GIFT OF MROIT L. SAPIRO THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL THE MACMILLAN COMPANY MACMILLAN & CO., Limited THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA. Ltd. TORONTO •THE PROPHETS Ol ISRAEL. FROM THE EIGHTH TO THE FIFTH CENTURY THEIR FAITH AND THEIR MESSAGE BY MOSES BUTTENWIESER, Ph.D. PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL EXEGESIS, HEBREW UNION COLLEGE, CINCINNATI THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 1914 AU riihis ruertcd COPYKIGHT, 1914 By the MACMILLAN COMPANY Set up and electrotyped. Published January, 1914 TO MY FRIEND AND COMRADE, "THE WIFE OF MY YOUTH," WHOSE SHARE IN THIS WORK IS GREATER THAN I CAN ACKNOWLEDGE 280802 TABLE OF CONTENTS PACE Foreword: Origin and Character of Egyptian Prophetic Litera- ture — Rise of Eschatology — Method and Scope xv BOOK I THE FAITH OF THE PROPHETS PART I Chapter I GENERAL SURVEY The KejTiote of the Prophetic Preaching— The Importance of Jeremiah ^ Chapter II THE TEMPLE-SERMON AND THE PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH UNDER JEHOJAKIM I The Originally Component Parts of the Temple-Sermon; its 21 Genumeness " 2. Jeremiah's Trial and Conviction, and the Law, Deut. XVIII, 15-22, Applying to the Case ^4 3. Jeremiah's Escape-The Reading of his Prophecies by Baruch 37 4. Chap. XXV— Its Origin and Purpose 46 Note on the Date of Jer. XVII, 19-27 ^^ Chapter III THE PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH UNDER ZEDEKIAH. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CHAPS. XXXVII, XXXVIII, XXXIV, XXXII, 3^-5, XXI A. The Actual Facts of the Case ,' „' ' ' " V ^^ B. Critical Analysis of the Prophecies and Biographical Records of the Period • ^^ vii viii TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 1. XXXVII, 17-21 and XXXVIII, 14-27 SS (a) XXXVIII, 14-27— The Legendary Account 56 (b) XXXVII, 17-21— The Authentic Record 62 2. XXXIV, 8-22 and XXXVII, 1-16— XXXIV, 1-7, XXXII, 3-5, XXI, 1-14 and XXXVIII, 1-13 65 (a) The Two Deputations from Zedekiah to Jeremiah, XXXV' II, 3, 7a — XXI, 1-3 — Both Accounts Legendary 67 (b) The Original Beginning of the Narrative, XXXVIII, 1-13, and the Prophecy, XXI, 4-14- XXXIV, 1-7— XXXII, 3-5 69 (c) XXXIV, 8-22 and its Original Conclusion, XXXVII, 7b-io —The Original Place of XXXVII, 4, and 5 76 Chapter IV THE CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 1 . Their Importance 80 2. The Date of the Confessions 81 (a) The Date of XX, 7-11, 13 83 (b) The Date of XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6 84 (c) The Date of XVIII, 18-20 86 3. The Completeness of the Confessions and of the Prophetic Writings in General from a Literary Point of View 87 4. The Peculiarity of Biblical Style gi 5. Analysis and Interpretation of the Confessions 95 (a) The Confession, XV, 10, 15-21 and its Sequel, XVI, 1-9 .... 95 (b) The Confession, XVII, 5-10, 14-18 and its Originally Com- ponent Parts, IX, 22, 23, X, 23, 24, XVT, 19. Their Original Order 103 (c) The Confession, XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6 115 (d) The Confession, XX, 7-11, 13 121 (e) The Confession, XX, 14-18 127 PART II Chapter I INTRODUCTORY Jeremiah Could not Write 133 TABLE OF CONTENTS ix Chapter II PAGE Inspiration as Opposed to Divination or Possession 138 PART III Chapter I IIow the Prophetic Utterances Became Literature 167 Chapter II The Prophets Believe the Doom Inevitable 176 Chapter III Jeremiah's View of the Doom rjg 1. Chap. XIII, 15-27 180 2. Chaps. XIV, 1-13 (19-XV, 4), XV, 5^ 184 3. Chap. IV, 3-31 195 4. XXX\'I, 3-7. Chaps. XXV and XLV 204 (a) XXXVI, 3,7 204 (b) Chap. XXV 206 (c) Chap. XLV 207 5. Chap. XVIII, iff 208 Ch.-u»ter IV AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 1. The Dominant Note of Amos' Preaching — The Certainty of Judgment 211 2. Chap. V, 1-17 (Reconstrued) Corroborates this View 212 3. Identity of the Written with the Spoken Prophecies 221 4. Chap. VII, 1-9. History of Amos' Call — General Plan of his Prophecies 222 5. Amos' Prediction of Doom Applies to the Whole Nation 225 6. Why Amos Delivered his Message at Beth-el 237 Chapter V HOSEA'S view of the doom — ESSENCE OF HOSEA'S preaching 1. The Unity of Chaps. I-III 240 2. The Epilogue XIV, 2-9, Supplementary to the Description of His Future Hope in II, 16-25 ^44 X TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 3. Chap. V, isb-VI, 3 — Another Exposition of his Future Hope 247 4. Note on the Original Order of Hos. I-III and the Original Place of II, 1-3 251 Chapter VI isaiah's view of the doom and his attitude toward THE political AFFAIRS OF THE DAY 1. Opinions of Present Day Scholars 254 2. Isaiah's Earliest Prophecies 255 (a) The Consecration Vision 255 (b) His Future Hope— X, 21-23 258 (c) IX, 7-X, 4+V, 25b-3o 261 3. The Prophecies of the Following Periods 265 4. The Theories Advanced in Explanation of Isaiah's Alleged Change of View Untenable 268 5. Isaiah's Guiding Principle — Faith 269 6. No Discrepancy in Isaiah's Prophecies 272 (a) X, 20, 24-27+XIV, 24-27. A Post-Exilic Product 273 (b) X, 27C-34. One or Two Fragments — Irrelevant to the Ques- tion at Issue 275 (c) XIV, 28-32. Another Post-Exilic Product 276 (d) XVII, 12-XVIII, 6. A Number of Fragments which Admit of No Conclusion 278 (e) XXIX, sa-b, 7-8. A Fragment or More Probably an Inter- polation 280 (f) XXXI, 5-9. A Conditional Prediction 282 (g) X, 5-19. God's Ultimate Reckoning With the Assyrian World- Power 285 7. Isaiah's Last Prophecy — Chap. XXII, 1-14 287 R6sum6 293 Micah's View of the Doom 297 BOOK II THE MESSAGE OF THE PROPHETS PART I Introductory 301 TABLE OF CONTENTS xi AMOS PACE Justice and Righteousness 302 Spiritual Religion Versus Ritualistic Piety 308 Righteousness the True Foundation of Society 323 Supplementary Note 327 Index of Scripture- Passages Discussed or Interpreted 331 Index of Subjects 341 Grammatical and Lexicographical Obser\'ations 349 ABBREVIATIONS b. ben Diog. L. Diogenes Laertius Gcs. Buhl, Worterbuci Gescnius, Hebraischcs und Aramaisches Handworterbuch, bearbcitet von Buhl, 14 und 15. Auflagc Holmes & Parson VetusTestamentumGraecum. Kd. Holmes et Parson, 1 798-1827 K KclJiibh Kautzsch ' Kautzsch, Die Heilige Schrift des Alien Testaments, 3. Auflage Marti HC Kurzer Hand-Commentar zum Alten Testa- ment, herausgegeben von K. Marti Nowack UK Handkommentar zum Alten Testament, herausgegeben von W. Nowack Pes. Pesitta SBOT The Sacred Books of the Old Testament, ed. by P. Haupt J. V. sub voce Targ. Targum \-ulg. Vulgata ZATW Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestamentliche Wissen- schaft ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gescllschaft LXX Septuagint LXXK " Codex Sinaiticus LXXA Codex Alexandrinus LXXQ " Codex Marchalianus 6 Theodotion FOREWORD There is perhaps, at the present day, no subject of bibHcal study which possesses more interest for the lay public than Prophecy, a fact which must be most gratifying to writers on this subject, though it carries with it one serious difficulty. For there is also proba- bly no subject of biblical study which engages the attention of the speciahsts to the extent that Prophecy does; and a presentation which would fill the needs of the one class of readers would hardly meet the require- ments of the other. I cannot claim to have solved this difficulty. I am aware that there are parts of the present volume which the lay reader may prefer to pass over, and that there are other parts which may seem commonplace to the scholar, but I beheve that this is almost inevitable in the present stage of biblical criticism. The general reader will probably find the first and the last chap- ter most readable, as these were originally lectures deHvered before a lay audience, the first as an exposi- tion of the Faith of the Prophets, the second as an exposition of their Message. These lectures, which were deUvered in Albany, N. Y. in Januar>', 1910, at the request of my friend and former pupil, Rev. S. H. Goldenson, I was strongly urged to publish at the time. They are here substantially unchanged, though the second has been necessarily somewhat enlarged. In \'iew of the fact that these surveys were based on an interpretation and a line of reasoning which are in many points at variance with those of the many ^ FOREWORD distinguished scholars who have written on the subject of prophecy, it would have been vain to pubhsh them without gi^ng the scientific basis for my presentation This last I have essayed to do in the present volume, and I am not without the hope that the studies m- ^otorat^d herein (which have grown out of my lecTures on the subject at the Hebrew Union College during the past fifteen years), may on some point open up new Unes of thought, and throw a new hght on certain vital questions connected with Israektish ^'St chapter, which might logically have been reserved for the second volume, has been included here in order that, as far as preexiHc prophecy is concerned the presentation of the subject in this first volume might, in a summary sense at least, be complete. The institution of prophecy, whose origin lies far back in the primitive stages of religious development, was common to all the religions of antiquity. It was indigenous to Israel, even as to the other nations of the Ancient Orient, whether near or remote- but m Israel there arose in the course of time another type, he so-called Uterary or spiritual prophecy, which from the very outset was a distinct species, in pronounced opposition to the popular, primitive prophecy. It is with the great representatives of this speafic Israektish type of prophecy and with their importance in the history of religious thought that the present work is "''onrecent years the uniqueness and originaUty of this Uterary phase of prophecy have been questioned by various writers, in view of the discovery of a number of E=wtian texts which have been claimed to show a FOREWORD xvii close kinship to Old Testament Prophecy and which, accordingly, have been regarded as the model and source of the latter. In regard to that text, however, to which the greatest importance has been attached (Papyrus Leiden 344 redo, dating from the XIX Dynasty, that is about 1300 B. C), A. H. Gardiner, by his edition and translation of the complete Papy- rus,^ has proved that the conclusions drawn from it by Eduard ]\Icyer, "Die Israeliten und ihre Nach- barstamme," (1906) pp. 45ifT., and others are without basis. He has shown that no part of the Papyrus has a prophetic character, and still less a Messianic outlook, not even the part originally pubKshed by H. O. Lange, on which those scholars prematurely based their deductions regarding the origin of Israelitish prophecy. Gardiner's conclusions, it may be well to add, have been fully corroborated by another dis- tinguished Eg>-ptologist, A. Wiedemann (in "Archiv fur ReUgionswissenschaft," XIII, 1910, pp. 349-351). Wiedemann refers also to the second of these texts, which was discovered in a Papyrus in St. Petersburg, and which dates from around 1900 B. C, and very rightly points out {ib.) that the excerpt published of it by GolenischefT,- and the duphcate of a part of this text, translated by Ranke in Gressmann, "Altorien- talische Texte und Bilder," I, pp. 2o5f., are altogether insufhcient to permit any positive conclusions. What remains of Egyptian prophetic literature is a third group of texts, which date either from the Hellenistic or the Roman period. These prophecies have been ' " The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage." From a Hieratic Papyrus in Leiden (Papyrus Leiden 344 recto). Leipzig, igog. Tn Rccueil de Travatix rclalifs d la philologie el d I'arclUologU egypliennes el assyrienncs, XV, 1893, pp. 89/. xviii FOREWORD commonly thought to go back to Old-Egyptian origi- nals, to which Wiedemann cautiously remarks (ib.) that, though such older origin is possible, it cannot at present be proved. I would go farther than Wiede- mann and say that such older origin is out of the question. There is nothing to support such a theory except the claim of the authors of these prophecies, and this claim should be judged in the same Hght as the similar claims met with in apocal>ptic literature, and, it may be added, also in the contemporaneous astrological Hterature. The authors simply thought to lend their predictions greater authority by labeling them as products of hoary anriquity. With this characteristic of these pseudonymous prophecies, as well as with their real time of origin, it accords that they are akin in their character and contents, not to propheric Hterature proper, but to apocalypric litera- ture, the oldest Old Testament products of which date from the close of the Persian and the beginning of the Hellenistic period. The simultaneous occurrence of apocalyptic texts in Egypt and in postexihc Juda- ism is, in all probability, to be accounted for by the fact that the rise and development of apocalyptic literature goes hand in hand with the spread and development proper of astrological hterature (see p. 159, n. i). As a matter of fact, a careful examina- tion of the two reveals the interesting fact that there is in some respects a very close relationship between astrological and apocal>'ptic literature, a relationship pointing clearly to a certain dependence of the latter on the former. In view of all this, I saw no occasion for referring to the Egyptian texts in the body of the present volume. By the foregoing remarks I have indirectly indicated FOREWORD xix my position also to the view, advanced by a recent school of biblical scholars, that Jewish eschatology existed fully developed in ancient Israel long before the appearance of literary prophecy and that its roots are to be sought in Old-Babylonian eschatological notions. It may suffice here to point out that the claim of the existence of an Old-Babylonian eschato- logical speculation rests on postulation rather than on estabhshed facts, and that — not to consider other objections — to argue the existence of an Israelitish eschatology from the preexilic prophetic writings is possible only by reading abstruse meanings and hidden references into descriptions which, in their essence, are purely imaginative and poetic. The fact is, as I hope to show in the second volume, that whatever there is of positive proof points to the rise of Jewish eschatology in the Persian period. Sellin, in his recent book, " Der alttestamentliche Prophetismus " (Leipzig, 191 2), which has just come to my notice, differs in his view of the eschatology of Israel from the scholars just referred to in that he holds that eschatology was indigenous to Israel, his explanation being that "the real root of it Hes in the act of Revelation from Sinai " (p. 182). I may add that Sellin's view-point through- out his treatise is in accord with this explanation. My treatment of the prophets, though it departs to a certain extent from the chronological order of presentation, is not in opposition to, but is in full harmony with the historico-critical method of modern research. This method means for that province of knowledge which deals with the politico-social and mental development of the human race, what the analytic-genetic method means for the province of science. Like the latter it insists that every fact or XX FOREWORD phenomenon under consideration be minutely ana- lyzed, that is to say, that its relation to its environment be determined, and its development and growth and, if possible, also its genesis, be traced. For it, also, emphasizes, as the guiding principle of modem re- search, that no real knowledge can be obtained from detached phenomena or isolated facts; in other words, that no fact can be accepted by itself, but must be recognized as a part of a great complex, the inter- relations of the various parts of which must be closely studied before the significance of the special phenom- enon can be ascertained. Up till recently, however, research in the field of literary prophecy can hardly be said to have fully complied with the demands of the analytic-genetic method. It concentrated its attention on the historic side of the problem, that is, on the development of the prophetic ideas and the composition of the prophetic writings, and neglected to a large extent the more vital side of the movement, the spiritual side. It failed to give due attention to the "inward" religion of the prophets, and this, after all, must be the investi- gator's primary concern. For, however important it is to trace the reflections and speculations which ulti- mately entered into the construction and shaped the expression of their views, their personal religion, the nature and quality of their inner experience, of their realization of their relation to God, can be the only basic starting-point. The touchstone of prophetic, as indeed of every, reHgion is not so much the particular interpretation of life and the universe to which the individual prophets were led, as it is the inner fire which was kindled in them and the active life of service and surrender to which they were inspired. FOREWORD xxi It is from this aspect, the aspect of tlie prophets' personal faith, that literary prophecy must be con- sidered first of all, in order to comply fully with the analytic-genetic method; and only after the spiritual side has been fully considered can the doctrinal side of the movement, that is the new world of religious ideas to which it gave birth, be appreciated in its tmc significance. This spiritual side of the prophetic movement, it has seemed to me, can be best studied by starting with it at the point of its highest development. Therefore, in the present volume, which aims, pri- marily, to be an exposition of this side of the subject, a departure from the chronological order of presentation has been made. It must further be noted, in explanation of my treatment of the subject, that not all the prophetic books have an equal value or a Uke character. Thus, to give only one illustration, the Book of Nahum is an example, among the preexilic prophetic writings, of the national chauvinistic prophecy, the representatives of which the true prophets never tired of denouncing. I have kept in view mainly the six great prophets, Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, and Deutero- Isaiah (Is. XL-LV). With these is to be classed, of preexiHc prophets, Zephaniah, though by far not so great and original a personality as they, and of postexilic prophets, the author of Is. LVH, 15-LIX. Kinship of spirit wath these great prophets must be claimed also for Zachariah (Zach. I-VHI), though marked originaUty must be denied him. His genius was not of the creative order. As to Ezekiel, though his importance for the subsequent religious develop- ment in Israel must be acknowledged, his place is not among the great prophets. His importance in a xxii FOREWORD study of the prophetic movement is not because of the nature of his personal faith, not because of his own spiritual conception of religion, but because of the practical effects of his teaching on the official reHgion of his day. In conclusion, just a word on the question on which at present biblical scholars are divided into two camps — the question whether monotheism originated with the Uterary prophets or was known long before their appearance. In the present volume I refer to this question directly only once, and then of necessity briefly. I hope to include a full discussion of this point in the second volume, and shall only state here that my study of the prophets has confirmed my convic- tion that the position of the Graf-Wellhausen school on this question cannot be dislodged. However scant the references of the prophets are to the official rehgion of their times, in Judah as well as in Israel, they leave no doubt that monotheism was unknown in Israel prior to their advent. It may be noted also that the stories of the patriarchs, in the form in which they have come down to us, are thoroughly imbued with the prophetic spirit, and, there is proof, are the product of the final metamorphosis which these ancient stories underwent among the followers of the great prophets. In translating bibUcal texts, square brackets are employed in all those cases where there is no exact word-equivalent in the Hebrew original, but where the word is impHed by the syntactical construction. Moses Buttenwieser. SCHLEUSSIG Southampton, Ontario, July, 1913. BOOK I THE FAITH OF THE PROPHETS PART I THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL CHAPTER I GENERAL SURVEY THE KEYNOTE OF THE PROPHETIC PREACHING — THE IMPORTANCE OF JEREMIAH If one should attempt to sum up in a single sentence, at once the faith of the prophets and the most striking truth illustrated by the history of Israel, one could not do it more fittingly than by the sublime utterance of the prophet Zachariah: "Not by virtue of material strength and political power shall ye prevail, but by my spirit, saith the Lord." ^ It is a notable fact that throughout the centuries of its history Israel never really attained political prominence among the nations. In view of the favor- able situation of Palestine, right on the highroad of traffic between the countries farther east and those of the Mediterranean, Israel would seem to have had the opportunity of developing great pohtical power and influence, but beyond the ambition cherished in this direction and the strides made toward this end, during the comparatively brief period of David's and Solomon's rule, this result was far from ensuing. Da\dd, by his consolidation of the kingdom and con- sequent multiplication of the nation's strength, laid the basis for commercial development and political • Zach. IV, 6. 4 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL prosperity, and Solomon, by following up this advan- tage and developing the possibilities which the country offered for world-commerce, succeeded in giving Israel the much-coveted rank and standing among the na- tions. But the progressive policy of the country was short-lived, owing to the disruption of the kingdom which followed on Solomon's death. From this time on, as before its rise under David, Israel, when not actually subservient to other nations, was at least obliged to maintain its independence with a struggle. PoHtical prestige among the nations it had none. As the ancient seer aptly expressed it, "It is a people that stands alone, that does not count among the na- tions." 1 Not only politically, however, was Israel's standing insignificant. Along the lines of material and intel- lectual ^ progress its achievement was just as slight. In all matters of general culture Israel was distinctly receptive rather than productive. After conquering Canaan it did not create a civilization of its own, but adopted that of the native Canaanites, and later, that of the great Kidlur-centres of the ancient world with which it came in contact. Neither in the useful nor fine arts, neither in science nor commerce were its achievements as a nation noteworthy. We read, e. g., of Solomon's sending to Phoenicia for skilled masons and artificers when building the Temple, and again, of his employing Phoenician sailors for the conduct of his fleet. Israel's originality lies, with the bulk of its achieve- ments, in another sphere, in a sphere of infinitely deeper concern for man's welfare than political great- 1 Num. XXIII, 9. 2 " Intellectual " is used here in the narrower sense of the word. GENER.\L SURVEY 5 ness or material advance. It became men's pathfinder in their search after the truth, after the knowledge of God; and it is in this sphere, the sphere of the spirit- ual, that Israel attained imperishable fame. Here its genius soared to heights never reached before, nor surpassed since; and, from this standpoint, it may be said without exaggeration that in the whole history of human progress no other nation has made such a mighty contribution to, or exercised such a lasting in- fluence on the thought of the world. This great realization was the fruit of the movement known as hterary prophecy — that wonderful move- ment which was inaugurated by Amos, the shepherd of Tekoa, about the middle of the eighth century B. C, and which was continued after him by an unbroken Hne of prophets through upwards of three centuries, before, during, and after the exile. A unique and imposing spectacle is this procession of prophets, appearing as they did under untoward circumstances, transcending material conditions, tow- ering over their contemporaries, preaching by divine compulsion a doctrine which for their age had neither material basis nor historical warrant, bearing testi- mony in their words and in their Hves to the truth expressed by Zachariah, "Not by virtue of material strength and pohtical power shall ye prevail, but by my spirit, saith the Lord." For mark, not at the flood-tide of Israel's power did these prophets appear, but at a time when the national life was at its lowest ebb, even threatened with extinction; and, what is equally significant, although they came apparently to predict doom, they were essentially the apostles of faith and hope. Here, indeed, we have the very heart of the matter. 6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL The prophets were convinced that the nation must perish; they were haunted by the knowledge of their people's sinfulness and of the impending judgment. So possessed were they by this thought, that they were unable to consider other problems or conditions, except as subsidiary to it. But while brooding over the coming ruin of their people, they were saved from despair by the deeper spiritual insight which came to them, by the larger vista that opened up before their soul. They caught a glimpse, as it were, of God's larger purpose; and in this light realized that Israel was but part of the general plan, and that the present was but a step to the future. They had a vision — a wondrous one for their age — of the ultimate regenera- tion of mankind and the universal dominion of God ; and it was this vision and this faith that inspired them, and gave them courage to go forth and proclaim to a doomed people the message of hope they had received from God, the gospel of final deliverance from sin and error. To this glorious faith the writings of every one of the prophets bear evidence. It is the keynote of the whole prophetic movement. It dignifies even the least important of the prophetic books. Let us con- sider, e. g., the book of the postexilic prophet Zach- ariah, from which we have already quoted. Taken as a whole, the writings of Zachariah, when judged according to their literary merits, do not rank high; yet there is a ring of idealism, in his prophecies which lends them both significance and charm, a towering trust by which one cannot but be impressed. The lofty vision of Zachariah's predecessor, Deutero- Isaiah,^ had not been realized. The great prophet 1 Is. XL-LV. GENER.\L SURVEY 7 of the exile had dreamed of Israel's restoration to glory and the subsequent regeneration of mankind, but such a fulfilment seemed now farther ofT than ever. The situation of the newly-returned exiles was most pitiable. They found themselves assailed by diffi- culties on all sides, even by discord witliin their own ranks. Worst of all, they were disheartened by the gloomy \'iew which they perforce took of their own situation. Unable to rise above the sordid reality of the present, they failed to realize that confidence is as certainly a condition of victory as it is a result of it. In short, they lacked faith. ^ Not so, however, the prophet Zachariah. Where others saw but failure and disappointment, he had visions of a glorious transformation of things; he saw the promise of a triumphant future. When his contemporaries asked in wonder, how in the face of their most depressing ex- periences, he could still cherish such dreams, could have such faith, could still hope for the ultimate triumph of the good, the prophet in reply gave utter- ance to that great word with which I opened this chapter: "Not by virtue of material strength and pohtical power shall ye prevail, but by my spirit, saith the Lord." ' Whence springs this ardent faith of the prophets? They themselves give us the answer. Their conscious- ness of divine inspiration and of immediate com- ' This state of aflFairs is reflected throughout the prophecies of both Zachariah (Zach. I-VIII) and his contemporary Haggai; c/. Zach. I, 12; III, 2; IV, 7a, loa; VIII, 10, 13; Hag. I, 2-1 1; II, 3-5, 11-14. 2C/. Zach. IV, 6-10; VI, 15; VIII, 3-9, 13, 19, also II, 13, 15; see also my article, " Remarks on tlic Importance of Zacliariah as a Proplict " in " Studies in Jewish Literature," issued in honor of Pres. K. Kohler (Berlin, 1913), pp. 71-73. 8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL munion with God is their fountain-light, the main- spring of their faith. Let us take the famous passage from Amos: "When the lion roars who can but fear; when the Lord God speaks who can but prophesy?" ^ Amos impKes by this parallel that as the roaring of the lion irresistibly inspires fear, so does God's revelation to a man as inevitably impel him to prophesy. Still more explicit is Amos on this point in his declaration to Ainaziah, the priest of Beth-El. Ama- ziah at the order of the king, had forbidden speech to Amos, telhng him, "Flee for thy life to Judah" — i. e., to the prophet's native country — "there thou mayest earn a livelihood by prophesying, but at Beth-El thou shalt not again dare to prophesy." ^ To this Amos replied: "I am not a prophet nor the disciple of a prophet — I am a shepherd and a dresser of sycamores — but God took me from my flocks, bidding me go, prophesy against my people Israel!" ^ By this seemingly contradictory assertion Amos meant to emphasize that he was not a prophet by profession, nor yet by his own choice — by profession he was a shepherd and a grower of sycamores — but that he had been compelled by the voice of God to leave his herds and to come to Beth-El to prophesy his people's doom. And so little did he heed the pro- hibition that he followed up his declaration just quoted with a new prophecy addressed particularly to Amaziah,^ by which act of defiance he implied that the priest and the king could no more suppress his message than they could stay God's purpose. It was reserved for Jeremiah, however, almost 1 Am. Ill, 8. » lb. 14, IS. 2/i. VII, 12, 13. * lb. 16,17. GENER.\L SURVEY 9 two centuries later/ to portray the elemental force with which God's revelation took possession of him: "Thou, O God, hast enthralled me, and I am en- thralled; thou hast seized and overpowered me!"^ Then he goes on to tell how his prophetic gift has brought shame and discredit on him, but still he must obey the divine force within him: "I have become a constant target for laughter; every one mocketh me. For as often as I speak I have to cry out, have to complain of violence and abuse, for the word of God but serveth to bring upon me insult and derision without end. And I thought I will not heed Him, I will not speak any more in His name; but it was within me as a raging fire shut up in my bosom; I strove to withstand it, but I could not." 3 Just as this description of the force of divine in- spiration has no equal in prophetic Kterature, so no other prophet was possessed to such a marked de- gree as Jeremiah by the conviction of his divine call and by the consciousness of intimate communion with God. Other prophets showed equal fervor and singleness of purpose; some even, as the Isaiahs, excelled Jeremiah in the loftiness of their conception of God and of the universe, as in logical precision and clearness of thought, and in poetic beauty and aptitude of language — in fact, in all those quahties which per- tain distinctly to the intellectual side of the prophetic * The date of the confession referred to here is 587 B. C, see Chap. IV, § 2, a. -Jer. XX, 7. — I use "enthrall" not with the meaning "enslave," but with the meaning "to cast a spell over," to "hold or bring under an overmastering influence." lo THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL movement; but as an exponent of the purely spiritual side of this movement Jeremiah stands without a peer. In support of this, one need only point to his writings, where with his prophecies proper he has interwoven his confession of faith and the record of his religious experience. Any discussion of the faith of the prophets must centre finally in this fervid record of Jeremiah's. Throughout the book of Jeremiah there is a strong personal note. At times, in the so-called confessions, e. g., the prophet's innermost soul is revealed to us. We see the man, his struggles and his sufferings, and we see the very pulse of the man — his unvarying reliance on God's presence with him. In the opening chapter, known as the consecration- vision, the prophet relates how God, in that hour when He revealed Himself to him, spoke the following words of assurance: "Be not afraid of them for I am with thee to deliver thee. . . . But do thou gird thy loins and rise and speak to them whatsoever I bid thee. Be not dis- mayed by them lest I suffer thee to be dismayed by them. Behold, I make thee this day as a fortified city, and as an iron pillar, and as a wall of brass against the whole land, the kings of Judah, her princes, her priests, and the people of the land; they shall wage war against thee but not conquer thee, for I am with thee, saith the Lord, to deliver thee." ^ These words with which, the prophet states, God sent him forth on his mission are not mere phrases calculated to produce effect. Every word reflects the bitter struggle Jeremiah had to endure in the pursuance of his prophetic mission. One needs only ijer. 1,8, 17-19- GENERAL SURVEY ii to recall the storm of opposition and persecution which his famous Tcmplc-scrmon ^ called down on his head. In this sermon Jeremiah denounces the people's belief in the inviolable sanctity of the Temple at Jerusalem, and declares that God will destroy the Temple and disperse the nation in order to show that He does not care for sacrifices and offerings, but solely for an obedient heart and a moral life : "Thus saith the Lord Sabaoth, the God of Israel, amend your ways and your doings that I may let you dwell in this place. Put not your trust in delu- sions like this, the Temple of God, the Temple of God, the Temple of God are these structures.- Nay, only if ye thoroughly amend your ways and your doings, if ye scrupulously practice justice toward one an- other, oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, or the widow, shed not innocent blood in this place, nor worship other gods to your hurt, only then will I let you dwell in this place, in the land which I gave to your fathers, forever. Verily, ye put your trust in delusions that are of no avail. [Think of it!] to commit theft, murder, adultery, and perjury, to sacrifice to Baal and worship other gods that ye know not, and then to come and stand before me in this house dedicated to my name and say, we are safe — 'VII, 1-15, 21-26; cf. Chap. II, § I, "The Originally Component Parts of the Temple-sermon." = Like most temples of antiquity, the Temple at Jerusalem con- sisted at that time as in New Testament times {cf. Math. XXIV, i and Mark XIII, if.) of a number of buildings. As he spoke the words, "The Temple of God, the Temple of God, the Temple of God are these structures," Jeremiah no doubt pointed with a gesture to the Temple and its adjoining buildings. 12 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL [safe] in doing ^ all these shameful things! Is this house, dedicated to my name, a den of robbers in your eyes? Verily, / do look upon it as such,- saith the Lord (w. 3-1 1). "Thus saith the Lord Sabaoth, the God of Israel, add your holocausts to your common sacrifices, and eat the meat! For on the day I brought your fathers out of Egypt, I did not give them any command, nor did I say aught unto them, concerning holocausts or sacri- fices. But only this did I command them : Hearken unto my voice; have me for your God and be ye my people, and walk in the way that I ever enjoin upon you" — i. e., by the divine voice within^ — ''so that it may be well with you" (vv. 21-23). ^l^ma'an has here, as quite frequently in such ironical comments, the force "so that," i. e., "to the efifect that," or "with the result that." 2 The preceding sentence, h''fn^'arath parislm Itaja hahhajith kazzce, is to be construed as object of raHthl, a by no means infrequent con- struction; hinne serves the purpose of emphasizing 'anokhl, and gam, as need hardly be pointed out, receives its point from ¥'enekhaem. ^ "^sawwcB is imperfect of reiterated action. That "I ever enjoin upon you" has the import here stated, follows directly from the whole tenor of the sermon as well as from the connotation which the terms "the revelation (Torah) of God" and "the word of God," invariably have in the prophetic writings. By his emphatic declaration in the preceding v. 22 Jeremiah implicitly denies the divine origin of the Deuteronomic Code or of any similar sacred lore, while throughout the sermon he insists on the divine and absolute authority of the moral law. Is it not clearly a postulate of this reasoning that it is through the moral consciousness that God communicates with man? The same reasoning underlies Amos' challenge to invite the occu- pants of the palaces of Ashdod and Egypt to Samaria to witness the lawlessness prevailing there and to testify against the house of Jacob (Am. Ill, 9 £., 13). Nowack, in explanation of this challenge, rightly remarks that Amos here proceeds from the premise, not of a written law known only to Israel, but of a imiversal law which asserts itself GENERAL SITRVEY 13 Are not these utterances the very quintessence of religion, even as we conceive of it to-day?— Not forms and ceremonies, but God in man's heart and in his daily Hfe. To Jeremiah's contemporaries, however, as even to much later generations, such utterances seemed rank blasphemy, and as a result the whole nation united against him. He was condemned to death and only with difficulty escaped into hiding, from which he dared not emerge for over ten years, until the death in the conscience of everj' individual and every nation — an idea brought out very pointedly by Amos in Chap. I. (See "Die Kleinen Propheten" in Nowack's HK. ad loc). So too, the fact that "the word of God" and "the revelation (Torah) of God" to which the prophets peremptorily demand obedience invariably connote "the living prophetic word," points to the same postulate. The use of these phrases to introduce messages like Jeremiah's Temple-sermon is particularly instructive in this regard, cf. e. g., Is. I, 10. No less significant are vv. 4-5 of the resume of the Temple-sermon, given in Jer. XX\T, inasmuch as these verses correspond to VII, 24-26, the immediate continuation of v. 23. These verses read: "Thus speaks the Lord, if ye do not heal%.en unto me by walking according to my Torah, which I have laid before you, that is, by hearkening unto the words of my servants, the prophets, whom I have zealously sent unto you though ye did not hearken unto them" — or as the LXX both here and VII, 26 pointedly read — "unto me." Note that walking according to God's Torah is expressly defined as hearkening to the words of the prophets, and that obedience to the prophets is in turn defined — in the text read by the LXX — as hearkening unto God. As a final link in this chain of evidence may be mentioned Jeremiah's sublime conviction that in the ideal future there will be no written code of law, but that God's law will be indelibly inscribed in the heart of each individual (XXXI, 31-34). As W. Robertson Smith expresses it, "God's Word, not in a book but in the heart and mouth of His servants, is the ultimate ideal as well as the first postulate of prophetic theology" (see "The Old Testament in the Jewish Church," p. 300). Cf. also infra Part II, Chap. II, "Inspiration as opposed to Divination or Possession," pp. 145II., 150, 156. 14 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of Jehojakim made it safe for him again to appear in public.^ How intense was the hatred of the people toward him and to what abuse he was subjected be- cause of the Temple-sermon may be seen from the confession, XV, lo, 15-21, which dates from this period, in which the prophet exclaims: "Woe unto me, my mother, that thou didst bear me, a man of strife and enmity for the whole land; I have not lent to them nor have they lent to me, yet everyone curseth me." - This persecution which began with the Temple- sermon continued, except for a comparatively brief intermission, until the very close of Jeremiah's career ; it became even more violent toward the end. From the confessions of this final period we know that even his nearest relatives and most intimate friends joined the ranks of his persecutors and conspired against him : "Yea, even thy brothers, and the house of thy father, even they have become treacherous against thee, even they talk without reserve ^ behind thy back; do not trust them if they speak kindly to thee" (XII, 6). And again: "Yea, I hear the wliispering of many, attack on all sides: inform on him or let us play the informer; every one of my bosom-friends is watching to contrive my downfall : ^ perhaps he will let himself be entrapped, so that we may get him into our power and take revenge on him" (XX, 10). ^ See Chap. II, § 2, "Jeremiah's Trial and Conviction." 2 Read kJilldm qilHilni. ^ male is elliptical for pe male (adverbial accusative) or b^phe male both of which phrases occur in Arabic miVa fi, bimWi fi; see Gold- ziher, "All b. Mejmun al-Magribi and sein Sittenspiegel des ostlichen Islams" in ZDMG, XXVIII (1874), 310, n. i. * saela' means "downfall," just as in Ps. XXXV, 15, XXXVIII, 18, Job X\Tn, 12; cf. Earth, " Wurzeluntersuchungen," p. 40 and Gas. Buhl, "Worterbuch," ^^ s. v. GENERAL SUR\'EY 1$ No amount of persecution, however, could shake Jeremiah. Four years after the Temple-sermon a great fast was ordained throughout the country, probably on account of the peril threatening the nation because of Nebuchadrezzar's victory over Pharao Necho at Karkemish in the year 604; and Jeremiah evidently thought the occasion propitious for making an impression upon the minds of the people and rousing them from their indifference. — Had he not all these years been predicting the very disaster of which they now stood in dread? As the death-sentence was still hanging over him, he dared not leave his hiding-place to deliver his prophecies in person,^ so he had Baruch b. Nerijah write down all the prophecies he had delivered up to that time — he him- self did not know how to write ^ — and read them before the people, assembled from all quarters of the country, in the Temple at Jerusalem.^ The result of this was that his sermons were burned by the King, and his life exposed to greater danger than ever ; ^ but, un- daunted, he caused his sermons to be rewritten,^ and this time took occasion to add a characteristic confession of his faith in God and in the power of things spiritual:^ — "Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom, nor the mighty one of his strength, nor the rich man of his wealth, but if one must ^ boast let him boast of this, that he understandcth and knoweth * See Chap. II, § 3, "Jeremiah's Escape." *See Part II, Chap. I, "Jeremiah could not Write." » See Jer. XXXVI, iff. *Seeib.,v\\ 11-26. 'Seeift., w. 27-32. « See Chap. IV, § 5, b, "The Confession, XVII, sff. and its origi- nally Component Parts." '' See infra, pp. io8f. 1 6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL me — that I am the Lord who doth work love, justice, and righteousness in the world, that it is in these things that I take delight, saith the Lord" (DC, 22). These words reveal the essential spirituahty of Jeremiah's teaching. Yet this man who preached love, justice, and righteousness was flogged,^ imprisoned, thrown into a dungeon, treated with every sort of contumely. Physical suffering, however, seems to have been but a small part of what Jeremiah had to endure. In his confessions he speaks of suffering far more terrible than any persecution or bodily privation, viz., the joyless Kfe of isolation which must be his because of his prophetic foresight.- This agony of soul which Jeremiah suffered because of the knowledge of the doom awaiting his people is reflected throughout his book. We see the prophet constantly beset by visions of the approaching catastrophe. The joys of Hfe have become a mockery to him, his heart can never more be light. Whithersoever he turns, hideous shadows thrust themselves across his path and drive him out from the circle of hfe's joyous ones, yea, make it impossible for him to share the society of his fellow-men at all. He longs to flee from the haunts of men, where his forebodings have made him an object of derision and a laughing-stock for the crowd, to hide his grief in the solitude of the desert, and to bear his hopeless burden alone. What a heavy price the seer pays for ^ Jeremiah was flogged on two occasions, when he provoked the ire of the Temple-overseer Pashhur (XX, 1-3) by his prediction that Jerusalem and the nation were doomed — an occurrence the date of which cannot be ascertained; and again later when he was thrown into the dungeon on the pretext that he intended to desert to the Chal- daeans (XXXVII, 11-16). » See XV, I7f.; cf. Chap. IV, § 5, a, pp. Qgff. GENER.VL SURVEY 17 his gift! — the bitterest isolation, the renunciation of all domestic happiness, the inability even to share in the common joys and sorrows of his fellow-men, be- cause his soul is filled with pictures of the desolation and misery about to overtake his people.^ Yet through this constant anguish of spirit, as through the persecution he had to suffer from his fellow-men, Jeremiah v/as upheld by his belief that God was with liim. Indeed, all his trials and suffering served but to strengthen his reliance on God and his consciousness of God's presence with him. Herein lies the secret of his power. No matter how often Jeremiah cries out that he is weary of Hfe, since in God's service he has to bear the hatred of the whole world, he always ends by declaring that God is present with him, and that it is the joy of his soul to carry out His will, so that, as he himself puts it, he verily devours every message from Him.- The bitter complaint, cited above, that his enemies beset him on every hand, and that even his bosom-friends are ready to betray him, is followed up by the joyful exclamation, "But since God is with me, I triumph like a hero." ^ Even more explicit, if possible, is another passage, in which, referring to the unceasing persecution he has to endure, Jeremiah reflects that those who are un- compromisingly righteous in their lives are beset with hardships and trials, while the unscrupulous wicked enjoy a hfe of ease and prosperity:'* "Absolutely 1 Cf. especiaUy IV, 19-21, VIII, 16, 18, IX, i, XIV, 18, XV, i7f., XVI, 1-9; see also Part III, Chaps. II, f. "The Prophets Believe the Doom Inevitable." 2 See XV, 16. 3 XX, 11; cf. Chap. IV, § 5, d, "The Confession, XX, 7-11, 13." «XII, i-2a. i8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL righteous art Thou, O God," he calls out, "even though I venture to dispute with Thee,— yet of a ques- tion of justice I desire to speak unto Thee: Why IS the way of the wicked prosperous, why are all faithless people at ease? Thou hast planted them hence they take root, thrive, even yield fruit " For a moment this reversed order of things seems to him hardly reconcilable with the justice of God— but only for a moment. Then the truth comes to him- ' "Near art Thou to their mouth'W. c, the mouth of the wicked- but far from their heart; but Thou, O God Ihou knowest me. Thou seest me ever,^ Thou hast tried my heart which is at one with Thee." ' He says in effect that in spite of the material prosperity of the wicked, he knows that no relation exists between them and God, whereas he feels that he has entered with God into such an intimate relation that nothing further can be desired; in this at-oneness with God he possesses the supreme good. In other words he recognizes that not material prosperity constitutes man s happiness, but that peace and strength of soul which IS enjoyed only by him who lives a life of right- eousness and feels himself at one with God. In this consciousness of union with God Jeremiah recognized the mainspring of all his endeavor, and ' lb. 2b, 3a. 2 tir'eni is imperfect of reiterated action Zeit'-'f' !' generally misunderstood; W. Erbt, "Jeremia und seine A en TeJ '"^^°^^f ^ ^'" ^^"^^^^^' "^'^ ^-lige Schrift des teTisX-^--'^^^^^^^ ^'.'-^ «"'"^^ '^ ^'^°g^^h-- The grammar. ' ^ b^> "'^ ""^-J uLuiLLca 11 altogether The text rs, however perfect from the point of view of both thought and grammar, 'utakk is not the objective of im but its qualific th' The quahficative cons.stmg of a prepositional phrase is used in the c„„,-/. , '« "* " picpuMLionai pnrase is used in the Semitic languages to an e.xtent altogether unknown in modern languages; it is often to be rendered by a relative or temporaUW GENERAL SURVEY 19 from it he derived his conviction of victory notwith- standing apparent failure. This explains why the prophet of the deepest gloom and most extreme personal privation is at the same time the prophet of the most ardent hope. For as Jeremiah is, throughout, the one of all the prophets most swayed by God's revelation, most possessed by the consciousness of his divine call, so, more fervently than any other prophet, does he bear testimony to his conviction that he was called to pave the way for God's future dominion — that it was his mission but to sow the seed, that the harvest would be reaped in some fu- ture age. Is not the very acme of zealous faith dis- closed by his account of how, in the face of the siege of the city by the Chalda^ans, he bought property at the behest of God from his cousin Hanameel, and of how he cirefully arranged for the preservation of the deed for future ages — in token of his conviction that the cities would be reinhabited and the land cultivated again. ^ Jeremiah's hope, however, did not end with the future material welfare of his people; his hope was for the spiritual regeneration of all mankind. Char- acteristic evidence of this is that confession which he had added to the second collection of his prophecies after the first had been burned by the King, that con- fession in which he reveals the faith and the hope that illumined his whole inner life and sustained him through all his persecution, — the faith that God, who was his power and his strength, would be his refuge in the hour of need, even on the day of the downfall of the nation;- the hope that through this downfall his people would ultimately be led to God. 1 XXXII, 1-15. »XVI, 19, XVII, 14-18. 20 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL This was the hope which inspired Jeremiah to look beyond the tragedy of his people's doom; this his hope for his people, that though they must iirst be de- stroyed, they would flourish again at some future day when the nations would come from the ends of the earth to confess to God, " Verily our fathers inherited but falsehoods, empty beliefs which are of no avail." ^ 1 XVI, 19. CHAPTER II THE TEMPLE-SERMON AND THE PERSECU- TION OF JEREMIAH UNDER JEHOJAKIM In' the foregoing chapter the statement was made that any discussion of the faith of the prophets must centre in the fervid record which Jeremiah has left of his inner Ufe. Inasmuch, however, as this record dis- closes itself as the immediate product of the persecu- tion which he had to suffer from his fellow-men, it behooves us, first, to fix our attention on the circum- stances and nature of this persecution, the more so as the prevailing views of Jeremiah's persecution and prophetic activity are in certain vital points open to question. And since the first real persecution on the part of the nation at large was called forth by the Temple- sermon, which in this sense may be said to mark the first crisis in Jeremiah's prophetic career, a discussion of this sermon and of its results for Jeremiah will occupy the present chapter. I . THE ORIGINALLY COMPONENT PARTS OF THE TEMPLE- SERMON; ITS GENUINENESS The Temple-sermon did not originally include the whole of VTI, i-VHI, 3, but must have consisted of VII, 2-15, 21-26. There are various reasons why VII, 27-VIII, 3 are to be considered a separate sermon or a fragment of one, and VII, 16-20 as originally having formed a part of the same, (i.) Verse 27b, as 22 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL is generally conceded, does not seem to be original text; the LXX did not read it, and instead of "And thou shalt speak all these words unto them" (27a) and the opening phrase, ''And thou shalt say unto them," of 28, they simply read "uf^amarta '"lehaem 'aeth haddabhar hazzce, "And thou shalt say this word unto them." This, however, like the "And thou shalt say unto them" of VIII, 4, sounds like the concluding phrase of the headings which preface a number of Jeremiah's sermons. These headings give the date of the sermon, the circumstances that inspired it, and the place where it was delivered, and conclude with the stereotyped phrase, "And thou shalt say unto them" (or "And thou shalt say this word unto them," or "And thou shalt proclaim these words," as the case may be.) ^ (2.) VII, 1-15, 21-26 are a denunciation of the people's mistaken behef in the inviolable sanctity of the TempJe at Jerusalem and in the divine authority of the sacrificial cult; while vv. 16-20, 28-VIII, 3 refer to the sacrificing of children and the worshipping of Istar and the other gods of the Assyrian-Babylonian Pantheon. (3.) VII, 21ft*. have no connection with w. 16-20, but are the logical continuation of 3-15; while w. 16-20, which, as Duhm points out,^ break the sequence of thought, are clearly not in their proper context.^ (4.) Additional proof that vv. 16-20, 28-VIII, 3 did not originally belong here with VII, 1-15, 21-26 is furnished by Chap. XXVI, which, be- iC/. VII, I (note also XXVI, i, 2), XIX, i, 2, 3a, XXII, i, XXXIV, I, 2. 2 " Das Buch Jeremia," pp. 74 and 78. * Giesebrecht ("Das Buch Jeremia," ^, prefatory remarks to Chap. VII) also notices that vv. 16-20 break the sequence of thought, but fails to draw the proper conclusion from this fact. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 23 sides relating in detail the date and place of the ser- mon and the disastrous consequences it had for Jere- miah, gives a brief resume of it. This resume applies perfectly to VII, 2-15, 21-26; it gives unmistakably the gist of these two parts, but has no application, no reference whatever to the intervening vv. 16-20 or to the following piece, 28-VIII, 3. Duhm's \iew that vv. 2-16, 21-26 arc the work of later compilers, based on Baruch's report of the Temple-sermon,^ is obviously not compatible with methodical criticism. The sermon bears all the earmarks of Jeremiah's authorship. It is the most passionate denunciation of the sacrificial cult that has come down to us in prophetic, or for that matter, in any Hterature; vv. 25-26 excepted, every utterance falls like the blow of a sledge-hammer. The prophet declares that only the moral law is binding and of divine authority, that to the IsraeHtes in the wilder- ness God commanded no laws whatever concerning sacrifices, and this, it must be remembered, he declares in the face of the recently promulgated Deuteronomic law claiming divine origin for the sacrificial cult. Thus to stamp the nation's holiest behefs as mockery and delusion required the penetration, the uncom- promising character, and the boldness of a Jeremiah. Indeed, the sermon is in every respect consistent with Jeremiah's ideals and beliefs. The sweeping rejection of a purely rituahstic religion, on the one hand, and the positive view, on the other, that the moral law implanted in the human heart is alone authoritative, proceed from Jeremiah's experience of the power of the divine within himself, and accord with his ideal of the future consummation as expressed in Chap. ' Op. ciL, pp. 75ff., Soff. 24 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL XXXI, 31-34.^ Such a vital message could not pos- sibly be the product of compilers. 2. Jeremiah's trial and conviction The authentic record of the consequences which the Temple-sermon had for Jeremiah is found in Chap. XXVI, one of the fortunately frequent bio- graphic chapters of the Book of Jeremiah. This chap- ter relates that Jeremiah's prediction that the Temple would be destroyed and the nation dispersed caused an uproar among the priests, prophets, and assembled people, and that no sooner had Jeremiah finished his sermon than he was seized and declared to have in- curred the death-penalty. When news of this reached the Sarim, i. e., the high officials of the state, they at once went from the King's palace to the Temple and opened the trial. The court, it is important to note, was composed of the Sarim and the people. That this was the practice in ancient Israel in cases of capital punishment we know from other sources; and that it was followed in this particular case we know from the fact that the verdict was pronounced by the Sarim and the people together (see v. 16), and from the fur- ther fact that the prosecuting priests and prophets in addressing the court mentioned expressly both the Sarim and the people (v. 1 1). Moreover, as the words, "as you have heard with your own ears," spoken on this occasion by the priests and prophets in addressing the court, could properly apply to the people only — the Sarim not having been present when Jeremiah delivered his prophecy — it stands beyond doubt that the people had a voice in the matter and were not simply bystanders. ^See Book II, Part I, pp. 3i8£, 322f. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 25 After the priests and prophets had demanded that he be sentenced to death, Jeremiah, speaking in his own defence, declared that he had been sent by God to prophesy against the Temple and the city everything that they had heard; and he admonished them accord- ingly to heed God's word and not to incur additional guilt by killing an innocent man. In conclusion he reaffirmed his claim that he had been sent by God. Verse 16 continues: "Then the Sari>n and the people spoke to the priests and the prophets, this man does not deserve the death-penalty, for he hath spoken unto us in the name of YmxTi our God" {'en laHs hazzce mispat maicactJi ki ¥scmjaJiii'a; ''Holicnu dihhacr 'elenu). On the ground of the first part of this verse it is generally held that Jeremiah was acquitted; and the second part is understood accordingly as proving that by his defence Jeremiah convinced his lay judges that he was a true prophet of Yhwh. This being the case, they could not but acknowledge his right and authority to speak, and, naturally, they were afraid to put him to death as the priests and prophets de- manded, for fear his prophecies might be fulfilled.^ There are, however, serious difficulties in the way of accepting this interpretation of the verse. (i.) Verse 16 is followed in w, 17 and 18 by the following statement: "Thereupon some of the elders of the country rose and spoke to the whole folk-tribunal, Micah of Mare- shah prophesied in the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, and told all the people of Judah, thus saith 'See Cornill, " Das Buch Jeremia," ad loc. and Einleitung, p. XXX; Duhm, op. cit. ad loc; Giesebrecht, op. cil. ad loc; Erbt, "Jeremia und seine Zeit," p. ii. 26 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Yhwh Sabaoth, Zion shall be ploughed into a field, and Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the Tem- ple-mound shall be turned into wooded heights. Did Hezekiah and all Judah put him to death? Did they ^ not rather fear Yhwh and beseech Yhwh, so that Yhwh repented of the evil which he had de- creed against them? But we are bent on doing ^ a great wrong bringing guilt upon ourselves." If, as V. 1 6 reads, Jeremiah was acquitted, acquitted moreover, because the Sarlm and the people realized that he was sent by God, what possible need or justification could there be for such a defence on the part of the elders? Giesebrecht notices this discre- pancy as well as another to be mentioned presently, but ascribes it to the fact that the chapter was pre- sumably not dictated by Jeremiah, but was the work of Baruch.^ This, however, explains nothing, as we have no reason to suppose that Baruch did not know what he was writing about. Duhm's explanation is still less credible: "Nachdem Jeremia schon gerettet ist, kommt iJim noch eine unerwartete Unterstuizung." "* If Jeremiah had just been acquitted, there would be no sense in this belated plea in his behalf. The words, "but we are bent on doing ^ a great wrong bringing guilt upon ourselves," with which the elders concluded their plea, would imply that Jeremiah had not been acquitted at all, but, on the contrary, that he had been sentenced to death. ' Readji/'M in accordance with the LXX, Pes., & Vulg. 2 See infra, pp. io8f. ' Op. cii. prefatory remarks to Chap. XXVI. < Op. cit. ad loc. * By the use of the participle here resolution is expressed; cf. infra, pp. io8f. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 27 (2.) Verses 20-23, which are connected with the preceding part by 'w'gam, go on to relate how "at the same time another man, Urijah b. Shemajahu of Kirjath ha-Yaarim, appeared as prophet in the name of Yh\\^ {b'^cm jaJrd'cc) and prophesied against this city and this country precisely after the manner of Jeremiah's words." And when the king Jehojakim and the Sarim heard of his words they ^ sought his Hfe, whereupon Urijah fled to Egypt. But by the king's order he was brought back from Egypt and executed. That Urijah's prophecy did not precede but followed that of Jeremiah may be deduced with certainty from "precisely after the manner of Jere- miah's words," which is equivalent to 'precisely as Jeremiah had prophesied;' had Urijah's prophecy been the prior event the comparison would have been reversed. Instantly, however, the question rises, if Jeremiah had just been acquitted, acquitted even with expressions of reverence for his person and his mission, why should Urijah under precisely similar circumstances have been dealt with so implacably? ISIoreover, on what authority of the law could the king and the Sarim without due trial order Urijah's execution, if there were no precedent to warrant such a summary procedure? Such a course would be con- trary to all that we know about the legal customs and jurisdiction of the king and the Sarim in ancient Israel. Even when, later, during the siege of the city by the Chalda^ans, Jeremiah was considered guilty of treason, and Zedekiah had empowered the Sarim to deal with him as they wished, this body did not ven- ture to kill him without a trial, but had him thrown, instead, into a miry cistern where he might perish.^ ' In accordance with the reading of the LXX. * See XXXVIII, i-^. 28 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL (3.) The report about Urijah's fate is followed up by V. 24: "But Ahikam b. Shafan protected Jeremiah so that he was not delivered up to the people to be put to death." The only inference possible from this plain, unequivocal statement is that Jeremiah had been condemned to death, and that he would have been executed had not Ahikam interfered. Duhm's at- tempt to reconcile this verse with v. 16 ^ may be passed over. Verse 24 cannot possibly be reconciled with V. 16, for the latter, as the text now reads, states that Jeremiah was acquitted by the Sarim and the people constituting the court, while the former states in plain words that, without the protecting hand of Ahikam, Jeremiah would have been handed over to the people for execution (in accordance with the law and custom in cases of this category; cj. Deut. XIII, 10, XVII, 7, also Lev. XXIV, 14, 16, Num. XV, 35f.). (4.) One cannot but ask, 'What new fact did Jeremiah present to the Sarim and the people by his assertion that he was sent by Yhwti to prophesy as he did?' Was not every word that he uttered in his sermon spoken in the name of Yhwh? Why then did not his sermon arouse fear and trembling in the people and cause them to bow to the divine authority by which he spoke, instead of inciting them to demand no less emphatically than the priests and prophets that he be put to death? In truth, that Jeremiah's persist- ent claim to divine authority could not possibly have had any such weight with the people as v. 16 would seem to imply, is shown clearly by v. 9, in which the frenzied people ask Jeremiah, "Why didst thou prophesy in the name of YhwH {Vsem jahwce), this Temple shall become Hke Shilo, and this city shall be ^ Op. cit. ad loc. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 29 devastated, shall become destitute of inhabitants?" It is obvious that the words, b'Sem ja/rd'cc "in the name of YH^^'H," are the real point in this question. The fact that the prophecy was uttered in the name of YH^^^I clearly formed an incriminating circum- stance. Note the similar significant addition of b'l^em jaJriVCB in the ultimatum of the priests of Anathoth mentioned by Jeremiah in XI, 21: "Thou shalt not prophesy in the name of Yhwh QfUm jaJnvcc), that thou die not at our hand." In fact, that in all such cases it was not the prophesying per sc which consti- tuted the real offence, but the prophesying in the name of YHWH, is evident from the explicit proviso in the Deuteronomic law, Deut. XVIII, 15-22. Strange to say, this law has always been interpreted as if it were written from the point of view of the lit- erary prophets, that is, as if the Hterary prophets' standard of true and false prophets were at the basis of it.i Obviously, however, there is a radical error in such an interpretation. The authority of the hterary prophets from Amos to Jeremiah was never recognized by the exponents of the official religion of their age. If not constantly persecuted, as was Jeremiah, or forbidden speech and expelled from the country, as was Amos, the literary prophets were invariably met with scorn and derision, often even with hostihty (r/. Hos. IX, yf., Is. XXVIII, gf., XXX, lof.). On the other hand, their opponents, whom they denounced as false proph- ets, were regarded by their contemporaries as the true mouthpieces of Yhwh, the authoritative interpreters ' C/., e. g., Driver, "Deuteronomy" (in the International Critical Commentary), Steuernagel, "Dcutcronomium" (in Nowack's HK.), Bertholet, "Deuteronomium" (in Marti'sHC), adloc. 30 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of his will. In view of this fact, it is clear that the law, Deut. XVIII, 15-22, dating from the time of Jere- miah's prophetic activity, must have been intended to safeguard the rehgious beHefs of the people, which were felt to be menaced by the preaching of the liter- ary prophets; and, accordingly, verse 22 will be seen at once to have a very different meaning from the one hitherto ascribed to it. Verse 22 has invariably been taken, by modern as well as by ancient exegetes, as meaning to say that by the non-fulfilment of his prophecy the prophet shall be recognized as a false prophet. Now, as a matter of fact, Deut. XIII, 3, 4 says precisely the opposite of this (Bertholet to the contrary), '^ viz., that Yhwh may permit "the sign and wonder" of the false prophet to be fulfilled in order to test the people's belief in Him. Further, the custom- ary rendering of v. 22 is hardly logical in view of v. 20, which commands the people to put to death the false prophet. If the prophet's status should be deter- mined by the fulfilment or non-fulfilment of his proph- ecy, a result which could be ascertained only after the lapse of time, perhaps of years, such a command would be meaningless. Conviction at the time the prophecy was delivered would be impossible. By reason of these facts, the customary interpreta- tion of V. 22 is untenable, even if Jer. XXVIII, 9 be understood as laying down the rule that in the event a prophet predicts good, he shall by the fulfilment of his prophecy be recognized as truly sent by God. The fact of the matter is, however, that Jeremiah uses irony in this verse. The nation is so iniquitous in his eyes that he scouts the idea that an inspired prophet could predict anything but evil. His summary denun- 1 Op. cit. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 31 ciation of Hananiah as a false prophet in w. 12-16^ accords with this, as docs also the fact that, as regards himself and his predecessor-prophets, he considers it self-evident that their prophecies bear the stamp of truth in themselves and require no proof beyond this. There is thus a close relation between Jer. XXVIII, 8, 9 and XXIII, 16-22, and, read in the light of the latter, the meaning of the former is at once clear. What Jeremiah really means to say is that the proph- et's own consciousness, his inward con\action, is the incontrovertible proof of his divine calling — a concep- tion of prophecy concurred in either directly or in- directly by every one of the great literary prophets. Indirectly they furnished proof that this was their idea by the fact that they, one and all, truthfully preserved even those prophecies in which their predic- tions had been disproved by the actual outcome of events; thus they showed that whether their prophe- cies were Kterally fulfilled or not had no weight what- ever with them, was not considered by them at all as a criterion of divine calling or inspiration.^ It is thus clear that the usual interpretation of Deut. XVIII, 22 has no raison d'etre other than the preconceived idea with which later ages approached the verse. The translation of the verse, as required by what we pointed out to be the historical basis of the law, w. 15-22, must be as follows: If it happen that a prophet pronoimceth in the name ^Verses 12-16 are the immediate continuation of vv. i-ii; wajjclaekh jirm^jd hannabhi l^'darko ("and the prophet Jeremiah went his way"), nb, is interpolated; the interpolation, as Cornill, op. cit. ad loc, rightly showed, grew out of the misunderstood halokh of the phrase halokh wf^amarta of v. 13. * Cf. infra, pp. i.$iS. 32 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of YnWH that which shall not he or occur, '^ that is the word which Yewh hath not spoken; presumptuously hath the prophet pronounced it: you shall not he afraid of him." The words, "which shall not be or occur," find their explanation in the express declaration, Deut. XIII, I, that none of the commandments enjoined in this code should ever be altered or abolished. The verse is aimed at such prophetic utterances as Am. V, 21-25, Hos. VI, 6, VIII, 11-13, Mic. VI, 6-8, Is. I, 11-17, Jer. VII, 2iff., which declare that the sacrificial cult has no divine authority. The meaning of the verse is that the false prophet is to be recognized by his speaking in defiance of the Law, which is eternally and absolutely binding. The law as a whole substantiates this interpretation. Verses 15-19 define indirectly the qualifications of the true prophet. In accordance with the people's demand at Horeb, Yhwh will raise up among them a prophet like Moses, who will expound His Law and interpret His will, and unto whom they shall hearken — the deduction from this being that the true prophet must first of all recognize the absolute authority of the divine Law (in accordance with Deut. XIII, i), and further, that it must be his foremost mission to im- plant obedience to the Law in the hearts of the people. (Illustrations of prophetic activity of this type are Ezekiel's reHgious constitution for the future nation, Ezek. XL-XLVHI, and the sermon, Jer. XVII, 19-27, dating from the time of Ezra and Nehemia,- ^ By the synonymous phrases, Id jihja iv^ld jabho, emphasis is added. 2 See Note on the Date of Jer. XVII, 19-27, at the end of the chapter. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 33 which has for its object to exhort the people to observe the Sabbath.) Verses 2off. deal with the prophet who has no claim to obedience, and who under no condition must be accepted as true, specifically, the prophet who pro- nounces in the name of Yhwh what Yh\\h has not enjoined. The prophet who speaks in the name of other gods is also referred to, but as this case was taken up fully in XIII, 2-6, it receives only cursory mention here. The reason that both cases are classed together in this law is, doubtless, that from the point of view of the lawgiver, the case of the prophet who speaks in defiance of the Law, and the case of the prophet who speaks in the name of other gods fall, in reality, in one and the same category, inasmuch as both tend to the same result, the estrangement of the people from the worship of Yhwh as laid down by the Law. The law prescribes that, "even as he who speaks in the name of other gods," a prophet who pronounces what Yhw^ has not enjoined shall be put to death, that is, as w. 20 and 21 expressly define, if he speaks in the name of YHWH: "But the prophet who pre- sumes to speak in my name {hismi) . . ." (v. 20), "If it happen that a prophet pronounces in the name of Yhwh {b'Sem jalrwce) . . ." (v. 22). There are, it will be noted, two conditions specified, that the prophet deliver a message that is contrary to the Law, and that he deliver this message in the name of Yhwh. Strangely enough, biblical scholars hitherto have failed to note the importance of the second condition; they have looked upon b'se?n jalnvcE and the virtually identical hihu-i as a conventional phrase contributing nothing to the general sense. Yet it will be readily seen that in reality it states the condition sine qua 34 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL non. In view of the fact that in those days not only the religious law but the civil law and even the cus- toms of daily life were believed to rest on divine authority, and as prophecy was looked upon as the medium through which the divine will was communi- cated — "prophecy" meaning "the word from God" or "from the gods," and "prophet," "interpreter of the word and will of God " or " of the gods" — a message not delivered in the name of Yhwh would not have to be considered seriously (unless, of course, it was delivered in the name of other gods, in which case it would come under the law, XIII, 2-6) ; in fact, it would not sim- ulate the prophetic message at all, inasmuch as it did not make any claim to divine authority. To declare what is contrary to the Law might be reprehensible in itself — this point need not occupy us — but to declare what is contrary to the Law in the name of Yhwh, i. e., to claim divine authority for such a false message would be blasphemous; and it was precisely such cases that the law, Deut. XVIII, 15-22, was intended to cover. ^ Now when we come to consider the case of Jeremiah in the light of this Deuteronomic law, at once two things become clear. The first is that, in view of this law, the priests and the legally recognized prophets, both, by virtue of their office, the legitimate guardians of the law (in addition to w. 18, 19, cj. Deut. XVII, 8-12, XXXIII, 9f.), could not do otherwise than ^ From the explanation of this law as given in these pages, it follows that there is no ground for the view, held by various scholars, that this law did not form a part of the law-book promulgated in the days of Josiah, but originated later. Marti in Kautzsch,' ad loc, and A. F. Puukko, "Das Deuteronomium" (1910), pp. 254f., are the latest advocates of this theory, both considering this law the work of the Redactor. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 35 demand that Jeremiah be put to death for his proph- ecy, Jer. VII, 1-15, 21-26; for in declaring that no sanctity was to be attributed to the Temple at Jeru- salem any more than to Shilo of old, and that the sacrificial cult had no divine authority, Jeremiah struck a blow at the very root of the Deuteronomic reformation. In the eyes of his contemporaries he was undermining their most sacred institutions, was declaring in the name of Yiiwh, "what shall not be or occur." Jeremiah himself tells us in Jer. XVIII, 18 that it was for the safeguard of the Law that he was persecuted: "Come, let us plot against Jeremiah, that the Torah of the priest, and the counsel of the sage, and the revelation of the prophet may not be imper- illed" ^ {cf. VIII, 8). It cannot be objected that Micah's prophecy of the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem had no such serious consequences for him, for, as far as we know, there did not exist at that time any law that would apply to such cases; and further, it will be remembered, in Micah's time the Temple at Jerusalem, though held inviolable, was not vested with the supreme sanctity and authority which in Jeremiah's days accrued to it in consequence of the promulgation of the Deuteronomic Law and the centralization of the cult.- The second thing that becomes clear is that, far from 1 ki of ki Id thohhad has the force of a consecutive particle; if an existing state of affairs were referred to, as Rothstein in Kautzsch,' Duhm, op. cit. and Cornill, op. cil. wrongly assume in their rendering and interpretation of the verse, the perfect and not the imperfect would have to be used, as e. g., VII, 28, XLIX, 7; Ezek. XII, 22, XXXV'II, II. Other examples of the use of ki as consecutive parti- cle in a negative sentence arc: ki Id 'abho, etc., I Sam. XXIX, 8; ki Id thukhal s"etko, Deut. XIV, 24. * See also Part III, Chap. VI, § 6, pp. 293f. 36 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL favorably impressing his judges by his persistent claim that he was sent by God to make this prophecy, Jeremiah must have convinced them beyond a doubt that he really deserved the death-penalty. In fact, everything points to the conclusion that the sentence passed by the Sarim and the people sitting in judgment over Jeremiah must have been: " Verily this man deserves the death-penalty, because he hath spoken unto us in the name of YHWH our God." The only change required in verse i6 to restore what according to this conclusion must have been the original text is to change the vocalization of 'en (V^) to 'in (r^). We would then have here another ex- ample of the particle, 'in, which occurs in I Sam. XXI, 9, and which has baffled ancient and modern exegetes alike, but which on closer examination proves to be a byform of the emphatic particle, hen, hinne} It is not difficult to understand how even at an early date this rare 'in should have been misread in our passage in Jeremiah. As early as the Hellenistic period, if not before that time, Jeremiah was prac- tically canonized; in fact, all the Hterary prophets were looked upon much as heroes and saints, and a radically different view was taken of their activity from that which had been held by their contemporaries. Accordingly, when the people of those times read Jer. XXVI, 1 6, the denial of Jeremiah's guilt lay much nearer their thoughts than the affirmation of it, and they very naturally read 'en. By the reading of 'in for 'en, and by this reading alone, do the various discrepancies noted above entirely vanish, and vv. 11-23 become a clear and connected account of the trial and conviction of Jere- ^ See Supplementary Note. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 37 miah. In regard to the defence by some of the ciders, it may be well to remark that this passus furnishes an excellent illustration of one of the most vexing pecul- iarities of biblical style, viz., the tendency of the writer to disregard rigid sequence and formal transitions.^ Thus our author does not consider it necessary to mention that the defence by the elders was fruitless; he goes on abruptly to relate the coincident and similar case of Urijah, and just adds in conclusion that Jeremiah escaped execution through the protection extended him by Ahikam. Not by any means is Chap. XXVI, as Giesebrecht would have it, the slip- shod work of an inferior author;- it is a dramatic and altogether topical specimen of Oriental narration. 3. JEREML\n's ESCAPE — THE READING OF HIS PROPHECIES BY BARUCH Regarding the protection of the prophet by Ahikam, one must conclude that the latter managed to spirit Jeremiah away to some place where he could remain in safe hiding from the people. Had his whereabouts been known, he would no doubt have been seized and executed like Urijah, who, as vv. 20-23 relate, was brought back from Egypt and put to death. It would be futile to speculate how Ahikam suc- ceeded in spiriting Jeremiah away after he had been sentenced to death. History offers examples without number of political and religious offenders' escaping after having been sentenced to death, and Jeremiah's ^ See my article, "The Presentation of Biblical Stories to Children," in "The Biblical World," XXV, (1910), 393f., and infra, Chap. IV, §4. ^ See op. cil. prefatory remarks to Chap. XXVJ 38 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL escape after his conviction is hardly more surprising than Urijah's flight to Eg}^t after the King and Sarim had given peremptory orders that he be put to death on the ground of the precedent estabHshed by Jeremiah's conviction.^ Substantial support of our theory that Jeremiah was helped to a place of safety by Ahikam is furnished by Chap. XXXVI, which, as stated above, records how in the 4th year of Jehojakim's reign Jeremiah had Baruch b. Nerijah write down all the prophecies he had delivered up to that time, and read them before the people assembled from all quarters of the country in the Temple at Jerusalem. When the Sarim were ^ Ahikam's motive in rendering protection to Jeremiah admits of only one explanation, viz., that he must have been a personal follower of Jeremiah, even as was Baruch b. Nerijah, who risked his life by reading Jeremiah's prophecies. There is no basis for Erbt's view that Ahikam's protection of the prophet was but an instance of the friendly attitude of the family of Shafan toward the prophet (see op. cit. 6f., i2f., also 37). The fact that Jeremiah's prophecies were read by Baruch from the chamber of Germajah b. Shafan (XXXVI, 10) is to be considered altogether accidental; it has no more weight than the other fact that JNIicajah, Germajah's son, did not interrupt Baruch's reading. Police-permission for and police-supervision of public speakers, such as exist in present-day Germany, were unknown in those days. As to Micajah, what throws real light on his at- titude toward both Baruch and Jeremiah is the fact that he thought it his duty to report the occurrence to the Sarim. Thereby he showed — as did in their turn the Sarim by their subsequent report to the King — that he considered the reading of Jeremiah's prophecies an affair calling for action on the part of the authorities. Had he been friendly disposed toward Jeremiah he certainly would not have reported the matter. Micajah's object in hstening to Baruch to the end was no doubt the same as that of both the Sarim and the King in ordering that the scroll be read to them — he simply wished to as- sure himself as to whether the public reading constituted a religious offence. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 39 informed of this occurrence by Micajah, they sum- moned Baruch to read the scroll to them, and verse 17 relates that, as soon as he had finished reading, they asked liim, "How didst thou come to write down all these words?" ^ Verse 18 gives Baruch's guarded answer: ''He dictated all these words to me." Now the Sarim knew that it was Jeremiah's prophecies which Baruch had been reading to them, for apart from the fact that the Temple-sermon was among them - (note v. 2, "And write therein ^ all the words that I have spoken unto thee . . . from the day I revealed myself unto thee in the days of Josiah even unto this day"), there can be no doubt that even as in the present Book of Jeremiah, so in the first col- lection, several prophecies, notably the consecration vision (note particularly verse 11) and the opening prophec}% Chap. XXV,ifiF., contained direct evidence that they were Jeremiah's words (note verse 3 of Chap. XXV, and cf. infra, §4, "Chap. XXV; its Origin and Purpose"). If the Sarim had not known that Jeremiah was the author, Baruch would neces- sarily have mentioned Jeremiah's name in v. 18 in- stead of merely referring to him as he. Their ques- tion, expressing, as it does, surprise and a certain curiosity as to how Baruch came to write down Jeremiah's prophecies, is, doubtless, to be explained by the fact that Jeremiah's whereabouts were un- ^mipphi, not read by the LXX, is clearly dittography of mippiu of the following verse. 2 Although the Sarim were not present when Jeremiah delivered the Temple-sermon, there can be no doubt that they were familiar with the contents of the sermon from the proceedings at the trial four years before. ' Read, in accordance with the LXX and also v. 18, ^alalia instead of 'clceha. 40 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL known to them at the time. It will be noticed how appropriate under the circumstances was Baruch's answer, how little real information it conveyed to his questioners: "He dictated all these words to me, and I wrote them in the scroll with ink." Lekh hissather 'attd ufjinnfjahu of v. 19 (usually translated "Go, hide thee, thou and Jeremiah!") is in no wise con- tradictory to the preceding w., as it may just as cor- rectly be translated, "Go, hide thou with Jeremiah" or "even as Jeremiah!" — in fact tliis is the more accurate translation.^ Further, the theory that Jeremiah was hidden by Ahikam throws light on 'asur (v. 5), which hitherto has not been satisfactorily explained. To take "^ni 'asur as meaning "I am prevented by rituahstic unclean- liness " is excluded, as Giesebrecht and Cornill rightly point out,^ for as v. 9 shows, there was an interval of several months ^ between the time Jeremiah arranged with Baruch for the dictation and reading of his prophecies and the date when Baruch actually read them in the Temple, and Jeremiah could not possibly have foreseen several months ahead that he would be ^ Cf. the similar force of w« in Num. XVI, 18, timoscB, Gen. I, 16 •w^'eth hakkokhahhlm, et alii. 2 Op. ciL, ad loc. ^ The exegetes have wrongly inferred from v. 9 that a year's time must have elapsed between Jeremiah's summoning Baruch and Bar- uch's reading Jeremiah's prophecies in the Temple. They have over- looked the fact that in reckoning the King's reign the autumnal era is followed (in accordance with the usage prevailing throughout pre- exilic times and adhered to elsewhere in the Book of Jeremiah), while in determining the date of the fast by the month of the year, the vernal era is followed, as is evident from the statement in v. 22, " the King was sitting in his winter-residence with the burning brazier before him." Jeremiah summoned Baruch, no doubt, in the last months of the 4th year of Jehojakim's reign. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 41 prevented by ritualistic uncleanliness from appearing in the Temple himself. The phrase, '"ni 'asur (usually translated "I am shut up"), it is safe to conclude, simply means "I am in hiding" — a meaning which will not seem at all farfetched if one considers that when in enforced hiding, one is not less confined than when imprisoned, 'asur seems to have this meaning also in I Chron. XII, i, as may be concluded from the analogous mistattcr of I Sam. XXIII, 19, XXVI. I, as well as from the rendering of the LXX, avve')(^ojjLevov. In the light of these probable facts, Jehojakim's action on hearing the recital of Jeremiah's prophecies by Baruch falls into its proper perspective. It has been explained as the arbitrary act of an autocratic ruler, but as a matter of fact, the King could not well have acted otherwise. The death-sentence would long since have been executed against Jeremiah had his hiding-place been known, and now that there seemed a possible clue to his whereabouts, the King was bound to order that he be captured and put to death forth- with. That Baruch was included in this order is easily explained, for, inasmuch as the Temple-sermon was among the prophecies read by him, he had clearly incriminated himself , and, like Urijah, had laid himself open to summary punishment. The King's burning of the scroll was likewise a perfectly logical procedure. Jehojakim simply wished, in accordance with the spirit of the law, Deut. XVIII, 15-22, to destroy all trace of Jeremiah's prophecies. To reason with Duhm,^ who concludes from v. 16 that the Sarim were impressed by the reading of 1 Op. cil., ad loc. 42 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Jeremiah's prophecies/ and that the King meant to show that he could not be thus impressed, is to view those remote ages through the spectacles of modern times. As a matter of fact there is in this chapter no real support for the theory that the Sarim were im- pressed by Jeremiah's prophecies. For since verse 24 expressly states, "But the King and his officials who heard all these words feared not, neither did they tear their garments," it follows either that paJfdu 'is 'ael reeu of v. 16 must mean, "they turned to one another amazed," or "horrified",^ not, as usually translated, "they turned to one another in fear" (one can easily beheve that the Sarim were indeed shocked by the temerity of Jeremiah and Baruch),^ or that in accord- ance with avv€/3ov\€vaavTo of the LXX the text originally read no^'su, "they consulted together," instead of palfdu. Verse 25, "Elnathan, Delajah, and Gemarjah even urged the King not to burn the scroll, but he did not Hsten unto them," cannot be cited in proof that Jeremiah's prophecies made an impression on the Sarim — or at least on some of them — for the indications are that the Masoretic text is not correct. The LXX read just the opposite: Kal ^XvaOav . . , vireOevro tw /SacrtXel tt/oo? to Kara- Kava-ai to x^'P'^^ov^ "Elnathan . . . urged the King to burn the scroll.'' Note that not only is the negative lacking in the reading of the LXX, but also the follow- ing clause, "but he did not listen to them." This read- ^ Duhm not only draws this conclusion from v. 16, but he arbitrarily emends v. 18 to accord with it. ^Cf. Gen. XLII, 28, wajjaehaerdu 'is 'ael 'ahlu, " and startled they turned to one another." * This is approximately also Giesebrecht's interpretation; see op. di., ad loc. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 43 ing of the LXX is clearly the only reading that is con- sistent with the preceding verse 24: "But neither the King nor his servants ^ that heard all these words showed fear, or rent their garments." It is safe to con- clude, therefore, that the original text of v. 25 did not read Vhhilli s'roph, "not to burn," but lisroph, "to burn," and that-ct'70 ^ania' '"IcJiaefnwas not added until after bilti had crept in. This conclusion is further con- firmed by the gam, "even." In urging the King to burn the scroll, Elnathan, Delajah, and Gemarjah were impelled by the same motive as the King was in burning it, i. c, by the desire to have all trace of the sacrilegious work destroyed. This would leave no ground for the assumption that the Sari??t took the part of Jeremiah and Baruch: for the only remaining passage on which such an inference could be based is V. 19, and this verse might just as easily have the opposite meaning from that which it is supposed to have. The Sarim's rejoinder on Baruch's clever refusal to betray Jeremiah's whereabouts may well have been, and very probably was, not a piece of sincere advice, but an ironical retort — "Go, hide thou with Jeremiah, and let no one know where ye are."- Regarding the persecution which Jeremiah met with from the nation at large, it is clear from the foregoing analysis that Jehojakim's alleged hostile attitude was no factor in it. Contrary to the prevail- ing opinion, it was not Jehojakim's example that fired ^ I advisedly follow the reading of the LXX, which omits kol of kol "^badaii, "any of his servants;" whether one reads kol or not is immaterial, since it is here, as frequently elsewhere, pleonastic. ^ It is hardly necessary to mention that there is no justification for either Cornill's translation, "niemand darf wissen," or Giese- brecht's, "niemand wisse." 44 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL the people to hostility toward the prophet when his prophecies were read by Baruch in the Temple. Their persecution of Jeremiah started with his Temple- sermon— in fact was the direct result of it. The Temple- sermon it was which formed the decisive event in the prophet's career. It marked the parting of the ways. In it Jeremiah mercilessly attacked what the people felt to be their hohest beliefs and institutions, and mocked at the hollowness of their worship. They, on their side, were convinced that he was a dangerous man, a false prophet, according to the Deuteronomic standard (Deut. XVIII, 15-22), and from that moment every man's hand was against him. From that time on he was forced to remain in hiding with the death- sentence hanging over his head. Only with the death of Jehojaldm and the accession of a new king was this sentence, we must assume, abrogated, and only then did it become safe for the prophet to appear in pubHc again. Cornill's idea that Jeremiah preached publicly during the second part of Jehojakim's reign cannot be substantiated; he bases his view on Chap. XV, 10, 15-21 and on Chap. XXXV. ^ In regard to the former I am of Cornill's opinion, that it dates from the time of Jehojakim, but from the first part of Jehojakim's reign instead of the second, i. e., from the time be- tween Jeremiah's condemnation to death and the reading of his prophecies by Baruch. (Cornill, who, with the rest of the biblical scholars, thinks that Jeremiah's persecution started with the latter event, necessarily places the confession after this occurrence.) The piece clearly reflects the fanatical persecution 1 See op. ciL, Chap. XXXVI, 26, Chap. XV, 21, and Chap. XXXV, and Einleitung, pp. XXXf ., XLf. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 45 which Jeremiah had to endure from the whole nation in consequence of his Temple-sermon, preached in the first year of Jehojakim's reign. The point is, however, that it is not a sermon that was delivered pubUcly, but is a confession never intended for public delivery — a passionate outburst of the prophet's soul to God, a bitter review of his suffering and isolation, conclud- ing with a burst of faith and exultant confidence in God's aid. There is nothing in this confession to indicate Jeremiah's public activity at that time, nothing to justify Cornill's remark: "The speaker is a man who works with the fullest publicity, and who moves about freely in the world. He stands in the very midst of life, whose current at the moment threatens to engulf him." In regard to Chap. XXXV, it must be remembered that the date given in the heading, v. i, cannot be accepted, for v. 11 states expressly that the flight of the Rechabites to Jerusalem, shortly after which Jeremiah delivered this prophecy, took place at the time of Nebuchadrezzar's approach to the country. Nebuchadrezzar's first appearance in the country, however, did not happen until after the death of Jehojakim,^ hence the earliest date of the prophecy would be the reign of Jehojachin. ' The recognition of Nebuchadrezzar's suzerainty by Jchojakim, mentioned II Ki. XXIV, i, was not the result of a military expedition by Nebuchadrezzar into Judah, but of his decisive victory over Pharao Necho at Karkemish and his consequent control over Syria. II Ki. XXIV, I is fragmentary, the original text having no doubt contained a statement about Pharao Necho's defeat (note v. 7); see Benzinger, "Die BUcher der Konige" (in Marti's HC), ad loc. and also "Die Biicher der Chronik " ib. on II Chron. XXXVI, 5-8. 46 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 4. CHAPTER XXV— ITS ORIGIN AND PURPOSE Chapter XXV cannot be taken as a proof that Jeremiah had appeared in pubHc earlier in the year in which he dictated his prophecies to Baruch. Verse 3, as Rothstein points out (in Kautzsch^, prefatory remarks to Chap. XXV), shows that this chapter has some connection with the record in Chap. XXXVI about the reading of Jeremiah's prophecies by Baruch. On the ground of this, Rothstein rightly concludes that XXV, 3-i3ba in their original form were written by Jeremiah for the distinct purpose of serving as an introduction to the reading of his prophecies by Ba- ruch. He points out further that only by such an assumption is light thrown on the words, "all that is written in this book," i3ba, with which the first part of XXV, originally closed ^— the book referred to ^The last clause of v. 13, "... which Jeremiah prophesied against the nations," is not a part of the original text of XXV, 1-13, but, as the LXX shows, it originally formed the heading of the non- Jeremianic oracles against the nations. Chaps. XLVI-LI, which at one time must have stood in the Masoretic text, as they still do in the LXX, between XXV, 1-13 and isff. This is not the place for a de- tailed discussion of the authorship of Jer. XLVI-LI— such a discus- sion must be reserved for the second volume. In view of the fact, however, that Cornill and others claim the oracles of Chaps. XLVI- XLIX for Jeremiah, and that Cornill holds in addition that these were delivered by Jeremiah in 605, shortly before he committed his proph- ecies to writing {op. ciL, Einleitung, p. XXXI), it must be pointed out that apart from everything else, these oracles, all with the exception of the one against the Philistines, differ in spirit as well as in charac- ter and object so radically from the prohecies of Jeremiah that they cannot possibly be considered his work. It may be well to add that they differ no less strikingly from the prophecies of Jeremiah's kindred predecessors, including even those prophecies of Amos and Isaiah which predict judgment against other nations. To take by way of illustration the opening piece, XLVI, 2-12, the first of the THE TEMPLE-SERMON 47 being none other than the one spoken of in Chap. XXXVI. Rothstein points out finally that XXV, i5ff. in their original form, /. c, vv. 15a, 27, 3ofT., formed a fitting conclusion to this book of prophecies which Baruch read in the Temple. The contents of the book, i. c, the impending judgment which the prophet has been predicting so many years, is figuratively spoken of in vv. 15, 27 as the cup of divine wrath which God has bidden him hand around, while vv. 3off. describe the stonn breaking over the country from the north and carrying destruction in its wake. Rothstein's view is most convincing, for one can hardly imagine that Jeremiah would have Baruch read to the people his prophecies of the past without dwelling on the circumstances that prompted him to this step, and without pointing out how present events \dndicate his claim that he has all these years been inspired by God."^ It was in fact this considera- tion that led me, independent of Rothstein, to prac- tically the same conclusions regarding the origin and purpose of Chap. XXV, as also regarding the original form of w. i5ff. On the question of the original form of vv. 1-14, Rothstein advances no new theory. Biblical scholars are agreed that what the Masoretic text contains in excess of the LXX is the work of an interpolater, and besides, that, even as read by the LXX, v. 12 is two utterances against Egypt, it will be noticed that this piece is not a prophecy at all, but a chauvinistic song of derision over the defeat of Pharao Necho at Karkemish. It shows no true religious feeling whatever. Jeremiah could never have produced anything of the kind; to him, who realized the seriousness of the situation after the battle at Karkemish, such blind rejoicing over Eg>'pt's defeat would have seemed sheer mockery. ' See also Part III, Chap. I, p. i72f. and Chap. Ill, § 4, b, p. 207. 48 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL not original text. The only point on which opinion is di\dded is whether to ehminate as interpolation also "and against all the nations roundabout" of v. 9. Rothstein rightly points out in favor of its elimination that, according to w. 3!?., 11, 13a, ha as well as v. 2, Jeremiah clearly addresses himself to Judah alone, and also that, according to all indications, the book of prophecies read by Baruch contained predictions of judgment against Judah only. In regard to the original form of i5ff., I agree fully with Rothstein except on one point. I do not consider the whole of v. 15b spurious, but only "all the nations to which I shall send thee." I find that Aquila's reading of 15b, Kat Tronet? avTov°jos'bhe ha'araes (in accordance with the parallelism and LXX omit kol and read 'al for 'ac/) means "the inhabitants of the land," as follows from 'al fiau'elnl of the parallel member, and accordingly 'ad q^?e ha'aracs of the immediately following v. 31 means "throughout the land" and miqse ha'araes 'u^'ad q^se ha'araes of v. 33 "from one end of the land to the other" {cf. XII, 12), and finally kol basar of v. 31 connotes, as ib., XLV, 5, and Jo. Ill, 1, "all people" and not "all mankind." As in XXXI, 8, the countries of the Assyrian-Babylonian realm are meant by mijjark^llie 'araes of v. 32; in Is. V, 26, XLI, 9 the terms q'se, q'soth, and 'asile "limits" or "borders" (which is the meaning also oljark^the), occur instead; these expressions find their explanation in the fact that for the writers of those times the .'\ss>Tian-Babylonian realm formed the geographical horizon to the east. so THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL XIII, 15-22, in which these scholars have rightly seen proof that the former is a product of the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, there are certain points which indicate an actual dependence of Jer. XVII, 19-27 on Neh. XIII, 15-22. It has remained unnoticed, except by Siegfried, that in both these pieces massa has not the meaning "burden," but the meaning "merchandise." ^ This follows clearly in the case of Neh. XIII, 15 and 19 from the fact that in v. 15 kol massd is used as a general term to include all the articles of mer- chandise that have just been enumerated, and from the further fact that the injunction, "no merchan- dise (massd) shall come in on the Sabbath-day," in V. 19 is followed up in v. 20 by the statement, "Then the traders and the dealers in all sorts of merchandise (kol mimkar) passed the night outside of Jerusalem once or twice." Neh. XIII, 15, i9f. throw light on the meaning of the word massd in Jer. XVII, 2 if. and 27, regarding which we would otherwise be in the dark. That unhke the author of Neh. XIII, 15-22, the author of Jer. XVII, 19-27 did not make it clear that he used massd with this specific meaning may be explained only in either of the following ways — that his address followed close on Nehemiah's ordinance, in which case he might safely assume that his audience would understand the use of the word massd, or that he mechanically drew on Neh. XIII, 15-22 as his source. Neh. XIII, 15-22 throws Hght on another obscure point of Jer. XVII, 19-27, viz., uhJio Vsa^'^re frusalaim }fj6m hassahhath of v. 27. Verse 19 of the former, "And I placed some of my servants at the gates, so that no merchandise should come in on 'See "Ezra, Nehemia und Esther" (in Nowack's HK.) on Neh. XIII, IS and 19. THE TEMPLE-SERMON 51 the Sabbath day" ((^'"Saery Id jahho massd b'jom Jia^abhat/i), shows that massd immediately preceding jihlio b'^a'^rc j'rusdaim in Jer. XVII, 27, besides being object of the infinitive, s"cth, is to be construed also with bho as subject (for examples of similar and con- verse construction cf. Exod. XXXII, 24, rmi zahabh hithparaqii; I Ki. V, i, Is. XLVI, i3aa, Prov. Ill, 21, d alii.). As in Neh. XIII, 19 so in Jer. XVII, 27 the ref- erence is to the importation of merchandise into Jeru- salem by foreign merchants, and the author of Jer. XVII, 19-27, in speaking or writing id'' bliilli s^'clhrnassd iibho b'Sa'^re fnlsalaim b'jom ha ssabbalh, "and not to transport merchandise or to have it come in through the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath-day," evidently had in mind the situation as described in Neh. XIII, 15-22, and took it for granted that this situation was familiar to his audience or readers. In view of these two facts which clearly point to a close dependence of Jer. XVII. 19-27 on Neh. XIII, 15-22, it is absolutely impossible to defend with Rothstein (in Kautzsch,^ ad lac.) Jeremiah's authorsliip of XVII, 19-27. On the other hand, in Jer. XVII, 19-27, as elsewhere, the Sabbath-observance consists in not carrying on busi- ness and not performing labor; Duhm's remarks {op. oil.) on w. 21 and 27 are without basis. CHAPTER III THE PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH UNDER ZEDEKIAH. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF CHAP- TERS XXXVII, XXXVIII, XXXIV, XXXII 3b-5, XXI A. THE ACTUAL FACTS OF THE CASE After the death of Jehojakim, Jeremiah was again free to appear in public, and he seems to have enjoyed a brief respite from persecution. However, toward the close of Zedekiah's reign, during the siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldasans, he stirred up the wrath of his countrymen anew by his insistent prophesying of doom ; and from that time on he was denounced and persecuted more vigorously than ever; on two occa- sions his life was in imminent danger. The first of these occasions was during the early stage of the siege of Jerusalem, when the siege was raised for a short time because of the arrival of an Egyptian army to relieve the city. While, presum- ably, the general rejoicing over their supposed deliver- ance was at its height, Jeremiah appeared in the peo- ple's midst, and scoring them for their breach of faith, pronounced their victory a mockery. The particular action which had so outraged the prophet's sense of justice was their conduct in regard to the serfs. These by proclamation of Zedekiah had been set free shortly after the siege had begun, in order, no doubt, that they might be made use of in fighting the enemy. In accordance with the custom of the time, their lib- 52 PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 53 eration had even been ratified by a solemn religious act. but no sooner had the siege been raised than the serfs were again enslaved. Jeremiah considered this nothing short of arrant treachery, and to the govern- ment and the people who were responsible for it, he predicted utter, inevitable ruin, and this in spite of their present triumph in driving back the Chalda?ans. He closed his prediction: "Even should ye destroy the whole army of the Chaldasans fighting against you until only the massacred be left, these will rise in their tents, man by man, and burn down the city" (XXXIV, 8-22, XXXVII, 7b-io). In the eyes of the Sarim, no doubt, this attack was both seditious and inflammatory, so that when, shortly after, Jeremiah was about to leave Jerusalem for his home-\illage, Anathoth (for what purpose is not clear, owing to the obscurity of the phrase, laJflaq miSam Vt/iokh ha' am of XXXVII, 12), he was summarily seized on the pretext that he meant to desert to the Chalda^ans, and without the semblance of a trial was flogged and thrown into a dungeon. Here he was held "for a long time," and here he would probably have died if the King, acceding to his request, had not finally changed the sentence to imprisonment in the court of guard (XXXVII, 11-21). As prisoner in the court of guard, Jeremiah enjoyed a certain amount of freedom in that he was allowed to hold intercourse with other people, but by this very Hberty he soon imperilled his life anew. The Chal- da^ans had again laid siege to Jerusalem (it was be- cause of this that he had been summoned by Zedekiah from the dungeon for a secret interview ^), and he 1 There is no doubt that the Chaldaeans had renewed the siege of Jerusalem at the time Zedekiah summoned Jeremiah from the 54 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL felt prompted to a new utterance. In spite of all his experiences in the past, he could not keep silent. He declared that the nation was irrevocably doomed, and drastically told the people engaged in fighting the enemy that their attempt to defend the capital was hopeless, that the city must fall into the hands of the Chaldasans and every soul therein perish, whether by the sword, by famine, or by pestilence; only those who should desert to the Chaldseans might escape. The Sarim, some of whom heard these words, saw in them an act of treason, and after receiving carte blanche from Zedekiah, they decided to get rid of him for good by throwing him into a miry cistern in the fortress. In this extreme case he would certainly have perished in a short time ^ but for the Ethiopian eunuch, Ebed-Melech, who obtained permission of Zedekiah to go to his rescue, and who with difficulty had him extracted from the cistern. Jeremiah was thus saved dungeon, for otherwise Jeremiah could not have asked, "WTiere are now your prophets who prophesied iinto you, 'The King of Babylon shall not descend upon this city?" (XXX\T:I, 19). ^ In XXXVIII, 9 not only kl 'en hallaehaem 'od hair but also mip- p^ne haraahh is undoubtedly an interpolation, for Zedekiah's words to Ebed-jNIelech, "get Jeremiah out of the cistern before he dies" (v. 10), show that Jeremiah was in imminent peril. Had the danger been that, in the distribution of the daily rations to the hungry masses, Jeremiah down in the pit might be overlooked and might starve to death, there would have been no need for instantaneous action. The great necessity for haste admits of but one explanation, viz., that the danger facing Jeremiah was that he might sink beyond recover^' in the miry bottom of the cistern. This is further borne out by the description of his rescue. Evidently it was hard work to get him out — no doubt because of the suction of the mire — and it was necessary to take precautions to prevent the strain of the pulling from injuring him. li'ajjamoth tahtdu "that he might die right there," is perfect text, the apocopate consecutive expressing here the avowed intention of the Sarim in throwing Jeremiah into the cistern. PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 55 from what had seemed certain death, but he was not set at liberty. He remained imprisoned in the court of guard until the fall of Jerusalem (XXXIV, 1-3, XXXII, 3b-5, XXI, 4-14, XXXVIII, 1-13, 28a). B. CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROPHECIES AND BIOGRAPHICAL RECORDS OF THE PERIOD The above presentation of events is based on a critical analysis of the biographical chapters XXXVII and XXXVIII and of the pieces correlated with these, viz., XXXIV, 8-22 with XXXVII, and XXXIV, 1-7, XXXII, 3b-5, XXI, 1-14 with XXXVIII. Inasmuch as in these two groups authentic records have become interfused with legendary tales, the analysis which follows will necessarily aim to sift out the legendary from the authentic in addition to estabHshing the correlation between the various parts. I. xxxvn, 17-21 AND XXXVIII, 14-27 Each piece relates a secret interview of Zedekiah with Jeremiah. Both accounts have hitherto been considered authentic, and accordingly, it has always been taken for granted that Zedekiah twice sum- moned Jeremiah for a secret interview, the first time, while Jeremiah was imprisoned in the dungeon of Jonathan's house, and the second, after his rescue from the miry cistern. This point has never been questioned, but a critical examination shows beyond a doubt that the account, XXXVIII, 14-27, is but another version of the interview related in XXXVII, 17-21. The key to the situation is found in Zedekiah's suggestion to Jeremiah in XXXVIII, 26 that, if interrogated about the interview by the Sarim, $6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL he should answer: "I presented to the King my petition that he would not send me back to the house of Jonathan to die there." Now during his interview with Zedekiah while imprisoned in the dungeon of Jonathan's house, Jeremiah actually did present such a request to Zedekiah, and in practically those identical words (cf. XXXVII, 20); while, after his rescue from the miry cistern, he did not make such a request, nor is there anywhere the slightest reference to a design on the part of the Sarim or the King to return him to the dungeon of Jonathan's house, or for that matter to any other dungeon. Which of the two accounts, however, is the authentic record and which the legendary product of a later age, is not difficult to decide. (a) XXXVIII, 14-27 — THE LEGENDARY ACCOUNT Both from a psychological and from a historical point of view the account, XXXVIII, 14-27, is ficti- tious. Note in the former regard how Zedekiah urges Jeremiah not to withhold anything from him (v. 14) — as if it were Jeremiah's habit to refrain from speaking his mind. Note further how Jeremiah shrinks from answering Zedekiah for fear that Zedekiah may kill him if he replies. In fact he does not speak until after Zedekiah has assured him under oath that he will neither kill him himself, nor deliver him into the hands of those men who seek his Ufe (w. isf.). The real Jeremiah knew no such fear; he had absolutely no regard for the consequences of his words. In fact he was only too ready to declare his mind on all occasions, and without doubt he would have told the truth bluntly to the Sarim had he been questioned by them. However, the picture of the Sarim, consumed PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 57 with curiosity regarding their interview, which we receive from the King's admonition to Jeremiah, and more especially the feature that the King foresees this curiosity and forewarns Jeremiah, bear the unmis- takable stamp of the legendary. It is safe to assert that Jeremiah's supposed mendacity, which has called forth such ingenious apology from modern exegetes, belongs altogether in the realm of the mythical. Logically considered, the Sarifu's curiosity regarding what Jeremiah secretly said to the King is absurd, in \-iew of the contemptuous attitude of the people in general toward Jeremiah. He was looked upon as a nuisance, and his prophecies held to be the utterances of a madman {cf. XXIX, 26), even as those of the other literary prophets had been considered in their day. The only point that concerned the authorities was how to get rid of him, or at least how to make him quit his troublesome prophesying of evil. Another point which indicates the legendary char- acter of the story is the circumstance that the Sarim learn at once of the interview, regardless of the fact that it is supposed to be a secret one. Such contradic- tions may almost invariably be detected in legendary records. They are doubtless to be explained by a de- sire on the part of the author to make the story more thrilling than the plain statement of facts seems to him. His iniagination readily supplies the necessary embelhshment, but in seeking to improve on his origi- nal, he is prone to overlook some detail which makes his addition most unlikely, if not altogether impossi- ble. In the present case our author betrays a lack of appreciation for the most vital quality of his original. He has not caught the true spirit of it. He does not see that the effectiveness, the ahnost crushing force of 5 8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL the original narrative lies in its very simplicity and directness (see infra, p. 63). How complete his lack of insight is for the situa- tion he attempts to describe, is shown by the couplet, V. 22b, the greeting with which Jeremiah tells Zedekiah he will be hailed by the captive women of his harem, when himself led captive to the camp of the Chaldeeans. This couplet has of late been taken as a dirge. In tone it is, however, clearly derisive, although written, like Is. XIV, 4fif., and XXXVII, 22fif., in the meter of the Kinastrophe, and Giesebrecht is right in defending the old interpretation of it as a song of derision.^ Is it credible that Jeremiah, whose sensitive soul suffered agonies at every thought of his people's doom, could have conceived such an unnatural and revolting scene as is this picture of the women of the King's harem coming forth to jeer at the degradation of their lord and King, — those women who had themselves been taken as spoils of war into the camp of the enemy and subjected to the humiliation and dishonor invariable under those circumstances. A picture, so psycholog- ically untrue, could not have suggested itself to Jere- miah. He would have known instinctively that in that hour of misery and despair those women, however frivolous, would not be in the mood for derision. Had he chosen to harrow the mind of the King with a picture of his women on that day, he would most certainly have painted the grim reality, as Amos in his prophecy to Amaziah, — '' Thy wife will be ravished in the city." ^ 1 See op. ciL, adloc. — Erbt's remark (in op. cit., p. 57) with reference to the couplet that to the King the lamentation "is bitter derision" is an involuntary acknowledgment that the old interpretation is the correct one. * The attitude at present prevailing among exegetes toward certain PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 59 The climax of absurdity, however, is reached in Jeremiah's advice to Zedekiah in vv. lyf., 20 and in Zedekiah's reply, v. 19. Taken by itself, v. 17 would probabl}' call for no comment; it would be taken as meaning that Jeremiah actually advised Zedekiah to seek his own safety as well as the welfare of the city by surrendering to the Chalda^ans; but Zedekiah's strange reply alters the complexion of the whole passage: *'I am afraid of the Juda^ans who have deserted to the Chaldaeans, lest they (/. e., the Chaldasans) deliver me into their hands to be reviled by them." Judging from this reply, one would have to conclude that Zedekiah understood either of two things : either that Jeremiah meant him to steal off to the camp of the ChaldiEans and give himself up like any deserter, or that he was ad\'ising him to offer to the Chaldaeans that the city be surrendered to them, in which case, Zedekiah reflected, the Chaldaeans would make it a condition that he, as head of the rebellious forces, be delivered over to them. In either case, however, the situation would be absurd. In the first case, Zedekiah would have treated Jeremiah's suggestion with the scorn it deserved, in- stead of simply demurring with such a ridiculous reason. No king, however great a weakhng, would entertain the idea of entering the camp of the enemy as a deserter. And in the second case, Zedekiah would obvious discrepancies in the biographic parts of Jeremiah is hardly compatible with exact methods of criticism. As a rule these dis- crepancies are disposed of lightly with the remark, "this but shows that the passage in question is the work of Baruch." But even were it certain that the biographic portions are the exclusive work of Ba- ruch, it would be but reasonable to suppose that Baruch knew what he was talking about, and also that he wrote either from personal knowledge or from information received from Jeremiah himself. 6o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL have known only too well, that if the Chaldaeans insisted upon the surrender of his own person, it would not be to turn him over to the taunts of his com- patriots, but to cast him into fetters and lead him in triumph to their own country, as was done ten years previously with Jehojachin. It would have been to these indignities that Zedekiah's mind would have reverted, and he would undoubtedly have told Jere- miah that he would fight to the last ditch, and if necessary, kill himself by his own sword or hurl him- self into the burning ruins of his palace, rather than deliver himself voluntarily to such a fate. For Jeremiah's advice to Zedekiah, the author of the story, XXXVIII, 14-27, drew from the prophecy XXXIV, 1-3 (XXXII, 3b-5), XXI, 4-14, which was delivered by Jeremiah while prisoner in the court of guard.^ His method of using his source illustrates a very interesting point, a point which is generally to be noticed in legendary records, viz., that the author betrays his lack of historical understanding most conspicuously when he deviates, for deviating from his source simply means that he has read his own subjective interpretation into it. Thus Jeremiah, in the prophecy just mentioned, nowhere advises Zedekiah to surrender. Instead, he emphatically asserts that the city is doomed beyond recall, and even so Zedekiah's fate decided — he will be taken as captive to Babylon. No fighting against the enemy can avail, since Yhwh Himself is in arms against them. Only if they heeded God's word, he declares, addressing himself to the royal house, might they be saved (XXI, 11), that is, as XXI, 12 defines, ^ Cf. infra, § 2, where it will also be shown that XXXIV, 4f. are an interpolation. PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 6i if they conformed to God's will by the estabhshment of a just government. Two things are at once clear from this prophecy, that Jeremiah did not cherish the remotest hope that the nation's doom might be averted, and that con- sequently, in this particular instance as throughout his preaching, he did not mean to give practical ad- vice,^ did not even expect that his words would be of any practical consequence for the immediate course of events. The latter point is made quite clear by the fact that he follows up his exhortation to the royal house to introduce righteous government with the renewed assertion that the city is doomed (XXI, i3f.)- Neither Jeremiah nor his predecessor prophets, it may be stated here, were concerned with the poUtics of the ' Chap. XXVII cannot be cited in proof that Jeremiah at one time did really advise Zedekiah to save the nation by submitting to the suzerainty of Babylon, for this chapter, it is generally agreed because of the contradictions in the text, has not come down to us in its original form but greatly interpolated. The late date of some of the interpola- tions is shown by the fact that the text as read by the LXX was as yet free from them. It is not possible to reconstruct the prophecy as Jeremiah delivered it. It was meant, we know, to explain his symbolic action of wearing the yoke at the time deputies from other Palestinian countries were counseling rebellion against Babylon. And so much is certain, that wilfju " and live," at the end of v. 12 with the following V. 13 and also v. 17 did not form a part of the original prophecy. These verses would indicate that Jeremiah advised a willing submis- sion to Babylon in order to prevent the nation's doom, but such ad- vice would be in direct contradiction to Jeremiah's declaration, vv.i6, iSfl., that the vessels of the Temple which were carried to Babylon with Jehojachin will not be brought back, as their prophets prophesy to the people, but rather that the remaining vessels which were not taken at that time, will also be taken to Babylon. Further the verses under discussion are not contained in the LXX, which under the cir- cumstances is a clear indication that they were added at a very late time. 62 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL day; they had no intention whatever of influencing the course of pubHc events.^ But the author of the story, XXXVIII, 14-27, was far from seeing Jeremiah and his preaching in this light. To him Jeremiah was the leader and adviser of his age, another Samuel or EHjah — a conception of the literary prophets which prevails in many quarters up to our own day. He saw in Jeremiah's utterance, XXXIV, 1-3 (XXXII, 3b-5), XXI, 4-14, no purpose other than that of advising Zedekiah to save the city by surrendering to the Chaldaeans ; and in drawing on this utterance for his own story of the inter\dew he naturally gave it this interpretation. Jeremiah's real advice to Zedekiah escaped him. He was, doubtless, confirmed in his conclusions by XXI, 8-10, where Jeremiah, addressing himself to the people, tells them to cease their hopeless fighting and join the ranks of the Chaldaeans — the bitter irony of these words he nat- urally failed to notice (see infra). (b) XXXVII, 17-21 — THE AUTHENTIC RECORD To turn now to the account of the secret interview between Zedekiah and Jeremiah, which is given XXXVII, 17-21, it will be seen at once how this account accords with Jeremiah's utterance, XXXIV, 1-3 (XXXII, 3b-5), XXI, 4-14, in that there is no mention of surrender, nothing that could even re- motely suggest such an idea. The scene is most reahstic, and especially is the picture presented of the prophet a Ufe-hke one, corresponding in every way to his real character as revealed in the various authen- tic situations throughout the book. ^ These points will occupy our attention more fully in the chaps. " The Prophets believe the doom inevitable." PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 63 As to the role played by Zedckiah, history offers numerous examples of kings, who, under similar circumstances, acted in precisely the same way. Prompted, no doubt, by the desperation of the mo- ment, rather than by any high regard for the prophet's authority, Zedckiah secretly summons Jeremiah, and without any preamble puts the question that is weighing on his soul, jcS dahliar in"cth jalnvcE, "Is there a word from Yhwh? " With crushing directness comes the prophet's answer: jc^ ^ h'jad maelackh babhael tinnatJicn, "There is! Thou shalt be given into the hand of the King of Babylon." The anxious question of the King reveals the seriousness of the situation. The return of the Chal- daeans has filled him with uneasiness and tragic fore- bodings, yet his heart is clamoring for hope, for a word of encouragement. His official prophets stand ready to reassure him, but their promises mean noth- ing to him. Have they not all along declared that it would not come to this, that the Chalda}ans would not invade the country nor lay siege to their capital? Had they not pointed triumphantly to the withdrawal of the Chalda^ans on the occasion of their previous invasion as proving they were right? But if Jeremiah, who customarily prophesied evil, who had even then, when the Chaldasans retreated, insisted they were not really gone, they would still destroy the nation — if he should hold out any hope, then indeed might he take courage once more. But the uncompromising Jere- miah bluntly tells him the truth, confirms his worst fears — "Thou shalt be given into the hand of the King of Babylon." Then referring, no doubt, to the turn in events 'Omit, in accordance with the LXX, the second wajjdtnaer. 64 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL which has verified his previous prophecies and proved those of the official prophets false, he asks, "What is my offence against thee and thy officials and thy people, that ye have thrown me into the dungeon? Where are now your prophets who prophesied unto you, 'The King of Babylon shall not descend UDon this country.'?" At this point Jeremiah very naturally seizes the opportunity, and beseeches the King to release him from the dungeon. And Zedekiah under the circum- stances cannot well do otherwise. A Herod, no doubt, would deal differently with Jeremiah for such audacity, but then a Herod would not have summoned the prophet in the first place. In this light the commutation of sentence granted to Jeremiah by Zedekiah has small significance. It does not show that Zedekiah took a personal interest in the prophet, nor even that he was in any way friendly disposed toward him. Least of all does the interview as a whole warrant the conclusion generally drawn from it, that at heart Zedekiah inclined to the course which Jeremiah is supposed to have urged, viz. that of making peace with Babylon, and that it was only by the superior will of the Sarim and their war- party that he was forced to the opposite course. As already pointed out, the strange inconsistency which Zedekiah committed in summoning Jeremiah was an act of desperation, for which history offers many strik- ing parallels. We need only recall the case of Saul who, when fate had turned against him, consulted, as a last resort, the witch of Endor, although he had pre- viously driven her and her consorts from the country and forbidden them the practice of their art under penalty of death. PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 65 2. XXXIV, 8-22 AND XXXVII, l-i6 — XXXn% 1-7, XXXII, 3-5, XXI, I-14 AND XXXVIU, I-13 It was Comill who first pointed out that the proph- ecy of Jeremiah which was called forth by the people's flagrant breach of faith in reiinslaving the serfs (XXXIV, 8-22), and the prophet's subsequent imprisonment in the dungeon on a mere pretext (XXXVII, 11-16), stand to each other in the relation of cause and effect.^ The date of that prophecy, as the time immediately after the raise of the siege of Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans, follows with certainty from the direct reference to this event in XXXIV, 2 if. Also the record of Jeremiah's imprisonment in the dungeon mentions the same event as marking the date of his seizure. And since he could not have addressed the people from the dungeon, it is obvious that his seizure and imprisonment must have followed directly upon his dehvering the prophecy, XXXIV, 8-22. On the ground of this evident relation of the two, Cornill tried to combine Chap. XXXVII with the two parts of XXXIV, that is w. 1-7 and vv. 8-22.2 jjjg attempt to combine them, however, was unsuccessful, (i.) because, as already indicated, there is no connection whatever between XXXIV, 1-7 and XXXVII (see also infra), and (2.) because he failed to see the real relation between XXXIV, 8-22 and XXXVII, being misled by the story about the deputation from Zedekiah, XXXVII, 3, 7a. 1 See op. cil. Einleitung, p. XXXV, Chap. XXXIV, prefatory re- marks, and Chap. XXXVII, nil. 2 See "The Book of Jeremiah" in SBOT; in his Commentary, "Das Buch Jeremia," p. 375, Cornill himself expresses doubt as to the correctness of his reconstruction. 66 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL The fact that all the scholars except Duhm consider this story authentic, and also the corresponding one, XXI, 1-3, explains why none of them noticed that the prophecy referred to in XXXVIII, 1-3 is none other than the one contained, though incompletely, in Chap. XXI. E\idently they reasoned that, after Jeremiah was put in prison in order that he might be kept from prophes>dng, it was not hkely that the King would publicly sohcit his opinion, and thus give him an opportunity to prophesy again; and this reasoning led naturally to the conclusion that the prophecy, Chap. XXI, must antedate Jeremiah's imprisonment in the dungeon,^ Duhm alone noticed that the stories of the deputations from Zedekiah to Jeremiah must be legendary,- but then in his ultra-radicaHsm he declared Jeremiah's utterances, XXXVII, yb-io and XXI, 4-10, to be likewise the product of later times. 1 Rothstein's remark to XXXWII, 3 (in Kautzsch^) justifies one in assuming that there was reall}' such a line of reasoning followed in dating XXI, iff. Stade, following Ewald, sought to prove, in ZATW, XII, 277ff., that XXXVII, i-io and XXI, i-io have reference to one and the same occurrence, and consequently tried to combine XXI, I-IO and XXXVII, 4-10 into one piece. Giesebrecht and Cornill, however {op cit., ad loc), rightly point out that such a view is impossi- ble, since XXXVII, 4-10 have reference to an altogether different situation from that described in XXI, i-io. Erbt tries to uphold Ewald's and Stade's view by a most arbitrary procedure. In the first place he omits from XXI, 2 everything that points to a different situation from that of XXX\H, 4-10, then (in accordance with his method in general) he reduces Jeremiah's utterances, XXI, 4-7b and XXXVII, 7b-io to less than three verses, viz., XXXVII, 7b, 8, 10, and finally he takes XXI, 8-10 as a separate utterance — an utterance, he argues, which Jeremiah did not make in public, but secretly, for the benefit of his political friends {op. cit., pp. 43ff. and 267f.). 2 See op. cit., on Chap. XXXVII, 3. PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 67 (a) the two deputations from ZEDEKIAH to JEREMIAH, XXXVII, 3, 7a — XXXI, 1-3 — both ACCOUNTS LEGENT)ARY In \-iew of the contemptuous and hostile attitude of both the people and the government toward Jeremiah and their disbelief in his prophecies (see above), it would from the ver}- outset seem improbable that the King publicly recognized Jeremiah's author- ity, by sending to him on two critical occasions high state-officials to inquire w'hat he believed would be the outcome of the situation. A critical examination shows, in fact, that neither in XXXVII. 3ff. nor in XXI, if!, can the story of the deputation from Zedekiah have been originally an organic part of the records. In XXXVII, 3ff. the story betrays itself as a legendary embellishment by the statement in v. 3 that Zedekiah sent the deputation for the express purpose of beseeching Jeremiah to pray to God for them {hithpallad-nd hha^'dcnii 'acljaJnvcB ^'^lohenu)} The question immediately arises, w^hat occasion was there at that juncture for beseeching divine interv^en- * These words, which are of basic significance, are entirely ignored by Comill in the strange theory which he advances. Comill makes the purel}- arbitrary- assertion that Zedekiah's real object in sending the deputation to Jeremiah, after the danger was averted, was to call his attention to the fact that he had again been wrong in taking a gloomy \new of the situation {op. cit., p. 243). Had this been the case, there is no reason whj- the author should not have said so; least of all is there any groimd, why he should have stated an altogether different reason. No weight, whatever, Giesebrecht to the contrary- (op. cit., ad loc), can be attributed to the l^dorsaii, "to consult me," of Jeremiah's reply in v. 7a. Such discrepancies as this, often much more striking ones, are, as we have already noticed, regularly met with in legendary records. 68 THE PROPHETS OF ISR.\EL tion? Had not the Chaldasans withdrawn, and was not all danger for the present averted? The absurdity of the Eang's sending a deputation to Jeremiah for this purpose is still more evident, when one considers the action of the people in regard to their serfs. The reenslaving of the serfs as soon as the Chaldaeans had withdrawn shows that the government and people must have been absolutely confident that all danger was over. Had they still considered the situation grave, or thought it possible that they might have to utilize their serfs soon again for the defence of the city, their own interests would have forbidden them to forfeit the loyalty of the serfs by such a breach of faith. Equally obvious is it in Chap. XXI that the story of the deputation from Zedekiah to Jeremiah given in vv. 1-3 must be a legendary product; for unless one shares the opinion of Duhm,^ Cornill,^ and Erbt,^ that XXXVIII, 2 is not an original part of the text, or that of Giesebrecht,^ that XXI, 8-10 is the work of a later interpolater, there is no other conclusion possible than that the prophecy, incompletely recorded in XXI, 4ff., is the one referred to in XXXVIII, 1-4, it being the only one which contains the utterance quoted in XXXVIII, 2, and it containing this utter- ance verbatim. But is it conceivable that Jeremiah would be publicly requested by the King to prophesy, after he had been imprisoned just in order to prevent his prophesying? And were it conceivable, would such a thing be Hkely in view of the fact that, in his secret 1 Op. cit., ad loc. ^Op. cit., ad loc. ' Op. cit., p. 49. * Op. cit., ad loc PERSECUTION OF JEREMIAH 69 interview with Zedekiah a short time previously, Jere- miah had boldly insisted on his conviction that the country was doomed. Additional proof that verses 1-3 are a later addition may be seen in the discrepancy between verse 3 and verse 8. The former represents Jeremiah as addressing his message to the messengers of Zedekiah, telling them what answer they should convey from him to Zedekiah: ''Thus shall ye speak to Zedekiah;" while the latter, which is closely connected with the inter- vening verses 4-7 both in thought and form, shows no trace of such a situation; indeed Jeremiah proceeds to state what message he has been commissioned by God to convey to the people: "And to this people thou shalt say." The latter half-verse at once suggests that, like the second part of the sermon, w. 11-14, so this first part must originally have been made up of two subparts, the first of which was addressed to the King and the second to the people. Thus, while suggesting the original structure of the first part of XXI, 4-14, verse 8a also throws light on the question of the original opening of the prophecy, and at the same time on the question of the original beginning of the narrative, XXXVIII, 1-13. (b) the original beginning of the narrative, xxxviii, i-i3, and of the prophecy, xxi, 4-i4. xxxiv, 1-7 — xxxii, 3-5. In discussing the question of the original beginning of XXI, 4-14 and XXXVIII, 1-13, it will best serve our purpose to consider the latter piece first. The verse which at present opens Chap. XXXVIII, 1-13 cannot have been the original beginning of the narrative. The words, "Shephatiah ben Mattan, and 70 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Gedaliah ben Pashhur, and Jucal ben Shelemiah, and Pashhur ben Malchiah heard the words that Jeremiah had spoken to the people," presuppose that a resume has just been given of the prophecy; what follows is merely a repetition of those parts which had given most offence — much, e. g., as in Chap. XXVI there is first a rehearsal of the Temple-sermon, then the state- ment that the priests and the prophets and all the people heard Jeremiah dehver it, and finally an inci- dental reiteration of the most objectionable part of the prophecy. This resum6, as we have called it, this originally preceding part is, however, not completely lost; it has been preserved, in part at least, in XXXIV, 1-3. Proof of this is XXXVIII, 3, "Thus saith the Lord, this city shall surely be given into the hands of the army of the King of Babylon, and he shall take it." This is not, as at first glance it would seem, a variant of XXI, lob, but, with the exception of ''into the hands of the army of the King" for "into the hands of the King," is a verbatim quotation of XXXIV, 2b, as read by the LXX: Oi/rty? elirev Kupio? TrapaSocret TrapaSodrjo-eTai rj 7r6Xi<; avrr] ei? ')(elpa See Stade in ZATW., XII, 282; Giesebrecht, op. cit., ad loc; Rothstein, in Kautzsch, ^ ad loc. 2 See infra, Part III, Chap. VI, "Isaiah's View of the Doom and His Attitude toward the Political Affairs of the Day." * I take issue with the prevailing opinion that it was through Jere- miah's interference that the contemplated revolt against Babylon in the fourth year of Zedekiah's reign did not take place. There is PERSECUTION OF JEREMI.\H 79 historic picture usually given of Zedekiah as a weak and vacillating monarch, and of the conditions which prevailed in Jerusalem at the time of the national nothing in Chaps. XXVII and XXVIII to justify such a deduction {cf. supra, p. 61, n. i). The fact is that we have no knowledge whatever about the circumstances which ultimately induced Zedekiah to refrain from the revolt. In this connection it may not be out of place to remark that the story of Zedekiah's journey to Babylon, Jer. LI, 59-64, is a legend; see Giesebrecht's proof, op. cil., p. 245. I would add that the story, vv. 59H54, is to be looked upon as the eflort on the part of the pseudonymous author of Chaps. L and LI to make more plausible his claim that Jeremiah was the author of the pseudo-prophecy, a procedure which has many parallels in apocalyptic literature. ^ Of the various accounts of Zedekiah and of the conditions during his reign, the one by Erbt is particularly uncritical and subjective. His e.xposition is for the greater part purely conjectural. In illustra- tion of his method, it may suffice to quote his remark on p. 56 in ref- erence to Jer. XXXVIII, igf. "Those Judaeans present in the camp of the Chaldaeans, of whom Zedekiah speaks as of a certain party, well known to Jeremiah, may he identified with these persons," i. e., with the family of Shafan and their political copartisans — a statement for which there is not even a semblance of basis. CHAPTER IV THE CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH I. THEIR IMPORTANCE It was pointed out in Chapter II that the Temple- sermon was the decisive event in Jeremiah's career. This is true, not so much in view of the persecution and the change in his outward fortunes which imme- diately followed it, as in view of the far-reaching ef- fect which this persecution had on the prophet's inner Hfe. It was as if the measure of personal suffering was necessary to bring his rehgious endowment to its full development. Even as Hosea's bitter domestic ex- perience led him, in advance of his age, to the realiza- tion that God was love, so the opprobrium and abuse which Jeremiah had to endure, led him through travail of spirit to a closer and more personal relation with God than we have evidence of in the case of any of his predecessor prophets. Forsaken by his fellow- men, driven into hiding to escape death, he found a higher fellowship, a surer solace, in the consciousness he acquired of God's nearness to him. His severe isolation served but to nourish and intensify his rehance upon God and to open his mind to the deeper spiritual significance of his mission. This saving sense of God's presence grew on the prophet until we find him exclaiming from a full heart, as the Psalmist later, "God is my strength and my refuge." Indeed, 80 ■ CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 8i with this sense of communion with God, Jeremiah's whole being became permeated and all his thinking surcharged. So in those years of utter loneliness originated the confessions — those dialogues in which the prophet pours out his soul to God, his human misgivings, his shrinkings from what he feels to be inevitable, his profound depression verging at times on despair, and on the other hand, voices the reassurance, the positive reasoning, the promises of strength and sustenance with which he feels liis soul fortified and inspired after he has thus unburdened himself. These confessions are distinctly characteristic of Jeremiah. They grew, as we have already suggested, out of the pecuhar conditions in his case, acting upon his intense and deeply spiritual temperament. The personal element we find more or less in all the proph- ets, but nowhere else do we find such complete revela- tions, such a laying bare of the hidden processes of the soul as in the confessions of Jeremiah. Needless to say, therefore, they are of central importance for the study of Jerem.iah as well as for the study of prophecy in general. 2. THE DATE OF THE CONFESSIONS The confessions in the order in which they are found in the Book of Jeremiah are: ^(a) XI, 18-XII, 3a,_5-6,_(b) XV, 10, 15-21, (c) XVII, 5-10, 14-18, and its originally component parts, (d) XVIII, 18-20 (a fragment), (e) XX, 7-1 1, 13, (f) XX, 14-18. Of these confessions, (b) and (c) were produced while Jeremiah was in hiding;, the former, doubtless, in the first year, immediately after his escape from 82 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL execution/ and the latter, several years later, when, the first collection of his prophecies having been burned by the King, he had Baruch write them down a second time.^ Regarding the date of XX, 14-18 we must agree with Duhm ^ and Erbt * that there is no clue to the particular occasion which called forth this outburst of despair. As to the date of the remaining confessions, the opinions at present entertained by biblical scholars are so widely divergent that no final conclusion has been reached.^ In regard to the various views that have been advanced, it must be pointed out that they are all based on the erroneous assumption that all al- ^ See supra, pp. 44f.; cf. also infra, pp. go and 97. 2 See supra, pp. 15 and 19; cf. also infra, pp. 90 and 104. ' Op. cit., p. 168. < Op. cit., p. 189. ^ XVIII, 18-20 and XX, 7-13 are commonly assigned to the time of Jeremiah's persecution under Jehojakim, which persecution, it has been generally thought, however, did not assume a serious character until after his prophecies had been read by Baruch in the Temple. Erbt, although he holds with the other scholars that up to 605 Jere- miah enjoyed freedom, places these two confessions in the beginning of Jehojakim's reign {op. cit., pp. 184, 186). XI, 18-XII, 6 is by Giesebrecht {op. cit., p. 72) also placed in the second part of Jeho- jakim's reign, by Comill, however {op. cit., p. 160), in the first part of this monarch's reign, while Rothstein (in Kautzsch ^, pref. rem. to XI, 18-XII, 6) is inclined to consider it a product of the period prior to the Temple-sermon, and Erbt, who takes XI, 18-23 and XII, 1-6 as two separate pieces, thinks that they date as far back even as the first years of Jeremiah's activity {op. cit., pp. 172, 174). In regard to XX, 14-18, Rothstein thinks they date from the same time as vv. 7-13; while Giesebrecht {op. cit., pp. 113, 115) is of the opinion that they were added by Jeremiah as a conclusion to vv. 7fi'., when he committed the latter to writing, which, he thinks, may have been at the time he was imprisoned in the court of guard. Similarly Cornill {op. cit., pp. 236, 238f.) considers these last years of Jeremiah's activity their most likely date. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 83 lusions to persecution must refer to occurrences in the reign of Jehojakim. The scholars have failed to take into consideration that Jeremiah's life of persecution comprises two distinct periods, the reign of Jehojakim, and the latter part of Zedekiah's reign. It would from the outset seem hardly probable that all his confes- sions, save alone XX, 14-18, should date from the first period; and a close examination shows that both XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6 and XX, 7-1 1, 13 are really a product of the second period of Jeremiah's persecu- tion. (a) the date of XX, 7-1 1, 13 To take up the latter confession, XX, 7-1 1, 13, first: — In seeking to determine the date of this con- fession, the scholars have laid undue emphasis on V. 7b, "I have become a constant target for laughter, everyone mocketh me." The statement which follows this is really much more important: "As often as I speak I have to cry out, have to complain of violence and abuse;" for it shows that at the period of his Hfe to which he refers the prophet was exposed not only to insult, but to bodily injury. This conclusion is confirmed by verse 10. Indeed, the complaint in verse 10 that he is surrounded by spies who plot his ruin and seek to entrap him, clearly appUes to Jeremiah's condition in the last years of Zedekiah's reign, when on a mere pretext he was arrested, flogged, and thrown into a dungeon. Further, by assuming that the confession originated in the last years of Zedekiah's reign, we immediately see the real force of the opening verses, and are enabled in turn to fix the date of origin still more definitely. In declaring that he has had to do God's bidding 84 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL regardless of the consequences, he, doubtless, had in mind his daring action in the court of guard, when, in the very presence of the Sarim — heedless of the peril to which he was exposing himself — he had sarcasti- cally called upon the people to desist from their futile defence of the city (Chap. XXI and its component parts).^ Conclusive proof that it was really this event, or rather the consequences therefrom, that gave rise to the confession is to be seen in the prayer of thanks- giving with which the confession closes. Far from being contradictory, as has been thought, to the prophet's declaration in the preceding part that he is beset by enemies on all hands, this exultant outburst is quite in place. Jeremiah certainly had cause for thanksgiving after his rescue from the miry cistern.^ (b) the date of XI, 18-X11, 3a, 5-6 This confession cannot possibly date, as Rothstein and Erbt hold, from the time prior to the Temple- sermon. It was clearly written at a time when Jeremiah was bitterly persecuted by the nation as a whole. Proof of this is the complaint with which the confession closes, that he was deserted and conspired against even by his nearest relatives, also the threat of his own clan, to which he refers (XI, 21), that they would take his Ufe unless he ceased prophesying. We have no reason to believe that Jeremiah was actually persecuted before the Temple-sermon. Had he been, there can be no doubt that some reference to it would have come down to us in the biographic parts of the book, considering that these contain fairly com- 1 See supra, pp. 53!., -j^. 2 See supra, pp. 54f. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 85 '1 , plete accounts of the various phases of liis persecution after the Temple-sermon. A certain degree of enmity and opposition to the prophet may have existed be- fore, but the great and general outbreak of hostility was produced by that event. However, wliile it is clear that the confession, XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6, cannot be a product of the time prior to the Temple-sermon, it is equally obvious, in my opinion, that it cannot be a product of the period following that event, that is, definitely, of the period extending from the Temple-sermon to the death of Jehojakim. XI, 19 states most explicitly that the people were plotting for Jeremiah's death, and seeldng to compass his ruin by preferring slander- ous charges against him, and v. 21, that his own clan threatened to kill him if he did not give up prophesy- ing. Now neither of these statements could apply in any way to Jeremiah's case during the reign of Jehojakim, for from the time he delivered the Temple- sermon, in the first year of Jehojaldm's reign, until the death of that monarch, he was in hiding, and such plots and threats against his Hfe would have been absurd, if not actually impossible. Jeremiah had been sentenced to death, not on any false charge, but for a very real offence (from the point of view of those times the Temple-sermon was a sacrilegious proph- ecy), and the death-sentence would have been executed immediately, had his hiding place at any time become known. Undoubtedly, the confession belongs to the second period of Jeremiah's persecution, when he was at large and prophes}ing openly. In those years when they were fighting desperately for their national existence, Jeremiah must have exasperated and en- raged his countrymen by his persistent declaration 86 THE PROPHETS .OF ISRAEL that the nation was doomed. In their eyes he was a traitor, and one can easily understand that, under those circumstances, his own priestly clan felt it their duty to take his life if he would not cease proph- esying, and that even his closest friends stood aloof and denounced him (see XX, lo). The fact that it was the foreign eunuch, Ebed-Melech, who came to his rescue when he was thrown into the miry cistern by the Sarim, and not a compatriot, as on the occasion when he was sentenced to death after the Temple- sermon, may be taken as indicative of his country- men's feelings toward him, and in fact, as charac- teristic of the situation in general. How bitterly his rescue was resented may be seen from the fact that Ebed-Melech's own life was not safe after his inter- ference in Jeremiah's behalf (see XXXIX, 17). (C) THE DATE OF XVIII, l8-20 Finally, the fragment, XVIII, 18-20 — the beginning of the confession is missing and probably also the conclusion — must date Ukewise from the second period of Jeremiah's persecution, since it, like XI, 19 and XX, 10, refers to the people's plotting to get rid of Jeremiah by means of false accusations. From the foregoing discussion of the dates of the various confessions, it will be clear that, as they at present appear in the Book of Jeremiah, the confes- sions are not in their chronological order. Nor have the prophecies which at present precede them any bearing on their date, or for that matter, any relation to them whatever. This is true, too, of the bio- graphic piece, XX, 1-6, which relates Jeremiah's flogging by Pashhur because of the sermon recorded in CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 87 Chap. XIX, for that the flogging-incident has no connection with the confession, XX, 7-1 1, 13, is evident from the date which we estabHshed for the latter. Apart from tliis, Erbt ^ and Cornill ^ to the contrary, the date of the flogging cannot be even appro.ximately ascertained, as we have no way of fixing the time when Paslihur held the office of the PaqU Nagid. The statement, XXIX, 26, "Yiiwii hath made thee priest in place of Jchojada, the priest," in no wise permits the deduction that Jchojada was among those exiled mth Jehojachin in 597, or that Zcphaniah held office from that time on. Indeed, we do not even know whether the office of the Paqid Nagid was identical with that of the Paqid. ^ Erbt himself called attention to this point {ih., p. 15, n. i), but failed to draw the logical conclusion from it. 3. THE COMPLETENESS OF THE CONFESSIONS AND OF THE PROPHETIC WRITINGS IN GENERAL FROM A LIT- ERARY POINT OF VIEW The view has frequently been expressed that the prophetic works, as we possess them, are very incom- plete, both as to the number of sermons and as to the contents of the same; that is to say, that only a limited number of the sermons actually delivered by the various prophets have come down to us, and these not in full. Those who hold this view believe, for the most part, that the prophets were occupied chiefly with the oral deliverance of their message, and that they were less intent on the preservation of the same. ^Op. cil., pp. 15-18. *0/>. cil., p. 230. * Instead of the plural, Paqidtm, the singular, Paqtd, is to be read in XXIX, 26, in accordance with the ancient versions. 88 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Were it not for the zeal of their disciples, as they think, very httle would have been committed to writing, and, as it was, much was omitted altogether, and the rest put into the form of abstracts. Add to this, that in the course of transmission other losses were suffered, and it seems to them clear that what has come down to us is but fragments and digests of original orations. To those who hold this \iew, it Vvdll not seem Hkely that a poet of Jeremiah's genius should have pro- duced only two confessions in the course of his ten years of hiding and, altogether, only six confessions in the space of twenty-two years. This view of the prophetic writings in general, as well as of Jeremiah's confessions in particular, is, how- ever, wholly unjustified. It seems to be due, prima- rily, to the fact that we are inchned to look upon such matters in the Hght of our own age of literary over- production, rather than in the light of the conditions of those times. We are apt to forget that, for the prophets who come within the range of this discussion, speaking or writing was not an every-day affair. It was not a profession with them nor a means of livelihood. They did not speak or write because they were expected to speak or wTite, or because it was the customary thing to do, but because they were driven to it by an inner compulsion, which, in its turn, sprang out of the exigencies of the times. With the delivery of their message their responsibility ended for the time being. When they had unburdened them- selves of the truth which, in travail of spirit, they had felt taking shape within them, with which they had reasoned and wrestled until overmastered by it to the point of expression — when they had thus fulfilled what they felt to be their mission, they returned simply CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 89 . ) their usual avocations, until roused to fresh stirrin<^s ; the spirit by some now and pressing issue, whether m their Uves as individuals or in the alTairs of the nation at large. Thus Isaiah's prophecies, with the exception of a few to the exact date of which there is no clue, group themselves round, in fact were directly called forth by, the critical events of the stormy forty years of his prophetic activity: viz., (i) the civil war which raged in the northern kingdom, — this event, in all likelihood, marks Isaiah's appearance as a prophet, (2) the Syro-Ephraimitic alhance and campaign, (3) the investiture and conquest of Samaria, (4) the insurrection of the Palestinian countries against Assyria (713-11) ending with the conquest of Asdod by Assyria, (5) Judah's aUiance with Egj-pt on the death of Sargon and Sennacherib's subsequent appearance in the country (705-701). In the tranquil intervals, Isaiah remained silent and in the background. As far, however, as the confessions of Jeremiah are concerned, properly only four out of the six come in consideration here, viz., XV, 10, 15-21; XVII, 5-10, 14-18 and its component parts; XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6, and XX, 7-1 1, 13, (XX, 14-18 is solely an outburst of despair, the expression of a passing mood,^ and XVIII, 18-20 is a mere fragment). Now each of these four confessions marks a crisis in the spiritual Kfe of its author. As we have seen, there are four stages to be distinguished in Jeremiah's persecution: (i) the years he spent in hiding immediately after he was con- demned to death; (2) the years he spent in hiding after the first collection of his prophecies was burned by Jehojakim, and during which he caused the second 1 See infra, pp. I27ff. QO THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL collection of his prophecies to be prepared; (3) the time he was confined in the dungeon; (4) the period of time after his rescue from the cistern; and for each of these stages there is a corresponding confession in which the prophet's experiences, but preeminently his spiritual experiences, are reflected. XV, 10, 15-21 is the product of the first stage; XVII, 5-10, 14-18 and its component parts were added to the second collection of Jeremiah's prophecies, as, in a manner, a confession of faith; XX, 7-1 1, 13 we found to be the product of the last stage of Jeremiah's persecution; and XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6, which also dates from the time of his persecution under Zedekiah, may safely be assumed to be the product of the third stage. Imprisoned in the dungeon, without knowing whether he should ever again see the light of day, what more natural than that reviewing his life of suffering and devotion, he would be led to ponder over the problem of suffering! Few in number, however, as are the confessions, and brief as are most of them, there is nevertheless a completeness about them, a sufficiency, that stamps them as true products of art. As by a flashhght, they lay bare to us the complex workings of the prophet's soul, for, unlike the biographic portions of the book, the confessions do not deal with Jeremiah's persecu- tion per se, but only as it reacts upon him. In this way we get a definite and vivid idea of the prophet's suffering and of the effects of this suffering on his inner life, especially of the way it opened up his mind to the full realization of his mission. This quality of completeness, or sufficiency, as I have called it, is characteristic of the prophetic writ- ings in general, when these are viewed in the right CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 91 light. The prophetic utterances are not, as too often supposed, formal sermons, moral or philosophic dis- courses per se. It cannot be too frequently empha- sized that the prophets were not preachers or pub- lic speakers in the modern sense of the term. They were rather poets, creative artists in the sphere of religion, and their utterances were all immediate, spontaneous products of the intuitive mind. From this \dew-point it is impossible to find any- thing abridged or fragmentary in the prophetic writ- ings, except in certain cases where there has clearly been something lost or misplaced in the course of transmission. And in the same way it is impossible to find any justification for the other theory which has been gaining ground among scholars of late, that the prophetic writings were originally epigrammatically short and disconnected utterances. 4. THE PECULIARITY OF BIBLICAL STYLE Both theories, i. e., the theory that the prophetic WTitings consist of epigrammatically short, discon- nected utterances, and the view that they arc largely fragmentary, must be ascribed to a general misunder- standing of the essential character of Biblical style, or for that matter of Oriental style in general. Orien- tal composition presents certain peculiarities, or, more correctly, one radical peculiarity, which in its various manifestations both startles and mystifies the modern Occidental mind. Now, instead of accepting the seeming peculiarities as facts wth a raison d'etre of their own and building up a theory in accordance with these facts, the tend- ency has been to reason them away as if they were mere errata, or to disregard them altogether. 92 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL I had occasion above (see p. 37) to refer to this fundamental trait of Oriental style, and to point out that it manifests itself in the abrupt thought- transitions, in the seemingly unrelated scenes and stages in the narration — the juxtaposition of ideas, where not coincidence is to be understood but se- quence. In further elucidation of this point I shall quote from my article there referred to: "Occidental Hterature tolerates no sudden transi- tions; each Hnk in the chain of thought must be given, and given in its proper sequence, and each situation be developed out of the preceding one. But in Oriental Hterature, quite frequently, the thoughts are joined to one another in an aphoristic manner, the author relying on the reader to discern the association of ideas which leads from one thought to the other. Similarly, in the progress of narration, situation is added to situation in much the same way as a series of events is depicted by a noveUstic painter. Like the latter, the Oriental writer depends on his readers or audience to see the proper relation or sequence of the various situations." This Oriental habit of thought and depiction, so radically different from ours, must be constantly borne in mind, not only in interpreting the confessions of Jeremiah, or even the prophetic wTitings in general, but in interpreting any characteristic piece of Oriental literature, whether it be Firdausi's Shah-name, or Sadi's Gulistan, or the Hamasa of Old-Arabic poetry. A very pertinent illustration of this fact is to be found in Friedrich Ruckert's article, "Bemerkungen zu Mohl's Ausgabe des Firdusi, Band I" (in ZDMG, VIII, 239-329, and X, 127-282), where, it will be no- ticed, in a great many cases the mistakes which Ruck- CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 93 ert points out in Mohl's translation, may be traced to this stumbling-block of the abrupt transitions. Mohl was no doubt guided by his own modern stylistic feeling and so failed to discern the intentions of his original. Rilckert nowhere seeks to explain the cause of Mohl's mistake in tliis respect, but his own more poetic insight led him invariably to catch the thought- connection in spite of the abrupt transitions by which the mere philologian was misled. It was, in fact, o\\'ing to this unerring poetic insight of his, that Ruckert penetrated more deeply into the spirit of the Oriental writings than perhaps any other scholar in his time. The failure on the part of modern scholars to realize this tendency of the Biblical writers to disregard rigid sequence and formal transitions, has caused confusion in the interpretation of the other Biblical books no less than in the interpretation of the prophetic writ- ings. In a great many cases where Old Testament exegetes suspect that the text is in disorder or other- wise defective, there is in reahty nothing amiss. It is interesting to note in this connection that the one example of this style which occurs in classical literature, the Elegies of Tibullus, has been similarly misunderstood. The Elegies of Tibullus were, in fact, looked upon as fragments, until J. Vahlen, dis- cerning their inner coherence, pointed out that what seemed to be fragmentariness was but a peculiarity of style.i In my above quoted article I attributed tliis peculiarity of style to the seeming tendency of the Oriental mind to think by leaps and bounds. My 'See "Uber drei Elegien des TibuU" in " Monatsberichte der Berliner Akademie," 1878, pp. 343(1. 94 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL attention, however, has since been drawn to the fact that a similar peculiarity exists in one species of Occidental literature, viz., the folksong — the folksong of whatever age or clime. Here too we find abrupt transitions without any apparent Hnks, sudden gaps in the narration which are left to the imagination of the reader to supply. As Wilhelm Grimm has expressed it with reference to the Old-Danish folk- songs: ^'Alles in der Mitte Liegende, Verbindende ist ausgelassen, die Thaten stehen strong nehen einander, ivie Berge, der en Gipfel bloss heleuchtet sind." ^ ^ See "Kleinere Schriften," I, 182; cf. also IV, 539: "Die Erzah- lung in diesen Liedern ist abgebrochen, deutet manchmal selbst das Wichtige nur an: sie beriihrt gleichsam wie ein einzelner Sonnen- strahl nur die vorragenden Spitzen eines Gebirges und lasst das Andere in Dunkelheit liegen." — I am indebted for this information to Professor Max Friedlaender of Berlin, with whom I discussed the subject after a lecture he delivered in Cincinnati on folksongs. Prof. Friedlaender had considered the abrupt transitions a distinct pecul- iarity of the folksong, as I had believed them particularly characteris- tic of Oriental literature, and it was a matter of mutual interest to have our views supplemented in this way. In view of the importance of this point for Biblical scholars, since the parallel in question illuminates and simplifies the question of Biblical comparison, I shall quote here also from Wilhelm Scherer's excellent characterization of the Folksong in "Geschichte der deut- schen Litteratur," pp. 256f.: "Trotzdem herrscht im Volksliede keineswegs immer Klarheit. Die Lieder sind nicht selten und gehoren zu den schonsten, worin die Meinung im Ganzen vollkommen verstandlich, auch jede Einzelheit f iir sich deutlich ist, die Verkniipfung der Einzelheiten unter einander und ihre Beziehung auf das Ganze jedoch im Dunkel bleibt. So das Lied: 'Ich hort' ein Sichelein rauschen.' Die Sichel rauscht durchs Korn; ein Madchen klagt um den verlorenen Liebsten; eine andere trostet sie: 'Lass rauschen, Lieb, lass rauschen!' und spricht von eigenem Gliick, das sie im Friihling erworben. Die Scene im Acker- feld, der Umstand, dass zwei Madchen sich unterreden, die Situation, dass der Dichter sie gewissermassen belauscht, dies alles muss errathen CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 95 One might conclude from this that this manner of presentation must at one time, in the primitive stages of Hterary production, have been common to all literatures. In our analysis of the prophetic writings we shall find many illustrations of tliis peculiarity of style. 5. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE CONFESSIONS (a) the COXFESSIOX. XV, 10, 15-21 AND ITS SEQUEL, XVI, I-9 XV, 15, according to all indications, originally formed the continuation of v. lo. Verse ii is too corrupt to admit of any positive conclusion; what is intelligible of it, however, seems to have no relation to this confession. In regard to v. 12 no definite decision is possible either, since its meaning dep)ends on V. II, but, it must be noted, the Aramaic yaro" is most surprising, and the reading of the verse in the LXX dififers widely from that of the Masoretic text. Verses 13-14 are clearly out of place here; they are absolutely unrelated to the confession. Unquestion- werden, unci der Gegensatz zwischen Friihling und Herbst schwcbt nur wie ein ungewisser Schein iibcr dcm Ganzcn. Die traurige Stim- mung aber, worin die Trostung nichts hilft und fremdes Gliick nur das Weh vergrossert, macht sich von vom herein entschieden fiihibar. " Das Errathenlassen ist iiberhaupt eines der wirksamsten Mittcl des Volksliedes. Sinnliches wird ausgesprochen, das Geistige muss man merken. Die Liebenden sprechen wenigcr von ihren Gcfiihlen, als von Kranz oder Ring. Es giebt auch Lieder, die ganz dramatisch nur in Gesprach verlaufcn und damit zugleich eine Reihe von Iland- lungen, ja ein ganzes Menschenschicksal enthiillen. Dor Zcilfort- schritt muss oft errathcn wcrden: 'Dort hoch auf jcnem Bcrge da geht ein Miihlenrad, das mahlet nichts dcnn Licbe die Nacht bis an den Tag' — und gleich darauf heisst es: 'Die Muhle ist zerbrochen, die Liebe hat ein End.' " 96 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL ably they got in here by mistake from XVII, 3-4, where they again occur, but where they form a logical sequence with the preceding vv. 1-2. Verse 15, however, as Giesebrecht points out,^ in its opening, "Thou, O Lord, knowest it," plainly refers back to V. 10, the contents of the latter being the object of jadata; in this way v. 15 makes the impression of being the immediate continuation of v. 10. Verse 10 " Woe unto me, my mother, that thou didst bear me, a man of strife and enmity for the whole land; I have not lent to them nor have they lent to me, yet everyone curseth me." "I have not lent to them nor have they lent to me" is Jeremiah's figurative way of declaring that there exist no personal grounds for the enmity of his fellow- men to himself. The effect of money relations upon friendship seems to be part of the worldly wisdom of all ages. No detailed description of the implacable hatred with which the people regarded Jeremiah after his Temple-sermon could be so effective as the trenchant words, " Everyone curseth me." In order to realize the full significance of these words, we must bear in mind the sinister power which in ancient times was believed to inhere in a curse. The belief so well expressed in Satapatha Brahmana, XV, 9, 4, 11, "Robbed of his power, robbed of the blessing of all his good deeds, he must depart from this world, who has been cursed by a Brahman," ^ belongs to the stock of religious notions, ^Op. cit., adloc. 2 Quoted by Oldenberg in "Die Religion des Veda," p. 519. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 97 common to all nations of antiquity. In ancient Hellas and Rome, no less than tliroughout the Orient, px^ople believed that a curse pronounced with proper rites, and by a duly quahfied person, i. c, by a. priest or diviner, was bound to bring earthly destruction on the person upon whom it was invoked, and to pursue him even beyond the grave. There is ample proof that this belief prevailed also in ancient Israel. It may suffice to refer to Num. XXII, 6, or to point out the noncommittal phrase, " May God so do unto me, and even more!" (II Sam. Ill, 35, XIX, 14, d alii.), used in place of the complete formula of an oath.^ The use of this phrase shows that it was common to refrain from uttering a curse even for literary purposes, so great was the fear that the curse might take effect even though pronounced without sinister design. The curse was resorted to particularly when the enemy was out of reach, as Jeremiah was during the time he was in hiding. Verse 15 "Thou, Lord, knowest it, remember me and pay heed unto me, procure vengeance for me on my persecutors not according to Thy long-suffering — take me away; know that I have borne shame for Thy sake." When properly construed, this verse is perfect and needs no emendation. Contrary to the accents and the * Formerly an oath was substantially an imprecation. He that swore invoked the vengeance of God or the gods, as the case might be, if he were not speaking the truth, or if he should ever violate his promise. The two e.xamples of this which we have in the Old Testa- ment are Job's asseveration of innocence, Job XXXI, and Ps. VII, 4-6. 98 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL customary translation, "not according to thy long- suffering" ('a/ l^'aeraekh 'app^kha) is not to be con- strued with the following "take me away" {tiqqaheni), but in accordance with the LXX and the Targ. with the preceding "procure vengeance for me on my persecutors" {hinnaqaem li merd(fphai); "procure vengeance for me not according to Thy long-suffering" means let the vengeance be speedy, tiqqaheni has here the same meaning as qah naphsi, "let me die," I Ki. XIX, 4. The customary translation, "take me not away in Thy long-suffering," has been generally felt to be unsatisfactory; but, when taken as sug- gested, not only does the sentence make excellent sense, but the pathos of the situation is enhanced beyond measure by Jeremiah's following up his plea for vengeance with the request that God may rather let him die. To emend this beautiful and characteris- tic verse, as modern exegetes have done, by striking out the most essential phrase and thus robbing it of its loftiest thought, savors almost of vandalism.^ The passage shows that, although driven into hiding by the people's fanaticism, although hated and cursed by the whole nation, Jeremiah did not become a prey to his resentment. He was saved from permanent bitterness by those springs of loyalty and tenderness 1 However widely Giesebrecht {op. cit.), Duhm {op. cit.), Cornill {op. cit.), Erbt {op. cit., p. 176), and Rothstein (in Kautzsch^, and in Kittel, "Biblia Hebraica") differ in their emendations of the verse in other respects, they are at one in omitting tiqqaheni. That the phrase is missing in the LXX seems to them to warrant their proce- dure. Evidently, however, the LXX had in this particular case a very defective text, for neither did they read 'attajada'ta with which the verse opens. Such a text can in no case have much, if any critical value, least of all, however, alongside of such an excellent text as is in the present case the Masoretic text. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 99 which lay at the root of liis nature, and which no amount of persecution could dry up. The temporary paralyzing effect which his con- demnation produced on him is described in w. 10-15. He was weary of hfe, and would fain lay down the burden. What had his eflforts availed, his zeal, his devotion to the service of God? — Only to bring shame upon him, and to make him an outlaw among men. Verses 16-21 picture the reaction from this state. We see how Jeremiah drew strength from his trials — how he became surer of his mission, surer of God's purpose. In his enforced solitude he came to realize that within himself he possessed a source of infinite happiness, in God's revelation to him. His soul swells with gladness at the knowledge that he is the chosen servant of God. Hence the apparently sudden outburst in v. 16, relieving the gloom of the preceding "When Thy words have offered themselves, I have [verily] devoured them, Thy words have been to me the joy and delight of my heart, For I am dedicated to Thee,^ Lord, God Sabaoth." But while his personal happiness is complete, for he knows that he has given himself up to God, and that God is working through him, there is, nevertheless, a terrible shadow hanging over his thoughts, a great ' nigra icm pHoni 'al means, as II Sam. XII, 28, Is. IV, i show, "belong to a person," "be a person's property," and, accordingly, said of God, the phrase means cither "belong to Him" {cf. Am. IX, 12) or, as here, "be dedicated to Him." loo THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL crushing weight from which he cannot escape, the foreknowledge of his people's doom. In vv. lyf, which mark this second seemingly abrupt transition, he cries : "I have not sat in the company of the joyful and rejoiced, I have sat lonely because of Thy overmastering force, ^ For Thou hast filled me with gloom.^ Why must my grief last forever? Why must my wound be incurable, ever refusing to heal? Thou hast been unto me as a deceptive brook,^ As water that cannot be relied upon." This pathetic outburst shows better than anything else how completely those exegetes have failed to penetrate into the spirit of the confession, who suppose that the craving for vengeance was uppermost in Jeremiah's mind. All that he has suffered on his own account, all the rebuffs, all the hatred and abuse are lost sight of in this larger sorrow he feels for his 1 By jadkha the overmastering force which God's revelation exer- cises over him is meant (c/. XX, 7fF.). jad is elliptical for haezqath jad which occurs Is. VIII, ii (c/. also Ezek. Ill, 14, w^jad jahwae 'alai hazaqd). The elliptical phrase occurs again, though with a different connotation, in Is. XXVIII, 2, hinnl'^h la'araes b^jad "who shall thrust [her] to the ground with violence." 2 Cf. to this meaning of zaam the phrase panim nizamlm, "sullen face," Prov. XXV, 23; with a somewhat similar meaning If math is used in Jer. VI, 11, "I am filled with the grim [pictures] of God's [revelation], so that I am unable to endure it." 3 'akhzabh is elliptical for nahal 'akhzabh; the explanation of this figure is to be found Job VI, 15-20. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH ici doomed people. It is reasonable to conclude that this sorrow weighed hca\ier on liim during the lonely years he was in liiding, and that his gloomy forebodings deepened until he felt liimself on the very verge of despair. But his reliance on God was too real, too deeply- rooted, and liis will-power too great for liim to become a prey to despair. He braces himself ^\^th the thought of his mission, and shakes off his weakness and depres- sion as apostasy: "Therefore, thus saith the Lord, if thou returnest [unto me], I shall let thee remain in my service, If thou producest noble things, not base ones, Thou shalt be my mouth-piece." What a wonderful piece of self-analysis we have here! Jeremiah confesses that in yielding to despair over the coming ruin of the nation he has shown him- self unworthy of his calling, has deserted the very post assigned to him by God, and acknowledges that he has to fortify himself if he means to remain in God's service. More than this, he concludes the verse : "Let them become converted to thee, sink not thou to their level," impljang by these words that if he were to give way to his despair, he could never succeed in carr>ing out his task; he would just sink to the level of the people, whereas, by remaining steadfast, he cannot fail to make converts in the end. IC2 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL In w. 20, 21 there is a note of triumph, of assurance after doubt, which lends to these verses the effect of a carefully worked- up climax: "And I will make thee as an inaccessible wall of brass against this people, so that they shall wage war against thee, but not conquer thee, for I am. with thee to shield and to dehver thee, saith the Lord. Even so will I deliver thee out of the hands of the wicked, and redeem thee out of the hands of the mighty." Verse 20 is practically identical with I, 18 of the consecration \ision. But nothing could be more significant than this repetition. After all the years of fruitless striving, God imparts to Jeremiah essentially the same assurance and encouragement that he had given him when sending him forth on his mission. It was from this unbounded trust, rooted, as it was, in his consciousness of constant union with God, that Jeremiah derived his conviction of victory, notwith- standing apparent failure, and drew the strength to fulfill his task in spite of the seemingly insurmountable difi&culties opposing him. In accordance -with this exultant trust he proceeds in XVI, 1-9, which may appropriately be called the sequel of the confession, to represent his lot of bitter isolation and renunciation as expressly ordained by God. Psychologically considered, the confession, XV, 10, 15-21, as a whole, must be accounted one of the most wonderful and most logical pieces of self-analysis that we have in any literature. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 103 (b) the confession. XVII. 5-10, 14-1S AND ITS ORIGINALLY COMPONENT PARTS, IX, 2 2, 23, X, 23, 24, XVI, 19. THEIR ORIGINAL ORDER It was Giesebrccht ^ who discerned that XVI, 19 must have belonged originally to the confession, XVII, 5-10, 14-18.^ It certainly does not belong in its present place, among the spurious verses XVI, 10-18, 21,^ where it serves but to break the sequence of thought; there is no doubt that v. 21 is the im- mediate continuation of v. 18.'' The genuineness of XVI, 19 is beyond question; the ardent expression of faith it contains is in keeping with the sublime trust revealed throughout Jeremiah's prophecies, and the hope for the conversion of mankind which it voices is ' See op. cil. on XVI, 19 and prefatory remarks to Chap. XVII, 1-18. 'The intervening vv., 11-13, the majority of modern exegetes agree, cannot have formed a part of this confession originally. Verse 1 1 has no bearing, as at first sight it might seem to have, on XVII, 5-8 or IX, 22, 23, which, as I shall show presently, originally preceded XVII, 5-8, the subject-matter of these verses being trust in God and not dishonest acquisition of wealth. Verse 1 2, on the face of it, cannot have been written by Jeremiah; it has for its basis the eschatological notions of later Judaism, and, moreover, claims absolute sanctity for the Temple, which belief, we know, Jeremiah uncompromisingly denounced. Verse 13 betrays itself by its quotations from other passages of Jeremiah as an interpolation; it also differs in diction from this confession, and, it must be granted, has no weight in its present connection. ' It is generally agreed that XVI, 10-18, 21 is a product of later times. * Verse 20 is a later, perhaps marginal comment on v, 19b, sug- gested, as Giesebrecht rightly points out, by II, 1 1. This is clear from a comparison of the two verses; in II, 11, "even though they are no gods," is a logical addition, but in XVI, 20 it has no point whatever, being added quite redundantly; it is really contained in the question, " Can a man manufacture his gods ? " I04 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL met with again in III, 17 and IV, 2.^ Giesebrecht, with fine acumen, places XVI, 19 after XVII, 10, remarking that v. 14 seems to have direct reference to such an utterance as XVI, 19. His reasoning in regard to this confession is most suggestive, and shows a clear insight into the workings of the prophet's mind. Giesebrecht also expresses the opinion that this confession was added by Jeremiah to the second collection of his prophecies, in order that, despite the persecution he was suffering, he might bear testimony to his innermost convictions (see supra " General Survey," pp. i5f. and i9f., also hifra, pp. ii4f.). I fully agree with Giesebrecht in Ms \iew regarding the circumstances that prompted the confession, and also in his view that XVII, 5-10, XVI, 19, XVII, 14-18 belong together. I am convinced, however, that these parts do not form the whole confession. It seems clear to me that IX, 22, 23, X, 23, 24 were also at one time a part of this confession. It is gen- erally agreed that these two passages have no logical connection in their present context, and they are clearly not in their proper place. Some have gone so far as to throw out one or both of these passages as spurious.^ To my mind, however, not only do IX, 22, 1 That Jeremiah's authorship of XVI, 19 cannot be questioned is aciinowledged also by Comill, who remarks on this point: "Die Worte, welche die bekehrten Heiden hier reden, sind durch und durch jere- mianisch, und die Erwartung, dass auch die Heiden sich zu Jahve bekehren werden, liegt in der Richtung der jeremianischen Theologie und ist eine einfache Consequenz seines Rehgionsbegriffes " (op. cit, ad loc). 2 Giesebrecht, op. cit.; Graetz, "Emendationes in Plerosque Veteris Testamenti Libros," I, p. 46, Stade, "Geschichte des Volkes Israel," I, 676, Anm. & Rothstein in Kautzsch ^ declare X, 22, 23 spurious, while Duhm, op. cit.., Kuenen, "Historisch-Kritische Einleitung i. d- CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 105 23, X, 23, 24 bear the unmistakable stamp of Jere- miah's individuality, but they show, moreover, a very close relationsliip both in language and thought to XVII, 5-20, XVI, 19, XVII, 14-18. I am convinced that these passages all formed part of one whole. Their original order was probably as follows: IX, 22-23, XVII, 5-8, X, 23, XVII, 9-10, XVI, 19, X, 24, XVII, 14-18. Read in this order, the various passages fit in with one another very well, and show a logical sequence of thought throughout. Unquestionably XVII, 5-10, XVI, 19, XVII, 14-18 are more rounded and complete when thus supplemented. A translation of the whole in the order suggested, followed by an interpretation of the same, will bear this out: IX, 22 "Thus saith the Lord, let not the wise man boast of his ^\^sdom, nor the mighty one of his strength, nor the rich man of his wealth; 23 but if one must boast, let him boast of this, that he understandeth and knoweth me — that he knoweth that I am the Lord, who doth work love, justice, and righteous- ness in the w^orld, that it is in these things that I take delight, saith the Lord. XVn, 5 Thus saith the Lord, cursed is the man who trusteth in man, and who maketh flesh his strength, and whose heart is turned away from God. Bucher dcs Alien Testaments," II, 173, 176, & Erbt, op. cil., jogfif. throw out both passages. io6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 6 He will be like the heath in the desert and will not see when good cometh; he Hvethin parched regions in the wilderness, in a barren, uninhabited land. 7 Blessed is the man who relieth on God, and whose trust is the Lord. 8 He will be Hke a tree planted beside the water, that spreadeth its roots by the stream; that feareth not when the heat cometh, whose foliage remaineth ever green; that taketh no care even in the year of drought, and never ceaseth from bearing fruit. X, 23 I know, O Lord, that man's way is not of his own making, that it is not in the power of mortal to choose and direct ^ his way. XVII, 9 Intricate ^ is the heart, more so than any- thing else, and frail it is — who can fathom it? 10 I, the Lord, search the heart and test the reins, and to every man is given ^ according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds. ^ Read, in accordance with the LXX, Symm., Vulg. halokh for hulekh and correspondingly, hckbcn for hakhln. ^ XVII, 9. The adjective, 'aqobh, seems to me to mean not "deceit- ful" or "arglistig," nor even "triigerisch," but rather "intricate." This meaning accords both with the following half-verse, "who can fathom it? " and with the meaning which the word has Is. XL, 4 and Sir. XX, 6, viz., "rugged mountain path" and "impassable" respec- tively. » In spite of the var. led., lalheth without w^, the w* is to be retamed, CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 107 XM^, 19 The Lord is my power and my strength, my refuge in the day of need! To Thee the nations shall come from the ends of the earth and confess: Verily our fathers inherited but falsehoods, empty beliefs which are of no avail. X, 24 Chastise me, O Lord, according to justice, but not in Thy [overwhelming] wrath, lest Thou reduce me to nothingness. XVn, 14 Heal me, O Lord, that I may be healed, save me that I may be saved, for Thou art my glory. 15 They, verily, speak unto me: Where is the word of God? Let it come to pass! 16 But I have not grown callous as shepherd in Thy service. Neither have I wished for the disastrous day ^ — Thou knowest it, the utterances of my Hps - are everpresent to Thee. latheth being a case of the emphatic infinitive (like ul'hhaqqei Ps. CIV, 21 and w^lasbilh, Am. VIII, 4); the infinitive of the active stem is used here in a passive sense, as it is in Exod. XXXII, 29, li'latlict ''^lekhacm hajjotn b<^raklid, "that blessing may be bestowed upon you this day;" in the present case k^ is the grammatical subject of latheth. The use of the infinitives of the active stems in a passive sense is quite as common in Hebrew as in the other Semitic languages, a point which the Hebrew grammars fail to make sufiiciently clear. — Emphatic infinitive seems to me an appropriate term for the Semitic infinitives, either construct or absolute, when used with the force of a finite verb for the purpose of emphasis. ' By jom 'aniii, as by jdm ra'a of vv. 17, 18, is meant the day of the downfall of the nation, both being cases of emphatic indctcrmination. 'By moid s'phathai, "the utterances of my lips," Jeremiah has reference to his prophetic utterances m general; for this connotation io8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 17 Prove not a terror unto me, [but] be my refuge ^ in the day of evil ! 18 Let my persecutors be dismayed, but let not me be dismayed, Let them be terror-stricken, but let not me be terror-stricken, When Thou dost bring upon them the day of evil, When Thou dost strike them with destruc- tion a second time." Before we can proceed to the interpretation of the confession as a whole, several detailed points must be discussed: hammithhallel, IX, 23 — The nice distinction, "If one must boast," or " If one cares to boast," is brought out by the participle, hammithhallel. One of the uses of the participle in Semitic languages in general is not to denote the occurrence of the action as such, but to express what may very properly be termed poten- tiality, i. e., the disposition or tendency, or predeter- mination of the subject to, or its qualification for the action.^ of the phrase, mosd phi jahwa of Deut. VIII, 3 may be referred to. In order to have the meaning, "my prayers" (in accordance with the connotation, "vow," which the phrase has in all other cases), mosd s^phaihai would have to be followed by an additional word, such as ba'''dam. ^ Verse 1 7a shows that by malf'sl 'attd a wish is expressed. Nominal sentences e.xpressing a wish or entreaty are quite frequent, though this use of them is often overlooked. 2 1 would suggest potential participle as an appropriate term for this use of the participle, several examples of which I have had occasion to point out before (f/. pp. 26, n. 5, 75, n. i, 77, n. 2); for additional examples see infra, pp. 182, n. 3, 184, n. i, 202, n. 2, and 283, n. 3. Though of extreme importance for Old CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 109 In the present case the participle, hammithhallcl, suggesting the transitoriness of all worldly glory, is what gives the verse its peculiar tinge of sadness. This note of sadness, from whatever mood it springs, runs tlirough Jeremiah's writings to such an extent that it may be considered as fairly characteristic of his style. "To every man is given according to his ways, according to the fruit of liis deeds," XVII, lob, is in perfect harmony with the first part of the verse (Duhm and Cornill to the contrary), as also with the confession as a whole. ^ Jeremiah has reference to retribution of a spiritual, not of a material nature. The verse is to be interpreted in the Hght of XII, i-3a, where the thought is develop)ed that not ma- terial prosperity constitutes man's happiness, but rather that spiritual strength and assurance which comes only to him who lives a life of righteousness and is at one with God. Verse lob is, therefore, a working out of the central thought of the con- fession, that man is absolutely dependent on God, and that his salvation lies in placing his trust in Him. "But I have not grown callous as shepherd in Thy service," XVII, 16: — It is the preposition min that gives 'w5 here a meaning practically opposite to that which it has with or without ¥ ret; similarly, c. g., Testament inteqDretation, this use of the participle seems to have escaped both the grammarians and exegctes almost en- tirely. As the full treatment of this point, however, would occupy too much space in the present work, it will be reserved for separate pubUcation. 'The reoccurrence of XVII, lob in XXXII, 19 is altogether irrelevant for our purpose, as XXXII, i6ff. is not a product of Jeremiah but of a later age. no THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Hth lebk 'del pHonl means " to mind " or " take notice of a person" {cf. Job VII, 17), but Uth min pHoni with ellipsis of lehh, "to leave a person alone" {ih., X, 20); or gara with min rei means "to diminish," but with f personae, "to procure" (ib., XV, 8).^ Other examples where 'alfre has the same grammatical force as here, and practically the same meaning, are: I Sam. XV, 31, wajjasobh fmu'el 'aJfre sa'ul, "then Samuel turn- ing back, followed Saul"; ib., XXV, 13, wajja^lu 'aJfre david k"'arba me'dth ^is, "and about four hundred men went forward under Da\'id's leader- ship." 2 Jeremiah's declaration in this half-verse, that he has not become indifferent to his calling, notwithstand- ing the taunts spoken of in the preceding verse, is in accordance with such utterances as XX, yff., XV, 10, "When Thou dost bring upon them the day of evil, when Thou dost strike them with destruction a second time," XVII, i8b: — Misnce is usually ex- plained as an accusative of specification, and misncE Hbbaron sobhretn accordingly translated, "and crush them with double destruction," In view of the cognate accusative, sibbaron, however, misncB cannot possibly have this force; the modification would have to be expressed in this case by an adjective attribute, or by the status constructus, misne — an emendation ^ Detailed proof that 'iis min has the meaning here stated must be reserved for a separate article. 2 The scholars who emend meroa to meraa in accordance with Aqu. and Symm., overlook the fact that though min may mean "wegen" denoting cause and reason, it cannot mean "wegen" mean- ing "concerning" or "about"; in the only seeming exception, s'mah m^'eiaetk n^'uraekka, Prov. V, 18, the correct and well attested varia lectio is b^'e^aeth. CON FESSIONS O F J K R K M L\H 1 1 r which in fact has been made by some scholars.' though quite unnecessarily. MiSiuc cannot possibly be any- thing else than an accusative of time, "a second time." The explanation of the phrase, "a second time," is that the prophet e\idently had in mind the i)re\ious destruction of the Northern Kingdom. Tliis meaning of mi^ncc does away also with the vindictive tone carried into the verse by the customary translation, " crush them %vith a double destruction." Such a feel- ing of vengeance on the part of the prophet would be in jarring contrast to the lofty spirit pervading the rest of the confession. This leads us to the further explanation due this verse. Verse i8b is not a coordinate clause, as it is gen- erally supposed to be, but the protasis of i8a. After he has just asserted in v. i6 that he has never ^vished for that disastrous day to come, and has called on God to witness that he is speaking the truth, it would be a rank contradiction for him to beseech God, practically in the same breath, to bring about the downfall of the nation.- Besides, v. 17 shows clearly, as do in fact Jeremiah's prophecies throughout, that he dreads that day more than anything else — he even prays to God not to fail him on that day of evil. It is psycho- logically impossible that Jeremiah at any time wished for the downfall of the nation. He believed the downfall inevitable, but, as we see from his ser- * By Kittel, "Biblia Hebraica," ad he, Giesebrecht, op. cil., ad loc, and the Lexica of Gesenius-Buhl and of Brown, Driver, Briggs, s. V. ^Duhm, op. cit., ad loc. and Comill, op. cil., ad loc, noticed the contradiction in v. 18, as customarily interpreted, to v. 16, but sought to solve the diiUculty by throwing out v. 18 as an interpola- tion. 112 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL mons no less than from his confessions, this was a tragic realization for him, wliich constantly weighed on his mind and colored all his thought and feeHng. It would be consistent with this frame of mind to curse the hour of his birth, as he does XX, 14-18, to wish that he had never been born to such misery and de- spair, but it would not be compatible with such a state of mind to ask for the destruction of the nation. As a matter of fact he nowhere expresses such a wish. In XV, 15, as we have seen, the utmost that he asks of God is to avenge him on his persecutors, and even this plea he follows up with the request that God may rather let him die himself. And in XI, 2off. he does not ask for personal vengeance, but declares that God's vengeance is bound to come, because the people have rejected him. — XII, 3b is misplaced from Chap. XIV; see infra, pp. ii6f. and iSgf. XVIII, 21-23, as Duhm rightly points out, cannot be the work of Jeremiah, inasmuch as they stand in flat contradiction to the preceding V. 20.^ In the same breath that he reminds God that he has interceded for the people and sought to turn away His wrath from them, he certainly could not give vent to such implacable and fanatic hatred toward them, as is expressed in w. 21-23. His reference to having prayed for the averting of their doom shows, in fact, how fer\idly he loved them. He knew their destruction was inevitable, yet in his at times almost frenzied grief at this knowledge, in his recoil from the terrible prospect, he prayed for the impossible, for the suspension of God's judg- ment. It is clear therefore that XVII, i8b cannot be co- ^ See op. cit., ad loc. Duhm's view is shared also by Comill, op. ciL, adloc. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 113 ordinate v^-ith i8a; when it is taken, however, as the protasis of iSa, the whole verse becomes an integral part of the prayer, X, 24, XVII, 14(1., and shows any- thing but a revengeful spirit. The verse is to be explained in the light of such passages as Jer. XIV, 18, "Yea, even prophet and priest are bowed in mourning ^ to the ground, void of knowledge," Is. XXVIII, 19, "Then it will be sheer terror to interpret the oracle," and the more explicit ones, Am. VIII, iif. and Mic. Ill, 6f. " Days shall come, saith the Lord, when I shall send famine in the land, not famine of bread, nor drouth of water, but of hearing the word of God. They shall wander from sea to sea, from the north even to the sunrise they shall roam to find the word of God, but shall not find it." (Am. VIII, iif.) "Therefore it shall become night unto you, that ye shall not have a vision, it shall become dark unto you, that ye shall no longer dixine; the sun shall go down on the prophets, and the day shall grow dark about them. The seers shall be put to shame, and the diviners confounded, they shall all cover the beard, because there is no answer from God." (Mic. Ill, 61.)— Cf. also Ezek. VII, 26f. All these passages refer to the same fact, viz., that the people, because of the nature of their religious belief, because of their conception of YmvH as their national God, are bound to be be\vildered and con- founded when overtaken by their downfall, since this will be to them a demonstration of the impotency of their God; that they will, necessarily, be left without 1 Read, as Giesebrecht correctly emended, op. cit., ad loc, iah'ra for iah'ni and omit, in accordance with var. lect. and LXX, vf of vflo; cj. infra, Part III, Chap. Ill, § 2, p. 191, n. i. 114 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL anchorage, and without any light to guide them through the darkness which will envelop them.^ Jeremiah's prayer for spiritual strength is in no wise contradictory to the firm faith revealed in the first part of the confession. The prophet realizes that there is an essential difference between simply knowing that a catastrophe is inevitable and being actually brought face to face with it. This prayer is also perfectly consistent with the thought expressed X, 23, XVII, gi., that, owing to man's imperfection and his inabiHty to fathom the depths of his own being, he is in constant need of God's guidance. It is but natural that a man thus humbly conscious of his own human frailty should pray that his faith might not falter when the dreaded crisis came. This confession is invaluable to us in that, like XV, 10, 15-21, it is markedly introspective; indeed it lays bare the prophet's inmost soul. Jeremiah opens the confession by declaring that neither material nor intellectual things are of avail — ■ only spiritual things. He continues that man is cursed if he rehes on material power and human strength — he will be unable to weather the storms and perils of Hfe; but that he is blessed if he trusts in God — being firmly enrooted, he will defy and endure every evil crisis. There is all the more need for man to have trust in God, since he is absolutely dependent on Him. Both his character and his path are pre- destined — he " can neither choose nor direct his way." 1 Ezek. XXXVII, 11 shows that this was in fact the effect which the final catastrophe produced on the masses when it actually oc- curred: "Son of man, like these bones is the whole house of Israel; they speak, our bones are dry, and our hope hath vanished, we are ruined." CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 1 1 5 The m\-stery of his being he cannot understand, only the Lord penetrates and knows his inmost heart, and deals with liim accordingly. Then the prophet afhrms his own reliance on God, his firm hope of the universal conversion of mankind. In giving expression to this hope, his mind reverts to the trials that must precede its realization. Hence the abrupt continuation in X, 24, X\TII, 14-18, in which he prays that God, who is the sole source of his strength, may uphold him in the hour of need, even on the day of the downfall of his nation. X, 23 recalls the consecration vision, where Jere- miah declares that he was prenatally chosen for his mission, that even before his birth he w^as ordained by God as His prophet (1,5). The two verses, X, 23, 24. must be ranked among the deepest utterances of Jeremiah. They not only reveal the spiritual depth of the man; they show his remarkable intellectual acumen, and prove to us, as do also XII, i-3a of the follovving confession, that Jeremiah had already pon- dered over those problems which, over a century later, we find occup}ing the author of the Book of Job. (c) THE CONFESSION, XI, l8-Xn, 3a, 5-6 XII, 3b, 4 do not belong to this confession. Verse 4a, which speaks of the misery prevailing in the coun- try in consequence of a drought, although it states that this calamity has been brought on by the wicked- ness of the people, has no thought-relation either to XI, 18-23 or to XII. i-3a, 5-6; for the subject- matter of the former is the persecution Jeremiah has to endure in his prophetic career, in particular what he has to endure from his own priestly clan, the people ii6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of Anathoth, and the theme of the latter is the problem of suffering. It cannot be argued with Duhm (who would show a thought-connection between v. 4 and XII, 1-3) that the wicked, who are principally to be found among the upper classes, suffered but little from the drought,^ for this is far from true. In ancient times rich and poor aHke were affected by such a visitation, a fact, which, as far as Jeremiah's age is concerned, is proved by XIV, 1-9, where Jeremiah, describing the great suffering that has been caused by a drought, points out particularly that the rich are not exempt from the general privation. The original place of 4a was with this passus, XIV, 1-9, a fact, which has been repeatedly surmised, but not sub- stantiated. The proof that the whole verse belongs to XIV, 1-9 will be given in the discussion of the latter chapter, our only concern here being to show that it should not be included in the present con- fession. It will also be shown that the preceding half-verse, 3b, as far as it is genuine, belonged Hkewise to Chap. XIV.^ This half-verse consisted originally only of ' See op. ctt., ad he. 2 See infra, Part III, Chap. Ill, § 2, pp. 187!., iSgf. We have had many cases of text-disorder such as this; they are easily explained. They occur throughout ancient literature, in Greek and Latin as well as in Biblical and other Oriental literatures. In the case of a lengthy omission, the copyist would add the omitted passage not in the narrow lateral margin, but in any available blank space, preferably in the available space at the top or bottom of the page. There were various methods of indicating the place where the omitted passage belonged, a very common one being the repetition of the words immediately preceding or following it. This, like the other methods adopted, was not understood by the copyists of later times, who mechanically inserted such passages in the body of the manu- script at the point where they were found. Cf. A. Brinkmann, CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 117 haqdi^em I'Jdm h^rcgd, "Consecrate them for the day of shuighter," as is proved by the fact that hattiqcm k'son rtibhhd was not read by the LXX. Yet even in this reduced form it clearly breaks the sequence of thought, for in XII, i-3a, 5-6, the prophet is no longer concerned with the fate awaiting liis persecutors for rejecting him, but \\ath the problem of sufTering in general, as he has learned to view it through his own particular case. XII, i-3a form, so to speak, the centre and kernel of this confession. But even apart from this, these verses are of the utmost importance, because of the evolution of religious thought in general wliich they show, and because of the insight they afford into the prophet's mind and soul. It is hardly credible that anyone should question their authenticity, for as Cornill rightly remarks, in refuting Duhm's idea that the whole passus, XII, 1-6, is a younger, postexilic product, "if anything in the Book of Jeremiah bears all the internal criteria of genuineness, it is XII, 1-2." ^ Cor- nill, however, should not have limited his remarks to w. 1-2, for V. 3a is a vital part of the thought. Jeremiah opens the confession by declaring that God's revelation has given him spiritual insight; then he abruptly proceeds to speak of what he has had to endure in the pursuance of his prophetic task, what has been the immediate result of his devotion to God's "Ein Schreibgebrauch und seine Bedeutung fur die Textkritik," in "Rheinisches Museum" (Neue FolRe), LVII, pp. 481-497; and Paul Rost, "Miscellen — Ein Schreibgebrauch bei den Sophrim und seine Bedeutung fiir die alttestamentliche Textkritik," in "Oricnlaliscbe Litteraturzeitung," VI, pp. 403(1., 443(1., VII, pp. 39ofif., 479^- ^ See op. cil., prefatory remarks to XII, 1-6, pp. 1541. ii8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL "Since God has imparted knowledge unto me, I have attained understanding — Wherefore Thou hast caused me to suffer their evil doings"! (XI, i8). The meaning of i8b follows clearly from the con- tinuation. The fact that v. 19a forms a circumstantial clause, depending on v. i8b, admits of no other inter- pretation than that by the latter Jeremiah has refer- ence to his persecution. Only so do we get a logical sequence of thought: " But I have been like a docile lamb led to the slaugh- ter, not suspecting that they plotted against me : Let us destroy the tree in its sap,^ and let us cut him off from the land of the living, so that his name will no longer be remembered " (v. 19). In spite of their persistent hatred of him, Jeremiah has never been swayed by feeHngs of vengeance to- wards the people, but on the contrary, as we have seen, has wished that it might be in his power to save them. Even now, though cast into the dungeon,^ he does not ask for personal vengeance, but simply states that God's vengeance is bound to come: ^ hodi''^ occurs with this meaning again, Is. XL, 13, "and (who) as His counsellor could impart knowledge unto Him?" {jodl'acnnu), ei alit.; 'az expresses consequence here just as in Josh. XXII, 31; to the meaning of hir'tthanl, "Thou hast caused me to suffer," cf. Ps. LXXI, 20. "Thou hast caused us to suffer {hir'Ukanu) many sore troubles." 2 Read b^leho instead of hHahmo, an emendation by Hitzig which has been generally accepted. * See supra, p. 90. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 1 19 "But Thou, O Lord Sabaoth. art the righteous judge, who testest the reins and the heart; I shall see Thy vengeance on them, for unto Thee do I reveal my cause" (v. 20). The people of Anathoth, he continues, shall perish on the day of doom for rejecting him, and for threaten- ing to kill him if he would not cease prophesying (vv. 21-23). In XII, I there is another abrupt transition. From brooding over his own persecution, Jeremiah is led to consider the problem of suffering in general: " Absolutely righteous art Thou, O God, even though I venture to dispute with Thee — yet of a question of justice I desire to speak unto Thee: Why is the way of the wicked prosperous? Why are all faithless people at ease? Thou hast planted them, hence they take root, thrive, even }'ield fruit. Near art Thou to their mouth, but far from their heart — but Thou, O God, Thou knowest me. Thou seest me ever, Thou hast tried my heart which is at one with Thee" (XII, i-3a). God's ways, he says by way of preface, are beyond human comprehension — the divine world-economy must forever be a mystery to man. Then he proceeds to give the solution of the problem in the Hght of his own religious experience: — Man being centered in God, finds true happiness only by living in harmony with the Divine. This at-oneness with God is for Jeremiah the real 1 20 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL prosperity, the only thing that counts, and the con- sciousness that he possesses this supreme good has been his solace in suffering, his strength amidst all opposition. His assurance might be expressed in the words of the psalmist later: *'If I have but Thee (God), I care not about heaven or earth." 1 (Ps. LXXIII, 23.) Verses 5 and 6 give a new train of thought, the words of God in answer to Jeremiah's communings: "If thou racest with foot-runners, and they exhaust thee, how wilt thou compete with horses? And if only in the land of peace thou feelest secure, what wilt thou do in the majestic jungle of the Jor- dan? ^ Yea, even thy brothers, and the house of thy father, even they have become treacherous against thee, ^ The real meaning of this verse is obscured in most of the transla- tions. Luther alone renders it adequately: "Wenn ich nur dich habe, so frage ich nichts nach Himmel und Erde." 2 By f'on hajjarden the forest region extending along the Jordan is meant, as is shown by "As the lion cometh forth from the majestic jungle of the Jordan to the banks of the flowing river" {'ael ti^we 'ethan), XLIX, 19, L, 44; g^'on is elliptical for g^'onjaar; the proof of this I find in the k^bhod ja'ar, Is. X, 18. Similarly n^we 'ethan, which is commonly misunderstood, and which has even been emended, is ellipsis for n^we ifhar ^ ethan, and ja^Ha is not to be translated "ascendeth," but "cometh forth," cj. 'ala 'arje misstibkhd, Jer. IV, 7. The animals of the jungle go to the river-banks not so much to drink as to seek prey. There are not a few cases where elliptical phrases have not been recognized as such, and where consequently the passages have been misinterpreted or unnecessary text-emendations resorted to, as here. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 121 even they talk without reserve behind thy back; do not trust them if they speak kindly to thee." The relevancy of tliis answer is not immediately apparent, but there is no doubt that these verses are supplementary to 3a: **Thou hast tried my heart, which is at one with Thee" (''tried my heart," /. e., by suffering), and that they are consequently part of the prophet's general explanation of sutTering. Jere- miah feels the hostility to himself growing more bitter — even his immediate relatives are plotting against him; he foresees still greater trials ahead of him, and he girds his soul for the combat. The prophet of God, he tells himself, must mind no hardships, must shrink from no trial. Only thus can he hope to fulfil his mission. He is conscious withal that his suffering has brought its own compensation, that it has given him the spiritual understanding wliich makes liis heart at one with God, and in the blending of these two Hnes of thought this confession offers a lofty solution of the problem of suffering. The metaphysical aspect of the question does not interest Jeremiah further; it is the effect of suffering on man's spiritual development that is to him the all-important consideration. In the light of its actual fruitage, the Why of human suffering is of Kttle moment. (d) the coxfession, XX, 7-1 1, 13 Vv. 7-10 "Thou, O God, hast enthralled me. and I am enthralled; ^ Thou hast seized and overpowered me. ^The usual translations of phlithanl 'd'oacppalli, "Thou hast deceived me, and I am deceived"; "du hast mich betiirt, und ich liess mich betoren"; "... vcrlockt . . ."; "... ubcrrcdct . . .," 122 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL I have become a constant target for laugh- ter; everyone mocketh me. For as often as I speak I have to cry out, have to complain of violence and abuse, ^ for the word of God but serveth to bring upon me insult and derision without end — And I thought I will not heed Him, I will not speak any more in His name; but it was within me as a raging fire, shut up in my bosom; I strove to withstand it, but I could not. Yea,2 1 hear the whispering of many, attack on all sides: inform on him, or let us play the informer; everyone of my bosom friends is watching to contrive my downfall: perhaps he will let himself be entrapped, so that we may get him into our power and take revenge on him." The singular significance of w. 7-9 has been pointed out before.^ In declaring that the voice of God within him has proved itself the all-controlling force of his life, so that he must obey its bidding with- out regard for the consequences, Jeremiah is speaking not only from the force of conviction, but from the are inadequate, to some extent even misleading. In my above render- ing of the words, I have sought to express more closely the connota- tion which they are acknowledged to have here, viz., the overmaster- ing, impelling force of God's revelation from which there is no escape. ^ hama's wasod are accusatives of specification. * ki, opening the verse, is emphatic kl. * See supra, pp. 9 and 2>2,i- CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 123 fullness of his long experience, for tliis confession dates from the last year of liis actixity. That verses of such beauty and cumulative force, as 7-9, should be the target for text-emendation, as these verses have been to all later exegetes/ is diflicult to understand; particularly, that they should be sub- jected to emendations for metrical and stropliic rea- sons is well-nigh inexcusable, in \iew of the uncer- tainty that still prevails in regard to the Hebrew meter and strophic structure. Whether considered from the point of view of grammar, sense, or poetic force, verses 7-9 are unimpeachable. - Among the changes made by Duhm and Cornill is the combining for strophic and other reasons of lifniVethi kalkhcl uflo ^iikhal with the following verse ID and the insertion at the same time of "^nl after -uf. The whole is then taken to refer to Jeremiah's perse- cution. But Jeremiah's renewed outcry in v. 10 be- cause of his persecution, is followed up in verse iia b.v the emphatic declaration, wajjaJrivae 'othi k'gibbor ''^ris, "But since God is with me, I triumph like a xiero." It is highly improbable that two such con- tradictory statements should follow each other so ' For the various emendations that have been made see Duhm, op. cit., ad loc; Cornill, op. cit., ad loc, and "Die metrischen StiiciiC des Buches Jeremia untersucht," p. 27; Giesebrecht, op. cit., ad loc, and " Jeremias Metrik," pp. 35f.; Erbt, op. cit., p. 184; and Rothstcin in Kautzsch ^ and in Kittel, "Biblia Hebraica," oJ /oc. 2 In V. 9 the masculine form of the second adjective phrase, 'ajJir, modifying 'el is grammatically unobjectionable (cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, "Hebr. Grammatik," ^^ § 132, d). '"{amolh is used synonymously with lebh to connote emotions Q'ust as in Ps. VI, 3f., XXXV, gf. it is synonymous with tiacphaes), possibly the best English word with which to render it is "bosom"; 't'J boaeraeth, it hardly needs to be re- marked, is an equivalent expression to 'ti lohcl or 'ci laehabha. 124 THE PROPHETS OF ISR.\EL closely, unless there were something in the text which would show the discrepancy to be but a seeming one. This is not the case however. Verse 9b combined with V. 10 makes a bald contradiction to the following v. 11, but construed in the traditional way with v. 9a, it gives an unassailable text. K^gihhor 'arts of v. 11 is appositive to ^othi, and not, as has been generally thought, to jahwae, or more exactly 'othl is both predicate of jahwae and virtual subject of k^ of ¥gihhor 'arts. Kimchi, in the thir- teenth century, pointed out the possibility of this construction. It is, however, not merely a possible construction, it is the only possible construction. Not only would the comparison here of Yhwh with a *' valiant hero," or " a terrible hero," as some translate, have no point, but inasmuch as it would arrest the attention, it would take all the force out of the asser- tion, '' but God is with me." On the other hand, when we translate, " Since God is with me, I triumph like a hero," the thought is excellent, and forms an appro- priate finish to the reflections of w. 7-10. More than this, the utterance is pecuHarly characteristic of Jeremiah, revealing, as it does, the spirit which ani- mates all his prophecies. It might, indeed, be taken as the keynote of his preaching, and for that matter, as the keynote of prophecy in general; for, as cannot be too strongly emphasized, it was the belief that God was with them that moved the prophets to take up their mission, and that sustained them through all the hardships which the pursuance of their mission en- tailed. ^ * It seems to have been generally felt by modem exegetes that the traditional translation of v. 11 was unsatisfactory, and this was, no doubt, an additional reason with Duhm (in "Das Buch Jeremia CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 125 The rest of v. 11 accords in tenor and spirit with the first part. Jereniiah does not give expression here to any feelings of revenge, but, ha\ing just declared that the Lord being with liini he triumphs like a hero, he continues: "Hence my persecutors must exhaust themselves and accomplish notliing, They suffer great shame, because they succeed not; their shame will never be forgotten." ^ In proof of the fact that jikka^'lil has here the meaning "must exhaust themselves/'- and not, as usually translated, "must stumble" or "fall," the corresponding passage in the LXX may be referred to: ^iCL TOVTO ehCoj^av kol voi}aai ovk -qhvvavTO. It will be seen that, though varying in expression, the Greek is practically identical in meaning with the Hebrew of v. iia: ^ "Hence they persecute me,^ but accom- plish nothing." The confession closes in v. 13 with a song of thanks- gi\ing to God for delivery "from the hand of the evil- doers," which is clearly a reference to Jeremiah's iibersetzt," ad he), and Cornill (op. cit., ad loc.) for cutting the verse out altogether as an interpolation. 1 Read in accordance with the LXX, k'limmdiham l^oldm instead of k^limmath ' oldm. Tor other examples of kasal meaning "to exhaust oneself" or "to be exhausted," cf. Ps. XXXI, 11, Neh. IV, 4, II Chron. XXVIII, is,elalit. ' Rothstein in Kittel, "Biblia Hebraica," correctly retranslated the Greek text 'al ken rad^phU u^haskcl lojakholii. * 'olhi, the nominal predicate of the preceding sentence, is to be construed as object with rad'phil, a by no means infrequent construc- tion. 126 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL rescue from the cistern. The fact that the confession originated shortly after this occurrence disproves the objections raised by the exegetes against the authen- ticity of the verse {cf. supra, p. 84) . Verse 12 cannot have formed a part of the confes- sion originally. It is a repetition of XI, 20, and, while in the latter place the verse has a raison d'etre, here, after iib, it has no force. In all probability it was added from XI, 20 by some later reader, as a marginal comment. Like the preceding confession, XI, 18-XII, 3a, 5-6, the confession, XX, 7-1 1, 13 is of extreme value in fixing Jeremiah's importance as a prophet, and in showing the evolution of religious thought in general. The realization of the power of the di\dne \\dthin the human heart, and the consciousness of constant com- munion with God, met with in Jeremiah, mark a spiritualization of rehgion in a degree which was not reached before, and which has not been surpassed since. The fact that it dates from the last year of Jeremiah's activity, and that it is probably the last thing he produced, attaches a special significance to this confession. It is as if the summing up of his experience in the opening verses 7-9, " Thou, O God, hast enthralled me, and I am enthralled; Thou hast seized and overpowered me . . . ," and the exultant declaration in the concluding part, "Since God is with me, I triumph like a hero," were meant to serve, at the same time, as a specification of the spiritual legacy he was leaving to mankind. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH 127 (e) the confession, XX, 14-18 " Cursed be the day that I was born! Let not the day that my mother bore me be blessed. Cursed be the man who brought the glad tidings to my father: ' A male cliild is born unto thee ' — [and] filled him with joy.^ May that man be like the cities wliich God overthrew mercilessly, May he hear screams of anguish in the morning, cries of alarm at noon-tide. Would that they had killed - me at birth, or that my mother had been my grave, and her womb carried me for all time. Wherefore came I forth from the womb to see misery and woe, that my days should vanish in despair?" Though there is no clue to the particular occasion that called forth this piece, it may be assumed that it was in an hour when the prophet felt completely crushed by his grief, when his cup of bitterness seemed full, and his burden greater than he could bear. In striking contrast to the other confessions, these verses contain no ray of hope or assurance to relieve the gloom, no comforting reflection, no transition of thought whatever. In fact, we have not a train of thought at all, but one single all-engrossing thought, and the whole is just the passionate expression of one * Verse 15b is a circumstantial clause. 'Read N7 instead of i^^; "^laer may be taken as '"lacr rccitativum, introducing' a new thought; the 3rd singular of mot/t^thani is used impersonally. 128 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL mood. That the customary transition followed, that a line of thought got started which changed the prophet's mood and led to his usual positive assurance, is most probable; that a passage containing such a sequel became lost in the course of transmission is possible ; but it is far from my present purpose to put forth such a theory. It may well have been so, but the point is hardly material here. As it stands the passage is the expression of a passing mood, and, as such, cannot invalidate any conclusions that have been reached regarding the other confessions. In particular, it offers no warrant for the inference frequently drawn from it, that Jeremiah's faith wavered in the end, that his erstwhile indomitable fortitude and serene harmony broke down under se- vere trials and gave way to despair and discord.^ One might just as well argue that Jesus in the end gave way to despair, because in his death-agony he cried: "EH, Eli, lama sabachthani? — My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? " In regard to its date only the negative conclusion is possible, that it did not immediately follow vv. 7-13. It would be psychologically impossible, as in fact the exegetes grant, for such faith, such surrender, such spiritual exultation, as expressed in vv. 7-13, to be followed immediately by such utter dejection and bitterness of spirit, as we find in vv. 14-18. Since these latter verses have no internal connection with the preceding confession, and since, as we have seen, the external connection or order of any confession has no chronological significance, the present position ^ Such an inference is drawn by Giesebrecht, "Das Buch Jeremia, " pp. 113-115; Duhm, "Das Buch Jeremia," p. 138; and Cornill, "Das Buch Jeremia," pp. 235f., 238f. CONFESSIONS OF JEREMIAH i 29 of v\'. 14-18, it must be granted, is entirely fortuitous. The passage is the expression of a mood into which the prophet might have fallen at almost any period of his life when the torturings of his own soul and the slings and arrows of his fellow-men combined to op- press him. We have reason to beheve that through some line of spiritual reasoning, born of his per- sonality and experience, the prophet always emerged from such moods to confidence and buoyancy, but in this case, from whatever cause, the line of reasoning does not follow. We have simply an isolated expres- sion of despondency, which has no further importance for us than as showng how keenly at times the prophet felt the bitterness of his lot.^ ' Cornill's remark, in disposing of the question of the connection between w. 7-1 1, 13 and vv. 14-18, may be taken as a tacit ac- knowledgment that the methodical interpretation of 7-1 1, 13 permits no other conclusion than the one here expressed. He writes: "Sind alle drei Verse 11-13 nicht ursprunglich, so ist damit auch die grosse Schwierigkeit des Anschlusses an v. 14-18 behoben. Hatte der Prophet sich zu der festen Zuversicht der Verse 11-13 durchgerungen, so ware ein Riickfall in die iiusserste Verzweiflung, wie cr 14-18 erfolgt, psychologisch unerkliirlich und Ewald belhiitigte scin fcines Gefiihl, wenn er desshalb v. 14-18 vor 7-13 stcUte. Dagegen als Fortsetzung und Steigerung von 7-10 sind 14-18 durchaus begrciflich und wohl an ihrem Platze, einerlei ob dieser Zusammenhang ur- spriinglich, oder lediglich Redactionsarbeit ist." PART II CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY Jeremlah's record in the confessions of the divine power which controlled his inner life leads naturally to the question of prophetic inspiration, a question which is obviously of central importance in any ex- position of the faith of the prophets. For reasons, however, which will become presently apparent we shall preface our discussion of this question with the proof of the statement made in the General Survey that Jeremiah did not know how to write. JEREMIAH COULD NOT WRITE The question, how and why Jeremiah dictated his prophecies to Baruch, has caused a good deal of specu- lation among bibhcal scholars. The only adequate explanation is a very simple one, so simple in fact, that one must wonder that it did not suggest itself to modern scholars. It is clear to my mind that Jeremiah dictated his prophecies to Baruch because he himself was unable to put them down in writing. Conclusive proof of this must be seen in the fact that, when Jeremiah arranged for the second collection of his prophecies, he again dictated them to Baruch, as XXXVI, 32 expressly states. If only the first collection came in question, one might argue that the fact that Baruch ^33 134 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL had to read the prophecies made it seem expedient that he write them down in his own hand, but no such reason — nor for that matter any other plausible reason — can be advanced to explain why Jeremiah dictated his prophecies to Baruch the second time, if he himself knew how to write. The luxury of a private secretary for a man in Jeremiah's walk of hfe was unknown in those days; moreover, in his enforced confinement, lasting over ten years, Jeremiah had all the leisure necessary to attend to the writing down of his prophecies himself, even granted that this would have been a most laborious under- taking for him. waaekhtohh hassepJiaer of XXXII, lo cannot be taken as a proof to the contrary, any more than W- khathabhtd and ukhthohh 'alcshd (LXX) 'aeth kol hadd"- hharim in vv. 2 and 28 respectively of Chap. XXXVI. As in the latter case, where the account that follows of the carrying out of God's behest leaves no doubt that vtfkhathahhta and k'tJwhh are to be understood in the sense, "have all the words written in it," so must waaekhtohh hassepJiaer correspondingly mean, "I had it recorded," for the reason that in Jeremiah's time, precisely as to-day, the transference of real property, in order to be valid, had to be duly recorded by a qualified ofhcial. So in XXXVI, 29, maddu'" k athab hta mesins "Why didst thou have . . . written down?" Usage evidently sanctioned the inexactness of all these expressions, even as it does in similar ex- pressions to-day. We are accustomed to say, "we filed suit," or "we deeded our property," or "the firm replied," although in each case the action is accom- plished through an intermediary. The scholars who assume that, in dictating his INTRODUCTORY 135 prophecies to Baruch, Jcrcmiali must have made use of more or less copious memoranda, which he had made at some previous time/ overlook the fact that there would be nothing surprising, nor in any way excep- tional for those times, about Jeremiah's retaining his prophecies in his memory, and being able to reproduce them accurately at any time he chose. Both in ancient and mediaeval times, it was not uncommon for poets to produce and to recite works of great length without resort to writing. It is well known that Wolfram von Eschenbach, the great German poet of the Middle Ages, could neither read nor wTite, yet he produced works of great length, and, in accord- ance with the practice of the time, he, no doubt, recited them on different occasions. How common illiteracy was among the poets of that age may be gleaned from Hartman von Aue's boast that he could "read in books." In ancient India the production and preser- vation of all literature continued for upwards of two thousand years independent of writing and manu- scripts. - The theory advanced by Stade in explanation of * See Cornill, op. cit., ad he. and Einleitung, p. XXXIX; Duhm, op. cit., ad lac. and on Cha^). XVII, 9, 10; Giesebrccht, op. cit, ad loc; Erbt, op. cit., p. 7, n. i. 2 An interesting case of a highly developed memory in modem times, though under somewhat primitive conditions, came to my notice about twelve years ago. Happening to be in Samia, Ontario, I drove with a friend to the near-by Indian Reserve, Moretown, to attend the Sunday-morning service. The service was conducted in the Indian tongue, with the exception of the sermon, which was delivered by a visiting Methodist minister (a white man). After speaking for about fifteen minutes, the minister gave i)lace to an Indian interpreter, who repeated what he had said in Indian. Then the minister continued for another fifteen minutes and was followed again by the interpreter. I noticed that the Indian spoke for about 136 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL J the question, " Why Jeremiah dictates his prophecies to Baruch," proceeds from a wrong premise. Stade remarks: "£r tut es, well es der Wiederholung der Ekstase bedurfte, um die friiher gehaltenen Reden zu reproduciren, und well man im Zustande der Inspiration redet abcr nicht schreibt."^ ("He did so because the repetition of the ecstasy was necessary for the repro- duction of the sermons delivered on former occasions, and because one can speak but not write in the state of inspiration.") The error involved in this reasoning is one very commonly met with in books on prophecy. It consists in the failure to differentiate between inspiration and ecstasy or mantic possession, that is between the revelation of spiritual prophecy and the divination peculiar to both the older and the contemporary official prophecy. This failure, together with the other serious mistake, referred to above,^ of believing the literary prophets to have been "the leaders and the same length of time as the minister, but that his delivery was marked by much greater fervor. Being greatly interested in the case, I made careful enquiry regarding the Indian and his rendering of the sermon. I learned, (i) that he was a man with an easy command of English, but with only the most elementary schooling; (2) that he had not previously heard the sermon he translated; (3) that he had reproduced the sermon in Indian practically verbatim, any changes that could be pointed out being of a trifling and immaterial nature. Of this last fact I received assurance from several persons who were conversant with both tongues, among others from the chief, who had some white blood in his veins, and who possessed both intelligence and school training far above the average. It was further claimed that the interpreter could even repeat a sermon with exactness several months after hearing it. 1 See ZATW., XXIII (1903), is7ff., 159; "Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments," p. 208. 2 See supra, pp. 6 if., 78. INTRODUCTORY 137 advisers of king and people in important political and religious matters," ^ even as were the older prophets, has caused confusion all along the line, and is particularly apparent in all the attempts wliich have been made of recent years to show that there is nothing unique, notliing original even, about Israelit- ish prophecy or, for that matter, about the religious development of Israel in general. To bring out the radical difference between pro- phetic ecstasy and prophetic inspiration, it will be necessary to enter with some detail into a discussion of the nature and origin of each of these phenomena. For only in this way is it possible to proceed with certainty and to determine whether the ardent belief of the prophets in their divine call, with the burning testimony to which this belief drove them, was really nothing more, as has often been maintained, than delirium, enthusiastic self-delusion, if not indeed mere vague pretension, or whether it was not rather the outcome of a new realization of the relation between God and man, and, as such, constituted religious pro- gress of a truly epoch-making order. ' So expressed by Kittel, "Geschichte des Volkes Israel,"' II, p. 438. CHAPTER II INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION OR POSSESSION The inspiration of the great literary prophets has nothing in common with the ecstasy of the prophets of the older type — a state v/hich could be artificially produced at will. It is altogether distinct from prophetic possession, as understood by the ancients and defined by Plato and Philo, who held that in order to become the medium of divine revelation, the mind must be in a state of absolute passivity.^ Naturally, utterances of persons thus possessed are both invol- untary and unconscious. The utterances of the Kter- ary prophets, on the other hand, proceed from an apperceptive state of mind. As Robertson Smith expresses it, "He (Jehovah) speaks to His prophets, not in magical processes or through the visions of poor phrenetics, but by a clear intelligible word addressed to the intellect and the heart. The characteristic of the true prophet is that he retains his consciousness and self-control under revelation." ^ ^ "Inspired and true divination,"' says Plato, "is not attained to by any one when in his full senses, but only when the power of thought is fettered by sleep or disease or some paroxysm of frenzy " {Timczus, cap. XXXII, p. 71, D). "Plato's theory was applied to the prophets by Philo, the Jewish Platonist, who describes the prophetic state as an ecstasy in which the human vovs disappears to make way for the divine Spirit" {Quis reriim div. heres, § 53, ed. Richter, III, 58; De Spec. Leg., § 8, Richter, V, 122).— See W. Robertson Smith, "The Old Testament in the Jewish Church," p. 286, n. i. 2 Op. cit., p. 289. 138 INSPIRATION AS OrrOSED TO DIVINATION 139 Nor are the visions of the literary prophets in any way akin to the ecstatic visions and dreams of the dixiner. There are two distinct kinds of visions met with in literary prophecy. The first comprises such visions as those related in Is. \T, Jcr. I, i-io, 15-19, and also Am. VII, 7-9, in wliich the prophets tell of the event from wliich they date their call to prophecy. As this event is always in the nature of a spiritual experience, and as spiritual experiences are something wliich cannot be directly expressed, the prophets re- sort of necessity to an indirect method of description. To them has come a divine moment when, as by a flash of light, they have beheld the mystery of life revealed, when, as by a sudden intuition, they have pierced to the reality of tilings, when their individual mind has stood face to face with the infinite, universal mind and realized itself the chosen instrument of God's purpose. Tliis moment marks a new epoch in their existence; never again can their life be just as it has been. From this moment they are pledged to God's purpose — they have found their mission. Such spiritual experiences are not the fruit of an inert, passive mind, but of a mind consciously sounding the very depths of its being, a mind awakened to the fullest realization of its moral and spiritual constitu- tion. Such ex-pericnces, moreover, are invariably accom- panied in the human consciousness by the emotion of the sublime. The mind is awed by the sudden sense of the infinite, of the newly revealed universe aglow with "the splendor of God," and by the perception withal that it is but "the hem of God's garment" of which the inner eye has caught a fleeting vision.^ » See Is. VI, 1-4. I40 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL The mystic agitation attending every influx of the infinite into the finite mind, attending every new flash of truth upon the soul, is nowhere so adequately described as in that memorable account of revelation given in Job IV, 12-16: " To me a message stole, My ear caught a whisper thereof; In the reveries of night- visions When deep sleep lay on men. Fear seized me and trembling. Filled all my bones with dread; A spirit flitted past my face, The hair of my flesh stood on end: It stood [there], but I could not discern the countenance thereof, A form before my eyes: — A faint whisper did I perceive." These lines from Job suggest the similar expressions from various modern poets on this point. Schiller's "Die Macht des Gesanges" contains the foUowing description: "Ein Regenstrom aus Felsenrissen, Er kommt mit Donners Ungestiim, Bergtriimmer folgen seinen Gussen, Und Eichen stiirzen unter ihm; Erstaunt, mit woUustvoUem Grauen, Hort ihn der Wanderer und lauscht, Er hort die Flut vom Felsen brausen, Doch weiss er nicht, woher sie rauscht: So stromen des Gesanges Wellen Hervor aus nie entdeckten Quellen." INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 141 Hamilton Wright Mabie says in his essay, "The Infinite in the Finite:" "In quiet hours, when what is called inspiration breathes on a human spirit, and that spirit vibrates into a music unheard before, the finite and the infinite blend for a moment, and a fresh wave of life flows into the sphere of mortal striving and seeking." Then he cites the personal testimony of a poet: "Writing poetry ... is like wading into the sea. You are cliilled and reluctant, and tempted to turn back; and wliile you stand hesitating a great wave rolls in from the infinite and bears you out — you know not how nor wliither." ^ But possibly of the moderns, Wordsworth in "Tin- tern Abbey" has come nearer than any other to an adequate expression of the emotions attending the sudden flash of truth upon the soul, the sudden per- ception of the invisible behind the visible, of the spiritual back of the material world: ". . . that blessed mood, In which the burthen of the mystery, In which the heavy and the weary weight Of all this unintelligible world, Is lightened: — that serene and blessed mood, In which the affections gently lead us on, — Until, the breath of this corporeal frame And even the motion of our human blood Almost suspended, we are laid asleep In body, and become a living soul: While with an eye made quiet by the power Of harmony, and the deep power of joy, We see into the life of things. 'The Great Word," p. i75f. 142 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL These modern analogies, to my mind, bring out clearly the serious misapprehension of spiritual proph- ecy involved in the views of those scholars who con- sider the visions related in Is. VI, and Jer. I, i-io, 15-19 and the ecstasies or trance of the diviner psychi- cally related phenomena. (See infra, p. 161, n. 2.) The second class of visions met with in literary prophecy comprises such visions as Am. VIII, 1-2, IX, 1-4,^ Jer. I, 11-14, which also have been thought by Stade ^ and other scholars to be of an ecstatic nature. There is, however, nothing pathological in the origin of these visions. They may readily be explained on a psychological basis. They reveal the prophet's state of mind. He is haunted by thoughts of the judgment he believes impending, filled with pictures of the coming ruin. Everything he sees serves but to recall that one momentous fact — he can- not get away from it. A basket of ripe fruit reminds Amos of his people ripe for judgment. The almond shrub budding into life in the spring speaks to Jere- miah of the certainty and the speed of the judgment which his people's wickedness has entailed on them. Actions, however, Uke those related in Hos. I, 4, 6, 9, Is. VIII, 3, XX, 2f., Jer. XIII, iff., XXVII, iff., to which Stade and others also refer in proof that ec- stasy is met with among the literary prophets, just as among the older prophets,^ are not the outcome of a ^Am. VII, 1-6 do not relate mere experiences in the prophet's soul, as Stade believes (see "Biblische Theologie des Alt. Test.," p. 126, § 61, and p. 206), but external events, visitations by locusts and drought, which had happened at some time in the past. See infra Part III, Chap. IV, § 4. ^Op.cii.,ih. 2 See ZATW., ib., p. 161, and "Biblische Theologie des Alt. Test.," p. 206. INSPIR/\TION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 143 state of ecstasy. They are voluntary acts intended to prognosticate or prefigure certain future events which the prophet felt sure were bound to hapjien. The Htcrary prophets themselves took pains to disclaim any connection between their revelation and the divination of the official prophets of their day, or the divination of the recognized prophetic guilds — which was the same divination as was practised by the older prophets.^ Thus Amos, in his reply to Amaziah (VH, i4f.),'^ protests emphatically against Amaziah's confusing him with the estabhshed prophetic guilds, with whom prophesying was a profession and a business, and points to his divine call, to God's revelation within him which has driven him to prophesy, as the dis- tinguishing mark between him and the professional prophets, with whom Amaziah is familiar. Or take Micah, III, 5-8. Here Micah describes the professional prophets of his time, who through visions and divination seek to secure the revelation of God, and who, though ostensibly the spiritual leaders of the people, in reahty lead them astray and work their downfall. He drastically characterizes their insincer- ity, their utter lack of moral convictions and princi- ples. Then he goes on to declare that he, on the con- trary, is stirred by the spirit of God, by the promptings of his own conscience, and that, consequently, he has the courage and the strength to denounce the wicked- ness of his people: ^ It is recorded of Samuel and the bands of prophets directed by him, and also of Elisha, that they had recourse to divination (c/. I Sam. IX, 6, 20, X, sf., loff., XIX, 2(^24, II Ki. Ill, 15). * See supra, p. 8. 144 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL "But I am filled with might, in that I am roused by the spirit of God, the spirit of justice and of moral power, so that I can tell Jacob his transgression, Israel his sin." ^ But the most important passage bearing on this point is Jer. XXIII, 9-40, where prophetic inspiration is clearly defined, and the radical difference between it and divination exhaustively set forth. In the open- ing part of this sermon Jeremiah scores the recognized prophets of the day for their immoral lives and their evil influence on the people. He denounces them as false prophets, who have not stood in God's council, who but preach delusions spun out of their own brains, prophesying prosperity to a country ripe for judgment: "Thus saith the Lord Sabaoth, hearken not to the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you — They do but delude you, they speak visions which spring from their own hearts, and not from the mouth of God. 1 Although this verse is rendered accurately enough in the King James' Version, it is thought by most modern exegetes to require emendation — some scholars omit ko^h 'acth, others 'aeth ru'^h jahwce. There is, however, nothing wrong with the verse. In the first place, malethi forms a sort of zeugma, the objects, 'aethruahjahwa; mnispat ugehhurd, altering its meaning, "am filled," slightly to "am roused," "am moved;" with a similar meaning male occurs Eccl. VIII, 11, "... the heart of man is prompted to do evil," and again Est. VII, s, ". . . whose heart prompts him to do so." Secondly, malethi koaJt, "I am filled with might," and ^aeth rti<^hjahwcB umispat ugebhura, "am moved by the spirit of God, the spirit of justice and of moral power," are in the relation of effect and cause, which explains the introduction of the latter with 'aeth. Thirdly, umiSpal ugehhiira are other genitives depending on ru<^h and explicative of ruP-h jahwce. INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 145 They assert positively to those that scorn me, the Lord hath spoken. >c shall have prosperity, and to those that follow wilfully the inclinations of tlieir hearts they speak, no evil shall befall you" (vv. 16, 17). The mark of the true prophet, on the other hand, is that he has held converse with God, has become possessed of His purpose, and must needs proclaim it: "For he who hath held converse with God, hath perceived and heard His word, he who hath hearkened to His word, must proclaim it" ^ (v. iS). It follows by implication that this converse with God is of a moral nature, that is to say, is through the medium of the moral consciousness. The false prophets, v/ho have set law and morality at defiance, are shut out from God's council. Had they held con- verse with God, had they entered into His purpose, like the true prophets, they would know that the judg- ment was imminent, and would of necessity preach to the people not prosperity but repentance: - "If they had held converse with me, they would have to proclaim my words to my people, ' Instead of wajjisma , the jussive Hiph'il, wajjahna, is to be read, in accordance with jastniil of the parallel verse 22; the jussive with wa consecutive here expresses consequence, as, e. g., wajjamoth, XXXVIII, 9. The object d'bharo of the preceding verb is to be con- strued also with -ivajjasma. * Jeremiah's mode of thought here is in accord with his reasoning, IX, 23 and XXII, 15b, 16; in the former passage he brings out the idea that to know or experience God is to realize that God controls the universe in accordance with the moral law, and in the latter, that to know God means to live in conformity with the moral law. 146 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL and make them return from their evil way and their wicked doings" (v. 22). But how is it possible at all for a man to hold con- verse with God? In verses 23 and 24 Jeremiah gives the answer to this very natural question: because God is ever present in man. Not v. 23 as it stands, but what we must conclude was the original form of v. 23. The original text, as preserved in the reading of the LXX, ^609 iyji^cov ijd) elfii koX ov'^l Oeb'i iroppcodev, must have read ^"Hohe miqqarobh, or with different word-division,' '^Hohim qarobh ''^ni w^lo ''^Hohe mera- hoq: *'I am a present God, and not a far-off God." ^ The interrogative particle with which the verse now opens was added later. That the reading of the LXX in this case is the correct one, cannot be doubted in view of the fact that v. 24 is the logical and coherent enlargement of the thought thus expressed: "If a man hides in secret, do I not see him? saith the Lord. Verily, I fill heaven and earth, saith the Lord." Further proof lies in the fact that v. 23, so read, with V. 24, estabhshes a perfect sequence of thought with the preceding vv. 18-22, a sequence which is alto- gether lacking when the Masoretic text of v. 23 is accepted. It is significant that vv. 23 and 24 express just the opposite view to that met with in I Ki. VIII, 27 (II Chron. VI, 18): "But doth God indeed dwell with ^ See Giesebrecht, op. ciL, ad loc, and Rothstein in Kittel, "Biblia Hebraica," ad loc. INSPIRATION AS OPrOSED TO DIVINATION 147 man ('acth ha'adam) ^ on earth? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee." The latter reflects the belief which prevailed in Jeremiah's own age, and which became more fully developed and dogmatized in later Judaism — the belief that God was a far-off God, a transcendent God, enthroned in the remote heavens. But the prophets, in particular Jeremiah, knew that God was present in man — had they not experienced the power of the divine within themselves? — and it is out of the fulness of this experience that Jeremiah declares that God is not a far-off God, but a near God filling heaven and earth, an immanent God, that is; a God enthroned in the universe, and present in every human heart. It is important to note that the author of Ps. LXXIII uses very similar phraseology in express- ing his reahzation of the presence of God in man's heart: wa'^ni qirbhath '"'lohlm li tobh, "But the pres- ence" — literally "nearness" — "of God is my very ^ happiness " (v. 28). That Jer. verse 23 became changed to an interrogative sentence was, no doubt, as Giesebrecht concludes, for dogmatic reasons. Later ages, failing to see the real meaning of the verse, evi- dently read in it a denial of the omnipresence of God. Verses 25ff. are as logically connected with vv. 23 f. as the latter are with vv. 18-22. Having established the basic fact that God is immanent, is a living reality 'The LXX read 'aeth ha'adam also I Ki. VIII, 27, from which Benzinger (contrary to Kittel) rightly concluded (in "Die Biicher dor Konige" and "Die Biicher der Chronik") that the original text read 'aeth ha'adam in Kings as well as in Chronicles. Its omission in the Masoretic text of Kings may have been accidental, but it is very probable that it was left out for dogmatic reasons. * The emphatic force of the appositive, '"wi, may thus be expressed. 148 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL in man, Jeremiah goes on to show how, in contrast to the mistaken notion of revelation and its manifesta- tions entertained by his contemporaries, true revela- tion is the manifestation of the indwelling God in the human heart. The people, by reason of their conception of God as a far-off God, looked upon the divine Spirit as an ahen force entering the mind of man from without, sub- duing his rational faculties, and making him a passive organ of revelation. The proper channels of di\ine revelation were thought to be dreams, ecstatic visions or religious frenzy, as the state of possession naturally demanded an unconscious or semiconscious frame of mind. Accordingly, prophecy for those ages did not consist in clear, connected thought, but rather in muttered utterances— often equivocal if not altogether obscure— or in such rapturous, unintelligible speech as speaking with tongues. Whenever, as in great crises, prophets of this t}^e acted in a body, the frenzy would communicate itself from one to another, and, to a man, they would frantically repeat the oracle uttered by the leader, as in the case of the four hun- dred prophets before Ahab, led by Zedekiah b. Ka- naanah (I Ki. XXII, 6ff.), "Stealing my words from one another" (v. 30) is the way Jeremiah puts it — for to him prophesying was a matter of direct, personal inspiration. By wajjm^''mu n^'um (v. 31) he refers explicitly to the muttered, obscure oracles, which were evidently in his mind also in w. 33ff., where he contrasts the people's sohcitous inquiry as to the meaning of the massa, "oracle," with the direct and immediate revelation {ma 'and jahvcB uma dihbacr jahwce; see infra) of the living God — living, i. e., present, indwelling in man's heart. By halloq^hlvi IXSPIRATIOX AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 149 Monam (v. 31), it i^; reasonably certain, the speaking .with tongues is meant. The reading of the LXX nAQ points to this: rois iK^d\\ovTa<; 7rpo(})T]T€ia^ ( — €tav A) yXcoaai)^ ( — aat} A). eV/3a\\. , evidently, has here the meaning "utter," a meaning which laqah may readily be assumed to have, in view of the fact that the verbal abstract. /a ^-^a//, may mean "speech" (cf. Prov. VH, 21). The dative inslrumcntalis yXwaar} ^ of A, which no doubt is the original reading, fur- nishes the clue to the grammatical force of I'^onam, showing that it is an accusative of specification. With all these irrational, pathological phenomena, believed by his contemporaries to be manifestations of revelation, Jeremiah contrasts the evidences and workings of true revelation. Inspiration, he tells them, is an elemental force which acts within the human heart, and with which their imaginary posses- sion by the Spirit has no more in common than "chafif has with grain": "Is not my word like fire, saith the Lord, like a hammer that splits the rock asunder?" fvv. 28, 29). Note here the resemblance to XX, 9, where he de- scribes his prophetic inspiration as a raging fire shut up in his bosom, which he has striven vainly to with- stand. This divine force, this inward fire, cannot be withstood, he says here, any more than the persistent force of the hammer can be resisted by the solid rock. • The use of the dat. sing, (and not dat. plur. as in Acts IT, 4, X, 46, XIX, 6) in referring to this phenomenon agrees with the expression yXwaa-rj \aXfXv, of I Cor. XIV, 2, 4, isf., 18, 27, the New Testament source which is of supreme importance for our knowledge of this phe- nomenon. .\s to £K/3oL\Aeiv, absol., " to speak," cf. Diog. L. be, 7. 150 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL In the light of w, 28, 29 the import of vv. 35-37 in general, as of ma 'andjahwcB uma dibbaerjahwcB, "What doth God respond and what doth God speak?" in particular, is clear. Not through such delusive and artificial media as dreams and frenzy, not through a perverted imagination, the prophet means to say, does God reveal Himself, but immediately and directly to the inner perception of man. Neither does He speak by strange, oracular utterances, but by a clear word, intelligible to all. Equally apparent is the significance of v. 37, " Thus shall you speak to the prophet. What doth God answer thee? {' anakh j ahwcz) and what doth God speak? (dibbaer jahwcs)." This verse has generally been thought to be a meaningless repetition of v. 35 by a later interpolater, but the exegetes have overlooked a very vital difference between the two, viz., that instead of "thus shall ye speak to one another,'^ (v. 35), v. 37 has "thus shall you^ speak to the prophet.'^ It is this variation that gives point to the repetition, for it brings out the fact which Jeremiah would impress upon his hearers, that God reveals himself not to the prophet alone but to every individual — reveals himself immediately and unmistakably in the moral consciousness of each. Thus reduced to its essence, divested of all the miraculous features and supernatural accompani- ments which the primitive mind had associated with it, prophetic inspiration seems a very simple matter indeed. Yet this view of inspiration was the view, not of Jeremiah alone, but of all the great literary proph- ets, only Jeremiah being the most subjective and ana- lytic of them, he naturally gave it the most reasoned ^ The 2d sing, thoniar is here translated " you ..." in order to better express its impersonal force. INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 151 out and definite expression. Amos, Hosea, Micah, Isaiah, Dcutero-Isaiah, every one of them, there is evi- dence, when he spoke of revehition, meant the divine force or voice which he felt within liis heart. None of them claimed anything else than the impulsion of this force, the authority of this voice. It was so simple, so elemental, so self-evident to them, that any particular explanation or demonstration would have seemed superfluous. They all refer to their inspiration in the most matter of fact way — God spoke to them. The earnest man of to-day might ponder over the initial m}-stery of man's moral consciousness — not so the prophets. For them it was no mystery, it was an a priori fact, the manifestation of God. It was the source from which they derived the moral vision and the moral energy, which constituted their prophetic gift. To any occult supernatural power the prophets laid no claim; against the morbid or artificial vision of the diviner, the phrenetic energy of the sooth-sayer they vented their loathing and reproach; they repudiated with scorn the idea that they had anything in common with the professional prophets, never failing to bring out the distinction between their own prophecies and vaticination. Thus, however authoritatively they declared that the judgment was near at hand, they openly admitted the limitation of their human insight in regard to the attendant circumstances, the How and the When, and the other details of the crisis. Thus, e. g., at the time of the civil war after the death of Jeroboam II, when the two contending factions into which the country was divided, appealed to Assyria and Eg>pt, respectively, for help, Hosea predicted that this foolish policy would prove the means by which God would work their certain ruin (Hos. VII, 152 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL I if.), but he left it open whether it would be through Assyria or through Egypt that their downfall would be brought about {cf. ib., IX, 3, XI, 5, and also VIII, 13, the latter as read by the LXX). The fact that they erred again and again in the matter of details was altogether irrelevant to them — their convictions re- mained unaltered, their assurance of divine revelation as abiding as ever. Hosea, in the first period of his activity, predicted that the fall of Israel and the over- throw of the dynasty of Jehu would occur simulta- neously (Hos. I, 4f.), and though the course of history disproved his expectations, he persisted, nevertheless, in his conviction that the nation was doomed. Sim- ilarly, Isaiah, when subsequent events failed to verify his prophecy at the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, that in a year's time Damascus and Ephraim, and Judah as well, would be conquered by Assyria (Is. VII, 14- VIII, 8), continued to declare that the judgment was inevitable. Equally if not more significant is the fact that the prophets preserved unchanged even those prophecies which contained erroneous forecasts, that is, fore- casts which had been disproved by the actual outcome of events. The fact is, the various details of time, place, and circumstance possessed no importance in their eyes. Such specifications were the result of their human reasoning, and as such were non-essentials. If their reason erred in these matters, if their judgment failed to estimate the poHtical situation correctly, this in no wise invalidated the great basic truths or prin- ciples of which they were cognizant through their moral consciousness, and which, constituting their revelation from God, formed the centre and essence of their prophecy. INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIMNAITON 153 This explains, in the case of Isaiah, how it came that, although practically all his political prognostica- tions in his prophecies of the time of the Syro- Ephraimitic campaign turned out to be mistaken, he not only preserved these prophecies intact, but even referred to them in his later prophecies of the years 704-701 as the revelation of God (see Is. XXX, 15).^ And so, too, it came that when Jeremiah, after twenty- three years of activity, committed his prophecies to writing, he included without alteration or adaptation his prophecies of the time of the Scythian invasion, although his forecast of events in these had in no wise been verified. It mattered not to the prophets that their con- temporaries pointed tauntingly to these unfulfilled prophecies, and sought to make light of their prophetic gifts (see Is. V, 19, Jer. XVII, 15). They had the serene assurance that the essence of their prophecies, the moral truths underlying and animating them, remained forever secure and unassailable. Whether destruction came from Assyria or from Egypt, from the Scythians or the Chaldasans, whether it came sooner or later, were after all very minor considera- tions,- in no wase affecting the vital, fundamental facts j that God was a God of eternal righteousness, that what He required of man was to know Him and to conform to His moral law, that Israel, utterly failing in these respects, was doomed to destruction, but that this I ' See supra, p. 76, and infra, pp. 266, 269. ' * This point has been correctly referred to by W. Robertson Smith, I "The Prophets of Israel," p. 268, and by Smend, "Lehrbuch der I Alttestamentlichen Religionsgeschichte," p. 192. Comill's explana- j tion of the matter {op. cit., p. 86) is altogether erroneous, the premise j from which it proceeds being in reality nothing else than Plato's I and Philo's view of inspiration. 154 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL destruction was to be simply God's means of effecting its spiritual regeneration, and of establishing His own dominion throughout the world. It is interesting to note that the great prophet of the exile, Deutero-Isaiah, who lived amid entirely different conditions, and who, accordingly, preached not retri- bution and doom, but pardon and redemption, held essentially the same view of inspiration as his great predecessors. The very words with which he opens his prophecies,^ "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, speaks evermore distinctly your God," show that he had the same triumphant faith and spiritual vision as they, since in the convulsions of the time, which, for his contemporaries, were exactly what they seemed , he beheld the manifestation of the divine Spirit — heard the voice of God. jomar has not the force of a future tense, but is imperfect of progressive duration, its meaning being that God is speaking through con- temporaneous events, viz., through the rise and the growing victories of Cyrus. But this verse, as also V. 2a, "Speak ye words of cheer to Jerusalem and proclaim to her," shows that Deutero-Isaiah regarded God's call as addressed, not to himself alone, but to all men — all, that is, that had ears to hear. This is shown by the plurals, "Comfort ye, comfort ye," and "Speak ye . . . and proclaim." In the following w. , 3-8 the basic thought is brought out that back of thej visible perishable things of this world, there is ai invisible, eternal world, viz., God and His universe plan of salvation. To those, therefore, who have the spiritual capacity to discern the eternal truths clothec in the passing events, to those is God's call in the opening lines addressed. In this way Deuterc 1 Is. XL-LV. L\SPIR.\TION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 155 Isaiah, although he makes use of different figures, brings out fundamentally the same idea of revela- tion that Jeremiah expresses in the conclusion of his exposition of revelation. This conception of inspiration was, in fact, the foundation upon which all the great prophets builded. It was. of course, too profound in its simplicity to be within the comprehension of the masses, which Deutero-Isaiah describes as "blind though they have eyes, deaf though they have ears," ^ but by the prophets it was so acutely realized that it was, so to speak, a governing principle with them. It is back of all their utterances, it is the sine qua non of their activity. It accounts for the spiritual element which entered so predominatingly into the prophetic move- ment inaugurated by Amos, and which characterizes it from the start as something radically and essentially different from the rehgious evolution that preceded it. This point cannot be stated too emphatically. Liter- ary prophecy is not the natural, hneal growth out of the older religious behcfs and usages, but, by virtue of the prophetic conception of revelation at the root of it, is, clearly, the direct fruit of the autonomous human spirit, which, freed from the fettering notions and traditions of the past, has come to a knowledge of itself and to a realization of the purpose and mean- ing of Hfe — in other words, literary prophecy must be accounted the spontaneous creation of genius, the immediate product of the intuitive human mind. The religious advance marked by such a conception ' Is. XLIII, 8. This was a favorite figure of the prophets in referring to the people's lack of spiritual comprehension; cf. further Is. XLII, 7, i8f., XXXII, 3, Jer. V, 21, Ezek. XII, 2, and also Deut. XXEX, 3. 156 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of inspiration must seem all the more marvellous when it is remembered that even Plato, a couple of cen- turies later, had not outgrown the primitive, pagan notion of revelation, but conceived of it as a neces- sarily irrational and subnormal phenomenon.^ For the first time in the history of the human race the essential truth was distinctly realized and un- equivocally expressed, that the relation of man to God is a moral relation, that it is in the conscience of man that God speaks, that man's moral convictions and promptings are the very voice of God. From this realization man's religious obligation followed clearly — the obligation to establish and sus- tain fellowship with God, not by means of external agencies, rites or other media, but by living up to the divine promptings within himself, by consciously aspiring after, and shaping his hfe and conduct in accordance with the absolute perfection of God. Thus righteousness was realized to be the link binding earth to heaven, and morality became henceforward the object and end of religion, moral perfection the religious ideal. The picture of the ideal future drawn by Deutero-Isaiah and also by the Psalmist, when righteousness shall descend from heaven to earth, and heaven and earth unite, so to speak, for the reaUzation of the perfect order of things (Is. XLV, 8, Ps. LXXXV, 12), was substantially the vision which inspired the literary prophets from the very start. It follows from the foregoing discussion that, psychologically considered, prophetic inspiration is not materially different from the furor poeticus of the master-poet or artist. Both are phases of human genius — prophetic inspiration being human genius ^ See supra, p. 138, n. i. INSPIRATION AS OrrOSED TO DIVINATION 157 acting in the most vital sphere of human interest, the interpretation of human hfe and its rehition to the universal Hfe. Not that such an explanation makes spiritual prophecy a whit the less mysterious, or more commonplace, for in its last analysis human genius is inexplicable, just as are the ultimate relations of all things, and as is, above all, the conscious, moral life of the soul. And nowhere is the inexplicableness of human genius so strikingly exhibited as in the case of the great prophets of Israel. Though the prophets, while towering far above the level of their race, were yet an integral, inseparable part of it, though no external influences of whatever sort had conduced to make them what they were, but rather the accumulated ex- perience of the race, from which they derived the ele- ments of their culture, and from which each assimi- lated those elements most vitally related to his own being, — though, in this sense, the harvest wrought by each might be traced back to seeds or roots lying deep in the history of the race, yet in each case fruition was dependent on the fructifying, vitalizing principle which sprang, as it were, from the prophet's own in- dividuality, and whose existence was, as it ever is, independent of race, time, and other circumstances within human ken. Unless the action of this mysterious principle, which is nothing else than what we call genius, be kept in mind, it is impossible to account for the inception of prophetic religion just at that period of Israel's history when it occurred. Between the religious beliefs which prevailed in Israel up to that time and the religious views of the prophets there is a gap which cannot be bridged by any logical process. The idea of God which 158 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL held sway in Israel at the time of Amos' appearance did not even remotely approximate a monistic concep- tion of the universe. The people believed in one God, the God of Israel, but granted the existence of other gods for other nations. A divine unity did not exist for them, and still less did such a conception exist for the surrounding Oriental nations, who believed in a plurality of divine forces in competition, if not in open conflict with one another.^ Indeed, the spectacle ^ There have been efforts of recent years to show that there was an "Old-Oriental Monotheism," antedating the prophetic movement by- many centuries; and although this is not the place for the detailed discussion of such a question, it may be in place to state here that, with the exception of the "Hymn to Aton" of Amenophis IV (1392- 1374 B. C.) and the religious reformation carried out by this monarch, there is, prior to the Persian period, no indication of even a tendency toward religious universalism or monistic speculation. (This will be taken up more fully in the 2nd volume.) As to the naive materialistic monotheism of Amenophis IV (Ichenaton), it must be stated em- phatically that this was neither the organic growth out of the previous religious development of Egypt, nor the point of departure for a new movement, but that it was essentially an individualistic reform, beginning and virtually ending with Amenophis IV. There is a radical difference between Amenophis' Hymn and the older Egyptian songs theorizing about the sun-god, Amon-Re. Though both have in common that they consider the sun-god the creator of the world and the supreme god, the songs differ from the hymn in that they do not regard Amon-Re as the sole god, but only as one among many gods. Furthermore, in the old songs Amon-Re is essentially a national god, Egypt alone being the object of his care and interest, while in the hymn of Amenophis IV Aton is represented as a universal God whose sphere of interest extends over the whole world. But the fate which the reform of Amenophis IV met with at the hands of his contem- poraries is the most conclusive proof that what this great monarch carried out was not the result of natural growth but of personal genius. Immediately upon his death the whole country rose in open revolt against his religious innovation, and with a fanaticism unparalleled in history literally effaced all trace of his reform. Even his name was INSPIR.\TIOX AS OPPOSED TO DIVIXATIOX 159 which the ancient world presented at the time was adapted to inspire just the opposite of idealism and abiding faith: it was a world of moral chaos and spiritual confusion, a world in which brute force reigned supreme. The small kingdoms were the helpless prey of the world-powers, and hardly even would these latter have built up their mighty empires on the ruins of vanquished nations than their struc- tures would in turn be wrecked or threatened by new rivals. One would expect such conditions to incline the people to a belief in a blind, inexorable fate rather than to a belief in a supreme being who guides history toward an absolutely moral goal — toward the reign of righteousness among men. And as a matter of fact, from the close of the Persian period, this belief in a re- lentless fate as the controlling power of the universe took ever stronger hold of the minds of the pagan world. ^ expunged from the records of his age, so that both the man and his work sank into oblivion; only in far distant Nubia a solitar>' monu- ment of this monarch remained in the Temple which he had built, and which contained on its walls his Hymn to Aton. This hymn of Amenophis IV certainly exercised no influence whatever on the subsequent religious development of Egypt, and there is no proof nor even likelihood that it ever had any influence on the religious thought of the other Oriental countries. ^ This fatalism of antiquity, in reality, a sidereal fatalism, has its roots in the astrology of ancient Babylonia, which, as Fr. Cumont remarks, "was religious in its origin and in its principles." With the close of the Assyrian and the rise of the Neo-Babylonian empire, as the research of recent years has shown, astro-theological speculations attained greater predominance in the Babylonian and Assyrian coun- tries than ever before. From the latter centre, as has further been shown, astrology with its belief in an absolute determinism was intro- duced into Egypt, where in the Hellenistic period it was developed to a most elaborate system of religious-philosophical speculation, and whence it spread over the entire Hellenistic world. There can be no i6o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Our discussion has shown that the inspiration of the literary prophets and the mantic possession or ecstasy of the older prophets are two distinct phenomena pro- ceeding from radically different states of mind, and not, as is widely thought, from a common psychical basis. It has further shown that inspiration, as the great literary prophets understood it, is the governing principle at the root of the new prophetic movement which began with Amos; and that, by virtue of this fact, Hterary prophecy is fundamentally different from the previous religious development of Israel ; — in fact, that it can in no sense be considered the offspring or the continuation of the older prophecy, but must be regarded as a movement essentially independent and sui generis. Certain points of contact between the two exist of course. Like every great movement in history, literary prophecy had its antecedents and forerun- ners, among whom might be named the Recha- bites, Elijah, Micajah b. Jimlah, and Nathan, but none of these had advanced to the conception of rev- elation held by the great Hterary prophets, or to the doubt that the great political upheavals in both the Oriental and the Occidental worid, which mark the history of those times, were partic- ularly conducive to this world-wide spread of fatalism. Cf. R. Reit- zenstein, "Poimandres," pp. 68ff., and Bousset's review of the latter work in "Gottinger Gelehrte Anzeigen," 1905, pp. 704Q.; Fr. Cu- mont, "Les Religions Orien tales dans Le Paganism Romain," pp. 254-269; W. Kroll, "Aus der Geschichte der Astrologie" in "Neue Jahrbiicher f. d. Klassiche Altertum," VII (1901), pp. 557-577; Fr. Boll, "Die Erforschung der antiken Astrologie," ib., XXI (1908), pp. 103-126; M. Jastrow, "Die Religion Babyloniens und Assyriens," II, pp. 418-457; P. Wendland, "Die Hellenistisch-Romische Cultur," pp. 592'., 8of.; F. X. Kugler, "Im Bannkreis Babels," pp. 1 16-126; and J. Kaerst, "Geschichte des Hellenistischen Zeitalters," II, i, pp. 203f. INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION i6i prophetic \iew of the relation between man and God which follows therefrom.^ The unbridgeable gap between the two forms of prophecy remains in the basic difference between inspiration and ecstasy or possession. - ' I Ki. XIX is not a product by Elijah, but a narrative about him. Apart from this, the storj^ is not the uniform work of one author, but a composite product, in which arc mirrored the conflicting views of successive ages in regard to revelation. For the original author of the storj' Mt. Horeb is still Yhw^'s abode proper, the place par excellence where His revelation is to be sought; while the later author, whose work may be distinguished in vv. ii-i3a, is imbued with the pro- phetic idea of revelation: — for him God reveals Himself, not in the phenomena of nature (the hurricane, the earthquake, and the light- ning), but in " the still small voice." This view of the composition of Chap. XIX would explain the repetition of n'v. 9b, 10 in 13b, 14, and seems to me a more satisfactory solution than that proposed by Wellhausen in "Die Composition des Hexateuch und der Histori- schen Biicher des Alten Testaments, " ', p. 280, n. i. 2 The lack of a clear discrimination between the older and the literary prophets on this vital point of revelation is a serious defect in the great majority of works on Old Testament prophecy. It is a defect which is found even in so excellent an exposition as that of Kittel in his new edition of "Geschichte des Volkes Israel," II, §§ 45, 46. Proceeding from the supposition that the inspiration of the literar>' prophets and the ecstasy of the older prophets are psychi- cally related phenomena, Kittel looks upon Isaiah's and Jeremiah's consecration-visions as pathological phenomena akin to the ecstatic visions of the seers and diviners, and explains the throne. Seraphim, smoke, altar, etc. of Is. VI as things which the prophet really saw while in the ecstatic state {op. cit., pp. 438, 443-450); in reality, as pxDinted out above, these are but the imagery which the prophet employs to describe those spiritual experiences which elude direct expression. There is nothing original or individual about the imagery; it was simply drawn from the stock of popular notions about God and supernatural beings which were current in that age. What has been remarked above wnth reference to Comill's explanation of the fact that the prophets preserved without alteration or adaptation even those prophecies in which their forecasts were contradicted by the i62 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Nor does the fact that ecstasy is strongly in evidence in the prophet Ezekiel alter the situation in the least, for, Stade to the contrary,^ Ezekiel does not really belong in the same category with the six great proph- ets, Amos, Hosea, Micah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Deutero-Isaiah. No matter how greatly he was influenced by their ideas, he never rose to the spiritual heights attained by them, never caught the real essence of their doctrines. The prominence which the ritual- istic religion occupies in Ezekiel's system makes him the very antipodes of the great prophets. And as he differs from them in his conception of God and of man's relation to God, so inevitably does he differ from them also in his idea of revelation and inspira- tion. Smend's remark is to the point: "/w Sehertum hatte die Wahrsagung ihre Stelle gehaht und heim Verfall der Prophetic taucht sie bei Ezechiel wieder auf. In merkwiirdiger Selhsttduschung, die seiner Inspirations- vorstellung entstajnmf, gestaltet er von hinten nach seine Weissagungen nach der Geschichte." ^ ("Reveal- ing the future had had a place in seership, and, on the decline of prophecy, it appeared again in Ezekiel. In strange self-deception, which proceeds from his idea of inspiration, he constructs his prophecies back- wards in accordance with history.") As a matter of fact, Ezekiel's writings reveal the interesting fact that the method employed by him is closely related to that in vogue in Apocalyptic Literature, that is to say, actual outcome of events, applies also to Kittel's view of the "Eigenart des prophetischen Bewusstseins und Seelenlebens" and the "psycholo- gische Form der Ausserung prophetischen Geistes." Kittel's view is at bottom nothing else than the dogmatic and pagan notion of revelation as defined by Plato and Philo. 1 See "Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments," p. 206. ^Op.cit.,p. 190. INSPIRATION AS OPPOSED TO DIVINATION 163 a good many of his predictions are only disguised as such, they are in reaHty vaticinia post rocnlum. With this it accords that the writings of Ezekiel, like those of Zachariah later, are manifestly not the immediate product of inspiration, but the labored product of speculation and study. If we compare, €. g., the visions of Ezekiel (Chaps. If!., Vlllff.) and Zachariah (in Chaps. I, 7-VI, 8) with those of Isaiah and Jeremiah, we find that the vital element of spontaneity which characterizes the latter is al- together absent from the former, and in place of it we meet with a minutely elaborated symbolism, which serves as a fantastic garb for the prophet's theological \-iews. This s}TTibolic and studied imagery of Ezekiel (and also of Zachariah), it should be noted, has noth- ing in common with the poetic imagery in Isaiah's consecration-vision, by means of which the prophet effectively describes his spiritual experience. The difference between the artificial method of Ezekiel and the direct presentation of Isaiah and Jeremiah may be further illustrated by the fact that Ezekiel, though he devotes fully twenty-five verses to the de- scription of his vision of consecration (Chap. I), de- lineating with great diffuseness every detail of the apparition, the cherubs with the chariot, the chariot- wheels, the firmament with the throne supported by the cherub-chariot, and, finally, " the appearance of the One above the throne," does not until the very end communicate the fact that he is facing God; while Isaiah and Jeremiah, in their consecration-visions, bring out immediately the dominant thought that their soul was standing face to face with the Eternal and heard the secrets of His counsel. PART III CHArXER I HOW THE PROPHETIC UTTERANCES BECAME LITERATURE Our investigation, in Part I, Chap. II, of Jeremiah's persecution during the reign of Jehojakim brought out the fact that the Temple-sermon, and not the reading of his prophecies by Baruch four years later, formed the decisive event in the prophet's career, and that, consequently, Jer. XXXVI does not possess the significance generally attributed to it for the history of his life. This chapter, however, is invaluable to us in that it gives definite enlightenment on a point which, otherwise, no doubt, would lead to much vexed discussion. As soon as it is granted that Jere- miah spoke altogether by word of mouth, the question naturally rises as to how his prophecies came to be written down and preserved; and to this question Chap. XXXVI gives the answer. We learn that in the first place it was owing to the prophet's own solicitude that his prophecies were preserved, and we learn also to what end he wished them to be preserved. Verses 27-32 tell us not only that Jeremiah himself arranged for the second collection of his prophecies after the first had been burned by Jehojakim, but also that he enlarged this second collection by adding to it his later prophecies. Proof of the latter is the state- ment, V. 32, "There were added to them, besides, many similar prophecies." This express statement, which, it is important to note, contains no specification as to 167 1 68 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL the time when the addition was made, can refer only to those prophecies and confessions of Jeremiah which originated later than the fifth year of Jehojakim's reign, and not, as Duhm is inclined to assume, to a more complete collection of his former prophecies; ^ for \^. 2, 4 mention expressly that the first collection contained all the prophecies which Jeremiah had dehvered from the day of his consecration as prophet, in the thirteenth year of Josiah, up to the fourth year of Jehojakim. This interpretation of "There were added to them, besides, many similar prophecies" is further borne out by the fact that there is no mention whatever of this addition in w. 27-31, which relate God's behest to Jeremiah after the scroll had been burned by the King: "Take another scroll and write in it all the words - that were in the first scroll which Jehojakim, the king of Judah, hath burned." The only addition mentioned in the behest is the brief personal threat against Jehojakim {w. 30-31). Though not directly stated in this connection, Jeremiah's purpose in preserving his prophecies is ob\dous. The fate his scroll had met wdth at the hands of the King had shown beyond a doubt that his prophecies were ineffectual for his own age. But the prophet foresaw other ages, when justice would tri- umph and the truth have recognition, and to these future and more discerning ages, he was determined that his words should be handed down. Again and again he declared that it was to the future that he looked for the reahzation of his hopes, and through all the vicissitudes of his career he never failed to assert his conviction that some day some good was bound ^ "Das Buch Jeremia," ad loc. 2 harisonim omitted, in accordance with the LXX. PROPHETIC LITERATURE 169 to come from his prophetic calling. Corroboration of this view is furnished by XXX, jf. : "Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, write all the words that I have spoken to thee in a scroll; for verily days are to come, saith the Lord, when I shall make a change in the condition of my people, Israel and Judah, and shall bring them back to the land which I gave to their fathers, that they may possess it [again]." As to the other prophets, we know, at least in the case of Isaiah, or, to be quite exact, in regard to certain of Isaiah's prophecies, that it was the prophet himself who took care that they should be preserved, and that he was influenced thereto by the same considerations as those by which Jeremiah was moved. Thus Is. XXX, 8 states that, at the behest of God, Isaiah put down in writing the prophecies which he had spoken at the time of the aUiance of Judah with Egypt (705- 701), "in order that they might serve as a lasting testimony ^ in the days to come." And in Chap. VIII, because of the manifest indifference of the King and the people to his prophecies during the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, the prophet de- clares that there is nothing left for him to do but to entrust the message and revelation to his disciples for preservation, so that the purpose for which God revealed Himself to him may be ensured (Is. VIII, 16-18). It may safely be concluded that the other prophets were likewise intent on having their prophecies pre- served, for they were one and all convinced that the fruit of their labor, the realization of God's purpose, belonged to the future. No one knew better than they ' Read, in accordance with Targ., Pes., and Vuig. la'cd for la'ad. The plural, "they," is in accordance with the reading of the LXX. 17© THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL that the burning words they addressed to their con- temporaries fell on deaf ears; yet they never doubted the ultimate efficacy of their labors, never wavered in their hope of the future. It will not be out of place to point out in this con- nection that the probable reason why no trace of Urijah's prophecy, referred to in Jer. XXVI, 20, has come down to us is the simple one that owing to his execution he had no opportunity of providing for its preservation. The fact that it was a single prophecy would not be sufficient explanation, as among the writings of the Minor Prophets we have so short a book as Haggai. (Obadjah, consisting of but a single chapter, can hardly be cited here, as the popularity of the theme of the pamphlet would account for its preservation among the Minor Prophets.) In view of the facts brought out above, it is obvious that the view referred to incidentally on pp. Syf., that the preservation of the utterances of the prophets was due to their disciples' initiative rather than to their own is untenable.^ And equally untenable is another very common view of the origin of the pro- phetic writings, viz., that the prophets started by put- ting into writing certain single detached utterances, or, it may be, complete separate sermons, as an effect- ive means of supplementing their oral preaching. The scholars who hold this view argue that, in com- mitting any particular utterance or sermon to writing, * Of recent years, this view has been expressed, with reference to Isaiah, by Guthe, in Kautzsch ', I, p. 549, by Harper, "Amos and Hosea" (in Intern. Crit. Com.), p. CXXVI, and by Hans Schmidt, "Die grossen Propheten und ihre Zeit" (in "Die Schriften des Alten Testaments" herausgegeben von Gressmann, etc., II, 2, p. 80); and, with reference to Amos, by E. Baumann, "Der Aufbau der Amosreden," p. 67, and Nowack, "Die Kleinen Propheten," p. 121. PROPHETIC LITER.\TURE 171 the prophets meant to give their hearers the oppor- tunity of reading it at home, when they could give more careful thought to it, but that, more particu- larly, they sought by tliis means to reach those who were not present at the time they delivered their message. For the latest expression of this view Kittel, " Geschichte des Volkes Israel," II, p. 454, may be referred to. Kittel sees in these beginnings of the prophetic writings in the form of separate sermons, or short collections of single utterances, something similar to tlie fly-sheets or pamphlets current among other nations in periods of poHtical or religious un- rest. The separate pieces, he reasons, were in the course of time gathered together into minor collections, and these in turn into books. This was the method of origin, Kittel asserts, "at least in the case of Isaiah, and, probably, also in the case of Amos and some others, while Jeremiah waits twenty-three years and then issues a larger collection of sermons." Kittel grants in a foot-note that there is no direct proof that even the book of Isaiah originated in this manner, but, in accordance with the widely prevaiHng view of the composition of the book of Isaiah, he thinks that the way the various sermons are combined in the present book of Isaiah makes this the probable process of origin.^ ^ The question whether in the arrangement of the book of Isaiah there is sufficient basis for such a view cannot be discussed here, but must be reserved for the detailed study of Isaiah in the 2nd vol. It should be remarked, however, that this view of the origin of the book of Isaiah is shared also by Robertson Smith in "The Prophets of Israel," pp. 210, 2i5f., 235f., but in "The Old Testament in the Jewish Church," p. 30if., he advances the view presented in these pages with regard to the writings of Isaiah and those of the other prophets. 172 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL In regard to Klttel's reference to Jeremiah it must be pointed out that, when Jeremiah, after the battle at Karkemish, committed his past prophecies to writing, the thought of having them sent broadcast among the people did not enter his mind. Nor by Baruch's rehearsal did he mean to afford the people a better acquaintance with his prophecies. He had Baruch read his past prophecies, together with his special message for that occasion,^ before the people assembled from all quarters of the country in the Temple at Jerusalem ^ for the reason that he was unable to deliver his message in person, as, because of the death -sentence hanging over his head, he dared not appear in pubHc. Had he been able to appear in person before the people, the probabihty is that he would not have resorted to the altogether exceptional step of having all his previous prophecies rehearsed to the people, but would simply have referred to them by way of adding weight to the present utterance, and as proof of his prophetic foresight. The events which had just transpired at Karkemish were a vindication of all his past preaching, and, although he could not point this out himself (as he was no doubt burning to ^ See supra, Part I, Chap. II, § 4. ^ It should be remembered that it was customary for the prophets to avail themselves of such occasions as this for delivering their message, unless the circumstances of the case prompted to immediate action. Thus Jeremiah, four years before, had on a similar occasion delivered his famous Temple-sermon. Also Amos delivered his message at Beth-El during the great fall-festival, when that famous sanctuary was filled with pilgrims from all parts of the country. And Isaiah, we know, delivered several of his sermons at this season of the year in the Temple at Jerusalem, e. g., Chap. XXVIII (c/. the reference in vv. 7-8 to the riotous feasting of people and priest), and XXIX, 1-14 (v. I shows that it was during the festive season at the completion of the year that the sermon was delivered). PROPHETIC LITERATURE 173 do), he was determined the people should understand that the prophecies which they had scorned had been fulfilled. They should be forcibly reminded that he had foretold these very events, they should be con- vinced that he was indeed inspired by God (r/. also infra, p. 207). Further, the view of Kittel and others as to the motive by which the prophets were actuated in put- ting their prophecies into writing is not borne out by the report, Jer. XXXVI, 27-32, of Jeremiah's second collection of his prophecies; for that matter, it is not borne out by any of the various passages in Jeremiah and Isaiah which refer to the prophet's recording his prophecies or to his recording certain words or trans- actions, as the case may be. There is no suggestion, even, in these passages that would justify such a view. On the contrary, whenever the reason is stated for the prophet's writing down his prophecies, whether all of them or certain ones, or for his making any other record, it is invariably to tlie elTect that the document or record shall serve as a testimony for future ages. This holds good not only of Jer. XXX, 2f., Is. XXX, 8, VIII, 16-18, which have been dwelt upon above, but also of Jer. XXXII, 10-15, which relate how Jeremiah took pains to preserve the deed of the pur- chase when he bought the land from his cousin Hanamel.^ Also when Isaiah, at the time of the Syro- Ephraimitic campaign, summarized his prediction in the words, " Maher-shalal-hash-baz " — "Spoil is speedy, plunder is hasty" — and engraved the words, in the presence of witnesses, on a tablet, he did it, as even Kittel acknowledges, in order that, when his forecast would be proved true by events, there should ^ CJ. supra, p. 19. 174 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL be documentary evidence of his prediction to that effect. Finally, the view of Kittel and others of the origin of the prophetic writings presupposes that the people manifested a general interest in the preaching of the prophets, while every utterance of the prophets is evidence that the very opposite was the case.^ Naturally, in discussing how the prophetic utter- ances came to be put down in writing, there can be reference only to the preexilic prophets, who delivered their messages in the first place by word of mouth. In the case of Deutero-Isaiah there can hardly be any doubt that his writings. Is. XL-LV, had book-form from the very first. They are not a series of separate detached sermons or messages, like the writings of the preexiHc prophets, but form one continuous discourse. Regarding the manner of their circulation, they offer no clue as to whether they were sent broadcast among the Jewish captivity, or whether their author delivered them personally before a large assembly of the exiles; but, from what we know in general about the conditions and customs of those times, the latter would seem to be the more likely theory. As to Ezekiel and Zachariah, there is no room for any ques- tion — their writings, as pointed out above, are not the spontaneous product of the intuitive, but the studied product of the speculative faculty, and there can be no doubt that their earliest formulation was in writing. From the fact, that the great preexilic prophets showed such solicitude for the preservation of their prophecies, it follows that the term, ''literary proph- ecy," is by no means a misleading term, Stade to the ^ Cj. infra, pp. 266f., 2945. PROPHETIC LITERATURE 175 contrary,^ but rather a most appropriate one, par- ticularly suited to bring out an essential point of difference between the older prophecy and the new movement marked by the appearance of Amos. The older prophets were concerned about the present; their vision and their energy were directed to the events of the hour; their purpose embraced only their own times and their own countrymen. The newer prophets beheld a scheme reaching into the far future; they were more vitally concerned about the ultimate working out of this scheme than about the affairs of their own day; their message was not for their com- patriots or contemporaries alone, but for all men in the days to come — hence the necessity for its preserva- tion in writing; their vision and their purpose were centered in that ideal future which should some day come to pass. » See "Biblische Theologie des Alt. Test.," pp. 2o^i., and ZATW., XXIII, p. 161. CHAPTER II THE PROPHETS BELIEVE THE DOOM INEVITABLE If the essential point of difference between the older and the literary prophets dwelt on in the preceding chapter is borne in mind, the question, whether the prophets' announcements of judgment are to be con- sidered as conditional or as absolute predictions, is a very simple one. That there is a division of opinion among the scholars on this question is to be attributed to the fact that the presentation commonly given of preexilic prophecy gives undue prominence to the prophets ' preaching of doom and somewhat obscures the more essential feature of their preaching. If the main stress is laid on the prophets' forecasting of doom, and their preaching considered principally from this point of view, one would have to conclude with Volz and others that the prophets "to the very last hoped for the conversion of the people and the warding off of the judgment," that "only on this supposition their preaching and especially the putting down of their sermons in writing has sense;" ^ or one would have to grant the validity of the argument which Giesebrecht advances in contesting the view of Smend, that the prophets look forward to the catastrophe as ^ See "Die vorexilische Jahveprophetie und der Messias" (1897), p. 8; and among others also Stade "Biblische Theologic des Alt. Test.'s," § 107, and E. Kautzsch, "Die Biblische Theologie des Alten Testaments" (i9ii),pp. 20if., 2511!. 176 THE DOOM INEVITABLE 177 inevitable (op. cil., 191, 194). "Why," Giesebrccht asks, "do the prophets not confine themselves to a few oracularutterancesannouncing the disaster that threat- ens them? Why do they take such pains to show the people their iniquity and to awaken in them a belief in their approacliing disaster? Wliy do they waste so many words if they know beforehand that no amount of talking will avail?" ^ But when the vital factor of the prophetic preaching is taken into consideration, the transcendent faith of the prophets in the final triumph of righteousness and their beHcf in the subservience of present events to this great end, there is no room for such reasoning. Nor is there room for the theory entertained by Duhm,- Cornill,^ and Henry P. Smith ^ in regard to Jeremiah, and by W. Staerk ^ in regard to Amos and Hosea, that, at least at the beginning of their activity, the prophets hoped that the people might be affected by their preaching and that thus the doom might be averted. A systematic interpretation of the prophetic A writings shows that at no time of their activity did 1 the prophets entertain such a hope. They were aware \ ^^ from the outset that they were preaching to deaf ears, ) for they fully realized the insuperable difference in re- j ligious views which separated them from the people; I and they did not fail to make clear their belief that by / 1 "Die Berufsbegabungder Alttestamentlichen Propheten" (1897), p. 82. 'Op. cit., general remarks on Chaps. II- IV, 4, and IV, 5-VI, p. 47I. ' "Das Buch Jercmia," Einlcitung, p. XXVIII, and p. 36. * "Old Testament History," p. 290. '"Das Assyrische Wcltreich im Urtcile dor Propheten" (1908), pp. 14, 38fT.; this view is taken also by Mcinhold, "Studicn zur Israeli tischen Religionsgeschichte," pp. 43fl., and Harper, ".Amos and Hosea," p. CXX. 178 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL nothing short of the overthrow of the whole religious- social structure could the people be brought to the realization of their delusions and superstitious beliefs. It was for the furtherance of the ultimate purpose which the prophets beHeved God pursued in calling them, and not because they hoped their exhortations might be heeded by their contemporaries, that they took pains to set forth how the doom might be averted. If these obvious facts are to-day recognized to a less extent even than formerly, the mistaken views, which we had occasion to point out above,^ are largely responsible for it, viz., the view now upheld by many that the prophetic sermons consist of epi- grammatically short utterances, and the contrary view advanced by others that they have, to a large extent, come down to us in a fragmentary form. 1 Supra, pp. 88 and 91. CHAPTER III JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM The majority of Jeremiah's sermons speak with such clearness and certainty of the impending judg- ment that they need not be considered in detail. Only those sermons and passages need be considered which, at first glance, might seem to bear out the view that the prophet's predictions of doom are conditional. The sermons which come into consideration from this point of view are: XIII, 15-27; XIV, 1-18 (19- XV, 4), XV, 5-9; and IV, 3-31. Of these the last- mentioned, IV, 3-31, belongs to the very oldest of Jeremiah's prophecies, — on this point exegetes are unanimous; the second, XIV, 1-18 (19- XV, 4), XV, 5-9, contains no clue whatever to its date. The first, XIII, 15-27, belongs to the later period of Jeremiah's activity, for v. 21 presupposes the ascent of the Chalda^ans to power. Beyond this, there is no possibility of fixing the date more exactly. It has wrongly been inferred from the mention of "the Queen Dowager" in v. 18 that the dirge, w. i8f., must have originated in the time of Jehojachin, as, owing to the great youth of this king, the Queen Dowager, no doubt, exercised a strong influence on the affairs of the state during his brief rule. However, in view of the fact that the queen dowager was in any case a most important personage, always ranking immediately after the king (much like the queen- consort to-day in Occidental countries), it was but 179 i8o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL natural that in his dirge the prophet should call upon her together with the King to mourn over the certain destruction of the nation. Another, but still more farfetched, conclusion regarding the time of origin, which has been drawn by some scholars from "I must weep in secret," is that the piece, or the part in question, must have been written at the time when Jeremiah lived in hiding from Jehojakim — else " why did he have to weep in secret? " ^ But both from a literary and a psychological standpoint the expres- sion admits of no such deduction. "To weep in secret" is a perfectly natural expression up to the present day; it may even be classed among the stock expressions of literature. The natural impulse of sorrow is not to weep on the housetop or on the public square. I. CHAP. XIII, 15-27 The opening of the sermon effectively mirrors Jeremiah's frame of mind. The prophet begins with a brief exhortation to the people to do penance while there is yet time. He would rouse his people from their apathy, but immediately his mind is crowded with pictures of the certain doom toward which in their bhndness they are hastening. Under the figure of a gathering storm he suggests rather than describes the terror and dismay in which they will be engulfed when the night of doom suddenly breaks over them : — They will wait for the storm to pass by, hoping for light, but, instead, they will be plunged into im- 1 See Duhm, op. cit., prefatory remarks to XIII, 15-27; Erbt " Jeremia und seine Zeit," p. 217, and Comill, op. cit., p. 180, who both accept Duhm's view. JEREML\H'S MEW OF THE DOOM i8i penetrable darkness, wrapped in the shadow of death: "Hear ye, and give ear, be not haughty, for the Lord speaketh! Give honor to the Lord, your God, before it groweth dark, before your feet stumble against the mountains of darkness — Ye shall hope for light, but it will be changed ^ to the shadow of death, will be turned to impenetrable darkness. But if ye pay no heed, I must weep in secret because of [your] haughtiness, my eyes must shed tears,- for the flock of the Lord is led away captive" (w. 15- 17). So certain and so real is it all to him that he con- tinues in w. 18-19 with a dirge over the fallen nation. He calls upon the royal house to mourn over their departed glory, their ruined country: "Speak ^ to the King and to the Mistress [of the land], sit lowly, for your glorious crown has fallen from your head. ' Read w^samoh instead of w^samd/i. The subject Ynwn, of samoh and jasllh is omitted, as in Job III, 20, VIII, 18, el alii.; the omission is for the purpose of heightening the eCfect, and the case belongs properly in the category of impersonal construction. The asyndeton jasz/// (Kethib) adds to the vividness of the description; the change to 'w^iith by the Masorites was a blunder. 2 Omit w'damo'a lidtna' , the phrase being a variant of wlhcrad dim' a. ^ Read, in accordance with the LXX, 'iitiril instead of '<"mor. 1 82 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL The cities of the South ^ are shut up,^ there is none to open them.^ Judah is carried away captive entirely, is carried away captive completely." Note, how V. 17 with its perfect of certitude, niSbd, "the flock of the Lord is led away captive," leads up skilfully to this vision of the downfall. No less perfect is the connection between the latter and the apos- trophe with which in v. 20 he turns to the country, bidding her note how the enemy is invading the land, though this sudden transition makes the impression, at first glance, of a break in the thought: "Lift up thine eyes and behold ^ them that come from the North! What of the flock that hath been entrusted to thee? What of thy beautiful flock?" The verse is just another variation of the prophet's vision of the coming doom, and in its turn leads up logically, though imperceptibly, to the concluding part, w. 21-27. With the close of v. 20 the prophet has got back to the actual present, and he continues in 2 iff. by asking the nation, the mother of the coun- try, what she will say then, when all these terrors have come to pass, when those whom in her blindness 1 That is, all the cities, even to the extreme boundary of the South. 2 That is, are desolate, life and trafl&c have ceased; cf. Is. XXIV, 10. * potheah is a case of potential participle; the subject 'are is to be construed also as object with pothe^'h, a construction which occurs quite frequently. * Read, as the Kethib demands, 5« 'i and r" 'i, and, accordingly, 'enajikh, as the LXX in fact read. The text-disorder arose through a copyist's mistake in thinking this verse also addressed to the King and the Queen Dowager. JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 183 she has befriended have become her masters.^ And when she asks why all this has befallen her, he adds, then shall she know that it is because of her sinfulness. The hopeless finality of the prophet's belief is expressed in his exclamation: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Verily, then would ye be able to do good who are practised in doing evil" (v. 23). Only after a long period of suffering in exile, he declares in conclusion, will they finally be cleansed from their errors and their corruption: "I shall disperse them like chaff that is tossed before the wind of the desert. This is thy lot, the portion assigned unto thee by me, saith the Lord, because thou hast forgotten me and hast put thy trust in falsehood. . . . Woe unto thee, Jersualcm, thou shalt not be cleansed for a long time yet!" (w. 24, 25, 27b). In reviewing XIII, 15-27 it will be seen that they have one central thought and form a well-connected whole, and that there is, consequently, no basis for the view taken by recent exegetes, that they are merely fragments of three different sermons. 1 In V. 21 read, as Comill (op. cit., ad loc.) on the ground of the LXX rightly emends, jippaq'du instead of jiphqod, and construe I'rol with jippaq'du 'alajikh; w^al limmadt 'otliam 'alajikh 'alluphim is parenthetical. The mistaken reading by the Masorites is to be accounted for by the fact that the 3rd plur. was written without the vowel letter, w. 1 84 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 2. CHAPS. XIV, I-18 (19-XV, 4), XV, 5-9 XIV, 19-XV, 4 are generally acknowledged to be out of place; the declaration of the preceding verses, that the doom of the people is sealed, cannot possibly have been followed by a renewed prayer for help. The solution of the difficulty, however, is not to be found in the assumption that this whole passus is the work of a later author, but in the conclusion that XIV, 19-XV, 2 are another version of the prayer, XIV, 7-9, and of God's reply to it in vv. 10, 12, Proof of this is that in vv. 19-22 the reference to the drought is even more pronounced than in w. 7-9; note partic- ularly the concluding verse 22: "Are there among the illusions of the nations any that have power to cause rain? ^ Or doth the Heaven give showers? Is it not rather Thou, Yhwh, our God? In Thee do we hope, for Thou effectest all this." "Do not disgrace the throne of thy glory," of v. 21 furnishes no argument against Jeremiah's authorship of these verses, since, as we shall see later, the prayer for dehverance from their present distress is put by the prophet in the mouth of the people. XV, 3 is a prosaic comment on verse 2. Verse 4 is evidently also a later addition. It ascribes the im- pending judgment to the wrong-doing of Manasseh, which, we know, is contrary to the principle of indi- vidual responsibility expressed by Jeremiah. Through- out his preaching Jeremiah represents the judgment as coming, not because of the sin of any one individual ^ tnagsimim is potential participle. JEREMIAH'S MEW OF THE DOOM 185 (particularly of an individual of a past generation), but because of the general corruption of his own age. Contrary to the opinion of the scholars who hold that XIV, 2-XV, 9 consist of two originally separate pieces, the first of which, XIV, 2-10, treats of a drought, and the second, 11-18, XV, 5-9, of a catastro- phe which is to come by sword, famine, and pesti- lence,^ an exact analysis leaves no doubt, to my mind, that XIV, 2-6 . . ., 7-10, 12 (= 19-XV, 2), XIV, 13-18, XV, 5-9 form an organic whole. It is most un- likely that the drought per sc would be the subject of Jeremiah's sermon; it is far more probable that he dwells on it only incidentally, while dealing with the real crisis with which he is preoccupied in every one of his sermons, that is, the coming destruction of the na- tion. The description of the suffering caused through- out the country by the drought (vv. 2-6) serves as a setting for the prophet's prediction of doom, and ef- fectively heightens the gloom and terror of the latter: " Judah moumeth, her gates languish, they are bowed to the ground in mourning; and the wail of Jerusalem ascendeth. Her nobles ^ send their servants for water; they come to the wells, they find no water, they return with empty vessels, dejected and confounded and with heads covered.^ The tillage * of the soil hath stopped, • See among others, Cornill, op. cil., ad loc, and Rothstcin in Kautzsch ', ad loc. - Read 'addiraha (LXX). ' We would say "with faces covered," as a sign of utter consterna- tion. * Read, in accordance with the LXX, lua' obltodath instead of 1 86 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL for there hath been no rain in the land ; the husbandmen are dismayed, they cover their heads. Even the hind in the woods beareth and forsaketh her young/ because there is no grass; and the wild-asses stand on the bare hills, they gasp for air like jackals, their eyes are languid, because there is no herbage." The prayer, w. 7-9, is not offered up by the prophet in behalf of the people, but is, as Duhm discerned, a prayer which the prophet represents the people as addressing in their present distress to Yhwh.^ Proof of this is "Yet Thou, O Yhwh, abidest with us, and we are dedicated to Thee " ^ of the concluding v. 9. Such a declaration could not possibly have been made by Jeremiah as expressing his own view of the situa- tion, for it would be in contradiction to his whole preaching. Put in the mouth of the people, however, it cannot excite surprise, for the prophet well knew that, in spite of his protestations, the people believed firmly that Yhwh was present with them and that they were truly serving Him. This view of the prayer is corroborated, in my opinion, by Micah III, 9-1 1, where precisely this point is emphasized: ba'^bhilr. The mistake of the Masoretic text was caused in the first place by W'^iAo^a/A being written abbreviated: 'T13J?1. 1 An interesting construction! The emphatic infinitive ^azohh has for its object the implied object of jal'dd; this construction occurs frequently, cf. e. g., Hos. V, 14, '^ni 'ani aetroph w^'elehh aessa we' en massil, "I shall make [them] my prey, and I shall carry off [the prey], and none will be able to rescue [it]"; Ps. XV, 4, 7iisba l^hara weld jatnlr, "Though he pledges himself to his own loss, he does not break his pledge." ^ See op. cit.,adloc. ' See supra, p. 99, n. i. JEREMIAH'S MEW OF THE DOOM 1S7 "Hear this, yc heads of the house of Jacob, and ye rulers of the house of Israel, that abhor justice and pervert right, that built up Zion by blood and Jerusalem by iniquity; . . . yet they profess to rely upon Ynwn, saying, verily, Yhwh abideth with us (/r'/J jalnucB Ifqirbcnfi), no evil can come upon us." It is interesting to note that Micah here, in showing the irony of the people's believing in spite of their corruptness that tlieir lives are centered in God, puts practically the same words in their mouth {tflo jalni'CE h'qirhcnu) as Jeremiah does in verse 9 of the prayer (uf'alla blfqirbcnii jaJnvcc). Additional support for this view of the prayer is furnished by XII, 4: "How long shall the country mourn, and the herbage wither all over the land; because of the wickedness of her inhabitants {mcra'ath jos'bJie bhd) beasts and birds are perishing," etc. This verse, as stated above,^ must at one time have formed a part of the description of the drought with which the prophet opens this sermon. The indications are that its original position was between the present v. 6 and V. 7. In the first place, there seems to be a trace of it left in the otto \aov aBiKiwi^ read by the LXX AQ at the end of v. 6, and corresponding, though with a slight variant, to mcra'alh jos'^bhc bhd of XII, 4. Further, it will be noticed at a glance how perfectly the verse fits in after vv. 2-6. The question, "How long shall the country mourn, and the herbage wither all over the land?" with which the verse opens, is clearly a condensation of the two subparts of w. 2-6, ' Sec supra, p. iisf. 1 88 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL viz., 2-4 and 5-6. These have just described minutely the gloom and the drought prevaihng throughout the land; XII, 4a asks, substantially, how long this state of affairs shall last. As to XII, 4b, "because of the wickedness of her inhabitants beasts and birds are perishing," this explanation of the cause of the drought is what we should expect after the detailed description of its horrors. It is the pointing of the moral. In fact, the absence of such a reflection would be an exception to what may be considered the customary line of thought in such cases in prophetic literature. Finally, when XII, 4 is inserted here, its last part, ki 'anfril lojir'ce 'aeih ^aJfrithenu, if emended in accordance with the LXX, becomes at once clear and related. The LXX read after Id jir'cE: jahwcB for the subject, and in- stead of ^ajfrithenu they read 'orhotJienu: — ki 'am'ru Idjir'cBJahwcB 'aeth 'orhothenu. ki (for which the LXX A has Kai) is introductory ki, which is frequently used in passing over to a new thought, as here, where the prophet turns from the description of the drought and his explanation of it to the people's reflections about it and their prayer to Yhwh. 'orhoth is used here in the same sense as Prov. I, 19, Job VIII, 13, "lot," "con- dition," "plight": "They speak Yhwh heedeth not our plight." This comment on the part of the people not only accords with, but also prepares us for, the note struck in the second part of the prayer: "0, Hope of Israel, its Savior in the time of trouble, why dost Thou act like a stranger in the land, like a wayfarer that tarrieth over night? Why dost Thou act like one that is dazed, like a hero that is powerless?" (vv. 8, 9a). If, as from all these facts it seems safe to conclude, JEREAriAH'S MEW OF THE DOOM 189 XII, 4 originally preceded the prayer, XIV, 7-9, there can be no question as to who oilers the prayer, since 'am'ru, "they speak," of XII, 4 expressly states that it is the people. In regard to the prayer, w. 19-22, of the parallel text, it is equally apparent that the people are rep- resented as praying. For only in this case would the words, "do not disgrace the throne of thy glory," of V. 21 be quite logical and natural. The people, indeed, beUeved Yhwti's honor to be imperilled by their plight. But not so Jeremiah; for him their distress in no wise reflected on Yhw'h's honor — rather would their downfall, he believed, be the manifestation of Yhwh's glory. No proof to the contrary follows from the term, hab/ile, "illusions," said of the gods of the nations in the concluding verse of this prayer, supposed to be offered up by the people; ^ an anachro- nism such as this ishableto occur in almost any author. In vv. 10, 12 the prophet gives God's answer to the people's prayer: The sinful Hfe in which they indulge without restraint leaves Him no other course than to execute judgment. Their fasting, their prayers and sacrifices will not avail with Him; He will bring about the dowTifall of the nation. He declares, by war and its concomitant evils, famine and pestilence. Verse 11 is the work of an interpolater, who thought the prayer was voiced by Jeremiah himself. Verse 1 2b , however, "but I will consume them by the sword, by famine, and by pestilence," was originally followed by haqdisem I'jom Ji^rcgd, XII, 3c, which Uke XII, 4, as ' The term, "illusions," with reference to the gods of the nations is altogether congruous not only with Jeremiah's religious views in general, but with his express statement in II, 11 that "they are not gods"; cf. also XVT, 19. I90 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL stated above/ got in its present place by mistake. Having Just declared that He will destroy the nation, God bids the prophet "consecrate them for the day of slaughter." Direct proof of this is the command in the parallel text, XV, i, 2: "Cast [them] - out of my sight and let them go," followed up by: "And if they ask you whither shall we go, tell them, thus saith the Lord, such as are destined for Death to Death, such as are destined for the sword to the sword, such as are destined for famine to famine, such as are destined for captivity to captivity." In fact this latter passage furnishes the clue to the interpretation and proper context of XII, 3c. As in IV, 10, V, 12-14, and 31, Jeremiah continues in XIV, i3-i7a that the naive assurance of the people and their prophets that his prediction of doom will not be proved true is a most pitiful delusion. In accordance with the form which suggested itself most naturally for the preceding part, XII, 4c, XIV, 7-10, 12, XII, 3c, the prophet continues this part, too, in the form of a dialogue between himself and God. This uniformity of structure contributes materially to the proof that XIV, 2-6, XII, 4, XIV, 7-10, 12, XII, 3c, and XIV, i3-i7a are all pivoted in one centre and are consecutive parts of one sermon. The reiterated declaration that their doom is sealed (vv. 1 5-1 7a) is effectively followed up by a dirge: ^ See supra, pp. ii6f. 2 The prepositional phrase, 'ael ha' am hazzcB, of the preceding sen- tence is to be construed as direct object with sallah; the omission of the object adds to the vividness of the command. JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM lor "My eyes shed tears night and day, unceasingly, for the virgin daughter of my people has sulTered a crushing calamity, a fatal blow. If I go into the fields, behold, those slain by the sword; if I enter tlie city, behold, those famished from hun- ger — Yea, even prophet and priest are bowed in mourning to the ground, void of knowledge " ^ (vv. i7b-i8). Note how the close of the dirge, with its picture of the despair and consternation with which priest and prophet will be seized on the day of doom, forms an eflectivc contrast to vv. i3-i7a, which dwell upon the mistaken feeling of security in which they indulge at present. XV, 5-9 are the sequel of the dirge, XIV, lyb-iS; verse 5 forms a sort of connecting hnk between the two, inasmuch as it continues in the same strain as the dirge. These verses bear much the same relation to the dirge as XIII, 20-27 do to the preceding dirge, vv. 18- 19. Like XIII, 20-27, they combine with the picture of the coming destruction an explanation of the cause of it: "- WTio will have compassion with thee, O Jerusalem? Who will extend sympathy unto thee? And who will turn aside to inquire about thy welfare? Thou hast rejected me saith the Lord; thou art given up to backsliding; * Read, as stated above (p. 113), fa//. cil., ad loc, rightly points out, must have been added later; possiljly the whole half-verse is rcdactorial addi- tion; the LXX;\ did not read it. 196 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL As if to show the irony of such an admonition, he leads his hearers abruptly into the midst of the judgment-scene, telling them to flee unto the fortified cities from the enemy invading the country: "Announce in Judah and Jerusalem, proclaim and say, sound the trumpet in the land, call aloud,^ bid them ^ assemble, that we may go into the fortified cities. Raise the standard toward Zion, flee, halt not! Yea, evil approacheth ^ from the north, a great de- struction. The lion hath come forth from the thicket, the destroyer of nations is on his way; he hath left his place in order to make thy land deso- late, that thy cities may become ruins, uninhabited. Because of this gird yourselves with sackcloth, mourn and wail; for the fierce anger of the Lord is not turned away from us"(vv.5-8). Verse 8 has brought the prophet back, almost imperceptibly, one might say, from his visualization of the doom to the actual present; so he continues by contrasting the terror and confusion that will prevail on the day of doom with the present bUnd assurance of ^ MaVu is elliptical phrase for maVu plkhaem (see Goldziher in ZDMG, XXVIII, 310, n.i). - Omit, in accordance with the LXX, the w^ of weifnril. ' Instead of 'aiiokhi mebhl read, as Duhm, op. cit., ad loc, rightly emends, ba'd — a reading attested in fact by Theodoret: iSov KaKo. airo (ioppa epx'^rai Kal a-vvTpLJ3rj fieydXr] (see Holmes & Parson, ad loc). JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 197 tlie people — an assurance the more pathetic, when one considers that the sword is suspended over their heads : ''On that day. saith the Lord, the King and the nobles shall lose courage, and tlic priests shall be appalled and the prophets be confounded. Then will they say/ Ah! Lord God, verily, Thou hast grievously beguiled this people and Jeru- salem - by saying ye shall enjoy safety — whereas the sword toucheth [our] very Hves. In that time it will be said about this people and Jerusalem, a scorching wind is blowing from the bare hills of the desert toward the daughter of my people, not to fan nor to winnow " (vv. 9-1 1). "Not to fan nor to winnow" is the prophet's way of saying "to destroy." The sinister implication of the words is more forcible than if he had said "to de- stroy" outright. ' Read, in accordance with the LXXA, w^^am^ru instead of wa'd- inar; the mistake of the Masoretic text arose from the fact that the 3d plur. was written without the final vowel-letter. The subject of u^'am^ril is the priests and oflacial prophets just mentioned, who at present assure the people, in the name of Viiwii, that they need fear no crisis. The ofiicial prophets and priests naturally believe their proclamations to be inspired by Yiiwii, which explains the reproach which Jeremiah sarcastically puts in their mouth. 2 The seemingly superfluous liru'salaim, following after /a' am hazzae, may be intentional on the part of the prophet, who no doubt wishes to make light of the people's belief in the inviolable sanctity of Jerusalem as the abode of '^'iiwn, this being the belief on which priests and prophets base their reassuring predictions. 198 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Then he concludes this first part by a brief reference to the cause of the judgment. As in vv. 9 and 10, God is represented as speaking: ''A full blast came from them against me, now also will I pronounce judgment against them " (v. 12). The figure which the prophet uses in this verse to express the people's unrestrained life of sin was sug- gested by the figure of the Sirocco which he employed in the preceding verses in describing the impending destruction. The concluding words, "now also will I pronounce judgment against them," call up immediately another vision of the coming judgment, and with this the second part begins: "Behold, he cometh up like clouds, his chariots are like the whirlwind, his horses are swifter than eagles — Woe unto us! we are undone " (v. 13). After this climax the prophet pauses very effectively to exhort the people to halt in their downward course; — but only for a moment, then he takes up anew his dramatic description of the approach of the enemy : "O Jerusalem! cleanse thy heart from wickedness that thou mayest be saved ! How long wilt thou harbor within thee thy evil thoughts? Hark! a messenger from Dan, a bearer of evil news from Mt. Ephraim : JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF TTIE DOOM 199 Tell all the people, 'There [they] are!' Proclaim in Jerusalem, the besiegers have arrived from a distant land, they shout at the cities of Judah the war-cr}-.' Like guards in the field they have closed her in round about, because she hath been rebellious against me, saith the Lord. Thy ways and thy doings have brought this upon thee. This is the fruit of thy wickedness. Yea, it is bitter, it toucheth one's heart " - (vv. 14-18). Thus the second part, like the first, closes with a brief explanation of the cause of the judgment, with the difference, however, that here the prophet adds an expression of his personal grief over the situation. This note is fully developed in the opening verses of the last part: "0 my innermost being! I writhe in anguish, my heart throbs violently, I find no rest. ' ki opening verse 15, is introductory ki, as XII, 4c (see supra, p. 18S). Note the vividness of the description — the messenger from Mt. Ephraim following closely on the heels of the herald from Dan. Verse 16 states what news they convey. This latter verse is perfect and, with the exception of the reading birilMaim (LXX) or /irwJ. (Pes.) instead of 'aljcriis., needs no emendation, gojim has here the meaning "all the people," just a.s 'ammim Job. XVII, 6, and l^'ummim Prov. XXIV, 24; the meaning "tell" which hizklr has here cannot be questioned, since the word occurs in Gen. XL, 14 with the meaning "mention" and in Is. LXIII, 7 and in Ps. LXXVII, 12 (K) with the meaning "relate." hinnc forms an ellipsis, the subject being omitted. The ellipsis adds greatly to the vividness of the scene; grammatically it is to be explained by the fact that hinne is primarily verbum sub- slanliviim. ^The sufTixof the 2d sm^.oi libhekh is impersonal, as, e.g., in io'^^/jd 'azzd (Jud. VI, 4), bd'<^kha stir (I Sam. XV, 7). 200 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL For my soul heareth ^ but the sound of the trumpet. the alarm of war. Destruction meeteth destruction,^ Yea, the whole country is ravaged, all of a sudden my tents are destroyed, in an instant my tent-hangings [are destroyed]. How long must I behold the standard, must I hear the sound of the trumpet?" (vv. 19-21). In answer to the question of the prophet, how long his agony must last, God points to the people's hope- less corruption, their utter mental and spiritual blind- ness, whereupon the prophet again takes up the thread of i9b-2i, and develops in detail his vision of the destruction of the country: " For my people are fooUsh, they know me not, stupid children they are, lacking understanding, they are cunning in doing evil, but know not how to do good. I look to the earth, and there is chaos and void, to the sky, and its luster is gone; I behold the mountains tottering and all the hills shaking; I look about, and there are no people, even the birds of the sky are scared away; I look about, and the fruitful country is turned to a wilderness, all its cities are destroyed, because of God, because of His fierce anger " (vv. 22-26). ^ Read the participle, somaath, in accordance with the LXX, Pes. and Targ. 2 nigra is not Nifal of qard, "tell," but of qard, byform of qard with he. JEREMIAH'S MEW OF THE DOOM 201 In vv. 27a and 28 the prophet develops the idea contained in the concluding words of the preceding V. 26, and accounts at the same time for the dread pictures of his vision — God's decree of judgment is irrevocable : "For thus saith the Lord, the whole land shall be made desolate; ^ therefore must the land mourn, and even the sky above will be cast in gloom; because I have spoken, and will not repent, I have resolved, and will not retract." There is nothing eschatological about Jeremiah's vision of the coming doom in vv. 23ff . (Gressmann to the contrary).^ "The sky above will be cast in gloom " of V. 28 and "its luster is gone" of v. 23 have a very simple explanation. It is a universally recognized fact that in periods of great grief we are prone to pro- ject our own gloom into the natural scenes and objects surrounding us; it seems hardly conceivable that nature should continue her course unaffected by our sorrow. Verses 29-31 are the finale. The prophet returns very skilfully to the starting-point of his whole description, the people's flight from the enemy con- quering the country: "At the sound of the horsemen and the archers the whole city ^ hath taken to flight, ' 27b, w'khald Id 'ae^scB, "yet will I not wreak complete destruc- tion," it is obvious, is an interpolation. It purports to moderate God's declaration in v. 27a, which, however, it flatly contradicts. - See " Der Ursprung dcr israclitisch-jiidischen Eschatologie," p. 147. ' The capital, no doubt, is meant; the LXX read ka'arae^. 202 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL they retreat to the woods, climb the rocks, every city ^ is deserted, none is left in them" (v. 29). He continues with an apostrophe to the nation, in which he mingles irony with sadness as he tells her that she cannot avert her doom by any wiles: "But thou, doomed to ruin,^ why dost thou endeavor to clothe thyself in scarlet, to deck thyself with golden jewelry, to enlarge thine eyes with stib- ium; in vain dost thou make thyself fair, the lovers scorn thee, they seek thy Ufe " (v. 30). "They seek thy life" leads over in turn to a graphic description of the nation in her death-struggle, which forms at once the cHmax and the conclusion of the whole : "Yea, I hear sounds as of a woman in travail, cries of anguish as of a woman giving birth to her first-born : It is the cry of the daughter of Zion, that gaspeth for breath, that throweth up her hands: ^ Woe unto me! My life doth succumb unto mur- derers!" (v. 31). This sermon ranks next to the confessions in importance, in that it so admirably portrays the con- ^ Read kol 'ir as taken demands and as the LXX in fact read. 2 Read sediidd; the mistake arose from the fact that the feminine was written abbreviated: 'TITC sediidd is potential participle as in Ps. CXXXVII, 8, where the text has imnecessarily been amended by recent exegetes. * That is, in her death-agony. JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 203 flict of feelings which was constantly being waged in Jeremiah's soul. Jeremiah knew (Jiat his people were past hope, he knew that they would not repent, that they could not be saved, and that, tlierefore, as far as they were concerned, his preaching was in vain. But he could not reconcile his love for his people to the thought of their destruction. The very knowledge that their doom was inevitable made the thought of it torture; and the fact that he loved them so deeply made it impossible for him to get the thought out of his mind. His people were rushing blindly, uncon- sciously, to their doom and he was powerless to stay them. With preternatural keenness his brain worked out again and again every circumstance and detail of his people's destruction. Yet his heart cried out for the impossible, that God might suspend His judgment, that His people might yet be saved. This conflict of feelings explains how the prophet comes to break off in the very middle of his vision of the approaching catastrophe to exhort his indifferent hearers to repent while there is yet time. It is important to note that similar expression is given to these conflicting feelings in Chap. VI (r/. v. 8 and also loa and 15a) — a sermon which in structure and tenor is almost the exact counterpart of IV, 3-31, though in dramatic effect and vividness of description it does not come up to the level of the latter. The circumstance that both sermons belong unquestionably to the oldest products of Jeremiah's activity lends them a special signifi- cance for our purpose, inasmuch as it shows that from the very first Jeremiah believed the doom inevitable.^ ' If in the face of such depth of feeling, such grief and gloom, as are revealed in Chaps. IV, 3-31 and VI, Cornill speaks of the averting of the Scythian danger as "schwere Tage fiir den jugendlichen Pro- 204 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Besides the above sermons, there are two pas- sages that call for discussion, XXXVI, 3 and 7, and XVIII, iff. 4. XXXVI, 3, 7; CHAPS. XXV and xlv (a) XXXVI, 3, 7 At first glance it would seem to follow from XXXVI, 3 and 7 that when, after the battle at Karkemish, Jeremiah had Baruch write down all his prophecies and read them to the people, he did it in the hope that a conversion of the people might yet be effected. On closer examination, however, this conclusion does not appear permissible. The particle, 'ulai, does not necessarily express what the writer or speaker hopes may occur, or what he thinks is likely to occur. It is often used to state a purely conjectural case, a con- tingency which he knows is imlikely to occur; ^ cf. Is. XL VII, 12, ^Ulai tukMl ko'il 'illai ta'^rosi, "If perchance," or better, "If by any chance thou mightst be able to achieve anything, if by any pheten," die "erste schwere Enttauschung," die moglicherweise "lahmend auf ihn eingewirkt hat" und durch die "sein Glaube auf eine harte Probe gestellt" wurde (op. ciL, p. 85 and Einleitung, p. XXVII), it but shows how he failed to enter into the spirit of these singular sermons. Cornill's reasoning here is the more surprising as in his excellent exposition on Chap. XLV he remarks aptly in regard to Jeremiah's mission's being at constant strife with his affection for his people: "War doch sein ganzes prophetisches Wirken ein fortgesetz- ter Kampf gegen das eigene mitfiihlende Herz, welches in ihm tobte und ihm die Brust zersprengen woUte, so dass er wiinschen konnte niemals geboren zu sein." ^ This use of 'tilai is even more in keeping with its etymology; the word is really a double conditional particle, this formation being intended, no doubt, to lend greater emphasis to the conjectural case. JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 205 chance thou mightst scare off [the catastrophe]," ' Jcr. LI, 8, '/?/(7/ Icrap/w, "If by any chance she might be healed." - And it is with this force that 'illal is used in Jcr. XXXVI, 3 and 7, as the contents of these verses clearly show: Verse 3, it may be well to point out, does not raid j is m'^ii ^acth d'bJiarl or d'^b/iar jaJrd>cc, "... hear my word " or " the word of God," as is customary in such cases, and as one would naturally expect here also, but significantly7/^w''M '(7c/// //ara a, " . . . hear the evil," etc., this evil being none other than the very peril wliich is staring them in the face and which has filled them with such alarm; and v. 7 concludes with the categorical statement that God's judgment has been decreed. The verses are to be translated: "If by any chance Judah might hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them so that they might return from their evil ways,^ and I might forgive their in- iquities ^ and their sins.* — If by any chance their prayers might be offered up unto God and they might * The customary explanation, that "scare off" means "scare off the demon believed to be instrumental in the destruction," is farfetched and quite unnecessary. This is just another interesting illustration of the grammatical case pointed out, pp. 51 and 182, n. 3. The sub- ject of the preceding sentence, so'd or rad of v. 11, is to be supplied as object of taardsi. 'Since Brown, Driver, Briggs' "Hebrew English Lexicon," s. v. 'iUai, explains the use of 'ulai in these two examples by remarking "in mockery," it may be well to point out that the fact that the au- thors use irony in these passages does not in the least explain the function of 'iilai from a grammatical point of view. The grammatical function of 'iilai in the above cases and in certain others, which cannot be taken up here, has its analogy in certain uses of Greek dv with the optative. * In accordance with the LXX, read middarkam (plural) and omit 'iJ. * Read the plural in accordance with the versions. 2o6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL return from their evil ways/ for great is the anger and fury which God has pronounced against this people." Thus the verses express a most despondent view of the situation rather than confidence that a turn for the better might be effected. Even when the people trembled for their existence, and in their fear ordained a day of fast and penance throughout the country, Jeremiah cherished no hope that they would come to see the peril in the light of his preaching "and turn from their evil ways." On the contrary, their zealous resort to ceremonial piety, whenever danger threat- ened or disaster befell them, their blind behef that they could appease God and induce His good will by ritu- alistic observances were for Jeremiah, even as for the other prophets, the proof that by nothing short of their destruction could they be made to realize the hollowness and mockery of their religious customs and beliefs.^ Jer. XXXVI, 3 and 7, then, although for the question occupying us here they cannot claim equal value with the sermons and confessions — inasmuch as, being a part of a biographic record, they do not express the prophet's thoughts and feehngs so immediately — corroborate none the less what everyone of his sermons and confessions shows, viz., that at no period of his preaching did Jeremiah expect that his words would produce a change of heart in his contemporaries. (b) chap. XXV The interpretation just given of XXXVI, 3 and 7 receives additional support from the direct utterances 1 Read the plural in accordance with the versions. 2 Besides the Temple-sermon and IV, 3f., cf. particularly Am. rv, 4-12, Is. I, 2-20, XXIX, 1-4, 5ch5, 9-14, Hos. V, 6, and see infra, Book II, Part I. JEREMIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 207 of Jeremiah which date from the time of his life with which that chapter deals, viz., Chap. XXV and Chap, XLV — utterances the testimony of which is the more pertinent as they are immediately connected with Jeremiah's committing his prophecies to writing. From Chap. XXV (part of which served as introduc- tion, part as conclusion to the reading of his prophe- cies by Baruch, see supra, pp. 46IT.) we know that Jeremiah's sole object in having his prophecies com- mitted to writing and read to the people was to estab- lish the fact that his past preacliing was vindicated by the recent events at Karkemish, and to make it clear that his prophesying was inspired by God (see supra, pp. i72f.). This chapter contains no hint of admoni- tion, no suggestion of a possible escape from the judgment; it shows the prophet's mind altogether preoccupied with the thought of the destruction which he sees so swiftly approaching from Babylon. (c) CHAP. XLV Chapter XLV furnishes even more convincing proof that Jeremiah had abandoned all hope for the nation before he committed his prophecies to writing, and that, consequently, he cannot have aimed at effecting a conversion of the people by this means. According to V. I, the utterance recorded in this chapter was made on the occasion of his dictating his prophecies to Baruch, in the fourth year of Jehojakim's reign; and that this really was the date and occasion of it Cornill, in his exposition of the chapter, referred to above, has conclusively proved. The utterance is addressed to Baruch: — Baruch, weighed down by his grief and despair at the disclosure of Jeremiah's prophecies, has asked if all hope must be relinquished, if there is 2o8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL no prospect of rest, if there is nothing to be looked forward to but endless misery and woe; and Jeremiah, who well understands the feehngs of loyalty and love which have prompted Baruch's passionate question- ing, and who, no doubt, would give comfort if he could, replies that God's decree of judgment is un- alterable — He is to overthrow and destroy what His own hands have planted and builded, and the evil which He is to bring will overtake all.^ The only hope he holds out to Baruch is that he may escape with his life. 5. xvin, iff There would be no necessity here for a consideration of XVIII, iff., were it not for the reason that this passus has frequently been referred to in support of the view that the prophets' predictions of judgment have not the value of absolute declarations, but only of conditional ones ; ^ as a matter of fact, in their present context, these verses point to the opposite conclusion. In XVIII, i-io Jeremiah simply states outright what follows by inference from all his preaching, and from the preaching of the other prophets as well, viz., that, in the case of the people's sincerely repent- ing, God's judgment might at any time be stayed, even as God's promises would not ensure immunity for a people, should this people subsequently fall into sinful ways. But that Jeremiah entertained no hope whatever that the people might yet repent is shown by ^ As in XXV, 31, which originated simultaneously with XLV, kol hasar connotes "all people;" cf. supra, p. 49, n. i. - Among others, by Giesebrecht, "Die Berufsbegabung der Alttes- tamentlichen Propheten," p. 82, and E. Kautzsch, "Biblische Thao- logie des Alten Testaments," pp. 202 and 256. JEREMIAH'S \1E\V OF THE DOOM 209 the fact that he follows up vv. i-io with tlic emphatic declaration that they are hopelessly corrupt. And, granted even that the declaration, vv. 11 and 12, formed no original part of i-io, the latter, even then, would not permit the inference which Giesebrecht and others draw from it — in proof of which we may appeal from Giesebrecht to Giesebrecht. For in that case the most Hkely interpretation of vv. i-io — as Giesebrecht in fact acknowledges in his Commentary by so interpreting them — would be tliat Jeremiah's chief object in this discourse was to assail the people's blind trust in God's promises of the past. It may be well to point out further that, suggestive as is Comill's reasoning in regard to the insight which came to Jeremiah on that day that he watched the potter at his work,^ it is quite excluded that, originally, the utterance consisted of the narrative part, vv. 1-4, only, and that all that follows is but the "edifying" comment of a later author. For if that were the case, not only would Jeremiah be leaving his hearers or readers altogether in the dark as to what truth had been revealed to him by the potter's moulding of the clay into a definite shape — he would be making no intimation that any truth whatever had been re- vealed to liim, beyond the common and well-known details of the craft. Though it is possible that the continuation, vv. 5ff., as it has come down to us, is not altogether Jeremiah's work, but was tampered with by later authors, it may be maintained with certainty that at least vv. 5 and 6 are authentic. It is not at all likely that the continuation was limited, as Erbt believes,- to these two verses, as this would give it a decidedly unfinished character, but it is im- ' Op. cil., ad loc. ^ Op. cil., pp. is6fiF. 2IO THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL possible to distinguish with any certainty just what is original of vv. 7-12 and what is a later addition. This point is, however, altogether irrelevant for our purpose, as the piece in no case leaves room for the deduction that the prophets hoped the doom might yet be averted. When Cornill in his interpretation of vv. 1-4 remarks:*' If we now ask to what circum- stances and to what time verses 1-4 point, the answer can only be: to the time when Jeremiah still thought the warding off of the doom possible, when he hoped that God's grace would ultimately find ways and means to guide his people in the right path and to save it," ^ he overlooks the fact that the salient point of the simile is, "And if the vessel on which he was working got spoiled in his hands,^ he made it into another one " — that is to say, degenerate Israel, "the worthless vessel," as Hosea called it,^ must give way to a new Israel, to the future, regenerate Israel, which is to rise out of the ruins of the present nation. ^Op. Cit., p. 222. 2 b^jadail, as is to be read in accordance with the LXX and Vulg. instead of kahomaer ¥jad kajjoser, which by an oversight of a copyist may have got into the text here from v. 6. 3 Hos. VIII, 8. CHAPTER IV AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM I. THE DOMINANT NOTE OF AMOS* PREACHING — THE CERTAINTY OF JUDGMENT In spite of the marked difference in temperament and individuality which Amos presents to Jeremiah, in spite of the resultant contrast between the intimate self-analysis, the emotional tenderness, the dramatic changes of feeling, which abound in Jeremiah's writ- ings, and the vigorous, uncompromising, sternly im- personal tone which characterizes the prophecies of Amos, there is, nevertheless, a fundamental point of contact between the two prophets. Both prophets, Amos no less than Jeremiah, looked upon the doom as inevitable. This con\dction it was that produced the pathetic questionings, the gloomy self-communings, the ever-present sorrow, which fdl the pages of Jere- miah; and it is this same certainty of judgment that gives the writings of Amos the austere, relent- less character, which has misled many of his critics into thinking him devoid of human sympathy and all the softer emotions. With this basal thought, that the nation is to perish, Amos dramatically opens his utterances: " Yhwh shall storm ^ from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem, 'The customary translation ol jil'ag, "shall roar," is inaccurate, for the ^hid^scjahiua ji's'ag here has its origin not in the comparison of 311 212 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL and the pastures of the shepherds shall mourn, and the summit of Karmel shall wither " (I, 2). This thought forms the motive, as it were, which runs through his entire preaching, swelling out more strongly in each successive part, until, in the shrill dissonance of the last one, it reaches a climax. At this point, the thought of the ruin about to overtake his people has gained such sway over his mind that, for the time being, it is a reality for him, and he describes how he sees God approaching to destroy Israel.^ 2. CH.\p. V, 1-17 (reconstrued) corroborates THIS VIEW Those scholars who hold that Amos' sentence of destruction was meant to be understood as conditional only, that to the very last he hoped that a conversion of the people might be effected,- and those who take Yhwh with a lion, but in the popular notion that saw in the thunder- storm a manifestation of Yh\\'h; with the same meaning as here jis'ag occurs again Job XXXVII, 4, where it is used s>TionymousIy with jar' e???, just as here v^'iVajitten qolo. ^The Messianic appendix, Am. IX, 8b-i5, which looks upon the downfall not as prospective nor as sure to happen, but as an actually existing state of affairs {cf. vv. 11 and i4f.), is not the work of Amos, the great majority of the critics agree, but the product of later, exilic, or more likely, postexilic, times. For a fuller discussion of the reasons which preclude Amos' authorship of this present close of his book, cf., among others, G. A. Smith, "The Twelve Prophets," I, 189- 195, Harper, "Amos and Hosea," 1953., Nowack, "Die Kleinen Propheten," 1722. and "Die Zukunftshoffnungen Israels in der Assyrischen Zeit " (in "Theologische Abhandlungen " gewidmet H. J. Holtzmann), pp. 38ff., and Marti, " Das Dodekapropheton," pp. 224fE. 2 See Giesebrecht, "Die Berufsbegabung der AlttestamentHchen Propheten," p. ?,t„ Volz, " Die Vorexilische Yahveprophetie und der Messias," p. 17, E. Kautzsch, op. cit., pp. 201 and 254. AMOS' MEW OF THE DOOM 213 the view that, at least at the beginning of his preaching, he reckoned with such a possibility,^ cite in proof of their views V, 4-6, i4f. On closer examination, how- ever, these passages yield a very dilTerent conclusion. That they seem to support tlie view that Amos' pre- diction of judgment was not "wholly unconditional '' is due to the fact tliat the piece, V, 1-17, as is widely recognized, has not come down to us in the order in which the verses originally followed one another. Their original order seems to me to have been as follows: vv. 1-6, 14-15, 12, 7, 10, 13, II, 16-17.- Thus rearranged, V, 1-17 show not only a logical sequence of thought throughout, but a highly effective unity of structure. A translation of the whole, in the order indicated, will bear this out: V, I "Hear this word which I recite as dirge over you, O House of Israel: 2 Fallen is the virgin Israel — powerless to rise again, prostrated to the ground — no one to lift her up. 3 For thus saith the Lord God, of the city that hath been wont to march to battle a thousand strong, a hundred shall remain, and of that one which hath been wont to march to battle a hundred strong, ten shall remain.^ ' See Mcinhold, op. cit., pp. 43fT.; Harper, op. cil., p. CXX; and Staerk, op. cit., p. 14. * The do.xology, vv. 8-9, modem scholars agree, is a later addition. •The stylistically objectionable I'bhelh jisra'el is, as Guthc and Sievers rightly point out, a gloss (see "Amos metrisch erlautert," 214 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 4 ^ Thus saith the Lord to the House of Israel, if ye sought me ye would live, 5 and sought not Beth-El and frequented not Gilgal and made not pilgrimage to Beer- Sheba : — Yea,- Gilgal must wander into exile, and Beth-El shall perish. 6 If ye sought God ye would live — [There is great fear] that fire will burst forth on the House of Joseph and consume it, there being none able to extinguish it.^ 14 Seek good and not evil that ye may live, and that the Lord, God Sabaoth, may be really "* with you as ye beheve. 15 Hate evil and love good pp. II and 63f., and Kautzsch,^ ad loc). The glossator's object in adding the phrase, Guthe thinks, may have been to point out to the reader that the decimation applied to Israel and not also to Judah. 1 ki is introductory kl, and is used here, as frequently elsewhere, in passing over to a new thought. 2 ki is emphatic ki. ^ paenjislah cannot be dependent on dirsiijahwcB, since the latter is virtually subordinate to wil/jii, but is to be classed with the seem- ingly independent sentences introduced by paen. The case belongs properly in the category of elliptical sentences, the governing clause or phrase, expressing fear, anxiety or despair, being omitted. Instead of ka'es read ba'es; the meaning of jislah ba'es "be kindled" or "be fanned into conflagration" is borne out by Sir. VIII, 10 — see ^largolis in "American Journal of Semitic Languages," XVII, 131, and Ges.- Buhl, " Worterbuch " s. v.; but contrary to the opinion of these two scholars, the phrase is to be taken as having intransitive force, salah being an intransitive verb. L^bhcth'el (for which the LXX read l^bheth jisra'cl) is superfluous (cf. Is. I, 31, Jer. IV, 4, XXI, 12), and betrays itself by its l^ as a late gloss. * ken here is not the adverb ken, but the verbal adjective ken, forming a casus ad-oerbialis; cf. I Ki. I, 37, ken jdmar jahwoe, "may God prove it true," or "verify it," and Ps. CXXVI, 2, ken jitlen AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 215 and establish justice in the court of justice — pcradventurc God might show mercy unto decimated Joseph. 12 For I know tliat your iniquities are many, and your sins numerous, ye that oppress the innocent, accept bribes, and deny justice to the poor ^ in the court of justice; 7 ye that turn justice into wormwood, and drag righteousness to the ground. 10 They hate him that stands up for the right in the law-court,- and detest him that speaks uprightly. 13 Therefore the prudent keep silent in such a time, for it is an evil time. 11 Therefore, because ye trample^ upon the poor, and levy a tax of grain on them, the houses which ye have built with quarried stone ye shall not inhabit; nor shall ye drink the wine of the pleasant vineyards which ye have planted. lidido send, where ken has the force of an expletive, " truly," "verily " : "Verily He giveth his beloved sleep." • 'aebhjdjiim is elliptical for mispa( 'aebhjduim, the full phrase occurs Ex. XXin, 6; cf. also Deut. XXVII, 19, Ther. Ill, 35, and daeraekh "^naxvimja((u Am. 11, 6. ^ balsa ar is qualificative of mokhi^h, as correctly taken by Guthe (in Kautzsch') and by Harper, op. cit. » Read DDD^3 instead of DDDC>i3 or 030^3, as some MSS. read. The mistake is easily explained: D3DU was written, in the manner of the .\ramaic, with f ; at some later time the correction D was made between the lines, and when the MS. was recopied, the copyist, either mechanically, or because he did not know better, copied the B' as well as the superlinear correction, D. 2i6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL i6 Therefore thus saith the Lord, God Sabaoth, in all places there will be wailing, and in all the streets people will cry : Woe ! Woe ! The husbandmen will call the professional wallers^ to mourning and wailing. 17 Even all vineyards will resound the wailing when I march through your midst, saith the Lord. It will be noticed that the above rearrangement of V, 1-17 ^ has in common with Marti's rearrangement of them ^ that it places vv. 14-15 after vv. 4-6, but differs from it in that it does not take V, 1-17 as three separate pieces or fragments, viz., (a) 1-3; (b) 4-6, 14-15; (c) 7, 10-13 (exclusive of v. 13), 16-17, but shows them to be consecutive parts of one harmonious whole. The piece opens with a dirge over the nation that God has destroyed — so real to the prophet is the disaster he foresees. This is followed up logically in V. 3 with the explanation of how the catastrophe is to be brought about: the nation will suffer utter defeat in battle, only a tenth of the army will remain. The close of the piece (vv, 16-17) harmonizes with this beginning in the picture it contains of the universal mourning which will prevail throughout the land on the day of doom.* * Read, as Sievers and Guthe emend, l^ode'e naehi instead of W yoi«'e naehi. 2 1 presented this rearrangement in my class-lectures on Amos as far back as 1902. * See op. cit., pp. iSyflf. * It would not be necessary to mention that nothing whatever is implied as to the nature of the threatening catastrophe in ki 'ae'^bhor AMOS' MEW OF THE DOOM 217 In the intervening verses 4-15, as rearranged above, the prophet takes up the transgressions and omissions which have made Israel's doom certain, and his dirge over them timely. This middle part is composed of four subparts of unequal length, (a) 4-5, (b) 6, (c) 14- 15, (d) 12, 7, 10, 13, II, each of which is but a variation of the same theme, the necessity for judgment, and each of which closes with another picture of the ca- tastrophe, which is described at length in the intro- duction and conclusion of the whole. In this way the separate subparts are clearly bound both to one another and to the introduction and conclusion. Amos begins this explanation of the judgment by pointing out how it might have been averted: — they Vqirb'klm 'arnar jalrwa:, v. 17b, were it not for the inferences which Gressmann and others draw from this half-verse (see "Die Schriften des Alten Testaments in Auswahl iibersetzt und erklart," II, i, p. 347). The fact that 'iV^' abliarli b^ 'acraes viisraim happens to occur in the stor>' of the slaying of the first-born of Egypt (see Exod. XII, 1 2) evidently led Gressmann to conclude that in Am. V, 16-17 destruction by pestilence is presaged, and, accordingly, he takes these verses as a separate utterance. The coincidence is, however, quite irrelevant, as may be seen from the fact that in Exod. XI, 4 God's passing through Egypt to slay the first-born is expressed by '"nijose b'thokh misraim, and thai jasd, both with and without the preposition 6* or any other prepositional complement (similarly 'abhar jakn'ce, E.xod. XII, 2^ has no prepositional complement), is used as technical term for "marching to battle" in regard to God as well as to man (cf. e. g., Is. XLII, 13, Ps. XLIV, 10, and LX, 12). Furthermore, the phrases 'abhar b^qaeraebh or 'abJtar 6* a.nd jasd b'thokh or ja^d b' are in them- selves equivocal as to the end in view, that is to say, God's passing through a place or through the people's midst may be for a beneficent just as well as for a calamitous purpose. Proof of this is the synony- mous jalnvcB '"lohakha milhhallckh b^qaeracbh tnaJftiaekha, Deut. XXIII, 15, which is followed by " to deliver thee and to surrender thy enemies to thee," as also the fact that the synonymous 'ae'^lcs bh'girb'k/ia occurs in Exod. XXXIII, 5 with a threatening intention, while in v. 3 the opposite intention is implied in the phrase. 2i8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL should have sought God, he represents God Himself as declaring. But, since the people have been most assiduous in visiting the sanctuaries and performing the ritual, and have no conception of any other way of worshipping God, the startling explanation is added — but not by frequenting the sanctuaries, whether of the Northern or of the Southern kingdom. The hypothetical force of dirsunl wilfju and of v. 5a (another protasis to wiJfju) follows directly from the declaration with which he continues: "Yea, Gilgal must wander into exile, and Beth-El shall perish." This conclusion of the first subpart predicts the nation's ruin not less categorically than the dirge of vv. 1-3 ; Hke the latter, it excludes all hope of their being saved. At the beginning of the second subpart, the prophet, in a sudden burst of sympathy, makes a personal ap- peal: "If ye sought God, ye would live!" But most significant is the exclamation of despair with which he immediately follows up this appeal. Certainly Amos could not have shown more emphatically that he did not expect his words to produce effect. Up to this moment Amos has defined only in a negative way what the requirement, "seek God," im- phes: they should do away with their ritual and cult, since this but blinds them to "what God doth require of man," as Micah later puts it; but now, in the third subpart, he explains positively that to "seek God " means nothing more nor less than to "seek good and not evil." By so doing they might live, and God would be with them even as their lives would be cen- tered in Him. Then he still further defines his mean- AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 219 ing: they must hate evil and love good and establish justice in the land — there is hope for them in nothing short of a thorough-going change. And, though the prophet has grown visibly more impassioned and persuasive, the hypothetical character of this final appeal is made not less plain than that of vv. 4-5 by the 'I'llai introducing 15b/ and especially by the epi- thet I' 'crith Joseph at the end. This epithet (the cus- tomary interpretation to tlie contrary) has no Messi- anic or eschatological connotation, like ^''erithjd'^qobh, Mic. V, 6-7, or r'crithjisra'el, Jer. XXXI, 7. That the prophet refers to the nation as "decimated Joseph" is quite in keeping with the funeral song with which he opened the piece. In the same way in VI, 1-6, when scoring the people for their self-complacent trust in the increased material prosperity of the nation, following Jeroboam's victories over Syria, Amos exclaims, "And they are unconcerned over the destruction of Joseph" ('a/ saebhacr Joseph), just as if the destruction had already occurred. Having thus concluded the third subpart, hke the preceding ones, with an allusion to their certain de- struction, Amos begins the fourth subpart, in vv. 12, 7, 10 (introduced by the causative particle hi), with a description of the arch depravity which has made their destruction inevitable. Such corruption, where honesty has no show, where ev^n the champion of right and justice is hated and detested, must be past amendment. This thought is succinctly expressed in the verse following v. 10, v. 1^: "Therefore the prudent keep silent in such a time, for it is an evil time." The meaning of this verse is that in a time of such utter corruption the prudent man, that is the man of ' Cf. the remarks on this particle, supra, pp. 204!. 2 20 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL worldly wisdom, keeps silent — not, however, because speaking serves to draw hatred and enmity on his head, but rather because speaking is futile.^ Thus taken, the argument of the majority of recent exegetes, that the policy of silence advanced in this verse is in such contradiction to the prophet's own practice and spirit that the verse cannot possibly have originated with him, does not hold; Amos makes here a mere matter of fact statement without passing any judg- ment whatever on the moral justification of keeping silent.^ He concludes this last subpart by telHng the ruling classes, who are principally responsible for the prevailing corruption, that the day of reckoning is close at hand — ere long they must relinquish their ill-gotten wealth. The harmony of structure marking this piece throughout, is shown in the closing vv. 16-17, in the way the leading chord is struck again, and in the way these verses effectively supplement v. 11: — the whole nation will be involved in the catastrophe; guilty and innocent, oppressor and oppressed alike, will be caught in the whirlwind of destruction. The above analysis shows that, contrary to the pre- vailing view, no discrepancy exists between V, 1-3 and vv. 4ff. Neither is there any part of V, 1-7, 10-17 redundant or discordant with the general drift and ^ Of recent exegetes, Harper {op. cit., ad loc.) is the only one who interprets the verse in this way. 2 There is no ground to maintain, as Volz {op. cit., p. 18), and No- wack (in his Kommentar, ad loc.) do, that this verse shows the char- acteristics of a later period of literature. The verse is clearly not a Mashal. The thought expressed is of so general a nature that it might easily find expression in any age, and the maskil, the men of worldly wisdom, were no doubt as common in Amos' age as they were at the time of the Wisdom-Literature. AMOS' MEW OF THE DOOM 221 purpose of the piece. Rather the symmetry of struc- ture extends even to the smallest details, and this quality, combined with the vigorous, fervid, intensely individual style, stamps it, when viewed from a literary standpoint, as a most finished piece of work, as a literary product of the very highest order. 3. IDENTITY OF THE ^\^lITTEN WITH THE SPOKEN PROPHECIES Notwithstanding the evidence in Chap. V, 1-17, the view that Amos looked upon the doom as inevitable would still be open to challenge, if it could be shown that the writings of Amos were not the true reproduc- tion of his oral message, more particularly, if it could be shown that the gloom and sternness which charac- terize them were the result of the ill-success of his ministry, and not of the hopelessness with which he started out on his mission.^ This, however, cannot be shown. The remarks above (pp. Syff.), regarding the relation of the prophets' writings to their oral preaching, apply here — the former do not materially differ from the latter. The writings of Amos form no exception in this respect. Indeed, in their noble simphcity of style and structure they show all the characteristics of oral deHvery, and this, to some extent, in a more marked degree even than the writings of his successors. As Robertson Smith well remarks, "The prophecies of Amos . . . are excellent writing, because the prophet writes as he spoke, preserving all the effects of pointed oral deUvery, with that breath of lyrical fervor which lends a special charm to the ' This view has been advanced by Mcinhold, op. cit., pp. 46f., Staerk also, op. cit., i^l., inclines to it. 2 22 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL highest Hebrew oratory." ^ Like the other prophetic books, Amos' writings, of course, suffered text- disturbances, but these disturbances did not creep in until some later time, in the course of their transmis- sion, and are not due, as W. Riedel ^ and Baumann ^ sought to explain, to the fact that Amos merely en- trusted his prophecies to his disciples for oral tradi- tion, and that, when they were later collected from memory and committed to writing, fragments only were remembered, which the editor arranged in a purely mechanical way. The text-disorder in the book of Amos, as Marti rightly remarks,^ does not exist by any means to the degree that Baumann believes. Leaving aside a couple of minor cases and the question of the original place of the narrative, VII, ic»-i7, 1 find, in addition to V, 4-15, only one case where a number of verses are clearly out of their origi- nal place, viz., VIII, 4-8a. The place of these verses seems to me to have been between III, 8 and 9. The proof of this, however, does not belong here, but in the detailed discussion of the plan and structure of the Book of Amos.^ 4. CHAP. Vn, 1-9. HISTORY OF AMOS' CALL — GENERAL PLAN or HIS PROPHECIES Moreover, VII, 1-9 furnish direct evidence that it ^ The "Prophets of Israel," pp. 1 26f . I do not hesitate to quote this remark of Robertson Smith, although he mentions in connection with it, in accordance with his view of the prophetic writings in general, that Amos' prophecies were "evidently rearranged for publication, and probably shortened from their original spoken form." 2 " Alttestamenthche Untersuchungen," I, pp. 2 iff. ^Op. ciL, pp. 67f. *0p. cit., p. 150. ^ This discussion will have a place in Vol. II. AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 223 was not the utter lack of response to his message which matured Amos' con\-iction tliat his people was doomed, but that it was this conviction Uiat, in tlie first place, drove him away from his flocks and caused him to appear as prophet at Beth-El. This passage is ex- tremely important, for it not only relates (vv. 7-9) the great vision which formed the turning-point in his life, but it portrays very accurately the state of mind which preceded and led up to this crisis; — the proi)het's reflections, his growing fears, the specific facts which influenced his reasoning, all are laid bare to us in the so-called visions of w. 1-6. These, unUke vv. 7-9, do not represent spiritual experiences of tlie prophet's, but actual events in the external world, viz., visitations by locusts and drought, which had taken place, not only before Amos' appearance at Beth-El, but even before his summons to prophecy. (It should be remembered that, even in the vision, VIII, if., the prophet has reference, not to an imaginary experience, but to the actual sight of a basket of ripe fruit; see supra, p. 142). The visitations are identical with those enumerated in IV, 6-1 1, of which the prophet declared that they were God's warnings to Israel in the past to return to Him. — But these warnings had been in vain! Too bhnd to understand the meaning which God meant His visitations to convey, the people sought to appease His wrath by increased zeal in their ceremonial worship, by sacrifices and gifts; and so Amos' fears for their future grew evermore, until at last he found himself face to face with the awful realization that their doom was sealed (VII, 1-9). From that time on, however fervently he had inter- ceded with God for them before, he was unable to pray for them, for he was absolutely convinced that no 2 24 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL intercession could stay God's judgment. In view of this, it cannot be doubted that Amos started out on his mission with a clear vision of the utter hopelessness of the situation, that is, as far as the immediate future of his people was concerned. VII, 1-9, it may be pointed out in passing, furnish support for the assertion made in the preceding para- graph, that, the few cases of later text-disturbances excepted, the Book of Amos is a true reproduction of Amos' preaching at Beth-El. These verses are held by some to have formed the opening of Amos' preaching,^ but this is excluded, inasmuch as they presuppose IV, 4-1 1, from which they derive their point. Their only logical place is where they stand at present, after Chaps. I-VI, and where there is every reason to suppose Amos himself placed them. In these chapters, which in themselves form a logically connected whole, the prophet sets forth the necessity of judgment in view of the people's hopeless corruption; he dwells particularly on the fact that both their rehgious delu- sions and their false interpretation of their material prosperity preclude the possibility of a change for the better. This objective side of his preaching he follows up by what may appropriately be considered its subjective side: VII, 1-9; the vision, VIII, 1-2, with its tripartite sequel, 3, 9-10, 13-14; ^ and the closing vision, IX, 1-4. These in their turn form a no less marked unity than Chaps. I-VI: VII, 1-9, as just 1 See Harper, op. cit., CVIII, and H. P. Smith, "Old Testament History," p. 211. Equally excluded is the view of G. A. Smith and others that VH, 1-9 together with VTH, 1-3 formed the sole contents of Amos' preaching at Beth-El; see G. A. Smith, op. cit., pp. loyff., 120, 180. 2 Verses 11-12 I take to be a fragment of the original conclusion of the book. AMOS' VIEW or rilK DOOM 225 noted, give the history of his call; and the two visions following describe his state of mind since his people's doom has been revealed to him — his complete pre- occupation with the thought of the judgment awaiting them. 5. AMOS' PREDICTION OF DOOM APPLIES TO TIIE ^VHOLE NATION The theory has repeatedly been advanced, both by critics who believe his predictions absolute and by such as consider them conditional, that Amos' predic- tions of doom appHed to the Northern Kingdom only; and this, if it were true, would rob of a great part of its significance the conclusion just deduced from the analysis of the Book of Amos, that the prophet be- lieved the doom absolutely certain. Mcinhold, in particular, has urged this view, advancing as reason that Amos hoped that his home-country, Judah, would not be affected at all by the catastrophe, but that the YnwH-religion would there be continued without any disruption.^ Others, though they consider it unlikely, if not altogether excluded, that Amos reckoned with such a possibihty as this, still hold that his preaching and prediction of judgment are concerned altogether with the Northern Kingdom, and nowhere apply to the conditions and fate of Judah.- In reality, however, as has repeatedly been pointed out,^ the Book of Amos leaves room for •0/>. cil., pp. 47ff. * See among others O. Scescmann, "Israel und Juda bci Amos und Hosea," pp. id; Marti, op. cil., pp. 150, isjf., 172 and 198; and No- wack, op. cil., pp. 137, 154 and 159. * Cf. particularly Giesebrechl's review of Mcinhold, "Sludien zur Israeli tischen Rcligionsgeschichte," in Tlicologische Lilcratur- tcitung, XXIX (1904), 6f.; also Smcnd, op. cil., p. 181, n. i, Volz, op. 2 26 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL neither of these views. They can be sustained only by arbitrarily eliminating several passages the genuine- ness of which is unassailable, and by wrongly interpret- ing another. In the first place, it would be difficult to explain satisfactorily why Amos should have believed that Judah would be exempt from judgment. The social and religious conditions, on the ground of which Amos predicted judgment at Beth-El, were essentially the same in Judah as in Northern Israel — the same venal greed and corruption of the worldly as well as of the religious leaders, the same perversion of justice, the same riotous living on the part of the rich, the same exploitation of the needy prevailed there as here, as the preaching of Isaiah (two decades or less later than that of Amos and simultaneous in part with that of Hosea) shows. Above all, there prevailed in Israel and Judah ahke the same rituahstic piety and the same delusions about the relation existing between Yhwh and Is- rael, both of which Amos assailed as blinding the people to what he considered the essential truth — the truth that Yhwti is the universal God of righteous- ness who demands of all men obedience to His eternal laws of justice and humanity.^ This being the case, it cit., p. 19, Harper, op. cit., pp. CXXXI, n. 2, 66, 143, and Staerk, op. cit., pp. i7ff. 1 In view of the fact that Amos' and to a still greater extent Hosea's condemnation of the cult is represented by various scholars as if it were directed not so much against the cult per se as against the Kanaanitish-pagan character of the same, and in view of the further fact that those who hold this view reason that this character of the YnWH-cult was particularly in evidence in the sanctuaries of the Northern Kingdom, and that it was for this reason that Amos as well as Hosea preached there, it may be well to point out that the Yhwh- cult as practised in the Temple of Jerusalem was no less thoroughly AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 227 is not possible to reconcile a belief that Judah would be exempt from judgment with Amos' unbending char- acter and penetrating mind, animated only by the passion for truth and righteousness. Further, if Amos had thought that the wave of war, which he believed would sweep over Syria and Pales- tine and destroy the countries immediately adjoin- ing Judah — not only those to the north but also those to the east and west — if he had thought that this wave would in some remarkable way stop at the borders of Judah, it may reasonably be assumed that he would not have failed to make this clear by some statement to that effect. The fact of the matter is, however, that Amos significantly opens his preaching by declaring that the result of Ym\TH's manifestation for judgment will be the destruction of the whole country, from the pasture-lands in the extreme south to the summit of Mt. Karmel in the north (I, 2). Amos' authorship of this verse cannot be questioned.^ The fact that the first part of the verse, the sentence, "Yhwh shall storm from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem," occurs verbatim in Joel IV, 16 is altogether irrelevant for the question of the authorship of the verse as a whole; the important point is that this sentence has in Amos just the opposite application from that which it has in Joel — a fact which points to a conclusion of great fused with Kanaanitish-pagan elements than the cult of the other sanctuaries throughout the country; not even the worst features of pagan religious practices, as the Astarte (Ashera) worship and the sacrificing of children, were missing {cf. particularly II Ki. XVI, ^t., and XXIII, 6f. and 10 of the report of the reform under Josiah). • The authenticity of the verse is denied by Voiz, op. ctt., pp. igf., Marti, op. cil., pp. i57f., Harper, op. cit., pp. gf., Guthe, op. cil., p. 27, Budde (in Z.\TW., XXX, pp. 37f!.) and others. 2 28 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL importance for our understanding of Am. I, 2, and of the reoccurrence of the phrase in Joel IV, 16. This conclusion is that the sentence was coined neither by Amos nor by Joel, but that it is to be classed among the stock-phrases of those ages, which, like our stock- phrases and expressions to-day (not to talk of our proverbs), might be used by any number of authors independently of one another.^ The sentence when first coined was meant to voice the belief in the superiority of Zion to all other YnwH-sanctuaries. This superiority accrued to Zion, not because in the glorious days of David and Solomon it had been the seat and centre of the consolidated kingdom, but because of the significance which the Jebusite strong- hold with its ancient Kanaanitish sanctuary occupied in the history of the conquest of Kanaan. For it was not until David succeeded in conquering this strong- hold with the old Kanaanitish sanctuary, on the site of which the Temple of Jerusalem was built later,^ that the Israelites gained complete mastery of the country, or — expressed from the point of view of the religious beliefs of the times — that Yhwh proved His superiority over the Baalim and usurped their place, that is to say, became the Baal or Lord of the coun- 1 Such stock-phrases are often not limited to one nation but are the common possession of several nations. A very pertinent illustration of the latter case is the phrase, "his fruit above and his roots beneath," {pirjo mitnma'al w^sarasau mitlahalh), Am. II, 9, and its variant in Is. XXXVII, 31, which, in the latter form, occurs in the Phoenician Tomb-Inscription of King Eshmunazar (about 600 B. C). ^ This significance of Zion is clearly reflected in the legend of the foundation of this sanctuary, II Sam. XXIV, I Chron. XXI-XXII, i, as may be proved by a critical analysis of the records. This critical analysis, however, cannot be taken up here, but must be reserved for separate publication. AMOS' MEW OF THE DOOM 229 try. It was largely due to this superiority of Zion to all other sanctuaries (converted, all of them, at one time from Kanaanitish into Yiiwii-sanctuaries) that under Josiah the centralization of the cult was elTected; for not only the other Judasan sanctuaries beside Jerusalem, but also Beth-El, and possibly still other sanctuaries of the Northern Kingdom, had retained their former sanctity and veneration even after the destruction of Samaria, as may be seen from the report of Josiah's reformation {cf. II Ki. XXIII, 15 and also v. 19), and also from II Ki. XVII, 24-32. The idea wliich was associated in the popular mind with the sentence, " YH^\'H shall storm from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem," was that, even as at the time of the defeat of the Jebusites (see II Sam. V, 6-10), so, whenever YH^\^^ would manifest His power from His sacred stronghold, Zion, He would deal terror and destruction to other nations, but to Israel would prove Himself a defender and a champion. It is precisely with this application that the sentence is used in Joel IV, 16, where it is followed up by the declaration, "and heaven and earth shall tremble, but to His people He shall prove Himself a refuge, a protection to Israel." Amos, however, uses the sentence with just the opposite application: the result of Yhwii's manifestation from Zion will be the ruin of the w^hole country, the destruction of His own people. It is thus obvious that Amos did not use the phrase, "Yhwti shall storm from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem," because he shared the belief in the superiority of Zion or the belief in any of the other popular notions associated with the phrase, but just the contrary, that he used it for a well- calculated effect, to startle his hearers by the un- 230 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL expected turn with which he continues in the second part of the verse. It is this paradoxical turn which gives the verse the unmistakable stamp of Amos' individuality, for Amos has a way of seizing upon current phrases and, discarding the popular notions associated with them, of investing them with an al- together new and usually contrary meaning. By this means he pointedly contrasts his religious views with those of the people, as notably here at the opening of his preaching, and frequently elsewhere in the course of the same (c/. Ill, 2, IV, 4,^ V, 4i.,^ and 18; also V, 15b and VII, i4f. may be cited in this connection). The conclusion that Amos' prediction of judgment is addressed to the whole nation is further confirmed by III, I, where the whole nation is plainly specified : "Hear this word that God hath pronounced against you, O Israelites, against the whole race which I have brought out from Egypt." Likewise in VI, i Amos refers expressly to "those who feel secure in Zion," and twice he mentions the Judaean sanctuary, Beer-Sheba — in V, 5 in connection with Beth-El and Gilgal, and again in VIII, 14 in con- nection with Dan and "the guilt of Samaria" (by the latter he probably means "the Calf of Samaria"; cf. Hos. VIII, 5f.). To eliminate from VI, i, as some would do, "those that feel secure in Zion" would be most arbitrary, as, in the course of this piece, Amos expressly declares that "the great house and the 1 "Make pilgrimage to Beth-El and sin, to Gilgal and sin more": for Amos' contemporaries their pilgrimage to these sanctuaries was an act of piety par excellence. ^Cf. supra, p. 218. AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 231 small house shall alike be reduced to fragments" (v. ii)^by "the great house and the small house" he means Israel and Judah respectively. This in- terpretation, which is the one given by the Targum and Jerome, and which was generally accepted by the older exegetes, is the only possible interpreta- tion of hahbajith haggadol -dfhahhajith haqqaton. The interpretation which has been favored by recent exegetes,^ viz., that "the great house and the small house" are to be understood Hterally, as mean- ing the luxurious houses of the rich and the modest houses of the poor, is grammatically untenable. Such a meaning could be expressed in Hebrew in two ways only — either by the plural, or, more commonly, by the singular preceded by koU for the generic article (under which category Jiabhajith haggadol ufJiabbajith Jiaqqaton would fall if the interpretation at present in vogue were correct) is used in Hebrew with class- names or names of species and materials only, never with common names.^ Though not an exact analogy, the phrase s'ne bdlte jisra'el, "the two houses of Israel," Is. VIII, 14, may well be compared with "the great and the small house," used by Amos to designate Israel and Judah respectively. Since Amos' prediction of judgment, then, is clearly addressed to Judah as well as to Israel, the special utterance against Judah, II, 4I., being altogether ^ The older interpretation has been retained by Orelli, WcUhausen, Smend, Harper, and Staerk. 2 It may be well to point out that the only seeming exception where bajilft, though undefined, occurs with the article, viz., habbajith luia- bacth, I Chron. XVII, 4, is clearly a case of textual mistake, as may be seen from the fact that the parallel text, II Sam. VII, 5, reads cor- rectly bajilh I'libhli, and from the further fact that the LXX read the latter text also ia Chronicles. 232 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL uncalled for, cannot fail to strike one with suspicion. Apart from this, it really betrays itself as the work of an interpolater by the fact that, unHke the charges against Israel and the surrounding nations, it does not point out any one violation of the laws of humanity as an example of three and four — i. e,, a multitude of transgressions — on account of which God's decree of judgment is unalterable, but describes Judah's sin in such general terms as "They have despised the Law of Yhwh and have not observed His statutes," so that the introductory formula, " Thus saith the Lord, on account of three transgressions of Judah and on account of four I shall not revoke it," is seen to be meaningless. Final proof that II, 4f. originated with an interpo- later is furnished by the fact that, as in III, i-8,+ VIII, 4-8a,^ so in II, 6-16 Amos does not address him- self to his North -Israeli tish hearers specifically, as he does, e. g., in III, 9-IV, 3 — if he did it might be argued that the preceding utterance against Judah would have a raison d'etre — but that throughout the passus his words are meant for the nation as a whole. This is clear from vv. 9-10, in which the prophet continues his charge against his own people by point- ing out that what makes their case worse even than that of the surrounding nations is the fact that they have experienced God's providence in a special degree, for not only did He conquer Kanaan for them, but He delivered them from the Egyptian bondage and subsequently led them in the wilderness for forty years.^ Since, however, the whole nation shared in ^ As stated above, I take VIII, 4-8a to have originally formed the continuation of III, 1-8. ^ Amos' object in mentioning the deliverance from Egypt after the AMOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 233 these acts of God's favor, it is obvious that through- out the passus II, 6-16 the prophet had the whole nation in mind, /. c, Judah as well as Israel. For the same reason IX, 7 must be taken as ad- dressed to the whole nation. In this verse Amos declares that the Israelites ("Bene-Yisra'el") are in no wise better to God than the Kushites (the despised negro-race), that is to say, the Israelites do not enjoy any prerogative before any other nation; to be sure, God led Israel ("Yisra'el") out of Eg}pt, but even so did he lead the Phihstines out of Kaphtor and the Aramaeans out of Kir. To argue that by "Bene- Yisra'el" and " Yisra'el" of this verse only Northern- Israel is understood ^ would be to maintain that for Amos Judah was not a part of the nation at all, that it was not led out of Eg}pt with the rest. On the ground of the above two passages it may safely be concluded that tlie whole nation is under- stood by the phrase, "my people Israel," in the following three passages: (a) "I shall apply the plumb- line - to my people Israel" of the vision, VII, yf., (b) "The end hath come for my people Israel" of the following vision, VIII, 1-2, and (c) "Go, prophesy against my people Israel," VII, 15. "The high-places of Isaac " and " the House of Isaac " of VII, 9 and 15, respectively, do not contradict, but rather corroborate this conclusion; for, since the name Isaac was asso- ciated particularly with the Judaian sanctuary. Beer- conquest of Kanaan, though in the actual order of events it preceded the latter, is made clear by his interpretation of that event in II, 2; cf. Book II, Part I, pp. 307^ 'This view is held by Secscmann, op. cil., p. 13, and Mcinhold, op. cil., p. 53. ' "Apply the plumb-line," i. e., a[)ply the rule or standard of divine righteousness. 234 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Sheba, inasmuch as the stories of Isaac clustered about this shrine, it is evident that Judah must be included in these terms. No proof to the contrary- follows from "I shall rise up against the house of Jeroboam with the sword," 9b, for that Amos thus specifies particularly the overthrow of Jeroboam, is to be explained in the same way as his fixing upon Beth-El as the place for delivering his message (see injra) . From all these facts it follows that the answer com- monly given to the question, to whom Amos' prophe- cies are addressed, requires to be modified very radically. That Amos addresses his prophecies al- most wholly to Northern Israel, and only incidentally makes reference to Judah (as at first glance might seem to be the case) is not correct; he addresses him- self, as a rule, to Israel and Judah alike, and only now and then directs his utterances against his North- Israehtish hearers specifically. The passages where he does the latter are: III, 9-IV, 3 ; V, 6, 15; VI, 6, 13; and VII, 9b, referred to above.^ But as in VI, 1-14 he makes it clear by his express mention of Zion in v. i and of Judah in v. 11 that, notwithstanding vv. 6 and 13, his description of the riotous living and the per- version of justice on the part of the ruling classes and his prediction of the downfall of the nation because of these conditions apply to Judah as well as to Israel,^ ^ What has been remarked above with regard to VII, 9b applies as well to all the other especial references to Northern Israel — they all find their explanation in Amos' reason for delivering his message in the Northern Kingdom. 2 No proof to the contrary can be deduced from v. 14, since we are altogether in the dark as to the identity of the nahal ha"^rabha, " the Wadi of the Araba." AMOS' \aEW OF THE DOOM 235 so in the case of V, 1-17 he makes this sufTiciently plain by the mention of the Judican sanctuary, Bcer-Sheha, along with Beth-El and Gilgal of Northern Israel — the destruction of the former, it is important to note, he predicts in VIII, i3f. no less positively than that of the latter here. And since V, 1-17 is addressed to Israel and Judah alike, it is evident that IV, 4-12 and V, 18-27 are likewise addressed to both, for together with V, 1-17 these pieces form a whole within the whole, Chaps. I-VI, the subject-matter of all three being the people's fundamentally wrong valuation of the ritual and cult. The fact that Amos in these parts fails to mention Zion is altogether irrelevant, and permits in no wise the inference which Mcinhold ^ and others have drawn from it, that he thought more favorably of Jerusalem and its Temple than of the other sanctuaries. For, as we have seen, Amos right in the opening of his preaching assails the popular belief in the superiority of Zion no less vigorously than in IV, 4-V, 27 he attacks the beUef in the sanctity of the other YmvH sanctuaries. The irony of Amos' following up the popular phrase, "Yhwii shall storm from Zion and thunder from Jenisalem," with the declaration that the result of Yiiwh's manifestation from Zion %vill be the destruction of His people is no less scathing than is that of the vision, IX, iff., with which Amos closes his preaching, and in which he describes how he sees God standing on the altar giv- ing the order to destroy the sanctuary and to bury beneath the ruins the multitude assembled for wor- ship. After the sweeping attack in I, 2, one can understand that Amos did not consider it necessary ' 0/>. ci7., pp. 57flf. 236 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL to mention Zion again in connection with the theme of IV, 4-V, 27. Similarly, in VIII, i3f. he does not mention Gilgal again. It follows further from our discussion that by "Yisra'el," "Beth-Yisra'el," and "Bene-Yisra-el" in Amos the whole nation is understood — a meaning of the terms which agrees with their common usage in the Hexateuch and the historic literature even after the disruption of the Kingdom, when these terms came to be used frequently of the Northern Kingdom as dis- tinguished from Judah, The same holds true of the terms, "Ya akob" and "Beth-Ya'akob,"in Amos: the whole nation is meant by them. As direct proof of this VI, 8 may be referred to, where the words, "I loathe that in which Jacob takes pride," etc., put in the mouth of God, are followed up in v. 11 (the original continuation of v. 8) by the declaration that "the great house and the small house," i. c, both kingdoms, shall be destroyed. Similarly Isaiah in Is. VIII, 17 (and again in II, 6) uses " Beth- Ya' akob" to designate the whole nation, as is shown by " the two houses of Is- rael " of V. 14. For this reason it was but natural that, after the destruction of Samaria, all these terms came to be used to designate Judah, since Judah constituted the nation from that time on — cf. Is. I, 3, XXXI, 6; Mic. Ill, I, 8f. (note v. 10); Jer. II, 4, 14, 26, 31. In the case of Hosea the question of the usage of "Yisra'el," and "Beth-" or "Bene-Yisra'el" is more complicated; yet there can be no doubt that his preaching and predictions are addressed to Judah as well as to Israel. This is certain from such passages as, "Precious as grapes in the wilderness I found Israel, pleasing as the early ripe fig of the fig-tree in its prime I beheld your fathers, but no sooner did they come to AMOS' \IK\V OF THE DOOM 237 Baal Peor than they gave tliemselves up to shameful practices and became abominable like the object of their love" (IX, 10), luid "WTicn Israel was young I loved him, and from EgN-pt I called him as my son; the more I called ^ them, the more they strayed away from me, they * sacrifice to the Baalim, they offer to images" (XI, if.); and apart from this, it follows inevitably from the very figure by which in the open- ing of his preaching, Chajis. I-III, Hosea depicts Yhwh's relation to Israel and Israel's apostasy and the course into which Yh\\ii is forced in consequence thereof, viz., the figure of the mariUil relationship: — for her infidelity, Yhwii, the husband of mother- Israel, is to give up His faithless spouse and drive her from his house, not to bring her back and betroth her to Himself anew, until, through the discipline of sorrow and suffering, he has effected her moral regen- eration. To hold that Hosea meant all this to apply to Northern Israel only would be to maintain that for him Northern Israel alone was Yhwh's spouse, that it alone enjoyed the privileges of His love, and that Judah was in no sense a part of the religious-social community of Israel. 6. WHY AMOS DELIVERED HIS MESSAGE AT BETH-EL WTiile. however, it was only natural for Hosea to choose the Northern Kingdom for the place of his public preaching, he being a citizen of that coun- tr>^ in the case of Amos the matter is quite differ- ent. The question must be asked, why he proceeded to Beth-El to deliver his message, since, as we have ' Read, in accordance with the LXX, instead of qar*'u: k*qor'i, and instead of mipp'nihaem, with diflcrent word-division: mippanai hem. 238 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL seen, it concerned his home-state no less than the sister-country. The explanation is to be sought not so much in the fact that Judah was at that time the vassal state of Northern Israel (c/. II Ki. XIV, 9-14), or in the other fact that Amos must have reasoned that, Northern Israel being the natural bulwark of Judah, its conquest would lay bare the frontiers of Judah and thus engulf it inevitably in the downfall, as in the victories of Jeroboam II over Syria, and the sudden influx of prosperity which the country was enjoying in consequence. These successes, the prophecies of Amos show, were the immediate incentive to his preaching. Syria, which for a century or longer had been the powerful foe of Israel, had during the reign of Je- hoachaz reduced the country to the direst extremity (see II Ki. XIII, 7, also XII, 19). An idea of the people's anxiety over their situation may be obtained from the story, II Ki. XIII, 14-19, which relates how Joash implored the blessing of the dying EHsha for the success of their arms against Syria. In contrast to the view which Amos took later of Jeroboam's victories, it is interesting to note from this story how exercised Elisha was at his people's danger, and how his dying concern was that Yhwh's cause should prove victorious, that is, that Joash should triumph over Syria. For him the two things were identical, as they were for Amos' contemporaries. No wonder that the latter saw in Jeroboam.'s \'ictories the un- mistakable sign of Yhwh's favor, and that their feeling of security and blind trust grew beyond mea- sure; never, they were convinced, had Yhwh been more visibly on the side of His people. This is the light in which these victories are presented in the MIOS' VIEW OF THE DOOM 239 contemporary record, II Ki. XIV, 25-27/ and in ''The Blessing of Moses," Deut. XXXIII, which probably dates also from the same time. The ruling classes of Samaria, in particular, were convinced that in Jeroboam's reconquest of Lo-dabar and Karnaim the kingdom had given evidence of its strength and virility (c/. Am. VI, 13 -), so that without any fear or concern about the future they gave themselves up to the enjoyment of their successes and to a life of ease and luxury. It was as a protest against this blind ma- terialism of the people and against the false confidence with which Jeroboam's military successes had inflated them that Amos thundered forth his verdict of doom ; — his preaching may be said to have been the first enun- ciation of that governing principle emphasized by every one of the prophets, that not by military prowess and material prosperity, but by virtue of righteousness alone can nations as well as individuals endure. This explains why Amos went to the Northern Kingdom to dehver his message, and it accounts also for his repeated specific references to the House of Josef)h and to its newly won prosperity. For him this flourishing kingdom, seemingly at the height of its power, even as in the days of the nation's pristine glory under David and Solomon, was in reality a iJi'^erith Joseph, "a decimated Joseph," or, as he calls it again, a Sh^'blf'r Joseph, a ''Joseph hastening to inevitable destruction." • A critical examination shows that II Ki. XIV, 25-27 did not originate with the Dcutcronomic Redactor, but was drawn from an older source. The detailed proof of this, however, does not belong here. *"Ye, who exult in Lo-dabar, who boast, have we not Ly our strength reconquered Karnaim." CHAPTER V HOSEA'S VIEW OF THE DOOM— ESSENCE OF HOSEA'S PREACHING I. THE UNITY OF CHAPS. I-III HoSEA no less certainly than Amos and Jeremiah looked upon the doom as the foregone result of the nation's guilt. His various appeals to do penance, II, 4f. excepted,^ are not addressed to the heedless Israel of the present, which is running headlong to de- struction, but to the Israel of the future, which has sur- vived the downfall and, presumably, awakened to a reahzation of the sinfulness of its past life. This holds true of V, 15 b-VI, 3 and XIV, 2-9 no less than of II, 9 and 16-25.^ Contrary to the opinion of those critics who consider all these passages the work of later au- thors, it must be remarked that they are not only essen- tially Hoseanic in spirit, but they follow directly from the rest of his preaching, in the light of which they are ' Hos. X, 12 cannot be classed as a plea, but is a hypothetical state- ment, pointing out how the coming ruin might have been averted. Proof of this is the immediate continuation in v. 13: "As ye have plowed wickedness ye shall reap evil, shall eat the fruit of falsehood." ^ No positive conclusion is possible in regard to XI, 7-11, for, owing to the hopeless text-condition of v. 7, we are altogether in the dark (i) in regard to the interpretation of v. 8a, (2) in regard to the ques- tion whether w. 8b-i i formed at one time the immediate conclusion of 8a, or whether some intervening link dropped out either before or after 8a. It must, however, be remarked that these verses betray themselves both in language and thought as the genuine product of 240 HOSEA'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 241 to be interpreted, and the key to which, in turn, is his conception of God as Infinite Love, expressed in Chap. III. (Of course, Volz. Marti, and Guthe deny that such was Hosca's conception of God, but their view can be upheld only by the arbitrary elimination of Chap. Ill as an unorganic part of Ilosea.^ There is no particle of ground for discarding Chap. Ill, but every reason to consider it genuine; see infra). Moreover, these passages are essential to the com- pleteness of Hosea's prophecies. Hosea's belief in a better world to come is really the corollary of his dec- laration that God is Love — the necessary outcome of bis novel conception of the relation between the hu- man and the divine, to which he was led by the bitter experience in his own Hfe. For Hosea the relation between God and Israel is in the nature of an indis- soluble ethical union, based not on any mere legal contract, which becomes invalid as soon as one party violates the covenant, but based, like the marriage bond, as he conceived it, on love and moral obligation. The union between God and Israel may be inter rupted because of the latter's sinfulness, like the prophet's union with his erring wife; but even as Hosea 'See P. Volz, "Die Ehegeschichte Hosea's" (in "Zeitschrift fiir VVissenschaftliche Thcologie," XLI, 1898, pp. 321-335); Marti, " Das Dodekapropheton," pp. 6, 33f.; Guthe, "Der Prophet Hosea," in KauLzsch', II, pp. sf. This is not the place for a detailed discus- sion of such a radical procedure in general, nor of Volz' interpretation of Hosea's stor>' of his marriage with Gomer, in particular. It may be well, however, to remark that, altogether apart from other considera- tions, the lofty ethics of the prophets and the spiritualization of religion as revealed in their lives and writings utterly exclude Volz' interpretation of Hos. I. — Harper, "Amos and Hosea," though he holds that "the fundamental idea of Hosea is his conception of Vahveh as a God of Love," considers the passages referring to Israel's future to be, on the whole, of exilic origin. :>^ 242 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL trusted that by the power of his love his wife would eventually be lifted above sin, so he believed that by the power of the divine love evil would in the end be conquered in Israel and good set up in its place. By reason of this conception, however inevitable Hosea considers the destruction of the nation, he cannot but see in it a means to an end. The casting- off of Israel he looks upon as a purifying punishment by which God's love is to work the final salvation of the people, and lead them to a fuller union with Him- self. Accordingly, he concludes Chaps. I-III, which in the story of his Hfe furnishes the key to all his preaching, by setting forth in II, 16-25 ^ how this regeneration is to be reahzed. God in His infinite love will follow the people, after the manner of love, into degradation and misery, and be with them in all the trials through which they will have to pass, until finally He has effected their change of heart and awakened their faith and love. In this way "the valley of tribulation will eventually be > converted into a gate of hope'' (II, 17), and a closer communion with God be estabhshed, a communion based not only "on righteousness and justice but on love and fervent devotion" (II, 21). If Marti finds the idea of love's conquering sin incompatible with the view that by severe, sustained punishment God will effect the conversion of the people,- he proceeds from the common error of looking upon Love and Law as antitheses. He forgets that true love is neither blind nor indulgent, but open-eyed and exacting. As the biblical writer expresses it, 1 See Note at the end of the Chapter, "On the Original Order of Hos. I-III and The Original Place of II, 1-3." ^ Op. ciL, p. 6. HOSEA'S VIEW OF THE DOOM 243 "God punishes him whom lie loveth, and afHicteth (read iv'k/ii^cbli LXX) him in whom He delif^hteth." ^ In contradistinction to Law, which is satished if the wrong has been avenged, and the wrongdoer punished, Love remains beside the olTendcr, sharing with him the shame and misery, but not sparing him the suflering and remorse. It punishes in order to save, for it is only through suffering, through trials and self-denial, that the human spirit rises to freedom and enlighten- ment — a thought met with, fully developed, in Deutcro-Isaiah. Thus Hosea did not take back his erring wife in order to lavish comfort on her, and still less to satisfy her sensual desires, but in the hope that through solitude and deprivation she might become chastened and purified, and once more worthy of his love. It may be mentioned in passing that the foregoing remarks make no pretension to completeness; Hosea's conception of God and the experience in his life which opened his mind to it are entered into only in so far as they serve to show how logically the various sub- parts of Chaps. I-III are developed out of one an- other, or, inversely, how logically they merge into one another to form a harmonious whole. In view of this latter fact it is clear that there is no justification for discarding Chaps. Ill, and II, 9 and 16-25, or any part of them. Interpolations, particularly such lengthy and material ones as would be Chap. Ill and Chap. II, 16-25, never lit in harmoniously with the work of the original author, but invariably betray themselves through some more or less striking dis- crepancy. iProv.III. 12. 244 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 2. THE EPILOGUE, XTV, 2-9 SUPPLEMENTARY TO THE DESCRIPTION OF HIS FUTURE HOPE IN n, 16-25 As in the opening part of his preaching, so in the conclusion of the same Hosea explicitly sets forth the purpose of the impending judgment — with this differ- ence, however, that, while in II, 16-25 he considers this purpose principally from the point of view of the workings of the divine Love, in XIV, 2-9 ^ he deals with it, primarily, from the point of view of the trans- formation through which the people must pass. The prophet's appeal in this epilogue to return to God with penitent heart is not addressed to contemporary Israel, as G. A. Smith - and Staerk ^ think, but to a future Israel, the Israel that will have sur\'ived the downfall. This is perfectly clear from "Thou hast incurred ruin by thy sins" (v. 2b), and also "They shall again abide under my shade" ^ (v. 8a), both of which sentences show that the prophet has reference to the time after the fall of the nation. There is no justification for the view, at present taken by most exegetes, that the epilogue is a product of later times. kasalta, "Thou hast incurred ruin," is prophetic per- fect like napJfla . . . hHhidath jisra'el, "Fallen is the virgin Israel," Am. V, i, and hence does not permit the deduction that for the writer the downfall is actually a past event. Nor can 'a/ siis Id nirkabh, "We shaU ^ Verse 10 is a later addition, stating the moral which, it was thought, might be drawn from Hosea's writings. The fact that the passage served as prophetic pericope in the synagogue probably explains the comment. 2 See op. cit., pp. 3Xofif. ^ See op. cit., pp. 38f. * Instead of b^sillo read besilli. HOSEA'S V7E\\' OF THE DOOM ?45 not ride on horses," (v. 4) be considered a proof of the inlluence of Is. XXX, 16 and XXXI, i. In scoring the people for their blindness, from a religious as well as from a political point of view, in having sought protection from the world-powers, Hosea speaks of alliances formed with both Assyria and Egypt; cf. VII, II, XII, 2, and note also IX, 3, 6, XI, 5, and VIII, 13c (the latter as read by the LXX). What more natural, therefore, than to find a reference to an alliance with Egypt as well as with Assyria in connec- tion with the prophet's hope that the future Israel will be cured of this fatal error of looking to the world-powers for assistance. In the light of this fact, the expression, "We shall no longer ride on horses," is quite as clear in Hosea as in Isaiah. As to its use in both, we must conclude either that the figure originated with Hosea and was borrowed from him by Isaiah, in support of which view it may be pointed out that there are in Is. XXX and XXXI other traces of the influence of Hosea on Isaiah;^ or — and this seems the more probable theory — that even Hosea has no claim to the au- thorship of it, but that it belongs in the list of stock- phrases current in that age. The origin of the expression is to be seen in the fact that the main » Cf. Hos. X, 13b, ki bhalahla bh'rikhb'kha (LXX) b'robh gibbo- raekha, "For thou hast put thy trust in chariots, in the multitude of thy warriors," and Is. XXXI, ib, 'ivajjibhfhu 'al raekhacbh ki rabh 'o^'al paralim ki 'aftnii m^'od, "And they put their trust in chariots because they are many, and in horsemen because they are very numerous;" and also Hos. \'III, 4, himlikhu w'lo mimmcutii hesirU 'dflo jadati, "They make kings without my consent, they set up rulers without my approval," and Is. XXX, i la^soth 'e^a w'lo tninni u^linSokh maiiek/ia ~', deceit, murder, theft, and adultery — dissolute they are, and one bloody deed follows on the heels of the other." (IV, if.; and see also V, 4). And here it is important to note that for Hosea, as for the other prophets, knowledge of God is not an intellectual acquisition, not a theological system or creed, but means the knowledge or experience of ' " Outlines of a Philosophy of Religion," p. 2^ and p. 334. 2 50 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL God in one's heart. The end and object of God's dis- ciplinary work with His faithless people, he sets forth in II, 21-2 2, is to effect this experience: "And I will betroth thee unto me forever; I will betroth thee unto me by the bond of righteousness and justice, by the bond of love and fervent devotion : And I will betroth thee unto me in faithfulness, and thou shalt know God." V, 1 5b- VI, 3, therefore, may well be considered as forming, much in the same way as the epilogue, an important supplement to the prophet's outlook of hope and promise, II, 16-25, in that it develops an essential thought which in the latter, by reason of the aspect from which the future restoration was con- sidered (see supra), wsis brought out only partially — the thought, that the people's experiencing God in their hearts is the condition of the future consumma- tion, in fact is the consummation. VI, 3, as indicated above, concludes the sermon. Verse 4, Hke the remaining verses of Chap. VI, is a fragment of another sermon. It cannot be considered the continuation of v. 3, as most of the exegetes take it, for since w. 1-3 speak of sincere repentance, of true conversion, it is obvious that they cannot possibly have been followed up by an answer on God's part questioning the sincerity of the people.^ Apart from this, the really vital thought in this preeminently ^ That w. 1-3 are "an earnest expression of faith and zeal" is acknowledged by Volz, op. cit., p. 33, and by K. J. Grimm, "Euphe- mistic Liturgical Appendices in the Old Testament," p. 70, but this fact is wrongly considered by them an argument against Hosea's authorship. HOSEA'S MEW OF THE DOOM 251 spiritual prayer seems to have escaped the exegctes, that is the people's absolute assurance, that their yearning for God will of necessity be satisfied. In contrast to the prayer of the epilogue, therefore, this prayer does not call for a reassuring answer from God. 4. NOTE ON THE ORIGINAL ORDER OF HOS. I-III AND THE ORIGINAL PLACE OF II, I-3 Chapter III, as many scholars rightly hold, must originally have followed Chap. I. Not only is it unlikely that the prophet, in telling the story of his life, would have separated tlie two parts from one another by the discourse, II, 4-25, but this discourse presupposes Chap. Ill as well as Chap. I. It is the detailed application of the story of his own Ufc, as given in Chaps. I and III, to God's experience with Israel. Apart from this, I find direct proof of this original chapter-arrangement in the description of Israel's future restoration, II, 1-3. The diffi(?ulty which this description has presented to the exegetes is very simply solved by taking it as the original con- clusion of III, or more correctly, as the original continuation of III, 4-5 (exclusive of -u/'clh david vialkam and IfaJfrilh hajjamlm). The description, as a whole, bears a close relation to Hosea's mode of thought in I and III; further, "and they shall appoint one head " of II, 2 refers directly to the situation described in III, 4, "many days the Israelites shall abide without a king and without a chief,'' being in fact logically conditioned by it. On the other hand, -ufniqb'su of II, 2 is no proof whatever of the exilic origin of II, 1-3, since the phrase does not mean "be gathered," as many scholars take it, but means here, as frequently elsewhere, "assemble" or "rally" 252 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL (cf. e. g. II Chron. XX, 4, XXXII, 4, Is. XLV, 20, XLVni, 14). Neither can such a date be argued on the ground of the author's hope for a united Judah and Israel, for the express mention of such a hope on the part of Hosea is sufficiently explained by the open outbreak of hostility between Judah and Israel, which, as we know from Is. IX, 20, occurred at the time of his preaching. Finally, -uf^alu min ha'araes of v. 2, as Lambert (in Revue des Etudes Juives, XXXIX, p. 300) suggests, means just as Ex. I, 10, "they shall gain mastery of" or "dominion over the country." (In further proof of Lambert's view, I shall add that to this meaning of 'aid min, equivalent to that of 'ala 'al, Deut. XXVIII, 43, the similar meaning of 'amad min in Dan. XI, 8 may be compared.) When III, 1-5 became shifted from its original place after Chap. I and placed after Chap. II, the original con- tinuation of III, 1-5, that is II, 1-3, being left be- hind, became subsequently joined to II, 4-25, as if it formed the beginning of the same. The translation of III, 4-5, II, 1-3 in their proper succession follows : III, 4 "For the Israelites shall abide many days without a king and without a chief, without sacrifice and without massebah, with- out ephod and teraphim. 5 Afterwards the Israelites shall return and seek the Lord their God ; they shall yearn for the Lord and His good- ness. II, I And the number of the Israelites shall become as the sands of the sea which cannot be meas- ured nor counted, HOSEA'S VIF.W OF THE DOOM 253 and in place of their being called, 'Ye arc not my people.' they shall be called 'Children of the living God.' 2 And the Judaeans and the Israelites shall assemble and appoint one head, and they shall gain dominion over the country, for great shall be the day of Jezreel. 3 One shall call your brethren A mml (My People) and your sisters Riihama (Beloved)." (Instead of 'imril read ^atn'ru, prophetic perfect; the 3rd plural is impersonal construction. The vocaliza- tion 'imru was caused no doubt by the imperative ribJiii of the following verse.) "Great shall be the day of Jezreel" (v. 2): In I, 3 the prophet referred to the utter defeat of the present Israel on the plain of Jezreel; here he refers to the triumph of the future Israel on the same battle-field — great shall be the day, he says in effect, when, on the famous battle-field of Jezreel, Israel shall again gain dominion over the country. CHAPTER VI ISAIAH'S VIEW OF THE DOOM AND HIS AT- TITUDE TOWARD THE POLITICAL AFFAIRS OF THE DAY I. OPINIONS OF PRESENT-DAY SCHOLARS Our examination of the prophetic writings up to this point has borne out the assertion made in Chapter II that the prophets looked upon the doom as inevitable, and that they neither expected nor designed that their words should influence the immediate course of events. As to Isaiah there is much difference of opinion. The majority of bibhcal scholars, however, hold that Isaiah, unHke his predecessors, Amos and Hosea, did not keep himself aloof from pohtical Hfe, but that, like the prophets of old, he assumed the role of a practical statesman, and approached the rulers of the state with precise directions as to the course they should pursue in certain critical situations. They grant that he was at first scorned and rejected, but think that he grad- ually gained a powerful influence over the government and people, until at last he practically guided the helm of state and shaped the subsequent development of affairs. Those who hold this view maintain further that in the supreme crisis of the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib's armies in the year 701, which event, they think, marks the height of his influence, Isaiah changed his mind regarding the judgment awaiting his people; and that, instead of predicting, in consistency with 254 ISMAH AND POLITIC.VL AFF.URS 255 his life-long conviction, that the hour for the execution of judgment had at last arrived, he declared that Ynwii Himself would rise in defence of Zion and Jerusalem and bring about the defeat of the world- power, Assyria, on His o\^^l holy mountain.^ These two points obviously have such a decisive bearing on our question, how the prophets viewed the doom, that a discussion of them must necessarily be interwoven with the discussion of this question. 2. ISAIAH'S E.VRLIEST PROPHECIES (a) the consecration vision From his consecration vision, Chap. VI, it is clear that at the very outset of his ministry Isaiah cherished no illusions whatever about the situation. He fully realized the insuperable distance in religious views which separated his countrymen from him, and which made their case so hopeless. He knew that they could not comprehend his words, he knew that they were ' See W. Robertson Smith, "The Prophets of Israel," pp. 205-210, 254ff., 296, 320, 330!!., 350II.; Wellhauscn, " Israelitische und Jiidische Geschichtc" (1901), pp. 1242.; Smend, " Alttcstamcntliche RcIIr- ionsgeschichtc," * pp. 231-240, 255(1.; Gicsebrecht, "Die Berufsbe- gabung der Alttestamentlichen Propheten," pp. 84f.; Budde, "Reli- gion of Israel to the Exile," i47f., I53ff.; Driver, "Isaiah: His Life and Times," pp. 3, 32, 62, 69-83; 11. P. Smith, "Old Testament His- tory," pp. 238, 244, 255; Ch. F. Kent, " A History of the Hebrew People," pp. 128, 130, 142, I44ff., 148(1.; F.Wilkc,"Jcsaia und Assur" (1905), pp. if., 57ff.; Stacrk, op. cil., pp. 64, 68, 85(1.; Kittcl, "Ge- schichte des Volkes Israel" (1909), II, pp. 477, 486, 494(1., 501, 505ff.; Hans Schmidt in "Die Schriften des Alten Testaments herausgcg. von Grcssmann, etc.," II, 2, pp. i2(T. On the point of Isiiiah's sup- posed change of view regarding the doom cf. also Kautzsch, " Hil)- lische Theologie des Alten Testaments," pp. 258f., and Meinhold, 2 56 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL doomed. How ineffectual he felt his preaching to be for his own age may be seen from his bitter declaration in vv. gi. that the purpose of his mission was "to dull their hearts, to deafen their ears, and to blind their eyes," — that is to say, to demonstrate their utter corruption and spiritual blindness, and so to make clear their ripeness for judgment. There is no occasion to suppose that this vision was written in the light of his later experience. The central fact of the vision is the revelation to the prophet of God's inexorable decree of judgment. Were we to question the trustworthiness of the prophet's descrip- tion of what passed in his mind in that hour, we could no longer attach value to the vision, in any respect, as a record of his spiritual experience. It is illogical to look upon the account as a valuable record of the turning-point in his Hfe and to maintain, at the same time, that it is colored by his later experiences— more specifically, that the tone in which the prophet speaks of the purpose of his mission is owing to the lack of response which his message in due course received, instead of to the hopelessness with which he started out on his ministry. As a matter of fact, the same tone prevails in II, 6-22, which all agree dates from the very year of his call to prophecy, and also in IX, 7- op. cit., pp. i3sff.; the latter thinks that this change of view dates at least as far back as 711 (pp. i4ff.) Fr. Kiichler, "Die Stellung des Propheten Jesaia zur Politik seiner Zeit," joins issue with this view of Isaiah's poHtical influence, though he holds with the above-mentioned scholars that during the Assyrian invasion Isaiah did change his mind regarding the doom threatening the country (cf. pp. VI, 27f., 43, 47, $2i. 56). Kiichler, as he states in the preface, pp. Vf., wrote this treatise in order to show by one example how utterly untenable Winkler's theory of Old Testament Prophecy is. IS.UAII AND POLITIC.\L AFFAIRS 257 X, 4+V, 26-30, which, most cxcgctcs agree, belongs to the earliest period of his activity. And not only does Isaiah make himself clear regard- ing the incvitableness of the judgment, he is equally emphatic on the point that the destruction is to be not a partial but a complete one. To his question, "How long?" that is, how long it shall be the purjDose of his mission to demonstrate, so to speak, the total apathy of "tliis people" (the people of his own age), God's answer is: ''Until the cities be desolate, without inhabitants, and the houses be destitute of men, and the land be converted into a desolation, and God have removed mankind, and the desolation be great in the land; and should there be a tenth still left, this in turn shall fall a prey to destruction, like the terebinth and the oak of which when felled only the stump remains." ^ The comparison is to the same effect as that in XVII, 5f. (of the prophecy of the immediately following ^ Zaera qodaeS ma^^abhta, as the majority of scholars hold, is a later addition; how late may be seen from the fact that the LXX did not read it. Hackmann's theory (in "Die ZukunftserwartunR des Jcsaia," pp. 72Cf.) that in the vision, Chap. VI, and in the proi)hccics of the first period of his activity Isaiah is concerned with Northern Israel only, and that it is the latter that is understood by "this people " of v. 9, has no basis. Hackmann overlooked the fact that by "and I dwell among a people of unclean lips" (v. 5) Isaiah made it perfectly clear that his native country, Judah, was certainly included in the verdict passed on the people in his consecration-vision (c/. G. Bu- chanan Gray, "The Book of Isaiah," I, p. 110) 2 58 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL period), where of the destruction of Israel the prophet says: "It shall be as when the harvestman grasps the standing grain, and his (other) arm reaps the ears- Yea, it shall be as when the ears are gleaned in the Vale Rephaim ; or gleanings shall be left as at the beating of an olive tree — ^ two or three berries in the top branch, four or five in the (other) branches of the fruit-tree." ^ An analogous comparison in Amos is : "As the shepherd rescues from the mouth of the Hon a couple of shin-bones or the tip of an ear, precisely so shall the Israelites escape who sit in Samaria in the corner of the couch . . ." (Am. Ill, 12). In all these comparisons, the idea expressed is that the nation shall be reduced to nothingness; those surviving the destruction will no more constitute a body poHtic than the stump of a tree forms a tree. (b) his future hope — X, 21-23 Thus understood, VI, 13 in no wise conflicts with Isaiah's future hope, to which he gave expression soon 1 In order to fully understand the second comparison one must bear in mind that the olives are picked by hand, and what is left after the picking, being beyond reach of the hand, is knocked off with a pole. What remains after the latter process will be a few scattered berries that were overlooked or missed by the pole, just as after the gleanings have been gathered, only a few stray ears may still be found in the field. 2 Read, with different word-division, bis'iphe happorijja. ISAIAH AND rOLITICAL AFFAIRS 259 after his summons to prophecy in the name he be- stowed on his son, S/ic\ir Yashiih, "A Remnant shall Return;" for this name, as Marti points out, implies a r.^nfirmation rather than a denial of the judgment. It '-,Miities. however, that the remnant, /. c, the survi- \ ors of the judgment, shall become converted.' That this is really the significance of She\ir Yashuh there can be no doubt, for the utterance in which at the time Isaiah explained the meaning of his son's name has not been entirely lost, as is generally thought, but has been preserved in its essential part in X, 21-23. In proof of this it is not necessary to enter into a critical analysis of the whole of X, 5-34, which, biblical scholars are agreed, is made up of heterogeneous elements.^ It will sufBce for our purpose to point out that vv. 21-23 are clearly not the original continuation of v. 20, since the author of the latter looks upon the destruction as an actual occur- rence (Israel or the House of Jacob are actually for him a ^^ar and p'lelath, "a remnant" and " those who have escaped" from the catastrophe), while for the author of w. 21-23 the destruction is yet to come; and that, just as clearly, they cannot have formed originally a part of w. 24-27; for they have an ominous tone, emphasizing that the destruction is inexorably decreed, while vv. 24-27 are of an alto- gether reassuring nature, bidding the people dispel all fear since their deliverance from their vanquisher is at hand. Internal evidence that X. 21-23 is a fragment of an utterance designed to e.xplain the name of the proi)h- et's son, She'ar Yashub, is not lacking: (i) It has in ' See "Das Buch Jesaia," on Chap. VI, 3. *See infra, pp. 2732. and 28sff. 26o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL common with Isaiah's older prophecies, i. e., those of the first period and those of the time of the Syro- Ephraimitic campaign, the expression, "Yaakob," used to designate the whole nation (see supra, p. 236). (2) Like the consecration vision it emphasizes that "the destruction inexorably decreed"^ will be com- plete, will engulf " the whole country" (v. 23; cj. to the b^qaeraebh kol ha'araes of the latter the heqaeraehh ha'araes of VI, 13). (3) By killajdn hams soteph fdaqa of v. 22, "destruction is unalterably decreed sweeping in righteousness Uke a flood," it pointedly reiterates what Isaiah developed at length in his description of the Day of Yhwh, II, 6-22, V, 15-16,^ which belongs unquestionably to the oldest of his prophecies, viz., that by the certain destruction of nation and country alone might the way be prepared for the recognition of God's moral kingdom among men. Since X, 21-23, therefore, dates from the period in which his son. She 'ar Yashub, was born, and ^ kala w^naeh'^rasa of v. 23 is a hendiadys. 2 V, isf., no doubt, got misplaced in Chap. V from II, 6-22, where originally, in all probability, it formed the closing refrain of the now completely mutilated third strophe of the latter. XVII, 7-8 may be another misplaced part of this strophe, but the evidence is not so convincing as in the case of V, isf. In the latter case there can be no doubt that the verses were first omitted from their proper place, then added in the margin and later, when the MS. was being recopied, inserted in the wrong place in the body of the text (see supra, p. 116, n. 2). Proof of this is the identity of V, 15a with II, ga, which is to be explained in the following way: II, 9a is to be considered as the open- ing words of the original closing refrain of the third strophe (II, 6-22, it is generally granted, have come down to us in complete disorder) and V, 15a as the repetition of these same words in the margin for the purpose of indicating the place where the omission belongs. — For the rearrangement of the first two strophes of II, 6-22 cf. Marti, op. cit. pp. 34f.5 and Gray, op. cH., pp. 49f. IS.VIAII AND rOLITIC.VL AIFAIRS 261 since its contents are so directly applicable to the missing utterance regarding the name S/ic\ir Yashuh, it is safe to conclude that it is really a fragment of that utterance: "A remnant shall return, a remnant of Jacob unto the mighty God. Even though thy people be as the sands of the sea, a mere remnant of them shall return; destruction is unalterably decreed, sweeping in righteousness like a flood. For an unalterable decree of destruction the Lord, God Sabaoth, shall execute on the whole land." (c) DC, 7-x, 4+v, 25b-30 Chapter IX, 7-X, 4 and its original conclusion, V, 25b-3o/ may serve as another illustration of the hopelessness with which Isaiah from the very start viewed the situation. This sermon, which also uses " Ya'akob " to denote the whole nation, is addressed to Israel and Judah alike, though, like Hosea's prophecies ' V, 25b-30 is another instance of a lengthy omission which was first added in a blank space of the MS. and later inserted from there in the wrong place. The case affords a good insight into the un- critical, altogether mechanical procedure of the ancient copyists. The copyist who was responsible for the omission took, for his part, unusual pains to indicate where the omitted passage belonged; he repeated not merely one or two of the immediately preceding words, but the whole refrain, " In spile of all this His anger hath not been ap- peased, and His hand is still outstretched," with which the preceding strophe, X, 1-4, closed; yet all his precautions were wasted on the later copyist, who doubtless gave no thought whatever to the matter, but inserted the passage at the point where he found it. The identi- fication by modem scholars of V, 26-30 as the original conclusion of IX, 7-X, 4 was due primarily to the repclilion of the refrain. 2 62 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL and to a certain extent also Amos', it deals specifically with the conditions in the Northern Kingdom, no doubt because it was prompted by the civil war raging there. By the emphatic ha' am hillo, "the entire peo- ple," of V. 8, the prophet, right in the opening of the speech, makes it clear that the whole nation, his own countrymen as well as the citizens of Ephraim and Sa- maria, will suffer the effects of God's "word " (i. e.. His decree of judgment). Further, the prophet devotes a whole strophe (X, 1-4) to the conditions in his home- state. It would be altogether arbitrary to throw out this strophe, as some have done, as not originally be- longing to this sermon; it is not at all incongruous with the preceding strophes, nor with the general drift of the sermon; for in IX, 7-20 the prophet does not Hmit himself to the retrospect of the reverses which the people of Northern Israel have been suffering, but side by side with this retrospect describes the corrup- tion which pervades all classes of society there — cor- ruption of which the present state of anarchy is but the culmination. Indeed, X, 1-4, with its description of the wholesale perversion of justice prevaihng in Judah, forms a fitting supplement to the picture presented in IX, 7-20 of the degeneracy of the sister-kingdom. Moreover, it is very probable that the retrospect of IX, 7-20 even contained a reference to reverses suffered by Judah. The sare r^sin in v. 10, as is widely acknowledged, is certainly not original text; the phrase is not only in itseh strange, but in its present connection admits of no satisfactory interpretation. Apart from this, there is nowhere in the records any mention of an attack of Aram on, or even of a hostile attitude of Aram toward, Northern Israel at that time; but II Chron. XXVIII, ISAIAH AND rOLITIC.VL AFFAIRS 263 17 records an attack of Edom on Judah, and, what is particularly important, records it as occurring simul- taneously with an attack of the Philistines on Judah (//)., V. 18). This circumstance, to my mind, makes it fairly conclusive that, instead of 'aram miqqacdacm, V. II of Isaiah's retrospect originally read "^dom miqqaedacm, and that thus by the words, "Edom on the East and the Philistines on the West," Isaiah had reference to this simultaneous attack of Edom and the Philistines on Judah. (Note that in II Ki. XVI, 6, where the attack of Edom on Judah is likewise re- corded, the original "^dom in the first part of the verse was both times similarly misread, while in the second part not only the LXX and Targ., but also the Kcre of the Masorites, has correctly '""domim for the Kethlb '"romim}) With such a deduction it accords that in the preceding v. 10 the LXX read }'V in iv tou? iiraviarafievox/i eVt 6po<; "Eeicov — "the adversaries of ISIt. Zion"— for the questionable p^n nv.^ As of the description of the Day of Yhwh, it may be said of IX, 7-X, 4, V, 26-30 that Isaiah expatiates therein on the revelation he received in the consecration-vision. Only, in the former he develops more fully the idea of God's holiness, which must destroy everything impure opposing it, while in the latter he dwells at length on the total apathy of the ' r'sin, as Klostcrmann, " Die Biichcr Samuclis und dcr Kcinige," ad loc, points out, was not inserted in the verse until after the mistake '"ram had crept into the text. ' The mistaken reading of the Masoretic text is due to false-word- division in the copying of an archetype which had as yet no word- division; the copyist joined the T of TH to pv reading pVl and mis- took the n for a vowel-letter of the defectively written "IV (H occurs occasionally in Aramaic as vowel-letter of the plur. masc. construct state). 264 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL people, to demonstrate which, he declared in the consecration- vision, seemed to him the immediate purpose of his mission. All the dire calamities that God has been visiting on the nation, the prophet points out, have been to no effect. Neither the crushing defeat which they have suffered from the hands of their enemies, nor the civil war which has wrought havoc in the country, has availed to make the people recognize God's punishing hand and effect "their return to Him that hath been smiting them." Blind to the fact that their lawlessness has brought them to the verge of ruin, the people "speak in their pride and haughtiness of heart : Bricks have fallen down, but with quarry stones shall we rebuild; Sycamores have been felled, but with cedars shall we replace them." Thus Wickedness prevails unabated, spreading to and infecting all classes of society: "For Wickedness burneth like fire: Consuming thorns and briars, It (spreads) kindling the thickets of the forest, upwards they whirl in columns of smoke." Because of these conditions the day of visitation is at hand, their destruction is certain — destruction from which there will be no escape, which will sweep away them and their earthly glory aHke.^ The nation which God has called upon to execute the judgment is a mighty and an irresistible one, and it will sweep down ^ Isaiah here (X, 3) touches briefly on what he developed in full in his description of the Day of Yhwh, II, 6-22 etc., that at God's appearance for judgment all earthly glory must sink in the dust. IS.UAH AND POLITIC.VL AFFAIRS 265 upon the country as the lion assails his prey. Though Isaiah does not mention the nation by name, there can be no doubt that he means Assyria. The ex- pression "from the end of the earth" (v. 26) is to be accounted for, like the similar expressions in Jeremiah and Deutero-Isaiah referred to on p. 49, n. i, by the fact that for the prophets the territory of Assyria formed the geographical horizon to the east. 3. THE PROPHECIES OF THE FOLLOWING PERIODS Isaiah's prophecies of the following periods show in no wise any change or modification in his view of the situation from that revealed in his earliest prophecies. Whether we turn to VII, 3-14,^ 16-21,^ 23-25, and to Vm, 1-8,- 11-18 of the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, or to XXVIII, 1-4, 7-23, dating either from the time of the siege of Samaria or from the immediately preceding time,^ or to XXIX, 1-4, 5C-6, ' Verses 15 and 22 were added later, after v. 14 had come to be understood as a Messianic prediction — a prediction which, as the context shows, was far from Isaiah's thoughts. He had reference in V. 14 not to the remote, but to the immediate future, that is to say, to the turn which, he believed, events would take in less than a year's time. The full discussion of this much-debated point, how- ever, can be taken up only hand in hand with the intcrjirctalion of VII, 3-25, as a whole, in Volume II. This prophecy (like the follow- ing VIII, itT.) dilTers in its literary character from other pro[)hecies in that, owing to the peculiar circumstances of the case of which the prophet wished to convey a true picture, it has the form of a memoir. * Verses 9-10, which break the sequence of thought are a later addition, due, like the additions in the preceding chapter, to the tendency of later times to put a Messianic construction on the pro- phecy. The words, "Immanu El," at the close of verse 8, arc part of the addition; they form its beginning. * XXVIII, 1-4, 7-22, as we shall show in Volume II, must have formed from the start an organic whole, the second part of which 266 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 9-14, and XXX, 1-17, and XXXI, 1-4 of Isaiah's last period of activity — the time of Judah's alHance with Egypt, 704-702 — we find that the prophet speaks with the same positiveness of the irremediable bhnd- ness and corruption of the people and of their certain doom. Besides this, the strongest possible evidence that this fundamental conviction of his underwent no change, either in the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign or in the initial years of Judah's alliance with Egypt (704-702), is furnished by the prophet's state- ments relative to the preservation of his prophecies of these respective periods. In regard to the latter period he is just as outspoken as to his reason for preserving his prophecies as we found he was in regard to the former (see supra, p. 169). He declares that since his words have been ineffectual for his own age, they must be saved for a future and — the impHca- tion is — a more discerning generation, in order to prove to them the truth of God's word: "Now go, write it ^ down,^ inscribe it Mn a scroll, that it ^ may serve as a lasting testimony (r. la'ed) in the days to come; for it is a rebeUious people, faithless sons they are, sons who will not hear the revelation of God, who say to the seers, 'See not,' and to the prophets, shows no less clearly than the first that it was delivered prior to the downfall of Samaria. 1 Instead of the sing, suffix and the 3rd sing, of the verb, the LXX, it is important to note, read the plural suffix and the 3rd plural respectively: "write them down, inscribe them in a scroll, that they may serve," etc. 2 'al lu'^h HUam is a gloss, as ^al sephaer shows. It is probably to be ascribed to the influence of VIII, if. IS.UAH .VXD POLITICAL AFF.VIRS 267 'Do not prophesy to us the truth I Speak, to us ilatterics, prophesy delusions! Get out of our way, begone from our path! Leave us in peace about the Holy One of Israel!'" (XXX,S-ii). More expressive even arc Isaiah's words in the subsequent prophecy of this period, where, in a strain similar to that employed in the consecration-vision almost forty years earUer, he declares that God has stricken the people with blindness and apathy: he continues significantly for our purpose: "Therefore, the prophecy of all this is for you like the words of a sealed book, which if one hands to a learned man, saying, pray, read this, he replies, I cannot, for it is sealed; and which if one hands to one who is not learned, sa>ing, pray, read this, he replies, I am not learned " (XXIX, 11-12). Is it likely that Isaiah would have viewed his life- work in such a light if, during the twenty years of his acti\'ity previous to this, he had been steadily gaining in influence, if he had reached the point where his counsel was eagerly sought by King and people, and his words carried the weight of conviction to his hearers? It is very clear the prophet's thoughts were not bent on efTecting the conversion of his contem- poraries, and still less were they set on influencing the direction of the affairs of state. Isaiah sim[)ly preached the word of God. as it was revealed to him, to a people who would not listen — to a deaf and faith- less people. 268 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL 4. THE THEORIES ADVANCED IN EXPLANATION OF ISAIAH'S ALLEGED CHANGE OF VIEW UNTENABLE As to Isaiah's alleged change of view regarding the doom in the following year, that is at the time of the Assyrian invasion in 701, it will be seen, after the deductions of the previous paragraphs, that such a change is, on the face of the matter, unlikely. It would be at variance with those basic views from which his whole preaching proceeds, and it cannot be reconciled with the well-poised, positive personality which the prophet presents throughout his career. If Isaiah suddenly changed his lifelong view on the most vital point of his preaching, we may be sure that it was an event of the greatest moment to himself; that it was not the result of mere whim or momentary vacillation, but of positive reasoning, the psychology of which could certainly be traced. Kittel's apology, "We have no assurance that doubts and all sorts of contradictory elements were not mingled together in his consciousness," ^ does not touch the point at all, and the explanation of Wilke and Staerk, that Isaiah's supposed change of view regarding the doom was the result of his altered estimation of Assyria, but confuses the issue, and imputes to the prophet motives which were altogether foreign to his mode of thought. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that Isaiah's view-point in regard to the poHtical af- fairs of the day was, like that of the other great prophets, not that of a statesman, but of a re- ligious idealist. ^Geschichie des Volkes Israel, II, p. 511. IS.\I.\H .\ND POUTIC.\L AFF.VIRS 269 5. ISALVII S GUIDING PRINCIPLE— FAITH When Isaiah in the years 705-702 condemned Judah's alliance with Kgyj)t. which had been formed for the purpose of shaking oil the Assyrian yoke, he was not guided by any insight into the pohtical con- steUation, nor by any shrewd understanding of the trend which matters were bound to take in the Orient, but by that spiritual truth which was to him a law throughout, that truth which at the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, 734, (when he scored Ahaz for his appeal to Assyria for aid) he crystallized in the words '/;;/ lo iJia ^'^minil kl Id ihcamenu: "If ye have not faith, verily ye shall not endure" (VII, 9b). In accordance with this spiritual law, the only policy which Isaiah recommended in the crisis of the Syro-Ef)hraimitic campaign, and again in the critical years of 704-702, was that of hasqct ubhitha, of "re- fraining from action and trusting (in God)," that is of abandoning all efforts at self-defence and reiving absolutelv on God (VII, 4, XXX, iff., cj. also VIII, i2f. and XXVIII, i6f.). This idea of faith is, essentially, the same principle that underlies the view-point of all the literary proph- ets in regard to the material strength and political safeguarding of the nation. But Isaiah developed the idea more fully and forcibly than any of the others. He was the first to make it clear that trust in God meant for a nation righteous government — conform- ity with the divine standard of holiness, cJ. XXVIII, 17 and V, 16: 2 70 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL "And I shall make justice the rule and righteousness the standard. On that day the Lord Sabaoth will be exalted by jus- tice, and the Holy God will show Himself Holy by right- eousness." He was the first to define holiness in the purely ethical sense and to draw the practical conclusions from it for humanity {cf. especially VI, 3-8 of the consecration- vision). And he, more clearly than any other, defined the beUef that it is not by material forces, or, to use a modern term, not by economic necessity, that man- kind endures and progresses, but by purely spiritual forces; and that, wherever these essential spiritual forces are not in the ascendancy, the life of nations as well as of individuals is doomed to destruction. Isaiah's conception of progress is characteristically expressed in his poetic description of the future com- monwealth (IX, 1-6): "The people that walk in darkness shall see a great light; Upon those that dwell in the land of the shadow of death Light shall shine forth " (v. i). This faith which stamps Isaiah as a religious idealist rather than as a practical statesman is sufficient an- swer to the theory advanced by Staerk and Wilke in explanation of the change of attitude which they be- lieve he underwent toward Assyria. These scholars argue that in the first three decades of Assyria's as- cent under Tiglath-Pileser III and his successors, Sal- manassar IV and Sargon, Isaiah recognized in the ISAIAH AND POLITIC.\L AFFAIRS 271 aggressive policy and invincible power of Assyria an ethical factor, which, as a contrast to the decadent life in the small kingdoms of Syria and Palestine, he hailed with enthusiasm, but that, in consequence of his close and intimate acquaintance with the Assryian hon at the time of the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib's armies, and the insight afforded him then in the real design of Assyria, he radically changed his attitude toward the Assyrian world-power.^ — To ascribe such reasoning to Isaiah is to make Isaiah an exponent of Nietzsche's Ilerrcnmoral. Nietzsche's ethics, however, and Isaiah's religious views, or for that matter, prophetic religious views in general, differ from each other as widely as the poles. Assyria's imperialism was the very opposite of divine rule, was directly contrary to the standard of divine holiness according to which Isaiah measured and judged every procedure. Neither Isaiah, nor indeed any other prophet, could ever have viewed Tiglath-Pileser's or Sargon's conquests in any other light than as the embodiment of brute force and unrestrained greed. ^ And in this connection it will not be amiss to mention that the imperialistic dream so in evidence in the Messianic hope of post-exilic times was entirely absent from the future hope of the great prophets, whose conception of ideal government was altogether spir- itual. Furthermore, it would not have taken Sen- nacherib's appearance in Judah and the havoc wrought by him in the countr}'' to convince Isaiah of the true character and design of the Assyrian world-power. The conquest of Gilead and Galilee and the deporta- ' See Staerk, op. cil., pp. 57f., 64, 75, 81, Ssff., and Wilke, op. cit., pp. ifif., 23ff., 5i,54fl.,95ff. ' Cf. the interpretation of X, 5-19, infra, pp. aSsff. 272 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL tion of their inhabitants by Tiglath-Pileser, and still more the conquest of Samaria and the exile of the people by Sargon to remote parts of the Assyrian empire, would have more than sufficed to open his eyes in this respect, for we may rest assured that Isaiah did not view the dowoifall of the sister-kingdom from the standpoint of an indifferent onlooker. Both Tiglath-Pileser and Sargon, it should be pointed out, were mightier conquerors than Sennacherib. Their wars, and also those of Salmanassar, were no less bloody than those of Sennacherib, though they did not happen to emphasize this feature in their records to the extent that the latter did. And, what is still more important, it was Tiglath-Pileser who intro- duced the system of transplanting the conquered nations to other, remote countries for the purpose of effecting their disintegration, and both he and Sargon carried out this poKcy quite as brutally and rigor- ously as did after them Sennacherib. 6. NO DISCREPANCY IN ISAIAH'S PROPHECIES There is then nothing in the circumstances of the case or in the prophet's views in general to corroborate the assumption that Isaiah changed his mind regard- ing the doom. And if we consider the question from the other end, that is, in regard to the utterances which gave rise to the assumption, we shall find that the discrepancy which has called forth so much apol- ogy and explanation is in reahty more seeming than real. The prophecies and passages that come in question are: (a) X, 5-19; (b) X, 20, 24-27 (exclusive of 'ol mipp^ne Samaen^ which close the verse), and XIV, The words, which yield no sense as they read at present, belonged IS.UAH AND rOLITIC.VL AFFAIRS 273 -M-27; (c) X. 27C-34; (d) XIV, 28-32; (c) XVII, 12- XVIII, 6; (f) XXIX, 5a-b, 7-8; and (g) XXXI, 5-9. Oi these we shall reserve X, 5-19 for the last and consider the second group first. (a). X, 20, 24-27 +XIV, 24-27. A POSTEXILIC PRODUCT Biblical scholars are agreed that X, 20 and 24-27 are not by Isaiah, but are a product of postexilic times,^ but they make the mistake of including also vv. 21-23 in this spurious passage. These verses, however, as has been shown above,- are no part of 20 and 24-27, but are a fragment of a genuine utterance of Isaiah which got wrongly put in here. The fragment, XIV, 24-27, contrary to the opinion of Cheyne that it origi- nally formed a part of X, 5ff.,^ does not show organic connection with that prophecy, nor for that matter, as is generally admitted, with any other prophecy of Isaiah. Cheyne can uphold his view only by omitting 25b from the fragment in question, on the ground that it is a later insertion, and by throwing out X, 15 (or i6)-i9 as a later addition to X, 5-14 (or 15), thus originally to v. 28, from which they were wrongly separated; their first part, there can be no doubt, is to be read 'old mi and in />'mc iamaen the name of a place must be contained; Duhm suggests p^nl rimmoti. ' As elsewhere in postexilic literature (cf. Is. XIX, 23fT., Zach. X, lof., Ps. LXXXIII, 9, Kzr. VI, 22) by 'aisur in v. 24 is not meant ancient Assyria, but the heirs of the .Xssyrian realm, the kingdom of the Selcucidae. Note that the Greek name Si'pia (Talmudic 'acrae^ iurid) is the shortened form of 'Ao-orvpia and that by k'lhabh a iuri in Talmudic literature "the Syriac" or "Aramaic characters" are meant. *See supra, pp. 259f. * Sec " Introduction to the Book of Isaiah," p. 79. 2 74 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL placing XIV, 24-27 immediately after v. 14 (or 15). X, 15-19, however, as we shall see later, forms one piece with X, 5-14, of which it is the immediate con- tinuation, while 25b is a vital part of XIV, 24-27, con- taining as it does the clue both to the authorship and to the original place of XIV, 24-27. From the contents of the half- verse: "And his yoke shall be removed from them, his burden be removed from their shoulders," it immediately becomes plain that XIV, 24-27 are closely related in thought and language to X, 20, 24-27, and in fact they fit in perfectly between v. 20 and V. 24. Moreover, by inserting XIV, 24-27 here, the lakhen, "therefore," introducing X, 24, which at present has no point, whether vv. 21-23 are left in or omitted, becomes at once most logical: — in XIV, 24-27 Yhwh avers that His plan to bring about the crush- ing defeat of the Assyrian world-power (i. e., of the Seleucidic Kingdom, as pointed out above) in His own country and on His own mountain shall abide, and that this plan cannot be thwarted; and X, 24!?., likewise put in the mouth of Yhwh, continues that, this being the case, Yhwh's people that dwells in Zion need not fear the Assyrian, who (at present) smites it with the rod and holds his stick over it, as did Egypt of old; for but a little while yet, and Yhwh's wrath with His people will be spent, and his scourge will be brandished against Assyria, and will vanquish it, as Midian and Egypt of old were vanquished. — It hardly needs to be remarked that the thought atmos- phere in X, 20, XIV, 24-27, X, 24-27 is strikingly at variance with that of Isaiah's prophecies. All these verses reflect the expectations characteristic of postexilic Judaism and quite commonly expressed in the literature of that time. . ISMAH AND POLITICO. AFF.VIRS 275 (b) X, 27C-34. OXE OR TWO FRAGMENTS— IRRELEVANT TO TUE QUESTION AT ISSUE X. 27C-34 is a fragment consisting of two parts, vv. 27C-32, and vv. 33-34. The former, which has some points of contact with Mic. I, 10-16, describes how an invading enemy will that very day by forced, rapid marches descend upon Zion-Jenisalem and deal it a destructive blow. In consistency with the trend of thought of 27C-32, w. 33-34, if an original part of these, can only be understood, as J. D. Michaehs ^ and others interpreted them, as describing by the figure employed, not the defeat of the invader, but the laying low of Zion-Jerusalem — an interpretation demanded, moreover, by the concluding words, "and the Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one," since "the Lebanon" is invariably used as descriptive of Palestine. If vv. 33-34, however, are not an orig- inal part of 27C-32, but are merely another fragment, it is clear that we have no clue whatever either to their origin or to the particular circumstances to which the verses have reference, so that in no case can these verses come into consideration for the question con- cerning us here. Neither is there any certain clue, it should be added, to the time of origin of vv. 27C-32, but if Isaiah is the author of them, the time of the conquest of Samaria would suggest itself as a far more probable date than the time of the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib. The march-route described is the route that would be traversed by an army ad- vancing from Samaria against Jerusalem. * Sec "Deutsche Ubcrsctzung dcs Alt. Test's, mit Anmcrku gen," ad he. 276 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL (c) XIV, 28-32. ANOTHER POST-EXILIC PRODUCT This oracle, if genuine, would certainly have some bearing on the question at issue, since it closes with the emphatic declaration that ''Yhwh hath founded Zion, and in it the afHicted of His people shall find shelter." However, the oracle cannot make claim to the authorship of Isaiah for the simple reason that the historical situation described in it is quite different from the conditions which existed at any time during Isaiah's ministry. It may be briefly remarked that the older, in part traditional, interpretation, sug- gested by the pseudo-date of the oracle ("in the year of King Ahaz' death"), which takes the "basihsk" as applying to Hezekiah, and "the serpent" and "the rod" of Phihstia's slayer, accordingly, as applying to Ahaz, is altogether excluded; for such a meaning of V. 29 would presuppose that Ahaz was victorious over Phihstia, while, as a matter of fact, just the opposite was the case (c/. II Chron. XXVIII, 18). Apart from this, the author of the oracle expects the enemy threatening Philistia to invade the country from the north (v. 31), but an attack by Judah, Philistia's immediate neighbor to the east, could be carried out only from the eastern frontier. It is obvious, too, that the situation described in V. 29 does not correspond to that presented by Assyria at the death of Tiglath-Pileser HI or of Sargon; for, in accordance with the meaning which nisbar, if used of men and countries, invariably has (cf. e. g. Is. XXIV, 10, Jer. XIV, 17, XL VIII, 4, 17, Dan. VIII, 8), "the rod that smote thee hath been broken" (nis- b'^rd) can mean only that the power that subdued and tyrannized over Phihstia has been vanquished, and ISAIAH .\ND POLITIC.\L AFFAIRS 277 Ass^Tia, we know, did not sulTor any disruption nor even any setback at the death of either Tiglath- Pileser or Sargon. The same holds true of Assyria after the death of Salmanassar IV; its p(nver stood as firm and solid as ever, even though the fleath of this monarch meant the coming of a new line of rulers to the throne. Least of all does the battle at Dur-ilu in the second year of Sargon's reign furnish the key to the situation in v. 29, as Winkler,' Cheyne,- and Staerk ' believe, for the encounter of Sargon with Humbani- gash was an altogether insignificant event, a mere drawn battle, as is obvious from the fact that both sides claimed the victory. And in view of the fact that "the rod that smote thee hath been broken" admits of no other interpretation than the one stated, viz., that the power which has heretofore held domin- ion over Philistia has been vanquished, Duhm is right in pointing to Alexander's victory over Persia at Issos in tlie year 7,2,2, ^- C. and the time prior to his conquest of Tyre and Gaza as the most likely key to the situation described in the oracle.'* It remains to be added that "Out of the root of the serpent hath come a basilisk, and a flying dragon is its fruit" (v. 29b) is a typical example of the enigmatic, figurative style so characteristic of the historical descriptions in apocal>ptic literature." the oldest products of which date from the close of the Persian and the beginning of the Greek period: "out of the ' " .\UtesUnienlliche Untcrsuchungcn," pp. 137^- «0^. ci/.,pp. 8off. » Op. cit., pp. 6of. * Sec " Das Buch Jcsaia," p. 97. ' The genesis of such descriptions frequently, no doubt, is to be sought in mythobgicai notions. 2 78 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL root of the serpent" is not another figure applying to Philistia's slayer, but the whole half-verse is a most adequate figurative description of the invincible Alexander, as he impressed his contemporaries, and of his father, the great Philip. (d) x\'n, i2-x\'in, 6. a number of fragments which ADMIT OF NO CONCLUSION XVII, I2-XVIII, 6 has in common with XXIX, 5a-b, 7-8, and XXXI, 5-9 that it is fragmentary, but differs from XXIX, 5, etc., where the situation is in part clear, and from XXXI, 5-9, where it is al- together clear, and where, besides, the prophet's reasoning underl>-ing the utterance is perfectly lucid, in that it does not afford us any real insight into either of these all-important particulars. In the first place, the question is whether XVII, 12-14 and XVIII, 1-6 are one or two fragments; and the fact is that, whether considered from the point of view of form or contents, they make the impression of being separate pieces, independent of one another: "This is the portion of our despoilers, and the lot of our plunderers" (XVII, 14b) reads like the conclusion of a sermon, or more correctly Kke the conclusion of a psalm, and XVIII, if., on the other hand, begins like a new sermon. From the point of \'iew of the contents the two pieces present insuperable difficulties. XVII, 12-14 leave us wholly in the dark about the identity of the hosts of nations arrayed, as well as about the object and scene of their attack, the mention of them in the concluding verse as "our despoilers" and "our plun- derers" being the only descriptive reference to them. XVIII, 1-6 are quite obscure, except for vv. 1-2, ISAIAH AND POLrnC.-\L AFFAIRS 27Q which are addressed to "the land . . . beyond the rivers of Kush " or rather to the envoys sent from this land, bidding them depart whence tlicy came. The obscurity, it is important to note, arises from the fact that vv. 3-6 are comprised of several fragments (whether of one or more than one utterance cannot be decided), and these fragments as they stand at present show no logical connection either with vv. 1-2 or among themselves. Verse 4 can have formed the continuation of v. 3 only in the case that the latter was preceded originally by some verses which indicated what it was that " the inhabitants of the world and the dwellers on earth shall see and hear," as also what occurrences are referred to by "when the banner is raised and the trumpet is blown." Further, after v. 4 and again after v. 5 there is clearly a gap; for the for- mer leaves us in the dark as to the particular occur- rences or processes toward which God will observe the placid, serene atritude described, and the latter does not show what is meant to be conveyed by the figure of the grape-vine ripening to vintage and of the lopping oflf of the branches and cutting ofT of the tendrils. However ingenious are the respecdve interpretations of Marti ' and Duhm ^ of w. 4 and 5, both scholars read more into the text than is per- missible. Finally, v. 6 cannot {X)ssibly have formed the immediate continuation of v. 5, for, aside from ever}'thing else, the striking contrast in style, the highly poetic and figurative language of the one and the plain prose of the other, preclude that they could have directly followed one another; even lesser authors than Isaiah would not be guilty of producing anything so discordant. To this must be added that neither ' Op. cit., ad loc. * Op. cil., ad loc. 28o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL w. 5 and 6 nor the preceding verses furnish any due as to who the people are that are to be left as prey to the carrion-birds and beasts — a point which bears further evidence to the fragmentariness of the whole passus. In view of this fragmentary character and the general obscurity of w. 3-6, it remains uncertain even whether these verses are in any way related to 1-2, i. e., whether they are, either all or in part, the residua of a prophecy which, as it would seem from w. 1-2, Isaiah delivered on the occasion of the arrival of envoys from "beyond the rivers of Kush" in Je- rusalem. But however this may be, it is certain that neither XVII, 12-14 ^^^ XVIII, 1-6 permit any inference in regard to the question concerning us here, the question viz., of Isaiah's beheved change of attitude regarding Assyria and change of mind regard- ing the doom awaiting Judah. (e) XXIX, 5a-b, 7-8. A FRAGMENT OR MORE PROBABLY AN INTERPOLATION XXIX, 5 (exclusive of the last three words, isfhaja I'phaetha pith'om, which belong to the following v. 6), 7-8 give expression to the beHef that certain hostile hosts that are arrayed against Zion-Ariel shall meet with such utter defeat, that they and the terror caused by them will appear hke a nightmare. Inasmuch as these verses utterly contradict vv. 1-4, 5C-6 (the latter being the immediate continuation of the former) and also vv. 9-14, it is obvious that they cannot be an original part of the prophecy XXIX, iff. — This prophecy in vv. 1-4, 5C-6 predicts the very opposite of 5a-b, 7-8, viz., that God Himself shall take the field against Zion-Ariel and destroy His ''altar-hearth"- IS.\IAH AND rOLITIC.VL AFFAIRS 281 city, and in vv. 9-14 gives the reason for this action: He is going to deal destruction to His people because of their spiritual blindness and their ritualistic piety. The insertion of vv. 5a-b, 7-S may be explained in cither of two ways. They may be the fragment of another prophecy of Isaiah's on the same issue as that with which he deals in XXXI, 5-9, and the frag- ment may have been inserted here purjwsely by edi- tors of a later age in order to take the sting out of the prophecy, v\\ iff., and to give it a construction more in harmony with the beliefs of their own times. Or these later editors may for the same reason have added these verses themselves, for there is no doubt that this prophecy, more than any other prophecy of Isaiah's, must have given offence to later ages, since it dealt a scathing blow to their holiest and most cher- ished beliefs. The second possibility seems to me the more likely one for the following reasons: (i) The verses have in common with the prophecy, vv. iff., the name Ariel applied to Zion-Jerusalem, but, while in vv. iff. it is used by Isaiah with apparent sarcasm (see infra, pp. 293f.), in v. 7 it is evidently used with the significance associated with the name in the minds of the people. It is, however, not likely that Isaiah would at any time have used the word in this sense, least of all after he had used it as a taunt a short time be- fore. (2) It may reasonably be assumed, if Isaiah had spoken these verses, whether at the time of the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib's armies, or at any time when the country was threatened by an attack from Assyria, that he would not have referred to the Assyrian hosts in such general, indefinite terms as "the multitude of all the nations" (vv. 7 and 8), "the multitude of thine enemies" and "the multitude 282 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL of tyrants" (v. 5), but would have referred to them by name as in XXXI, 5-9. But even if the fragment were a product of Isaiah's, it would still not permit the inference that at the time of the Assyrian crisis Isaiah cherished the belief that Assyria would meet with destruction at Zion, for the possibility would have to be reckoned with that what at present seems to be an absolute prediction, might appear, if we had the complete prophecy or a sufhcient part of it, to be meant conditionally only. This view of the case, it will be seen presently, is directly sug- gested by XXXI, 5-9. (f) XXXI, 5-9 A CONDITIONAL PREDICTION Contrary to the view taken of XXXI, 4 by some scholars,^ it is certain that it cannot form a part of vv. 5-9. sahhd 'al invariably implies hostile inten- tion, never protective purpose (cf. XXIX, yf., Num. XXXI, 7, Zach. XIV, 12), and therefore the verse predicts the very opposite of what v. 5 promises. It must belong to the preceding prophecy, w. 1-3, to which it forms a fitting continuation — the prophet declares in effect that the alliance with Eg>pt will not avail, the less so since God Himself is arrayed against Zion. In the emphasis which this latter thought receives, the verse forms a parallel to XXIX, iff., just as in the expression of the futility of their alliance with Egypt verses 1-3 form a parallel to XXX, 1-7 and 16. The meaning of the simile employed in v. 4 is that it would be as impossible to thwart Yhw^e's design against them by means of Eg^-pt's aid as it would be ^ Among others by Dillmann-Kittel, Der Prophet Jesaia, ad loc, and Duhm, op. cit., ad loc. ISAIAH AND POLITIC.\L AFF.URS 2S3 to rescue the prey from the jaws of a lion even by the efforts of a host of shepherds. Verse 7, which breaks the sequence of thought, is not an original part of w. 5-9; the verse got in here by mistake from XXX, i8ff., where it fits in perfectly after v. 22.^ With verse 7 eliminated, XXXI, 5-9 is well- connected and complete in itself, though the original beginning of the prophecy is missing.- The prophecy holds out the prospect of the protection of Jerusalem against Assyria and of tlie defeat of the latter by the direct intervention of Yh\\'h; and many scholars have seen in this a proof that in the crisis of the year 701 Isaiah predicted that in the last extremity Yhwh would Himself protect Jerusalem and strike down the Assyrian invader. They have, however, overlooked a most essential fact, viz., that the imperative hlbliii of v. 6 forms with, jagen of v. 5 and naphal and the follow- ing verbs of vv. 8 and 9 a compound conditional prop- osition, it being the protasis of both the preceding v. 5 and the following vv. 8 and 9; and that hence vv. 5 and 8-9 make no absolute prediction, only a conditional one: — Yhw'h's rising in defence of Jerusalem and His destroying Assyria is contingent on Israel's renouncing its deep-rooted apostasy and returning to God: "Like hovering' birds, so God Sabaoth will shelter Jerusalem, shelter and deliver, spare and rescue it, ' XXX, 18-33 together with its original opening part, XXIX, 17-24, is a postexilic product. * It may be pointed out that even if v. 4 could be taken as a part of vv. 5-9, the prophecy would still be without a beginning. ' 'apkdth is potential participle, its meaning properly being "in a flying position" {see supra, p. 108.). 284 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL if ye return to Him from whom ye have fallen away so radically; then Assyria will fall by the sword of no mortal, and the sword of no earthly being will consume it — It will flee from the sword,^ and his picked soldiers will be put to hard service; and his rock will vanish out of fear, even his captains will flee affrighted from the standard, saith the Lord who hath a fire in Zion and a furnace in Jerusalem." The prophecy in no wise contradicts Isaiah's Kfe- long convictions, but, on the contrary, is quite con- sistent with them. Isaiah points out the one course by the adoption of which the present crisis could and, without fail, would be averted. He did the same thing at the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, and again on the completion of the alliance with Egypt, which precipitated the alarming situation of the year 701 {cf. XXX, i5f.). For though he, like the other prophets, was well aware that his preaching fell on deaf ears, he was convinced, even as they, that if only a spiritual regeneration of his contemporaries might be effected, no power on earth could thence- forth prevail against them; — their future would be assured. Jer. XXI, 12 furnishes a striking parallel: 1 "From the sword," i. e. from God's sword, — the sword of swords: a case of emphatic indetermination (see supra, p. 107); cf. the parallel case Job XIX, 29, "Fear the sword" (mipp^ne haeraebh) — /. e. the avenging sword of God — "for these are (read hema) sins that will be avenged by the sword." The objection raised against v. 8b by Marti (op. cit., ad loc), Duhm (op. ciL, ad loc), and Guthe (in Kautzsch 2, ad loc.) does not hold: "It will flee from the sword" is in reality a variation of the statement, "it will fall by the sword," for it means, it will be completely put to rout; no matter how crushing the defeat, an army is never destroyed to the last man. ISAIAH /VXD POLITICAL AFF.URS 285 here Jeremiah taunts the people for their futile defence of the city (during the last stage of the siege of Jeru- salem by the Chaldaeans) declaring that their doom is sealed, yet he takes occasion to point out by what course they might even yet be saved, if tliey would {cf. supra — pp. 6of., 70). (C.) X, 5-19. god's ultimate reckoning with the ASSYRIAN WORLD-POWER There is no discrepancy, either, between X, 5-19 and the rest of Isaiah's preaching. Though the prophecy evidently dates from a time when Jerusalem was threatened by Assyria (see v. 11), and for this reason, because of the reference to the conquest of Karkemish (717), must be considered a product of the year 711 or, what is more likely, of the year 701, the conviction expressed in it might have found utterance at any time of Isaiah's ministry. Isaiah reviews in it the mighty conquests of Tiglath-Pileser and his successors in exactly the same Hght as he must have looked upon Assyria's imperialism and brutal despotism from the ver}'- first. He declares that Assyria is not bent upon destroying Israel because it feels itself the rod of God's anger, destined for that purpose, but because it is filled with wanton desire for conquest and unlimited power. It is ready to trample nations under foot, to wipe them out by transplanting the people from tlieir native soil as one would rob a bird's nest, and it gloats: "By the strength of my hand I have done this, and by my wisdom, for I am prudent." For this wicked presumption, Isaiah asserts, God is to mete out punishment to Assyria, but, it is important to note, he makes it clear that God's plan to punish 286 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL Assyria in no wise interferes with His intention of first using this nation for the overthrow of His people. In V. 12 which, for reasons that must be considered altogether arbitrary, has been eliminated by recent exegetes from X, 5ff., Isaiah states expressly that God will not proceed to visit pimishment upon Assyria until "He has completed His whole work on Mt. Zion and in Jerusalem," that is to say, until by the destruction of Zion- Jerusalem, in addition to that of Samaria (which has already been effected), He has completed His work of destroying His people through the agency of Assyria (c/. vv. 5 and 6, and also the similar meaning of ?na"^sehil in Chap. V, 19). As to the authenticity of v. 12, it must be pointed out that the verse by no means forms a break in the sequence of thought. The theme of the prophecy, Assyria's lust of dominion and its inevitable conse- quences, is developed in two well-rounded parts: vv. 5-12, and 13-19. The first part sets forth that Assyria, not realizing that it is merely the tool in God's hand, has set its heart on conquest, and that for this reason God shall hold a reckoning with Assyria as soon as its commission is performed. The second part, in vv. 13-15, expatiates on Assyria's policy of conquest from its two principal aspects, i. e. from the aspect of Assyria's insatiable greed for do- minion, as manifested especially in its brutal disregard for the individuahties of nations, and from the aspect of its inordinate presumption bordering on self- deification. The concluding verses of the second part, 16-19, give a more complete description of the fate awaiting Assyria: the collapse of Assyria as a world- power is sure to come, and the conflagration, which is to sweep away the vast, proud realm it has built up, IS.\IAH .\ND POLITICAL AFFAIRS 287 will be fanned by "the Light and the Holy One of Israel" Himself. Further, since v. 12 is thus an integral part of X, 5-19 and its explanation clearly indicated by the general trend of thought, which is perfectly lucid, it follows that the eschatological interpretation of the verse, which has come into vogue of recent years, is unwarranted. Finally, though it must be granted that some parts of vv. 5-19 read more smootlily than v. 12, others, both from the point of view of diction and of rhythm, are quite on a level with it; ^ cf. e. g. vv. 10 and i4a-b. As to "the King of Assyria," this does not indicate any change of sub- ject, for throughout this prophecy Isaiah addresses himself actually to the absolute ruler of Assyria, in whose person ail power of the state is centered. In fact, I can find no disparity anywhere in X, 5-19; the figures are adequate throughout, and the whole is Isaianic both in spirit and in language. 7. ISAL\h'S last prophecy — CIL\PTER XXII, I-14 Chapter XXII, 1-14 may be referred to as a final proof that Isaiah at no time during the crisis of the year 701 predicted the deliverance of Judah and Jerusalem from Assyria by the intervention of Yiiwii. The piece is to be considered as one whole, as Hack- mann - and Dillmann-Kittel ^ take it, with the excep- tion, however, of v. 6. * To the genitive-construction, peri godael I'bhabh madaekh 'aiiur, which Duhm calls an "Ungetum, das trcfUich in die Grammatikcn passt, aber nicht in cine bcschwingtc I'rophctenredc," (op. cit., ad he.) cf. the similar construction, ''^(acraclh gcuth iikkore 'cphraim, XXVni, I and 3, of a passage which is unquestionably genuine and even forcible. ^Op. cit., pp. 92-97. * Op. cit., ad loc. 288 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL This verse belongs in the pse-udo-prophecy, XXI, i-io/ from which being omitted it was added in the margin, and when the MS. was subsequently recopied it became wrongly inserted in Chap. XXII. The original place of the verse, or more correctly of uf'elam nasd 'as pa w^qir 'era mageji, was after bd raekhaebh 'is saemaed parasim of XXI, 9, as is shown by D-'K'is DnwS nann of XXII, 6; the latter words are practically identical with ha raekhaebh'is (saemaed) parasim: 3 is not the preposition 2, as in our present text, but X3 written without the vowel-letter, like ri3^n>l (K), II Ki. Ill, 24, and ^n, I Sam. XXV, 8; 'adam is a variant of 'is. As to saemaed, from the fact that it is missing in XXII, 6 it is safe to conclude that it did not stand originally in XXI, 9 either, but that it got in here by mistake from v. 7. This re- moves the difficulty presented by the strange use of saemaed in reference to persons.^ n^'^^nSi mx 33"i2 then are the words which immediately preceded the omitted passage, and which were repeated in the margin alongside of the passage in order to indicate the place where it belonged.^ ^ Like Jer. L-LI, Is. XXI, i-io belongs in the category of vaticinia post evcntiim: what purports to be a prediction of the imminent fall of Babylon proves on closer examination to have been written after the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus. 2 In V. 7 parasun means "horses," while here in v. 9 it can only mean "horsemen," being in apposition with raekhaebh 'is. 'That h{d) raekhaebh 'adam parasun was put between the two omitted hemistichs when the latter were inserted in XXII, 6 may easily be explained. In order to keep the omitted passage separate from the words indicating the place where it belonged, the copyist's method in putting down both in the margin, whether at the top or at the bottom of the page, may have been as follows: ,.-s I. I.; I J A — -uo^'elam nasd 'aspd bya) raekaebh adani parasim , ^ or wegir erd magen; ISAIAH AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS 2S9 The prophecy, XXII. 1-14, describes in opening how the people are given up to revelry because of their joy over the propitious turn afTairs have taken. Though the particular alTairs alluded to are not specified at this juncture, it is at once apparent that the joy and excitement of the people must be due citlier to the sudden termination of the war which has been carried on in the country or to some un- expected success in the same. For the prophet con- tinues, "Thy slain are not those that have been killed by the sword, not tliose that have fallen in battle," but (this follows by implication) they are this light- hearted people — stricken though not by sword thrust — this people bhnd to the real issue of affairs, and heed- less of the day of terror and destruction so near at hand: "For a day of panic, of treading-down and confusion hath in readiness the Lord, God Sabaoth — In the vale of vision the walls are bursting, and cries resound to the mountains." There has been much speculation about "the vale" or "valley of vision," and various, necessarily un- successful attempts have been made both to explain the name and to locate the valley. As soon, however, as the expression is taken as a poetic figure, its mean- ing is self-evident. The people are rejoicing blindly, because, according to superficial indications, they have reason to be confident of the future, but to the prophet's vfelamnasd'aipd ^(^.^ ^^^^^^^ ,^^^ ^^^^j.,,, weqir era nuigcn And since the copyists of later times no longer understood the method pursued by the earlier coypists in cases of omission, it is but natural that they inserted the whole mechanically as they found it. There are other cases in support of this explanation. 290 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL vision the reality is revealed — the destruction, in all its harrowing details, that is in store for them. In verses yff. the prophet continues by stating the reasons for his gloomy outlook, and, though at the beginning of this part something must have dropped out,^ there can still be no doubt about this part's being the continuation of vv. 1-5 inasmuch as it sup- plements them in two essential respects. Not only does it deal explicitly with the happenings which have led to the prophet's forecast of doom, but it gives a clear idea of the particular peril the removal of which caused such exultation among the people. We learn that Jerusalem itself was in immediate danger; and the detailed description of the measures adopted by the people in that crisis is identical with the account in II Chron. XXXII, 2-5, 30 of the precautions taken by Hezekiah in the year 701, when Jerusalem was blockaded by a detachment of Sennacherib's army. Contrary to the opinion of Duhm,^ Marti,^ and others, there is no ground for eliminating vv. Qb-iia as not being an original part of the prophecy. The difference in diction between these verses and the rest of the prophecy is owing to the circumstance that the prophet refers in them to plain prosaic facts, which it would be stilted to clothe in any but matter-of-fact language. It is thus clear that the jubilation of the people, described in the opening of the prophecy, was caused by the sudden raise of the blockade and the departure of the Assyrians, which occurrence, as most ^ The insertion of v. 6 here may well have been due to a gap in the text caused by the effacement of some lines or by some other accident to the text. ^Op.cU.,adloc. ^Op.cit.,adloc. ISMAH .\ND POLITIC.\L AFFAIRS 291 scholars agree, is the only possible date of the proph- ecy. Considering the havoc that had been wrought by the Assyrian invasion, and the seriousness of the situation when Jerusalem itself was blockaded, we cannot wonder that the people's Joy knew no bounds when all of a sudden the blockading force was with- drawn, and the Assyrian armies left the country. Nor can we wonder that, in their anxiety when the Assyrian armies were advancing to besiege the capital, Hezekiah and the people overhauled the fortifications and provided for an adequate water-supply. But Isaiah saw things in a different light! He could sec nothing but rank apostasy in either action. According to his belief the people should not have sought to de- fend the city against the enemy, but should have turned to God for dehverance, should have trusted their case entirely to Him. From the great peril which threatened them, he declares, they should have com- prehended God's ''long-formed plan" toward tliem, and should have returned penitently to God, as he had admonished them to do (in XXXI, 5-9). But they have remained blind throughout, and this feasting in which they now indulge because of their deliverance, and by which they frivolously extol the principle of enjoying life while it lasts,' but shows the extent of ' Similar parallels to the carpe diem of Horace are found in both the ancient Egyptian and ancient Babylonian literature. In a frequently quoted product of the former it is said: "Enjoy the glad day and think of joy ere the day comes when you journey to the land that loves silence," and in a product of the latter: "When the Gofls created man, they ordained death for man, but life they took for themselves — • thou, O Gilgamesh, glut thyself, seek joy day and night, feast day after day, dance (?) and be merr>' (?) day and night" (r/. Erman, "Acg>ptcn and Acgyptiscbcs Lcbcn," p. 320; " Das GiJgamcsh-Epos " 292 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL their callousness. Therefore, the prophet concludes, their doom is sealed. The evidence furnished by XXII, 1-14 confirmatory of what we have sho\vn to have been Isaiah's attitude in the crisis of the year 701 could not be more conclu- sive. It precludes, in fact, any other explanation. For it is not conceivable that if Isaiah, as many scholars think, really believed that Assyria by its attack on Jerusalem proved itself the enemy of Yh\vh (be- cause, they argue, for the prophet Zion was the in- violable abode of Yhwh), and if the more desperate the situation grew, the more confident he became of the ultimate triumph of Yh^\'h's cause, and, moreover, if he even predicted the exact outcome of events, as the story II ICi. XIX, 5-7 ( = Is. XXXVII, 5-7) claims he did, then certainly it is not conceivable that, just as soon as everything had turned out according to his prediction, he would deliver such a prophecy as XXII, 1-14. It is much more likely that he would rather have pointed triumphantly to the glorious vindication of his faith, that he would have joined in the general rejoicing over Jerusalem's deliverance, and exulted in the fact that Yuwii had proved Himself more victorious than ever before. Isaiah's prediction of doom, however, though to the crowd rejoicing over their deliverance it must, in its untimeliness, have fallen like a thunderbolt from a clear sky, is not more significant than his scathing and equally untimely review of Hezekiah's and the people's preparations for the defence of Jerusalem. In branding as impious their various precautions, notably their providing for a water-supply suf&cient in Gressmann, "Altorientalische Texte und Bilder," I, p. 49; and Marti, op. cit., ad loc, and Gray, op. cit., ad loc). ISAIAH AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS 203 to meet the demands of the siege, he clearly showed tliat he stood quite as aloof from political life at the close of his ministry ^ as he did when starting out on the same. In this retrospect, just as in VII, 4 and 9 (of the time of the Syro-Ephraimitic campaign) and in XXX, I5f. (704-702), Isiiiah viewed the situation purely from a spiritual standpoint: the impending judgment, he declared, might have been warded off in one way only — had the people in the crisis from which they have just escaped proved implicit faith in God by abandoning all efforts at self-defence. Resume It is evident from our examination of Isaiah's prophecies in general and from the analvsis of X, 5-^, XIV, 24-27, 2S-32, XVII, 12-XVIII, 6. XXIX, sa-b, 7-8, XXXI, 5-9, and XXII, 1-14 that Isaiah at no time of his preaching confessed allegiance to the popu- lar belief, that Zion was the inviolable abode of Yh\mi, and, what follows from this, that Assyria's wanton attack on Jerusalem would have to be frustrated by Yhwh's o\mi intervention. On the contrary, it is clear that in XXIX, ifT., as briefly indicated above,' he predicted the destruction of Zion and its Temple no less categorically than his contemporary Micah had done some time before, or than Jeremiah did almost a centur}- later, and that in addition to this, he assiiiled the people's belief in the sanctity of Zion and the efi'iaicy of the sacrificial cult with no less sen thing sarcasm than Amos, when by his vision, Am. IX, ilT., he attacked their belief in the sanctity of Beth-El. • There is no evidence of Isaiah's activity after he delivered this sermon. Whether the coincidence is significant or purely accidental is a {x>int which there is no means of deciding. * See pp. aSof. 294 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL To the festive crowd assembled with sacrifices and gifts for worship before Yhwh's altar at Zion Isaiah declares that within a year's time God Himself will take the field against His " altar-hearth "-city — ''then there will be wailing and moaning," and then Jerusalem will be to Him "a real altar-hearth " — that is to say when the streets of Jerusalem reek with the blood of its slaughtered citizens as the altar-hearth now flows with the blood of sacrifices. No less pointed is his reference to Zion in vv. i and 3 ^ as " the city against which David encamped," by which the prophet means to emphasize that in Yhwh's eyes Jerusalem with its altar-hearth dedicated to Yhwh is quite as truly a Kanaanitish-pagan city as it was when David encamped against it. The view, therefore, that Isaiah upheld the belief in the inviolable sanctity of Jerusalem, or, as it is even generally expressed, that it was he who originated this behef, should no longer have a place in critical works on Israeli tish Prophecy, but should be relegated to the realm of myths, where it belongs.^ In the same realm belongs the widely prevailing ^ Instead of the Masoretic kedur read, in accordance with the LXX and V. I, as most exegetes do, kedavid. 2 In XXVIII, 16, as has been repeatedly pointed out by recent exegetes, no allusion whatever is contained to the inviolability of Zion or its Temple. By the second part of the verse, "He who hath faith will not be in haste" — or perhaps "will not be moved:" Id jamus — Isaiah made it perfectly clear that by "the proven stone, the precious corner-stone laid as foundation in Zion" by God, he had reference to the spiritual community of the faithful, the circle of disciples gathered around him, and of which he said, in VIII, 16-18, that in them all his hope concerning the coming of God's future dominion was centered. The verse is but another assertion of the basic, guiding principle expounded in VII, 9, and emphasized by Isaiah on all occasions, that only by faith in God can man's life be IS-\I.\H AND POLITICAL AFFAIRS 295 \new that Isaiah succeeded in acquiring great political influence and a commanding position in the state under Hezekiah. This view, as frequently pointed out in these pages, has no basis in Isaiah's prophecies; it rests altogether on the presentation given in II Ki. XIX-XX ( = Is. XXXVII-XXXLX) of Isaiah's re- lation to Hezekiah and of the role \Yhich the prophet played in the events of the year 701, and this presenta- tion, as the majority of modem scholars agree,^ and as even Staerk acknowledges,- is purely legendary. It has its origin solely in the fictitious picture formed by later ages of the prophet and his ministry, and has no more in common with the real Isaiah and the facts of the case ^ than the picture of Jeremiah in the legendary record of Zedekiah's inter\'iew with Jere- miah and in the legends of Zedekiah's deputations to Jeremiah has with Jeremiah.'* The real relation of the prophet to the people and the government, and vice versa, as revealed in his proph- ecies, is briefly this: — on the one hand there was the placed on a firm foundation. (C/. Marti, op. cit., ad loc, Guthc in KauLzsch', ad loc, Staerk, op. cit., p. 72.) ' Cf. Stade in Z.\T\V., VI (1896), pp. i72ff., Cheyne, op. cit., 212B., 22iff., Mcinhold, "Die Jcsaiacrzahlungcn, Jes. 36-39," Duhm. op. cit., on Chaps. XXXVI-XXXIX, Marli, op. cit., on Chaps. XXX\I-XXXIX. 'Op. cit., pp. 8 if., 140(1. * If, at the time of the conquest of Asdod (711) by Sargon's com- mander-in-chief, Judah escaped unscathed for its participation in the insurrection, it was not because Hezekiah in the eleventh hour, as is generally thought, heeded Isaiah's advice, but because in all prob- ability conditions arose similar to those which later in 701 led to the sudden raise of the blockade of Jerusalem, viz., certain developments in the East demanding that Sargon's efforts be concentrated in that direction. * Sec supra, pp. 56fl., 67(1., 78f. 296 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL prophet viewing every contingency from his lofty, ideal pedestal, warning the people in all critical situa- tions not to rely on human precautions or material defence, but to seek safety by resting their case with God; and, on the other hand, there were the King and the people, heedless of the prophet's words, in- capable of grasping their significance, laughing at the strange visionary who proposed in all seriousness that they abandon their efforts at self-defence, and so meet their fate, as it seemed to them, with folded arms. We cannot wonder at this attitude of his contemporaries, for to enter into Isaiah's proposals, to submit to his guidance, would have meant for the people to rise to the spiritual heights attained by the prophet, and this would have been nothing short of the realization of God's dominion then and there. Isaiah himself understood this perfectly, and so he never failed to make it clear that it was to the future that he looked for the recognition of the truth which he was preaching; as to the people of his own age, he knew that for them his words were bound to be fruit- less — -meaningless even, since their sole conception of the worship of Yhwh was the ritual minutely pre- scribed and punctiliously carried out, just as their whole notion of Yhwh's holiness was a purely ritu- alistic one. Of the holiness of God as Isaiah under- stood it, that holiness that makes purity of heart and righteous conduct imperative on man, they had no conception. And we can easily understand that they heaped derision and invective on the prophet who importuned them with "the Holy One of Israel" and His requirements of man (c/. XXIX, 9-14, XXX, 9-12 also I, 10-18).'^ ^ It follows from Isaiah's sweeping condemnation of the Yhwh MIC.\H'S VIEW OF THE DOOM micah's view of the doom ?97 In the case of Isaiah's younger contemporary, Micah, no detailed examination of his prophecies is required for our puqwse, for botli those who ascribe only Chaps. I-IIIof the Book of Micah to Micah, and those who rightly hold that certain parts of Chaps. IV- \'II are his work also, are agreed tliat he sjicaks of the doom in the most absolute terms throughout his prophecies, and that it is quite apparent tliat he en- tertained absolutely no hope tliat his contemporaries might be alTected by his preaching. Since these so utterly failed to realize "what God demands of man," that they believed their lives to be centered in God even though their commonwealth was built up on crime and wrong, he could see only certain destruction in store for them. Accordingly he started, some short time prior to the conquest of Samaria, to predict that Samaria and Jerusalem alike would be completely destroyed, and after the fall of the sister-kingdom, he in more sweeping terms than ever reiterated his prediction of the complete overthrow of his home- state. Whatever Micah's hope for the future may have been in detail, it is certain that for him the future, ideal Israel would have to be built up on the ruins of the present, that it would have to be looked for only after the complete destruction of nation and country. cult of his time that, even if the report, II Ki. XVIII, 4, alx)ut Ilezekiah's reform were authentic, Isaiah would have been as indiflcr- cnt to such a reform as Jeremiah was btcr to the Deuteronomic reformation. The detailed discussion of Jeremiah's attitude to ihc Deuteronomic reformation will have a place in Volume II. BOOK II THE MESSAGE OF THE PROPHETS PART I AMOS JUSTICE AND RIGHTEOUSNESS SPIRITUAL RELIGION VERSUS RITUAL- ISTIC PIETY INTRODUCTORY The two sides from which we have undertaken to present Hterary prophecy, the spiritual and the in- tellectual, are, by the nature of the case, bound to overlap, just as in an analytic study of the human mind the various functions of mind and spheres of mental activity invariably encroach on one another, and resist every attempt at absolute demarcation. In analysing the Faith of the Prophets, therefore, we have been obliged to make frequent reference to their Message; but, however frequent or extensive these references have been, they have not commanded at- tention as illustrating the prophets' religious views, but only as elucidating their religious experience. Their religious views have been taken up only in so far as they serve to throw lighten the personal faith of the prophets, and to afford us an insight into the source of that wonderful idealism which filled the prophets with visions of spiritual regeneration and universal righteousness at the very time when everj- thing pointed to corruption and decay. In Book II we shall consider the religious views of the prophets per se. We shall seek to trace them through the successive stages of their growth and 301 30 2 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL development, and to define as nearly as possible the contribution of each of the great prophets to the progress of religious thought. Our point of departure for the Message of the Prophets, therefore, will be Amos — on whom, accordingly, our attention to a large extent will be centered in Part I. It will be interesting to note in this survey, how from the very first the basic and distinctive features of the prophetic reHgion were clearly and forcibly set forth. I. AMOS. JUSTICE AND RIGHTEOUSNESS In personality and temperament, Amos presents a striking contrast to Jeremiah. Not less great, per- haps, is he, not less fervid and sincere, but full of wrath and fire and thunder — austere and pitiless he seems, when compared with the tender, emotional Jeremiah. A humble shepherd, tending his flocks on the hillsides of Tekoa, Amos felt the divine call: "God called me away from my flocks, bidding me, Go, prophesy against my people Israel." And even as Jeremiah, a century and a half later, Amos left every- thing and dedicated himself to the service of his God. But while Jeremiah, as we know, was oppressed with grief at the knowledge of his people's sinfulness, Amos' soul was filled with wrath. Fiercely he de- nounces his countrymen for their iniquities, mercilessly he scores the high and mighty for their pride, for their cowardly oppression of the poor, their gross pleasure in things material, their venal greed; and again and again he thunders forth the warning of their doom — complete, irrevocable. Throughout the prophetic utterances of Jeremiah we noticed a definite hope — his boundless confidence AMOS 303 in God's mercy, his sublime trust that he was sow- ing the seed, Uie harvest of which would be reaped in some future age. In Amos' prophecies there is no clear assurance of pardon or mercy or hope, only stern, uncompromising justice. Only in one passage is there anything that might be construed as a gleam of hope, and here it is not expressed outright, but suggested by the general tone of the passage: "Days shall come, saith the' Lord, when I will send famine in the land, not famine of bread nor drought of water, but of hearing the word of God. They shall wander from sea to sea, from the north even to the sunrise they shall roam to lind the word of God, but shall not find it." (VIII, 11-12). It is not unlikely that this passage, as we have it, is incomplete, and that the part which we have not, contained positive reasoning to the efTect that light might ultimately dawn for tlie benighted wanderers. At least, similar passages in other prophets cannot be taken as implying that the spiritual darkness described will be final and permanent.^ But we have to reckon with the passage as it is, and so are not justified in noting anything more than tlie incomplete suggestion of a hope. The predominating features in Amos' writings are, on the one hand, his denunciation of the shameless luxury and injustice that prevailed in his age, and, on the other, his clamor for righteous government and for a pure, moral life. It is a mistake to conclude, as is ' See supra, pp. ii^i. 304 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL commonly done, that Amos lacked in patriotism and in sympathy toward his countrymen. Austere and uncompromising he was, without a doubt, but not indifferent. He does not give utterance to his feelings like Hosea, or Jeremiah or Isaiah; but his dirges and his various descriptions of the judgment reveal true depth of feehng and show that, even as the other prophets, so was he shaken and haunted by the thought of his people's doom. It was during the great fall-festival that Amos made his appearance at Beth-El, that most famous sanc- tuary of the Northern Kingdom. From all over the country the people had assembled, as was their cus- tom, with tithes and sacrifices to offer thanksgiving to God for a bountiful harvest and to give themselves up to rejoicing. At that period of their history, especially, the IsraeUtes believed that they had cause to rejoice and celebrate thanksgiving, for, owing to the military successes of Jeroboam II, the country was enjoying a sudden influx of prosperity. And, indeed, we know from the writings of the contemporary prophets that the feasting and mirth at these festivals celebrated in honor of Yhwh, were carried beyond all bounds, so that the whole celebration had come to bear a worldly rather than a religious aspect.^ What a contrast is presented by this rejoicing multi- tude and the austere prophet who suddenly appears in their midst predicting doom: "Hear this word which I recite as dirge over you, House of Israel: Fallen is the virgin Israel — 1 Cf. especiaUy Is. XXVIII, jL AMOS 30s powerless to rise again. Prostrated to the ground — no one to lift her up " (V, 1-2). But more significant still arc the prophet's opening words: 'Yhwh shall storm from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem, and the pastures of the shepherds shall mourn, and the summit of Karmel shall wither " — that is to say, it is Yhwh Himself who will rise and destroy the whole countr}^ from the pasture-lands in the extreme south to the summit of i\It. Karmel in the north. This prophec}' of Amos fell on deaf ears. That his compatriots failed to grasp the significance of these startling words is to be explained by the radical difference in religious views which separated prophet and people. This difference was twofold, pertaining (i) to the relation between Israel and Yhwh, and (2) to the importance that should be attached to the cult and ritual. For Amos' Israelitish contemporaries Yhwh was Israel's God and Israel was Yhwh's people. Yhwh Himself, they believed, had created this relationship by delivering them out of Egypt. How could it be possible, therefore, that Yhwh would destroy His own people? Nay, more than this, they argued, in granting them victor>' and protection Yhwh was I but upholding His own interests, for only in Israeli was He worshipped, only there did He have His^ dwelling and His shrines. This popular view of the reciprocal relationship between Israel and Yuwii is if 306 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL reflected throughout the literature prior to Amos' appearance. Thus, e. g., in the song of Deborah, which celebrates Deborah's victory over Sisera, we read: "Curse Meroz, saith the Angel of Yh^vh, curse her inhabitants bitterly, because they came not to the aid of Yhwh, to the aid of Yhwh among the heroes!" Qudg. V, 23). And in the EHsha-story, a story dating from Amos' own times, where it is related how EKsha on his death-bed prophesied to Joash that he would vanquish Aram, Elisha calls Joash 's prospec- tive victory over Aram, or, as he puts it, "Joash's victorious arrow against Aram," "an arrow of victory for Ynmi " (II Ki. XIIL 14-19). In accordance with this view, Amos' contempo- raries reasoned that it would be absurd to think of Yhwh without Israel, for what could Yh"\\th do, how could He be glorified without His people? What would become of His dominion if Israel were to per- ish? — Such were the tacit questions with which the IsraeHtes at Beth-El ridiculed the prophet's fore- boding of evil. But in contrast to their belief that Yhwh's and Israel's interests were identical, Amos declares signif- icantly: "Verily ye are not better to me, Israelites, 1 than the Kushites {i. e. the despised negro-race), saith Yhwh. I did indeed lead forth the Israelites from Egypt, but I also led forth the Philistines from Kaphtor and the Aramaeans from Kir " (Am. IX, 7) . Thus Amos denies emphatically that Israel enjoys a special monopoly of God's favor, and in contrast to the popular conception of Yh\mi as the national God AMOS 307 of Israel, he sets up the idea of a universal God. who controls the destinies of all men, and to whom all the world must do homage. This universal God, it is important to note, is for Amos, as, in fact, for all the prophets, a God of eternal righteousness, a supreme moral being, whose will it is that right and justice shall triumph through- out the world, and who, accordingly, punishes sin and injustice wherever he finds it, without regard to who is responsible for it, or who suffers by it. It has a special significance, therefore, that Amos opens his prophecies (Chaps. I, 2-II) by representing Yhwh in judgment over Israel and the Kanaanitish na- tions alike, and, %vhat is more important, in judgment over them, not because of ritual sins or heathen ignorance of ritual observ^ances, as the case may be. but because they have sho\vn no regard for the universal laws of morality. By his novel conception of God Amos represents Israel's deliverance from Eg^pt in an altogether new light. Yhwii, as God of universal justice, delivered the Israelites from Eg\pt, not because they were Israelites, , but because they were held in unjust bondage. ' This act of special favor, they should understand, did not ensure immunity for them; on the contrary, it but imposed greater obligations upon them : "Hear this word which Yiiwii hath pronounced against you, O Israelites, against the whole race, which I led forth from Eg>pt; Verily I have taken more care of you than of any other race of the earth; ^ hence I will visit all your sins upon you" (III, ij. * raq has here not restrictive but mtcnsivc force, as in Gen- XX, 3o8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL This latter verse sounds like a paradox when taken by itself, but in the light of Chaps. I, 2-II the prophet's meaning is plain. Amos means to tell the Israelites, they have indeed experienced Yhwh's providence in an especial degree; but, in the very beginning of their history, by leading them out of Egypt Yhwh revealed Himself to them as a God of justice, and now since they have persistently scorned His laws of justice and trampled on humanity. He, as a God of justice, is bound to visit all their sins upon them. 2. SPIRITUAL RELIGION VERSUS RITUALISTIC PIETY The second illusion which closed the people's mind to the prophet's preaching was the significance which they attached to the cult and ritual. Indeed, in ancient Israel, as throughout antiquity, ' worship of God ' was synonymous with ritual and sacrifices, for the people beheved that, above everything else, Yhwh laid stress on the punctilious observance of the ritual and on regularity and zeal in offering sacrifices. An excellent illustration of this belief is the record, II Ki. XVII, 24-28,^ about the reco Ionization of Samaria by Sargon with people drawn from remote II, Deut. rv, 6, Is. XXVIII, 19, et alit.; jada is used to connote "God's providential care," as in Hos. XIII, 5, Nah. I, 7 and Ps. I, 6 — in the two latter passages the meaning is evident from the parallelism; and min is the min of comparison. This meaning of v. 3a is the only one consistent with the general drift of the preceding discourse, I, 2-II, as sketched above, and with Amos' em.phatic denial in IX, 7 that Israel enjoys a monopoly of God's favor. Thus the contradiction that has been supposed to exist between III, 2 and I, 2-II, and partic- ularly between III, 2 and IX, 7, does not exist in reality. It arose from the incorrect translation: "Ye only have I known (or 'do I know') ot all the races of the earth." 1 Verses 29-41 consist of later additions to this record. The SPIRITUAL RELIGION 309 parts of the Assyrian empire— a record which is most important for our pnqjosc since it dates from the very time of the prophets. The author ascribes tlie in- crease of wild animals in tlie devastated regions of Samaria to the fact that the new settlers at first failed to worship YH\ni — tJiat is, failed to worship Him in the sanctuaries of the country and according to the rules of the ritual. And, what is equally signilicant, the Assyrian colonists are represented as viewing the matter in the same light. They petitioned for the return of one of the priests who had been deported, that they might be instructed by him in the ritual observances essential for the Yh\\'h worship. In view of the importance which the ritual possessed in their minds, it was but natural that the people should bestow on it the greatest vigilance and as- siduity. Whenever disaster befell them, they accepted it as a sign that Yhwh was displeased with them; their concern for the cult was wont to grow in propor- tion to the severity of the visitation, and they would seek to appease Yhwh's wrath by increased otTerings and gifts and by holy assembhes. This behef of the people that they could worship God by celebrating festivals and please Him by offering sacrifices was vigorously assailed by Amos and / his successors, for the prophets acknowledged no other mode of worship tlian the worship of God in the spirit, that is to say, by faith and by righteous con- duct (see Part H, Chap. II, pp. 1531!.). In this connection Jeremiah's impassioned Temple- sermon may be recalled, where he denounces the importance of this record has been pointed out by Hans Schmidt in " Die Schriftcn des Alt. Test's" herausgcg. v. Grcssmann, etc., II, 2, p. 5. 3IO THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL people for putting their trust in such delusions as the Temple and the cult and bids them dispense with their sacrifices, since the only thing that can avail them is to amend their hves and practise justice.^ To the same effect is Isaiah's utterance: "The Lord God speaks, because this people ap- proach me with their mouths, and honor me with their hps, but their heart is far from me, and their worship is but a precept devised by man and learned by rote, therefore I will deal with this people to [their] con- fusion, so that the wisdom of their sages will vanish, and the intelligence of their wise men be confounded" (Is. XXIX, 13-14). Similarly Hosea declares in the name of God : "Love do I desire, and not sacrifices, and knowledge of God, not holocausts" (Hos. VI, 6). Then, too, we have the great passage from Micah: "Wherewith shall I approach the Lord, wherewith shall I bow myself before God on High? Shall I approach Him with burnt-offerings, with calves of a year old? Doth God take dehght in thousands of rams, or in myriads of streamlets of oil? Shall I give my first-bom in atonement of my trans- gression, the fruit of my womb in expiation of my sin? 1 See sitpra, Part I, Chap. I, pp. iiff. SPIRITUAL RELIGION .^ 1 1 He hath told thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justice and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God!" (Mic. VI, 6-8) All this we are inclined to accept to-day as self- evident truth; but to the Israelites of Amos' age such utterances must have seemed intolerable blasphemy, and the prophet who dared to proclaim them, little short of a madman. What did he mean by proph- esying irrevocable doom to them? Did they not offer daily sacrifices to God? Did tliey not seek con- stantly to appease His wrath by holocausts? Did they not observe His festivals, the days of solemn as- sembly, and offer thanksgiving to Him and sin- and peace-offerings? Amos, however, points out to them the mocker>' of their belief that they serve Yuwii by festal celebrations and sacrifices, and induce His good-will by ritual obser\'ances. Referring to their visits to the holy shrines, which visits represented the very acme of piety to their minds, he says caustically: "Go to Beth-El and sin, to Gilgal and sin more, in that ye bring the following day your sacrifices, the third day your tithes, and sacrifice thank-offerings of leavened bread, and loudly invite to free-will offerings; for so do ye love to do, O IsraeUtes, saith the Lord God" (Am. IV, 4f.). With characteristic vigor he thunders forth in the name of God: ''I loathe, I despise your festivals, I oinnot abide your sacred assemblies. WTien ye offer me sacrifices and gifts 312 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL I do not care for them, and at your thank-offering of fatted calves I do not look. Begone from me with the noise of your hymns! To the music of your harps I will no longer listen" (V, 21-23). Justice and righteousness alone, he tells them, have value in God's eyes, and only by cultivating these can one serve Him and incur His favor: "But let justice flow forth like water, and righteousness like a perennial stream" (ib., 24). And again : *'Seek good and not evil, that ye may live, and God be really with you as ye believe. Nay, hate evil and love good and establish justice in the gate of justice, — Perchance the Lord, God Sabaoth might show mercy unto decimated Joseph" (V, 14-15). Equally emphatic is Isaiah : ''Hear the word of God, ye chieftains of Sodom! Give ear to the revelation of our God, people of Gomorrah ! What is the multitude of your sacrifices to me, saith the Lord? I have enough of your holocausts of rams and the fat of fed beasts; and in the blood of bullocks and he-goats I deUght not. That ye come to appear before me, who hath required this of you — to tread my courts? Bring vain offerings no more! SPIRITUAL RELIGION 313 Bringing sacrifices is an abomination to mc! Xew moon and Sabbath, tlie calling of assemblies I cannot endure .... Your New moons and >'our festivals my soul doth hate, they are a burden unto me; I am weary of bearing it. And when }-e spread forth }'our hands I hide mine e}'es from }-ou ; even if ye offer up many prayers, I will not hear: Your hands are full of blood. Cleanse yourselves! Purify yourselves! Remove your wicked deeds from mine eyes! Cease to do evil! Learn to do good! Practise justice! Hold in check the oppressor! Secure the right of the fatherless! Plead the cause of the widow! Come, let us reason, saith the Lord: If your sins are as scarlet, shall they become white as snow? If they are red as crimson, shall they become white as wool? If ye be willing and obedient, ye may enjoy the fruit of the land; but if ye refuse and be rebellious, ye shall be consumed by the sword — It is the mouth of God that speaketh " (Is. I, 10-20). It is very diflicult for us to realize what a tremen- dous advance in religious thought was marked by this view of the prophets as to what constitutes true worship. It must be remembered that it was not only for their Israelitish contemporaries that the worship of God had no wider significance than the cult. To whatever literature of ancient times we may turn, we 314 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL see that religion was identified with ritual and sacri- fices, and that in these the whole religious life centered. Take, e. g., the sacred literature of the Hindus — a name, which for most people is synonymous with the most profound philosophy and the loftiest religious views, but wrongly so, as far as the older period, the pre-Buddhistic times, are concerned. In the Rigveda the sacrifices are the centre of interest. They were regarded as the sum total of all mysteries, and upon them were thought to depend both the material and the spiritual order of things— a view, which, notwith- standing the teaching of the prophets, is also found in the Talmud.^ The numerous rules which had to be scrupulously carried out to ensure the efficacy of the sacrifice are described in the 52//ra-literature and in the addenda to the latter (the Prayogas and the Padd- thatis) not less minutely than in the Talmud. But from the Old Babylonian literature we have perhaps the best illustration of the fact that in ancient times the great object of men's concern was the ritual. Among the most interesting rehgious monu- ments we have of ancient Babylon are the so-called ^ As to this belief in the efEcacy of sacrifices in the Rigveda, cf. Oldenberg, "Die Religion des Veda," pp. 315-317. Of the frequent statements to this effect in the Talmudic and Midrashic literature, it will suffice to refer to the regulation stated in Mishna Taanith, IV, i, that the twenty-four divisions, chosen from all over the country and deputed to go to the Temple in Jerusalem to participate in the sacrificial service, and the corresponding divisions, which at the set time of the sacrificial service assembled in the coun- try towns, recite daily the story of the creation. Gen. I-II, 3. The reason for this regulation is stated in both the Palestinian and the Babylonian Gemara: "If it were not for the sacrificial cult, the world would not exist," etc. — See Taan. bab. 27b, jer. IV, 2, fin., Meg. bab. 31b; in the latter passage Jer. XXXIII, 25 is quoted as scriptural authority, and interpreted as meaning something altogether different SPIRITU.\L RELIGION 315 Penitential Psiilms, which, of late years, have often been compared with our Penitential Psalms of the Bible. There is, however, a vital dilTerencc between the two. In the Babylonian Psalms the penitent is solely concerned lest he have overlooked some ritual observance, and have incurred thereby the displeasure of the god or goddess, whereas in the Bibliail Psalms it is by the consciousness of human imperfection, of moral instabihty that the psalmist is oppressed. The Hebrew Penitential Psalms show the influence and breathe the spirit of the prophetic teaching.^ The primitive conceptions at the root of the sacrifi- cial cult are most apparent in the twofold purpose which it was thought to serve. Sacrifices were re- garded, on the one hand, as the medium by which man might enter into or renew^ communion with the deity, as the sacramental meal by which the bond between the devotee and his god was established — for par- taking at the god's table meant being admitted to his friendship; and, on the other hand, as the most efficacious means of incurring the favor of the deity. In the latter respect it must be remembered that, in return for his holocausts and sacrifices, the offerer expected from the deity, not spiritual gifts, but purely material blessings, such as a plentiful harvest, numer- ous flocks, long life, or, for the nation at large, pros- perity, conquest, and so on. It was this grossly materialistic conception of reli- gion that was so repugnant to the prophets. It was from what it really says: it is taken to say: "If my covenant were not kept up day and night, I would not have established the orders of heaven and earth." — "My covenant" is understood as denoting the sacrificial cult ordained at Sinai. ' The above remarks apply especially to Psalms LI and CXXX, which excel in depth of thought and religioui feeling. 3i6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL this that Hosea had in mind when he upbraided his contemporaries : "They do not pray from their hearts; when they cry in their vigils, they are exercised because of their grain and wine " (Hos. VII, 14). He would have them pray, not for their temporal welfare, not for the gratification of their material wants, but to satisfy the needs of their soul. But to such a spiritualization of religion the people were necessarily impervious. Their own conception was like a barrier, against which the prophetic ideas beat in vain. Hence the repeated declarations of the prophets that it was because of their religious delusions and their mistaken cult that the people were so blind to the real truth — that is to say, to the fact which they considered all-essential, that only righteous- ness and purity of heart have weight with God, and that only by cultivating these can one serve Him. As Hosea represents it, the cause of the people's god- less life lies in the fact that their altars and sacrifices are of paramount concern to them : "A luxuriant vine was Israel, whose fruit grew plentifully. The more its fruit increased, the more numerous it made its altars; the more the land prospered, the more beautiful massebas they built. Ephraim has built many altars — its altars have caused it to sin." ^ (Hos. X, i and VIII, 11). ' The second lalfio is to be omitted as a mistaken repetition of the first. SPIRITU.VL RELIGION 317 It may be noted incidentally that Hosea consistently refers to the people's sacrifices and otlier religious practices as sin, lewdness, iniquity; cf. IV, 8, 12, V, 4-6.1 The great value of the oft-quoted passage from IMicah consists therein that both conceptions, the false conception of the people and the vital conception of the prophets, are placed side by side, so that the immense spiritual advance of the latter over the for- mer is brought home to us most forcibly by the con- trast: ''WTierewith shall I approach the Lord, wherewith shall I bow myself before God on high? Shall I approach Him with burnt-ofTerings, with calves of a year old?" concluding, ^ "They (the priests) feed on the sin of my people (/. c, they de- rive a revenue from the sacrifices), they are desirous of their iniquity. My people consult their wooden blocks, and their staff lellclh them the oracle." (The reference is, no doubt, to the practice of consulting the oracle by means of wooden blocks or staves; cf. I Sam. XIV, 41, as read by the LXX.) "For a spirit of lewdness hath misled them, so that, faithless, they have strayed away from their God. Their deeds do not permit them to return to their God, for a spirit of lewdness possesseth them, and they know not God. Thus doth Israel's pride testify to its face, Ephraim must come to fall through its guilt, Judah also shall come to fall with it. (Omit w'jisra'il «-*, and accordingly read 'immo for 'immam.) With their sheep and their cattle will they then go to seek Yuwu, but they will not find Him; for He hath withdrawn Himself from them." 3i8 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL "He hath told thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justice and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God." Various passages from the other prophets might be cited confirming or supplementing this formulation of Micah.^ Each one expresses some phase of that most essential truth of prophetic religion, that regarding the relation of man to God. We might sum up briefly our conclusions from them all as follows: Contrary to the views of their times that only through the medium of ritual and sacrifice, of temple and priest, could man have intercourse with God, the prophets, for the first time in the history of human thought, gave expression to the fundamental ethical truth that God is present in every human heart, and that, by virtue of this, it is in every man's power to enjoy communion with Him without any mediator- ship whatever, the only condition being that he who would hold converse with God, must live a life of pu- rity and righteousness and walk humbly with God. In accordance with this, the glorious future consum- mation, which is the ideal of the prophets, will consist therein, that the whole people will know God, that every man will experience God in his heart and strive evermore after justice and righteousness; - Jeremiah even goes so far as to predict that in the ideal future 1 Cf. particularly Jer. XXIII, 23 (see supra, Part II, Chap. II, pp. 1462.) and also Is. LVII, 15. "Thus speaketh the High and Sublime One, Who abide th forever and \Vhose name is Holy One: On high and as the Holy One do I abide, and with him who is contrite and humble in spirit." 2 Cf. especially Hos. VI, 3, II, 2 if., and see supra, pp. 248fE. SPIRITU.\L RELIGION 31Q all codified law will be dispensed with, since God's moral law will be indelibly inscribed in the heart of each individual and will assert itself unfailingly in every conscience: "Days shall come, saith the Lord, when I shall make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah; not like the covenant which I made with tlieir fathers the day that I took tliem by the hand to lead tliem out of the land of Egypt, which covenant they broke, so that I cast tliem off.' But this will be the covenant which I shall make witli the house of Israel in the days to come, saith the Lord : I shall implant my law in tlieir minds, and I shall write it in their hearts, and I shall be to them a God, and they will be to me a people — Then they will no longer need to teach one another with the words, 'Know God!' For they will all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, s:iith the Lord " Qer. XXXI, 31-34). Having reached with this vision of Jeremiah the very pinnacle of prophetic ideahsm (than which no visionar}' of whatever age could go farther), we shall go back to the rituaHstic religion of ancient Israel, to take up another phase of it— a phase which, though its full discussion belongs in the second volume, must briefly be touched on here in order to set forth in all its bearings the prophets' position to the cult. In ' Read, in accordance with the LXX and Posh., ga'alli instead of ba'dlti. 32 o THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL ancient Israel, as throughout antiquity, religion was inseparably bound up with the forms of political life, with nation and country. In accordance with their conception of Yhwh as the national God, the Israelitish people believed that He could be wor- shipped only within the sphere of His influence, that is within the domain of Israel. Thus David, reproach- ing Saul for banishing him from the country, says, in case men incited him to that course: "Be they cursed before Yhwh, for they have driven me away this day from sharing in the heritage of Yhwh, saying: 'Go, worship other gods.'" (I Sam. XXVI, 19). In Deut. XXVIII, 64 we find: "The Lord shall scatter thee among the nations all over the earth, and there thou shalt worship other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, of wood and stone." Similarly Hosea, speaking from the people's point of view, asks his contemporaries what they will do at the festive season, on the day of the feast of Yhwh, when they are exiled from "Yhwh's country," and, con- sequently, are unable to sacrifice to Him: "They shall no longer dwell in the land of Yhwh, Ephraim must go back to Egypt, or in Assyria they shall eat unclean things. Then they will not be able to pour libations to Yhwh, nor to prepare ^ their sacrifices to Him; their bread ^ will be like the bread of mourning, all that eat thereof will be defiled; their bread wiU serve but to satisfy their hunger,^ ^ 'Read jaarkhii instead oijaeaerbhu. 2 Read instead of lahaem: lahmam, a reading clearly indicated by the second part of the verse. ' Cf. Prov. XVI, 26, "The hunger (naephaes) of the toiler drives him to toil." SPIRITUAL RELIGION 321 it will not come in the house of Yhwh. What will ye do then at tlic festive season, on the day of the feast of Yiiwh?" (Hos. IX, 3-5; c/. also III, 4, and Ezek. IV, 12I.). But the most essential feature of this system was that religion was primarily the concern of tlie com- munity, not of the individual; tlie individual, as the above-quoted passage from I Sam. XXVI, 19 shows, could share in the service of YHWII, and enjoy the fellowship of faith only by virtue of being a member of the social-religious community. The prime object of all religious celebrations and functions was the promo- tion of tlie common weal, not of the individual well- being. As W. Robertson Smith well describes it: " In ancient religion, as it appears among the Semites, the confident assurance of divine help belongs, not to each man in his private concerns, but to the com- munity in its public functions and aims; and it is this assurance that is expressed in public acts of worship, where all the membersof the community meet together to eat and drink at the table of their god, and so renew the sense that he and they are altogether at one. . . . The good things which religion holds forth are promised to the individual only in so far as he Hves in and for the community." ^ With this purpose and character of religion it accords that the basis of the old Israelitish system of government was the tribal or patriarchal order of society — much like the order that prevailed in China up to very recent date— and, what follows from this, that it was by the principle of tribal solidarity and responsibility that the whole social-religious Life of preexilic Israel was governed. ' " The Religion of the Semites," pp. 266f. 322 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL This order of things must be borne in mind if we are to reahze the full significance of the prophetic concep- tion of the relation of the individual to his God. For the prophets religion meant individual piety. They re- pudiated the idea of tribal responsibility, of mediator- ship and sacrifices, and, instead, set up as standard for the individual a humble consciousness of God — for He is a "present God" — and the moral obligation and desire to do what is just and right — for He is a "holy God." This conception of religion marks a new era in the religious development of Israel, for through it religion became dissociated from the confines of nation and country; it ceased to be part and parcel of the political-social order into which a man was born, and became preeminently the concern of the individual. It should be stated that, while all the prophets implicitly opposed the old belief in tribal solidarity and collective responsibility, it was Jeremiah in particular, who explicitly formulated the new idea of moral freedom and individual responsibility : "In those days (i. e. in the days of the future Israel) it shall no longer be said: 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the teeth of the children are set on edge;' but every one will die for his own sin — he ^ that eateth sour grapes, his teeth will be set on edge." (Jer. XXXI, 29-30). It is not surprising that Jeremiah was the one to give expression to this thought, for of him it is more true than of any other prophet that his relation to 1 Omit kol ha'adam, in accordance with the LXX. RIGHTEOUSNESS 323 God was of a conscious, personal nature. On God he relied utterly with heart and reason — from him he derived his strengtli, his comfort, and his hope; and his conclusions regarding individual versus collective responsibility, as also his picture of tlie ideal, future Israel (which directly follows tlie verses just quoted), are the outgrowth of his own spiritual experience.' 3. RIGHTEOUSNESS THE TRUE FOUNDATION OF SOCIETY There is still another point on which the views of the prophets were diametrically opposed to those of their contemporaries, and on which Amos, in especial, is most outspoken. This is in regard to the social and economic conditions which prevailed throughout the land. It was the injustice of these conditions and, as we have notcxi above, the undue inflation of the nation at large because of the successful issue of the wars of Jeroboam II, that fired the soul of Amos to wrath and to the belief that retribution must follow.- In those times, even as in our ovm days, wealth and prosperity were looked upon as the bulwark of the nation's strength, and as the unmistakable sign of God's favor; and, consequently, nothing was so highly valued and so dihgently sought after as material prosperity. But Amos had very different views. To him the ' What has been remarked at the beginning of this paragraph applies particularly to this last point. We must defer to the second volume the proof that the departure from the old order of things did not start in the juridical sphere, but in the sphere of religion, and that it was Jeremiah, and not Ezckiel, who first formulated the principle of moral freedom and individual responsibility. *See supra, pp. ^jjff. 324 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL country's wealth was offset by the impoverishment of the masses, and the ease and luxury to which the upper classes complacently gave themselves up were purchased by the sweat of the poor: "Proclaim in the palaces of Asdod and in the palaces of the land of Egypt, and bid them assemble in Mt. Samaria, and witness the lawlessness and oppression therein. They know not how to do right, they who let violence and tyranny hold sway in then- palaces " (Am. Ill, gf.). The pleasure-loving women of the capital, whom he contemptuously calls "Kine of Bashan," ^ vied with their husbands in gratifying their avarice and their desire for luxurious living: "Hear this, ye Kine of Bashan, in Mt. Samaria, who oppress the poor and crush the needy, who speak to their lords: Get [the means] that we may carouse!" (IV, i). On account of these conditions, the whole splendid structure of which the nation boasts is to Amos a tottering edifice, a mighty evil doomed to destruction. He represents God speaking: "I loathe the pride of Jacob," viz., the splendid palaces of sin, the whole flourishing constitution of the state founded on despotism, "and I shall deliver up the city and her wealth." (\T,8). ^ Bashan was noted for its fertile territory and its fine breed of cattle. RIGHTEOUSNESS 325 -Viid again he says : "Hear this, ye who would swallow up the needy, and who ruin the poor of tlie country, who speak, when will the New Moon be gone, that we may sell com? and the Sabbath, tliat we may open the granaries? — make the measure small and the price high and deal falsely with tlie balances of deceit! ^ — that we may buy the poor for silver and tlie needy for a pair of shoes,^ and that we may sell refuse of grain? Vhwh has sworn by the pride of Jacob, I will never forget one of tlieir deeds." (VIII, 4-7). Again and again Amos tells his audience it is be- cause of the orgies indulged in in the palaces of the rich f and the injustice practised towards the poor that the I nation must come to ruin. For it is just as impossible, he tells them, for a state to exist in which right and justice are perverted, as it would be for horses to race over rocks, or as it would be to plow the sea with oxen ^ (VI, 12). According to Amos the day of utter woe and terror (V, i8ff.), when this whole structure of social wrong will be destroyed, will be a day of victor}^ for Yhwh — but victory in the sense that on that day God's justice shall triumph over lawlessness and sin, and * "Make the measure small" etc. — the prophet throws this in as a sarcastic reference to their business methods. * " For a pair of shoes," that is to say, " for a trifle." •Instead oi jch^roi babb'qarim read, as J. I). Michaclis with fine acumen emended, jeharel babbaqar jam. babb^qarim is a plain case of false word-division, and this b turn led to the mistaken vocaliza- tion >a/i*roJ. 32 6 THE PROPHETS OF ISRAEL his eternal righteousness be manifest to all the world. Similarly Isaiah describes his nation's day of doom. When all earthly glory sinks in the dust at Yhwh's appearance for judgment, men's eyes will be opened to the vanity of their idols, to the vanity of all things material, and they will realize that the distance between the human and the divine is a moral one, will realize that God's Kingdom is the Kingdom of morahty : "On that day the Lord Sabaoth will be exalted by justice, and the Holy God will show Himself holy by right- eousness." ^ This is the ethical monotheism of the prophets, this their contribution to religious thought, their message to mankind, that it is in man's moral nature that religion has its roots, that it is the spiritual, not the material world whence the idea of the divine flows into man's soul, that it is the sense of right and justice innate in man that brings him ever new as- surance of the existence of God and of His control of the universe for a moral purpose — or, as the prophetic author ^ of the story, "Elijah on Mt. Horeb," puts it, that it is by "the still, small voice" that God reveals Himself to man. ^ Cf. Is. II, 6-22 -f XVII, 7-8, V, 15-16, and see supra, p. 260, n. 2. 2 See supra, p. 161, n. i. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE (p. 36) On n3-t'?.rN^ I Sam. XXI, 9 Modem as well as medicTval scholars have been divided as to whether to take PN of I Sam. XXI, 9 as irregular form of rx, if not a misspelled form of the same, or as meaning "niun^"^ — a division of opinion which may be traced, it seems to me, to the rendering, on the one hand, of c? px with t^ by the Pes., and, on the other hand, of px with si and i^n by Jerome and the Targ. respectively. However, on closer e.xamination, the rendering of C'.'.px? with 'ISe el eariv by the LXX points in the direction indicated above, p. 36. It must be pointed out (i) that like the Pes., Jerome, and the Targ., the LXX did not read the 1 of pxi; (2) that the question, though not indicated in the Hebrew text by any interrogative particle, was introduced by the Greek translators with e* — there are two other such cases in the following Chap. XXII; v. 7 gam ^khidkhacm jiltcn bacnjiSai =€t aKrjdas iraaiu vyuv hoxreL 6 vlo^^ nxn, but rather that the LXX took px as equivalent to nan.^ No doubt this rendering by the LXX was based on a reliable tradition; at all events it is the only satisfac- tory explanation of this much debated text. Modem scholars have clearly been at sea regarding this r^<. Thus Budde in Die Biicher Samuel (in Marti's HC.) abandons Wellhausen 's emendation r^'e h" in favor of Klostermann's -ufe — no doubt because of the difficulty of explaining how r^'e h" could have got changed to lif'tn. There are, however, even graver obstacles in the way of accepting Klostermann's emendation; for apart from the fact that iif'ejaes-pd thahath jad^kha is stylistically objectionable, ns-'N iSee "The Books of Samuel" in The Sacred Books of the Old Test., ad loc. 2 See "Biblia Hebraica," ad loc, where the readings w^'en and r«'c Ifijaes are proposed as alternatives. ^ Einne is rendered with t'Se I. Sam. XX, 22 hinne hahesi(m), ISe (A) y (rxfifl. further Gen. XXVII, 6 hinnc samati T8e lyio TjKOvcra, and Jud. XIX, 24 hinne bitti, iBe (iBov A) ■^ dvyaTrjp /j.ov. An example, on the other hand, of hinne introducing a question spoken with emphasis, is I. Sam. XIV, 43, hin^nl 'amilth, "must I die? " So Kittel, in Kautzsch ^, rightly translates it. The fact that Saul in reply to Jonathan's confession again declares {cf. v. 39) by an oath, that Jonathan must die (v. 44), admits of no other interpreta- tion. This declaration would have no sense if Jonathan had just ex- pressed his readiness to die. In Arabic oj (both without and with the interrogative f ) occurs quite frequently in interrogative sentences. When used to introduce a complete sentence the emphatic particle commonly adds emphasis to the sentence as a whole, i. e., to the predicate rather than to the subject. Accordingly it occurs not only with the indicative but with the various other modes as well. An example of its use with an imperative is hen habbaet-nd, Is. LXIV, 8. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE 329 nowhere occurs separated by an intervening word. Kittel in Kautzsch ^ on the other hand, decides for tlic reading 'uf'en (in the first edition he accepted Welihau- sen's emendation unreservedly), but since en JcS expresses an emphatic negation ^ its use in an inter- rogative sentence is excluded, and 'aph ^en jacs-ru'^h U phlhaem, Ps. CXXXV, 17, which has been referred to in support of this emendation, proves nothing, as it is a declarative sentence. There is really no reason why the occurrence of such an emphatic px in Hebrew should excite surj^rise. Like Aram. fS, «», and, contrary to the general view, also a of Aram. P, it is another form of P which latter, in accordance with a suggestion made by Reckendorf with reference to the relation of Arab, oj to .J/,- is not to be considered as the younger, apocopate, but rather as the older, non- sharpened form of nin. And what Fleischer and Reckendorf state in reference to the conditional particle Jj and J;, o/, "ecce," viz., that they are identical, being originally deictic particle out of which the use as conditional particle subsequently de- veloped,^ holds true of their Hebrew and Aramaic equivalents: these may be used either as deictic or * It must be borne in mind that C^ J'X cannot be considered as equivalent to Aram. »oi. and Arab. »^' ; as a matter of fact, in Hebrew px is used as equivalent to the latter, and L**' ii*?, the corrc- SfMjndlng Hebrew form of >^c>. and ^ does not in all probabilityoA, meaning of, 219, 239; inter- polations: II, 4f., 23ifr.; IX, 8b-is, 212, n. i; his person- ality, contrasted with Jere- miah's, 302f.; misjudged by critics, 211, 303f.; his God- conception vs. that of his times, 305(1.; denies Israel's monopoly of YHWH'S favor, 306, 3o8n.; his interpretation of Israel's deliverance from Egypt. 307f-; his view of worship, the religious advance marked by, 2i8f., 223, 226, 3o8f., 311, 3«3ff-; his view- point regarding material pros- perity, 323(1.; sec Inspiration Asdod, conquest of, 89, 295, n. 3 34' 342 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Assur, meaning of name, in post- exilic literature, 273, n. i Astarte (Ashera) worship, 273, n. Baruch, 15, s&S., 172, 2o7f. Beth-El, after destruction of Samaria, 222 "Blessing of Moses" (Deut. XXXIII), 238f. Centralization of the cult, 35, 229 Chaldaeans, withdrawal of, from Jerusalem, 52; return of, 53f., 63 Children, sacrificing of, 227, n. Civil war, the, 89, 262, 264 Communion (converse) with God, see Inspiration Criminal court, 24 Curse, behef in efficacy of, 96f. David, 3f.; conquest of the Jebu- site stronghold by, 228 Deutero-Isaiah, 6f., 9, 174, 243; sec Inspiration Deuteronomic law pertaining to false prophet, 29ff. Deuteronomic Law, promulga- tion of, 2s, 35 Discrepancy, seeming, between Jer. XXXVI, i and v. 9, 40, n- 3 Divination, forms of, i38f., i48f.; practised by the older proph- ets, 143 Divine call, see Inspiration Downfall of the nation, effect of, on the people, ii3f., 303 Dur-ilu, battle at, 277 Ebed-Melech, 54, 86 Edom, attack of, on Judah, 26 2f. Egypt, trade in horses by, 245f. Elijah, 160 Elisha, 143, n.; his concern at the nation's defeat by Syria, 238, 306 "Ends of the earth," from the, 49, n., 265 Era, autumnal, vernal, 40, n. 3 Ethical Monotheism, 326 Ezekiel, 32, i62f., 174 Fatalism, sidereal, of antiquity, iS9f., n. "Guilt of Samaria," the, 230 Hananiah, denounced by Jere- miah, 3of. Hezekiah, 290, 295, 297, n. Hosea : subject of the Northern King- dom, 237; his preaching ad- dressed to whole nation, 236f., cf. 226f., n.; "Israel," "Beth- Israel," etc., his usage of the terms, 236; his future hope, various expositions of, gen- lune, 24of., 243, 246f., 247f., 250; outcome of his God- conception, 24if., 247; experi- ence in his life that led to the latter, 80, 24 if.; figure of the marital relationship, 247; Love and Law not antitheses, 242f.; the two-fold aspect from which he considers the future resto- ration, 244, 250; "ride on horses," origin of phrase, 245f.; the spiritual truth revealed in VI, 3, 249, 25of.; knowledge of God, 249f., 318; original order of I-III, 251; original place I INDEX OF SUBJECTS 343 of IT, 1-3, 25iff.; "Great shall be the day of Jezreel," 253; influence on Isaiah, 245; his view of worship, 310, 3i5fT., f/. 249f.; his idea of prayer, ^16; see Inspiration Immanence of God, sec Inspira- tion and Jeremiah Inspiration, prophetic: distinct from ecstasy or man- tic possession, i36fiF., 143, 151, i6if., n. 2; consecration-vi- sions, spiritual experience de- scribed in, 139; revelation and attendant emotions, account of, in Is. Viand Job IV, 12-16, i39f.; modem analogies, i4ofi'.; other visions, psychological explanation of, 142; inspira- tion and revelation as under- stood by the great prophets, i43fT.; by Amos, 143, cf. 8; by Micah, i43f.; by Jeremiah, 144(1.; true prophet, mark of, 145; converse with God, me- dium of, i45f.; immanence of God, i46f.; true revelation, evidences and workings of, contrasted with mistaken no- tion of, 148(1., cf. g; the revela- tion of God universal, isof., cf. I2f., n.; in.spircd prophecy vs. vaticination, 15 iff.; es- sence of, 152(1., cf. 3of.; Deu- tero-Isaiah's conception of in- spiration and revelation, i54f ; conception of inspiration the governing principle of spiritual prophecy, 155, i6of.; the re- ligious advance marked there- by, iSS^; 322f.; genius, is6f.; religious views prior to liter- ary prophecy, in Israel, I57f.; among the Oriental nations, isSf.; conditions in the ancient world at the time of the proph- ets' preaching, i5of.; story of Klijah on Mt. Horcb (I Ki. XIX), growth and composi- tion of, 161, n. i; Ezckiel's idea of revelation, 162; his writings and visions, character of, 163; Zachariah's writings and visions, character of, 163 Isaiah: compared with Jeremiah, g; events marking the various periods of his preaching, 89; the consecration-vision, 139, 161, n. 2, 163; not colored by his later experience, 256f.; starts out with a clear vision of the situation, 255f.; the destruction is to be comjilcte, 25 yf.; the idea e.xpresscd by the comparison in VI, 13, 2S7f.; the hope (.•\;)resscd by hisson'sname,67;*'ar yashiibh, 258f.; the prophecy explaining the name, 259(1.; "Va'akob," usage of term, in his older prophecies, 260, 261; his de- scription of the Day of VHWH (II, (y-22), comjKjncnt j>artsof, 260, n. 2; the idea developed in, 260, 263, 264, n. I, 326; the prophecy, IX, 7(1., addrcjwcd to Israel and Judah alike, 26of.; conditions and reverses described in, 2ft .'f.; the idc-a de- veloped in, 263(1.; his view of 344 INDEX OF SUBJECTS the situation unchanged in the following periods, 2655.; exerts no influence on the peo- ple or state, 266f.; no states- man, 268f.; his basic views — faith and holiness, 2695., 291, 293, 294f., n., 296, cf. 263, 322; his idea of progress, 270; no discrepancy in his prophe- cies, 272ff.; his attitude in the crisis of the year 701, 282ff., 287, 292; his view of the As- syrian world-power, 2855., cf. 271; denounces the belief in the inviolable sanctity of Zion, 28of., 293f.; stood aloof from political life to the end, 291, 292f., 294ff.; "Vale of Vision," the, (XXII, 5), explanation of, 289f.; his view of worship, 293f., 296, 310, 3iif., 316, 322; see Inspiration, and Prophetic messages, preservation of "Israel," "Beth-Israel," usage of terms in Hexateuch and historic literature, 236; after the destruction of Samaria, 236 "Jacob," "Beth Ya'akob," us- age of terms, after destruction of Samaria, 236 Jehoachaz, defeat of, by SjTia, 238f. Jehojada, priest, 87 Jehojakim, attitude of to Jere- miah, 4if., 43f.; recognition of Nebuchadrezzar's suzerainty by, 45, n. Jehojachin, 61, n., 87, 179 Jeremiah: greatest exponent of the faith of the prophets, gf., i5f., i7fif., 1 24, 1 68f . ; the Temple-sermon , | the beUefs denounced in, the positive \news expressed in, I iff., 23, 35, 309f.; critical analysis of, 2 iff.; persecution resulting from, i3f., 21, 43ff., 84f., 96f.; condemned to death, 24ff., 85; helped into hiding by Ahikam, 37ff.; writing down of his prophecies, read- ing of by Baruch, 15, 38f.; occasion of, reason for, 15, 4of., 46ff., 172, 207; scroll burned by Jehojakim, 15; motive of king's action, 4iff.; attitude of Micajah b. Gemar- jah to reading, 38, n.; of the Sarlm, 38, n.,4iff.; date of, 40; flogged by Pashhur, 16, n., 86f.; persecution renewed, 14, 52ff., 84, 85f., ii7f.; flogged and imprisoned in a dungeon by the Sarim, 16, 53; prophecy that provoked them, 52f., 65f., | 76f., summoned by Zedekiah i for interview, S3f., 62ff.; com- mutation of sentence, 53, 64; j thrown into a miry cistern, 27, j 54; rescued by Ebed-Melech, ' 54f., 86; the utterance which gave offence, 53!., 6of., 62, 66, 68, 69ff., 84, 284f.; authen- ticity of wrongly questioned, 75; legendary accounts of Jeremiah, s6ff., 67ff.; origin of, 62, 78; imhistoric conception of Jeremiah due to, 78f., cf. 61; his mental suffering, i6f., 58, 99ff., inf., i8of., 191, 19s, I ggf.; conflict of feelings, 202f.; INDEX OF SUBJECTS 345 prayed for suspension of the doom, 112; effect of persecu- tion on his inner life, 17, Sof., 90, 99; his confessions, record of his spiritual experience, 9, 10, i5f., lyi., 19, 21, 45, 81, 89, 90, 99ff., ii4f., 117, 119, i22f., 124, 126, 133; date of, 9, n. I, 14, IS, 19, 44f., Siff., 90, 97, 104, 123, 126, 128; present order of, 81, 86f., i28f.; literary character of, 90; his view of worship, iiff., 309f., 316, 318, 322; divine authority of the moral law, I2f., n. 3, 23; immanence of God, i46f., 318; absolute de- pendence of man on God, 109, 114; problem of suflering, his solution of, iigf., 121; retri- bution, spiritual, 109; moral freedom and individual re- sponsibility, 32 2f.; his future hope, 13, n., i9f., io3f., 115, 3i8f., 323; date of purchase of property from Hanamel, 71; nothing eschatological about Jer. IV, 23ff., 201; authorship of the oracles against the na- tions, 46f., n., 79, n., 208, n. i; see Inspiration, and Prophetic Messages, preservation of Jeroboam II, victories of, 238f. Jerusalem and its Temple, in- violable sanctity of, see Zion- Jerusalem Joash, implores Elisha's blessing, 238 Judah, alliance of with Egypt, 89, 169, 266, 269 Karkcmish, battle at, 15, 45, n. Kingdom of God, 6, igi., 154, 260, 326, f/. 156 "Lebanon," the, descriptive use of, 27s Messianic hojx?, characteristic features of, in postcxilic times, 271, 274 Micah, 35, 113, i86f.; his view of the doom, 297; his view of worship, the religious advance marked by, 3iof., 3i7f., 322; sec Inspiration Micajah b. Jimlah, 160 Nathan, 160 Nebuchadrezzar, first appear- ance in Judah, 45 Oath, see Curse Opliacl (Acropolis), 73, n. Oracle, method of consulting, 317, n. I Pashhur, 16, n. 86f. Penitential Psalms, Biblical, con- trasted with Babylonian, 315 Pharao Nccho, song of derision at defeat of, 47, n. Philistines, attack of, on Judah, 263, 276 Philo, view of revelation of, 138, 153. 162 Pbto, view of revelation of, 138, 153, 156, 162 Prophetic messages, preserva- tion of, due to [jfophcts' own initiative, i67f., i6g; motive by which propbeUt were ac* 346 INDEX OF SUBJECTS tuated, i68fF., 175, 266; cur- rent views on the question not substantiated, lyoff., cf. ?>^i.^, Jeremiah's object in having his past prophecies rehearsed by Baruch, lysf., cf. 2045.; "literary prophecy," appro- priate term, i74f.; contrast between older and literary prophets, i75f. Prophetic preaching, vital factor of, 5ff., 124, i68ff., 17s, 177, cf. 176 Prophetic writings, relation to oral preaching, 87flF., 221; Ut- erary character of, gof. Prophets, literary, circumstances marking their appearance, 5; attitude of their contempora- ries to, 29, 57, 67, 174, 266f., 296, cf. 35; of later ages, 36; distance in religious views separating them from the people, 177, i86f., 255, 296, 305; not concerned with the poHtics of the day, 6 if., see Isaiah; cf. 136; contrasted with the older prophets, 175; pro- fessional or official, the repre- sentatives of official religion, 29, 34, i43» 197, n. i; op- ponents of the literary proph- ets, 29; denoimced by the latter, 29, 3of., i43f. Prophet, true and false, accord- ing to the Deuteronomic stand- ard, 32f., 35, 44; according to literary prophets' standard, 3of., i43ff. Queen dowager, rank of, 179 Rechabites, 160; flight of, to Jerusalem, 45 Religion, character and purpose of, in ancient Israel, 321; prophets' conception of, 322 Retribution, spiritual, see Jere- miah Revelation, see Inspiration Rigveda, view taken of sacrifices in the, 314 Sabbath-observance, 51 Salmanassar IV, 270, 272 Samuel, 143, n. i Sargon, 27off., 295, n. 3 Sennacherib, 27if.; invasion of Judah by, 89, 254, 268, 291; blockade of Jerusalem, sgof., 295, n. 3 Seven, the number, 194, n. i Solomon, 3f. Stock phrases, 228, 245f. Style, BibUcal, or Oriental, fun- damental trait of, 37, 9iff.; examples of this style in Occi- dental hterature, 93ff.; illus- trations of, in prophetic litera- ture, 37, 99, 100, 115, 117, 119, 182, 191, 196 Syro-Ephraimitic campaign, 89, 169, 266, 269 Talmud, view taken of sacrifices in the, 3i4f. Text-omissions, method of copy- ists in dealing with, ii6f., n. 2, 260, n. 2, 261, n. I, 288f. Tiglath-Pileser III, 2 7off.; in- troduces system of transplan- tation, 272 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 347 Tongues, Gift of (Speaking with), i4Sf. "Torah (revelation) of God," connotation of, i2f., n. Transcendence of God, i46f., 148 Tribal responsibility, 321 f. Urijah, contemporary' prophet of Jeremiah, 27, jbf., 41, 170 "Voice, the still small," i6i, n. i, 326 Wadi of the Araba, the, 234, n. 2 "Word of God," connotation of, I2f., n. YHWH, preprophetic concep- tion of, 114, 158, 189, 228, 238, 305f., 320; His worship, Imal limitation of, 32of. Zachariah, 3, 5, 6f.; writings of, 6, 103, 174 Zedckiah, 27, S2ff., 63f., 72; con- templated revolt against Baby- lon, 7Sf., n. 3; legend of his journey to Babylon, 70, n. 3; unhistoric picture of, 7Sf., cj. 64 Zedckiah b. Kanaanah, 148 Zephaniah, priest, 87 Zion- Jerusalem, inviolable sanc- tity of, 35, 103, n. 2, 197, n. 2, 293; superiority of, to the other YIIWH-sancluaries, 228f. GIL\IMMATICAL AND LEXTCOGRArillCAL OBSERVATIONS 'abhar b', equivocal as to inten- tion implied, 2i6f., n. Accusative of specification, 122, n. I, 2i4f., n. 4 'a/ l^'acraekh app'kha (Jer. XV', 15), construction of, 98 'alii mill ha'araes (Hos. II, 2), 252 'aqobh (Jer. XVII, 9), 106, n. 2 '^laer recitativum, 127, n. 2 'ajiir Qer. XXXVI, 5), 4of. As>'ndeton, iSo, n. i, 193 'ac (Jer. XI, 18), denoting conse- quence, 118 basar Qer. XXV, 31, XLV, 4), 49, n. I, 208, n. I Circumstantial clause, 127, 191, n. I, 248 Ellipsis, 14, n. 3, 100, n. 2 and 3, 110, 120, n. 2, 196, n. I, 199, n. I, 214, n. 3, 215 'm bahiir Qer. XV, 8), i92f. Emphatic indetennination, 107, n. I, 284, n. I Emphatic infinitive, 107, n. i, hitme, in sentence-ellipsis, 199, n. I hodVani (Jer. XI, 18), 118 Imperfect of reiterated action, 12, n. 3, 18, n. 2; of progressive duration, 154 Impersonal construction, 181, n. I 'm, emphatic particle, 36, 327ff. Infinitive of active stems, two- fold voice of, 107, n. "itlakh (Jer. XII, 3) qualificativc, 18, n. 3 jalm'cT jii'ag, meaning and origin of, 21 if., n. jhlah (Am. V, 6), 214, n. 3 Jussive with wa consecutive, 54, n., 145. n- I ken, verbal adjective, 214, n. 4; expletive, 2i4f., n. 4 ki, consecutive, in a negative sentence, 35, n. i kl, introductory, 188, 199, n. i, 214, n. I gara' with /* pcrsonae, 110 Generic article, 231 hazkirH laggojim (Jer. IV, 16), 199, n. I Idq'hlm I'ldnam, I48f. malllhlO>V\c. Ill, 8), 144. n. mall (Eccl. VIII, 11, EsL VII, S), 144, n. 349 350 GRAMMATICAL OBSERVATIONS tnassd (Jer. XVII, 19-27, Neh. XIII, 15-22), so misnoe (Jer. XVII, 18), iiof. mosa s^phathai (Jer. XVII, 16), io7f., n. Nominal sentence expressing wish, 108 Object of preceding verb con- strued with following verb, 48, n. I, 145, n. I, 248, cf. 190, n. 2 Object, implied, construed with following verb, 186, n. i 'orhoth, 188 paen, in sentence-ellipsis, 214, n. 3 palf'du ael, 42 Potential participle, 26, 75, 77, io8f., 182, 184, 202, 283, n. 3 raq (Am. Ill, 12), intensive force, 307f., n. sahha 'al, 282 Subject of preceding sentence construed as object with verb of following sentence, and ■vice versa, 51, 182, n. 3, 205, n. I, cf. 125, n. 4 Suffix, 2nd sing., impersonal construction of, 199, n. 2 'illai, denoting a conjectural case, 204f. 'usmero'ce ^alf're, logi. Za'am (Jer. XV, 17), 100, n. 2 Zeugma, 144, n. icHi«^ai^' ID DESK i'ROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPARTAAENT my 15- J/ This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 'f' on the date to which renewed. _ Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. i^^ m^ 5 1073 7 T Oi UU. r^' V l\Pi! ■t 3 73-lPW05- ^S NOV 2 5 1979 - BEC 1-18. NOV 1 ,, 1573 JB CDM7MMEi77 ."2 9,h ^h ^2 uSivER SITY OF CALIFORNIA UBRARY