discriminate between the true and false prophets, it is evident that they had no criterion by which to decide. There was usually nothing in tiie mere
projihecy or prediction on one side or the other to carry conviction. They had to bring the criterion with them in their own minds, i.e. to go back to the princijjles on which the prophecy was bsised — He tliat 18 of the truth hearetn my words. The condition of the people's mind can be observed in Jer 18". Hero we see that the peoiile believed in prophecy us the word of J", and in tlieir prophets; but Jeremiah, who contradicted these prophets, they consiilered a deceiver and no lover of his country. Their state of mind appears even more clearly from Jer 28. Hanaiiiali pre<licted that the Exile would be over in two years, while Jeremiah said it would last two generations Naturally, the
people gave their voice for Hananiah, and for tl e moment Jeremiah was put to silence. There wer« several things which it has been supposed might have served as external criteria of true prophecy : (1) the prophetic ecstasy ; (2) miracle; and (3) fulfil- ment of the prediction. Hut all these things when used as tests to discriminate between one prophet and another were liable to fail.
(1) The ecstasy in greater or less degree was a thing natural to an Oriental people ; in the early prophetic period it was common ; it was, however, no essential element in prophecy. It was no evi- dence that a prophet was true, neither was it any evidence that he was false, tliouj;li if evidence at all it was rather evidence that lie was false, at least in later times, for in the ethical proiihecy of the 8th century it rarely appears. Ewald, indeed, li.as observed that the ecstasy was liable to he a source of false propliecj-, for one subject to such a condition might think himself inspired by J" when he was not.
(2) Miracle might certainly be an evidence and test of true propliecj', e.g. in the conditions pio- po.sed by Elijah atCarmel ; but such conditions were rarely possible. In the OT miracle means wonder ; it is something extraordinary, nothing more. The force of a miracle to us, arising from our notion of Law, would not be felt by a llclirow, because he had no notion of natural law. l''urtlier, the ancient mind was reverent, or superstitious, and felt itself surrounded by superhuman powers. It was not J" alone or His servants that could work wonders; the magicians in Egypt also did so (Ex 7"- " 8'). Again, even when J" empowered one to give a sign or wonder, the meaning of the wonder might be ambiguous. In Dt 13"'- a prophet is supposed per- mitted to work a miracle at the same time that he advocates worship of other gods than J " ; but the miracle so far from authenticating him as true has quite another purpose : it is to prove the people whether they love J" with all their heart. To one who knows and loves J" no miracle will authenticate another god. And to all this has to be added the fact that from Amos downwards miracle plays hardly anj' part in the history of prophecy (though cf. Is 7" SS"''-), while it was just in the last days of the kingdom of Judah that false prophecy was most prevalent.
(3) The test of fulfilment of the prophetic word is proposed in Dt 18-'. Hut this criterion was one which was serviceable less to individuals than to the people, whose life was continuous and extended. As a guide to the conduct of individuals at the moment when the prediction was uttered it could bo of little service. Occasionally predictions were made which had reference to the near future, as when Micaiah predicteil Ahab's defeat at Kiuiiotli-gilead, or when Jeremiah foretold the death of Hananiah within the year. But usually the pro|>hecies bore upon the destinies of the State, and had reference to a somewhat indefinite future. Tliis peculiarity per- plexed men's minds, and led to the despair or the disparagement of prophecy. They said, ' The days are prolonged, and every vision failetli' ; or if they did not go so far thej' said of tlie prophet, 'The vision that he seeth is for many days lo come, and heprophesicth of the times that are far oil" (Ezk 12-^-'^). Wliile, therefore, in the prolonged-life of the people the event might ultimately be seen to justify the prophet (Ezk '2'), some more immediate test was necessary for the guidance of the indi- vidual. Such a test is proi>oscd hy Jeremiah. Tlio test lies in the relation of the prophecy to the moral condition of the people. The prophet who predicts disaster and judgment needs no further aiitlieiiti- cation: the nature of his prophecy proves him true; the prophet who prophesies I'eace, let lliu event justify him I (Jer 28^"). The interesliiiy
118 PROPHECY AND PROPHETS
PROPHECY AXD PROPHETS
thing in all this is that so far as religious certitude was concerned the people of Israel were exactly in the same position as ourselves. Neither the super- natural nor anything else will produce conviction apart from moral conditions of the mind. This is perhaps a truism because the conviction required was not mere intellectual helief, but religious faith in a person and in II is word.