Isaiah chapter 00

The Ministry of the Prophets;

OR,

THE WORK AND WRITINGS OF THOSE WHO CAME AFTER MOSES IN THE DIVINE GUIDANCE OF THE NATION OF ISRAEL.

INTRODUCTORY.

CHAPTER I.

TO build a house and to carry it on are two different things. They are the different things represented by the works respectively of Moses and the prophets. Both are works of God, but differing vastly in character and calibre. It is said to be one of the works of God by Christ that he will “ plant the heavens and lay the foundations of the earth ” (Isaiah li. 16). This, in the language of figure, is what God did by Moses for the nation of Israel at the beginning. Whereas before the time of Moses Israel was a mere race sojourning in an alien land, in subjection to the laws of Egypt, after him Israel was a nation having defined and established institutions of their own, and dwelling in a country which they had sub­jugated and which they were able to defend.

The prophets had nothing to do with establishing this great work. The work once done was done for ever. No one could come after Moses in the doing of it. It was a maxim of the constitution, “ Thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish aught therefrom,” and to this day it remains unaltered as it came from the hands of Moses. The system of things established by Moses has been destroyed, and the “ prophet like unto Moses ” will “ restore again,” “ restitute," and “regenerate” the thing destroyed. But so far as setting it up in the first instance was concerned, Moses alone was the “ mediator of the first covenant.” As such he had direct dealings with God such as none who came after him except Christ: “ There arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord (Yahweh) knew face to face ” (Deut. xxxiv. 10).

The ministry of the prophets, though equally divine, was not in the same exalted and intimate form. God Himself defined the difference during the Aaron and Miriam revolt: “If there be a prophet among you, I, the Lord, will make myself known unto him in a vision and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently and not in dark speeches, and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold ” (Num. xii. 6-8). So also in His message by Hosea, which supplies us with the name of this series of articles : “I have spoken by the prophets: I have multiplied visions and used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets ” (Hos. xii. 10).

The prophets succeeded the work of Moses—(which included that of Joshua). Their mission was to keep Israel faithful to the law delivered by Moses, and not to give a new law or amend the old. They were in a very different position from a succession of natural writers improving upon each others’ ideas. They were simple messengers of God, as God Himself declared to Jeremiah : “ Since the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt unto this day, I have sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them. Yet they hearkened not unto me nor inclined their ear. This is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God ” (Jer. vii. 25).

This is their character as defined in the summary of their work which appears at the end of the Chronicles; and is illus­trated by Christ himself in several of the parables he uttered. “The Lord God of their fathers sent them by his messengers, rising up betimes and sending : because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place. But they mocked the messengers of God and despised his words and misused his prophets until the wrath of the Lord arose against his people till there was no remedy ” (2 Chron. xxxvi. 15).

Christ s illustration will be remembered : “ There was a certain householder which planted a vineyard and hedged it round about and digged a winepress in it and built a tower and let it out to husbandmen and went info a far country. And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen that he might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants and beat one and killed another and stoned another,” etc. (Matt. xxi. 33).

But though the work of the prophets was secondary by comparison with that of Moses, and though it was primarily directed to the condition of Israel while in their land, yet we should err greatly were we to give to their writings that unim­portant and neglected place which they occupy in the general practice of Christendom. Those writings are as much the product of inspiration and as reliably communicative of the divine mind as any of the words directly addressed to Moses. The evidence of this it is simply impossible to miss in any ordinarily attentive reading of the New Testament. Jesus, for example, always conjoins Moses and the prophets as co-ordinate authorities: “ They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them ” (Luke 16: 29). “ Think not that I am come to destroy the law and the prophets. I am not come to destroy but to fulfil (Matt. v. 17).

Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself ... All things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the psalms concerning me ” (Luke xxiv. 27, 44).

It will be found upon examination that the prophets are included in all Christ’s general allusions to “ the Scriptures ” as a thing unbreakable. They are included in Paul’s general allegation that “ all Scripture is given by inspiration of God ” (2 Tim. ii. 15). They are the specific subject of Peter’s declaration, that they are “ more sure than the apostolic testimony,” if that were possible ; that they are a light in a dark place, and that they “ came not by the will of man, but holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit ” (2 Pet. i. 19, 21).

See also their constant casual recognition as the standard and fountain of Gospel truth : “The Gospel of God which he had promised before by the prophets in the holy Scripture ” (Rom. i. 2). “ By the Scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God,made known to all nations for the obedience of faith ” (chap. xvi. 26), “ Saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come ” (Acts xxvi. 22). “ Persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses and out of the prophets, from morning till evening ” (xxviii. 23).

There are numerous allusions of the same sort throughout the New Testament. Those we have quoted are conclusive. They are clinched by the statement of the angel to John in the island of Patmos: “ The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy ” (Rev. xix. 10).

The work of the prophets took various forms during the long interval lying between their entrance into the land under Joshua, and the re-building of the temple on their return from Babylon. When the prophets are spoken of, most people think of the books of the prophets forming the last part of the Bible from Isaiah to Malachi, whereas the writers of these books form only a part—and a comparatively modern part—of the order of men by whom God spoke to Israel. That order of men goes back to the very beginning, and embraces many who did not write books and some whose books have not been preserved. Their primary work was not to write books, but to deliver oral expostulations from God to Israel, to bring the nation back to harmony with Himself. If this is kept in mind, there will be none of the quandary that some appear to experience on the subject of unwritten books and lost books—people who seem to think that a prophet’s work was a failure if he did not leave something for the Bible ; and still more if he wrote something that has been lost.

They have not realised that the prophet’s primary work was the work of his own living presence in Israel, and that in the case of the preserved writings, their preservation is something over and above the natural work of their lives—a present of God’s providence to succeeding generations—for which succeeding generations have not been thankful enough. These remarks will be found verified upon a careful perusal of the history of Israel as contained in the Scriptures. The books that are preserved are sufficient for the work to be after­wards accomplished by their means. If we had not had the others, we should only have had books agreeing with those we have, as those we have agree with one another.

Another point that cannot be too strongly recognised, is that the utterances of these prophets, whether oral or written, are not to be classed with human efforts in authorship or rhetoric in any category. The modern literary habit of referring to them as “the ancient Hebrew bards ” is intended to put the prophets on a level with human writers, which means either that the prophets were not inspired, or that human poets are. Either view is a lie of the first rank, as a study of the case will show.

When the prophets were sent, it was to speak God's words, and not their own. Ezekiel’s case may be taken as illustrative of the rest: “ Son of man, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them. ... I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore, hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. . . . Then the Spirit entered into me, and set me upon my feet, and spake to me, and said unto me : Go, shut thyself within thy house. And I will make thy tongue cleave to the roof of thy mouth, that thou shalt be dumb. . . . But when I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth; and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God " (Ezek. iii. 4, 17, 24-26).

So Jeremiah : “ Whatsoever I command thee, thou shalt speak. Be not afraid of their faces, for I am with thee to deliver thee, saith the Lord. Then the Lord put forth his hand and touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold I have put my words in thy mouth ” (Jer. i. 7-9).

So Isaiah s book opens: “ Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord hath spoken. I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me... Moreover, the Lord spake unto me,” etc. (Isaiah i. 2 : viii. 1)

So also with “ the minor prophets,” of which Amos may be taken as an example : " I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son ;

but I was an herdman, and a gatherer of sycamore fruit. And the Lord took me as I followed the flock ; and the Lord said unto me : Go, prophesy unto my people Israel ” (Amos vii. 14).

In harmony with these elementary facts has to be noted this singular and distinguished peculiarity of the writings of the prophets throughout, that they constantly employ this introduction to what they have to say from time to time: “ Thus saith the Lord,” or “ Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel.” Take Jer. xxx. as an instance, chosen at random. The phrase occurs many hundreds of times. What other writing on earth is like this ?

That this is no merely Hebrew way of expressing personal authorship, but the expression of a literal operation of divine author­ship outside of and extra to Hebrew faculty, is shown many times by incidents showing the operation to be beyond human control. Let three suffice:

Jeremiah, finding the utterance of the divine messages a cause of contempt and hatred among the people towards himself, resolved to suppress them : “ Then, I said, I will not make mention of him, nor speak any more in his name.” Could he stop it then ? On the contrary: “ But his word was in my heart as a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing and could not stay."

The case of Balaam shows the same thing in another way. He was sent to Balak, King of Moab, to deliver a prophecy concerning Israel, who, having just emerged from the wilderness, were encamped on his borders. His instructions were : “ Only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak. . . . And Balaam said unto Balak, Lo I am come unto thee : have I now any power at all to say anything ? The word that God putteth in my mouth, that I shall speak ” (Num. xxii. 35, 38).

The opening of the mouth of Balaam’s ass is an example another way : “ The Lord opened the mouth of the ass.” The critics cannot suggest any explanation here on the score of idiomatic descrip­tion : so they clean deny the record, in spite of its endorsement by Peter (2 Pet. ii. 16), of whom Jesus said, “ He that heareth you heareth me.” This is mere literary rowdyism which is not made anything different by the patronage of the wise of this world who aim by hook or by crook above alJ things to get rid of the authority of the Bible.

Another illustration in a different line of things is found in the history of Elisha. The Shunammite woman went to him in grief at the loss of her son. “ And when she came to the man of God to the hill, she caught him by the feet: but Gehazi (his servant) came near to thrust her away. And the man of God said, Let her alone for her soul is vexed within her, and the Lord hath hid it from me and hath not told me” {2 Kings iv. 27). In other cases Elisha was able to “ tell the King of Israel the words which the King of Syria spoke in his bedchamber ” (vi. 12). Here was a limitation of the discernment of the prophets expressly attributable to the divine will. If it had been a natural gift, it would have always acted. See also the expression concerning the days of Samuel’s childhood: “In those days, there was no open vision ” (1 Sam. iii. 1). This could never have occurred if the open vision had been subject to human will.

The same reflection is forced home upon us by the notorious fact that for over 1,800 years (since Israel’s dispersion) there has been neither prophet, prophecy, nor vision among them. If the prophetic gift were normal to the human temperament, there would have been no interruption to the prophetic succession.

How immeasurably is this consideration strengthened by the fact that this suspension of revelation was foretold : “ The children of Israel shall abide many days without a sacrifice and without . . . an ephod and without teraphim ’’ (Hos. iii. 4). “ We see not our signs . . . there is no longer any prophet ” (Psa. Ixxiv. 9). “ I will hide my face from the house of Jacob ” (Deut. xxxii. 20 ; Isaiah 8:17). “ Night shall be unto you that ye shall not have a vision : it shall be dark unto you that ye shall not divine : the sun shall go down over the prophets, and the day shall be dark unto them. Then the seers shall be ashamed... for there is no answer

from God ” (Micah iii. 6). “ Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will send a famine in the land—not a famine of bread nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the word of the Lord. They shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east: they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord and shall not find ” (Amos viii. 11).

“ But there were false prophets also among the people " (2 Pet.2: 1). Some people use this as an argument against the true. In reality it establishes the true. It is according to human nature everywhere to imitate the genuine. The very occurrence of the phrase “ false prophets ” is a proof that there were true prophets. But then, say the objectors, how are we to know the one from the other ? The question is provided for in the Scriptures. “ When the word, of the prophet shall come to pass, then shall the prophet be known that the Lord hath truly sent him ” (Jer. xxviii. 9). Here is a test that cannot fail. It applies triumphantly to the true prophets. They have foretold the future in a hundred matters, and in nothing has their word failed. Now, as man has no knowledge of the future, the only explanation of their having truthfully foretold it, is the fact of God having spoken to them.

The false prophets had had no communication from God. As God says : “ I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran. I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied... they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart ” (Jer. xxiii. 21, 26). " They speak a vision of their own heart, not out of the mouth of the Lord ” (verse 16). Again, “ They prophesy a lie in my name ” (xxvii. 15). Again, " Woe unto the foolish prophets that follow their own spirit and have seen Nothing . . . saying, The Lord saith, and the Lord hath not sent them.”

They were to be practically confuted thus : “ Thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that prophesy in my name and I have sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land,—By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed, and the people to whom they prophesy shall be cast out in the streets of Jerusalem because of the famine and the sword, and they shall have none to bury them, them, their wives nor their sons nor their daughters: for I will pour their wickedness upon them ” (Jer. 14: 15-16).

The character and the policy of the false prophets distinguished them entirely from the true. Whereas the work of the true prophets was one prolonged protest against Israel’s disobedience of the divine law and threatening of dire consequences, bringing upon them the ill-will of the people—(see for example, Jer. xxvi. 1-15), the false prophets tried to ingratiate themselves with the people by flattering them and assuring them that all was well : “ They say still unto them that despise me, The Lord hath said, Ye shall have peace: and they say unto every one that walketh after the imagination of his own heart, No evil shall come upon you ” (Jer. xxiii. 17)

James puts forward the true prophets as “ an example of suffering affliction and of patience ” (Jas. v. 10). And Paul says of them, “ They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword ; they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins, being destitute, afflicted, tormented. Of whom the world was not worthy : they wandered in deserts and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth ” (Heb. xi. 37-38).

There is therefore a complete answer to those who ask how we are to distinguish between the false prophets and the true. We know the true because all their words have come to pass in the dispersion and affliction of Israel, and in the evolution of Gentile power in the earth (Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome and her subdivisions). We know them in another and very conclusive way. The Scriptures of the true prophets have been preserved, though the nation that preserved them was the destroyer of the true prophets themselves. There is no trace of the false prophets preserved except in the condemnations of them that occur in the true. And these Scriptures so preserved have received the direct attestation of the resurrected Jesus as the word of the living God.

But though the prophets were true prophets of the future, they were not fortune-tellers or conjurers. Israel did not apply to them for knowledge of private affairs. The course of private affairs was sometimes predicted in the course of their work, as when Abijah told Jeroboam’s wife that her sick son would not get better (1 Kings xiv. 12-13), or Elijah prophesied of the bloody ending of Ahab and his wife because of their murder of Naboth (1 Kings xxi. 19), or Isaiah informed Hezekiah of his recovery and the lengthening of his days (Isaiah xxxviii. 4).

But in all such instances, it will be found that the incidents of private life when prophetically illuminated by the light of inspiration, were ingredients in a public situation of affairs in which God was speaking for the guidance of His people, and were never the subject of treatment for private behoof, as in the case of witches, familiar-spiritists, sorcerers and soothsayers, and other kinds of impostors.

Still less, were they made the occasion of extorting fees as in the case of various heathen practitioners. The two things were as far removed as light and darkness, both in character and treatment. The prophets were “ the messengers of the Lord of Hosts,” whose messages were delivered “ without money and without price.” They were examples of righteousness to Israel and the appointed heirs of life eternal, as Jesus recognises. The empirics and pretenders of all kinds, who professed magical powers and knowledge of the occult (a class who abounded among the neighbouring nations), are denounced throughout the prophets as evil men, whom Israel were not only forbidden to follow or consult, but commanded by the law of Moses to destroy.

Chapter II

Angels and Prophets : From Moses to Elijah.

THE question of who the prophets were, is delivered from all the fogs created by learning when we accept the Bible’s own simple testimony on the subject - against the reception of which, not a single good reason can be given. The propensity of human learning is to divest the prophets of any divine authority and to bring them into the category of human thinkers and speakers. The testimony of the Bible is that the prophets were men whom God chose as vehicles of His own utterance and communi­cation to the nation whom He had established for Himself. The testimony is explicit, simple, and clear. Here are examples :

"Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel ... I have sent unto you all my servants, the prophets ... saying, Return ye now every man from his evil way, and amend your doings, and go not after other gods to serve them ” (Jer. xxxv. 15) ; “ My words and my statutes which I commanded my servants, the prophets ” (Zech. i. 6); “ I have sent unto you all my servants, the prophets, rising early and sending them, saying, Oh do not this abominable thing which I hate ” (Jer. xliv. 4); " The Lord testified against Israel and against Judah by all the prophets and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways and keep my command­ments ” (2 Kings xvii. 13) ; “ God . . . spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets ” (Heb. i. 1).

Not only have we these general declarations of a divine authorisa­tion of the words of the prophets, in a sense excluding literary authorship on their part, but we have express instruction as to the method by which these words became the words of God. And this instruction fences off all idea of those words being the words of the prophets in any sense of natural gift. Natural gift could not produce most of them. They are carefully discriminated from the words that a man might speak from natural impulse, and are expressly attributed to a divine impulse with which the prophet had nothing to do.

"Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit ” (2 Pet. 1:21). “ Thou testifiedst against them by thy Spirit in thy prophets ” (Neh. ix. 30). When this divine impulse was on a man, he could not resist it, as we learnt from the case of Jeremiah, already referred to (Jer. xx. 9). In the case of Ezekiel, its action is described circum­stantially thus : "And the Spirit entered into me when he spake unto me, and set me upon my feet. . . . And he said unto me. Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them . . . When I speak with thee, I will open thy mouth, and thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God ” (Ezek. 1:2 : iii. 4, 27).

A prophet might therefore be compared to an electric lamp with the electrical current turned on. Detached from the current, he was as dark as any other man ; but with the power of the Spirit aglow, he showed the brightness of the mind of God in words which were the words of God, and not the words of the prophet. God alleges His connection with the matter thus : “ I have spoken by the prophets, I have multiplied visions, and used similitudes by the ministry of the prophets ” (Hos. xii. 10). “I have hewed them by the prophets, I have slain them by the words of my mouth ” (Hos. vi. 5). “ The Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants, the prophets ” (Amos iii. 7).

The operation is illustrated in the case of the seventy elders appointed to assist Moses in the administration of the law in the congregation. “ The Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy of the elders of Israel . . . and I will take of the Spirit which is upon thee and will put it upon them. And Moses went out and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle. And the Lord took of the Spirit that was upon him (Moses) and gave it unto the seventy elders. And it came to pass that when the Spirit rested upon them that they prophesied. But there remained two of the men in the camp . . . and the Spirit rested upon them. And they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle, and they prophesied in the camp ” (Num. xi. 16-26). Here was a simultaneous touching of seventy men by the Spirit, irrespective of locality, and being touched they were affected and could not but speak, “ as the Spirit gave them utterance.”

So at a crisis of danger in Judah, when Jehoshaphat the king held a public assembly in the temple for prayer, “ Upon Jehaziel . . came the Spirit of the Lord in the midst of the congregation. And he said, Hearken ye, all Judah and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem and thou King Jehoshaphat. Thus saith the Lord unto you, Be not afraid or dismayed by reason of this great multitude (that cometh against you). ... Ye shall not need to fight in this battle Set yourselves, stand ye still and see the salvation of the Lord. . . . to-morrow go out against them, and the Lord will be with you ” (2 Chron. xx. 14).

The simple truth is that the prophets were men by whom God spoke. Their words were not their own words. What they said, they said under the power of an impulse extraneous to their own faculties —which explains a good deal.

Among other things, it explains why they did not always under­stand what the Spirit uttered through them : as stated by Peter : “ The prophets have enquired and searched diligently . searching what and 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 (1 Pet. i. 10-11).

The theories of learning assume that in dealing with the writings of the prophets, they are dealing with writings of an ordinary human origin. This renders it impossible that they can account for them or render them intelligible. They ignore the first principle of the subject and necessarily create confusion. The only key to the scriptures of Moses and the prophets is their own truthfulness. The fact that explains all is the fact declared by Paul and Peter, and exhibited in their entire constitution ; that God wrought with Moses, spoke by the prophets, and impelled them to commit to writing some portion of His word by them.

This fact cannot be taken away without arbitrary and unjustifiable and presumptuous violence. It may be denied, but the denial is mere assertion on the part of men who personally know nothing about it, but who wish to exclude God if they can. The simple reading of the writings in any translation whatever is sufficient to justify the implicit confidence placed in them by Jesus and the apostles as the word of God.

The prophets very early made their appearance in the midst of Israel. Why need we trouble with the etymology of their name ? Etymology may furnish a useful clue where particulars are not known : but when we know the facts of a case, etymology is useless, and may even be harmful in raising a dust over what we know—as if a man should try to learn the nature of electricity from an analysis of the term, and find himself floundering among amber as the source of the mysterious energy instead of being the mere accidental substance of its discovery.

The prophet was also called a seer (both terms are sometimes used in the same sentence—Isaiah xxx. 10 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 25). The term “seer” (chozeh, from the verb to see, and roeh likewise) expressed the fact that a man whose eyes God opened saw things unknown to normal human faculty (Num. xxiv. 3-4). The term prophet (nabi) from the Hebrew verb to flow forth, intimated that a man so illuminated could not repress the ideas afflating him, as in the case of the men in the house of Cornelius, upon whom the Holy Spirit having been poured out, all heard them speak with tongues (Acts x. 45-46).

That is all that the deepest learning amounts to on the etymology of the subject : only that learning conceals the part of God in the matter, and tries to make out the seeing and the out­pouring to be something natural.

The popular idea that the prophets began with Isaiah and ended with Malachi is due to the mere arrangement of those prophetic books that have been preserved. The names of the prophets between Isaiah and Malachi represent but the merest fraction of the prophets that arose—a very important fraction to us, certainly—the most important that could be imagined : for without the books of these prophets, our knowledge of the mind of God as expressed through the prophets would be scanty to the famine point. Without these writings the prophets would be to us but a mere list of names, with the fragmentary sayings recorded in the historic books. The intensity with which, in that case, we should have desired to possess the sayings of the prophets in some extended form, we may only judge by the ecstatic appreciation with which wise men read and value the actual compilation we have. Still, as a matter of fact, the advent of the prophets goes back to the very beginning of Israel’s history, and their activity forms a concurrent stream in that history, with little intermissions throughout, until the day threatened, broke upon Israel at last, when “ the sun went down over the prophets," and there was “ no answer from God.”

We may say with truth that the prophets began before Moses passed off the scene. His words on the occasion of the appointing of his seventy helpers recognise their existence as a class (in the abstract, at all events), and also indicate for us that which constituted their prophetship. “Enviest thou, for my sake,” said he to Joshua, who proposed the suppression of the two of the seventy who were prophesying in the camp (Eldad and Medad, who did not come to the muster at the tabernacle) : “ would God that all the Lord’s people were prophets, and that the Lord would put his spirit upon them ” (Num. xi. 29).

For a man to have the Spirit of God operatively upon him (as distinguished from a mere state of natural faculty) was for a man to be a prophet (not necessarily a foreteller of future events, though that power was present if necessaiy), a revealer, a discloser, an utterer of the divine mind to which man in a normal state of nature has no access. In this sense, Moses himself was a prophet, and the greatest among the prophets before Christ. He is so described: " By a prophet the Lord brought Israel out of Egypt, and by a prophet was he preserved ” (Hos. xii. 13) ; “ There arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses ” (Deut. xxxiv. 10). Moses also stands at the head of all the prophets in having had direct intercourse with God, and in having foretold the destiny of Israel for ages in advance, actually before their entry into the land (Deut. xxxi.-xxxii.; also Lev. xxvi., and Deut. xxviii.).

But it is in the history of Israel after the death of Moses that we are now to look more particularly for “ the ministry of the prophets.”

This ministry is not a prominent feature during the times of the judges, which lasted from the division of the land under Joshua until Samuel the prophet—a period of about 450 years. The judges were not prophets, though prophets were in one or two cases judges (e.g., Moses and Samuel). A judge was a leader possessed of legal authority over the people in all things, temporal and spiritual; whereas a prophet was a man qualified by the possession of the Spirit to teach the right way, and to express God's thoughts con­cerning the doings of the people, but without authority to enforce the law. The judges might be considered as elective kings divinely raised up in the ways of Providence for the deliverance and protection of Israel; while the prophet was a mouthpiece of divine utterance in their midst, for message, expostulation, and reproof—as the situation might call for. It was a happy thing for Israel when the two tilings were united in the same person, as in the case of Samuel. But as a matter of ordinary experience, the two functions were separated, so that Israel had to look to the judge for the settlement of all questions of law and judgment in temporal matters ; and to the prophet for information of God’s thoughts. To be a judge did not necessarily require inspiration, but no man could be a prophet except by the Spirit of God upon him. This discrimination between the two offices greatly helps the understanding of the narrative.

The first specifically-mentioned prophet after the settlement of the land under Joshua, was between the judgeship of Deborah and Gideon—nearly two hundred years after the crossing of the Jordan. His mission was a mission of reproof against Israel’s declension from the ways of God. As a result of this declension, Israel had come into great trouble at the hands of the Midianites, who had come into the land “ as grasshoppers for multitude ” and destructiveness Israel “ cried unto the Lord because of the Midianites,” and “ the Lord sent a prophet ” to them to explain the situation, which probably, in the lapse of time, they had ceased to understand.

No man could have told them God’s relation to the matter, or could have confidently maintained that God had anything to do with it at all. Human helplessness in this respect will be manifest to anyone who attempts the interpretation of the modern situation— that is, who attempts t o answer the simple questions, What does God think of European life ? or has He any knowledge or regard in the case one way or other ? It requires the Spirit of God to answer such questions, and the Spirit of God coming on a man makes him a prophet, or a vehicle of the expression of the divine mind.

In the case before us, “ the Lord sent a prophet unto the children of Israel,” with this message : “ Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I brought you up from Egypt and brought you forth out of the house of bondage. And I delivered you out of the hands of the Egyptians and out of the hands of all that oppressed you, and drave them out from before you, and gave you their land. And I said unto you, I am the Lord your God : fear not the gods of the Amorites in whose land ye dwell: but ye have not obeyed, my voice ” (Jud. vi. 10). Israel humbled themselves, and there shortly followed deliverance by the hand of Gideon in a miraculous manner.

There had been a similar message of expostulation more than a hundred years before, namely, some time after Israel had subdued the land and had settled comfortably in their new possessions, but without that thorough expulsion of the Canaanites which had been commanded. Joshua was dead and all the elders that overlived him, and there had arisen “ another generation which knew not the Lord nor yet the works which he had done for Israel ” (Jud. ii. 8-10). The new generation had gradually relaxed their views of the stringency of the command to have nothing to do with the Canaanites but to destroy them. There is a long list in the 1st chapter of the Judges of cases in which the various tribal commanders had neglected to expel their Canaanitish neighbours, and had settled down into social dealings with them (see Jud. i. 21-35).

In this case, not a prophet, but “ an angel ” came to the tribes living in the northern districts of the land, and spoke with such effect that the multitude who heard his words at a place afterwards called Bochim (weeping) because of the effect produced, broke out into lamentation and tears. The angel said, “ I made you to go up out of Egypt and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers. And I said ... ye shall throw down their altars. But ye have not obeyed my voice. Why have ye done this ? Wherefore I also said, I will not drive them out from before you (any more), but they shall be as thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare unto you ” (Jud. ii. 1-5).

A prophet is a messenger (2 Chron. xxxvi. 16) and in this sense, an angel (which means messenger). But there are higher messengers than mortal men—messengers that “ excel in strength ” (Psa. ciii. 20), and whose countenances are “ very terrible ” (Jud. xiii. 6), whose normal aspect is that of spirit brightness (Acts x. 3-30; Matt, xxviii. 2-3) and concerning whom Jesus says the accepted of mankind will be made equal to them and will die no more (Luke xx. 36). It is evident from the language of the angel of Bochim that he belonged to this class, and was no mere messenger. An ordinary prophet says, “ Thus saith the Lord ” : this messenger says, “ I made you to go up out of Egypt. ... I said ye shall make no league,” etc. This is a peculiarity perpetually recurring in the Bible record of the works of God among men. The angels speak as if they were God, like the angel of the bush : “I am the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ” (Ex. iii. 2-6). The explanation of this we have seen on former occasions (notably The Ways of Providence and The Visible Hand of God). It is referred to now as proving that the angel of Bochim was no mere prophetic messenger, but one of the angels of almighty power.

It is a striking circumstance that the first reprover of Israel’s waywardness should be an immortal angel, and the long succession of the reprovers who came after should be mortal men. It is in harmony with the angelic origin of Israel’s commonwealth. Stephen told the Sanhedrim, “ they received the law by the disposition (or mediation) of angels ” (Acts vii. 53). Paul also refers to the law as “ The word spoken by angels ” (Heb. ii. 2). God had said, “ Behold I send an angel before thee to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee unto the place which I have prepared. Beware of him and obey his voice : provoke him not: for he will not pardon your transgressions, for my name is in him ” (Ex. xxiii. 20).

This appears to have been the personage who introduced himself to Joshua, outside the walls of Jericho, as “ captain of the Lord’s host ” (Josh. v. 13-15). What more natural than that he should openly reprove the whole nation when Joshua was dead, and the current of things was setting in the wrong way ? But afterwards, when apostasy became the established and incorrigible habit of the nation, it seemed equally natural that not angels but the mortal descendants of Levi should be employed as rebukers of the nation’s folly. The angels retired into the background. God hid His face in the spirit of Hos. v 15: "I will go and return unto my place till they acknowledge their offence and seek my face.” At last, even the prophets were removed. “ We see not our signs : there are no more any prophets.” Israel has been “ many days ” without the privileges with which they began their national existence, as foretold (Hos. iii. 4).

Samuel, under the interesting circumstances recorded in the first three chapters of 1 Sam., was “ established to be a prophet of the Lord.” For a long preceding season, there had been “ no open vision,” and “ the word of the Lord was precious in those days ” (iii. 1). But in Samuel’s lifetime, there was a great change in this respect. Both “ the prophets ” and the “ sons of the prophets ” became a flourishing institution. We read in connection with the anointing of Saul as king that “ a company of the prophets met him, and the Spirit of God came upon him, and he prophesied among them. And it came to pass that when all that knew him beforetime saw that behold he prophesied among the prophets, then the people said one to another, What is this that is come unto the son of Kish ? Is Saul also among the prophets ? ” (1 Sam. x. 10-12).

A still more interesting illustration is found at the close of the days both of Samuel and Saul—a case which not only shows the prophetic institution in full and vigorous operation under the hand of Samuel, but shows the ascendant and irresistible operation of inspiration upon those who become the subjects of it—whether willing or not. Saul had become the enemy of David : “ So David fled and escaped and came to Samuel at Ramah and told him all that Saul had done to him : and he and Samuel went and dwelt in Naioth. And it was told Saul . . . and Saul sent messengers to take David: and when they saw the company of the prophets prophesying and Samuel standing as appointed over them, the Spirit of God was upon the messengers of Saul, and they prophesied likewise. And Saul sent messengers again the third time, and they prophesied also. Then went he—Saul—also to Ramah and came to a great well that is in Sachu, and he asked and said, Where are Samuel and David ? And one said, Behold they be at Naioth in Ramah. And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah, and the Spirit of God was upon him also and he went on and prophesied, until he came to Naioth in Ramah. And he stripped off his clothes also and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night ” (1 Sam. xix. 18-24.)

When Samuel died, Saul was left to his own resources. The company of prophets organised under Samuel would probably scatter. At all events, “When Saul enquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets ” (1 Sam. xviii. 6). Then came Saul’s death, and David’s reign. David himself was a prophet, as Peter informs us (Acts ii. 29-30). His prophetship may be said to have dated from the youthful day of his anointing by Samuel in his father’s house, for we read on that occasion, “ The Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward ” (1 Sam. xvi. 13). And it may be said to have gone right up to the day of his death, for in " the last words of David,” we read, “ The Spirit of the Lord spake by me and his word was on my tongue ” (2 Sam. xxiii. 1-2).

It is this fact that gives to the Psalms of David the divine character attributed to them in all apostolic allusion (Acts. i. 16 : iv. 25 : xiii. 33, and many other places). They are the writings of the Spirit of God, and not the natural literary effusions of David at all, as Jesus repeatedly recognises (Matt. xxii. 13 ; Mar. xii. 36 ; Luke xxiv. 44). But though David was himself a prophet, it did not exclude the accessory activity of other prophets during his life and reign.

Thus the prophet Gad gave him counsel while he was yet a fugitive in the lifetime of Saul (1 Sam. xxii. 5). Thus also “ Nathan the prophet ” revealed to him the covenant of the throne after David had been king some years (2 Sam. vii.), and by the hand of the same prophet, the divine rebuke was administered in the matter of Bathsheba (2 Sam. xii. 1). By Gad also, who on this occasion is called “ David’s seer ” (implying a special vehicle of communication with God), God offered David the choice of three punishments in punish­ment of the political pride of the census (2 Sam. xxiv. 11)  “ Nathan the prophet ” was also very prominent in the proceedings connected with the accession of Solomon and the pretensions and defeat of Adonijah (1 Kings i.).

At the end of Solomon’s reign, when Solomon’s departures from the right way were exciting God’s displeasure, “ the prophet Ahijah, the Shilonite,” appears on the scene to intimate the coming rupture of the kingdom, and the transfer of ten tribes to Jeroboam, a servant of Solomon (1 Kings xi. 29-39). His words are a direct message from “ the Lord God of Israel,” in the first person. Then, when the revolution had taken place, and Jeroboam was established on the throne as king of the ten tribes, we read of a nameless prophet, “a man of God out of Judah,” journeying to Bethel " by the word of the Lord,” with a heavy message to Jeroboam, whose headquarters were there, and who was behaving worse than Solomon (1 Kings xiii. 1-10). The controlling action of inspiration is signally illustrated in the sequel to his message.

There were present on the occasion of the prophet’s message and attendant incidents, the sons of another prophet—an old prophet who dwelt at Bethel. The old prophet was at home. When his sons came home and told him what had happened, his interest was strongly excited in “the man of God out of Judah,” who, in obedience to the Lord’s command, had started on his journey home as soon as his message was delivered, without staying at Bethel for any refresh­ment. Having ascertained the route he had taken, he started after him to bring him back, and found him resting on the roadside, under a tree. The old prophet asked the man of God to come back with him and accept his hospitality. The man of God informed the old prophet of the command he had received, to “ neither eat bread nor drink water at Bethel.” The old prophet said, “ I am a prophet as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied unto him.” The man of God either did not suspect falsehood or gave in to a proposal that was agreeable to his fatigued feelings, contrary to the command that he himself had received. He went back with the old prophet, and entered into his house. The old prophet would, of course, be anxious to keep up the false impression he had made on the mind of the man of God. But while they sat at table together, the old prophet, under the impulse of the Spirit of God, broke through all the rules of hospitality, and “ cried ” to the man of God thus : “ Thus saith the Lord, Foras­much as thou hast disobeyed the mouth of the Lord, and hast not kept the commandment which the Lord thy God commanded thee, but earnest back and hast eaten bread and drunk water in the place of which the Lord did say to thee, Eat no bread and drink no water, thy carcase shall not come into the sepulchre of thy fathers.” When he was gone, a lion met him by the way and slew him. The case is also important as showing how necessary it is that we should act on what we ourselves know to be the will of God, and not allow any second party to come between, even if he should say, “ I am a prophet as thou art.”

Then we have Jeroboam, several years after he had been king, sending his wife to “ Ahijah the prophet, which told me that I should be king over his people,” to know how it should fare with his son who was sick (1 Kings xiv. 1-2). Not that Ahijah was a fortune­teller. It was the idea of Jeroboam, who was an unenlightened man, that as Ahijah had correctly informed him of his elevation to the throne at a time when such an event was most improbable, he would likely be able to inform him about the destiny of his son. Ahijah’s correct prophecy of the kingdom was a direct message from God, and not a reading of the future by Ahijah : but Jeroboam probably did not understand, and sent his wife to Ahijah as anyone would send a messenger to a soothsayer. Ahijah could not see, for his eyes were set by reason of age : “ And the Lord said unto Ahijah, Behold the wife of Jeroboam cometh to ask a thing of thee for her son : for he is sick. Thus and thus shalt thou say unto her ; for it shall be when she cometh in that she shall feign herself to be another woman. And it was so when Ahijah heard the sound of her feet as she came in at the door that he said, Come in thou wife of Jeroboam : why feignest thou thyself to be another ? I am sent to thee with heavy tidings. Go tell Jeroboam, thus saith the Lord God.” Then followed a message from God, telling of the fatal result of the sickness and of coming disaster to Jeroboam’s house because of Jeroboam s disregard of the law.

The next prophet appears in about a generation afterwards, in the reign of Baasha, by whom the evil prophecy against Jeroboam was fulfilled : for “ it came to pass when he reigned, that he smote all the house of Jeroboam : he left not to the house of Jeroboam any that breathed, until he had destroyed him, according to the saying of the Lord which he spoke by Ahijah the Shilonite ” (1 Kings xv. 29) “ By the hand of the prophet, Jehu, the son of Hanani, came the word of the Lord, against Baasha and against his house, even for all the evil that he did in the sight of the Lord in provoking him to anger with the work of his hands, in being like the house of Jeroboam, and because he killed him ” (1 Kings xvi. 7).

Several reigns later, the prophets as a class come into distinct view in what is said concerning the action of Jezebel, the wife of Ahab : that she “ cut off the prophets of the Lord." At the same time, “ Obadiah took an hundred prophets and hid them by fifty in a cave, and fed them with bread and water.” Jezebel was the daughter of a Canaanitish king (Ethbaal, King of the Sidonians— 1 Kings xvi. 31) : and as a worshipper of Baal, she had an aversion to “ the prophets of the Lord,” whom she sought thus to get rid of, substituting “ the prophets of Baal ” in their place. The latter were brought to a public test at a time when “ Elijah, the Tishbite,” imagined he was the only survivor of the Lord’s prophets (xix. 10). There had been a water famine for more than three years ; and Ahab, who superstitiously attributed it to the magical power of Elijah, said to Elijah when he found him, " Art thou he that troubleth Israel ? And Elijah answered, 1 have not troubled Israel, but thou and thy father’s house (have done so), in that ye have for­saken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim. And now (let us bring the matter to a test). Send and gather all Israel unto Mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal, four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the grove, four hundred, which eat at Jezebel’s table . . . the God that answereth by fire, let him be God.”

Ahab acted on this proposal. The prophets of Baal were duly mustered in the presence of a multitude of the Israelites. Elijah came to them and said : “I, even I only, remain a prophet of the Lord; but Baal’s prophets are four hundred and fifty men. Let them give us two bullocks ; let them choose one bullock for themselves and cut it in pieces and lay it on wood and put no fire under, and I will dress the other bullock and lay it on wood and put no fire under. And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of Yahweh. And the God that answereth by fire, let him be God.”

The people applauded the proposal, and the test sacrifices were offered. The prophets of Baal “ took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, ‘ 0 Baal, hear us.’ But there was no voice nor any that answered.” When mid-day was past, and the Baalite sacrifice was a manifest failure, “ Elijah said unto all the people, Come near unto me.” When he had completed the arrange­ments for offering the second bullock, he said, “ Fill four barrels with water, and pour it on the burnt sacrifice and on the wood. And he said, Do it the second time. And they did it the second time. And he said, Do it the third time. And they did it the third time. And the water ran about the altar ; and he filled the trench also with water.”

He then offered a brief prayer to “ the Lord God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Israel,” requesting that He should let it be known that day before the multitude that He was God. " Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces, and said, Yahweh, he is God ; Yahweh, he is God. And Elijah said, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them. And Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there ” (1 Kings xviii. 17-40).

Elijah was not the only prophet of the Lord surviving at that time, though he thought so. Not only were there seven thousand men who had stood faithfully aloof from the national apostasy (xix. 18), but there were other prophets who began to show them­selves again after the slaughter of the priests of Baal. One of them came to Ahab during the siege of Samaria, and promised the destruc­tion of the Syrian besiegers, which came to pass (1 Kings xx. 13). The prophet also came to him on two subsequent occasions, and gave him valuable precautionary information (verses 22, 28). When Ahab, in harmony with that information, had got the Syrian king, Benhadad, into his power, but had let him go instead of destroying him, another divine messenger, “ a certain man of the sons of the prophets," came to him with a message of reproof, at which “ the King of Israel went to his house heavy and displeased, and came to Samaria ” (1 Kings xx 43).

At the end of Ahab’s reign, there was quite a dramatic illustration of the relative positions occupied in the kingdom of the ten tribes by the false prophets and the true. Jehoshaphat, King of Judah, having consented to help Ahab in an expedition for the recovery of Ramoth Gilead, Jehoshaphat, with an evident uneasiness, suggested enquiry at the word of the Lord as to the success of the expedition. Ahab, in response, “ gathered the prophets together, about four hundred men,” propounding this question for answer : “ Shall I go against Ramoth Gilead to battle, or shall I forbear ? ” The answer was prompt and unanimous enough : “Go up, for the Lord shall deliver it into the hands of the king.”

But Jehoshaphat was not satisfied. Why he should be dissatis­fied we can only guess. The four hundred prophets who were paraded in his presence by Ahab were professedly “ prophets of the Lord ”— no longer prophets of Baal; evidently the slaughter of Baal’s prophets on Mount Carmel by Elijah had ended that caste. Still, they were evidently of the same sort—flippant time-servers whose ruling aim was to please the king : men professing to be prophets, but who were not so, and therefore ‘ false prophets—prophets of the deceit of their own hearts,’ and not of the word of the Lord. So Jehoshaphat wished to know if there was no other prophet besides the four hundred.

Ahab answered, “ There is yet one man, Micaiah, son of Imlah, but I hate him, for he doth not prophesy good concerning me, but evil.” Jehoshaphat had probably heard of this man, and he was sent for. The messenger that went for him, told him that the prophets were unanimous in their prediction of good : “ Let thy word, I pray thee,” said he, "be like the word of one of them, and speak that which is good.” Micaiah’s rejoinder was that of a true man: “ What the Lord saith unto me, that will I speak.” When brought to the two kings, he foretold in a parable the disastrous ending of the enterprise for Ahab. The head of the four hundred (Zedekiah, son of Chenaanah) went straight to Micaiah and hit him on the face, saying, “ Which way went the Spirit of the Lord from me to speak unto thee ? ” Micaiah’s answer was an appeal to the logic of events : “ Thou shalt see in that day when thou shalt go into an inner chamber to hide thyself ” (1 Kings xxii. 25). Then the king gives lordly command to have Micaiah, “ this fellow,” strictly imprisoned, “ till I return in peace.” What could be more to the point than Micaiah's response : “ If thou return at all in peace, then hath the Lord not spoken by me.”

This is the great test of all men professing to be prophets : Do their words come to pass ? It is the test that the Scriptures recommend, and it is certainly the one that plain sense would lead every man to apply : “ When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken ” (Deut. xviii. 22). Tried by this simple rule, not only are the false prophets of all ages found out, but the true prophets are shown and established. This simple rule proves the divinity of the Scriptures of Moses and the prophets beyond all cavil. All that they have foretold has come to pass, down to date If this be the case for 3,000 years past, how can reason doubt concerning that which still remains to be fulfilled ?

CHAPTER III.

The Prophets and the Kings : Elijah to Isaiah.

WHEN Ahab died, Elijah, the prophet, was still in the land of the living. Ehjah’s figure, next to Moses, stands out as the brightest among the prophets. Though he did not write a book and have a place in Scripture in this sense, he more sensibly influenced the nation’s affairs, and more strikingly manifested the power and glory of God than any of those whose names are on the books of the prophets. He did not sink out of view with his flight from Jezebel. He was in se­clusion for a time, but he came out of that seclusion early in the reign of Ahaziah, Ahab’s successor. Ahaziah had an accident that was likely to prove fatal, and being anxious to know how it would turn out, he sent messengers to Ekron, a Philistine city, to enquire at the God of that city (Baalzebub—afterwards known as Beelzebub) whether he would recover.

While this disgraceful scene was being enacted—(a King of Israel sending a public commission of enquiry of a heathen god that was no god, concerning a matter that none but God could tell), the angel of the Lord ordered Elijah to leave his seclusion and go and intercept the messengers at Samaria, and tell them that the King would die. The messengers returned to the King with this message. They did not know who Elijah was. They spoke of him as “a man that came up to meet them.” The King asked what sort of a man he was. His enquiry evoked the only personal description we have of any of the prophets in the Scripture. The messengers said “ He was a hairy man and girt with a girdle of leather about his loins.” This was not much of a description, certainly. But it was enough to enable Ahaziah to recognise him. He said, “It is Elijah, the Tishbite”

Ahaziah’s father had tried in vain to get hold of Elijah. Ahaziah thought the opportunity was now favourable for effecting his arrest. He sent a military troop, fifty strong, under a captain, to go after him and bring him back. If we think it strange that a sick king, under a prophetic intimation of imminent death, should be guilty of this madness, we must remember that the superstitious­ness capable of believing in a heathen idol would naturally regard the powers of Elijah as magical powers resident in Elijah himself which could be nullified by imprisonment and death. The captain and his troop discovered Elijah on the top of a hill, and summoned him in the King’s name to give himself up.

There is a time for everything under the sun. There is a time for the servants of God to be passive and to resist not evil, as when Jesus laid down his life, and as when his brethren, in obedience to his commandments, have to follow his example. But there is a time for the avenging hand to be lifted—as when Joshua was commanded to destroy the Canaanitish nations for their wickedness. Elijah was the prophet of God, not merely to teach the right way, but to punish Israel’s departure therefrom. Hence a famine of three-and-a-half-years : and hence now the destruction of this captain and his fifty men by fire sent down at the prophet’s command. Another captain and another fifty men perished in like manner. A third captain and a third fifty, taking a more respectful attitude, were spared, and Elijah, by direction of the angel, went down with them to the king and personally delivered the message of death, and came away again in safety.

This incident concluded the work of Elijah, and the time came “ when the Lord would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind ” (2 Kings ii. 1). It is an extraordinary fact that Elijah alone of the prophets (Enoch, the seventh from Adam, excepted) should not die. Paul’s comment in Enoch’s case probably furnishes the explanation of the case.of Elijah : “ Before his translation, he had this testimony that he pleased, God ” (Heb. xi. 5). The one feature specially visible in Elijah’s life is the one he referred to when excusing himself for having fled from the face of Jezebel: “ I have been very jealous for the Lord God of Hosts : because the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword.”

God is jealous of His honour, though full of compassion and kindness. We may therefore understand how pleasing to Him would be Elijah’s undiluted and untiring zeal on His behalf. For the same reason we may understand how God would feel at liberty (as we might express it) to exempt Elijah from the common lot of men, in translating him like Enoch, “ that he should not see death.” The offensiveness of sin, which brings death, is its violation of the divine supremacy, and therefore of the divine honour Its antidote, in the sense of allowing God to forgive, is the recognition, the assertion, the vindication of that divine supremacy. This is what was done in the condemnation of sin in the crucifixion of Christ. It is what, in another form, “ pleased God ” in the case of Elijah, and admitted of his removal without death.

The translation of Elijah, as a miracle, will be found fully considered in The Visible Hand of God.

When Elijah was removed, Elisha, whom God had nominated to him as his successor (1 Kings xvi. 19), took Elijah’s place as the representative and vindicator of the honour of God in the midst of Israel. We read that “ the sons of the prophets,” when they saw him, said, “ The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha, and they came to meet him and bowed themselves before him ” (2 Kings ii. 15). The sons of the prophets had known him some time previously as Elijah’s companion, as the chapter relating to Elijah’s removal shows. That God had named him as Elijah’s successor would also probably be known to them. At all events, after Elijah s removal, we find Elisha and the sons of the prophets living together as one family in various places.

Incidents in their communal life show the powerful activity of the Spirit of God at the command of Elisha : e.g., the healing of the bitter spring at Jericho ; the destruction by two she-bears of forty- young blasphemers ; the succouring of an army with a supply of water in a desert place; increasing a widow’s pot of oil to many gallons ; the cure of a great woman’s barrenness ; the subsequent raising of her dead son to life ; the antidoting of poisoned food ; the multiplication of a small supply of food to feed a hundred men ; the cure of Naaman’s leprosy : the smiting of Gehazi with leprosy, etc. (2 Kings ii. 21, 24 : iii. 15-20 : iv. 14-17, 38, 42 : v. 1-14, 25-27). He likewise influenced the public affairs of the country by the power at his disposal, for we find it a matter of notoriety that he reported to the

King of Israel the words spoken by the King of Syria in his chamber (vi. 12) ; and that he led a Syrian army, smitten with blindness, into the heart of their enemy s country, not to be destroyed, but to be hospitably entertained and dismissed (vi. 19) ; and afterwards anointed a successor to the throne (ix. 1-9). In his very death, the power resident with him was manifest; a dead man being hurriedly thrown upon his bones received such an electric shock from the contact that life revived (xiii. 20).

Elisha, like Elijah, departed without writing a book. His life was more an acting than a literary life : and his actions were more characterised by the miraculous element than any of the prophets except Moses—agreeably to the saying of Elijah (2 Kings ii. 10), that if he saw him after his elevation from the earth, his petition that he should be endowed with a double portion of Elijah’s spirit would be granted.

It strikes the mind at first as a strange thing that such a display of miraculous power should occur in connection with that section of the nation (the ten tribes) which apostatised from the law and rebelled against the house of David. If we may speculate as to its object, we are probably not far wrong in supposing it was intended to preserve alive the elements of faithfulness that were at work in spite of the national apostasy, which might otherwise have been extinguished by the influence of idolatrous kings and rulers. God told Elijah that He had “ reserved to himself seven thousand men that had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. This is probably a representa­tive rather than a literal number. Whether or no, it shows that here and there, throughout the ten tribes, there were families that remained true to the law of the Lord, in the midst of the general declension.

To ensure the continuance of these, and also to maintain a divine testimony against the national corruption, and perchance, influence them to return to the God of their fathers, God showed His hand in their midst by the notable work of Elijah and Elisha. The spirit of divine compassion was the moving spring of the ministry of the prophets, as we learn from the statement at the close of their history: “ The Lord God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers . . . because he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling place ” (2 Chron. xxxvi. 15). The practical effect of the Elijah-Elisha work is visible in the almost over-weening regard in which Elijah is held among the Jews to the present day; and in another form, may be traced in the racial faithfulness to the law of Moses among those masses of Jewish population who are the undoubted descendants of the ten tribes in Russia, Poland, Roumania, Austria, and Germany. Such a thing as an idolatrous Jew is rarely to be found in the land of their captivity, though they were so prone to idolatry when they lived in their own land.

After the death of Elisha, it would seem as if the prophetic institution had gradually faded away. We read no more of “ the sons of the prophets ” during the hundred years or so that elapsed from the death of Elisha to the captivity of the ten tribes (b.c. 724). We read only of one or two individual prophets who stand forth for a moment in the gathering darkness like solitary twinkling stars in the advancing night : such as the mention of Jonah, son of Amittai, as a prophet whose word was fulfilled in a temporary restoration of Israel’s coasts under Jeroboam II. ; and in the indication that the written prophecies of Hosea and Amos covered the reigns of one or two of the last of the ten-tribe kings (Hosea i. 1; Amos i. 1).

There is a greater activity of the prophetic function, and less of the miraculous element, in the reigns of the kingdom of Judah. May we suppose that this was because of the greater faithfulness of Judah. Miracles are “ a sign to unbelievers,” to use Paul's ex­pression ; they are intended to create faith. Where faith already exists, they are superfluous. So with regard to the activity of prophecy. Paul in the same connection observes that prophecy is for the edification and comfort of them that believe. Judah, nationally speaking, was of this class, though with periods of lapse, consequently, prophesying was more common among them than among the ten tribes, while “ the sons of the prophets ” as a wonder­working institution was more common among the latter. Most of the books of the prophets were produced in connection with the kingdom of Judah—a fact which may have its explanation in the suggestion just made—which is greatly strengthened by the fact that the Lord Jesus sprang out of that kingdom.

The prophets that appeared in Judah, after the revolt of the ten tribes, were twenty-two in number, and twenty-five if Hosea, Amos, and Jonah be included. The reason for doubting the propriety of their inclusion is that though their prophecies related to affairs of Judah, they themselves may have appeared in Israel or the ten tribes, as they treat of the affairs of the ten tribes. Of the whole number, sixteen wrote books which have been preserved, namely, those whose names appear in the compilation of Scripture. Some whose names are not on the list of the twenty-five, wrote books which have not been preserved, viz. : Nathan the prophet, Gad the seer (1 Chron. xxix. 29), Ahijah the Shilonite and Iddo the seer (1 Chron. ix. 29), Shemaiah (2 Chron. xii. 15).

Some have felt concerned at the absence of these books so referred to in Scripture. There is no need for concern. The books that have been preserved, viz., the “ all Scripture ” of Paul’s declar­ation to Timothy (2 Tim. iii. 15) are affirmed, on the authority of the Spirit of God, to be sufficient for the making of men “ wise unto salvation.” If the others had been necessary for their sufficiency in this respect, they would have been preserved. Curiosity might wish to know their contents, but as products of inspiration, the deepest study must have failed to discover in them anything inconsistent with the same inspiration in the other books. It is barely possible they may have contained the casual quotation or two that occur in the New Testament from the Old Testament Scriptures for which nothing corresponding can be found in our present compilation. At all events, the loss is inconsiderable in a spiritual sense. Godly men find the Scriptures as they are, all sufficient for conviction, enlighten­ment, holiness, comfort, and salvation. As for those who are not influenced by the Scriptures as we have them, it is very certain that they would be no better off with a hundred extra books.

With regard to those prophetic books that have been preserved, it has to be observed that they are not arranged in the Bible in the order of the date of their production. It was not necessary for spirit­ual purposes that they should be so arranged, or that order of arrange­ment would have been observed. Still, it is necessary to know to what period of Israel’s history a particular prophetic book belongs. This, as a rule, is indicated in the opening verse of each book ; but in one or two cases, we have no such indication, and the position of the book in these cases would be misleading in point of date—(a comparatively unimportant item in a writing recording divine thoughts)

Ezra is said to have been the servant of God who put the books of Scripture together in one volume in their present order. He was doubtless guided in the matter as much as in the conduct of the expedition from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezra vii. 6 ; viii. 21- 23). It is, on the whole, in good chronological sequence ; but the following is the real order in point of time of the books of the prophets, which we purpose considering in the course of these articles : 1, Jonah (b.c 862) ; 2, Joel (b.c. 800) ; 3, Amos (b.c. 787) ; 4, Micah (b.c. 750) ; 5, Hosea (b.c. 740) ; 6, Nahum (b.c. 713) ; 7, Isaiah (b.c. 698) ; 8, Zephaniah (b.c. 630) ; 9, Habakkuk (b.c. 626) ; 10, Jeremiah and Lamentations (b.c. 588) ; 11, Obadiah (b.c 587) ; 12, Ezekiel (b.c. 574) ; 13, Daniel (b.c. 534) ; 14, Haggai (b.c. 520) ; 15, Zechariah (b.c. 520) ;  16, Malachi (b.c. 397). We do not propose to consider them in this order, but in the order in which they occur in the Bible—which is a very good order as regards their size and comparative importance.

The prophets who arose in Judah after the revolt of the ten tribes appear casually in the historic narrative. There was first Shemaiah, who was contemporary with that revolt, but comes in sight as a prophet only after its occurrence. He did so at an acute crisis in Israel’s affairs. The ten tribes had rebelled and appointed Jeroboam king over them ; and Rehoboam, Solomon’s son, who had just come to the throne, was contemplating military measures of coercion, when “ The word of God came unto Shemaiah the man of God, saying, Speak unto Rehoboam, the son of Solo­mon, the King of Judah, and unto all the house of Judah and Ben­jamin, and to the remnant of the people, saying, Thus saith the Lord, Ye shall not go up nor fight against your brethren the children of Israel. Return every man to his house, for this thing is from me.” To this message, the people were obedient, and thus the word of a prophet averted civil war.

There was next the case of Oded and his son Azariah, twenty years or so later, during the reign of Asa, son of Abijah, son of Rehoboam. Asa began his reign well. He had not been long on the throne when a huge Ethiopian host came against the little Kingdom of Judah. Asa went out at the head of the small army of Judah, and before the battle, prayed thus : “ Lord, it is nothing with thee to help whether with many or with them that have no power : help us, O Lord our God, for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude.” The battle was a great victory for Judah, and on the return of the army to Jerusalem, “ The Spirit of God came upon Oded, and he went out to meet Asa and said unto him, Hear ye me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: The Lord is with you while ye be with him : and if ye seek him he will be found of you, but if ye forsake him, he will forsake you. Now for a long season, Israel hath been without the true God and without a teaching priest and without law. But when they in their trouble did turn to the Lord God of Israel and sought him, he was found of them. And in those times, there was no peace to him that went out nor to him that came in, but great vexations were upon all the inhabitants of the countries. And nation was destroyed of nation, and city of city, for God did vex them with all adversity. Be ye strong, therefore, and let not your hands be weak, for your work shall be rewarded.”

These words greatly encouraged Asa, and he proceeded to carry out various reforms with vigour. But later in his reign, another prophet (one Hanani) had another message for him which was not so pleasing. Under the fear of invasion from Baasha, king of the ten tribes, Asa purchased the help of Benhahad the Syrian king, by despoiling the temple, and sent the gold and silver and treasures to that monarch When the cloud had passed, “ Hanani the seer came to Asa, King of Judah, and said unto him, Because thou hast relied on the King of Syria, and not relied on the Lord thy God, therefore is the host of the King of Syria escaped out of thine hand. Were not the Ethiopians and the Lubims a huge host, with very many chariots and horsemen. Yet because thou didst rely on the Lord, he delivered them into thine hand. For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth to show himself strong in the behalf of those whose heart is perfect towards him. Herein thou hast done foolishly:  therefore from henceforth, thou shalt have wars ” (2 Chron xvi. 7). Asa was enraged at this message, and put the seer in prison, and at the same time in his vexation dealt roughly with the people.

The next prophet that appears on the scene is Jehu, the son of Hanani, that is, probably, the son of the seer imprisoned by Asa, of whose end we have no knowledge. (Perhaps he died in prison.) It was during the next reign (Jehoshaphat) that his brief ministry occurred. Jehoshaphat, in all respects but one, a worthy successor of David, had paid a friendly visit to Ahab, the idolatrous king of the ten tribes, and had assisted him in a military expedition against Ramoth Gilead. On his return to Jerusalem, Jehu “ went out to meet him, and said to King Jehoshaphat, Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord ? Therefore is wrath upon thee from before the Lord. Nevertheless, there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God ” (2 Chron. xix. 2).

Jehoshaphat evidently received this message in a very different way from his father Asa. There is no mention of angry words or spiteful deeds towards the prophet or anyone else. On the contrary, Jehoshaphat proceeded to put the affairs of the land more in harmony with the law of God. He took steps to bring the Ephraimites back to the Lord God of their fathers. Moreover, he set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do, for ye judge not for man, but for the Lord who is with you in the judgment. Where­fore now, let the fear of the Lord be upon you : take heed and do it, for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons nor taking of gifts. Also in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites and of the priests and of the chief of the fathers of Israel for the judgment of the Lord, and for controversies when they returned to Jerusalem. And he charged them saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of the Lord, faithfully and with a perfect heart. And what cause soever shall come to you of your brethren that dwell in the cities between blood and blood, between law and commandment, statutes and judgments, ye shall even warn them that they trespass not against the Lord, and so wrath come upon you and upon your brethren. This do and ye shall not trespass. And behold Amariah the chief priest is over you in all matters of the Lord, and Zebadiah, the son of Ishmael, the ruler of the house of Judah, for all the king’s matters : also the Levites shall be officers before you. Deal courageously, and the Lord shall be with the good ” (2 Chron. xix. 4-11).

This was a very different sequel to the prophet’s reproof from the rage and the oppression vented by Jehoshaphat’s father upon Jehu’s father under similar cirumstances. It prepares us for the behaviour of Jehoshaphat in the presence of a great national peril that presently threw its shadow over Jerusalem. “ Then came some that told Jehoshaphat, saying, There cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea (Dead Sea) on this side Syria.”

“And Jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek the Lord, and proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah. And Judah gathered them­selves together to ask help of the Lord, even out of all the cities of Judah they came to seek the Lord. And Jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of Judah and Jerusalem in the house of the Lord before the new court, and said : “0 Lord God of our fathers, art thou not God in heaven ? and rulest thou not over all the kingdoms of the heathen ? and in thine hand is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee ? Art not thou our God who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham, thy friend, for ever ? And they dwelt therein and have built thee a sanctuary. . . . And now behold the children of Ammon and Moab and Mount Seir, whom thou wouldest not let Israel invade when they came out of the land of Egypt. ... 0 our God, wilt thou not judge them ? For we have no might against this great company : neither know we what to do, but our eyes are upon thee.”

It was in the presence of an immense concourse of people—“ all Judah, with their wives and children ”—that this prayer was prayed. It was an impressive prayer because very earnest and sincere, and coming out of the mouth of a righteous man.

“Then upon Jahaziel, the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, a Levite of the sons of Aaron, came the Spirit of the Lord, in the midst of the congregation. And he said, Hearken ye, all Judah, and ye inhabitants of Jerusalem, and thou, King Jehoshaphat. Thus saith the Lord unto you, Be not afraid nor dismayed by reason of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours, but God’s. To-morrow, go ye down against them. Behold they come up by the cliff of Ziz : and ye shall find them at the end of the brook before the wilderness of Jeruel. Ye shall not need to fight in this battle. Set yourselves : stand ye still and see the salvation of the Lord with you, O Judah and Jerusalem : fear not nor be dismayed. To-morrow, go ye out against them, for the Lord will be with you. ’

At the hearing of this inspiring message, Jehoshaphat and the whole assembly fell on their faces on the ground and worshipped. What a spectacle ! A contrast to the shoutings and yellings of a Gentile mob on the eve of war. After a few moments, the assembly rose to their feet, and the choral priests then, " With a loud voice on high,” stood up and praised the Lord God of Israel Early next morning, the crowds streamed out of Jerusalem to go to meet the advancing foe. As they went forth, Jehoshaphat addressed them : Believe in the Lord your God, so shall ye be established ; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper.” Arrived on the ground where they were to take up position, a most singular preparation for battle was made.

Singers went out before the army, and sang, “ Praise the Lord, for his mercy endureth for ever.” ‘ And when they began to sing and to praise,” the Lord caused confusion in the ranks of the embattled foe. “ The children of Ammon and Moab stood up against the inhabitants of Mount Seir, utterly to slay and destroy them ; and when they had made an end of the inhabitants of Seir, every one helped to destroy another. And when Judah came toward the watchtower in the wilderness, they looked unto the multitude, and behold, they were dead bodies fallen to the earth.” For three days, Judah had nothing to do but to strip the dead and take away an enormous booty of “ riches and precious jewels.” On the fourth day they had an assembly for praise in the valley of Berachah. “And then they returned, every man of Judah and Jerusalem, and Jehoshaphat in the forefront of them, to go again to Jerusalem with joy, for the Lord had made them to rejoice over their enemies. And they came to Jerusalem with psalteries and harps and trumpets unto the house of the Lord ” (2 Chron. xx. 1-28).

A finishing cloud in Jehoshaphat’s reign brings another prophet into view. Although Jehoshaphat did not resent the reproof admin­istered to him by Jehu, early in his reign, on account of his alliance with Ahab, and so far profited by it that he does not appear to have renewed his intimacy with Ahab, he evidently failed to see clearly the inadmissibility of friendship with that king’s house, for after Ahab’s death, and after the stirring episode above narrated, he got into friendly relations with Ahab’s son, Ahaziah, and went so far as to enter into arrangements for the building of a navy for their joint benefit. The navy was fitted out, and there was a prospect of a good trade to Tarshish, when the Lord interfered: “ Eliezer, son of Dodavah, of Mareshah, prophesied against Jehoshaphat, saying, Because thou hast joined thyself with Ahaziah, the Lord hath broken thy works.” In accordance with this prophetic intimation, in the language of accomplished fact, “ The ships were broken that they were not able to go to Tarshish ” (2 Chron. xx. 35-37).

Thus three times during Jehoshaphat’s reign did a prophet from the Lord interpose in the affairs of the kingdom—with the object each time of asserting the Lord’s authority or administering the Lord’s reproof—in total contrast to the policy of intermeddling ecclesiastics in European politics, past and present.

The next instance was in the reign of Jehoshaphat’s grandson, Joash. The interval was abundantly illustrative of the mischief of Jehoshaphat’s temporising policy towards Ahab’s house—rebuked by the prophet. As the result of Jehoshaphat’s friendship with Ahab, Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram, married Ahab’s daughter, and this as a cause is bracketed in the same verse with the dire effects that sprang from it. “ He walked in the way of the kings of Israel (the ten tribes), like as did the house of Ahab, for he had the daughter of Ahab to wife, and he wrought that which was evil in the eyes of the Lord ” (2 Chron. xxi. 6). To begin with, he murdered all his brothers, to whom Jehoshaphat, his father, had given provincial governorships. Moreover, he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit fornication and “compelled Judah thereto ”

These enormities called forth the singular incident of a letter from Elijah some time after he had been removed from the scene. “ There came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the Lord God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa, King of Judah, but hast walked in the ways of the kings of Israel, and hast made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to go a whoring like to the whoredoms of the house of Ahab, and also hast slain thy brethren of thy father’s house which were better than thyself, Behold with a great plague will the Lord smite thy people and thy children and thy wives and all thy goods. And thou shalt have great sickness by disease of thy bowels until thy bowels fall out by reason of the sickness day by day ” (verse 12).

This terrible message was fulfilled in a short time. He died of sore diseases (verse 19). The effect of Jehoshaphat’s mistaken friend­ship was not yet exhausted. Jehoram’s son, Ahaziah, succeeding to his father, must of course go and see his friends in Samaria, Ahab’s family, for was he not the son of their sister Athaliah ? While on that visit he lost his life in the judgments that overwhelmed Ahab’s house at the hand of Jehu, which, on his mother in Jerusalem hearing, “ she arose and destroyed all the seed-royal of the house of Judah, and proceeded herself to reign—a daughter of idolatrous Ahab in the capital of faithful Judah.

Her reign was not long Through the wise measures of Jehoiada, the high priest, her death was brought about, and a little boy that had been saved from the wholesale destruction of David’s house was proclaimed king. This was Joash, who did well so long as Jehoiada lived to guide him. Jehoiada died when Joash was twenty-six years old, and Joash then yielded to the influence of the young princes brought up with him and turned aside to the idolatries of the land and all the execrable but flesh-pleasing practices therewith associated. “ God sent prophets to them to bring them again to the Lord and they testified against them, but they would not give ear. And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada the priest, who stood above the people and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the Lord that ye cannot prosper ? Because ye have forsaken the Lord, the Lord hath also forsaken you.”

The king was exasperated at this message, and Zechariah was stoned by his orders in the court of the temple. Zechariah, in the act of expiring, exclaimed, “ The Lord look upon it and require it,” and truly a terrible retribution came immediately on the princes who had instigated the crime. “ It came to pass at the end of the year that the army of the Syrians came up against Jerusalem with a small company of men, and the Lord delivered a very great host into their hands. And they executed judgment upon them They destroyed the princes from among the people and sent all the spoil (of their houses) unto the King of Damascus.” When the Syrians went away, Joash, who was in a state of disease, was murdered by his own servants.

The successor of Joash (his son Amaziah) appears to have taken warning from these terrible events, and returned to the obedience of the Lord’s law from which his father had departed. He re-organised the public and private life of the nation. Among other measures, seeing Israel exposed to danger from marauding neighbours, he hired 100,000 fighting men out of the ten tribes. This was a mistake, which he did not seem to know till “ There came a man of God to him, saying, O King, let not the army of Israel go with thee, for the Lord is not with Israel, to wit, with all the children of Ephraim (the ten tribes). But if thou wilt go, do it: be strong for the battle : God shall make thee fall before the enemy, for God hath power to help and to cast down.” The king took the hint, and sent away the hired Ephraimites. Afterwards, Amaziah went wrong, and he was assassinated.

His son, Uzziah, walked in the right way during a long reign of fifty-two years, or the best part thereof. His faithfulness was partly owing to the influence of another Zechariah “ who had under­standing in the visions of God.” He sought the Lord during the lifetime of that prophet, “ and as long as he sought the Lord, God made him to prosper ” (2 Chron. xxvi. 5). Afterwards, Uzziah made the terrible mistake of usurping the functions of the priesthood, and was withstood by Azariah, the high priest, who said to him.

“It appertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah, to burn incense unto the Lord, but to the priests of the sons of Aaron that are consecrated to burn incense. Go out of the sanctuary, for thou hast trespassed, neither shall it be for thine honour from the Lord God.” Uzziah was angered at this repulse, and would have resisted, but leprosy smote him as he lifted his hand against the priests, and he beat a retreat covered with shame, and was a leper to the day of his death.

The next appearance of a prophet in Israel’s affairs was in the reign of Ahaz, grandson of Uzziah. Ahaz did not that which was right, but imitated the corrupt ways of the ten tribes : in punishment whereof, besides allowing the Syrians to get the upper hand of him, God gave Judah into the hands of the ten tribes, who, in a sanguinary campaign, destroyed vast multitudes and took an enormous number of captives. The captives were brought to Samaria, the capital of the ten tribes, and they were about to experience the usual fate of captives in being sold into slavery, when “ a prophet of the Lord (who) was there, whose name was Oded ” addressed a very solemn message to the king and his officers : “ Because the Lord God of your fathers was wroth with Judah, he hath delivered them into your hand and ye have slain them with a rage that reacheth up into heaven. And now ye purpose to keep under the children of Judah and Jerusalem for bondsmen and bondswomen unto you, but are there not with you sins against the Lord your God ? Now hear me, therefore, and deliver the captives again which ye have taken captive of your brethren : for the fierce wrath of the Lord is upon you.”

This speech greatly impressed leading men in Samaria who had not taken part in the war. They withstood the military men and said, “Ye shall not bring in the captives hither ; for, whereas we have offended against the Lord already, ye intend to add more to our sins and to our trespass.” The military men were abashed at this attitude, and allowed the princes to settle the matter. These nominated a commission, who sent the captives home after seeing that they were clothed and fitly provided for out of the great “ spoil ” the army had brought. “ They clothed all that were naked among them, and arrayed them and shod them, and gave them to eat and drink, and anointed them, and carried all the feeble of them upon asses, and brought them to Jericho—the city of palm trees— to their brethren.” There is no more touching episode in the whole history of Israel.

In the next reign (Hezekiah), Isaiah the prophet took a leading and influential part; but his case may advantageously be deferred until we come to consider his book in detail. The same remark may be made concerning Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who belonged to later reigns.

We conclude this preliminary notice of the position of the prophets in Israel’s public affairs by reference to the only remaining instance of note. In this case, a woman comes into view as the mouth­piece of inspiration. It was during the reign of Josiah, the last distinguished era in the history of David’s house. Josiah was called to the throne at a very early age (eight years), on account of the assassination of his father, Amon. Eight years afterwards, when he was sixteen, “ while he was yet young, he began to seek after the God of David, his father.” Four years later, he began to remove the instruments of idolatry from Jerusalem ; and when he was twenty-six, he ordered the temple to be cleansed and brought into condition for divine service according to the law. He had not seen the law, but had received such instruction from his teachers as led him to discern his duty in these directions.

While the temple was being cleansed, a copy of the law was found and brought to him. He had it read to him, and was amazed to find that things around him were so far from what the law of God required. His trouble was so great that he wept, and sent a deputation to " Huldah, the prophetess, wife of Shallum, the son of Tikvath, the son of Nasrah, keeper of the wardrobe,” with this direction : “ Go, enquire of the Lord for me, and for them that are left of Israel and Judah, concerning the words of the book that is found, for great is the wrath of the Lord that is poured out upon us because our fathers have not kept the word of the Lord, to do after all that is written in this book.”

The prophetess sent back the deputation with this answer : “ Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the curses that are written in the book which they have read before the King of Judah, because they have forsaken me. ... As for the King of Judah, who sent you to enquire of the Lord, so shall ye say to him. . . . Because thine heart was tender and thou didst humble thyself before God, when thou heardest his words against this place and humbledst thyself before me and didst rend thy clothes and weep before me. . . . Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers . . . in peace, neither shall thine eyes see all the evil that I will bring upon this place and the inhabitants thereof.”

The King having received this message, immediately convened a meeting of the head men and an assembly of the people in the temple, and read to them the book of the law which had been found, and entered into a covenant before them “ to walk after the Lord and to keep his commandments and his testimonies and his statutes with all his heart and with all his soul.” He also caused all that were present to enter into the same covenant—after which, he went to work with their co-operation, to cleanse the country of all idolatrous abomina­tions, and to bring into force the ordinances of the law. While he lived, public life went wholly in this direction. "All his days, Israel departed not from following the Lord, the God of their fathers” (2 Chron. xxxiv.).

This survey of the work of the prophets, as living and practical participators in the public life of Israel, is a necessary preface to the consideration of the books of the prophets as we have them in the collected writings beginning with Isaiah and ending with Malachi. It was a work extending over about a thousand years. It must strike the least reflective that it was a work with only one meaning—the meaning condensed into the formula, “ Thus saith the Lord of Hosts.” It was a work in no feature akin to the work of magicians, or sooth­sayers, or necromancers, or fortune-tellers. There was no pleasing of men, no earning of rewards, no gratification of petty human curiosities, but a uniform solemn condemnation of human disobedience of divine law, at the risk, and often at the sacrifice of life itself.

There is no explaining such a phenomenon of human history except on the principle furnished by itself, and endorsed by Christ in the parable of the rejected messengers (Matt. xxi. 33-41), viz., that God spoke by these men for the instruction and reproof of His people whom He had brought out of Egypt. Any attempt to give it a human explanation will fall to pieces in the hands of the expositor. Let any honest unbeliever make the attempt, and he must necessarily experience the truth of the statement if he possess sufficient experience of men, and capacity to discern between things that differ.