t Am 24, with its allusion to the (Judean) 01319, lit. ‘lies,’ [=‘idols’], is generally recognized to be a later interpolation.
t On the controversy as to the beginning of absolute mono- theism, the reader may consult: A. Kuenen, art. ‘Jahweh and the other gods’ in Theol. Review, J uly 1876; Baudissin Studien zur semit. Religionsgeschichte, i., Leipzig, 1876 [Studie 2 ‘Die Anschauung des AT von den Géttern des Heidenthums’]; Baethgen, Beitrdge zur semit. Religionsgeschichte: der Gott Israels und die Gotter der Heiden, Berlin, 1880 [cf. esp. pp. 131-152 ‘Israels Verhiltniss zum Polytheismus’]; Ed. onig,
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
frequent cautions in Deuteronomy against other gods; in none of the passages containing these is there any expression of opinion as to the reality or non-reality of these ‘other gods.’ Even the famous ‘ Hear, O Israel’ of Dt 64, which the Jews and many Christian exegetes are wont to regard as the formulated fundamental confession of mono- theism, signifies by itself no more than that Jahweh is the God of Israel, Jahweh alone,* and that hence the veneration of Israel is due to Him alone. The declaration is thus on a parallel with the First Commandment. Hos 134, again, says only that Israel knows (or should, know) no other God, and has experienced no other deliverer than Jahweh. Moses testifies in Dt 3%4, as Solomon does in 1 K 8%, that Jahweh the God of Israel has no other god like Him, either in heaven above or on earth below. But here the existence of other gods seems to be yet always assumed, pre- cisely as in the question of Ex 15" ‘ Who is like thee, O Jahweh, among the gods?’; or in the designation of Jahweh as ‘God of gods’ and - ‘Lord of lords’ (Dt 10”); or, finally, in the state- ment of the prophet: ‘Before him (Jahweh) trembled the idols of Egypt’ (Is 19).
There can, however, be no doubt that the pas- sages last cited are to be set down simply to the account of poetic colouring or of an involuntary accommodation to the still subsisting popular con- ceptions. The real belief of the leading circles of thought is presented to us—at least in the later: Deuteronom. stratum—in the confession: ‘ Jahweh is the [true] God’ (Dt 7°) ; ‘ Besides him there is none’ (4%. %, 1 K 8; cf. also Is 3716, 2K 19%). But the same faith is held by the writing prophets, although it is never reduced to so precise a formula. Without it the conception of Jahweh as God of heaven could never have established itself in the shape above (p. 679) described. The God to whom ‘belongeth the heaven to its utmost heights, the earth and all that is upon it’ (Dt 10%), cannot possibly share this sovereignty of His with another god. It might indeed appear surprising that the allusions to the creative power of Jahweh, in which afterwards His uniqueness as God of the whole world comes into the sharpest prominence, are so scanty in the pre-exilic prophets. For, apart from the oft recurring Divine name Jahweh Zéb@ 6th, which, in the mind of the writing prophets (see above, p. 637°), doubtless includes a confession of the supramundane power and glory of Jahweh, and leaving out of account occasional allusions to Jahweh as bestower of the rain (Am 4’, Jer 5% 14”) and, conversely, as the author of drought and famine, all that we find is an express reference in Jer 27° to Jahweh as the Creator of the earth, with man and beast, and an allusion (put in the mouth of Hezekiah in 2 K 19% =Ts 3726) to Him as the Creator of the heaven and the earth.+
But the scantiness of these allusions should not excite our wonder. It is richly counterbalanced by the abundance of other passages which witness to the solity, or at least the incomparable omni- potence, of Jahweh in the world of nations. It was not the function of the prophets to solve cosmic or purely. metaphysical problems, but to hold up Beitrige zum positiven Aufbau der Religionsgeschichte Israels,
i ra Der Monotheismus der legitimen Religion Israels,’ Leipzig, 1889,
.* This interpretation of the words is claimed, in our opinion rightly, on the ground of the accentuation. The prevailing explanation, on the other hand, yields the sense: * Jahweh our God is one Jahweh’ (i.e. not broken up into a number of local deities; cf. Zec 149). Even thus the question of the reality of the strange gods is still left quite out of account.
} So far as their contents are concerned, Am 413 58f. 95f. would also fall under this category ; but these passages are now pretty generally ronetoee as late glosses. The same remark applies to Jer 1012f and 8325, where we read of a covenant of Jahweh with the day and the night, and of His appointing of the ordinances of heaven and earth.
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
681
SE a
to the eyes of their people the greatness of their Gus ead and the dreadfulness of the God to whom they ad to give account. Thus the judg- ments of God, present and future, supply a con- stant motive to portray Jahweh as the God who has at His command not only the resources and powers of the whole Universe, but, no less, the nations of the earth, when it is necessary to realize His purposes. When He commences a law- suit with His people, heaven and earth have to listen in reverential silence (Is 12; cf. also Mic 6, Hab 27°); and, when He comes to execute judg- ment, the whole course of nature reels (Mic 1*, Nah 1°*-), and men hasten to hide themselves in terror of His majestic appearance (Is 2% 1% 21), The mighty Assyria, with all its subject peoples, is like a lifeless instrument in His hands if He cares to employ it for the chastisement of Israel. He whistles for it from the end of the earth (Is 5°), much as the shepherd whistles to his dog, and it comes hurrying up. And if, in its haughty conceit, Assyria fancies that it has accomplished by its own strength what it has done only as the chastising rod in Jahweh’s hand (Is 10°), it has to listen to the crushing question: ‘Does the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith, or does the saw magnify itself against him that worketh it?’ (v.). Then by a fearful judgment is Assyria taught the truth of the all-superior might of Jahweh (vv.16% 8), The réle that Assyria plays in Isaiah is played in Jeremiah by ‘all the families of the kingdoms of the north’ (Jer 1). These are called by Jahweh to execute judgment upon Jerusalem ; He has given all lands into the power of Nebuchadrezzar (Jer 27°; cf. 284%, Hab 12, also 2 K 15%). Jahweh’s judgments upon foreign nations are for the most part occasioned by their hostility to Israel (so Am 1% 9% 11-13, Ts 14°48. 17128. 1898, Nah 3°%, Hab 2'6). Yet passages are not wholly wanting which speak of an un- limited exercise of the Divine sway amongst the nations, even apart from any such motive. Jahweh punishes Moab for its outrage on the king of Edom (Am 2'#) ; it was Jahweh that brought the Philis- tines from Caphtor and the Aramzans from Kir (97). He stirs up the Egyptians against one an- other, and gives them over into the hand of a cruel lord (Is 194); He produces in them a spirit of dizziness (v.4). He has determined upon the de- struction of Tyre, ‘to stain the pride of all glory, to bring into contempt all the honourable of the earth’ (23%, cf. also v.4). At His command, Jeremiah hands to all kings of the earth the in- toxicating cup, and, whether they will or no, they must drink it (Jer 251),