one of his pupils, are at once ascribed to Elijah, e. g. the anointing "I lla/ael to he king over Syria i 1 Kin^s \i\. 15; comp. 2 Kings \ iii. 13); the anointing of Jehu to he king over Israel (I Kings xix. 16; comp. 2 Kings i\. I sq.) ; the writing of the letter to Joram, etc. Thus in a certain sense it may be affirmed that Elijah was in
his lime the only prophet of the kingdom of Israel. Similarly of Moses it is recorded, during his passage through the desert, that a portion of his spirit was con- veyed to the seventy elders (Numb. \i. 1 7 >. The his- tory of the Christian Church itself offers analogies; look. e. g. at the relation of the second-class Reform- era to Luther and ( 'ah in.
(6.) h hardly needs t,. i„. mentioned that before a man could he a prophet he must be converted. This clearly appears in the case ol Isaiah, " whose iniquity was taken away and his sin purged" previous to his en- tering on his missii.n t,, the people of the covenant,
PROPHET
645
PROPHET
For a single momentary inspiration, however, the mere beginning of spiritual life sufficed, as instanced in Ba- laam and Saul.
3. As to prophecy in its circumscribed sense, or the foretelling of future events by the prophets, some ex- positors would explain all predictions of special events; while others assert that no prediction contains anything but general promises or threatenings, and that the prophets knew nothing of the particular manner in which their predictions might be realized. Both these classes deviate from the correct view of prophecy : the former often resort to the most arbitrary interpreta- tions, and the latter are opposed by a mass of facts against which they are unable successfully to contend : e. g. when Ezekiel foretells (xii, 12) that Zedekiah would try to break through the walls of the city and to escape, but that he would be seized, blinded, and taken to Babylon. The frailty of the people, under the Old Test., required external evidence of the real connection of the prophets with God, and the predictions of par- ticular forthcoming events were to them arifism, signs. These were the more indispensable to them, because the ancients generally, and the Orientals in particular, showed the greatest tendency towards the exploration of futurity, which tended to foster superstition and for- ward idolatry. All other methods of knowing future events by necromancy, conjuration, passing through the fire, etc., having been strictly forbidden (Deut. xviii, 10, 11), it might be expected that the deep-rooted craving for the knowledge of forthcoming events would be grat- ified in some other and nobler manner. The success of a prophet depended on the gift of special knowledge of futurity ; this, it is true, was granted comparatively to only few, but in the authority thus obtained all those shared who were likewise invested with the prophetic character. It was the seal impressed on true prophe- cy, as opposed to false. From 1 Sam. ix, 6, it appears that, to inspire uncultivated minds with the sense of divine truths, the prophets stooped occasionally to dis- close things of common life, using this as the means to reach a higher mark. On the same footing with defi- nite predictions stand miracles and tokens, which proph- ets of the highest rank, as Elijah and Isaiah, volun- teered or granted. These also were requisite to confirm the feeble faith of the people ; but Ewald justly remarks that with the true prophets they never appear as the chief point; they only assist and accompany prophecy, but are not its object, not the truth itself, which super- sedes them as soon as it gains sufficient strength and influence.
Some interpreters, misunderstanding passages like Jer. xviii, 8; xxvi, 13, have asserted, with Dr. Kiister, (p. 226 sq.), that all prophecies were conditional; and have even maintained that their revocability distin- guished the true predictions (Weissaguna) from sooth- saying (Wahrsaguncf). But beyond all doubt, when the prophet denounces the divine judgments, he pro- ceeds on the assumption that the people will not repent, an assumption which he knows from God to be true. Were the people to repent, the prediction would fail ; but because they will not, it is uttered absolutely. It does not follow, however, that the prophet's warnings and exhortations are useless. These serve " for a wit- ness against them ;" and besides, amid the ruin of the mass, individuals might be saved. Viewing prophecies as conditional predictions nullifies them. The Mosaic criterion (Deut. xviii, 22), that he was a false prophet who predicted " things which followed not nor came to pass," would then be of no value, since recourse might always be had to the excuse that the case had been al- tered by the fulfilment of the condition. The fear of in- troducing fatalism, if the prophecies are not taken in a conditional sense, is unfounded; for God's omniscience, his foreknowledge, does not establish fatalism, and from divine omniscience simply is the prescience of the prophets to be derived. The prophets feel themselves so closely united to God that the words of Jehovah are
given as their own, and that to them is often ascribed what God does, as slaying and reviving (Hos. vi, 5), rooting out nations and restoring them (Jer. i, 10 ; xviii, 7; Ezelc. xxxii, 18; xliii, 3); which proves their own consciousness to have been entirely absorbed into that of God.