(3) The prophets address themselves to the nation ; but in appealing to the whole they appeal to each individual, though no doubt specially to those whose conduct is influential in shaping the destiny of the whole. J" chose a nation because His idea of mankind, of which He wUl be God, is that of a social organism. It is this organism of which He is God. But though the relation might seem to be with the ideal unity, it operated in dis- posing all the parts making up the unity ri<jhtly to one another. And in this way each individual felt J" to be his God. It is absurd to argue that the nationalism of OT religion excluded individual religion. But the later prophets feel that a true social organism can be created only out of true individual members, and they begin to construct a whole out of single persons. Many things united to work in this direction. The nation no longer existed, but the individuals remained, and J" and religion remained. Moreover, personal piety, such as was seen most conspicuously in Jer., but was not confined to him, was a great creative force ; the sense of relation to God made powerful men, and the sense of the relation in common united them. Reflexion also did something. Ezekiel saw the practical need of reconstructing a people, and re- cognized this to be his ta.sk. lie felt himself in a certain waj' a Pastor with a care of intlividual souls. And he saw the need of creating independ- ent individual personalities by disentangling them from the national whole and its doom — ' .Ml souls are mine, saith J"; as the soul of the father so also the soul of the son.' But, however individualistic the operations of the prophets of tiiis age were, they never abandon the idea of founding a new social organism. Individualism is but the neces- sary stage towards this. J" is God of mankind, not of an inorganic ma-ss of individual men.
ii. Predictive Prophecy. — As the prophets are absorbed in the destinies of the kingdom of God, it will be chiefly mumenta in its history and de- v«loi)ment and its linal condition that will form the subject of their predictions. They will have little occasion to refer to the future of individuals,
or to predict events in their history. There ar« instances : e.g. Samuel predicted some things that would happen to Saul, whicli the history declares did happen (1 S 9. 10). Jer. predicted the death of Ilananiah within the ye.ar, which took place (Jer 28). But most of the predictions relate to the history of the State and its destinies. Micaiah predicted the defeat and death of Ahab at Kamoth- gilead(l K22). Isaiah predicted the failure of the Northern coalition to subdue Jerusalem (Is 7) ; he also predicted the overthrow in two or three years of Damascus and Northern Israel before the Assj-- rians(Is8. 17). In like nutnner he predicted the failure of Sennacherib to capture Jerusalem ; while, on the other hand, Jer. predicted the failure of the Egyptians to relieve Jerusalem when besieged by Nebuchadnezzar. And in gener.al, apart from de- tails, the main predictions of the prophets regarding Israel and the nations were verilied in historj' (e.g. Am 1. 2). The chief predictions of the prophets relate (1) to the imminent downfall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah ; (2) to what lies beyond this, viz. the restoration of the kingdom of God ; and (3) to the state of the people in their condition of final felicity. To the last belong the Messianic predictions. It is Israel, the kingdom and people of God, that is properly the subject of prophecy, but other nations are involved in its history ; e.g. Assyria is the instrument in the hand of J" in humiliating Israel, and Babylon is the obstacle which has to be removed before its Restoration, and thus these kingdoms and others become also the subject of prophecy.
1. Prediction in general. — There are two ques- tions in connexion witli prophetic prediction which h.ave given rise to iliscussion : hrst, how are the prophetic anticipations as to the future to be ex- plained? anil second, what is the explanation of the prophet's feeling that the events which he predicts, e.g. the downfall of the State, the coming of the day of the Lord, and the inbringing of the perfect kingdom of God, are imminent? As to the lirst point, it must be obvious that the pro- phetic anticipations or certainties cannot be ex- plained as the conclusions of a shrewd political insight into the condition of the people or the nations at the time. Neither can the anticipa- tions of the nation's dissolution be the mere iiessimistic forebodings of a declining and e.\- Iiausted age, for the material and political con- dition of the North in the time of Amos, and of the South in the early days of Isaiah, was not such as to suggest such gloomy outlook. And least of all can it be pretended that the predic- tions are only app.arent, being, in fact, written post evc7itiim. It has been suggested that the human mind, or at any rate some rarely endowed minds, possess a faculty of presentiment or divina- tion, and that it is to this faculty that the jiro- phet's anticipations or certainties in regard to the occurrence of future events are due. Certainly, belief in the possession of such a faculty by pcculiarlj' gifted persons has been prevalent in diMcreiit .ages and among ditlerent peoples, but iinytliing like scientilic proof of the existence of the facility has probably never been offered. 7t would be remarkable if such a large number oi persons as the prophets of Israel should all 1 o endowed with this extraordinary faculty. And it would be even more strange if a faculty of this kind, tlie operation of which appears to be blind and unrational, should be found to manifest itself .so generally ju--t in the purest period of prophecy, at the time when prophecy had thrown otl' all naturalistic and physical characteristics and be- come ]iurely ethical. I'lobably, if any one of the data of this sujiposed faculty of luesciitiment were analyzed, it would be found to be the result of a