tes-

tament and in Christian tradition, is referred to as

messianic prediction, or, to speak more correctly, as

messianic doctrine. How was this doctrine understood

by the men to whom it first came? As the knowledge

of it existed in their minds, what did it mean?

          Assuming that the history is authentic, what did the

contemporaries of Abraham understand to be the mean-

ing of the promise? Or, assuming the standpoint of

the so-called Modern View, what did the Israelites of

the century before Hosea understand to be the meaning

of the promise?

212     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          We do not ask, observe, how Abraham or Jacob or

others who may have had prophetic gifts understood

The proper       the matter; whether they saw all that we

form of the       think we see in the revelation that was made

question                    through them. As men commonly estimate

the prophets, we have no means of knowing to what

extent their knowledge may have been modified by

special inspiration. It has been generally believed

that Deity may have given them a far-reaching fore-

sight of the future. It was not beyond the power of

the divine Spirit to enable Abraham to look forward and

see every incident in the personal life of Jesus. But

we have no information as to how far such inspiration

was granted to the patriarchs and prophets, and it is

better not to let such an uncertain element enter into

our study. And on the other hand it would be of no

account to ask how the promise seemed to unsympa-

thetic persons, who took no interest in it. The proper

question to ask is how it seemed (or, if you hold the

other view, how the prophets who first taught it thought

it seemed) to uninspired but devout and intelligent

persons of the patriarchal times. How did it seem,

for example, to Eliezer of Damascus, or to some other

circumcised servant of Abraham, who had received

just such information as we now find in Genesis and

no more?

          Necessarily, he found in it an element of prediction.

In the uttering of it something was foretold. Every

Contempora-     promise is a prediction. This promise was

ries under-       the foretelling of something that should hap-

stood the         pen to the posterity of Abraham and to man-

promise as a     kind for ages to come, to time unlimited.

prediction        From the time when it was first given it was

doubtless thought of as something by which future ages would

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS    213

 

be able to test God's ability to reveal coming events.

Those who first heard it might reflect that in no long

time men would begin to verify this miracle of fulfilled

prediction, and that the verifications would thereafter

continue to be made, eternally. This would make the

promise the greater in their estimation. In this aspect

of it, it would stir their imaginations, and set them to

looking forward.

          The fulfilment of the promise hitherto, if it has had

one, has been accomplished in the history of Israel;

and, according to the claim of the men of the New

Testament, that which is greatest in the history is that

which has entered in and through Jesus Christ. Apart

from miraculous inspiration, however, there is no rea-

son to think that a contemporary of Abraham would

form in his mind a distinct picture of the details that

have entered into the history. He would have no

detailed expectation, for example, of a person living

and dying in Palestine, many centuries in the future,

and doing there the things that Jesus did. His thought

would contain no materials for constructing beforehand

personal biographies of Moses or David or Jesus, or for

constructing accounts of Israel's ancient conquests, or

of the dispersion among the nations, or of Israel's modern

glories won in finance and art and learning and states-

manship. If this is what you mean by prediction, or by

messianic prediction, then there is none of it in Genesis.

          Nevertheless the promise is essentially and necessarily

predictive. Its devout though uninspired contemporary

could not help seeing it to be so. As it was for eternity,

he would expect that the events included under it would

still be in progress, whatever their nature, hundreds of

years in the future. If he happened to fix his mind on

the date that we now designate as 28 A.D., he would be

214     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

certain that the descendants of Abraham would then be

living, would be in relations with the land of promise,

would be in some form carrying forward God's plan of

blessing for men. There would be nothing to exclude

from his conception such facts as those concerning

Jesus. We need not take the trouble to say how far

the first promulgators of the promise understood the

contents of the messianic doctrine that was revealed

through them; how far they had foresight of the future,

or knew the ways in which Yahaweh's plan for the na-

tions was to be carried out. At least they regarded

themselves as cognizant of the fact in general; they

understood enough to make them see that Yahaweh's

choice of Israel brought responsibilities upon themselves

and their generation.

          It is worth while to note, at this point, that the men

of the New Testament, in all that they say concerning

the promise to Abraham, do not claim that it was pre-

dictive in any other sense than that just indicated.

          Probably, however, the predictive aspect of the prom-

ise-doctrine was not greatly emphasized by the earliest

But rather as     teachers and recipients of it. In the main,

a practical        the promise was to them of the nature of

religious                    religious doctrine. The book of Genesis pre-

doctrine          sents it as a matter of practical preaching, rather

than as prediction. The ostensible purpose is to give infor-

mation bearing on conduct, rather than to make known

things to come. As the teachings of the New Testa-

ment give the promise a central position, so it is in

Genesis the central and commanding article of theologi-

cal dogma. Its earliest student found in it a great

religious fact, holding the same place in his theology

that the fact of Christ holds in ours, something to be

believed and taught and practised for purposes of cur-

THE PROMISE AS GIVEN TO THE PATRIARCHS    215

 

rent living; a doctrine that could be preached, and

made pivotal in all attempts at religious persuasion.

          The thought of sin and of redemption is basal in all

religions. In both the New Testament and the Old it

underlies messianic doctrine at every point. It char-

acterizes the narratives in Genesis, and it connects itself

with the promise; though perhaps by implication rather

than by direct statement. The men to whom it first

came were conscious of being sinners. However crude

their ideas of sin may or may not have been, they had

this consciousness. To them the promise was some-

thing that looked forward into the future, and was for

eternity; but it was also for the present. They them-

selves were of the tribe of Abraham, and they were

entitled to their present share in that which had been

promised. In short, the promise constituted for them

just such a basis for faith and for moral and spiritual

character as the Christian of to-day claims that he pos-

sesses in Christ.

          As thus explained, the promise was to these earliest

recipients and teachers of it something immeasurably

more than mere prediction, though its predictive value

is not thereby diminished. It was spiritual bread for

them to feed upon. Accepting the promise for just

what lies in its terms, irrespective of the contents with

which future history might fill it, it would serve the pur-

poses of practical faith and spiritual nourishment. A

person who had some idea of the infinite personality of

God; who held that God had purposes of blessing to the

whole human race, and had laid upon himself and

the family to which he belonged both the honor and

the responsibility of guarding and transmitting this

grace, had a theology that would serve the purposes of

an evangelical faith. Independently of the question

216     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

how minutely he understood the details of God's plan,

he had a good intellectual basis for moral and spiritual

character.

          How could one better influence Abraham's tribe and

their descendants than by indoctrinating them with this

truth? by making them feel that they were God's

chosen people, chosen for the benefit of all the nations?

by awakening within them the religious experiences

which this truth ought to awaken? They might thus

be led to faith and repentance and hope and love and

obedience; might be so brought under the power of

these gracious truths that they should thereby be com-

forted in sorrow, restrained from yielding to temptation,

nerved to fidelity in times of testing.

          What is said in the book of Genesis concerning the

blessing of Abraham certainly includes prediction; but

it is essentially not prediction but instruction. The

very core of the book is the affirmation that Abraham

and his posterity are eternally God's peculiar people,

not for their own sake, but for the sake of the nations.

This teaching is ethically lofty, but it is not recondite

nor obscure. It is level to the comprehension of even a

barbarous intellect. Any man who wanted to do right

could understand what it meant, and could feel the per-

suasive power of it. It was the heart of the theology

of Israel from the time of the earliest recorded doings

of the prophets. The New Testament writers are cor-

rect in finding it in the old record, and correct in identi-

fying it with the gospel which they themselves preached.

Paul made no mistake when he spoke of the gospel

"given beforehand to Abraham."

 

 

 

                                    CHAPTER X

 

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL AND TO DAVID

 

 

          IN tracing the history of the promise-doctrine in the

Old Testament, we have already recognized the neces-

sity of confining ourselves to relatively a few instances,

belonging to the great representative periods. In the

preceding chapter we have covered briefly the times of

the patriarchs. The present chapter must be made to

cover, however inadequately, the times of the exodus

and of David.

          I. We begin with the time of the exodus. Do we

find that the promise through Abraham and Israel to

the nations is made conspicuous in the record of this

period?

          I. The promise to Israel, constituting Israel Yaha-

weh's peculiar people, is much emphasized for the times

of the exodus.

          The covenant formula, "Ye shall be to me for a peo-

ple, and I will be to you for God," of which we found

barely a hint in Genesis, is very abundant in                         “To me for a

the writings that treat of the exodus. Take                            People”

an example or two:--

 

          "And I will take you to me for a people, and will be to you for

God, and ye shall know that I am Yahaweh your God, the one bring-

ing you out from beneath the burdens of Egypt" (Ex. vi. 7).

          "For thy passing into the covenant of Yahaweh thy God and into

his oath which Yahaweh thy God is making with thee to-day; in

order to establish thee to-day to him for a people, while he shall be

 

                                                217

218         THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

to thee for God, according as he bath spoken to thee, and according

as he sware to thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob"

(Deut. xxix. 12-13).¹

 

          In the accounts of the exodus a new form of state-

ment appears for indicating this relation between Yawha-

Yahaweh's       weh and Israel. They are said to be father

son                and son.  The phrase is used sparingly.

Israel's peculiar relation of sonship is not made very

prominent. The matter is significant chiefly for its

foreshadowing the diction of the history of the later

times. Nevertheless it is distinct, and should not es-

cape notice.²

          To the same effect might be cited all those hexateu-

chal institutions which have it for their purpose to keep

Hexateuchal Israel        separate from the other nations. I ab-

separative                  stain from specifying. No fact is more famil-

institutions                 iar than that a large part of the hexateuch

is made up of legislation of this sort. A full treatment

of this point would require us to go through the six

books.

 

            ¹ Other instances maybe found in Deut. xxvi. 17-19; Lev. xxvi. 12, etc.

Instances which offer the first half of the formula, without the second, are

Deut. iv. 20, etc. Instances which offer the second half of the formula

only are Ex. xxix. 45; Lev. xi. 45, xxii. 33, xxv. 38, xxvi. 45; Num. xv. 41,

etc. The instances here cited are all from sections which are assigned to

either P or D.

            ² The following are the instances: —

            "And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Yahaweh, Israel is my

son, my firstborn; and I have said unto thee, Let my son go, that he may

serve me; and thou bast refused to let him go; behold I will slay thy

son, thy firstborn" (Ex. iv. 22-23 J).

            "Thou hast seen how that Yahaweh thy God carried thee, as a man

carrieth his son, in all the way that ye went" (Deut. i. 31).

            "Do ye thus requite Yahaweh,

            O people foolish and not wise?

            Is not he thy father that bought thee?

            Himself made thee and prepared thee" (Deut. xxxii. 6).

     THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL      219

 

          For the times of the exodus, as for the patriarchal

times, much stress is laid on the assertion that Yaha-

weh's promise and covenant are in force to                 The promise

eternity.¹  In the records of these times this                for eternity and

assertion takes on a new form; namely, that               irrevocable

the benefits of the promise are irrevocable even for sin.

This is a fresh way of affirming that it will be forever

operative.

          Ordinarily Yahaweh's promises to men are conditioned

on obedience. Even the promises of eternal blessing to

Israel are thus conditioned (e.g. Deut. iv. 40, xii. 28).

In some passages it is perhaps fairly implied that the

 

            ¹ "To the end that it may be well to thee, and to thy sons after thee,

unto eternity" (Deut. xii. 28).

            "That it may be well to thee, and to thy sons after thee, and that thou

mayest prolong thy days upon the ground which Yahaweh thy God giveth

thee, all the days" (Deut. iv. 40).

            At the burning bush: "I AM THAT I AM. . . . Yahaweh the God

of your fathers . . . hath sent me unto you: this is my name to eternity,

and this is my memorial to generation and generation" (Ex. iii. 14-15).

The requirement upon Israel concerning the sabbath is: —

            "To observe the sabbath throughout their generations for a covenant

of eternity; it is a sign between me and the sons of Israel to eternity "

(Ex. xxxi. 16-17).  Here observe the threefold repetition of expressions

for eternity.

            It is to the same effect that a large proportion of the Levitical ordi-

nances are said to be eternal. "It shall be a statute of eternity to you:

in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your

souls." "It is a statute of eternity." "This shall be a statute of eternity

to you" (Lev. xvi. 29, 31, 34). These words are spoken of the great

annual sin offering: Similar statements are made in regard to the ordi-

nary sin offering, the wave breast and the heave thigh, the single place of

sacrifice, the ceremonies connected with the firstfruits (Lev. vi. 18, vii.

34, 36, xvii. 7, xxiii. 14, 21).

            These are but instances. Like instances are very numerous. Make

whatever allowance may be due for any supposed modifying of the idea

of eternity, and it still remains true that the record insists on future time

without limit as characterizing the covenant and the promise and the laws

based thereupon.

220      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

promise to Abraham and Israel for the nations is con-

ditioned on Israel's obedience. However this may be,

there are a few remarkable passages in which the prom-

ise is expressly declared to be unconditional — not to be

forfeited even by disobedience. In Leviticus, for ex-

ample, we find a series of terrible denunciations of pun-

ishment upon Israel in retribution for sin, and this is

followed by these words: —

 

          "And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies,

I will not reject them, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them

completely, and to break my covenant with them; for I am Yahaweh

their God. And I will remember for them a covenant of first things,

how I brought them out from the land of Egypt in the eyes of the

nations, that I might be to them for God" (Lev. xxvi. 44-45).¹

 

          It is not difficult to solve the verbal paradox involved

in thus declaring this promise to be both conditional and

unconditional. So far forth as its benefits accrue to any

particular person or generation in Israel, it is conditioned

on their obedience. But in its character as expressing

God's purpose of blessing for the human race, we should

not expect it to depend on the obedience or disobedience

of a few. So we are not surprised to find passages in

which the other aspect of the case appears. Israel may

sin, and may suffer grievous punishment; but Israel shall

not become extinct, like other sinning peoples. The

promise is for eternity, and Israel shall be maintained in

existence, that the promise may not fail.

 

            ¹ Perhaps certain passages in the parallel series of threatenings in Deu-

teronomy (xxix-xxx) should be also so construed as to make them uncondi-

tional. The following passage certainly should be so construed, though the

old version and the margin of the revised version make it conditional: —

            "When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee,

in the latter days thou shalt return to Yahaweh thy God, . . . he will not

fail thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers, which

he sware unto them" (Deut. iv. 30-31 RV).

 

  THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL           221

 

          Incidentally but importantly connected with the great

promise, as it appears in the records of the exodus, is

the subsidiary promise that Yahaweh will give                               The rest-

Israel rest, and will choose a place for his name                             promise

to dwell in.^l This promise is reiterated in the records,

making it conspicuous. It constitutes a significant mat-

ter of detail under the great promise. But it becomes

especially significant later as a link of connection be-

tween the time of the exodus and the time of David.

          2. In all this we find a record of a great promise to

Israel; but is it also taught that Israel's vocation is for

the benefit of mankind? The answer to this question

must be that this is taught in these records, though less

persistently than in the history of the patriarchs.

In Deuteronomy occurs the following representative

statement: —

 

          "Yahaweh will establish thee to him for a holy people, according

as he hath sworn to thee; for thou shalt keep the com-                    That man-

mandments of Yahaweh thy God, and walk in his ways,       kind may

and all the peoples of the earth will see that the name                     know of

of Yahaweh hath been called upon thee, and will be             Yahaweh

afraid from thee" (Deut. xxviii. 9-10).

 

In explicitness such a statement as this falls far behind

the patriarchal statement that in the seed of Abraham all

the nations shall be blessed; and yet it implies relations

between Deity and Israel and the nations. At least, the

 

            ¹ "And he said, My presence shall go, and I will give thee rest" (Ex.

xxxiii. 14). Driver is in doubt whether to assign this to J, with Dillmann,

or, with Wellhausen, to the compiler of JE.

            "For ye have not as yet come in unto the rest and unto the inheritance

which Yahaweh thy God is giving thee; and ye shall cross the Jordan,

. . . and he will give you rest from all your enemies from round about,

. . . and there shall be the place which Yahaweh your God shall choose

to cause his name to dwell there" (Deut. xii. 9-11). Add Deut. xii. 14,

21, xxv. 19, etc., and Deut. iii. 20; Josh. i. 13, 15, xxi. 44, xxii. 4, I.

Cf. Ps. xcv. I I; Heb. iii-iv. The passages in Joshua the critics assign to D.

 

222      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nations shall recognize Yahaweh's name as "called

upon" Israel. They shall do this so distinctly that they

will be filled with wholesome fear. To this extent, at

least, Israel is to transmit to the nations the monotheism

of the religion of Yahaweh.

          Another group of passages is represented by the

following:--

 

                    "For thou art a holy people to Yahaweh thy God.

His own, out     Yahaweh thy God hath chosen thee to him to be his

of all the                    own people more than all the peoples that are upon the

peoples                     face of the ground" (Deut. vii. 6, repeated without

                    essential variation in xiv. 2).       

 

In a moment we will pay some attention to the meaning

of the phrase "his own" as here used. We no only

attend to the fact that Yahaweh is here represented as

having relations with all mankind, and as having man-

kind in view when he separates Israel to himself to be his

in a peculiar sense. This is equally the meaning of the

words, whether you translate "more than all the peo-

ples," or "out of all the peoples."

          The same is taught yet more distinctly in an earlier

passage. In the accounts of the transactions which

A kingdom       preceded the giving of the "ten words" on

of priests         Mount Sinai is a brief message which stands

by itself, being in the form of thirteen short balanced

lines of verse. The consideration of this belongs in our

chapter on the Kingdom, but we may now attend to one

phrase in the message. Yahaweh is represented as

saying: —

 

          "Ye shall be mine, my own, out of all the peoples.

          For mine is all the earth,

          While ye yourselves shall be mine —

          A kingdom of priests and an holy nation " (Ex. xix. 5-6).¹

 

            ¹ Driver regards this as from E "in the main." Others make it to be

late matter, supplementary to JE.

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL       223

 

In thus proposing to adopt Israel as his own, Yahaweh

has all the nations in mind, so he says. This does not

utterly differ from saying that he chooses Israel for the

benefit of all the nations. Further, he has his covenant

in mind, the covenant with Abraham, of course, in virtue

of which all the families of the ground are to be blessed

eternally. Yet further, Israel, in being a separate nation,

is to be a "kingdom of priests." The function of a priest

is to mediate between a people and the God they wor-

ship; that is, Israel is to be a mediatorial nation.

          Of course this interpretation will be disputed. It fol-

lows, however, the natural meanings of the words; and

it is the interpretation which we accept in the four

places in the New Testament in which our Exodus text

is cited (Rev. i. 6, v. 9, 10; I Pet. ii. 5, 9). These pas-

sages regard Christian believers as inheriting this prom-

ise. They teach that we are "unto our God a kingdom

and priests," that we "are an elect race, a royal priest-

hood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession,"

to the end that we may transmit the divine blessing to

others. And there is no reason for saying that in

 

            The word here translated "my own," s' gullah, is an unusual word, oc-

curring eight times only in the Old Testament. David is represented as

using it when he says that he has given of his own, that is, of his private

property, for the building of the temple (I Chron. xxix. 3). It is used in

Ecclesiastes to denote that which is so fine that only kings have it for their

own (ii. 8). The other five instances are repeated from this place in Exo-

dus. Four times Yahaweh is spoken of as having chosen Israel "to be to

him for a people, his own" (Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2, xxvi. 18 [19]; Ps. cxxxv,

4). In Malachi is a promise to faithful Israelites:

            "And they shall be mine, saith Yahaweh of hosts, for the day which I

am making, my own, and I will have compassion upon them as a man hath

compassion upon his son that serveth him" (iii. 17).

            In this last passage the King James version renders "my jewels." Else-

where the English versions render "peculiar people," "special people,"

"peculiar treasure," "mine own possession."

 

224     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

this they are guilty of either misquotation or misinter-

pretation.

          This view of the case is strongly confirmed by the

fact that the promise made at the exodus is regarded

as a continuation of that made to the patriarchs. This

warrants the inference that it was not thought of as

radically changed in character.

          Whatever is done for Israel in the time of Moses and

Joshua is represented as in continuity with what was

Continuity       done in the earlier time. Moses comes with

with patriar-     the words:  "The God of your fathers hath

chal times        sent me unto you " (Ex. iii. 13). This idea

and this phraseology are repeated at every turn of the

narrative.¹ Already we find in the recorded history of

Israel this peculiarity, that it is simply the unfolding of

the promise made to Abraham.

          The continuity becomes the more marked when we

observe the stress that is laid in this history on the

A continuous    statement that the covenant made with the

covenant         patriarchs is still in existence. At the outset

it is said of the oppressed Israelites in Egypt: —

         

          "And God heard their groaning; and God remembered his cove-

nant with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob" (Ex. ii. 24 ).²

 

It is true that Yahaweh represents himself as publicly

entering into a fresh covenant, at the bringing of Israel

 

            ¹ "Yahaweh the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of

Isaac, and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you: this is my name for-

ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations."

            "Yahaweh the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac and

of Jacob, hath appeared unto me, saying, I have surely visited you"

(Ex. iii. 15, 16).

            Driver assigns these sections to E, but verse 16 to J.

            ² As additional instances note Deut. xxix. 12-15, 25, and the following: —

"I am Yahaweh. And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and

unto Jacob, as El-Shaddai, and by my name Yahaweh I was not known to

them. And I also established my covenant with them, to give them the

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL  225

 

out of Egypt; indeed, as making more than one such

covenant; but it is possible to understand these transac-

tions as the renewal and perpetuation of the covenant

with Abraham and this is clearly the intended under-

standing.

          That the supreme end of Israel's mission is his being

the channel of Yahaweh's blessing to all peoples is per-

sistently repeated in Genesis, both in the covenant

passages and elsewhere. That this idea is present in

the transactions of the exodus is an inference demanded

by the continuity, of the transactions, unless there be

something in the records to exclude it. As we have

seen, there is nothing to exclude it, and there is much to

confirm it. Israel's separation to Yahaweh is for the

benefit of the nations. If this is not here so insisted on

as in Genesis, it is at least entirely clear. The God of

all mankind takes thought for the interests of mankind,

in what he does for Israel. If this is not here so much

reiterated as in Genesis, it is at all events not left entirely

in the background.

          To this it might be objected that it supposes in Israel

a benevolent feeling toward the nations quite inconsist-

ent with the harshness he was required to                   The harsh-

show to the Canaanites and Amalekites, and              ness toward

in some cases to other peoples. We cannot                 the Canaanite

now stop to discuss this problem on its merits.                     and Amalekite,

For the purposes of the present argument it                etc.

is sufficient to say that the alleged instances of harsh-

ness are exceptional. It was to be exercised toward a

 

land of Canaan, the land of their sojournings, wherein they sojourned.

And also, I have heard the groaning of the sons of Israel, . . . and have

remembered my covenant " (Ex. vi. 3-5 P).

            "For Yahaweh thy God is El, a compassionate one; he will not fail

thee, and will not destroy thee, and will not forget the covenant of thy

fathers, which he sware to them" (Deut. iv. 31).

 

226     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

few only of the many peoples known to Israe As

a rule the international policy of Israel was to be liberal

and generous, even while it involved religious separation.

The laws for the stranger and the sojourner, and the

provisions for incorporating foreigners into Israel by

the rite of circumcision, are familiar instances. Even

in the cutting off of the condemned nations, Israel

might supposably be rendering a service to the human

race.

          It might be further objected that Israel never during

his history appears to have been actuated by the high

Only the few     ideal of having a mission to mankind. The

have the          reply is obvious. Only a few, relatively, of

highest ideals    the hundreds of millions of Christians now

living give evidence of being greatly under the control

of the ideals set forth by Jesus. There is no difficulty

in supposing that the cosmopolitan promise-idea may

have been known and accepted by the devout few in

Israel, even in the times when its absence from the

thinking of the majority was most conspicuous.

          3. As in the case of the preceding period, we meet

here the two questions: How must these statements of

fact be modified if one would make them fit current

critical theories? What was the contemporary under-

standing of the statements?

          The scholars of the Modern View hold that all state-

ments of fact in the bible in regard to the times of the

The case          exodus are untrustworthy. The history we

according to     have represents, they say, not the actual facts,

the Modern      but the ideas concerning the exodus which

view              were held by certain Jewish writers, some of them

as early as Hezekiah, others of Josiah's time, others still

later. It gives us, however, the earliest ideas concern-

ing these times that have been anywhere preserved, the

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO ISRAEL      227

 

oldest known conception of this part of the history

of the religion of Israel. On the basis of this critical

view, therefore, we are not entitled to say that the

promise-doctrine was actually dominant in the minds of

Israel's leaders when they came from Fgypt, but only

that this is the idea of the matter that appears earliest

in Israelitish literature.

          This view of the case is starved and meagre, but even

this ought to count for something. These earliest writ-

ers on the subject, whoever they were, thought that

Moses and his contemporaries thought that the covenant

with Abraham and his seed was then still in existence;

that in virtue of that covenant Israel was Yahaweh's

peculiar people; that he was so in the line of Ya-

haweh's purposes for mankind; that he was thus

Yahaweh's son; that this covenant and promise are

eternal, irrevocable even if Israel is to the last degree

disobedient. It is the same religious idea which we

found dominating the history of the patriarchs; some-

what unfolded, indeed, with the progress of the cen-

turies; less insistently cosmopolitan by reason of the

existing situation; but still the same idea.

          How did men then living understand this idea? How

did they interpret the body of sacrifices and other insti-

tutions to which the idea gave shape? The                  The contem-

question is not how it was understood by                             porary inter-

Moses, for example, or by some other in-                   pretation

spired man, who might supposably have all the details

of the future history of redemption miraculously re-

vealed to him. And the question is not how it was

understood by one whose religious instincts had become

atrophied, or by depraved or stupid or excessively

ignorant persons. But how was it understood by an

uninspired, though intelligent and devout, Israelite of

 

228     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

the period? There is no reason to think that such

an one saw in the covenant revelations of his time any

premonition of a man who would some time live and be

crucified in Palestine, to be the Saviour of men; what

he saw in them was a religious doctrine, in the form

of a promise from God, already for some hundreds of

years in process of fulfilment, and to remain in process

of fulfilment forever.

          On any tenable theory of the rise and progress of

civilization, such a doctrine was easily intelligible to

persons of that period, and capable of influencing such

of them as were open to ethical influences. And it

appealed to the imagination. Yahaweh's covenant was

for eternity.  It was not to fail, no matter how per-

versely Israel might disobey, or how grievously he

might be punished. Other races might be annihilated,

but this race would not be. It should be perpetuated,

that through it God's purpose of blessing for mankind

might be unfolded. All this is prediction. It is an

exhibition of divine foreknowledge in the making known

of future events. It was so understood by those who

first understood it. But it was more than prediction.

It was doctrine, doctrine effectively preachable, for the

guiding of the conduct of those to whom it came, for the

awakening of their patriotism and their moral virtues,

for the building up of their spiritual character.

          II. Similar things are to be said concerning the

promise as entering into the history of the time of

David.

          Next to the promise made to Abraham the New

Testament magnifies as messianic doctrine the promise

made to David. This needs no proof. Nothing is

more familiar to readers of the New Testament than

the idea that the Christ is the son of David.

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID       229

 

          The classical Old Testament passage concerning this

is the seventh chapter of 2 Samuel, with its duplicate,

the seventeenth chapter of I Chronicles. It                            The classical

is the account of David's proposing to build                         passage

a temple to Yahaweh, and the message he received

concerning it through Nathan the prophet. Few Old

Testament incidents are more familiar. Nathan at first

acceded to the king's suggestion, but afterward brought

a message from Yahaweh forbidding David to build the

temple. No reason for the prohibition is given in this

passage, though elsewhere (I Chron. xxii. 8) David's

being a man of battles is mentioned as a reason. Along

with the prohibition Nathan brought to David a prom-

ise, which is spread out in several verses, and which so

affected David that he "went in and remained before

Yahaweh," with adoration and with supplications in view

of the wonderful honor conferred upon him.

          What was this honor? An average reader of the

bible would probably say that it consisted in David's

being told that his son should build the                                David's house

temple which he himself was forbidden to                            which Yahaweh

build. But to say this is to substitute a sub-                           will build

ordinate matter of detail for the principal fact.                      him

The central thing is this:  that in response to David's

thought to build Yahaweh a house (5b), Yahaweh will

make David a house. This is emphasized by reiteration,

the house that Yahaweh will make for David being eight

times mentioned in this short passage.¹  Its nature is

indicated in the context.

 

            ¹ "And Yahaweh telleth thee that Yahaweh will make to thee a house"

(11b).

            "For thou, Yahaweh of hosts, the God of Israel hast uncovered the ear

of thy servant, saying, A house will I build for thee" (27).

"Thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure forever before

thee" (16).

 

230     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          1. It is explained that David's "house" is the line

of descendants which Yahaweh will give to him (12, 16,

David's           19, 26, 29). The promise to David, like the

"seed"            promise to Abraham, is a promise of a

"seed," though this word is used but once in the chapter

(12). That the seed is not one person only, but a line of

descendants, appears from the eternal duration assigned

to him and his activities. This line of descendants is

the essential feature of the promise.

          (a) Incidentally it is said that the "seed" shall build

the proposed temple (13), that is, that it shall be built

The temple       by some member of the house of David, by

builder            some one of his eternal line of descendants.

We naturally and correctly infer that the temple builder

is to be the first successor in the line. But this becomes

merely incidental; the main thing is the eternally

enduring house and throne promised to David. The

temple building is mentioned only once in Nathan's mes-

sage, and not at all in David's utterances before Yahaweh.

Although the project for building the house furnishes

the occasion for the giving of this promise, David has

not a word to say about temple building, when he goes

in before Yahaweh. Evidently the other parts of the

promise seemed to him so important as to thro this

into the background. Temple building, important as it

was, was eclipsed by the larger thought that had sud-

denly come to fill David's mind.

 

            "Thou hast spoken also concerning thy servant's house for a far

time" (19).

            "The word which thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and con-

cerning his house, cause thou it to stand forever" (25).

            "The house of thy servant David being made ready before thee” (26).

            "And bless thou the house of thy servant . . . may the house of thy

servant be blessed forever" (29).

            Besides these eight instances, the idea is repeated in other language.

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID      231

 

          (b) The thing emphasized in regard to the line of

David's descendants is that they shall be kings, having

a kingdom, sitting on a throne (12, 13, 16, 16). A line of

One item of the promise for the times of the kings

patriarchs and of the exodus was, as we have seen, that

Israel should be a kingdom, and should have kings (Gen.

xvii. 6, 16, xxxv. 11, cf. xxxvi. 31; Ex. xix. 6; Num. xxiv.

7, 7), and it is clear that the kingdom here assigned to

David's family is the kingdom of Israel (23, 24, 26, 27).

The Chronicler calls it Yahaweh's kingdom (1 Chron.

xvii. 14).

          (c) Equal stress is laid — and here again the prom-

ise to David parallels that to the patriarchs and to

Israel of the exodus — on the affirmation that            David's line

the Davidic line of kings and their kingdom               and kingdom

are eternal, this being an irrevocable divine                eternal

purpose. Besides other ways of expressing this, the

word "forever" is used three times in the message

of Nathan, and five times in the utterances of David

before Yahaweh, being applied six times directly to

David or to his seed.^l

          In the record of the times of the exodus we have

found certain passages in which Yahaweh's great

promise is declared to be irrevocable even for sin.

The same phenomenon appears in the accounts of the

 

            ¹ "I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever" (13).

            "Thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure forever before thee;

thy throne shall be established forever" (16).

            "Thou hast established to thee thy people Israel, to thee for a people

forever" (24).

            "And now, Yahaweh God, the word which thou hast spoken concern-

ing thy servant and concerning his house, establish thou forever, . . . that

thy name maybe great forever" (25, 26).

            "Bless the house of thy servant that it be forever before thee, . . . and

out of thy blessing let the house of thy servant be blessed forever" (29).

 

232      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

promise to David. Although it is sometimes presented

as conditioned on obedience (e.g. 1 Chron. xxviii. 7 ; Ps.

The promise     cxxxii), it is also, in other places, declared to

irrevocable       be beyond recall even in case of d sobedi-

even for sin      ence. In the original narrative, for ekample,

Yahaweh is represented as saying: —

 

          “And I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will

be to him for a father, and he shall be to me for a son; in whose

being perverse I will correct him with a rod of men, and with stripes

of sons of man, while my loving kindness shall not remove from

him, as I removed it from with Saul, whom I removed from before

thee. And thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure forever

before thee" (13b-16a).

 

The explanation of the paradox is doubtless the same as

in the earlier instance: any member of the line of David

may by sin forfeit his own share in the promise, but he

may not forfeit that which belongs to his successors to

eternity.

          2. But is there anything to indicate that the promise

to David is for mankind, like the promise to Abraham

and to Israel?

          In answering this question much depends on the

closeness of the identification we make between this

transaction and the earlier promise-transactions. If

the promise to David be a renewal, with further un-

folding, of the promise made to Abraham and renewed

at the exodus, then we naturally infer that it has

the same scope as they in its relations to mankind.

There is nothing in its terms to exclude the nations.

Their right to a share in it is therefore proved, provided

it is the continuation of the older promise.

          At the outset we must notice the fact that this chap-

ter does not explicitly mention Abraham, as do the

records of the time of the exodus. There is no sharp

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID         233

 

statement to the effect that Deity called Abraham to

the end that all families of mankind might be blessed

in him, and that he now extends the same call to

David. Nevertheless the promise to David abun-

dantly identifies itself with that to Israel, and therefore

with that to Abraham, since these last two are identical.

          We have already noted certain points of identifica-

tion. The seed of David is the seed of Abraham and

of Jacob. It is a royal seed as Yahaweh had promised

that theirs should be. We have again the great char-

acteristic of the promise, that it is for eternity and

irrevocable. But there are yet other points of identi-

fication more specific than these, and on that account

perhaps even more convincing.

          The account in the seventh chapter of 2 Samuel

begins with the implication that David was familiar

with the line of hexateuchal passages which               The Deuter-

say that Yahaweh would give Israel rest from             onomic rest-

his enemies round about (Deut. xii. 10, 9, xxv.                     promise

19, etc.). This is repeated a few verses further on, in the

same Deuteronomic phrase,^l with the additional Deuter-

onomic statement that the rest has come through

Yahaweh's cutting off of Israel's enemies (Deut. xii.

29, etc.), this being elaborately connected with the situ-

ation existing when the promise was given.² In the

 

            ¹ "The king dwelt in his house, Yahaweh having given him rest from

round about from all his enemies."

            "I am giving thee rest from all thine enemies" (1, 11).

            ² "And I have been with thee whithersoever thou hast gone, and have

cut off all thine enemies from before thee, and am making for thee a great

name, as the name of the great ones who are in the earth, and am setting

a place for my people Israel, and am planting them, and making them to

dwell in their place, and they no longer tremble, nor do sons of mischief

continue to afflict them as formerly, even to from the day when I put judges

in charge over my people Israel" (9-11, cf. 1 Chron. xxii. 9, 18, xxiii. 25,

xxviii. 2; I Ki. v. 4 [18]; 2 Chron. vi. 41; Ps. cxxxii. 8, 14, etc.).

 

234     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Deuteronomic passages it has been promised that when

Yahaweh has thus cut off Israel's enemies and given

him rest, then Yahaweh will choose a place were his

name shall dwell (Deut. xii. 11, 14, 21, etc.).  Evidently

the record gives us to understand that David believed

that Yahaweh had now at length chosen Jerusalem as

the place where his name should dwell, this being the

circumstance that led David to think that the time was

come for the building of a permanent temple (2 Sam.

vii. 13; i Ki. viii. 16; 2 Chron. vi. 4-7, etc.).

          Further, as the phrases "to be to thee for God, and

to thy seed after thee," "and I will be to them for

The peculiar      God," first appearing in the promise to Abra-

people idea      ham (Gen. xvii. 7, 8), are expanded for the

time of the exodus into a more complete formula (e.g.

Deut. xxvi. 17-18), and are much used, so we find this

formula prominent in the account of the Davidic promise.

The formula appears here in direct terms,^l and the idea

appears several times in phraseology that is less techni-

cal. It is Israel's God that David finds himself dealing

with in this matter. We are told that it is "Yahaweh

of hosts, the God of Israel," that has uncovered David's

ear (27). Other like phrases are used.² And indeed,

even without these specific phrases, any one can see

that the promise to David concerns his kingdom, and

that his kingdom is Israel.

          Among the clauses that mention Israel as Yahaweh's

 

            ¹ "And thou wilt confirm to thee thy people Israel, to thee for a people

forever, thou Yahaweh being to them for God" (24).

            "Like thy people, like Israel, . . . to ransom to himself for a people,

. . . thy people which thou didst ransom to thee from Egypt" (23).

            ² "I am setting a place for my people Israel " (10).

            "And may thy name be great forever, to say, Yahaweh of hosts, God

over Israel; the house of thy servant David being meanwhile established

before thee " (26).

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID          235

 

peculiar people, those in the twenty-second and twenty-

third verses are especially marked in their                  “One nation

hexateuchal phraseology. The statements                   in the earth”

are not entirely clear, but the verses are evidently

made up of phrases taken from the accounts of the

exodus.¹ At the opening of the twenty-third verse

the English versions translate,  "What one nation in the

earth is like thy people Israel?" This fails to convey

the true meaning. The question, "Who are like thy

people, like Israel, one nation in the earth?" is odd in

form, whether in Hebrew or in English, and its oddity

identifies it as a quotation. The plural verb in the

clause "whom Elohim have gone "presents a construc-

tion that is unusual. Clearly the sentence is based on

a passage in Deuteronomy that offers the same two

peculiarities: —

 

          "For who are a great nation which hath Elohim that draw near

unto it like Yahaweh our Elohim in all our calling unto him? And

who are a great nation that hath righteous statutes and judgments

like all this torah which I am giving before you to-day?" (Deut.

iv. 7-8).

          The writer here represents David as echoing the pecul-

iar diction of Deuteronomy. The clauses that follow

can best be made intelligible by regarding them as

similar echoes, and filling out the meaning by the aid

of the contexts from which they were taken.

          In these various ways David is evidently represented

as thinking of the time of the exodus, and of Israel's

being constituted Yahaweh's people in a peculiar sense,

 

            ¹ "For there is none like thee, and there is no Elohim besides thee, alto-

gether as we have heard with our ears. And who are like thy people, like

Israel, one nation in the earth whom Elohim have gone to ransom to him

for a people, and to set for him a name, and to do for you that which is

great, and terrible things for thy land, from before thy people which thou

didst ransom to thee from Egypt?"

 

236      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

and is identifying the promise to himself with that

transaction.

          In the records of the promise at the exodus, as

we have seen, Israel is sparingly called the son of

David's seed     Yahaweh. This form of expression comes

Yahaweh's       into prominence in the record of the time

son                of David:--

          "I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to me for a

son" (14).

          This statement is made emphatic by the clauses which

follow, telling how Yahaweh will treat David's son, in

view of their paternal and filial relation.

          In the respects thus far mentioned the promise to

David is clearly in continuation of that to Abraham

Other mat-       and Israel, both in its contents and its dic-

ters of diction    tion. An additional instance of parallel dic-

tion occurs in the twelfth verse:

         

"Thy seed after thee, which shall come forth from thy bowels."

 

The first half of this expression is not very common in

the bible, but it occurs five times in one of the promise

chapters in Genesis (xvii. 7, 8, 9, 10, 19). The second

half occurs only here and in the Abrahamic promise

(Gen. xv. 4), and twice elsewhere (2 Sam. xvi. 11;

2 Chron. xxxii. 21). It would not be safe to build

upon such an item as this, if it were unsupported; but,

taken in connection with the rest of the case, we may

infer that these two phrases in Samuel were borrowed

from Genesis. Not to delay for other instances, the

passage in Samuel is throughout by its diction brought

into continuity with the record of the times of Abra-

ham and of the exodus. Its echoes of the penta-

teuchal phraseology are not much less numerous than

its verses.

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID        237

 

          We look at one more phrase. By position it is the

climacteric clause of David's statement of the case when

he went in before Yahaweh. Its meaning is                The torah of

concealed in the English versions by impos-               mankind

sible translation. Rendered with strict literalness this

clause and its duplicate in Chronicles read as follows: —

 

          "This being the torah of mankind, 0 Lord Yahaweh!" (2 Sam.

19).

          "And thou art regarding me according to the upbringing torah

of mankind, 0 Yahaweh God!" (1 Chron. xvii. 17).¹

 

In these texts "this" ought logically to mean the reve-

lation recorded in the context concerning the "seed" of

David, who is to exist and reign forever, Yahaweh's

son, Yahaweh's king. "The torah of mankind" natu-

rally denotes a well-known revelation which Yahaweh

has made concerning mankind.  "The upbringing torah

of mankind" can only mean Yahaweh's torah for the

uplifting or exalting of mankind. It is presupposed

that David has a knowledge of something which he

describes in this phrase — something so great as to be

the crowning fact in the honor Yahaweh is bestowing

upon him.

 

            ¹ The following are the current renderings: —

            "And is this the manner of man, 0 Lord GOD?" (Old Vet.).

            "And this too after the manner of men, 0 Lord GOD!" (Rev. Ver.).

            "And is this the law of man, 0 Lord GOD?" (Rev. Ver., Marg.).

            "And hast regarded me according to the estate of a man of high degree,

O LORD God."

            None of these renderings are of the nature of simple translation. Each

includes an explanation, and one that is conjectural instead of being drawn

from the context. All are false in syntax. Three of them give to the word

torah the absolutely anomalous rendering "manner," "estate." All neg-

lect the fact that the law denoted by torah is regularly divine law. The

verb in Chronicles is not a present-perfect, but is either a future or a con-

tinuative present.

            See Journal of Biblical Literature, VIII, 137.

 

238     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          What is this "torah of mankind," this "elevating

torah of mankind "?  Was David thinking of some

matter of petty personal exaltation?  The context

shows that his mind was fixed, with deep emotion, on

the thought of Yahaweh's having chosen Israel to be

his peculiar people; and that it was more or less occu-

pied at the moment with the phraseology in which the

ancient promises had been given. In the circumstances,

the expression "the torah of mankind" must have a

broad and high meaning. The most natural under-

standing is that David recognizes in the promise just

made to him a renewal of the ancient promise of bless-

ing for mankind. His eternally reigning line of de-

scendants, Yahaweh's king, Yahaweh's son, is to be

also Yahaweh's channel of benefit to all the nations.

For this fact we are not left to mere inference; it is

explicitly affirmed in this clause concerning the torah

of mankind. The mere process of putting together the

logical elements of the clause gives us a meaning so

simple and so rich that its very simplicity and rich-

ness cause some natural hesitation about accepting it.

There is no sufficient reason, however, for not accept-

ing it. There is no escaping the conclusion that the

narrative represents that David recognized in the prom-

ise made to him a renewal of the promise made of old

that all the nations should be blessed in Abraham and

his seed.

          As in the treatment of the earlier periods, we pause

for an instant to inquire what this record becomes on

What this         the basis of certain theories of criticism now

becomes on      prevalent. Stenning (Dic. of the Bib.) assigns

the basis of       2 Sam. vii to a writer of the E school, liv-

certain criti-     ing about 700 B.C., but also assigns it to a

cal views         much later Deuteronomistic editor. Kuenen and Well-

 

 

THE PROMISE AS RENEWED TO DAVID         239

 

hausen both regard it as preexilian. Stade (Encyc. Bib.)

is sure that the Deuteronomist who wrote it was postex-

ilian. The men of this school would agree that the state-

ments of fact made in this chapter are untrue, whether

they date from about 700 or 600 or 400 B.C. But

there still remains this remarkable phenomenon: that

the prophets or scribes, whatever their date, who wrote

the history of David, had this idea of David's relations

to the promise. The idea either is or is not true to fact.

If not true to fact, then it is a product of imagination so

wonderful as to demand careful study.

          Such, then, is the promise for the time of David, as

the records describe it. Had this promise any clear

meaning to an Israelite of the time when                              Contempo-

it was given, supposing that Israelite to be                 rary interpre-

uninspired but intelligent, and a devout be-                tation

liever in the idea that Yahaweh makes promises and

afterward fulfils them? If it had a meaning, what did

it mean? The meaning can be nothing else than that

David would have as his posterity an unending succes-

sion of kings, one of whom, presumptively the first,

would build the temple, while through the whole line

would be fulfilled eternally the promise made of old to

Abraham and Israel. This meaning is simple, is as

comprehensible to men of one age as to men of another,

and is required by the words as recorded.

          In other words, this man of the time of David, or, if

you will, of the later time when some unknown scribe

invented the account, understood that the promise made

to Abraham was still in existence, and that Israel was

still entitled to its benefits, but that henceforth its cen-

tral fulfilment was to be along the line of the royal

descendants of David.

          He would understand that it was of the nature of pre-

 

240      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

diction, prediction that had already been gloriously veri-

fled, especially in the then recent conquests made by

David, but looking forward to still more glorious ful-

filments in the future. He would understand that the

future glorious events which were to occur under it

would be events in which all mankind would have an

interest. He would doubtless infer a divine foreknowl-

edge, made manifest through the prophets. If we may

suppose him to be asked concerning affairs in Palestine

at the then future date which we now designate 28 A.D.,

we should hardly expect him to be able to narrate de-

tails concerning Jesus; but we should expect him to

reply that the great promise would at that date still be

working itself out, in Palestine, and especially through

the line of David.

          Nevertheless it must have been true that the con-

temporaries of the first publication of the promise to

David, while they regarded the promise as a genuine

prediction, yet mainly looked upon it as religious teach-

ing rather than as a foretelling of the future.  Here

was a great fact concerning God's relations to men--

a truth for the prophets to teach and for the people to

feed upon; a truth suitable for purifying and stimulat-

ing their loyalty, for controlling their conduct, for the

building of character.

 

 

 

 

                                  CHAPTER XI

 

 

  THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS AND

                                   PSALMISTS

 

 

          WE have found that the narratives of Genesis include

an account of the revealing of a divine promise to

Abraham and Isaac and Jacob. The narra-                  Recapitula-

tives of the exodus describe a renewal and                 tion

continuation of that revelation. They declare Israel to

be Yahaweh's son, his own people, a kingdom of priests

and a holy nation. In this Yahaweh claims the whole

earth, and makes Israel a priestly nation, thus declaring

afresh that the election of Israel is for the benefit of

mankind. To David the promise is again renewed, and

especially vested in his seed, the interest of mankind in

it being again affirmed.

          We are now to inquire, how these traditions concern-

ing the promise were regarded by the prophets of

David's time and later-- the prophets who                   A new phase

wrote the Psalms and the historical books and            of the subject

the wisdom books, as well as those who wrote the so-

called prophetic books. In their writings the covenant

promise to Abraham, to Israel, to David, is perpetually

insisted upon. The prophets who were David's con-

temporaries or successors constantly appeal to the

promise as made to him, interchangeably with the

promise as made to Abraham and to Israel. To such

an extent does this teaching affect the Psalms,

the prophetic addresses, and even the historical state-

ments, that there is no way of considering it more

briefly than by studying the Old Testament through.

 

                                        241

 

242      THE PROMISE.  MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

The messianic material in these writings is so abundant

that it could be exhausted only by a treatment that

should cover the entire writings. Directly or in directly,

nearly all that they say is somehow connected with the

promise.

          As with the contemporaries of Abraham and Moses

and David, so with the successive generations of proph-

Both a pre-       ets that followed them, in the matter of the

diction and a     use they made of the promise: it had at any

dogma            given time a twofold character; it was a

standing prediction of the time to come, and it was an

available religious doctrine for the time being. In their

hands the messianic teaching was always anticipative,

always looking forward, always not yet fulfilled, though

it had been fulfilling for ages. Yahaweh's purpose in

it was for eternity, with unfoldings that reached end-

lessly into the future. But the promise, to the Israel of

David's time and later, as to their predecessors, was

after all religious doctrine rather than prediction. It

was a dogma which they had inherited from the past.

If we have thus far rightly understood the matter, we

should expect to find these prophets using this dogma,

very prominently, in religious instruction and appeal,

for the temporal and spiritual benefit of their contem-

poraries. Precisely this is what we actually find.  Their

theology centres in the promise. This is the spiritual

bread with which they feed the souls of the men of their

day.

          They had this as the great doctrine of their religion:

that Yahaweh had made Israel to be peculiarly his

people; had vested this relation centrally in the royal

line of David; had done this for purposes of blessing to

mankind—purposes that had already been unfolding

for centuries, and were on the way to an ever larger

 

THE PROMISE—DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS     243

 

unfolding. Henceforth this messianic doctrine, preached

by the prophets, sung in the Psalms, built into the

temple, rising with the smoke of every sacrifice, the

great quickener of Israel's conscience, the bulwark

against idolatry, the protection of patriotism from de-

spair, the comfort under affliction, the warning against

temptation, the recall to the wandering; in short, a

doctrine of salvation offered to Israel and every Isra-

elite; more than this, Israel's missionary call to the

nations, inviting all without exception to turn to the

service of Yahaweh — is this doctrine of the promise

of blessing, made to Abraham and Israel, renewed in

David and his seed, to be eternally without recall, and

including the human race in its scope.

          The messianic passages in the writings of the prophets

are mostly the repetition, the unfolding, the supplement-

ing, or the homiletic use of the promise, as                 The messi-

given either to Abraham, to Israel, or to                               anic passages

David. This is their gospel, as the same                     homiletic

promise in a more advanced stage of fulfilment is the

gospel that we preach in the twentieth century. It

varies in the different stages through which revelation

passes, and yet is uniform in its essential character

throughout the Old Testament.

          Descending to particulars, we will consider some of

the modes in which the prophets present this doctrine,

and some of the points in it which they principally

emphasize.

          I. First, their modes of presentation are such as we

should expect in a homiletical literature that preserves,

in prose or poetry, the substance of sermons actually

preached.

          In this literature there are a large number of passages

which are capable of being understood as disconnected

 

244     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

predictions of the experiences of a Person who was

to appear at a certain time in the future, or the

Predictive        redemption of Israel and mankind.  In-

passages          stances of these, in very large number, are

given and argued in the older works that treat of the

argument from prophecy (e.g. Pss. ii, xvi, xxii, cx). It

may be that sore of these are genuine instances of dis-

connected prediction, though most of them, when stud-

ied in their contexts, appear to the mind in new aspects.

Most of them should not be regarded as disconnected

predictions, but as shoots from a common stem—the

common stem being the body of connected messianic

promise-history which we have been examining. Very

many of them have a certain quality of universalness,

in virtue of which they are capable of being under-

stood as direct forecasts of a coming personal Messiah.

That is to say, they are so constructed that their original

setting may be left out of the account without the effect

of perverting their meaning. In a large proportion of its

conclusions the older apologetic is virtually correct, in

spite of its neglect of the local elements of the problem.

But even the instances of this kind yield more satis-

factory meanings when examined in connection with

their relations to the central promise.

          In some cases the so-called prediction occur in a

continuous discourse, but loosely connected with it.

The promise     The messianic statement may be used as

as a sermon-     a text on which the contiguous discourse

text or a          is based.   Isa. ii–iv, for example, is a

proof-text        sermon, based on the messianic prevision of

ii.2-4 as a text. Or the promise-passage is used as we use a

proof-text, for illustrating or confirming something in

the discourse.  For example, an Israelite bard sings

(Ps. xvi. 10):--

 

 

THE PROMISE—DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS      245

 

          "For thou wilt not abandon my soul to sheol,

             Thou wilt not permit thy hhasidh to see corruption."

 

For the meaning of the term hhasidh, see Chapter XIV.

In this passage the singer assumes that it is a well-

known truth that Yahaweh's hhasidh will not see corrup-

tion, will never cease to be; and so, identifying himself

with the hhasidh, he expects immortality. He cites

this well-known truth for confirming his own faith in

Yahaweh.^l To mention but one more instance, the

promise to David is called to mind to emphasize Ma-

nasseh's wickedness in using the temple for idolatrous

purposes (2 Chron. xxxiii. 7).

          To a limited extent the preachers and singers of

Israel repeat the formulated phrases that accompanied

the original giving of the promise. Jeremiah               Repetitions

promises that if Israel will return and be                               of the old

faithful, "then nations shall bless them-                      phrases

selves in him" (iv. 1-2). The forecast of the future

of David's dynasty, as found in the seventy-second

psalm, culminates in the words:

 

          "Yea, all nations shall bless themselves in him,

          Shall call him happy" (17).²

 

            ¹ This view is entirely consistent with the use made of the psalm in Acts

25, 27, 31, and xiii. 34-37.

            ² Whatever differences of opinion there may be concerning this psalm,

no one doubts that it is a song concerning the seed of David. The ver-

sions translate the cited couplet thus: —

            "And [men] shall be blessed in him,

            All nations shall call him happy."

But "nations " is placed where the subject of the first of the two verbs

ought to be placed; and the structure of the psalm, as found throughout,

requires that the two verbs have the same subject, and that it be expressed

with one, and implied with the other.

            The fact that these passages echo the phraseology of Genesis is not

changed even if one regards the phrase "bless themselves" as here indi-

cating merely a recognition of Israel or of the Davidic king, rather than

an expectation of receiving a blessing.

 

246      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

With these two passages compare a third, in which the

same diction is echoed, though with a different idea.

 

          "So that he who blesseth himself in the earth shall bless himself

in the God of truth" (Isa. lxv. 16).

 

And in changed form we find the Abrahamic phrase in

the twenty-first psalm: —

 

          "Thou settest him to be blessings forever" (ver. 6, arg. of

RV).¹

 

These instances of the use of the promise phraseology

will serve for illustration. Others will be found abun-

dantly in what is said in this chapter concerning the

interest of the nations in the promise, and in what is

said in future chapters concerning the messianic ter-

minology.

          A more conspicuous mode of use appears in passages

or complete poems which take the promise made to

Amplifica-       David as a theme, amplifying parts of it,

tions              and making variations upon it. In these

cases the treatment is sometimes very formal.

          Take, for example, the accounts of the preparation

for the building of the temple. A single passage must

suffice, though similar marks characterize the records

throughout.

 

          "Behold a son born to thee. He it is that will be a man of rest,

and 'I will give rest to him from all his enemies round about.' For

Solomon shall be his name, and I will give peace and quiet upon

 

            ¹ The prophets often refer to the call of Abraham without expressly

mentioning the blessing for the nations. Note an instance or two

            "Look unto Abraham your father . . . for when he was but one I

called him, that I might bless him, and make him many" (Isa. li. 2).

            "And their seed shall be known among the nations,

                        and their offspring in the midst of the peoples,

            All that see them shall recognize them,

                        that they are a seed that Yahaweh hath blessed" (Isa. lxi. 9).

 

 

    THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS         247

 

Israel in his days.  'It is he who shall build a house to my name.'

'And he shall be to me for a son, and I to him for a father.'  'And

I will establish the throne of his kingdom' over Israel 'forever'"

(I Chron. xxii. 9-10).

 

          The clauses here included in single commas are quoted,

with slight variations and transpositions, from the lan-

guage of the promise to David as recorded in 2 Sam. vii.

The same method appears in the account of the dedi-

cation services of the temple, in Solomon's address and

prayer on that occasion (I Ki. viii. 15-21, 24-26, and

2 Chron. vi. 4–11, 15-17). In the prayer, Solomon

pleads God's faithfulness in the temple-building item

of the promise as an earnest that God will equally

accomplish the wider promise of the perpetuity of the

royal line of David.

          The eighty-ninth psalm is perhaps the most notable

instance of this habit of amplification. This poem men-

tions the promise to David through Nathan,                Ps. lxxxix as

with extensive verbal citations, insists espe-               an instance

cially upon its being a promise which is to                 of amplification

endure forever, and makes it the basis of expostulation

with Yahaweh concerning the misfortunes that had

befallen the king then on the throne of David. In its

middle section the psalm takes four or five clauses

from the narrative in 2 Sam. vii, and expands them into

stanzas aggregating thirty or forty lines.¹  Ps. cxxxii

might also be cited as affording a notable instance of

similar amplification.

          The promise-doctrine appears in poems and addresses

 

            ¹ In this psalm the singer first states and expounds his theme (1–4).

The theme is stated in the first verse, The Faithful Lovingkindness of

Yahaweh. In the third verse it is narrowed to the specific topic, Yahaweh's

Oath to David to make his Throne Eternal.

            Having thus stated his theme, the singer abandons himself to a burst

of praiseful song in view of it (5-18), coming back in the eighteenth verse

 

248     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

that celebrate events. The second psalm, for example,

The promise-    celebrates a futile attempt of kings and nations

doctrine in       to break away from the dominion of a king

pieces that       reigning in Zion. The singer designates this

celebrate         king in terms of the promise. He is Yaha-

events              weh's Anointed, Yahaweh's Son, to whom the uttermost

 

to the thought of "our shield," that is, "our king," and his relations to

Yahaweh.

          Then, in verses 19-37, the singer takes up in detail the account of the

giving of the promise to David.

 

19. "AT THAT TIME thou spakest in vision to thy kindly loved ones,

                    and saidst: —

          I have laid help upon a mighty one,

          I have exalted one chosen out of the people,

20.     I have found David my Servant,

          With my holy oil have I anointed him.

21.     With whom my hand shall be kept ready,

          Yea, mine arm shall make him strong.

22.     No enemy shall harass him,

          Nor son of mischief afflict him.

23.     And I will beat down his adversaries from before him,

          And them that hate him will I defeat.

24.     And my faithfulness and my lovingkindness being with him,

          And his horn being exalted in my name,

25.     I will place his hand at the sea,

          And his right hand at the rivers.

26.     He for his part shall call me, Thou art my father,

          My God, and the rock of my salvation.

27.     Yea I for my part will give him to be firstborn,

          A most high one to the kings of earth.

28.     To eternity will I keep for him my lovingkindness,

          My covenant being made faithful to him.

29.     And I will place his seed for everlastingness,

          And his throne as the days of heaven.

30.     If his sons forsake my law,

          And go not in my judgments,

31.     If they profane my statutes,

          And keep not my commandments,

         

THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS       249

 

parts of the earth have been given. Apparently it was

originally written of a situation in the reign of David

himself. But it has that character of universalness of

 

32.     Then will I visit their transgression with a rod,

          And their iniquity with stripes,

33      And my lovingkindness I. will not break off from with him,

          And I will not be false in my faithfulness.

34.     I will not profane my covenant,

          And the outgo of my lips I will not change,

35.     Once have I sworn by my holiness:

          If I will be deceitful to David!

36.     His seed shall be to eternity,

          And his throne as the sun in my presence;

37.     As the moon that is made ready forever,

          And a witness that is faithful in the sky.

 

            The remainder of the psalm is an expostulatory prayer to Yahaweh in

behalf of the then reigning king of the line of David. The singer says

that Yahaweh, so far as appearances go, is not keeping this great promise

made to David and his seed. The living representative of David's blood,

whom the promise entitles to be regarded as Yahaweh's Anointed, Yahaweh's

Servant, has been cast off by Yahaweh. His fortresses are broken down.

He is a failure in war. He is helpless. His only recourse is to plead

Yahaweh's "first lovingkindnesses" as expressed in his oath to David.

            The thing to be here observed is, first, that every part of this psalm is

based on the promise to David, and second, that the details of the quoted

section of it are those of the passage recording the promise.

            "At that time," az, verse 19, points to a definite occasion which the

singer has in mind. "Thou spakest in vision" is an echo of 2 Sam.

vii. 17. "Nor son of mischief afflict him," is copied from a clause in

2 Sam. vii. to, while verses 20-25 of the psalm give the same situation

with verses 9-11 in Samuel, and verse 19bc is simply a variant of verse 8

in Samuel. In the following verses the phenomena are still more marked.

            In the fourteenth verse in Samuel we find: "I will he to him for a

father, and he shall be to me for a son." This is expanded in the psalm

into the four lines of verses 26-27. In Samuel it is promised that if

David's sons are perverse, Yahaweh will chastise them, but will not remove

his lovingkindness from them. The psalm enlarges this into eight lines

(30-33). And in verses 28-37 the eternalness of the transaction, so

insisted upon in Samuel, is repeated in line after line, with the heavens

and sun and moon and sky cited for illustration.

 

250      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

diction that marks so many of these messianic passages.

The language might plausibly be applied to the reigning

king of the line of David in any one of several different

generations, with no need to change the phraseology to

fit the situation. The apostles make no change in the

words when they apply them directly to him whom

they regard as preeminently Yahaweh's Anointed Son

(Acts iv. 25–26, etc.).

          The forty-fifth psalm is primarily a marriage song.

In it the singer addresses the bride (10-12), and

addresses three different kings (2-7, 8-9, 13-17). The

king to whom the principal address is made (2–7) is

presumably the reigning king of Judah. Th singer

thinks of him as the living representative of the promise;

the contemporary occupant of the throne of David, which

has been declared to be Yahaweh's throne (1 Chron. xvii.

14, xxix. 23 ; 2 Chron. ix. 8, xiii. 8). So the singe makes

his climax in the form of a direct address to Deity: —

 

          "Thy throne, 0 God, is for ever and ever" (6a).

 

The singer does not here address the Davidic king as

God, but he speaks of him as of unique character in

that the throne he occupies is God's throne on earth.¹

Whoever this king was, the singer's soul is filled with

the thought of the eternal promise to David, and from  

this comes the great undertone of his song.

          Two celebrated brief prophecies in which the

takes the promise to David as a theme, and works it out

into glowing terms of encouragement for Israel, are

those in Isa. ix. 1-7 and xi. 1-10.

          Other modes of the teaching of the promise-

by the prophets were through the originating of

 

            ¹ This interpretation offers as perfect a logical basis for the reasoning of

Heb. i. 8-9 as if the singer addressed the king as God.

 

THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS     251

 

what extended vocabulary of special terms, used in

setting forth the doctrine, and collaterally through the

institutions of Israel, including the prophets                A technical

themselves as an institution. To the special                vocabulary. Collateral

terminology we shall devote several chapters,            presentations

and a chapter to the collateral lines of teaching.

          In regard to their modes of presenting the doctrine

it remains to be said that they everywhere teach it more

by presupposition than by express statement.             By presuppo-

They take the promise for granted, as some-               sition more than

thing with which their hearers are acquainted,            by open statement

on which they may build at any time. They regard

it as public property. The singer of the eighty-ninth

psalm counts the vision as given not to Nathan or David

alone, but to Yahaweh's hhasidhim in general.

 

"Thou spakest in vision to thy saints " (Ps. lxxxix. 19 RV).

 

The promise idea is evidently thought of as to some

extent familiar and well known. This doubtless implies

that the doctrine was more widely taught and under-

stood than many suppose. The prophets certainly used

it just as we use religious dogma, for enforcing public

and private duties. The messianic passages commonly

occur in the midst of connected discourse on current

subjects. Oftenest the messianic utterance is within

some continuous treatment concerning Israel or Israel's

king, and is itself an interwoven part of the treatment.

Instead of mentioning the great promise, the prophets

take it for granted as well known and needing no expla-

nation. Just as Christian ministers assume that their

hearers are acquainted with the facts stated in the

 

            ¹ The King James version, following the Hebrew bibles that have been

most in use, makes the noun singular, but there seems to be no room for

doubt that the true reading is that in which it is plural.

 

252     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

gospels, so the preachers of the older Israel assumed

that their hearers had some degree of familiarity with

the promise that had been made to Israel, and they

based their appeals on the knowledge which they thus

presupposed in the minds of their countrymen. In all

the variety of forms known to literature, the prophets

presuppose and use the theme offered them in the

doctrine of the promise made to Abraham, to Israel, to

David.

          II. To complete our view of their presentation of the

doctrine, we need to, glance at some of the points which

they most emphasize. In doing this we shall have to

take for granted some things that are reserved for fuller

treatment in the next four chapters.

          I. They identify the promise made to David with

that made to Israel and that made to Abraham, some-

The three         times blending the characteristics of the three

promises         in a single presentation, passing without

identical          apparent consciousness of change from the

promise in one form to the promise in another form.

We have already passed under review several instances

of this, and we shall find other instances. So, though

we need just here to state the point by itself, we may

dismiss it with the cursory mention of an illustration

or two. We have found the seventy-second psalm, for

example, bringing its panegyric on the line of David

to a close by quoting the words of Genesis: "All na-

tions shall bless themselves in him," in other words,

by representing that the promise in and to the seed of

Abraham is fulfilled in and to the seed of David.  In

the eighty-ninth psalm we have found the term "ser-

vant" applied to David. Elsewhere it is a few times

applied to Abraham, but most commonly to Israel.

This psalm contemplates David and his seed as a single

THE PROMISE—DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS    253

 

object of thought, and identifies this, in interest at least,

with Israel. The writer in 2 Samuel says of Israel that

sons of mischief no longer afflict him (vii. 10), and the

psalm quotes this, applying it to the line of David (22).

The psalm, in citing the passage in Samuel concerning

sonship, mingles with it the Deuteronomic phraseology

concerning the exaltation of Israel (Ps. lxxxix. 27; cf.

2 Sam. vii. 14; Deut. xxviii, i, xxvi. 18, 19): —

 

          “Yea I for my part will give him to be firstborn,

          A most high one to the kings of earth."

 

          2. The prophets and psalmists sufficiently recognize

the cosmopolitan character of the promise.

          That they habitually thought of the promise inter-

ests of Israel as centring in the line of David needs no

further proof. That they habitually regarded                They teach

the promise interest as something in which the                     that the

nations were concerned is equally true, though           promise is

less attention has been paid to it. The dogma              cosmopolitan

which they inherited included the specification that

Yahaweh's purpose was not for Israel alone, but for

mankind.

          This appears significantly enough in the passages

cited above (Ps. lxxii. 17; Jer. iv. 1-2; Ps. xxi. 6a, marg.

of RV; Isa. lxv. 16), in which the Abrahamic promise of

blessing to the nations is connected with the destinies

of Israel and of the house of David.

          The cosmopolitan idea is elaborately wrought into

the services that followed the completion of Solomon's

temple. The fifth of the seven supplications                The share of

in the dedicatory prayer on that occasion is                the nations

as follows: --                                                             in the temple

 

          "And also concerning the foreigner, who is not of thy people

Israel, and shall come from a far land for the sake of thy name; for

they will hear of thy great name and thy strong hand and thy

 

254       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

stretched out arm, and will come in and pray toward this house; do

thou thyself hear in the heaven, thy prepared dwelling-place, and

do according to all which the foreigner shall call unto thee for, to

the end that all the peoples of the earth may know thy name, for

fearing thee as thy people Israel, and for knowing that thy name is

called upon this house which I have builded" (I Ki. viii. 41-43; cf.

2 Chron. vi. 32-33).

 

In verse 60 the plea is made: —

 

          "To the end that all the peoples of the earth may know that

Yahaweh is the God, there is none else."

 

This language is rendered the more significant by the

fact that the plea is in the following verse transformed

into a reason why Israel's heart should be perfect with

Yahaweh, to walk in his statutes. This is what Israel

is for, this extending of the knowledge and the fear of

Yahaweh to the nations. These dedicatory utterances

emphasize throughout the idea that Israel is Yahaweh's

peculiar people. A dozen excerpts to this effect might

be made, for example: —

 

          "For they are thy people and thine inheritance, whom thou didst

bring out of Egypt " (51).

 

The doctrine here taught is distinctly that which we

have found at all points in our investigation; namely,

that Israel, and centrally, Israel in the line of David, is

Yahaweh's chosen eternal channel of blessing to man-

kind. It is here taught that this is the divine plan, the

plea of the Israelite when he approaches Yahaweh in

prayer, his motive for fidelity to his God, his inspiration

for achievements, his hope in the midst of calamities.

          The interest of the nations in the temple is very

strikingly presented in the passage from Isaiah which

the gospels (Matt. xxi. 13; Mc. xi. 17; Lc. xix. 46) rep-

resent Jesus as citing: —

         

   THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS    255

 

          "Ho every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters." "And let

me make for you an eternal covenant, the assured lovingkindnesses

of David." "And let not the son of the foreigner who hath joined

himself unto Yahaweh say, Yahaweh hath utterly separated me from

his people." "And I will bring them in unto my holy mountain,

and will make them glad in my house of prayer, their burnt offerings

and their sacrifices will be for acceptance upon my altar; for my

house shall be called a house of prayer for all the peoples" (Isa. lv.

I, 3, lvi. 3, 7, and the whole context).

 

          This is in accord with what is said about the nations

going up to Jerusalem to worship at the feast of taber-

nacles (Zech. xiv. 16-21), and with other utterances

which represent the nations as coming to worship, or as

having the privileges of Yahaweh's people extended to

them.¹  In such utterances as these we have full proof

that the prophets, with those of their auditors who

were most in sympathy with them, were aware that the

 

            ¹ For example: —

            "All nations whom thou hast made shall come in that they may worship

before thee, 0 Lord, that they may do honor to thy name" (Ps. lxxxvi. 9).

"In that day shall Israel be a third country to Egypt and to Assyria, a

blessing in the midst of the earth; whom Yahaweh of hosts hath blessed,

saying, Blessed be my people Egypt, and Assyria the work of my hands,

and Israel my inheritance" (Isa. xix. 24-25)1.

            Cyrus is called "for Jacob my Servant's sake," but also "that they may

know from the rising of the sun and from the west that there is none be-

side me." In the same passage it is said that "in Yahaweh shall all the

seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory"; and this is balanced by "Look

unto me and be ye saved, all ye ends of the earth." "By myself have I

sworn . . . that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear."

"Even to him shall men come, and all that are incensed against him shall

be ashamed" (Isa. xlv. 4, 6, 25, 22, 23, 24).  Here we have very emphati-

cally the double truth that Israel is Yahaweh's own people and that Israel's

greatness is for "all the ends of the earth."

            In many other passages, in exceedingly varied phraseology, Israel is

represented as destined to judge the nation, to give torah to the nations,

to be the light of the nations, to accomplish other like offices (e.g. Isa. ii.

2-4, xlii. 1, 4, 6, xliii. 9, xlix. 6-7, lvi. 6, 8b). Specific instances in abun-

dance will come up for discussion in subsequent chapters.

 

256      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nations had a share in the benefits of the promise as it

was preached in Israel.

          3. Further, the preachers and poets of Israel do not

fail to recognize the eternal and irrevocable character of

The promise     the benefit promised. We have found the suc-

for eternity,      cessive narratives strongly characterized by

and irrevo-       this, and the characteristic runs through to

cable              the close of the Old Testament. In proof, one might

adduce most of the passages that have been cited in this

chapter, and very many others. The biblical writers

magnify the claim that the promise is for eternity. At

every date their language implies that the promise has

been fulfilled in the past, is in process of fulfilment in

the present, and is on the way to larger fulfilment in the

future.

          Notice a few instances taken at random, most of them

from passages already cited. The seed of David is to

reign eternally (I Chron. xxii. 10). The twenty-first psalm

is an exultation in the mouth of an Israelitish king, who

is represented as living and conferring blessings forever

(RV of 4 and 6 marg.). In the various passages based

on 2 Sam. vii, scores of instances might be gathered

where the eternity of the promise to David is spoken of.

In the eighty-ninth psalm, for example, the word olam

is six times thus used, and other expressions for eternity

still oftener. The comparisons with the sun and moon

and sky, as the most durable objects known to men, are

especially notable.¹

          In these writings, as in the narratives of the earlier

 

            ¹ "And I will place his seed for everlasting,

                And his throne as the days of heaven" (29).

            "His seed shall be forever,

               And his throne as the sun in my presence,

               As the moon that is made ready forever,

               And a witness that is faithful in the sky" (36-37).

 

THE PROMISE-DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS    257

 

times, stress is laid on the statement, many times re-

peated, that, although the interest of individuals in it is

conditioned on obedience, the promise itself is irrevoca-

ble, even for the sins of its beneficiaries. We have

already noted this in the eighty-ninth psalm: —

 

          "If his sons forsake my law,

          And go not in my judgments,

          If they profane my statutes,

          And keep not my commandments,

          Then will I visit their transgression with a rod,

          And their iniquity with stripes,

          And my lovingkindness I will not break off from with him" (30-33).

 

Other instances, a few out of many, may be found in

I Ki. xi. 36, 39; 2 Chron. xxi. 7; 2 Ki. xiii. 23; Isa.

liX. 20-21.

          4. Very notable in the presentation of this matter by

the prophets is the habit which they formed of looking

upon Israel as the people of the promise.

          In the circumstances such a habit was inevitable.

When one devotes much of his mental activity to some

one group of ideas, his ways of thinking and              Our objects

of expressing himself are affected thereby.                 of thought affect

In particular, religious people come to have                our forms of

their peculiar forms of thought, and their                              thought

consequent peculiar uses of language. We ourselves

ask in song: --

          "Are your windows open toward Jerusalem?"

 

We sing: —

          "The hill of Zion yields

             A thousand sacred sweets."

 

We say of one who has a happy way of uttering his

religious experiences, that he speaks the language of

Canaan. A member of a local congregation speaks of

a revival there as "God's blessing upon our Israel."

 

258     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          In particular, we, whose religion comes by ancestral

descent from the Old Testament, use the proper name

Israel with wide variations of meaning. By it we mean,

sometimes the Israelitish race; sometimes their ancient

political organization; sometimes their country; some-

times their religious organization; sometimes the spir-

itually minded among them; sometimes the religious or

social forces which they embody; sometimes the Chris-

tian church; sometimes the true church within the

visible church; sometimes the spiritual forces of Chris-

tianity; sometimes a local congregation; with a long list

of other possible variations. In any of these meanings

we apply the term sometimes to the whole indicated by

it, and sometimes to any part. And all this variety

indicates, not that we employ the term unintelligently,

but rather that we treat it as a term widely used and

familiar. Our minds herein simply follow certain natu-

ral laws of human thinking.

          These same natural laws of thinking were in oper-

ation in millenniums past as now. In the Old Tes-

The same         tament teaching of messianic doctrine there

law in the         is this same assumption that the principal

thinking                    terms used are so familiar that they will be

of the               intelligible through a wide range of variation

prophets          of meaning. For example, the human channel

through which the blessing is conveyed is sometimes spoken of

as the person Abraham; sometimes as the person Jacob

or Israel; sometimes as the person David; sometimes

as the progeny of Abraham and Israel taken collec-

tively; sometimes as the line of David's descendants;

sometimes as any one person in that line; sometimes

as Israel enlarged by the promised ingathering of the

nations; sometimes as the aggregate of the true be-

lievers within Israel; and not seldom in terms that may

 

THE PROMISE—DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS     259

 

be applied to a coming Person of the stock of Israel and

of David. These writers count the promise to Abraham

as germinal. They find its unfolding in the history of

Israel and of the nations. In this unfolding it comes

perpetually into new historical relations. New portions

of its meaning are constantly opening to the light.

Some of the assertions they make concerning it apply

equally to its whole extent or to any part of it, while

others apply only to the particular part that is under

consideration at the moment. Certain statements are

true alike of Israel, of any true Israelite, of a personal

Messiah, of the church universal, of any believer; while

other statements are more restricted in their application.

          There is one conception which existed in the minds

of the prophets, which we need to recognize with espe-

cial distinctness, because of its importance in             Israel as the

the understanding of their utterances. They                 people of the

habitually thought of Israel as not merely the              promise

population of their fatherland, but as Yahaweh's promise-

people; not merely from the point of view of patriotism,

but from that of religious doctrine. This fact is evident,

however it may have been overlooked. And the distinc-

tion is vital.

          The mother of a certain distinguished man is said to

have been a woman of remarkable insight. The man

had an unpromising boyhood; but through all the

stupidity and wickedness of it, the mother recognized

the potentialities of greatness and goodness, and was

able to guide her son to their ultimate realization. All

the while she had in her thought two sons, — the actual,

unregenerate youth that he was, and the ideal person

who had in him the making of what she meant that

he should come to be. So to the prophet, the existing

ethnical aggregate known as Israel was, in reality, two

 

260     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Israels. Israel looked at in his actual faultiness was

one entity, while Israel as the embodiment of Yahaweh's

promise was a different entity.

          This is nowhere more marked than in the passages

that use personal terms concerning future manifestations

of the promise. Some of these passages we shall, later,

consider more in detail. For the present we only note

that while they sometimes speak of the Coming one as

the chief product of Yahaweh's dealings with Israel,

they quite as often make him to be Israel himself.

Oftenest they use language which explicitly designates

Israel as a race or people or nation. But in such utter-

ances they always refer to Israel in his especial character

of the nation of the promise. Israel, when thought of

as representing Yahaweh's promise, is always glorious,

no matter how inglorious he may be in himself.

          It is not only true that the prophets have this concep-

tion of the promise-Israel, but that in virtue of this con-

ception they make the existing Israel a witness against

himself, and a teacher to himself. As we have seen,

the great bulk of messianic prophecy is not the mere

foretelling of facts, but the preaching of religious doc-

trine for the securing of public and private conversion

and growth in grace. The prophets regard the promise

as made for the sake of the nations, and Israel as God's

peculiar people for the manifestation of the divine 1ov-

ingkindness to the world. Because Israel is thus the

divinely appointed hope of mankind; because Israel's

monarch is Yahaweh's anointed Servant, in a kingdom

that is to be universal and eternal; because this, while

already true, is to become more grandly true in the

future; Israel is exhorted to turn from idols, to purify

himself, to repent, to take comfort in the midst of

affliction; in short, to act as becomes the people whom

 

 

THE PROMISE—DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS      261

 

God has made the channel of his grace. In other

words, the existing Israel is exhorted to conform himself

to the ideal Israel as defined by the conditions of the

promise.

          5. It could not escape the notice of the prophets that

the various calamities which befell Israel had their con-

nection with his mission as the people of the Mediatorial

promise. Though he is for a blessing to the suffering

nations, the nations bring suffering upon him. He can-

not escape by becoming annihilated, for his mission is

eternal. He must be preserved in existence and made

to suffer, that the nations may be benefited. In same

of the prophetic writings this idea of suffering for the

benefit of others becomes very prominent (e.g. Pss. xxii,

xl; Isa. liii). This point needs to be mentioned here

it will be more fully discussed in our study concerning

the Servant, in the next chapter.

          This chapter has been prepared from the critical

point of view which assumes that the several Old

Testament books were written at the dates critical

assigned to them in the Old Testament itself questions

From this point of view the doctrine taught by the

prophets presents an orderly unfolding and progress

from David to Malachi, though the main points in

it are the same throughout. From a different point

of view, the unfolding and the progress would look

differently, and there would be modifications in many

of the details. In particular, the criticism, that puts

over more and more of the writings into the postexilian

times would transfer a large part of the messianic

utterances to those times; and that would change their

setting, and to some extent their meaning. But I think

that the results would not be greatly changed so far as

the main points are concerned, provided we allow the

 

262      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

utterances of the biblical writers to mean what by their

words they naturally mean. A vast number of questions

have arisen as to the date and the authorship of these

writings; but whatever their date or origin, they cer-

tainly contain these strains of thought concerning the

promise and the mission of Israel.

 

 

 

                              CHAPTER XII

 

 

            MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT

 

 

          As we have seen, the prophetic literature says that

the calling of Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees was

the beginning of Israelitish history. At that time, these

writings say, Yahaweh made a promise to Abraham, the

benefits of which extend to all mankind. This promise

was the heart of the creed of what the prophets regard

as the true religion of Yahaweh in Abraham's time.

This literature further affirms that the promise was re-

newed to Israel when Israel became a nation, still with

the necessary implication that it constituted the heart

of the creed of those who most truly worshipped Israel's

God. There was another distinguished renewal of

it, these writings say, to David the king, making his

line central in Israel in the fulfilment of the promise.

In David's time and the centuries that followed, they

say, there arose in Israel a large number of singers and

other prophets, and these generally made this promise,

already well known, the basis of their religious and

political teachings; and in doing this they unfolded and

illuminated the promise itself.

          Now if this is true, we should expect to find in the

writings of these singers and other prophets a consider-

able number of technical terms, set apart to                Rise of tech-

the uses of this teaching. The evolution of                  nical terms

such terms would in the circumstances be inevitable,

under the known laws of human speech. Similar phe-

 

                                        263

 

264       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nomena mark our own habits of thinking and utterance.

A dictionary which should include all our technical reli-

gious terms and phrases, with an exhaustive classifica-

tion of the uses of each term, would be a large volume.

It is incredible that the teaching of the prophets con-

cerning the promise should have been maintained gener-

ation after generation without giving rise to such terms.

As a matter of fact, the literature is marked by them.

In the course of time certain words came to have a

partly technical sense when used in the treatments of the

promise-doctrine. Especially do we find personal terms

denoting the "seed" through whom the promise and its

benefits are transmitted, — for example, Servant, Son,

Chosen one, Branch, Holy one, Messiah; and other

terms denoting his relations to human history, — for

example, the kingdom, the last days, the day of Yaha-

weh. In most instances the roots of this use are pre-

Davidic. There is a strong development of it in the

Psalms that are assigned to the times of David. The

use remains to the close of the Old Testament.

          Taking up these terms in the order of their conspicu-

ousness, we should perhaps expect that "Messiah"

"Servant" is      would come first; but that is not the case.

the most con-    On the whole, the term "Servant" is the most

spicuous          prominent and is the best fitted to stand as a

term               representative of the rest in any brief statement of

the matter. In the King James version this term is occult in

the New Testament, but it appears in the revised version.¹

Aside from its use elsewhere in the Old Testament, it

 

            ¹ For example, Peter says: "Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of

the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham,

And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed. Unto you

first God, having raised up his Servant, sent him to bless you" (Acts iii.

25-26. See also iii. 13, iv. 27, 30, etc.).

      MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT           265

 

characterizes the last twenty-seven chapters of Isaiah,

and in our consideration of it we will mainly confine our-

selves to these chapters. They are more cited in the

New Testament as messianic than any other scriptures

except those that contain the promises to Abraham and

to David.¹  I should say that there is no room for dis-

pute over the use of the term "Servant" in these

chapters were it not for the fact that it is actually very

much in dispute. Owing to this we shall have to make

a study of the term, though necessarily an incomplete

one.

          I. We shall simplify the study if we begin with two

auxiliary points.

          I. First, the author of these chapters of Isaiah, being

a Hebrew-speaking person, follows the Hebrew idiom

when he applies a personal name to a nation.             National per-

That is, he thinks of the nation as a person-                sonality in

ality rather than as personified. In English                  Hebrew

we think of a business corporation as an artificial per-

son, created by law. There is a Hebrew conception of a

nation that is as personal as our idea of a corporation.

          We personify a country in the feminine. We say

America expects her sons to be loyal. The Hebrew

 

            ^l As the word "servant" is one of the words most frequently used in the

Hebrew literature, we cannot always easily differentiate its technical use,

that is, its use as a messianic term. It is used untechnically of the patri-

archs and of Moses, Caleb, Samson, David, and others (see concordance).

In the later prophetic books the word "servant" is used in the singular of

such men as Moses and Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar, and in the plural of

the prophets. But these facts do not disturb the fact of the technical use.

Something like the technical use occurs in personal references to David

and to the patriarchs (e.g. Acts iii. 26 RV, perhaps Gen. xxvi. 24, and con-

cordance of both Testaments). It is used of Israel and of the house of

David in other prophetic writings than the last twenty-seven chapters of

Isaiah (e.g. Jer. xxx. to, xxviii. 21, 22, 26, xlvi. 27, 28; Ezek. xxviii. 25,

xxxiv. 23, 24, xxxvii. 24, 25, 25; Hag. ii. 23; Zech. iii. 8).

266    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

does the same. Our prophet might speak of Judah as

expecting the return of her sons. In mentioning na-

tional characteristics, we speak of a typical individual.

We say, The Spaniard is proud, or, The German is plod-

ding. The Hebrew uses the same form of expression,

but rather with the conception of a national personality

than of an individual typifying a nation. In Hebrew

one would say, in the masculine singular, the Canaanite,

or, the Moabite, meaning thereby the collective body

of the Canaanites or Moabites, speaking of them as if

they constituted a single person.

          But the Hebrew carries this a step farther. In

Hebrew one speaks of a nation precisely as of a person,

using the name itself, and not merely its gentile adjec-

tive. When one says Asshur or Mitsrayim, you have to

look at the context to see whether he means the founder

or the country or the nation or the persons who com-

pose the nation. If the agreeing words are feminine

singular, he means the country. If they are masculine

plural, he means the persons who compose the nation.

If they are masculine singular, he may mean either the

founder or the nation. He talks of the nation as a per-

son precisely as he talks of the founder as a person.

          This point in Hebrew diction is important in the study

of these twenty-seven chapters. Through inattention to

it, wrong inferences have been drawn from the strongly

personal way in which these chapters speak of "the

servant of Yahaweh."

          2. Second, these chapters are saturated with the ideas

and the diction of Genesis and of the other parts of the

Old Testament where the promise-doctrine is taught.

          They are familiar with the creation story, using the

word "create" twenty times, about as many as all the

rest of the Old Testament together, leaving out the nar-

 

      MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT           267

 

ratives in Genesis. They make much of Abraham (xli.

8, li. 2, lxiii. 16). They magnify the covenant (xlii. 6,

xlix. 8, liv. l0, lv. 3, lvi. 4, 6, lix. 21, lxi. 8).

          They refer repeatedly to the incidents of the exodus:

the crossing of the sea, the passage through the wilder-

ness, the water from the rock, Yahaweh's Spirit with

Moses, and the like. They lay stress upon Yahaweh's

choosing of Israel.¹

          While Abraham and Israel are thus to the front in

these chapters, David is not neglected. Mention is

made of "the sure mercies of David" (lv. 3). The prom-

ise to David, —

 

          "There shall not be cut off to thee a man from upon the throne

of Israel" (1 Ki. ii. 4, viii. 25, ix. 5),

 

finds its echo in the passages that speak of the everlast-

ing name that shall not be cut off (xlviii. 19, lv. 13,

lvi. 5).

          Just as the pentateuch and 2 Samuel emphasize the

thought of the "seed" of Abraham, of Jacob, of David,

so the second part of Isaiah emphasizes the same term.²

 

            ¹ "Jacob whom I have chosen;" "I have chosen thee, and not cast

thee off;" "my Servant whom I have chosen;" "Israel whom I have

chosen;" "Jeshurun whom I have chosen;" "I chose thee in the furnace

of affliction;" "my Chosen one in whom my soul delighteth;" "to give

drink to my people, my Chosen one;" "and Israel my Chosen one" (xli.

8, 9, xliii. 10, xliv. 1, 2, xlviii. 10, xlii. 1, xliii. 20, xlv. 4). In the later

chapters, where the word "servants" is used in the plural, we also find

this other word used in the plural: "My chosen ones shall inherit it;"

"for an oath for my chosen ones;" "my chosen ones shall long enjoy"

(lxv. 9, 15, 22).

            ² "Seed of Abraham my Friend" (xli. 8).

            "I will bring thy seed from the east" (xliii. 5).

            "I will pour out my Spirit upon thy seed" (xliv. 3).

            "I have not said in vain to Jacob's seed, Seek ye me" (xlv. 19).

            "In Yahaweh all the seed of Israel shall be righteous, and shall glory

for themselves" (xlv. 25).

268       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          The second part of Isaiah, like the other writings that

emphasize the promise, lays especial stress on the point

that the promise is to be eternally operative. To say

nothing of other phraseology in which eternity is men-

tioned (e.g. xlv. 17, liv. 8-9, lxv. 18, 22), the word olam

occurs thirty-four times in these chapters.¹

          These chapters, like the other scriptures that treat of

the promise, make much of the fact that the promise is

for the nations. The word "nation" occurs thirty-six

times in these twenty-seven chapters.²

 

            "Thy seed also had been as the sand" (xlviii. 19).

            "He shall see seed " (liii. 10).

            "And thy seed shall possess nations" (liv. 3).

            "The seed of the adulterer." "A seed of falsehood" (lvii. 3, 4).

            "Out of the mouth of thy seed, or . . . of thy seed's seed" (lix. 21).

            "And their seed shall be known among the nations . . . for they are a

seed that Yahaweh hath blessed" (lxi. 9).

            "And I will bring out from Jacob a seed" (lxv. 9).

            "For they are a seed of those blessed of Yahaweh" (lxv. 23).

            "For as the new heavens . . . stand before me . . . so shall your seed

and your name stand" (lxvi. 22).

            ¹ For example, the following: —

            "The word of our God shall stand to eternity" (xl. 8).

            "Israel hath been saved in Yahaweh a salvation of eternities; ye shall

not he ashamed and shall not be confounded unto eternities of endless-

ness" (xlv. 17).

            "While my salvation is to eternity; and my righteousness shall not go

to pieces" (li. 6).

            "In an outpouring of wrath I hid my face an instant from thee; and in

lovingkindness of eternity I have compassion upon thee" (liv. 8).

            "Yahaweh to thee a light of eternity" (lx. 19, 20).

            "Inherit the land to eternity" (lx. 21).

            "A covenant of eternity" (1v. 3, lxi. 8).

            "Joy of eternity" (li. 11, lxi. 7).

            “For a sign of eternity" (lv. 13).

            "A name of eternity" (lvi. 5).

            "For an excellency of eternity" (lx. i5).

            ² The Servant shall "bring out judgment to the nations" (xlii. I).

            He shall be "for a light of the nations" (xlii. 6, xlix. 6).

            He shall "startle many nations" (lii. i5).

 

    MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT          269

 

          In Exodus xix we are told that Israel was to be "a

kingdom of priests," thus sustaining a peculiar relation

to Yahaweh, the owner of all the earth. This priestly

character of Israel as compared with the other nations

appears in the last chapters of Isaiah.¹

          And in many other matters of detail these chapters

are full of the promise made by Yahaweh to the nations

through Abraham and Israel and David. The one

supreme, ever recurring idea is that Israel, however

unworthy he may be, or however desperate his con-

dition, is nevertheless Yahaweh's Chosen one, chosen

for a purpose, a purpose that will surely be accom-

plished.

 

            "In the eyes of all the nations" (lii. to).

            "Thy seed shall inherit the nations" (liv. 3).

            "Behold thou shalt call a nation thou knowest not; and a nation that

have not known thee shall run unto thee" (lv. 5).

            "And nations shall come to thy light" (lx. 3).

            "A power of nations shall come in to thee" (lx. 5).

            "To bring in unto thee a power of nations" (lx. ii).

            "For the nation or kingdom that serveth thee not shall perish, the

nations being utterly brought to waste" (lx. 12).

            "Suck the milk of the nations" (lx. 16).

            "Giveth nations before him, and maketh him subdue kings" (xli. 2).

            ¹ "And strangers shall stand in waiting,

                        and shall shepherd your flock,

            Sons of a foreigner being

                        your husbandmen and your vineyardmen;

            While ye yourselves shall be called

                        the priests of Yahaweh.

            ‘The ministers of our God!’

                        shall be said to you" (lxi. 5-6).

            "A robe of righteousness hath he made me wear,

               as when the bridegroom acteth the priest, garlanded" (lxi. 10).

                        "And they will bring in all your brethren

                                    out of all the nations" (lxvi. 20).

                        "And I will also take of them for the priests,

                                    for the Levites, saith Yahaweh" (lxvi. 21).

270     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          II. From the point of view thus gained we approach

the main question, the question of the use of the term

"Servant" in these chapters.

          With all the differences of opinion that exist, I sup-

pose that the following statements of fact would be ac-

Outline           cepted by all who have studied the subject.

statement         The word "servant" occurs 20 times in the

first 14 of these 27 chapters, always in the singular num-

ber, and 11 times in the last 13 of the chapters, always

in the plural. In but one of these 31 places is it used as

an ordinary common noun.^l  In 12 of the 20 instances

in which it is used in the singular it is defined in the con-

text as denoting Israel. In all the cases in which it is

used in the plural it denotes Israelites, though in some

of the cases those who are Israelites by adoption (e.g.

lvi. 6).

          I. From this general survey we turn to details. We

look first at instances in which the Servant is expressly

said to be Israel,

          (a) The twelve instances occur in the following eight

passages:--

          "And thou Israel my Servant,

              Jacob whom I have chosen,

              seed of Abraham my friend!

          Whom I firmly laid hold of from the ends of the earth,

              and called from the distant parts of it,

          And to whom I said, Thou art my Servant,

              I have chosen thee, and have not cast thee off;

          Fear not, for I am with thee!

              be not dismayed, for I am thy God!" (xli. 8-10).

 

            ¹ "Servant of rulers" (xlix. 7). But even this is hardly an exception,

for the meaning is determined by the implied contrast of "servant of

rulers" with "Servant of Yahaweh." The instances in xliv. 26 and 1. 10

are not exceptions, even if any one thinks that the Servant in these verses

is the prophet.

 MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT                 271

 

          "And now hear thou, Jacob my Servant,

               even Israel whom I have chosen:

          Thus saith Yahaweh thy maker,

               even thy fashioner from the womb, who helpeth thee,

          Fear thou not, my Servant Jacob,

               even Jeshurun whom I have chosen.

          For I will pour water upon a thirsty [field],

               and streams upon dry land;

          I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed,

               and my blessing upon thy offspring" (xliv. 1-3).

 

          "Remember these things, 0 Jacob,

               and Israel, for thou art my Servant.

          I fashioned thee, Servant to me thou art,

               thou, Israel, wilt not be forgotten of me" (xliv. 21).

 

          "For the sake of my Servant Jacob,

               and Israel my Chosen one,

          I have called thee by thy name,

               I surname thee though thou hast not known me" (xlv. 4).

 

This is spoken to Cyrus, who is in the context called

Yahaweh's "anointed," but is distinguished from the

Servant.

          "Yahaweh hath redeemed his Servant Jacob" (xlviii. 20).

          "And he said to me, Thou art my Servant,

            0 Israel, in whom I glorify myself" (xlix. 3).

 

          In the instances thus far cited the defining context is

separated from the word "Servant" by only a few clauses

at most; in the two following instances the defining con-

text is a little more remote, but it is unmistakable.

 

          "Hear, ye that are deaf,

               and look, ye blind, that ye may see!

          Who is blind as my Servant,

               and deaf as my Messenger whom I am wont to send?

          Who is blind as the Perfected one,

               and blind as the Servant of Yahaweh?" (xlii. 18-19).

272     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          "Let them give their witnesses, that they may be justified,

                    that men may hear and may say, Truth.

          Yourselves are my witnesses, saith Yahaweh,

                    and my Servant whom I have chosen,

          To the end that ye may know, and may believe me,

                    and may discern that I am he" (xliii. 9-10).

 

          (b) To appreciate the full force of these instances one

needs to read carefully the whole context. Israel is in

The in-            deep trouble. The purpose of the poem is

stances           to bring consolation (xl. I), and thereby to

should be         awaken courage and conscience and aspira-

studied in        tion in Israel. To this end, the formally

their context     stated subject of the poem is "The Word of Our

God Standeth Forever" (xl. 8). The poet's thought is that

Yahaweh has made utterances concerning Israel, and

that these will not fail. In his estimation this fact

overbalances all possible discouraging facts. This one

comforting fact he urges and illustrates, with wonderful

fertility of resource and variety of treatment, in every

sentence of the entire poem. The Servant passages are

those in which the poet is especially felicitous in pre-

senting his thought. Many scholars regard some of

them as lyrical excerpts, but their meaning does not

depend upon this. Read again the instances, and see

how this meaning stands out in them. Israel is pre-

sented as blind and deaf and disheartened and obstinate

and abused, but he is nevertheless Yahaweh's Chosen,

the "seed of my friend Abraham," Yahaweh's dear

little Jeshurun, his Messenger, his Meshullam the

complete, his Called one, and above all his Servant.

Yahaweh has brought him with firm grasp from the

ends of the earth, and called him, and made him

promises, and said encouraging words to him, and

redeemed him; is his maker and his helper; will not

    MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT        273

 

cast him off or forget him; gives him the Spirit, glori-

fies himself in him, manages such world movements as

that of Cyrus in his interest. All this the poet brings

in for the consolation of Israel, as a part of the riches

included in his great theme, "The word of our God

standeth forever."

          We fail, however, of rightly understanding this, if

we neglect to notice that the poet is here looking at

Israel from the point of view of the promise.              The point of

In the last chapter our attention was called                 view of the

to the prophetic habit of observing things                   promise

from this point of view. This is an important matter,

and one that has been too much neglected. Neither

in the instances just cited nor elsewhere in these twenty-

seven chapters is the term "Servant" ever applied to

Israel considered merely as an ethnical aggregation of

persons. It implies, indeed, that Israel is an ethnical

aggregation, but also that he is something more.

When the prophet uses the term, he is invariably

thinking of Israel as Yahaweh's own people. We have

already seen that these chapters are saturated with the

idea—the same idea that appears in the pentateuch

and in 2 Samuel—that Yahaweh has made an eternally

operative covenant with Abraham, Israel, David, in

virtue of which he will bless all nations through them.

It is in this character of promise-people, covenant-peo-

ple, that the chapters speak of Israel as the Servant,

not in the character of a mere political aggregation.¹

          This distinction is not in all respects new. Paul long

ago wrote: —

          "For they are not all Israel which are of Israel; neither, because

they are Abraham's seed, are they all children; but, In Isaac shall

 

            ¹ This might be illustrated at length from the cases of peculiar phrase-

ology with which these chapters abound. Take, for example, the verb paar

274         THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

thy seed be called." "It is not the children of the flesh that are

children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned for a

seed" (Rom. ix. 6-8).

 

          As interpretations of Paul's word, we are familiar with

such phrases as "the Israel within Israel," "the ideal

Israel," "the spiritual Israel." Whatever phrase you

use for it, the distinction is genuine. I think that the

best of these phrases is "the Israel of the promise," or,

"Israel regarded as the promise-people." This corre-

sponds most closely to the facts, and to the phraseology

of the Old Testament, and to Paul's term "the children

of the promise."

          Israel the Servant is therefore Israel regarded as the

promise; people, Israel regarded as Yahaweh's Chosen

one. From one point of view he is identical with the

political aggregation known as Israel, while from other

points of view he is something entirely different. It

should not surprise us if we find Israel the Servant and

Israel the political aggregation sometimes spoken of as

two, or even as having relations one with the other.

 

in the Piel or Hithpael. It occurs eight times in Isaiah 11, and six times

in all in Ezra, Deuteronomy, Psalm cxlix, Exodus, Judges, and Isaiah x.

            "And to the Holy one of Israel, for he hath glorified thee" (1v. 5, lx. 9).

                        "To glorify the place of my sanctuary" (lx. 13).

                        "I will glorify the house of my glory " (lx. 7).

                        "And glorifieth himself in Israel " (xliv. 23).

                        "0 Israel in whom I glorify myself " (xlix. 3).

                                    "Thy people, being all of them righteous,

                                                shall possess earth forever,

                                    The flower of my planting,

                                                the deed of my hands for glorifying myself" (lx. 21).

                        . . . "glory instead of ashes . . .

                        And they shall be called, The trees of righteousness,

                                    the planting of Yahaweh for glorifying himself " (lxi. 3).

            Obviously it is not Israel as a mere mass of persons in whom the prophet

            is interested; but Israel as the one whom Yahaweh glorifies because of a

            certain relation of identity with himself which he has established.

        MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT          275

 

          2. We turn to a second class of passages, those in

which the word "servant" is used or implied without an

explicit contextual identification with Israel.

          At the outset we may lay aside all anxiety as to the

bearings of these passages on the claims of the New

Testament. If the passages represent the Servant to

be a person different from Israel, then the New Testa-

ment claims that what is said concerning that person is

fulfilled in Jesus. If on the other hand we find that the

Servant, in these passages, is still Israel, we shall also

find that the New Testament claim is that Jesus Christ

is Israel the Servant in his highest manifestation. In

either case the passages are messianic, and in either

case the New Testament claims that they are fulfilled

in Jesus the Messiah.

          (a) Study first a group of two passages. The first

consists of the lines that introduce the mention of Cyrus

(xliv. 25-26).

 

          "He breaketh impostors' signs,

                    and maketh diviners mad.

          He maketh wise men return backward.

                    and maketh their knowledge folly.

          He raiseth up the word of his Servant,

                    and fully performeth the counsel of his messengers.

          “That saith to Jerusalem, She shall be made to abide;

                    and to the cities of Judah, They shall be builded;

                    and, Her ruinous places I will rear up."

 

          At a superficial glance it is natural to say that "the

word of his servant," here placed parallel with "the

counsel of his messengers," must of course be the word

uttered by the prophet, the prophet being here the ser-

vant. This will afford a passable interpretation of the

whole passage. But it is not a necessary interpretation.

It is possible to regard the genitive as objective, so that

276        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

"the word of his Servant" will be Yahaweh's word con-

cerning his Servant. This makes good parallelism with

"the counsel of his messengers," for Yahaweh's word

concerning his Servant is an important part of his coun-

sel as transmitted through his prophetic messengers.

So far, therefore, as parallelism and syntax are con-

cerned, we may translate —

 

"He establisheth his word concerning his Servant,

    and fully performeth the counsel announced by his messengers."

 

This is clearly the meaning that best fits the logical and

poetic requirements of the whole context. The writer

uses the word "Servant" here in the same sense in which

we have found him using it elsewhere.¹

          The same peculiarities appear in the remaining in-

stance.

          "Who is there among you fearing Yahaweh,

                    hearkening to the voice of his Servant,

          That hath gone in darknesses,

                    there being no brightness for him?

          Let him trust in the name of Yahaweh,

                    that he may stay himself in his God" (1. 10).

 

We have here again the objective genitive. "The voice

of his Servant" is the voice concerning his Servant, the

word "voice" being used as in Isa. xl. 3, 6. Cheyne is

correct in regarding the preceding verses as spoken by

the Servant, and is therefore wrong in thinking that

there is here an arbitrary break, and that the tenth verse

is perhaps spoken by the prophet in his own person.

          (b) Taking the passages in the order of the obvious-

ness of their meaning, we notice next those in which the

word "servant" is used in the plural.

 

            ¹ Some have held that the Servant is here the prophet, but the prophet

as the representative of the true Israel, who is properly the Servant. This

gives in part the same result as the interpretation I have proposed, but it

seems to me less feasible.

      MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT          277

 

          We have already touched the fact that this word

occurs only in the singular in these chapters up to the

fifty-third, and only in the plural from the                   The plural

fifty-fourth onward. Of course scholars who               instances not

regard the later chapters as written at a dif-                irrelevant

ferent period from the earlier, and from a different view-

point, will count these plural instances as irrelevant;

but at all events they will not prejudice the argument.

The instances are as follows. Observe that in each

case the servants are Israelites either by birth or by

adoption.

          "Return thou for the sake of thy servants,

                    the tribes of thine inheritance" (lxiii. 17).

 

          “And the sons of the foreigner that join themselves

                    upon Yahaweh, to minister to him,

          And to love the name of Yahaweh,

                    to be to him for servants" (lvi. 6).

 

          "So will I do for the sake of my servants,

                    in order not to destroy the whole;

          And I will bring out from Jacob a seed,

                    and from Judah one possessing my mountains,

          That my chosen ones may possess it,

                    while my servants have their dwelling there.

                    *        *        *        *        *        *

          And you, ye forsakers of Yahaweh,

                    those forgetting my holy mountain,

          *        *        *        *        *        *

          Behold my servants shall eat,

                    and ye shall be hungry;

          Behold my servants shall drink,

                    and ye shall be thirsty;

          Behold my servants shall be glad,

                    and ye shall be ashamed;

          Behold my servants shall sing aloud

                    from gladness of heart,

          And ye for your part shall cry out

                    from sorrow of heart,

278        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          And from breaking of spirit ye shall wail.

          And ye shall deposit your name

                    for an oath to my chosen ones;

          And the Lord Yahaweh will slay thee,

                    and will call his servants by another name'' (lxv. 8-15).

 

The two remaining instances are like the others, though

less marked.

          "This is the heritage of the servants of Yahaweh,

                    their righteousness being from with me,

                    saith Yahaweh" (liv. 17).

          "And Yahaweh's hand with his servants shall be known,

                    and he will spurn his enemies" (lxvi. 14).

 

          Whatever one may hold as to the unity of the twenty-

seven chapters, it is clear, at least, that the "servants"

mentioned in the later chapters are the individual

Israelites who compose Israel the Servant as mentioned

in the earlier chapters. They are Israelites, either

native or adopted, regarded as sharing in the promise,

and not merely Israelites in an ethnical sense.

          This is in itself an indication that the later chapters

are a part of the same unit with the earlier. This unity

is disputed, but really there is no room for dispute.

The twenty-seven chapters, however they originated, are

a single poem. They are so, whether they became so

by processes of original composition or by combining

processes. The action of the poem is homiletic rather

than dramatic or epic. In point of sublimity of thought

and strength of conception, the climacteric passages are

in the earlier or middle sections; but in point of practi-

cal urgency, pressure upon the conscience of individuals,

the poem grows more and more intense to the end.

Having aroused the thought and the imagination of his

audience by his picturing of the lofty character and mis-

sion of Israel as the Servant, the poet treats each Israel-

      MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT             279

 

ite as himself a servant, and presses home upon him his

failings and his obligations.

          In this second group of instances, therefore, the ser-

vants are Israelites, regarded as the persons in whom

the promise stands firm. This is not quite the same as

to say that they are the faithful in Israel, though per-

haps the difference after all is not very great.

          (c) We will take next the instances in which the Ser-

vant is presented as speaking in the first person. In

these instances it is quite generally true that the Servant

is differentiated from the actually existing Israel, and is

represented as having a mission to Israel. The most

distinct instance is that in the forty-ninth chapter (1-7).

 

"Hearken ye coastlands unto me,

          and be attentive ye peoples from afar.

He that called me from the belly is Yahaweh;

          from the bowels of my mother he made mention of my name.

And he placed my mouth as a sharp sword,

          in the shadow of his hand he hid me,

And he placed me as a polished arrow,

          in his quiver he concealed me.

And he said to me, Thou art my Servant,

          thou, Israel, in whom I glorify myself.

 

"And I, I said, Vainly have I toiled,

          for nought and vanity have I used up my strength.

Verily, my judgment is with Yahaweh,

          and that which I have wrought is with my God.

And now [be ye attentive]: Yahaweh hath said

          he that formed me from the womb for a Servant to him,

For bringing back Jacob unto him,

          and that Israel may be gathered to him,

So that I might be honored in the eyes of Yahaweh,

          my God being my strength

He hath said, It is too light a thing,

          thy being Servant to me

To raise up the tribes of Jacob,

          and to restore the preserved of Israel;

280        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

And I will give thee for a light of nations,

          that my salvation may be unto the end of the earth.

"Thus saith Yahaweh,

          Israel's redeemer, his holy one,

To one despised of soul, to one abhorred

          of a nation, to a slave of tyrants:

Kings shall see and arise,

          captains, and they shall worship,

For the sake of Yahaweh who is faithful,

          the Holy One of Israel who hath chosen thee."

 

          In the beginning of this passage Israel is the Servant.

Farther on the Servant has a mission to Israel. The

Servant is to be honored for bringing back Jacob and

gathering Israel to Yahaweh. What he is Servant for

is in part the raising up of the tribes, and the restoring

of such Israelites as have been preserved.

          Who is this Servant that has a mission to Israel? Is

he the same who has just been called Israel? Verbally

Israel             he is presented as different from Israel, and

thought of        as a person doing personal acts rather than

as having a       as a personification.          Does this prove that

mission to        he cannot possibly be Israel? Who is he?

himself           Is he a new character introduced here without

warning? or is he the Israel of the promise, differentiated in

thought from the merely ethnical Israel, and conceived

of as having relations with him?

          The second of these alternatives is the true one.

Israel is here represented as having relations with him-

self. There is nothing strained in this way of stating

things. Even those who do not accept it must at least

admit that it is free from absurdity. The American

church has duties to its own membership. The French

nation has obligations to its own citizens. We can

easily imagine Mr. Booker T. Washington or Professor

DuBois or some other colored citizen of the United

 MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT           281

 

States as saying to his compatriots that the African

race in America has its work not for negroes and mu-

lattoes merely, but for men of all races everywhere. In

each of these cases the church or the nation or the

race, when conceived of as a divine agency, has a mis-

sion to the persons who compose it, as well as to others.

So Israel the Servant may be conceived of as having a

mission to Israel the aggregation of persons.¹

          This one clear instance in which the Servant is intro-

duced as speaking in the first person, and as having a

mission to Israel, though also he himself is                Other

Israel, may serve to interpret four other in-                 instances

stances, and may in turn be interpreted by them. In

these four other instances the word "Servant" is not

used; but a character, not Yahaweh, is introduced speak-

ing in the first person.² In each of them the speaker

is in commission from Yahaweh. One of them is

 

            ¹ Some say that the Servant who is here mentioned as having relations

with Israel is the prophet speaking in his own person, or is some typical

Israelite. This is not so different from the view I have given as one might

at first think. When the prophet thinks of Israel the chosen people as

differentiated from the political Israel, he of course identifies himself and

men of like spirit with Israel the chosen people. It would not be surpris-

ing if he should sometimes speak of himself or some other representative

Israelite as typically the Servant. But any interpretation is untenable that

does not directly or indirectly identify the Servant of the fifth and sixth

verses with the Israel-Servant of the third verse.

            ² One of these instances is the sixty-first chapter, read by Jesus in the

synagogue of Nazareth, with the comment: "To-day bath this scripture

been fulfilled in your ears"  (Lc. iv. 16-21), the section that begins:

            "The Spirit of the Lord Yahaweh is upon me;

            Because Yahaweh hath anointed me

                        to bring good tidings to the meek.

            He hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,

            To proclaim liberty to captives,

                        and recovery of senses to the imprisoned" (cf. ver. 10).

Cheyne regards this as a soliloquy of the Servant. The section in its whole

282     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

very brief; in each of the others the speaker identifies

himself with Israel, but may be differentiated from

Israel. In each it is plausible to say that the speaker

is the personified Israel of the promise, as in the forty-

ninth chapter.

          (d) One group more remains. It consists of three

instances, in two passages which are very prominently

quoted in the New Testament.

          The first is found in Isa. xlii. 1-4.

 

          "Behold my Servant whom I uphold,

                    my Chosen one in whom my soul delighteth.

          I have given my Spirit upon him,

                    he will bring out judgment to the nations.

 

          "He maketh no outcry, nor lifteth up

                    nor publisheth his voice in the street.

          A bruised reed he breaketh not,

                    and a flickering wick he quencheth not.

 

extent is an address to Israel rather than a soliloquy, but the suggestion

that it is uttered by the Servant is natural and plausible.

            The instance in Isa. 1. 4-9 is briefer, but is almost equally familiar.

            "The Lord Yahaweh hath given me a tongue of learned ones . . . I

                        gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked

                        off the hair," etc.

This might more properly than the other be called a soliloquy. It pictures

the abuse the speaker suffers, his trust in God, his tactful, courageous,

persistent service. Many attribute it to the Servant.

            The third instance is brief. It occurs in the midst of an address by

Yahaweh, and can be understood only by supplying a clause.

            "And now [I remind thee that thou art able to say],

            It is the Lord Yahaweh that hath sent me,

                        and his Spirit" (Isa. xlviii. i6).

Scholars differ concerning this passage. But, like the two preceding

instances, it employs the rather unusual divine name "the Lord Yahaweh."

            The remaining instance (Isa. lx iii. 7-lxiv) is much fuller, but less differ-

entiated. The speaker is engaged in earnest prayer to Yahaweh in behalf

of Israel, using part of the time the first person singular, and part of the

time the first person plural.

   MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT          283

 

          "Of a truth he will bring out judgment,

                    he will not flicker nor be broken,

          Until he put judgment in the earth;

                    meanwhile coastlands wait for his law."

 

This is quoted somewhat in full and applied to Jesus,

in the gospel by Matthew (xii. 18-21 ). Notice that the

emphatic statement in these three stanzas is               The Servant

that the Servant shall be the supreme judge                 supreme over

of the nations. This is spoken of in the first                the nations

stanza; its inconsistency with the manifested meekness

of the Servant is suggested in the second stanza; and

the third stanza four times affirms that it is nevertheless

a fact. The point illustrated in Matthew is the meek-

ness of the person spoken of, in contrast with his vic-

toriousness and his being the hope of the nations.

          The other passage is the complete section concerning

the humiliated Servant (Isa. lii. 13-liii).  It occupied a

remarkably large place in the thinking of the first

preachers of Christianity.¹  Its full messianic signifi-

cance cannot be appreciated except through a thorough

study of the entire passage. But we must be content

with citing briefly the two places in which it uses the

word "Servant."

          "Behold my Servant dealeth wisely,

          Is high and exalted and lofty exceedingly" (Isa. lii.13).

 

          "It being Yahaweh's will to bruise him, making him sick;

                    even if thou regard his soul as a trespass-offering,

          He shall behold a seed, shall prolong days,

                    the will of Yahaweh prospering in his hand.

 

            ¹ It is formally cited at least nine times, in at least the six books Luke,

John, Acts, Romans, Galatians, I Peter; and is informally cited much

oftener. See the reference bibles. Probably the most familiar instance is

that it was the passage which the Ethiopian eunuch was reading when

Philip joined him (Acts viii. 32-33).

284     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          Of the toil of his soul he shall behold, shall be sated ;

                    in knowing him shall my Servant, righteous,

          Give righteousness to the many,

                    and their iniquities himself shall bear as a load " (liii. 10-11).

 

In this passage Yahaweh represents the Servant's be-

ing stricken as the result of the transgression of "my

people " (liii. 8). That is, this section, like the forty-

ninth chapter, makes a distinction between Yahaweh's

people and the Servant, that is, between Israel the

Servant and Israel the aggregation of persons. But it

goes farther in this direction than the forty-ninth chap-

ter. It distinguishes the Servant from his generation,

his unspeakable generation, and represents him as cut

off from the earth, as having a grave, as experiencing

"deaths" (vv. 8-9). So far as these representations

go, he is not an unending succession of persons, but is

one Person. Later we shall meet again this figure of

the Person of the promise, wonderful both in his sor-

rows and his exaltation.

          This passage brings out into strong relief an expe-

rience of the Servant that is also much emphasized

The servants     elsewhere, namely, his humiliations and suffer-

sufferings        ings; but it brings out an aspect of this expe-

mediatorial       rience that is presented in other places only

by allusion or implication. The sufferings of the Ser-

vant are vicarious and mediatorial in their character.

In many of the passages heretofore cited we find Israel

suffering for his own misdoings, and this is the case

in some of the passages in which he is called the Ser-

vant. But in this fifty-third chapter we find a different

view. Over and over the passage reiterates that the

Servant is blameless. It is not as the result of his

own sins that he suffers, but of those of his people

and of the many nations. The result shall be their

   MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT       285

 

being made righteous from their sins, and this shall

eventuate in such victory and glory and joy for the

Servant as shall more than compensate him for all his

sorrows.

          III. We must not dismiss the term "Servant" without

recurring to the point that this is the one messianic

term that is best fitted to stand as representative. What

is true of the term "Servant" in its messianic use is typi-

cally true of the other terms that have the same signifi-

cation. For this reason let us ask here, in regard to

the Servant, two or three questions which we shall have

to repeat, later, in regard to the whole body of mes-

sianic prediction. It is no reason against this proced-

ure that we thus catch a glimpse of certain still distant

goals toward which our study is moving.

          Who is the Servant spoken of in these Isaiah chap-

ters?  A certain interpretation replies that the Servant

clearly is the people of Israel, and therefore                Two one-

is not Jesus of Nazareth. It is Israel, this                              sided inter-

interpretation affirms, whom Yahaweh chose,            pretatians

separated from the peoples, led through a career of

mingled suffering and victory, set for a light to the

nations, and made to be, in very important senses, the

world's redeemer. It is Israel whose mission of good

to mankind has so largely resulted from his sufferings,

from his being scattered among the peoples, and sub-

jected to undeserved contempt and ill treatment. This

is not an ignoble interpretation, and it agrees with most

of the facts as we have been studying them. But it

does not, unless supplemented by something else, account

for some of the personal experiences attributed to the

Servant, nor for the degree of the exaltation ascribed to

him.

          This interpretation is contradicted by another which

286     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

affirms that the Servant is Jesus Christ, and therefore

is not Israel. This view fully accounts for the personal

terms, the exaltation of the Servant, his being sometimes

separate from Israel and in relations with Israel, and

the wonderfully minute identity between the character-

istics and experiences of Jesus and those of the Ser-

vant; but it necessitates a dreadful amount of difficult

explanation when it is called upon to account for the pas-

sages which explicitly declare that the Servant is Israel.

          The truth is, that both interpretations are correct in

what they affirm, and incorrect in what they deny, If

The true in-      the Servant is Israel, that does not prove that

terpretation      the Servant is not Christ. If he is Israel,

then he is Israel thought of as the promise-people,

Israel in all the fulness of his mission to the world,

and not in some relatively narrow and circumscribed

portion of it. The prophet was dealing with what he

regarded as the eternally operative promise of Yaha-

weh. He is speaking constantly of the future of Israel

the Servant, though of course not to the exclusion of

the past or the present. He holds that the promise

has been fulfilling in the past, is at present in process

of fulfilment, and will continue to be fulfilled in the

future, without limit of time. He holds this as an arti-

cle of religious doctrine, independent of any power

which he may possess of miraculously foretelling the

future. The statements he makes concerning Israel

the Servant do not terminate their effect with the

Israel of his own time. By their very terms they look

forward. They apply especially to any future portion

of Israel's history which shall be especially the mani-

festation of God's purpose toward mankind through

Israel. They so apply if the prophet had a definite

knowledge as to the events in which the manifestation

    MESSIANIC TERMS. THE SERVANT            287

 

would be made; and equally they so apply if his knowl-

edge of the coming events was vague — merely a con-

viction that Yahaweh would somehow accomplish the

word he had spoken.

          It follows that there is no contradiction between the

statement that the Servant is Israel and the statement

that the servant is Jesus Christ, provided Jesus Christ

is the most significant fact in the history of Israel as

the people of the promise; and this Christianity claims

that he is.

          This may be variantly stated. The prophetic use

of the term "Servant" has such a character of univer-

salness that really it might be applied to any               Universalness

person of any race or time, provided he is                  of the term

characteristically the agent of the divine                               "Servant"

purpose for mankind. It might be applied to the

personified aggregate of all such persons, or to any

lesser aggregate. In the Old Testament, as a matter

of fact, it denotes Israel regarded as such an aggre-

gate. It might be properly applied to any Israelite

who is in this respect typical, and it is so applied to

Moses and Caleb and David and others, though per-

haps not in all cases in its full meaning. In particular,

the Servant might be any priest or prophet or other

public man, brought into such relations with Yahaweh

that he is the representative of the Israel of his gen-

eration. If the New Testament writers are correct

in regarding Jesus as preeminently the representative

Israelite, as the antitype of all types, then they are cor-

rect in applying directly to him what the prophets say

concerning Israel the Servant.

          It will help to give us a steady grasp of these facts

if we take a glance forward to our own times, and the

fulfilment now in progress of the things that are said

288       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

concerning the Servant. Israel the Servant is now

in very important senses the light of the nations, as

A glimpse of     the prophet said he would be. His being so

the later           consists in three things, and it is a mistake

fulfilments       to omit any one of the three from our con-

sideration. First, the promise-people is in a unique

degree a blessing to mankind if we consider only

what Israel the race has accomplished and is accom-

plishing in business and commerce and governmental

administration and learning and literature and art.

If Israel's contributions of this kind to the civilization

of the twentieth century could be suddenly obliterated,

the world of mankind would come to a standstill.

Second, the work of the promise-people for Mankind

is being wrought in what the religion of Israel and

its daughter religions, Christianity and Islam, are ac-

complishing. And third, these two great things be-

come insignificant when compared with the person and

work of Jesus, provided Jesus is the Son of God

that we Christians believe him to be. The career of

Israel the Servant includes all the beneficent things

that God has wrought through him, including God's

supreme manifestation through him in the person of

Christ the Lord. Defining thus, we Christians should

accept, instead of rejecting, the statement that in all the

instances Isaiah's Servant of Yahaweh is Israel.

 

 

 

 

                               CHAPTER XIII:

 

 

MESSIANIC TERMS. THE KINGDOM AND ITS ANOINTED

                                       KING

 

 

          IN the last chapter we studied the term the "Ser-

vant" as being the most nearly representative among the

special terms created by the teaching of the promise-

doctrine in Israel. We now take up the pair of terms

which are on the whole the most significant. The fact

that the kingdom and the Messiah are cognate terms,

that they go together, is better understood now among

Christians than it was a generation ago. So far as

words are concerned, the Messiah is simply the anointed

king of the kingdom. Conspicuous in the New Tes-

tament is this "kingdom of God," this "kingdom of

heaven," with its sphere of operations in the present

world of men, but extending into the world to come.

In this kingdom the Christ is the royal judge both

here and hereafter.

          Three topics especially claim our attention: first, the

Old Testament presentation concerning the kingdom;

second, its presentation concerning the king, the

Anointed one, the Messiah; third, the eschatological

trend of the doctrine of the kingdom and the king.

          I. First, the doctrine of the kingdom is a part of the

promise-doctrine of the Old Testament.

          In the record for the times of the patriarchs the king-

dom is not at all in the foreground. It only comes in

incidentally that kings shall descend from Abraham,

 

                                     289

290      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

from Sarah, from Jacob (Gen. xvii. 6, 16, xxxv. 11).

Doctrine of       Among the kings descended from Abraham

the kingdom     might perhaps be included Ishmaelites and

in the earlier     Midianites and Edomites, but the royal line

times             descending from Jacob is necessarily Israelite.

          In the records for the time of the exodus the king-

dom idea is not presented often or at large, but it is

somewhat conspicuous by reason of the importance of

the passages where it appears. Not wholly insignifi-

cant is the representation that Moses was looking for-

ward to a king in Israel (Deut. xvii. 14-20), or that a

writer in Genesis is impressed with the fact that there

has been a line of kings among Abraham's Edomite

descendants before there were any in Israel (Gen.

xxxvi. 31). A much more important record, however,

is found in the account of the happenings at Mount

Sinai. The heart of the whole is the message from the

mountain, arranged in symmetrically balanced short

lines.

          "Thus say thou to the house of Jacob,

            And tell thou to the sons of Israel:

 

          "Yourselves saw what I did to Egypt;

            And I lifted you on wings of eagles,

            And brought you in unto me.

 

          "And now if ye will thoroughly hearken

             To my voice, and keep my covenant,

            Ye shall be mine, my own, out of all the peoples.

 

          "For mine is all the earth,

            While ye yourselves shall be mine

            A kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

 

          "These are the words

            Which thou shalt speak unto the sons of Israel"

                                                            (Ex. xix. 3b-6),

     THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH         291

 

This purports to be the original communication from

Yahaweh, constituting Israel differentially his own

people.¹  The New Testament writers claim, as we

have had occasion to see, that under its provisions be-

lievers in Christ are God's own people. A part of this

communication is to the effect that Israel is to be "a

kingdom of priests and a holy nation." This phrase-

ology in particular the New Testament men eagerly

quote and appropriate, though their doing this is not

apparent in the King James version, and has therefore

been ignored by English-speaking students.²

          The first book of Samuel testifies to the existence

before the monarchy of this idea of Israel as Yahaweh's

holy kingdom. For example, the song of Hannah

over the birth of Samuel, whether composed by Han-

nah herself or by some prophet speaking in her person,

testifies that she had in mind a lofty conception of this

sort.

          "It is Yahaweh that judgeth earth's uttermost parts,

                That he may give strength to his king,

                    and exalt the horn of his Anointed" (I Sam. ii. 10).

 

Samuel's, objection to the setting up of the monarchy

was that, this would tend to obscure the fact that Israel

 

            ¹ See above, tenth chapter, I. 2, especially the foot-notes.

            ² "But ye are an elect race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people

of [God's] own" (1 Pet. ii. 9).

            In the same context it is said that Christians are "to be a holy priest-

hood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices" (5).

            In the book of Revelation it is said of Jesus that he "loosed us from

our sins by his blood; and he made us [to be] a kingdom, [to be] priests

unto his God and Father" (i. 6 RV).

            "Didst purchase unto God with thy blood [men] of every tribe, and

tongue, and people, and nation, and madest them [to be] unto our God a

kingdom and priests; and they reign upon the earth" (v. 9–10 RV).

            "Over these the second death hath no authority; but they shall be

priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years "

(xx. 6 RV).

292       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

was Yahaweh"s kingdom (I Sam. viii. 7, x. 19, xii. 12).

From the time of the anointing of Saul the conception

appears more prominently that the kingdom of Israel is

in peculiar relations with Yahaweh, and that its king is

Yahaweh's Anointed (see concordance).

          From the time of the making of the great promise to

David, the records give a central and emphatic place

The king-         to the kingdom. The kingdom, they say, is

dom in and       God's kingdom among men, it is Israelite,

from David's     its kings are of the line of David, it is to

time               be eternal, its sway is to be worldwide. Already

in Chapter X we have examined a good many passages

that affirm these points. We will look again at some of

these, and will look at some others. We cannot make

the survey exhaustive, because the passages are too

numerous; we can only look at specimens.

          In the original record of the promise to David the

throne and the kingdom are conspicuous.¹  Here the

kingdom is Israel. The king is of the line of David.

Both are to be eternal. The same points appear 'with

much reiteration in the eighty-ninth psalm, which we

have already quoted so much. In this psalm the king-

dom (ver. 25) is said to be widespread.  In many of the

passages it is declared to be universal as well as eternal.

          Take, for example, the seventy-second psalm. What-

ever its date or author, it is a glowing supplicatory

The king-         description of Solomon and his reign, with

dom in            a presentation that is accurately the same

Ps. lxxii           with that in the books of Kings and Chroni-

cles. The leading verbs should be translated either as

present or as precative; by making them future the

 

            ¹ For example: "I will establish his kingdom." "I will establish the

throne of his kingdom for ever." "And thy house and thy kingdom shall

be made sure for ever before thee" (2 Sam. vii. 12, 13, 16 RV).

    THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH          293

 

English versions obscure the meaning, though they do

not utterly hide it. First, the subject is stated — not

"the king," but "a king," who is also a king's son (I).

His administrative and judicial abilities are commemo-

rated (2, 4, 7, 12-14), and the peace that characterizes

his reign (3, 7). His wide dominion is mentioned (8),

and especially his commercial victory over the desert.¹

The tribute paid by many kings is spoken of — Tar-

shish and the coastlands and Sheba and Seba (10, 15).

In such details we find Solomon in the psalm from

beginning to end, but Solomon as the representative of

the promised line of David. The singer knows that

Solomon is mortal; but David's royal line is immortal,

and in this sense the king whom he sings will live

"while the sun endureth, and before the moon, through-

out all generations," "till the moon be no more," "as

long as the sun " (5, 7, 17). His kingdom is worldwide

as well as everlasting.

 

          "Yea, all kings shall do obeisance to him,

                    all nations shall serve him" (i I).

 

          "And let him be conqueror from sea as far as to sea,

                    and from the River as far as to earth's uttermost parts" (8).²

 

And this culminates, as we have seen in a preced-

ing chapter, by vesting in this king the Abrahamic

promise: —

 

          "Yea, all nations shall bless themselves in him,

                    shall call him happy" (17).

 

            ¹ "Before him deserts bow" (9), not "they that dwell in the wilder-

ness" (cf. 1 Ki. ix. i8; 2 Chron. viii. 4).

            ² Compare Zech. ix. 10: --

            "He shall speak peace to the nations, and his dominion shall be 'from

sea as far as to sea, and from the River as far as to earth's uttermost

parts.'"

294      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          Study carefully this conception of a universal and

eternal kingdom, represented, however, for the time

contemplated in the song, by the Davidic king then

reigning over Yahaweh's chosen people.

          An equally explicit example is the second psalm, so

extensively quoted in the New Testament. In this

The second       psalm we find a character who is variously

psalm             described as Yahaweh's "anointed," Yaha-

weh's "king," Yahaweh's "son." The powers of earth

are in revolt against him, and God sees the ridiculous-

ness of their setting up their puny might against his.

In this psalm the eternalness of the kingdom is left to

implication, but its cosmopolitan character is made

explicit.

 

          "Ask thou of me,

          And I will give nations as thine inheritance,

              and earth's uttermost parts as thy possession" (8),

 

          Additional instances are given below for various

specific purposes. Or one might use a concordance,

and look up all the post-Davidic passages which men-

tion a king or a kingdom. It should be noted, how-

ever, that this conception of universal dominion for

Yahaweh's promise-people, for the purposes of the

promise, is not confined to the passages that use these

specific words.¹

 

            ¹ Note, for example, statements like the following concerning the Ser-

vant:  "He shall bring out judgment to the nations." "In truth he shall

bring out judgment." "He shall not fail . . . till he have set judgment

in the earth." "The coastlands wait for his law" (Isa. xlii. 1-4).

Or such passages as the following: —

            "And it shall come to pass in future days that the mountain of Yahaweh's

house shall be made ready at the head of the mountains, and shall be exalted

above the hills; and all the nations shall flow unto it. And many peoples

shall go and say, Come ye and let us go up unto the mountain of Yahaweh,

unto the house of the God of Jacob; that he may give us torah out of his

     THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH            295

 

          There is a line of passages in the books of Chronicles

which speak of Israel under the reign of a king of David's

family as "the kingdom of Yahaweh." Whether                    Yahaweh's

this is to be regarded as a late expression orig-                     kingdom

inating with the Chronicler, or as taken by him from

some earlier source, at all events it has significance as

interpreting the conception of the kingdom that was

prevalent.^l  The same mode of expression appears in

the forty-fifth psalm, which I believe to have been

written some centuries earlier than the Chronicler.

When the singer says (ver. 6), —

 

          "Thy throne, 0 God, is for ever and ever,"

 

he refers not to God's throne in heaven, but to God's

throne on earth — the eternal throne promised to the

seed of David, and at the time occupied by the Davidic

king whom the singer is praising. And the glory

and the everlastingness of Yahaweh's kingdom are

 

ways, and that we may go in his paths. For out of Zion torah shall go

forth, and the word of Yahaweh out of Jerusalem. And he shall judge

between the nations, and reprove many peoples" (Isa. ii. 2-4).

            ¹ One of these passages is in the Chronicler's duplicate of the narrative

in 2 Sam. vii: "I will settle him in my house and in my kingdom for

ever" (i Chron. xvii. 14 RV).

            Elsewhere David is represented as saying: "Yahaweh . . . hath

chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of Yaha-

weh over Israel" (1 Chron. xxviii. 5).

            In another place David says: —

            "For all that is in the heaven and in the earth [is thine]; thine is the

kingdom, 0 Yahaweh, and thou art exalted as head above all" (1 Chron.

xxix. 11).

            The queen of Sheba is represented as saying to Solomon: —

            "Blessed be Yahaweh thy God who bath taken pleasure in thee to set

thee on his throne, to be king for Yahaweh thy God; because thy God

loved Israel, to establish them for ever" (2 Chron. ix. 8).

            And Abijah king of Judah accuses Jeroboam and his associates of array-

ing themselves against "the kingdom of Yahaweh in the hand of the sons

of David" (2 Chron. xiii. 8).

296       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nowhere more enthusiastically mentioned than in another

psalm: —

          "They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom,

          And talk of thy power;

          To make known to the sons of men his mighty acts,

          And the glory of the majesty of his kingdom.

          Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,

          And thy dominion [endureth] throughout all generations"

                                                            (Ps. cxlv. 11-13 RV).

 

          Very prominently the idea of the dominion of Israel

and the Anointed one takes on the form of glowing de-

A reign of        scriptions of a good time coming — a reign

universal         of universal peace and happiness. We have

peace             just cited in a foot-note the passage concern-

ing the mountain of Yahaweh's house fixed at the head

of the mountains (Isa. ii. 2–4; Mic. iv. 1–5). As given

in Isaiah, that passage terminates with a picture of

swords beaten into ploughshares and spears into prun-

inghooks, and the nations learning war no more. To

this, in Micah, is added: —

 

          "But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig

tree, and none shall make them afraid."

 

          In the ninth chapter of Isaiah the names attributed to

the child that is to be born reach their climax in "God

all-victorious, Father of eternity, Captain of peace," with

the statement added: —

 

          "Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no

end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish

it, and to uphold it with judgment and with righteousness from hence-

forth even for ever" (Isa. ix. 7 RV).

 

          Few passages in the Old Testament are more familiar

than the one concerning the "shoot out of the stock of

Jesse," through whose wise and just administration of

affairs —

    THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH                297

 

"wolf shall sojourn with lamb, and leopard shall lie down with kid,

. . . They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for

the earth shall be full of knowing Yahaweh, as the waters cover the

sea" (Isa. xi. 6-9).

 

This is directly followed by the assertion that "the

nations shall seek" unto "the root of Jesse, which

standeth for an ensign of the peoples." With this com-

pare the following: —

 

          "Wolf and lamb shall pasture together, and the lion shall eat straw

like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent's bread. They shall not

hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith Yahaweh" (Isa. lxv.

25)

 

And with these compare Ezek. xxxiv. 24–31; Isa. iv.

2–6, etc.

          In the latest Old Testament books the kingdom-doc-

trine is as explicit as in any of their predecessors. We

have already noticed the definiteness with which First

and Second Chronicles specify that the Davidic king-

dom is Yahaweh's kingdom on earth. In Daniel we

find the idea of "an Anointed one, a Regent" (ix. 24,

25, 26), and also, in passages that are very familiar to

us, the writer's expectation of the renewed manifestation

of the kingdom. Of the stone cut out of the mountain

without hands he says:--

 

          "And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a

kingdom, which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the sovereignty

thereof be left to another people; but it shall break in pieces and

consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever" (Dan. ii.

44-45 RV).

 

And in Daniel's vision of the four beasts it is said: —

 

          "And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the

kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the

saints of the Most High; his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom,

and all dominions shall serve and obey him" (Dan. vii. 27 RV).

298      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          My personal opinion is that the Old Testament gives

us approximate dates for most of these utterances, and

Independent     that when we arrange them in chronological

of disputed       order, that brings out their meaning more

dates              explicitly and strongly. But others dispute

the dates. Without delaying to settle all questions, this

at least is true: that these utterances concerning the

kingdom are numerous, and that there is no large sec-

tion of the literature as it has come down to us which is

not in some way marked by them.

          It should be noted, however, that in the latest biblical

times the utterances concerning the kingdom take on a

A kingdom       new color. When Nebuchadnezzar had de-

of influence      stroyed Jerusalem, and there was no longer,

politically, a descendant of David reigning there, this

did not interfere with the confidence of the prophets in

the reality and the perpetuity of the kingdom. From

the first the prophets had presented their doctrine of the

kingdom in two aspects, — that of a personal sovereign

reigning in Zion, and that of a beneficent influence go-

ing out through the nations. As long as Judah had a

personal sovereign, the prophets regarded that sovereign

as Yahaweh's Anointed, in and for the generation to

which he belonged. When for generation after genera-

tion Judah was no longer a monarchy, the prophets still

taught that the kingdom and the line of David were

eternal, but the emphasis fell more and more on the

idea of the kingdom as a cosmopolitan influence which

the God of Israel has established in the world. It is an

easy transition from this to the New Testament idea

of the kingdom as a body of spiritual forces for the

social and ethical elevation of men.

          II. We turn from the kingdom to the king.

          It is perhaps needless to say that our English word

   THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH                299

 

"Messiah" is transferred from the Hebrew, and that our

English word "Christ" is the Greek translation of the

Hebrew word. The Hebrew word is a passive verbal

of the stem which signifies to anoint with oil. Physi-

cally, it denotes a person who has been anointed with

oil.

          The verb of the stem is used in connection with the

promise quite as prominently as the noun.^l But a suffi-

cient study of the meaning can be made from the noun

alone.

          Most readers of the Old Testament would probably

accept offhand the statement that the prophets foretell

the coming of a person whom they most com-            The usual

monly designate as the Messiah. This state-               statement

ment is inaccurate rather than untrue. One might make

it, having a meaning that is true. But, first, the proph-

ets use this word less than some other words as a mes-

sianic term. And, second, in most of the instances in

which they use it, it does not directly and exclusively

denote a coming person.

          The noun occurs thirty-nine times in the Old Testa-

ment. Four times, all in Leviticus (iv. 3, 5, 16, vi. 22

[15]), the anointed one is the Levitical priest.             Analysis of

Twenty-three times the word is unmistak-                  the usage

ably the official title of the reigning king of Israel.

Among the instances are those in which Saul was in

David's power, and David would not put forth his hand

         

            ¹ For example: —

            "Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated wickedness:

              Therefore God, thy God, bath anointed thee

              With the oil of gladness above thy fellows" (Ps. xlv. 7 RV).

 

            "I have found David my servant,

              With my holy oil have I anointed him" (Ps. Lxxxix. 20).

            "Because Yahaweh hath anointed me to bring good tidings to the

meek" (Isa. lxi. I).

300     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

against Yahaweh's anointed; or when Samuel went to

Jesse's house to anoint a king in place of Saul, and saw

Eliab and said:  "Surely Yahaweh's anointed is before

him;" or when Abishai said that Shimei ought to be

put to death for cursing Yahaweh's anointed (I Sam.

xxvi. 9, 11, 16, xvi. 6; 2 Sam. xix. 21 [22]). The word

is thus used ten times of Saul, ten times expressly of

David or the kings of his line and in three other in-

stances. Further, it is once applied to Cyrus (Isa. xlv.

1); and in two passages, or rather in one repeated pas-

sage, to the patriarchs, with "my prophets" in the

parallel line.^l  In none of these thirty passages, cer-

tainly, is the term Messiah, "anointed one," applied ex-

clusively to a great coming person, who is to be the

deliverer of the nation or of mankind.

          There remain nine instances in which one might claim

that the word denotes a coming person, but in every

one of them this is disputed. One of these is the prayer

of Hannah (I Sam. ii. 10): —

 

          "It is Yahaweh that judgeth earth's uttermost parts,

                That he may give strength to his king,

                    and may exalt the horn of his Anointed."

 

Another is in the prophecy against Eli (I Sam. ii. 30:

 

          "Hophni and Phinehas,

In one day they shall die, both of them.

And I will raise me up a priest that is made sure,

According to that which is in my heart and in my soul he shall do.

And I will build him a house that is made sure,

And he shall walk before mine Anointed all the days."

 

            ¹ "Touch ye not mine anointed ones,

                        and do my prophets no harm" (1 Chron. xvi. 22; Ps. cv. 15).

Here the allusion is to Gen. xx. 7 and its context, where Abraham is

spoken of as a prophet.

 

 

 

   THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH         301

 

Other instances are the following: —

 

          "Kings of earth set themselves,

              and rulers take counsel together,

              against Yahaweh and against his Anointed" (Ps. ii. 2).

 

          "Now know I that Yahaweh saveth his Anointed" (Ps. xx. 6).

         

          "Yahaweh is strength to them,

              And he is the stronghold of the salvations of his Anointed"

                                                                                (Ps. xxviii. 8).

          “Behold thou our Shield, 0 God,

              and gaze upon the face of thine Anointed" (Ps. lxxxiv. 9).

 

          "Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people,

              for salvation with thine Anointed " (Hab. iii. 13).

 

          "From the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jeru-

salem up to an Anointed one, a Regent, shall be seven weeks ; and

threescore and two weeks, it shall be built again, street and moat,

even in troublous times. And after the threescore and two weeks

shall Anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing" (Dan. ix.

25-26).

 

In this passage in Daniel the syntax of the word

"Anointed" is practically that of a proper name. The

words "Anointed" and "Regent;" (nagidh, regent, vice-

roy, primate, see concordance) are used as synonyms.

We need not spend time discussing these nine in-

stances. Any one who will carefully examine them

will see that in most of them the Anointed one is pri-

marily the actual or supposed reigning king of the line

of David. The margin left for the use of the word for

denoting simply a coming person is very small.

          If we ask the question in this form, therefore: What

do the prophets say concerning a coming person called

the Messiah? — we shall not obtain a satis-               The correct

factory answer. But the answer will be                       form of the

satisfactory if we ask the question in the                              question

different and better form: What do the prophets say

 

302      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

concerning the Messiah, the Anointed one? They

say that the Anointed one is Yahaweh's regent, his

primate, his king, over his eternal kingdom on the

earth. He is at any moment the man who is entitled

to sit as Yahaweh's representative on the imperishable

throne over Israel. To the prophets of David's time,

David is the Anointed one, especially when they think

of David as the depositary of the promise. To each

succeeding prophet the reigning Davidic king of his

own time is the Anointed, especially when thought of

as the representative of the promise. After the exile

a like character was attributed to Zerubbabel, and

possibly to others.

          There came a time, however, when for generation

after generation there was no recognized living repre-

The Messiah     sentative of the blood of David who could be

as a coming      regarded as the promised king, occupying the

person            promised eternal throne. The Anointed one

had ceased to be a manifested fact among men. But if

one believed the promise, he believed that the imperish-

able kingdom was still in existence, and that in coming

time it would again be manifested. He believed that

the line of David still survived, and that a time would

come when a king of that blood would be manifestly on

the throne. Those who thus believed were watching for

this manifestation; and thus they came to think of the

Anointed one as he that should come. Usage fixed

upon this term, in preference to all the others, as the

fittest to describe the expected king of the kingdom, in

its new manifestation; and the selection was a happy one.

To repeat this, in part. The prophets count the ful-

filment of the promise to David, Yahaweh's Anointed,

as beginning at once in his lifetime. They find it in

the preparations for building and in the building and

     THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH             303

 

dedication of the temple. And each prophet recognizes

in the events of his own time a double embodiment

of the promise. It is embodied in the people Israel,

Yahaweh's Servant, and in the living representative of

the line of David, the reigning king of Judah, Yaha-

weh's Anointed. To each prophet the people and the

king alike have a dual character. No matter how un-

worthy either may actually be, each stands on a lofty

pedestal when thought of in the character of the rep-

resentative of the promise. By their teachings the

prophets aroused expectations that endured long after

their own succession ceased. As the generations

passed, the character of the expectation was affected

by the historical events. From a time as early as the

temporary political independence under the Maccabees,

the characteristic form of the expectation was that the

kingdom and its Anointed king would again become

visible realities.

          We have glanced at the passages in which the noun

"messiah" is used in the Old Testament. We might

gather a much larger number in which the                  Other terms

personality denoted by the noun is mentioned,            for the messi-

but in which the noun itself is not used. We               anic person

might, for example, group the places in which other de-

rivatives of the stem are used, or those in which the mes-

sianic person is called king, or by some other official

name. But the result would be simply to lay additional

emphasis on the points already gained.

          Obviously there is nothing violent in the transition

from the Old Testament conception of the kingdom,

with its world-wide and unending reign of                  Transition to

righteousness and peace and happiness, and the                   New Tes-

with its king who is one in an eternal succes-             tament idea

sion, to the New Testament idea of the spiritual king-

304    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

dom of Christ, including in its domain all the kingdoms

of the world, with a son of David as king. The most

marked difference between the two conceptions is that

Christians regard Jesus as the eternal king, not merely

in the sense of being one person of an eternal succes-

sion, but also in the sense of being himself an eternal

person.

          In the time of Jesus the messianic hope included with

much prominence the expectation of a coming person

(Matt. xi. 3, xxi. 9, xxiii. 39; Lc. vii. 19, 20, xix. 38;

Jn. vi. 14, xi. 27, xii. 13; Acts xix. 4, etc.). His com-

ing was to be the revival of God's kingdom on earth,

and so he was called the Anointed one, the king. In

their own times the prophets had used a variety of terms,

and this term among others. It was simply one of sev-

eral terms which they were accustomed to employ. In

the time of Jesus it had come to be the one preferred

term, and it would not be easy to say how long before

his time it became so.

          III. There remain to be considered certain expres-

sions concerning the regnal and judicial acts of Yaha-

weh, in their relations to his kingdom and its Anointed

king.

          These expressions are the ones translated "the latter

days," "the day of Yahaweh," with certain variants, and,

as interpreting these, certain representations of Yaha-

weh as coming to judgment. It is the New Testament

rather than the Old which connects these expressions

specifically with the messianic "kingdom of heaven";

but even in the Old Testament they connect themselves

not merely with the universal sovereignty of Yahaweh,

but also with his particular sovereignty in the promise-

kingdom.

          The phrase ahharith hayyamin, translated "latter

        THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH           305

 

days," "last days," in the English versions, does not

of necessity mean anything more definite than sub-

sequent days, future time. There is nothing                 The latter

in the phrase itself to indicate whether the                  days

later time to which it refers is proximate or remote or

eschatological.¹  It is used in writings of all dates, and

in connection with events of all dates. It is sometimes

used in the passages that speak of the victorious king-

dom, and of the universal reign of Yahaweh's law and

of peace (Isa. ii. 2; Mic. iv. 1; Ezek. xxxviii. 8, 16).

There is nothing in the phrase itself to connect it with

"the day of Yahaweh," or with the idea of a judgment

scene, but this connection is sometimes made by the con-

text.² And so the phrase comes to include the idea of

certain future times that shall be times of retribution to

Israel for his lack of fidelity to the promise-covenant,

but also times of the fulfilment of the promise, and of

overthrow to his enemies. We are not surprised to find

the term used in the New Testament to denote the times

then current and coming, with more or less distinct

eschatological implications (e.g. Acts ii. 17; Heb. i. 2;

 

            ¹ Jacob says that he will make known to his sons "what will befall you

in the latter days" (Gen. xlix. 1 J). Balaam proposes to advise Balak

"what this people shall do to thy people in the latter days" (Num. xxiv.

14 J). Moses is represented as saying: —

            "For I know that after my death ye will act very corruptly, and will

remove from the way which I have commanded you, and the evil will

befall you in the latter clays" (Deut. xxxi. 29).

            "In the distress to thee, when all these words shall have found thee in

the latter days, and thou shalt turn unto Yahaweh thy God, . . . he will

not forget the covenant of thy fathers" (Deut. iv. 30-31).

See also Hos. iii. 5; Jer. xxiii. 20, xxx. 24; Dan. x. 14, etc.

            ² For example: "And my anger will burn with him in that day, . . .

and many and distressing evils will find him, and he will say in that day,

Is it not because my God is not in the midst of me that these evils have

found me? And I for my part will surely conceal my face in that day"

(Deut. xxxi. 17-18, cf. 29).

306        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

I Pet. i. 20 ; 2 Pet. iii. 3); while a modification of it, "the

last day" is specifically eschatological (e.g. Jn. vi. 39, 40).

          Much more important in the prophetic writings is

"the day of Yahaweh," variantly spoken of as "that

day," and as a day in which Yahaweh "cometh." For

some purposes it might be regarded as simply a speci-

fication under the more general term "the latter days,"

but it is a specification that has a character of its own.

          We shall better understand this term if we look first

at a different Old Testament form of expression. Yaha-

Yahaweh         weh in his character as chief magistrate of

holding a         the nations is sometimes presented as hold-

judgment         ing a solemn assembly for adjudicating the

assembly         cases that may arise. Look, for example, at this pres-

entation:--

 

          "Arise 0 Yahaweh in thine anger!

          Uplift thyself at the aggressions of mine adversaries!

          And be thou awake unto me, thou [who] hast commanded judgment,

          A congregation of races surrounding thee!

          And over it return thou on high " (Ps. vii. 6-7).

 

Here the adjudication is presented as a solemn pageant.

Yahaweh is to arise and come from his lofty dwelling

place to perform it. He is attended by the populations

as a retinue, and when the court is over, they escort him

in his return on high. With this compare the familiar

picture in Daniel:

 

          "Thrones were placed, and one that was ancient of days did sit;

. . . thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand

times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and

the books were opened " (Dan. vii. 9-10 RV).

 

And with these compare the briefer description in

Joel: --

 

          "That the nations may come up unto the valley of Yahaweh-

judgeth; for there will I sit to judge all the nations from round

about" (iii. 12 [iv. 12]).

    THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH                307

 

          Passages of this kind are not unfamiliar. The one

just cited from Daniel is expressly connected with the

promise-kingdom.¹  In most of the instances the connec-

tion is less direct. But in them all we have a way of

speaking in which Yahaweh's judicial activities with

men are pictured as special occasions, occurring at defi-

nite dates. This mode of figuring the matter prepares

the way for another; any such occasion might naturally

be called a day of Yahaweh; or, with reference to the

particular matters to be adjudicated, the day of Yahaweh.

          This phrase appears inchoately in the record of the

exodus. After the sin of the golden calf,                                         History of

Moses intercedes for the people, and at last                          the term “the day

obtains from Yahaweh this concession:                                of Yahaweh"

 

          "And now [I say to thee], Go, lead thou the people whither

I spake to thee [saying], Behold my Angel will go before thee;

and in the day of my visiting I will visit upon them their sin "

(Ex. xxxii. 34 JE).

 

The threat here uttered is terse, and likely to have made

an impression. The impression would be deep in pro-

portion as the Israelites were in the habit of looking

forward to "the latter days" and expecting therein

divine blessings or retributions.

          It is a natural suggestion, though one hardly capable

of decisive proof, that this clause is the original text of

the sermons which the prophets preach concerning the

day of Yahaweh. The sermons are many. Joel, Oba-

diah, Zephaniah; and several prophetic discourses in

other books are monographs on this subject, and the

day is frequently mentioned in still other prophecies.

We cannot treat of them all, but we will follow the his-

 

            ¹ "Until the ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints

of the Most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the king-

dom" (Dan. vii. 22 RV).

308     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

tory of the term a little way, on the theory that Joel is

the earliest of the books to which the names of prophets

are attached.¹

          The book of Joel has "The Day of Yahaweh" as its

subject; treating it, first, as a day of dread to Yahaweh's

The day of        people, demanding repentance from them

Yahaweh in      (i. 2-ii. 17), and, second, as a day of blessing

Joel               to them if they repent, and a day of judgment

to the nations (ii. 18 to close of book).

          After picturing the locust calamity and the drouth

(i. 4-9, 10-13) the prophet challenges the calling of a

fasting assembly (14), and then pictures these calami-

ties a second time, beginning thus: —

          "Alas for the day!

             Because the Day of Yahaweh is near,

                    and like destruction from the Almighty it cometh!

             Hath not food been cut off before our eyes?" (15-16).

 

Then, after five verses descriptive of the drouth,, the

prophet introduces his second sketch of the locusts : —

 

          "Blow ye a trumpet in Zion,

                    and raise a shout in my holy mountain.

          Let all the inhabitants of the land tremble!

                    for the Day of Yahaweh cometh, for it is near!

          A day of darkness and gloom,

                    a day of cloud and thick darkness" (ii. 1-2).

 

With this introduction the prophet describes the locusts

again, closing with the words: —

 

          "For the Day of Yahaweh is great,

                    and terrible exceedingly, and who may abide it?" (11).

 

          Thus far in Joel the day of Yahaweh is a day to be

dreaded by his people; in the second half of the book

it takes on a different character. We are told that

 

            ¹ The hypothesis that Joel is of later date would affect the history only

in details.

     THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH              309

 

Yahaweh was jealous for his land (ii. 18-20), and gave

a compassionate answer to his fasting people, promising

relief, first from the crop failure, and second from the

invading Northerner.  In ii. 21-27 the promise con-

cerning the crops is amplified, and that concerning the

Northerner is amplified in ii. 28-iii. 17. This last sec-

tion opens with the great passage cited by the apostle

Peter at the pentecost, the passage concerning the out-

pouring of the Spirit upon all flesh.¹  In this passage

the day of Yahaweh appears as great and terrible, but

as a time of deliverance for those who call on the name

of Yahaweh, and of retribution for others. A little

further on we read of the nations summoned to the val-

ley of Yahaweh-judgeth, where Yahaweh sits as judge,

and again we find the day of Yahaweh, a dreadful day,

attended by convulsions of earth and heaven, but a day

of reassurance to his people.²

 

            ¹ "And it shall come to pass afterward

                I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh,

                        and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,

                Your elders shall dream dreams,

                        your choice young men shall behold visions.

               And even upon the bondmen and the bondwomen

                        I will pour out in those days my Spirit.

            "And I will give wonders in the heaven and in the earth,

                Blood and fire and columns of smoke.

                The sun shall be turned to darkness,

                        and the moon to blood,

                Before the Day of Yahaweh come,

                        the great and terrible [day].

            "And it shall be that whoever shall call

                on the name of Yahaweh shall escape" (Joel ii. 28-32).

 

This is followed by details concerning the deliverance granted by Yahaweh

to his people.

            ² "Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of Decision!

                 For the Day of Yahaweh is near

                        in the valley of Decision.

310     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          On the theory of the early date of the book of Joel,

these are the earliest occurrences of the term "the day

of Yahaweh." We have here also the fullest and most

elaborate of the many presentations of this theme. And

there is probably no other use of the phrase in the Old

Testament that cannot plausibly be regarded as presup-

posing this treatment in Joel. But even in Joel the

phrase is introduced as if it were not altogether un-

familiar. If we suppose that the prophet's generation

had inherited prophetic utterances concerning "the

latter days," and concerning Yahaweh's holding assizes

for judgment, and that they believed that Yahaweh had

said to their ancestors, —

 

          "In the day when I visit I will visit their sin upon them,"

 

our supposition recognizes likely materials from which

the prophet might construct just the treatment he has

constructed.

          The book of Obadiah is another monograph on the

day of Yahaweh (8, 15), the day here being one of

The day of       retribution on Edom, and of victory and re-

Yahaweh in      prisal on the part of Yahaweh's people.

the other          Amos addresses auditors who are familiar

prophets          with just such a doctrine of the day of Yahaweh as

Joel teaches, and who are gladly expecting the day; and he

rebukes them, saying that for such as they the day is

only dreadful.^l   Like Joel he insists upon it that men

 

          Sun and moon are darkened,

                    while stars have withdrawn their shining,

          While Yahaweh from Zion roareth,

                    and from Jerusalem giveth his voice,

                    and heaven and earth are quaking.

          While Yahaweh is a refuge to his people,

                    and a strong place to the sons of Israel" (iii. 14-16).

 

            ¹ "0 ye that long for the day of Yahaweh! What is it to you, the day

of Yahaweh? It is darkness and not light. As when a man fleeth from

     THE KINGDOM AND THE MESSIAH       311

 

will find the day of Yahaweh fortunate for themselves

only in case they are repentant and faithful. Amos

specifically appeals to the clause in Exodus: —

 

          "For in the day of my visiting the transgressions of Israel upon

him, I will visit upon the altars of Bethel," etc. (iii. 14, cf. Ex.

xxxii. 34).

 

And with him "that day" is a frequent phrase.¹  Oba-

diah and Amos enable us to see that the doctrine of the

day of Yahaweh had taken a deep hold upon the men of

their generation, so that it could be appealed to in popu-

lar preaching. To them we might add prophet after

prophet, in passage after passage.²

          One notable phenomenon is that the day of Yahaweh

is characteristically represented as "near," as impend-

ing (Joel i. 15, ii. 1, iii. 14; Isa. xiii. 6; Ezek.              The day of

xxx. 3 ; Zeph. i. 7, 14, etc.). This representa-             Yahaweh always im-

tion is made by prophets who lived many                   pending

generations apart, and therefore by prophets who knew

that other prophets had made it generations before.

Perhaps this indicates that the prophets thought of the

day of Yahaweh as generic, not an occasion which

would occur once for all, but one which might be re-

peated as circumstances called for it. However this

 

before the lion, and the bear meeteth him. Or he entereth the house and

leaneth his hand upon the wall, and the serpent biteth him. Is not the

day of Yahaweh darkness and not light? and thick darkness, with no

brightness to it?" (Am. v. 18-20).

            ¹ "And temple songs shall be howlings in that day" (viii. 3).

            "In that day . . . I will cause the sun to go in at noon" (viii. 9).

            "In that day the fair virgins shall faint, and the youths, for thirst"

(viii. 13).

            "In that day I will raise up the fallen booth of David" (ix. I I). Com-

pare the passages that speak of "the evil day," or that use the phrase,

“Behold days are coming " (vi. 3, iv. 2, viii. 11, ix. 13).

            ² See articles in Homiletic Review, October and November, 1889, and

February, 1890.

312       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

may be, the peculiarity in their representation exists.

They picture the day as close at hand, not at one point

of time only, but century after century.

          We are all familiar with these modes of representa-

tion in the forms which they assumed in the New Testa-

The New          ment times. The pictures of Yahaweh with

Testament        his retinue coming to judgment are repro-

imagery           duced in what is said concerning the Son of

Man coming "in his glory, and all the angels with him,"

or concerning the Lord descending from heaven “with

a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the

trump of God" (Matt. xxv. 31; I Thess. iv. 16), and in

other like representations. No idea of the men of the

New Testament is more marked than that of "the last

days," as a period already reached in their tirne, but ex-

tending forward into eternity (Acts ii. 17; 2 Tim. iii. 1;

Heb. i. 2, etc.). And "the day of the Lord," "the day

of judgment," "that day," are expressions that occur

scores of times (e.g. 2 Pet. iii. 10, 12; I Thess. v. 2, 4;

Matt. vii. 22, xi. 22, 24). That these New Testament

representations are those of the Old Testament in a

widened form, and that they constitute an important

part of the New Testament doctrine of the kingdom, are

facts too obvious to require arguing.

 

 

 

                            CHAPTER XIV

 

 

MESSIANIC TERMS. YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH. OTHER

                                   TERMS

 

 

          IN pursuing this subject, we will discuss somewhat in

detail the term hhasidh, a term which in the prominence

of its use in the Old Testament is surpassed only by the

terms "Servant" and "Messiah"; and will afterward

deal more briefly with the terms that remain.

          I. Hhasidh is in the English' versions translated vari-

ously by "holy one," "merciful one," "godly one,"

"gracious one," and in the plural by "saints"; and in

each of these translations the Hebrew word is liable to

be confused with other words. Hence, it seems expe-

dient here to use the transferred Hebrew word rather

than any translation of it.

          The word hhasidh is used only in poetry, never in

prose. It occurs in the Psalms twenty-five times; in the

psalm-duplicates twice (2 Sam. xxii. 26; 2 Chron. vi. 41);

and elsewhere five times (Deut. xxxiii. 8 ; 1 Sam. ii. 9;

Prov. ii. 8; Jer. iii. 12; Mic. vii. 2).

          Hhasidh is from the same stem with hhesedh, often

translated "mercy," but properly "lovingkindness," the

word that appears in the psalm-refrains, "for his mercy

endureth forever," and in such phrases as " the assured

mercies of David." The idea properly conveyed by the

words of this stem is that of kindness or favor, or free

grace —never that of mercy in the sense of compas-

sion.  We shall probably cling to the musical English

 

                                       313

314        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

phrase, "for his mercy endureth forever," but the exact

rendering is, "his lovingkindness is to eternity."

          When the words of this stem are translated by "holy"

or "saint," that confuses them with the words of the

very different stem, qadhash. The adjective of this lat-

ter stem denotes one who is holy in the sense of being

separate by reason of his ceremonial or moral good

character. Yahaweh himself is in this sense preemi-

nently the Holy one, Israel is the one holy nation,

angels or human persons may be holy (e.g. Lev. xx. 7, 26;

Dan. viii. 13, 13, 24; Job v. 1, xv. 15; Pss. xvi. 3, xxxiv.

9). As differing from this, the adjective from the stem

hhasadh should denote a kindly loved one, a dearly loved

one, a favored one, one who is in favor, a favorite one, who

is the object of gracious love and is treated accordingly.

          The lovingkindness denoted by the words of this

stem may be that of any person to any other person,^l but

oftener than in all other uses combined it is Yahaweh's

lovingkindness, under his promise, to Abraham, to

Israel, to the line of David. This is, perhaps, exclu-

sively the usage of hhasidh, as distinguished from the

other words of the stem.

          Hhasidh is properly the passive adjective of the stem,

though it passes readily into a noun, and should, per-

haps, in actual use, be always regarded as a noun. It

denotes that wherein the quality denoted by the stem

resides. That is, it denotes a person in whom loving-

kindness is thought of as resident. When we find the

word used of Yahaweh, he is presented as the person in

whom his own lovingkindness dwells, whence it may

be manifested for the benefit of his creatures. When

we find it applied to men, it describes them as the de-

 

            ¹ For example, the lovingkindness of Abimelech or of Rebekah's

family to Abraham (Gen. xxi. 23, xxiv. 49).

                   YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                         315

 

positaries of Yahaweh's lovingkindness. A hhasidh is

a person to whom or in whom the divine graciousness

and favor are especially manifested. If there is such a

personality as "the hhasidh," then the hhasidh is he

who is distinguished above all others in the matter of

such manifestation. In nearly all the instances, the

human persons who are called hhasidhim are expressly

called Yahaweh's hhasidhim, and in the few remaining

instances this is implied. It is safe to say that there

are no exceptions. When the sacred writers thought of

a man as hhasidh, they invariably thought of him as

Yahaweh's hhasidh.

          Further, it is clear in most of the instances that the

lovingkindness implied in the word hhasidh is Yahaweh's

lovingkindness, and there are no instances from which

this idea is excluded. It goes without saying that persons

in whom Yahaweh makes his lovingkindness known

should themselves practise lovingkindness toward him

and toward other beings; but they are hhasidhim not in

virtue of this, but in virtue of his lovingkindness as

shown in and through them.

          These general statements prepare us to examine the

instances. So far as the statements need proof, the

proof will appear as we proceed.

          The word hhasidh is used in the Old Testament sev-

enteen times in the plural, eleven times in the singular,

and four times where there are variant readings, the

word being singular in some copies and plural in

others.

          Of the instances in which it is used without variant in

the singular, there are probably three in which the mean-

ing is subjective, the term being applied to                 Yahaweh the

Yahaweh himself. In each of the three he                   hhasidh

is presented as himself the repository of his lovingkind-

316    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

ness to Israel. In Jeremiah he urges his characteristic

kindly feeling as the reason why Israel should turn to

him.^l In the great kingdom psalm, the character of

Yahaweh as hhasidh is made parallel with his character

as righteous.² A third instance, not so uniformly recog-

nized, is found in Deuteronomy.³ And this use of the

noun is paralleled by that of the verb in the Hithpael, in

the psalm in which David celebrates Yahaweh's having

rescued him from all his enemies.⁴

          In the seventeen cases in which the word is used in

the plural, with no variant reading, the English versions

Hhasidhim       uniformly translate it "saints."  In these

as used in the    passages the Septuagint translates by o!sioj

plural             except that in some copies, perhaps in the

best copies, ui[oi< is used in 2 Chron. vi. 41. The Vul-

gate, I believe, uniformly has "sanctus." In fourteen

of these passages it is specified that the hhasidhim are

Yahaweh's hhasidhim, while in one place we have "her

hhasidhim," meaning Zion's (Ps. cxxxii. 16), and twice

 

            ¹ "Go thou and proclaim these words toward the north, and say:

               0 turn back thou back-turning Israel, saith Yahaweh;

               I will not cause my face to fall with you,

               For I am hhasidh, saith Yahaweh,

               I will not maintain [my displeasure] forever" (Jer. iii. 12).

Here the Septuagint translates e]lew?n, the Vulgate "sanctus," and the

English RV "merciful."

            ² "Righteous is Yahaweh in all his ways,

                        and hhasidh in all his deeds " (Ps. cxlv. i7).

Septuagint o!sioj, Vulgate " sanctus," RV "gracious."

            ³ "And in regard to Levi he said "— addressing Israel :

               "Thy Thummim and thy Urim are for the man of thy hhasidh,

                [Thy hhasidh] whom thou didst prove at Massah,

                        and wert striving with by the waters of Meribah" (Deut. xxxiii. 8).

Here the Septuagint translates a]ndri> t&? o[si<&, and RV has "thy godly

one," as if Levi were the hhasidh, instead of being "thy hhasidh's man."

            ⁴ "With a hhasidh thou wilt show thyself hhasidh" (2 Sam. xxii. 26;

Ps. xviii. 25).

                   YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                     317

 

we have simply hhasidhim, without the article or other

limiting word (Ps cxlix. 1, 5). If by saints we under-

stand favorites of Deity, rather than holy persons, the

translation conveys a correct idea. The idea itself is

very intelligible, apart from all question of the road by

which it is reached.

          David is prominent in the hhasidh passages, though

there is no uniformity in this. In the cases of undis-

puted plural use, the hhasidhim are primarily the Israel-

ites, but the Israelites regarded as the depositaries of

Yahaweh's lovingkindness, his own people, in covenant

with him. At the same time, these passages have the

same quality of universalness that we have found in

the Servant passages in Isaiah. It is no perversion

of most of them to apply them directly to the case of

any persons who are in gracious relations with God.

Note how these points are illustrated in the following

three instances: —

 

"And he hath lifted up a horn for his people,

  A praise for all his hhasidhim,

  For the sons of Israel, the people that is near him" (Ps. cxlviii. 14).¹

 

"He calleth unto the heaven from above,

          and unto the earth, for judging his people:

Gather ye my hhasidhim to me,

          who made covenant with me by sacrifice" (Ps. 1. 4-5).²

 

"I would hear

          what the God Yahaweh speaketh.

For he speaketh peace

          unto his people and unto his hhasidhim.

And let them not turn again to foolishness" (Ps. lxxxv. 8).³

 

            ¹ This psalm has no title, and David is not mentioned in the context.

            ² The title of this psalm is "A psalm. Asaph's." It does not mention

David.

            ³ The title is "To the leader. To the sons of Korah. A psalm."

David is not mentioned.

318        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          In the use of this term it is quite common to empha-

size faithfulness, and to put wickedness in contrast with

it. The hhasidhim are often those Israelites who avoid

transgression and are true to Yahaweh. This does not,

however, change the definition of the word as above

given. It is especially the faithful Israelites who con-

stitute the Israel of the promise.

 

"Love ye Yahaweh, all ye his hhasidhim.

 Yahaweh preserveth them that are trustworthy,

 And, for the remaining part, requiteth a proud doer " (Ps. xxxi. 23).¹

 

"For Yahaweh is he that loveth judgment,

          and he will not forsake his hhasidhim.

Forever they are kept,

          while a seed of wicked men is cut off" (Ps. xxxvii. 28).²

 

"Ye that love Yahaweh, hate ye evil.

 He keepeth the souls of his hhasidhim,

 From hand of wicked men he rescueth them" (Ps. xcvii. 10).³

 

          It is sometimes alleged that the hhasidhim are a

particular sect or class or set of men, like the priests,

Were the         for example. The strongest instances that

hhasidhim        can be adduced for this are the following, and

a sect?            they are obviously inadequate. In particu-

lar, when the hhasidhim are mentioned in parallelism

with the priests, it is in the character of worshippers,

and not in that of an order like the priestly order.

 

          "Arise, Yahaweh, to thy rest-place,

                    thou and the ark of thy strength.

          Let thy priests be clothed with righteousness,

                    and let thy hhasidhim sing loudly.

 

            ¹ The title is "To the leader. A psalm. David's." It is apparently

written in the person of David, but does not otherwise mention him.

            ² The title is "David's," and the psalm seems to be written in the

person of David, but it does not directly mention him.

            ³ This psalm has no title, and does not mention David.

          YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                 319

 

For the sake of David thy Servant

          turn thou not away the face of thine Anointed."

 

“And her priests I will clothe with salvation,

          while her hhasidhim shall loudly, loudly sing"

                                                  (Ps. cxxxii. 8-9, 16).¹

 

"Let thy priests, 0 Yahaweh God, be clothed with salvation,

while thy hhasidhim rejoice in the good " (2 Chron. vi. 41).²

 

“0 God, nations have come into thine inheritance!

 Have made unclean thy holy temple!

 Have placed Jerusalem for heaps of ruins!

 

"Have given the corpses of thy servants

 As food for the fowl of the heaven;

 The flesh of thy hhasidhim to beasts of earth!" (Ps. lxxix. 1-2).³

 

          If in these last four instances we regard the hhasidhim

as a sect, we may perhaps admit the same usage in

some other passages; but if the usage does not exist in

these four, it does not exist at all. And there is no

strong reason for admitting its existence here. If by

hhasidhim we here understand representative members

of Yahaweh's chosen nation, who are on that account

dearly loved by him, that meets all the conditions of

each of the contexts. There is no need of going fur-

ther and regarding them as a sect or outwardly differ-

entiated class.

          The remaining instances of the undisputed plural use

are the following: —

 

            ¹ The title is "The song of the ascents." The psalm is full of the

 mention of David. The name is in verses 1, 10, 11, 17, and there are

allusions to David in almost every verse.

            ² Here the Chronicler, in his account of the dedication of Solomon's

temple, makes a free citation from Ps. cxxxii, apparently implying that

the psalm was used on that occasion. Here the Swete text has "sons"

instead of "saints."

            ³ The title is "A psalm. Asaph's." David is not mentioned.

320     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

“Sing psalms to Yahaweh, ye his hhasidhim,

          and give thanks to his holy memorial" (Ps. xxx. 4).¹

 

“I will give thee thanks forever because thou hast done it,

And I will wait for thy name, because it is good

          in the presence of thy hhasidhim" (Ps. lii. 9 [11]).²

 

"Precious in the eyes of Yahaweh

          is the death to his hhasidhim" (Ps. cxvi. 15).³

"May all that thou hast made give thee thanks, Yahaweh,

          while thy hhasidhim bless thee" (Ps. cxlv. 10).⁴

 

          "Halleluia!

          Sing ye to Yahaweh a new song,

                    his praise in an assembly of hhasidhim."

          "Let hhasidhim be proud in glory,

                    let them sing loudly upon their beds.

          The high praises of El in their throat,

                    and a two-edged sword in their hand,

          To execute vengeance among the nations."

 

          "To execute among them a written judgment,

                    it is majesty for all his hhasidhim.

          Halleluia!" (Ps. cxlix. 1, 5-7, 9).⁵

 

          Of the instances in which the word is used without

variant in the singular, there is one in which the hhasidh

is a nation, that is, Israel.

          "Judge me, 0 God, and plead

                    my cause from a nation not hhasidh" (Ps. xliii. 1).⁶

 

            ¹ The title is "A psalm. The song of the dedication of the house.

David's." It is natural to understand it as written in the person of

David, though it does not mention him.

            ² The title is "To the leader. Maskil. David's. When Doeg the

Edomite went in and told Saul and said to him, David went in unto the

house of Ahimelech."

            ³ No title. David not mentioned.

            ⁴ Attributed to David in the title.

            ⁵ No title. David not mentioned.

            ⁶ Septuagint o[si<on, RV "an ungodly nation."

                   YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                     321

 

This non-hhasidh nation may be some other nation in

contrast with Israel; or it may be Israel, the nation

that ought to be hhasidh but is not. In either case we

have by implication the conception of Israel as the

hhasidh, the nation that is made up of hhasidhim.

          In the remaining instances of use without variant in

the singular, hhasidh denotes some human person. In

these instances it is uniformly without the                            A human

article, and without a limiting genitive. In                            hhasidh

most of the instances the English versions utterly fail

to give the essential meaning.

          We may begin with the following, attributed in its

title to David: —

          "Bow down thine ear, 0 LORD, and answer me;

            For I am poor and needy.

            Preserve my soul; for I am godly:

            0 thou my God, save thy servant that trusteth in thee"

                                                            (Ps. lxxxvi. 1-2 RV).

 

          Changing this translation so that it may show the

form of the original, it becomes: —

          "O keep thou my soul, for a hhasidh am I;

          Save thy servant, 0 thou my God,

                    who trusteth in thee."

 

That is, the speaker in the psalm declares himself to

be a hhasidh. According to the earliest understanding

of the psalm of which we are cognizant, we have here

David claiming to be Yahaweh's hhasidh, and on that

claim entreating the divine favor.

          In the psalm in which David commemorates his

deliverance from all his enemies, we have the couplet,

as rendered in the revised version:

 

          "With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful;

          With the perfect man thou wilt shew thyself perfect"

                                                  (Ps. xviii. 25; 2 Sam. xxii. 26).

322     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

The English makes the mistaken impression that

"the merciful" is a plural term. Further, if one un-

derstands the word as meaning compassionate, he will

be misled by it. He will see the true meaning if he

puts the clause in the following form: —

 

          "With a hhasidh thou showest thyself hhasidh."

 

          David is here represented as claiming, either directly

or indirectly, that he is Yahaweh's hhasidh, and that

Yahaweh treats him accordingly.

Look at a third instance: —

 

"And know ye that Yahaweh hath distinguished to himself a

          hhasidh;

It is Yahaweh that heareth when I call unto him" (Ps. iv. 3).

 

Here again the title says that the speaker is David.

The Septuagint translates "hath made his hosion won-

derful." As in the preceding two instances, the speaker

claims to be Yahaweh's hhasidh. He gives that as a

reason why all attempts of men against him will be

futile. As in the preceding instances it is possible to

make this claim indirect: Yahaweh distinguishes as his

own any person who bears the hhasidh character, and

I am such a person. But it is simpler to understand

the claim as direct: Yahaweh has distinguished one

person as his hhasidh, and I am that person.

The following instance is somewhat different: —

 

          "Help, LORD, for the godly man ceaseth;

            For the faithful fail from among the children of men"

                                                                      (Ps. xii. 1 RV).

         

The impression made on most English readers is that

the failing and ceasing are in progress, that one godly

man after another is ceasing to be, and that the faithful

are failing, one after another. This impression is incor-

rect. The verbs are in the perfect, and the fact de-

                YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                   323

 

scribed is a fact thought of as complete. Further, the

subjects are without the article. The following transla-

tion gives the form: —

 

          "O save, Yahaweh, for a hhasidh hath ceased."

 

It is possible to regard the noun as collective, indicating

that hhasidhim generally have gone out of existence.

But the simplest interpretation is that the psalm laments

the downfall (not necessarily the death) of some particu-

lar person who is here called a hhasidh. Possibly his

restoration is spoken of in the fifth verse: —

 

          "I will set him in safety at whom they puff."

 

A similar instance is found in the book of Micah.

          "The godly man is perished out of the earth,

           And there is none upright among men" (Mic. vii. 2 RV).

 

Give this its exact form, and its implications are

different.

          "A hhasidh hath perished from the earth,

                    while an upright one among mankind is not."

 

In this case the Septuagint has eu]sebh<j instead of the

usual o!sioj. The natural understanding is that we have

here a reference to the death of some distinguished

individual, whom the prophet thinks of as Yahaweh's

hhasidh, and whose departure opens the way for all

license and wrong-doing.

          There is one more instance: —

 

          "For this let every one that is godly pray unto thee"

                                                            (Ps. xxxii. 6 RV).

 

Changing the form this becomes: "Concerning this

every hhasidh prayeth," or "one who is wholly hhasidh

prayeth." And again, either directly or indirectly, we

have the speaker in the psalm, evidently David, count-

ing himself as Yahaweh's hhasidh.

324     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          In most or all of these seven instances, the person

who is called a hhasidh is not indefinitely some one of

the hhasidhim taken at random, though that would be a

natural use of language, but is a person who is thought

of as having a preeminent right to be called hhasidh.

In most of the instances he is the speaker, and the

speaker is of the house of David. In other words, the

hhasidh is the person who would in other diction be

called the Anointed one.

          This is still more marked in certain of the remaining

instances, those in which some copies have the word in

The cases         the singular, and some in the plural. As we

of variant         have seen, there are four of these instances.

readings          In each of them the word has a genitive pro-

noun. In two of them the evidence seems decisive in

favor of the reading in the singular. The first is from

the sixteenth psalm, attributed to David by its title and

by New Testament witnesses.

 

          " For thou wilt not abandon my soul to sheol,

                    Thou wilt not give thy hhasidh to see destruction "

                                                                                (Ps. xvi. 10).

 

Here the documentary evidence preponderates in favor

of the singular. The two lines give in different words

the same meaning. "My soul"— that is, "myself"—

in one line corresponds to "thy hhasidh" in the other.

Myself not being abandoned to sheol is the same thing

with thy hhasidh not seeing destruction. The hhasidh

therefore is here the speaker, represented to be David;

and yet not David as a mere individual, but David as

the depositary of Yahaweh's lovingkindness. The

man David may die, but the hhasidh is eternal. Just

as David is the Anointed one, and yet the Anointed

one is eternal; just as David is the Servant, and yet

the Servant is eternal; so David is the hhasidh, and

              YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                    325

 

yet the hhasidh is eternal. David as an individual

went to the grave, and saw corruption there, but the

representative of Yahaweh's eternal promise did not

cease to exist. Peter's argument in the second chapter

of Acts might be fallacious if his claim was that David

in this psalm does not refer to himself; but this is not

what Peter claims. He claims that David does not

refer merely to himself in his ordinary character.

          Peter and Paul are critically correct in arguing that

the meaning is not exhausted when the words have been

applied to the mortal man David, but extends on into

the future, along the line of the eternal promise. And

they are correct in claiming that the hhasidh is pre-

eminently Jesus Christ (Acts ii. 25-31, xiii. 35).

          As the word is used in the prayer of Hannah, the

preponderance of proof is in favor of the singular.

 

          "The feet of his hhasidh he keepeth,

                    *        *        *        *        *

          Upon him in the heaven he thundereth,

                    it is Yahaweh that judgeth earth's uttermost parts;

          That he may give strength to his king,

                    and may exalt the horn of his Anointed one"

                                                                      (1 Sam. ii. 9-10).

 

If the word is here in the singular number, then the

representation is that in the ideals of Hannah Yaha-

weh's hhasidh and his king and his Anointed one are

all the same person.

          In the eighty-ninth psalm is the familiar line: —

"Then thou spakest in vision to thy hhasidhim " (or hhasidh,

ver. 19).

 

And in Proverbs: —

 

          "To preserve paths of judgment,

                    and the way of his hhasidhim (hhasidh) he keepeth " (ii. 8).

 

In these the word is probably plural. If so, the pas-

326       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

sages are like the other seventeen that use the word in

the plural. If, on the other hand, you decide that the

word is in the singular in these two places, then they

are somewhat notable additional instances of the men-

tion of Yahaweh's one preeminent hhasidh.

          Summing up the results we have reached, hhasidh,

though sometimes translated merciful, does not prop-

Summary         erly denote a compassionate person, though

of results         the person in whom Yahaweh's lovingkind-

ness dwells ought to be compassionate. It is trans-

lated pious, godly, godly, one, holy one, but none of

these translations are exact, though it is to be pre-

sumed that the person in whom Yahaweh's lovingkind-

ness is displayed will be pious, godly, kind, holy. It is

translated saint, gracious one, favorite, he whom Yaha-

weh favoreth, and, in a certain direction, these terms

approach the true meaning; but the hhasidh is not

properly the person in whom Yahaweh's lovingkind-

ness in general dwells, but the one in whom dwells

Yahaweh's particular lovingkindness as manifested in

the eternal covenant with Abraham and Israel and

David.

          Like all the benefits of this eternal promise, Yaha-

weh's lovingkindness is for the nations, but for the

nations through Israel. The principles on which he

deals with one part of mankind are the principles on

which he deals with all; the privileges of hhasidhim are

not restricted to one race; but it is through Israel that

they are offered to mankind. In all the representations

that are made the hhasidhim are Israelite. The word

in the plural is applied to Israelites, and in the singular

it once denotes by implication the Israelitish nation.

To this extent its use is parallel to that of the terms

"servants" and "Servant " in the second half of Isaiah.

                     YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                    327

 

          The word hhasidh in the singular, however, is like the

word "Messiah" rather than like the word "Servant";

its use points to David rather than to Israel. Several

of the passages where the word is used in the plural

have a context that speaks of David, and about half of

these passages are attributed to David, either in the

psalm titles or otherwise. Six of the eight places

where hhasidh in the singular denotes a man or a

nation are in Davidic psalms, and the other two have

possible Davidic affiliations. Usually the hhasidh de-

noted by the word in the singular is either David or

the inheritor of the promise made to the eternal seed

of David.

          The representation is that this idea existed in the

minds of some of the devout in Israel as early as the

time of Hannah the mother of Samuel; that they be-

lieved in the promise that Yahaweh had made; that

they expected that kings would descend from Jacob, and

that the law of Moses concerning the kingdom would

become operative; that they thought of this as the

manifestation of Yahaweh's lovingkindness; that they

looked forward to a future when Yahaweh's hhasidh,

his king, his Anointed, should exist and reign. After-

ward, in David's time and later, this idea became

prominent. In their relations to the eternal promise

Israelites came to think of themselves as hhasidhim, of

the nation taken collectively as Yahaweh's hhasidh, of

any particular obedient Israelite as a hhasidh, especially

of David and David's promised eternal seed as a hhasidh,

of the person who was at any time the inheritor of

David's throne as preeminently the hhasidh of that

generation. Those whose thinking was deepest thought

thus of the Davidic hhasidh, not in virtue of his stand-

ing as an individual, but in virtue of his being the

328     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

representative of the eternal promise to men through

Abraham and Israel and David.

          In the Maccabaean times there were Jews who called

themselves hhasidhim, or, as the name has come to

The                us through Greek sources, Asideans. They

Asideans         seem to have been a religious reform party,

precursors of the Pharisees. They were commonly in

sympathy with the political patriots, though apparently

not always. They took their name of course from the

scriptures. If it had been in the scriptures from the

time of David and earlier, its ancientness fitted it all

the better for their use. There is nothing in the history

of the Asideans that necessarily calls for any modifi-

cation of our exegesis of the passages.

          There are critics, however, who regard the hhasidh

passages as of late date, many of them having been

written by the Asideans or their contemporaries. I do

not accept this opinion. If I did, I should have to

modify what I have said about the hhasidh only to the

extent of saying that this was in Israel a comparatively

late way of looking at the matter.

          The men of the New Testament are not careful to

keep the hhasidh line of expressions distinct. The word  

Hhasidh                    o!sioj and its cognates they use but sparingly.

expressions      Twice they quote from the sixteenth psalm

in the New       the clause "Thou wilt not give thy hosion to

Testament        see corruption" (Acts ii. 27, xiii. 35). Once they

quote literally from the Greek of Isa. lv. 3: "The assured

lovingkindness of David," ta> o!sia Dauei>d ta> pista<

(Acts xiii. 34). About eight times more they use o!sioj

or its derivatives in connections that make good sense

equally whether we give the words the hhasidh meaning

or not (I Tim. ii. 8; Tit. i. 8; Heb. vii. 26; Rev. xv. 4,

xvi. 5; Lc. i. 75; Eph. iv. 24; I Thess. ii. 10).  But

                   YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                  329

 

it is possible that in the very numerous places where

they speak of being holy or of saints, using the word

a!gioj and its cognates, they frequently had in mind

the ideas that the Hebrew expresses by words of the

hhasidh stem. In particular, the New Testament

"saints" are often hhasidhim rather than q'doshim.

          II. We must deal summarily with the remaining

messianic terms, though some of them are exceedingly

interesting. The list here given makes no claim to

completeness. It includes only such instances as I

have happened to note.

          Christians are accustomed to speak of Christ as

Saviour and Redeemer. These terms are not in this

especial sense applied in the Old Testament to the

messianic person. Any person may supposably be a

saviour or a redeemer. In the Old Testament "the

Saviour," "the Redeemer," is commonly Yahaweh.

          In Isa. ix. 6 is a list of epithets which we apply

familiarly to the Messiah, —"Wonderful one, Coun-

sellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of

Peace."  Whatever else we make of this diction, the

terms are descriptive epithets rather than technical

designations like Servant and Messiah and hhasidh.

The like may be said of Haggai's phrase "the Desire

of all nations " (ii. 7 OV), and of other similarly well-

known phrases.

          Taking up the technical terms that are properly such,

we find that they arrange themselves in two classes, —

those which, like the term "Servant," primarily denote

Israel the promise-people, and those which, like "Mes-

siah," primarily denote the king of the line of David.

          1. Among the terms of the first of these two classes,

the one most to the front is probably "my Chosen one,"

"my Elect one." The stem bahhar has a usage

330        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

extending to perhaps three hundred occurrences in the

Old Testament. The verb is almost uniformly translated

Yahaweh's       by "choose," and is used with subjects and

Chosen one      objects of all kinds. It is the verb that is

commonly used of Yahaweh's choosing Israel, or choos-

ing Jerusalem to put his name there, or choosing David,

or choosing the Servant (e.g. Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2 I Ki.

iii. 8, xi. 13, 32, 34; Isa. xli. 8, 9, xliii. 10). The pas-

sive adjective bahhir denotes an object that is char-

acterized by having been chosen. It appears in the

plural seven times, always denoting Israelites (1 Chron.

xvi. 13; Pss. cv. 6, 43, cvi. 5; Isa. lxv. 9, 15, 22). It is

used in the singular six times, once of Saul, once of

Moses, once of David, three times of the people Israel

(2 Sam. xxi. 6; Pss. cvi. 23, lxxxix. 3; Isa. xlii. 1, xliii.

20, xlv. 4). When used of David and of Israel, it is

three times in parallelism with Servant. The passive

participle is used as the equivalent of the noun in

Ps. lxxxix. 19.

          This showing needs no comment. Yahaweh's Chosen

one and his chosen ones are the same with his Servant

and his servants as presented in the last twenty-seven

chapters of Isaiah. In the New Testament the term in

the singular is in a few places, some of them citations

from the Old Testament, applied to Christ (e.g. Matt.

xii. 18; Lc. xxiii. 35; I Pet. ii. 4, 6), and in both the

singular and the plural is often applied to Christians as

the inheritors of the promise.

          Three additional terms of the same kind, though in-

frequently used in the records that have come down to

Jeshurun,         us, are Jeshurun (Isa. xliv. 2; Deut. xxxii. 15,

Meshullam,      xxxiii. 5, 26), Meshullam (Isa. xlii. 19), my

my Called        Called one (Isa. xlviii. 12).          Jeshurun is

one                commonly explained as a diminutive of endearment,

 

                  YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                    331

 

meaning upright one. Meshullam means "perfected

one." Though it occurs only once in this use in our

scriptures, it was not perhaps an infrequent term. It

also occurs as the proper name of more than twenty

different persons. My Called one appears as a singular

use of a word of a very common stem.

          In the places in which Israel or David or David's

seed are designated as Yahaweh's son, that word is to

be regarded as a messianic term. In Chap-                  Yahaweh's

ter X we have already considered this term                Son

as marking slightly the records of the time of the exo-

dus (Ex. iv. 22, 23; Deut. i. 31, xxxii. 6), and as mark-

ing more prominently the records of the time of David

and later. In these later times the habit of represent-

ing the Israelitish people as Yahaweh's son still persists.

Note a few examples: —

 

          "When Israel was a boy, then I loved him,

                    and from Egypt I called to my son" (Hos. xi. 1).¹

 

          "Ephraim . . . is a son not wise" (Hos. xiii. 12-13).

 

          "I said, How shall I put thee among sons? . . . ye shall call

me, My father" (Jer. iii. 19).

 

          "I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn."

          "Is Ephraim a precious son to me, or a child of caresses? For

altogether as I have spoken with him, I will surely still remember

him" (Jer. xxxi. 9, 20).

 

          In the matter of use in the singular and the plural,

this term is like the terms "Servant" and hhasidh; as

in the singular it denotes Israel, so in the plural it

 

            ¹ When Matthew says (ii. 15) that this was "fulfilled" in the flight of

Jesus to Egypt and his return thence, he means, of course, that it was ful-

filled in the sense of there being an interesting coincidence between the

experience of Israel and that of Jesus—not in the sense of an intended

foretelling on the part of the prophet.

332      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

sometimes denotes Israelites who are true to their

descent.  See Isa. lxiii. 8, 16, lxiv. 8.¹

          The term is more conspicuous in the passages in

which the seed of David is spoken of as the Son of

Yahaweh, though here the conspicuity is due rather to

the character of the passages than to their number.

We have already looked at the expression as it occurs

in the original account of the promise to David (2 Sam.

vii. 14; 1 Chron. xvii. 13). It is equally prominent in

the passages that cite that account, for example: —

 

"It is he that shall build a house to my name, while he himself

shall be to me for a son, and I to him for a father" (I Chron.

xxii. 10),      

or, —

          "He shall call me, My father thou,

            My God and the rock of my salvation,

            Yea, I myself will give him to be firstborn,

            A most high to kings of earth " (Ps. lxxxix. 26-27).²

 

So we are not surprised at finding in the second psalm

a personage who is called Yahaweh's Anointed, but of

whom Yahaweh says: —

 

          "Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee" (7).³

 

The most jubilant passage in Isaiah is the exultation

over the Son who is born to us, to sit on the throne of

David, but who is to be called Mighty God and Ever-

 

            ¹ Other instances of this mode of representation may be found in Jer.

iii. 4; Mal. i. 6, ii. to, iii. 17.

            ² It is noticeable that the phrase "give thee to he a most high" seems

to be taken from Deuteronomy (xxvi. 19, xxviii. 1), the author thus com-

bining in one view the promise to David and that to the Israel of the

exodus.

            ³ In the English versions, this psalm also contains the exhortation to

"kiss the son," that is, to do him homage (12). This is possibly correct,

though the word is bar, and not ben, as in verse 7. Perhaps, however,

the correct translation is, "Do ye homage sincerely."

                    YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                     333

 

lasting Father (ix. 6). Ezekiel represents Yahaweh as

speaking of "the sceptre of my Son" (xxi. 10 [15]),

and though the passage is obscure, Yahaweh's Son can

here be no other than the occupant of the throne of the

line of David.

          The term "Son" is subject to certain modes of use

that are peculiar to it. The "seed," whether of Abra-

ham or of David, was to be perpetuated by                           Sons of

fresh births in each generation. The promise                         Promise

is therefore in part a promise of perpetual parentage.

Critical points in its history are marked by the gift of

promised sons, such as Isaac, Ishmael, Samson, Samuel,

Solomon. In these cases the mothers are made promi-

nent, witness Sarah and Hagar and Manoah's wife and

Hannah and Bathsheba. There is, so to speak, a son-

ship of human motherhood, as well as a sonship of

divine fatherhood. And in connection with this a cer-

tain formula appears in the successive parts of the

record. It is given most completely in connection with

Hagar's bearing of Ishmael.

 

          "And the Angel of Yahaweh said to her, Behold thou art preg-

nant and about to bear a son, and thou shalt call his name Ishmael "

(Gen. xvi. 11).

 

Less complete versions of the formula appear in con-

nection with the giving of Isaac and of Samson (Gen.

xvii. 19; Jud. xiii. 5, 7).

          These phenomena should not be neglected when we

study the sign given through Isaiah to Ahaz, which

Matthew cites as a prophecy concerning the                         The virgin

virgin mother (Isa. vii. 14–16; Matt. i. 22–23).                               mother

With only the substitution of Immanuel, "God with

us," for Ishmael, "God heareth," Isaiah's words in the

Hebrew are exactly the same with those uttered to

Hagar: —

334        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          "Behold, thou the almah art pregnant and about to bear a son,

and thou shalt call his name Immanuel."¹

 

The sign given to Ahaz consists in the repeating to him

of a familiar form of words promising the birth of a son,

with the implication that certain events would come to

pass before a child then soon to be born would be old

enough to distinguish good from evil. The sign was

proved true when, within a few years, the events fore-

told came to pass. Those who heard the prophet's

words understood him to be preaching to Ahaz the

familiar doctrine of the promise. There is no absurdity

in supposing that the prophet himself knew by inspira-

tion that he was foretelling a miraculous birth some

centuries in the future. But if this seems to any of us

improbable, we may find room enough for the disposal

of all difficulties in the wide latitude of meaning with

which Matthew frequently uses the phrase "that it

 

            ¹ The Hebrew verb "call" is here second person feminine (cf. Jer.

iii. 4; Gen. xvi. 11; Isa. lx. 18, in contrast with the third person feminine in

Gen. xxix. 35, xxx. 6; I Chron. iv. 9), and this controls the person of the

preceding adjective and participle. The Greek translates the adjective

and participle by verbs in the third person, but the verb "call" in the

second person, the Greek not being able to distinguish the gender.

Matthew follows the Greek, changing "thou shalt call" to the indefinite

"they shall call."

            Almah is not the distinctive word for virgin. So far as derivation goes,

its proper meaning is young woman of marriageable age.  But there is no

trace of its use to denote any other than a virgin. It denotes Rebekah

(Gen. xxiv. 43), the sister of Moses (Ex. ii. 8), timbrel players (Ps.

lxviii. 25), young women as distinguished from queens and concubines

(Cant. vi. 8), young women (Cant. i. 3). It occurs twice as a technical

term in regard to the public songs (Ps. xlvi, title; 1 Chron. xv. 20).

Finally, it appears in the clause "the way of a man with a maid"

(Prow. xxx. 19). Here the allusion is to the mystery of "love's young

dream," and the meaning is fine and worthy. It is absurd to make the

meaning degraded and dirty, by regarding the almah as not a virgin. In

fine, the Greek translators chose deliberately and correctly when they

chose parqe<noj as the translation here, and Matthew made no mistake

when he so understood their translation.

                  YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                    335

 

might be fulfilled." Matthew was sure that the virgin

birth of Jesus was a fact. He found that the words of

Isaiah were in remarkable and interesting correspon-

dence with this fact. This justifies his language, irre-

spective of the question whether the words are to be

regarded as properly foretelling the fact.^l

          Returning from this digression concerning the sons

of promise and the prophecy of the virgin mother, we

note once more that when the word "Son" is                         Summary

used as a messianic term, the Son is either                           concerning

Israel or the existing representative of the                                       the Son

house of David, thought of as the fulfilling of the eter-

nal promise. The Son will always exist. Though he is

explicitly said to be Israel, or is expressly identified

with some member of the house of David, he is also in

certain passages (e.g. Ps. ii or Isa. ix. 2-7) declared to

be a superhumanly exalted person. We have here the

same phenomena that we have in the case of the Ser-

vant, and they are to be accounted for in the same way.

          We must not delay to trace the later history of this

term, or its relations to what the New Testament has to

say concerning the Son of David, the Son of God, the

Son of man, the fatherhood of God.

          2. We have already crossed the line that separates

the messianic terms which primarily denote Israel from

those that primarily denote the Davidic king. The

term "Son" is significant in both ways. We now take

up other Davidic terms.

          Words of two different Hebrew stems are in our

English versions translated by our word "Branch," the

word being in some bibles so printed as to                           The Branch,

indicate that it has a special use. One of                                         Tsemahh

these two is the noun tsemahh with its cognate verb.

 

            ¹ See article in Homiletic Review for April, 1889.

336       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

The verb denotes the coming up of a shoot from a root

or a seed, or the branching off of a shoot from a stem.

For the noun we will use the traditional translation

"branch." Examine first the passage in Isa. iv. 2-6: —

 

          "In that day the Branch of Yahaweh shall be for beauty and for

honor, and the Fruit of the land for pride and for glory to them that

are escaped of Israel; and it shall come to pass that he that remain-

eth in Zion, and he that is left over in Jerusalem, shall be called

holy, even every one that is written for life in Jerusalem; when the

Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and

shall cleanse the bloodguiltiness of Jerusalem from the midst of

her."

 

It is obvious that the terms "the Branch of Yahaweh"

and "the Fruit of the land" may here be employed as

designations for the dynasty of David, or for the reign-

ing king in that dynasty. In other words, these phrases

may be terms equivalent in signification to Anointed

one or hhasidh. Some think, however, that these terms

here have not this significance, but are mere expressions

for the crops and for agricultural prosperity. It seems

to me that the messianic interpretation is the correct

one.

          However it may be with this passage in Isaiah, the

instances that follow are not open to doubt. To get

The Branch      the full meaning of the two passages now

in Jeremiah      to be cited from Jeremiah they should be

read carefully in their contexts. The first is immedi-

ately introduced by two verses in which Yahaweh

promises the return of "my flock out of all the coun-

tries whither I have driven them," and that he will

place satisfactory shepherds over them. Then the

promise proceeds:--

         

          "Behold, days are coming, so saith Yahaweh, when I will raise

up to David a righteous Branch; and a king shall reign, and shall

deal skilfully, and shall do judgment and righteousness in the

                     YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                          337

 

earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, while Israel shall abide

securely. And this is his name which one shall call him, Our-

righteousness-is-Yahaweh.

          "Therefore behold, days are coming, so saith Yahaweh, when

they shall no longer say, As Yahaweh liveth who brought up the sons

of Israel from the land of Egypt, but, As Yahaweh liveth who brought

up and brought in the seed of the house of Israel from the land of

the north, and from all the lands whither I had driven them, and

they dwelt upon their own ground" (Jer. xxiii. 5-8).

 

          In the second of the two passages in Jeremiah, the

promise of the return is expanded to half a chapter

(xxxiii. 6-13), and then follow the words: —

 

          "Behold, days are coming, so saith Yahaweh, when I will estab-

lish the good word which I have spoken unto the house of Israel

and concerning the house of Judah. In those days and in that time

I will cause to branch forth to David a righteous Branch, and he

shall do judgment and righteousness in the earth. In those days

Judah shall be saved, while Jerusalem shall abide securely. And

this is [the name] which one shall call her, Our-righteousness-is-

Yahaweh.

          "For thus saith Yahaweh, There shall not be cut off to David

a man sitting upon the throne of the house of Israel" (Jer. xxxiii.

14-17).

 

This is followed by nine long verses magnifying the

promise which Yahaweh has made to the Levite priests

and to David and Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and

comparing the eternity and exactness of his covenant

with them to the eternity and exactness of his covenant

of the day and the night as exhibited in the movements

of the heavenly bodies.

          These passages need no comment. In both, the

Branch is the representative of the line of David, reign-

ing according to promise over Yahaweh's kingdom.¹

 

            ¹ Some of the differences between the two passages are interesting. In

both Israel is expressly included, as well as Judah. In one it is the Branch

that is named Our-righteousness-is-Yahaweh, while in the other it is Jeru-

salem.

338       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          In the time after the exile when Zerubbabel and the

highpriest Jeshua were building the temple, when the

The Branch      prophecies of Jeremiah concerning the return

in Zechariah     after seventy years were much in the thoughts

of the Jewish leaders, we find Jeremiah's doctrine of the

Branch applied to Zerubbabel, the representative for his

generation of the house of David. In each case the

prophet addresses the highpriest, but he speaks to him

concerning Zerubbabel.

 

          "O Joshua the highpriest, listen, pray, thou and thy companions

that sit before thee; for they are men who are a sign; for behold,

I am causing to come to pass my Servant Branch" (Zech. iii. 8).¹

 

In the fuller passage (Zech. vi. 9-15), the prophet is

directed to make crowns for the highpriest and his

companions (11, 14), and place one of them upon the

head of the highpriest,² giving him this message:--

 

          "Thus saith Yahaweh of hosts, saying, Behold, [there is] a man,

his name is Branch, and from beneath himself he shall branch forth

and build the temple of Yahaweh; it being he that shall build the tem-

ple of Yahaweh, and he that shall carry majesty, and he shall sit and

shall rule upon his throne; and there shall be a priest beside his throne,

and peaceful counsel shall be between them two" (Zech. vi. 12-13).³

 

            ¹ "I will bring forth" (RV) is incorrect, and misses the meaning.

"Bring in" would be correct. The Branch is spoken of as something that

had been promised, and the promise is now to be made good.

            ² "And set [them]" (11). The object is not expressed. RV is incorrect

in failing to italicize "them." Of course it was one crown only, and not

all the crowns, that he was to set on the head of the highpriest. The

crowns were apparently not kingly. The Persian government might have

resented anything that looked like kingly state on the part of these men.

The account specifies five men who are to have the crowns, and that seems

to exclude Zerubbabel.

            ³ In the last clause but one the translation might be "a priest upon

his throne," which would give us a picture of a priestly throne in addition

to the throne of the Branch. In any case there are two of them. The

Branch is one and the priest is another, and the Branch is Zerubbabel and

not Joshua.

                     YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                   339

 

          Zechariah regards Jeremiah's prediction as fulfilled

in Zerubbabel, and he expects that through him will

come the building of the temple, and good govern-

ment and prosperity, and a large immigration of return-

ing Jews; but that did not hinder his recognizing the

fact that Jeremiah had said that the Branch stands for

something that is as eternal as day and night. Ful-

filled in Zerubbabel, the promise concerning the Branch

still remained in existence, ready for whatever com-

pleter fulfilment Yahaweh might have in store. There

is no clear recognition of the Branch in the New

Testament, but clearly the expression is parallel to

Anointed one and hhasidh. In the passage cited

from Zech. iii Servant is used as an equivalent

term, and the fact that David and Israel are from

the promise point of view identical is brought out in

the several passages.

          The other word which our versions translate by

"Branch" is netser. "Flower" is a better rendering.

 

          "Thy people being all of them righteous, . . . the The Branch.

Flower of my plantings, the deed of my hands" (Isa. Netser

lx. 21).

          "And there shall come forth a bud-shoot out of the stem of Jesse,

                    while a Flower out of his roots shall be fruitful" (Isa. xi. 1).¹

 

In one of these passages netser denotes the idealized

Israelitish people, and in the other the idealized Davidic

king. The last passage is so very marked as to make

the word conspicuous in spite of the paucity of the

 

            ¹ The word occurs elsewhere only twice: —

            "Thou art cast out of thy grave like a discarded flower" (Isa. xiv. 19).

            "And out of the flower of her roots shall one stand up" (Dan. xi. 7).

And it is the only word of the stem, though it may be akin to a stem that

denotes to preserve.

340        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

instances. If one were to choose the one Old Testa-

ment messianic passage that would best serve as a type,

it is possible that his choice might fall upon Isa. xi.

1-10. This passage is cited in the New Testament often

indirectly and once (Rom. xv. 12) formally. It presents

in a strong light "the root of Jesse that standeth for an

ensign of peoples" (10), and the "Flower from his

roots" that will surely become fruit; this Flower rested

upon by the Spirit of Yahaweh, wielding universal do-

minion, the result being good government and peaceful

prosperity and the knowing of Yahaweh throughout the

earth. We must not delay upon the details. In the

mind of the prophet's first hearers the netser may sup-

posably have been Hezekiah, or have been an ideal king

of David's line, but he was so as a link in the promise

made for eternity by Yahaweh to Abraham and Israel

and David and mankind.

          The word hhoter, translated "bud-shoot" in the pas-

sage just cited, is perhaps entitled to mention among

the messianic terms, but it need not delay us.

Not least important among these terms, though left

in the background in the English versions, is the word

Nagidh,           nagidh, variously translated captain, ruler,

that is,             prince, chief ruler, leader, chief governor,

Regent            nobles, etc. It is one of three words of a

stem that is much used. One is a preposition signify-

ing in front of. A second is the verb that signifies to

lay before one, that is, to announce, declare, make

known, tell. The word nagidh is used in most parts

of the Old Testament, but its use is more frequent and

more varied in Chronicles than in the other books. In

general it denotes a person or a tribe that is in front of

others, commanding attention and obedience; one that

is before others, not in the sense of being first in the

 

 

                      YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                       341

 

order of march, but in the sense of being looked to for

orders; one that is second only to the supreme authority;

one that has the primacy, a primate, viceroy, lieutenant,

regent. The English word "regent" sometimes denotes

a person who performs the duties of the sovereign

because the sovereign is too young, or is otherwise in-

competent. Excluding this use, the English word will

translate nagidh wherever it occurs, and ordinarily with

implications the same as those of the Hebrew word.¹

We have heretofore found that the human person who

is over Yahaweh's kingdom on earth is called king,

Yahaweh's Anointed. When the word nagidh is used,

we have a different way of presenting the matter. In

 

            ¹ Five times the word is plural (2 Chron. xi. 11, xxxv. 8; Job xxix. 10;

Ps. lxxvi. 12; Prov. viii. 6), the persons denoted being military or ecclesi-

astical officers or others of high rank. Three times the regent is an officer

of the highest rank in a foreign nation (2 Chron. xxxii. 21; Ezek. xxviii.

2; Dan. ix. 26). About eleven times, besides instances in the plural, he

is at the head of a department in Israel, the temple, the priesthood, the

treasures, the house (1 Chron. ix. 11; 2 Chron. xxxi. 13; Jer. xx. 1; Neh.

xi. 11; 1 Chron. ix. 20, xii. 27, xxvi. 24; 2 Chron. xxxi. 12, xxviii. 7;

1 Chron. xiii. 1). Four times the regent is of especially high rank, but

is not otherwise designated (1 Chron. xxvii. 4, 16; Job xxxi. 37; Prov.

xxviii. 16). Zebadiah, "the regent of the house of Judah" (not the tribe,

but the royal house), was, next to the king himself, over the people "in all

the king's matters" (2 Chron. xix. 11). Abijah was made regent at the

head of his brothers the sons of Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi. 22).

            This general use of the word may serve to define it when it is applied

to the king of Yahawelrs kingdom. David is represented as saying that

Yahaweh has chosen Judah for Regent (I Chron. xxviii. 4). Though

Reuben was the firstborn, Judah had the birthright, so that the Regent

came from him (i Chron. v. 2). Saul and David and Solomon and Jero-

boam and Baasha and Hezekiah are in their kingly character each spoken

of as Regent (1 Sam. ix. 16, x. 1, xiii. 14, xxv. 30; 2 Sam. v. 2, vi. 21;

1 Chron. xi. 2, xxix. 22; 1 Ki. i. 35, xiv. 7, xvi. 2; 2 Ki. xx. 5). And this

way of speaking is employed in the passages that treat specifically of the

promise (2 Sam. vii. 8; 1 Chron. xvii. 7; 2 Chron. vi. 5; Isa. lv. 4; Dan.

ix. 25, xi. 22).

 

342    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

this mode of speech the king is Yahaweh, and the hu-

man monarch is Yahaweh's Regent, his grand vizier,

his supreme representative, second in rank only to

himself.

          This list would be incomplete if we omitted the term

"my Lord" as used in the opening of the one hundred

My Lord,         and tenth psalm. The one who uses the

in Ps. CX         phrase is speaking in the person of David,

and the person of whom he speaks is Yahaweh's king

or Regent. This would be clear even if we had not the

word of Jesus and the writers of the New Testament

for it (Matt. xxii. 43–45; Mc. xii.. 36; Lc. xx. 42–44;

Acts ii. 34–35; Heb. i. 13, x. 13; I Cor. xv. 25, etc.).

Deferring to the next chapter our examination of the

contents of the psalm, we now only note the name "my

Lord" as here applied to this conquering king, who

sits at Yahaweh's right hand, second in authority only

to him.

          In regard to each of the terms in the list we have

been examining, we might repeat, with the requisite

Common         changes in details, certain things that have

character of      been already said concerning the Servant and

the messianic      the Messiah. Each one of them is so univer-

terms              sal that it might be applied to any person or

personified aggregate, thought of as representing Yahaweh's

redemptive purposes for mankind. Each one was

primarily understood to denote either Israel or the

contemporary representative of the line of David, or

both, thought of as standing for Yahaweh's promised

blessing to mankind. But in each case this contem-

porary person or personified people is a link in an end-

less chain. The prophets never forget that the promise

is for eternity. They taught that the Servant or the

hhasidh or the Branch or the Son or the Regent belong

 

                    YAHAWEH'S HHASIDH                      343

 

to the present and the past, but also to future genera-

tions without limit. They looked forward to the future

manifestation of the Servant or the hhasidh or the

Branch or the Son or the Regent in such glory as

should eclipse all earlier manifestations.

 

 

 

 

 

                         

                             CHAPTER XV

 

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE

 

 

          Thus far we have been dealing with the direct state-

ments made in the Old Testament concerning the prom-

ise. In the present chapter we are to look at certain

less direct ways in which it gives testimony in the

matter.

          The central line of the Old Testament records is that

of the history of Israel. We have traced the messianic

                    promise in that history, up to the time when

Summary         the psalmists and prophets whose works re-

main to us took up the doctrine. We have noticed how

these poets and preachers of Israel found the promise

in existence and made it the principal theme of their

songs and sermons, regarding it as the central doctrine

of their religion, and treating it accordingly. We have

made a study of some of the terms which they created

for the expressing of this doctrine: Servant, the King-

dom and the Anointed, hhaasidh, Chosen one, Beloved

one, Perfected one, my Called one, Son, Branch, Flower,

Bud, Regent, my Lord. All this is what the records

directly say concerning the promise as existing in the

times of the patriarchs, of the exodus, of David, of

David's successors. Now we come to the consideration

of certain collateral ways in which this literature hands

down this same doctrine of the promise.

          As preliminary we need to look more closely at one

or two aspects of the evidence as already presented.

 

                                     344

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE      345

 

Inevitably, as we consider these facts and terms one

after the other, there arises in the mind a conception

which we may describe as that of the Person              The Person

of the promise. Each one of the messianic                  of the

terms denotes either a person or an aggre-                  promise

gate of people personified. We all have to agree in

this, even if we differ in our opinions as to the identity

of the person or the aggregate. For example, if one

regards the Servant as Israel, and another regards him

as the heir to David's kingdom, and another regards

him as the prophet, and another as some typical Israel-

ite, and another as a person who is to come, all alike

have the conception of him as a person. They might

use this conception in formulating their differences, one

saying that the Person of the promise is Israel, another

saying that the prophet himself is the Person of the

promise, another saying that the Person of the promise

is a coming Saviour, and so on.

          We have already seen that certain extraordinary

things are said concerning the Person of the promise,

but we now need to attend to this more par-               Extraordinary

ticularly. Under the title of the Servant the                 statements

Person of the promise is in the same breath                concerning him

said to be Israel and to have the restoring of

Israel as his mission (Isa. xlix. 1-6). Again, in a closely

connected passage he is one moment presented as Israel,

suffering for the wrongdoing of the nations, and in the

next moment as stricken for the transgressions of "my

people"; at one moment as belonging to a particular

generation, and cut off out of the land of the living, and

in the next moment as prolonging his days and possess-

ing to the full all that is included in Yahaweh's eternal

covenant with Israel (Isa. liii).

          Perhaps the eternal and universal dominion ascribed

346        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

to the Person of the promise, under more than one of

the titles by which he is designated, and the peace and

happiness prevailing thereunder, should not be regarded

as extraordinary, because the passages of this kind are

so very frequent. But when we find applied to him,

under the description of the Son that is born, such titles

as Wonderful, Counsellor, God all Victorious, Eternal

Father (Isa. ix. 6), these at least indicate something

most unusual in his character as estimated by the

prophet.

          A very marked presentation of this idea of the won-

derful exaltation of the Person of the promise appears

in Jacob's blessing upon Judah: --

 

          "Sceptre shall not be removed from Judah, nor lawgiver from his

lineage, until that he come whose it is, and obedience of peoples be

his" (Gen. xlix. 10).

 

Even if one does not venture to decide too dogmatically

on a passage concerning which opinions differ so greatly,

one may at least suppose that the poet has here in mind

the conception of the Person of the promise. He says

that the prerogatives of the promise shall descend

through Judah, in a dominion that shall have no end.

Compare Ezek. xxi. 27 [32].¹

          Jesus showed his insight into the scriptures when he

selected the one hundred and tenth psalm as a typical

instance for calling attention to the extraordinary char-

 

            ¹ The translation "until Shiloh come" (OV) is not bad. Shiloh is

here not the familiar proper name, but the transliterated Hebrew phrase

"whose it is." To a reader who understands this the meaning is clear.

There is an old-fashioned interpretation that regards the verse as a predic-

tion fulfilled in the fact that Judah under Herod retained some shadow of

national prerogative till after the birth of Jesus. This is really quite

plausible, but the meaning seems to me to be, rather, that the dominion

vested in Judah will never cease, but will be merged into the "obedience

of peoples" to the Person of the promise.

 

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE       347

 

acter attributed to the Person of the promise. Let us

look at this song more particularly. Its title is "David's.

A Psalm." There is no reason for disputing                 The instance

that Jesus and the men of the New Testa-                   selected by

ment are correct when they say explicitly that            Jesus

the words of the psalm are spoken in the person of David

(Matt. xxii. 44; Mc. xii. 36; Lc. xx. 42-43; Acts ii.

34-35).

          "The utterance of Yahaweh to my Lord:

                    Sit thou at my right hand

          Until I make thy foemen

                    a footstool for thy feet.

 

          "The sceptre of thy strength

                    Yahaweh stretcheth forth from Zion.

          Be thou conqueror in the midst of thy foemen.

 

          "Thy people are volunteers in thy muster-day.

            In holy splendors from the womb of morning

                    thy dew of youth are thine.

 

          "Yahaweh hath sworn, and will not repent,

            Thou art a priest for ever,

                    after the manner of Melchizedek.

 

          "It was the Lord upon thy right hand

                    that crushed kings in the day of his anger.

          He dictateth among the nations; it is full of bodies;¹

                    he crushed one that was head over a wide land.

 

          "One drinketh from a brook by the way,

                    therefore one lifteth up his head."

 

          The singer, apparently, has been reading the account

of the victory of Abraham over the four kings (Gen. xiv).

It is to him like drinking of a brook by the way; he is

refreshed, and feels like holding his head high, when he

thinks how Yahaweh enabled the recipient of the prom-

ise, with his little band of retainers and allies, to defeat

 

            ¹ That is, the field of the battle is covered with bodies.

348    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

the armies of the "wide land" of the Babylonian-Ela-

mitic empire. He is reminded of what Yahaweh has done

for the Person of the promise from the time of Abraham

to his own time, and of what Yahaweh has promised for

future time without limit. No wonder he speaks of the

Person of the promise as "my Lord."¹  He sings of

the strong sceptre of "my Lord," reaching forth from

Zion, of his willing warriors, numerous and splendid as

the morning dewdrops, and of their victories. He re-

members also that the promise-people is "a kingdom of

priests." The, Person of the promise is a priest, as well

as a conqueror. In Abraham he paid tithes to Melchize-

dek, but he is himself a priest of the same rank with Mel-

chizedek. It is not only in the phrase "my Lord" that

the psalm ascribes extraordinary exaltation to the Person

of the promise, but also in what it says concerning his

dominion, his subjects, his victories, his priesthood.

          We must not make the mistake of understanding too

concretely this conception of the Person of the promise,

An idea           as if it steadily amounted to an expectation

rather than       of the coming of a concrete person. In itself

a concrete        considered it is an idea rather than a concep-

person            tion of fact, though like all such conceptions, it

would come to have, in many minds, more or less of the char-

acter of reality. We must remember that this stream of

teachings, on its way to us from its first fountains, flowed

through different belts of soil, and also received affluents

and from these derived not only greater fulness, but also

varieties of taste and coloring. There might supposably

come a time—actually there came a time—when the

conception of the Person of the promise assumed the

character of an actual expectation of a concrete person.

Of course Christians hold that the Person of the promise

 

            ¹ On this phrase see Chapter XIV, near the end.

 

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE        349

 

became completely a reality in the person of Jesus

Christ.

          This conception of the Person of the promise, whether

it existed at any given date as a mere form of thought

or as the presentment of an expected actual                          A nucleus of

person, became the heart of a more or less                           a doctrinal

definitely formulated body of ethical and theo-                     system

logical beliefs. We have had occasion to notice the char-

acter of a suffering mediator attributed to the Person of

the promise — to the Servant, for example, in Isa. liii.

The idea in one form or another is not rare, and the re-

demption spoken of is not from disaster merely, but from

sin and its punishment. This presupposes familiarity

with certain doctrines concerning obligation and right

and wrongdoing, and the relations of Deity to men.

The promise-doctrine, and especially the idea of the

Person of the promise, became a nucleus around which

crystallized an ethical theology. Many of the points of

Christian dogma concerning the extraordinary personal-

ity of Christ, his character, his atonement, his relations

to the Holy Spirit, the privileges of those who are united

to him, are more or less distinctly anticipated in what the

Old Testament says concerning the Person of the promise.

          As we have many times had occasion to notice, the

Person of the promise is presented to us both as a typi-

cal Israelite and as a typical human person.                          The Person

Or, using a mode of speech that is common                         both typical

among theologians, he is the antitype in an-                         and antitypal

tithesis to which much that appears in the dealings of

God with man is typical. The subject of type and anti-

type we have briefly considered in Chapter VI. These

terms will now afford us convenient phraseology for pre-

senting what the present chapter has already described

as the collateral lines of the promise-doctrine.

350     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          Some of these lines of information at least were in

existence all through the period when the Psalms

and the prophetic books were being produced, and

served to illustrate the teachings of the prophets to

their contemporaries.

          I. The prophets were themselves typical men, men

representative of the facts and the principles included

in the promise, types with the Person of the promise

for an antitype.

          With the definition above given of the Person of the

promise, this is not directly the same thing as to say

that the prophets were types of the personal coming

Messiah, though it may supposably amount to the same

in the end. So far as the coming Messiah is concerned,

the proposition just stated is hypothetical. Each prophet

stood for the whole line. He was a type of the chief

prophet in case the line of the prophets should culmi-

nate in a chief prophet. This is true alike of the whole

succession and of each prophet in the succession.

          In outlining the external history of the prophets, and

again in outlining their functions, we have already

Deut. xviii       (Chapters III, V) given some attention to the

                    eighteenth chapter of Deuteronomy. This

passage has also a distinctly messianic character. It

promises that from time to time, as Yahaweh should see

fit, he would raise up a prophet, so as to meet all the

needs which his people might have for communication

with the supernatural world.

 

          "A prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me,

will Yahaweh thy God raise up for thee."

          "A prophet will I raise up for them from the midst of their breth-

ren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth, and he

shall speak unto them all which I command him" (Deut. xviii. 15,

17-18).
COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE—DOCTRINE         351

 

Scholars are correct in saying that the word "prophet"

is not here a collective, but denotes one prophet and no

more. All the same, however, the word is here used

distributively. The prophets will be a succession, and

each one will have the typical character. As the word

"Messiah" denotes the successive kings of the line of

David, with the possibility that the line may culminate

in a greater King, so there is the possibility that the line

of prophets may culminate in a greater Prophet.

          The Apostle Peter (Acts iii. 21, 24) connects this

passage in Deuteronomy with the thought of the "holy

prophets which have been since the world began," and

with "Samuel and them that followed after." Evidently

he understands that the passage refers to a succession

of prophets. But in the same context (21-26) he claims

that it is a messianic prediction, fulfilled in Jesus the

Christ. Stephen (Acts vii. 37) puts the same interpreta-

tion upon it.¹  In other places, exceedingly numerous, the

New Testament writers seem to have in mind the details

of the Deuteronomic passage. Jesus is spoken of as

he "of whom Moses . . . did write," as "the prophet

that cometh into the world," as speaking only God's

words (e.g. Jn. i. 45, vi. 14, iii. 34; Lc. x. 16), and

thus as having made a record agreeing with the de-

scription in Deuteronomy. Great stress is laid on the

 

            ¹ The citations in the Acts are doubtless from the Septuagint, though

they are somewhat free. They differ more from the Hebrew than does

the Septuagint, though neither differs materially. That the citation is

from a form of the text that was current among the disciples is to be

inferred from the fact that the divergences which appear in Peter's

speech are repeated in Stephen's.

            In Acts iii. 26 (cf. iv. 2) there is apparently a play on words. Jesus

Christ, here called Servant, is said to he raised up, not merely, like his

predecessors, in the sense of being commissioned, but also in that of

resurrection from death.

352     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

points of comparison and contrast between him and

Moses, as if the New Testament writers had in mind

the "like unto me" of Deuteronomy (e.g. Heb. iii. 2, 5,

ix. 19). The specification "of your brethren" is like-

wise made prominent (Heb. ii. 12, 17, etc.). In these

various ways they claim that the things that were typi-

cally true of each prophet were preeminently true of the

one great prophet, the culmination of the line.

          In the fact that the prophet was regarded as espe-

cially the organ of Yahaweh's Spirit, we have an addi-

tional point that characterizes the antitype as it does the

type.

          II. The line of passages in which the Old Testament

writers present the theophanic Angel of Yahaweh

— the Angel, as distinguished from angels -- bears col-

laterally on the doctrine of the promise.

          That there is such a line of passages no one would

question, nor that the Angel is especially to the front in

the theophanies that are described (see I, 2 (d) of Chap-

ter VI). So much is easy to make out. It is less easy,

in some of the instances, to distinguish between the

Angel and any other angel;¹ and this we need not now

 

            ¹ The following are the passages in which the word "angel" appears

with the article or with a defining genitive. Whether the angel is in all

of them the same person, is another question. For the purposes now in

hand we need not take the trouble to distinguish between "angel of

Yahaweh" and "angel of Elohim."

            The Angel (or angel) appears to Hagar, fleeing from her mistress, and

commands her to return; and again appears for her rescue when Ishmael

is at the point of death (Gen. xvi. 7, 9, 10, 11, xxi. 17). He appears to

Abraham when Isaac is upon the altar, and, as we may probably infer, in

the great theophany just before the destruction of Sodom (xxii. 15,

xviii). He is sent with Abraham's servant who seeks a wife for Isaac

(Gen. xxiv. 7, 40). He appears to Jacob in a dream, and is described

by him as "the Angel that redeemed me from all evil" (Gen. xxxi. 11,

xlviii. 16). Hosea represents Jacob as coming into contact with the

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE—DOCTRINE      353

 

attempt. Nor need we formulate a theological theory

as to the nature of the personage described as "the

Angel."¹  It is sufficient to note that in several of the

instances the Angel is represented as appearing in human

form; and in several of the instances he not merely speaks

in the name of Yahaweh, but is personally identified with

Yahaweh. There are relations between the things that

 

Angel at Bethel, and also, evidently, at Peniel (Hos. xii. 3–5; cf. Gen.

xxviii. 10-19, xxxii. 24–30, xxxv). He met Moses at the burning bush,

and protected Israel at the Red Sea (Ex. iii. 2, xiv. 19; Num. xx. 16, the

word being indefinite in Numbers). It is promised that he shall go before

Israel into Canaan (Ex. xxiii. 20, 23, xxxii. 34, xxxiii. 2, the first and last

instances being indefinite). He rebukes Israel at Bochim, and curses

Meroz (Jud. ii. 1, 4, v. 23). He is prominent in the story of Gideon, and

in the account of the birth of Samson (Jud. vi. 11, 12, 20, 21, 22, xiii.

3, 6, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, all the instances being in the Hebrew

definite). To him the Tekoite woman compares David (2 Sam. xiv.

17, 20), and Mephibosheth does the same (2 Sam. xix. 27). He was

concerned with the pestilence and the threshing floor of Ornan the

Jebusite (2 Sam. xxiv. 16, 17; I Chron. xxi. 12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 27, 30),

and thus with the selection of the site of the temple. He gave messages

to Elijah (2 Ki. i. 3, 15). Apparently the destroyer of the one hundred

eighty-five thousand in the camp of Assyria (2 Ki. xix. 35; Isa. xxxvii. 36;

2 Chron. xxxii. 21) was "an angel," "the angel" that was commissioned

for this purpose, and not the Angel. The Angel (or angel) protects those

who fear Yahaweh, and drives away their persecutors (Pss. xxxiv. 7, xxxv.

5, 6). It is foolish to make excuses before the Angel (Ec. v. 6). "The

Angel of his presence saved" Israel of old (Isa. lxiii. 9). "The house

of David shall be as God, as the Angel of Yahaweh" (Zech. xii. 8). The

word "angel" is used twenty times in Zech. i–vi, and it is merely a mat-

ter of painstaking here to distinguish the Angel from the other angels that

appear. It was God's angel (or Angel) that delivered Daniel from the

lions, and his three friends from the furnace (Dan. vi. 22, iii. 28). The

closing message in Malachi presents Yahaweh's Angel, "the Angel of

the covenant" (iii. 1). "The angel" that appears ten times in the

story of Balaam (Num. xxii) is probably not the Angel.

            ¹ There is some plausibility in the idea that used to be advanced, to the

effect that the Angel is the Son—the second person of the Trinity, as

defined in Christian dogma — temporarily assuming human form, before

his incarnation in the person of Jesus.

354     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

are said concerning him and the New Testament doc-

trine of the incarnation.

          The accounts of the theophanic Angel are a constitu-

ent part of the history of the promise. He is repre-

The Angel       sented as in communication with Abraham in

and the           some of the crises when the promise is men-

promise          tioned (Gen. xxii, and by probable inference

xviii). He was with Jacob at Bethel, and when his

name was changed to Israel, and was remembered by

Jacob as "the Angel that redeemed me from all evil "

(Hos. xii. 3–5; cf. Gen. xxxii. 24–30, xxviii. 10-19, xxxv,

xxxi. 11, xlviii. 16). He is with Moses at the burning

bush, and with Israel in the pillar of cloud and fire (Ex.

iii. 2, xiv. 19). Evidently it is the theophanic Angel con-

cerning whom Yahaweh says to Israel:  "Behold I send

an Angel before thee," and again, "Mine Angel shall go

before thee" (Ex. xxiii. 20, 23). Yahaweh makes this

a great thing; the presence of the Angel with his peo-

ple is his own presence with them.

 

          "If thou wilt indeed hearken at his voice, and do all that I speak,

            I will be enemy to thine enemies," etc. (22).

 

He adds threats that are correspondingly severe.

 

          "Take ye heed of him, . . . be not rebellious with him, for he

will not pardon your transgression, for my name is within him" (21).

 

When Israel sinned with the golden calf, Yahaweh's

promise to go with him in the person of the Angel was

revoked. The intercession of Moses elicited only this

concession: —

 

          "And now, go thou, lead the people unto the place concerning

which I spake to thee [saying], Behold my Angel shall go before

thee. And in the day of my visiting I will visit their sin upon them"

(Ex. xxxii. 34)

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE—DOCTRINE     355

 

          "Go thou up hence, thou and the people . unto the land

which I sware . . . , saying, To thy seed will I give it, And I will

send an Angel before thee . . . ; for I will not go up in the midst

of thee" (Ex. xxxiii. 1-3).

 

Observe that here is no renewal of the promise that the

Angel should go, but, on the contrary, an implication

that the promise is no longer in force. After further

intercession, and after punishment inflicted on the peo-

ple, and repentance expressed by them, Yahaweh relents

and says: —

 

          "My presence shall go, and I will give thee rest" (xxxiii. 14).

 

          Apparently it is Yahaweh in the character of the

theophanic Angel that rebukes Israel at Bochim,

and that reveals himself to Gideon and to Manoah

(Jud. ii. 1-4, vi. 11-22, xiii. 3-21). It is the Angel that

deals with David in the matter of the pestilence, when

Ornan's threshing floor was purchased to be the site of

the temple (2 Sam. xxiv. 16-17; 1 Chron. xxi. 12-30).

Various significant allusions are made to the Angel

(Pss. xxxiv. 7, xxxv. 5, 6; Ec. v. 6; Isa. lxiii. 9; Zech.

xii. 8). He appears very prominently, in company with

other angels, in the first six chapters of Zechariah.

And perhaps Malachi's mention of him is the most sig-

nificant of all: —

 

          "Behold, I send my Angel, and he shall prepare a way before me ;

and suddenly the lord whom ye are seeking shall come unto his tem-

ple, and the Angel of the covenant whom ye delight in, behold, he is

coming, saith Yahaweh of hosts. And who may abide the day of

his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth?" (Mal. iii.

1-2).

         

          The word here translated "the lord" is in the sin-

gular, and has the article. It differs from both "the

Lord" and "the LORD," the two familiar forms in which

this word is applied to Yahaweh; and yet the phrase

356     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

"his temple" indicates that the word here denotes

Yahaweh. There are a certain number of parallel in-

stances (e.g. Isa. i. 24, iii. I, x. 16, 33). What is said

here concerning the Angel is a repetition in modified

form of the promise made at the time of the exodus

(Ex. xxiii. 20, 23, xxxii. 34, xxxiii. 2). The question,

"Who may abide the day of his coming?" includes an

allusion to the warnings given in Exodus (xxiii 21,

xxxii. 34c). As cited in the evangelists, it reverts in part

to its original form, as found in Exodus: —

 

          "Behold I send my Angel before thy face,

            Who shall prepare thy way before thee"

                                        (Matt. xi. 10; cf. Mc. i. 2; Lc. vii. 27).

 

What Yahaweh says in Malachi is that his ancient

utterance to Israel holds good, and that he will signally

manifest himself in the person of the theophanic Angel.

Jesus says, as reported by Matthew and Luke, that the

movement in which he and John the Baptist are engaged

is this signal manifestation of Yahaweh. His words

have been commonly understood as also affirming that

John is the Angel (the messenger) sent before his face,

but this is not necessarily their effect.¹

          In fine, the theophanic Angel appears at all stages

of the history from Abraham to Malachi. He is repre-

sented as in relations with the kingdom, the last days,

the day of Yahaweh, the coming of Yahaweh. He is

especially prominent in giving to Yahaweh's people

their possession in the benefits of the promise.

 

            ¹ Of course it is a very natural way of understanding them. But it de-

mands the exercise of too much ingenuity for interpreting Malachi, and it

ignores the relation of the exodus passages with both the Malachi passage

and the New Testament citations. It is ingenious conjecture rather than

sound inference which makes "my angel" in Malachi to be a different

being from "the angel of the covenant," and one or both to be different

from the theophanic Angel.

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE      357

 

          III. As we have seen in Chapter VII, the scriptures

represent that the whole of Yahaweh's law was given to

Israel through the prophets. In addition to their direct

utterances, they taught indirectly through the sanctuary

and its furniture and the public worship and all religious

observances. And the promise was so incorporated

into the national institutions that these were a perpetual

reminder of it to those who had the insight needed for

understanding this lesson.

          The heart of Israel's sanctuary, as described in the

scriptures, was the ark standing in the holy of holies.

The ark contained the two tables on which                 The heart of

Deity himself had written the ten words.                              the cult of

The lid of it, with the cherubim, constituted                Israel

what we are accustomed to call the mercy seat. The

ark is called the ark of the covenant, because the ten

words, its contents, were the basis of Yahaweh's cove-

nant with his people (Ex. xxiv. 3, 7-8). It was called

the ark of the testimony because the two tables, Yaha-

weh's autograph, were the authenticated copy of the

basis of the covenant. The covenant consisted in Yaha-

weh's acceptance of Israel as his own people on con-

dition of obedience to the ten words in their religious

and ethical and social obligations. But every Israelite

who had insight knew that this was an impossible con-

dition. He knew that neither Israel as a people, nor

himself, nor other Israelites, were ever, in the eye of

omniscience, perfectly obedient to the ten words. If

that had been all, the covenant was a hopeless proposi-

tion. But that was not all. The mercy seat was sig-

nificant, as well as the two tables. It signified that

Yahaweh was gracious and compassionate as well as

just, ready to forgive as well as strict, one who prof-

fered atonement as well as one who required obedience.

358      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          The heart of the sacred year had the same signifi-

cance with that of the sanctuary. Once in the year the

highpriest entered the holy of holies, and placed on the

mercy seat the blood of the great annual sin-offering.

To this central solemnity were adjusted the three great

feasts and the new moons and the sabbaths and the

daily burnt-offerings, and all special and individual sea-

sons of worship.

          Thus the mercy seat and its functions were the heart

of the whole sacrificial system. This was carried out

in the ceremonial of all the various sacrifices. The sin-

offering idea entered into the ritual in connection with

the disposal of the blood of all burnt-offerings and all

peace-offerings. And the ideas that pervaded the sacri-

fices pervaded all the religious observances, the worship

by gifts that were not properly sacrificial, and by prayer

and song and fasting, and the reading of scripture and

the booths of the autumnal feast and the blowing of

trumpets and the resting on the sabbath.

          This does not minimize any other significance which

may have belonged to the sacrifices or to the other wor-

ship. It is impossible not to find in the burnt-offering

an emblem of self-surrender, accepted from the skies as

the smoke mounts heavenward. In the sacrificial feasts

the worshipper found religious fellowship with his fel-

low-worshippers and with Deity. But in the Levitical

scheme all other ideas are bound to those that centre in

the ark, with its tables of the covenant and its mercy seat.

          Of course it is not claimed that all Israelites of every

period were fully aware of the spiritual meanings of the

Men who         rites they practised. In our day the majority

were devout      of worshippers are deficient in spiritual in-

and had                     sight, and very likely the ancient worshippers

insight            may have been yet more deficient. It is likely that there

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE—DOCTRINE       359

 

were Israelites who thought of their sacrifices as a bribe

to their God, or as a way of putting him into good

humor by giving him a good feed. But however true

this may be, it is certain that the cult itself was inspired

by loftier meanings, and that some of the worshippers

were, in a greater or less degree, conscious of these.

          Further, it is, of course, true that the view which

a modern person takes of these things will depend very

much on the critical theories he holds. The                           One's

ceremonial laws of Israel will have maximum                      critical point

value in the mind of one who holds that they                        of view

originated with Moses, and were actually, to some extent,

in operation from his time. If one holds that they are

mainly fiction, a presentation of ideas rather than facts,

he, none the less, ought to recognize the principles that

underlie the ideas. And even if one holds that the cere-

monial laws are a chance aggregation of relatively late

materials, coming into existence in different centuries

and in connection with different movements, he is still

under obligation to account for the fact that they may

naturally be interpreted as the expression of these under-

lying principles. It is impossible so to interpret the

laws as to eliminate these meanings utterly from them.

My own opinion is that the meanings are in them

through the design of the prophets who gave Israel the

laws. But if they entered in some other way, at all

events they are there.

          The priestly laws of Israel may be regarded as an

especial embodiment of the idea that Israel himself is

"a kingdom of priests and a holy nation"                                        Connected

(Ex. xix. 6). The national priestly character                          with Israel's

is exhibited in the functions exercised by the                        priesthood

priests of the nation. When the psalmist says that the

Person of the promise is "a priest for ever after the

360       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

order of Melchizedek," he implies both comparison and

contrast between that priest and the existing priests of

Israel. The author of the book of Hebrews, in his

long comments on this matter, has not failed to catch

the spirit both of the psalm and of the ceremonial

law.

          As we have already seen, a different presentation of

the sacrificial idea sometimes occurs. Israel, or the

The victim       Servant, or the hhasidh, or the Person of the

as well as the    promise, appears as the victim rather than as

priest             the priest. Or, rather, inasmuch as his medi-

atorial sufferings are voluntary, he is both priest and

victim.

          On the whole, it is, perhaps, this phase of the promise-

doctrine, this idea of vicarious suffering, the precursor

of the New Testament doctrine of the atonement, that

is principally emphasized in the Israelitish legislation.

Every part of the national institutions, and in particular

the worship, the sacrifices, the priesthood, the temple, has

a typal value, is a presentation of the great truths of the

doctrine of the promise. If the truths of sin and redemp-

tion are here most emphasized, emphasis is also placed on

the separateness of Israel, and so on Yahaweh's eternal

purpose for the nations through Israel. The institutions

of Israel were themselves the perpetual fulfilment of the

promise, and therefore a perpetual pointing forward to

the coming stages of the fulfilment.

          This was not a light thing. Imagine its influence

over the worshippers who came from all parts of the

earth to Jerusalem, in the generations just before the

public ministry of Jesus. Was not the worship con-

nected in their thoughts with the promise and with the

future glories of Israel? Were they not ready to find

in all its details illustrations of the hope that burned in

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE       361

 

their hearts? The author of the book of Hebrews knew

what he was about. He knew how to select his argu-

ments so that they would appeal to thoughts that were

already in the minds of those for whom he wrote.

          IV. To these lines of collateral testimony we may

add a vast number of matters that are sometimes cited

as instances of type or of prediction.

          The quoting of Old Testament examples as types of

the Messiah is a very common practice: Noah's ark,

for example, or Noah himself, or Lot, or                              Persons or

Melchizedek, or Joseph, or Jonah, and so                            objects as

forth. The representations of this kind that                            types

are currently made need careful sifting; but there can

be no doubt that the prophets thought of many persons

and objects as bearing some relation to the great national

promise.

          We should also class as collateral any predictive pas-

sages that may be found, which do not connect them-

selves directly with the main line of the                               Discon-

promise. In these chapters we have exam-                            nected

ined a large number of the passages that are                         predictions

commonly quoted as messianic predictions, and we have

found that they are not a miscellaneous collection of dis-

connected fragments, but parts of a continuous history.

They are shoots from a common stem, the stem being

the one never vanishing doctrine of the promise. Two

additional questions arise. First: Have some of these

passages, besides their value as statements of the

promise-doctrine, an additional value as predictions

of specific events in the career of the Person of the

promise?  Second: Are there other passages whose

primary value is that of specific predictions? In the

interest of brevity, I shall take the liberty of answering

these questions hypothetically rather than categorically.

362     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

As an example under the first of these two questions

take the Canto of the suffering Servant (Isa. liii). We

                    have seen that the Servant is the personified

Isa. liii            idealized Israel, the people of the promise; and

that he is equally any typical Israelite, and in particular

the one antitypal Israelite who beyond all others stands

for the promise idea. In other words, the Servant is the

Person of the promise, and the Person of the promise

became a reality in Jesus the Christ. But in addition

to this there are several matters of detail in the proph-

ecy which correspond in a marked way to incidents in

the personal career of Jesus. These have been often

pointed out, and we need not repeat them. Are they

to be regarded as specific predictions of these particular

incidents? An alternative reply is sufficient. If one

so regards them, that need not change his opinion of

the main bearing of the passage; if one does not so re-

gard them, the identification of the Servant with Jesus

as the Person of the promise remains unimpaired.

          Or take the twenty-second psalm. Except to one

who denies the existence of predictive inspiration, no

                    theory could be more plausible than that the

Ps. xxii           prophet was made to see in vision the events of

the humiliation and death of Jesus, and that he made the

song from what he saw. On this theory, the parts of the

psalm that are cited in the New Testament, and other

parts along with them, are specific predictions. The

prophet-singer in his vision heard the cry:  "My God,

my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"  He saw the

enemies of Jesus shaking the head and laughing him to

scorn. He heard them say: Let him deliver him, see-

ing he delighteth in him." He witnessed the thirst, and

the pierced hands and feet, and the projecting bones of

the body fastened to the cross. He saw the garments

COLLATERAL LINES OF PROMISE-DOCTRINE      363

 

parted, with the casting of lots. And looking beyond,

he saw the victory that the crucified one was winning

through his humiliation, and he sang: —

 

"I will declare thy name unto my brethren:

In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.

*        *        *        *        *        *        *        *

All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn unto the LORD:

And all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee.

For the kingdom is the LORD'S:

And he is the ruler over the nations" (Ps. xxii. 22, 27-28 RV).

 

          This is one theory of the song. Compare it with

another. In these sufferings of his Jesus was, in his

human nature, an antitypal man. There have been ten

thousand other instances practically the same in type.

Suppose that the prophet had primarily in mind some

typical man or personified people of his own time, the

representative of the promise for that generation; and

that the men of the New Testament simply applied to

Jesus this presentation of the Person of the promise, as

they applied other like presentations.

          The question that we have to consider is this: Are

these items concerning the outcry and the scoffing and

the thirst and the pierced hands and feet and the part-

ing of the garments to be regarded as specific predic-

tions of these particular incidents in the crucifixion of

Jesus? If we say that they are, that is no more in con-

flict with the second of the two theories of the song than

with the first. If we say that they are not, it will still

be true, on the second of the two theories, that the song

is a truthful presentation of Jesus as the Person of the

promise, and that the use made of it in the gospels is

exegetically sound.

          As with details in the passages that formally teach

the promise-doctrine, so with predictions that seem to

364     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

be isolated. Is Balaam's utterance about the star that

shall arise out of Jacob (Num. xxiv. 17) of the nature of

Other             a prediction of a particular messianic event?

instances         Are the utterances, "Let their habitation

be desolate" and "Let another take his office" (Pss.

lxix. 25, cix. 8; cf. Acts i. 20), to be regarded as properly

predictions concerning Judas, or simply as scripture

phrases aptly applied to the circumstances? If you say

that they are predictions, you say nothing that contra-

dicts the view of the promise-doctrine that has here been

presented. If you say that they are not, you put your-

self under obligation to explain the New Testament use

of them, but the doctrine of the promise is sufficiently

buttressed without them.

          In fine, this body of literature which we call the Old

Testament is so thoroughly permeated with the idea of

the promise that this affects the whole of its contents.

Whatever in it is not of the nature of statement of fact

concerning the promise is likely to be connected with it

by way of illustration or suggestion.

 

 

                           CHAPTER XVI

 

 

 

MESSIANIC EXPECTATION AND FULFILMENT

 

 

          WE have been trying to interpret what the Old Testa-

ment records say concerning the giving of the promise.

But if the promise is anything, it is a promise. It raised

expectations in men's minds, and it was followed by

fulfilments. We shall be able both to test and to

illustrate the results we have reached if we can bring

them into comparison with the expectations that existed

in the time of Jesus, and with any fulfilments which

the promise may have had.

          I. We take up the question of the expectation of

the Messiah as it existed in the New Testament times.

          Sources of information on this subject are some of the

later Old Testament Apocrypha, the Psalter of Solomon,

the Sibylline books, the book of Enoch, Jose-                       Sources

phus, Philo, etc., with the traditions of the early

Christian fathers and the Talmudists. But it should not

be forgotten that the New Testament is by far the most

explicit and trustworthy source. The New Testament

comes nearer than the other sources to being first-hand

evidence on the subject. It is mistaken procedure to

begin by gleaning stray information from other sources,

and then, on the basis thus laid, to subject the New

Testament evidence to modifying treatment before we

accept it.

          The statement commonly made is that the Jews, at

the time of the Advent, were looking for a political

 

                                          365

366       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

Messiah, who should free them from the Romans, and

make them a dominant nation. In a rough way the

A temporal       statement is true. It has the same sort of truth

deliverer?        with other crude general statements-- the

statement, for example, that the earth is round like an

orange. But it needs to be much modified in order to

render it accurate.

          The nature of the expectation may be defined in the

following propositions. First, the Jews of the genera-

The ex-           tion of Jesus were looking for a signal mani-

pectation         festation from Israel's God in fulfilment of

formulated       the promise. Second, this quite commonly

took the form of an expectation that the Person of

the promise would appear among men as an actual per-

son, Yahaweh's Servant, his hhasidh, his Chosen one,

the Lord. Third, most prominently it was an expec-

tation of the setting up of the kingdom, with the

Anointed one, the son of David, as king. Fourth, be-

yond this, and in matters of detail, the expectation

presented a great variety of aspects, according to the

characters and the mental and spiritual habits of the

men who held it. In the minds of political leaders and

of others who made the most noise in the world, the

idea of a political Messiah was doubtless to the front,

but even these were uncertain on many points. In the

minds of the more devout, of those who had greater

insight into the scriptures, the spiritual mission of the

hoped-for Coming one was clearly recognized. From

the times of Jesus until now most Christian people have

steadily held to the doctrine of the second coming of

Christ; but that does not mean that they have uniformly

held to some particular millenarian theory. There were

many men of many minds in the generation of Jesus,

as in the present generation. Let us look at a few

           MESSIANIC EXPECTATION                367

 

sections of the superabundant evidence by which these

statements might be substantiated.

          To begin with, the promise-doctrine, as we have al-

ready seen (Chapter VIII), is all-pervasive in the New

Testament, and this fact shows the nature of               The promise-

the expectation to which the first teachers of              doctrine in the

Christianity had to appeal. If we could take                New Testament

the space for a fresh study of this matter, now that we

have been prepared for it by our studies in the Old

Testament, we should find that the New Testament is

far more saturated with the promise idea than even the

treatment in our eighth chapter would indicate. In that

chapter we used mainly the passages where the word

"promise" occurs; but the doctrine is taught in a vast

number of other passages.¹

          The citations made in Chapter VIII for the New

Testament doctrine of the promise were taken mostly

from the book of Hebrews or the writings of                         Not a Pauline

Paul. But the doctrine is not the opinion of                           view merely

Paul and of the writer of Hebrews only, but of the other

New Testament men as well. In affirming this matter,

I use advisedly such phrases as "the New Testament,"

"the men of the New Testament." The nouns and

verbs that specifically denote the promise appear in the

utterances of James and John and Peter, and in the

gospels. There is nowhere a more emphatic or explicit

 

            ¹ For example, the New Testament writers mention in a detailed way

the accounts given in Genesis of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, including

their relations with Sarah, Rebekah, Hagar, Ishmael, Esau, Lot, and others.

The several phrases in which the Old Testament affirms that Israel is Ya-

haweh's own people are repeated in the New Testament by citation from

the Old. For instance, in Heb. xi. 16, the phrase, "And I will be to

them for God," occurring first in Genesis (xvii. 8), and recurring through-

out the Old Testament. Or the phrase "stars of heaven in multitude"

(Neb. xi. 12). Or innumerable other descriptions or incidents or phrases.

368      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

statement of the doctrine than in the following from

Peter's sermon on the day of pentecost, though he does

not use the word "promise": —

 

          "Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God

made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall

all the families of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having

raised up his Servant, sent him to bless you, in turning away every

one of you from your iniquities " (Acts iii. 25-26).

 

It would be interesting to trace the variations of the

doctrine as seen from the different points of view of the

different men of the New Testament, and to trace its

growth in time in the mind of such a man as Paul

himself. But these things would be mere matters

of detail.  The doctrine in its essential character is

taught by Jesus, and by all the original teachers of

Christianity.

          The fact that they thus taught it indicates the nature

of the messianic expectation that existed among those

to whom they taught it. When they based their appeal

on the promise, they expected to be understood. Their

ideas of the character of the promise were certainly

so far forth accepted, both in Palestine and in other

regions, as to furnish a basis for the arguments they

based upon it.

          The generation to whom Jesus came were looking for

some great manifestation from God in fulfilment of the

ancient promise. It does not follow that they all to a

man expected exactly the same thing, and that the thing

they expected was a military deliverer. As we think

of it, it seems likely that we should find that different

persons expected different things. Doubtless the idea

of a political Messiah loomed up large in the minds of

the politicians and their followers; but these did not

constitute the whole Jewish population.

            MESSIANIC EXPECTATION                369

 

          The beginnings of the gospel, as preached both by

John the Baptist and by Jesus, included the announce-

ment that the kingdom of heaven was at                                         An expects-

hand. This indicates the nature of the thing                           tion of the

that their hearers were looking for, namely, a                       kingdom

new manifestation of the kingdom that Yahaweh had

anciently set up among men. This idea of the matter

is traceable throughout the gospels. Late in the life of

Jesus, his disciples were seeking positions of honor in

the kingdom. The charge against him before Pilate is

that he claims the sovereignty over a kingdom, thus

placing himself in rivalry with Caesar. The whole New

Testament is an explanation of the nature of the king-

dom. Doubtless this idea became modified during the

interval between the birth of Jesus and the writing of

the several parts of the New Testament; but it was in

existence from the first. The first teachers of Christian-

ity did not create it, they found it current among their

compatriots. The common expectation of the fulfilment

of Yahaweh's ancient promise took the form of this

expectation of the kingdom.

          There was also, as we have already noticed, an ex-

pectation of the Person of the promise. At                            And of a

the very beginning of the public ministry of                          Person, its

Jesus, we find Philip expressing to Nathanael                       Anointed king

his expectations in these words: —

 

          "We have found him of whom Moses in the law, and the proph-

ets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph" (Jn. i. 45).

 

Philip is cautious, not venturing to say that they had

found the Messiah, but only that they had found the

Person of the promise as pictured in Moses and the

prophets.^l But Andrew the day before had been less

 

            ¹ See Chapter XIII, last paragraph of II.

370     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

cautious, saying to Simon: "We have found the Mes-

siah" (ver. 41). And it is under this latter description

as the Anointed king of the kingdom, that the expected

Person is commonly presented. In proof of this, one

might cite every one of the hundreds of New Testament

passages that speak of Christ or of the kingdom.

          It is made very prominent that in their expectations

they thought of this Person of the promise, this Anointed

Descendant      king of the kingdom, as being of the royal

and heir of        line of David, and heir to the eternal throne

David             which Yahaweh had promised to David and

his seed. The Christ is in the New Testament about

thirty times explicitly said to be son of David. The

opponents of Jesus argued against him by appealing to

this point in the current expectation: —

 

          "Doth the Christ come out of Galilee? Hath not the scripture

said that the Christ cometh of the seed of David, and from Bethle-

hem, the village where David was?" (Jn. vii. 41-42).

 

When the wise men inquired for him that was "born

king of the Jews," and Herod gathered "all the chief

priests and scribes," and asked them "where the Christ

should be born," the answer he received was based on

the scripture concerning David's town of Bethlehem

(Matt. ii. 2-6). In the annunciation to Joseph the angel

addresses him as “Joseph, thou son of David” (Matt.

i. 20). The book of Matthew begins with "the gener-

ations of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of

Abraham " (Matt. i. 1). The genealogies of Jesus trace

his line back to David, though also to Abraham, and in

Luke to Adam (Matt. i; Lc. iii). In the annunciation

to Mary, Joseph is described as "of the house of David"

(Lc. i. 27). We are told that Joseph and Mary went

for enrolment "to the city of David which is called

Bethlehem, because he was of the house and family of

               MESSIANIC EXPECTATION                 371

 

David " (Lc. ii. 4). The angels are represented as say-

ing to the shepherds:  "There is born to you this day

in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord"

(Lc. ii. 11). Surely, further citations are unnecessary.

          But when we have looked at these facts, the case is

still incomplete. The points thus far mentioned are

very definite, but we also have glimpses of                          Uncertain

points in which the expectation was marked                         elements in the

by indefiniteness and uncertainty. There were                      expectation

uncertainties as to whether the manifestation would be

through one person or through several, and, indeed, a

very general uncertainty as to the forms it might be

expected to assume. Alike the first disciples and the

priests in Jerusalem and the Pharisees and the people

and Herod were conscious that they did not know

whether to look for one person or more than one.¹

They were talking of the Christ, and Elijah, and "the

prophet," and "one of the old prophets." So far as

they knew, the kingdom might be manifested in one

person sent from God, or in a group or succession of

persons. They looked confidently for a certain great

thing, but concerning the nature of that thing they were

at many points in doubt.

 

            ¹ "And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent unto him from

Jerusalem priests and Levites to ask him, Who art thou? And he con-

fessed, . . . I am not the Christ. And they asked him, What then? Art

thou Elijah? And he saith, I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he

answered, No. They said therefore unto him, Who art thou? that we may

give an answer to them that sent us. . . . He said, I am the voice of one

crying in the wilderness." "And they had been sent from the Pharisees"

(Jn. i. 19-24).

            "He asked his disciples, saying, Who do men say that the Son of man

is? And they said, Some say John the Baptist; some Elijah; and others

Jeremiah, or one of the prophets" (Matt. xvi. 13-14; cf. Mc. viii. 28, vi.

14-15). Luke has: "And others say that one of the old prophets is risen

again" (ix. 7-9, 19).

372     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          John the Baptist shared in this consciousness of a

lack of complete and specific knowledge. He knew

that he was the voice in the wilderness. He knew that

he was preparing the way for one that should follow

him. He knew that Jesus was his mightier successor,

and was the lamb of God. But he did not know that

he was the Elijah of prophecy, and he did not know

whether Jesus was "He that cometh," or was only, like

himself, a precursor of the Coming one (Matt. iii.; Mc. i;

Lc. iii ; Jn. i. 19-36, iii. 27-36; Matt. xi. 3; Lc. vii.

19, etc.).¹  And the disciples of Jesus were constantly

asking questions concerning the kingdom, questions

which showed that their minds were full of unsettled

ideas on the subject. Their uncertainties were not

cleared till after the resurrection (Lc. xxiv).

          The New Testament accounts imply that the eternal

and spiritual elements in the expected kingdom, its

Spiritual          character as connected with redemption from

elements in       sin, its mission for all mankind through

the expecta-      Israel, were familiar to the minds of devout

tion                Israelites, to such persons as Zacharias and Elisabeth

and Joseph and Mary and Simeon and Anna and John

the Baptist and Andrew and Philip and Nathanael and

Simon. It would be fruitless to inquire how large a

proportion of the adult Jews living at the time of the

birth of Jesus were of this type; but lofty ideas con-

cerning the kingdom were prevalent enough so that one

would be intelligible if he spoke of such things.

 

            ¹ The more common explanation is that John at first knew, but that

afterward his faith grew dull, and then he did not know. This explana-

tion is based in part on the mistaken theory that faith is a sort of pious

guesswork which good people may substitute for evidence. Certainly

John's course is more reasonably accounted for as resulting from the

limitations of his knowledge.

           MESSIANIC EXPECTATION                373

 

          The narratives of the earliest New Testament inci-

dents assume the existence of a conception of the king-

dom as part of a movement dating from Abraham or

from the beginning of the world, and to last eternally.

The angel says to Mary: —

 

          "And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father

David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of

his kingdom there shall be no end" (Lc. i. 32-33)

 

Mary thinks of the revelation made to her as one in

which God her Saviour remembers mercy: —

 

          "As he spake unto our fathers,

            Toward Abraham and his seed for ever" (Lc. i. 55).

 

Zacharias celebrates the "horn of salvation" which "the

Lord, the God of Israel," has raised up —

          "In the house of his servant David,

            As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets

            Which have been since the world began;"

 

          "To remember his holy covenant,

            The oath which he sware unto Abraham our father"

                                                                                (Lc. i. 68-73).

 

          The records imply that it was well understood that the

kingdom and the salvation were for mankind as well as

for Israel. They imply this in mentioning Abraham.

They speak of the lamb that takes away the sin of the

world. They represent Simeon as saying: —

 

          "For mine eyes have seen thy salvation,

            Which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples;

            A light for revelation to the Gentiles,

            And the glory of thy people Israel " (Lc. ii. 30-32).

 

The cosmopolitan character of this stanza becomes even

more apparent when one looks it up in the context from

which it is quoted (Isa. xlix).

374        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

We have found the Old Testament, in a few passages,

attributing remarkable exaltation to the Person of the

promise. This feature is very prominent in the earliest

New Testament incidents. The representation is that

in that generation it was a thing to be expected that

the angel should say to Mary: —

 

          "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High"

(LC. 1. 32).

 

It was not out of harmony with the expectations that

prevailed to say that the wise men came to worship the

child, and that Herod pretended to desire to worship

him (Matt. ii. 2, 8, 11), or to represent his birth as

miraculous, or as heralded by angels.

          More prominently still these devout Jews are repre-

sented as expecting that the Anointed one will be a

Redemption      redeemer from sin. When John said to his

from sin as a     two disciples: "Behold the lamb of God that

part of the        taketh away the sin of the world " (Jn. i.

expecttion         29, 36), they understood him to imply that the

lamb of God was the Messiah (41). That the Messiah should

be a remedy for sin was an idea intelligible to them.

They understood that the Person who should follow

John would baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire.

They believed that in preparing the way for him John

was preparing the way for Yahaweh to rescue and com-

fort his people. But the idea that John especially put

in their minds was that of redemption from sin: not a

warrior Messiah who should overthrow Rome, but "the

lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world."

          In this representation of the matter the gospel by

John is not alone. Matthew tells us that the child was

named Jesus because he should "save his people from

their sins" (i. 21)—not from the Romans, but from

 

            MESSIANIC FULFILMENT                    375

 

their sins. Luke represents Zacharias as saying that

John was to —

          "Go before the face of the Lord to make ready his ways;

            To give knowledge of salvation unto his people

            In the remission of their sins" (Lc. i. 76-77).

 

The forerunner was to be "filled with the Holy Ghost,"

and was to "turn the disobedient to " "the wisdom of

the just" (i. 15-17). Personal holiness is insisted upon

in the new movement. He that was to be born of Mary

was to be "called holy" (i. 35). The purpose of it all

is that men should serve God " in holiness and righteous-

ness" (i. 75). Not to give further details, the great

message was not merely that the kingdom was at hand.

It was:  "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at

hand" (Matt. iv. 17).

          There were false messiahs in that century, and these

were political pretenders. This fact is sometimes cited

in proof that the Messiah was expected to be                        False

a political deliverer. But the false messiahs                          messiahs

all belong to the later generations, after the career of

Jesus had made the messianic idea a concrete one.

This idea of a political Messiah existed. In time it

became sharply defined as the idea of those who refused

to accept Jesus as the Messiah. But among persons

who were thoughtful, and had insight, and understood

the scriptures, the messianic idea was not so simple or

so crude as this. They expected a signal manifestation

in fulfilment of the ancient promise, but one that in-

cluded spiritual as well as temporal elements; and

many of the details became definite in their minds only

with the progress of events.

          II. We turn to the question of the fulfilment of the

promise—first, the nature of the thing we call fulfil-

ment, and second, the fulfilment as a fact.

376    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          1. First, what do we mean by fulfilment when we

think of it as sequent to a promise?

          From some points of view there is no difference be-

tween performing something that has been promised or

Fulfilment        threatened and the coming to pass of some-

of a promise     thing that has been foretold; but from other

versus a                    points of view there is a great difference.

prediction        For example, when we think of a promise and its

fulfilment, we think of the means employed for that purpose.

The promise and the means and the result are all in

mind at once, and our conception of each is modified

by our conception of the others. In the case of any

fulfilled promise it would for certain purposes be proper

to single out the foretelling clause in the promise, and

to connect it in thought with the result foretold, describ-

ing the thing as a fulfilled prediction. If the promise

involved a series of results, we might connect any one

of the results with the foretelling clause as a fulfilled

prediction. So far our thinking would be correct. But

if we permanently confined our thought to these items

in the fulfilled promise, we should be led to an inade-

quate and very likely a false idea of the promise and

its fulfilment. To understand the predictive element

aright we must see it in the light of the other elements.

Every fulfilled promise is a fulfilled prediction; but it

is exceedingly important to look at it as a promise, and

not as mere prediction.

          Throughout the Old Testament, as we have seen, the

prophets give us the conception of a promise that is

An eternal        eternally operative. This necessarily implies

fulfilment        a cumulative fulfilment, and certain culmi-

must be                     nating periods of fulfilment. At every date

cumulative       Deity has already begun to perform the great

thing he has promised, and he will never cease performing it.

              MESSIANIC FULFILMENT            377

 

If one affirms that the promise is fulfilled in Jesus

Christ, he ought not to separate that fulfilment from

the rest of the eternal fulfilling movement. The idea

of a long line of fulfilment is not a hypothesis offered

for the solution of difficulties, but a part of the primary

conception of a promise that is for eternity.

          And if there is a long line of fulfilment, the nature

of it may change as the ages go by. If the supreme

Ruler of the universe begins the keeping of his promise

by bestowing racial and political dominion, he may con-

tinue it by substituting a dominion of influence, a spir-

itual dominion. The transition from a racial to a spiritual

seed of Abraham, or from a racial to a spiritual king of

the line of David, may be a legitimate transition.

          We have found that the promise is of a blessing at

once cosmopolitan and national, and also that it is pre-

vailingly expressed in personal terms.                        This Cosmopolitan

threefold character must be taken into the                   and national and

account in considering the nature of the                     personal

fulfilment.     In other words, we have found the

representation that it was given to Israel for the na-

tions, and we have found it taking the form of the pres-

entation of a Person, a person in some cases identifiable

with Israel or with some Israelite, but of whom also are

said things too wonderful to be applied to any ordinary

man.  In what they teach concerning the divine pur-

pose through Israel, the prophets sometimes speak of

his mission as a whole, and sometimes of parts of it.

In speaking of the parts they sometimes treat them as

typical, so that an assertion made concerning one part

applies equally to other parts or to the whole; and

sometimes independently of their typical character, so

that what is true of one part does not apply to the whole

or to the other parts.

378      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          As the promise was for eternity and for mankind,

the Person of the promise is a typical human person,

thought of in his relations to Yahaweh. This is equally

true whether you conceive of the Person as merely

ideal, or as a personified people, or as a person existing

when any particular utterance concerning the promise

was made, or as a person then future; whether you call

him Servant or Messiah or hhasidh or Son or Regent

or by some other technical name. The terms differ,

but they are mostly capable of being thought of as

alike.¹

          We must further have it in mind that a teaching that

was uttered generation after generation, for centuries,

A matter          by a succession of prophets, did not ordinarily

familiar and      come to its audience as something startling.

practical          It was perpetually the repetition in forms

more or less changed of affirmations that were familiar

and well known. And the repeating of it was not

mainly the putting on record of predictions of events, so

that these might be verified in the future; it was the

teaching of a practical theology for the enforcement of

public and private duties.

          If one claims that the promise is fulfilled in Jesus

Christ, he should take these various matters into the

 

            ¹ Generally speaking each may, as we have seen, denote any person of

any race or time, regarded as in close relations with Yahaweh. Each

prevailingly denotes either the Israelitish race or the line of David, or

either, but always with especial reference to their close relations with

Yahaweh. In the use of each, stress is laid on God's purpose for man-

kind, on this as eternal, on this as already manifested, but to have its most

glorious manifestation in the future. In the use of each the prophet ordi-

narily presents the Person of the promise from a subjective point of view

as identical with Israel; but each is capable of being presented objec-

tively, so that the promise nation or the promise king, for example, will

be thought of as differing from the nation or king actually existing, and as

having a mission to these.

                  MESSIANIC FULFILMENT                   379

 

account, in defining his claim. The validity of his claim

depends on its taking a form consistent with these

facts. If the promise is fulfilled in Jesus,                              In what sense

it is fulfilled as promise, and not barely as                  is Jesus the

prediction; its fulfilment in Jesus is a part of               fulfilment?

its eternal and cumulative national and world-wide ful-

filment. In the form of the unfolding of a divine

promise, the prophets made a forecast of the future his-

tory of Israel in his relations to mankind. They made

this forecast for the purpose of edifying their contem-

poraries. We need not attempt to answer the question

how far they anticipated the actual details of external

events. In many places in their forecast appears the

figure of the Person of the promise, and in a few places

he takes on an extraordinary character, very like that of

the divine-human Redeemer whom Christians believe

Jesus to be. From their point of view they must needs

think of this Person as springing from Israel, and there-

fore as a part of Israel. If we suppose that some of

the prophets had foreglimpses of the actual personal

Jesus, they were compelled to think of him as a part of

Israel. The apostles sometimes look from the same

view-point, though they also have the conception of the

Christ as greater than Israel, and of Israel as included

in him.

          In fine, if we are to regard Jesus as the fulfilling of

the forecast of the prophets, we must follow the mode

of thought of Paul and his associates, thinking, of Jesus

Christ as the greatest fact in the history of Israel, and

as the culminating manifestation of God's purpose for

mankind through Israel. If they were correct in this,

then they were correct in applying directly to Jesus

Christ whatever the prophets say concerning Israel the

promise-people as distinguished from the merely eth-

380     THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

nical Israel. And I think that no intelligent student

of history, of any creed, doubts that Jesus is the great-

est fact in the history of Israel; and I see no room for

doubt that Jesus is the culminating manifestation of

God's purpose for the nations through Israel.¹

 

            ¹ "In the sense in which it is true that the Servant is the Israelitish

people personified, personification is not a mere figure of speech; it

involves the recognition of the fact that a people is an organic unit.

In law we speak of a business organization as a corporate person. In

its corporate personal character it has rights and obligations, and is sub-

ject to rewards and punishments. We apply the same modes of speaking

to other aggregates of individuals. We speak of the German people or

of the American church as organic wholes, having each a character and

duties like a person."

            "There is nothing to prevent such a personified aggregate from having

relations with itself or its members; as well as with the world outside it.

Even an individual has relations with himself, owes duties to himself, may

be in conflict with himself, should respect himself. In a more marked

sense the same is true of a personified aggregate. The German people

has duties to itself, and to the persons that constitute it. The American

church has obligations to itself and to its members. If the Servant is

Israel personified, that does not exclude him from having a mission to

Israel or to Israelites."

            "When Deutero-Isaiah identifies the Servant with Israel, it is never

with Israel as a mere political or ethnical aggregation of persons; invari-

ably it is with Israel as the medium of Yahaweh's gracious purpose for the

nations. Giesebrecht is correct in saying that the personified Israel is not

some part of the people, for example, not those who stand with the prophets,

or the pious kernel within Israel, but the whole people. Nevertheless it

is the ideal Israel, the eternal Israel contemplated in Yahaweh's purpose

and promise, and not merely the concrete Israel existing at any given

point of time."

            "Any Israelite, so far forth as he has Israelitish characteristics, may

within limits be taken as a type of the whole people. In particular, any

Israelite who is imbued with the spirit of Israel's call for the sake of man-

kind, may so far forth be regarded as a type of the ideal Israel. Within

limits, that which is true of the people is true of any typical individual

among the people."

            "If the history of the world presents us with any one person who is

peculiarly and uniquely a typical Israelite, who stands by himself as the

representative of Yahaweh's promise to the nations through Israel, whose

 

 

 

               MESSIANIC FULFILMENT                 381

 

          2. Having attained to this conception of the nature

of the fulfilment which we are to expect, we are ready

to consider the fulfilment as a historical fact. The ques-

tion may be divided. First, what are the historical facts,

if any, that seem to correspond to the thing promised to

Abraham and Israel? Second, is the correspondence a

reality? We take up the first of these questions, leaving

the second to be discussed in the following chapter.

          What are the facts of history, if any, in which the

supreme powers of the universe have kept the promise

that was made to Abraham and Israel? An                            A summary

adequate reply would be a many-volumed his-                     as to the

tory of Israel his relations to mankind. A                              fulfilment

compact summary of the reply may be framed as fol-

lows, confining itself to a few general salient matters.

If we leave Christianity out of the account, except as

a medium through which Semitic ideas have dissemi-

nated themselves, it still remains true that the Israel-

itish race, both by what they have achieved and by

what they have suffered, have been peculiarly a chan-

nel of benefit to substantially all races, and are likely

to be increasingly so in the future. In this fact Yaha-

weh seems to be keeping the promise that he made of

old, the promise that all the families of the ground

should be blessed in Abraham and his seed. This fact

is not erased, but on the contrary greatly magnified,

 

experiences and character and relations to the world are such that Israel's

mission to the world culminates in him, then it is correct to apply directly

to that person the statements made in Deutero-Isaiah concerning Israel

the Servant. The writers of the New Testament regard Jesus Christ as

such a person. Because they so regard him they apply to him the utter-

ances concerning the Servant. Their doing so is not a matter of accom-

modating interpretation, but is as correct critically as it is magnificent in

the conception of human history which it implies" (Am. Jour. of Theol.,

July, 1903, P. 543)

382      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

when we recognize Christianity and Mohammedanism

as movements growing out of Israel and constituting

part of the mission of Israel. And these parts of the

fulfilment of the promise to Israel, in their turn, sink

into insignificance beside the fact that the person Jesus

Christ came of the seed of Abraham and Israel — pro-

vided that Jesus is the God-man and the Saviour that

Christians believe him to be. If there has been a ful-

filment, it has been threefold: that in the race Israel,

that in Israel's religion and its daughter religions, that

in the person and work of Jesus; and it is a mistake to

neglect any one of these three factors.

          A certain current interpretation claims that the seed

of Abraham in whom the nations are blessed is Israel

A Jewish in-     the race, set apart by Yahaweh as his espe-

terpretation      cial organ for economic and ethical and reli-

gious revelation to mankind, and still kept separate by

him for the further working out of these his beneficent

purposes. No one need wonder at the great influence

which this interpretation has, especially among the more

reverent and appreciative of the rationalistic thinkers.

But those who hold it sometimes draw the inference

that since the national career of Israel is thus the ful-

filment of the promise, therefore Jesus Christ is not its

fulfilment. This inference is a gross non sequitur.

          As opposed to the view just mentioned, a great body

of Christian interpreters claim that the fulfilment is not,

The exclusive    except incidentally, in Israel the race; but in

Christian in-     the Christian Messiah, perhaps with Israel the

terpretation      church, gathered from the nations, and abid-

ing in the Christ. If the other conception was a large

and worthy one, this is still larger and worthier. The

mission accomplished by Israel through Jesus, his atone-

ment, his church, his influence, his personality, is infi-

                     MESSIANIC FULFILMENT              383

 

nitely greater than that accomplished by Israel merely

as a race. But if the Christian interpreter persists in

excluding the ethnical Israel from his conception of the

fulfilment, or in regarding Israel's part in the matter

as merely preparatory and not eternal, then he comes

into conflict with the plain witness of both Testaments.

His interpretation is even less consistent with the text

than is the exclusive Jewish conception. Rightly inter-

preted, the biblical statements include in the fulfilment

both Israel the race, with whom the covenant is eternal,

and also the personal Christ and his mission, with the

whole spiritual Israel of the redeemed in all ages. The

New Testament teaches this as Christian doctrine, for

leading men to repentance and for edification; and the

Old Testament teaches it as messianic doctrine, for lead-

ing men to repentance and for edification.

          In the biblical idea of the Christ is included the idea

of his mission — his work among men in all the genera-

tions. From one point of view, seeing that the larger

includes the less, his mission includes that of Israel.

From a different point of view, one would say that

Christ and his mission came out of Israel, and were

germinally included in Israel. Genetically, the acorn

includes the oak, the less may include the greater.

Whether from the one point of view or the other, the

scriptures habitually identify both Israel and the Christ

as the fulfilling of the promise.

          The exclusive Jewish interpretation and the exclusive

Christian interpretation are equally wrong. Each is

correct in what it affirms, and incorrect in                            An interpretation

what it denies. The Christian should never                           that is both Jewish

say to the Jew:  "Jesus Christ is the fulfill-                           and Christian

ing of the promise, and therefore you are shut out."

The truth requires us to say instead: "Your view is

384      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

correct as far as it goes, but it is incomplete. Large

and lofty as is your conception of the mission of Israel,

the true conception is still loftier and larger. You

Israelites have been kept in the world these thousands

of years, and your record as a whole has been a pecul-

iarly splendid and beneficent one. Your vigor as a

race seems to be unabated. No one knows what mag-

nificent possibilities the God of your fathers may have

in store for you. But you do your race injustice if you

claim that its career is circumscribed within even these

spacious boundaries."

          Christianity came into the world, so far as its human

founders are concerned, as the joint product of Israel's

bible and of influences set in motion by men of Israelite

blood, who claimed inspiration from the God of Israel.

In a later century Mohammedanism sprang from the

two older forms of the religion of Yahaweh. As adher-

ents of these two religions, several hundred millions of

the human race now profess to worship the God of Israel

as the only God; and these hundreds of millions include

the leading races and the leading civilizations of the

globe. These results are parts of the mission of Israel

in the world; and they are parts of it larger and more

important than those which have thus far been directly

accomplished by the perpetuation of Israel as a separate

race. Put the lowest possible estimate upon Moham-

medanism and the corrupted forms of Christianity, and

even upon Christianity in its purer forms, and still the

blessing of Abraham, flowing and to flow to the nations

through these channels, is such as to be a worthy

fulfilment of even the promise of the infinite God.

          That which Israel has achieved through the Israelite,

Jesus Christ, and through those other Israelites his

earliest disciples, and through their successors till now,

               MESSIANIC FULFILMENT                  385

 

is not less the accomplishment of what Yahaweh prom-

ised to Israel than are the successes that Israel has

achieved through Moses or David or Solomon or Isaiah

or Nehemiah or Maimonides or the Rothschilds.

          But even the view we have thus far been taking is

comparatively a low and narrow view to take of the

outcome of the promise made to Israel. It                   Fulfilment in

shows up dwarflike by the side of the out-                  the person of

come in the person of Jesus Christ. If the                             Christ

Christian doctrines be true, the doctrines of the incar-

nation, the trinity, the person of Christ, the atonement,

salvation, immortality, then there is in the character of

Jesus the Saviour, offspring of Jacob and of David, a

fulfilment of the promise so vast that even the achieve-

ments of the religion that Jesus founded are by com-

parison insignificant.

          Even from a theologically agnostic point of view the

wonderful personality of Jesus, coupled with the un-

equalled acceptance he has had among men, render him

a fact greater and more important than a whole cycle

of other facts. Much more, if the doctrines of immor-

tality and of the incarnation and the atonement are true,

then the kingdom of the promise is eternal in the world

of the blessed, and is as much beyond the largest tem-

poral greatness as eternity is beyond time. If they are

true, then the person of the divine-human Saviour, Deity

incarnate in a man of Jewish blood, is as much greater

than the great things we have been considering as God 

is greater than men. So far as duration is concerned

there is no final fulfilment for an eternal promise; but

there was a climacteric fulfilment, one whose sublime

height will never be exceeded, in the historical mani-

festation when the Word was made flesh and dwelt

among us.

386       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          So much for the facts in which the promise made to

Israel finds its accomplishment. When we are scanning

the career of Israel in search of these facts, we should

look at the whole historical process, and not at some

relatively narrow and circumscribed portion of it.

          Possibly we need to remind ourselves that the fulfil-

ment is still in progress.  It is not correct to say that

it was accomplished on 'the cross and at the resurrec-

tion, with the implication that these were the last end

of the process. If one holds that the culminating ful-

filment is in the person bf the divine-human Saviour, as

manifested in Jesus Christ, he must none the less hold

that there are remainders of the eternal fulfilment yet

to be wrought out, alike in the Israelitish race, in the

spread of the kingdom on the earth, and in the bless-

edness in heaven of the recipients of the promised

blessing.

 

 

 

                          CHAPTER XVII

 

 

      THE APOLOGETIC VALUE OF PROPHECY

 

 

          VERY familiar among the theologians is the argument

given in such works as Keith On the Prophecies, or

Bishop Thomas Newton's Dissertations on                          The old ar-

the Prophecies which have remarkably been                        gument from

Fulfilled, or in its appropriate place in many                         prophecy

of the full treatises on Dogmatics. It is to the effect

that there are in the scriptures many hundred predic-

tions which have come true. In particular, it is said

that the Old Testament contains numerous predictions

concerning a personage called the Messiah, who was to

come at a certain time in the future; that these predic-

tions sketch his character, give beforehand his biogra-

phy, mention details in his career, his sufferings, his

death, and that these details correspond remarkably to

those of the career of Jesus Christ, as recorded in the

New Testament. It is therefore inferred that, since it

was beyond human power to foresee these details, the

foresight of them must have been by divine inspira-

tion; and thus that the facts prove at once the divine

authority of the prophets who foresaw, and the divine

mission of the Christ who was foreseen.

          I do not attack or undervalue this argument. It has

superficial defects, but it is in its essential nature im-

pregnable. We cannot shut our eyes, how-                           Its

ever, to the fact that it is now much less                                         decadence

influential than formerly. Some of the reasons for this

 

                                        387

388      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

are not hard to find, and they show that the argument,

however valuable, needs to be restated.

          Its influence has been weakened by the indiscriminate

claims which some of its advocates have made. When

you claim instances and fail to make your claim good,

your claim ought, logically, to go for nothing. Prac-

tically, however, it counts against you, bringing suspi-

cion on any other claims you may make.

          Again, many even of the valid instances used in this

argument are instances whose validity is not at once ap-

parent, but has to be argued in order to have it accepted.

Instead of cogently using the instance, you have to ex-

haust your logical energy in vindicating your right to

use it.

          Again, the argument as commonly presented lacks

unity. It deals with facts that seem to be disconnected

and heterogeneous. Indeed, some of the presentations

make the unconnected character of the facts an impor-

tant part of the argument. They assume that marvel-

lousness is a special proof of divineness. But our

generation is not easily convinced by proofs of this sort.

In its study of God and of miracles, as in its study of

ordinary nature, it believes mainly the truths which it

can classify and reduce to statements of law, and looks

with suspicion on that which is incapable of being so

treated.

          Yet again, the argument as commonly presented is

historically associated with the assumption that predic-

tion is the main thing in prophecy. This our genera-

tion rejects. It is convinced that the prophet is a

forthteller rather than a foreteller; that miraculous pre-

diction, however real, is only one item in prophecy, and

not the most important item. This doubtless diminishes

for the time being— by suggestion, of course, and not

 

                     APOLOGETIC VALUE                     389

 

by logical necessity — the influence which arguments

from prediction have over us.

          Further, the interpreters of the past have treated as

predictions many passages that were not properly such,

but expressions of fears or hopes or wishes or opinions,

or statements as to existing tendencies. Confused hab-

its of interpretation have been established. With similar

confusion of thought, the opponents of the argument

from prediction are now affirming that the prophets

made many predictions that were proved false by the

events; that the fulfilment of what the prophets fore-

told was a haphazard matter; that the thing sometimes

came true, and sometimes not. There is at present

enough of confusion of thought to dull the edge of the

traditional argument.

          When to considerations like these we add others based

on the general sceptical and agnostic tendencies of our

age, and on the effect of the current theories                         The argu-

of criticism, whatever be the weight or the                           ment needs

bearing any one may assign to these, we                                        to be restated

reach at least one conclusion; namely, that it is not

superfluous to inquire whether some better way can be

found of stating the argument from prophecy. It seems

to me that there is such a way, and that it is indicated

by the treatment of the subject given in the preceding

sixteen chapters.

          In these chapters, let us remind ourselves, we have

reached, strictly speaking, only provisional conclusions.

We have been asking: What did the prophets                       Our provisional

claim? rather than: What were the actual                                        conclusions. Are

facts? We have taken the statements of fact                          they true?

as we found them, and have tried to get an orderly

understanding of them. Now that we have been over

the ground, we are ready for the inquiry whether the

390      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

conclusions we have reached are genuine fact, or are

falsehood or romance. And this question will closely

connect itself with the question whether we can substan-

tiate the claims of the religion that traces its existence

back to the prophets.

          In this region the one most important, indisputable

fact which we possess is the scriptures themselves in

the forms in which we have them. No one doubts that

the scriptures are a fact, existing in some millions of

details. Most of the statements made concerning

their sources, their original form, their structure, the

divine element in them, and other like matters, are more

or less matters of inference, of conjecture, of opinion;

but the scriptures themselves, including their contents,

are a fact. Thus far we have been engaged in simply

examining this fact. Apart from all questions of trust-

worthiness or inspiration, the scriptures are the original

literary sources for information concerning the prophet,

and we have been merely asking what they say con-

cerning him. Now we are ready to ask whether what

they say is sane and credible; and in asking that, to ask

whether the religion taught by the prophets is a rea-

sonable religion.

          The effect of such an argument on the mind of any

person will depend somewhat on the view which he

The lowest       already holds concerning God and the uni-

theistic pre-      verse; but it will have weight with any one

supposition      who is so far forth a theist that he regards

the supreme energy of the universe as a Being that is

intelligent and purposeful. We have found the proph-

ets claiming to be in communication with such a Being.

We have found them describing him as not merely the

intelligent supreme energy of the universe, but as the

Power that makes for righteousness, as exercising love

 

                       APOLOGETIC VALUE                 391

 

and preference and indignation, as having a plan in

human history, as the creator of nature, always every-

where present in that which he has created, but also as

transcending creation, and able at will to exercise pow-

ers different from those of nature as we understand it;

and in particular as interested in redeeming men from

sin. If we find reason to hold that what they say is

credible, that will be to us proof that their views of the

nature of the supreme energy of the universe are cor-

rect, and in particular that the offered redemption which

they proclaim is a reality. These things will become

credible to us, both on the basis of their testimony and

through our own insight in the course of the processes

by which we are convinced that their testimony is

credible.

          Upon this discussion we now enter, first recapitulat-

ing the results we have reached, and then inquiring how

these results bear on the question of apologetic restate-

ment.

          I. First, we make a brief recapitulation.

          We have found that the scriptures present the prophet

as a citizen with a message from Deity; not a priest,

not a wizard of some sort, not an oracular                            The prophet

recluse, but eminently a man among men.                            as we have

We have found that the prophets were the                            found him

statesmen, the reformers, the writers and poets, the

preachers, of their times, as well as men who claimed

to be in supernatural communication with the unseen

world. We have found that the revelation which they

professed to bring from Deity was the product of their

human good judgment, as well as of special gifts

claimed by them to be superhuman. Much of this so-

claimed revelation was written down, and is still extant

in the scriptures with which we are familiar; and thus

392      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

it is within our reach for purposes of testing and of

judgment.

          So far as the element of prediction enters into their

utterances, we have found that it consists almost exclu-

Prophetic         sively of promises and threats uttered with

prediction        a homiletical purpose. They appeal to ful-

as we have       filled prediction as accrediting their divine au-

found it                     thority, but their utterances contain very little

prediction that purports to have been uttered merely or mainly

for this purpose.

          In particular, we have found that the foreshadowing of

the Messiah,which constitutes by far the larger portion of

The messi-       all the predictive element in prophecy, is the

anic doctrine     teaching of a doctrine, a doctrine in the form

as we have       of a promise affirmed to have been given by

found it                     Yahaweh. We have found the New Testament

calling attention centrally to what it describes as "the promise,"

the one promise which it elsewhere designates as "the

hope of Israel," — identifying this promise as the one

originally made to Abraham, recognizing the specific

promises into which it branched out, tracing its unfold-

ing through the Old Testament narrative, preaching it

as Christian doctrine, claiming that it finds culminating

fulfilment in Jesus Christ, under it announcing salvation

to the gentiles, and connecting it throughout with the

redemptive and ethical and eschatological doctrines of

the gospel. We have found their position fully justi-

fied by the testimony of the Old Testament. The Old

Testament is the literature of Israel regarded as the

people of the promise. We do not need to settle the

critical questions that have arisen in order to justify this

proposition. Many important details under it depend

on questions of date and authorship; but the proposition

as a whole is true on any possible adjustment of dates

 

                     APOLOGETIC VALUE                    393

 

and questions of authorship. At the beginning of the

main line of the history recorded in the Old Testament,

we found the record of the giving of this great promise

which was so influential with the men of the New Testa-

ment — the promise that in Abraham and his seed all

the nations shall be blessed. We found this promise

emphasized in the story of the patriarchs. Again we

found it in the records of the time when Israel came

out of Egypt, made central in the form of the affirma-

tion that Yahaweh, the God of all the peoples, has con-

stituted Israel a separate and priestly nation. Later we

found the same promise renewed to David and his seed

— the promise that Israel shall be perpetuated as the

eternal kingdom of God, reigned over eternally by the

anointed king of the line of David. In this connec-

tion we found the promise described as "the torah of

mankind," cosmopolitan as well as everlasting in its

scope. And from David's time on we found the same

promise presupposed in the songs and sermons of the

prophets.

          For we have found that the psalms and the prophetic

discourses are simply the preaching of this gospel.

They reiterate the promise. They unfold it                            The gospel

in new lights, and present it in new aspects.                         in the Old Testament

They apply it each one to the circumstances                         as we have

of his own day. They call attention to past                            found it

fulfilment, and affirm that what God has promised is

sure for time to come. They make the truth vivid by

new illustration. They do this in a main line of messi-

anic prophecy, which can be traced, creating a vocabu-

lary of terms in which to describe the great Agent of

the promise — such terms as Servant, Messiah, Elect

one, hhasidh, Branch; speaking at large of a kingdom,

of universal peace, of the last days, of the always

394      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

impending day of Yahaweh. They equally make the

same truth vivid through the object lessons presented in

their own persons, in the ceremonial law which they

introduced, in all the institutions of Israel.

          In their presentation of it the promise is not a mere

forecast of a distant future, but is spiritual food for

immediate use. It was fitted to be the central doctrine

of the practical theology of Israel. If any descendant

of Abraham believed that Deity had chosen his race for

purposes of blessing to mankind, that was a reason why

he should practise repentance and faith and obedience

and deathless patriotism; why he should never despair

even when things were at their worst, but should be

sure that God would carry out his irrevocable plans.

In short, here was a preachable gospel— not merely a

gospel like that which Christians have to preach, but the

very same gospel, though in a less unfolded stage.

          In current sermons and addresses in our day the

messianic doctrine of the Old Testament is sometimes

effectively illustrated by the minute scarlet strand said

to exist in every rope of the cordage of the navy of

Great Britain. In one respect the illustration fails.

Rightly understood, the messianic element in the Old

Testament is not a minute thread, difficult to discern; it

is everywhere the principal thing, that which underlies

all the history, all the poetry, all the prophetic preaching,

all the national worship, all the sayings of wisdom. It is

at some points more discernible than at others, but the

whole Old Testament is simply the record of the promise.

          II. Does this view of the matter afford a practica-

ble ground for restating the apologetic argument from

prophecy? Is there a basis here for proving the truth

and the superhuman sanctions of the religion revealed

in the scriptures?

 

                  APOLOGETIC VALUE                        395

 

          In answering this question, we must confine ourselves

to four specific arguments, — those from the personality

of the prophet, from the national ideal, from historical

verisimilitude, from fulfilled prediction; and in the case

of each of these we shall be able to give no more than a

brief illustrative sketch.

          I. To me it seems that the personality of the prophet,

as presented in the prophetic writings, is an argument

of no small weight in proof of the genuineness of their

mission and of the truth of their teachings.

          The idea that God likes manliness in men, that manli-

ness especially fits a man to interpret God, has in our

day a good deal of currency. Our literature                           The biblical

is full of this, and is busy in contrasting this                         ideal of a prophet

idea with real or alleged ideas that have pre-                        is a true ideal

vailed in the past. One pictures the ultra-professional

minister of a few generations ago, or the minister of

ultra-ecclesiastical type, or the grotesque and distorted

types of holy men that are found somewhere, by way

of illustrating the superiority of the type of Christian

worker who depends solely on his own manliness and

human sympathy and consciousness of divine mission.

Many seem to suppose that this idea of the true charac-

ter of a religious teacher is a twentieth-century idea —

that it perhaps began to come in when the Young

Men's Christian Association introduced athletics into

their methods of work. Prophetic character of this type

seems to be regarded by many as the crowning product

of the current stage of evolution. And I suppose that

none of us doubt the superior fineness of this type as

compared with other types. It ought to stand for some-

thing, then, that this is the type of prophetic character

set forth in the Old Testament, from the earliest parts

of it to the latest.

396       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          That this is the Old Testament presentation of the

prophet has been shown in the preceding chapters, par-

ticularly in the fourth chapter. The prophet is presented

as the highest human religious authority, and yet he is

simply a citizen with a message. We have traditional

conceptions of the prophet in which he is robed or ton-

sured, or otherwise marked by external insignia, or by

professional practices, and perhaps one cannot prove

that these traditional ideas are at all points incorrect;

but none of them are distinctly found in the Old Tes-

tament. So far as the primary record is concerned,

they are importations, and many of them are importa-

tions that contradict the record. The Old Testament

presentation of the highest type of religious teacher dif-

fers very little from the highest conception to which our

century has attained.

          This fact is the more marked because it is so in con-

trast with the ideas that have commonly prevailed

among men. In all religions the teacher who has repre-

sented Deity has affected visible marks of distinction

from other men. This is so among the American abo-

rigines; among the Africans and the Islanders of the

sea; among the highly civilized Buddhists and Brah-

mans; among Christian clergymen and scholars. It is so

thoroughly the case that interpreters in all the past have

assumed that the Old Testament prophet could not be

an exception, and have supplied from inference or from

imagination the details that the Old Testament omits.

The uniqueness of the prophet of Israel in this respect

is not to be lightly passed over. He is a class by

himself.

          These facts have a double bearing on questions of

apologetics. First, this biblical idea of the typical reli-

gious man is a true idea. It appeals to our judgment

                     APOLOGETIC VALUE                    397

 

as to what ought to be. We are sure that it is correct.

This judgment ought to carry with it our respect for

the records that present the conception. The                         Apologetic

writers of these records were persons who                            bearings

had attained to insight. Their affirmations have a claim

on our confidence. But this is not all. We are com-

pelled, in the second place, to raise the question how

they attained to such a conception. The old-fashioned

opinion that it was revealed to them by divine inspiration

will account for the phenomena. Can any one account

for them more reasonably? Account for it as you may,

these men were, somehow or other, in remarkably close

relations with the supreme intelligent Energy that mani-

fests itself in the universe.

          The argument gains in cogency if we carry it over

into the region of the inspiration of the prophets, and of

divine revelation through them. Tell a child                          God revealing

that God gave the bible through the prophets,                       himself through

the prophets writing it, and the child inevi-                           the prophets

tably gets the notion of something like a dictating pro-

cess. That notion persistently clings to our minds, and

we find it difficult to prevent its vitiating any idea we

may form of the matter. Our study of the prophets

offers a different form of conception. We have before

us the conception of the supreme Energy of the universe

operating purposefully in human history. In particular

we examine a block of history extending from Abraham

to the time when the New Testament was written. God

causes the events of the history to be transacted, the

prophets themselves and their writings being portions

of the events ; and he causes a record to be made of the

events transacted. He is represented as raising up the

prophets, and as guiding them guiding them in such

a way that each prophet distinctly continues to be him-

398      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

self, even while he is the agent of Deity. Here we have

a mode of conception not lax in its recognition of the

divine element and wide enough to include all the phe-

nomena in the case.

          2. If this argument from the Old Testament ideal of

the prophet is strong, yet stronger is the argument from

the national ideal which the promise-doctrine represents

as existing in the consciousness of Israel.

          That ideal is that Israel is God's chosen channel of

blessing to mankind.

          The details of the argument are partly dependent on

critical questions. If Moses wrote the pentateuch, then

Critical theo-    the promise was already on record in his

ries and the      time, whether one count the date as the thir-

national ideal    teenth century before Christ, or the sixteenth,

and was in the consciousness of the family of Abraham

more than four centuries earlier. But how if one holds

that, Moses did not write the pentateuch? Certain

scholars say that the earliest parts of the pentateuch

date from a time shortly before Amos, about 800 B.C.;

and that there is an element of fiction in the narrative,

so that we cannot be sure of the facts for the times

much earlier than that century. Now it is not a matter

of indifference which of these views we hold. One con-

tradicts the other, and one of the two is necessarily false.

In matters of apologetical detail the difference is impor-

tant, and it is so in its bearing on many other questions.

Nevertheless, the main contention from the national

ideal stands firm on either view, or on any intermediate

view.

          Whether it began in the twentieth century before

Christ, or the sixteenth or the thirteenth or the eighth,

it is on record that a certain national ideal existed in the

consciousness of Israel. Israelites held that the God

                      APOLOGETIC VALUE                  399

 

of all the earth had chosen Israel as his own especial

people, for purposes of blessing to mankind. We need

not insist that every person was greatly under the influ-

ence of this ideal. The majority were ignorant and

indifferent, as the majority in Christendom are to-day

ignorant and indifferent concerning the great truths of

religion. But the doctrine of the promise was widely

enough understood so that the prophets could appeal

to it in their preaching; and devout souls in Israel

accepted it with the whole heart.

          Think for a moment what a conception this was, to

stand as a nation's ideal. Chosen of God for pur-

poses of blessing to all mankind! Had the                            The signifi-

sages of China or India or Persia or Babylon                        cance of such

any conception to compare with this? Did                            an ideal

Greek philosophy or that more wonderful thing, Greek

insight, ever attain to it? Was it incorporated into the

Roman ethics of legislation? In these modern times

we have borrowed the idea from the bible. It is an

element of some importance in our religion, our philan-

thropy, our statesmanship. In hours of supreme mis-

sionary enthusiasm we sometimes rise to a very distinct

consciousness that, our nation, our race, our church, is

chosen of God for purposes of blessing to mankind.

But this consciousness, even on the theory of those who

date it latest, was on record in Israel when Rome was

founded; on record centuries before Plato or the pub-

lishing of the Greek drama with its wonderful theology

and ethics; existing and on record then, and then be-

lieved and preached as the ancient religious tradition of

the nation. If the same consciousness existed in the

Abrahamic race twelve centuries earlier, that makes the

case so much the stronger; but it is strong enough if

we take the later date.

400       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

          Such are the facts in this argument from the promise

as the statement of a national ideal. They have two

bearings. First, the ideal is a worthy one. It indicates

mental largeness and moral fineness. The men who

entertained and taught it deserve our respect, and de-

serve it both intellectually and spiritually. It is not

reasonable to reject lightly the things which they affirm

to be true. And secondly, we have to face the question

how they attained to such an ideal. It is a remarkable

phenomenon. In possessing it they are a class by

themselves.

          How shall we account for this wholly unique instance

of national consciousness? this ideal of Israel as di-

How is this       vinely chosen, not for his own sake, but for

ideal to be ac-   the sake of the nations? If one offers the

counted for?     hypothesis of miraculous divine inspiration,

that will account for it. On this hypothesis, God gave

Israel's ideal to him by superhuman revelation. And

certainly the ideal is worthy of such an origin.  If we

thus account for it, it proves the divine mission of the

prophets, the apostles, the scriptures. But suppose one

refuses to entertain the hypothesis of an inspired reve-

lation; suppose he tries to account for the phenomena

from an agnostic point of view. The thing that he has

to account for is the fact that this altruistic ideal existed,

and that it constituted a part of the monotheism that

has come to mankind through Israel. It existed, and

it is so very marked a thing in human history that it

amounts to a special and exceptional manifestation of

the powers that control history. It shows something in

regard to the nature of the powers that control history.

Somehow or other, Israel and the prophets and apostles

sustain this peculiar relation to the powers that control

human history, whoever or whatever these powers may
                      APOLOGETIC VALUE                     401

 

be. It follows that Israel and the prophets and apos-

tles and the scriptures have an especial claim to atten-

tion and credence, even from a theologically agnostic

point of view. But the facts also constitute a strong

argument against theological agnosticism, and in favor

of the doctrine that the power in history is a personal

and self-revealing God.

          The strength of this argument from the national ideal

will perhaps be the more apparent if we set it in contrast

with a different ideal that has sometimes been                      A contrasting

presented. Whoever has thoughtfully read                            ideal

Mr. Kingsley's novel, Hypatia, doubtless has a certain

picture deeply burned into his memory — the picture

there so frequently sketched of all the millions of the 

human race who lived before Christ as now burning in

hell. Whether or no Mr. Kingsley is correct in repre-

senting that this was current Christian doctrine in the

time of Cyril, there can be no doubt that it is a doctrine

that many Christians have taught. Probably there are

those now living who regard it as a part of the scheme

of Christian theology; who recognize no revelation of

a redemptive divine purpose for any who lived before

Jesus came save the obedient few in Israel. Such views

of Christian doctrine as this have caused apologists to

be at a great disadvantage when they addressed intelli-

gent and humane minds. That disadvantage is turned

to advantage when one notices what the ideal presented

by the prophets actually is; for that ideal makes the'

divine redemption for men conterminous with human

history.

          An added consideration of some weight is to be found

in the method in which the prophets present their ideal.

It is easy to teach a great religious doctrine in such

terms that it shall be intelligible only to persons of certain

402          THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

attainments or habits of mind; in such terms that it

would be uninteresting to those who have not reached

Argument        these attainments, or to those who have left

from their        them behind. By putting their doctrine into

mode of          the form of a promise, the prophets rendered

presentation     it intelligible to those to whom it was first given,

and yet expressed it in terms that could be retained age

after age as its truths unfolded themselves. They thus

made it a statement of doctrine that was fitted to be

central in religious teaching and practice for all time.

          In this characteristic of the form of their teaching, we

have something that is of weight in apologetics.

In this matter of the national ideal, therefore, we

have an argument based onlundoubted facts. It is not

open to the charge of being trivial. No one can belittle

it by placing "mother Shipton's prophecy" by the side

of it. Its facts are the grave and central things of his-

tory. Its force is obvious, I think, on the first presen-

tation; and it grows weightier the more one reflects

upon it.

          3. We turn to the argument from historical verisimili-

tude. The account of the prophets and of the promise,

as we have found it in the scriptures, commends itself

to the historical judgment as bearing the marks of truth.

          Of course, the scholars of the so-called Modern View

would not wholly accept this affirmation. They regard

Marks of         a large proportion of the statements of fact

historicity        made in the bible as either fiction or false-

hood. In the preceding sixteen chapters we have been

examining what purport to be facts. There are those

who would admit our conclusions to be biblically correct

and spiritually truthful, who would yet deny their truth-

fulness as matters of fact. And indeed it is supposable

that a statement may be true in its own proper sense,

                        APOLOGETIC VALUE                   403

 

and may have spiritual value, and may nevertheless be

fiction. One who holds that many of the statements we

have examined are unhistorical might also supposably

hold that they are in their proper value truthful. We

need not raise this question, however, unless we find rea-

son for doubting their historical verity. If the view given

by the testimony in the case is self-consistent and reason-

able, and marked by such continuity as history ought to

possess, we need not hesitate to accept it as true to fact.

          (a) The question of self-consistency is largely a ques-

tion of details. But if the view we have drawn from the

bible has been correctly drawn, that very fact                       Self

shows that the records are mainly consistent;                       consistency

for the view itself is certainly consistent. Records that

are full of contradictions will not yield an agreeing view

of a matter except by processes of elimination; and we

have not found it necessary to resort to such processes.

The consistency of the record becomes impressive in

proportion as one examines a large body of details; and

the number of details which we have passed under review

is very large. In them all we have found that the doc-

trine of the promise serves as a key. It has solved the

difficulties before they arose, by the simple process of

suggesting the true understanding of the text.

          One difficulty with the argument from fulfilled proph-

ecy, as sometimes presented, is that many of its cita-

tions from the Old Testament are not at                                Difficulties and

once obviously applicable. An apologist                                         the promise-

cites a passage as applying to Jesus. One                                       doctrine

looks up the passage and finds that the words were

spoken of Israel, or of some ancient historical person-

age, in a context that gives no hint of referring to a

coming person who is to appear some centuries in the

future. Just at this point there is often found a gulf

404       THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

between the apologist's premises and his conclusion,

and he has to resort to some device for bridging the

gulf. We are familiar, for instance, with the formula

in which one says: Yes, it does indeed appear that the

passage applies primarily to Israel or to David or to

the author or to his hero, as the case may be; but this

one of whom it was originally spoken is here to be

regarded as a type of the personal Christ; and so the

Antitype is signified through the type. Perhaps there

is no greater fault to be found with this than that it

opens the way for bringing in too large an element of

personal opinion in interpreting passages of scripture.

But this is only one of the many devices of apologetic

exegesis, ranging all the way from the idea of generic

prophecy, manifold fulfilment, progressive fulfilment,

down to that of double meaning or of accommodated or

allegorical interpretation. Some of these devices are

legitimate processes for getting at the essential truth,

and some are of a pretty desperate character.

          In almost every one of these instances it simplifies

the case, and renders it intelligible, to note that the

prophet in the given instance is speaking of Israel as

the people of the promise, or of some person as repre-

sentatively related to the promise; and that the apostle

who quotes him is speaking of Jesus as the fulfilment

of the promise made to and through Israel. When we

note that both are dealing with the promise, we see that

they are on common ground.

          With this in mind, read the New Testament through,

comparing it with the Old at every suitable point. As

you find that the difficulties vanish and the statements

become luminous, in one case after another, your con-

viction of the thorough truth of the scriptures and their

claims will grow deeper and more intense.

                    APOLOGETIC VALUE                   405

 

          To put this in other words, the appeal of the New

Testament to the Old in proof of the claims of Jesus is

rather to a doctrine taught there than to utterances that

were the mere foretelling of events; and when we

understand this doctrine, the meaning of the appeal be-

comes clear. That which is not easily intelligible as

long as we count it to be the foretelling of an event may

become perfectly plain the moment we recognize it as

a doctrinal statement. It was as competent for the

apostles to appeal to the doctrines taught by the

prophets as to any other prophetic utterances.

          And so the fact that this is the nature of their appeal

offers itself to us as a solution of problems that would

otherwise be puzzling. It affords an improved way of

stating whatever is true in the theories of generic

prophecy. It presents itself as a reconciliation of the

Jewish and the Christian interpretations of the prophe-

cies, so far forth as both are tenable; as a reasonable

substitute for all theories of a double sense; and, in

fine, as a full refutation of most of the objections raised

against the messianic claims of Jesus Christ, as set

forth in the New Testament.

          (b) But however consistent with itself the biblical

presentation of the matter I may be, is it rationally

credible?

          We are not to accept absurdities as fact, on the

ground of their being self-consistent. If they are

absurdities, their consistency may prove them to be

fiction rather than falsehood, but it cannot prove them

to be history. This question still remains: Is the

account given by the prophets inherently unbelievable?

One's reply will depend in part on his mental attitude

toward miracles. So we may begin by classifying the

statements of the prophets into those which affirm the

406        THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

occurrence of miraculous events, and those which do

not. For present purposes we have no need to define

more closely than by saying that miraculous events are

such as the human mind cannot account for as the prod-

uct of natural law. Supposably what we call miracle

may really come under natural law, and might be so

accounted for by a superhuman mind, the divine mind

for example; but we do not now need to discuss this.

We need not be troubled even if the definition thus

given of miracle is a sliding definition, the human mind

to-day being able to account for things that were unac-

countable to men of earlier times.

          The record as we have studied it has been almost ex-

elusively concerned with events that are not, under this

Most of the       definition, miraculous. We have found it to

events un-        be, not an account of a series of marvels, but

miraculous       of sober and believable facts, some of them

remarkable and wonderful, but no one of them a miracle

in the sense of being out of the ordinary and intelligible

operations of nature. It is true that there are miracu-

lous events described in the records, and that we have

not disputed their reality; but also we have not made

use of them.

          Of course, nothing could be more sane or open to

credence than the affirmations of the prophetic writings

in regard to ordinary unmiraculous events, provided

these are taken by themselves. No one would allege

against them any charge of inherent incredibility. And

the history of the prophets, as we have traced it, is

almost exclusively made up of events of this kind.

          But how is it when these writings affirm events such

as the human mind cannot account for as the product of

natural law? They certainly make affirmations of this

sort. Shall we accept these as fact? or shall we reject

                       APOLOGETIC VALUE                      407

 

them, and regard them as discrediting all other affirma-

tions of the prophets? If one holds that every alleged

apprehension of the supernatural is irrational,                       Alleged

he must of course hold that the biblical                                miraculous

account of the prophets is irrational so far                            events

forth as they lay claim to the supernatural. But even

such an one has no reason for holding that the prophets

are not in the main honest and truthful in the account

they give of themselves. One might give them credit

for that, even if he regarded their claim to superhuman

revelations as a delusion. But who knows that their

communion with the superhuman was a delusion? Most

men now living are not ready to take the sweeping posi-

tion that all alleged communication with the superhu-

man is unreal. What intellectual right has an agnostic

to affirm that the ordinary system of operations of the

ultimate powers of the universe cannot be interpene-

trated by a different system or by a different mode of

energy? He who says that forsakes the ranks of agnos-

ticism, and simply affirms something of which he has no

evidence.

          In short, the question whether we are to believe those

parts of the prophetic records which, so far as we can

see, transcend natural law, is a question which depends

on the cogency of the evidence. And here the unique-

ness of the biblical accounts of miracle must not be

neglected. Their simplicity and soberness and freedom

from grotesqueness, when they speak of miracle, differ-

entiate them from most other accounts of miracle, and

are strong points in their favor. Why should we disbe-

lieve their testimony in this matter?

          But even from the point of view of one who is con-

vinced that miracles do not occur, these records are not

incredible so far as they relate to unmiraculous events.

408      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

And so, really, in view of the facts in the case, miracle

or no miracle, there is no reason for doubting that the

The history       recorded history of the prophets is true his-

as a whole is     tory, or that the record concerning the prom-

true               ise is a trustworthy record of a reality.

          (c) When we turn to the question of historical conti-

nuity, this statement, "There is no reason for doubting,"

is changed to one more positive. There are overwhelm-

ing reasons for believing.

          The historicity of a record, when attacked, may be

defended by showing that the record is self-consistent

and is free from incredible statements. These have

more than a negative value, constituting a probability in

favor of trustworthiness. If to this it can be added, in

the case of any record, that it conforms to the tests of

historical continuity, the probabilities in its favor become

very strong indeed. They would be strong even in a

record made by a single person, though in that case the

continuity might be accounted for as the product of the

constructive mind of the author. But where the record

is made up of many independent writings, the proof

from continuity is especially cogent.

          Nowhere is this mark more distinct than in the writ-

ings of the prophets. They include many different

Historical         documents of different authorship and dates.

continuity in     No writer of either the Old or the New Testa-

the bible          ment is properly a writer of history. Their

historical narratives are uniformly selections from his-

tory made for the purpose of teaching religious lessons.

These facts render it the more remarkable that we find

among them in so high a degree a correct conception of

the nature of historical movements. They treat history

as a continuous process of dynamic ideas working them-

selves out in social movements. One ought to see that

                      APOLOGETIC VALUE                     409

 

their method is correct, even if he disagrees with them

as to the nature of the dynamic ideas. Further, they so

present the events that they fit together in intelligible

lines of antecedence and consequence.

          Many are accustomed to say that the biblical writers

are not scientific historians, and to ask indulgence for

them on the ground that nothing of this kind ought to

be expected from them. But they need no indulgence,

provided the view we have taken of the promise and

its place in the history is correct. A perfectly definite

conception of historical unity and continuity underlies

the New Testament interpretations of the Old Testa-

ment, and equally underlies the Old Testament itself.

This conception makes the promise to be the centre, and

arranges all the facts according to their relations to the

promise. In this the best of the historians of our own

time do not surpass the men of the bible, and most men

who have treated of their themes are far behind them.

Once more we come face to face with the fact of the

uniqueness of these writings and these men. They are

a class by themselves. And what a class it is!

          For our purpose all this has more bearings than one.

There is an argument from the nature of the facts.

Their interfitting and continuity is proof that                         Bearings in

they are true to reality; for chance state-                                         the argument

ments would not fit thus, and it is unimaginable that

all these writers joined in fabricating a fiction. There

are arguments from the character of the biblical men.

The loftiness of their point of view is wonderful. If we

account for it by their inspiration, we have in it direct

proof of the divine authority of the men and of their

writings. If we try to account for it otherwise, we

have to attribute to them remarkable insight and rare

trustworthiness, and we thus put ourselves under obliga-

410      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

tion to accept their testimony, both in regard to the

history they narrate and when they claim divine author-

ity for themselves.

          It is remarkable that such a national ideal as that

indicated in the promise should have been framed among

such a people; but this ideal being given as one of the

elements of this historical problem, we can see that

the problem has wrought itself out congruously from

the time of Abraham until now. With the view we

have taken of the promise and its fulfilments, they

constitute a historical movement, extending over some

thousands of years of past time, and indefinitely into

the future. This movement, whether considered in

itself, in its relations with other history, or as the

channel of a special revelation from God, is one that

will stand the tests of all reasonable investigation.

          4. We turn to a fourth argument from the facts we

have traversed— the argument from fulfilled prediction.

When we substitute the conception of one promise for

that of many foretold events, this argument, far from

becoming effete, gains immensely in strength.

          The national ideal existed, let us remember, not merely

as a conception of something which might be, but of

Has the                     something which actually was. Israel's son-

promise been      ship with God, his priesthood between God

kept?              and the nations, his electness for the sake

of the nations, his office as Yahaweh's Servant among

the nations, his anointing for purposes of blessing to

mankind—these are spoken of as matters of obliga-

tion; this is what Israel ought to be; but they are also

spoken of as matters of fact. Israel is all these. He

is so, no matter how unworthy he permits himself to

be. The promise is essentially a statement of facts,

largely a statement of future facts, a predictive state-

                  APOLOGETIC VALUE                   411

 

ment. In this character has it turned out to be

true?

          Our present treatment of the question of fulfilled

prediction must be restricted to the answering of this

question. Of course, however, the prophets made many

other predictions. Our argument does not destroy the

instances that were cited in the older books on proph-

ecy. Some of those instances it strengthens by binding

them together. The others it leaves intact, provided

they are in themselves tenable. It does not require the

giving up of a single case of fulfilled prediction which

is otherwise defensible. It simply places a distinguish-

ing emphasis on the one body of fulfilled prediction which

is central and all-embracing.

          The promise is, remember, that the seed of Abraham

shall be Yahaweh's channel of blessing to mankind.

To this end, it was promised, Israel should                           The thing

be kept in existence and multiplied, even                                       promised was

after he should become a people without a                           exceptional

country. This was not a matter-of-course future career

for Israel, such as any person could forecast. It was

not the regular experience for all peoples to have. In

the time of Abraham or Moses or Isaiah or Jeremiah,

there were very many other peoples on the earth, each

seemingly as distinctive and as likely to persist as

Israel. Most of these peoples long ago became extinct,

either by dying out or by mingling their blood with that

of others. Where now are the Assyrians or Babylo-

nians or Philistines? A few ancient peoples have per-

sisted, for example the Copts in Egypt or the Greeks

or Arabians, largely as subject races on the soil where

their ancestors once were lords. As a rule, expatriated

peoples have either perished or become incorporated

into other races. A fractional percentage of such races

412      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

may have survived, the Gypsies being a supposable ex-

ample, but not as a people having any significance in

history. There were scores of peoples whom the Assyr-

ian and Babylonian conquerors deported to other coun-

tries, as they did Israel; but so far as we know not one

of them now remains as a distinct people. The destiny

foretold for Israel was not the ordinary destiny of all

peoples, such as a sagacious person might have pre-

dicted on general principles, but was one altogether un-

paralleled. Has the promise, nevertheless, proved to be

a true prediction?

          (a) This question must be answered in the affirmative,

even if we look no further than the secular history of

Israel.

          The Israelitish race still exists, without a country, but

one of the greatest races on earth, the peer of any other

in wealth, in intelligence, in the power it wields. It is

the only expatriated ancient people that thus survives as

great and cosmopolitan. Its history, like that of other

peoples, includes things to glory in and things to be

ashamed of.  Israelites have been and are of all shades

of character, from the meanest to the noblest. But

Israel is everywhere an international and a mediatorial

people. In matters of banking and commerce and

Finance,          finance, the world owes Israel an immense

science, art,      debt. In matters of statesmanship, partial-

monotheism      larly international statesmanship, the debt is

also large. From the time of Daniel until now Israel-

itish public men have been at the helm, sometimes in

one nation and sometimes in another. In science and

literature and music, the debt is likewise great. But

high above all these things, the literature of Israel's

prophets has been translated into all languages. Israel

has been made the channel for communicating to man-

                        APOLOGETIC VALUE                  413

 

kind the monotheism of the religion of Yahaweh, and

the monotheism thus communicated now influences the

thought and the welfare of hundreds of millions in every

climate and of all races.

          Suppose we stop at this point, and ask: Has the

promise been kept? Have all the families of the ground

been blessed in Abraham and his seed? Who can

answer otherwise than in the affirmative?

          One might supposably object to this reasoning by

raising the point that Israel is not the only people that

has a mission. The fact is readily granted, but compare

the missions. Egypt has a mission to the world. India

has a mission to the world. So have Greece and Rome

and Arabia. State this, if you please, in the diction of

the Abrahamic promise. Yahaweh has blessed mankind

through Arabia and Rome and Greece and India and

Egypt. But the blessing through Israel is so utterly

different from that through these others, different in

kind, in quantity, in quality, in details, as to constitute

it a thing unique in history. Further, the national

mission to mankind was not preached in these other

nations as it was in Israel; was not made central in the

national religion for centuries; was not lifted up and

exhibited as a national ideal; in short, is not, as in

Israel, a matter of fulfilled prediction.

          The promise to Israel was for eternity. We are not

at the end of eternity yet, and are to this extent not

qualified to say whether in this particular                             Eternal

the promise corresponds with the fulfilment.                        fulfilment

But inasmuch as ages of history have rolled by, and now,

at the end of thirty or forty centuries, Israel seems more

vigorous than ever, we have an impression of unlimited

time that may well be taken into the account. And

whatever stress any one may lay upon the physical

414    THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

possession of Palestine and kingly state there, as items

in the promise, who dare say that these may not be

resumed in time to come, and with such conditions of

permanence that the current centuries of dispossession

shall seem, in comparison, but a mere temporary inter-

ruption?

          In the treatment of the promise-doctrine in the Old

Testament much is made of the sufferings of the Agent

Mediatorial       of the promise—sufferings which are in some

suffering         sense mediatorial. This is especially the case

in those consecutive chapters in Isaiah which treat of

the Servant of Yahaweh — chapters that are more em-

phasized in the New Testament than anything else

except the promise to Abraham. The Servant's visage

is marred beyond measure, he is despised and rejected,

led as a sheep to the slaughter, and this for iniquities

not his own, and with the effect of bringing blessing to

others. It is not wonderful that devout Jews see in

this a characteristic mark of the history of their race.

From Rameses II of Egypt to the reigning emperor of

Russia, antisemitism has been one of the vices of the

world. No other people has been so cruelly persecuted

through so many centuries. Others have been perse-

cuted, and have either conquered their persecutors or

else become extinct or slavish; Israel alone has main-

tained his place in spite of persecution. The very

cruelties practised have resulted in enlarging the bene-

fits conferred on mankind through him. All mediation

between God and sinful men is at the cost of suffering

on the part of the mediator. Of this truth the history

of God's priestly kingdom, Israel, has been emphatically

typical.

          Were this, then, all; were there no further fulfilment

that could possibly be claimed, we might here safely

                      APOLOGEIC VALUE                   415

 

rest our case. Here is no trifling with marvellous trivi-

alities, no appeal to details that have a flavor of super-

stition in them; but an appeal to great facts,                          The argu-

well verified and beyond dispute. It is an                                       ment not

argument from prediction, indeed. It rests on                        trivial

the fact that certain things were foretold thousands of

years before they occurred. But it is prediction that

conforms to the law of historical continuity; and it is,

by reason of that fact, at once the more remarkable and

the more indubitable.

          Concerning Frederick the Great of Prussia the story

is often told that he said one day to one of his chaplains:

"Give me in a word conclusive proof of the claims you

make for Christianity." The chaplain replied:  "The

Jews, your majesty"; and the agnostic king was silent,

whether convinced or not. He was too well informed

in history not to feel the force of the reply. Even with

the crude, distorted, prejudiced notions that have pre-

vailed in Christendom concerning Israel, the proof is

one that cannot be set aside; and it grows in strength

as one attains to correcter views of the glories of Israel-

itish history. As in biblical times, so now. Israel never

ceases to be God's witness in the world.

          (b) The fulfilment in the civil history of Israel does

not stand alone; note also the fulfilment in the religions

of Israel and Christianity and Islam.

          Jesus of Nazareth was an Israelitish man. Those

who most strongly hold to the Christian doctrine that

he is God incarnate none the less regard him                        Their civili-

as a man of Israel, and to all others he is                                        zational

simply a man of Israel. The first disciples                            results

and Paul and Paul's first coworkers were all Israelites.

The writers of the New Testament were of Israelitish

blood. Christianity, both in fact and in the claims of

416      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

its founders, is the extension of the influence of Israel

in the world. So far as the words go, the Christ is

simply the anointed king of the line of David. The

Christian kingdom of God on earth claims to be the

perpetuated eternal kingdom promised to David. Simi-

lar statements — similar though with a difference —

might be made in regard to the religion of Mohammed.

In strict truth, perhaps Christianity should be regarded

as the religion of Israel itself; but Christianity and

Mohammedanism are, in the common thought of men,

daughter religions to the religion of Israel. We must

not enlarge; but in one or another of the three forms

several hundred millions of men and women acknowl-

edge allegiance to the God of Israel, and profess to

regard this allegiance as the greatest thing in their lives.

Those who do this include the leading powers of the

earth, and they are engaged in active and successful

propaganda for persuading the rest of mankind. What-

ever these three religions have done or are doing or shall

do for civilization, for morality, for human well-being, is

a part of the work that Yahaweh has wrought for

mankind through Israel. Has he made good his prom-

ise that in Abraham and his seed all the families of

the ground shall be blessed? The magnificent results

achieved by Israel as a race sink into insignificance by

the side of the greater results accomplished through the

three religions, and all are alike parts of the blessing of

the promise.

          But in our estimate of these religions as a blessing

we have not yet reached the end. There is something

Their per-        greater, namely, their spiritual values. The

sonal and         blessing bestowed through them on mankind

spiritual                     has not been exclusively external or civiliza-

results           tional or temporal. Under the power of the religion of

                        APOLOGETIC VALUE                     417

 

Yahaweh, especially in its purer forms, human hearts

have been changed, human lives have been renewed,

men have been sanctified, have been victorious over

death, have had good hope of eternal blessedness. If

spiritual character is of the nature of the highest good,

how large an endowment of this good has come to men,

directly or indirectly, through the people of the promise!

All the nations have received spiritual blessing through

Abraham and his seed.

          (c) Once more, the fulfilment in the person of Jesus

is so marked as to be classed by itself. He is the repre-

sentative person of the promise and its accomplishment.

          This argument doubtless seems more weighty to

those who hold the Christian orthodox view of the per-

son of Christ than to others, but it is not to                           Not proof for

be despised by others. If the doctrines of                                        the orthodox

immortality and of the incarnation and the                            only

atonement are true, then this range of the fulfilment

of the promise is higher than those we have hitherto

traversed, so much higher that they become low in the

comparison. But does it not remain so, even if we

waive the acceptance of these doctrines? Apart from the

question of his divine-human character, who is there that

fails to see that Jesus is, from the promise point of view,

the typical Israelite? that the men of the New Testa-

ment were correct in claiming that the promise was

culminatingly fulfilled in him? Thinking of Jesus, for

the moment, as a reverent agnostic might think of him,

does he not embody preeminently the idea that was in

the promise to Abraham? In his character and work,

in the cosmopolitan reach of his influence, in his expe-

rience as a suffering mediator, is he not the very anti-

type of Israel as the people of the promise?

          We have spoken of the promise as fulfilled in the

418      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

three religions of Yahaweh, but we must not forget that

the personality of Jesus is an element in those three reli-

gions. In Christianity he is supreme. In Islam he shares

the throne with Mohammed. And as for Judaism, it is

intensely conscious of his presence, even if it excludes

him. Eliminate him utterly from the three religions,

and how much that is of real value would remain?

          In fine, is he not, more than all else combined, the

channel through which the blessing of Abraham has

flowed to the nations? Is not the blessing itself best

described in brief by speaking of the earth-wide domin-

ion of the anointed son of David?

          Let me repeat this in the words published many years

ago by the distinguished Jew, Benjamin Disraeli: --

 

          "The pupil of Moses may ask himself whether all the princes of

the house of David have done so much for the Jews as that prince

who was crucified on Calvary. Had it not been for him the Jews

would have been comparatively unknown, or known only as a high

oriental caste which had lost its country. Has not he made their

history the most famous history in the world? Has not he hung

up their laws in every temple? Has not he avenged the victims of

Titus, and conquered the Caesars? What successes did they antici-

pate from their Messiah? The wildest dreams of their rabbis have

been far exceeded. Has not Jesus Christ conquered Europe, and

changed its name into Christendom? All countries that refuse the

cross wither, while the whole of the new world is devoted to the

Semitic principle and its most glorious offspring, the Jewish faith!"

(Interior, Jan. 20, 1881).

 

          Certainly there is no room for doubt. There is a. cor-

respondence between the word of promise spoken long

                    ago by the prophets and the fulfilment which

Summary         we ourselves behold: that in Israel the peo-

ple, that in the great religions in which men worship

Yahaweh, that in the peerless personality of Jesus.

This correspondence is sure proof both of the divine

                    APOLOGETIC VALUE                  419

 

mission of the prophets and of the truths concerning

him who is the supreme fulfilment of the promise.

          If any one should raise the point that the preaching

of the promise by the prophets, and afterward by the

apostles and their successors, has had an in-                        A futile

fluence in bringing about the result promised,                       objection

the fact is admitted, but it has no weight as an objection.

There is a difference between prediction in the form of

a great promise and predictions in the form of discon-

nected bits of the marvellous. How did it happen that

a like promise was not preached, with like results, in

other nations than Israel? Even if you grant that the

promise has wrought out its own fulfilment as naturally

as in the case in which the acorn is a prediction of the

oak, it is none the less true that the performing of the

thing promised proves that the prophets were not mis-

taken in claiming that they had a revelation from the

Promiser. It proves that both the revealing and the

accomplishing of the promise are a part of the programme

of the Intelligence that is supreme in human history.

The proof is as convincing as it is wonderful.

          The Apologetic of the twentieth century is dis-

posed to deal with human experience and human

ethical judgments rather than with histori-                            The Apologetic

cal facts. Within limits this Apologetic has                           that surrenders

great advantages in point of direct applica-                           historical fact

bility and convincingness. But if it surrenders the field        

of historical fact, it thus renders itself vulnerable. Win

a man to Christianity by appealing to his spiritual per-

ceptions and his sense of what is reasonable, and you

will in turn lose him if he becomes convinced that

Christianity originated in fraud.  Open a person's

eyes to behold the peerless personality of Jesus, and

his vision will become blurred if he comes to think

420      THE PROMISE. MESSIANIC PROPHECY

 

that Jesus habitually made assertions which he did

not know to be true. If we surrender to the enemy

the positions of historical Apologetics, that enables

him seriously to disturb us in our possession of the

other parts of the field.

          We need make no such surrender. In arguing from

the unique character of the prophet as presented in the

scriptures, from the unique national ideal of the people

of the promise, from the unique conformity of our record

of them to the requirements of historical criticism, from

the unique character of the promise as fulfilled predic-

tion, we hold a position that is both impregnable and of

strategic importance. It is impossible for one who has

really studied the matter to disbelieve that the state-

ments concerning the promise were on record, as then

ancient, more than twenty-three centuries ago; or to

disbelieve that the forecasts thus recorded have ever

since been proving themselves to be realities. This

establishes the fact of a central superhuman element

in the history of the religion of Yahaweh. Account

for it as you will in your philosophy concerning mira-

cles, the fact is certain. And the reality of the tran-

scendent divine element in this part of the field being

demonstrated, the question of its existence in other

parts of the field is simply a question of the sufficient-

ness of the evidence. Holding this position, we corn-

mand the field, so far as the defence of Christianity as

a revelation from God is concerned. Having substan-

tiated these claims, we are entitled to make other like

claims covering the whole region.

          Every advance in genuine knowledge of truth

strengthens our reasons for holding that the truth is

true. To this rule the truths concerning the prophets

are no exception.

 

 

 

                                           INDEX

 

When the references in this Index are to the chapters, many of the details are omitted

from the Index. They may be found in the Table of Contents, and in the marginal cut-in

notes.

            Of the numerous scriptural quotations and references in the volume only a few appear

in the Index.

Aaron, the prophet of Moses, 43. Abraham, his prophetic character, 39;     the promise to him, see Promise. Acts ii. 16-18, 111; iii. 21-26, 38, 351, 368; iv. 25-26, 250 ; viii. 32-33, 283; xxvi. 6-7, 179. Agrippa, 179, 190. Ahab and the prophets, 97. Ahab son of Kolaiah, 61. Ahijah, 47, 49, 53, 100. Amalekites and Canaanites, 225. Amos, 57, 96, 161, 311. Amos vii-viii, 118. Amplifications of the promise, 246. Angel, the, 24, 29, 45, 123, 145, 352-356. Anointed, 298-303. See Messiah. Antitype. See Type. Apologetic value of prophecy. See Prophecy. Apologetics, historical, 419. Appearing of Yahaweh. See Theoph-     any. Argument from prophecy, 387. Ark and mercy seat, 357. Art, its presentment of the prophet, 67. Asaph the seer, 22, 47, 49, 78, 100. Asideans, 328. Assembly of nations, 198. Astrologers, 67. Authority, prophetic, 169. Azariah the prophet, 53.   Balaam, 43, 104. Baruch, the law in, 139. Baruch the scribe, 61. Biography, prophetic, 36. Book of the law, 145. See Torah.

Branch, messianic term, 335-340. Burden. See Massa.   Caiaphas a prophet, 104. Called one, 272, 330. Canaanites and Amalekites, 225. Casiphia, the place, 63. Celebrations of events, 249. Cessation of prophecy, 63. Chosen one, 272, 329. Christ. See Messiah. Christocentric theology, 193. 1 Chronicles xvii, 229 and often; xxii,    229, 233, 246, 332; xxv, 49; xxix,    48. 2 Chronicles vi, 247, 253 ; xviii, 55. Citizen with a message, 66–87. Collateral presentations, 251, Chapter    XV, 344-364. See Table of Con-    tents. College of Huldah, 80. Coming person, 302. See Person of    the promise. Common false notions of prophet, 67. Comparative religion, 12–14. Conjurer contrasted with prophet, 93. Consistency of bible record, 403. Contemporary understanding, 211, 227,    239, 242, 251. Continuity of the promise. See under    Promise. Cosmopolitan and local, the prophet    both, 102. Cosmopolitan, the promise.       See    Nations. Costume of the prophets, 67, 69. Covenant formula, 203, 217, 234.

 

                                                                           421

422                                                          INDEX

 

Covenants, 201, 203, 273, etc. Credibility. See Scriptures. Cretan prophet, 104. Critical questions, 7, 33, 40, 44, 47, 66,    207, 209, 226, 238, 261, 298, 359, 398. Culminating fulfilment. See Promise,    fulfilments of. Cumulative fulfilment, 129-132, 205, 376, 404. Cyrus, 62, 255, 273, 275.   Daniel, 62, 117. Daniel ii, 297; vii, 297, 306; ix, 297, 301. Dates of prophetic functions, 90. Dates of terms for prophet, 32. David a prophet, 29, 35, 37, 47, 48, 78,    100, 170, etc. David, his house, line, seed, kingdom,     230, 289-297, 370, 418, etc. David, promise to, Chapters X—XIV,     228-240, 247-260, 269-284, 317-343. See Table of Contents. Day of Yahaweh, 56, 190, 304-312. Deborah the prophetess, 44. Dervishes, 68. "Desire of all nations," 329. Details, certain matters of, 16. Deuteronomy xviii, 44, 91, 350. Devout persons are prophets, 103. Direct examination versus cross-exam-     ination, 7. Disconnected predictions, 361, 388. Doctrine, messianic. See Promise-    doctrine. Dreams, 115.   Ecclesiasticus and the law, 138. Eisegesis, 9 ; of Christian doctrine, 10;    of negative assumptions, II; of    theories of religion, 12. El and Elohim, 18. Eldad and Medad, 42. Elect one. See Chosen one. Eli, prophecy in his time, 45. Eliezer son of Dodavah, 53, 54. Elijah, 29, 37, 53-56, 68, 79, 96, 100. Elisha, 29, 37, 53-56, 69, 79, 96. Elohim and El, 18. Emmaus, 179. Equivocal prophecy, 127.

Eschatology, 190, 304, 312. See Day    of Yahaweh. 2 Esdras and the law, 135. Eternity of the promise. See under Promise. Ethan, 47, 100. Evangelism, prophetic, 99. Evidence tested by use, 8, Chapter XVII. Excitation, absence of artificial, 124. Exilian prophets, 62. Exodus iii, 123, 219 ; vii. I, 43, 90 ;     xix, 123, 222, 290 ; xxiii. 20-23, 354 ;     xxxii. 34 if., 354. Exodus, times of, 41, Chapter X, 217-     228. See Table of Contents. Expectation. See under Messiah. External history. See under Prophets. External presentment of a prophet, 66. Ezekiel, 62, 68, 118, etc. Ezra, 62, 82.   False messiahs, 375. False prophets, 55, 59, 61-63, 102, 116. Familiar fact, the promise was, 251, 378. Fetich-men, 67. Frenzy, prophetic, 35, 72. Fulfilled prophecy, argument from, 387, 410. Fulfilment, messianic, Chapter XVI,     375-386, see Table of Contents; in     Israel the race, 285, 288, 381, 412; in     Christianity and Islam, ib. and 41s ;     in Jesus Christ, 186, 285, 288, 379,     381, 385, 417; still in progress, 386, 413. Functions of a prophet. See under    Prophets.   Gad the seer, 22, 47, 48, 100. Generic prophecy. See Cumulative     fulfilment. Genesis, early chapters, 38; xiv, 347;     xviii, 122; xlix. 10, 346. Gentiles. See Nations. Gideon, 45. Godly one. See Hhasidh. Gospel in the prophets, 177, 393. Great Synagogue, 63. Greek oracle-givers, 67.

                                                            INDEX                                                        423

Habakkuk, 60. Haggai, 62. Hanani the seer, 24, 53. Hananiah son of Azzur, 61, 126. Heman the seer, 22, 47, 49, 78, 100. Hhasidh, 245, Chapter XIV, 313-328.    See Table of Contents. Hhoter, 340. Hhoseh and its cognates, 22, 26, 49, 51,     53, 55, 6o, 115, 119. Historical continuity of bible records, 408. Historical fact in Apologetics, 419. Historical verisimilitude, 402-410. Historicity, 6-15. Holy one. See Hhasidh. Holy Spirit. See Spirit of Yahaweh. Homiletical character, 99, 243. Hope, messianic, 179, 304, 365-375. Hosea, 58, 73, 94, 95, 149, 161, 331. House of David, 229. How one became a prophet, 84. Huldah the prophetess, 60, 80.   Iddo the seer, 22, 49, l00. Ideal Israel. See Promise-people. Ideal of a prophet, in bible, 395-398. Ideal, the national, 398. Ideals, the highest, limited to a few, 226. Insignia, their significant absence, 71, 86. Institutions as types, 357. Interpreting dreams, 118. Interpreting the promise, see Fulfil-     ment, and Contemporary under-     standing; one-sided interpreting, 285, 382. Interpreting the sources, 9. Irrevocability of the promise, 185, 219,      232, 256. Isaac as a prophet, 40. Isaiah, 56, 58, 94. Isaiah as a statesman, 95. Isaiah ii, 294, 296; iv, 336; vii. 14-16,    333; ix. 1-7, 250, 296, 329; xi. 1-10,     250, 297, 339; xl-lxvi, 265-288 ; xli,     270; xlii, 271, 282, 294; xliii, 272;     xliv, 270, 271, 275 ; xlv, 255, 271;     xlviii, 271; xlix, 271, 274, 279 ; 1, 270,     276, 282; 283, 362; lv, lvi,     255, 277 ; lx, 274; lxi, 274, 281; lxiii,      112, 113, 277; lxv, 277, 297.

Israel at the exodus, see Exodus ; as     fulfilment of the promise, see Ful-     filment; his mission to himself, 280,     380; the promise-people, 259, 273     as Servant, 270, see Servant.   Jacob as a prophet, 40. Jadon. See Jedo. Jahaziel, 53. Jedai. See Jedo. Jedo the seer, 22, 29, 47, 49, 53, 100. Jeduthun, 22, 47, 49, 78, 100. Jehoiada, 53, 54. Jehu son of Hanani, 22, 53, 100. Jehu son of Nimshi, 30. Jeremiah, 6o, 82, 94, 118. Jeremiah iii, 316; xxiii, 336; xxix. 26-     27, 72 ; xxxiii, 337. Jeshurun, 272, 330. Jesus Christ the culminating fulfilment.    See Fulfilment. Job, his dreams and visions, 43. Joel, 56, 111, 306-310. John the Baptist, 65, 372. Jonah, 57. Josephus and the law, 135. Joshua a writer, 100. Judah giving torah unto Goshen, 140. Judges, times of, 44. Judges vi, 45; xiii, 45, 123, 353. Judgment scenes, 306, 308.   Kingdom, the, 189, 231, Chapter XIII,     289-298, see Table of Contents; of     influence, 298, 303; of Yahaweh, 295. Kings from Abraham, Jacob, David, 231. I Kings viii, 247, 253; XViii, III, 112;     xxii, 53, III, 114, 127. 2 Kings i. 7-8, 68, 69. Knox and Mary of Scotland, 97.   Latter days, 305. Law. See Torah; in sense of scripture,     134; as a New Testament term, 136. Leaders are in a sense prophets, 104. Leviticus xxvi. 44-45, 220. Literary work by the prophets, too. Local and cosmopolitan, the prophet both, 102. Longevity of the prophets, 75.

424                                                             INDEX

 

Lovingkindness, 313. Luke i. 38, 373-375; iv, 281. Lying Spirit of Yahaweh, 113.   Maccabxan times, 65. Magic versus prophecy, 91. Mahhazeh, 23. Malachi, 62, 355. Manifold fulfilment. See Cumulative       fulfilment. Mankind. See Nations, and Promise. Manliness of the prophets, 85. Manoah, 29, 45, 145. Man of God, 28, 45, etc. Man of the Spirit, 30. Mar'ah, Mar'eh, 25-28. Massa, 30, 56, 58, 60. Matthew i. 22-23, 333; xii, 283. Medad and Eldad, 42. Mediatorial suffering, 261, 284, 360, 414. Medicine-men, 67. Meshullam, 272, 330. Message of the prophet, Chapter VI,    110-132. See Table of Contents. Messiah, expectation of, Chapter XVI,    365-375, see Table of Contents; a    political deliverer, 365; the term,    Chapter XIII, 298-303, see Table    of Contents; see Person of the promise. Messiahs, false, 375. Messianic doctrine. See Promise-doctrine. Messianic hope, 179, 304, 365-375. Messianic terms, Chapters XII-XIV,    263-342, 251. See Table of Contents. Metaphorical terms for prophet, 32. Methods, true and false, 14. Micah, 59. Micaiah, 53, 113. Miracle, 405-407. Miracles by prophets, 106. Miriam the prophetess, 42. Miscellaneous types, 361. Modern View. See Critical questions. Modes of revelation to prophets, 115. Monotheism, Israelitish, 87, 108, 133,  412. Moses as a prophet, 41, etc. Multitude of nations, 200. "My Lord," 342, 347.

Nabhi and its cognates, 21, 51, 55, 60, 72. Nagidh, 340. Nahum, 60. Naioth in Ramah, 73, 77. Nataph, 31, 60. Nathan, 37, 47, 48, 100, 144. National ideal of Israel, 398; compared    with others, 399; a contrasting ideal,    401; how accounted for, 400. National personality, 265. Nations, assembly of, 198; multitude    of, 200; promise interest of, 181, 188,    Chapter IX, 197—206 (see Table of    Contents), 221, 232, 253, .269, 279,    377; their share in the temple, 253. Naturalistic prophetic functions. See     under Prophets. Nehemiah, 62. Netser, 339. New Testament, as a source, 4, 365; its    doctrine of the promise, 367, Chap-    ter VIII, 175-194, see Table of Contents. Noadiah the prophetess, 63. Numbers xi. 24-29, 42, III; xii. 6-8,    27, 42, 90. Numerousness of the prophets. See    under Prophets.   Obadiah, 57, 307. Obadiah, Ahab's steward, 54, 79. Oded of Asa's time, 53. Oded of the time of Ahaz, 59. Old argument from prophecy, 387. Old Testament, 168. See Torah. Oracle priests, 67. Order of treatment, 15. Order, the prophetic, 80. Ordination of prophets, 83. Organizations. See under Prophet. Original study, need of, 5. Outward mien of a prophet, 66.   Patriarchs, the, as recipients of the    promise, Chapter IX, 197-206. See    Table of Contents. Patriarchs as prophets, 39. Paul before Agrippa, 179, 190; at An-    tioch, 184; his interpretations, 201, 202, 205.

                                                      INDEX                                                         425

 

Peculiar people. See Yahaweh's own,     and Covenant formula. Pentateuch, 163. Periods of the history, 37. Person of the promise, 303, 345-350,    361-364; the conception, 345; ex-    traordinary in character, 345; ideal    or actual, 348 ; looked for as coming,    369; a reality in Jesus, 349. Persuasive speech of the prophets, 132. Picture-visions, 118. Poets, the prophets as, 100. Political Messiah, 365. Powwow circles, 68. Practical dogma. See under Promise-doctrine. Pre-Abrahamic prophecy, 38, 196. Preachers, the prophets as, 99, 177, 243. Prediction versus prophecy, 21, 88, 102,    105, 107, 175, 177, 212, 228, 240, 242,     211, 392; argument from, 387, 410-420. Predictions, 361. Preliminary matters, Chapter I, 3-20.    See Table of Contents. Presupposing the promise, 251, 378. Priest versus prophet, 81, 82, 91. Priesthood, of Israel, 222, 357; of the Person of the promise, 360. Progressive fulfilment. See Cumulative      fulfilment. Promise, Chapters VIII to XVII, 175--     420; to Abraham, Chapters VIII,     IX, 179-192, 197-206, see Table of     Contents; contemporary under-     standing of, 211, 227, 239, 242, 251;     continuity of, 224, 233, 252; cumula-     tive fulfilment of, see Cumulative ful-     filment; for eternity, 185, 204, 219,     231, 256, 376, 378, 413, see Irrevoca-     bility; at the exodus, see Exodus;     to David, see David; fulfilment of,     see Fulfilment; interpretations of, see     Contemporary understanding, and     Fulfilment; known in earliest times,     210; for the nations, see Nations;     New Testament presentation, see     New Testament. Promise-doctrine, the, Chapters VIII-     XV, 175-364, see Table of Con-     tents; in Abraham's time, 211; in

David's time, 239; diction of, 266;     eschatological trend of, see Escha-     tology; familiar at all dates, 251, 378;     homiletical character of, 243, etc.;     pervades the whole Old Testa-     ment, 179, 241; in the post-Davidic     prophets, Chapter XI, 241-262, see     Table of Contents; practical dogma,     214, 228, 240, 242, see Contemporary     understanding ; presupposed as    familiar, 251, 378; proposition, for-    mulated, 178 ; recapitulation of, 241,    392; a solution for difficulties, 403;    subordinate items of, 197; suited to    men of all eras, 402; in theology of    New Testament, 189. Promise-people, the, 259, 273. Promise-phrases as repeated, 245. Promise point of view, 273. Promises, 182, 192, 392. Proof texts, 244. Prophecy, before Abraham, 38; apolo-    getic value, Chapter XVII, 387-420,    see Table of Contents; cessation of,    63; in time of Eli, 45; homiletical,    21, 89, 243; times of the judges, 44;    Maccabsean times, 65; patriarchal    times, 39; versus prediction, see Prediction. Prophet, biblical ideal of one, 395-398    how to become one, 84; not a magician, 91;    a manly man, 85; a messianic type, 350;    terms denoting, Chapter II, 21-35, see Table    of Contents; used at all dates, 32; all    applicable to same person, 34; de-     grees of extension, 34. Prophet, the word, 21, 89.  profh<thj, 21. Prophetic authority, 169. Prophetic diction in New Testament, 185. Prophetic men, 34. See Prophets. Prophets, Chapters II-VII, 21-174;     baseless notions concerning them,     67-71; citizens with a message,     Chapter IV, 66-87, see Table of     Contents; "Companies" of, 50, 74-     79; contrast with Gentile prophets,     86; Egyptian, 81; Elijah and Elisha     group, 53-56; evangelistic preach-     ers, 99, 242; Exilian group, 62;

426                                                                INDEX

 

external history, Chapter III, 36-65,    see Table of Contents; disclosers    of secrets, 107; false, see False    prophets; functions of, Chapter V,    88-109, see Table of Contents; Isaiah    group, 56-60; Jeremiah group, 60-    61; literary men, 100; longevity, 75;    their message, see Message; how    given, 110-124; how uttered, 125-    132; their Messianic forecast, see    Promise-doctrine; their miracles,    106, 405; numerous, 54, 59, 61, 62,    63; order, the prophetic, 80-84;    ordination, 80-84; organization, 50,    73, 74, 76-80; persuasive speech of,    132; postexilian, 62-63; preachers,    21, 89, 99, 243; primary and sec-    ondary, 35, 101; promise-doctrine    teachers, Chapter XI, 241-262, see    Table of Contents; versus prophetic    men, 35; reformers, 98; Samuel    and Nathan group, 47-52; Scripture    writers, see under Scriptures, and    Torah; secondary and primary, 35,    101; sons of the, 54, 56, 59, 76-80,    83; statesmen, 94-98; terms describ-    ing them, see Terms; torah and    the prophets, see Torah; types of    Person of the promise, 350. Proverbs, use of the word torah, 141. Provisional conclusions settled, 389. Provisionally historical viewpoint, 7. Psalm ii, 249, 294, 301; vii, 306; xvi,    244, 324; xxii, 362; xlv, 250, 295,    299; lxxii, 245, 253, 292 ; lxxxix, 247-    256, 325, 332; cv. 14-15, 39; cx.    342, 347; cxxxii, 247, 316, 318; cxlv, 296.   Rachel and the innocents, 128. Rational probability of bible statements, 405. Recapitulations, no, 192, 195, 241, 263,    344, 391, 418. Redemption from sin, 191, 215, 329, 374. Reformers, the prophets as, 98. Regent, 340. Religious diction, 257. Repetitions of the old phrases, 245. Rest, the promised, 221, 233. Revelation, modes of, 115, 397.

Roeh and its cognates, 24, 26, 51, 52,    53, 55, 60, 115, 119. Romans ix, 274.   Sacred year, 358. Saint. See Hhasidh. Saith Yahaweh, 30. Samaria, Assyrian colonists, 1415. Samson, 45, 113. Samuel, 24, 29, 34, 37, 47, 70, 82, 100. I Samuel ii-iii, 45, 46, 51, 300, 325; ix,    46, 52; x, 52, 74, 76 ; xix. 18-24, 73, 77. 2 Samuel vii, 229, 256, and often. Schools of the prophets. See Sons of    the prophets. Scope of the volume, 3. Scriptures, see Torah; authorship, 133;    credibility, 6, 405; equally of pro-    phetic authority, 170; not three    canons, 167; as a source of infor-    mation, 4; to be tested by use, 8. Secondary prophets, 35, 101. Secrets disclosed by prophets, 107. Seed of Abraham, of David, 181, 202,    205, 230, 267. See under David. Seer. See Hhozeh and Roeh. Separative institutions, 218. Series of type and antitype, 131. Sermon-texts, 244. Servant, Chapter XII, 263-288. See    Table of Contents. Shemaiah, 29, 47, 50, 53, 100. Shemaiah son of Delaiah, 63. Shemaiah the Nehelamite, 61. Simon the just, 63. Sin and redemption. See Redemption. Solomon, 47, 48, 100. Son of Yahaweh, 218, 232, 236. Sons of the prophets. See under Prophets. Sons, promised, 333. Sources, 4, 365. Special terms. See Terms. Spirit of Yahaweh, 110-115, 191. Spirit, man of the, 30. Spiritual Messiah expected, 372. Spokesman of Deity, 91. Statesman, the prophet as, 8o, G4. Stephen, 183.

                                                                          INDEX                                                427

 

Study versus superficial reading, 5. Subordinate items in the promise, 197. Succession of the prophets, 81. Successive fulfilment. See Cumulative    fulfilment. Suffering. See Mediatorial suffering. Superhuman prophetic functions, 105.     See under Prophets. Synagogue, the Great, 63.   Technical terms. See Messianic terms. Temple, its builder, 230; dedication    prayer, 247; for the nations, 253-    255. Terms denoting the prophets. See    Prophets. Terms indirectly denoting the prophet,    or the Person of the promise, 32,    329. Terms, messianic.         See Messianic    terms. Testimony, its credibility, 6. Theology, of the promise, see Prom-    ise-doctrine; of the Person of the    promise, 349. Theophany, 24, 40, 121, 352. See    Angel. Tishbite, 97.    "To thee for God." See Covenant    formula. Torah, Chapter VII, 133-172, see    Table of Contents; abstract use of    the noun, 152; authoritative, 142;    book of the, 145, 158; the definite    aggregate, 153 ; derivation of the    word, 139; Deuteronomic and    Deuteronomistic mention, 158; of    divine origin, 141; earlier mention,    157, 161; a growing aggregate, 156,    162, 166; Josephus's use of the word,    135; Judah's giving of torah, 140;    of mankind, 237; oral and written.    148; Old Testament uses of the    word, 149; Old Testament as extant    torah, 166-172; Pentateuch and

torah, 163 ; priests its guardians,    145; produced at five epochs, 167;    prophets its revealing agents, 143;    called also Prophets, and Writings,    162; of Samaritan colonists, 146;    written and oral, 148. Tsemahh, Branch, 335-340. Type and antitype, 126-131, 349-364.   Uncertainties concerning the expected     Messiah, 371. Unearthly phenomena, their absence,     68. United Israel as a prophetic ideal, 96. Universalness of the prophetic diction,     287. Uriah son of Shemaiah, 6x. Use as a test of evidence, 8, Chapter     XVII.   Virgin mother, the, 333. Vision, intellectual, 119. Vision, pictorial, 118. Voudou, 67.   Word of Yahaweh, 29, and often.   Yahaweh's house and David's house,     229. Yahaweh's kingdom, 295. See King-     dom. Yahaweh, the name, 17. Yahaweh's own, 222, 223, 290.   Zadok the' seer, 24, 47, 49, 82. Zechariah (i-viii), 62, 118. Zechariah (ix-xiv), 58. Zechariah iii, vi, 338; xiii. 2-6, 69;     xiv. 16-21, 255. Zechariah son of jehoiada, 54. Zechariah of Uzziah's time, 57. Zedekiah son of Chenaanah, 55. Zedekiah son of Maaseiah, 61. Zephaniah, 60, 307. Zerubbabel, 338.

 

Please report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt: