od.
Since we have already (p. 672 ff.) discussed fully the nature and functions of these, we may here refer to other two points only. There is, first, the very definite way in which the prophets look for the fulfilment of their predictions (cf. esp. Is 8% 308, Hab 2?, where the prediction is still further strengthened by being committed to writing; but also Is 20'*-, Jer 208 217 2816). ‘The other point is that the natural feelings of the prophet may readily come into conflict with the message he is commanded by God to utter, whether it be that he has a transi- tory fit of doubt as to the justice of the principles that govern the course of the world (Jer 121), or that he despairs of any success to his mission (15!5": 2078-), or that he is unable to suppress a feeling of
rofound compassion for the objects of his threaten- ing (Is 224, Mic 18, Jer 4!° 818%). In the end, how- ever, the conviction always triumphs which Jere- miah (12?) prefixes to his complaint and reproaches: ‘Thou remainest in the right, O Jahweh, if I think to strive with thee.’ Nay, in God’s sight all human wisdom and strength and all riches are as nothing (Jer 9%),
Amongst other organs of Jahweh, Amos once (24) mentions the Nazirites (see above, p. 658*) ; but of the priests, apart from the honourable reference to the chief priest Uriah in Is 8?, all that we hear from the prophets are vehement denunciations for neglect of duty. Almost as frequent are serious complaints against the kings. Not, indeed, that the old conception (cf. above, p. 660°), which saw in the monarchy a blessing from Jahweh, and in the king as well as in the priests and prophets an organ of the theocracy, is ichsliy denied. It meets us clearly in the present (Deuteronom.) form of 28 7; but experience of the monarchy in general —particularly in the Northern kingdom—as this is netd clearly reflected in the so-called ‘law of the kingship’ (Dt 171“*-), must inevitably have led to a judgment almost entirely adverse.
(y) There is still one question we must answer before passing from this division of our subject. Do the prophets consider that perfect obedience to
* The usual interpretation, ‘the lying pen of the scribe hath made deceit of it,’ would require the reading inyy instead of myy,
t Instead of the sing. ‘nA, by which the MT means to suggest the one Law of Moses, read the plur. ‘nim. Only thus does ‘the countless number’ spoken of bear any sense.—On the usage of the word 17)n, cf. J. Valeton, art. ‘Beteekenis en
eo van het woord Thora in het Oude Testament’ in Theol. tudién, 1891, p. 101 ff.
-
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
689
the Divine will is possible, and do they measure each man’s responsibility accordingly? The answer must be that the prophets know only too well the inborn sinfulness of man, which is connected with the weakness of the flesh. Even an Isaiah must lament (6°) that he is a man of unclean lips and dwells in the midst of a people of unclean lips. Jeremiah (17°, cf. also 13%) pronounces that ‘the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately sick : who can know it?’ The Deuteronomist, again, makes Solomon declare (1 K 84) at the dedication of the temple: ‘There is not a man that sins not.’ But, in spite of this general con- dition of sinfulness, the prophets know of a re- lative righteousness, a piety which honestly en- deavours to satisfy the Divine claims. What it still lacks, owing to error, haste, and weakness, is made up to it by the sparing, pardoning grace of God. In this connexion it is noteworthy that, in all the numerous expressions for the forgiveness of sins, stress is laid, not upon a complete destroying of sin (as in the Catholic sense, without which there could be no ‘saints’), but only upon an overlooking of it or rendering it invisible, so that it no more provokes the judicial eye of God to punish it. No doubt, we have figurative language here, but language answering to the true evan- gelical view, according to which the man remains as before a poor sinner, but is declared by God in His grace to be righteous, and accordingly free from condemnation. Propitiation* consists in a ‘covering’ (and thus making invisible) of guilt; and, according to the Prophetic usage of language, it is God Himself that covers the sin (Is 6’, Jer 18 e¢ al.). Other expressions for the forgiveness of sins are ‘take away,’ ‘put aside,’ ‘let pass,’ ‘wash away,’ ‘wipe away,’ ‘heal’; God plunges sin into the depths of the sea (Mic 71), or casts it behind His back (Is 38!7)—all with the same result, that sin is now withdrawn from His view. In all this it is assumed as a matter of course that true contrition and repentance are present, and these can make sins that are blood-red to be white as snow, and make the purple-red to be like wool (Is 118).
The proof that at least a relative righteousness is regarded by the prophets as attainable, is found, on the one hand, in allusions to such righteousness in past times (Is 1°76); and, on the other hand, in the frequent promises attached to the honest fulfilment of the Divine will (Is 1, and with special frequency and emphasis in Deuteronomy [72 11188 and, with the corresponding threaten- ings against disobedience, 28" 30!"-]). The ques- tion how such a doctrine of retribution, according to which a man’s lot corresponds exactly to his conduct, is in harmony with the experiences of real life, is not yet raised. Pious faith holds simply to the postulate which must always be maintained by any truly religious Weltanschawung, that genuine godliness must find its reward, un- godliness its punishment. This postulate appeared to be justified all the more as it was applied, above all, to the conduct and the lot of the people as a whole, and less to those of the individual. And if, according to D (for to this stratum belongs, no doubt, the expansion of the Decalogue in Ex 205% 6), a continued influence of guilt upon the children, grandchildren, and great- grandchildren of the ungodly is taught, as conversely a continuance of the Divine favour, gained by godliness, till the thousandth generation, this is merely to affirm, in the sense of the Prophets, a truth which is frequently testified to elsewhere in Scripture and confirmed a thousand times over by experience. As the merits of David benefit the peoples for centuries long (1 K 111% 154, 2 K 87%), so, on the