rals put forward by the prophets, if not higher or
sterner or purer than that of the law, is more plainly declared, and with greater, because now more needed, vehemence of diction. -Magna tides et grandis audacia prophetarum," says St. Jerome | //' /•/..'. This was their general characteristic, but that gifts and graces might be dissevered i- proved by the cases of Balaam, Jonah, Caiaphas, and the disobedient prophet of Ju- dah.
(5.) They were extraordinary, but yet authorized, exponents of the law. As an instance of this we may take Naiah's description of a true fast (lviii.:! 7); Eze- kiel's explanation of the sins of the father being visited on the children (ch. xv iii) ; Micah's preference of "doing justly, loving mercy, and walking humbly with (.ml." to "thousands of rams and ten thousands of rivers of
oil" (vi,6 8). Iii these, as in other similar cases (comp.
llos. vi. 6; Amos v. ■_'! i. it was the task of (he prophets
to restore the balance which had been overthrown by the .lew s and their teachers dwelling on one Bide or on the outer covering of a truth or of a duty, and leaving the other side or the inner meaning out of sight.
(6.) They held, as we haw shown abo\e. a pastoral or quasi-pastoral office.
,. I In y were a political power in the state. Strong
in the safeguard of their religious character, tiny were
able to serve as a counterpoise to the royal authority
w hell wielded even b\ all Allah.
s.i Bill the prophets wire something more than national poets and annalists, preachers of patriotism, moral teachers, exponents oi the law, pastors, and poli- ticians. We have not yet touched upon their most es- sential characteristic, which is that they were instru- ments of revealing God's « ill to man : as Ui other waj b,
so. specially, bj predicting future events, and, in par-
PROPHET
643
PROPHET
ticular, by foretelling the incarnation of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the redemption effected by him. There are two chief ways of exhibiting this fact — one is suitable when discoursing with Christians, the other when ar- guing with unbelievers. To the Christian it is enough to show that the truth of the New Testament and the truthfulness of its authors, and of the Lord himself, are bound up with the truth of the existence of this pre- dictive element in the prophets. To the unbeliever it is necessary to show that facts have verified their pre- dictions.
(«.) In Matthew's Gospel, the first chapter, we find a quotation from the prophet Isaiah, " Behold a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel ;" and, at the same time, we find a statement that the birth of Christ took place as it did "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet," in those words (i, 22, 23). This means that the prophecy was the declaration of God's purpose, and that the circumstances of the birth of Christ were the fulfilment of that pur- pose. Then, either the predictive element exists in the book of the prophet Isaiah, or the authority of the evangelist Matthew must be given up. The same evangelist testifies to the same prophet having "spoken of" John the Baptist (iii, 3) in words which he quotes from Isa. xl, 3. He says (iv, 13-15) that Jesus came and dwelt in Capernaum "that" other words "spoken by" the same prophet (ix, 1) " might be fulfilled." He says (viii, 17) that Jesus did certain acts " that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet" (Isa. liii, 4). He says (xii, 17) that Jesus acted in a particular manner "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet" in words quoted from xlii, 1. Then, if we believe Matthew, we must believe that in the pages of the prophet Isaiah there was predicted that which Jesus some seven hundred years afterwards fulfilled. This conclusion cannot be escaped by pressing the words "iva TrXfjpwSjj, for if they do not mean that certain things were done in or- der that the divine predestination might be accom- plished, which predestination was already declared by the prophet, they must mean that Jesus Christ know- ingly moulded his acts so as to be in accordance with what was said in an ancient book which in reality had no reference to him, a thing which is entirely at vari- ance with the character drawn of him by Matthew, and which would make him a conscious impostor, inas- much as he himself appeals to the prophecies. Further, it would imply (as in Matt, i, 22) that God himself con- trived certain events (as those connected with the birth of Christ), not in order that they might be in accordance with his will, but in order that they might be agree- able to the declarations of a certain book — than which nothing could well be more absurd.
But. further, we have not only the evidence of the evangelist; we have the evidence of the Lord himself. He declares (Matt, xiii, 14) that in the Jews of his age " is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith — " (Isa. vi, 9). He says (Matt, xv, 7), " Esaias well prophesied of them" (Isa. xix, 13). Then, if we be- lieve our Lord's sayings and the record of them, we must believe in prediction as existing in the prophet Isaiah. This prophet, who is cited between fifty and sixty times, may be taken as a sample; but the same argument might be brought forward with respect to Jeremiah (Matt, ii, 18; Heb. viii, 8), Daniel (Matt. xxiv, 15), Hosea (Matt, ii, 15; Rom. ix, 25), Joel (Acts ii, 17), Amos (Acts vii, 42; xv, 16), Jonah (Matt, xii, 40), Micah (Matt, xii, 7), Habakkuk (Acts xiii, 41), Haggai (Heb. xii, 2G), Zechariah (Matt, xxi, 5; Mark xiv, 27; John xix, 37), Malachi (Matt, xi, 10; Mark i. 2; Luke vii, 27). With this evidence for so many of the prophets, it would be idle to cavil with respect to Ezekiel, Obadiah, Nahum, Zephaniah; the more so as " the prophets" are frequently spoken of together (Matt, ii, 23; Acts xiii, 40 ; xv, 15) as authoritative. The