The right understanding of the prophetical office among the Hebrews will throw much light on the Mosaic constitution, and strikingly evince the popular character of the Israelitish government. On this point, far be it from me to disturb the faith which we have inherited from our fathers, or to unsettle, in any mind, the received opinion concerning the true divine inspiration of the Hebrew prophets. I believe, with implicit and unquestioning faith, the testimony of Paul, that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God,"1 and the testimony of Peter that "holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."2 Nevertheless, to foretell future events, and to impart religious truth and spiritual lessons, were not the whole duty and office of a prophet under the constitution of Moses.
Doubtless, the most important functions of the Hebrew prophets were, in the strict sense, religious in their character. The office of the prophets was much more like that of our modern clergymen than was office of the priests, who had, in fact, but few points of resemblance to the ministry instituted by Christ.3 The prophets were the preachers of the ancient church. According to Augustine, they were the philosophers, divines, instructors, and guides of the Hebrews in piety and virtue. These holy men were the bulwarks of religion against the impiety of princes, the wickedness of individuals, and every kind of immorality. But by far the most important part of their commission was to foretell the coming and kingdom of the Messiah, with their attendant circumstances, and, by slow degrees, yet with constantly increasing clearness, to acquaint their countrymen with the approaching change of their economy, and with the nature of the new, more spiritual, and universal dispensation, which was to succeed it.
Still, as hinted above, the duties of the prophets were not wholly religious. Their relation to the civil state was not, indeed, fixed by any constitutional provision or legal enactment. They did not form a component part of the political system. They were not a branch of the machinery of government. Yet their authority and influence in affairs of state was by no means inconsiderable. They were, so to speak, the privileged state-moralists, guardians, and popular orators of the republic. Coleridge speaks of them as uniting the functions and threefold character of the Roman censors, the tribunes of the people, and the sacred college of augurs. The historian Schlosser says, "We hear, in the prophets, the voice of true patriots, who, standing upon a provision of the law of Moses, spake the truth to the people, to the priests, and to the kings." Horne speaks of them as possessing great authority in the Israelitish state, and as highly esteemed by the pious sovereigns, who undertook no important affairs without consulting them. Alexander represents their influence in the government as very powerful, not indeed by official, formal action, but as special divine messengers, whose authority could not be disputed or resisted by any magistrate, without abjuring the fundamental principles of the theocracy. Milton compares them to the orators of the Greek democracies. The lines which this sage and learned poet puts into the mouth of our Savior, both from their truth and appositeness, deserve to be cited here.
"Their orators, thou then extoll'st, as those The top of eloquence--statest, indeed, And lovers of their country, as may seem; But herein to our prophets far beneath, As men divinely taught, and better teaching The solid rules of civil government, In their majestic, unaffected style, Than all the oratory of Greece and Rome. In them is Plaines taught and easiest learnt, What makes a nation happy, and keeps it so, What ruins kingdoms and lays cities flat."
Nobly said, and truthfully too! The prophetical writings abound with the finest lessons of political wisdom. I know of no compositions more worthy of the profound study of statesmen and legislators than the writings of the Hebrew prophets. In seven verses of his forty-seventh chapter, beginning at the seventh verse, the prophet Isaiah, as Coleridge has observed, revealed the true philosophy of the French Revolution of 1789, more than two thousand years before it became a sad, irrevocable truth of history. A collection of political maxims, forming an excellent manual for statesmen, might be culled from the books of e Hebrew prophets--a collection which would surprise even diligent students of the scriptures by the number, the variety, the purity, and the deep and comprehensive wisdom of its counsels.
But it is time to look at the institution of the prophetical office, as it is related in the Hebrew history. The record is contained in Deuteronomy 18:9-22. I cite the passage in a somewhat abbreviated form, retaining, however, all the material parts of it. "When thou comest into the land which Jehovah, thy God, giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any ... that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirit, or a wizard, or a necromancer. ... Jehovah, thy God, will raise unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken. ... But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. ... When a prophet speaketh in the name Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."
On this passage I offer the following observations.
1. At the time when this law was given, it was the custom of mankind to pry into future events. No propensity was stronger or more general than this, and religion was universally regarded as the means gratifying this curiosity. Indeed, it was looked upon as a chief service, which religion owed to her votaries, to give them information concerning the future. The nations by whom the Hebrews were surrounded, had their various ways of peering into futurity, some of which are enumerated in this law. If no means had been provided whereby the Israelites could foreknow things to come, it would have been very difficult, considering the prying curiosity of those early ages, to keep them from despising their own religion and resorting to the divinations of their idolatrous neighbors. All this is noticed by Origen, as a ground of necessity for the establishment of the prophetical office in the Hebrew commonwealth. To keep the Israelites from being carried away by the torrent of superstition which overflowed and corrupted the nations, true religion was provided with an institution which should really furnish that knowledge which false religion pretended to give. A constant succession of the prophets would be a powerful means of weaning God's people from superstitious practices, and of keeping them from consulting diviners to discover what would befall them. And this is precisely what God promises in the passage under consideration.
2. This interpretation, which is the obvious and natural one, confutes that which restricts the words to a prophecy respecting the Messiah. Some interpreters do so restrict their import because they are expressly applied to our Savior by Peter.4 Certainly the passage has reference to Christ, since the apostle affirms it. But who is ignorant of the fulness of meaning, which often inheres in the words of holy scripture? Bishop Middleton has well expressed the principle, which is applicable here. He observes that there are many passages in the Old Testament which are capable of a twofold application, being directly applicable to circumstances then past, or present, or soon to be accomplished, and indirectly to others which divine providence was about to develop under a future dispensation. Bloomfield, while pointing out the peculiar resemblances between Moses and Christ, admits that, after all, this reference may not have been directly in view, and accordingly, that this may be of the number of those passages to which Bishop Middleton refers as being capable of a twofold application. Dr. J. A. Alexander says that one of the most plausible interpretations of this passage is that it contains the promise of a constant succession of inspired men, of which succession Christ himself was to be the greatest. The word plausible here is rather ambiguous, but it is evident that the learned professor inclines to the belief that the interpretation is just as well as plausible. This is the decided opinion of Michaelis, in which I fully concur. Beyond a doubt, there is a double reference in the passage, viz. to the Messiah, and to the whole line of divinely inspired prophets under the Hebrew theocracy. One of these references did not quit the purpose of Peter, while the other did. He takes that which is in point, without alluding to that which is not. But this use of the one reference is not, upon any just principles of interpretation, exclusive of the other. If a single prophet only is intended, and that one the Lord Jesus Christ, the context seems to be without meaning, and the whole passage out of joint. The words, then, are to be regarded as a record of the institution of a permanent order of men in the Israelitish commonwealth, of whom Jesus Christ, as he would resemble Moses in being the minister of a new dispensation and in his intimate communication with God, would at the same time be the greatest and the most illustrious.
3. Two tests only of the truth or falsity of the claim to prophetical inspiration are here recognized, viz. first, whether the prophet spake in the name of Jehovah or of false gods; and, secondly, whether or not a future event, foretold by him, happened according to his word. Miracles could not be demanded of him in proof of a divine commission to speak in the name of Jehovah. The power of working wonders did not inhere in his official designation. As long, therefore, as a pretending prophet was not convicted of being a lying prophet, he was to be tolerated, and was to go unpunished, although he should have threatened calamity or even destruction to the state. Whoever prophesied in the name of the true God must be borne with until an unfulfilled prediction proved him to be an impostor. The trial of Jeremiah, as related in the twenty-sixth chapter of his prophecies, casts a strong light upon this subject. He had publicly foretold the destruction of Jerusalem. For this he was seized and arraigned before the princes, or senate, as worthy of death. He offered no other defense than that the Lord had sent him to speak as he had, and he was willing to die in attestation of the truth of what he affirmed; only he added, by way of warning, that, if they put him to death, they would surely bring innocent blood upon themselves. He had done nothing, which, by the law of Moses, merited death, or even censure. He had predicted evil to the state, but that was not a crime, unless he had spoken it presumptuously. He might, indeed, be a false prophet, in which case he would be worthy of death, but as yet there was no proof of it. If it was not a crime to be a prophet, it was not a crime to predict calamity, for nations do not always experience good fortune. It was his duty to foretell the truth, just as it had been revealed to him, whether it was agreeable or disagreeable. It is remarkable that there were prophets among his accusers; how many is not stated, but apparently not a few. The court, after hearing the case, rendered a judgment of acquittal, on the ground both of law and precedent. They aver, in their judgment, that Jeremiah had spoken in the name of Jehovah, as the law required, and that the fact of his foretelling evil cannot be imputed as a crime, since other prophets had done the same without rebuke, of which they cite a memorable instance. And so the case was dismissed, and the accused set at liberty. The history of the procedure is very interesting, and the reader is requested to peruse it for himself.
4. So far as the right of interdiction by man was concerned, this law gave a very broad liberty to the exercise of the prophetical office. Undoubtedly there could be no right, in the sight of God, to assume this office, without a true divine commission and a supernatural divine inspiration. But, so far as his fellow citizens were concerned, every man, whatever his birth, tribe, calling, or fortune might be, could say, "I am a prophet." He could proclaim to the people the consequences of their iniquities, and freely censure the conduct of the magistrates, of the priests, of the senators, of the kings, of all. He could speak, preach, exhort, reprove, and fulminate; and no man had the right to close his mouth. On the contrary, both citizens and rulers were bound to listen to him, when his voice was raised against corruptions and abuses, and in favor of the just and the right. There is no need to cite examples of the boldness and energy with which the prophets reproved the sins of all, from the highest to the lowest. Nathan dared to say to David, "Thou art the man."5 Isaiah addressed the rulers as rebellious, as companions of thieves, as loving bribes, and as following after rewards.6 Ezekiel speaks of the princes as resembling wolves ravening for their prey, in their eagerness to shed blood and get dishonest gain.7 Zephaniah represents the princes of Israel as roaring lions, her judges as ravening wolves, her prophets as treacherous persons, and her priests as doing violence to the law.8 Malachi charges upon the whole nation the crime of robbing God.9
5. This liberty, however, was restrained by a severe penalty to be inflicted upon the false prophet. The prophet who presumed to speak without a commission from God was to be punished with death. The falsity of his claim to the prophetic inspiration could be evinced by proving, either that he had prophesied in the name of strange gods, or that he had uttered a prediction which was falsified by the event. The reader who would see the justice of so severe a penalty fully vindicated is referred to articles 252 and 253 of Michaelis' Commentaries on the Laws of Moses. The assumption of the prophetic office without authority was a species of treason in the Israelitish state; and besides this, mischiefs of a fearful magnitude flowed both from the public predictions of false prophets, and from the secret practice of superstitious art, such as fortune telling, astrology, and divinations of all sorts.
6. The passage under consideration affords solid ground for belief in the supernatural inspiration of the true prophets of Jehovah. What legislator, not bereft of the last spark of justice and humanity, would punish with death a mere error in judgment? Yet this charge is in effect brought against Moses by those who represent the Hebrew prophets as nothing more than sagacious men, whose natural perspicacity enabled them to foresee and predict future events, men endowed, in a superior degree, with the faculties of reason, imagination, and genius. Could there be a clearer proof, if not that the prophets were supernaturally inspired, at least that Moses and his countrymen thought so? Unless, indeed, we are willing to suppose, that the lawgiver himself rather deserved the punishment which he threatened against the violators of his law.
Upon the whole, there can be no doubt that the prophetical office was designed to be a great and influential element in the Hebrew government. The seventy elders, chosen as assistants to Moses in the valley of Paran, were divinely inspired men, and spake to the people under the influence of the Holy Spirit. From the very foundation of the state, teachers supernaturally enlightened were appointed to instruct the people in religion, virtue, and law; and, in the darkest periods of the Hebrew history, God left not himself without inspired witnesses to the truth. At length there appeared what have been called schools of the prophets, that is, companies of young men, taught and disciplined under the direction of Samuel and other aged prophets who succeeded him. Not that the art of prophecy became a branch of Hebrew education. Three principal objects, we may reasonably conjecture, the youths who frequented these schools had in view--the improvement of their minds, growth in piety, and knowledge of the Mosaic law. From among the persons thus disciplined and instructed, the prophets were ordinarily, though not uniformly, selected by God, who communicated to them, in addition to the qualifications for the prophetical office thus acquired, the gift of inspiration. It was of the utmost importance that the prophets should have an ample and accurate acquaintance with the laws of Moses, and it was, on many accounts, better that they should acquire this by their own study than by immediate inspiration.
It would naturally be expected that, under a law like that which we have been examining, the prophets, true and pretended, would form a numerous body in the state. And such was undoubtedly the case. Every city had its prophets, who, says Calmet, in the public assemblies on the Sabbath, at the new moons, and in the solemn convocations, preached to the people, and reproved the various disorders and abuses which appeared in the nation. Ezekiel has indicated, in a manner extremely elegant and poetical, the duties of a prophet under the Mosaic economy.10 The prophets served as a counterpoise to the influence of the priests, the magistrates, and the senate itself, which rarely omitted, on important occasions, to call for the advice of one or more of the most renowned of these inspired men.
Among such a crowd of popular preachers and orators, it will readily be imagined that multitudes were mere pretenders, and that there was but a feeble minority of divinely commissioned prophets. The mass spake without divine light and guidance. Profaning the name of Jehovah, and sacrificing the welfare of the state to their private interest, they ignominiously sold both their consciences and their discourses. Every page of the prophetical writings proves this. "Thy prophets," cries Jeremiah, "have seen vain and foolish things for thee; and they have not discovered thine iniquity, to turn away thy captivity." In the same strain, Ezekiel inveighs against the prophets who daubed with untempered mortar, and divined lies; and he speaks of a conspiracy of prophets who ravened the prey like a roaring lion and filled their lands with treasure and precious things. But what if some abuses grew out of the prophetical institution? It is better, as Salvador says, to give free course to torrents of vain words, than to arrest a single one about to be uttered by a true messenger from heaven.
NOTES:
1 2 Timothy 3:16. 2 2 Peter 1:21. 3 A single fact is decisive of this, viz. their living in cities by themselves. How could Christian pastors discharge their appropriate functions, how could they fulfill the command to watch for souls, if they dwelt in isolated towns, twenty, thirty, or fifty miles apart, instead of living as now among their respective flocks? 4 Acts 3:22. 5 2 Samuel 12:7. 6 Isaiah 1:23. 7 Ezekiel 22:27. 8 Zephaniah 3:3-4. 9 Malachi 3:8. 10 Ezekiel 33:2 seqq.
