[d) The new proplietism was a national-religious movement, though the emiiliasis lay on the reli- gious aspect of it. Like their great successors, the projihets hoped that the national restitution would be the .shape in which the religious regeneration would verify it.self. Nevertheless, the national claimed expression. The monarcliy was the crea- tion of prophecy, not merely in the sense that the ))rophet Samuel, by inspiration of J", gave the jieople a king. The national direction of pro- phecy embodied itself in the kingship. The liist king of Israel was a prophet as well as the second. When Saul turned to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart, and when he met the iirophets the spirit of God came on him nnd he prophesied. His excitation was not mere contagious sympathy. There was iniml uiuler it; it was the thouglit awakened by Samuel of his high destiny and of the task before him taking lire from contact with the national - religious enthusiasm of the prophets. The exclamation of the populace, Is Saul also among the projihets? has been taken as an ex- pression of wonder that a solid yeoman like Saul should join himself to a conijiany of ranting en- thusiasts. This view is wholly imju-oliable. It was not in this way that religious exaltation was looked on in the ta.st. It was just the visible excitation that suggested to the onlooker that the enthusiast was possessed by the deity. Even the insane, just because he had no mastery over
no PEOPHECT AND PROPHETS
PROPHECY AND PROPHETS
his mind, whicli seemed moved by another, was lield inspired. A multitude of passages sliow the popular reverence for the prophets, c.ij. 2 K 4'"- *"'• (cf. 6' 9'), particularly 2 K 4''-'''- which describes how a person ' brought the man of God bread of the first fruits,' as people did to the sanctuary of J" (cf. 1 K 12^''-)- Iseither can Amos' disclaimer of being a prophet or one of the sons of the prophets mean that ' he felt it an insult to be treated as one of them." Amos (V) merely states a his- torical fact, viz. that he had not been an isolated prophet such as Elijah and others were, nor a member of one of the 'prophetic schools,' but had been suddenly called from behind the flock to ' prophesy ' to God's people Israel. The respect with which he mentions prophets elsewhere a-s God's greatest gift to the people (2" 3'), is sufficient evidence of his feeling, t
2. Early Monarchy. — During the time of; the Judges and the early monarchy the means of ascertaining the \n\\ of J" was chiefly the sacred lot and ephod. This was employed by Gideon (Jg 8") and Micah (Jg 17. 18), by Saul, and by David and his priests in the early period of his history (1 S 23"-''). At a later time it is little referred to, the king's advisers being the prophets. Side by side with this there existed seers through whom J" spake. The Arab. Mhin or seer was also sup- posed to be possessed by a spirit, which spake through him (Wellhausen, Beste^, 134). The seer was absorbed into the class of ' prophets,' and the name ' prophet ' remained common to the isolated individual and the member of the community. And from this time forward the will of J" was chiefly asked at the mouth of the prophet (1 K 14'''-). The early waters of prophetism may have been somewhat turbid, but they gradually ran clear, and became that stream of ethical prophecy to which there is nothing like in the religious history of mankind. J" spake in the mind of man and to his mind ; the propliet stood in the council of God. The two ways of ascertaining the will of J" in the age of Samuel are reflected in the two narratives of the election of Saul. Both narra- tives ascribe the institution of the monarchy to the \^-ill of J ", but in the one (1 S 9'-10" II) his will is declared through prophetic inspii-ation, in the other (1 S 8. 10"«- 12) through the oracle of the lot. The latter tradition, though further removed from the actual events, is at least true to the his- torical conditions of the period.
The true causes of the rupture between Samuel and Saul can scarcely be ascertained. The pro- phetic spirit in Saul never obtained the mastery within him, it was always in conflict with contrary currents in his nature. Latterly the spirit became troubled and obscured, and its place was taken by an evil spirit from God (cf. 1 K 22^'*). David was a man according to God's heart, that is, in all things subject to the wUl of J" (cf. 1 S IS**), and the prophets are found supporting his throne. Special designations are given to some of them suggestive of the oflices they performed, e.g. men- tion is made of ' the prophet Gad, David's seer ' (2 S 24", 1 Ch 21», 2 Ch 29-«). These prophets indirectly influenced the government and acted on the allairs of the kingdom as a whole, although through the king (2 S 24" T'"- IZ'"-, 1 K I'^ff). So long as the prophets and kings were in accord this may have continued, but when kings arose who were mere national rulers and unprogressive or retrograde