w 
 
 tihvavy of ^he theological ^cmmary 
 
 PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY 
 
 FROM THE LIBRARY OF THE 
 REVEREND WILLIAM PARK ARMSTRONG, D.D. 
 
 1893- 
 
U^i ^ /Zou^:^ ^^.^ -5V 
 
 /cff-) 
 
/^*^" ^'^^ 
 
 I ^ JUL 12 1944 . 
 
 Prophets and Prophei 
 
 PROF. W. H. GREEN 
 
 A COMPILATION FROM NOTES OF THE LECTURES 
 BEFORE THE SENIOR CLASS. 
 
 [printed, not published.] 
 
 ®^e ^rincttont '§xtss 
 
 C. S. ROBINSON * CO., STEAM POWER PRINTERS 
 1895 
 
Entered according to act of Congress, in the year 1877, by 
 
 W. H. GREEN, 
 In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington. 
 

THE PROPHET. 
 
 What is meant by the term " prophet " in the O. T. ? 
 True definition: An authoritative and infallible expounder 
 of^the will of God. 
 
 The books of the prophets form an important part of 
 the 0. T. writings. This importance is shown in four par- 
 ticulars : 
 
 1. In their authority. — They contain a divine revelation 
 of God's will, and dealings with Israel through over four 
 hundred years, which wilfis still binding, in its essence, on 
 us to-day. 
 
 2. In their historical value. — They show to us the religion 
 and theology of the theocracy in its doctrinal aspect, in its 
 most advanced stages. 
 
 3. In their Messianic value. — They contain the fullest and 
 clearest disclosures B. C. concerning the coming Redeemer, 
 his work among men, and his ignominious death upon the 
 cross. They give the criteria for his recognition, holding 
 him up before the world as an object of faith and hope. 
 
 4. In their apologetic value. — They contain the most 
 astonishing exhibitions of supernatural foresight in numer- 
 ous predictions, whose fulfillment furnishes us with a power- 
 ful argument for the truth and divinity of our religion. In 
 these four points the prophecies are most important. 
 
 For the study and appreciation of the character of the 
 prophets, we must first see whaMs jneant by the term 
 prophet. 
 
 I. DEUTERONOMY 18: 18,19. 
 
 The true idea of an O. T, prophet may be learned first 
 and most explicitly from the formal definition given in 
 Deut. 18 : 18, 19 : *' I will raise them up a Prophet from / 
 among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my 
 words in his mouth ; and he shall speak unto them all that | 
 I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that who- 
 soever will not barken unto my words which he shall speak 
 in my name, I will require it of him." This passage is ap- 
 
plied by Peter in Acts 3 : 22, 23, to Christ, and is supposed 
 by some to refer to Christ alone. The difficulty of this is 
 found in the connection, which is two-fold : 
 
 a. There were no diviners, charmers, consulters, wizards 
 or necromancers, Deut. 18 : 9-14, to whom they were per- 
 mitted to resort. The people were forbidden to use any 
 other means of inquiring into the will of God, as the heathen 
 had done, for they would have no need of it, for God would 
 raise them up a prophet. 
 
 b. In condescension to the weakness of the people,* as 
 shown on Mount Sinai, when they were not able to endure 
 the presence of God, he promises to send them a prophet, 
 or to raise up one who should stand between them and God. 
 Now so distant an event as Christ's coming could not be 
 used as a reason for their not applying to diviners, or to some 
 substitute for the God of heaven. There must be a nearer 
 one than Christ, hence the O. T. prophet. 
 
 It is plain from the original language that this passage 
 from Deut. 18 : 18, 19, being the ground of two different 
 applications, these two applications must be reconciled, by 
 , making Deut. 18 : 18, 19, refer to the line of prophets, and 
 that of Peter in Acts 3 : 22, 23, must refer to Christ, the 
 / last and greatest of all the prophets. The passage has a 
 Messianic reference, and therefore comprehends Christ and 
 the 0. T. prophets. We must conciliate this double reference. 
 
 Different Views of the Term "Prophet."— A. Some 
 I commentators take the word prophet in Deut. in a collec- 
 tive sense, /. ^,, it is a singular noun used for the plural. 
 Answer 1. This view is unreasonable, for nowhere else is a 
 singular used for a plural. 2. To so use it, would destroy the 
 individuality of the term, which is so marked, and, besides, 
 all the verbs and pronouns are also used in the singular. B. 
 Some apply it to Joshua, instead of taking it in a collective 
 sense. On the whole, it seems best to understand it in its 
 generic sense, as Haverneik ; or, in an ideal sense, as Hengs- 
 tenberg, that is : a. Equivalent to a prophet at each time of 
 emergency ; b. Equivalent to a prophet, that is, a complex 
 or ideal person, conceived of as a unit, but embracing in it 
 /t*-* whole line, or order of prophets ; e. g., the Pope of Rome 
 is an ideal man, he is one of many in the line of popes ; the 
 President of the United States is an ideal man, being one of 
 many presidents. It is in this sense, that all are combined 
 as one person, into an ideal unity. He argues — 
 
 1. That the prophetic order was to culminate in Christ. 
 
y'^^-^rc <jL,^-o -^ 
 
 yCt^ Vtr ce^- 
 
 —■^ '^.tf^ /fiyti^^u^^ Xr <U^«< 
 
^f-^-M-^ ju/f^ Ki-«-<-^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 A 
 
 /t^ 
 
 ^. 
 
2. Is called the " spirit of Christ," as in 1 Peter 1 : 11, 
 for the spirit of Christ was to speak through the prophets. 
 In Peter it says, " searching what, or what manner of time 
 the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify when it • 
 testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory 
 that should follow." The Spirit of Christ spoke through 
 these prophets; he therefore was, in a certain sense, the only 
 prophet. V 
 
 Essential Particulars.— «. God would put his words 
 into his mouth. 
 
 X Infallibility. He should speak to the people all things- 
 comnianHed, and should give it just as he received it. 
 
 c. His authority should be absolute and unconditional. 
 To refuse or reject him was to refuse or reject God. This 
 subject may stiU further be illustrated by Moses, thus plac- 
 ing the [wophets in contrast with two classes of men. 
 
 1. In contrast with hcatlien divdners., v. 10; and with 
 prophets who spake in the name of other gods, v. 20. These 
 last thought, or sought, to penetrate the will of deity by the 
 observation of omens. This is denounced and prohibited in 
 the verses following. 
 
 2. In contrast nnth false prophets, who profess to speak in 
 the Lord's name, but are unauthorized. These are to be 
 distiuguislied%y their uttering what does not come to pass, 
 V. 22 ; anc^n teaching what is at variance with what God 
 has taught them, Deut. 13 : 1-5. These heathen diviners 
 were of heathen origin, and introduced by heathen nations. 
 They belong to the earlier stages, i. e., those under the first, 
 
 and from the Canaanites, e. g.^ihe " witch of En-dor." Or '^^^ 
 
 they belong to the apostate Kingdom of the ten tribes, 
 
 " prophets of Baal," 1 Kings 18: "^he false prophets from ^^"^ 
 
 Israel belonged to a later date, and to Judah. They were 
 
 courted on account of their smooth words, Jer. 28: 15; 
 
 29 : 8-9 ; Micah 3 : 5. 
 
 11. NAMES, EPITHETS, ETC. 
 
 This is another source whence to derive a true idea of 
 the prophet. They are — 
 
 1. Those names which describe them absolutely. 
 
 2. Those which describe them relatively to God. 
 
 3. Those which describe them relatively to th.e people. 
 
jf^D.2 a. Nahhi: common term applied to prophet. 
 T rr^S^ ^- Roeh : A seer. And in Hosea 9 : 7, we have : 
 i-,^ti-i^ c- Jshharuahh: Man of the spirit : inspired man (poetic). 
 
 1 . * 1. Description Absolutely. — i^o^A.- 8eer does not mean 
 
 one who simply sees visions, as some have supposed, but one 
 who possesses the power or /acuity of foresight in a higher 
 degree than ordinary men. Not confined to visions strictly, 
 but in a wider sense to one who, by God's power, could see 
 what lay hid to others ; the hidden will of God. The cora- 
 ls ^ ^ nion designation of prophets is )iabhi, from nabha, to bubble 
 r^ 1 forth; with the passive signification, is one on whom the 
 spirit of the Lord is poured out, as given by some interpre- 
 ters. But in Hebrew it signifies "dropping; " hence words 
 ' =>2.* V significant of dropping, are figuratively referred to speaking ; 
 jt'» ^ therefore, to speak, and in the passive sense one who is 
 Uf:^i qualified to speak — one skilled in pouring forth meaning of 
 VKTt*/ the word is seen from Ex. 7 : 1, " i have made spring pour 
 forth its waters." That this is the primary word— one who 
 pours forth words or utterances, as " thee a god to Pharaoh, 
 and Aaron, thy brother, shall be thy prophet," i. e., his 
 spokesman. Hence, what God says to Moses must mean, 
 one who is a mouth-piece of God to man. 
 
 So also in the Greek, prophets is commonly interpreted 
 as 2>ro, beforehand, hence speaking beforehand. Again, in 
 a local sense, to speak beforehand was onlv a subordinate 
 function of the prophet, hence, pro has been referred to 
 place and not to time, which is the primary signification. 
 
 Nabhi gives authority to declare the word of God. This 
 gives signification to 1 Sam. 9: 9. " Beforetime in Israel, 
 when a man went to enquire of God, thus he spake, Come, 
 and let us go to the seer : for he that is now called a Prophet 
 M^as beforetime called a Seer." Prediction is only subordi- 
 nate. Pro, in local sense, indicates one who speaks in the 
 presence of another for him; seer describes simply one who 
 sees; while prophet is one who speaks what he sees. 
 
 2. Description Relatively to God. — The second series 
 of names are those which show their relation to God, e. g., 
 1 Sam. 2 : 27, "And there came a man of God unto Eli." 
 Again, they are called servants, 2 Kings 17 : 23, "As he had 
 said by all his servants the prophets." They are called mes- 
 sengers, 2 Chron. 36: 15, 16, "They wait upon Him ready 
 to do His bidding." These terms, from their nature, are 
 inapplicable to those in the service of false gods. They have, 
 however, a wider sense, a more general use, and are not 
 
<!u_4- <-*T' Ct» ^^ 
 
 «Y^ <f^ ■ 7*~^ - 
 
 ^ -^^ 
 
 _^^^^ 
 
 7 
 
 .>^ "^- 
 
 -f/^ .v^o f^iys^ /^> 
 
 7) *- C-'V** 
 
 -^i_^ rit, /li-Av^ t.^^M 
 

 
restricted to prophets, but are used of any employed by God 
 to do his work. Jer. 25 : 9, " Nebuchadnezzar, the king of 
 Babylon, my servant." The angels, also, are his messengers, 
 Ps. 119 : 91, " For all are thy servants." 
 
 3. Description Relatively to Man.— Thus they are 
 called Roek : shepherds, signifying their duty to protect, 
 guide and feed the flock of Grod. The general term applied 
 to civil rulers and priests. They are called watchmen, in- 
 terpreters. The word watchman is equivalent to two Hebrew 
 words, one derived from a^krth, to set at a distance, to watch, 
 Is. 21 : 6, " Go, set a watchman." Shamar : a guardian set 
 in the streets or on the walls, a watchman to guard near at 
 hand, to sound the alarm. Is. 62: 6. Interpreters: those 
 who explain the otherwise unintelligible will of God. He 
 imparts utterances of God's will, Is. 43 : 27. These words 
 correspond to seer and prophet in order. The watchman is 
 one who sees what others do not. A seer is a supernatural 
 watchman. An interpreter utters clearly God's will as a 
 prophet. His qualilications for the functions of a prophet 
 are divine, hence, what he utters is inspired. 
 
 III. PHRASES AND EXPRESSIONS. 
 
 We gather the true idea of a prophet by collecting and 
 comparing the various phrases and expressions about them. 
 That God's will is made known to them is seen : 
 
 1. Because God speaks to them. He shows them what to 
 say, and what to do ; His spirit rests upon them ; His words 
 come to them ; they hear Him, hence revelations are made 
 to them, and " thus saith the Lord " shows' a divine com- 
 munication. 
 
 2. That they are commissioned to declare His will is also 
 asserted, e. g., God .sends them, bids them prophesy, gives 
 them tongues to speak. They are charged with authoritative 
 communications to others. They are bound to deliver these > 
 under the severest penalties. They declare what they have 
 from God, in contrast with false prophets. They always 
 preface what they say with, " Thus saith the Lord." So 
 completely is the prophet's own personality lost that often 
 the pronoun is changed, as if God spoke directly. Divine 
 impartation of divine instruction, y Modern critics say it is 
 merely a mode of expression among the people, and not 
 actual in fact. 
 
Skeptical Opinions. — 1. Some regard the prophets as 
 men of superior enlightenment dealing with^ignorant people. 
 To conciliate favor for their utterances they publish them as 
 coming from the deity, /. f., impostors-. 
 
 2. Others say the prophets were the most advanced rep- 
 resentatives of public sentiment. Enthusiasm thus referred 
 to God. They combined what was in the popular heart. 
 They were men who enthusiastically thought that all this 
 was inspirations, i. e., enthusiasts. 
 
 3. The prophets, they say,- were really inspired of God, 
 but only as every right exercise of our faculties is under 
 God's guidance. They differ from Christians not in kind, 
 but in degree. Taking any one of these cases, and adopt 
 their views, it takes away the grand distinction of a prophet, 
 it robs them of their spiritual and scriptural meaning. 
 
 Answer (1). The supernatural character of the prophet 
 is involved in the supernatural character of the 0. T., and 
 of ifeiigkrrrtn general. 
 
 (2). Though the prophets were holy men, and many of 
 them were highly gifted, yet the inspiration was distinct 
 from their sanctification. Even men who were destitute of 
 piety were thus inspired, — Balaam, Saul, Caiaphas. 
 
 (3). It appears from the nature of these communications 
 made to the prophets, that they were such as necessarily 
 imply^upernatural communications from above. 
 
 (4). It is universally conceded, even by skeptics, that 
 while other nations had their oracles, etc., yet the prophets 
 of Israel stood alone in the character of their revelations. 
 There were deep thinkers elsewhere, and philosophers, but , 
 ^theyjdo not rise beyond ambiguous responses. If prophecy 
 is inherent in all men, how is it that the prophets of Israel 
 stand alone in the purity, value and fitness of their com- 
 munications. 
 
 4. Another limitation of the ter;n prophet, not by 
 skeptics, but by religious people, is that a prophet refers to 
 one who foretells future events. The Fathers also held this 
 view. The error is in mistaking a part for the whole ot 
 their duty, and the means for the end. Foretelling the 
 future, was of course, important, yet it held a subordinate 
 place. The prospective nature of their work gave it a pro- 
 phetic character. They were not predicters merely, but 
 also teachers, although this, in a large measure, came to 
 overshadow the rest. The constant aim of these disclosures 
 is lost sight of, beside their own inherent grandeur. Remark. 
 
oLn. «-tr« 
 
 
 _ ^ p ii i %ttjw0h ^ « 
 
 V /<A.<<^ Ub*'^ 
 
 -±^ p-^ tv.^-.--.^:::*^ ._ a^,^ ^^^ f^'^ --t-^-C/' y^^^^ <^ri*^ 
 
A«-o"v 
 
 cJ^.^^^> -^ "—f t^-^-^-^- f^ 
 
 ^'^-^ v h^- 
 
 *>^~— uj-~»~, :Aj) 
 
 yi^=^ C-!x^^ />a^x^. y^ mA^^ fr^ 
 
 
 -^ 
 
9 
 
 1. There is no speciiic reference to future events found 
 in any one of the cleiinitions of prophet ah-eacly given. 
 However conspicuous this element may appear, it is not 
 essentiaLto the office. They were to speak all that was 
 commanded them, whether present, past or future. 
 
 2. In actual fact we see that the revelations of the proph- 
 ets do not concern the future exclusive!}', hut refer to the 
 past and present as well, e. g., when Samuel told Saul that 
 his father's asses had been found, 1 Sam. 9 : 20, this is past. 
 Ahijah, though blind, yet knew and prophesied to Jero- 
 boam's wife, when she came to him in his old age, 1 Kings 
 14 : 6-16. This shows present power. Elisha told Gehazi 
 where he had been, 2 Kings 5 : 26. Daniel related a dream 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, Dan. 2:28. Elisha told the King of 
 Israel words spoken in the bed-chamber by the Syrian 
 king's servant, 2 Kings 6 : 12. Ezekiel 24 : 2, tells them 
 the very day, " Even of this same day the king of Babylon 
 set himself against Jerusalem." 
 
 3. The function of the Hebrew prophet was not limited 
 to the revealing of secret events. This was not the main 
 and characteristic part of their work. They were princi- 
 pally divinely instructed guides, and the instructors of the 
 people. They^maintained in its dignity and integrity the, 
 covenant relation of the people with God. This was their j 
 particular function, and to conduct the people towards thai 
 end for which that relation was established, /. e., the coming 
 of Christ, and his great salvation. , His future purposes 
 were revealed, as were also the past and the present. 
 
 4. To regard the predictions or prophecies merely in 
 the light of prediction of divine help is to mistake entirely 
 their grand aim. This would exalt the subordinate end 
 over the principaU'*"*lTfe evidence was often incomplete 
 until the fulfillment, and hence many would thus lose their 
 meaning and value, for the prophets were contemporaries. 
 Other prophecies are considered doubtful, because obscure 
 and enigmatical. Others still by the failure of God to pre- 
 serve authentic records. Many prophecies were not com- 
 piled in the time of the prophets. 
 
 Deuteronomy 18 : 18. It adds two other functions^f the 
 prophets. 
 
 1. They were invariably of the chosen people.^ Balaam 
 though a foreigner, was no exception to the rule, for the 
 name prophet is given to him only in the N. T. (2 Peter 2; 
 16), and here it is used in its wider, more general sense. 
 
10 
 
 Balaam is nowhere called a prophet in the O. T. but in 
 Joshua 13 , 22, he is called a soothsayer, and in Num. 22 : 
 7, " rewards of divination " He was summoned as a sooth- 
 sayer ; God made use of him as he did of the witch of En- 
 dor, but this did not constitute him one of the prophets.^. 
 So also he made use of Abimelech concerning Abraham's 
 wife, Gen. 20 : 3. To this may be added Pharoah's dream, 
 Gen. 41 : 1. Also Nebuchadnezzar's dream, Dan. 2 : 1. 
 These are revelations. The dream of the man in the host 
 of Midian, Judges 17: 13, 14. All these were for the benefit 
 of God's chosen people, and were confined to the extraor- 
 dinary circumstances which evoked them, but none of these 
 were prophets. 
 
 2. A second particular in this passage of Deuteronomy 
 is that the prophet was to be one like unto Moses; that is, 
 the revelations made to him would be like those made unto 
 Moses, a continuation of the scheme which he hud begun, 
 , and in the same spirit. They were not therefore isolated 
 phenomena, but vital relations to the former scheme. All 
 belonged to one closely related scheme, initiated by Moses, 
 and to be continued by them in likeness to him. ^ The reve- 
 lation of the 0. T. is one, a regular unfolding begun by 
 Moses, and carried on by succeeding prophets: their teach- 
 ings must be like his, and built upon his. The prophets 
 were not antagonistic to the law, but contemplated by the 
 law itself, not to reform it, but to keep it before the minds 
 of the people. It was no afterthought to meet an emergency, 
 but provided for by Moses. It was opposed to false glosses 
 put upon the law, and to those who sheltered themselves 
 behind the law. So Christ was also against tradition. 
 Ezekiel 18 : 20, is not opposed to Exodus" 20 : 5. This is 
 not contradictory. He, while claiming that they suffered 
 for their fathers' sins, says the}' also suffered for their own, 
 and putting false constructions on the law, Exodus says, 
 "of them that hate me." Ezekiel appeals to Dent. 24: 
 16. Therefore, Ezekiel is the same as Moses, and contrary 
 to false interpretations. They base their instruction on the 
 law, and so always enforce it. This oneness of the proph- 
 ets with the law, is repeatedly recognized in the 0. T., as 
 well as in the IST. T., Is. 1 : 11-14. The prophet here is 
 showing the worthlessness of the ceremony, and does not 
 aim at the abolition of the ritual, but rebukes their heart- 
 less formality, joined with ungodly living. Sacrifices be- 
 came unendurable when joined with lives of sin. The 
 
e.jf~t , X-t/~> e^L-e^^ 
 
 
11 
 
 prophets were divinely commissioned reformers, not of the 
 law, but of the people. The law needed no correction. 
 They repeat and re-enact the law. Allusions to it abound 
 everywhere, and all their instructions are based upon the 
 law. Is. 8 : 20, refers to the law and testimony. Mai. 4 : 4. 
 Though no direct citations, yet as we see allusions are 
 everywhere found in the prophets, even the forms of ex- 
 pression show familiarity with the law. The law and the 
 prophets are combined in the O. T., e. g., Zech. 7 : 12. So 
 in the N. T. we find the expressions, " Moses and the 
 prophets," " the law and the prophets." 
 
 From the preceding, loe see that the prophet is — 
 
 1. Favored with the immediate dislosure of the divine 
 will. 
 
 2. He is authorized to make it known. 
 
 3. Inspired in recording and teaching it. 
 
 We now come to consider, with additional clearness, not 
 only absolutely, but relatively, their position in the theocracy 
 and in the great scheme of divine revelation. 
 
 1. As to certain orders the question arises. How do the 
 prophets stand related to other contemporaneous orders of 
 men ? We inquire in the general scheme of divine revela- 
 tion. 
 
 2. As to other subsequent and antecedent modes of 
 divine communication. 
 
 Priests. — The priests were a sacred order of men, medi- 
 ators between God and man. The radical difference is — 
 The priests acted on the part of man before God ; the proph- 
 ets on the part of God before man. The priests were such 
 by hereditary descent, from representative tribes and fami- 
 lies. The levites were selected as representatives for the 
 rest of the people. The priests were an organized body, with 
 gradations of rank. Levites, the priests, and then High 
 Prfest. They carried the principle of representation to its 
 farthest extent. The high-priest was highest in rank. They 
 w^ere supported by a legal income, from the people in whose 
 behalf they acted. In other ancient nations, as Egypt, the 
 prophets belonged to the priesthood, but it was not so in 
 Israel. 
 
 The prophets were without any regular succession. They 
 had no organization among them ; no stipend. They were 
 called to the office by the immediate agency of the Spirit of 
 God, by His sovereign pleasure. They might be taken from 
 any tribe, not excepting Levi, e. g., Samuel, 2 Chron. 20 : 14. 
 
12 
 
 They might come from any part of the land, even from 
 Galilee, as Nahura and Jonah, notwithstanding the sneer: 
 " There ariseth no prophet out of Galilee ; " John 7 : 52. 
 They might and did come Irom any rank. Ro3'al blood, e.^.,. 
 Isaiah, Daniel, Zephauiah. Or from priestly rank,-/Zecha- 
 riah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel. Or from the most obscure herds- 
 men, as Amos. They might be taken from either sex, as 
 Miriam the prophetess Ex. 15 : 20 ; Deborah, Judges 4:4; 
 Huldah, 2 Chron. 34: 22; Anna, Luke 2 : 26 ; and four 
 daughters of Philip, Acts 21: 9. Their descent from the 
 prophets was not essential, nor the contrary, 2 Chron. 15 : 18. 
 Azariah, also Jehu, 2 Chron. 19; 2 and other cases. It be- 
 longed to the prophets to declare the will of God. They 
 were valued as being inspired of God. The priests were not 
 usually inspired, their province being to offer sacrifices for 
 the people before God, and to obtain for them the forgive- 
 ness of sins, and yet in consequence of the mediatorial char- 
 actor belonging to these two classes, the functions sometimes 
 overlapped. The priests were authoritative expounders of 
 the divine will. In the early period especially was this true, 
 as Joshua in Num. 27 : 21 ; Deut. 33 : 8-10. Repeated men- 
 tion is made of consultation, I Sam. 14 : 3 ; I Sam. 22 : 13 ; 
 Judges 18 : 5. ^Degenerate Priests asked counsel of God no 
 doubt in imitation of true method of procedure. 
 
 While the prophets were permanent, and the priests not 
 so much so, yet in Ezra 2 : 63, they are commanded not "to 
 eat of the most holy things till there stood up a priest with 
 Urim and Thummim." And in John 11 : 51, the high-priest 
 prophesied of Christ's death. In regard to immediate divine 
 communication there is this distinction : the prophet received 
 ,his knowledge by the direct illumination of the Holy Spirit,, 
 while the priest received his knowledge from Urim and 
 Thummim, or the ephod belonging to it. The difference 
 between them may be illustrated by the heathen oracles as 
 opposed to augurs who consulted omens and entrails of 
 animals. Beside the supernatural responses, it was the or- 
 dinary province of the priest to teach the law to the people^ 
 and to deliver the will of God to them in doubtful cases, Lev. 
 10: 10; Haggai 2: 11. The prophets were to intercede for 
 the people only by the free offering of prayer; the priests by 
 symbolical ritual. Lev. 10 : 3 ; Deut. 33: 10. 
 
 Judges. — Another sacred order of men were the judges 
 — extraordinary judges. They, like prophets, were the im- 
 mediate representatives of God, hence they were called to 
 
'^i..-«.^*<J^ 
 
 
 yO^.,-^ /0-t-<- o-^^ '—. 
 
 /Tlx,^ [/- ^r-'Vj.'t-^ -*-t) ^— »' Jv 
 
 X)^-->^? c^-~ 
 
 Ca. 
 
 <wy<^ 
 
^ rt-dUt-^^ \ /tu^-ySH^ «-'-•• ^ - f/-*"'"^ 
 
13 
 
 their office by the direct agency of the Holy Spirit. They 
 were limited to no particular tribe, family, rank, occupation, 
 sex. Deborah was a judge as well as a prophet' Judges 6 : 
 4. Like the prophets, they were inspired, were under the 
 immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit, but for diiferent pur- 
 poses. They were not to teach, but to rule. They were 
 fitted for the special duties of their office. The office of 
 judge was executive and administrative. They were extra- 
 ordinary magistrates and leaders raised up by God himself 
 in time of special need. They may be called divinely ap- 
 pointed dictators. The prophets were divinely inspired 
 teachers, or expounders of fhe will of God, but exercised 
 none of the functions of the magistracv. Their aims were 
 not political. Their^words are not to be viewed in a political 
 or patriotic aspect. We do occasionally find them confront- 
 ing kings, but they do not on this account deserve to be es- 
 teemed as tribunes of the people or guardians of public 
 liberty. Elijah came into repeated conflicts with Ahab ; 
 Elisha sent a j'outh to anoint Jehu as king of Israel and de- 
 stroyer of the house of Ahab. Hosea and Isaiah denounced 
 the dangerous alliance of the kings with Assyria and Egypt. 
 •Jeremiah was also against Zedekiah. In all these cases they^ 
 acted as teachers from God, not as politicians, but as religious 
 instructors. They did not seek the office, and were not 
 building up a political party; they were not demagogues. 
 What they opposed was not on the ground of impolicy, but 
 sin. What they maintained was for the honor and the law 
 of God. We must bear in mind that the government of 
 Israel diftgred from all others. In the true sense it was a 
 theocracy^ot by ecclesiastics, by priests, but by God him- 
 self It was government by the direct manifestation of God's 
 will. He gave them law, appointed their rulers ; they were 
 his vicegerents^and hence this gave a religious complexion 
 to all the aftairs of state. The idolatry of Ahab's house was 
 .a violation of the constitution of Israel, as the covenant peo- 
 ple of God, and so often called for the intervention of the 
 prophets. Alliances with heathen nations were crimes 
 against the government of Israel, and the will of God. The 
 evils which the prophets predicted were held up as the just 
 judgments of God. When the prophets were consulted by 
 kings and rulers, the responses were not dictated by policy, 
 but by the divine will. 
 
 While the prophets were such, and while they stand side 
 by side with the priests and judges, and had their own proper 
 
14 
 
 work, yet their powers were limited only by their great com- 
 mission from God. Their office might be so extended as to 
 comprehend all the others. The prophets performed any 
 functions that the occasion might demand. So, in cases of 
 emergency, they might act either as priests, judges or rulers. 
 It was not a profance intrusion for a prophet to otter sacri- 
 fices, as it would be for any one else, e. g., in the days of the 
 degeneracy of Saul. Here the prophets assumed the func- 
 tions of priest. Samuel, though not a priest, yet ottered 
 
 ;^: ,/ sacrifices by virtue of his right as an immediate messenger 
 
 , . r of God. So also of Elijah and Elisha, 1 Sam. 13 : 8 ; 1 Kings 
 18 : 30. The ordinary officers had abdicated, or had been 
 ,^ deposed. Elijah sacrificed at Carmel. Bread of the first- 
 fruits was brought to Elisha, which he was commanded to 
 give to the hungry people, 2 Kings 4 : 42. These fruits were 
 due to the priests. The people resorted to Elisha at new- 
 moons, and on the Sabbath, etc., 2 Kings 4: 23. Samuel 
 took supreme direction over the commonwealth, and acting 
 as judge anointed Saul king, 1 Sam. 7: 15. He subsequently 
 
 ''j' deposed him and appointed David. Ahijah prophesies to 
 '*'«^^ Jeroboam, 1 Kings 11: 29. Elijah was directed to anoint 
 
 /S' ' Hazael king over Syria, and Jehu king over Israel, 1 Kings 
 c^'j 19: 15, 16; 2 Kings 8: 12, 13. Not only did they depose 
 
 I and set up rulers over the people of God, but over heathen 
 
 states as well, being the ambassadors of that God who is 
 ruler and supreme governor of the universe. 
 ^ , It only remains now to examine the position of the 
 prophets among the methods of divine commiinication. 
 There is a growmg nearness and fullness.^ There is a dif- 
 ference in the modes of God's revelations of himself. By 
 the first method, we have : 
 
 1. The Theophany, characteristic of the patriarchal period. 
 God made himself personally known. He spoke in audible 
 voice to Abraham concerning the oflJering up of his son 
 Isaac; to Jacob, Abimelech and Laban in dreams. He ap- 
 peared in human form to Abraham in the plains of Mamre, 
 face to face. Then God needed no agent. But when the 
 flood came, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, 
 God himself declared it, and sent them out. 
 
 2. Frojphetic Stage. — When the seed of the patriarchs 
 swelled into a nation, a new mode of revelation was needed 
 and supplied. The will of God was now revealed through 
 prophets, especially Moses. God no longer stood aloof from 
 and out of connection with men, so to speak. Divine virtue 
 
;' /U^ 
 
 Jjz. 
 
 7 
 
 rZjL 
 
^'Ai-'«-e— 
 
15 
 
 was now made resident in particular men. The spirit 
 descended upon them, and made them the depositaries of 
 His will ; Amos 3 : 7, " He revealeth His secrets unto His 
 servants the prophets." In the solemn transactions at Sinai, 
 when the covenant of God was to be made between Him 
 and His people, He spoke once more with His own voice, 
 but all further communications were made through Moses, 
 and the prophets raised up like to him. Miracles were 
 wrought, and revelations made through them, e. g., the 
 plagues of Egypt were sent and removed at the bidding of 
 Moses. So, also, the Red Sea was divided at the uplifting 
 of his rod. At his word the manna came down from heaven, 
 and water gushed forth from the flinty rock for the famish- 
 ing people. The drought came and disappeared at the bid- 
 ding of Elijah. Sennacherib was not destroyed until Isaiah 
 had first foretold it. This second mode or stage of revela- 
 tion, while an advance on the theophany, was not the ulti- 
 mate and highest, for Paul says in 1 Cor. 13 : 8-10, " But 
 whether there be prophecies, they shall fail ; whether there 
 be tongues, they shall cease ; whether there be knowledge, 
 it shall vanish away." Thus he shows that prophecy was 
 preparatory to and emblematic of the future. 
 
 3. The prophetic idea is realized in two forms; a. Indi- 
 vidual ; b. TJniversal. All these gifts, etc., of prophets in 
 the O. T. are but types of better things to come. 
 
 a. Individual. The prophetic idea found its consummation 
 in the person of Christ. He was the prophet of God in the 
 highest sense, Deut. 18 : 18 ; Is. 42 : 1 ; 49 : 1 ; 61 : 1. God 
 no longer acts remotely ; He no longer speaks from heaven, 
 nor through His servants, but comes Himself as a man to 
 instruct and bless His people. The prophets were thus 
 types of Christ. The ladder which Jacob saw reaching 
 down from heaven to earth, is thus fully realized. 
 
 b. Universal realizations. The idea of the prophets was 
 destined also to be universally realized in the entire body 
 of the people of God. The prophets be longed to the peo- 
 ple. They had no native gifts of divination ; they did not 
 exercise their gifts for their own benefit, but for the good 
 of the people at large. They were established among the 
 people for the people. The spirit of prophecy belonged not 
 to the prophets alone, but to all Israel, but was restricted 
 to one individual at first, e. g., Num. 11 : 29, " Enviest thou 
 for my sake ? Would God that all the Lord's people were 
 prophets, and that the Lord would put His spirit upon 
 
 <. 
 
16 
 
 -them! " When Moses desired in this passage that all the 
 people might become prophets, he expressed what he be- 
 held in type and pledge, which was yet to reach its final 
 culmination. The ultimate form of communication is not 
 through the few, but when Christ shall come and abide, the 
 Teacher and the Sanctifier, of all the truly regenerate. 
 Joel 2 : 28, predicts " the day when the spirit of God shall 
 be poured out on all flesh." Jer. 31 : 34, " And they shall 
 teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his 
 ibrother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, 
 ^from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the 
 Lord." Then shall the necessity of all prophetic instruc- 
 tion be superseded, and the prophetic order itself swallowed 
 up in the indwelling of the Spirit, in each and every be- 
 liever. 
 
 Different Classification Proposed.— A somewhat dif- 
 ferent classification has been proposed by some correspond- 
 ing to the three leading dispensations, viz. : the Patriarchal, 
 Mosaic and Christian. This was the classification favored 
 by Dr. Moore, formerly of Richmond, Va,, now dead, in his 
 " Prophets of the Restoration." (See Commentary). 
 
 1. In the Patriarchal the form of divine communication 
 was theophanic. 
 
 2. In the Mosaic, theopneustic. **«<^tk— .-^ K*,M^^^. 
 
 3. In the Christian, theologic. In this, the will of God 
 is made known by divine writings, the living Word. The 
 present form is the only one that can be really universal. 
 The prophets in this form meet us now, not in prophetic 
 ofiice, but in the prophetic word. The next will be the 
 return of Christ, and the completion of the circle, back again 
 to the theophanic, when " the pure in heart shall see God," 
 and be admitted to His presence in heaven. 
 
 Jf-^^iJ-r^ The^prophetic ofiice itself is divided into three great eras, 
 corresponding to the three great dispensations to which they 
 are referred. - 
 
 1. Theojihanic. — This extends from Moses to Samuel. 
 In this the ofiice was rarely filled. There was no regular 
 succession of prophets. 
 
 2. Theopneustic— From Samuel to Hosea. This is the 
 era of the prophets of action, who were mainly occupied 
 with the present, and so left but few writings behind them. 
 
 3. Theologic. — This period is marked by inspired «* oe. 
 It began with Hosea. The whole period of phophecy dur- 
 ing this era looked more to future events. All the books 
 

17 
 
 were written during this period, and hence it is called the 
 Tbeologic era, or marked revelation of truth. They turned 
 away from what had gone before. The office marked the 
 mercy of God's grace to men. The last phase culminated 
 in the incarnation of the Son of God. He assumed our 
 human nature, and dwelling among us, became the personal 
 Word. 
 
 II. IHE PROPHETIC ORDER. 
 
 The law of Moses contemplated and made preparation 
 for the prophets, as it did also for the kings. It is plain 
 that, though coming from Moses, the scheme of divine 
 communication was not to end with him, but it was to be 
 perpetuated by others like unto him. As to the govern- 
 ment, the people were not provided with kings immediately 
 after Moses, but were first put under priests ; subsequently 
 were organized under judges; and, finally, the kingdom 
 was established. So of the prophetic order, it was contem- 
 plated in the law, but dM not begin at once. The term 
 ^' prophet " was general at first. God at first was consulted 
 through the priests. The prophets appeared only sporadi- 
 cally as it were. Finally, a continuous and permanent order 
 was created, from Samuel onward, as kings were from Saul 
 and David. 
 
 A " prophet," in its v:ider sense, denotes any one favored 
 with divine communications. In Gen, 20 : 7, Abraham is 
 called a prophet; in Ps. 105 : 15, David is referred to as a 
 prophet : " Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets 
 no harm." In Acts 2 : 30, David is again called prophet. 
 
 In the technical and more restricted sense, the teYva " prophet" 
 belongs to those not only invested with the gift of prophecy, 
 but especially to those who were invested with the prophetic 
 office. A distinction is made between donuni propheticum 
 and munus jpro-pheiicum. In an official sense, David was not 
 a prophet, but a king. In this sense, Moses was more than 
 a prophet, though in Hosea 12 : 13, he is called a prophet. 
 He was the great exemplar, the great lawgiver of Israel. 
 
 There were other prophets in the time of Moses. In 
 Ex. 15: 20; Num. 12: 2, Miriam is called a prophetess., 
 Eldad and Medad, and the seventy elders are called proph- 
 ets, in Num. 11 : 25, 26, In Judges 2 : 1, probably an angel 
 speaks, yet men of God are spoken of as his messengers, 
 
18 
 
 e. g., 1 Sam. 2 : 27, "And there came a man of God unta 
 Eli," etc. So in Judges (3 : 8, men of God are spoken of as 
 prophets. The prophetic office, however, appears in its full 
 and complete form for the tirst time in the time of Samuel,, 
 Acts 3 : 24. Before the time of Samuel prophecy was rare, as 
 is seen from 1 Sam. 3:1. " The word of the Lord was prec- 
 ious in those days, there was no open^isiyU;" After the 
 time of Samuel, though rare, the office wa& regularly trans- 
 mitted, and- seems never to have been entirely suspended 
 until the time of Malachi. Samuel was the tirst real prophet. 
 
 Seer and Prophet. — The opinion has been pressed by 
 some that the seer possessed the gift of prophecy, but not 
 ^>2ii the office, and thus was distinguished from prophetsj^^who 
 had both the gift and the office. Some say it implies the 
 office as well as the gift, and the Scriptures give the name 
 prophet to every one who was a seer. This distinction holds 
 good, according to the derivation of the words seer and 
 prophet, but it is not sustained in the O. T. usage, e. g., 1 
 Sam. 9 : 9. The name prophet and seer are both given. 
 The words are used as synonymous. Roeh, seer, was applied 
 to Samuel almost exclusively. The original word for prophet 
 was nabhi, to boil up, to pour forth words, but the function 
 of address was small. The people consulted them princi- 
 pally in regard to the future. Moses had this term applied 
 to him, because he taught ; but seer was the usual term ap- 
 plied to Samuel. After the change noted in 1 Sam. 9 : 9, 
 the word prophet was revived, and became the standard. In 
 1 Chron. 29 : 29, we have three terms for prophet. 
 
 The Call of the Prophets.— The call ot the Prophets 
 '■''^ come immediately from God himself, Amos 7: 15, "Go, 
 
 prophesy unto my people Israel." Jer. 1:4," The word of 
 the Lord came unto me ; " Ezek. chaps. 1 and 2, The charge 
 laid on Isaiah in the sixth chapter has been supposed by many 
 to be his original call, but is more probably a re-investiture, 
 designed to tit him for a new and special work, like that of 
 John in Rev. 1 : 10 ; or Paul in 'Acts 22: 17. In the call 
 of prophets, human instrumentality is only once mentioned, 
 and that was in the case of anointing Elisha by Elijah, in 
 1 Kings 19: 16. In the 19th verse, " cast his mantle upon 
 him." This was a symbolic act. This departure from the 
 /ordinary custom was peculiar. The prophets then had to 
 act in the functions of the theocracy. The absence of all 
 allusion to human agency shows that prophets probably had 
 no rite of induction into office. In Deut. 34: 9, Moses laid 
 
^^ Li^^t^ a-^ /(C. ^ 
 
 ^^w-Pt— ^ 
 
 ^> •« -> ~3 ^ x_-fci '^'*-*-(^ 
 
J<1 
 
 19 y^^ 
 
 his hands on his successor Joshua, to show the impartation 
 of the Spirit, but there is no good reason for supposing there 
 was any such ceremony in the line of the prophets. In Ps. 
 105 : 15, the term " anointed " occurs parallel with the term 
 "prophet." In Is. 61 : 1, the same term is used. Anointing 
 is symbolical of the Holy Spirit, and hence it is inferred that 
 unction was as customary in the installation of prophets as 
 of kings. The only case where it is spoken of or com- 
 manded, is ill 1 Kings 19 : 16, " And Elisha * * * shalt thou , 
 anoint to be prophet in thy room." But in this case there 
 is no mention of its actual occurrence. When Elijah was 
 taken up into heaven, his mantle fell upon Elisha as a symbol 
 and pledge, that a double portion of Elijah's spirit should 
 rest upon him, 2 Kings 2: lOr'^But the prophets in most 
 cases stood in no such relation of succession as Joshua to 
 Moses, and Elisha tu Elijah. There is no propriety in any 
 such inductions to office. The possession of the spirit of God < 
 was a sufficient induction. 
 
 Age of the Prophets. — The priests entered upon their 
 work atjijprecise and regulated tune. This probably was 
 not the case with prophets, called at God's time. The only 
 one whose age is especially mentioned, is Ezekiel, 1: 1 — 30 
 years. It is here insinuated that Ezekiel began to prophesy 
 when thirty years old, but lie was a priest, and this may 
 account for it. Being of priesTIy origin, and debarred by 
 the captivity from entering the priesthood, he was called at 
 the same age as in the priesthood. He is the only one whose 
 age is mentioned at the beginning. Zechariah was called 
 when"ayoi2ng man," 2: 4. Samuel wlien "a child." 1 
 Sam. 3: 1, "The child Samuel." So also Jeremiah, 1: 6. 
 " Behold, I can not speak, for I am a child." Daniel when 
 a child or youth, for a different term is used in the Hebrew 
 (Dan. 1 : 7.)' From the great length of Hosea's ministry, 
 60 years, it has been inferred that he entered upon it at a 
 very early age. Haggai, 2: 3, must have begun his pro- 
 phetic work when advanced in life. He saw the temple in 
 its glory. 
 
 In 1 Sam. 10 : 5-10 we read of a " company of prophets." 
 The "hill of God " was probably GibeahT^Tn 1 Sam. 19 : 
 20, another company at Naioth in Ramah, Samuel's birth- 
 place, is mentioned. Both Saul and his messengers were 
 overcome, when they met the prophets, and they prophesied 
 also. The " hill of God " may have been so called because 
 it was the abode of these prophets, or perhaps because they 
 
20 
 
 were passing it. Others say there is no evidence for this. 
 The word Naioth means habitations, and this was the com- 
 mon name for the residence of the prophets.^ In the Targum 
 it is translated " schools " or " house of instruction." In 2 
 Kings 22: 14, we have the same term, college," whence we 
 obtam the expression " schools of the prophets." The Bible 
 terms are not applicable to our idea. These schools, or com- 
 pany of prophets, are not heard of in Judah after the time 
 of Samuel. In 2 Kings 22 : 14, college or prophetic school 
 is not meant, but " ward.'-i Huldah, the prophetess, lived in 
 the lower part or ward of the city. There is no authority 
 for saying these companies of prophets were to be perma- 
 nent. They were establishmentSv constructed for the time 
 and place, and they ceased with the exigency that brought 
 them into existence. They were not schools for instruction 
 jto train men for the prophetic office, but they were bands of 
 men, as the terra implies, already invested with the office,, 
 > and with a power sufficient to affect all coming into contact 
 ^with them. The fact, then, would appear to be this: that 
 ^ they were men of God brought together, so that under the 
 ^' ' direction of Samuel they might be centers of reformation, in 
 ■ the midst of great apostasy. 
 
 Music. — As music was mentioned in 1 Sam. 10 : 5-10, 
 it has been argued that singing formed part of their exer- 
 cises. That music was taught is plausible, and it has been 
 conjectured that thus David may have learned to become 
 Z-L^tf^^' the s\veet singer of Israel." In 1 Chron. 25 : 1, David dis- 
 " tributed the service of song among the Levites, who are 
 
 spoken of as prophets. 
 
 Historians.— As the prophets were the historiographers 
 of the nation, it has also been supposed from 1 Chron. 29: 
 29, that recording the history of God's people was a part of 
 the work of the prophets. <^ cb+^-x..^^ *>^jt.<w— >^r.-v^ . 
 
 Sons of the Prophets.— It has been su^yposed that "sons 
 of the prophets " formed an analogous company in Israel. 
 In the history of Elijah and Elisha we have frequent men- 
 tion of the sons of the prophets, e.g., Kings 4: 38; 6:1. 
 These sons of the prophets were pupils or adherents of the 
 prophets, residing in considerable numbers at times, as would 
 appear from the passages above cited. 
 
 Maintenance of the Prophets.— From 2 Kings 4 : 38- 
 44 we see that, though not monastic, or celibates, yet con- 
 tributions were made for their maintenance. There were 
 communities at Bethel, 2 Kings 2:3; Jericho and Gilgal. 
 
" xW^ A^LcY^-i -^ 
 
 r=-cu,*^«^ ^ L/* u.A..<_^/C*-*v <^rvO 
 
 '^^/-'-••^W*-.- <y~-r U^ CL^A^j^,^ 
 
 (jlTx^^ ov-v^V 
 
 
 
,./9 A>.' > 
 
 Two of these places, Bethel and Gil^al, were prominent 
 seats of idolatrous worship. Perhaps this shows reason why 
 the prophets intended them to be centers of Reformation, 
 and opposed to idolatry. How long these institutions con- 
 tinued is not known. Amos 7 : 14, is the only place where 
 they are mentioned after'the time of Elisha. He says " I 
 was no prophet, neither was I a prophet's son." In 2 Kings 
 9: 1, Elisha sent one of them to anoint Jehu. The sons of 
 the prophets were sometimes delegated to act in the place of / ^ 
 a prophet, as in the above passage. Some were inspired^ ^^^ 
 though not all of them. In 2 Kings 3: 5, those at Bethel '^^'^*^^' 
 knew and told Elisha that Elijah would be taken away. Itj 
 does not appear that the prophets were ordinarily taken f ^ 
 from these institutions, or received any special training for ', ^ 
 their work. Elisha was trained by Eliiah, but this was a 
 peculiar case av^j|,^,a^j;0,^^^xc£ption. Absence ofjraining 
 does not exclude^Drovid^ential preparation. 
 
 Mode of Life. — Of the mode of life of the prophets little 
 is said. Only incidentally is it alluded to, so that we infer 
 that in most respects it was like that of other men. As an 
 appropriate dress for their work, they wore a, garment of 
 hair, e. g.^ in ^ech. 13 : 4, " Neither shall they wear a rough 
 garment to deceive." Is. 20: 2, "Go and loose the sack- 
 cloth from off thy loins." This perhaps is the same referred 
 to in 2 Kings 1 : 8, where Elijah is called a "hairy man." 
 This official dress was the mantle which Elijah cast upon 
 Elisha. This was not \vorn as by an ascetic, but as a /''''**/' ''?• 
 mourner's dress, mourning for the sins of the people, as a- 
 preacher of repentance, Dan, 9 : 18 ; Ezek. 24 : 18. 
 
 Their Homes. — The prophets usually dwelt in their own 
 houses. Some of them were married, and had families — 
 Isaiah 7:1, Sanuiel/Ezekiel ^4: ^3. Jeremiah 16 : 2, w-^e 
 forbidden to marryr ^orae 'of iliem had servants, e. g., Eli- 
 jah had Elisha in (Constant attendance; Elisha had Gehazi; 
 Jeremiah had Barak. 
 
 Inspiration. — As to inspiration it would seem to have 
 been temporary, e. g., Saul had only temporary inspiration, 
 1 Sam. 10: 10. The seventy elders, in Num. 11: 25, pro- 
 phesied, but did not add, i. e., they did not continue to 
 prophesy. Our version conveys just the contrary, " proph- 
 esied, and did not cease." Those who were permanently 
 in the prophetic office, seem not to have been under the 
 permanent influence of the Spirit. What would seem to 
 have been from foresight, they only knew when communi- 
 
^fs"- '-W 
 
 y*^*V 
 
 22 
 
 cated, and what it was. This was the case with Moses, 
 Lev. 24: 12. He did not judge until the will of the Lord 
 was made known. So in the case of Samuel, his own pri- 
 vate thought is distinguished from that of God. This is 
 shown in his dealings with the sons of Jesse, 1 Sam. 16 : 6, 7. 
 God told him the right one^Nathan first told David to 
 Jhuild the house of the Lord, but afferward told him God had 
 ''forbidden it, 2 Sam. 7: Sf All this is important in showing 
 the nature of prophetic power. They knew and exercised, 
 not at all times, but as God told therffto speak. Elisha said, 
 4/i>') " The word of the Lord came unto them." ^This shows the 
 distinction between their ordinary and inspired condition. 
 Hence it is said by some that the spirit of prophecy is inter- 
 mittent, in the way of transient impression, and not pro 
 modum, John 14 : 16, 17. Some think the inspiration of 0. 
 T. prophets is thus inferior to that of the apostles. From 
 Num 12 : 6-8, it is supposed that there are different m ode s 
 of revelation. The circumstances are these: Aaron and 
 Miriam had resisted the leadership of Moses. At this time 
 Moses was the chief organ of divine communication. The 
 revelations of the others are shown to bo, from their inferi- 
 ority of character, subordinate to his, by their intrinsic char- 
 acter, and by the way they were made known. There was 
 no sufficient reason for believing this was permanent. When 
 the prophets were raised up, " like unto Moses," why should 
 not the Lord speak to them as to Moses ? Deut. 34 : 10, 
 refers to the age immediately succeeding Moses, and so need 
 not be applied to the entire^condition. Moses beheld the 
 similitude of God, and spake with him face to face. If the 
 . ■ former passages are made to cover the period of all the 
 J ^/•^^^ ]irophets, it does not confer on them the same power as on 
 » y Moses, but shows they are thereby only inferior to Moses in 
 '^ * ' -j-i the special way of receiving their communications. Moses 
 , c«^ ' stalked with God face to face, while the others received theirs 
 ' only by signs, visions, etc. 
 
 This question is principally important only as it relates 
 to the state of mind of the prophets when they received 
 their message. Hengstenberg maintains that the ordinary 
 faculties of the mind — consciousness, understanding, etc., — 
 of the propliet were for the time suspended, and only the 
 spiritual faculties awake ; — that they were in an ecstastic 
 state when they prophesied. It is true that this was the 
 case sometimes; it was so in visions. So with the prophets, 
 their minds were completely absorbed in what they were 
 
X«-w-ir> ^<-*-r >-<> 
 
 
 *7,-V' yC*^u-^ t.^.— s.,^^ /->/ 9-1 4. *— ^ 
 
 
 xu^ — 7 '^^^^ ''^ ''^^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 e^ — ^"fcv 
 
 ^^^ cCT T^^^"^-^^^ 
 
23 
 
 ^oing to pay, or rather in what was within them. Dan. 8 : /o - <^< 
 
 27, " And I, Daniel, fainted, and was sick certain days." He 
 was physically exhausted. This also was occasionally the 
 case with the apostles, as Peter was in a trance when he saw 
 the sheet let down from heaven, Acts 10 : 10. John also, ^ 
 while in Patmos. The apostle Paul was caught up into the ■ ^^^^- ' 
 third heaven, 2 Cor, 12: 2, 3. It cannot be argued from 
 
 these that the prophets always received their im press ions in /"U^ . 
 this way, any more than that the apostle^did. Usually t^y 
 were in their ordinary state of mindj^^Some impressions^are 
 produced by their writingsan whicnuis seenythat all their 
 functions were at work. This is evident from the fact that 
 their peculiarities of style are brought out as in profane 
 writers. This has been the belief of the church and the 
 apostolic fathers. ^^ ^ c'c-^.^> /s r^^^-^C — --<-a.^ . 
 
 Inward suggestion. — It would appear from the scanty hints 
 on this subject that, diyin^t^ranittmcations were usually by 
 inward suggestion^nd'iKese mey were able to distinguish 
 from their ordinar^ethougbtsjin some manner which we can 
 not understand. Triere\vere also other ways. 
 
 Audible voice. — As in 1 Sam. 3 : 4, " The Lord called 
 Samuel, and he answered, Here am I." Num. 7 : 8, 9, Moses. 
 At the baptism of Jesus, Matt. 3: 17. At the transfigura- 
 tion, Matt. 17: 5. Paul's conversion, Acts 9: 4. John 12: O-cAzx 
 
 28, 29, " I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again." 
 Angels were sometimes employed to communicate to the 
 
 prophets, as in Dan. 9 : 21, " Even the man Gabriel, whom 
 I had seen in vision," etc., "touched me." 
 
 Visions. — Sometimes these announcements wej^g;;;^?^^^® 
 known by visions. Some writers have gone to the.extreme 
 of denying that the p'rophet&Jiad any visions at all. They 
 claim that this was only th^^rm or dress in which they 
 clothed what they wished to say. But there can be no 
 doubt but that visions were really presented to their minds 
 as they record them. When given in detail, it is said such . 
 minutife would not remain. These are more frequent iiisom^^^^^^_^ ^ 
 late'r prophets than in others. This shows viVidness.^Tv is- 
 ions were more vivid with the later prophets, e. g., Ezekiel, 
 Daniel and Zechariah ; also Amos 7 ; Is. 6 ; Jer. 1. Yis- 
 ions were, 1. Of sensible objects, as when Ezekiel sees the 
 temple, 8:3; 11: 1. 2. a. Of symbolic objects as repr^^^^^ 
 sentative images of another order of creation. 6. (?f as 
 sacred symbols of the sanctuary, e. g., Ezekiel's vision of the 
 (cherubiii_ of the High Priest ; of the candlestick, in the vision 
 
24 
 
 ^^^^ \^ 
 of Zachariah, chaps. 3 and 4. c. Or as symbols may be 
 natural emblems, as in Jeremiah's vision, 1 : 13, of a " seeth- 
 ing pot," i. e., evils which were to come upon the people. 
 Also Daniel's visions of the four beasts, Dan. 7. 3. Visions 
 of supersensuous beings. God appears in visions; so do 
 angels. Is. 6. r 
 
 Sometimes the prophets sought for revelations before 
 they were given, e. g., Daniel in the case of Nebuchadnez- 
 zar's dream. In most cases, however, revelations were un- 
 solicited. Upon one occasion, Elisha asked for a minstrel, 
 2 Kings 3 : 15, and when the minstrel played, the hand of 
 the Lord came upon him. Ordinarily no external aid seems 
 to have been used,*Dan. 12 : 8; 2 Peter 12 : lO.^The proph- 
 ets did not always understand the meaning of what was re- 
 vealed to them. In Zech. 1: 9-19, an angel interpreted to 
 Zechariah. 
 
 CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPHETS. 
 
 Before entering upon the subject specifically, it may be 
 of advantage to us to take a general survey of the classes 
 and groups into which it is divided. It will thus prepare 
 us for a better understanding ofCjhe wholej -^ ;iU*/,'«-«-« /a^. 
 
 Number of Prophets. — There are preserved in the 0. 
 T. the names of thirty-eight prophets, three prophetesses, 
 and six or seven others, whose names are not given. These 
 are but a small proportion of the whole number. The 
 companies of prophets, the language of Scripture^^ows to 
 be great companies gathered at the centre of^mfiuence. 
 These were inspired men throughout the kingdom for mu- 
 tual encouragement and teaching. In 2 Kings 2 : 7-16, we 
 read of fifty prophets, or fifty men of the sons of the proph- 
 ets at Jericho. In 1 Kings 18 : 4, we read of one hundred 
 prophets being saved by pious Obadiah. He hid them in 
 caves from the persecutions of Jezebel. There were also 
 idolatrous prophets, e. g., 1 Kings 18 : 19, we find the proph- 
 ets of Baal, 450; and the prophets of Astarte, 400, who ate 
 ' at Jezebel's table. If so many were employed in a false 
 religion, why not at least an equal number in the service of 
 the true religion ? We find <^^^ vague expressions during 
 the period wdiere more are named. 2 Chron. 24 : 19 ; 33 : 
 18; 36: 15f» ^These inspired men oeiy formed the perma- 
 
25 
 
 nent witnesses of God ; they supplied the place of ordinary 
 teachers. Only the more prominent are mentioned or re- 
 ferred to in the sacred records, so we infer there were not 
 only one or two at a time, but scores and hundreds in every 
 age, even when not named. This great body of prophets 
 who were the depositories of God's will, have been variously 
 classified 
 
 CLASSIFICATION.— 1. The Anonymous Prophets, ^^ 
 and those^ mentioned. — The anonymous were by far the ^^^^ ^^ 
 greater in number and aggregate influence. All were alike 
 in inspiration and authority. Both those whose names have 
 been given and those whose names have not been preserved, 
 have played an important part in sacred history, but those 
 named were most prominent, hence their names are pre- 
 served for us in the Bible. 
 
 2. Canonical and Extra-Canonical. — The Canonical 
 were charged with the teaching of God's people in alTages^ 
 and accordingly they have left writings which have been, 
 recorded in the sacred book. These comprise all whose 
 names are mentioned as authors of books in the 0. T., and 
 also the authors of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, an3 T 
 
 and 2 Kings, which by credible tradition are classed among ^.^^ au.^^ 
 prophets. The Extra-Canonical prophets were no less in- <^ ^^.^^ 4 
 spired, but their commission was to their contemporaries — 
 exclusively. They either left no writings at all, or such a& 
 were to have no place in the canon, and hence, what they 
 communicated was not intended for a permanent rule of 
 faith. Elijah, Elisha, and others, who were Extra-Canon- 
 ical, have a larger place in the books than those whose 
 works have been preserved. This division is not the same 
 as the former. Some that were not Canonical were of great 
 influence, and even second to none others, e. 9., Elijah. 
 Some of the anonymous prophets or writers were authors 
 of historical books already mentioned, and preserved for us 
 in the sacred canon. 
 
 3. The Former and Latter Prophets. — The^ Former ^ C{/hjk 
 prophets were authors of the six historical books already 
 mentioned. The Latter prophets were the authors of the 
 strictly prophetical books. These terms. Former and Lat- 
 ter, have reference not to the time oT the composition of the 
 
 books, but are due simply to the order of the books in the 
 Hebrew canon. The Former prophets were those immedi- 
 ately following the Pentatauch. Judges and Samuel were 
 written before the prophetic books, while Kings were writ- 
 
. oJ^ 26 
 
 ten after. The Former prophets were all anonymous, and 
 by unknown authors, except Joshua. ISTone of the strictly 
 prophetical books, so-called, are anonymous, but their names 
 are found either in the books themselves, or attached to the 
 close. The reason for this is that prophecy requires divine 
 authentication attached to the person, his character and his- 
 tory. It was essential that the person of the prophet should 
 be known. History is authenticated by being proved to be 
 a true narrative, y This classification does not embrace such 
 prophetical works as are found in other parts of the canon, 
 e. g., Lamentations of Jeremiah, and certain Psalms, such as 
 may have been written by other prophets. The book of 
 Daniel stands in the Hebrew Bible, not among the prophet- 
 ical books, but in the Hagiographa. Some say it was be- 
 cause the book of Daniel was written in exile, and out of 
 the Holy Land, that it was excluded from the prophecies, 
 but this furnishes no sutlicient reason, for the same is true 
 of Ezekiel. Others allege the reason to be that the collec- 
 tion of the prophets was completed before the book of Dan- 
 iel was written, and hence it found its place in the later 
 division. This is based on two false assumptions. 1. It is 
 claimed that the book of Daniel is not genuine, not written 
 by him, but is of a later date, and written by another hand. 
 2. It is assumed that different parts of the canon were col- 
 lected at widely different periods of time, instead of all at 
 once, as it really was. The true reason why Daniel is found 
 among the Hagiographa is that Daniel was not a prophet 
 in the strict and official sense. He was an inspired 
 man, but did not exercise prophetic ministry among the 
 people, as Ezekiel and Jeremiah and Isaiah did. He held a 
 political station — prime minister at Babylon. The character 
 of the contents of this book justifies us in classifying it 
 among the prophets, in our present classification. ^ 
 
 Turning our attention to the Latter prophets, we find 
 they may be classified into the Major arid^ Minor prophets. 
 This has reference to the size or length, and not to the 
 quality or rank. f\^. ^^<:iw-*-c c-z^**-*^. 
 
 A. The Major" prophets are three: Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
 Ezekiel ; to which, for reasons already assigned, we may 
 join Daniel, though it is not so long. Properly it belongs 
 to an intermediate place between the two classes. 
 
 B. The Minor prophets ave twelve in numhev. In all the 
 ancient catalogues of Scripture, they are regarded as one, 
 under the name of " the twelve," " the twelve prophets." 
 
- ih-^ -^-^-^^^^ 
 
 JZm- 
 
 r '»-i — ^ 
 
 a<.*-* r ' 
 
27 
 
 On account of their brevity, they were combined for con- 
 venience, and for preserving them from destruction. 
 Though thus combined, they are entirely independent in 
 authority. Their arrangement among themselves is, for the 
 most part, chronological. This is denied, but it may be 
 said — 
 
 a. There are seven out of the twelve books whose dates 
 are known, and they stand in proper chronological order. 
 
 b. This principle determines the position and regular 
 succession in other parts of the canon, e. g , in the Major 
 prophets; but this is not the case in the Hagiographa, be- 
 cause they were liturgical, and other reasons make change 
 in them. 
 
 e. Tradition favors this. Jerome says those prophetical 
 books having no title belong to the reign of kings named 
 in the books preceding them. 
 
 d. There is nothing in the books themselves to show 
 that they do not stand in chronological order. The order 
 is determined not by the time when the books were written, 
 for then Hosea would come after Joel ; nor by the absolute 
 time of the beginning of each prophet's ministry, for then 
 Jonah would precede the others, 2 Kings 14: 25; but the 
 order is determined by the beginning of that portion of 
 their ministry covered by those books which bear their 
 names. 
 
 The arrangement of the Minor prophets among them- 
 selves, as well as their arrangement in relation to the Major 
 prophets, differs in the Septuagint from that in the Hebrew 
 canon. In the Septuagint, Hosea is followed by Amos, 
 probably because both relate to the ten tribes of Israel. 
 After them, comes Micah in the Septuagint, which relates 
 to both Israel and Judah, In the other cases the Hebrew 
 order is retained. It seems that the Septuagint departed 
 from the Hebrew because of territorial reasons, boundary 
 being followed. 
 
 The Major prophets, being the larger and more impor- 
 tant, stand first in order in the Hebrew Bible. In the 
 Septuagint, the order is reversed, perhaps because of chron- 
 ological reasons; 6y perhaps the Minor prophets, because 
 they begin with Israel and end with Judah, stand first, as 
 the Major prophets all relate to Judah, and thus all the 
 prophets of Judah came together. Hosea, the first of the 
 Minor prophets, began before Isaiah, the first of the Major 
 prophets. Or because the Major prophets all belong to 
 
28 
 
 Judah, and so correspond with the end of the Minor 
 prophets. 
 
 This division of the prophets just given, into Major and 
 Minor, is purely external and formal. It does not affect 
 the authority or character. There is more breadth and 
 fulness in Micah and Zachariah, and ampler instructions 
 as to the Messiah, than in Jeremiah. * 
 
 Further divisions to be made in the prophets have more 
 vital connection with the nature of the work, and the 
 themes on which they respectively dwell: (1.) Divisions as 
 to the sphere of labor, and the tribes ; (2.) Periods of their 
 ministry. 
 
 4. Division according to sphere of labor.— The 
 sphere of the prophets' labor is divided into the prophets 
 of Judah, and the prophets of Israel. The prophets of 
 Israel are Hosea, Amos, Jotiah ; all the rest are prophets 
 of Judah. The book of Jonah is the record of a special 
 mission to Nineveh, but is mainlj' designed for the benefit 
 of the covenant people.^ The distribution of the prophets 
 between the two kingdoms into different fields of labor, has 
 some points of analogy with the divisions of apostolic labors 
 to the circumcision and uncircumcision. The .e^(]sp£Lo^t^^ 
 uncircumcision was committed to Paul, yet he^wTote the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews.v Peter admitted the first Gentile 
 convert into the church, although his mission was to the 
 circumcision. So there was a division of labor in the O. T. 
 times. But we must remember that the existence of distinct 
 
 > kingdoms was in itself schismatic and sinful. It was never 
 recognized as lawful. The tribes of Israel were one, and 
 formed the one chosen people of God. A writing came 
 from Elijah, the prophet of the ten tribes, to King Jehoram 
 of Judah, 2 Chron. 21 : 12. Nahum was taken from Israel 
 to labor in Judah. Amos from Judah to Israel. The 
 prophets extended their reformatory work over both king- 
 doms. Thus it was in the period we are now discussing. 
 Hosea and Amos occasionally addressed themselves to 
 Judah. Isaiah and Micah sometimes have regard to Israel:, 
 dthough they were prophets of Judah. 
 
 5. Division by Periods-— The prophets may again be 
 divided with reference to the periods to which they be- 
 longed, the Assyrian and Chaldean. The design of the 
 
 I prophets is to teach the lessons of the schism, etc., and to 
 
 ^ record the judgment (Assyrio-Babylonish judgment) of God 
 
 for the good of the church. The work of judgment exhib- 
 
X flji-T O AxK-f^-^ -j___ 
 
 ..^<^ <:- 
 
 c^^ ^ 
 
 jU^i^ XPi^ (j-^^K^^ ^<f^<^^^- > r^^Lc^fJlj^^-^J^ ^^^tA- 
 
 1C C^^ 
 
 /Cv,' LkjU/-^*-*-^ 
 
29 
 
 ited the forbearance of God, and gave the people time for 
 repentance. Idolatry required a violent corrective. In the 
 fulfillment of ancient threatenings of the law of Moses, this 
 great empire of Asia was raised up for punishment. In the 
 successive stages we see God's mercy in giving opportunity 
 for repentance. The empire of Assyria was raised up, and 
 succeeded in overthrowing the ten tribes, the stronger but 
 more sinful of the two. This empire was not permitted to 
 overthrow Judah, the weaker. The warning thus given to 
 Judah was ineffectual. Having disregarded it, Babylon was 
 erected, and they were given into its power. Judah was car- 
 ried into captivity, and held therein until the time of Cyrus, 
 when it was restored. The lessons of prophecy corresponded 
 to the necessities of the people at the time, and reflect the 
 spiritual wants of the people at that particular time. Proph- 
 ets were raised up at each successive stage of this severe but 
 salutary lesson. The wants of the time are determined : 1. 
 By the condition of the people. 2. By God's purposes re- j"^ 
 specting them. These different epochs define the various ' 
 prophetic periods. Of these periods, the first is : 
 
 A. The Assyrian period, embracing the prophets prior to, 
 and contemporary with, the Assyrian invasion, which over- 
 threw Israel and threatened Judah. To this period belong 
 eight prophets, one half of the whole number. Three be- 
 long to Israel, Ilosea, Amos, Jonah. Five to Judah, Joel, 
 Obadiah, Isaiah, Micah, Nahum. 
 
 B. The Chaldean period, embracing the prophets prior to, 
 or contained within, the period of the Babylonish invasion 
 under Nebuchadnezzar, by which Judah was led captive. 
 To this period belong three, Jeremiah, Habakkuk, Zeph- 
 aniah. 
 
 C. The Period of Exile, during which Judah was in the 
 
 land of oppressors. To this period belong Daniel and _^j^,. 
 Ezekiel. iKly Csy^^^^lf"'^ 
 
 D. The Period of Restoration, from ^Cyrus to^ thc N. T . 
 To this period belong Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi. 
 
 (L) I. Typical Messianic. (■_>.) II. Properly Messianic. 
 
 A. Implicit. B. Explicit. 
 
 Jonah, i. I. 
 
 jar>-i»<^^^ /fs JU-<- . ^- Nahum, ii. J. (A.) Periods. (B.) Person. 
 
 T^ } / c- ' ~'' ' Isaiah, i. 
 
 ' •^'^ ^^' (a.) Negative, (b.) Positive. Micah. 
 
 a. Ohadiah, i. a. Hosea, i. Ij Jeremiah, iii. 
 
 *. Habakliuk, ii. d. Amos, ii. j Daniel, ii. 
 
 Zachariah, iv. 
 f. Joel. i. ~) Malachi. 
 
 «. Zephaniah, ii. 
 6. EzekieJ, iii. 
 c. Haggai, iv. 
 
30 
 
 6. Division, into Messianic and Non-Messianic. — 
 
 The prophets may still further be divided with reference to- 
 their attitude coucerning the comins; of Christ, and the 
 function they were to perform in preparation for his com- 
 ing, a. The Non-Messianic, which were onlj' tyj^ically or 
 indirectly Messianic. 6. The Messianic, or directly and 
 properly Messianic, 
 
 (1.) The Non-Messianic prophets did not direct their 
 thoughts to the remote future, but confined themselves to 
 the immediate wants of the people, The}^ comprise nearly 
 all who precede the period of written prophecy, i. f., from 
 Samuel to Hosea. They are restricted almost exclusively 
 to the needs of the people and the time in which they lived. 
 They reclaimed the people from apostasy, made disclosures, 
 and urged the people to 'i<^lhei^. toGjtKl^jbi^^j as a rule, say 
 nothing of the coming Messiah.^ During this period we find 
 only the most scanty predictions of Christ, 2 Sam. 7: 12- 
 16. There were only enough of this kind to keep alive the 
 Messianic hope of the people, and to preserve their faith 
 from extermination. The teaching was mostly by types, y 
 sufficient for the times. It is' not until the lessons of the 
 types are adequately set forth, that the Messianic prophecy 
 ^ ^C^^ becomes prominent. Yet every promise, even of temporal 
 '-^"^ good, under the old covenant, foreshadowed to them better 
 things for the future,ya greater spiritual good. The pre- 
 dictions of this period still have a mediate reference to the 
 Messiah. Acts 3: 24, "Yea, and all the prophets from 
 Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, 
 have likewise foretold of these days," is therefore true in 
 typical import. 
 
 (2.) The Messianic prophets embrace all from Hosea 
 
 ^ onward who were writers of prophecy. ^T hoac o f - Can aan^ 
 
 J^it^^^ot onl}' w^rote concerning the present wants of the people, 
 
 but also for the needs of God's people for all time to come. 
 
 In these, the doctrine of the Messiah becomes very promi- 
 
 ' nent, and yet in treating this theme there is no dull, life- 
 
 : less uniformity on this part of the prophets. In treating of 
 
 ^the Messiah, the substance, character, and amount of their 
 
 /teaching are all difierent. They do not develop on all sides 
 
 [ the doctrine of Christ,^but they make their approaches to 
 
 this theme from different standpoints, exhibit different as- 
 
 / pects of it, and with different degrees of fullness. But tliis 
 
 divergence shows no discrepancy. It is possible to gather 
 
 the whole up into a higher unity. They are not only bar- 
 

 -'-t^-tO- 
 
 -^ /Vt ^cr^-*- 
 
 
 .a^-<_ 
 
 -^^^^---^ .^— ^-TVT^ 
 
0-c a-c-^ 
 
 -^.-a-e^ y^-^ A^ y 
 
31 
 
 monious, but they are mutually self-supporting, and are sup- <- 
 plementary to each other. Whether such a combination 
 was possible before Christ appeared, or was fully under- 
 . ^, stood, is difficult to say. However, it is plain that all these i 
 W*"'*^ divir re representations do find their counterpart in the Lord i 
 Jesus Christ. In Christ all the enigmas of prophecy are 
 solved, and we see the consistency of what the prophets 
 wrote concerning him. 
 
 Division according to Implicit or Explicit Disclos- 
 ure concerning Christ. — These sixteen prophetical books 
 may be further classified in_respect to their manner of dis- 
 closure concerning Christ. This manner may be divided 
 and the prophets viewed as Implicitly Messianic, and Ex- 
 plicitly Messianic, a. Implicitly Messianic furnished a link 
 between the prophets of this and the former period. They 
 do not in express terms speak of that which is strictly Mes- 
 sianic, yet their predictions obviously stand in closer con- 
 nection with the Messianic prophets than the unwritten 
 types do. b. The Explicitly Messianic make Christ the 
 direct theme of prophecy. A. Of the Implicitly Messi- 
 anic or transition prophets, there are only two, Jonah and 
 Nahum. They were not contemporaries, yet they belonged 
 to the Assyrian period, Jonah in Israel, and Nahum in 
 Judah. The theme of both was the p urpo se of God with 
 respect to Nineveh, the capital of Ass3^ria, the prominent 
 foe of God's people. These two prophets make entirely 
 diverse revelations concerning the fate of Ninevah^the com- 
 mon foe of both nations. They appear at different times, 
 and present Messianic lessons, from different sides. 
 
 a. Jonah, the sphere of whose work lay mainly in the 
 ten tribes, in the time of prosperity under Jeroboam, was 
 sent to prophesy in Nineveh, the capital city of Assryia, 
 Jonah 4: ll. This city was selected rather than some 
 other, because it was then the great hostile power which 
 threatened Israel. Jonah's prophecy had a good efi'ect. 
 By hearkening to his message the city was spared. The 
 contrast is, that Israel is obs_tiiiate, and hastening on to de- ^ro-t>^^^- 
 struction, while Nineveh, the heathen enemy, is saved, Jon. 
 4: 11. Jonah had preached a long time to Israel, and 
 they did not repent. He went and preached \\\ Nineveh, 
 audit repented at once, and was saved. The g reat typical 
 lesson is that the gospel shall one day be preached to the 
 Gentiles, and. they sE^aW hear it, while God's ancient cov-.^ 
 enant people should be cast off. The great foe of Israel 
 
32 
 
 was spared to be its overthrow. But the time had not yet 
 '<3ome for an actual change. God's purposes were not yet 
 ripe. Therefore Assyria was not then substituted for Israel. 
 Assyria still continued heathen, and Israel the favored peo- 
 ple of God. The Gentiles should not only hear the gospel, 
 but obey it, while Israel should be cast off, and deprived 
 ' u^tJh<^<i^ the religion of their fathers. It was typical of what 
 should transpire when Christ came. "^ 
 
 b. The message of jVahum was for Judah, which was 
 not to be overthrown -by ^^A^yria as Israel was. Nahum, 
 therefore, predicts the^^reservation of the people of God. 
 It is not the development of a Messianic prophecy, but this 
 may be inferred. This disastrous overthrow of Assyria 
 stands as a type of the overthrow of all God's enemies, the 
 safety of God's people, and the judgments against an un- 
 godly world. These are totally different, and yet the same. 
 . If we put them into contrast, according to Jonah, Israel 
 is cut off"; while according to Nahum Israel is saved, and 
 the heathen cut off'. 
 
 B. The rest of the prophetic books are Explicitly 
 Messianic, — they teach of Christ in express terms. Here, 
 again, we find a great variety of aspects, far greater than 
 before. As to the character of the Messianic period, we 
 may view it as comprising two classes, (a.) Those which 
 treat of the Messianic period itself. (6.) Those which, in 
 addition to that, speak of the Messiah's person. /The one 
 exhibits a negative view of the Messianic period in the 
 light of deliverance from present and future evils ; Mihe 
 other develops the positive character. /The former declare 
 what the Messianic period is not. *^The latter what it is. 
 A future which stood in no sort of relation to the present, 
 could not be understood by the people, but if so related 
 that the lesson may become comparatively easy, then we 
 must make the present the point of departure. It is thus 
 we obtain our knowledge of spiritual things — by our own 
 consciousness, negative and positive. Thus we get an idea 
 of God from a knowledge of ourselves : first by denying to 
 Him all the imperfections which we find in ourselves; sec- 
 ond, by ascribing to Him all the perfections of what is 
 good. So the prophets do. '/ Some deny to that glorious 
 period the evils of the present. Y Others positively prophesy 
 blessings and benefits on that time. 
 
 (A.) Messianic Periods. Negative and Positive. ^ (a.);- 
 '7 In the negative^ Obadiah belongs to the Assyrian period ; 
 

 ^. 
 
 "Z<-«_fr^ 
 
 -6 , ^ 
 
 = 7- 
 6 
 
^.^^ c^ t^-,^ -^--^' "^-y ^^ 
 
38 
 
 Ilabakkuk to the Chaklean. Both btlonged to Judah. 
 Botli direct their prophecy to difterent yet related themes. 
 
 a. Obadiah belonged to the earlier portion of prophecy, 
 and selected Edoni, a small JQeijdiboring state, as the repre- 
 sentative of the" enemies ofjfG®^ ^The burden of O. is the 
 downfall of Edom. He reaches into Messianic times, and 
 ]3rodi^cts that every enemy of God shall find its downfall. 
 The book ends with the declaration, ': The Kingdom shall 
 be the Lord's. "v This offers another opportunity for incul- 
 cating the same lesson in a more impressive form, which 
 occurred in the Chaldean [)eriod, i. e., the universality of 
 His kingdom. ^^^ 
 
 h. Ilahakkakm t\\& C\\'S^diQi\\\ period. A far more form- 
 idable foe than Edom had arisen. The great empire of 
 Babylon was terrible. It gave a conception of the possible 
 combination which, might be arrayed against the people of 
 God. It presente^a spectacle of universal empire, ruling 
 almost the whole world. It was given to Habakkuk to 
 predict the overthrow of this huge empire, and* 'deduce 
 from it the same lesson Obadiah had done, the universality 
 of God's kingdom as opposed to all others. ^Hab. 2 : ^4, 
 ''^For the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the 
 glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea." This truth 
 could insure the downfall of Babylon, though now at the 
 height of its power. 
 
 b./ The remaining six prophets are positively/ Messianic, 
 not only as speaking of this period as one of deliverance, 
 but in a positive sense. They are Joel, Zephaniah, Ezekiel, 
 Haggai, of Judah; Hosea and Amos, of Israel. They de- 
 lineate in positive aspect the ac_tual benefits of the Messi- 
 anic period, yet here also is there vai'iety in the mode of 
 presentation, f^^^ x «...>.< <5^ c*^^ — g- ^ .^ / ^ ^ — . 
 
 a. Hosea takes no note of anything but the fortunes of 
 God's covenant people, and of the Gentile nations" merely 
 as executioners of what comes upon God's people, without_^t- — ^^^j 
 any reference to what shall become of them themselves. He^^'^^ 
 was sent to prophesy to the ten tribes'^iortly before they 
 were to be overthrown by Assyria. He was to assure the 
 ■despondent pious of the glorious future awaiting God's peo- 
 ple. The Messianic teaching in Hosea has four points : 1. 
 The f|v^rof God snail be restored forever. 2. The unity 
 qf^the people of Gotl under one head. No such disastrous 
 schism as at present exists shall divide the nation. 3. Im- 
 mense multiplicity (|f the people of God. 4. Their return. 
 
 p4<.^4-2> 
 
 iiA» ^ fl f^ CJ^ ^ 
 
34 
 
 They shall be regathered out of the dispersion, so threat - 
 e nin g, and be brought back to the Lord's land. 
 
 h. Ezekiel, sent to Juclah when in exile, develops still 
 more fully and minutely the blessings which the people 
 vvould enjoy. He adopts the symbols of the old economy^ 
 and pushes them to greater length than Hosea did. Ezekiel 
 de^ribes iri addition to the return, and in minute details 
 the fresh partition of lands among the people, the rebuild- 
 ing and measurements of the temple, and restoration of the 
 Levitical cerenionials. This is only in a symbolic and em- 
 blematic sense. The theocracy, ^which seemed to be in 
 ruins, was to be restored after the same general pattern as 
 before, but on a much larger scale.^ He refers also to the 
 destiny awaiting their heathen foes, now exulting over 
 Israel's downfall and Judah's captivity. He declares they 
 shall fall before the people of God. There is no mention 
 '7 that the Gentiles shall be partakers of the blessings of God's 
 people. ■* 
 
 c. Haggai comes after the exile and stands on substan- 
 tially the same platform as Ezekiel, although he seems tO' 
 be partially paving the way for the extension of the good 
 news of the kingdom to the Gentiles. The government of 
 Judah shall be protected.^ W hate v^jv^ay jed sh ,^ God's 
 p_eople shall be saved. The result 'is- statedin Haggai 2: 
 7, " And I will shake all nations, and the desire of all na- 
 tions shall come : and I will till this house with glory, saith 
 the Lord of hosts." The " desire of all nations " is not a 
 personal designation of the Messiah, as satisfying the long- 
 ings of mankind. It does not mean Messiah, as many have 
 explained it. This view is true from various considerations, 
 being supported from the prophet's own understanding of 
 the passage. According to grammatical principles the " de- 
 sire " of all nations is a collective, feminine singular. The 
 temple seemed poor in comparison with Solomon's, which 
 preceded it, but all the treasures of the nations shall be 
 brought to adorn and beautify the Lord's house. Haggai 
 d^s not say persons of the Gentiles should be brought 
 into the kingdom of God, but their noblest possessions,-, 
 He does not say whether they are to be voluntarily brought, 
 or wrested from their unwilling hands. This is not ex- 
 plicitly declared, yet all suspense and doubt are removed 
 by th^ three remaining ones, who each unambiguously 
 affirm that the Gentiles^ shall share in the blessings of the 
 Messiah's kingdom. T^his is set forth by each in different 
 aspects. ^ 
 

 ^^ ^-^ 
 
 [aZ 'Xp'-t <-4_-o /fyv^/v^^ 
 
 ^' -tt*-. 
 
 <«. 
 
 ^ i;Lo->~^ ''^^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 r. 
 
 ^^ 
 
 ^-cr 
 
 
 /^ (^u-^^ 
 
35 
 
 d. Amos speaks of the incorporation of the Gentiles into 
 the kingdom of God, as the result of their spiritual subjuga- 
 tfon by Israel, 9 : 12, " That they may possess the remnant 
 of Edom^and of all the heathen, which are called by my 
 name, saith the Lord that doeth this." That the Gentiles, 
 like Israel, were to be called by the "Lord's name," implies 
 that they are to come into the same relation with God as 
 His people. This is the res^iilt of conquest by Israel. Active i 
 propagation of the gospel proceeding from the heart of the ! "-^ 
 Christian church. !So David must be built up as of old. ' 
 There must be a Spiritual people. The Christian church , 
 must be built up and owe its existence to the Jewish church. "^ 
 This was in part the case. The founders of the Christian 
 church were Jev»'s. 
 
 c. Zephaniah, on the other hand, declares the Gentiles, 
 like Israel, are to be puritied by divine judgments, Zeph. 
 2 : 11 ; 3 : 8, 9. According to Zephaniah, God's providen- 
 tial judgments are to be the agents in l)ringing about the*"^ 
 blessing. 
 
 /. Joel 2 j_ 28 . makes no mention of any active extension a^^^^B: 
 or propagation of^^God's kingdom by those included in it, «(— <^ (Im^. 
 nor of the eftjec^^^^^otrs providences in breaking down 
 obstacles,%ut iic'^reiers rh-^lely to the outpouring of the • 
 Spirit of God, this being thex^i^lv agency employed in the 
 work. This is in accordance wnhN^Iis great promise, " I 
 will ]»our out my spirit upon all flesh." 
 
 (B ) Person of the Messiah. — The last class of Messi- 
 anic prophets are those who make revelations, not only con- 
 cerning the character of the Messianic period, but also con- 
 cerning the person of the Messiah. This class embraces the 
 six remaining prophets, a]]_of whom bekmg to Judah. The 
 Personal prophets are Isjiiah^ Micah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Zech- 
 ariah, and Malachi. There is a double reason for confining 
 these explicit disclosures concerning Messiah's person to 
 Judah. First, because the kingdom of the ten tribes was 
 not to survive, as the kingdom of Judah should, till the 
 advent of the Messiah. It wasdestroyed by Assyria, and 
 never be revived again. It <Ava«-+e^e /superfluous, there- 
 fore, to supply them with marks of the coming Messiah. 
 Second, the great body of the truly pious, and that in which 
 the proper succession of the covenant people lay, was in 
 Judah. They greatly outnumber the prophecies of Israel, 
 and the disclosures made to Judah far surpass those made 
 to Israel. So, also. Messianic disclosures were limited. 
 
86 
 
 These six prophets, who make distinct mention of the per- 
 son of the Messiah, are distributed through all four of the 
 prophetic periods. There are two in the Assyrian period ; 
 two in the period of Restoration ; and one each in the Chal- 
 dean and Exile periods. Isaiah and Micah belong to the 
 Assyrian; Jeremiah, Chaldean; Daniel, Exile; Zechariah \ 
 and Malachi, Restoration. /^ (t, /f^tfi*^ 7 (^ tZc-^/ 
 
 a. Jeremiah makes the most scanty revelation of the 
 
 person of the Messiah. His period was the downfall of 
 
 Judah. He predicts the Messiah as the righteous king, in 
 
 (j^^contrast with the degeneiate~monarch of his own da3^ He 
 
 ^(A/tf^x^ to restore^not only his people, but all things to his will. 
 
 ' h. Micah adds the Messiah shall be not only a virtuous 
 
 king of David's ancient race, but a_divine monarch, and an 
 
 effectual defense and protection against all foes, however 
 
 powerful. 
 
 c. Daniel contrasts Christ's kingdom with the utmost 
 potency with the greatest kingdoms of the world. He thus 
 carries the teachings of the Messiah to the greatest extent. 
 In symbol, he represents the kingdoms of the world as 
 brutal, figured by beasts of uncommon kinds; on the other 
 hand, he represents the Messiah as the Son of Man, 7 : 13. ^ 
 • d. Isaiah adds to what has thus far been set forth, his 
 
 prophetic office as teacher of the nations, and the fact of his 
 vicarious sacrifice for sin is set forth most clearly by this 
 prince of the prophets. 
 
 e. ZecJiariah combines with his kingl}' office that of his 
 priestly office, making him a priest upon his throne, as well 
 as the Good Shepherd disowned by his flock, thus repre- 
 senting the sufferings he should endure as a priest. 
 
 /. Malachi predicts the Messiah as a judge, refining and 
 purifying by the fires of his justice, separating the righteous 
 from the wicked. 
 
 All of these prophets except Jeremiah present special 
 yiA'-*^ marks of identification, marks by which-fe^ may be known 
 when he comes. Isaiah foretells his birth from a virgin 
 mother, and his ministry in Galilee. Micah foretells his 
 birth in Bethlehem. Daniel mentions the time of his ap- 
 pearing. It should be at the expiration of the seventy 
 weeks. Zechariah speaks of his riding into Jerusalem upon 
 an ass. Malachi, his being preceded by a forerunner, or 
 one who should " come in the spirit and power of Elias," as 
 we read it elsewhere. 
 
A»* " " a.*-— •-— » i-''*"^ 
 
^ SJ c>^^,^ ac^ t,^ OjLc ^CJ~U7Cj ^ \<n) 
 
37 
 
 [Various passages quoted or used in support ot our 
 present " Division of Propiiets." From the Minor proph- 
 ets : Hosea 1: 10, 11; 3: 5. Joel 2: 28-32. Araos 9: 
 11-15. Obadiah 1: 31. Mieah 4: 1-3; 5: 2. Hab. 2: 
 14. Zeph. 2 : 11 ; 3 : 8, 9. Ilau'. 2 : 6, 7. Zech. 6 : 12, 
 13; 9: 9; 13: 17. Mai. 3: 1-3; 4: 5. From the Major 
 prophets : Is. 7 : 14-16 ; 9 : 1-7 ; 53 : 1-12. Jer. 33 : 
 15-17. Ezek. chs. 38, 39, 40-48. Dan. 2 : 44-45 ; 9 : 
 24-27.] 
 
 ASSYRIAN PERIOD. 
 
 I.— PROPHETS OF THE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL. 
 
 They should not be taken at random, for there is order 
 here. The}' must not be massed together, nor isolated, so 
 tlTat the connection ma}' be lost. 'I'he}' were part of the 
 divine scheme(/a*sj(^'tem of training- to which the Israelites 
 were subjectecf, and v/ere conceived in order. The minis- 
 try of each particular prophet fills its approprite place in 
 the era to which he belongs. The complete study of the 
 propliets embraces: 
 
 1. Each book i>ijts own individual character, and abso- 
 lute amount of propn'ecy which it contains. 
 
 2. In its relation to its own group or period. The 
 functions which belong to it individually and how all work 
 together. «-^ ».-<:-<-*— ^ f)-c^K^ ^t ^-fi^c 
 
 3. Relation of the mission of each period to the grand 
 system of prophetic teaching which embraces all the proph- 
 
 ets. " ^€ ^«-^ — 1 ^ ^*i*-*-^^^ 
 
 4 Relation of the work of preparation ^considered as a 
 whole to tlie entire scheme of training to which Israel was 
 subjected under the whole O. T., for this preparation by 
 the medium of the prophets is only a part in a greater 
 whole, a. Legal preparation by Laws of Moses, b. Prov- '^'*^'*'*'^ 
 idential preparation by the history of the people in the his- 
 torical books — negative and positive, c. Individual pre- 
 paration: the subjective preparation in the poetical books, 
 the religious experiences of inspired and sanctified men^ 
 their inward and outward trials which have their bearing 
 upon the Son of Man. 
 
 We begin with the consideration of the prophets of 
 Israel, because : 
 
38 
 
 (1.) This is probably the chonok)gical order. Although 
 the prophets of Israel are in general synchronous with the 
 first periods of Judah, yet Hosea, the first prophet of 
 Israel, began before Joel, the first prophet of Judah. 
 
 (2) It enables us to complete tha prophets of one king- 
 xlom before beginning theothers. ^ *- i^l *^ '*f ^^'^ 
 
 (3.) The future disclosures made to Israel, as well as 
 the revelations concerning the Messiah, are less full and 
 clear than those granted to the prophets of Judah, and 
 thus there is nrp gress. In order to understand the whole 
 character^? tliei?^ Tviinistries we must look at the provi- 
 / dential circumstances which determined their char- 
 acter. 
 
 I. Intrinsic character of the kwgdom . and the domestic and 
 foreign relations of Israel. 
 
 a. It was inherently sinful in character, being founded 
 on schism and apostasy, leaving the true worship of God in 
 Jerusalem for the worship of false gods in Bethel and Dan. 
 The very existence of this kingdom was a crime against 
 God. The perpetuity of the kingdom involves this twofold 
 guilt. ^' <*>^<,c:r i3,-wt -Ma*-. — cji^o 
 
 b. There was universal corruption. ^1) The kings uni- 
 versall}^ were wicked from a scriptural point of view. In 
 Judah some were good. (2) The abandonment, by the 
 people, of the true worship of God, followed by awful sins 
 and violence, which are rebuked by the pr(>phets, in both 
 princes and people. One of the fruits of this is to be found 
 in the fact that there were was no regular hereditary suc- 
 cession to the throne, but many usurpations and regicides 
 and interregnums. Four out of seven kings during the 
 ministry of this period were murdered, and only two trans- 
 mitted the crown to their descendants, and this for one 
 generation. There were repeated civil wars, and two pe- 
 riods of anarchy, during which no monarch sat upon the 
 throne for several years. /This ¥eenis a necessary inference 
 from the history, though not expressly statecj| The ten 
 tribes having thus cut themselves off from the people of 
 God and his divinely appointed worship, and having be- 
 come more opposite to the character of God's chosen peo- 
 ple, the question arises. How will God treat them and deal 
 
 /with them? The book of Chronicles omits the history of 
 the ten tribes altogether, as not belonging to the theocratic 
 history of the kingdom of God at all, and confines itself to 
 Judah. 
 
>-srf? .<:<t^' A-»vt-^ 
 
 ^""^ f»^^>--fi.4^>^ J^^^n-^^C-^Th^-^-p.^-^.J- ^ 
 
-«^-*-<_ . 
 
 ^ </-^-^ ^ ^ 
 
39 
 
 II. Purpose of God respectlna i t. 
 
 a. His tqrbearance hitherto is shown by preserv ing it 
 for nearly t\vo hundred years in a moderate state of peace 
 and prosperity. The schism began with the r evolt of Jero - 
 boam I , B. C. 975_; death of Jeroboam II., B. C. 784; 
 shortly before which the latter period begins with the 
 period of the pro[>hecy of Ilosea, 
 
 b. God's favor is shown by interi'upting the coarse of 
 degradation from Jeroboam to Ahab, by: (1) Ministries of 
 Elijah and Elisha. (2) After Ahab by placing otr the 
 tlirone the princes of Jehu. Jehu was made king, 884 
 B. C. The first century~of the schism, or, more exactly, 
 the first 90 years from the original revolt of Jeroboam to 
 the fall of the house of Ahab, was one of growing corrup- 
 tion, until Ahab and his heathen wife renounced the wor- 
 ship of God entirely for the heathen gods. This process 
 of degradation was broken off by placing Jehu on the 
 throne. The preparation for this was madefy the period 
 of Elijah and Elisha, whose ministry extended to Joash, 
 the grandson of Jehu, and^/mder Jehu there was a zealous 
 reform, for which he was commended by God.^ Although 
 the golden calves were still retain ed,*'{rehu was of marked 
 ability, and the princes remained for four reigns, upward 
 of a century, as God had promised to Jehu, 2 Kings 10: 
 50. Under the reign of these |)rinces there was prosperity 
 to Israel, and deliverance from their foreign oppressors, 
 and victory over them. Under Jeroboam II. there w-as an 
 •extension of the kingdom to the limits ^reached by Solomon, 
 2 Kings 14 : 25. " ^<^^^t: o^-rv^ 
 
 c. The raisjjig up of prophets to labor among them for 
 their admonition and salvation, and to show that they were 
 not yet to be cast off, combined ministries of Ilosea, Amos, 
 .Jonah, besides others, as Oded, 2 Chron. 28: 9, and many 
 more...,. All these measures failed to effect any thorough 
 reform of the people of God at large, and the period of for- 
 bearance was drawing to a close, and was to be followed by 
 one of judgment. The term of the house of Jehu was 
 nearly at an end; his third descendant, Jeroboam II., had 
 nearly reached the end of his reign. His successor, Zacha- 
 riah, w^as to reign only six months. The great Assyrian 
 power (B. C. 721) was to overthrow Israel, capture Samaria, 
 and take the people into captivity. 
 
 Nature of their Ministry.— The chaj-acter of the peo- 
 ple and the designs of God respecting them are the main 
 
40 
 
 elements that determine their necessities and show the na- 
 ture of the ministry. This ministry was not to be exer- 
 cised by a single individual. Even as our Lord sent out 
 his disciples two by two, both for mutual aid and counten- 
 ance, as v.'ell as that in the mouths of two or three wit- 
 nesses his word should be established, so here the prophets 
 were to supplement each other, to seize the truth on differ- 
 ent sides, to teach distinct though related lessons. In re- 
 gard^ to Hosea, Amos, and Jonah, there was not the full 
 amount of instruction in any one of them, but in the com- 
 bination of the lessons which they severally teach and in 
 regarding them altogether as one united ministry. Yet we 
 must not lose sight of their individual peculiarities. We 
 must show their close connection, and how each had its 
 own distinctive mission to fultil, but all harmonize and co- 
 operate in the accomplishment of the common end. It is 
 apparent that a people so given to sin, and in the prospect 
 of judgment, needed : 
 
 1. A rirhnsiry of rebuke and denunciation. This is a charac- 
 teristic of these three prophets, and is in marked contrast 
 with the Otl«»e^ prophets of Judah. This denunciation and 
 rebuke is administered by Hosja directly, Jonah indirectly, 
 Amos in both ways. Hosea and Amos performed their 
 direct work by threatening in so many terms the complete 
 destruction of the kingdom, and foretelling the captivity and 
 rejection of the mass of the people, and this occupies the 
 bulk of these books, only a few verses containing a promise 
 of mercy. Amos threatens the overthrow of many nations 
 around Israel who are less guilty than Israel, while as to the 
 great power, Assyria, which was around Israel, he_says n ot 
 a,word, leaving it to be inferred that it is to finish the mis- 
 sion of destroying Israel. Jonah also shows indirect proof of 
 the same fact. The Ninevites are less obdurate than Israel,, 
 and the actual destruction ot Nineveh is postponed. Yet the 
 promises of God are not to be frustrated, mercy was in store 
 for them and for the world, for which the judgment was to 
 be a means to an end. Ko promises whatever of the proxi- 
 mate future are given to Israel, nothing to break the full 
 force of the impending judgment, so that this judgment 
 might be averted. For the present all is dark, but there is 
 a brighter prospect beyond, after the work of judgment shall 
 be accomplished. -^ ''"^-<^ ivy^^-y.-j/KA- 
 
 2. With an entire absence of all promises for the pres- 
 ent, they nevertheless point forward, to Messianic blessings. 
 
C /JU.JZ. rV^^'^^t*-, r ^ h-^r\^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^M^.^^^^^ /UJU^ 
 


 Nothing is said about the person of the IVnessiah, but only 
 about the Messianic period, which is ditferenV from the con- 
 temporaneous prophets of Judah, e. g., Isaitm and Micah. 
 /'There the person of Messiah is treated ofj\a) j.n a more 
 obscure form, sufticient for present purpose to comfort them ; 
 (b) not the same necessity to give marks to a kingdom which 
 was to end long before the advent of the Messiah. For 
 similar reasons, the Messianic period is not largely and fully 
 dwelt upon by these prophets of Israel. The}' make a con- 
 trast between the evils of the present, and the glories of the 
 future. 
 
 1. The attitudes and revelations of the prophets are dif- ^^i^^ 
 ferent. Ilosea and Amos are explicit, use express terms, ^'**' 
 JoiTah implicit, by actions which foreshadow the future. 
 
 2. There is a difference in the extent of the revelations 
 themselves respecting the Messianic period. Ilosea tells 
 only of the blessings to Israel, Jonali of the calling of the 
 Gentiles, and Amos speaks of both. He unites with Hosea 
 in announcing that the destruction of the kingdom is a nec- 
 essary antecedent to the fulfilment of their hopes. That 
 they shall be returned to God by these, and be reunited to 
 Judah, and then the blessing shall come. A.mos, with Jonah, 
 tells of the future calling of the Gentiles, but in a different 
 way, and different aspect. Amos foretells the spiritual sub- 
 jugation of the hea*:hen. by a power from Israel. Jonah 
 treats of the preaching of the Gospel to all nations, and 
 embraced by them voluntarily, while Israel remains im- 
 penitent and unbelieving. The calling of the Gentiles is 
 implicitly connected by Jonah with the rejection of the 
 Jews.K From the N. T. we see that both were fulfiled. 
 
 3. Personal Relations. — Knowledge on this matter is 
 scanty. The only thing mentioned of Hosea is the name of 
 his father. The residence and occupation of Amos is given. 
 The residence and father of Jonah. 
 
 4. Citizenship. — Hosea and Jonah belong to the King- 
 dom of Israel. Amos lived in Judah, but ministered to 
 Israel. It is not stated concerning Hosea, but is inferred 
 from knowledge concerning the others. 
 
 5. Scene of their Minisiry. — Hosea in the ten tribes : no 
 particular place mentioned. Amos in Bethel, 7 : 18. Jonah 
 in Nineveh. 
 
 6. Their writings. — Hosea a resume or abstract of a long 
 ministry. Jonah and Amos record a single brief mission 
 which in the case of Amos was a mission from Israel to 
 
42 
 
 Judahj/ It may have been the whole of his prophetic career, 
 but in the case of Jonah it was not, 2 Kings 14: 25. 
 
 Messianic teaching. — The prophets of Israel do not ad- 
 vance much on the promises made to David, but thej^ are 
 reiterated and re-enforced, expanded in the caseof Judali. 
 
 7- Theme. — Hosea exclusively treats of the dut}' and 
 destin}' of the covenant people. Amos relates botli to the 
 covenant people and Gentile nations ; Jonah exclusively to 
 a particular Gentile nation. 
 j^*^^ 8. Form of the Prophecies. — Hosea and Jonah symbolic 
 jfty^ '*^actions; Amos symbolic visions. 
 jr^"^ ^. All are recou'mzed and referred to in t^ie N. T. Hosea 
 
 ^^ in Rom. 9 : 25 ; 1 Pet. 2 : 10. Amos, James in Acts 15 : 16. 
 
 Jonah by our Lord, Matt. 12: 39-4]. 
 
 HOSEA. B. C. 784-724. 
 
 PERSON AND BOOK. 
 
 Name means salvation ; from which we may perhaps 
 infer that he was from pious parents. It is the original name 
 of Joshua, Num. 13 : 8, 16. Also, the name of the last king 
 of Israel, 2 Kings 15: 30. He was the son of Beeri, the 
 mention of whom does not prove him to have been a person 
 of distinction, nor a prophet, according to the Rabbins, who 
 say that whenever the name of the father of the prophet is 
 given, the father also was a prophet. It is simply the orien- 
 tal mode of supplying the lack of family names; called so to 
 distinguisii him from others of the same name. 
 
 It is probable that, like most of the other prophets, he 
 was a native of Israel, (a.) If not we should expect it to be 
 expressly mentioned, as in the case of Amos. (6.) The 
 places mentioned in Hosea belong to the ten tribes, and 
 the events belong to the history of the ten tribes, (c.) Es- 
 pecially (7 : 5) "our king," and such expressions as "the 
 land " (1 : 2) " I have seen " (6 : 10). These indicate a knowl- 
 edge of the land. 
 
 Some have urged that there are unusual forms in the 
 book which betray the northern idiom, but not enough is 
 known of the Hebrew dialects to warrant such a statement. 
 
 Some have objected to the view of the prophet's belong- 
 ing to the ten tribes ; that the title of the book indicates that 
 
2L, ^-o _ ^.^-^.^^ ^ c^ -f.^.^- ^ ^ rci^^ 
 
 
 «— «3 (2..-«--^ t^\^ '>^--? 
 
 

 M^ 
 
 .-<— o V 
 
 cttT^ 
 
43 ^ ^ ---^ 
 
 he was of Judab, because ho names tbe kings of Judab, in 
 
 whose reigns he prophesied. The kings of Judab are meu- 
 
 tionect.in full, while of tbe kings of Israel, only Jeroboam is ^^'^'^^ t- 
 
 mentioned. Tbe explanation of this is not that be lived in 
 
 Judab, but that he did not recognize tbe right of tbe schism 
 
 of Israel, and that the king of tbe bouse of Judab was tbe 
 
 only lawful king. This is shown by other passages, 8: 4, 
 
 *•• They have set up kings, but not by me; " and in 3: 5, 
 
 they are to come back under tbe rule of Judab. To these 
 
 kings of Judab, be adds tbe name of Jeroboam, king of 
 
 Israel, for a double reason, (a.) To indicate more exactly C^u^*^- 
 
 the beginning of bis ministry. ITzziab's reign lasted until 
 
 26 years after the death of Jeroboam, but it was in that part 
 
 of Uzziab's reign when Jeroboam was still living, that he 
 
 began his ministry. (6.) Because God by His providence 
 
 gave a certain kind of sanction to Jeroboam as one of tbe 
 
 princes of Jehu, mde 2 Kings 14 : 25-27, " He saved them by ^ 
 
 Jeroboam tbe son of Joash." '"^ *^ 
 
 Ewald bas a kind of intermediate theory, viz. : that the 
 , prophet at first belonged to Israel, but on account of opposi- 
 tion, be removed to Judab. This is only imaginative. 
 
 Marriage — As to the account of tbe prophet's marriage, 
 from ancient times interpreters have been divided. Was 
 his fViitbless wife an allegory or a fact ? In either case it was 
 certainly symbolical of the Lord's relation to His erring peo- 
 ple. It is improbable that it was a literal occurrence, for 
 
 1. God would not have commanded a hoi}' prophet to 
 form such a connection. (Hengstenb«rg) though it is not a 
 command to form a sinful connectiouy as some have main- 
 tained, yet it was certainly a revolting one, would subject 
 him to an endless amount of scandal, and thus destroy his 
 influence. 
 
 2. The law of Moses (Lev. 21 : 7) forbade a priest to 
 marry an unchaste woman. In regard to this, the law of 
 ceremoniaj^uritv relative to tbe priesthood is not to be 
 applied^to tbe prophet, for tbe priest would not even marry 
 a divorced woman. The high priest (Lev. 21 : 13, 14) could 
 not marry a widow. But the prophets were nevetbeless a 
 sacred order of men as well as tbe priests, and God would 
 not specially direct them to form alliances of this kind. 
 
 fS^Some think God could command this for be could change 
 the moral law,/ 
 
 3. An argument from the third chapter in which the 
 prophet is again required to form another such connection, 
 
44 
 
 without any intimation that the former wife is dead or put 
 away. Is this a direction to renew his connection with the 
 woman ? Or is it a direction to marry irrespective of the 
 command? The force of this arsjument depends upon the 
 interpretation to be put upon this latter command, (Chap. 
 3). It it is interpreted as a mere repetition of the former 
 command, the argument has no force. If it is a new com- 
 mand, the argument will apply, 'i'he whole appearance of 
 the second command is against a previous actual marriage. 
 
 4. Significant names of the children of this woman seem 
 to show that it was merel}- allegorical. 
 
 5. The action of the first chapter would require years for 
 its performance, requiring not only his marriage, but the 
 birth of several children. 
 
 The symbolic lesson would be lost entirely, and the peo- 
 ple would think of the scandal.^* The marriaire is simply an 
 allegory. [W. II. G.] 
 
 Other inter prciatiohs — (1) To modify the meaning from 
 literal sense to that of unchaste nature, but it is too personal. 
 (2) A reformed harlot. But there is no mention of children 
 born of her before marriage with Hosea. Moreover the 
 syTTibolism would not be applicable to Israel. (3) Others 
 hold to the literal interpretation and say that as Abram 
 obeyed God in offering up Isaac, so Hosea in marrying. If 
 God could suffer the transgression of Israel, Hosea could 
 suffer his foul wife. But it is probably an allegory told as a 
 parable. (4) Evvald (followed by Robinson Smith) supposes 
 Hosea really had this experience, but without knowing at 
 the time its significance. God prepared him in this way f^r 
 deeper understanding of his jjrophetic work. This view 
 relieves the difficulty, but is not consistent with the words of 
 the prophecy. Hos. 1 : 2. Jer. 2 : 8 does not show that the 
 word of the Lord was revealed in an ex post facto manner. 
 Ewald'stheorj' moreover, does not explain the 2nd marriage 
 of Oh. 3. 
 
 Date. — " The word of the Lord that came unto Hosea, 
 the son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and 
 Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam, the 
 son of Joash, king of Israel," Hosea 1 : 1 
 
 Duration of Ministry. — Hosea 1:1, Uzziah reigned 52 
 years, Jotham 16, Ahaz 16, Hezekiah 29, in all 113. It can 
 not be supposed that Hosea was prophet during the entire 
 reigns of all these. Jeroboam II, died 784 B. C. Uzziah 
 survived him 26 or 27 years. From the death of Jeroboam 
 
o^^yU*a aJz: i7\. 
 
 U^-*-^ ^ -^•T^ ■ 
 
 /,H^ ^ 
 
J^ 
 
 
.CL-'Y'' 
 
 
 dh^JL 
 
 .. 45 
 
 i:o the accession of Hezekiah, was 58 years. Supposing 
 Hosea was prophet one year under Jeroboam, and one.year 
 under Ilezekiah, his ministy would iiav'e been sixt}- years in 
 length. We are not int©ruied whether Hosea lived to see 
 the overthrow of Samaria* or not. If so, his ministry would 
 be 65 years. If he began his ministry when 20, he was 85, 
 when he died, the oldest of all the prophets. The truth of 
 the title has been imnuo-Hed. In answer to the charge that 
 these statements are false, we answer : 
 
 1. Those who make them are not agreed among them- 
 selves as to the length of his ministry. Some say 55, others 
 40, others 30, others 20, and others still less. This disagree- 
 ment betrays the insufficiency of the data. 
 
 2. The niethod pursued by them is inadmissible. They 
 assume the ministry of the prophet terminated immediately 
 after the latest event recorded in the prophecy, and that the 
 absence of allusion to any important event shows that it did 
 not occur during his ministry ; but Hosea was not intending 
 to give a history of all events. Ewald says he makes no 
 mention of the invasion by the khig of Assyria, and there- 
 fore it can not have transpired during his ministry, or he //,_</'■ 
 surely would have alluded to it. Simpson finds an allusion "^^^^^ 
 to the assassination of Menahem's so;i, Pekahiah, by Pekah, 
 
 son of Remaliah. />*^^ /u^o^-k* (I^-*-^ '^^-^=— 
 
 3. The title is directly established by the statements of ■ , 
 the book itself In 1 : 4, the fall of the house of Jehu is ^^ ^J/^^*^ 
 predicted as still future. With the exception of six months, 
 Jeroboam was^'the last king, hence Hosea's ministry must 
 have begun in the reign of Jeroboam. In 10 : 14, " as Shal- 
 man spoiled Betharbel in the day of battle." Betharbel is 
 Arbela, a fortified town in Galilee; Shalman is Shaj_maneser, 
 whose invasion was under Hoshea, the last king of Israel, 
 which brmgs us almost to the reign of Hezekiah. From the 
 former passage he must have begun in the reign of Jero- 
 boam ; from the latter passage he must have continued to 
 Hezekiah. 
 
 4. Diversit}' of length and form of titles corroborate the 
 truth of the book. Books of Kings seem to be confirmed 
 and the length of each reign given. Time of reigns of Judah 
 160 and of Israel 144 years. This obtained by saying there 
 were times of anarchy, e. g., 2 Kings 14 : 21 — between Jero- 
 boam and Zachariah. Assyrian chronology, dissuades from 
 idea of interregnum between Kings. Som/ have been fond 
 •of giving political effects and eclipses to get chronology and 
 
 y^^cM' 
 
46 
 
 a o-oocl one as-reeino; with biblical record can be made out. 
 Monuments also give testimony', some years oti" the record. 
 Actually the reign of succession begins before the lather's 
 ends. 
 
 Structure of the Book — Critics are divided From the 
 brevity of the book it is not probable that it contains all the 
 prophcies Hosea ever uttered. Does not contain distinct 
 discourses which we can state [tarticularly, and their date be 
 ascertained. Dr. Wells says there are live discourses in 
 chronological order. German critics go to tiie most unwar- 
 rantable extremes, multiplying these divisions, saying that 
 the book is compiled without any order at all. Maurer says 
 13 discourses; others say 29; some 17, 14, etc , and others 
 many more. Fach paragr;i]>h is searcjjed to Hud an histori- 
 cal statement as a theme of discourse. The book is not a 
 j congeries of fragments, but is one continuous composition 
 > ' prepared by him near the close of his ministry, and having 
 in condensed form the discourses ot his ministry. lie simply 
 places upon record what is of peririaneht value to the people 
 of God in such a form as would suit best his immediate pur- 
 poses. ^ 
 
 Ewald proposes an ingenious but artificial division. He 
 says fliere are two parts corresponding to the two allegories 
 in chaps, 1 and 2 1-2 are the first part of the allegory and 
 the comments: the remainder, 3-14, is the second part of 
 the allegory and comments. This last comment has three 
 parts: 1, Charge of sin against the people, and against par- 
 ticular classes; 2, Denunciation of punishment; 3, Two 
 retrospects of ancient and better days. 
 
 Perhaps the most satisfactorj' division is based upon the 
 literarj^ form of the book. The first three chapters are em- 
 blematic.^ The second part of the book, from 4th to 14th 
 chapter, is literal. "Agreeably to a liint furnished by chap. 
 1 : 2, the former may be considered as the earlier part of the 
 prophet's ministry. This corresponds to the contents of the 
 text. In this the people are charged with outward sins.,*. 
 From the 4th chapter the tone of the book manifestly 
 changes, and the latter division reflects the turbulent period, 
 regicides, etc. Reason in the first three chapters for the 
 overthrow of the kingdom clearly foretold, and announcing 
 who shall be the authors of that judgment. In the first part 
 of the book, the Assyrians are not mentioned by name, but 
 in the subsequent chapters they are named. In each of 
 these three main sections of the book are three Messianic 
 

 (/-«> S-c-^-K^ ^^ c->-»->-. C-t^-^ c-<. '^'-' *-Y )L_-V- . '2 c^fc-w-c^ 
 
 c-^ c^.w<- -^ a% . o~-t--^ ^-o , "^ /^-/^ /S->-«^ 
 
 
 c^ 
 
 /^ 
 
 

47 
 
 passages, making the ends of as many subdivisions. Those 
 in th^ first section occur a t th e close of each of the first 
 three chapters. Iii^the second section are threejDromissory 
 p"assages, 6,: 1-3 ; 11 : 8-11 ; 14 : 1-9. The passages are not 
 on]y~of ihcreasinglength, but are of growing fulhiess and 
 power. They are climactic in thought. Predictions of the 
 book relate partly to the ^i ear and partly to the remote 
 future. 
 
 PREDICTIONS OF HOSEA. 
 
 I. Nearer predictions: {(>) ch. 1: 4, overthrow of the 
 house of Jehu, rf. 2 Kings 10: 30; 15: 10. 12. (6) The 
 complete destruction of the kingdom of the ten tribes, the 
 exile of the people, and the desolations of the land, 1 : 4-6; 
 2 : 11-13 ; S: 4, et passim. This is burden of the book. 
 
 Locality of the Exile. — Forms of statement varj-, and ap- 
 pear to conflict. 8 : 13, " They shall return to Eijypt." 
 9: 6, "Egypt shall gather them up, Memphis shall bury 
 them." But, on the other hand, 11:5, "He shall not re- 
 turn into the land of Egypt, but the Assynan shall be his 
 king, because thej^ refused to return." ""9^: 3, " They shall 
 not dwell in the Lord's land; but Ephraim shall return to 
 Egypt and they shall eat unclean things in Assyria." 11 : 
 11, " They shall tremble as a bird out of Egypt, and as a 
 dove out of the land of Assyria." These varying- declarations 
 seem to be: {<i) They sliall be carried into Egypt; (6) not 
 in Egypt, but Assyria; [c) both into Egypt and Assyria. I ^ ^.^'-''^*^ 
 Skeptics say this shows vacillation in mind of prophet.^cJlut-' 
 (1) they hold this book to be a continuous history. But it 
 is singular that the prophet should record these vacillations 
 in a continuous history. Vacillations would seem to prove 
 the book a compilation of fragments. (2) There is, how- 
 ever, no contradiction here. It is not necessary to suppose 
 that the prophet was of different mind in different periods 
 of his ministry. The meaning either is, (r/) That while a 
 portion of the people shall be scattered into Egypt, and find 
 graves there, the bulk of them shall not go there, but to / 
 Assyria, [h) Egypt is here introduced in a symbolic sense, 
 as the land in which their fathers had been in bondage, and i 
 they should be carried not into literal Egypt, but to a land 
 which shall be to themselves what Egypt had been to their 
 fathers. 
 "if In 1 : 7, he predicts that Judah shall not fall as Israel, 
 but shall be mira(iulously delivered. Cf. 2 Kings 19 : 35, 
 
 a^ 
 
,r^' 
 
 
 ^M 
 
 .48 rr 
 
 host of Sennacherib smitten by an angel. 8: 14, subsequent 
 destruction of Judah's cities is directly threatened. The 
 captivity is not predicted, but presupposed, 1 : 11, and 2 
 Kings 25 : 8, 9. The destruction of the palaces of Judah by 
 fire was fulfilled 130 years after his death, in o88, B. C, 
 
 II. Four Blessings- — In addition to these predictions, 
 H. predicts four blessings belonging to the remote future, 
 (a) 1 : 10, Immense multiplication of Israel, as the sand of 
 the sea. (b) Return to God and enjoyment of his favor, 2 : 
 20, 21. (c) Union wTtli Judah under King David, the lawful 
 prince of David's line, 1 : 11; 3: 5. (f/) Th^r return thus 
 united from the land of their captivity, 1: 11; 11: 11. 
 
 Each of these is disclosed in cojjtrast with existing or 
 threatening evils. These evils are : (a) The impending de- 
 struction of the kingdom ; (6) Their apostasy from God ; 
 ) Their schism from Judah ; (d) Threatened captivity, 
 om the judgments upon Israel, they might fear they would 
 be extirpated, and what is to become of the promises? H. 
 discloses that the promises shall abide in their full force. 
 The work of purgation shall be the means^f fulfilling the 
 promise. The schism between Israel and Judah shall ter- 
 minate. III. Period of great success. — Earlier chapters of 
 Israel well supplied. 2 : 5-12 ; 2 : 11 time of mirth ; 2 : 13, 
 jewels. He promises to save Judah and after his anger 
 turns he promises to defeat Israel's foes, but by His power 
 and not their's. In_what are we to look for the fulfillment 
 of these predictions of blessings? They were' partially ful- 
 filled before Christ. When some of the Israelites were 
 mingled with the tribe of Judah in the return under Zerub- 
 babel they never relapsed into idolatry, 2 Chron. 10 717; 
 11 : 13-lt). This blending began before the captivity by 
 emigration. It is furtlier asserted that the ten tribes were 
 carried into the same land, into which Judah was subse- 
 quently carried — Babylon. Mention is particularly made of 
 Levi, Benjamin, Ephraim, and Manasseh being with Judah 
 in settling Jerusalem, I Chron. 9 : 2, 3. After return from 
 exile they are repeatedly called Israel, Rom. 9: G; 11 : 26; 
 Ezra 2 : 70 ; 6: 16, 17. The twelve tribes are recognized in 
 the N. T., Acts 26 : 7. Paul was of the tribe of Benjamin, 
 Phil. 3:5; Anna, tribe of Asher, Luke 2: 36. While here 
 ■are incipient and partial fulfillments, we do not find what 
 corresponds particularly and directly to the terms of the pre- 
 dictions. There was no multitude, as predicted, no complete 
 conversion to God, no inalienable possession of God's favor. 
 
/Vt^ 
 
 
 
 
49 
 
 The entire body of Israel was not united to Judah. Zerub- 
 babel was not king, and all Israel do not return. As inade-'^ 
 quately met before the coming of Christ, we must h)ok 
 for the residue since his coming. IV. Representative 
 Period.— 3: 4; 2: 5. Service to Baal 2: 17. These crimes 
 (to Baal) are the only ones charged. 2 Kings 10 : 28, Jehu 
 destroyed Baal out of Israel 2 Kings 12: 14. Ilosea 8 : 
 10-1 4, we see that it took form of worshipping golden calves. 
 13: 1, 2 shows that they thought worsliip of God was same 
 as that of ±}aal for when the people return they shall not call 
 him Baalim. 
 
 Fulfilment of Blessings is explained in two ways, {a) The 
 lineafdescendants of the patriarchs, Israel ; {b) the sjiiritual 
 see'^ those who are successors to the privileges of Israel If 
 we adopt the former, the substance of the prediction is that 
 the lineal descendants will be as numerous as the sands of 
 the sea, be converted to God, and made His people. The 
 theocratic king of the house of David will be C:irist on an 
 earthly throne; thus the prediction becomes a wholly national 
 one, only applied to the ten tribes, or, at most,"to the de- 
 scendants of Jacob. Any other application is subversive of 
 any real intent. According to the other view the descend- 
 ants of Israel are to be counted not in the lineal descent of 
 the tribes, but in a spiritual succession. Spiritual succes- , 
 sion is urged : 
 
 1. Israel as God's people, and in the sense of the promise 
 never was co-extensive with Abraham's natural posterity. 
 Sonie excluded, others outside included. Ishmael and the 
 sons of Keturah cut off. The descent was counted in the 
 line of Isaac, Esau was cut off, and the line counted from 
 Jacob. A provision was made at the same time to give the 
 seal of circumcision to those in the house of Abraham. In 
 every period in the history of God's people has this been the 
 case, Ex. 12:^-49. Multiplication in Egypt a mixed mul- 
 titude, Ex. 12: 49. Strangers as those born in the land, at 
 the same time those who violated the covenant were cut off 
 from the people. Gen. 17 : 14. This excision might occur 
 on a large or small scale, might affect individuals" or whole 
 nations. Ex. 1 : 10— the ten tribes rejected. 2 Kings 17 : 
 18. God was angry with Israel. When Christ came, an 
 other great excision occurred : those who received Christ 
 were called the true Israel, all others being apostates. It 
 was the faithful few who inherited the promises, and at the 
 same time their numbers were increased by believing- Gen- 
 
50 
 
 tiles, and thus the continuity was preserved. % God did not 
 have one people under the O. T., and another under the if. 
 T., not one church then, and another now. It was Israel 
 then and Israel still, by a regular succession. Israel was a 
 church as well as a nation, and the promises were to Israel 
 as a church. In the light of the history of the case, believers 
 are those to whom the promises were made, and the church 
 of the O. T. continued in that of the N. T. 
 
 2. The abundant and explicit testimony of the IST. T. 
 favors this view, John 8: 39: Gal. 3: 7; 8: 28, 29; Rom. 
 2: 28, 29; 4: 11, 12: 9 : 6, 8; Rom. 11 argues at length this 
 view in the grafting in of the Gentile branch to the original 
 olive tree, and the ultimate conversion of the o riginal tree : 
 Eph. 2 : 12-20 ; Kev. 2 : 9 ; 3 : 9. These are the most strik ■ 
 ing representations that believers in Christ constitute the 
 true people of God. 
 
 3. That this was the view taken by the apostles, and by 
 them made current in the early church, may be confirmed 
 in this : that if the Jewish converts were heirs of anything 
 particular in the church, they would not be blended with 
 others. If the promises had been exclusively to the de- 
 scendants of the patriarches as such, they would not have- 
 been permitted to blend with Gentiles. There would then 
 have been a distinction between Gentile and Jewish church. 
 
 4. This distinction not having been maintained between 
 ^Gentile and Jewish converts, it would now lead to a most 
 
 singular anomaly to claim that the Jews are to receive honor 
 above the gentiles, for if that be so the descendants of the 
 Jews who rejected the Messiah when he came are tO' be 
 exalted above those who accepted him, for only the former 
 can be recognized, as the latter are lost in their union with 
 the gentiles. 
 
 5. The very predictions of H. now in question are ap- 
 plied by two apostles to believing Gentiles : Paul in Rom. 
 9 : 25, 26 : Peter in 1 Pet. 2 : 9, 10. Thus applied by the 
 apostle of the uncircumcision and the apostle of the circum- 
 cision. Other arguments tending to the same conclusion 
 will be raised in taking up other prophets. 
 
 Conclusion. — The Christian church, considered as a body 
 I of believers, is the heir of the promises, and it is to the 
 / church that the promises are to be fulfillftL ♦ This is not ex- 
 pecting a promise to be fulfilled to one vraien made to an- 
 other. Nor is it taking a promise in one sense, and then 
 using it in another, but Israel, in the Bible sense, is the 
 

 ^ ^ 1 : T--U.' ^3 
 
 Z 
 
 4<-., 
 
 J - -^^^€*-w^^, 
 
 ^_r 
 
 2 ''t-T (£ c^ . 
 
 =^^ 
 
 r^-o/S . 
 
51 
 
 Christian church. How are we to expect these promises to 
 be fulfilled ? Ans. — In a form appropriate to N. T. dispen- 
 sation. This would modify the meaning so as to make the 
 healing of the schism — the unity of the church, and the 
 return — return to the circle of God's favor. This is what the 
 Holy Ghost intended in the promises. This is the strict 
 meaning, Israel of the promise are the people of God, for 
 {a) true believers are to be as numerous as the sands of the 
 sea ; (6) they are united under one head ; they should be 
 brought back to Canaan. 
 
 Objected: — Threatenings of H. against Israel are taken 
 literally, as against" lineal descendants, while promises are 
 taken spiritually, as to the spiritual seed. But the church I 
 was then "as always made up of two classes. Threatenings 
 were directed vs. unbelievers, in which believers might be 
 involved ; promises were to believers, by which unbelievers^ 
 might be indirectly benefitted ; as far as these were accom- 
 plished under O. T. dispensation, they were accomitlished in 
 a form appropriate to O. T. ; as far as they remained to be 
 accomplished, they will be accomplished in form of N. T. 
 So as fulfilled under O. T., they were fulfilled literally, both 
 threatenings and promises. 
 
 Have the lineal descendants then no part? Yes, but not 
 as Jews, but as believers in Christ. As to literal return to 
 Canaan : (1) Restoration of the Ten Tribes at least improb- 
 able. They cannot be any longer identified. (2) As to 
 the Jews, the N. T. predicts their conversion, but not their 
 return to Palestine. All the O. T. prophets who seem 
 to prophesy a return can be explained like Hosea. (3) It 
 is remarkable, on the other hand, that the Jewish people 
 have been preserved distinct, and the land can now accom- 
 modate them. We must, however, suspend our judgment 
 until the event. All prophecies can be explained without 
 this supposition ; but if it should occur, it would not involve 
 any inconsistency. *^ ^«* *-^ 1 f^^ "a-"*- 
 
 Critical Attacks iqion Hosea. — Kuenen School. Hosea 
 gives a vivid picture of the prevalence of sin and corruption 
 in the land, and is open in his denunciation of it, especially 
 of idolatry. On this critics base their attack, and say idola- 
 try was the primitive worship in Israel, and that Hosea here 
 attempts a revolution. And as all previous books imply a 
 pure form of religion, they must belong to a later period, 
 and be not what they claim to be, but spurious. Ans. — (1) 
 By showing the evidence which these previous books afi[brd 
 
52 
 
 of their own genuineness. (2) By showing evidence which 
 Hosea affords as to their genuineness, (a) Hosea charges 
 the people with apostasy, (b) Contains many allusions to 
 Pentateuch as a recognized authority. But Kuenen saj^s 
 that Torah of which Hosea speaks instruction, i. e., his own 
 preaching, or a collection of laws, but not Pentateuch. We 
 therefore can argue nothing as to his knowledge of the Pen- 
 tateuch. Ans. — But Torah uniformly — Pentateuch, and the 
 Pentateuch as a written law. Ch. 8 : 12. 
 
 Kuenen s-.iys jiiraiii, H. condemns the people's religion 
 because it involved human sacrifice, not because it was idol- 
 atry. He might have approved of idolatry as the national 
 religion. Ans. — This is based on a false rendering of 13 : 2, 
 and beyond this has no foundation. Objected : The quota- 
 tions in N. T. from 0. T. have been claimed as showing the 
 impossibility of N. T. inspiration. Hos. 11:1 in Matt. 2 : 15. 
 In H. this refers to the exodus of Israel, therefore Matt, is 
 uninspired. Ans. — Meaning of H. clear. Matt, in applying 
 this to Christ must have known what the prophet meant. It 
 IS explained not as a new application — too definite, — but as 
 referred to Israel typically. IsraeUvvas beloved of God and 
 beset by foes ; so was Jesus. 
 
 AMOS. 
 
 The prophet Amos was by some early fathers confounded 
 with Amoz, the father of Isaiah. This mistake arose from 
 the two words being alike in the Greek. They are altogether 
 diflferent in the Hebrew. Amos means burden ; Amoz means 
 strength. He was taken from the herdsmen of Tekoah, 
 twelve Roman miles from Jerusalem, six miles south of 
 Bethlehem. 2Chron. 20: 20. The word "herdsman" is 
 applied to the king of Moab as the owner of flocks, 2 Kings 
 3 : 4. Was Amos an owner of sheep, or a tender of flocks 
 belonging to others ? We learn that he did not own them 
 from 7 : 14, 15. Thus his occupation as a herdsman is put 
 on a level with his gathering of sycamore fruit. But this 
 latter occupation belonged to poorer people. Further, he 
 says he was not a prophet — nor his previous vocation, not 
 the son of a prophet, i. e., he had not been taught in the 
 schools of the prophets under Elijah, Llisha, etc. It would 
 seem that he was sent on this single errand to Israel from 
 Judah, and this may have been the whole of his ministry. 
 
53 
 
 Time. — The time of the delivery of this message is seen 
 in 1 : 1. Compare 1 Kings 13 : 1. The time is still further 
 defined by saying it was two years before the earthquake. 
 Zechariah speaks of it, 14: 5, the beginning of threatening 
 judgments. But this does not aid us, for we do not know 
 when it took place. Prove however that his prophecy was 
 not committed to writing immediately upon its delivery. 
 Since he could not have dated his ministry with reference to 
 an event still future. 
 
 Divisions. — Chs. 1-6, literal ; 7-9, allegorical. Amos, 
 consists of three parts according to subject. The three parts 
 are: (a) ch. 1: 2; 2: 5, introductory; (6) 2:6; 9 : 10, de- 
 nunciatory; (e) 9: 11 — 15, promissory. 
 
 Theme. — The theme is announced in 1 : 2, a sentence 
 partly taken from Joel 3:16. (a) He does so first in a pre- 
 liminary denunciation of seven nations in succession. Six 
 contiguous Gentile nations, Syria, Philistia, Tyre, Edom, 
 Ammon, Moab, and finally Judah. The judgments are suc- 
 cessive stanzas of like construction, suggesting argument a 
 fortiori. If these heathen nations are to be punished, how 
 much more Israel. The heathen are generally contemplated 
 as the foes of Israel ; in Amos it is different. Also, if Judah 
 is punished, how much more Israel. These denunciations 
 are embraced in seven stanzas of precisely the same struc- 
 ture, opened and concluded in same vvay. 
 
 The sins against the nations are oft'enses against the the- 
 ocracy. In the case of Judah the sin is different. The high-' 
 est offense is violation of God's law. Gentiles vs. the mal- 
 treatment of God's people. The only exception, if it be 
 such, is the charge in 2 : 1, against Moab — oftense against 
 the Gentiles. Edom's bones burned into lime is the only 
 exception, if it is offences against covenant people. Because 
 probably at this time Edom was a subject or ally of Judah. 
 (b) Then follows the main portion of the book, the denunci- 
 ation against Israel. After four chapters of literal, it is pre- 
 sented in the form of five symbolic visions. The five are to 
 represent not as many distinct judgments, but are to be taken 
 together as the same judgment in difl'erent figures. 
 
 Visions. — 1. Thefirst vision, 7: 1-3, presents the instru- 
 ments of judgments, under the symbol of devouring locusts, 
 being the symbol of foreign foes, even the idea of returning 
 prosperity devoured. 
 
 2 The second sets forth the source of these judgments, 
 7 : 4-7. It is a devouring fire, symbolical of God's devour- 
 ing wrath, twice withheld by God's mercy. 
 
54 
 
 • 
 
 3. The third vision, 7 : 7-9, exhibits the character of the 
 judgments, righteous retribution. A plumb-line is seen, 
 and all that is not perpendicular is thrown down. This is 
 the test of their uprightness. Here the prophet is inter- 
 rupted by Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, forbidding him to 
 prophesy any longer, and telling him to leave the country. 
 He then resumes the series of his visions in the 8th chapter. 
 
 4. The fourth vision, 8 : 1-3, is intended to represent the 
 near approach of judgments. The prophet sees a basket of 
 summer fruit, and Israel is shown to be ripe for judgment. 
 It is more expressive in the Hebrew on account of the sound 
 of the vowels. 
 
 5. Then the last vision, 9 : 1, the actual infliction of judg- 
 ment. The Lord is seen standing by the altar of idolatry, 
 and striking down and slaying. The idol is helpless to de- 
 liver. Hengstenberg makes this altar — that at Jerusalem. 
 !No ground for this. Rather from the connection (8 : 14) 
 the altar at Bethel, which is denounced in other parts of the 
 book (3 : 14; 4 : 4,) and by another man of God sent to 
 Jeroboam I. (1 Kings 13 : 1.) 
 
 The main lessons taught by Amos are identical with 
 those taught by Hosea. 
 
 Nearer Predictions. — (a) 7 : 9. The house of Jerobo- 
 am shall perish by the sword : fulfilled in 2 Kings 15 : lOi 
 his son killed after a reign of six months. 
 
 (6) He predicts further the destruction of the kingdom, 
 the desolation of the land, and the exile of the people, which 
 was fulfilled after the partial deportation by Tiglath-Pileser, 
 was completed by Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, 2 Kings 
 17 : 6. This occupies the main body of the book. 
 
 (c) 6 : 9-10. Account of great siege. As regards the 
 fulfillment of this we have no means of knowing, but from 
 2 Kings 17 : 5, we learn that the siege lasted three years; 
 and 2 Kings 6 : 6-24, shows the great distress of Samaria, 
 famine and pestilence, on a former occasion. 
 
 {d] Predicts that the sons and daughters of Amaziah shall 
 fall by the sword, and he himself die in exile. Of this we 
 have no further account — no means of knowing whether the 
 prediction was actually fulfilled— no history on the matter. 
 
 (e) The special predictions of desolation to Israel, 8: 14; 
 visits to altars of Bethel, 3 : 14; 5:5; Gilgal, 7:9; <?/. 2 
 Kings 13 : 10-15. 
 
55 
 
 More Remote Predictions. 9 : 11-15. — Promissory 
 portion told at the close of denunciation : 9 : 8, 9, that the 
 exile and dispersion would not be a total destruction of the 
 people, but should be a sifting, so as to effect a separation 
 between the good and bad; the good are to remain. The 
 fallen and ruined tabernacle of David should be raised up, 
 repaired and restored, 9:11. This means David and his 
 royal house shall be restored fo former splendor, 2 : 5. The 
 fall of Judah is presupposed. That it is spoken of as fallen 
 is not sufficiently explained in that in his time the rule di- 
 minished from twelve tribes to Judah, but that it should in- 
 clude the fall of Judah also, and should entirely fall before 
 the coming of Christ. This was fulfilled in the fall of the 
 royal line, after the Babylonish captivity. The house of 
 David ceased to be royal, and was reduced to a private con- 
 dition, but in Christ this kingdom has been restored. The 
 tabernacle of David has been set up in Christ more glorious 
 than ever. 
 
 Again, Amos predicts that its sway shall extend over 
 Edom, and all the heathen which are called by the name of 
 the Lord, 9 : 12. This cannot mean only those nations 
 which David had overcome, for this would merely mean that 
 the limits of the restored kingdom would be as extensive as 
 previously. No instance can be adduced of an application 
 of this name to any heathen nation because it was tributary 
 to Judah or subject to it, but applied to the covenant people 
 of God, Deut. 28 : 10. " Called by the name of the Lord," 
 wherever used, is applied to the covenant people of God, 2 
 Chron. 7 : 14; Dan. 9 : 18, 19; Jer. 14 : 9. In conformity 
 with this usage, the meaning here must be that the re-cre- 
 ated kingdom shall bear sway over Edom and other heathen 
 nations, which shall in consequence become a part of the 
 covenant people. They shall thenceforth be called by the 
 name of the Lord. The conquest, from this description of 
 it, must not be by force of arms, but conquered in a spiritual 
 sense. This, therefore, is a prophecy of the calling of the 
 Gentiles. As such is quoted in Acts 15 : 15-17. 
 
 Further, he predicts the permanent restoration of Israel 
 out of captivity to their own land, 9 : 13-15, and never to be '^) 
 removed from it again. This must be as parallel in Hosea, 
 partly fulfilled in the return from exile. The O. T. forms 
 must be replaced by N. T. corresponding things. The rest 
 was fulfilled in Christ. It will thus be seen that Hosea and 
 Amos agree entirely in predictions of the proximate future 
 
56 
 
 or Messianic period. They predict the fall of the house of 
 Jeroboam though then so strong, and the utter destruction 
 of the kingdom of the ten tribes. Amos does not mention 
 Assyria as the instrument of judgment, which Hosea does, 
 but he threatens captivity to both Israel and Judah, by a 
 nation to be raised up, 6 : 14. This captivity is to be a dis- 
 tinct one beyond Damf.scus, 5 : 27. 
 
 Special Predictions. — That the smaller kingdoms in. 
 the vicinity of Israel should be desolated, direful mortality, 
 etc. In regard to Messianic periods Hosea and Amos agree 
 in a spiritual sense. They predict permanent restoration. 
 They shall be united and governed under the son of David. 
 Amos goes beyond Hosea. (a) In showing the prostrate 
 condition of the family of David ; (6) the announcement in 
 express terms of the calling of the Gentiles, which we have 
 seen is implicitly set forth in Hosea; (c) in clear statement 
 that nothing was to be hoped for by ten tribes except in con- 
 nection with Judah. 
 
 Genuineness and truth of Pentateuch found in Amos 
 shown not only in the existence of Pent, but that it was be- 
 lieved by people of Israel and those about them. The polit- 
 ical institutions we find here were framed from Pentateuch. 
 In Amos is fact of Pentateuch 4: 11; 1: 11. Edom as Israel's 
 brother as in Gen. 16 : 26 ; 31 : 33. &c. 
 
 JONAH. 
 
 Son of Amittai, 1 : 1. Native of Gath-Heepher, 2 Kings 
 14: 2-5. Which was in the bounds of Zebulon, Josh. 19: 
 13. Tarshish, a Phoenician settlement in the south of Spain. 
 Jerome says Gath-Heepher was two miles from Sephoris on 
 the way to Tiberias. 
 
 Date. — Only data accessible are obtained from the fol- 
 lowing considerations, (a) 2 Kings 14 : 25. Israel's en- 
 largement by Jeroboam was said to be in fulfillment of 
 Jonah's prophecy, therefore Jonah prophesied upon close of 
 Jeroboam's reign, {b) Position among minor prophets in 
 the canon. It comes after Amos, who prophesied in later 
 years of Jeroboam's reign. So Jonah must have begun to 
 prophesy near the close of J's reign. But it comes before 
 Micah, who prophesied in reign of Jothara,-» there fore the 
 greater part of his ministry must have come before this time. 
 (c) Date of the first invasion of Israel was in reign of Mena- 
 
*Tr 
 
57 
 
 hem, 2 Kings, 15 : 19. ^ J's mission to Nineveh was for the 
 warning of Israel. Therefore as this invasion was the first 
 assumption of a threatening attitude on part of Assyria, a 
 time after this invasion would be a proper time for this mis- 
 sion. A few months of reign and twelve years of inter- 
 regnum are required by the chronology of the two kingdoms 
 after Jeroboam. We, therefore, argue that 2 Kings 14 : 25, 
 and the book of Jonah were at difterent periods. f<K,^^,„,u^ 
 
 Divisions. — (1) Chaps. 1, 2, first mission, (_Mercy.^ (2) 
 Chaps. 3, 4, second mission. • rV'a-c^-«--<'-» 
 
 Contents. — Extji^aordinary nature of some of the events 
 has occasioned critical attacks. Abarband : whole account 
 oT^the fish was a dream of Jonah's while he was sleeping in 
 the side of vessel. Clericus: and by a vessel with figure- 
 head of a whale. Vanderhart : whole narrative a mere al- 
 legory'. Others: a moral fiction conveying a lesson; a 
 popular legend with an historical basis ; a heathen myth, 
 without any historical basis. We have no reason to believe 
 i^is not historical, (a) The whale is the great stumbling- 
 block. But while the miracle is peculiar, it is nq^more dif- 
 ficult than any other miracle. 
 
 Objected : No whales in the Mediterranean, and if there 
 were their mouth is too small to swallow a man whole. 
 
 Ans. — The species of fish is not defined. Heb. LXX. 
 Vulgate — " great fish." Modern interptetei^hold it to have 
 been a species of shark, white, soft, long^ \vlii^'are known 
 to have swallowed men whole. (6) Repentance of Ninevites 
 incredible, and no mention of it by profane historians. 
 Ans. — (1) Apart from Spirit of God there was great incen- 
 tive. The Assyrians were greatly superstitious and would 
 be likely moved by the appearance among them of a strange 
 prophet, from a foreign country of whose wonderful deliver- 
 ance they may have heard. (2) The coiulition of the empire, 
 defeat of their armies may have predisposed them to listen 
 to'lhe warning message. (3) It is not mentioned by profane 
 historians because they had no Assyrian records for it. There 
 were no records because it was too evanescent, and because 
 such events are not recorded, [c) Covering of beasts with 
 sackcloth improbable. Ans. — We learn from Herodotus that 
 it was a custom to make animals participate in their religious 
 observances, e. ^., sha^ngJaair from horses for religious 
 rejoicing, {d) Various mylTTs have been pro_posed as sub- 
 stitutes for the history. ' But (1) they had no resemblance to 
 the narrative. Oanes, half man and half fish. Resemblance 
 
-f 7 
 
 58 
 
 merely in name. Andromeda, chained to rock; delivered 
 by Perseus. Resemblance merely in fact that A. was ex- 
 posed to a sea-monster. The oldest form is Hesione chained 
 to a rock. In 2nd century, A. D., was said she was swal- 
 lowed by a fish, and 5th century, A. D., was added that she 
 was disgorged. This shows how legends grow with the form 
 of history. (2) The Jews never adopted such myths, t (3) If 
 they had they would have shaped this more to suit their 
 national prejudices. "^ «-^( ic^Jkt-*^ ou- ■^-JT^ *n^^ 9^iU-^u. 
 
 Positive Arguments in Favor of Historical Char- 
 acter. —(«) Natural, obvious interpretation of the language. 
 {b) Admission into the canon, (c) Authority of the N. T., 
 especially Christ's specific reference to Jonah as a type of 
 himself Although of a genuine historical character, the 
 narrative is not given as mere history, but for the spiritual 
 lessons which it contains. This is proved : (1) Compara- 
 tively small part of the book is occupied with historical oc- 
 currences, and a moral lesson is implied in all that are 
 related. (2) Position in the canon — being among the pro- 
 phetic books, though not itself prophetic. If it had been 
 mere history it would have been classed among the historical 
 books, e. g., Samuel. It is put among prophetic books be- 
 cause the events recorded are typical. (3) Character of bis 
 mission. Designed not so much to secure repentance of 
 Nineveh, nor as a promise to Gentiles, as a lesson to Israel, 
 ef. Jer. 27 : 2, S,jf (4) No attempt at permanent result, as in 
 cases of Elijah and Christ with the Gentiles. (5) Testimony 
 of Christ, who calls attention to the spiritual lessons of this 
 book. Matt. 16:24. A*--^ - ^^ a, J^ y>. 
 
 Lesson of this Book- — (1) A means by which other 
 prophets ma}' justify themselves when their predictions fail, 
 Hitzig. This is purely skeptical, based upon failure of 
 prophecy. (2) Salvation was to be by penitence and pious 
 feeling, e. g. Sailors, Jonah. Ninevites repented and were 
 saved. (3) Narrowness of the Jews. Jehovah was God of 
 Gentiles also To understand this we must see what were 
 the motives of Jonah's action, Fairbairn. If God should 
 overthrow N. for its sins, this would be a striking instance 
 of his justice, and would lead Israel to repentance. J. de- 
 sires this, but fearing God's mercy woijl^s^ve it, he fled. 
 Jewish tradition, more concerned for his country (Son) than 
 for his God. (Father.) Others find a motive in difiidence ; 
 risk of the undertaking, hopelessness of the task. True 
 view : J. feared to preach to N. lest it should be sparedlbr 
 
 ' • ^- *^ (M^ 
 

 
 

 /' 
 
 t^. 
 
 1_ 
 
 
 -.—3^ u 
 
 JCTv^^ ^o: (- >> 
 
 ■'<2^c % ; '^ ^ 
 
 i'Oui^ / i ; vyi 
 
 >-i_:a <----t^ 
 
 C^ 
 
 
 <=*-» />■»'>-» 
 
 
 (S^. 
 
 r 
 
 3: -3. 
 
 A<v, ^ CAI^ 
 
 eya -Sr7 
 
59 
 
 the overthrow of Israel. He desires to die after the repent- 
 ance of the city, because he felt that the doom of his country [ 
 was sealed, cf. Elijah at Carmel. 
 
 Symbolic events show Gentiles less obdurate than Israel. 
 Twofold application, (a) Admonitory — of the present. J. 
 cast into the sea for his disobedience; mariners cry to God 
 and are saved. Israel had many prophets, yet had not 
 repented. K repents at the preaching of one. (6) Typical. 
 J7 cast out of ship, afterwards delivered; Jews rejected, 
 though not utterly destroyed. J. preaches to Gentile Nin- 
 eveh, who repents. Word of God will be preached to Gen- 
 tiles who repent. Plainly stated, Amos 9 : 12. Same truth 
 taught elsewhere in Scripture. Elijah was sent to widow of 
 Zarepta, 1 Kings 17. Elisha cures Naaman, 2 Kings 5. 
 Christ preaches to woman of Samaria, John 4. Syrophce- 
 nician woman's daughter healed, Mark 7'7^'^agi at the Sav- 
 iour's birth. Christ unfolds a still deeper typical meaning 
 in Jonah's being in the belly of the fish. Typical of His 
 death and burial. Not merely as to length of tim^; but the 
 apparent destruction of Jonah was not end of his work. It 
 only paves the way for his miraculus deliverance and preach- 
 ing to the Ninevites. Same fact is apparently used in Rom : 
 11:15: 
 
 Date of Composition. — Various views. Assyrian exile. 
 Time of king Josiah. Time of Maccabees. Those who held 
 to mythical origin place it as far as possible from time of 
 Prophets. This class argue (a) J. not the author because he 
 is spoken of in third person. This is the case in books of un- 
 doubted authorship. (6) Numerous Aramaisms. No more 
 than in Hosea, whose date is acknowledged, {c) Prayer of 
 Jonah said to be inappropriate is taken from Psalms written 
 a'fter exile. We may claim as well that Psalms were composed 
 from J's prayer. Itis urged that it is inappropriate to condition 
 in which J. was, therefore was not written by Jonah. Ans. — 
 (1) No argument. For whoever wrote the book must have 
 thought it appropriate or he would not have inserted it, and 
 J. may have erred in this matter as well as another. (2) It 
 is appropriate, since he had reason to be thankful for his de- 
 liverance from the sea. (3) It is natural that he should base 
 his prayer on Scripture, adapting figurative language of oth- 
 ers to his own real sufte rings, (d) Use of past tense in de- 
 scription of Nineveh, implying city not in existence when 
 book was written. But it merely implies what it was when 
 J. found it, and ch. 4 : 11, God spared N. (e) Impossible 
 
60 
 
 size of city. Ans. — Measurements of ancient historians 
 agree with Jonah's. Modern historians differ. Layard 
 agrees with Jonah. " Three days' journey " — circuit of city. 
 Rawlinson thinks it means sum of lengths of all the stre ets. 
 Far-fetched. Not necessary to suppose all property occupied 
 with residences. 
 0-^ Authorship of Jonah Proved.— (^0 The introduction 
 ^ is such as a prophet would claim for himself This is a pre- 
 sumption in favor of its being production by Jonah, (b) It 
 is claimed for Jonah, 1 : 1. (c) Placed among prophetic 
 books. Its position is testimony of the collectors that it 
 was the production of Jonah, and the later the date of the 
 writing the less danger of mistake, {d) Hatred by Jews for 
 Gentiles imakes its production at a late date impossible, (e) 
 Tradition\favors authorship of Jonah. 
 
 ASSYRIAN PERIOD. 
 II.— PROPHETS OF JUDAH. 
 
 Condition of the Kingdom. It was not schismatic. 
 Idolatry was introduced by the daughter of Ahab. The re- 
 action comes in more completely under Joash than under 
 Jehu in Jeremiah. There were four princes in this period. 
 The first and second were godly ; Ahaz, idolatrous ; Heze- 
 kiah, reformer. Evil was at no time totally eradicated. In- 
 flictions by Syria and Assyria. 
 
 There are five prophets in this period : Joel, Obadiah, 
 Isaiah, Micah, Nahum,and this is their chronological order^ 
 There was conflict all the time between evil tendencies of 
 the people and influences of the good kings. The people 
 being thus balanced, God employed both mercy and judg- 
 ment. In first reigns, mercy ; but the people became proud ;^ 
 then judgment, but Judah being not yet ripe for overthrow 
 was spared. Their ministers differ from those of their con- 
 temporaries in Israel. 
 
 Nature of Their Ministry.— 1. They are ministers of 
 gentleness rather than severity ; of hope, rather than de- 
 nunciation. They are either positive or negative. Micah, 
 positive ; Obadiah, Nahum, negative ; Joel, Isaiah, both. 
 The positive give greater space to promise, and make these 
 of a larger and fuller kind than in Israel. Exactly one-halt 
 
J\ 
 
 '-S'-l-— 
 
61 
 
 of Joel is promissory ; and Isaiah, in the last twenty-seven 
 chapters, devotes himself expressly to the work of comfort; 
 Micah gives large space to promise. The contrast of this 
 period with Israel is great. In Judah, the promises made 
 are not all left to the distant future, but include present de- 
 liverances. The negative are consolatory. Denunciation and 
 downfall of their heathen foes, because the overthrow of 
 these is mercy to Judah. Their overthrow is in order that 
 the power may be given to Israel. The heathen for a time 
 will o^^erthrow the peuple of Gud, bul il is added that they 
 shall ultimately be cast down, and the power given to God's 
 people. This is so in regard toEdom in Obadiah. Nahura 
 tells of a similar judgment on Nineveh and Assyria. Isaiah 
 against Assyria and Babylon. 
 
 2- The greater clemency of the Lord to Judah is shown 
 by granting to the prophets of the kingdom a range of much 
 greater foresight than to Israel. Not only do they advise 
 them of the events immediately before them, but they also 
 disclose the remote future, preparing the people in advance 
 for remote necessities, [a) A most appalling disaster to Ju- 
 dah in the succeeding period, {b) Existence of Judah not 
 limited to this period, but continued. {c) Judah is to be 
 brought into contact with the greatest nations of the world, 
 and is to experience their hostility, {d) Needful for proph- 
 etic marks of the Messiah to be given. For these reasons a 
 much greater range is given to Judah than to Israel. The 
 overthrow of the ten tribes and its attending circumstances 
 are almost the whole that is given to Israel. To Judah, in 
 addition : A series of successive judgments against Judah ; 
 Assyrian invasion, and its failure; captivity of Babylon and 
 its deliverance; overthrow of Nineveh; judgments against 
 inferior foes ; and, lastly, the overthrow of Babylon herself, 
 the foe of the future. 
 
 The body of the revelations just given has been variously 
 apportioned. Joel : A general overthrow of the future, with- 
 out distinctly specifying the events in it. Judah has re- 
 peated strokes of judgment, and when it is brought to itself 
 by this means, God shall return to it, and execute judgments 
 upon its enemies. This is filled up more in detail by other 
 prophets. Micah dwells exclusively upon the fortunes of 
 God's people, their punishment for unfaithfulness, and their 
 subsequent blessedness. Obadiah and Nahum individualize 
 the work of judgment upon the foes of God's people. Oba- 
 diah tells of the fate of Edom, the hereditary foe of Judah. 
 
62 
 
 Nahum, toward the close of this period, foretells the down- 
 fall of Nineveh. Isaiah goes over the ground in a general 
 way marked out by Joel, but differs from him in unfolding 
 in their details what Joel gives in general outline, while at 
 the same time he goes beyond in the fullness of the blessings 
 of God's people. Micah : The judgments against the foes 
 exceeds Obadiah and Nahura. To no one is so large a view 
 of the future given as to Isaiah, until the time of Daniel. 
 
 Messianic Predictions. — The range of the Messianic 
 predictions of the Judeau prophets is also extensive. In 
 Israel it was negative. Judah does this, but goes far beyond 
 this position. The people shall not only return to God from 
 their apostasy, as Amos says, but they shall also be purged. 
 All their foes shall themselves be humbled and destroyed, 
 all that is noxious in animal creation — even death itself. No 
 form of evil shall remain to the people of God. The prophets 
 of Judah are not couiined to this negative view of the case. 
 They develop the positive beauties of the period, as to the 
 people of God and the Gentiles. 
 
 1. The people of God, both in inward character and out- 
 ward condition, shall correspond to what they should be. 
 They shall be holy in their character, and have the Spirit of 
 God poured out upon them, and then their kingdom of peace 
 shall be universal, perpetually prosperous, and shall sway 
 the whole world, whose resources shall flow into it, and con- 
 tribute to its honor. 
 
 2. The calling of the Gentiles, and their conversion to 
 God, are more clearly revealed than in Israel. It was 
 shadowed forth by Jonah, stated limitedly by Amos, but by 
 the prophets of Judah in the most unambiguous way, " All 
 nations will flock to God, etc." 
 
 Person of Christ- — Besides this general development of 
 the characteristics of the Messianic period as respects the 
 people of God and the Gentiles, the Judean prophets bring 
 into view the Person of the Messiah as was not done by the 
 prophets of Israel. The prophets of Israel predicted the 
 family of David, and its rise again, but do not view the Per- 
 son of Christ. The prophets of Judah say he shall appear 
 during a time of oppression, and shall spring from the house 
 of David, born in Bethlehem, the son of a virgin. He shall 
 honor Galilee, be rejected by the Jews, but accepted by the 
 Gentiles, By his death, he shall be brought into glory, and 
 establish a kingdom of righteousness. Obadiah and Nahum 
 simply refer to the Messianic period, the former explicitly. 
 
63 
 
 the latter implicitly. They simply refer to it in its negative 
 phase, as to its deliverance from and judgments upon the 
 foes of God's people. Isaiah and Micah, between whom 
 there is a close connection, speak of the Person of the Mes- 
 siah, of his birth in Bethlehem, of his deity, and of his 
 kingly office as Messiah. Isaiah alone gives the birth from 
 the virgin, the suiferings and vicarious death. The blessings 
 are nowhere set forth so well and so gloriously as in Isaiah. 
 
 Divisions. — This prophetic period, though strictly a unit, 
 may be divided into two portions : (a) Outward prosperity 
 under the vigorous reign of the pious Uzziah, and before 
 the Assyrians had come. (6) Trial under Ahaz and Heze- 
 kiah. This is after the invasion by Syria and Ephraim, and 
 w^hen the Syrians present a threatening aspect. To the first, 
 belong Joel, Obadiah, and the first six chapters of Isaiah. 
 The prophets endeavor to break the proud spirit of the peo- 
 ple, which prosperity had engendered, by setting forth the 
 coming trials. To the second, belong Micah, IsTahum, and 
 considerable of the remainder of Isaiah. Here the downfall 
 of Nineveh, and the Messiah as defender and king of his 
 people, are displayed. Isaiah's ministry extends not only 
 through both portions of this period, but goes beyond the 
 downfiall of Sennacherib, and proposes the way for the next 
 period, the Chaldean. These prophets of Judah in the As- 
 syrian period may be compared in minor points: 
 
 Personal and Family Relations — Mention is made of 
 the fathers of Joel and Isaiah ; the residences of Micah and 
 Nahum are given ; but of Obadiah, only the name. This is 
 all we have of their personal history, except a few scraps of 
 Isaiah's. Probably all except Nahum belonged to Judah. 
 
 Duration of Ministry, — Isaiah under four kings; Micah 
 under three kings. The ministries of Joel, Obadiah, and 
 Nahum were probably brief. 
 
 Structure of the Books. — Isaiah in successive portions, 
 which are kept distinct ; Micah, a general summary of the 
 revelations made to him, without distinction of date. The 
 other prophets have done the same, unless, as seems to be 
 the case with Obadiah and Nahum, they have given us only 
 a single discourse. 
 
 JOEL. 
 
 From 1 : 9, 13, 14, some infer that he was of Levitical 
 descent. There is no warrant for this. 
 
64 
 
 Date of His Ministry is shown by his position between 
 Hosea and Amos. He must, therefore, have been of the 
 time of Uzziah, and durino; the part when Jeroboam, king 
 of Israel, was yet living. For Ilosea's ministry began in 
 that part of Uzziah's reign when Jeroboam was living, and 
 the ministry of Amos was begun and finished during same 
 period. So anything between these ministries must also 
 have been in that same period. Some put him at a still 
 earlier date, as far back as Joash. The enemies given as 
 enemies of Judah can all be shown to have been enemies in 
 the time of Joash. This proves nothing, because the powers 
 mentioned were hereditarj^ foes, and ready for war at any 
 time. Amos denounces the same nations, and accuses them 
 of the same crimes. Others place Joel at a later date than 
 Ilezekialj. This is claimed from 3 : 2, but the " Israel " 
 moitioned there means both branches of the covenant people, 
 iind their captivity is future, and not spoken of as past. Fur- 
 ther, Joel must have preceded Amos, since A. begins with 
 words with which J. closes and the way in which they appear 
 in the two books shows that A. is one who quotes. But A. 
 finished his ministry before that captivity, so J'.s could not 
 have been after it. 
 
 Divisions. — There are two parts, of 36 vs. each : a 1 : 2; 
 2 : 17, the judgment and exhortation to repentance, b 2: 18 ; 
 8 : 21, the blessing. ^ is a description of unexampled dis- 
 tress and scourge of devouring insects. Is it allegorical or 
 real ? Whichever they were, they were symbolical of the 
 punishment to Judah by invading enemies. Some say there 
 is an allusion to the four great powers of the ancient world, 
 by which the people of God were successively assailed. £ 
 In the second, we pass from judgment to mercy. («) Re- 
 moval of scourge. (2 : 18-27.) (6) Bestowment of all spir- 
 itual gifts. (2 : 27-32.) (c) litter destruction of all foes. 
 Oh. 8. Many critics think Joel wrote more than we have, 
 and they think they find it in Isaiah. Joel quoted Matt. 24 : 
 29. Morn 10: 13 equals Joel 2 : 32. Rev. 14: 15 equals 
 Joel 3 : 13. 
 
 The first part is a description of unparalleled distress by 
 a swarm of insects. There are difterent views as to what 
 kind of insects is intended, four terms being employed. 
 (a) They denote four kinds of locusts: (6) Different species 
 of the same kind ; (c) The same insect in successive stages 
 of its growth. Four stages of growth. Credner: '■'■Gazam 
 is the migratory locust, which visits Palestine chiefly in the 
 
65 
 
 autumn, 'arbeh, the young brood, i/eleg, the young locust in 
 the last stage of its transformation, or before changing its 
 skin for the fourth time, and chasil, the perfect locust after 
 this last change, so that, as the brood sprang from the gazam, 
 chasil would be equivalent to gazam!' (See Keil, " Minor 
 Prophets," Joel 1 : 1-4.) Palestine was first visited by the 
 locusts in the autumn, full grown ; this swarm laid its eggs 
 and perished in the Red Sea. The combined heat and drought 
 favored the hatching of the eggs in the spring. Then de- 
 scribes a running or climbing. They have to cast the skin 
 four times before they come out perfect. Objections to this 
 view: (a) It requires an interpolation of the laying the eggs, 
 and hatching, and requires a ditferent subject. (6) While 
 assuming distinct significance for three, four is a species. 
 This theory has been modified. But the only proof that 
 there would then be successive stages, is (1) that in verse 4 
 they occur in a particular order; but in 2 : 25, they occur in 
 another order. (2) 'Arbeh is not so used elsewhere, but is 
 the usual term for locust. (3) Yeleg cannot have this mean- 
 ing, because i^ahum 3 : 6, makes it mean " full-grown." 
 (4) In Ps. 105 : 34, ^arbeh and yeleg are synonomous: so also 
 'arbeh and chasil in Ps. 78 : 46. Chasil, Deut. 28 : 38, ex- 
 presses the act of devouring. On the whole it is best to con- 
 sider them as poetic equivalents of the same thing. The 
 terms used really mean " gnawer," swarmer," " feeder," 
 " devourer." 
 
 Do they mean actual locusts, or are they symbolic ? Doubt- 
 less the latter, because: 1. They are a natural figure 
 for hostile invaders; cf. Rev 9 : 3-11, and often in SS. 2. 
 It is represented as a judgment of unparalleled severity, 
 and to be the last before the Messianic blessing shall come. 
 This would be exaggerated if actual locusts were meant. 
 Cf. 2 : 2, the darkness was to be before them, not by them, 
 the Lord's hosts 2: 10; 2: 11. 3- Their ravages are not 
 past nor present — as they must be on the literal hypothesis, 
 for it is impossible to suppose the prophet would spend so 
 much space in predicting a mere swarm of locusts, — but 
 future. In 3 : 15, preterites are used and yet refer to the 
 future, and in 1 : 15, " the day of the Lord " is identified 
 with locusts. 4. The connection of the prophecy demands 
 an allegorical hypothesis. The heathen are denounced for 
 crimes not yet committed. This can only relate to the crime 
 predicted in 3 : 7. In consequence of final judgment on the 
 heathen, strangers shall pass through Jerusalem no more, 
 
66 
 
 etc. 6 The attributes of the locusts, and the terms used of 
 them, belong to a nation, as goi/, 1 : 6, and am, 2: 2. The 
 latter is twice used of ants, but never the former. They are 
 called "northern," 2 : 29 ; but locusts come from the south, 
 and invasions from Babylon from the north. The reason 
 assigned for destruction is that they have done great things 
 and will be punished. They shall perish in two seas at once, 
 2 : 20, and so mere foes on all sides, 2 : 17, priests are to 
 pray God for deliverance, that the heathen should not rule 
 over them, which is not because they are so reduced as to be 
 a prey to the heathen, nor that they should become a by- 
 word among them. 2 : 25, speaks ot the years the locusts 
 have eaten. 2 : 4, 5, they are like horses and chariots, which 
 shows their true meaning. In 1: 19, 20, the figure is changed 
 to that of fire, which shows it to be but a figure. Literalists 
 say it refers to a drought, but it is not said there would be 
 one. 6. The allegorical view is the oldest, and has also 
 been most prevalent. Targum substitutes names of people 
 for locusts. Rufinus is the only Latin father holding the 
 literal view. 8ome Jews hold literal view. Bochart finds 
 literal interpretation among Christians, followed by ration- 
 alists. It is not necessary that all the names, 1 : 12, should 
 have separate signification. It is a question whether the 
 four different names of locusts have difi:erent significations. 
 Ephrsem Syrus refers them to ditferent invaders. Jerome, 
 Cyril, and Hengstenberg refers them to the four world king- 
 doms of Daniel, which should oppress Israel. Nothing is 
 certain, except that these are curious coincidences. Ch. 1 
 has descriptions of judgment; ch. 2 has the same theme, but 
 under different aspects, agents are different, described in vs. 
 10, 11, 12, etc. ; then in v. 18 the tone changes to that of 
 promise. These promises are: 1. Removal of the scourge, 
 and restoration of all that had been lost, 2: 18-27; 2. Be- 
 stowment of spiritual gifts, 2 : 28-32 ; 3. Destruction of foes, 
 ch, 3. In 2 : 23 occurs in the English version an incorrect 
 translation. The correct meaning is " teacher of righteous- 
 ness." This includes all whom God commissioned to instruct 
 the people, and includes the prophet, and the greatest teacher 
 of all, the Messiah. " Teacher " is used generically. In 
 consequence of the people being thus led to righteousness, 
 God would give them abundant rains in the first '• month," 
 as in the A. V., but it should be in the first "place." 
 Observe, 1. This has the sanction of all the versions. 2. 
 The usage of the word moreli is not rain, but teacher, in 
 
67 
 
 every other passage. In Ps. 84 : 7, the meaning is disputed. 
 3. Expression " to righteousness " favors teacher. If it 
 means rain, it must mean that which is suitable, a sense it 
 never has elsewhere. In A. V., " moderately " should be 
 "to righteousness." 4. Translation "former rain " would 
 introduce a tautology, for next clause has the same. He 
 pours out upon them a spiritual blessing. This shall be 
 upon all flesh, i. e., not only upon all mankind, without 
 national distinction, but also upon all classes of men, irre- 
 spective of age, rank or sex. In Acts 2 : 16, Peter tells us 
 the fulfillment of the prophecy had begun then, and also the 
 marvelous outpouring of the Spirit w"as not a final comple- 
 tion of the prophecy but only a beginning. There were to 
 be signal judgments upon the enemies of God ; there were 
 to be premonitory wonders, 2 : 30, 31. In ch. 3, we have an 
 account of the judgment itself. This chapter is figurative, 
 but in substance it has met repeated fulfillment, as one after 
 another of the enemies of God has been destroyed, and it 
 shall finally be fulfilled completely in the universal judgment 
 of the world to come. In 3 : 2, the scene of judgment is laid 
 in the valley of Jehoshaphat, which is supposed to be the 
 same referred to in 2 Chron. 20 : 26. Others suppose from 
 3 : 16 that the valley nearest the temple must be meant, so a 
 Jewish literalism expects the final judgment there. Jehosha- 
 phat, Jehovah judged, hence, " valley of God's judgment." 
 3 : 1-8, charges against the heathen ; all nations are repre- 
 sented as leagued against the Lord, and are destroyed by 
 Him. 3 : 9-15, all people are called to come and witness and 
 assist in this afiSiction. 3 : 17-21, the blessed results : His 
 people are to be preserved. The type of the abundance is 
 expressed in 3 : 18, even the most desolate places shall be 
 blessed. Egypt and Edom are types of the foes of Israel, 
 and they shall be destroyed. 
 
 OBADIAH. 
 
 Other Obadiahs in the Bible but no identification. 2 
 Chron. 17 : 7 ; 34 : 12. Because his name is nowhere else 
 found they think that is testimony against it l)ut it is the 
 reverse. 
 
 Shortest of all 0. T. books. Not a fragment. Name 
 borne by_ others, ministry in Judah, of author's life, dura- 
 tion of ministry, nothing known. Date of ministry infer- 
 
68 
 
 red from position in Minor Prophets. Comes after Amos, 
 whose ministry was in the first part of Uzziah's reign, and 
 before Jonah, whose ministry was ended before the close of 
 Jothan's reign. So O's ministry must have been in latter 
 part ot Uzziah's reign or in first part of Jotham's. Some 
 place it as early as reign of Joram. Others as late as in or 
 after the Bab. exile. First vieir as to date conjirmed (a) per- 
 haps by ver. 20, (h) indefinite allusions to Chaldeans, ver. 
 11. (c) Denunciations of Edom in same period by Joel, 
 Amos, Isaiah. Three parts : vs. 1-9 the desolation to which 
 Edom was doomed, vs. 10-16 reason of it, his unbrotherly 
 treatment of Judah, vs. 17-21 contrasted restoration and 
 enlargement of Israel. Predictions. 1. Capture of Jerusa- 
 lem vs. 11-14. This is the passage in which there is diflfer- 
 ence of opinion as to date. 2. Hostility then shown by 
 Edom, comp. Ps. 137: 7; Ezek. 35: 5. 3. Overthrow of 
 Edom (a) by the nations, ver. 1 fulfilled by Nebuchadnezzar, 
 comp. Mai. 1 : 3,4; (b) by the house of Jacob restored to 
 their ancient seats, ver. 18. 4. Day of the Lord upon all 
 nations, vs. 15, 16, fulfilled successively and simultaneously. 
 5. Restoration of Israel, vs. 17-21. Saviour's human champ- 
 ions and the Messiah. 
 
 Correspondence with preceding and succeeding prophets, 
 Jeremiah, ch. 49; not (a) independently suggested to both, 
 nor (b) servile imitation, but (e) indication of oneness, {d) 
 mutual sanction, [ej call attention to what is about to pass 
 into accomplishment. Incidental evidence of genuineness 
 and canonicity of earlier Scriptures. Critical extremes, (a) 
 pedantic minuteness and baseless conclusion; (6) alterations 
 of text to restore an imaginary conformity. 
 
 ISAIAH. 
 
 PRELIMINARY CHAPS. I.-VI. 
 
 This prophet is called the "prince of prophets." His 
 writings are the largest and clearest as to the^worS of the Mes- 
 siah. Singular fitness in his name. " Isaiah " means " sal- 
 vation of Jehovah," and such was his message. According 
 to Is. 1 : 1, he was the son of Amoz, of whom nothing is 
 known. He lived in Jerusalem, the " middle city," 2 Kings, 
 20 : 4. He was married, and had at least two children, 7 : 
 

69 
 
 8; 8 : 3,/8. The name of one, Shear-jashnb, signifies mercy 
 to Judah, after the first coming judgment. The name of the 
 olher, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, signifying speedy ruin to Syria. 
 Some suppose a third son, 7: 14, Inimanuel, but the child 
 thus spoken of is the Messiah. There is no evidence that 
 his wife was inspired; 8: 3, called prophetess simply from 
 her relation to Isaiah. 
 
 Leading Events. — 1. Confronting Ahaz, ch. 7. 2. En- 
 couraging Hezekiuh, ch. 37. ^ 3. Healing of Hezekiah, 37-39 
 chs., and reproof of his vain display. Ch. 38: 21 is quoted 
 in favor of his medical skill, but this is given onh' in virtue 
 of his prophetic office. 
 
 Duration of Ministry. — During the reigns of Uzziah,; /-V 
 y^Hezekiah, Ahazy 'Jothani. Not during their entire reigns 
 wliich would be 113 years. The earliest date in the book, 
 6: 1, the year Uzziah died; latest date, 36 : 1. Between 
 these 46 years is the shortest period that can be allowed. 
 Probably his ministry extended some time beyond this. 
 Some say until the time ot Manasseh, because [a) Jevvish 
 tradition says that surviving Hezekiah, he was sawn asunder 
 by Manasseh. Some refer to Heb. 11: 37. {b) Refers the 
 rest (2 Chron. 32 : 82), of the acts of Hezekiah to a writing 
 of Isaiah, and this, they say, implies Isaiah survived Heze- 
 kiah. ( (c) A record of Sennacherib's death, Is. 37 : 38. (d) 
 Not forbidden by Isaiah 1:1; rf. Jeremiah 1 : 3, Dan. 1 : 21./ 
 
 Structure of the Book- — i- Utterly confused, jumbled 
 together, disorderly, and some seek to bring them into an 
 order which mangles the iTook. 
 
 2. Partial and orderly collections, receiving accidental 
 accretions, and ultimately bleijrled. This, too, is arbitrary, 
 based on an assumption of '/d i sag ree r^ eliTs'^Tn" the book, and 
 on that of^he collection of these parts by another than the 
 
 3. Chronological^ arrange^^s^eliverea. In favor of <. 
 this it is urged that all the dates which do occur in the book 
 are in chronological order. The two cases in which a de- 
 parture is assumed are chs. 1 and 6. Chapter 6, described, 
 
 it is affirmed, the inauguration of the prophet into office. If 
 this be correct, then ch. 6 is the first of all chronologically. 
 They assume that Isaiah, having put together his prophecies 
 uttered in the reigns of Uzziah and Jotham, appended to 
 them his original commission in order to show them that the 
 denunciations which he had uttered were in strict accordance 
 with the divine command. Bjut in ch. 6 the prophet de- 
 
70 
 
 scribes not his original commission, but a special dedication 
 for a new and specific work. Ch. .1, all suppose to be out of 
 its original place. Not a discourse in the outset of his min- 
 istry, but the last of all, and not prepared until the whole 
 was written. It is supposed that this chapter is the intro- 
 duction prepared at the conclusion of the whole. The 
 decision of the question rests mainl\' on the interpretation of 
 vs. 7-9, whether the preterite is historical or prophetical. 
 The latter indicates a future event spoken of as having 
 already occurred. The country was not ravaged to the ex- 
 
 , tent there mentioned until the time of Hezekiah. In gen- 
 
 ■eral, then, the order is chronological. 
 
 4. Others insist on a topical arrangement, prophecies 
 relating to the same theme being classed together. Vitringa, 
 as follows : {a) chs. 1-12, prophecies relating to Judah and 
 Ephraim, from the earlier part of his ministry, (h) 13-23, 
 Relating to other nations, [c) 24-35, Punishment of Jews 
 and enemies of the church, (d) 36-39, Historical, (e) 40-66, 
 Person and reign of Christ. Gesenius divides substantially 
 the same, but joins (d) and (e) as both relating to the deliv- 
 erance from the exile. 
 
 5. A better view is to combine the chronological order 
 and topical. — A record of his ministry in its leading features 
 as they were successively unfolded, viz : {a) 1-6, Before the 
 Syrian invasion. Exhibition of the certainty and necessity 
 of the coming judgment. The prophecies were delivered to 
 an outwardly prosperous people, under Hezekiah and Jotham. 
 Little space is devoted to [tromises. All that are given 
 relate to the distant future. Messianic period referred to 
 brings out the present guilt and unfaithfulness. Necessity 
 of judgments to prepare for the blessings of the future. 
 Person of the Messiah only once alluded to, and then only 
 obscurely, (b) 7-37, Extending to the Assyrian invasion. 
 Alternate between judgment and mercy. One judgment by 
 Syria already sent, and another by Assyria still in the future. 
 Necessity of a severer judgment in the future. The person 
 of the Messiah appears repeatedly in his kingly office. He 
 is a pledge of his people's preservation and deliverance from 
 oppression, (c) 38-66, Subsequent to the Assyrian invasion. 
 The second judgment l)y Assyria is past, but another more 
 fearful one is yet to come,fwhich shall not merely threaten 
 the destruction of the holy cit}^ but shall actually accom- 
 plish it, and they shall be taken away from their land, break- 
 ing the presumption of sinners over Sennacherib's destruc- 
 
V "^^"7 «-/ /.-/x / "^ ■- t-i 
 
 2v .' — "5 •> ■ 
 
 
 — /2^ 
 
 ^/U^^ / ^ 
 
 cy^ U.^.j^-J,-y 
 
 y. (k CV- <X^ J« 
 
71 
 
 tion, by this announcement. He yet gives comfort to the 
 pious, who were in danger of despairing, that though this 
 calamity shall befall them, it shall come to an end, and the 
 oppressor shall be overthrown. Cyrus named, Israel named. 
 Here the Messiah is again exlxibifed, not^s a king but as a 
 prophet, and as a sufferer, t h e^ieaao in i s people, and iden- 
 tified with them in the accomplishment of that which shall 
 avail for the good of others, but suftering for himself. The 
 last section is adapted to a great necessity of the future, 
 hence not distinct discourses as the preceding, but one con- 
 nected composition. 
 
 Unity of plan in the whole book. i" 
 
 1. Chs- 1-6. The denunciations of the early chapters ^ , 
 increase in vehemence, until they culminate in sentence of 
 desolation, by successive judgments pronounced by God 
 himself, in the vision of ch, 6. This is the germ of all that 
 comes after. The prophet is informed that the people in- * 
 stead of being benefited by his ministry would continue in 
 
 sin until the land should be desolated, although they should 
 not be finally destroyed, because there was still a holy seed 
 which should be preserved. The sixth chapter is in its right 
 place. If this is the place where this vision is to be recorded 
 it is also where it should appear. If we see in 6th ch. only 
 his call to the ministry we lose much of its truth. The pre- 
 vious chapters lead up to the 6th, Jehovah speaks in the 
 6th ch. 
 
 2. Chs. 7-37- Subdivided, (a) 7-12, (b) 13-27, (c) 28-35 
 {d) 36-37. (a) Prophecies occasioned by the first of the pre- 
 dicted judgments, the invasion by Syria and Ephraim, 
 promising deliverance from this, but threatening a sorer one 
 to come, {b) Meaning of these predicted events to the world 
 at large, (c) Occasioned by the approach of the second 
 judgment, the Assyrian invasion, promising its miraculous 
 defeat, (d) Record of the Assyrian invasion and its over- 
 throw. 
 
 3. Chs. 38-66. («) Chs. 38, 39, occasion of predicting 
 the third judgment, (b) 40-66, comfort in view of this judg- 
 ment and assurance of ultimate deliverance. This same 
 work, of judgments upon the people for their sins, is spoken 
 of in general terms by Obadiah and Joel. They said it 
 would be carried to the extent of destroying the holy city, 
 but by what steps and foes, was unknown, until Isaiah re- 
 vealed it. No prophet of this or any other period is explicit 
 except Daniel. 
 
72 
 
 1. Subdivided into eh. 1, chs. 2-4, ch. 5, and ch. 6. Ch. 
 1, vs. 2-4, charge of ingratitude and sin ; vs. 5-9, land to be 
 ravaged in consequence ; vs. 10-15, observance of the ritual 
 could not save them ; vs. 16-20, sin must be repented of and 
 forsaken ; or, vs. 21-31, it shall be wiped out by judgment. 
 Chs. 2-4; (a) 2: 2-4, Zion's glorious destiny, as the seat of 
 a worship which shall attract and bless all nations ; (6) 2 : 5 ; 
 4 : 1, present failure to realize this destiny, which is due to 
 their sins, and shall be remedied by judgments; (c) 4: 2-6, 
 Zion shall be thus purged of evil, and rise to her true bless- 
 edness and glory ; Branch of the Lord and fruit of the earth 
 denotes the Messiah ; {a) the Branch, Jer. 23 : 5 ; 33 : 15 ; 
 Zech. 3: 8; 6: 12, comp. Isa. 11 : !;*(''>) ancient and com- 
 mon explanation ; (c) no other satisfactory. Ch. 5, Parable 
 of the vine and its application. Ch. 6, The vision, commis- 
 sion and announcement. 
 
 The first period contains four distinct prophecies. In 
 each there is the same idea. They are so many arguments 
 for the necessity of judgment, and of purification, anterior 
 to the Messiah's coming. In the second discourse it is put 
 in the glorious destiny of Zion, and the seat of the true 
 religion. In the third discourse the same truths under the 
 emblem of a vineyard, carefully attended to, and yet it pro- 
 duces wild grapes. In consequence of this the wall of the 
 vineyard is broken down. This prepares the way for the 
 last discourse, ch. 6, in which these denunciations culminate 
 in a sublime vision. The Lord appears in his temple with 
 majesty, and pronounces formal sentence on his people — 
 desolation and banishment, but not of entire destruction. 
 According to the election of grace, a remnant shall be pre- 
 served. There is a holy seed to remain. 
 
 This idea which is here brought out is really the key- 
 note of the book, and shows reason for its arrangement and 
 structure. All the rest is built upon and grouped around 
 successive judgments. The future has thus far been set forth 
 in its general outline, but by what agents the judgment is to 
 be inflicted, is not yet declared. This majestic vision of ch. 
 6, was seen in the year king Uzziah died, ch. 6 : 1. A& 
 XJzziah was a leper during the latter years of his reign, 
 Jotham (2 Chron. 26: 21) was then acting monarch. For 
 the remainder of Jotham's reign, we have no distinct utter- 
 ances. Whether the prophet was dumb (Ezek. 33: 22) or 
 not, cannot be determined, if new revelation was given him. 
 The king had from his throne pronounced judgment, and 
 
73 
 
 the prophet holds his peace. The decree heard in the temple 
 enters on its first sta^e in the days of Ahaz. Prophet was 
 sent with message which was constantly disregarded, 
 
 2. Chs/ 7-37. (A) 7-12. Subdivision of chs. 7-12: (1) 
 Ch. 7, circumstances, deliverance from this invasion, but a 
 severer one from Assyria. (2) 8: 1; 9: 7, Both from this 
 present and that future distress Immanuel is a pledge of pro- 
 tection to them that fear God. (3) 9 : 8 ; 10 : 4, Ephraim, 
 the foe of the present, shall perish, (4) 10 : h ; 10 : 34, As- 
 syria, the foe of the future, shall likewise perish. (5) Ch. 11 
 and 12, Blessings of Immanuel's reign. 
 
 The moment Isaiah met Ahaz was a critical one for 
 Judah, and their unbelief was the immediate cause of the 
 evils which followed. The question was distinctly proposed 
 to them, whether they would rely on God for assistance, or 
 on Assyria. The unfortunate king of tlie people chose the 
 fatal consequences. The Assyrian general, Rabshakeh (36 : 
 2), stood on the conduit of the upper pool, where Isaiah met 
 Ahaz, and delivered his insulting message. The direful 
 vision of the first chapter is here given. In his discourse to 
 the king, Isaiah (7 ch ) had sketched dark visions of Assyrian 
 invasion, and no relief. Severe chastisement of sins, fol- 
 lowed by the overthrow of foes. Such is the future of the 
 people of God. When Isaiah met Ahaz, he delivered the 
 message, 7: 7-9. The sign given was the virgin's child, 
 comp. Ex. 3:11, 12, time of deliverance indicated, vs. 15. 16. 
 Almah, a virgin, (a) etymology, (6) usage, (c) cognate lan- 
 guages, (d) LXX. A child miraculously born, (a) Mat. 1 : 
 22, 23, (6) solemnity of the announcement, (c) the name and 
 8 : 8-10, ((/) 9: 6, 7. Not the prophet's child, (a) mother a 
 virgin, (6) 8: 1-4. Three views, {a) Messianic, (b) non-Mes- 
 sianic, (c) double sense. 8: 1; 9: 7, Maher-shalal-hash-baz, 
 deliverance from present and future judgments for those who 
 fear God, of which Immanuel is the pledge, scene of his min- 
 istry, 9 : 1, 2, its consequences, multiplication, joy, deliver- 
 ance, end of war, vs. 3-5, person and titles, vs. 6, 7, Jewish, 
 Rationalistic and Messianic interpretations. 9: 8; 10 : 4, 
 overthrow of Lphraim in four stanzas with like ending. 10 : 
 5-34, overthrow of Assyria, Sennacherib's march, cut down 
 as a forest. Chs. 11, 12, in contrast Messiah sprouts from 
 root of Jesse, filled with the Spirit, restores Paradise, gathers 
 the Gentiles and remnant of Israel, unites Judah and Eph- 
 raim, makes them victorious over all foes. Messianic pas- 
 sages: 7: 14-16; 9: 1-7. Chs. 11, 12, progressive climax. 
 
74 
 
 (1) The prophets' thought was the security of the people. 
 Their weapons are spiritual. The prophecy as given by 
 Isaiah is fulfilled. The genuineness of ch. 12 has been ques- 
 tioned on insufficient grounds. Other prophets pass from 
 prophecy to song and why not Isaiah ? It has one of his 
 characteristic passages in it. 
 
 (2) In time of Jothan, Isaiah was sent to a prosperous 
 but carnal people. He was to startle them into obedience 
 or vindicate God's righteousness. These being unheeded, 
 he was to pass judgment on them and people would be swept 
 awa^' except the good. 
 
 (3) Support under affliction, 1st judgment has come and 
 Assyria is rested on instead of God. 
 
 In early discourses ch. 1-6, pictured a prosperous people, 
 but no prominence given to Messiah. In ch. 7-12, the Mes- 
 siah is the source of aid. Each of these sections has a unity 
 and completeness. The 1st six chs. advance regularly on 
 each other till the glorious vision of the sixth. The 2, 7-12 
 follows the other. 
 
 (B) Chs. 13-27 ten burdens culminating in judgment on 
 the whole world, followed by triumph of the Lord's people, 
 two naturally corresponding series, twofold design, masah. 
 (1.) chs. 13, 14 : 27, Babylon, the object of two burdens, here 
 first connected with Judah's exile, to be overthrown by the 
 Medes, 13: 17, and become a perpetual desolation, vs. 19-22, 
 in order to the deliverance of the chosen people, who sing 
 their song of triumph over the oopressor's downfall, 14 : 
 1-23; Assyria's overthrow, vs. 24, 25. (2) 14: 28-32, 
 Philistia rejoicing in calamities of Judah, threatened with a 
 formidable enemy from the north, by whom she shall be 
 devastated in order to Zion's more complete establishment. 
 (3.) chs. 15, 16, against Moab. (4.) chs. 17, 18, Damascus. 
 (a) 17 : 1-11, denunciation of Syria, passing over, v. 3, into 
 one against Ephraim its ally in assaulting Judah ; (6)17: 
 12-14, denounces all succeeding invaders, hower numerous 
 and powerful, with special reference to Sennacherib; {c) ch. 
 18, his fall announced to Ethiopia and other distant nations, 
 who bring offerings to God. (5.) chs. 19, 20, Egypt; (a) 
 19: 1-7, ruin under image of drying the Nile ; (6) vs. 18- 
 25, mercy, the salvation five times greater than the destruc- 
 tion, v. 18, altar, v. 19, union of Assyria and Egypt, 23, 
 and of both with Israel, vs. 24, 26; (c) ch. 20, symbolical, 
 action defining time of fulfillment, (6.) 21 : 1-10, Desert of 
 the sea, i.e., l3abylon ; Elam or Persia joined with the 
 
75 
 
 Medes in its capture in a night of festivity. (7.) 21 : 11, 12, 
 Dumah, silence, i. e., Edom. (8.) 21 : 14-17 Arabia. (9.) 
 ch. 22, valley of vision, i. e., Jerusalem ; (a) vs. 1-14, denun- 
 ciation of the city; {b) vs. 15-19, degradation and exile of 
 Shebna; (c) vs. 20-25, exaltation and establishment of Elia- 
 kim. (10.) ch. 23, Tyre to be overthrown by the Chaldeans, 
 vs. 1-15, but to revive after seventy years, and her gain to 
 be consecrated to the Lord, vs. 15-18. Ch. 24, General 
 judgment of the whole world. Chs. 25-27, Judah's triumph 
 and blessedness. 
 
 The first five and the last five burdens constitute two 
 series. The first of each series are against Babylon, and the 
 rest against nations subjugated by Assyria and Babylon, and 
 by which the judgment was partially fulfilled. The second 
 and third in each are against minor nations near Palestine. 
 The third of each series is concluded with the time of its 
 fulfillment, " in the years of an hireling," mean " years ex- 
 actly measured." The object of the fourth of each series is 
 the true covenant people. Damascus is equivalent to Israel 
 here, because they are associated together. The fifth of each 
 series is against prominent heathen powers, both of which 
 series end with promises, and here, too, dates are given, but 
 with reference to the duration and removal of judgments. 
 Twofold design of these burdens: first, for the covenant 
 people; second, for the nations themselves. All the na- 
 tions named had been guilty of sins against the people of 
 God, and it is so taught in the first six. Humiliation of 
 Egypt is to remove objects (20 : 6) of idolatrous trust from 
 covenant people. The design of announcement to the Gen- 
 tiles, is, first, that the judgment of one (18 : 7) might lead 
 others to trust in God ; and secondly, the nations themselves 
 are to be converted to God, e. g., Egypt and Tyre ; Assyria 
 is mentioned with Egypt, same purpose toward all. These 
 individual judgments are given as parts of God's general 
 judgment of the world, shown both by the beginnings and 
 ends of the burdens. Thus, 13 : 6-13, mentions convulsions 
 of nature which did not happen in the overthrow of Baby- 
 lon, but they are put here because it is viewed as one scene 
 in God's providential work of judgment, as in Matt. 24: 29; 
 and in 14 : 26, the character of tne judgment is stated, " upon 
 the whole earth ;" and in the 24th ch., the judgments term- 
 inate upon the world at large. These judgments have same 
 title affixed to each, viz. : " burden." This word explained, 
 1, derived from nasa — "to lift up the voice." Therefore it 
 
76 
 
 means solemn utterance, a prophec}' irrespective of the char- 
 acter of its contents. 2. From same root in sense of " to 
 lift up and carry," hence " a burden," i. e., a prohecy of 
 threatening import. Proof, a. universal usage of word, 
 being used with prophecies of grievous character, b. agrees- 
 better with radical meaning of verb, and with the ordinary 
 meaning of noun. 3. Agrees better with syntax, the noun 
 stands, in construct, before name ot that which is object of 
 prophecy, e. g., burden of Babylon — load which B. is to bear. 
 The utterance of Babylon would not convey the idea of the 
 syntax. The fact that these were genuine prophecy is 
 strengthened by the use of such enigmatical title, which 
 would not have been used by a forger. In the first six chap- 
 ters exile of Judah is predicted, but hitherto the agent has 
 not been named, but now Assyria, though only a province^ 
 is here declared to be the agent, hence it is the subject of 
 two distinct burdens. In the 13th ch. Babylon is to be over- 
 thrown by the Medes, and this in 14 : 1, 2, is declared to be 
 for the deliverance of the covenant people. Hence he reverts 
 to the nearest foe, by whom the first blow is to be struck. 
 Ch. 11 : 24, 25, repeats Syria's overthrow for the comfort of 
 the people. The second burden has a title in 14 : 28, denun- 
 ciation against l^alestine in the year Ahaz died, and they 
 are threatened with destruction from the north. In the 
 fourth burden, which begins against Assyria, and then pro- 
 ceeds to prophesy against Ephraim, since it and Syria were 
 to be devastated by Assyria. Then he passes to the most 
 distant powers under the name of Ethiof»ia, who are exhorted 
 to behold how God would destroy all his enemies. The fifth 
 is against Egypt. Five cities of Egypt are to embrace the 
 true religion, to one that is to be destroyed, and an altar is 
 to be erected to the Lord, which may mean that Jerusalem 
 shall no longer be the only place of sacrifice. If signifying 
 altar of witness, it simply implies conversion of Egypt. 
 Sixth burden vs. Desert of the Sea. This Babylon v. 9. 
 Sea — Euphrates. This term sometimes applied to large 
 rivers, especially such as overflow their banks. Desert is a 
 reference to what it is to become. This second judgment 
 vs. Babylon goes beyond previous one since 1. Persia is 
 added to Media as an instrument. 2. The capture is pre- 
 dicted as happening on a night of festivity. Seventh burden 
 vs. Dennah. Evidently means Edom, from resemblance to- 
 name Idumea. It has reference to condition to which it will 
 come, i. e., silence and destruction. Eighth burden vs. Ara- 
 
77 
 
 bia. Ninth burden vs. the valley of vision — Jerusalem 
 where visions and prophecies were given. Thus both 
 branches of Israel are included in these judgments, ten tribes 
 in first under Damascus : Judah in second under valley of 
 vision. Reason for judgment vs. Jerusalem is her associa- 
 tion with Edom. This is followed by prediction concerning 
 two individuals, a. 15-19 Shebna, whose degradation and 
 exile is foretold as leader and example of the sinning people. 
 b. 20-25 Eliakin, whose exaltation and establishment is fore- 
 told as type of faithful remmmt. Tenth burden vs. Tyre, 
 stating time of her remaining under judgment, with promise 
 of restoration. Ch. 24, general judgment on whole world, 
 resulting in triumph of God's people and manifestation of 
 his glory. Chs. 25-27. Judah's triumph and God's glory, 
 an advance. 
 
 {C) Chs. 28-35. As the time for the Assyrian invasion 
 came on, the warnings and the comforts needed to be re- 
 peated. Ch. 28 : 1-6, gives the overthrow of kingdom of 
 ten tribes, followed in rest of section by rebukes and threat- 
 enings of Judah, with interjected promises of Assyria's over- 
 throw and Judah's deliverance. This section begins with 
 woe. 28 : 1 is first date and Samaria is still standing. The 
 first woe is against Samaria, a proud city, drunken. In that 
 day " the Lord of Hosts shall he for a crown of glory." 4 : 2 
 the parallel passage supplies key for 28 : 1. The branch of 
 Jehovah is not then prosperity of an abundant harvest. 
 Where priests and prophets are so associated that they err, 
 they are swallowed up. Isaiah tells them they can have 
 what they want, but God will speak to them in strange 
 tongues, in precept upon precept, line upon line. Foreign 
 invasion shall issue in your destruction. 
 
 They claimed to have made an understanding with death 
 80 that they would not be harmed — meaning that they had 
 made an alliance with Egypt. They have broken alliance 
 with Assyria and gone to Egypt against all their vows. The 
 Lord says, I have a " foundation," seeing that those who 
 trusted God need not hasten to leave this foundation. Judg- 
 ment is his. They were exposing themselves to his right- 
 eous judgment. Your alliance with Egypt will not save you 
 for Assyria will overcome. This frightful scourge which As- 
 syria brings will be the word of God to you. You are too 
 long for your bed. Be ye not scoffers. The cornerstone is 
 rightly applied to Jews by Peter and Paul. The section 
 closed appropriately in ch. 28. Everything is done in order. 
 
78 
 
 Ploughman don't plough for sake of ploughing. He sows 
 later and all preparatory work is for sake of the grain. 
 When grain is ripe and gathered, it is not threshed indis- 
 criminately. He is not threshing for sake ol threshing, but 
 he afterwards grinds it for bread. So Jeliovah has an end 
 in view, and maybe the treatment may be severe, but it 
 must be for the good of the people. 
 
 Isaiah listened to as if it was nothing, but they worked 
 in silence, so that Isaiah would not see them and give God's 
 will against them. This pretending to* honor God, and yet 
 not doing it, is to call forth a marvelous work : — woe to 
 them concealing their plans from the Lord. He tells them 
 that in a short time there will be great changes. The meek 
 and poor would rejoice in the Lord after the wise n.en should 
 perish. After overthrow they would recognize God. We 
 have traced their hidden scheme to trust Egypt through two 
 stages. 
 
 [D) Chs. 36, 37. This section is wound up by these two 
 chapters which give the fact of the invasion by Ass3'ria. 
 Isaiah's prophec}' at the time, and the miraculous deliverance. 
 
 3. (A) Chs. 38, 39, are introductory. They give the 
 prophet's ministry. After such a judgment, and snch a de- 
 liverance, it might be hoped that the people would turn to 
 the Lord, But it is not so. A better prince than Ahaz is 
 now on the throne, and yet Hezekiah had not escaped the 
 taint of former kings. His heart was lifted up with pride, 
 and to the messengers sent to him by the king of Babylon 
 with messages of congratulation that he had recovered, he 
 shows the treasures of the Lord's house. This display of 
 the treasures served to excite the cupidity of the king, and 
 caused him to take them away from Judah. The people are 
 not allowed to gloat over the defeat of Sennacherib. As far 
 as this was allowed, it was committed to Nf.hum. Isaiah 
 announces the Babylonish captivity. From this time he de- 
 votes himself to the work of comfort ; not here and there a 
 ray of comfort, as in the preceding part of the prophecy, 
 but in the great body of what follows. The captivity was 
 so dreadful that some great thing was needed to prevent the 
 true people of God from falling into utter despair. So 
 Isaiah, a prophet of a former age, prepared the way for them. 
 It is for a like reason that Daniel was sent to tell the times 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, which were to come long after. 
 Isaiah tells of God's great purpose respecting his people. 
 He shows the occasion, design and issue of their suffering. 
 
79 
 
 Their sufferings (a) arose not from God's weakness but their 
 sins, (6) were designed to lit them for and further the accom- 
 plishment of their task, (c) would issue in the blessedness 
 and glory. These topics are intermingled in the chapter. 
 
 (B) Chs. 40-66. Each division, of nine chapters each, 
 is distinguished, sometimes by a particular event, without 
 being exclusively occupied by it. Babylon and Cyrus are 
 nowhere else named. This election is divided into — 
 
 (1.) Chs. 40-48, Deliverance from exile, characteristic 
 chap. 45. (2.) Chs. 49-57, Sufferings and triumph of Mes- 
 siah, ch. 53. (3.) Chs. 58-66, Future glory of God's people, 
 ch. 60. Shadowed forth, 40 : 2. Mission of Covenant Peo- 
 ple, includes work of Messiah, both embraced under name 
 Servant of the Lord ; (a) appropriateness of title ; (b) anal- 
 ogies to seed of Abraham, the prophet, son of David, Christ 
 and His church in N. T. ; {e) N. T.— Acts 13 : 47, comp. Isa. 
 49 : 6; 2 Cor. 6:2; comp. Isa. 49 : 8; also Jer. 11 : 19; 
 comp. Isa. 53 : 7 ; (d) applicability to all the passages. Can 
 not mean Israel to the exclusion of Messiah ; (a) called Is- 
 rael 49 : 3, but distinguished from them, 42 : 6 ; 49 : 5, 6, as 
 their mediator and restorer ; (b) his atoning death, ch. 53. 
 Nor Isaiah or the prophets : (a) Mission not to Gentiles, (6) 
 nor sufferings vicarious. Nor Cyrus. Nor even Messiah 
 exclusively, for he is charged (42: 9) with unfaithfulness and 
 sin. 
 
 1. Chs. 40-48. Ch. 40, Omnipotence of Him who offers 
 deliverance, voice crying in wilderness, v. 3. Ch. 41, con- 
 trasted impotence of idols ; they can do nothing, but God 
 will raise up Cyrus and redeem His people. Ch. 42, destiny 
 of God's servant, which neither God's seeming apathy, nor 
 his own character and condition shall obstruct. Chs. 43, 44, 
 God will certainly befriend His people in spite of idols and 
 diviners. Chs. 45-47, Cyrus predicted by name, the humili- 
 ation of Babylon and the deliverance of God's captive people. 
 
 2. Chs. 49-57. Ch. 49, Servant of Lord complains of 
 want of success; he shall accomplish the salvation, not of 
 Israel only, but of the ends of the earth. The blessedness 
 thence resulting, 49 : 12 ; 66 : 8, confirmed by former bene- 
 fits, viz. : Multiplication of Abraham's seed, 51 : 2, deliver- 
 ance from Egypt, v. 9, and from Assyria, 52 : 4, and twice 
 interrupted by the sufferings of the Servant of the Lord, 50 : 
 6, and ch. 53. Blessings flowing from this vicarious death, 
 ch. 54, offered freely to all without restriction, ch. 55, ex- 
 pressly extended to sons of strangers and those ceremonially 
 
80 
 
 debarred from covenant privileges, 56 : 1-8 ; the heavy doom 
 of apostates and sinners, 56 : 9 ; 57 : 21. 
 
 3. Chs. 58-66. The wickedness and hypocrisy of the 
 people the cause of their suffering, chs. 58, 59, and call for 
 divine intervention, 59 : 16, both for mercy and vengeance, 
 bringing salvation to Zion, chs. 60-62, and judgment on 
 Edom, the type of her foes, 63: 1-6. The Servant of the 
 Lord for the last time, 61: 1-3; comp. Luke 4: 18, 19. 
 The prophet's prayer for the speedy accomplishment of these 
 things 63 : 7 ; 64 : 12. The Lord^'s answer, chs. 65, 66, the 
 wicked shall be cut oft'. God's true servants preserved and 
 blessed, new heavens and new earth, paradise restored, God's 
 people brought back, Gentiles made priests, all flesh worship. 
 Extension of salvation to Gentile foreshadowed in call of 
 Abraham, Gen. 12: 3, recognized in Mosaic period. Num. 
 14: 21, and by Psalmist, 22: 27, 28 ; 72 : 8, etc., and taught 
 with great fullness by Isaiah ; this was the design of (a) the 
 appointment of the Servant of the Lord, 42 : 1-4, 6 ; (6) the 
 exaltation to be bestowed on Israel, 2 : 2-4 ; 60 : 3 ; (c) the 
 judgments on the heathen, whether (a) the overthrow of an 
 empire aspiring to be universal, 10 : 34 ; 11 : 9 ; [b) the pun- 
 ishment of individual nations resulting in the conversion of 
 others, 18 : 7, or their own, chs. 19-23, or, (n) the judgment 
 on all nations, 24: 14, 15 ; 59: 18, 19, Represented as [a) a 
 subjugation, 11 : 14; (6) voluntary accession, 2 : 3 ; 11 : 10 ; 
 (e) rendering service, 14: 1, 2; 49: 22, 23, {d) union on an 
 equal footing, 19: 24; 56: 6, 8; 66: 21, {e) substitution in 
 place of the rejected sinners of Israel, 65: 1, 2. Expressed 
 mostly in O. T. forms; coming up to Zion, oftering sacrifices, 
 etc., yet occasional intimations of their temporary character, 
 (a) physical impossibility literally understood, 66 : 23 ; [b) 
 unessential nature of outward forms, 1 : 11-15 ; 58 : 2-7; (c) 
 removal of Levitical restrictions, 19 : 19; 64: 4, 5. 
 
 GENUINENESS OF ISAIAH. 
 
 External evidence is almost perfect for Isaiah's genuine- 
 ness. Josephus says, that Cyrus moved to liberate Israelites 
 from reading prophecy of Isaiah regarding himself. Isaiah 
 named in N. T. 22 times. Authorship of these last chapters 
 was never doubted till lately. 
 
 For correspondence of Isaiah, 2 : 2-4, and Micah, 4 : 1-3. 
 {Vide Alexander's Commentary.) Also of the four histori- 
 

 ^V^. 
 
 y^ ,t/rt ^-^A.y ^^ . ^ 
 
 1. 
 
 -^-<^ (\-, <t.<_ir,. 
 
 /X softs''- 1 
 
 I T^v, r. '. ,• /Ov t <*\ e-^t > ' 
 
 •J 
 
 '<i< ^C^ ,•/ 
 
 ...D 
 
 -^ 2^- 
 
 '/ 
 
 /^ 
 
 V 
 
 >/ ./ /c^ ^ 
 
 *:^ c <y-^li^e 
 
 
 • •A c-~ 
 
 . ^ /.5 rf-7 cy 
 
81 
 
 cal chapters, 36-39, and 2 Kings 18 : 13 ; 20 : 19. The bur- 
 den of Moab, chs. 15 and 16 (see 16: 13, 14,) in consequence 
 of its closing verses has been thought to be the production 
 of a prophet older than Isaiah, and simply re-affirmed by 
 him. It is more probable that Isaiah here repeated an earlier 
 prophecy of his own. This prophecy is not in form, but 
 substantially what has been predicted by prophets before him. 
 The question of genuineness is very different from this. 
 Every prophecy from the beginning to the close of the book 
 which implies a foresight of the Babylonish exile, is said to 
 be spurious on the ground that such foresight is contrary to 
 nature e. g., two burdens of Babylon, 13 and 14 chs., 21: 
 1-10, and the comfort (40-66 chs.) given to the people of God. 
 
 Reply. — 1. Skeptics from a disbelief of prophetic fore- 
 sight have no influence with those who are Christians. It 
 is simply a begging of the question. 
 
 2. Objectors have not a pretext on any external ground. 
 The entire book claims to be the book of Isaiah. So as- 
 serted in:)Chron. 32:32. Alluded to in Ecclesiasticus 48: 
 22-25. Of the 21 times in which Isaiah is mentioned in the 
 N. T., 11 are from this section. No MSS. or versions leave 
 them out. The book has been in Jewish custody from the 
 earliest times, and no doubt has been expressed until recent 
 times. They must have guarded it carefully. 
 
 3 The allegations that these sections differ in style 
 from the other parts of the book have been made in sub- 
 serviency to the objections already named. There was no 
 discovery of diiierence in style for 24 centuries, and it was 
 first brought forward when the book was given up on other 
 grounds. What one critic condemns as inelegant, another 
 lauds to the skies. They are quite at variance as to whether 
 these sections differ from one another. They all agree that 
 they differ from Isaiah's style in other places. When they 
 undertake to point to specific ditierences in style, they 
 bring up such words and phrases as do not occur in other 
 parts of the book. This may be true if it be allowed that 
 nothing is to be accepted which is found in one book of a 
 writer, but not in another. As far as there is any differ- 
 ence of style in Isaiah, it may be accounted for by the dif- 
 ference of subject and occasion, or diiierence of purpose, if 
 it be admitted that the last seven chapters had a different 
 purpose. These differences of style are the variations of 
 style of a writer of great genius. The changes are due 
 partly to advancing years. The objection of the existence 
 
82 
 
 of words and phrases which indicate a later time than that 
 of Isaiah, is established by most uncertain data. Supposi- 
 titious senses are laid to them. Words which occur in no 
 other writings of that time are said to belong to another 
 period. Sometimes words are found to agree with prophets 
 of an earlier period, and these are rejected. 
 
 4. It is impossible to account for the prophecies in 
 question being tound in the canon if they were not his own. 
 They were either put there innocently, or by fraud, but how 
 a writer in the time of the exile could succeed in passing 
 one of his writing for those of Isaiah, which were at the 
 time of the formation of the canon is unimaginable, and the 
 greater the number of writers the greater the complexity. 
 How these chapters could have been innocently put into 
 the (janon, it is impossible to see. How writings could have 
 appeared in the time of Isaiah, and been mistaken for his is 
 inconceivable. This difficulty is greatly exaggerated by the 
 number of spurious passages. If these passages were taken 
 away the symmetry of the book would be exceedingly 
 marred. It is objected to the two burdens of Babylon, chs. 
 13, 14, 21 : 1-10, that the exile is not predicted, but implied,^ 
 therefore the writer must have lived in the midst of the ex- 
 ile. Ajisiver. — The prophets often speak of future events as 
 if they were present, their certainty is so great. The exile 
 had been already foretold by Isaiah, chap. 5. It had been 
 foretold by Moses in Lev. 26. Isaiah in ch. 39 declares who 
 the agents of this calamity were to be. He speaks of the 
 birth, death and sufferings of the Messiah as past. Are we,, 
 therefore, to conclude that these portions were written after 
 the death of Christ ? 
 
 Positive Proofs of Genuineness.— (1) The title of 
 the first of these burdens (13: 1) expressly alludes to Isaiah. 
 It was put there by the prophet himself, for (a) the title was 
 necessary to the understanding of the prophecy. (6) From 
 analogy of other burdens, (c) Such enigmatical titles would 
 not likely have come from a forger. (2.) 11: 24-27, The 
 concluding part of this burden is admitted to belong to 
 Isaiah. Critics have in vain attempted to find a place for 
 this passage in other portions of the prophecy. It refers to 
 Assyria, but where is there mention of Assyria at the time 
 of the exile, when Assyria had passed away long before ? 
 (3.) 21 : 1-6, By the general structure of the burdens, and 
 from the enigmatical title, introducing the figure of the 
 watchman. The structure of these burdens is like all the 
 

 /' ' 
 
 
 ^. 
 
 -^r 
 
 ""V ' 
 
 '-/■- 
 
 ■ / y 
 
 r '. ^ i 
 
 --7 ^^- 
 
 
 o-y^y*~-* <-^ 
 
 p^ 
 
 ^-^^ 
 
 ^T. CV^ 
 
 / ^c 
 
 ^ ■ / S" 
 
 /J •- y , 
 
 y • '"~' 
 
 /; 
 
 
 <"^ < 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 'O 
 
 "^ ^ • ^<y j~7 ■ ^ 
 
 ^J ■ 'c > : / --^ ? 
 
 -^^ ' // . <^' ? ,/6- i,> "^^w'u^ ,; 
 
 
 2— *, ;, ' 
 
 .5 ^;7 
 
 -/"/ -. >^"> ■ 
 
^■h; 
 
 t^.. 
 
 i~~--a 
 
 ■^L^A^,*^- -^ 
 
 F 
 
 i 
 
 f^- 
 
 
 
 ^4^ 
 
 
 
 T 
 
 /^ 
 
 A f ''-^ 
 
 
 /^.--^ 
 
 ^7x^/72^^ /v-.*^/.^ /C^lJ.<_^ 1^ r^^l^-^f 
 
83 
 
 others, therefore they were written by Isaiah, (4.) The 
 prophetic foresight will not be obviated by transferring him 
 to the latest period possible — exile. Even when Cyrus was 
 before the walls of Babylon, no one would believe he could 
 overcome the city. 
 
 Objections to 40-66— (I.) The people are represented 
 as already in exile, but (a) this is possible far less frequently 
 than is alleged. Those passages which refer to the exile or 
 return are lew, and many which are said to relate to it, refer 
 to some other result ; e. g , '■'■ highway " refers to God's prep- 
 aration for conversion of the Gentiles ; "release of prisoner" 
 — release from trouble, " pools of water" — joyful changes 
 of any kind, and vvhen return from exile is promised it is a 
 return from all quarters, not merely from Babylon, [b] this 
 objection is inconsistent with the fact that the prophet urges 
 his prediction of coming events in proof of God's foreknowl- 
 edge and superiority over idols. 41 : 22-27; 43 : 9-12; 45 : 
 3; 46 : 9-11, [c) These passages show a better state of 
 things existing before the exile. The temple was still stand- 
 ing,^66 : 6-20; 58 : 2-6; 43 : 24 ; 65 : 11. Idolatry was 
 still existing, 66 : 17 ; 65 : 11 ; and in such forms as more 
 probably derived from Egypt than from Babylon. The peo- 
 ple are courting alliance with foreign monarchs ; their judg- 
 ment is represented as future. The critics explain this by 
 assuming the record of these facts to be an earlier fragment. 
 But this is begging the question, (d) The force of the ob- 
 jection is derived from confounding the ideal with the actual 
 present. Such is the assurance of the prophet that he re- 
 gards these events as actually present. That these events 
 were regarded by the prophet as really future is seen from 
 the fact ; (1) that the terms are too broad to be confined to 
 exile; (2) that some other deliverance than return from 
 Babylonish exile is referred to. For the evil from which 
 the deliverance foreshadowed and the glory which followed 
 it are different ; (3) specific reference to Babylon and the 
 exile are singularly few, but this could hardly be the case if 
 the writer was writing during the exile. Admitted that the 
 specific predictions with reference to Cjn'us are remarkable, 
 yet they are few and the whole description is general. If 
 they were uttered before the event, there is prevision whether 
 Isaiah wrote them or not ; (4) the writer transports himself 
 to various points of time; e. g., exile, fall of Babylon, time 
 of Messiah, time of Israel's glory. But confessed not writ- 
 ten after the latest point. Therefore prevision is involved. 
 
84 
 
 (2.) The predictions are plain till close of the exile, but 
 vague thereafter, which shows the standpoint of the writer. 
 But(l) though the prediction of the fact of the exile audits 
 end are sufficiently clear to be proof of the divine foreknowl- 
 edge, yet the expressions are mostly general. While on the 
 other hand, what is predicted of Christ and his work is more 
 specific than the definite predictions referring to the exile. 
 (2) This apparent change of style is to be accounted for by 
 the fact that prophecy is the disclosure of just so much of 
 the future as will furnish useful lessons. But in this latter 
 part ot the ministry ot the prophet, the thing most neces 
 sary was to prepare the people for the next event of God's 
 judgment, viz: their actual overthrow by Babylon and ulti- 
 mate glory ot Israel. So the language with reference to this 
 event needs to be plain; (3) in so far as the fact alleged is 
 true, it rather makes against the critic. For it would be 
 naturally inferred from the statements of Cyrus and return 
 being followed immediately by Messianic predictions, that 
 Messianic period was to come at once. But if these predic- 
 tions were written after these events such an idea would 
 have been impossible, for the poor realization of any glory 
 in the return would give the idea that Messianic period was 
 not at hand. But if written before these events it involves 
 prevision. If, however, written by Isaiah as supernatural 
 predictions the juxtaposition is accounted for, because in all 
 his prophecies Messiah is the background. (4.) Josephus, 
 (Ant. XI. 1, 2,) says that these predictions were shown to 
 Cyrus and were among the things that induced him to rescue 
 the people of God, which would account for his restoration 
 of them. This corroborated Ezra 1 : 2. (5.) The argument 
 from expressions peculiar to this section is balanced by the 
 fact that there are expressions here, which are found in ac- 
 knowledged parts of the book, c. g., Holy One of Israel, 12 
 times in previous [)arts; 14 times here. 
 
 3. The theme is one which could have had no interest to 
 Isaiah or his contemporaries. He speaks of evils which then 
 had no existence, whereas the people wanted release from 
 present evils of Syria and Assyria. But (1) we hold that 
 this is a question that is to be decided only by a survey of 
 his writings, with relation to the times in which he lived and 
 wrote. Now, at the opening of his ministry, which was in 
 the prosperous times of Josiah, he declares future judgments 
 which he afterwards unfolds. When the first blow (Syria) 
 ■came, he declared its failure and yet announced a far more 
 
7 
 
 CLu^ 
 
 ^r. 
 
 o^^^jud 
 
 
 '- e. C-^ ... 
 
 " 0* -sT 
 
 THE EQOK| OF MQ8B 6. 
 
 BY PROFESSOR W. H, GRKKN, LL.D., OF PBINCK- 
 TOJST THEOIiOaiCAIi SEMINARY. 
 
 The Unity of Isaiah. 
 
 After the Book of Isaiah had passed as the genuine 
 production of the prophet for twenty-five hundred 
 years unchallenged and unsuspected, the critics pro- 
 fess to have discovered within the last century that it 
 contains two distinct series of prophecies, diverse in 
 occasion, character, and style, and proceeding from 
 different authors who lived a century and a half 
 apart. The one series, amounting to not quite half 
 of the book, is confessed to be beyond question the 
 work of the prophet to whom the whole has hereto- 
 fore been uniformly ascribed. Theother series em- 
 braces every prophecy, from the beginning of the 
 book to its close, which implies or has been thought 
 to imply a foresight of the Babylonish exile. The 
 suspected passages are accordingly the two burdens 
 of Babylon (xiii, 1-xiv, 23, and xxi, 1-10), the denunci- 
 ation and triumph (chapters ixiv-sxvii, and xxxiv, 
 xxxv), and the comfort to the people in prospect of 
 the exile (chapters xl-Ixvi). Some hesitating voices 
 have also declared against the burden of Egypt 
 (chapterxix), on the assumption that it describes a 
 state of things subsequent to the time of Isaiah; 
 others withdraw all objection on the ground that it 
 can be brought within the life of Isaiah by referring 
 it to an Assyrian invasion. Some cast away the 
 burden upon Tyre (chapter xxiii), because of the 
 mention of the Chaldeans (verse 13); others save the 
 chapter by ejecting that troublesome word, or by 
 supposing that the Chaldeans are here spoken of, not 
 as an independent power, but as subjugated by the 
 
 
Assyrians. According "^^Dr. Driver {Literature of 
 the Old Testament, page 205), xxi, 1-10, is by Isaiah 
 if it refers to "a siege of Babylon by the Assyrians in 
 Isaiah's own time;" but if it refers to "the conquest 
 of Babylon by Cyras," it is to be ascribed"toa prophe 
 et living toward the close of the exile." 
 
 This vacillation of the critics shows that the one 
 conclusive consideration with them is that no pas- 
 sage can be admitted to be genuine if thi3~lmplies 
 the admission of superhuman foresight. All other 
 arguments are subordinate to this. Arguments 
 which are held to prove a passage spurious by such 
 critics as think it to imply a supernatural knowledge 
 of the future, are set aside as insufficient by those 
 who fancy that they can so explain it as to avoid this 
 implication. And the same critic will attach no im- 
 portance to arguments of spuriousness in one pas- 
 sage which he urges as convincing in another, if in 
 the former passage this expedient is not necessary to 
 escape the evidence of supernatural foresight, and in 
 the latter it is. 
 
 It is n^tj)reten^ed that there is any external proof 
 of the late date of these disputed chapters. So far as 
 we have any means of tracing the Book of Isaiah, 
 they would seem to have been always included in it. 
 All existing manuscripts and all ancient versions 
 exhibit the Book of Isaiah without variation precise- 
 ly as we now have it, the disputed portions as well 
 as the rest. Ancient authorities referring to the 
 book make no discrimination, and manifestly accept 
 the whole as equally undoubted. There is explicit 
 testimony to Isa.ah's authorship in Isa. i, 1, wEIch is 
 the title of the whole book, and a specfal{testimony 
 in regard to chapters xiii and xiv in xiii, 1. The au- 
 thor or compiler of Kings, in adopting Isa. xxxvi- 
 xxxix into his book, gives his confirmation to the 
 fact that Isaiah predicted the Babylonish exile 
 (2 Kings XX, 16-18). "The vision of Isaiah the prophet, 
 the son of Adjcz," is referred to, as well known, in 
 2 Chron. xxxii, 32. It is distinctly alluded to in 
 Eccles. xlviii, 22-25, where special reference is made 
 tcTt'he disputed chapters. The iangnage of the decree 
 of Cyrus (Ezra i, 2) contains an evident allusion to 
 Isa. xliv, 28; xTv, 13. And Josepjius (Antigitities, xi, 
 1. 2) says that Cyrus was moved to restore the Jews 
 to their own land and to aid in rebuilding their tem- 
 ple by reading these prophecies of Isaiah respecting 
 himself. When the Greek Sep_tungint Version was 
 made the Book of Isaiah contained precisely what it 
 does now. Isaiah is spoken of by name twenhy-two 
 times in the New Testament, in eTeven of which he is 
 connected with citations from chapters xl-lxvi. 
 
 The denial of Isaiah's authorship of the prophecies 
 in question rests upon the three_f olio wing proposi- 
 tions, namely: 
 
 1. The theme of these prophecies is one that could 
 have been of no interest to Isaiah or to his contem- 
 porariea. They promise deliverance from evils which 
 then had no existence, and from foes which were 
 not the real foes that the people had then to dread. 
 They craved present relief from Assyrian oppressions 
 and invasions, net restoration from a Babylonish 
 exile which had not yet taken place, and of which 
 there was noimmedjate prospect, 
 
 2, This exile is not predicted, but assumed as then 
 Actaitlif exifltiag. All tfes expiessio&s saipioyed re- 
 

 85 
 
 lormidable blow from Assyria, which, however, would not 
 be successful. As neither of these was to accomplish this 
 judgment, it was natural that he should show by whom it 
 was to be accomplished, which he does by declaring the 
 overthrow of Babylon. Yet this is not to be complete. 
 Thus we see (a) that in these acknowledged portions of the 
 book the prophet speaks of a distant evil, when another one 
 was present before the people. Therefore a similar method 
 cannot be made an argument against the genuineness of this 
 section. (6) That all these predictions of judgments and 
 ultimate deliverances, are but development of one theme, 
 and since same ideas of deliverance and judgment are pres- 
 ent in this section, the presumption is that it is the following- 
 out of the same theme. (2.) On the contrary-, it was a theme 
 of intense interest to Israel, since it concerned their national 
 existence and the accomplishment of God's promise. 
 
 4. The theme has reference to an event too remote to 
 have alfected Israel. (Captivity.) But (1.) This is assum- 
 ing that the critic has the right to determine the time over 
 wliich proi)hecy is to range. (2.) Messianic prophecies of the 
 book relate to an event much further removed than this. 
 (3.) On the hypothesis that these are the real declarations of 
 God, the propriety of their relating to a far distant event is 
 seen. (4.) We must remember that, while, from the develop- 
 ment of histor}', this event appears far removed from the 
 time of the prophet, yet its date was not known to prophet 
 or people at that time. As far as they knew the judgment 
 vt^as imminent. (5 ) This argument shows the inconsistency 
 of the theory, and since the very absence of remoteness is 
 urged by them against the inspiration of the book. 
 
 PREDICTIONS OF OLD TESTAMENT AS TO 
 SUFFERINGS OF THE MESSIAH. 
 
 They are not first revealed to Isaiah, but are really made 
 known from the first promise in the garden. Then they 
 are brought t)ut in those Psalms which refer to the righteous 
 sufterer. They reach their fullest development in Isaiah. 
 Lowly origin ; despised of men ; obstacles to his work ; per- 
 sonal violence. After Isaiah they are taken up by Daniel. 
 Cut oft' for the people (9: 24-26.) Then by Zechariah. 
 Lowly (9 : 9) ; an object of aversion (11 : 8) ; sold for silver 
 (11 : 13) ; smitten by a sword (13 : 7). Isaiah combines the 
 various methods of all the O. T. prophets. He shows results 
 
86 
 
 viewed («) from the appointment of Israel and M. as servant 
 of Jehovah; (h) as judgments on the heathen. Either judg- 
 ments on individual nations, which would bring the rest to 
 acknowledge God, or judgments on all, which would bring 
 them all to God. 
 
 He shows the relations of the Gentiles to the Jews sub- 
 jugation (11: 14), voluntary accession (60: 3), a rendering 
 of service (14: 2), union on a level (56: 6, 8), substitution in 
 place of Israel (65 : 1, 2). Their coming is mostly described 
 under the forms of the ancient ritual, while its spiritual 
 character is shown by coupling it with physical impos- 
 sibilities. 
 
 NAHUM. 
 
 Name.—" A comfort." Called " the Elkoshite." Proba- 
 bly not a patronymic, hut a local designation — the place 
 where he was born or lived. But Elkosh is nowhere nien- 
 tioned in the Bible. Jerome and Eusebius, — a small village 
 in Galilee. Some — same as Capernaum (village of Nahum). 
 Both are mere conjectures. 
 
 Date. — Nowhere distinctly stated. 1. From its position 
 among minor prophets it might be assigned any place be- 
 tween reigns of Hezekiah and Josiah. 2. The inferences 
 made rest really upon the interpretation of 1 : 9-14. Some 
 sa}^ this refers to the Captivity of Manasseh by king of As- 
 syria, and infer that it was the last invasion by Assyria. But 
 (a) it merely means that when God shall judge their oppres- 
 sors they shall be overthrown, not necessarily that they shall 
 never come again (6) It is scarcely probable that the prophet 
 speaking in time of Mana&seh, would merely refer to the 
 coming deliverance without allusion to the kings, (c) Ac- 
 cording to this hypothesis he would be the only prophet in 
 the reign of Manasseh, which reign, with that of Amos, is 
 regarded as without prophecy, merely separating between 
 the Assyrian and Chaldean Periods. 
 
 A better interpretation refers the passage to the invasion 
 of Sennacherib in the reign of Hezekiah. Proof : — («) The 
 bonds that are to be broken are not those of an individual 
 (Manasseh) but of Judah,the people. (6) The circumstances 
 of that invasion seem to be specially referred to. e. g. Evil 
 counsel of Rabshekali v. 11. Sudden overthrow of As- 
 syrians. V. 12. Murder of Sennacherib. Then the only 
 
garding it imply, not that it was anticipated in the 
 distant future, but that it was the veritable present. 
 The time and circumstances of the writer, as in- 
 ferred from his production, are not those of Isaiah, 
 but of the later years of the Babylonish exile. 
 
 3. The style and diction of these chapters are 
 wholly unliJse those of the chapters which are ad- 
 mitted to be Isaiah's. 
 
 In opposition to which we maintain: 
 
 1. The theme of these prophecies is such as might 
 be expected from Isaiah, and forms a proper com- 
 plement to his other revelations. • 
 
 2. The revelation here made is in analogy with his 
 other disclosures of the future, and those of other 
 prophets, and is such as could not have been written 
 during or after the events referred to. It bears in- 
 ternal evidence of being a prophetic and not an histor 
 ical survey of those events. 
 
 3. The style and diction offer no obstruction to 
 their being regarded as the geauine productions of 
 Isaiah. 
 
 I. The question whether the^themej)f the disputed 
 prophecies is an appropriate one for Isaiah is not to 
 be decided magisterially or capriciously, but after a 
 careful survey of his writings in their relation to the 
 times in which he lived. Early in his ministry he 
 predicts the utter desolation of the land (vi, 11-13) by 
 foreign foes (v, 26-30). When the first wave of ca- 
 lamity broke over Judah in the reign of Ahaz he de- 
 clared to the territied king and people that the in- 
 vasion by Syria and Ephraim fwoul d be unsuccessful ^ 
 and would soon be over (vii, 4-7), and that Assyria, 
 which would press Judah more sorely still, ^'ouid 
 likewise fail (viii, 9, 10). Itjs precisely in the line of 
 these revelations that he should make known what 
 power it was which was destined to accomplish the 
 pjedicced desolation. As be had alleviated the fears j 
 respecting Syria by pointing out that it was not ■ 
 Syria in the present so much as Assyria in the future 
 that was to be dreaded, so in prospecc of the evils to 
 be wrought by Assyria he diverts attention from them 
 to the incomparably greater disaster to be wrought 
 by Babylon. As he gave assurance of the defeat of 
 Syri.a by declaring the downfall of its more formi- 
 dable successor (viii, 7-10; x, 6-34), so he builds a 
 fresh argument of the overthrow of Assyria (xiv, 24r- 
 27) by exhibiting (chapters xiii, xiv) the certainty 
 and completeness of the downfall of Babylon, which 
 was to arise upon its ruins. As he chastised the 
 dependence of Ahaz upon Assyria by declaring that 
 Assyria would be a direr source of evil than that 
 from which he was then seeking relief, so la like 
 manner he chastises Hezekiah's vain display to the 
 messengers of the King of Babylon (chapter xxxix) 
 by announcing that it was from this very Babylon 
 that Judah's overthrow should come. And as Isaiah's 
 previous predictions of foreign oppression are uni- 
 formly followed by promises of the ultimate deliver- 
 ance and triumph of Israel and the downfall of their 
 foes (ix, 1-7; xi, xii), so in the case of Babylon and 
 every other oppressor (chapters xiv, xxiv-xxril, 
 xxxiv, XXXV, xl-lxvi). 
 
 When now in the book ascribed to Isaiah we find 
 this series of prophecies relating to Babylon inter- 
 mingled with and attached to the other series relat- 
 ing to Assyria, and discover that both alike are but i 
 the more explicit unfolding of what was already in- 
 
T 
 
 i 
 
 volved in his initial predictions (chapters i-yi), and 
 that they are in all respects parallel the one to the 
 other, that they are based on the same principles, 
 inculcate the same lessons, and are developed in the 
 same identical manner, by what right can it be 
 affirmed that the one theme is appropriate to Isaiah 
 and that the prophecies which treat of It are un- 
 doubtedly his; but that the other series of prophecies 
 must be denied to be his because the theme, which la 
 in its essence identical with the preceding, Is one 
 which Isaiah could not have treated because It 
 lacked interest for him and his contemporaries? 
 
 But it is^ claimed that the event contemplated was 
 too remote to have affected either prophet or people 
 in Isaiah's days. Cyrus and the fall of Babylon and 
 the return from captivity were a century and a half 
 away. Who then is to define the limit of time over 
 which prophecy may range? Isaiah's predictions of 
 Messiah, whether in his humiliation or in his king- 
 dom and glory, look lo a period still more remote. 
 And although a long interval did, in fact, elapse be- 
 fore the Babylonish exile and the restoration from It, 
 v,the existence of such an interval and the length of it 
 were not revealed. For aught that the people or the 
 prophet knew, these were imminent, and might take 
 place at auy(time after the respite of fifteen years 
 promised to Hezekiah (xxxviii, 5; xxxix, 8). So far 
 is the prophecy from indicating the remoteness of the 
 events in question, even in the view of the objectors 
 to its genuineness, that the absence of any such 
 Indication is their chief argument against It, the 
 force of which we shall presently examine. When 
 and how all had its historical fulfillment is a very 
 proper question, if the matter under investigation 
 were the divine origin and inspiration of the prophecy. 
 But^whether it was ever fulfilled at all, and if so, 
 when, is quite irrelevant now, when the question be- 
 fore us is solely that of Isaiah's authorship. If these 
 predictions had turned out to be vague, unfounded 
 anticipations, to which no future had ever corre- 
 sponded, the present objectors would have found 
 little difficulty in admitting them to have been from 
 Isaiah. If the subject be approached with no pre- 
 possessions as to the nature of prophecy, and none 
 either for or against the possibility or reality of 
 supernatural inspiration, the theme of the disputed 
 prophecies can create no surprise. It is in strict 
 analogy with his acknowledged prophecies, and is 
 their appropriate sequel. The fact that they were 
 fulfilled long after, with an accuracy and a minute- 
 ness which show them to have been inspired of God, 
 can surely not be urged by any candid man as a 
 reason for discrediting them. 
 
 Moreover,when his contemporary, Mlcah, explicitly 
 predicts the desolation of Jeru8alLm,"The Babylonish 
 captivity, and deliverance from it, wiih what pro- 
 priety can it be affirmed that these topics are unsuita- 
 ble in Isaiah? Micah soughtTb- startle his auditors 
 out of their presumptuous confidence by declaring 
 to them (tii, 13): "ZiOQ shall for your sake be plowed 
 as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the 
 mountain ol' the house as the high places of a for- 
 est." And to the people personified as "the daughter 
 of Zion" he announces (iv, 10), "Thou shalt go forth 
 out of the city, and shalt dwell iu the field, and shalt 
 come even UDto Babylon; there shalt thou be rescued; 
 there shall the Iiord redeem thee from the ha&d of 
 
question remains as to whether it was before or after the 
 iirst invasion. If aftei", then the preterites are historical ; if 
 before, they are propljetical. 
 
 Inferences have also been drawn from the mention of 
 the capture of No-Amraon, (Thebes) 3: 8-10. But the date 
 is uncertain. 
 
 Structure. — Double title. 1: 1. Subject, the burden 
 of Nineveh : author — the book of the vision of Nahum, the 
 Elkoshite. Contents divi^ied into 3 parts, (a) Ch. 1. God 
 coming to judgment: the object being Nineveh. (6) ch. 2. 
 Overthrow of Nineveh is exhibited to the prophet. Prelim- 
 inary of the siege, v. 2, 3. Assault, 4, 5. Ineffectual defence, 
 6-8. Sack, 9. Resulting desolation, 10-12. Pledge of 
 Jehovah for its fullment, 13. (c) Ch. 3. Repetition of the 
 same subject in which the act is justified by giving reasons 
 for it in form of charges against the city. Crime and fraud, 
 V. 1-3. Whoredoms and witchcrafts, 4-7. i. e., the political 
 and commercial management by which Nineveh reduced 
 nations to ruin. Fate of No-Ammon is told as typical of 
 Nineveh's downfall. This was fulfilled in the taking of 
 Nineveh by Cyaxeres and Nabo Polassar, 606 B. C. From 
 that date the city began to decline. The instrument is not 
 named, only described. The special mention of cavalry cor- 
 responds to Media. 
 
 CHALDEAN PERIOD. 
 
 Separated from preceding period by the ungodly reigns 
 of Manasseh, 55 yrs., Amon 2 yrs., and the people under 
 them were very bad. Manasseh was woi^se than any king 
 Israel ever had. He erected altars of idolatry, even in the 
 temple, and he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, 2 Kings 
 21: 1-16; 2 Chron. 33: 1-9. Manasseh repented and 
 reformed at the close of his reign, but with so little effect 
 upon the popular corruption that the author of Kings passes 
 it over in silence. 
 
 Such was the state of things when Josiah, at 8 years of 
 age, came to the throne. At 12 years of age, he began to 
 purge the land of idolatry. At 18 years he repaired God's 
 house, and abolished idolatry. After 31 years of reign he 
 was slain at Megiddo. Four kings followed, and all were 
 wicked. Of these, the first and last were sons of Josiah by 
 different mothers. Jehoahaz, 3 mos., was carried to Egypt, 
 
88 
 
 and died there. Jehoiakim, 11 yrs. ; he was placed over the 
 kingdom by the king of Egypt; he exceeded the others in 
 wickedness. In the fourth year, Nebuchadnezzar completed 
 his preparation, and captured Jerusalem, Jer. 46 : 2. The 
 first deportation of exiles was at this time, and the 70 yrs. 
 captivity must be reckoned from this time. The city still 
 continued for some years. The rebellion of Jehoiakin (3 
 mos.) called for a new demonstration on the part of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar. Zedekiah was a weak prince, in fear of the 
 nobles of the land. He did not protect Jeremiah, or obey 
 his message. His reign of 11 yrs. terminated with the 
 destruction of the city. 
 
 Observation. — 1. This period is distinguished from the 
 preceding by the greatly increased and increasing corrup- 
 tion. Several signs of this : [a) The character of the kings 
 was an influential cause of the state of things. In the former 
 period Ahaz is the only wicked king; in this, Josiah is the 
 only good one. And even in his time the idolatry and cor- 
 ruption were only put down for a time. When this was past 
 they became worse than ever. (/>) Obduracy in the face of 
 judgment. In the former period, on the approach of the 
 Assyrians, Hezekiah went in sackcloth, and in prayer to 
 God. But now Jehudi (Jer. 86 : 23, 24) cut in pieces the roll 
 of Jeremiah, and threw it into the fire. Zedekiah refused to 
 obey the prophets, though the enemy was before the city, 
 Jeremiah, chs. 37, 38. And the people were confirmed in 
 evil, Jer. 44: 17, 18. (a) Persecution and martyrdom of the 
 prophets of God. The former pro|»hets complained that the 
 people had not obeyed their messages, but there was no 
 violence done them. Even judgments of which they were 
 forewarned were defied. Is. 5 : 19; Amos 5 : 18 ; 7 : 12, 18. 
 Now thev are the subjects of every form of abuse, 2 Chron. 
 36: 16; Jer. 26: 20-23. (c?) Prevalence and influence of 
 false prophets. The existence of false prophets was intimated 
 in the previous period, but now they appear with an influence 
 and a power such as they never had before. By their 
 promises they break the force of the messages of the true 
 prophets, Jer. 28. This is an index of corruption, especially 
 of the noble classes, [e) Presumptuous trust in covenant 
 privileges, even while disregarding the conditions of promise, 
 Jer. 7 : 4. Even the captivity of the ten tribes instead of 
 confirming to them the threats and warnings of the true 
 prophets, bolstered their conceit, because the fact of their 
 preservation thus far proved God's special favor. And Jo- 
 
thine enemies." These predictions are not only 
 attributed to Micah in the book which bears his 
 name, but his utterance of the former has besides 
 the attestation of Jer. xxvi, 18. And this is the more 
 significant in its bearing on the subject now before 
 us, as there is in many respects an intimate relation 
 betAveen the Books of Micab and Isaiah. Isaiah bor- 
 rowed the theme of his discourse (chatters ii-iv) 
 from Micah iv, 1-3, which immediately follows the 
 prediction of the desolation of Jerusalem and the 
 temple. And it is not surprising that he should else- 
 where dwell upon that great catastrophe which 
 Micah so unambiguously announces. 
 
 II. It is argued that these prophecies belong to the 
 period, not of Isaiah, but of the exile, because the 
 exile is not predicted as future, but presupposed as 
 then existing; and while their statements are dehaite 
 and accurate respecting what took place untU near 
 the close of the exile, all is vague beyond it, and has 
 no correspondence with subsequent history. The 
 real fact is that the character of these prophecies 
 shows them to be predictive anticipation, and not * 
 historical reminiscence. They are not spoken out of \ 
 the actually existing exile by way of descripton or 
 retrospect, but out of the midst of foreseen tribula- 
 tions and distresses. That these calamities are really 
 future to the writer, and not past or present, is ap- 
 parent from various considerations. 
 
 1. They are not speciQcally nor only the Baby- 
 lonish exile. The expressions used are for the most 
 part general.'^and are quite as applicable to other 
 calamities and distresses. Thus, in chapters xl-lxvi 
 the people are described as engaged in a warfare 
 (xl, 2); passing through the waters and walking 
 through the fire Cxliii, 2); refined in the furnace of 
 affliction (xlviil, 10); tossed with tempest (liv, 11); 
 walking m darkness and having no light (1, 10); 
 robbed, snared, and in prison (xlii, 22; xllx, 9^; poor 
 and needy, seeking water when there is none (x!i, 17); 
 a barren (liv, 1), forsaken (liv, 6), and divorced wife, 
 or children sold to creditors (1, 1). The foes and 
 oppressors of the people are described by terms 
 equally general and indefinite; as, all that are in- 
 censed against thee and strive with thee (xli, 11; xlv, 
 24), that afflict thee (11, 23; Ix, 14), that contend with 
 and oppress thee (xlix, 25, 26); they are the islands, 
 and peoples, and nations (xli, 1; xliii, 9; lix, 18), the 
 uncircumcised and unclean (lii, 1). The period of 
 oppression is subsequent to that by Egypt and 
 Assyria, but not otherwise defined (lii, 4, 5). Captiv- 
 ity is referred to without saying where (li, 14), and a 
 return to Zion without saying whence (U, 11). The 
 allusion in xliii, 16-20, is to the exodus from Egypt, 
 not from Babylon.* The highway to be made in the ^ (j^ 
 desert (xl, 3) is not for the return of the people from 
 exile, but of Jehovah to His people. Exiles are to 
 return, not from Babylon merely, but from every 
 point of the compass, and from the remotest parts 
 (xliii, 5, 6; xlix, 12, as in xi, 11, which is acknowledged 
 to be from Isaiah). God's work on their behalf is 
 described as making the worm Jacob thresh moun- 
 tains (xli, 14, 15), cleaving rivers in the desert (xli, 18), 
 pouring water upon the thirsty (xliv, 3), planting 
 trees In the wilderness (xli, 19), leading the blind, 
 making darkness light, and crooked things straight 
 (xlii, 16) ; bringing forth them that are in prison and 
 in darkness (xlix, 9; li, 14); restoring the desolations 
 
1/ 
 
 of Judah and Jerusalem (xlix, 8; li, 3; lii, 9; liv, 3), 
 the everlaatlng wastes, the desolations of many gen- 
 erations (lyiil, 12; Ixi, 4) — expressions suggestive of 
 more than an exile of seventy years. 
 
 Amid these general and far-reaching expressions, 
 which perpetually recur throughout these chapters, 
 the specific references to Babylon and Cyrus are few 
 in number and limited in extent. Babylon and the 
 Chaldeans are spoken of but three times outside of 
 chapter xlvli, namely, xliii, 14; xlviii, 14, 20. Bel and 
 Nebo, gods of Babylon, are mentioned once (xlvi, 
 1, 2). Cyrus is named in one passage (xliv, 28; xly, 
 5, 13), and referred to four times besides (xli, 2, 3, 25; 
 xlvi, 11; xlviii, 14, 15). With what propriety can 
 these explicit references in a few passages to one 
 great crisis in Israel's affairs be made to dominate 
 the entire prophecy of twenty-seven chapters, and to 
 restrict tho^application of numberless expressions oc- 
 curring tlifoughout, which in themselves suggest 
 no such limitation ? and a sense thus obtained, which 
 is sometimes directly at variance with the language 
 used, and which never adequately represents It, be 
 held to justify the assertion that the Babylonish ex- 
 ile and deliTerance from it is the one sole subject 
 herein treated? and this to warrant the further infer- 
 ence, otherwise unsupported, that these chapters 
 could have been written in no other period than that 
 of the exilef The language of the prophet suggests 
 that he is looking down over a future of gloom fol- 
 lowed by brightness, into which desolation of the 
 land, exile in Babylon, and deliverance from it enter, 
 but which is indefinitely conceived, figuratively ex- 
 pressed, and which has a far wider and much more 
 extensive meaning. 
 
 2. The impossibility of this limitation is further 
 confirmed by the circumstance that another great 
 event of the future is referred to with equal explicit- 
 niss la these chapters. Another deliverer besides 
 Cyrus is spoken of, the Servant of the Lord, whose 
 function it is to open the blind eyes and to release 
 the prisoners (xlii, 7; 1x1. 1), to bless both Israel and 
 the Gentiles (xlix, 6), to gather God's elect out of 
 every land (xlix, 12), and by His vicarious sufferings 
 to achieve a splendid triumph (chapter liii). Since 
 the deliverance which He is to effect falls thus within 
 the scope of this prophecy, the calamity described 
 must likewise embrace that from which Hq rescues; 
 and the happy issue depicted must include the glori- 
 ous results which He shalljacconipUsh, That supe- 
 rior stress is laid upon this ultimate and greater de- 
 j liverance appears from the repeated declaration that 
 there shall thenceforth be no further experience of 
 I suffering and woe (liv, 9, 10; Ixii, 4-9; Ixv, 19); while 
 I all that is glowing in human speech is suuimoned to 
 I describe the resultmg exaltation aud bliss of Zion 
 (chapter Ix), even to the creation of new heavens and 
 j a new earth (Ixv, 17; lxvi'22). Such language could 
 not be applied to Jerusalem immediately after the 
 exile even by the most strained hyperbole. Even 
 after Cyrus had given permistion to the exiles to re- 
 turn no one in his senses could have expected such 
 magniflcence and glory from any rational view of 
 their prospects; and if any prophet bad been fanatical 
 enough to utter such a prediction, he would have 
 l>e8n speedily put to shame by the event in the view 
 even of the most credulous. And yet the false appli- 
 eation of the ultimate good which God had ixx store 
 
89 
 
 siah's reformation seems only to have made them self- 
 righteous. 
 
 2. Consequent nearness of the divine judgment. God's 
 forbearance had reached its last period. The Assyrians had 
 passed off the scene. The Chaldeans are nov>' charged with 
 the execution of this sentence. They began as soon as good 
 King Josiah died. 
 
 Three prophets in this period : Jeremiah, Habakkuk and 
 Zephaniah. These occupy an unequal amount of space. 
 From the long ministry of Jeremiah we have full account of 
 his work. Prophecies of Habakkuk and Zephajiiah are 
 brief, as their ministries were. These books may be short, 
 disconnected portions, or summaries of their prophecies. 
 Of their persons we know nothing. The condition of things 
 in Judah at this time was the same as that of Israel before 
 the captivity, which called for the denunciations. There is 
 this difi'erence, however: (1.) The kingdom was not essen- 
 tially criminal, nor utterly apostate (2.) It still retained 
 the body of God's people. (3.) The rejection, therefore, was 
 not to be so great nor final. The kingdom looked at a fu- 
 ture restoration, hence there is more room for promises, di- 
 rect and indirect, positive and negative. While, therefore, 
 Jeremiah is like Hosea, and Zephaniah like Amos, Habak- 
 kuk proclaimed the overthrow of Babylon is in contrast with 
 Jonah. Jeremiah and Zephaniah are mainly denunciatory, 
 with few promises. And so are most of the prophecies of 
 this period. Habakkuk is chiefly consolatory. Judgment 
 is necessary in order to break the fatal securit}- of the people. 
 For the sake of the people of God, in view of the great judg- 
 ment it was important that the design and result of the 
 judgment should be stated in advance. God was not to 
 break off' the covenant of grace, but his promises would 
 still be fulfilled, Hab. 2 : 14 ; 3 : 13. (1.) Jeremiah had a 
 long ministry, a large book of prophecy. The other books 
 are short, and their ministries likewise. (2.) Full details of 
 Jeremiah's life, while nothing is recorded of the others. 
 (3.) Jeremiah and Zephaniah principally judgment on Judah, 
 Habakkuk judgment on Babylon. (4.) Promises given that 
 the judgment should not destroy but purify, limit set to the 
 exile, people, city, kingdom, priesthood should not perish 
 forever, Jer. chs. 31-33. The exile (Jer. 29 : lO), would be 
 temporary. Every apparent loss should be more than com- 
 pensated. Sequel to the preceding period in Judah. His 
 promise was still to stand sure. The ark might perish, but 
 
90 
 
 would not be missed. Every loss was a real gain, Jer. 3 : 
 16, 17. The tables of the law might be lost, but the law 
 was written on their hearts, Jer. 31 : 31-33. The Chaldean 
 period is a sequel of what had preceded it. They were pur- 
 suing the same course with the same causes and similar re- 
 sults. The same judgment was still before them, but now- 
 nearer. (1.) The range of foresight of these prophets did 
 not reach beyond that of the preceding ones. (2.) They re- 
 iterate the same predictions their predecessors proclaimed, 
 often stating them in the same language. They thus con- 
 formed to the ancient prophecies, and at the same time give 
 authority for their own predictions. (3.) No new or peculiar 
 Messianic predictions. Habakkuk gives the negative side 
 of the future, the overthrow of all that obstructs the people 
 of God. Zephaniah is positive, and tells of the regathering 
 of the people from captivity, and of their future glory. Jer- 
 emiah is both ])ositive and negative, and at the same time 
 goes beyond Habakkuk atid Zephaniah, by introducing the 
 person of Christ, as Branch of David, over Israel and Judah 
 united. All three prophets declare that the theocracy is now 
 to break up, and that all nations will one day be included in 
 the kinirdom of God. 
 
 JEREMIAH. 
 
 His life. — More details of Jeremiah's life are given than 
 of any other canonical prophet. His name signifies " he 
 whom God hath appointed," but the usage of the word 
 makes it mean, '• he whom God will throw down," and his 
 was a ministry of overthrow and reconstruction, 1 : 10. He 
 was son of Hilkiah, priest in Anathoth. He was, therefore, 
 of priestly descent, like Ezekiel. Was Hilkiah the same as 
 the one mentioned in 2 Kings 22 : 4 ? It is not certain, but 
 probably they were different persons. For (1.) Jeremiah's 
 father is never called the High-Priest. (2) 1 Chron. 9:11; 
 Nehemiah 11 : 11. The High-Priest, Hilkiah, was from 
 Zadok, of the family of Eleazer, to whom this dignity was 
 transferred, 1 Chron. 24 : 35 ; 1 Kings 2 : 35. (3.) En addi- 
 tion it has been alleged that the High-Priest must reside 
 in Jerusalem. This is questioned. If the Hilkiah of Jer. 
 29 : 3, is the prophet's father, then the prophet had a brother. 
 The hostility of his house against him is recorded in the 
 
Vior Israel to the period succeeding the exile, in spite 
 of BO utter a lack of correspondence ttiat no one at the 
 time could ever have dreamed of their tallying, is the 
 only ground for the assertion that the predictions of 
 
 I events after the captivity were not fulfilled, and for 
 the conclusion thence strangely drawn, that they 
 must have been written in the captivity. 
 
 3. There is an entire absence of anything to con- 
 j nect the writer himself with Babylonia. There is no 
 I suggestion of any locality there, or of any such sur- 
 roundings as in the case of Ezekiel, who really did 
 live in exile. There is repeated mention of Jerusa- 
 lem and the cities of Judah (xl, 2, 9, etc.); Lebanon is 
 used as ^in illustration, when a mountain is referred 
 to (xl, 16); Ur of the Chaldees is spoken of as remote, 
 at "the ends of the earth" (xli, 9); and the fornas of 
 idolatry described (Ixv, 4^sqq.) are those of Egypt, 
 rather than those of Babylon, so that Ewald was led 
 to conjecture that the writer was resident in Egypt. 
 
 4. Thereis a singular paucity of specific details rct- 
 s^ecting Babylon and Cyrus. Dr. Cheyne admits that 
 Isaiah "might have learned almost as much about 
 Babylon, as is mentioned in these chapters, either 
 from traveling merchants or from the embassadors 
 of Merodach baladan." And he adds, "This paucity 
 of Babylonian references would be less surprising 
 were it not for the very specific allusions to Palestin- 
 ian circumstances in some of the later chapters." 
 Cyrus is not even called the King of Persia, as in 
 every historical reference to him in the Old Testa- 
 ment. He is simply a great conqueror from the 
 north and east who should capture Babylon. But 
 the whole description is general and ideal, with the 
 exception of two remarkable circumstances, which 
 none but a true prophet could have anticipated prior 
 to their actual occurrence: that he should find the 
 gates of Babylon open (xlv, 1), and that he should 
 release the Jews and direct the rebuilding of Jerusa- 
 lem and the temple (xliv, 28; xlv, 13.) 
 
 5. It is again and again decl_ared that ^hese state- 
 ments respecting Cyrus were uttered before the 
 event, before there were even any germinal indica- 
 tions of it (xli, 21-29; xlvi, 9-11, etc.). These are 
 urged as the irrefragable proof of the divinity of 
 Jehovah, and His superiority to idola, which possessed 
 no such prescience. Such language is unaccountable 
 if the prophet merely announced what was already 
 obvious to sagacious observers. And it is besides 
 fatal to the whole critical position. It is self-contra- 
 dictory to say that a writer represents these events 
 as taking place around him, and that his historical 
 position is to be determined accordingly, while at the 
 same time he alleges that the mention of them is 
 evidence of divine prescience. 
 
 6. It^is by no means true that the writer uniformly 
 speaks as though the people were in exile. He 
 speaks out of the actual present, Isaiah's own times, 
 when he rebukes the people for seeking the alliance 
 of foreign monarchs (Ivii, 9), or for their neglect of the 
 ritual worship (xliii, 23, 24; Lxv, 11), or their hypocrit- 
 ical observance of it (Iviii, 2-6; Ixvi, 1,3), or speaks of 
 the temple as standing (Ixvi, 6), and the regular serv- 
 ice as performed there habitually (Ixvi, 20), or of the 
 punishment of the people as still future (xliii, 28, Re- 
 vised Version; lxv, 6, 7, 12). The censures of idolatry 
 (Ivii, Ssqq.; lxv, 3, 4, 11; Ixvi, 17) and the numerous 
 arguments and warnings against it are, to say the 
 
 "1 
 
leasf., more in place m Isaiah's days than near the 
 end of the exile. It is equivalent to a confession of 
 the falsity of the assertion which the critics make 
 on this subject, when Ewald alleges that paragraphs 
 written before the exile have been interpolated into 
 these prophecies; or Dr. Driver (Isaiah, page 188) sup- 
 poses that the exilic prophet "borrows here passages 
 written originally in the age of Jeremiah, and ap- 
 plies them to the generation of the exiles." 
 
 Again, the prophet transports himself not only to 
 the time of the exile, bat to that of Babylon's fall 
 (xlvi, 1, 2), and the deliverance and glory of Israel 
 (xl, 2; li, 3. Revised Version; lit, 9, 10, Heb.), and be- 
 tween the humiliation and glory of Messiah (chap- 
 ter liii). 
 
 7. It cannot be satisfactorily explained how these 
 disputed prophecies came to be included in the Book 
 of Isaiah, if they are not really his. The later the 
 date assigned to themi, and the nearer to the time 
 when the canon was collected, the more insupposa- 
 ble it becomes. And the complexity of the problem 
 is increased by the fact that there is not merely one 
 piece added at the end, but various pieces inserted at 
 Intervals in the course of the book; and this book is 
 constructed upon a regular plan, Into which these 
 enter like the rest as component parts, and are essen- 
 tial to its symmetry and completeness. The assump- 
 tion that these prophecies are by a "great unknown" 
 is contrary to the analogy of the entire Old Testa- 
 ment, in which there is history and poetry by un- 
 known authors, but no anouymous book of prophecy. 
 Even the smallest of the niinor prophets is kept dis- 
 tinct and referred to its proper author. 
 
 III. The objection from thj alleged difference of 
 style and diction is manifestly subordinate and pre- 
 carious. It is a convenient species of argument, that 
 in the hands of modern critics is always available to 
 bolster up their foregone conclusions; and they abide 
 by their own tests just so far as it may suit their 
 purpose, and no further. The work."? of dis- 
 tinguished writers in modern times show differences 
 quite as striking as any that exist in the Book of 
 Isaiah. Whatever diversity there is is KuflBclently 
 explained by the admitted genius and versatility of 
 the piOphet; by the difference of occasion, subject, 
 and purpose of the composition; and'perhaps also by 
 the more advanced period of his life. How little 
 weight Dr. Cheyne himself attaches to the argument 
 from diversity of style appears from his suggestion 
 (Commentary, II, p. 230) that the author of chapters 
 xl-lxvi "incorporated the substance of connected dis- 
 courses of that great prophet, of whose style we are 
 80 often reminded in these chapters— Isaiah.^' 
 
 The unity of the Book of Isaiah is vouched for by a 
 steadfast tradition from the most ancient times and 
 by the inspired authority of the New Testament. 
 The doubts expressed as to certain portions are of re- 
 cent origin, are traceable to an antisupernaturalbias, 
 and are supported by inconclusive arguments. The 
 disputed portions are in harmony with the rest of the 
 book, and with the revelations of Micah, a contem- 
 porary of Isaiah. They indicate by their character 
 that they are a forecast of the future, not a descrip- 
 tion of the past and present; they contain no sugges- 
 tion of the writer's presence in Babylonia; they are 
 put forth as indisputably evidencing the divine fore- 
 knowledge; many passages are plainly pxeexilic; the 
 
 U 
 
91 
 
 12th ch. 37 : 2, he had a cousin and an unde. His uncle is 
 said to be the same Shallum who was the husband of the 
 prophetess Huldah, 2 Kings 22 : 14. Anathoth was estab- 
 lished for the possession of the priests, Josh. 21 : 18. It was 
 three miles north of Jerusalem. Here the prophet was 
 born, 29 : 27, and spent his early years. He was called at 
 iin early age, 1 : 6. This was the year after Josiah began 
 his first reformation. He was, therefore, called early to aid 
 this pious king in his work. His youth may not have been 
 so great as it seems to be from the expression, " a child," 
 which is applied to him. This term is applicable from birth 
 to twenty years of age, and is so used in other passages. We 
 do not read that he ever acted as priest, and we know he 
 was never married, 16 : 2. In the title of the book, 1 : 2, 3, 
 mention is made of Josiah. But Jehoahaz and Jehoiakin 
 are omitted. His ministry was forty years, to the capture 
 of Jerusalem. Under Josiah, eighteen years, 13 : 31 ; Je- 
 hoash, three months; Jehoiakim, eleven years ; Jehoiakin, 
 three months; Zedekiah, fourteen years. Two remarks: 
 (a) The omission of two of these kings made in Jeremiah, 
 is accounted for either by the brevity of their reigns, or be- 
 cause nothing occurs to bring out anything from the pro- 
 phet, {b) The ministry of the prophet is spoken of as ex- 
 tending only to the captivity of Jerusalem, whereas the 
 prophecies ot chapters 40-46 were after that date, Dan. 1 : 21. 
 
 Jeremiah's task was to testify of the coming ruin. He 
 had done this for a long time. The kingdom was overthrown, 
 and the people came into captivity. In order to complete 
 the picture, he traces the fortunes of the remnant left behind 
 in Jerusalem, and going from bad to worse. We are not to 
 understand, therefore, that his ministry extended only to the 
 captivity. Whatever he was to tell after this was not so 
 important. Dan. 1 : 21, a parallel " until the first year of 
 Cyrus ; " but we find him after the third year of Cyrus. 
 Yet the most important part of his ministry was before the 
 first year. 
 
 Three great events. 1- The reformation of Josiah. 
 
 2. Capture of Jerusalem in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. 
 
 3. Its destruction in the eleventh year of Zedekiah. With 
 the mention of 2 : 21 and 12 : 6 of the hostile treatment of 
 the men of Anathoth, some have said he began his ministry 
 in the place of his birth, but meeting with persecution there, 
 went to Jerusalem. But 2 : 2 says he exercised his office in 
 Jerusalem from the first, its vicinity being such that men of 
 
92 
 
 Anathoth could exercise hostility toward him there easily. 
 Was persecuted, 36 : t> ; 22 : 2. The command, in 11 : 6y 
 to the cities of Judah, does not say that his miinstry was 
 itinerant, because 26 : 2, he is represented as doing the same. 
 No other prophet except Elijah met with such treatment. 
 He was persecuted by others as well as by citizens of Ana- 
 thoth. Even Elijah retired from persecution, Jeremiah kept 
 on. He was warned of this when he was commissioned of 
 God. He was met with sneers, 23 : 33-40. I'eople upheld 
 their false prophets, who attempted to destroy the force of 
 Jeremiah's messages. The sight of this evil from the people 
 of God was almost too much for such a prophet, und he 20 : 
 14-18, curses the day of his birth. It was not timidity, for 
 no one can exceed him in courage, 20 : 11-13. His enemies 
 were not contined to words, but extended to acts, 20 : 1-6, 
 put in stocks by Pashur. Arrested on charge of treason 36 : 
 5, not imprisoned but under restraint. So that, 36 : 19, he 
 could not' with safety show himself Oh. 29 : 26, 27, his 
 punishment was demanded from Zephaniah. The prophet 
 attempted to leave the city, 37 : 13. In spite of his denial 
 of treason he was put in prison 26 : 8. Cast into a pit in the 
 court of the prison to die, 39 : 15-18. His imprisonment 
 must have lasted nine months. Daring this time Zephaniah 
 consulted him secretly twice. Jeremiah came into Egypt 
 when the Jews Med thence, and he remained there. 
 
 Legends concerning Jeremiah.— That he was stoned 
 by the Jews, and that his grave is in Cairo. Alexandrian 
 Jews loved him because he had been with them in Egypt, 
 and they have many legends about him, 2 Mac. 2 : 1-7; 15 : 
 15, 16. * From Matt. 16 : 14, it appears that at the time of 
 Christ there was an expectation of his personal re- appear- 
 ance, which may be accounted for by the fact that no men- 
 tion is made of his death. Many think that he is one of the 
 two witnesses in Rev. 11. 
 
 The Septuagint differs from A. V. very considerably. 
 33 : 14-26, have been dropped. 46 : 46-51 are not only in 
 a different order among themselves, but the entire section 
 has been removed to stand after ch. 26. These differences 
 are remarked on by Jerome and Origen. Jerome — careless- 
 ness of transcribers. The Septuagint made from a faulty 
 MS. Michaelis says there was one edition in Egypt after 
 the prophet's death. From the nature of the variations it 
 is evident that they cannot be traced to the ordinary differ- 
 ences in copying. They must have had a purpose. 
 
writer transports himself In thonght to postexlllc as 
 well as exilic times; the presence of spurious prophe- 
 cies In the book cannot be accounted for; and there is 
 no serious objection from style. Why then should 
 we surrender our faith in Isaiah's authorship? 
 
 < 
 
93 
 
 Text and Plan of Jeremiah. — Discrepancies between 
 Hebrew and Greek text, abbreviations, additions, alterations, 
 transpositions, remarked by Origen and Jerome. Theories 
 of Egyptian and Palestine editions of the original. Due to 
 the translator, (a) Their character; (/>) inaccuracies and 
 arbitrary changes in other books ; (c) 2 Chron. 36 : 20. 
 Prophecies not in chronological order. Hence many com- 
 mentators complain of want of arrangement and confusion. 
 Lightfoot and Blaney assume accidental dislocation. Eich- 
 horn's hypothesis is that there were different editions of this 
 book. (1.) These statements are based on a false assump- 
 tion. The disorder claimed does not exist. (2.) These hy- 
 potheses are mere figments of the brain. The only solution 
 they offer is a mere chance. (3.) Nothing can be safely built 
 on the roll of Baruch, 36, because the contents of it are un- 
 known. They were not for permanent preservation, but for 
 a special occasion, 36 : 32. (4.) These theories regard the 
 formation of the book as a mere mechanical work, thrown 
 about without any ideas at all. This excludes any partici- 
 pation by the prophet in the arrangement of the book. Re- 
 action in German criticism, and now Ewald recognizes an 
 orderly arrangement. 
 
 The Book from Jeremiah Himself.— That the book 
 in its present form proceeded from the prophet is shown : 
 (1.) By the frequent use of the first person, both in the in- 
 dividual prophecies, and the headings of the transpositions, 
 which show that he composed and arranged them, 12 : 6. 
 (2.) In the fourth and fifth years of Jehoiakim, 36 : 2-32, 
 he reduced to writing what had been given him. He was 
 again told, 30 : 2, to write. That the prophetical book could 
 not have been produced at the time is evident from the fact 
 that these are productions after that time, and formulas of 
 transition. The arrangement topical, hinted 27 : 12. Not 
 written piecemeal in the course of his ministry, but a con- 
 tinuous composition prepared at its close. 1. Prophecies of 
 different periods put together, those of the same period dis- 
 persed. 2. Prophecies f.ccompanied by remarks made at a 
 later period, 25 : 1. 3. Allusions to succeeding portions of 
 the book. 4. Systematic disposition of the matter. 
 
 Analysis of Jeremiah. — Three sections with a histor- 
 ical appendix, ch. 52. I. chs. 1-33, Prediction of the judg- 
 ment and the restoration. II. chs. 34-45, History of the 
 judgment. III. chs. 46-51, Predictions respecting foreign 
 nations. First section subdivided. A. chs. 1-20, General 
 
94 
 
 denunciation of Judah. B. chs. 21-23, Civil and religious 
 leaders. C. chs. 24-29, Design and duration of the judg- 
 ment. D. chs. 30-33, Blessing which would follow. Threat- 
 ening preponderates, but a few words of promise in each di- 
 vision till the last. In A. not separate discourses, but con- 
 tinuous treatment of one theme ; no date except 3 : 6. Sec- 
 ond section. A. chs. 34-38, Evidences of ripeness for judg- 
 ment. B. ch. 39, Destruction of the city. C. chs. 40-45, 
 Fortunes of the remnant. No promise to the people, onl}' 
 one in each division to individuals, the llechabites, 35 : 18, 
 19; Ebed-melech, 39 : 15-18; Barnch, ch. 45. 
 
 Contents of Jeremiah. — There is a larger number of 
 symbols than in any previous prophet. The symbols are of 
 three kinds. 
 
 Symbolic Visions — Two occur in ch, 1 in connection 
 with the call of the prophet and signity the character of his 
 ministry, (a) 1 : 11, 12. " The rod of an almoud tree,'^ 
 which God says means that he will hasten his word to per- 
 form it. It comes from a root meaning " to be awake." 
 Thus God was about to waken to judgment. (6) 1 : 13, 14. 
 "A seething pot and the face thereot is toward the north," 
 which God says means that out of the north an evil shall 
 break forth upon all the inhabitants of the land, i. e., Baby- 
 lon and its various sub-kingdoms were to desolate the land ; 
 these always entered Judah from the north, (c) 24 : 1-3, 
 " two baskets of tigs . . . one basket had very good 
 figs even like the figs that are first ripe; and the other bas- 
 ket had very naughty figs, which could not be eaten, they 
 were so bad." The good figs represented those that had 
 just been carried away captive by Neb , for the captivity w^as 
 to result in their good ; and the evil figs represented those 
 who remained in Judea under Zedekiah, for they were to 
 suffer for worse evils, {d} 25 : 15, 16. A wine cup of which 
 Jerusalem and all the nations were to drink— the fury of 
 God in his judgment from which the nations were to be, as 
 it were, intoxicated. This symbol is used by other prophets, 
 and by Jeremiah elsewhere. 
 
 Symbolic Actions.— («) Ch. 13 : l-H., The prophet is 
 directed to take a girdle and put it on his loins. Afterwards 
 to hide it in a rock by the Euphrates. Then commanded to 
 take it out and he finds it all spoiled. Explanation : Judah 
 w^as bound to the Lord as a peculiar people, but they re- 
 belled and now their pride was to be broken by the captivity. 
 {b) 18 : 1-6. The prophet was directed to go down to the 
 
95 
 
 potter's house, when he saw the potter make one vessel out 
 of the clay, and that proving defective he made another. 
 God could do with Israel as he pleased, {c) 19 : 1-13. The 
 prophet was directed to take an earthen bottle and break it 
 to pieces in the valley of Hinnom in sight of people and 
 priests. Exp.— Judah was to be utterly destroyed. (<:/) 27 : 
 1-11, 12-22; 28 : 1-14. The prophet is directed to take 
 yokes of wood and put them on his neck and send them to 
 various nations. This is repeated in the reign of Zedekiah. 
 Hananiah, a false prophet, breaks the yoke, whereupon the 
 prophet is directed to make iron yokes and repeat the action. 
 Exp, — Judah and these nations were to be brought under 
 the rule of Babylon, (e) 32 : 6-15. The prophet is directed 
 to purchase the field ottered to him by his uncle's son, which 
 he does, weighing out 17 shekels of silver, subscribing the 
 evidence and sealing it in the presence of witnesses and re- 
 cording the evidence of the purchase and putting all the pa- 
 pers in an earthen vessel. Exp. — Judah should be restored 
 and reinherit her own land. (_/') 35. The prophet is di- 
 rected to set wine before the Rechabites, which he does, but 
 they refuse to drink because of their father's command. 
 Exp. — They regarded the command of their ancestor, though 
 Judah did not recognize command of God and in conse- 
 quence they were to be blessed and Judah punished, (g) 43 : 
 8-10. The prophet is directed to take great stones and to 
 hide them in the clay in the brick-kiln, which is in Tahpan- 
 hes, in sight of the men of Judah. Exp. — Nebuchadnezzar 
 should firmly establish his throne in Egypt and completely 
 conquer the land, {h) 51 : 59-64. The prophet wrote in a 
 book all the evil that was to come upon Babylon, and gave 
 it to Seraiah who went into captivity along with Zedekiah 
 and commanded him to read all that was written in it when 
 he came to Babylon. After he had read it he should bind a 
 stone to it and cast it into the Euphrates. Exp. — Babylon 
 should be utterly destroyed. 
 
 Symbolic Names. — Passur, who persecuted the pro- 
 phet and prophesied falsely, is called Magor-missabib. Fear 
 round about. 20 : 1-6. Exp. — Refers to the terror and des- 
 olation to come upon him and the nation by the Babylonish 
 captivity. Other names. Shallum, 22 : 11 ; Coniah, 22 : 
 24; new application of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah, 23 : 5, 6 ; 
 Sheshach 25 : 26. Merathaim, Pekod, 50 : 21. 
 
 I. A. Ch. 1. introductor}^, describes character of his min- 
 istry, first literally, then symbolically, in two visions. Chs. 
 
96 
 
 2-20, divided by headings into three parts, (1.) Chs. 1-6, 
 argument of doom, (a) 2:1; 3:5 Judah guilty of forsak- 
 ing Jehovah. (6) 3:6; 4:2 Judah worse than Israel. 3 : 
 14 Judah shall be brought back to Zion, and God will rec- 
 ognize His marriage relation to them on condition of their 
 returning to Him. This will be fulfilled not in the return 
 of the entire body, but even to single individuals. Instead 
 of the foreign oppressors under whose sway they were, 3 : 
 15, they shall have pastors like David, 1 !Sam. 3 : 14 ; Jer. 
 3 : 16, (c) 4 : 3 ; 6 : 20, Judah to be visited by desolation 
 and exile, (2 ) Neb. 7 : 13, Judah's covenant privileges 
 could not save him. The ark of the covenant was to be de- 
 stroj^ed even though Judah was relying upon it. God will 
 reveal Himself to the pious among the people, in such a way 
 as they had not experienced before. The whole city of 
 God's people will be made what the ark had been before, v. 
 17. All nations would be gathered to Jerusalem. The 
 promises of Jeremiah are substantially a repetition of those 
 of Ilosea and Amos. There are some difi'erences however. 
 (a) In Jeremiah there is an enlargement of God's grace. 
 The condition of promise is more individual. (6) The an- 
 nouncement of Judah's fall is made with more distinctness, 
 because the time of the evil was so much nearer. The speak- 
 ing of the ark of the covenant as being taken away and de. 
 stroyed implies a change in the whole economy. The ark 
 had given value to the temple, and if that was gone, every- 
 thing was lost, unless a new order of things should come in 
 to take its place. A new dispensation here, and in ch. 31, 
 was particularly appropriate because demolition wa3 already 
 about to take place. The taking away of the ark is not un- 
 derstood by those who think there will be a return to the 
 rituals of Judaism, for what will they be without the ark ? 
 2 Chron. 35 : 3. The prophet then goes on to say that Ju- 
 dah will be given into the hands of the heathen even as Is- 
 rael was. The temple would not save them, 7:4; nor their 
 sacrifices, 7 : 21 ; nor their possession of the law, 8:8; nor 
 the presence of God, 8 : 19; nor their circumcision. 9 : 25, 
 26. Jeremiah 12 : 14-17 contains a promise to the Gentiles. 
 God will return to them and bring them to His heritage. 
 The form of this promise gives us a hint as to the literal 
 method of interpretation. If this prophecy does not and 
 cannot mean that the lineal descendants of Babylon shall be 
 built up again in their own land, then why are we compelled 
 to regard the promises in the case of Israel as literally a re- 
 
97 
 
 turn to their own land? (3.) Chs. 14-20. Judah's doom 
 terrible and inevitable. Yet there is a promise of distant 
 mercy in a form implying the nearer judgment, 16 : 14, 15. 
 
 B. Chs. 21-23. The people having been sentenced, the 
 prophet turns to the leaders of the people upon whom the 
 guilt falls. He rebukes the kings of former days, and then 
 contrasts with them the future faithful shepherds, and espe- 
 cially Messiah. 
 
 C. Chs. 24-29. Purpose and duration of the exile declared 
 in the reign of Jehoiakim, " whom the Lord shall raise up." 
 The former Jehoiakim was only a parody of the king who 
 should come. Zedekiah, "the Lord" our righteousness." 
 Here again the first is the mere parody of the second. Jer- 
 emiah concludes the first section of the book with a series 
 of promises. 
 
 D. Chs. 30-33. These four chapters are promissory of 
 blessings to follow the judgments; as appears from title of 
 ch. 32. They are divided into two parts of two chapters 
 •each. 
 
 (1.) Chs. 30-31. 1. Ch. 30. (a) To both branches of 
 the covenant people, (h) To the people separatelv. To Is- 
 rael, 31 : 1-21. To Judah, 31 : 22-30. The promise is that 
 they should be restored with David as their king. (2) The 
 promise is that God will enter into a new and more intimate 
 covenant relation with them than formerly when they came 
 out of Egypt. And hence (31 : 31-34,) all shall know the 
 Lord. The covenant written upon stone shall be engraved 
 upon their hearts. The relation to the people shall be in- 
 dissoluble, fixed as the natural laws of God, 31 : 35-37. (3.) 
 These three truths, (a) the restoration, (b) the new intensity, 
 (c) the perpetuity of the theocracy, having been stated in 
 literal terms (31 : 38-40), are again set forth under a figure 
 of the rebuilding of Jerusalem ; not only in its former di- 
 mensions, but greatly enlarged. It shall be rebuilt so as to 
 extend over new territory outside, and formerly regarded as 
 polluted, but now made sacred. Hill of Gareb, 31 : 39, the 
 hill of the lepers, that profane spot outside of the city, where 
 the lepers were banished. Goath (31 : 39) : About the 
 meaning of this there is a question. But the derivation of 
 the word will decide it. It may be derived either from goah, 
 to expire, or geiah^ to groan. It is probable that it denotes 
 the place of execution of criminals. The temple is .to include 
 all these, and also, " the whole valley of dead bodies; " not the 
 cemetery, but the valley of Hinnom, which was a very un- 
 
98 
 
 clean place, and the image of hell. "And of the ashes/^ 
 This place is the spot to which the ashes from the temple 
 sacrifices were carried out of the city. "And all the fields 
 nnto the Brook of Kedron." These fields Josiah had defiled 
 by strewing the ashes of the idolatrous vessels which had 
 been burned upon the grass of the worshippers of the false 
 gods, Baal and Astarte, 2 Kings 22 : 24-26. All these places 
 were profane, yet to be included within the limits of the re- 
 stored city, and to become holy to the Lord. Idolatry and 
 pollution were not only not to come into the city, but the holi- 
 ness of the city should reach out and hallow even that w^hich 
 before had been regarded as irretrievably unclean. That 
 these promises do not belong to the material Jerusalem, nor 
 to the natural Jerusalem as such, but to the spiritual people 
 of God, is apparent, {a) from inspired application, Heb. 8 : 
 8; 10 : 15-17. (6) Also Jeremiah's words elsewhere. God's 
 promises not bound by nationality irrespective of character, 
 18 : 6-10 ; the true Israel preserved in the faithful few not- 
 withstanding the rejection of the unbelieving mass, 3 : 14 ; 
 24 : 4-10 ; and the building of heathen in the midst of God's 
 people, 12:6; when the covenant of stone had been broken. 
 God will put his law in their inward parts and write it in 
 their hearts, 31 : 33. After the ark had been taken away 
 (3 : 16), what is there to give sacredness to Jerusalem, which 
 is not possessed by every other city which is spiritual ? Cf. 
 John 4 : 21-23. 
 
 (2) Chs. 32-33. Promises by restoration repeated, reaf- 
 firmed, and enforced by the symbol of the purchase of the 
 field of Anathoth, outside the city. This indicates the cer- 
 tainty of a restoration. He then, in addition, gives : 1. As- 
 surance of the perpetuity of royalty and priesthood (33 : 17- 
 18). The purpose of God in this matter is as fixed as the 
 succession of day and night. 2. The multiplication of those 
 invested with royal and priestly dignity (33 : 22). Judah 
 was on the point of being broken up and the temple de- 
 stroyed, the throne of David cast down. But Jeremiah 
 would teach the people of God that these things will not 
 continue forever. A glorious future is before them. The 
 theocracy is not dissolved, but only interrupted, to be re- 
 stored again into a more glorious condition. The promise 
 (33 : 17, 18), is that David and the priesthood should never 
 lack successors. The marginal reading is the true rendering. 
 This secures from extirpation, but not from temporary inter- 
 ruption. Of. 2 Sam. 7 : 14-16 : Ps. 89 : 29-37, with Jer. 33 : 
 
99 
 
 22. These promises are fulfilled in a three-fold way, (a) In 
 a partial fulfillment in Zerubbabel, who, though not strictly 
 king, exercised some regal functions. (6) Further fulfilled 
 in Christ, who is the seed of David, (c) Finally in all the 
 true people of God who are all to be made kings and adopted 
 into the house of David. That this is intended appears from 
 33 : 22, where the vast multiplication of the house of David 
 is mentioned. 1. The perpetuity of the kingdom does not 
 require such a vast number of descendants. 2. Its fulfill- 
 ment in the line of natural seed is not only not verified by 
 fact, but would be preposterous and anything but a blessing. 
 Therefore the Septuagint dropped this passage. A reigning 
 family- thus multipli'^d would be burdensome for the people 
 to support. 3. The language of the promise is in the pre- 
 cise terms of that to Abraham. Therefore the entire family 
 of Abraham is merged in the house of David. 4, This was 
 the true idea of Israel, as the people of God. They were 
 (Ex. 19 : 6) kings and priests. These functions for a time 
 were entrusted to individuals, but were to revert to the peo- 
 ple. 5. The N. T. teaches its fulfillment in all the people of 
 God, 1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5 : 10. 
 
 Priesthood. — There is an analogous fulfillment with re- 
 spect to the priesthood. 1. Literal in the return from the 
 captivity. 2. Christ as perpetual priest. 3. All the true 
 people of God are priests, and are included in the family of 
 Levi. That this last is included appears not only from the 
 analogy of kingship but also because: 1. The thing really 
 contemplated in the promise is that the priesthood should 
 be perpetual. No stress was laid on its being in the fleshly 
 family of Levi. The point at issue was not the prerogative 
 of a tribe but the condition of the people. The ofiice should 
 remain. 2. Jeremiah often intimates the abolishment of the 
 old economy, which implies a change of outward form. The 
 ark of the covenant (3 : 16) was to be taken away. This 
 intimates the abolishment of the old economy of which the 
 ark was the great representative. Ch. 31 : 1-2 says a new 
 covenant was to supersede the old covenant. 3. An older 
 prophet speaks in like manner (Isaiah 66 : 21 ; 61 : 6) of the 
 entire people of God. 4. From the providence of God. 
 The priesthood of the tribe of Levi has never been literally 
 perpetuated, and could not now be except by miracle, for 
 all the tribal distinctions are lost. If the prophecy of Jere- 
 miah is to meet with any fulfillment at all, it must be spiri- 
 tual. 5. Teachings of N. T. 6. Even such a literalist as 
 
100 
 
 Henderson confesses this. " We are shut up to the spiritual 
 interpretation of this passage." 
 
 2. Chs. 84-45. A. 34-38, facts adduced as specimens 
 and evidences of the prevailing corruption. Hebrew ser- 
 vants, ch. 34. Rechabites, ch. 35, Jehoiakim, ch. 36, Zede- 
 kiah chs. 37, 38. B. ch. 39, Destruction of city. C. chs. 
 40-45. The wretched remnant, closing with personal promise 
 to Baruch. 
 
 3. Chs. 46-51. Probably in chronological order. Prom- 
 ises to Egypt, Moab, Amraon and Elam ; none to Babylon, 
 51 : 65. Ch. 52, historical appendix, perhaps added by 
 another. (1.) Jer. 51 : 64. (2.) Similar narrative in ch. 39. 
 (3.) Date of 52 : 31-34, twenty-six years after the destruction 
 of the city. (4.) Coincidence with 2 Kings. Contains no 
 mention of return from exile. Jeremiah's adoption of lan- 
 guage of preceding books, especially ch. 48, Moab ; 49 : 7, 
 etc., Edom ; affords incidental proof of their genuineness; 
 variations not arise from corruption of text. 
 
 LAMENTATIONS. 
 
 One of the five Megilloth, in Hagiographa or after Jere- 
 miah, catalogues of canon. Hebrew, Greek and Latin 
 names. Not composed with reference to death of Josiah, 2 
 Chron. 35: 25, nor on occasion of his death with foresight 
 of destruction of city, but on occurrence of this latter event. 
 Five sections ot one chapter each ; all alphabetical but the 
 last; ch. 3, triple recurrence of each letter; chs. 2, 3, 4, 
 transposition of Ayin and Pe. Not distinct elegies relating 
 to successive states of Jerusalem's overthrow. Written by 
 Jeremiah, (a) unanimous voice of tradition, verse prefixed in 
 Septuagint and Vulgate, Josephus, Origen, Jerome, Talmud, 
 (b) correspondence with character of prophet, coincidences 
 of statement of facts and forms of expression, (c) no ground 
 for disputing it. 
 
 HABAKKUK. 
 
 Of the present and personal circumstances of the prophet 
 we know nothing except from his book. It is inferred from 
 S : 19, his last words, that he was of the tribe of Levi, and 
 one of the family engaged in sacred music of the temple. 
 
101 
 
 This is plausible, and if true, it gives a real explanation of 
 the close resemblance of ch. 3 to the Psalms, and the adop- 
 tion there of so many technical terms \vhich belong to the 
 Psalms. The title of ch. 3, and the subscription are both 
 modeled after the Psalms. Selah occurs three times; and 
 the last verse is almost verbatim from the Psalms. If this 
 be held, it would be another instance of prophets taken from 
 the temple servitors. Jeremiah, Zechariah, and Ezekiel 
 were priests. While the prophets of the former period were 
 independent of the sacred orders, in this degenerate age the 
 fittest material was found among the priests. 
 
 The date of the prophet is inferred from, 1. That the 
 invasion of the Chaldeans would be in the lifetime of that 
 generation, 1 : o, 6, Hence not in the reign of Josiah. 2. 
 Chap. 2: 20 implies that the temple was standing. Musical 
 worship still continued in the temple (3 : 19). This was 
 probably after the twelfth year of Josiah's reign. Hence 
 Habakkuk was a contemporary of Jeremiah and Zephaniah, 
 and not more than 24 years before the invasion of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar. 3. The order of minor prophets. Some try to 
 fix the date more exactly, by comparing it with Jeremiah 
 and Zephaniah. Thus, it is said, that as Jeremiah is much 
 more specific as to the Babylonian conquest, while Habak- 
 kuk mentions only the bare fact, therefore Habakkuk was 
 before Jeremiah. This is sometimes the case, but not al- 
 ways, and therefore cannot be made the basis of argument. 
 Sometimes it is reversed, e. g., Isaiah prophesied the over- 
 throw of Babylon more minutely than did Habakkuk. Again, 
 there are passages in which Jeremiah and Zephaniah have 
 borrowed the language of Habakkuk. Yet while this is 
 probably true, the argument as to priority is questionable, 
 because it can be so easily reversed. The design is both 
 minatory and consolatory. Minatory to chastise sinners in 
 Judah; consolatory to comfort the pious. 
 
 The prophecy of the overthrow of Babylon. Observe : 
 I. Its dramatic power. First he speaks to God for the peo- 
 ple. Then God answers. Then the prophet speaks for 
 himself. Then God speaks to the prophet. Finally he gives 
 utterance to his prophecies of joy. What is peculiar is this 
 regular alternation from beginning to end. and is an index 
 of the psychological condition of the prophet. He is in a 
 rapt, ecstatic state, and the form of the prophecy reproduces 
 his own states of mind ; and the dramatism is not merely a 
 form, or due to fancy, but is what really took place, like the 
 
102 
 
 visions of other prophets. The prophet is not an artist, but 
 a seer. But this ecstacy does not supersede his natural 
 faculties, but lifts them to a higher sphere. The fact is, the 
 prophetical inspiration has its analogy with spiritual illum- 
 ination. A real supernatural communication is made ab 
 extra. Yet the extraordinary method attaches itself to the 
 ordinary methods used by the Holy Spirit. The facts re- 
 vealed are not absolutely new truths. The unknown is 
 imparted as limited with what was previously understood, 
 and a sense of need is created which demands the new truth ; 
 and thus God revealed His purpose that the land should be 
 ravaged by the Chaldeans, and they in turn overthrown. 
 But this was disclosed as part of the spiritual training of the 
 people, and hence given in their moral senses and relations. 
 Judah was very corrupt. Fraud and impiety were unchecked. 
 God's law was disregarded. Shocked by this, and personal 
 wrongs, the pious, through Habakkuk, appeal to God if He 
 will longer tolerate it. They are in extremity and look up 
 to God. Then the answer comes in a revelation adapted to 
 this state of need. God will punish by the Chaldeans. But 
 with this come fresh doubts and difBculties. The fear lest 
 the fierce Chaldeans should involve in punishment the good 
 and bad together. Hence they appeal to God again ; and 
 plant themselves upon His attributes and covenant relations. 
 They cling to the conviction that the Chaldean invasion was 
 for correction and not for destruction. They appeal to God 
 as governor of the world. Thus the new complexities of 
 Providence demand fresh solutions, and the prophet waits 
 the answer. It then comes. The Chaldeans themselves 
 shall be trodden down, and the people abide the retribution 
 of Jehovah. And hence the people of God are prepared for 
 vengeance in the same way in which they are ever prepared 
 for new supplies of grace. But while this is true, we must 
 not confound the two methods. Here there is a real dis- 
 closure of truth. The prophet does not f??/lT a judgment on 
 themselves and upon the Chaldeans, and then announce 
 these results; but he had a divine revelation necessitating 
 his belief. We have the same general providence to guide 
 us, but we can not so supply it as to make it reveal the 
 future. Hence there was a real revelation, and not a mere 
 inference; which would be conjectural, delusive, and unful- 
 filled. Still less is it a vaticinium post evenium. Nor is it a 
 declaration of what was so near as to be within the power of 
 human foresight. On the contrary the prophets declare that 
 
103 
 
 they would not believe it though it were told them. And 
 the fact of the overthrow of Babylon could not be calculated 
 upon. Hence the future is disclosed, not as mere disjointed 
 facts, but as the laying bare of the links which bound the 
 future to the present. This lays the foundation of the pro- 
 pheticum curriculum a common track which all pursue. They 
 proceed from a charge of sin to its penalty. And if in refer- 
 ence to God's people, thej^ proceed to fact of deliverance. 
 Observe these especially in flabakkuk. He begins with the 
 sins in Judah ; passes to their punishment by the Chaldeans ; 
 and then to the overthrow of Babylon. While it is a revela- 
 tion it is not merely an anticipation of history. The prophet 
 is true in representing the future ; yet the prophet so surveys 
 it from his own view that it is good evidence that it is pro- 
 phetical and not historical. Hence it is written from the 
 prophet's own historical standpoint, and by its structure 
 indicates its own proiihetic truth. 
 
 Divisions of the Book. — The first complaint, 1 : 2-4. 
 The Lord's response, 1 : 5-11. The second complaint, 1 : 
 12 ; 2 : 1. The Lord's response, 2 : 2-20. The triumph, ch. 
 3. The injustice and oppression in Judah to be punished 
 by the Chaldeans and the Chaldeans to be punished by 
 their overthrow. The burden, 2: 4-20, consisting of a 
 brief preamble and live woes in successive stanzas. Mes- 
 sianic passage in the third. Ch. 3 a lyrical recapitulation, 
 resemblance to the Psalms in style, artistic form, title, sub- 
 scriptions and Selah. Applied by the fathers to the advent 
 and work of Christ. Bengel's chronological hypothesis, v. 
 2 ; vs. 3-15 not historical ; [a) diversity in the explanation of 
 details; (6) disproportionate length; (c) tense of opening 
 verb, V. 3 (Hebrew). Prophetic of a divine descent to judg- 
 ment, which is to include whatever was most grand in former 
 manifestations of God, directed against the Chaldeans and 
 all other foes. Convulsions of nature poetic and emblematic 
 or suggestive of the final judgment. 
 
 ZEPHANIAH. 
 
 Habakkuk describes judgment on Chaldeans; Zephaniah 
 a universal judgment, in which, however, no allusion is made 
 to the Chaldeans, who are viewed, not as objects, but as 
 executioners of God's wrath. It has special reference to the 
 
104 
 
 unfaithful in Judah, and inferior contiguous nations, from 
 whose fate, as in Amos, an argument of Judah's doom is 
 derived, 3 : 6-8. Zephaniah and Jeremiah more frequent 
 allusions to former Scriptures than Habakkuk. Zephaniah's 
 ancestry traced through four degrees, to Hezekiah, probably 
 the king, {a) identity of name; {b) traced to so remote an 
 ancestor; (c) correspondenee with the date. Objections that 
 he is not explicitly called king, and that no such son of king 
 Hezekiah is mentioned in the history. Date, 1: 1, probably 
 after Josiah's twelfth year. Other criteria inconclusive ; 2 : 
 13, predicted desolation of Nineveh ; 1:4, " remnant of 
 Baal," cutting off Chemarim ; 1 : 8, " the king's children ; " 
 3: 4, "the law." Ch, 1, universal and sweeping judgment, 
 with particular application to the wicked in Judah, vs. 4-13; 
 exhortation to seek the Lord as the only means of escape 2 : 
 1-3; enforced by judgments on other nations, exhibited in 
 three stanzas, of four verses each, Philistia in the west, 
 Moab and Ammon in the east, Ethiopia and Assyria in the 
 south and north. In the middle stanza. Messianic allusion, 
 as in Habakkuk. Application to Jerusalem, 3 : 1-8. Prom- 
 issory conclusion, vs. 9-20. The heathen shall possess a 
 pure language, and take part in the restoration of God's 
 people. Purity and blessedness of Israel. 
 
 PERIOD OF THE EXILE. 
 
 The course of degeneracy was now violently termiinated. 
 It was followed by a period of seclusion and trial. l!i order 
 to effect the best results in this process, they were, iirst, to 
 be sifted, the best carried away, the worst left to perish in 
 Jerusalem. The good figs indicate those carried into exile. 
 The sifting was performed : 1. By the overruling provi- 
 dence of God; 2. Natural causes. The Lord had told the 
 people by Jeremiah what was to come. Those who believed 
 the prophecy would be submissive, {a) to the disposition of 
 the people; (6) to the intentions of the Chaldeans. 
 
 Two things were needed in this period. 1. Influence 
 upon the people themselves ; 2. Influence upon the oppres- 
 sors in behalf of the people. The former was exerted by 
 Ezekiel ; the latter by I'aniel. Ezekiel dwelt among the 
 exiles for their instruction, comfort and elevation. Daniel 
 lived at the court of Babylon to protect the interests of the 
 people, and to consult for their welfare as Joseph did before 
 
105 
 
 Pharoah. Hence Daniel is placed in the Hagiographa. The 
 work needed was of two kinds, according to the period. 
 The first part of the exile was a transition period, during 
 which there was the mere shadow of a kingdom. The exile 
 began in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. This portion of the 
 period of the exile, therefore, overlaps the former, the Chal- 
 dean. Ezekiel, therefore, was living contemporaneous with 
 Jeremiah. His ministry was fitted to the period. As long^ 
 as Jerusalem still stood, the false prophets hidulged pre- 
 sumptuous hopes; and hindered the growth of that humility 
 and penitence which the captivity was designed to produce. 
 Hence his discourses were denunciatory, and full of warn- 
 ing, during this time. After the city had actually been 
 destroyed, a ministry of consolation was needed lo preserve 
 the people from utter despair. Up to the full of Jerusalem 
 his ministry was like that of Jeremiah, but afterwards it 
 entirely changed 
 
 Ezekiel and Daniel. — («) Ezekiel was to build up the 
 theocracy trom within, Daniel was to exhibit the kingdom 
 of God in its conflict with, and victory over, the enemies of 
 God. Both use figures. (6) Ezekiel draws his symbols 
 mainly from the sanctuary with which his position as priest 
 made him familiar. Daniel draws from other sources, (c) 
 There is the same variety in Messianic predictions. Ezekiel 
 sometimes sets them forth from a priestly point of view. 
 Daniel exhibits it as the universal and unending empire of 
 the Son of Man. These prophets note the exact time in 
 which their prophecies were recorded, and sometimes the 
 very month. Ezekiel, 24:1-2, tells the fact of the siege of 
 Jerusalem the very day it began. The exile was the con- 
 clusion of God's dealings with the Jews. The prophets 
 preceding the exile were limited to the judgments wrought 
 by or upon Babylon. Now they pass from the Babylonish 
 exile to the future troubles of Israel, and the succession of 
 empire, until the Messiah, and the conversion of the world. 
 When the exile was at hand, it was necessary to prepare 
 the people for coming events, lest they should suppose that, 
 with the exile, all was lost. This opinion it was necessary 
 to correct, by showing that a long period must intervene, 
 succession of empires, and times of trouble come, before the 
 advent of the Messiah. 
 
106 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 Fewer details are given of Ezekiel than of Daniel. His 
 work was spiritual, and the events of his life had no special 
 effect upon his work. The record of his life is found in his 
 prophecy. 
 
 Name. — " One whose God strengthens him." He was 
 carried captive eight years after Daniel with Jehoiachin. 
 His ministry began (ch. 1:1) in the fifth year of Jehoia- 
 chin's captivity, (this event dated from rather than Zedor 
 kiah's reign), the year after Jeremiah's message, Jer. 51 : 
 59, in thethirtieth year of his age, Num. 4 : 3. During the 
 early portions of his ministry, he was a contemporary of 
 Jeremiah thirty years. This was not from the first year of 
 Nabopolassar, nor from the last jubilee, nor the eighteenth 
 year of Josiah. 1. There is no proof that these were eras. 
 2. There is no other date reckoned from them. 3. If in- 
 tended they would have been mentioned. 
 
 Scene of Labors.— 3: 15, at Tel-abib, by the Chebar, 
 same as Habor, 2 Kings, 17 : 6. Marriage, 24 : 18. 
 
 Duration of Ministry. — Uncertain. 29 : 17, is the latest 
 date of the book, the twenty-seventh year of Jehoiachin's 
 captivity. The people were hopeful and yet rebellious. 
 But the effect of his labors was shown by : 1. Frequent con- 
 sultation by elders and others, 8 : 1 ; 14 : 1. 2. Freedom in 
 uttering his reproofs ; 3. Moral changes effected during the. 
 exile. His Hebrew has more anomalies and foreign forms 
 than that of Daniel, who was both Hebrew and Chaldee. 
 This corruption is first found in Jeremiah. It was natural 
 that the change of language should affect the dialect of the 
 people. 
 
 Divisions of the Book- — 1. Before the capture of Jer- 
 usalem, chs. 1-24, denunciatory. 2- Respecting foreign 
 nations, chs. 25-32. 3. After the capture of Jerusalem, chs. 
 33-48, promissory. Opening vision, 1 : 1 ; 3 : 15, like Isa. 6 
 and Rev. 4, based on cherubim over the ark. Design not 
 merely to make an impression of majesty and glory but as 
 preparation for this specific message. The Mosaic symbol 
 its general signification. The God of creation and of temple 
 present in profane land of captivity, and about to make a 
 communication to the prophet. Modifications, its particular 
 application ; (a) life and swiftness ; (6) fire, wrath, qualified 
 by rainbow of the covenant. Verbal commission and sym- 
 bol of roll, 2 : 9; 3 : 3, c/. Rev. 10 : 9. After seven days, con- 
 
107 
 
 uected prophecy to end of eh. 7 : Responsibilities of his 
 •office, four symbolic actions followed by denunciation in 
 literal terms; (a) tile, besieged city; warfare; (b) lie bound 
 ^90 and 40 days. Literal performance physically impossible, 
 out of proportion to the end, weaken the impression, chron- 
 ological difficulty. Not represent days of siege, with which 
 they do not correspond, and the days stand for years, 4: 6, 
 either of sin or punishment ; how reckoned, (c) bread, (d) 
 hair. Chs. 8-11, one year later. Presumption of inhabi- 
 tants of Jerusalem ; etfect on exiles. 1. The crimes of Jer- 
 usalem and its certain destruction, 8 : 1 ; 11 : 13. 2. The 
 exiles are God's true covenant people, 11: 14-21. Profana- 
 tion of temple, not perhaps actual, scenes of single idolatrous 
 festival, or various forms of idolatry gathered there, but ideal 
 ■concentration, (a) Lev. 16 : 16-19 ; {b) Ex. 20 : 3 ; (c) temple 
 was Judah's place of worship ; {d) justified by actual profana- 
 tion at different times. Image of jealousy, chamber of 
 imagery, Jaazaniah, Tammuz, five and twenty men. Six 
 men with the man in linen. Five and twenty men at the 
 east gate, Pelatiah, son of Benaiah. Promises to exiles, (a) 
 God will be a sanctuary to them, 11 : 16 ; (6) bring them 
 back to land of Israel, v. 17 ; (c) give them a new heart, v. 
 19. Glory of God forsakes the temple. Denunciations con- 
 tinued until the day that Jerusalem is besieged, ch. 24. 
 Seven foreign nations, chs. 25-32. Ammon, Moab, Edom, 
 Philistia, Tyre, Zidon, Egypt. Promises: I. Deliverance 
 from foes, chs. 33-39. II. Restoration of the theocracy, chs. 
 40-48. I. Evening preceding news of fall of city, second 
 formal call of prophet, ch. 33; deliverance from wicked 
 rulers, David their shepherd, ch. 34 ; from present foes, 
 Edom denounced, contrasted blessedness of Israel, valley of 
 •dry bones, union of the two sticks, chs. 35-37; from future 
 foes, Gog and Magog, chs. 38, 39. II. Fourteenth year after 
 the city was smitten, 1st month and 10th day. 
 
 Different OpinionS' — 1. Historical, of what had been. 
 2. Mandatory, for the direction of the exiles. 3. Prophetic, 
 It can not be literal. 1. Historical, for (a) it did not cor- 
 respond with what had been ; (6) unnecessary if it referred to 
 the past ; (c) the language prevents such reference. 2. It is 
 inot mandatory, because the exiles did not follow the com- 
 mands. 3. It can not be prophetic, for this would be con- 
 trary to the declarations of N. T. and the intimations of O. 
 T. If prophetic, it would predict the return of the Christian 
 church to Jewish forms, but the Jewish ritual is abolished 
 
108 
 
 by the sacrifice of Christ and the providence of God. It is 
 symbolic and ideal, for: 1. The original temple was sym- 
 bolical : made use of symbolically by Ezekiel elsewhere, Jer. 
 31 : 38-40. 2. It yields a good and proper sense. 3. There 
 are many things in the vision which could not be carried 
 out literally, e. r/., the size of Jerusalem and the temple ; the 
 stream proceeding from the temple and healing the nations. 
 4, It is like Rev. 21 : 22. In fact Rev. seems to be a com- 
 mentary on this passage. Rev. is symbolic. 
 
 2 40-48. This last vision was at the beginning of the 
 year (40 : 1). These chapters contain 1. Description of the 
 temple. 2. Ritual service in the temple ; 8. final apportion- 
 ment of the land. Some take literal views, others regard 
 the temple as ideal. 
 
 This section is divided : (1.) 40-43 : 12, Measure of the 
 temple. The church of God is to be re-established on the 
 earth. Ezekiel's temple in the vision differs from Solomon's 
 real temple, (a) in dimensions, which are enlarged, {b) Eze- 
 kiel gives more prominence to subordinate facts. Nothing 
 is left to the choice or direction of the builders. . He gives a 
 great deal of time to the gates, the doors, the courts, etc. 
 These inferior parts have a new and sacred importance con 
 nected with them. The court is exalted to a sacred pre- 
 eminence corresponding to the Holy of Holies in Solomon's 
 temple, 43 : 1. In the new temple the glory of God is never 
 to depart. In the old it did, 11 : 23. (2.) 43 : 13; 47 : 12. 
 This division gives a description of the holy service. Priests,, 
 people and rulers should all be united in the worship, 47 : 
 1-12. The trees by the stream of life remind us of Paradise. 
 To represent the blessings brought by this stream it is spo- 
 ken of as flowing to dead localities, even to the Dead Sea, 
 which shall be purified, the Dead Sea being the symbol of 
 all that is vile and lifeless. Even this shall be vitalized and 
 beautified by this stream of life. The only places not re- 
 claimed are those not reached by this stream. (3 ) 47: 13; 
 48:35. Concluding Portion, Division of the land among 
 the twelve tribes. Two points of difference from the real 
 division, [a] Uniformity of division. All have an equal 
 portion from W. to E., and all are on the W. side of the 
 Jordan. No tribe is preferred above another, 47: 22, 23; 
 Rev. 7: 5-8. It is even said that strangers dwelling among 
 them shall have equal privileges, {h) Ezekiel's division 
 leaves nothing to the decision of men, but all fixed by God. 
 We can not conclude that the Christian church is ever tO' 
 
109 
 
 return to Judaic forms. This last portion shows how 0. T. 
 forms may set forth K. T. things. 
 
 DANIEL. 
 
 The name signifies " God's judge," i. e., " one who deliv- 
 ers God's judgments." According to 1:1, Daniel was of 
 the tribe of Judah, and of princely descent. He was carried 
 away in the first deportation by Nebuchadnezzar, eight years 
 before Ezekiel, Carried away at the beginning of the exile, 
 he survived its close, but did not return, probably because 
 of advanced age. He was a favorite of Nebuchadnezzar on 
 account of his wisdom and supernatural endowments, which 
 are referred to by Ezekiel, chs. 14 : 14 ; 28 : 3. He was set 
 aside by Belshazzar. and reinstated by Darius. The minis- 
 try of Daniel was mainly external, in reference to the king- 
 doms of this world in conflict with the kingdom and people 
 of God. 
 
 Divisions of the Book. — 1 : 1-6. Personal history of 
 Daniel and his friends, historical. 2 : 7-12. National, 
 prophetical visions. The book does not profess to be a his- 
 tory of the exile, or a connected biography of Daniel, but a 
 series of pictures of exile life. 2:4; 7 : 28, is in Chaldee ; 
 the rest of the book is in Hebrew. The number and great- 
 ness of its miracles mark it out as a special object of hos- 
 tility to skeptics. Celsus and Porphyry, English deists and 
 -German rationalists, have attacked it, and the book has been 
 referred to the time of the Maccabees. The best treatise in 
 reply to the following objections is Hengstenberg's " Au- 
 thenticity of Daniel." 
 
 Objections. — 1. Greek words : (a) their number exag- 
 gerated ; (6) readily accounted for; (c) like charge against 
 still older books of Bible ; {d) abandoned as untenable. 2. 
 Position in canon, {a) Division of canon not chronological ; 
 (b) Jewish tradition ; [c] accounts for nothing, true explana- 
 tion. 3. Needless multiplication of miracles. But (a) needed 
 by people ; {h) prepared the way for their restoration ; (c) 
 present effect on the heathen ; [d) future consolation. 4. 
 Definite dates and minute details of the prophecies, (a) Nat- 
 uralistic views; (6) explicitness of other prophecies, 70 years' 
 captivity, 65 years Ephraim, 3 years Moab, 15 years Heze- 
 ki ah, fall of Babylon, Zechariah ^: 13, same conflict with 
 kingdom of Greece ; (e) provide for the future wants of the 
 
110 
 
 people. 5. Definite predictions only to death of Antiochus ;: 
 
 (a) like limitation in other prophecies, Jacob, Isaiah, Jere- 
 miah, Ezekiel, Zechariah; (6) date of Messiah's advent, rise 
 of Roman empire. 6. Self-laudation, but (a) so Moses. Paul; 
 
 (b) impartiality of sacred writers ; (c) Daniel relates facts or 
 repeats words of others. Proofs of genuineness. 1. Pur- 
 ports to have been written by Daniel ; 1st person in second 
 part, and unity of the whole shown by consistent plan, like 
 expressions, reciprocal allusions, change of language; can 
 neither be fiction nor fraud. 2. Canon closed in time of 
 Ezra and JSTehemiah. 3. Our Lord Son of Man, kingdom 
 of heaven. Mat. 24 : 15, 30 ; 26 : 64 ; John 5 : 28, 29 ; Apos- 
 tles Heb. 11 : 33, 34 ; 1 Cor. 6 : 2 ; 2 Thes. 2 : 3 ; 1 Pet. 1 : 
 10-12, Revelation. 4. Josephus, 1 Mace, Greek version. 
 5. Character of the Hebrew, of the Chaldee, use of both 
 languages aii in Ezra 6. Acquaintance with the history^ 
 shewn in character of Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar, Darius, Bel- 
 shazzar, no error in dates, Nebuchadnezzar's adorning Baby- 
 lon, prophetic dream, insanity, circumstances of Babylon's 
 capture, Darius the Mede, 120 princes, Medes and Persians, 
 Persians and Medes. 7. Knowledge of customs ; land of 
 Shinar, 3 : 2, fed from king's table, changing names ot 
 Daniel and his companions, years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, 
 punishments, colossal image, music, women at entertain- 
 ments, gold chain, king's edicts immutable, the magi, 9. 
 Abundance of symbols as in Ezekiel ; book inconsistent 
 with assumed Maccabean origin. 
 
 Prophecies. — The disclosures in the second and seventh 
 chapters are parallel. The second chapter has Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's dream — four empires, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Mace- 
 don, Rome. The seventh chapter contains the vision of the 
 four beasts=the same four empires. The lion with eagle's 
 wings=Babylon. The bear with three ribs:=-the Medo- 
 Persian ; greedily ravenous propensity. The leopard with 
 four wings and four heads = the Macedonian Empire, por- 
 tioned into Syria, Egypt, Thrace and Macedon. A non- 
 descript animal with ten horns and a little horn=the Roman 
 empire, whose ?itack no animal is fierce enough to with- 
 stand. Ten horns indicate ten successive kings, and the 
 little horn= Antichrist. St, John sees only one beast, which 
 represents all Daniel's beasts in one. The seven heads of 
 John's beast represent the seven empires in which one un- 
 godly power was embodied. The Apostle says five had 
 already existed, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Syria, Macedon. 
 
Ill 
 
 The one standing in Rome. Another is yet to come. The in- 
 terpretation so depends on historical facts that all orthodox 
 writers agree as to its meaning. Skeptics have invented 
 other meanings for symbols. They are, 1. To divide the 
 Medo-Persian empire into two. But (a) this was only one. 
 Media and Persia was the same empire. Persians were con- 
 federated with the Medes, the only change being that of the 
 reigning family. (6) It is always thus spoken of by profane 
 and sacred writers; Esther; Daniel 5 : 28; 6 : 8 ; 12: 15. (<?) 
 The skeptics make the leopard represent the Persian empire; 
 but the leopard has four heads, snd Persian empire was not 
 so divided. 2. To divide the Macedonian empire into two, 
 Babylonian, and Medo-Persian, the Macedonian empire of 
 Alexander, and those of his successors being made separate. 
 But (a) the leopard with four heads represents the empire 
 broken into four parts. (6) The fourth empire is stronger 
 and more terrible than its predecessors, cf. 8 : 22 ; 11 ; 4. {c) 
 Then no explanation would be given of the ten horns. 
 
 Chs. 8-12 are supplementary. In chap. 8, the rams= 
 Syria. The he-goat=the Macedonian empire. The horn 
 between his eyes=Alexander the Great. The four horns 
 springing up = Syria, Egypt, Thrace, Macedon, into which 
 the empire was divided at Alexander's death. Out of the 
 Syrian kingdom grew a little horn which waxed greater. 
 This was Antiochus Epiphanes who was monarch of the 
 kingdom, the persecutor of the Jews. 
 
 Ch. 9, revealed in the first year of Darius the Mede, 
 which is the 69th year of the captivity. The prophet was 
 praying for the restoration of the people when further, full 
 disclosures were made to him. It might be supposed that 
 immediately, at the expiration of the captivity, the kingdom 
 of the Messiah would come. But the angel tells the prophet 
 that the seventy weeks are about gone, but that there are 
 yet to come seventy more years to finish the transgression 
 by atonement. All relates to the work of Christ. Within 
 these seventy weeks of years, all these Messianic functions 
 shall be performed. This is made more precise by divid- 
 ing these seventy weeks into three periods of seven, sixty- 
 two and one weeks. He informs us from what point of time 
 the seventy weeks are to date, viz., the going forth of the 
 commandment to rebuild Jerusalem. This is not the per- 
 mission of Cyrus to return to their own land. Down to the 
 time of Nehemiah, the city was still in runs, Neh. 2: 3. The 
 first effectual measures were taken by him, after that he 
 
112 
 
 a^eceived permission to rebuild, Neh. 2 : 5, 6, in the twentieth 
 year of Artaxerxes Longimanus. This is the exact time 
 from which the seventy weeks were to begin. There is some 
 difference among historians as to the length of Artaxerxes' 
 reign. Hengstenberg goes into an elaborate argument to 
 show that the time of the prophecy was exact. The entire 
 restoration of the city would be accomplished though in the 
 midst of much trouble. After sixty-nine weeks would be 
 the. Messiah's public appearance; in the midst of the last 
 week. His effectual sacrifice, followed by destruction of the 
 €ity and sanctuary. What distinctly belongs to the last 
 week is shown in 9 : 27. 
 
 Chs. 10-12. The last vision of the book. In the third 
 year of Cyrus, Daniel was in mourning because of the 
 events in Ezek. 4: 1-5. The subject of ch. 8 is here re 
 sumed and dwelt upon in literal language. Prediction in 
 literal terms of tiie overthrow of the Persian empire by 
 Alexander. Division of his empire at his death*. Persecu- 
 tion of Antiochus set forth. As a relief from these dark 
 pictures he gives the brightness of the future, the resurrec- 
 tion and external glory. Reluctant testimony of skeptics to 
 the truth of the prophecies. Apocryphal sections are added 
 in the Septuagint. 
 
 PERIOD OF THE RESTORATION. 
 
 The period of captivity is now over. The decree has 
 been procured from Cyrus that the Jews may return to 
 their own land. Ezekiel has prepared the people inwardlj^ 
 for their return, and for the establishment of the forms of 
 the theocracy. The people had been sifted at the close as at 
 the beginning of the exile. The work of Ezekiel and Daniel 
 had been amongst this better class. It was the better and 
 more pious people who would leave their houses and return 
 to Jerusalem to rebuild that desolated city. Returning to 
 their own land, new opposition meets them from the Samar- 
 itans, and other enemies. The exiles were under strong 
 temptation, therefore, to succumb to despair. Haggai and 
 Zechariah cheer them under present trials and discourage- 
 ments, by showing : 1. That their present weakness was no 
 indication that God was not with them. For in spite of 
 present adversities they should rise higher than ever before. 
 The}^ were shown also that the heathen nations should be 
 brought low, and pour in their resources to them ; Ezra 
 
V -O 
 
 -/? 
 
113 
 
 5 : 1 ; 6 : 14. 2. The altered condition and disposition of 
 the heathen nations. Haggai and Zechariah appear to be 
 summoned to the prophetic office within one month of each 
 other, and they labored together. The book of Zechariah, 
 indeed, seems to be an expansion 'of the smaller one of Hag- 
 gai. It was the mission of both to show the people that 
 their present condition was due to temporary causes, and 
 should not last forever. But in comforting the people, and 
 in promising them that there was danger that they v/ould 
 think the glory was to come immediately, Zechariah pre- 
 pares them for additional troubles before the promises 
 should be fulfilled, and declares how signally they would be 
 delivered out of them. He dwells chiefly on the external 
 condition of the people. 
 
 Malachi is different. The people must not think that 
 the divine blessing would be given to them without regard 
 to their own character. The altered tones of the prophecies 
 grew out of the different circumstances in which they were 
 uttered. The ministry of Malachi was later than that of 
 Zechariah and Haggai ; and the temple had been built, but 
 the long years of suffering had brought to light certain evil 
 tendencies. It had shown a measure of hypocrisy. These 
 must be removed if they would enjoy the blessings which 
 the older prophets had predicted. Thus we have the O. T. 
 prophets forming themselves into a grand scheme, and each 
 period forming the preparation for that to come. The 
 prophets are, therefore, not isolated individuals, but are to 
 carry forward from age to age one divine scheme. 
 
 HAGGAI. 
 
 The name signifies " a feast." A relation has been 
 found or fancied in the fact that he labored for the restora- 
 tion of the feast of the Jewish rituals. He is mentioned in 
 Ezra 5:1; 6 : 14. The duration of his ministry is unknown. 
 The discourses in his book were all delivered within four 
 months. It would be precarious to say from this that his 
 ministry lasted only four months, as it would be, from Ezra 
 6 : 14, to say that it lasted through the entire reign. 
 
 Four discourses. — The dates of all which are accurately 
 given. It is not probable that these are the only discourses 
 he ever uttered. They are the only ones for the benefit of 
 
114 
 
 the church in the time to come. Cyrus had no sooner died, 
 than the adversaries obtained from the king decrees adverse 
 to the building of the temple. Haggai strives to waken them 
 to courage, to the rebuilding of the temple. These dis- 
 courses were delivered in the second year of Darius. 
 
 1. The first (ch. 1) was addressed to Zerubbabel, governor 
 of Judah, and to Joshua, *the high-priest. Hag. 1:1. It 
 reprimanded them for the suspension of the building of 
 God's house, while they content themselves with dwelling 
 in their own houses. He urges them to go at once and 
 bring wood to build the house. The efi^Bct was that the 
 people began that same month to build. 
 
 2 The second discourse (2 : 1-9) there was danger 
 that the people who had seen the former temple would 
 despise the latter one ; and there is need that Haggai should 
 tell them that the glory of this latter house would be greater 
 than the former. This universal shaking of all nations in- 
 cludes convulsions to take place through all the world. It 
 is the convulsion of states and nations which is shown forth, 
 and it is to take place for the glory of God. The people of 
 God were weak. Their enemies were powerful. But the 
 shaking of the world would begin in a little while, and it 
 should be destroyed. After all had been shaken down, 
 God's house should remain. The design for which this is to 
 take place should fill this house with glory. A common 
 interpretation is that " the desire of all nations " (2 : 7) is 
 the Messiah. Therefore the meaning would be, that the 
 shaking of all nations would be in order that " the desire of 
 all nations," i. e., the Messiah should come. There are 
 many things attractive in this interpretation, and it coin- 
 cides well with the result. Still an inspection of the proph- 
 et's language in the original will do away with this interpre- 
 tation. The verb '' come " agreeing with " desire of all 
 nations," is in the plural, though the noun " desire " is in 
 the singular, feminine. The agreement, therefore, is in sense 
 and not in letter. " The desire of all nations " is, in the 
 Septuagint, " the most desirable of all nations ; " that is, the 
 result will be the conversion of the choicest nations. This 
 is closely allied to the real meaning. " The desire of all 
 nations " — those things that the nations desire — their valu- 
 ables. It is applied to jewels and other precious objects. 
 The present structure seems mean and poor in comparison 
 with the temple of Solomon, but the prophet tells them that 
 God would shake down all nations till they should lose their 
 
116 
 
 hostility to Him. And they would delight to help Israel to 
 fill the house of God with glory. They should bring their 
 treasures to it, or more probably the glory— the treasures 
 themselves. In order to assure them of His ability to ac- 
 complish this, He adds further promises. Consequently at 
 any time He pleases. He can give* peace to His people. 
 Upon this interpretation we are not clear to the very letter 
 of the passage. The real temple signifies the spiritual. 
 
 3. Third discourse, 2 : 10-19. This relates to the first 
 discourse. Everything is vitiated by their former neglect, 
 but God's blessing will attend their reviving zeal. 
 
 4. Fourth discourse, 2 : 20-23. It is related to the second. 
 The shaking of the heavens and the earth, the overthrow of 
 hostile kingdoms, while Zerubbabel, as the representative of 
 the royal house of David, is chosen and protected. 
 
 ZECHARIAH. 
 
 Name, parentage, priestly descent, age, beginning of 
 ministry, its duration. Matt. 23 : 35. Three parts : 1. Chs. 
 1-6, series of visions. 2. Chs. 7, 8, answer to a question 
 proposed by the people. 3. Chs. 9-14, prophecies in literal 
 terms relating to future fortunes of God's people. Difficulty 
 in the citation. Matt. 27: 9; various solutions, Zechariah not 
 the author, error in transcription, a peculiar order of the 
 prophets, combined reference to two passages. Genuineness 
 of chs. 9-14; objections; (a) style and character; (b) inci- 
 dental allusions, Judah and Israel, 11 : 14, or Ephraim, 9 • 
 13; 10: 6,7; but see 1 : 19; 8: 13, Ezek. 37 : 16; king of 
 Gaza, 9 : 5, Assyria and Egypt, 10 : 10, 11 ; idolatry, 10 : 2 ; 
 13 : 2. No allusion to any king in Judah. Position in this 
 book not explicable otherwise. Divisions. I. Chs. 1-6, 
 eight visions. First, 1 : 7-17, man on red horse; second, 1 • 
 8-21, four horns and carpenters; third, ch. 2, measuring 
 line; fourth, ch. 3, high-priest in filthy garments; fifth, ch. 
 4, candlestick and two olive trees; sixth, 5: 1-4, flying roll ; 
 seventh, 5 : 5-11, woman in an ephah ; eighth, 6: 1-8, 
 chariots issuing from between two mountains. Symbolical 
 section, 6 : 9-15, the crowned priest. II. Chs. 7, 8, continued 
 observance of fasts; 7 : 4-14, rebuke of spirit in which they 
 had been kept; ch. 8, happy future. III. Chs. 9-14, scenes 
 from future fortunes of God's people, from their protection 
 in the time of Alexander to final overthrow of all enemies. 
 
116 
 
 Ch. 9: burden of Hadrach, pledge of protection, vs. 9, 10 in 
 Zion's King, Maccabean deliverance, v. 13. Ch. 11 : Deso- 
 lation of land, vs. 1-3, its predicted cause, vs. 4-14, the 
 treatment of the good shepherd, Beauty and Bands, three 
 shepherds cut off, his price ; vs. 15-17, abandoned to foolish 
 shepherd. Chs. 12, 13 : Jerusalem assailed, delivered, out- 
 pouring of spirit, mourning by families, fountain opened, 
 sin abandoned ; judgment to follow the smiting of the shep- 
 herd. Ch. 14 : Jerusalem besieged by all nations, taken, 
 miraculous rescue, living waters, judgment on gathered foes, 
 universal consecration. 
 
 MALACHI. 
 
 Name, date, self-righteousness of people {a) claiming that 
 they had fultilled their duty ; [b) demanding a better recom- 
 pense. Two parts : I. 1:2; 2 : 16, their obligations and 
 sins; (a) 1:2-5, their obligations to God; (6)1:6; 2:9, 
 sins directly against God ; [c) 2 : 10-16, against their breth- 
 ren. II. 2:17; 4 : 6, judgment and recompense; («)2:17; 
 3 : 6, severity of the test which the Lord shall apply at his 
 coming; messenger to prepare the way ; Angel of the cove- 
 nant, Christ contemplated not as a redeemer but a judge ; 
 (6) 3 : 7-12, their desert of the curse with which they had 
 been visited ; (c) 3 : 13 ; 4:6, distinction to be made between 
 the righteous and the wicked. Elijah ; the last of the 
 prophets ends with the announcement of the herald of the 
 new dispensation. 
 
 MICAH. 
 
 Name, Morasthite, in days of Jotham, Ahaz and Heze- 
 kiah. Title disputed, {a) from form of prophet's name. 
 But various forms used interchangeably in same passage : 
 and masoretic note to Jer. 26 : 18 no proof of later usage ; 
 (6) from subject of prophecy, but see 1 : 5, 6; (e) from Jer. 
 26 : 18, but this does not limit his ministry to reign of 
 Hezekiah ; {d) from contents of book, but disagreement of 
 those who allege it ; 4 : 9, 10 does not refer to carrying away 
 of Manasseh ; denial of prophetic foresight. 
 
117 
 
 Summary of prophet's ministry, not distinct discourses. 
 Three sections ch. 1, 2, chs. 3-5, chs. 6, 7. In the first 
 judgment preponderates, and negative side of coming salva- 
 tion. In the second, mercy, the positive salvation, person 
 of Messiah. In the third, the threatenings justified, and 
 promises appropriated. 
 
118 
 THE FULFILMENT OF PROPHECY. 
 
 Abridged from Dr. Green's article in Princeton Review, Jan., 1861. 
 
 Between prophecy and its fulfilment in history, there can 
 be no discrepancy ; but there may be, and there is, a very 
 wide difierence in the mode of their representation. Prophecy 
 surveys its objects from its own definite point of view. His- 
 tory sets each in its proper position in respect of time and 
 attendant circumstances. 
 
 The prophetic dift'ers from the historical mode of repre- 
 sentation chiefly in respect, first, to the time, and second, to 
 the form of the events predicted. Prophecy very commonly 
 neglects the relations of time. It was seldom necessary, in 
 order to the lesson to be drawn from the future events, that 
 anything should be known as to the time of their occur- 
 rence, their precise duration, or the intervals which were to 
 separate them. Again, the revelation of time might defeat 
 the design of the lesson itself. The knowledge that a judg- 
 ment was still far off, might convert it for the present into a 
 temptation to carnal securit3^ 
 
 Where any important end was to be answered by it, the 
 time was definitely revealed. 
 
 To Abraham, Gen. 15 : 3, the four hundred years of 
 oppression. 
 
 To Isaiah, 7 : 8, the sixty-five years within which Eph- 
 raim was to cease being a people ; also 16 : 14, the three 
 years to the humbling of Moab ; 21 : 16, the one year to 
 the reduction of Kedar; 23: 17, the seventy years of Tyre's 
 depression. 
 
 To Jeremiah, 29 : 10, the seventy years of the captivity. 
 
 To Habakkuk, 1 : 5, its occurrence in the life-time of his 
 hearers. 
 
 To Daniel, 9 : 24-26, the seventy weeks to Messiah's 
 coming. 
 
 Sometimes where the precise time was unimportant, 
 gome idea of its relative duration was desirable. Cf. Ezek. 
 4:5,6; 29:9,12. In Revelation, the three years and a 
 half of the humiliation of the church, and three days and 
 a half of the triumph of antichrist, and the thousand years 
 of the reign of the saints. All the above Dr. Green cites 
 with a " perhaps." 
 
 Relations of time may be disregarded in four ways : 
 
119 
 
 1st. The logical method ; when events are grouped 
 agreeably to their affinities or their relation of cause and 
 effect ; irrespective of their chronological position. Thus a 
 denunciation of the penalty may immediately follow upon a 
 charge of sin, because they are indissolubly linked together, 
 whatever interval of time may separate them. 
 
 Any event in the progress of God's plan of grace may be 
 set in connection with the ultimate result to which it looks, 
 and of which it is a necessary or important antecedent. The 
 curse upon Canaan, Gen. 9: 25, did not enter upon its ac- 
 complishment until ages after it had been uttered. The 
 promise to the patriarchs, Gen. 26 : 4, was that they should 
 have a numerous posterity, possess the land of their sojourn- 
 ings, and all nations be blessed in them. The salvation of 
 the world is here joined with the multiplication of their 
 descendants and their settlements in Canaan, and there is no 
 intimation that the events may not be simultaneous or im- 
 mediately successive. Habakkuk, 2 : 14, fall of Babylon 
 and the glory of the Lord filling the earth ; the destruction 
 of that great oppressing power one of the necessary antece- 
 dents to the perfect triumph and universality of the King- 
 dom of God. 
 
 The prophets often present events in classes according 
 to their respective characters. Joel throws together all the 
 evils to be experienced by the chosen people under the sym- 
 bol of the ravages of locusts ; then the l)lessings they were 
 to experience ; and lastly, the judgments upon their foes. 
 Yet these three were intermingled throughout the entire 
 course of history. Cf Is. 10 : 11 ; 40 : 66 : Jerem. 33; Mes- 
 siah and return from Babylon. Zech. 9 : 8. 9. 
 
 2d. The complex method : events, which occupy long 
 periods in their performance and advance by successive 
 stages, are condensed into a single picture. The character- 
 istic features which it assumes at different periods, belong 
 still to one common subject, and are properly included in its 
 complete delineation. Thus, the fall of a great empire is 
 commonly not accomplished in a moment. The heavy blow 
 which initiates the process of decline may be separated by 
 centuries from the complete ruin. The prophets give to the 
 whole its unity and connection by exhibiting it in a single 
 ficene. Isaiah, 13: 17-22 links the capture of Babylon by 
 the Medes with its final and utter desolation ; its decline 
 began with the conquest of Cyrus, although it continued for 
 a long; time to flourish. 
 
120 
 
 The prophets often link divine judgments upon partic- 
 ular nations with the final judgment upon the whole world ; 
 these diiferent acts being but parts of the one continued exer- 
 cise of his punitive justice. Is. 13: 6-13, fall of Babylon 
 connected with the day of the Lord when the sun and stars 
 shall be darkened and the earth removed out of its place. 
 Mat. 24, destruction of Jerusalem linked with end of the 
 world. Zech. 9 : 9, 10, Christ riding upon an ass and reign- 
 ing from sea to sea; his work in humiliation and exaltation, 
 being viewed in its totality. Cf. Joel, 2: 28-32, the begin- 
 ning and end of the Messianic period is presented in its 
 unity. 
 
 3d. The apotelesmatic method; the last of a long series 
 of events is described to the exclusion of the others, in order 
 to exhibit the matter in its mature form. As the political 
 philosopher often neglects to describe a constitution in its 
 earlier and undeveloped form, speaking of it only in its 
 completion ; so the prophets most frequently present the 
 Kingdom of Christ in its triumph and glory. It is to be 
 judged by what it shall be when all opposition is vanquished, 
 and it is allowed, without restraint or foreign commixture, 
 to put on its own proper form, and to reveal its true nature. 
 Is. 11, rod of Jesse immediately followed by the wolf dwell- 
 ing with the lamb. Cf. Dan. 2 : 44. 
 
 4th. The generic method; predictions are made, not of 
 an individual event, but of a series, in each of which they 
 have a separate fulfilment. They are commonly such as 
 reveal a principle in the divine administration, which secures 
 a fixed result from given antecedents ; as often as the con- 
 ditions exist, so often will the predicted consequence follow. 
 Jesus announced this rule. Matt. 24 : 28. 
 
 Deut. 4 : 25, ft, transgression to be punished at the hands 
 of the heathen, and mercy to follow repentance; again and 
 again fulfilled. So, too. Is. 40 : 3, " voice crying, prepare 
 the way of the Lord." So, too, outpouring of the Spirit, 
 Joel, 2: 28. 
 
 Three varieties of the generic prophecy : 
 
 (1) One event, as being important or most fully realiz- 
 ing the common idea, is alone described. Deut. 18 : 18, the 
 expressions employed are applicable to all the prophets, but 
 find their highest application in Christ. 
 
 (2.) No one of the events exactly represented, but individ- 
 ual traits borrowed from many in the series and blended. 
 
121 
 
 2 Sara. 7 : 12-16, the perpetual ro3'alty of David's seed 
 includes all his descendants who sat upon the theocratic 
 throne, and also Christ. Some of the expressions arc con- 
 formed to one, others to another of the subjects to which it 
 was intended to apply. In the later prophecies of Isaiah, 
 " the servant of the Lord " applies to the chosen people and 
 to the Redeemer; they had the common commission to per- 
 petuate and spread the true religion. Israel had a part in 
 these predictions, for his name is given to this " servant," 
 49 : 3; and he is charged with unfaithfulness, 42 : 19. Yet 
 the title belongs in its high sense only to the Messiah, for 
 the vicarious atonement as ascribed to him, 53. The fulfil- 
 ment by Israel falls within the prediction, but the work of 
 the Messiah is coincident with it. 
 
 No mystical or hidden sense is in the words, the same 
 fact or principle, which is represented in the one, appears 
 likewise, but in greater perfection in the other. One of the 
 events may even be past. Thus the Messianic psalms have 
 a partial application to experiences of David and Solomon, 
 or, as in Ps. 8, to man in general ; but the terms employed 
 would be extravagant, if nothing more was intended by 
 them. The only adequate explanation is their additional 
 reference to Christ. 
 
 (3.) The prophecy may be restricted to what is common 
 to all the events. 
 
 A generic element is more or less involved in all 
 prophecies. The facts may not occur again in the precise 
 form ; but the laws are permanent, and will have other ex- 
 emplifications. This explains why later prophets, in adopt- 
 ing the language of their predecessors, not unfrequently 
 make a new application of it. Jer. 48 : 43, 44, about Moab, 
 quoting what Is. 24 : 17, 18, had said of the whole earth. 
 Also Jer. 11 : 19, with Is. 53 : 7. Nahum 1 : 15, with Is. 
 52 : 7. Revelation resumes the ancient prophecies concern- 
 ing Babylon. 
 
 Prophecy may also depart from the strictly historical 
 form. 
 
 In this the same two-fold design as in the neglect of 
 time; viz., the partial obscuring of the events revealed, and 
 the greater distinctness and force of the lessons conveyed. 
 
 Had God seen best, he might have revealed the details. 
 He often did so. Cyrus predicted by name, Is. 44:28; 
 likewise Josiah, I Kings, 13 : 2. The birth of Christ of a 
 virgin at Bethlehem, &c. 
 
122 
 
 Two methods adopted. 
 
 Ist. The identity of the object predicted is retained with 
 a mere diversity of form. The future object is spoken of, 
 Dot as it shall actually be at the time of its fulfilment, but as 
 it is at the time of the prediction. It was spoken of as the 
 people know it, being thus more intelligible to them. 
 
 Thus, objects common to the two dispensations are, as a 
 rule, called by their 0. T. names and presented in their 0. T. 
 form. God's people constantly called Israel their habita- 
 tion ; Canaan, the seat of God's worship or his dwelling 
 place; Jerusalem, Zion of the temple. The conversion of 
 the heathen is represented by their erecting altars in their 
 land and engaging in the ritual worship. Is. 19 : 19 ; ofi'er- 
 ing incense and oblations in every place, Mai. 1 : 11 ; keep- 
 ing feast of Tabernacles, Zech. 14 : 16 ; paying annual or 
 even monthly and weekly visits to Jerusalem, Is. 66:23; 
 and enrolled amongst the Levitical priesthood. Is. 66 : 21 ; 
 although at the time to which these predictions refer, this 
 particular mode of worship would be abolished. 
 
 The outpouring of the Spirit, Joel 2 : 28, is described 
 under the form of speaking with tongues, though sanctifica- 
 tion was the universal manifestation. 
 
 Names of nations, hostile to the Kingdom of God, are 
 used to those in whom this hostility is perpetuated. Joel, 
 3:19, Egypt and Edom. Cf. Mic. 5 : 5, 6 ; Is. 11 : 14. 
 
 Unity of the people under Messiah is represented by the 
 healing of the breach between Judah and Israel, Is. 11 : 13; 
 Jer. 3 : 18. Messiah to sit on David's throne. Is. 9 : 7. Cf. 
 Ezek. 34 : 23, Hos. 3 : 5. We of to-day constantly use the 
 words Canaan, Israel, Zion. 
 
 The statements, however, are not false nor inaccurate ; 
 simply there is no disclosure made of the changes to be 
 effected in the plan of grace. Even so everything is not 
 made known to us now that is to be revealed hereafter. We 
 have glimpses of but cannot imagine precisely the future. 
 From the glimpses given to the prophets of the future, they 
 invariably return to the representation of the future under 
 forms then existing. Isaiah connects with the new heaven 
 and the new earth, 65 : 17, building houses and inhabiting 
 them, planting vineyards and eating the fruit, 66 : 22. Cf. 
 Joel, 3 : 17 : Zech. 14 : 16. 
 
 The literalists maintain that the predictions respecting 
 Israel, Jerusalem and Canaan, in the days of the Messiah 
 
123 
 
 :and the establishment of his Kingdom in Zion, are to have 
 .a national and local fulfilment. They should 
 
 1. Remember the principle underlying the whole mat- 
 ter, which is far more comprehensive than the particular 
 cases in dispute. 
 
 2. Interpret all prophecies consistently and upon some 
 settled method. 
 
 2nd. Another similar object may by a figure be sub- 
 stituted for it. This may be a figure of speech or symbol. 
 Is. 2 : 2 " Mentioned of Lord's house shall be ex- 
 alted above the hills ; " in strict sense of words, a physical 
 change, but doubtless a moral change of analogous nature is 
 intended. 
 
 In the symbolical prophecy, one thing not merely il- 
 lustrates another, but is substituted for it. The symbol 
 may be 
 
 a. Presented to the senses. Zech. 6 : 11, the high priest 
 Joshua, crowned with silver and gold brought from Babylon, 
 symbolizes Messiah as both priest and king, to whom all in 
 distant lands should lend their aid. The symbolical action 
 of the prophets are instances of the same kind. 
 
 b. Exhibited in vision or dream. The temple and its 
 worship, Ezek. 40 ; the image of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, 
 Dan. 2, symbolical of the future state of the theocracy. Cf 
 Dan. 8, Zech. 1. 
 
 c. Simply described, and thus partake of the nature of 
 allegory. The locusts, Joel, 1 : 2, represent the foes of the 
 covenant people. Cf Hos. 1:3; Ezek. 17 : 23. 
 
 Aids in interpreting symbolical prophecies are three : 
 
 (1.) The prominent qualities and associations. Symbols 
 in the Scriptures not like letters of the alphabet, arbitrary 
 and with no resemblance between the sign and the thing 
 signified. The locusts, Joel, 1 : 2, are a natural emblem of 
 foreign invaders; filthy garments, Zech. 3: 4, of sin ; crowns, 
 Zech. 6: 11, of royalty. 
 
 (2.) Established usage. Symbols must have a uniform 
 signification, if they are to be an intelligible medium of 
 communicating ideas. 
 
 Some interpret the brazen serpent as a healer, and refer 
 to the serpent in Egyptian symbolism, where it denotes 
 healing, and to its use in the worship of yEsculapius. It is 
 more natural, however, to conclude that either the serpent 
 form in Num. 2 : 8, is not symbolical ; or else that it retains 
 its constant signification of destroyer (Cf. Rev. 12: 9; 20; 
 
124 
 
 2; and Gen. 3), and, being transfixed and harmless, indicates 
 a victory over the destroyer. 
 
 Many symbols borrowed from the Levitical institutions ; 
 being familiar, sacred and significant of the very truths with 
 which prophecy was concerned. The signification, belong- 
 ing to thera in their original connection, is always retained. 
 Cherubim, Ezek. 1, and temple, 40. 
 
 If the symbol be not illustrated by scriptural usage, we 
 should consider the symbolical use of the same object among 
 other ancient nations, especially those with which Israel was 
 brought into contact. 
 
 (3) Authoritative explanation furnished by inspiration' 
 sometimes given by the prophet himself. Daniel states the 
 symbol and adds the interpretation of Neb. 's dream, 2. 
 
 Sometimes by a letter writer of scripture. " Son of" 
 man," Dan. 7 : 13, is applied by Christ to himself The little 
 horn of Daniel's fourth beast, 7, with 2 Thes. 2 : 3. 
 
 Sometimes the explanation is indirectly given by ming- 
 ling literal language with the description of the symbol. Cf. 
 Zech. 3:1. 
 
 Distinguish Prophecies. — To distinguish prophecies 
 which adhere to the historical form from those in which it 
 is neglected, the following suggestions suffice : 
 
 1. In prophecies already accomplished, the criterion is 
 to be found in the fulfilment. That Christ should rise from 
 the dead without seeing corruption, Ps. 16 : 10 ; that his 
 garments should be })arted, etc., Ps. 22 : 18, are shown by 
 the event to have been literally intended. The drying up 
 of the river of Egypt, Is. 19: 5, coming of Elijah, Mai. 4: 5, 
 are shown to have been figurative. Perhaps, however, the 
 prophecy has as yet been but partially fulfilled and what was 
 only figuratively true of the past may come to pass literally 
 in the future, Is. 13 : 10. 
 
 2. Comparison with other prophecies in the O. or N. T. 
 relating to the same subject, is valuable. The figures of one 
 may be detected by the literal language of another, or by the 
 figures of another with which they would be incompatible 
 if literally understood. 
 
 Heathen, when converted, build altars, and ofl'er sacri- 
 fices in their own land, Is. 19 : 19-21 ; and that in all parts 
 of the earth, Mai. 1:11. Yet they are said to go up to Jer- 
 usalem to worship. Is. 2 : 3. 
 
 Cf. Joel, 3 : 18 with Ezek. 47 : 1, Zech. 14 : 8. 
 
 Cf Ezek. 38 : 2 with Rev. 20 : 8. 
 
125 
 
 3. N, T. teaches that the restrictions of the old economy 
 and its ceremonial are now abolished. Consequently, if any 
 prediction speaks of these obselete forms in connection with 
 Messianic times, it must be understood, not according to its 
 letter, but according to its spirit. See Gal. 4:9; Acts 15 : 
 
 10 ; Heb. 10 : 1, 2 ; John 4 : 21 ; Eph. 2 : 14. 
 
 4. The figurative character ot a prophecy is often stated 
 or suggested. Ezek. 37 : 11, declares the resurrection of the 
 dry bones to mean the restoration of Israel. Also, Dan. 
 7:8; Joel, 2 : 4, 5, 20 ; Zech. 10 : 11 ; Jer. 25 : 15. 
 
 6, When the terms of a prediction stand in evident rela- 
 tion to the past history of the chosen people, or to typical 
 events and institutions, there is reason to suspect that these 
 may be figuratively employed 
 
 Thus a second dividing of the Red Sea, Is. 11 : 15. 
 
 See, also, Ezek. 20 : 34-38, Is. 48 : 21, Ezek. 38 : 22, Is. 
 
 11 : 6-8, 65 : 25. 
 
 6. If the literal explanation would involve a physical im- 
 possibility, or a manifest incongruity, this is a clear index 
 of the figurative character of a prediction. 
 
 Ezek. 42 : 16, a temple of this size could not be placed 
 upon Mt. Moriah. See, also, Rev. 21 : 16, Joel, 2 : 20, Ezek. 
 39 : 12. 
 
 7. The general literary style of a prophet affords a hint 
 as to the character of a particular passage in his writings. 
 
 8. In prophecies yet unfulfilled, the developments of 
 Providence must decide. It could not have been known in 
 advance that the prophetic appellations, Josiah, 1 K. 13 : 2, 
 and Cyrus, Is. 45 : 1, 4, were to be real names; and that 
 Immanuel, Is. 7 : 14, was not. See, also, Mai. 4 : 5. 
 
 9. The line between figurative and literal prophecies is 
 not to be too sharply drawn, as though these formed quite 
 distinct classes. The same prophecy may be intended and 
 fulfilled in both senses. Opening the eyes of the blind and 
 the ears of the deaf. Is. 35 : 5, was fulfilled literally in the 
 miracles of Christ and figuratively in the blessings of the 
 gospel dispensation. See, also, Hag. 2 : 7-9, Zech. 9 : 9. 
 
 The literal fulfillment sometimes serves to identify the 
 subject of the figurative. That John came preaching in the 
 wilderness of Judea, was an external sign that he was 
 the voice spoken of by Isaiah as crying in the spiritual wil- 
 derness, " Prepare." John 19 : 36, a literal mark of simili- 
 tude, identifies Christ as the true paschal lamb. 
 
1-26 
 
 The study of a prophecy is for the purpose of drawing^ 
 therefrom instruction, and is therefore quite distinct from 
 the study of its fulfillment. As to the latter, two directions 
 are important. 
 
 Fulfillment of Prophecy. — 1. It should be preceded 
 by a thorough study of the prophecy itself. The reversion 
 of this order has led to the most extravagant results. Some 
 of the old Dutch interpreters found in the O. T. prophecies 
 all the events of the Thirty Years' War. 
 
 2. The student should proceed from the plain to the 
 obscure, from the fulfilled to the unfulfilled. When engaged 
 upon prophecies which are clear, or where the fulfillment is 
 before his eyes, the student is in less danger of error, and 
 may correct his result by the divine exposition afforded by 
 the event. Having thus tested and adjusted his methods, 
 he may adventure prudently and cautiously into those whose 
 fulfillment is still future. 
 
 Uses of the study of the fulfillment of prophecy^ 
 
 Ist. Practical ; it sheds light upon duty and the incen- 
 tives to its faithful performance. We learn also the nature 
 of the events which are transpiring around us and their 
 place in the divine plan. Thus the early Christians antici- 
 pated the destruction of Jerusalem and made good their 
 escape. 
 
 2nd. Apologetic; there is no clearer proof of Divinity 
 than infallible foreknowledge of the distant and contingent 
 future. There are so many plain prophecies that the 
 strength of the argument could not be increased by the ad- 
 dition of more. 
 
 Actual Fulfillment. — To the question, whether all the 
 prophecies of Scripture have been or are to be fulfilled, a 
 negative answer has been returned by two very difterent 
 classes of interpreters, and on essentially different grounds. 
 Many believers in the inspiration of the prophets have con- 
 tended that certain prophecies contain implied conditions 
 upon which their fulfillment or non-fulfillment, according to 
 the tenor of their announcement, is suspended. The Socin- 
 ians held it to be inconsistent wdth the liberty of free agents 
 that their acts should be foreknown or certainly determined 
 beforehand; all predictions relating to the free acts of men 
 must, consequently, upon this theory, be contingent or con- 
 ditional. The schoolmen distinguish three sorts of prophe- 
 cies — prophetia prcedestionationis, prophetia praescientice and 
 prophetia comminationis. The prophecy of predestination is 
 
12^ 
 
 when the event depends wholly upon God's will, without 
 any respect to the will of man, as the prophecy of the incar- 
 nation of Christ; the prophecy of prescience is of such 
 things as depend upon the liberty of man's will ; and the 
 prophecy of commination denotes God's denunciations of 
 heavy judgments against a people. The first and second 
 rest upon the Divine decree and foreknowledge, and they 
 always take effect ; the third is a simple declaration of what 
 is deserved, and, in the existing state of things, is to be ex- 
 pected, but which need not follow if the antecedent condi- 
 tions are altered. 
 
 The decisive objection to this view, on whatever footing 
 it is placed, or by whatever grounds it is defended, is that 
 the inspired criterion for distinguishing true from false 
 prophets, is the accomplishment of their predictions, Deut. 
 xviii. 22. This test would be practically rendered nugatory 
 if predictions of specific events, expressed in absolute terms 
 and with no intimation of any condition, might fail of ful- 
 filment, and yet be true prophecies. And that Jeremiah 
 xviii. 7-10, had no intention of nullifying this test, appears 
 from his appeal to it in his contest with Hananiah, Jer. xxviii. 
 9. The righteous dispensations of God towards men are 
 indeed conditioned by their character and conduct, so that a 
 change in them is followed by a change in his dealings with 
 them, which the Scriptures, employing the language of men 
 and speaking according to the outward appearance, often 
 described as a change in the Divine mind. But God's eternal 
 purpose never changes. His foresight of the future is not 
 conditional, but absolute, and he may, if he pleases, reveal 
 it absolutely. When a specific good is unconditionally 
 promised, therefore, it is because it is certain to the divine 
 mind that his mercy will not be taken away from the object 
 of his favor. When a specific evil is similarly threatened, it 
 is with the certainty that they who are thus doomed are in- 
 corrigible and will not repent. Even where this is the case, 
 as in Isa. vi. 9, etc., the prophecy is not useless, as Fairbairn 
 objects. It still serves two important purposes. It is a wit- 
 ness on God's behalf and against the obdurate offenders, 
 that judgment did not come upon them without just cause, 
 or without antecedent warning ; and it may be the means of 
 leading individuals to repentance and salvation, though the 
 unbelieving mass persist in going on to ruin. There may 
 be no claim upon God, ab extra, to fulfil his threatenings, 
 but the reasons of his acts are in himself, and his inviolable 
 
128 
 
 truth and justice stand in the way of his revoking them. 
 Whenever the moral effect of a prophecy required that it 
 should be conditional, it is made so in express terms. Or, 
 the same end may be answered by leaving it indefinite, an- 
 nouncing some general prmciple of the Divine administra- 
 tion, without specifying when or how it shall go into effect, 
 or, at least, leaving the time undetermined. But whatever 
 is absolutely declared by the prophet, is to be absolutely un- 
 derstood. The most plausible exception is that derived from 
 the case of Jonah. Nineveh continued to stand, notwith- 
 standing his having been sent of God with the declaration, 
 " Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown." But, 
 as Hengstenberg has well said, we have only this general 
 statement respecting Jonah's preaching there, not the preach- 
 ing itself No doubt this was such as to indicate the only 
 hope of escape lay in a timely repentance. It was, at least, 
 so understood by the Ninevites, and they acted accordingly. 
 Jonah's displeasure at the sparing of the city cannot be urged 
 in proof of the unconditional character of his prophecy ; for 
 there is reason to believe that this did not arise from the 
 fear of his being discredited as a prophet, but rather from 
 his distress at seeing the mercy of God transferred from 
 obdurate Israel to their penitent foes. Jer. 26 : 18, 19, to 
 which Caspari * appeals in proof of the conditional character 
 of Micah's prophecy, iii. 12, is still less to the point. It sim- 
 ply repeats the opinion of certain elders, without vouching 
 for its correctness. The prediction in question relates to an 
 event whose time was not defined by the prophet, although 
 intimated, iv. 10, and it was fulfilled to the letter. 
 
 On the other hand, unbelievers in the inspiration of the 
 prophets allege that several of their predictions failed of ac- 
 complishment, thereby showing that they had no certain 
 knowledge of the future. Thus De Wette : f " Jer. xxii. 18, 
 etc., xxxvi. 30, appear not to have been fulfilled, comp. 2 
 Kings xxiv. 6; 2 Chron. xxxvi. 6. The following are not 
 fulfilled: Amos vii. 11 ; Hosea ix. 3, xi. 5; Isa. xxii., xxix., 
 xvi. 14; xxiii. ; Jer. xliii. 8, etc., xlix. 7, etc.; Ezek. xxxv., 
 
 * Caspari on Micah, p. 160. 
 
 f Einleitung in die A. T. | 204. In the translation of this work by 
 Theodore Parker, the translator has mistaken his author's meaning, when he 
 makes him say, " The definite predictions of Ezekiel xii. xxiv. 25, 26, xxxiii. 
 21, 22, seem not to have been fulfilled." De Wette merety alleges these as 
 instances of the prediction of specific events, without denying their fulfilment, 
 this being too plain to be questioned. , 
 
129 
 
 xxix., xxxviii , etc. ; not accurately fultilled, Isa. vii 17, etc., 
 yiii. 4, xiv. 23, xvii. 1-3, xxxiv. 9, etc." But even if vve 
 were not able to prove that these particular prophecies have 
 been accomplished, this would not affect the argument of 
 inspiration from the remainder, many of which have been 
 most signally and undeniably fulfilled. This is sufficient, 
 likewise, to show that we should be slow to admit the non- 
 fulfillment of any prophecy uttered by those who are so 
 clearly attested as the messengers of God. Nothing but the 
 plainest and most undeniable evidence can justify such an 
 admission. But so far from this being afforded, an examina- 
 tion of the passages adduced by De Wette, will show that 
 his denial rests in every case upon a false interpretation of 
 the passages themselves, a want of historical knowledge, or 
 the groundless assumption that the prophecies contemplate 
 only the immediate future. Amos vii. 11, 'Jeroboam shall 
 die by the sword,' is not the language of Amos, but words 
 which Amaziah slanderously puts into his mouth, to make 
 him odious to the king. The real words of Amos were, vii. 
 9, " I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword," 
 which came to pass, 2 Kings xv. 10. Ezekiel's prophecy 
 respecting Gog, chaps, xxxviii., xxxix., relates to events still 
 future. Isaiah, ch. xxxiv., blends the final judgment with 
 the judgment upon Edom. Isa. vii. 17, the invasion of Judah 
 by the king of Assyria; Isa. xiv. 23, the utter desolation of 
 Babylon; and Jer. xlix. 7, etc. ; Ezek. ch. xxxv., that of 
 Edom, have been fulfilled to the letter, and the length of 
 time which mtervened between the predictions and their ac- 
 complishment, only enhances the evidence of prophetic fore- 
 sight. According to 2 Kings xv. 29, xvi. 9, the riches of 
 Damascus and the spoil of Samaria (not the city, but the 
 kingdom) were taken away before the king of Assyria with- 
 in the time predicted, Isa. viii. 4. That Damascus was in 
 consequence temporarily desolated. Isa. xvii. 1-3, is as 
 credible as the desolation of Samaria and Jerusalem in their 
 respective captivities. In regard to Isa. xvi. 14, the over- 
 throw of Moab within three years, Isa. xxiii., the humiliation 
 of Tyre for seventy years, and its subsequent revival, and 
 Jer. xliii. 8, etc., Ezek. xxix., Nebuchadnezzar's subjugation 
 of Egypt, the sole difficulty arises from the deficiency of his- 
 torical records. We know nothing of Moab's history, except 
 from the incidental references occasionally made to it in the 
 Old Testament. But it was, in all probability, devastated by 
 the Assyrian armies, which so often invaded Palestine. It 
 is well known that Tyre was besieged b}' Nebuchadnezzar 
 
130 
 
 for thirteen years, and there is good reason to believe suc- 
 cessfully, although the fact of its capture does not happen to 
 be mentioned in express terms. It cannot, at any rate, be 
 disproved ; neither can his conquest of Egypt, which is, 
 moreover, asserted by Josephus, Antiquities, x. 9, 7, who 
 quotes Megasthenes and Berosus to the same effect, Anti- 
 quities. X. 11, 1. These positive statements are certainly suf- 
 ficient to outweigh the silence of Herodotus and Diodorus. 
 The indignities threatened to the dead body of Jehoiakim, 
 Jer. xxii. 18, etc., xxxvi, 30, are not discredited by 2 Kings 
 xxiv. 6, 2 Chron. xxxvi. 6, for there is no conflict between 
 these passages and the prophecy. ISTor is there any reason 
 to question Josephus' explicit testimony to its fulfilment, 
 Antiq. x. 6, 3, notwithstanding its rejection by De Wette. 
 The difficulty in Isa. xxii. 29, is not so much to discover a 
 fulfilment, as to decide between difterent events which have 
 a claim to be so regarded. The invasion of Sennacherib 
 seems to have been more immediately regarded in both 
 cases. Elam and Kir, chap. xxii. 5, denote troops from those 
 nations in the Assyrian army ; and the sudden and mirac- 
 ulous defeat, xxix. 5, etc., is that of the host of the Assyrians. 
 But with this is blended the foresight, in chap, xxix, of 
 other trials and deliverances; and perhaps, in chap, xxii., of 
 the later sieges by Esar haddon and Nebuchadnezzar. Hos. 
 ix. 3, '• Ephraira shall return to Egypt," and xi. 5, " he shall 
 not return into the land of Egypt, but the Assyrian shall be 
 his king," are mutually contradictory, if regard be had 
 merely to the letter and the form of expression. In thus 
 affirming and denying the same proposition, the prophet 
 must, if he is to be absolved from the charge of inconsis- 
 tency, have intended it in different senses. Two explana- 
 tions are possible, either of which is satisfactory. He may 
 mean, Ephraim shall return to an Egypt, i. e , he shall be 
 reduced again ;o a servitude like that which he formerly ex- 
 l^erienced in that land — not in the literal Egypt, however, 
 but in Assyria. Or he may mean some of the people shall 
 return to Egypt, fugitives from Assyrian invasion; the mass, 
 however, shall be carried not to Egypt, but to Assyria. 
 Upon either of these hypotheses, the language of the pre- 
 diction accords with the event. And these explanations will 
 still hold good, though xi. 5 be translated with De Wette, 
 interrogatively, Shall he not return into the land of Egypt? 
 There is no note of interrogation in the Hebrew, however, 
 so that the declarative form, adopted in the common Eng- 
 lish version, is to be preferred. 
 

 Date Due 
 
 
 [f ! , a w 
 
 
 
 \i. - » "' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f)