(10. 15; 37. 26-29). Obadiah could declare that Edom should feel the heavy hand of Jehovah for her league with Israel's enemies. Habakkuk could declare that the Chaldeans should find their doom for the same social iniquities that had brought woe upon Jerusalem (ch. 2). Zephaniah could summon all the nations to fear the day of wrath that was coming. Nahum could utter his cry of vengeance upon Nineveh, "the bloody city.' Each of the great prophetic collections includes a series of oracles concerning the nations, in which the idea of a divine justice over against the cruelty and inhumanity of the world powers is strikingly set forth. In the break-up of nationalities in western Asia in the seventh and sixth centuries B. C., the tribal gods of the older times lost their significance. Even Asshur could not save Assyria, nor Bel and Marduk preserve Babylon. Jehovah emerged clearly in the prophetic consciousness as the God of the whole earth. In the great passage, which represents one of the high-water marks of prophecy, Egypt and Assyria, the great hereditary enemies of Israel, are seen as co-worshipers with Israel herself, and equal objects of Jehovah's blessing (Isa 19. 24f.). § 4. THE PROPHETS AND THE IDEAL SOCIAL State The final resolution of the hard problem presented by the failure of Israel and the awful tyranny of the world powers was afforded by the prophetic ideal of a social state in which righteousness should dwell. The answer to every cry of distress was, on the one hand, an explanation that the present evil was the punishment of sin and, on the other, a promise that the good times were coming. This golden age of the future was always conceived ethically and in social terms. In the great Messianic prophecies of the book of Isaiah there is the expectation of a Ruler who, as supreme Judge, will secure that justice for the poor and the unfriended which was fundamental for a prosperous and peaceful community (11. 1-5); and the consequence of his strong government should be universal peace instead of the brutish warfare that was so destructive of all human achievements (11. 6-9). Again, in the brilliant contrast to the foolish, weak, selfish, and quarreling princes that sat on David's throne, there was the hope of a Ruler wonderful in counsel, divine in strength, paternal in his care, and peaceful in his reign (9. 2-7). Jeremiah, a profound optimist, in spite of the direful messages which it was his unhappy task to carry to his rebellious people, saw that no mere righteousness of government could secure the ideal state. He resolved the antagonism which is often presented to-day between evangelization and socialization by his healthy realization that the two processes are one. In his view individual and social purification go hand in hand, when the new covenant is written on the hearts of the people (31. 31-34) and the state is reconstituted in righteousness (30. 18-22; 31. 10-14). Ezekiel has the like idea. He lays emphasis on individual responsibility for sin and righteousness (ch. 18). Then he allows his patriotic and priestly imagination to revel in the hope of a reorganized Judaism in which all the tribes shall have their due inheritance, the temple with its elaborated ritual shall dominate the national life, and Jerusalem shall be a city where Jehovah dwells (48. 35). In the great exile prophecy (Isa 40 to 55) there comes most clearly into view the conception of the universal purpose of Jehovah. Everything looks forward to the redemption. of a purified people who are to be the inhabitants of a good land where they shall be established in righteousness (54. 14); and this is not to be confined to Israel but to extend to all peoples (42. 1-4; 49. 6; 51. 4f.). The profound conception of the Servant of Jehovah (42. 1-9; 49. I-7; 50. 4-7; 52. 13 to 53. 12) has been so generally considered in its Messianic aspect that its social quality has not been recognized. Strictly speaking, the Servant of Jehovah is not a Messiah. This prophecy does not think of a king who would save his people by justice. Josiah had tried to do that and had failed. It presents the view that the prophets and leaders of righteousness will inevitably be misunderstood, persecuted, sacrificed. The path of social regeneration follows the blood prints of those who are wounded for the transgressions of others. It was true of Jeremiah. It was true of Jesus. And Jesus warned his followers that they too must pay the price of becoming the redeemers of men. Later prophecies which look forward to the glorious future are expressed in such glowing terms that they are often read as descriptions of the life that is beyond this world. But they describe the social righteousness that is to flourish on the earth when Israel has repented of the social sins and idolatries of the past (ch. 59). They picture a happy people building houses, planting vineyards, dwelling together in peace (65. 17-25). A wonderful vision of the future, which is now included in the prophecy of Micah (4. 1-4) and of Isaiah (2. 2-4), sees Jerusalem obedient to the laws of righteousness given by Jehovah and becoming the teacher of the nations of the earth, while the weapons of warfare are changed into the tools of peace, and every man sits secure under his vine and under his fig tree. As we to-day recognize the part that Israel has played as the teacher of righteousness, we cannot fail to realize the force of this great expectation, Out of Zion shall go forth instruction, And the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem. One of the latest prophetic voices was that of Joel. He spoke at a time of calamity, rebuking the people for their unfaithfulness. But he too felt the sense of the awful inequity of human affairs, and bitterly he denounced the cupidity of the Phoenicians who had made profitable traffic in Hebrew slaves with the Greeks (3. 4-6). Jehovah had punishment in store for these national crimes (vv. 7f.), and in the future there is to be prosperity and the divine presence for Israel (2. 26-32). DIRECTIONS FOR STUDY 1. Read 1 Kings 17 to 2 Kings 9. Note the different activities of the prophets. 2. On the basis of the narratives just read give your impression of the "sons of the prophets." 3. What different types of prophet do these narratives present? Read Amos 1 and 2. Against what nations does the prophet speak? What national crimes are denounced? 4. 5. Read Nah 2, the prophetic denunciation of Nineveh. For what sins is the city punished? 6. Glance hastily through Isaiah 13 to 24, Jeremiah 47 to 49, Ezekiel 25 to 32. What is the general purport of these prophecies? What do they indicate as to the outlook of the Hebrew prophet? Was he a narrow patriot who exalted his own nation and hated all others? 7. What was the prophetic view of the ultimate meaning of human history? Upon what was this view based? 8. What different forms did the Messianic hope assume? How do you account for the divergencies? 9. What were the fundamental ideals in all phases of the Messianic hope? 10. What modern social ideals have any similarity to the Hebrew CHAPTER XX THE RELATION OF THE PROPHETS TO THE SOCIAL PROCESS THE Outline development of Hebrew prophecy in the previous chapter indicates how the outlook of the prophets broadened with the course of events, and how responsive were their messages to the needs of the times. It is further evident that their hopes were always cast in the form of the social institutions with which they were familiar. Under the rule of the kings the prophet, feeling the inadequacy of the royal justice, and seeing how great a power a righteous king might be, naturally saw a vision of the coming social state when God's man should be king. The priest, realizing how far short his colleagues had come in their spiritual leadership of the people, and yet profoundly convinced of the religious value of the sacrificial ceremonial, looked forward to a social state under a noble ecclesiasticism as containing the promise of human blessedness. In the midst of persecution came an insight into the meaning of suffering, and the possibility of the redemption of a people through the sacrificial death of their noblest souls. The prophets, therefore, must never be thought of as the proclaimers of absolute truth. They were products of the times in which they lived. They spoke to the people and in the language of their day. They were concerned with the future only for its bearing upon the present. Their truth, like all truth, was relative, and that which was spoken for one generation was often inadequate for the next. As we, therefore, face the problems of our day we must not expect the prophets to give us the solutions that we need. That |